Nyāya Sūtras 55
Nyāyabhāṣya 55
- Language
- Sanskrit
55.3
sambhavato 'rthasyātisāmānyayogād asambhūtārthakalpanā sāmānyacchalam ||
Generalization quibble (sāmānyacchala) is the presumption of an impossible meaning through excessive generalization of a possible meaning.
55.4
aho khalv asau brāhmaṇo vidyācaraṇasampanna ity ukte kaścid āha sambhavati brāhmaṇe vidyācaraṇasampad iti/
When it is said: "Oh, that Brahmin is indeed endowed with learning and conduct!", someone replies: "The endowment with learning and conduct is possible in a Brahmin."
55.5
asya vacanasya vighāto 'rthavikalpopapattyāsambhūtārthakalpanayā kriyate --- yadi brāhmaṇe vidyācaraṃasampat sambhavati vrātye 'pi sambhavet, vrātyo 'pi brāhmaṇaḥ, so 'py astu vidyācaraṇasampanna iti/ yad vivakṣitam artham āpnoti cātyeti ca tad atisāmānyam/ yathā brāhmaṇatvaṃ vidyācaraṇasampadaṃ kvacid āpnoti kvacid atyeti/ sāmānyanimittaṃ chalaṃ sāmānyacchalam iti/
asya ca pratyavasthānam --- avivakṣitahetukasya viṣayānuvādaḥ praśaṃsārthatvād vākyasya; tad atrāsambhūtārthakalpanānupapattiḥ/ yathā sambhavanty asmin kṣetre śālaya iti anirākṛtam avivakṣitaṃ ca bījajanma, pravṛttiviṣayas tu kṣetraṃ praśasyate; so 'yaṃ kṣetrānuvādaḥ nāsmin śālayo vidhīyanta iti; bījāt tu śālinirvṛttiḥ satī na vivakṣitā/ evaṃ sambhavati brāhmaṇe vidyācaraṇasampad iti sampadviṣayo brāhmaṇatvaṃ na sampaddhetuḥ/ na cātra hetur vivakṣitaḥ/ viṣayānuvādas tv ayaṃ praśaṃsārthatvād vākyasya, sati brāhmaṇatve sampaddhetuḥ samartha iti/ vis'yaṃ ca praśaṃsatā vākyena yathāhetutaḥ phalanirvṛttir na pratyākhyāyate/ tad evaṃ sati vacanavighāto 'sambhūtārthakalpanayā nopapadyata iti//
The subversion of this statement is performed through the presumption of an impossible meaning by demonstrating an alternative meaning: "If endowment with learning and conduct is possible in a Brahmin, it should also be possible in a fallen Brahmin (vrātya); a fallen Brahmin is also a Brahmin, so let him too be endowed with learning and conduct." Excessive generality is that which covers the intended object and extends beyond it; just as Brahminhood covers endowment with learning and conduct in some cases and extends beyond it in others. Quibble caused by generality is generalization quibble. And the counter-argument against this [is as follows]: It is a restatement of the locus whose cause is not intended to be specified, because the sentence has praise as its purpose; therefore, the presumption of an impossible meaning is unjustified here. Just as in: "Rice grows in this field," the origination from seed is not denied and not intended to be stated, but the field, as the locus of action, is praised; this is a restatement of the field, [and] rice is not enjoined in it [without seeds], while the origination of rice from seeds, though real, is not intended to be expressed. Likewise, in "Endowment with learning and conduct is possible in a Brahmin," Brahminhood is the locus of the endowment, not the cause of the endowment. And here the cause is not intended to be expressed. Rather, this is a restatement of the locus because the sentence has praise as its purpose: "given Brahminhood, the cause of the endowment is capable." And by praising the locus, the sentence does not deny that the result is produced by its proper cause. Therefore, this being so, the subversion of the statement through the presumption of an impossible meaning is not justified.
Translations (1)
- English (machine translation) — English, machine translation
Commentaries (2)
- Nyāyavārtikatātparyaṭīkā — Vācaspati Miśra, Sanskrit
- Nyāyavārttika — Uddyotakara, Sanskrit
Linked texts (6)
- Nyāyasūtra — Akṣapāda Gautama, Sanskrit
- Nyāyamañjarī — Jayanta Bhaṭṭa, Sanskrit
- Vedāntakaumudī — Rāmadvaya, Sanskrit
- Nyāyasāra — Bhāsarvajña, Sanskrit
- Tārkikarakṣā — Varadarāja, Sanskrit
- Nyāyakalikā — Jayanta Bhaṭṭa, Sanskrit