________________
104
Studies in Indian Philosophy
Ives inferring from the presence or something like smoke that another thing, such as fire, must be present. Vidyāraṇya is certainly not doing anything comparable. Hence, I think his statements are to be interpreted in the manner shown. In the introduction to his translation of the Upadešasāhasri (A thousand teachings, The Upadeśasāhasri of Sankara, translated with introduction and notes; Tokyo ; University of Tokyo Press, 1919), Sengaku Mayeda says the following about reasoning from anvaya and vyatireka : “Furthermore, it seems to be a meditational method rather than an exegetical method (p. 52)." "When we examine it more closely, we find that the anya yav yatireka method is a means of realizing the true Atman excluding
non-Atman and, in essence, a kind of meditation... (p. 56)." 59 Untersuchungen über Texte des frühen Advaitavāda, 1. Die Schuler
Sankaras. Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literature in Mainz, Abhandlungen der Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse, Jabrgang
1950, Nr. 25, pp. 1907-2072 (1-166). 60 Hacker, op. cit., p. 1980 (74): "Das Verstandnis des heiligen Satzes ((7),
G.C.] geht aus vom Verständnis der Wörter, die ihn koostituieren. Man erreicht es durch die logische Methode des Anvaya und Vyatireka, d. h. durch Rellexion darüber, dass der Inhalt der Wörter und des
Satzes wohlbegründet und das Gegenteil logisch unmöglich ist." 61 J. A. B. van Buitenen, Rāmānuja's Vedārthasamgraha, introduction,
al edition and annotated translation (Deccan Colloge Monograph Series, 16); Poona : Deccan College, 1956; p. 63, note 174. 62 Mayeda (op. cit. [note 58)) p. 33. Mayeda gives textual references in
the places where I show lacunae. 63 Mayeda 54. 64 Mayeda 53. 65 Mayeda 55. 66 Mayeda 55. 67 Note also that Sankara explicitly says reasoning by anvaya and vyatireka
is meant to allow a discrimination with respect to what is designated by tvam (see note 43). Mayeda (p. 191) translates the verse in question as follows; “The method of agreement and difference has been mentioned for the purpose of analyzing out the meaning of the word 'Thou'l and for no other purpose...". This gives to the word viveka (discrimination') a meaning which is not justified but is forced on translator because of his conception of what anvaya and the ypatireka meant to Sankara. If the reasoning in question was meant for "analyzing out" the meaning of tvam in (7), why could Sankara not also say it
was meant for "analyzing out" the meaning of tad in this sentence ? 68 This was seen by van Buitenen, op. cit. (note 61), pp. 62-63. Note also
that Mayeda (p. 57) says, “Therefore, Sankara's method can be said to be essentially the same as jahada jahallakṣāņā."
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
