Sanskrit Manuscript Of Dharmakirtis Pramanaviniscaya

Author(s): Kazunobu Matsuda, Ernat Steinkellner
Publisher: Kazunobu Matsuda, Ernat Steinkellner
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/269417/1

Page #1
THE SANSKRIT MANUSCRIPT OF DHARMAKIRTI'S PRAMANAVINISCAYA (Report on a Single Folio Fragment from the National Archives Collection, Kathmandu) By Kazunobu Matsuda, Kyoto and Ernst Steinkellner, Vienna 1. INTRODUCTION The identification of the Buddhist Sanskrit manuscript fragments preserved in the National Archives of Nepal, Kathmandu, has been the ongoing work of K. Matsuda, one of the collaborators in this study. The main portion of these fragments was first examined by Cecil Bendall about a century ago?. After Bendall's death, the photographs of these fragments passed into the hands of Louis de La Vallee Poussin who published studies on several of the fragments?. A few studies by Kazunobu Matsuda would like to acknowledge his debt of gratitude to Professor Balram D. Dangol of the National Archives for his unstinting cooperation in providing the microfilms needed and arranging for permission to publish the study and the related folios. 2 C. BENDALL spent a four month period from November 1898 to March 1899 in India and Nepal, during which time he visited the Durbar Library (present National Archives) where he discovered the cache of old manuscript fragments which he borrowed and photographed. For his reports, see: Remarks on the Results of Bendall's Recent Journey to Nepal in Search of Sanskrit Mss. and Inscriptions. Proceedings of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 2 (Feb. 1899) 30-35; Pali MSS. in Nepal. JRAS 1899, 422; Outline-Report on a Tour in Northern India in the Winter 1898-9. JRAS 1900, 162-164; Nepal MSS. JRAS 1900, 345-347; Siksasamuccaya ([Bibliotheca Buddhica I] Petersburg 1897- 1902), p. 291, n. 7 and frontispiece; Fragment of a Buddhist Ordination-Ritual in Sanskrit. Album Kern (Leiden 1903), p. 373-376; Subhasita-Samgraha. Le Museon 1903, 375-402 and 1904,5-46 and 245-274, esp. p. 375-377; Note on the History of the Pali Canon in Northern India. Verhandlungen des XIII. Internationalen Orientalisten-Kongresses, Hamburg Sept. 1902 (Leiden 1904) 58-60. - Some of the fragments examined by Bendall are entered in H.P. SASTRI'S A Catalogue of Palm-Leaf & Selected Paper Mss. Belonging to the Durbar Library, Nepal, Vol: II (Calcutta 1915), p. 246-248 (rep. Stuttgart 1989 as VOHD Supplementband 31, with microfilm concordance by R. GRUNENDAHL), where they are among the particular group of manuscripts in the Library's collection referred to as 'Bendall's Puka'. 3 See DE LA VALLEE POUSSIN'S Mss. Cecil Bendall. JRAS 1907, 375-379; Mss. Cecil Bendall II. Fragments en ecriture Gupta du Nord. JRAS 1908, 45-53 WZKS 35 (1991) 139-149

Page #2
140 K. MATSUDA - E. STEINKELLNER other scholars have also appeared. A number of the folios, however, have remained unidentified. Overlooked by scholars for decades, the originals of these fragments have slumbered unnoticed in Kathmandu until now. Among the folios so far examined by Matsuda, there is a manuscript set entitled Bauddhasastriyapattrani (Manuscript No. I-1697 Vi Bauddhadarsana 64 Ka)5, which is an unusual compilation comprised of one folio taken from eight different manuscripts. These eight folios written on palm leaves are, with the exception of one, written in Gilgit/ Bamiyan Type II (G/B-II) script or in Early Nepali script, a fact indicating that they are among the oldest extant manuscripts from the Nepal region. Of these eight, only one of them has been previously published by Bendall? Matsuda has succeeded in identifying the other folios as follows: and Bouddhisme. Etudes et Materiaux-Theorie des douze Causes (London 1913), p. 115f. * For example, S. LEVI, Mss. sanskrits decouverts au Nepal. JA 1923-II, 359; Notes Indiennes. JA 206 (1925) 17-69, esp. p. 26-35; M. P. MASSONOURSEL, Les Trois Corps du Bouddha-Appendice (Manuscrit de la Collection Bendall). JA 1913-I, 598-618; P.V. BAPAT, A Pali Manuscript in an Indian Script. ABORI 33 (1952 [53]) 197-210; Z. NAKAMURA, On the Four Sheets of Gilgit Manuscripts of Saddharmapundarikasutra in the Bill (Bir) Library. Anjali (Peradeniya 1970), p. 63-74 and Gilgit Manuscript of the Mahasannipataratnaketusutra kept in the National Archives, Kathmandu. Hokke-Bunka Kenkyu 1 (Tokyo 1975) 13-37. - Regarding to two articles by NAKAMURA, his 1975 article successfully identified the 5 folios of which 4 had been previously published by POUSSIN in JRAS 1908 as the Ratnaketuparivarta. Unfortunately, at that time Nakamura was unaware of Poussin's publication, and had further considered these folios (as well as the Saddharmapundarika folios in his 1970 article) written in Gilgit/Bamiyan Type I script, i.e., Round Gupta script, as belonging to the famous Gilgit manuscripts discovered by M. A. Stein in 1931. But this is incorrect. These folios, although written in the same script as the Gilgit manuscripts, should be regarded as one of the Nepalese manuscripts which are deposited in Kathmandu and were earlier examined by Bendall in 1899 (see BENDALL, JRAS 1900, 345ff.). 5 This mansucript set is catalogued in Brhatsucipattra VII-2 'Bauddhavisayaka' (Kathmandu 1966), p. 27. 6 According to Lore SANDER's Palaographisches (Wiesbaden 1968, VOHDSupplementband 8), G/B-II script, i.e., Proto-Sarada script, was used after the sixth century. This script had reached China and Japan via the Silk Road, where it was known as the Siddhamatnka script. 7 See BENDALL 1903, which corresponds to fragment No. 6 in the list below. 8 The order of the fragments below corresponds to the order in which they appear in the microfilm provided by the Nepal/German Manuscript Preservation Project (Real No. A39/3, taken on Sept. 23, 1970).

Page #3
The Sanskrit Manuscript of Dharmakirti's Pramanaviniscaya 141 1 Viniscayasamgrahani Section of the Yogacarabhumi [G/B-II script] 2 Saddharmapundarikasutra 10 [G/B-II script] 3 Pramanaviniscaya [Early Nepali script] 4 An Unknown Commentary on the Abhidharmakosabhasya 11 [G/B-II script] 5 Gaudapadiyakarikabhasya 12 [Nepali script] 6 Bhiksunikarmavacana 13 [G/B-II script] 7. Satasahasrika Prajnaparamita 14 [G/B-II script] 8 Paryayasamgrahani Section of the Yogacarabhumi 15 [G/B-II script] Although Matsuda intends to publish detailed findings on these folios in the near future, this paper represents the initial results of a collaborative study on the folio identified as Dharmakirti's Pramanaviniscaya. The Pramanaviniscaya is an important text in the Indian school of Buddhist logic systematized by Dharmakirti, of which the 9 Corresponding to Tibetan tr., Peking ed., No. 5539, Hi 87b7-92a3; and Chinese tr., Taisho Vol. 30, p. 728c16-730b21. Cited herein are passages from the Samdhinirmocanasutra, Tibetan tr., Peking ed., No. 774, Nu 42a5 46a1; and LAMOTTE ed., VIII.39-IX.7. For a report on other manuscript fragments of the same text, see MATSUDA, On Leningrad Ms. Ind. VII.23 presented by the 13th Dalai Lama. The Identification of the Sanskrit Manuscript of the Viniscayasamgrahani Section of the Yogacarabhumi. Report of the Japanese Association for Tibetan Studies 34 (1988) 16-20. 10 Corresponding to KERN/NANJIO ed., p. 15.1-18.4. Matsuda noticed that another four folios belonging to the same mansucript were in another manuscript set of the Archives examined by Bendall; for his forthcoming paper done in collaboration with Prof. H. Toda, see Three Sanskrit Fragments of the Saddharmapundarikasutra from the Cecil Bendall Manuscript Collection in the National Archives, Kathmandu. Memoirs of the Department of Ethics, College of General Education, The University of Tokushima 20 (1991). 11 A fragment from a large hitherto unknown commentary on the Abhidharmakosabhasya, chapter I, corresponding to PRADHAN's first ed., p.7.10-8.4. In content it is completely unlike Yasomitra's commentary (WOGIHARA ed., p. 27.18f.), nor does, it match those by Sthiramati (Tib. tr., Peking ed., No.5857, To 57a2f) and *Purnavardhana (Tib. tr., Peking ed., No.5594, Ju 34b3f) which it resembles. It is speculated that this fragment is from a commentary either by Gunamati or Vasumitra, neither of which exists today. 12 Written in ordinary Nepali script, it covers chapter II.7-13 of a Vedanta text attributed to Sankara. This fragment is the only one that is out of place in this otherwise Buddhist manuscript set. 13 See note 7 above. 14 Corresponding to Chinese tr. by Hsuan-tsang, Taisho Vol. 5, p.516-517. 15 Corresponding to Tibetan tr., Peking ed., No. 5542, Yi 47b7-49b7; and Chinese tr., Taisho Vol. 30, p. 768c20-769c9.

Page #4
142 K. MATSUDA - E. STEINKELLNER original Sanskrit manuscript has long been believed lost. This folio, numbered on the verso side as folio "87", belongs to the latter portion of chapter III, Pararthanumana, in the Tibetan translation, which corresponds to Ce 323b7-324b5 of the Peking edition No.5710 and to Ce 225a2-b6 of the Sde dge (Derge) edition No. 4211. There is a rumor among scholars that the complete Sanskrit manuscript of the present text exists somewhere in China 16, but up to now there is no solid evidence to support this contention. If, in some future age, such a mansucript should appear it will no doubt be of great interest to scholars. In the meantime, scholars in the field, who are acquainted with the text only through citations in other works, will have to be content with this 'tantalizing whiff of the original Sanskrit text which the present folio affords. 2. TRANSCRIPTION The transcription below is that done by Matsuda 17, following which is the constitution of the text, based on the transcription, as done by E. Steinkellner. Symbols used: ( damaged letter; ( ) restored letter; ( ) cancelled letter; ( > superfluous letter; * Virama; (!) sic. recto 1 =d anvayam apadayati pratisedhanisedhasya vi[dha]narupatvat* | asatah sapaksan na nivsttir ity asapaksa eva nastiti cet* neti< saiva nivstter nivsttir asatah katham ista abhavapratisedho hi bhavo'= 2 = saty apy asti bhavapratisedhas tu na sambhavatity askhalita prajno devanampriyo yas tadvisayam pratisedham necchati asad abhava iti ca vyavaharati | nirlothitas cayam artho 'sati na= 3 = stitety arthantare | tena neha pratanyate | na casann atma satta sadhanavitteh sandigdhah syat* | na ce(!) parena tathopagata iti || apramanad abhyupagamat tathaiva bhavati | atiprasa = 4 = ngat* | na copagamabalena sapaksapaksau vyavasthapya prama napravarttanam yuktam* | evam hy agamasiddha atma syat* | nanumanasiddhah | tasmad avyatireke (opy asatah sapaksa(!) vyatirekah sa = 16 A private correspondence from Dr. Chr. Lindtner of last year indicated to Matsuda that there are at least three more or less complete Pramanaviniscaya manuscripts available from Lhasa. 17 Matsuda also wishes to acknowledge his debt of gratitude to Professors T. E. Vetter, T. Tani and T. Iwata for their helpful comments to his draft transcription.

Page #5
The Sanskrit Manuscript of Dharmakirti's Pramanaviniscaya 143 5 = ndigdhah syat* pranadinam atmanah sandehat* | ata eva vipaksad api (1) ekatra hi niyame siddhe 'nyanivarttanam verso 1 sidhyet* | anyatha kvacid drste 'bhavasiddhav api syad evadrste samsayah | tatha hy asakala(bhe)vyaktibhedavyapino hy(!) arthah keci(t) tajjatisambhavino drstah parthivalohalekhyavat* | virodha sya cadrste(h) sam= 2 = deha eva | nairatmyena pranadinam ( uktalaksanasya virodha syasiddheh sandigdho nairatmyad vyatirekah |atmapratiniyame hi tatkaryatmataya pranadinam nairatmyena saha virodhah 3 syat* | sa ca na sidhyatity uktam* | astu nama niratmakebhyo vyatirekah () pranadinam tadbhave ca nairatmyavyavsttih | tathapi nanairatmyad atmaj(!) jivaccharire sidhyati yenayam na vya= 4 = tirekasyabhavam bhavam icchati | yatha vyatirekabhave ()pi sapakse pranadir nestah sapaksavyatireki ced dhetur hetur ato (')nvayi nanvayi (!) avyatireki ced anairatmyam na satmakam | iti samgra= 5 = haslokah | na pranadisambhavena nai[ratmyavy]avarttanadat magatih kin tarhi vidhimukhenaiva pranadayah 3. CONSTITUTION OF THE TEXT The fragment identified and transcribed above by Matsuda and edited below belongs to the section of the third chapter of the Pramanaviniscaya which deals with the theory of apparent logical reasons (hetvabhasa). This section covers PVin III vv. 68-85b (f. 313a3-327a8) and has no direct correspondence with a parallel section in the fourth chapter of the Pramanavarttika where a similar coherent treatment of this topic is lacking 18. As Prof. Frauwallner demonstrated, this part of the last chapter of the Pramanaviniscaya is essentially new, both in structure as well as in content, although materials from relevant parts of the Pramanavarttika have been exploited 19. After an explanation of the unproved (asiddha), indecisive (anaikantika) and contradictory (viruddha) reasons, Dharmakirti refutes 18 Steinkellner was able to use the analytical descriptions of PV IV and PVin III that were prepared by Tom J.F. Tillemans, Lausanne, and T. Iwata, Tokyo, respectively for the Mahayana Buddhism volume of the Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophy edited by K. Potter, and would like to thank both colleagues on this occasion for making these surveys available to him. 19 Cf. E. FRAUWALLNER, Die Reihenfolge und Entstehung der Werke Dharmakirti's in Asiatica, Festschrift Friedrich Weller, Leipzig 1954, p. 148f.

Page #6
144 K. MATSUDA - E. STEINKELLNER (322a5-324b7) the Naiyayika Uddyotakara's theorem of the kevalavyatirekin hetu, i.e. the idea that the reason can be valid when only the condition of its common absence with the inferred property (sadhya) is satisfied, i. e. when only the contrapositive pervasion (vyatirekavyapti) can be adduced 20. This is, for example, the case when the existence of a self (atman) is inferred in living bodies (jivaccharira) from their having breath etc. (pranadimattva) 21. The fragment begins near the end of Dharmakirti's demonstration that if the Naiyayika insists on his idea that the logical reason "having breath etc." (pranadimattva) does not occur only in dissimilar instances (vipaksa), this would oblige him to approve of a positive pervasion (anvaya) for this reason, too. And this, in turn, would contradict his theorem of a "reason with only contrapositive concomitance" (kevalavyatirekin), "because the negation of a negation is an affirmation" (lines 1f.). This is followed by a short resume of his more elaborate explanation of affirmation (vidhi) and negation (pratisedha) in PVin II 8, 1-10, 1 (lines 3-8). Then Dharmakirti answers the question as to how similar instances (sapaksa) could be implied in this case, since a Buddhist does not accept the existence of a self (atman) at all (lines 9-31). After the summarizing verse 84, the fragment ends within a final objection. A short answer is terminated by Dharmakirti's own classification of the crucial reason "(having) breath etc.": it is a case of the "indecisive uncommon" (asadharananaikantika) reason (P 324b7). Since most of the contents of this fragment from the hetvabhasa section have been treated by Dharmakirti more elaborately in PV IV and PVin II, they are presented here in an extremely concentrated form - although sometimes the dissolution of the Pramanavarttika verses into prose is helpful too. My attempt at translating this fragment has therefore also been added in order to present additional reasons for the text's constitution. Numbers in square brackets refer for the following passage to parallel texts of the Pramanavarttika. Mistakes in these texts are corrected without comment. ... da anvayam apadayati, [1] pratisedhanisedhasya vidhanarupatvato * read (bala)d (cf. nan gyis P). b Ms.: de dgag pa bkag pa'i no bo ni P. Ms.: sgrub pa'i ran bzin yin pa'i phyir ro P. 20 In this section Dharmakirti draws on materials from the context of the discussion of the asadharananaikantikahetu in PV IV, in particular vv. 205-212, 216-222, and 237-244. 21 Nyayavarttika (ed. Calcutta 1936-1944) 145, 2-4.

Page #7
recto verso ma: ya aan| bhanuna ya dakiyaH hyaagaar, maamaa| naam

Page #8
The Sanskrit Manuscript of Dharmakirti's Pramanaviniscaya [2] asatah sapaksan nad nivrttir ity asapaksa eva nastiti cet, neti saiva nivrtter nivrttir asatah katham ista. [3] abhavapratisedho hi 5 bhavo 'saty apy asti, bhavapratisedhas tu na sambhavatity askhalitaprajno devanampriyo yas tadvissayam pratisedham necchaty asad abhava iti1 ca vyavaharati. nirlothitas cayam artho 'sati nastitety arthantares. tena neha pratanyate. [4] na casann atma sattasadhanavrtteh sandigdhah syat. na cah 10 parena tathopagata ity apramanad abhyupagamat tathaiva bhavati, atiprasangat. na copagamabalena sapaksasapaksauk vyavasthapya pramanapravartanam yuktam. evam hy agamasiddha atma syat, nanumanasiddhah. [5] tasmad avyatireke 'py asatah sapaksad vyatirekah sandigdhah syat pranadinam atmanah sandehat. ata eva vipaksad 15 apim. [6] ekatra hi niyame siddhe 'nyanivartanam sidhyet. anyatha kvacid drste 'bhavasiddhav api syad evadrste" samsayah. [7] tatha hy asakalavyaktibhedavyapino 'pydeg arthah kecit tajjatisambhavino drstah parthivalohalekhyavat. [8] virodhasya cadrstteh sandeha eva. nairatmyena pranadinam uktalaksanasya virodhasyasiddeh [9] san20 digdho nairatmyad vyatirekah. [10] atmapratiniyame hi tatkaryatmataya pranadinam nairatmyena saha virodhah syat, sa ca na sidhyatity uktam. [11] astu nama niratmakebhyo vyatirekah pranadinam tadbhave ca nairatmyavyavrttih, tathapi nanairatmyad atma jivaccharire 25 sidhyati, [12] yenayam na vyatirekasyabhavam bhavam icchati yatha vyatirekabhave 'pi sapakse pranadir nestah. [13] sapaksavyatireki ced dhetur hetur ato 'nvayi | nanvayavyatireki ced anairatmyam na satmakam || v. 84 || iti sangrahaslokah. na pranadisambhavena nairatmyavyavartanad atmagatih. kin tarhi. vidhimukhenaiva pranadayah..." 30 d na without equivalent in Tib. tudvisayam Ms.: yul de la P. f Tib. adds de lta bu la sogs pa. 8 arthantare Ms.: de'i nan du P. h ca: ce Ms. i opagata iti Ms.: khas blans pa'i phyir ro ze na P. i eva without equivalent in Tib. 145 kasapaksau (cf. mi mthun pa'i phyogs P): apaksau Ms. sapaksad (cf. mthun pa'i phyogs... las P): sapaksa Ms. m Tib. adds ldog pa the tshom za ste. "adrste Ms.: ma mthon ba rnams la P. 'py (cf. don yan P) hy Ms. Patma atmaj Ms. (: Tib. gson po'i lus bdag dan bcas par seems to translate atmavaj jivacchariram). 0 9 yenayam Ms.: gan gis na bdag med pa med pas bdag yod par 'gyur bas 'di P (probably a gloss). bdag rtogs par byed pa yin no ze na P.

Page #9
146 K. MATSUDA E. STEINKELLNER 4. PARALLEL TEXTS [1] Cf.: pratisedhanisedhas ca vidhanat kidrso 'parah || (PV IV 221cd) [2] Cf.: nivrttir nasatah sadhyad asadhyesv eva no tatah | neti saiva nivrttih kim nivrtter asato mata || (PV IV 222) [3] Cf.: nivrttyabhavas tu vidhir vastubhavo 'sato 'pi san/ vastvabhavas tu nastiti... (PV IV 223a-c PVin II 15a-c) [4] Cf.: sattasadhanavrttes ca sandigdhah syad asan na sah asattvan cabhyupagamad apramanan na yujyate // (PV IV 237) [5] Cf.: asato 'vyatireke 'pi sapaksad vinivartanam | sandigdham tasya sandehad vipaksad vinivartanam // (PV IV 238) [6] Cf.: ekatra niyame siddhe sidhyaty anyanivartanam | dvairasye saty adrste 'pi syad adrstesu samsayah || (PV IV 239) [7] Cf.: avyaktivyapino 'py arthah santi tajjatibhavinah | kvacin na niyamo 'drstya parthivalohalekhyavat || (PV IV 240) [8] Cf.: bhave virodhasyadrstau kah sandeham nivartayet / (PV IV 241ab) [9] Cf.: nairatmyad api tenasya sandigdham vinivartanam / (PV IV 242ab) [10] Cf.: kvacid viniyamat ko 'nyas tatkaryatmataya sa ca // (PV IV 241cd) [11] Cf.: astu nama tathapy atma nanairatmyat prasidhyati // (PV IV 242cd) [12] Cf.: yenasau vyatirekasya nabhavam bhavam icchati/ [13] yatha navyatireke 'pi pranadir na sapaksatah || (PV IV 243) = PV IV 244 5. TRANSLATION (Therefore by implication of (? the respective forms of the reason?) "occurrence in only the similar instances and non-cecurrence in only 22 the dissimilar instances" either of the two examples is said to indicate both (forms) 23. Thus a non-deviating concomitance in difference of this type is not established in the case of (a reason) which does not have a concomitance in agreement (ananvayin) 24. If established )25 it procures by force the concomitance in agreement, because the negation of a negation has the form of an affirmation 26. 22 Wrong for "only non-occurrence in .. 23 Cf. PV IV (220cd): arthapattyata evoktam ekenobhayadarsanam //. Cf. PVin II 7,7-12, 29-32 and PVin IIa: 37, 38f. and note 92. 24 Cf. PV IV 221ab: idrgavyabhicaro 'to 'nanvayisu na sidhyati [. 25 P323b6f.: de nid kyi phyir mthun pa'i phyogs nid la yod pa dan mthun pa'i phyogs ma yin pa nid la med pa zes don go bas dpe gnis las gan yan run ba gni ga bstan par brjod do || de'i phyir ldog pa mi 'khrul pa 'di 'dra ba ni rjes su 'gro ba med par mi grub bo || grub na ni... 26 Following the Tibetan: "because the form of the negation of a negation of that is essentially an affirmation".

Page #10
147 The Sanskrit Manuscript of Dharmakirti's Pramanaviniscaya If (it is said): "There is no non-occurrence [of the reason] in similar instances that do not exist. Therefore [the reason] does not occur only in what is not a similar instance (asapakse)" 27, (we answer): When (you say) "(there is) no (non-occurrence)", why do you assume just this non-occurrence of an non-occurrence in (similar instances) that do not exist? 28 "The negation of non-occurrence as occurrence is well extant even in (the similar instance) that does not exist; the negation of occurrence, however, is not possible." He is (indeed) a beloved of the gods with unshaken intelligence, who does not accept a negation referring to something and (at the same time) uses words like "nonexistent, non-occurrence". We further treated this subject extensively in another circumstance 29 (arthantare), [i. e. the section beginning with the words] "non-occurrence at the non-occurrence" 30. Therefore it is not spread out here. Furthermore, a self is not non-existent because of the (actual) function of a proof for (its) existence, (but) would be doubtful (only). And it is certainly neither31 so [i. e. non-existent] on account of an inauthenticated assumption in form of (the statement) "The opponent assumes [the self to be] so [i. e. non-existent]" 32, because of undesired consequences. Nor31 is the use of a valid cognition appropriate when similar and dissimilar instances are established (merely) by force of an assumption. For in this case the self would be proven by scripture, it (would) not be proven by inference. Therefore, because this (self) is doubtful, the exclusion (vyatireka) of breath etc. [from the similar instances] would be doubtful even if [according to the Naiyayika] (the reason) is not excluded from non-existent similar instances. For the same reason [the exclusion is doubtful] from the dissimilar instances too. For, if the necessary occurrence in the one case [i. e. the similar instances] is established, the non-occurrence in the other [i. e. the dissimilar instances] would follow; else a doubt would surely occur with regard to [occurrence in] an invisible (case), even if in a certain visible case non-occurrence is established. To wit: we find that certain proper 27 Cf. PV IV 222ab and PVin II 8, 1f. (cf. PVin IIa: 39). 28 Cf. PV IV 222cd and PVin II 8, 13f. (cf. PVin IIa: 40 with note 99). 29 I. e. PVin II 8, 1-10. 1. 30 Cf. PVin II 8, 1; ... med pa la med pa nid... The final source for the beginning of this section is NV 166, 2f.: asati nastiteti casampradharya proktam... 31 It seems that the two na ca sentences are connected, which would corroborate the emendation of na ca in line 9. 32 This is only an attempt. The Tibetan says: "If (it is said): 'Because the opponent assumes (it to be) so'".

Page #11
148 K. MATSUDA - E. STEINKELLNER ties (artha) belong to the same genus, although they do not occur in all the different individual things, e.g. (the property "scratchable by iron"] in case of the earthen (diamond) which cannot be scratched by iron. And if the contradiction [between "having breath etc." and "being without self"] is not cognized, there (remains) only doubt. Since a contradiction as defined 33 between breath etc. and selflessness is not established, the exclusion (of breath etc.) from selflessness is doubtful. For a contradiction with selflessness would (only) be extant if breath etc. were restricted to (the occurrence of) a self by being an effect or the essence of that (self). And this contradiction) is not the case, as has been said (before). But let there be an exclusion of breath etc. from selfless (things) and an absence of selflessness when these (i.e. breath etc.) occur. A self is nevertheless not established in a living body because of a non-selflessness on account of which 34 this opponent) does not accept the absence of an exclusion to be a presence in the same way) as he does not accept [an occurrence of] breath etc. in similar instances, although the counterpositive (vyatireka) is absent [therein). If what is not excluded (avyatirekin) from the similar instances is [accepted as] the reason, then the reason would be concomitant in agreement (anvayin). If (a reason) which is not excluded [from the similar instances) is not [accepted as] concomitant in agreement, something non-selfless (would) not have a self. (v. 84) This is the summarizing verse. If (the opponent says:) "The self is not cognized on account of an exclusion of selflessness because of an occurrence of breath etc. How then? Breath etc. (cause the cognition of a self) only by way of affirmation." NV PV Abbreviations Nyayavarttika. Ed. in two vols., Calcutta 1936-1944. Peking edition. Ed. D.T. SUZUKI, Tokyo-Kyoto 1955- 1961 Pramanavarttika. Ed. Y. MIYASAKA, Acta Indologica 2 (1971-72) 1-206. Pramanaviniscaya, Chapter II. Ed. E. STEINKELLNER, Wien 1973. Pramanaviniscaya, Chapter II. Transl. E. STEINKELLNER, Wien 1979. Pramanaviniscaya, Chapter III. P 5710 (Tshad ma, Ce, 285a7-329a7). PVin HI PVin IIa PVin III 33 Cf. perhaps PVin II 13, 2-4 and 5f. 34 Tib. adds the gloss (?): "since the self would be existent because of non-selflessness".

Page #12
The Sanskrit Manuscript of Dharmakirti's Pramanaviniscaya 149 An Historical Postscript On 4 March 1991, during a research tour to Europe, I had an opportunity to make a firsthand examination of the photographs taken by Cecil Bendall, through the kindness of my friends Dr. Jens-Uwe Hartmann and Dr. Klaus Wille of the University of Gottingen. These photographs were passed from the hands of de La Vallee Poussin to Etienne Lamotte, and are now deposited at Gottingen. Among them, I was surprised to find a photograph of the very folio discussed here. I was even more surprised to find on the back of the photograph the correct ascription, 'Pramanaviniscaya', written in what is apparently the hand of de La Vallee Poussin, as well as the page numbers for the correspond ing Tibetan translation. In other words, the credit for first identification should go to de La Vallee Poussin, although his discovery has gone unpublished and unnoticed until now. (K. Matsuda, 19 March 1991).