[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Philosophy](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana) › [General works and doxographies](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.all) › [Sarvadarshanasangraha](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.all.sarvadarsanasangraha) › 13.15 # Sarvadarshanasangraha 13.15 Sarvadarśanasaṅgraha 13.15 - **Language:** Sanskrit ### [13.15](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.all.sarvadarsanasangraha.13.15) nanv evam apy abhimataṃ prayojanaṃ na labhyate/ tadupāyābhāvāt/ atha pratipadapāṭha evabhyupāya iti manyethās tarhi sa hy anabhyupāyaḥ śabdānāṃ pratipattau pratipadapāṭho bhavet/ śabdāpaśabdabhedenānantyāc chabdānām/ evaṃ hi samāmnāyate bṛhaspatir indrāya divyaṃ varṣasahasraṃ pratipadapāṭhavihitānāṃ śabdānāṃ śabdapārāyaṇaṃ provāca nāntaṃ jagāma/ bṛhaspatiś ca pravaktā indro ’dhyetā divyaṃ varṣasahasram adhyayanakālaḥ/ na ca pārāvāptir abhūt/ kim utādya yaś ciraṃ jīvati sa varṣaśataṃ jīvati/ adhītibodhācaraṇapracāraiś caturbhir hy upāyair vidyopayuktā bhavati/ tatrādhyayanakālenaiva sarvam āyur upayuktaṃ syāt/ tasmād anabhyupāyaḥ śabdānāṃ pratipattau pratipadapāṭha iti prayojanaṃ na sidhyed iti cet > Therefore it was only when they understood it to be an aṅga of the Veda that they applied themselves to its study. So in the same way the students of the present day would not be likely to apply themselves to it either. It is to obviate this danger that it becomes necessary to set forth some end which shall, at the same time, establish that grammar is an aṅga of the Veda. If, when the end is explained, they should still not apply themselves, then, being destitute of all knowledge of the true formation of secular words, they would become involved in sin in the course of sacrificial acts, and would consequently lose their religious merit. Hence the followers of sacrifice read, "One who keeps up a sacrificial fire, on using an incorrect word, should offer an expiatory offering to Sarasvatī." Now it is to declare this end which establishes that it is an aṅga of the Veda that he uses the words atha śabdānuśāsanam and not atha vyākaraṇam. Now the rules of grammar must have an end, and a thing's end is determined by men's pursuit of it with a view thereto. Just as in a sacrifice undertaken with a view to heaven, heaven is the end; in the same way the end of the exposition of words is instruction concerning words, i.e., propriety of speech. "But," an objector may say, "will not the desired end be still unattained for want of the true means to it? Nor can it be said that reading the Veda word by word is the true means; for this cannot be a means for the understanding of words, since their number is infinite, as divided into proper and improper words.\[11\] Thus there is a tradition that Bṛhaspati for a thousand divine years taught to Indra the study of words as used in their individual forms when the Veda is read word by word,\[12\] and still he came not to the end. Here the teacher was Bṛhaspati, the pupil was Indra, and the time of study a thousand years of the gods; and yet the termination was not reached,—how much less, then, in our day, let a man live ever so long? Learning is rendered efficient by four appropriate means,—reading, understanding, practising, and handing it on to others; but in the proposed way life would only suffice for the bare time of reading; therefore the reading word by word is not a means for the knowledge of words, and consequently, as we said at first, the desired end is not established." We reply, however, that it was never conceded that the knowledge of words was to be attained by this reading word by word. And again, since general and special rules apply at once to many examples, when these are divided into the artificial parts called roots, &c. (just as one cloud rains over many spots of ground), in this way we can easily comprehend an exposition of many words. Thus, for instance, by the general rule (iii. 2, 1), karmaṇi, the affix aṇ is enjoined after a root when the object is in composition with it; and by this rule we learn many words, as kumbhakāra, "a potter," kāṇḍalāva, "a cutter of stems," &c. But the supplementary special rule (iii. 2, 3), āto 'nupasarge kaḥ, directing that the affix ka is to be used after a root that ends in long ā when there is no upasarga, shows how impracticable this reading word by word would be \[since it would never teach us how to distinguish an upasarga\]. "But since there are other aṅgas, why do you single out grammar as the one object of honour?" We reply, that among the six aṅgas the principal one is grammar, and labour devoted to what is the principal is sure to bear fruit. Thus it has been said— > — Edward Byles Cowell & Archibald Edward Gough 1882, The Sarva-darśana-saṃgraha, or Review of the Different Systems of Hindu Philosophy - [Previous: 13.14](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.all.sarvadarsanasangraha.13.14) - [Next: 13.16](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.all.sarvadarsanasangraha.13.16) - [Up: 13](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.all.sarvadarsanasangraha.13) ## Translations (2) - [The Sarva-darśana-saṃgraha, or Review of the Different Systems of Hindu Philosophy](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.all.sarvadarsanasangraha~en-cowell.13.p12) — Edward Byles Cowell & Archibald Edward Gough 1882, English - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.all.sarvadarsanasangraha~en-mt.13.15) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.all.sarvadarsanasangraha.13.15](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.all.sarvadarsanasangraha.13.15) · Pramāṇa