Notes On Manuscript Transmission Of Vaisesika Sutra And Its Earliest Commentaries

Author(s): Harunaga Issacson
Publisher: Harunaga Issacson

Page 10

for adding this sūtra and SM's 1.1.4 may well have thought much the same.21 It is interesting, however, that the added sūtra in T has a perhaps slightly archaic ring to it, in that it enumerates only the first and most fundamental three categories, unlike SM's 1.1.4.
2 The sūtras 2.2.4-5 read in C and A tejasy uşnatā (2.2.4), apsu śītatā
(2.2.5). For tejasy usnatā V reads tejahsüsnatā and SM tejasa uşnatā. T is unique in reversing the order of these sūtras; its reading is apsu
sītatā tejasy usnatā. 3 2.2.16 is found in T in the following form: ädityasamprayogät bhavisya
to bhūtāc ca prāci. The edition of C reads ādityasamyogād bhūtapūrvad bhavisyato bhūtāc ca prāci (but see section iv below), as do SM and A, while BhV/V has ādityasamyogād bhūtapūrvād bhavisyato bhūtāc
ca.22
4 T reads 3.1.9 as follows prasiddhabhūtapūrvakatvād apadeśasya. This
differs from the other versions; C prasiddhapūrvakatvād apadeśasya,
V, SM and A prasiddhipurvakatvād apadeśasya. 5 Between the sūtras 6.1.4, buddhipūrvo dadātiḥ (thus C, V, SM and A;
T, though reading buddhipūrvo dadāti should also be corrected to read thus) and 6.1.5, tathā parigrahah (thus all versions), T inserts what appears to be a hitherto unknown sūtra mahine căpravrttih. Here the possibility should be considered that this sūtra has arisen due to some form of textual corruption. Compare 6.1.14 same hine căpraurttih (thus C and T: A same hino capravsttih, which should be emended to agree with Cand T; SM same hine vāpravsttih). If some sort of eyeskip forward and again back is indeed the source of this 'sūtra' (though it is hard to explain such an occurence here), this would tend to confirm that the examplar also contained the strapātha only.
6 7.2.14 reads as follows yutasiddhyabhāvāt kāryakāraṇayos samyogavi
21 And such considerations may well underlie the pratijria attributed to Kanāda in the sentence, quoted twice by Vyomaśiva in his Vyomavati, with slightly different wordings, which Frauwallner supposed to be the original opening of the VS. Cf. Frauwallner 1984 and Halbfass 1992, 69–70.
22 The suggestion of Nozawa that V should read ...ca na práci (Nozawa 1974, 472 and Nozawa 1985, 79) is ruled out rather than confirmed by the publication of BhV; cf. BhV p. 269.
10