Vaisheshika-sutra with Commentary
by Nandalal Sinha | 1923 | 149,770 words | ISBN-13: 9789332869165
The Vaisheshika-sutra 2.2.33, 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 3 (‘arguments for the eternality of sound’) contained in Chapter 2—Of the Five Bhutas, Time, and Space—of Book II (of substances).
Sūtra 2.2.33 (Arguments for the eternality of Sound)
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration, Word-for-word and English translation of Vaiśeṣika sūtra 2.2.33:
प्रथमाशब्दात् ॥ २.२.३४ ॥
prathamāśabdāt || 2.2.34 ||
dvayoḥ—of both; tu—but; provrittyoḥ—of the activities or occupations; abhāvāt—from the non-existence or absence.
33. (Sound is eternal), because (otherwise) the occupations of both (the teacher and the pupil) will vanish out of existence.
Commentary: The Upaskāra of Śaṅkara Miśra:
(English rendering of Śaṅkara Miśra’s commentary called Upaskāra from the 15th century)
Now, in order to confute the arguments, advanced by the conclusionist (the Mīmāṃsā thinker), in support of the eternality of Sound, he says:
[Read sūtra 2.2.33 above]
The word ‘tu’ cuts off connection with the context, and introduces the statement of an objection of the first party. The occupation or employment ‘of both,’ i.e., of the teacher and the pupil in teaching and learning respectively, is observed. “From its non-existence or absence,” i.e., from the entailment of its non-existence. For teaching is an act of gift or donation. The teacher makes a gift of the Veda to the pupil. If it is something constant or fixed, then a donation of it is possible. The second party may say, “A cow, and the like which are being given away, are perceived as standing between the donor and the donee; whereas the Veda, etc., are not perceived as lying between the teacher and the pupil. Therefore teaching cannot be a donation.” Our (i.e., the first party’s) reply is that they are perceived in the interval between the teacher and the pupil by the ear of a person standing there. Moreover, the eternality of Sound follows from recurrence also. As in “He sees the colour for five times,” the recurrence or persistency of colour which is constant or permanent is observed, so the recurrence or persistency of Sound in “The anuvāka or paragraph has been read ten times, twenty times,” is proof of the constancy or permanence of Sound. And constancy or steadiness being proved, since nothing is known which can destroy it, its eternality also is necessarily proved, on the principle “What will afterwards destroy it which is constant or lasting all this time?” This is the import.—33.