Nakamura On Bhartrhari

Author(s): Ashok Aklujkar
Publisher: Ashok Aklujkar

Page 13

NAKAMURA ON BHARTRHARI
173
some authority is accepted, inference can properly be used only for the purposes of interpretation and justification; it cannot be used to oppose or uproot the authoritative source. It is always possible to deduce through some inference a conclusion contradictory or detrimental to that of a scripture, 35 but so doing, one contradicts one's own initial acceptance of the validity of the scripture. For this reason, in transcendental matters, inference is to be restricted to the interpretation and justification of the accepted authority.36 Just as it is incapable of contradicting scriptural lore, for the two do not belong to the same sphere, in the same way it is incapable of contradicting or invalidating a cognition derived from extraordinary perception.37 Furthermore, it cannot be used to question the nature of the final postulates of a theory or system. There is a limit to which one can answer the question, “Why is it so?” At some level, it is inevitable that one will be forced to say, “Well, this is the very nature of the thing(s); it cannot be otherwise." We cannot go on questioning the postulates of a theory indefinitely with a "why". If, for example, an atomist (Vaiseșika) were asked, “Why is it that the smallest particles combine in a particular way?” he would point out that specific particles attract certain other particles only. But this is just another way of phrasing the point in question; it does not answer the "why". 38
5.1 Incorrect comparisons: As I have demonstrated so far, there are serious flaws in Nakamura's understanding and statement of Bhartshari's views. Consequently, his comparisons are of little value. I shall touch upon only one. Nakamura (p. 283.25-27) remarks that Bhartphari's position on the eternality of the Vedas is "precisely the same as” that of the Mimāmsakas. But in fact there is an important difference. According to Bhartshari, after the dissolution of the universe, the Veda remains in a
actions are capable of non-mundane results and, if they are capable, what type of non-mundane result they produce) is tied to (is derived only from) agama." TK 1.132ab. 35 See TK 1.142cd/132cd in 2:16 above. 36 (a) tasmäd ägamam kañcit pramānikrtya vyavasthite tasmin yā kācid upapattir ucyamānā pratipattāvi upodbalakatvam labhate (V 1.132 p. 212.4-5) "Therefore, any piece of logical reasoning which is stated after an āgama has been accepted and well established, serves to strengthen one's understanding (or acceptance, or determination to practice the teaching [of the āgama)." (b) Bharthari realizes the fact that some persons misinterpret āgama intentionally (V 1.31 p. 88.1-2). 87 atindriyān asamvedyān paśyanty ärşeņa cakşuşā / ye bhāvān vacanam teşām nânumānena bādhyate // (TK 1.38) "The statement of those who, with their seer's eye, see entities that are beyond senses (and) beyond feeling, is not invalidated by inference." V pp. 95.6-96.5. 88 sarve hi vādino dūram api gatvā sva-bhāvam na vyativartante. (V 1.30 p. 86.1); Vrşabha, p. 86.7-14; TK 3.1.95, Helā. p. 95.11-20; cf. V 1.127 pp. 205.8-206.1.