Chatushatak Part 02

SR No.: 004332
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Vidhushekhar Bhattacharya
Publisher: Visva Bharti Book Shop
Publication Year: 1931
Total Pages: 334
Language: Sanskrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari
File Size: 6 MB

Page 78

218] CHAPTER IX 53 na ni deni tshe rags pa rnams rgyu med par hbyun bar hgyur to | dehi phyir yan lag can gyi rdzas kyi rgyu rdul phra rab rnams yod pa kho na yin la || de rnams kyan rtag pa z'ig ste | yod la gryu dan mi ldan pa nid kyi phyir ro || de yan mi rigs te gan gi phyir -- 1 =अवाह / परमाणवो नित्या एव / स्थू लानामुद्भवस्य बोजस्वभावानुगमात् / यदि ते न स्युर्बीजमन्तरेण स्थूलानामुद्भवो भवेत्। तथा हि। कुतः प्रथमे कल्पे स्थू लानामुद्भवः। प्रलयकाले हि सर्वाण्यवयविद्रव्याणि विशीय माणशरीराणि / न स्थू लानां सम्भवः। यदि तस्यामवस्थायां स्थू लवत् परमाणवोऽपि न स्यस्तदा हेतुमन्तरेण स्थूलामामुद्भवः स्यात् / तस्मादवयविद्रव्यस्य हेतुभूताः परमाणवः सन्त्येव / ते च नित्याः / सतोऽहेतुमत्त्वात् / तदपि न युज्यते / कुतः-। hbras bu yis ni rgyu bz'ig pa des na rgyu ni rtag ma yin yan na gan na rgyu yod pa de na hbras bu yod ma yin || 18 || Here according to V in the Tib. text the reading in a begins with hbras bu yi (genitive). This is found also in our Vx of CS. But as the sense requires and the Vx of CSV has it and is supported by CSV itself and the Chinese the true reading must be hbras bu yis (instrumental). See karika 352 (=XV. 2) of which a is identical with a of the present karika, the reading of the former being : hbras bu yis ni rgyu bz'ig pa. In the same line, i.e. a, V with Vxx of CS and CSV has wrongly boig for bz'ig after rgyu. The same mistake occurs also in V's edition in karika 352a. In d Vx of CS has rgyu yod pa for yod ma yin while that of the CSV reads yod ma yi. Both of them are evidently wrong. * V hetor vinasah karyena tena hetur na sasvatah | atha hetur bhavati yah sa karyam naiva jayate || 18 || Here gan na in cand de na in d are taken by V as nominatives, Skt. yah and sah respectively. This cannot be done. They must be taken in the locative case, as the particle na in both the places clearly shows. V's translation of the second half (i.e. c and d) is also objectionable, and his two versions, Skt.