Vaisheshika-sutra with Commentary

by Nandalal Sinha | 1923 | 149,770 words | ISBN-13: 9789332869165

The Vaisheshika-sutra 1.1.11, English translation, including commentaries such as the Upaskara of Shankara Mishra, the Vivriti of Jayanarayana-Tarkapanchanana and the Bhashya of Chandrakanta. The Vaisheshika Sutras teaches the science freedom (moksha-shastra) and the various aspects of the soul (eg., it's nature, suffering and rebirth under the law of karma). This is sutra 1 (‘actions do not originate actions’) contained in Chapter 1—Of Substance, Attribute, and Action—of Book I (of the predicables).

Sūtra 1.1.11 (Actions do not originate Actions)

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration, Word-for-word and English translation of Vaiśeṣika sūtra 1.1.11:

कर्म कर्मसाध्यं न विद्यते ॥ १.१.११ ॥

karma karmasādhyaṃ na vidyate || 1.1.11 ||

karma—action; karmasādhyam—producible by action; na—not; vidyate—is known.

11. Action, producible by Action, is not known.

Commentary: The Upaskāra of Śaṅkara Miśra:

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

But it may be asked; Why do not Actions originate other Actions? So he says:—[Read sūtra 1.1.11 above]

Here the root ‘vid’ has the sense of knowledge, and not existence. The meaning is that there is no proof of the existence of Action which is producible by Action, as in the case of Substance and Attribute originated by their congeners.

Here the idea is this: If Action is to produce Action, then it will, like Sound, produce it immediately after its own production. Therefore Disjunction from substances in Conjunction having been completely caused by the first Action itself, from what will the second Action cause Disjunction? For Disjunction must be preceded by Conjunction, and a new Conjunction has not also been produced in the subject in question. But the definition of Action suffers if there is non-production of Disjunction. It cannot be said that a new Action will be produced at another moment; because a patency cannot be delayed and because there is nothing to be waited for. In the case of the production (of Conjunction) at the very moment of the destruction of the previous Conjunction, the production of Disjunction (by Action) will be surely not proved. The same also will be the result in the case of its production of the subsequent Conjunction. And after the subsequent Conjunction there is really destruction of Action. Therefore it has been well said that Action producible by Action is not known.—11.

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: