Karma Mimansa

Author(s): Berriedale Keith
Publisher: Berriedale Keith

Page 19

10
THE KARMA-MIMĀMSA
Brhati has enabled us to correct this error, Prabhākara follows Sabarasvāmin closely ; he does not refute the opinions of Kumārila ; in one passage (IV, 1, 2), when he does criticise an opinion of the latter, the form of words used by hin in adducing it differs entirely from those in which the viety of Kunārila is expressed, showing clearly that he is dealing with some older author, whom Kumārıla, has followed. On the other hand, Kumārila frequently diverges from the views of the Bhasya; he criticises (I, 2, 31; 3,2; 4, 1) views which are expressed by Prabhākara, and asserts independent views. There is a clear difference of style between the two authors; Prabhākara IS comparatively simple, vivid and direct like Sabarasvåmin; he seldom uses long compounds; he avoids the combination of various reasonings in a single clause ; in lieu of the formal terminology of objection and reply (ranu ... ced, ma or syad ciat ... tad ayuktam) he adopts the form of question and answer, whích, however, has the disadvantage of leaving at times the meaning in doubt. In all these aspects Kumāríla shows a richer, more varied, and elaborated style, which is reminiscent of the Sārīrakabhūşya of Sarkara
Kumărila's great exposition of the Sabarabhasya falls into three parts, the first, the Slokuväritika, in verse, deals with Pada I of Adhyâya I of the Bhāsya, and is of the greatest value as an explanation of the metaphysics and epistemology of his system. The second, the Tantravārttrka, covers the remaining three Pādas of Adhyāya I and the whole of Adhyāyas II and III. The third part, the Tupeikā, consists merely of scattered notes on the last nine Adhyāyas. Each part has been commented on; the first by Pärthasärathi Miśra in his Nyāyaratnakara, and by Sucarita Misra in his Kāśikā; the second by Someśvara, son of Mahadeva, in his Nyāyasudhā or Ränaka; the third by Venkateśvara Diksıta in his Värttikābharana, Kumarila's date is determinable within definite limits; he used the
1 Ed. Benares, 1898-99 ; trans. Gangånātha Jhā, "Bibliotheca Indica, 1900-8.
• Éd Benares, 1890; trans. Gangānātha Jha, Bibliotheca Indica, 1903-20.
Pathak, J.B.R.A.S XVIII, 213 ff.