Sanskrit Fragments Of Jnendrabuddhis Visalamalavati

Author(s): Ernst Steinkellner
Publisher: Ernst Steinkellner
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/269733/1

Page #1
SOME SANSKRIT-FRAGMENTS OF JINENDRABUDDHI'S VISALAMALAVATI Ernst Steinkellner A thorough and comprehensive study of the Buddhist tradition of epistemology and logic has been impeded to some extent by the fact, that only a few works of the school have been transmitted in their original language, Sanskrit. While in the early days of researh one dealt practically with Dharmakirti's Nyayabindu and Dharmottara's commentary alone, the fortunate finds of Sanskrit manuscripts in the vaults of some Tibetan monasteries made by Rahula Sankstyayana during his journeys in 1929, 1934, 1936 and 1938deg considerably enhanced the material in the original language. Some of the major works of the school, e.g. Dharmakirti's Pramanavarttika (ed. 1938) and Vadanyaya (ed. 1935-36), and some important commentaries, e.g. Karnakagomin's subcommentary on the Pramanavarttikasvavstti (ed. 1943), Prajnakaragupta's Pramanavarttikabhasya (ed. 1953), Santaraksita's Vadanyayatika (ed. 1935-30) and Manorathanandin's Pramanavarttikavstti (ed. 1938-40), being available since put our knowledge of the school's literature and ideas on a firm basis. At the same time the Tibetan translations of these and many other works prove, nevertheless, to be indispensible. For, where we have the original text, they are a reliable testimony for the condition of the extant text and a decisive help in any emendatory work, and where the original is lost, they are our only source. The latter is the case, e.g., not only with Dharmakirti's second major work, the. Pramanaviniscaya, and the oldest commentaries on the Pramanavarttika, by Devendrabuddhi and Sak yamati, and on the Pramanaviniscaya, by Dharmottara, but also with Dignaga's Pramanasamuccaya

Page #2
Some Sanskrit fragments 97 and Vrtti, the foundation-stone of the whole tradition, and the only commentary on it known, Jinendrabuddhi's Visalamalavati, to mention but a few works of major importance. Besides this host of works, transmitted in their Tibetan translation only, we find a great number of Sanskrit fragments, partly in Buddhist works, partly in Nyaya and Vaisesika works and above all in works of the epistemological and logical tradition of the Jainas. And in the same way as the Tibetan translations can be used to improve upon the condition of the Sanskrit texts, these Sanskrit fragments can be used to enhance the source-value of the Tibetan translations. In this respect there are some good and obvious reasons for collecting the Sanskrit fragments of works extant in their Tibetan translation only : In general, they may or may not confirm the quality of the translations and their value as reliable sources. And in particular, their dignity as original phrases and statements is unsurpassable even by the usually very neat and scrupulous Tibetan translations of the cpistemological literature. For, due to the schematic and conceptorientated simplified wording, these translations are paradoxically quite often ambiguous, lacking the conceptual colours of the corresponding Sanskrit expression in the originals. And finally, depending on the amount of material that can be collected it is possible to regain some texts and textpieces in their original. Here even fragmentary recovery would be particularly useful, for the fragments such text-pieces would consist of, have been transmitted as quotations in other works, and by having been quoted at all these texts prove to be valuable as carrying an interesting contribution of their author to a philological or systematical issue. And as such they are textual marks for our research into the development of the school. ' Re-translations into Sanskrit, often mistakenly and misleadingly published under the style of "reconstruction", are no substitute for the original or fragments of the originals. The

Page #3
98 A Corpus of Indian Studies great accuracy and consistency of most Tibetan translations of works from this school and our generally increasing know. ledge of the Tibetan translation-techniques usually allow a good idea of what the original Sanskrit might have looked like, but there is no critical certainty in this and with regard to the details of phraseology and syntactical arrangement we can never reach such a standard of probability that a re-translation can be considered as a real substitute of the original text. These re-translations have the same distance to the original as e.g. English or German translations from the Tibetan, although this distance is deceptively minimized by the seeming identity of the la nguage used with the language of the original. They have to be considered, therefore, as modern translations into Sanskrit, and not as restorations or reconstructions of the Sanskrit original. The merit of re-translations consists only in that they render intelligible the Tibetan translations to the traditional Indian scholar or Indologist who does not read Tibetan, and thus present him with an impression of a lost literary treasure of the Indian tradition. Since it is tempting to consider such translations into Sanskrit as the original and at the same time evident that such a conception can lead further on towards misinterpretation, one cannot caution too strongly against this kind of error. To be sure, from such re-translations we have to distinguish authentic reconstructions which are possible, however, only to that extent to which fragments of the original and Sanskrit-commentaries extant have transmitted the language-material of the text, which then can be checked and arranged by means of comparing them with the Tibetan translations. JI The following group of fragments from Jinendrabuddhi's Visalamalavatl (PST), the only real commentary on Dignaga's Pramanasamuccaya and -vptti existing, is a small example of the often surprising possibilities we have in gathering these valuable textual remains.

Page #4
Some Sanskrit fragments 99 They come from the rather curious Appendix I (pp. 515531) in Rahulaji's edition of Manorathanandin's Pramanavarttikavstti (PVV)' containing shorter and larger unconnected pieces of texts with clearly commentatorial character. Vibhuticandra, who was the copyist of the whole manuscript (cf. PVV p. 513, 4), has not only added numerous foot-notes to the manuscript? which have been added to the edition of the PVV, too, but also personal remarks and scholarly notes at the end of the manuscript". The literary character of these scholarly notes is not yet clear to me in every detail. One piece is definitely copied from another commentaryo, the others contain a great amount of textual material from commentaries-mainly the Pramanavarttikatika, but also the Visalamalavati., but I have not been able to trace these other pieces as a whole in the earlier literature of the school. They may be either copied by Vibhuticandra from other commentaries, not yet determined, who have made use of other commentaries already, or they may have been written by Vibhuticandra himself, incorporating pieces of older literature. The texts nr. 2 (p. 516f.) and nr. 3 (p. 517-523) of this appendix are concerned with the question of the sequence of chapters in the Pramanavarttika and with the beginning of the pramana-chapter. Since this pramana-chapter is an extended"commentary" on the mangala-verse of the Pramanasamuccaya, this verse is quoted (p. 518, 26f.) and a lengthy commentary follows (p. 518, 29-521, 20). This commentary, highly interesing in itself, but so far of unclear origin, obviously contains pieces of Jinendrabuddhi's comments on the same verse. Dignaga's mangala-verse is of considerable importance functioning somewhat as a key for an interpretation of the spiritual and cultural meaning of a Buddhist tradition of epistemology and logic11. And the Sanskrit fragments from Jinendrabuddhi's explanation of these Dignaga-words we can extract from this text will help to understand and emphasize the leading character attributed to it by the tradition in its approach towards reflecting its own religious and cultural value.

Page #5
100 * A Corpus of Indian Studies Jinendrabuddhi's comments on the mangala-verse itself run from f. 264 to f. 4b313. The following fragments 1-6 comment upon the important first two padas of the verse and taken together represent the Sanskrit original of the greater part of Jinendrabuddhi's words on these two padas (f. 263-3a8). The last words of fragment 6 and fragment 7 comment upon the second line of the verse. To make up for those parts of the text not accounted for in the fragments, I have added an English translation of the Tibetan translationis. Short Sanskrit words and phrases without correspondence in the Tibetan translation and apparent glosses are put between square brackets, larger glosses are given in the notes.. Omissions are marked by dots and supplied in the notes or in brackets. Possible corruptions are printed with normal letters. PST f. 2b3r.: "Although (a phrase like) "You are the real saviour' does not use a word of comparison', its meaning is understood. The same is the case in this (verse). Thus the Venerable one is a means of cognition, because he is like a means of cognition."16 fragment 1 (PVV, Appendix, p. 518, 29-519, 4-PST f. 264-7): patha pratyaksadipramanam purusarthopayogino 'nadhigatasjarthasya prakasakan sumvadakan ca tatha bhagavan api yatrotkrstah purusarihah pratibaddhas caturaryasatyalaksane tative tadvisayani hi jnanam asadya moksarthinani [moksadhigamat). tasya (hy) anadhigatasya prakasako visam vadakas ca (bhagavan nanyah] iti pramanasadharmiyat pramanam/ bhuta utpannah...16. bhutavacanam aprajatasyesvaradeh... 17 paraparikalpita-18 nityasya pratisedhartham/ [ ]1pramanan casau bhutas ceti pramanabhutah/ tasmai pramanabhutaya/ PST f. 267-8 : "(Objection:) Why has the accusative not been used here in explaining just that, as e.g. : "having saluted the teacher (sastaram pranam ya); who has virtues of such a kind." ? (Answer:) Right. For the intention of speech is followed by the best (word) relation (mchog gi sbyor ba ?, i.e.

Page #6
Some Sanskrit fragments 101 the accusative ?), when one wishes to express the objectgovernment (*karmakaraka), and when..."20 fragment 2 (PVV, Appendix, p. 519, 10-12 - PST f. 268-3a2): prarthanadhyavasaya[adi]kriyaya" praptun isgatamatval labdhakarmavyapadesaya pranatikriyaja: bhipreyamanasya?' sampradanatvavivaksayam atras caturthi... / PST f. 3a2f.: "As in the case of the phrase) 'she lies down to the husband' (patye sele ini), when one wishes to express the action for the benefit of the husband, -because (this) one thinks of by lying down,-by that which denominates the obtained object, there is only the dative; in the same way here, too's. Therefore there is no fault."90 fragment 3 (PVV, Appendix, p. 519, 23-27 - PST f. 3a3-6): jagaddhitaisine iti jagaddhitam salopayaThey'opadeyayor atyantike hano 8 padane tadesanasilaya/ pranamiya '' kayava. nmanobhih pranamam katra...! samuccayah karisyate iti 'i sambandhah.xyetena pranamatah puja vihitak sastre iti...3 trnircau samsiksadadibhyah sanijnajam canituust 9. ity [aunadika itpratisedhah). duhkhaksayopayopadesah sasanamke PST f. 3a6 : "The author of this (instruction) is called 'teacher'(*sastr) with reference to the state of effect. Here the word 'instruction' is used because of a metaphorical usage of the effect for the practise of the cause-path of this very instruction."16 fragment 4 (PVV, Appendix, p. 519, 28-29 - PST f. 3a6-7) : tac ch7sanam kurvan bhagaran bodhisatt vavasthayam sastssabdenoktaht. fragment 5 (PVV, Appendix, p. 520, 26 = PST f. 3a7): sugatayeti susthu gatah praptah sarvahey'aprahan 36. fragment 6 (PVV, Appendix, p. 520, 29-31 - PST f. 3a8) : tayine itif tayate'neneti tayah...! sva 8 drstamargopadesaht. so'syastiti tayit. preksavadaranibhanam... 80 prayojanena vyaptatvatt PST f. 3b4:40 "If this must be taken up for this purpose,"41 fragment 7 (PVV, Appendix, p. 521, 1-3 = PST f. 364-6): .'

Page #7
102 A Corpus of Indian Studies narabdhavyam (idam] pramanasiddher nyayamukhadi...': eva sadhitatvattyat sadhitan tad..., yatha siddha odanah (iti),..." vyapakavirodham......... ahasvamatad viprasstad itit. hetau pancami. *7. NOTES 2. This 1. Ed. by P. Peterson, Calcutta 1889, from manuscripts in Jaina, collec tions and transmitted in India due to the interest of the Jaina epistemologists in the kindred tradition of the Buddhists. This state of things remained basically unchanged until Th. Stcherbatsky published a systematic account of the school's theories together with a translation of Dharmottara's commentary in the two volumes of his "Buddhist Logic", Leningrad 1930-32. Reports and manuscript-lists are to be found in: Sanskrit Palm-Leaf MSS. in Tibet (JBORS 21, 1935, pp. 21-43), Appendix F of his edition of the Vadanyayah (JBORS 22, 1936, Pt. 1, pp. XIV-XIX), Second Search of Sanskrit Palm-Leaf MSS. in Tibet (JBORS 23, 1937, pp. 157). Scarch for Sanskrit MSS. in Tibet (JBORS 24, 1938, pp. 137-163). The works of our school are collected in the Tshad ma-section of the Tanjur and add up to twenty volumes of the Peking edition (Nrs. 5700-5766 in Vols. 130-139 of the Japanese reprint). S. They may have the quality of pioneers' works as H. R. Rangaswamy Iyengar's "reconstruction" into Sanskrit of the first chapter of Digniga's Pramanasamuccaya with selections from the Vrtti and the Tika (Mysore 1930), or they may be superficially executed as Mrinalkanti Gangopadhyaya's "reconstruction" of Vinitadeva's Nyayabindutika (Calcutta 1971), which in addition is translated into English, thus offering a translation of a translation of a translation. They may also be made carefully, with critical consciousness and approach and with the peculiar empathy of the traditional pandit, as the ones by the Jaina Muni Jambuvijayaji, who seems to be one of the few to use the correct term "translation" (anuvada) for what he does and has translated into Sanskrit parts of Dignaga's Pramanasamuccaya with Vrtti and Tika (cf. Vaisesikasutra of Kanada with the Commentary of Candrananda. Baroda 1961, Appendix VII, pp. 169-219; Dvadasaram Nayacakram. Part 1. Bhavnagar 1966, Appendix, pp. 95-140 ; Part II, 1976, in various footnotes). 6. Ed. in the Appendix to JBORS 24(1938), 25(1939), 26(1940). Cf. Rahulaji's preface p. I; E. Frauwallner has studied these notes and shown that many have been taken from Devendrabuddhi's comnientary on the Pramanavarttika in his article : Devendrabuddhi (WZKS 4, 1960, pp. 119-123).

Page #8
Some Sanskrit fragments 103 8. Cf. R. Sankstyayana, Saoskrit Palm-Leaf MSS. in Tibet. JBORS 21, 1935, p. 11-13. 9. Cr. PVV, Appendix, p. 515, note 1: pustakante kargadapafresu vibhn ticandrenaira likhitam 10. Nr. 1 (p. 515) e.g. is a commentary of the second mangala-verse of the svarthanumana-chapter of the Pramanavarttika and has been copied with some omissions from Sakyamati's Pramapavarttikatika (Peking ed., f. 4a 7-5b 2), a text which has also been used by Karpakagomin in composing his Svavsttitika (ed. 1943), where it corresponds to p. 3, 25-4, 27. 11. It has been translated with the Vrtti and commented upon by M. Hattori (Dignaga, On Perception, being the Pratyaksa-pariccheda of Dignaga's Pramanasimuccaya from the Sanskrit fragments and the . Tibetan versions. Cambridge, Mass., 1968, p. 23f. and 73-76). 12. I refer to the Japanese reprint (ed. D. T. Suzuki, Tokyo-Kyoto 1957, Vol. 139, Nr. 5766) of the Peking edition. 13. The Peking version (P) has been compared with the version of Derge (D) (Tshad ma, Vol. Ye, f. 1ff.). 14. lit. : "the word 'of such kind ('di 'dra ba'i sgra). 15. khyod ni sgrol byed dam pa'o i'es pa'di 'dra ba'i sgra sbyar ba med pa yai de'i don rlogs pa de Itar 'dir yan no z'es pas ishad ma dan'dra bas bcom Idan das fshad ma'o // 16. omitted : "that means 'produced' " (byun ba ces pa'i don to 11 ). byun ba may correspond to pradurbhata (cf. PVV, Appendix, p. 521, 27: pradurbhavarthah) or to prajata(cf. the immediately following apra Jatasy'a which is rendered by ma byun ba). 17. omitted : shad ma. 18. The whole line seems to have been wrongly corrected after the omission of the word pramanam. Since bhnta is an attribute of the Bhagavan, it is said here that it is used to exclude fsvara a.o., who are conceived as eternal by others. But the real meaning is, that the Bhagavan is said "to have become" (bhita) a pramuna in order to exclude the eternal pramana of e.g. an Isvara as conceived by others (cf. Sakyamati's Tika, Peking ed., JI, f. 866 5: ishad ma rtag par riog pa bsal ba svin no 11 ). For lsvara, being eternal, cannot "becomic" a pramina. According to the Tibetan translation the sentence originally looked probably like this: bhntavacanam aprajatasya nityasyesvaradipramanasya paraparikalpitasya pratisedhartham Gloss: ivarthas tu samarthyagara iti na tadartham etad iti vak syate/ 20. lo na 'dir ji Itar 'di nid kyi 'grel par 'di la bu'i yon tan can gyi ston pa la phyag 'Ishal nas z'es pa ltar gflis pa 'byun ba ma yin nam (D: yinam P) z'e nalbden te brjod 'dod 'di ni mchog gi sbyor ba'i rjes su 'bran ba Nid kyi phyir gan gi ishe las kyi byed pa brjod par 'dod lagan gi ishe... 19.

Page #9
A Corpus of Indian Studies For the objection cf. PVV, Appendix, p. 519, 5-8. The interpretation. of the dative used here with pranamya is also discussed at length by Yasomitra in his Abhidharmakosavyakhya (ed. U. Wogihara, Tokyo 1932-36) p. 6, 16-7, 12, where he refers to Dignaga's mangala-verse, too (p. 7, 5f.). 21. bya ba 'di dag gi (?). 22. Corrected: abhipriyamanasya (cf. Padamanjari 1, p. 549, 11 and Nyasah 1, p. 548, 31; both ed. by Dvarikadasa Sastri, Varapasi 1965.). 104 23. de'i tshe las la. de'i tshe has been omitted, because the quotation does not have the corresponding gan gi tshe at the beginning of the sentence and las la (karmani) has been substituted by atra. 24. bz'i pa nid rigs te ("the fourth alone is correct"). 25. Jinendrabuddhi refers to Mahabhasya (ed. F. Kielhorn, Bombay 1892ff.) 1. p. 330, 18ff. on kriyagrahanam apl kartavyam, which is taken as a Varttika in our context (cf. PVV, Appendix, p. 519, 9). My translation is just an attempt. 26. ji ltar de kho nar theb pa'i las kyi min can nal bas mion par 'dod par bya ba nid kyi phyir bdag po ched du bya bar brjod par 'dod pa na bdag po la Mal lo z'es pa 'dir bz'i pa kho nar 'gyur ba de bz'in du 'dir yan no || ces pas skyon med do || 27. corrected: sa hyapaya-. 28. corrected: dano 29. phyag tshal nas z'es pa. 30. 'di yan. 31: 'di dan brel (: sbrel P) lo // 32. 'dir it med de (D: te P)......z'ed bsad pa'i phyir ro || ("in this case anit, for it is said......2 33. Unadisutra 2.94 (ed. T. R. Chintamani, Madras 1933). 34. Jinendrabuddhi includes Unadisutra 2.95 (...gz'an du yan man por ro). The word fastr is also explained by Yasomitra (loc. cit. p. 7, 14-21) refering to Upadisultra 2.94.. 35. de'i byed pa po ston pa z'es brjod de 'bras bu'i gnas skabs su'o || 'dir ni bstan pa de fid kyi rgyu lam goms par byed pa la 'bras bu le bar btags pa't phyir bstan pa'i sgra 'jug go || 36. spans pas bde bar glegs pa'o || 37. de yan. 38. sva-(ran gis): su-. 39. thams cad kyi. 40. After some lines on the purpose (PST f. 3a8-3b4) which have not been incorporated into Vibhuticandra's text the last fragment found starts with an objection. 41. gal te de'i don du 'di brisam par bya ba yin na

Page #10
Some Sanskrit fragments 105 42. ran gz'un gis khyod kyis svar ("[already earlier by you through your own theories/treatises, e.g.".) 43. tatra sadhyate, corrupted for : de ni sgrub pa'i ched du riogs pa dan Idan pas brisams par bya ba ma yin te 1 ("that should not be taken up by an intelligent person in order to prove it.") 44. rshad ma sgrub pa yan brgrubs zin pa rin no 11 ("and the proof of the means of cognition is already established.") 45. z'e na. . 46. instead of asankya : 'di bsal ba'i ched du ("in order to refute this"). 47. According to rnam par 'thor ba ni rab tu bkram pa ste / rnan par bkram pa'o z'es pa'i tha ishig go // and the beginning of the following sentence of Vibhuticandra : visirtaprakaranatartho....