Book Title: Indologica Taurinensia
Author(s): Colette Caillat, Siegfried Lienhard, Irma Piovano, Saverio Sani
Publisher: Comitato AIT
View full book text
________________
On the Relationship of the Nyayâvatāra and the Sammati-tarka-prakarāṇa
71
the operation of the logical reason would be impossible, if the scope [of inference (sc. thesis)] were not demonstrated - this [logical reason] is capable of proving the thesis]".
[22] [Rejoinder:] [A reply] to this has already been given [in PV 4.19], [namely that] also without this [scope being demonstrated (sc. without the statement of the thesis)], even when one asserts [only]: "Sound is [something] which has been produced, [hence] all [entities] like this are impermanent", [then] the comprehension of the impermanence of this [sound] should occur by implication.' 104
With the purpose to disprove Dharmakirti's position, Siddhasena Mahamati inserts the simile in order to show the proper role of the thesis. He does agree that pakṣa is not an integral part of the proof formula in the logical sense, inasmuch as it has no 'proving capacity'. Its role is rather didactic, to clearly demonstrate what the proof formula is intended for. But also the thesis corroborates the soundness of the
104. PV1/PV3 4.18-22:
hetv-artha-viṣayatvena tad-aśaktôktir iritā/ śaktis tasyâpi ced dhetu-vacanasya pravartanāt // tat-samśayena jijñāsor bhavet prakaranâśrayaḥ/ vipaksôpagame 'py etat tulyam ity anavasthitiḥ // antar-angam tu sāmarthyam triṣu rūpeṣu samsthitam/ tatra smṛti-samādhānaṁ tad-vacasy eva samsthitam // akhyāpite hi viṣaye hetu-vṛtter asambhavat/ viṣaya-khyāpanād eva siddhau cet tasya saktatā" // uktam atra" vinâpy asmat kṛtakaḥ śabda idṛśaḥ/ sarve 'nitya iti prokte 'py arthat tan-nāśa-dhir bhavet //
My translation differs in some crucial points from that of TILLEMANS' (2000:30-36). a. Cf. PV2 4.21cd: viṣaya-khyāpanād eva samarthyam iti cen matam // For variae lectionis see TILLEMANS (2000: 35, n. 130). It seems to me that the translation in TILLEMANS (2000: 35) slightly distorts the logical connection of the elements of the verse, which is as follows: The condition in the clause is siddhau, to be connected with hetu-vṛtter (primarily related with asambhavat, but here supplemented). Its justification is viṣaya-khyāpanād eva, as the necessary single condition; the ground for the fact the operation of the logical reason can be warranted 'only on account of the demonstration of its scope', is 4.21ab, which explains why and under what conditions the logical reason is not operational. When the condition is fulfilled ([hetu-vṛtter] siddhau), it is effective (tasya saktatā).
b. Cf. PV2 4.ab: vyāpti-pārve vinâpy asmāt kṛtakaḥ śabda idṛśaḥ / For variae lectionis see TILLEMANS (2000: 36, n. 131).
A similar idea is expressed succinctly in NB 3.34: dvayor apy anayoḥ prayogayor na avasyam pakṣa-nirdeśaḥ.
