Sūtra 2.2.6 (Marks of Time)

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration, Word-for-word and English translation of Vaiśeṣika sūtra 2.2.6:

अपरस्मिन्नपरं युगपत् चिरं क्षिप्रमिति काललिङ्गानि ॥ २.२.६ ॥

aparasminnaparaṃ yugapat ciraṃ kṣipramiti kālaliṅgāni || 2.2.6 ||

aparasmin—in respect of that which is posterior; aparam—posterior; yugapat—simultaneous; ciram—slow; kṣipram—quick; iti—such; kala-liṅgāni—marks of Time.

6. ‘Posterior’ in respect of that which is posterior, ‘simultaneous’, ‘slow,’ ‘quick,’—Such (cognitions) are the marks of Time.—85.

Commentary: The Upaskāra of Śaṅkara Miśra:

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

Thus it has been stated that particular Attributes such as smell, etc., of tangible things, which are preceded by like Attributes in their causes, are the characteristics of Earth, etc., Now he begins the section on the characteristics of Time, brought in by the order of enumeration, by saying:

[Read sūtra 2.2.6 above]

The word ‘iti’ which shows the mode of cognition, relates to each individual word; so that the meaning is that the cognition ‘it is posterior’ the cognition ‘it is simultaneous,’ the cognition ‘it is slow or late,’ the cognition ‘it is quick or early,’—are the marks of Time. By ‘posterior in respect of that which is posterior,’ we are also to under stand ‘prior, in respect of that which is proir [prior?].’ Therefore the sense is this: If we make a youth our point of view of starting point, then the cognition of Priority is produced in an old man, whose birth has been distanced by a large number of the revolutions of the sun; and this Priority depends upon some non-combinative cause. Now. Colour, etc., cannot be the non-combinative cause, owing to their variable presence. The three, beginning with Smell, do not produce Priority in respect of Air. Touch also, rendered different by the difference of hot, etc., is in each case variable in its presence. Nor is a fixed Measure the non-combinative cause, for it does not originate a heterogeneous object. Therefore it remains at last that, the revolutions of the sun being connected with a different substratum, conjunction with a Substance determined by those revolutions is really the required non-combinative-cause. And that Substance, being conjoint both with the lump of matter on earth (e.g., the body of a youth) as well as the sun, must be universal. If the characteristic of that Substance be supposed to be belonging to Ether, then it would follow that the beating of a drum at any place will produce Sound in all drums everywhere. Thus the Conjunction of Time alone, which is conjoint with the sun, with the lump of matter in question, is the non-combinative cause of Priority. It is Time which demonstrates the action of the sun, because, for the purpose of the determination of a different Substance in the case of the properties of a different Substance, the Soul is dependent upon an affinity in addition to its own propinquity, otherwise the redness of a kusumbha flower at Vārānasi [Vārāṇasī] (Benares) would entail redness in a crystal at Patna also. But Time being supposed to be of that very nature, this (i.e., dependence upon another affinity) is no fault here. If it be asked, why Time also would not transmit colour, we reply, it is because Time has been established only as that which always demonstrates action.

In the same way, the production of Posteriority should be ascertained in a youth, with an old man as the starting point. ‘Simultaneous’: ‘They are born simultaneously,’ They exist simultaneously,’ ‘They act simultaneously,’—in such cognitions, ‘simultaneously’ means at the same time, during the same movement of the sun, in other words, at the same time as determined by the movement of the sun. It is not unconnected movements of the sun, which undergo the qualifications, e.g., ‘simultaneously born,’ etc.; nor are these connected by their own nature. Therefore, these specific cognitions being incapable of a different proof, the Substance which establishes the specification, is Time.—6.