Text 34

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of Text 34:

एवं सर्वत्र साधर्म्यं विपर्ययाद्वैधर्म्यं च वाच्यमिति द्रव्यासङ्करः ॥ ३४ ॥

evaṃ sarvatra sādharmyaṃ viparyayādvaidharmyaṃ ca vācyamiti dravyāsaṅkaraḥ || 34 ||

Text (34):—In this way we may describe the similarities of all things, and contrariwise, also their dissimilarities; and thus there would be no intermixture (or confusion) among the various substances.—(I-i-13, 14; V-ii-21.)

Commentary: The Nyāyakandalī of Śrīdhara.

(English rendering of Śrīdhara’s commentary called Nyāyakandalī or Nyāyakaṇḍalī from the 10th century)

So long as the things have not been mentioned, there can be no definitions of these; as these could have no objectives till then; and on the other hand, until the things hive been defined, people have no definite ideas of them. Hence a science that seeks to describe the nature of things, operates both ways; it points out the things and gives their definitions. With regard to the examination or inquiry (into the nature of things), the following rule has to be observed: In a case, where when the definition has been put forward, the real nature of the thing, defined is not a-certained, on account of such ascertainment being interrupted by the disturbing element of another definition,—we have to take recourse to the method of enquiry and examination, for the setting aside of one of these contending theories (definitions); when however, the mere mention of the definition, gives a due idea of the nature of the thing defined, then an enquiry or examination is useless, and as such is not taken up.

Some people hold that a science should operate in all three ways (of statement, definition and examination.) These people also do not examine such things as the purpose &c. (of the science); and their only reason for desisting from such examination is that these (purpose &c.) are found to be duly recognised on the mere putting forward of their definitions. Such being the case, the operation of science, which is always for the purpose of a due recognition of the nature of things, cannot be said to be threefold only.

(1) The ‘uddeśa’ or statement of a thing consists in its being spoken of by its name. (2) ‘Lakṣaṇa’ or Definition consists in the property that serves to differentiate the homogeneous or like things from the heterogeneous or unlike ones. (3) Parīkṣā or Examination consists in an enquiry into the nature of the thing, in view of the said definition. (4) The subdividing of the mentioned thing does not constitute a distinct method of operation; as this operation is included in the explanation that, we have given of the ‘statement’ of a thing. And these subdivisions are mentioned separately, only with a view to restricting the mention of these, and also for the purpose of the patting forward of the definition of each of these subdivisions. (5) When the things have been subdivided, then we have the particular definition of each of these; otherwise such definitions would be wholly devoid of their objectives.

Thus then, we have found that Substances have been mentioned in the Sūtra—‘Substance Quality &c. &c.’; they have been subdivided in the Sūtra—‘Earth, Water &c. &c’ and hence we now take up the next chapter where we shall put forward the specific definition of each of the nine substances; mentioned above.

Note:

The Kiraṇāvalī enumerates a few of these ‘similarities’ and ‘dissimilarities.’ (1) All the Substances except the Soul, are for the sake of others, and are unconscious. (2) All except water are devoid of viscidity and fluidity. (3) All except Fire are not—hot and incapable of burning, (4) Space, Time and Mind are devoid of specific qualities &c.