Page #1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ INFLUENCE OF BUDDHIST LOGIC ON ALANKARA SASTRA 1 By ANANTALAL THAKUR, Darbhanga Kautilya describes logic as a lamp unto all the sastrasand his claim is just. It is no wonder that the Alamkarasastra, which gradually became a veritable dialectic discipline, should have deep connections with it. But to a student of Alamkara the predominence of the influence of the Buddhist logic on this sastra in preference to the orthodox system of logic of the Aksapada school seems to be a puzzle. Almost all the rhetoricians were Brahmins and there is no reasonable ground to hold that they were catholic in their outlook at all. Yet when occasions arise, they unhesitatingly quote Karikas from the classics of Buddhist philosophy in support of their contention and use definitions and terminology adopted by the Buddhist logicians. We propose here to quote some important and concrete instances and offer an explanation. Of all the Rhetoricians Bhamaha seems to be the foremost to accept the viewpoints set-forth in the Buddhist logic in his Kavyalamkara. He " defines and illustrates the eleventh dosa which arises from a faulty pratijna, hetu or dpstanta, the treatment being based upon a discussion of such Nyaya-Vaisesika (?) topics as the number and definitions of pramanas, definitions of pratijna and its varieties, of hetu and its varieties, of distanta, etc. (History of Sanskrit PoeticsMM. Dr. P. V. Kane, 1951, p. 79). We should humbly point out that here Bhamaha is indebted to the school of Dinnaga. And the fact has attracted the notice of modern scholars. 1 Read in the All-India Oriental Conference, Delhi, 1957. 2 yea: Haziran .........75721ffit har Arthasastra. p. 28. Triv. Edn,
Page #2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ 258 ANANTALAL THAKUR Dandin's first example of nyayavirodha refers to the Buddhist Philosophy and the way of the Tathagata ( Jinayana) finds a mention in one of his illustrations. 3 Commentators on Dandin's Kavyadarsa like Vadi Janghala and Ratnasri are found to quote and refer to the Pramanavarttika of Dharmakirtti. Ratnasri was no doubt a Buddhist. But Vadi Janghala was to all intents and purposes a Brahmin. Anandavardhana in his Dhvanyaloka shows evidence of his close acquaintance with the works of Dharmakirtti. His mukhyAM vRttiM parityajya guNavRttyArthadarzanam / yaduddizya phalaM tatra zabdo naiva skhaladgatiH // Dhvanyaloka I. 17 reminds us of yatra rUDhyAsadartho'pi janaiH zabdo nivezitaH / sa mukhyastatra tatsAmyAd gauNo'nyatra skhaladgatiH // Pramanavarttika II. 37 Anandavardhana refers to the kRtrimasaMbandhavAdinaH-Scholars who accept a conventional relation between words and their senses. Here the Buddhist thinkers must have been meant along with others and Abhinava the commentator refers to the Pramanavarttika III. 91 here. He quotes the karika in full in a separate context (p. 542, Dhvanyalokalocana, Chowkhamba)". Abhinava. in his locana refers to another verse of Dharmakirtti5. Of the two verses attributed to Dharmakirtti by Anandavardhana himself, viz. lAvaNyadraviNavyayo na gaNitaH and anadhyavasita .......the former is said to belong to the concluding portion of the Nyayaviniscayavytti6. Anandavardhana employs the terms like alten which are familiar with the Buddhist logicians. He is reported to have written a commentary on the Pramanaviniscaya of Dharmakirtti also. 3 satyamevAha sugataH saMskArAnavinazvarAn / Kavyadarsa III. 174 Vide also Kavya III. 46. - zabdAH saMketitaM prAhurvyavahArAya sa smRtaH / tadA svalakSaNaM nAsti saMketastena tatra na // Pramanavarttika, III. 91 nopAdAnaM viruddharaya taccaikamiti cenmatam / tadajJAnasya vijJAnaM kenopAdAnakAraNam / Pramanavarttika, II. 263-4 6 cf. tathA cAyaM vinizcayavRttyante dharmakIrtyAcAryasya zloka iti prasiddhiH / etadarthasaMsUcakazcAparo'pi hi sphuTa eva tasya iloko vidvadbhiH paripaThyate yathA-anadhyavasita.... Kavyanusasanaviveka, p. 363
Page #3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ 259 The Kavyanusasanaviveka of Jaina Hemacandra also is found to quote Pra. var. II. 57. INFLUENCE OF BUDDHIST LOGIC ON ALAMKARA SASTRA The Avaloka of Dhanika on the Dasarupaka of Dhananjaya uses terms like Anvapoha (p. 251, Chowkhamba Edn., 1955), Svasamvedana (p. 210) , Vipratipatti (p. 219), nantariyaka (p. 220) and avinabhava (p. 244)-of which some are exclusively terms of Buddhist logic. Mahima Bhatta, the author of the Vyaktiviveka, being himself a logician shows closer connection with Buddhist logic. He quotes several verses from the Pramanavarttika as authority: P. 65 (Chowkhamba edn.) P. 74 P. 77 P. 407 tadbhAvahetubhAvau hi dRSTAnte tadavedinaH / khyApyete viduSAM vAcyo hetureva hi kevalaH // Pramanavarttika, III. 26. tirapi [ artha ]saMbandhataH pramA itimaNipradIpaprabhayormaNibuddhayAbhidhAvatoH / mithyAjJAnAvizeSe'pi vizeSo'rthakriyAM prati // Pramanavarttika, II. 57. svajJAnenAnyadhIhetuH siddhe'rthe vyaJjako mataH / yathA dIpo'nyathA vApi ko vizeSo'sya kArakAt // Pramanavarttika, III. 262-3. nAsiddhe bhAvadharmo'sti vyabhicAryubhayAzrayaH / dharmo viruddho'bhAvasya sA sattA sAdhyate katham // Pramanavarttika, III. 190. Ruyyaka, the commentator, identifies a quotation in the Vyaktiviveka with a passage in the Vadanyaya of Dharmakirtti hasati hasati svAminyuccairudatyapi roditi | draviNakaNikAkrItaM yantraM pranRtyati nRtyati // yaduktam, tacca na zabdapunaruktaM pRthagvAcyam, arthapunaruktena gatArthatvAt / na hyarthabhede zabdasAmye'pi kazcid doSaH / yathA Vyaktiviveka, p. 288. cf. The Vadanyaya JBORS, p. III where the verse is quoted in full-- hasata hasata svAminyucairudatyapi roditi kRtaparikaraM svedodgAraM pUrdhAvati dhAvati / guNasamuditaM doSApetaM praNindati nindati dhanalava parikrItaM yatraM pranRtyati nRtyati //
Page #4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ 260 ANANTALAL THAKUR The definitions of inference and syllogistic reasoning in the Vyaktiviveka are evidently borrowed from the Nyayabindu of Dharmakirtti : Vyaktideg, p. 78 TETSFIT CHIA TH1781 cf. Nyayabindu II. 3. Ibid, pp. 65 & 105 feqfettura urefqarah 1 cf. Nyayabindu III. I. Another passage supporting the view of the Buddhist logicians that there are only two types of cognitive organ seems to have been quoted from some standard work? of Buddhist logic. The expression g:exuala THTA (Vyaktio p. 322) is traced to the Saugata prakriya by Ruyyaka. Again terms current in the authoritative works on Buddhist logic like Sarvopasamharavyapti (p. 376), Vyapakaviruddhopalabdhi (p. 85), Asambhavo laksanadosah (p. 79), anyathanupapatti, (p. 112), etc. are often met with in the Vyaktiviveka. One Karika from Dharmakirtti's Pramanavarltika is found quoted in the Srngaraprakasa of Bhoja. 8 Mammata's definition of inference definitely smacks of Buddhist influence: p. 696 BTTN Agri 4 Ayara : pakSadharmAnvayavyatirekitvena trirUpo hetuH sAdhanam // Kavya Pra. BORI, 1950 The Alamkarasarvasva (Pp. 12-13) of Ruyyaka while refuting Mahimabhatta's inclusion of suggestive sense in inference refers to the Buddhist view of invariable concomittance arising out of tadatmya (identity) and tadutpatti (causation). Jayaratha commenting on the same makes the point clearer. 9 The Tarala by Mallinatha on the Ekavali of Vidyadhara also criticises Mahimabhatta on the same point and a discussion on the same theory of causation follows in it 10. The Sahityadarpana of Visvanatha is no exception to it. It defines Savikalpakajnana just in accordance with the Buddhist logicians. abhilApasaMsargayogyatvavirahAnna ca / savikalpakasaMvedyaH * Sahityadarpana, III.57 cf. effatutafahat gaifa: 4711 741 fedi a 4244 Nyayabindu 1.5, 6. Again Visvanatha is found to quote Pra. Var. III. 262-3 7951apft : etc. (S. D. Cal. p. 72 ) and to use the term apoha (p. 710 ). 7 na cAnyadarzane'nyakalpanA yuktA, atiprasaGgAt / tasya nAntarIyakatAyAM syAt / na hi yathAvidhasiddhaH teau fauna gaafa athra a daftar seg fagfaghaha a ya TATU, Vyaktio, p. 79. 8 fatisfa ggakhi...... Pramanavarttika, II. 345. 9 Alamkrasarvasva-Pp. 12-13. 10 Ekavalitarala, pp. 32-35
Page #5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ INFLUENCE OF BUDDHIST LOGIC ON ALAMKARA SASTRA 261 These internal evidences render it obvious that the relation between the two systems is more than casual. It was thought, though without sufficient ground, that the Buddhist philosophers like Dharmakirtti and others made important contributions to Indian Rhetorics. There are references to Sauddhodani--a rhetorician and Rahula-a dramaturgist. Bhamaha also has been called a Buddhist. But Mm. Dr. P. V. Kane could not accept the suggestion of Dharmakirtti being a rhetorician for want of sufficient proof 11. The contributions of Sauddhodani and Rahula do not seem to be great and grave doubt is entertained regarding Bhamaha's religious faith. Hence we are inclined to hold that the influence was indirect rather than direct though it was strong. It has been shown elsewhere that the school of Dinnaga is responsible to bring about drastic changes in all the speculative systems of India 12. It may also be said that the Buddhist Philosophers replaced blind faith by pure reason in Indian thought. The orthodox philosophers coming after Dinnaga and Dharmakirtti had to refashion their outlook and important additions aud alterations were made in every system. The Alamkarasastra also cannot be an exception. It has many things in common with the Buddhist philosophers-the relation between the words and their import being one such important topic. We find Buddhist thinkers making important contributions on this item. Thus independent works on this topic like the Sabdarthacintavivrti of Ratnasrijnana of Ceylon are heard of 13. The Buddhist definitions in almost all the cases were precise and their terminology very rich and all-embracing. Moreover as the land where Alamkarasastra thrived more than anywhere else. It was Kashmir where Buddhist Logic and Philosophy also flourished a bit earlier and formed an important item in the curriculum. Hence it is but natural that the rhetoricians should take recourse to the Buddhist means and methods of thought and quote from Buddhist works whenever they were found useful. It may be added in this context that Brahmanical logic for a time was overshadowed by its Buddhist counterpart to be revived subsequently by scholars like Vacaspati Misra and others. But the Buddhistic elements made a permanent impression on the Alamkarasastra in its hay days and continued to exert the same influence unabatingly even long after the decline of Buddhism in India. 14 11 History. Sans. Poetics 12 Introduction to the Ratnakirttinibandhavali-KPJ Institute, '57. 18 Kavyalaksana of Dandin, Mithila Institute, 1957, p. 143. 14 I am glad to note that Professor Sivaprasad Bhattacharya has written an illuminating article on the same subject-Neo-Buddhist Nucleus in Alamkarasastra, JASB, Vol. XXII, 1956 which came to my notice when the above note was prepared. It is hoped that this note will be accepted as a supplement to Prof. Bhattacharya's learned paper.