Sūtra 2.2.37 (Counter objection stated and answered)

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration, Word-for-word and English translation of Vaiśeṣika sūtra 2.2.37:

संख्याभावः सामान्यतः ॥ २.२.३७ ॥

saṃkhyābhāvaḥ sāmānyataḥ || 2.2.37 ||

saṃkhyābhāvaḥ—the existence or application of Number; sāmānyataḥ—from Genus.

37. The existence of number (in Sound) is with reference to the Genus.

Commentary: The Upaskāra of Śaṅkara Miśra:

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

It may be objected, ‘Fifty letters; an eight-lettered mantra; a three-lettered mantra; the eight-lettered mantra, anuṣṭubh; etc.—How can there be such uses of members, when, the letters being non-eternal, there is a possibility of their being infinite in number according to the difference of utterance?” So he says:

[Read sūtra 2.2.37 above]

The meaning is that the existence of the number, fifty, etc., arises from the class notion of ka, ga, etc. Although there might be an infinity of ka’s, etc., the letters determined by the notions of ka, ga, etc., are fifty, three, or eight, in the same way as Substances, Attributes, etc.,' are nine, twenty-four, etc., although there may be an infinity of them according to differences within the group of each of them. This is th a import.

The objector may say: “This is that ga,”—This recognition itself proves the permanence of Sound. Nor is it opposed by the perception, ‘Loud ga, soft ga,’ which conveys, contrary properties; because loudness, etc., are there due to external conditions. Nor is it to be maintained that there cannot appear any difference from the difference of the external condition also; for, then, the crystal also will not shine as different, developing in the form of blue, yellow, etc., from the conjunction of the China rose tāpiñja, etc., nor will the face also, when reflected as elongated, etc., in the sword-blade, jewel, and looking-glass, appear to be different. If it be asked, To what does this property of loudness, etc., belong, which influences ga We reply: It may be the property of Air, or of utterance, or of resonance. What is the use of fixing upon the particular one amongst them? You also admit that loudness, etc., are natural distinctions, as the relation of high and low amongst them cannot be established or explained by the notions of ka, ya, etc.”

We reply: It is not so. Because even when such contrary perception exists, viz., ‘ga is produced,’ ‘ga is destroyed,’ ‘ga which was just heard, does not exist,’ ‘the noise has stopped, etc., if this recognation does not then cease, then it must be supposed to relate to class-notions. Otherwise such recognition coming to rest upon the permanence or steadiness of individual Sounds, the above contrary perceptions themselves would not be produced. Nor is this the property of Air, because the properties of Air are not the objects of aural perception. Nor again is it the property of the utterance; for if utterance is only Air, then the defect has been already pointed out; if it is something else, then nobody, can say what it is. Nor again is it the property of resonance, for loudness, etc., are perceived also in the resonance from the conch, etc., even though ga is not found there. The naturalness of loudness, etc., however, does not involve an intermixture of classes, for its diversity is obtained from its being pervaded by the class-notion of ga, etc., Moreover, there is a very distinct mode of distinguishing forms in the ga’s, etc., utterer by male and female parrots and man, as also in those uttered by a male and a female, as well as in those uttered by those who are neither males nor females; by which a parrot, etc., concealed from vision by branches, a screen, etc., are inferred. But their being produced by external conditions does not arise from external conditions which can be perceived, as in “a young woman looking yellow with saffron.” Nor is their being produced by external conditions proved by argument, for no proof of such a conclusion exists. So far in brief—37.

Here ends the second chapter of the second book in Śaṅkara’s commentary on the Vaiśeṣika aphorisms.

Commentary: The Vivṛti of Jayanārāyaṇa:

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

Some explain the production of Sound on the principle of ripples and waves. According to them, the first Sound is produced from the impact of a drum and a drum-stick, etc., within the limits of that particular Space. Then outside that circle and within the confines, of the ten quarters the second Sound is produced from the first, and. extends it. After that, beyond this second circle, and within the confines of the ten quarters, the third Sound is produced from the second. And. in the same way the production of the fourth and other Sounds should be understood Others, however, hold that the production of Sound takes place on the principle of the ball of the kadamba flower. In their view, the second and other Sounds are neither single nor confined to the ten quarters taken together, but are produced ten-fold in ten-quarters (Thus the one is the theory of the successive production of single Sounds, while the other is the theory of the simultaneous production of multiple Sounds). Tin’s is the difference.