by Nandalal Sinha | 1923 | 149,770 words | ISBN-13: 9789332869165
The Vaisheshika-sutra 3.2.11, 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 1 (‘above answered’) contained in Chapter 2—Of the Inference of Soul and Mind—of Book III (of soul and mind).
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration, Word-for-word and English translation of Vaiśeṣika sūtra 3.2.11:
दृष्ट्यात्मनि लिङ्गे एक एव दृढत्वात् प्रत्यक्षवत् प्रत्ययः ॥ ३.२.११ ॥
dṛṣṭyātmani liṅge eka eva dṛḍhatvāt pratyakṣavat pratyayaḥ || 3.2.11 ||
dṛṣṭe—(lit; seen)—grasped by perception, Ātmani, the soul; liṅge—being accompanied with marks; ekaḥ—one; eva—only Dridhatvāt, because it becomes more firm or fixed, Pratyakṣavat, like other percepts or perceptions; pratyayaḥ—intuition; Belief.
11. As in the case of other percepts, so, if the Soul, which is grasped by perception, is also accompanied with, or comes at the top of, marks (from which it can be inferred), then, by means of, confirmation, the intuition becomes fastened to one and only one object.
Commentary: The Upaskāra of Śaṅkara Miśra:
To this the advocate of Inference says:
[Read sūtra 3.2.11 above]
‘Dṛṣṭe,’ i.e., grasped by perception; ‘ātmani’; ‘liṅge,’ i.e., having all its marks or causes developed; eka eva,, i.e., having one object only as its matter; ‘pratyayaḥ.’ ‘Pratyayaḥ’ implies the expulsion of all apprehension of error. “How can it be so?” Hence he says, ‘dṛḍhatvāt,’ i.e., because the current of proof is capable of removing the apprehension of its being otherwise. He gives an example,‘pratykṣavat’; i.e., as even when there is perception of water from a distance, yet inference of water by the mark of the balākās (water birds) is made for the purpose of corroboration. So it has been said, “Skilful logicians desire to understand by inference even what is grasped by perception.” The import here is this: Although at times the Soul really shines in mental perception, yet, like knowledge, produced by the flash of lightning, it does not derive so much fixity or permanence being overclouded by such other conflicting perceptions as “I am fair,” “I am lean,” and the like. Here another form of knowledge produced by marks which cannot but lead to their proper inference, confirms or fixes the very knowledge previously obtained from perception. Moreover, inference must be applied to the Soul owing to the desire to infer the knowledge that intellection of the Soul as taught in the precepts “(The Soul) should be heard about, reflected upon,” and the like, is a means towards the realization of that which is desirable, i.e., the Supreme Good. Because if there be no intellection of the Soul, then constant meditation would be impossible, and consequently there would be no realization of the Soul in the understanding, and so salvation would be impossible. This is the purport.