Читать книгу The Sarva-Darsana-Samgraha - Madhava - Страница 15

Table of Contents

[40] Vivasanas, "without garments."

[41] "The Buddhists are also called Muktakachchhas, alluding to a peculiarity of dress, apparently a habit of wearing the hem of the lower garment untucked."—Colebrooke.

[42] In p. 26, line 3, read Syád-vádinám.

[43] I propose to read in p. 26, line 5, infra, gráhyasya for agráhyasya.

[44] As these terms necessarily relate to the perceiver.

[45] I correct the reading tasyágrahaṇaṃ to tasyá grahaṇaṃ (tasyá being jaḍatáyáḥ).

[46] I.e., if you say that the avayava may be not seen though the avayavin is seen, then I may say that the post is the avayavin, and the unperceived three worlds its avayava!

[47] I read arhatsvarúpam arhachchandra in p. 27, line 3, infra.

[48] The following passage occurs in some part of Kumárila's writings in an argument against the Jainas. It is curious that in the Sáṅkara-digvijaya, chap. lv., it is mentioned that Kumárila had a little relenting towards the Jainas at the end of his life. He repented of having so cruelly persecuted them, and acknowledged that there was some truth in their teaching. Jainagurumukhát kaśchid vidyáleśo játaḥ.

[49] Kumárila tries to prove that no such being can exist, as his existence is not established by any one of the five recognised proofs—the sixth, abháva, being negative, is, of course, not applicable. I understand the last śloka as showing the inapplicability of "presumption" or arthá-patti. A Jaina would say, "If the Arhat were not omniscient, his words would not be true and authoritative, but we see that they are, therefore he is omniscient." He answers by retorting that the same argument might be used of Buddha by a Buddhist; and as the Jaina himself would disallow it in that case, it cannot be convincing in his own.

[50] In p. 29, line 2, read tatsadbhávávedakasya for tatsadbhávádekasya.

[51] In p. 29, line 9, for nikhilárthajñanát notpatty, I propose to read nikhilárthajñánotpatty.

[52] Janya is included in Kárya and equally disputed.

[53] Thus "I am possessed of a body" (aham Śarírí), "my hand," &c., are all sentences in which a predicate involving the notion of parts is applied to the soul "I."

[54] Reasoning in a circle. I suppose the &c. includes the Anavasthádosha or reasoning ad infinitum. He accepts the supposed fault, and holds that it is actually borne out in a case before everybody's eyes.

[55] In p. 31, line 5, infra, read tattvárthe for tattvártham.

[56] I read in p. 32, line 9, Samyagdarśanádi for asamyagdarśanádi; but the old text may mean "caused by the abolition of hindrances produced by the qualities, wrong intuition," &c.

[57] Cf. the five yamas in the Yoga-sútras, ii. 30. Hemachandra (Abhidh 81) calls them yamas.

[58] I read kámánám for kámáṇám in p. 33, line 7 (2 × 3 × 3 = 18).

[59] For abháshaṇa, see Hemach. 16.

[60] I propose in p. 33, line 17, raśayanajñánaśraddhávacháraṇáni for rasáyaṇajñanaṃ śraddhánávaraṇáni. For avacháraṇa, see Suśruta, vol. ii. p. 157, &c. If anávaraṇa be the true reading, I suppose it must mean "the absence of obstructions."

[61] This is a hard passage, but some light is thrown on it by the scholiast to Hemachandra, Abhidh. 79.

[62] Or this may mean "by the influence of upaśamakshaya or kshayopaśama, it appears characterised by one or the other."

[63] I read in p. 34, line 7, kalushádyákáreṇa for kalushányákáreṇa. The upaśamakshaya and kshayopaśama seem to correspond to the aupaśamika and ksháyika states about to be described.

[64] Strychnos potatorum.

[65] Just as in the Sánkhya philosophy, the soul is not really bound though it seems to itself to be so.

[66] A valid non-perception is when an object is not seen, and yet all the usual concurrent causes of vision are present, such as the eye, light, &c.

[67] I read in p. 35, line 5, 'stíti for sthiti.

[68] Hence the term here used for "category"—astikáya.

[69] These (by Hemach. Abhidh. 21), possess only one sense—touch. In p. 35, line 10, I read śaṅkhagaṇḍolakaprabhṛitayas trasáś chaturvidháḥ pṛithivyaptejo.

[70] In p. 35, line 16, I read teshám ajívatvát for tesháṃ jívatvát. If we keep the old reading we must translate it, "because the former only are animate."

[71] In p. 35, line 3 from bottom, I read sarvatrávasthite for sarvatrávasthiti. In the preceding line I read álokenávachchhinne for álokenávichchhinne.

[72] Cf. Siddhánta-muktávali, p. 27. The vishaya is upabhoga-sádhanam, but it begins with the dvyaṇuka. This category takes up the forms of sthávara which were excluded from jíva.

[73] It is an interesting illustration how thoroughly Mádhava for the time throws himself into the Jaina system which he is analysing, when we see that he gives the Jaina terminology for this definition of dravya—cf. Vaiśesh. Sútra, i. 1, 15. Paryáya is explained as karman in Hemach. Anek. Paryáya, in p. 36, line 11 (infra, p. 53, line 9), seems used in a different sense from that which it bears elsewhere. I have taken it doubtingly as in Hemach. Abhidh. 1503, paryáyo 'nukramaḥ kramaḥ.

[74] Yoga seems to be here the natural impulse of the soul to act.

[75] In line 18, read ásravaṇakáraṇatvád.

[76] The jnána is one, but it becomes apparently manifold by its connection with the senses and external objects.

[77] These are also called the eight karmans in Govindánanda's gloss, Ved. Sút., ii. 2, 33.

[78] The Calcutta MS. reads ádaraṇíyasya for ávaraṇíyasya, in p. 37, last line. But ávaraṇíya may be used for ávarana (Páṇ. iii. 4, 68). Cf. Yoga Sút., ii. 52, where Vyása's Comm. has ávaraṇíya.

[79] Jálavat? The printed text has jalavat.

[80] Umásvámi-?

[81] For the ságaropama, see Wilson's Essays, vol. i. p. 309. In p. 38, line 16, I read ityádyuktakálád úrdhvam api for the obscure ityádyuktaṃ káladurddhánavat. I also read at the end of the line prachyutiḥ sthitiḥ for prachyutisthitiḥ.

[82] In p. 38, line 18, read svakáryakaraṇe.

[83] In p. 39, line 2 and line 5, for írshyá read íryá—a bad misreading.

[84] In p. 39, line 6, I read ápadyetá for ápadyatá.

[85] In p. 39, line 9, for seshaṇá read saishaṇá.

[86] In p. 39, line 12, join nirjantu and jagatítale.

[87] Mádhava omits the remaining divisions of saṃvara. Wilson, Essays, vol. i. p. 311, gives them as parishahá, "endurance," as of a vow; yatidharma, "the ten duties of an ascetic, patience, gentleness," &c.; bhávaná, "conviction," such as that worldly existences are not eternal, &c.; cháritra, "virtuous observance."

[88] In p. 39, line 14, read ásravasrotaso.

[89] For moha, in line 16, read moksha.

[90] In p. 39, line 2 infra, I read yathákála- for yathá kála-.

[91] This passage is very difficult and not improbably corrupt, and my interpretation of it is only conjectural. The ordinary nirjará is when an action attains its end (like the lulling of a passion by the gratification), this lull is temporary. That nirjará is "ancillary" which is rendered by asceticism a means to the attainment of the highest good. The former is akámá, "desireless," because at the moment the desire is satisfied and so dormant; the latter is sakámá, because the ascetic conquers the lower desire under the overpowering influence of the higher desire for liberation.

[92] I read nirodhe for nirodhah in p. 40, line 6; cf. p. 37, line 13. The causes of bondage produce the assumption of bodies in which future actions are to be performed.

[93] Literally "absence of sanga."

[94] In p. 41, line 7, read sapta-bhaṅgí-naya, see Ved. S. Gloss., ii. 2, 23.

[95] I cannot understand the words at the end of the first line, kim vṛitatadvidheḥ, and therefore leave them untranslated.

[96] Thus Govindánanda applies it (Ved. Sút., ii. 2, 33) to "may be it is one," "may be it is many," &c.

[97] 'Ακαταληψἱα This is Śriharsha's tenet in the Khaṇḍana-khaṇḍa-khádya.

[98] In p. 42, line 17, for matenámiśritáni read matena miśritáni.

[99] In p. 43, line 2, for na yasya read nayasya.

[100] This list is badly printed in the Calcutta edition. It is really identical with that given in Hemachandra's Abhidhána-chintámaṇi, 72, 73; but we must correct the readings to antaráyás, rágadwesháv aviratiḥ smaraḥ, and háso for himsá. The order of the eighteen doshas in the Calcutta edition is given by Hemachandra as 4, 5, 1, 2, 3, 10, 11, 12, 7, 9, 17, 16, 18, 8, 6, 15, 13, 14.

[101] In p. 43, line 13, for vartini read vartiniḥ.

[102] This seems corrupt—a line is probably lost.

[103] In last line, for saṃsrave read saṃvare.

[104] Does this mean the knowledge of the world, the soul, the liberated and liberation? These are called ananta. See Weber's Bhagavatí, pp. 250, 261–266.

[105] Sarajoharaṇáh is explained by the rajoharaṇadhárin (= vratin) of Haláyudha, ii. 189.

[106] Cf. Wilson, Essays, i. 340. For strím read strí.