Study of Tattvarthasutra with Bhasya

SR No.: 001578
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Suzuko Ohira
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1982
Total Pages: 196
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Tattvartha Sutra, Philosophy, Tattvartha Sutra, & Tattvarth
File Size: 13 MB

Page 47

Sec. 3. TEXTUAL COMMENTARY
yathokta-nimittah şad-vik alpah seşānām!/23//'. 'yathokta-nimittaḥ' mentioned in the sūtra 23 is impossible to be understood from these aphorisms alone. The Bhāşya on the aphorisms 21 cun pents, 'bhiva -pratyayah kşiyopisana-ninittas-ca', and the B'āsya on the aphoris n 23 elucidits the poiat, 'ya!hokta-nimittah kşayopasama nimitta ity-arthah. The said phrase, 'yathokta-gimittah', in the sūtra 23 indisputably refers to the Bhasya on the sūtra 21, which proves that Umāsvāti was composing this text portion along with its commentary. This bears witness to th? fact that the concerned aphorisms and their Bhāsya expositions were written by the same hand. The same sūtra is read in the text of Pūjyapāda, 'kşayopasamı-nimittah şadvikalpah seşānām (1: (22)), an improvement of which reading could not have been made without referring to the Bhāşya on the sūtras 21 and 23.
Incidentally, it became unquestionable in this context that the author first drafted the text side by side taking down necessary commentarial notes, upon which the further details of exposition were made later.
V:31 (32) Sarpitānarpita-siddheh
It has been previously examined that the anomalous arrangement of V:29-31 relevant to sat-nityatva was derived in the context of the topics discussed in the Vaiseșika. sūtra 4.1. These sūtras read, 'utpāda-vyıya-dhrauvya-yuktam sat (29), 'tad-bhāyāyyayam nity.in (35),' and 'a-pitā irpita-siddheh (31)'. The concept expresssed in the aphorism 29 does not yet occur in the extant canonical corpus. Sūtra 30 is directly derived from the concept expressed in the sūtra 29.4 V:31 offers the ground of reasoning for the sūtras 29-30 that the existence which is eternal is at the same time characterized by the mutually contradictory characteristics. Arpita-anarpita, expressing a theory of relativity, are included in ten dravyānuyogas listed in the Sthana 10 972,5 which are made in actual use, for instance, in the Uttaradhyayana niryukti 49, eso puna du-viho appiya-vavahāra arappio ceval ikk-ikko puni ti-viho attāri pare tad-ubhae ya' (three characteristics here denote ksāyika, aupaśmika and kşayopaśmika).
Umāsvāti posited the problem of sat-nityavta in the context of pudgala wherein the matter substance is discussed from the standpoint of bhāva as to its nature (2324), dravya as to its components (25-27), køetra as to its perceptibility (28), and bhāva as to the process of combination (32-36) and a similar method of approach is likewise observed in handling the rest of the topics, i. e., dravya-guna-paryāya and pariņāma, as these can be treated from the standpoint of bhāva (37,40-44). [The topic of kala expressed in the aphorisms 38-39 is absolutely misarranged in this context ]
The Nyāyasūtra 4.1.10 takes up the topic of rebirth, and in this connection examined and refuted in 4.1.11-24 are the theories of the origination of things upheld by
34