Alamban Pariksha

SR No.: 002350
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Dinnaga, Dharmapala, N Aiyaswami Shastri
Publisher: Adyar Library
Publication Year: 1942
Total Pages: 142
Language: Sanskrit, English
Classification: Book_Devnagari
File Size: 8 MB

Page 124

100
ĀLAMBANAPARĪKṢĀ
of the object", then, is it that which is not expressible, because there is nothing, or because it is there justly the proper characteristic? In all cases, if it is so (1) because there is nothing, this not logic, for one could express the very non-existence. For example, one could express the horns of a rabbit, etc. If it is so (2) because it is justly the proper characteristic, we have just refuted this [proposition, in saying all the proper characteristics are inexpressible].
What Paramartha translates on this subject by: louan che pu ko yen chi hsiang (=afasıanfàèzyc9g) is justly this last doctrine which Vinitadeva has just refuted." (Fren. trans.) Pārthasarathi Mis'ra has ably presented the standpoint of the Vijñānavādins that the object, blue, etc. is not different from its consciousness, see his comment on S'lokavārtika, p. 274.
P. 7, 1. 11, and p. 54. 1. 12. After "C different" and non different" Paramartha adds "C inexpressible" pu ko chouo, anabhilapya, (or anirvacya). One could not find this word either in the Tibetan text or in the text of Hiuan Tsang. But, if one takes account of the phrase of Vinitadeva one could explain why "inexpressible" finds its way in the text of Paramartha. Vinitadeva in his commentary, says: (gal. te. dños. kyi. tshul. dpyad. na. ni. dehḥi. tshe. nus. pa. rnams. gnas. skabs. kyi. khyad. par. gyi. bdag. ñid. yin. pas. kun. rdzob. tu. yod. paḥi. phyir. rnam. par. s'es. pa, las. gzhan. ñid. dam. gzhan. ma. yin. pa. ñid. du. brjod. par. bya. ba. ma. yin. no.) "If one examines transcendently (paramarthena) the proper nature [of dominant forces], they are then inexpressible whether they are or not of a nature different from consciousness. For, being the proper nature of a characteristic of a stage of forces (s'akti), they exist but conventionally" (s'aktinām avasthāvis'eṣātmakatvena samvṛtisattvat). This explanation signifies: things being not capable of existing in proper nature, one could not give them any designations" different" or
non different", but one could simply call them
77
different
66
or non different" when they are considered as conventional things."
66
CC