Tattvartha Sutra

SR No.: 006796
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Sukhlal Sanghavi, K K Dixit
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2000
Total Pages: 596
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Tattvartha Sutra, & Tattvarth
File Size: 10 MB

Page 237

64
the basis of a generic feature are fit to be placed in the category sangraha naya.
TATTVÄRTHA SUTRA
Vyavahāra Naya
Even after various things have been subsumed under one form if it is required that they be introduced to someone in a specific form or if the occasion arises for making a practical use of them-then they have to be distinguished from one another on the basis of a specific form. For example, by being told of just cloth one cannot be made acquainted with the various types of cloth taken separately. Again, he who wants khādī-that is, the handspun-and-woven cloth-cannot get it without introducing distinction among clothes; for certainly clothes are of numerous types. Hence it is that distinctions like the khādī cloth, the millmade cloth, etc. too have to be introduced. Similarly, in the field of philosophy one says: The thing of the form of existence is of two types-viz. the physical and the conscious; again, the conscious thing is of two types-viz. one entangled in the worldly life and one emancipated from it.' And further distinctions of the same sort have to be made. All such views with a tendency towards making distinction are to be placed in the category vyavahāra naya.
In the above illustrations it can be seen that the basis of naigama naya is popular convention while popular convention in its turn is based on a transfer of epithet; and a transfer of epithet has for its basis something that is generic. This being the case it becomes absolutely clear that naigama naya is something that grasps the generic. Similarly, sangraha naya being of the form of a unificatory cognitive operation is obviously something that grasps the generic. As for vyavahāra naya even though it involves a cognitive operation which tends towards making distinctions the basis of its activity is something generic; hence it too should be treated as something that grasps the generic. All this explains why the three nayas in question are regarded as divisions of the dravyarthika naya.
Question: What is the mutual distinction among these