Verse 3.14.426-427

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 3.14.426-427:

सादृश्यमात्रं सामान्यं द्विष्ठं कैश्चित् प्रतीयते ।
गुणो भेदेऽप्यभेदेन द्विवृत्तिर्वा विवक्षितः ॥ ४२६ ॥
व्यापारो जातिभागस्य द्रव्ययोर्वाभिधित्सितः ।
रूपात् सामान्यवाचित्वं प्राग्वा वृत्तेरुदाहृतम् ॥ ४२७ ॥

vyāpāro jātibhāgasya dravyayorvābhidhitsitaḥ |
rūpāt sāmānyavācitvaṃ prāgvā vṛtterudāhṛtam || 427 ||
sādṛśyamātraṃ sāmānyaṃ dviṣṭhaṃ kaiścit pratīyate |
guṇo bhede'pyabhedena dvivṛttirvā vivakṣitaḥ || 426 ||

426. By sāmānya (common property) some understand mere resemblance existing in two things. Or it is meant to be a quality looked upon as identical, though, as existing in two things, it has variation.

427. Or it is the function of the universal aspect of the quality in the two substances which is meant. Because of the (common) form it is said to be expressive of the common attribute. Or because it was so before it entered into the compound.

Commentary

[The difficulty is sought to be removed as follows—By the word sāmānya what is meant here is resemblance existing in two things. Resemblance presupposes difference and identity—two things. Even though an attribute may be presented as existing in one thing, it brings the other to the mind, so that it is really by the expressive power of both that the attribute is understood as existing in both. Even though the attribute is modified by a particular form and substratum, it is meant to be understood as existing in both the upamāna and the upameya by the word sāmānyavacana. What is called resemblance is nothing more than an attribute presented as existing in more than one thing. As the M. Bhā. has said: A word can be said to be sāmānyavacana even if it presents an attribute as existing in two things only, not necessarily as existing in many things. Even though the universal of a quality, inhering in all substrata and, therefore, identical everywhere is not very useful for a comparison, still when it is coloured by the subtle peculiarities of the substrata, it becomes a minor universal (avāntara-sāmānya) and is then called resemblance and is useful for making comparisons. Thus the word sāmānyavacana is expressive of a quality like darkness, diversified from the universal and existing in both the standard and the object of comparison. A word like śyāmā becomes sāmānyavacana when it denotes a qua lity existing in both the upamāna and the upameya and considered to be identical because of resemblance. It is said to be expressive of substance because of identification of quality with substance.

Another way of removing the difficulty is stated in the M. Bhā. as follows. Every word, when associated with another in the sentence becomes particularised. So the word sāmānya vacanaiḥ in P. 2.1.55 means: “with words expressive of the common attribute before they enter the compound.” In a compound the meanings of words are mixed up in an indivisible manner. In the sentence stage, the meanings of words are connected, but separate. In the compound, there is integration. Because of resemblance, they are identified. That is why the formation of a compound is explained with the help of meanings obtained by analysis. Even though the word syāmā in the compound is mentioned in relation to the upameya, it is still said to be expressive of the common attribute as in the sentence, it was not related to any of the two in particular. It was expressive of the universal there. So, even though it denotes the particular in the compound it is still called sāmānyavacana on the basis of its previous state in the sentence.]

Now the points mentioned in the M. Bhā. on P. 2.1.56 are explained.