Sūtra 1.1.5 (Enumeration of Substances)

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration, Word-for-word and English translation of Vaiśeṣika sūtra 1.1.5:

पृथिव्यापस्तेजो वायुराकाशं कालो दिगात्मा मन इति द्रव्याणि ॥ १.१.५ ॥

pṛthivyāpastejo vāyurākāśaṃ kālo digātmā mana iti dravyāṇi || 1.1.5 ||

pṛthivī—earth; āpas—waters; tejas—fire; vāyuḥ—air; ākāśam—Ether; kālaḥ—time; dik—direction, space; ātmā—Self; manas—mind; iti—only; dravyāṇi—substances.

5. Earth, Water, Fire, Air, Ether, Time, Space, Self, and Mind (are) the only Substances.

Commentary: The Upaskāra of Śaṅkara Miśra:

(English rendering of Śaṅkara Miśra’s commentary called Upaskāra from the 15th century)

Because as the soul it participates in salvation and is the support of all the Predicables. therefore he now says by way of giving the division and particular reference of the first mentioned Predicable, Substance.—[Read sūtra 1.1.5 above]

‘Iti’ has the sense of determination. Thereby the meaning is that Substances are nine only, neither more nor less. If it is doubted that the exclusion of a greater or less number having been secured by the force of the division itself, there was no need for the word. ‘iti,’ then it should be understood that it being possible to take the aphorism in a merely denotative, indicatory or enumerative sense, the word ‘Iti’ is used to indicate that it has the object of division also, and that the word is used also to indicate that gold, etc., as well as God are included in them, and also that Darkness which may be apprehended to be an additional substance is a non-being. The fact that the words have not been compounded goes to show that they are all equally prominent. And the author of the aphorisms himself will point out their definitions or differentiae while treating of ‘difference.’

It cannot be said that gold is neither Earth as it has no smell, nor Water as it has no wetness and natural fluidity, nor Fire as it has weight and on the last account, nor Air, nor again Time, etc.; therefore it is something over and above the nine. For, in the first two cases, there can be no comparison; in the third case, that which has to be proved is something imaginary (i.e., that gold is not a transformation of Fire). After that there has been analogous argument, although there is no doubt about that which has to be proved, and also the mark of inference is fallacious. He will prove afterwards that gold is a transformation of fire—5.

Commentary: The Vivṛti of Jayanārāyaṇa:

(English extracts of Jayanārāyaṇa Tarkapañcānana’s Vivṛti or ‘gloss’ called the Kaṇādasūtravivṛti from the 17th century)

It may be objected, “The writer of the Kandalī and the Sāṃkhya teachers have held that Darkness is a Substance. And it is right. For otherwise how can people have the perception of quality and action in it, viz., ‘Dark Darkness moves’? Now, being devoid of Smell, Darkness is not Earth; as it possess dark colour it cannot be included in Water, etc. Therefore how is it right to say that the substances are nine only?” We reply, “It is not so, because it is illogical to imagine another Substance, when it can be produced by the absence of necessary Light. The perception of dark colour is, like the perception of the vault of heaven, erroneous. The perception of movement is also an error, occasioned by the departure of light, as the perception of movement by the passengers of a boat in respect of the trees, etc., standing on the bank of the river, is occasioned by the movement of the boat, etc. The supposition that Darkness is a substance will entail the supposition of the antecedent non-existence and annihilation of an infinite number of its parts. In the opinion of the writer of the Kandalī Darkness is included in Earth. So that according to him there is no impropriety in the exclusion of a greater number.”

Among these nine divisions of Substance, Ether, Time, and Space do not form any class, since they have only a single individual existence, but the rest form classes.

Commentary: The Bhāṣya of Candrakānta:

(English translation of Candrakānta Tarkālaṅkāra’s Bhāṣya called the Vaiśeṣikabhāṣya from the 19th century)

The separate mention of Time and Space is intended to indicate the difference in the uses of these terms according to the difference of the effects, Ākāśa, though it is one. still admits of a variety of names and uses, according to the difference of effect. It is not that Time and Space are essentially different objects from Ākāśa. Ether.