Tattva Sangraha Vol 2

Author(s): Kamlashila, Ganganatha Jha
Publisher: Oriental Research Institute Vadodra

Page 10

INTRODUCTION.
vü
This belief is further strengthened by a reference to the Brahmasiddhi of Mandana Mishra,-which is believed to be anterior to Shankarachārya.
Under Text 348 we note another parallelism between the Buddhist and Vedānta ways of dealing with the 'Soul'. We know that, in th last resort, the Vedāntin has recourse to the idea of wford , the 'Soul' being one of the wordgata, Inexplicable, things. We find the same idea expressed by Shantaraksita and his commentator under Text 348. The question having been put-"If no such thing as the Pudgala exists, then how was it that when asked if the Jiva was different from, or the same as, the Body, the Blessed Lord only vouchsafed the answer that 'this matter has not been explained'; why did not He say straight away that 'there was no such thing as the Jiva, Soul, apart from the Body'?”—The only answer given by Shāntaraleșita is that the intention of the Compassionate One was the denial of Nästikya (i.e. the view that denies the other world and other Regions); and to this end he adopted various methods'. So that according to this also the Soul is something that has 'not been explained', is 'inexplicable', wfordata.
On p. 16, line 7, we find mentioned a Kavya of the name of Sitāharana ; the poet's name is not given.
Under Texts 2671-2673 we have a comparison drawn between the Mimāmsaka's and the Buddhist's idea of Pralaya, Dissolution. According to the former, Dissolution consists in the destruction of particular countries and of particular families or peoples; and there is no such thing as Universal Dissolution; there is no evidence for any such Dissolution: while according to the Buddhist, there is an 'undeniablo Destruction affecting even Brahmã and others, which affects the Veda also; so that Dissolution consists in "the withdrawal of the energy of Fire, Water and Air, extending horizontally over the Trisähasra-Mahäsähasra (?), down. wards to the lowest limits of the atmospheric air, and upwards to the highest stages of Dhyāna; which affects Brahma and other beings also".
Text 2447 speaks of the Pärasikas as perceiving nothing wrong in the marriage of their mother. Does this mean "Widow-marriage'?-or something worse ?–Text 2807 speaks of these Pärasikas as blindly adhering to their custom.
In Text 2520 the view is expressed that ‘attraction by the Magnet is due to the contact of the invisible rays of light emanating from the Magnet and penetrating the piece of Iron'. Does this indicate the knowledge of the fact that all phenomena relating to Light, Electricity and Magnetism are due to the action of the same 'Force' or 'Fluid'?
The commentary on Texts 2653-2655, distinguishes between the verbal usage of the 'Arya' from that of the 'Dravida'.