Nyāya Sūtras 49
Nyāyabhāṣya 49
- Language
- Sanskrit
49.3
yasmāt prakaraṇacintā sa nirṇayārtham apadiṣṭaḥ prakaraṇasamaḥ ||
The counterbalanced [reason] is that which is stated for the sake of ascertainment, [but] from which the consideration of the issue arises.
49.4
vimarśādhiṣṭhānau pakṣapratipakṣāv ubhāv anavasitau prakaraṇam, tasya cintā vimarśāt prabhṛti prāṅ nirṇayād yat samīkṣaṇam,
The issue consists of both thesis and counter-thesis, which are the substrata of deliberation and remain unresolved; the consideration of that [issue] is the investigation from deliberation onwards prior to ascertainment.
49.5
sā jijñāsā yatkṛtā sa nirṇayārthaṃ prayukta ubhayapakṣasāmyāt prakaraṇam anativartamānaḥ prakaraṇasamo nirṇayāya na prakalpate/
prajñāpanaṃ tv anityaḥ śabdo nityadharmānupalabdher iti, anupalabhyamānan ity adharmakaṃ nityaṃ dṛṣṭam sthālyādi/ nityaḥ śabdo vānityadharmānupalabdheḥ anupalabhyamānānityadharmakaṃ nityaṃ dṛṣṭam ākāśādi/
yatra samāno dharmaḥ saṃśayakāraṇaṃ hetutvenopādīyate sa saṃśayasamaḥ savyabhicāra eva/
That [reason] through which this desire to know is caused, being applied for the sake of ascertainment, does not advance beyond the issue because of the equivalence of both theses; being counterbalanced, it is not capable of [bringing about] ascertainment.
As for demonstration: ‘sound is impermanent, because the properties of the permanent are not apprehended’—[just as] a pot or the like is observed to be impermanent, having properties that are not apprehended; or, ‘sound is permanent, because the properties of the impermanent are not apprehended’—[just as] space or the like is observed to be permanent, having properties of the impermanent that are not apprehended.
Where a common property is taken as the logical reason as the cause of doubt, that is the [pseudo-reason] similar to doubt, which is strictly speaking erratic.
49.6
yā tu vimarśasya viśeṣāpekṣitā ubhayapakṣaviśeṣānupalabdhiś ca sā prakaraṇaṃ pravartayati/ yathā śabde nityadharmo nopalabhyata evam anityadharmo 'pi/ seyam ubhayapakṣaviśeṣānupalabdhiḥ prakaraṇacintāṃ pravartayati/
But that requirement of deliberation for a differentiating mark, and the non-apprehension of the differentiating mark of either thesis, sets the issue in motion. Just as a property of the permanent is not apprehended in sound, so too a property of the impermanent [is not apprehended]. This non-apprehension of a differentiating mark in either thesis sets the consideration of the issue in motion.
49.7
katham? viparyaye hi prakaraṇanivṛtteḥ --- yadi nityadharmaḥ śabde gṛhyeta na syāt prakaraṇam, yadi na syāt prakaraṇam, yadi vānityadharmo gṛhyeta evam api nivarteta prakaraṇam/ so 'yaṃ hetur ubhau pakṣau pravartayann anyatarasya nirṇayāya na prakalpate// 7 //
How? Because, in the reverse case, there would be cessation of the issue: if a property of the permanent were apprehended in sound, there would be no issue; if a property of the impermanent were apprehended, in that case too the issue would cease. Thus, this logical reason, setting both theses in motion, is not capable of ascertaining either one. // 7
Translations (1)
- English (machine translation) — English, machine translation
Commentaries (2)
- Nyāyavārtikatātparyaṭīkā — Vācaspati Miśra, Sanskrit
- Nyāyavārttika — Uddyotakara, Sanskrit
Linked texts (1)
- Nyāyasūtra — Akṣapāda Gautama, Sanskrit