________________
XXXVIII] Doctrine of the Pāśupata-sūtras
145 Gunaratna says that the Vaiseșikas also follow the same kind of external insignia and dress, because the Vaišeşikas and the Naiyāyikas are very much similar in their philosophical attitudes. Gunaratna further says that there are four types of Saivas-Saivas, Pāśupatas, Mahāvratadharas, and Kālamukhas, as well as other subsidiary divisions. Thus there are some who are called Bharata who do not admit the caste rules. He who has devotion to Siva can be called a Bharața. In the Nyāya literature the Naiyāyikas are called Saivas, because they worship Siva, and the Vaišeşikas are called Pāśupatas. So the Naiyāyika philosophy goes by the name of Saiva and Vaišeşika by the name of Pāśupata. Gunaratna says that he gives this description just as he has seen it and had heard of it. Their main dialectical works are Nyāya-sūtra, Vātsyāyanabhāsya, Udyotkara's Vārttika, Vācaspati Miśra's Tātparya-tīkā, and Udayana's Tātparya-parisuddhi. Bhāsarvajña's Nyāya-sāra and its commentary Nyāya-bhūşana and Jayanta's Nyāya-kalikā and Udayana's Nyāya-kusumāñjali are also mentioned as important works.
The statement of Gunaratna about the Saivas is further corroborated by Rājasekhara's description of the Saiva view in his Şaddarśana-samuccaya. Rājasekhara further says that Akşapāda, to whom the Nyāya-sūtras are attributed, was the primary teacher of the Nyāya sect of Pāśupatas. They admit four pramāņas, perception, inference, analogy, and testimony, and they admit sixteen categories of discussion, namely, pramāņa, prameya, samsaya, prayojana, drstānta, siddhānta, avayava, tarka, nirnaya, vāda, jalpa, vitandā, hetvābhāsa, chala, jāti and nigrahasthāna. These are just the subjects that are introduced in the first sūtra of Akşapāda's Nyāya-sūtra. The ultimate object is the dissolution of all sorrow preparatory to liberation. Their main logical work is that by Jayanta and also by Udayana and Bhāsarvajña.
Kauņdinya's commentary on the Pāśupata-sūtras seems to belong to quite an early period, and it may not be inadmissible to say that it was a writing of the early period of the Christian era. But whether Kauņdinya can be identified with Rāsīkara, is more than we can say. Rāšīkara is mentioned in Sarva-darśanasamgraha, and there is of course nothing to suggest that Kauņdinya could not have been the gotra name of Rāsīkara.
Apart from the Ratnatīkā on the Gaņakārikā, it seems that there was also a bhāsya, but this bhāsya was not on Ganakārikā, but it
DV
TO
