Once Again Vaisesika Sutra 3 1 13

SR No.: 269610
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Johannes Bronkhorst
Publisher: Johannes Bronkhorst
Total Pages: 17
Language: English
Classification: Article
File Size: 2 MB

Page 11

ONCE AGAIN VAIŠEȘIKA SŪTRA 3.1.13
675
(manas).21 The fact that the soul is dealt with after the mind is explained by the fact that sūtra 3.2.4, which proves the existence of the soul, presents as one of the arguments the movement of the mind (manogati).
What was the purpose of the commentator who changed the order of the sūtras? Again it is not difficult to divine the answer. This commentator apparently wanted the discussion of the substances to continue without interruption. After the treatment of space (dis) the next substance mentioned in sūtra 1.1.4 was the soul (ātman). He introduced this topic in the way we now know, i.e., before the mind.
One final question must be addressed: When did the change of order take place? Better perhaps: when was the commentary written which commented upon the sūtras in their modified order? Here22 we have to consider the following statement in Praśastapāda's Padārthadharmasangraha (Ki p. 97 1. 25-26, Ny p. 219 1. 3, Vy I p. 134 1. 17-18): atmalingādhikāre buddhyādayah prayatnāntāh siddhāh "In the section on inferential marks of the soul (the qualities) from consciousness (buddhi) to effort (prayatna) have been established." The early commentators on the Padārthadharmasangraha all agree that this statement refers to the Vaiseșika Sūtra. Sridhara (Ny p. 219 1. 9) specifies that the reference is to the prāņāpānādisutra. Udayana provides the following commentary (Kip. 98 1. 10-11): prāņādisütre buddhyādayah prayatnāntāh siddhāh yady api buddhis tatra kantharavena nästi tathāpi sukhādaya eva svakāraṇatayā tām ākşipanti/ "In the prāņādisutra the qualities from consciousness to effort have been established. Although consciousness does not figure explicitly in that (sütra), [the qualities) happiness (sukha) etc. suggest it as it is their cause." These remarks show that the three early commentators on the Padārthadharmasangraha, as perhaps Praśastapāda himself, knew sūtra 3.2.4 more or less in the form which we find in versions C and U (pränäpānanimeşonmesajivanamanogatindriyantaravikārāḥ sukhaduḥkhe icchädveşau prayatnas cety ātmalingāni / sukhaduhkhecchādveşaprayatnās cātmano lingāni), and not as we find it in V (prānāpānanimeşonmesajīvanamanogatindriyāntaravikārāh parātmani lingam). But there is a problem connected with the identification proposed by the commentators, as pointed out by Udayana. Sūtra 3.2.4 does not mention consciousness (buddhi). Udayana's solution to the prob
21 VS 3.2.1: átmendriyārthasannikarșe jñānasyābhāvo bhāvas ca manaso lingam.
Hattori (1966: 893 (104)) has already drawn attention to the parallelism that exists between the interpretations of VS 3.1.1-2 offered in the three oldest commentaries, and a passage in the Padarthadharmasangraha (Ki p. 84 & 86, Ny p. 176, 179 & 182, Vy p. 133-34).