Vaisheshika-sutra with Commentary
by Nandalal Sinha | 1923 | 149,770 words | ISBN-13: 9789332869165
The Vaisheshika-sutra 9.1.3, 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 (‘the existent is a different thing from the non-existent,...’) contained in Chapter 1—Of Ordinary Perception of Non-Existence and of Transcendental Perception—of Book IX (of ordinary and transcendental cognition...).
Sūtra 9.1.3 (The existent is a different thing from the non-existent,...)
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration, Word-for-word and English translation of Vaiśeṣika sūtra 9.1.3:
असतः क्रियागुणव्यपदेशाभावादर्थान्तरम् ॥ ९.१.३ ॥
asataḥ kriyāguṇavyapadeśābhāvādarthāntaram || 9.1.3 ||
a-sataḥ—from the non-existent; kraiyā-guṇa-vyapadeśa-abhāvāt—in consequence of the non-existence of reference by, or predication of, action and attribute; artha-antaraṃ—a different object.
3. (The existent is) a different object (from the non-existent), inasmuch as Action and Attribute cannot be predicated of the nonexistent.
Commentary: The Upaskāra of Śaṅkara Miśra:
(English rendering of Śaṅkara Miśra’s commentary called Upaskāra from the 15th century)
[Full title: The existent is a different thing from the non-existent, so that after annihilation there can be no continuation of existence]
It may be objected: It is the same water-pot that under a particular condition gives rise to the idea, or conventional use, of annihilation; and not that the annihilation of the water-pot is different from the water-pot:
[Read sūtra 9.1.3 above]
Accordingly he says:
“The existent”—such is the complement of the aphorism. The existent is a different object from the non-existent. If it be asked, How? So he says, ‘kriyā-guṇa-vyapadeśa-abhāvāt.’ For there can be no such predication, during the period of annihilation also, as “The water-pot remains,” “The water-pot exists at this moment,” “The water-pot possesses colour,” “Bring the water-pot,” etc. In consequence of this difference, therefore, the existent is a different thing from the non-existent.—3.
Commentary: The Bhāṣya of Candrakānta:
(English translation of Candrakānta Tarkālaṅkāra’s Bhāṣya called the Vaiśeṣikabhāṣya from the 19th century)
Whatever is non-existent prior to its appearance as an effect, is non-existent only by the nature of an effect, but is really existent at the time by the nature of a cause, and that, therefore, it is essentially different from absolute non-existences.