Sūtra 2.2.1 (Smell may be essential or accidental)

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration, Word-for-word and English translation of Vaiśeṣika sūtra 2.2.1:

पुष्पवस्त्रयोः सति सन्निकर्षे गुणान्तराप्रादुर्भावो वस्त्रे गन्धाभावलिङ्गम् ॥ २.२.१ ॥

puṣpavastrayoḥ sati sannikarṣe guṇāntarāprādurbhāvo vastre gandhābhāvaliṅgam || 2.2.1 ||

puṣpa-vastrayoḥ—of a flower and a cloth; sati—existing; sannikarṣe—contact; guṇāntarāprā-durbhāvaḥ—non-appearance from another Attribute; vastre—in the doth; gandhābhāva-liṅgam—mark of the non-existence of Smell.

1. The non-production (of the smell which is perceived in the cloth), after or during its contact with a flower, from the Attribute (of the constitutive cause of the cloth), is the mark of the non-existence of smell in the cloth.

Commentary: The Upaskāra of Śaṅkara Miśra:

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

Now the author desires to examine the characteristics, such as Smell, etc., of the “elements” (bhūta). Therefore, by way of establishing that Smell, etc., may be essential or natural as well as accidental or conditional, he says:

[Read sūtra 2.2.1 above]

Where Colour, Taste, Smell, and Touch are produced from the corresponding Attributes in the cause, there they become essential and. so acquire the nature of being characteristic marks, and not otherwise. For, the fragrance which is perceived in the breeze, or the cold which is perceived in a tablet of stone, or the warmth which is perceived in water, does not become a characteristic. Therefore he says. ‘Of a flower and a cloth.’ For the fragrance of the golden ketaki (Pandanus odoratissimus), which is perceived in the cloth when the cloth has been brought into contact with the golden ketaki flower, does not belong to the cloth, because it is not produced according to the (corresponding) Attribute of the cause (i.e., yarns). What, then? It is accidental or conditional, because due to the proximity of the golden ketaki; for the non-existence of Smell in the ketaki is not the mark of the non-existence of Smell in the cloth. What is the mark? So it has been said, “Non-appearance from another Attribute,” i.e., non-production from the Attribute of the cause. For, if the Smell, which is perceived in the cloth, were essential to it, then it would be percieved in the cloth also before the constituent parts, i.e., the yarns of the cloth, are brought into contact with the ketaki; but it is not so. This is the meaning. Thus the Smell in question is not inherent in the cloth, because, like -cold and hot Touch, etc., it is a particular Attribute which is not produced by the Attribute of the constituent parts.—1.

Commentary: The Vivṛti of Jayanārāyaṇa:

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

It has been already stated that the possession of Smell, etc., are the marks of Earth, etc. But this would not be proper. For Smell being perceived of Air, etc., combined with fragrant parts, the mark becomes too wide. For this reason he shows that the perception of Smell, etc., in Air, etc., is accidental.