by Ganganatha Jha | 1915 | 250,428 words
The English translation of the Padarthadharmasamgraha of Prashastapada including the commentary called the Nyayakandali of Shridhara. Although the Padartha-dharma-sangraha is officially a commentary (bhashya) on the Vaisheshika-Sutra by Kanada, it is presented as an independent work on Vaisesika philosophy: It reorders and combines the original Sut...
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of Text 157:
अथ समवायपदार्थनिरूपणम् । अयुतसिद्धानाम् आधार्याधारभूतानां यः सम्बन्ध इहप्रत्ययहेतुः स समवायः । द्रव्यगुणकर्मसामान्यविशेषाणां कार्यकारणभूतानाम् अकार्यकारणभूतानां वायुतसिद्धानाम् आधार्याधारभावेनावस्थितानाम् इहेदम् इतिबुद्धिर्यतो भवति यतश्चासर्वगतानाम् अधिगतान्यत्वानाम् अविष्वग्भावः स समवायाख्यः सम्बन्धः । कथं यथेह कुण्डे दधीतिप्रत्ययः सम्बन्धे सति दृष्टस्तथेह तन्तुषु पटः इह वीरणेषु कटः इह द्रव्ये गुणकंरणी इह द्रव्यगुणकर्मसु सत्ता इह द्रव्ये द्रव्यत्वम् इह गुणे गुणत्वम् इह कर्मणि कर्मत्वम् इह नित्यद्रव्येऽन्त्या विशेषा इतिप्रत्ययदर्शनाद् अस्त्येषां सम्बन्ध इति ज्ञायते ॥ १५७ ॥
atha samavāyapadārthanirūpaṇam | ayutasiddhānām ādhāryādhārabhūtānāṃ yaḥ sambandha ihapratyayahetuḥ sa samavāyaḥ | dravyaguṇakarmasāmānyaviśeṣāṇāṃ kāryakāraṇabhūtānām akāryakāraṇabhūtānāṃ vāyutasiddhānām ādhāryādhārabhāvenāvasthitānām ihedam itibuddhiryato bhavati yataścāsarvagatānām adhigatānyatvānām aviṣvagbhāvaḥ sa samavāyākhyaḥ sambandhaḥ | kathaṃ yatheha kuṇḍe dadhītipratyayaḥ sambandhe sati dṛṣṭastatheha tantuṣu paṭaḥ iha vīraṇeṣu kaṭaḥ iha dravye guṇakaṃraṇī iha dravyaguṇakarmasu sattā iha dravye dravyatvam iha guṇe guṇatvam iha karmaṇi karmatvam iha nityadravye'ntyā viśeṣā itipratyayadarśanād astyeṣāṃ sambandha iti jñāyate || 157 ||
Text (157): Inherence is the relationship between things that are inseparably connected, and which stand to each other in the relation of the container and the contained,—the relationships namely, that serves as the ground of the notion that ‘such and such a thing subsists in this.’ That is to say, the relationship named ‘Samavāya ’ or ‘inherence’ is that from which proceeds the notion that ‘this subsists in this,’—with regard to substances, qualities, actions, communities and individualities, that appear in the form of causes and effects, as well as those that do not appear as causes and effects, which are inseparably connected; and also that relationship from which proceeds the interdependence of things of limited extension upon something else, from which they are known to be different. As for instance, the notion that ‘there is curd in this pit’ is found to be present only when there is a distinct relationship between the two things; so also the notions—‘the cloth is in these threads’ ‘the mat is in these reeds,’ ‘this, quality and that action are in this substance’ ‘Being is in these substances, qualities and actions’, ‘there is the general character of substance in this substance’, ‘the general character of quality in this quality’, ‘the general character of action in this action’, ‘the ultimate individualities in this eternal substance’; and from all such notions we infer the existence of the relationship in question.—(VII-ii-29, 27, 28; V-ii-23)
Commentary: The Nyāyakandalī of Śrīdhara.
The author proceeds to describe ‘Samavāya’ or ‘inherence’. Inherence is the relationship &c., &c. This we have already explained when mentioning the categories by name. The author proceeds to show what the ‘inseparable substances’ are, the relationship whereof is called ‘inherence’:—With regard to substances &c., &c. ‘That appear in the form of causes and effects and those that do not appear in these forms’—this is added with a view to restrict the scope of the relationship; thab is to say, the relation between the whole and its parts, between transient substances and their qualities, between eternal substances and the transient qualities belonging to them, between actions and the substances to which they [belong—all these appearing in the form of causes and effects,—is ‘samavāya’ or ‘inherence’; and it is also that relationship which subsists between eternal substances and their qualities, between, communities and the individuals included therein, between ultimate individualities and the substances in which they reside,—all these not appearing in the form of causes and effects, but being inseparably connected.
Inherence also consists in the interdependence, or non-separateness of such things of limited extension as are distinctly known to be different from each other. This we infer from the fact of mutual intermixture of two distinct things being due to a certain definite relationship (and this relationship can be none other than that of inherence).
This same fact the author proceeds to explain further:—As for instance &c., &c. All the notions cited point to some sort of a distinct relationship between the two objects in each case. The argument is put forward in the following form:—‘All these notions are based upon a particular kind of relationship,—because they are definitely ascertained notions,—like the notion ‘there is curd in this pit.’