Text 87: On Isolation (Pṛthaktva)

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of Text 87:

पृथक्त्वमपोद्धारव्यवहारकारणम् | तत्पुनरेकद्रव्यमनेकद्रव्यं च | तस्य तु नित्यानित्यत्वनिष्पत्तयः संख्यया व्याख्याताः | एतावांस्तु विशेषः एकत्वादिवदेकपृथक्त्वादिष्वपरसामान्याभावः संख्यया तु विशिष्यते तद्विशिष्टव्यवहारदर्शनादिति ॥ ८७ ॥

pṛthaktvamapoddhāravyavahārakāraṇam | tatpunarekadravyamanekadravyaṃ ca | tasya tu nityānityatvaniṣpattayaḥ saṃkhyayā vyākhyātāḥ | etāvāṃstu viśeṣaḥ ekatvādivadekapṛthaktvādiṣvaparasāmānyābhāvaḥ saṃkhyayā tu viśiṣyate tadviśiṣṭavyavahāradarśanāditi || 87 ||

Text (87).—Isolation is the basis of all notions of separateness. It inheres in one as well as in many substances. Its eternal and non-eternal manifestations are in the same way as those of Number; the only difference lies in this: that of Isolation, there are no such subdivisions as ‘Individual Isolation’ and the like, as there is in the case of ‘unity’ &c. (of number); but Isolation is always qualified by number; as we often come across notions of Isolation qualified by number.—(VII-ii-2).

Commentary: The Nyāyakandalī of Śrīdhara.

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

Isolation or separateness is the cause or basis of all such idea and expression as ‘this is separate from that.’ It cannot be rightly urged that this usage based upon mutual negation only—Because that which is of the nature of pure negation cannot form the subject of affirmation as well as denial.

This Isolation pertains to one as well as to many substances. The word ‘punaḥ’ [punar] implies that Isolation, which belongs to one as well as many substances, is distinct from parimāṇa which exists in one substance only. That is to say, while Parimāṇa, (Dimension) belongs to a single substance, single Isolation belongs to one as well as to many substances.

The eternality, non-eternality and production of this should be taken to be the same as those with regard to Number. That is to say, the number ‘one’ is eternal when belonging to atoms, and transient or non-eternal when in products, in which case it is brought about by a cause, and is destroyed by the destruction of its substratum; and similar is the case with single Isolation belonging to a single substance; and in the same manner, just as the numbers ‘two’ &c. belonging to many substances are produced by the apekṣābuddhi based upon many qualities, on the destruction whereof again they also are destroyed, as also on the destruction of their substrata.—so also the dual Isolation &c. inhering in many substances &c.

The affix ‘tva’ in ‘nittyānityatva’ is to be taken along with both ‘nitya’ and ‘anitya’, as it appears at the end of the Dvandva compound. In this sentence also the particle ‘tu’ is meant to indicate a distinction or peculiarity,—the sense being that it is the eternality &c. of this Isolation, and not those of Parimāṇa, that is to be taken as analogous to those of Number.

Having thus pointed out the similarity of Isolation with Number, the author proceeds to show the points of difference between these two.—Etāvān &c. Isolation differs from number in the following point In the'case of Number we have the sub-classes ‘one’, ‘two’, &c. under the one general class of ‘number’; but in the case of Isolation we have no such sub-class as ‘single Isolation under the general class of ‘Isolation’.

Question: “How is it then, that there are intermediate class-notions with regard to the ‘single Isolations’ belonging to many substances?”

Answer: ‘This one is separate’ ‘these two are separate’,—in all these cases when separateness or Isolation is spoken of, it is always spoken of as qualified by Number. The Isolation inhering in a single substance is qualified by the number ‘one’; and it is a peculiar form of this number which appears to be spoken of as a ‘sub-class’; and as for the comprehensive notion of ‘Isolation’, it is due to the class or generality of ‘Isolation’, and not to any sub-classes of it.

In the same manner we should also deny any such generality or class as ‘atom’, inhering in all atoms; as also universal usage may be explained as based upon the generality ‘aṇu’ as qualified by the epithet ‘parama’.

Question: “Why do you not admit that a single Isolation exists in all substances, and that the diversity of notions is due to the qualifying number, ‘one’, ‘two’ &c.?”

Answer: We do not admit this for the simple reason that in the case of substances produced one after the other, we do not perceive any inherence of qualities, as we do that of the Generalities. Nor could it be a Generality or Class itself; as until ideas of other substances are present, there is no notion of Isolation, just as there is none of any Generality.