Sūtra 3.1.8 (Faltacious mark—continued)

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration, Word-for-word and English translation of Vaiśeṣika sūtra 3.1.8:

अर्थान्तरं ह्यर्थान्तरस्यानपदेशः ॥ ३.१.८ ॥

arthāntaraṃ hyarthāntarasyānapadeśaḥ || 3.1.8 ||

arthāntaram—any one thing; hi—because; arthāntarasya—of any other thing; anapadeśah—not a mark.

8. (Although a mark is quite different from that of which it is a mark, still they are not wholly unconnected), for, any one thing cannot be a mark of any other thing.

Commentary: The Upaskāra of Śaṅkara Miśra:

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

It be may said, “As the Soul is not identical with the auditory and other organs of sense, so there is no production of the latter from the former. For the sense-organs of hearing, etc., are not producd from the Soul, as smoke is produced from fire” So he says:

[Read sūtra 3.1.8 above]

Because, as the effect, e.g., smoke, etc., is a different thing from an ass, so it is also a different thing from its cause, e.g., fire, etc. So that in the absence of any distinction in respect of being a different object, a particular nature is the regulative principle here, whereby the smoke does not infer an ass, but only fire. And if that nature belongs to any thing other than the effect, then that too really becomes a mark. Thus an effect cannot be a mark, if it is devoid of the particular nature intended here. Thus, identity and causation only constitute inseparable existence or universal concomitance; these two are reduced into inseparable existence; or, it is co-ordinate with them as the principle of inference; or, its apprehension is dependent upon the apprehension of the above two only. Hence the aphorism is only the statement of an argument for causing confusion to the disciples in the above way. This is the import.—8.