Sūtra 2.2.36 (The same refuted)

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration, Word-for-word and English translation of Vaiśeṣika sūtra 2.2.36:

सन्दिग्धाः सति बहुत्वे ॥ २.२.३६ ॥

sandigdhāḥ sati bahutve || 2.2.36 ||

sandigdhāḥ—Doubtful; Uncertain. Inconclusive. sati—existing; bahutve—plurality.

36. Plurality (of Sound) existing, (these arguments are) inconclusive.

Commentary: The Upaskāra of Śaṅkara Miśra:

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

Confuting all these reasons, he says:

[Read sūtra 2.2.36 above]

‘Sandighāḥ,’ i.e., not one-pointed. So it has been said, “Kaśyapa taught that a contradictory, unproved, or uncertain mark was no mark.” Thus it is observed that there can be learning, repetition, and also recognition, also if there is a plurality of diversity of Sound, therefore these arguments are inconclusive. For, “He learns dancing,” “He practises dancing.” “He danced the same dance twice,” “You are dancing the same dance to-day, which you danced the other day,” “This man also is dancing the same dance which was danced by another dancer,”—in these cases, learning, repetition, and recognition (of Action) are observed. But you (the conclusionist) too do not on this account admit the permanence (or eternality) of dancing which is a particular kind of Acting.—36

Commentary: The Bhāṣya of Candrakānta:

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

Candrakānta reads II. ii. 33 as simply sandigdhāḥ, supplying for himself the reason for the declaration there, and joins the latter part of it to II. ii. 37, and interprets it to mean that in spite of plurality of individual sounds, their definite enumeration is possible by means of reference to their genera or types.