Medhatithi On Samanyato Drstam

SR No.: 269450
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Albrecht Wezler
Publisher: Albrecht Wezler
Total Pages: 19
Language: English
Classification: Article
File Size: 2 MB

Page 16

154
ALBRECHT WEZLER
57 The expression pragalbha is found in the Arthasästra in the enumeration of the amātyasampat (1.9.11) as well as in that of the ātmasampat (6.1.6); it is also one of the qualities of a particular type of secret agents (1.11.2). 58 It reads thus:
pratyaksam cānumānam ca śästram ca vividhāgamam / trayam suviditam karyam
dharmaśuddhim abhipsatā ll. 59 What is Me. here talking about the inclusion - by implication - of the other means of valid knowledge recognized by the Mīmāņsā, i.e. upamāna and arthāpatti (cf. Kullaka on M. 12.106), or, rather, the difference between the apauruşeyatva of the Veda and the pauruseyatva of "the Mahabharata and similar texts" (cf. e.g. Nyāyamañjari, ed. by Varadacharya, Vol. I p. 575 ff. and Nyāyakumudacandra ed. Mahendra Kumar Nyayacharya p. 726 f.)? 60 Add kāryam / kartavyam after suvivecitam, in accordance with the verse. 61 Cf. Halbfass 1991. 62 Cf. Bhäsya on 12.106 where this possibility is however already presupposed by Manu himself; cf. n. 63. 63 It reads as follows:
ärşam dharmopadeśam ca vedaśāstrāvirodhinä / yas tarkenānusamdhatte
sa dharmam veda netarah II. 64 The rest of this sentence is: nirūpayati sa dharmam vedeti padayojanů /. 65 Not, as maintained by Jha 1920–1926, Vajs 2.11! 66 Cf. Oberhammer-Prets-Prandstetter 1991-1996 s.v. ūhah. In passing it may be noted that the passage from the Nyāyabhāsya quoted first at the end of the article is not that translated by the authors, that the translation is demonstrably wrong and that it is the reading found in the (in reality translated) version quoted last which clearly has to be preferred (cf. e.g. Nyayamañjari (ed. Varadacharya) Vol. II p. 584.19 ff.) - I thank Ms. Preisendanz for this information. - The translation of the definition of üha as found at Sankhayana Srauta Sūtra 6.1.3, which is given in the first paragraph of the article on ühah, is also not acceptable, even though the authors may have been mislead by Caland (1953: 141). 07 Reference is to a lecture which she gave at Hamburg University and which will be published, perhaps still this year in: Buddhismus in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Erkenntnistheorie der Religion. Weiterbildendes Studium Universität Hamburg, ed. by Klaus Glashoff. 68 Cf. also AS 1.5.5. 69 The occurrence of ūha in the Suśruta S. referred to in the Large Petrograd Dictionary, viz. 2.44.18 = Cikitsāsth. 5.29, for which Böhtlingk gives the meaning "Erschliessung", actually confirms the semantic explanation of Ganapati Sastrī: Dalhana also paraphrases it by aśrutasya kalpanā. 70 My thanks are due to Mr. Narayan Ramachandran for rendering me assistance in consulting this commentary.
It reads as follows: anuktakaranam ühyam. The example quoted thereafter (15.1.70) is AS 3.16.5 (yathä сa dātā pratigrahītā ca nopahatau syātām tathānusayam kusalāh kalpayeyuh) (cf. 3.15.99). Cf. also Oberhammer-Prets-Prandstetter 1991/96 s.v. ühyam. 72 Or any other work in which the AŚ's theory of prajñāguņas was received. Note that the wording is slightly different in the Abhidhanacintämani.