Sunteți pe pagina 1din 442

II

«ft:

II

Annamalai University Sanskrit Series:

No.

J.

TATTVABIND

U

BY

VÄCASPATIMISRA

WITH

TATTVAVIBHÄVAN Ä

 

BY

RSIPUTRA

PARAMESVARA

EDITED BY

Mlmämsakaratna Mimämsävisärada Vedasiromani

V, A. RAMASWAMI SASTRI, M.A,,

Lecturer in Sanskrit, Annamalai University

WITH

A FOREWORD

BY

Mahämahopädhyäya

'ROF, S. KUPPUSWAMI SASTRIGAL, M.A., LE.S. (Retd),

AND WITH AN INTRODUCTORY NOTE

BY PROF. K. RAMA PISHAROTI,

M.A.,

L.T.,

Professor of Sanskrit and Dean of the Oriental Faculty, Annamalai University»

PREFAC E

r T" r HIS

edition

of

Vacaspatimisra's

 

Tattvabindu

JL

and

of

its

commentary

 

Tattvavibhavana

by Paramesvar a

II

is

based on

(1)

a

trans-

cript

of a manuscript

Tattvavibhavana

preserved

in

the

Madra s Government

Oriental

Manuscripts

Library,

and

(2)

the

Benares

Edition

of

the

Tattvabindu.

 

Since

the

commentator

ha s

made

it

a

rule

to quote

the

full

text

by

parts

before

commenting

 

on

it,

his

text

ha s

been

accepted

for

this

edition.

But

the

many

lacunae

 

in

the

text

have

been

filled

tip

with

the

help

of

the

printed

book.

 

The

readings

both

in

the

text

and the

commentary are

however

found

defective

in

some

instances,

and

suggestions

of

better

readings ar e given in

brackets.

 

The commentary is indispensable for a correct appreciation of the intricacies of Väcaspatimiära's

thought

 

and

style.

Parameävar a II

who

lived

more

tha n

half

a

millennium

 

after

Vacaspati-

misra,

considers

occasionally

the

interpretations

of

the

earlier

commentators

on

the

Tattvabindu

and the various readings of the text. In its

Sphotakhandana

section

he

cites

kärikä s

and

prose passages from the Sphotasiddhi

of Mandana-

misra and

advances the important and

interesting

view

tha t

the

first

part

of

the

Tattvabindu

contains

a

direct

refutation

of

the

views

of

Mandanamiära

on

 

the

theory

of

Sphota.

Para -

mesvara II wa s no doubt

thoroughly familiar

with

all the works of Kumärila,

probably including

the

Brhattika,

 

and

of Prabhäkar a

with

Sälikanätha's

VIII

PREFACE

commentaries thereon.

He

was

equally

familiar

with

other

authoritative

works

like

the

Naya-

viveka

and

the

Vivekatattva,

and

he

ha s

displayed

in

his

work

a

critical

estimate

of

both

the

Bhätt a

and

Präbhäkar a

schools

of

Münämsä.

Consequently

he

offers

to

students

of

Mimämsä

Sästr a

 

solutions

for

many

knotty

problems

concerning

the

historical

and

the

doctrinal

sides

of this

Sästra.

 
 

It

now

remains

for me

to

acknowledge

the

help I

have

received

in

editing this work.

I

owe

a

deep

debt

of

gratitude

to

my

friend

and

colleague

Brahmaäri

K. A. Sivaramakrishna

Sas-

trigal

Avl.,

Vedänt a

and

Vyäkaran a

Siromani,

Pandit

in

Sanskrit,

and

to

my

friend and teacher

Brahmasri

S. K. Ramanath a

Sastrigal

Avl.,

Lec-

ture r

in

Sanskrit,

Madras

University,

for

their

valuable

suggestions

in the

fixing

up

of

the

text

and

in proof-reading;

and to my friend

M.R. Ry.

R.

Satyanatha

Ayya r

Avl., M.A., L.T.,

Lecture r

in

History,

for

 

his valuable

suggestions

in

the

preparation

of

the

historical

 

portions

of

the

Introduction.

I

am profoundly

grateful

to

Professor

K. Rama

Pisharoti, M.A., L.T.,

Professor

of

Sanskrit,

for

his kindness in revising

the

manuscript

of

my

Introduction.

It

is

difficult

for

me

to

adequately thank my revered

Professor

Mahämahopädhyäya

Darsanakalänidhi

Vidyä-

väcaspati

Kulapati

S. Kuppuswami Sastrigal Avl.,

M.A., I.E.S.,

Retired

Professor

 

of

Sanskrit

and

Comparative

Philology,

Presidency

College,

Mad-

ras, for

the

kindness

and

readiness

with

which

he ha s enriched this work with his FOREWORD.

I sincerely thank Pandit Lakshmana Sastri

Tailang

for

having

allowed

me

to

incorporate

in

this

edition

the

Tipparu

of

his

late

brother,

 

PREFACE

 

IX

MM.

Manavalli

Gangadhar a

 

Sastri.

I

cannot

forget

the

great

help

tha t

my

friend

Brahmaärl

Vedäntälankär a

Vedänt a

Siromani

T.

V.

Rama-

chandra

Dikshitar

AvL,

Professor

of

Vedänta,

Sanskrit

College, Mylapore, Madras, ha s

rendered

me

in

suggesting

almost

all

the

improvements

to

the

printed

text

incorporated

in

Appendix

V.

I

have

to

record

my

thanks

to

the

Curators

of

the

Madras

 

Govt.

Oriental

Mss.

Library

and

the

Adyar ' Library

for

the

facilities

 

they

have

given me

to

consult

man y

valuable

manuscripts.

 

I

wish

to

express

my indebtedness to

the

authorities

of

the

University,

and

in

particular

to M.R.Ry. Dewan Bahadur S. E. Runganadhan

AvL, M.A., I.E.S., Retired Vice-Chancellor of

the

Annamalai University, for permitting me to edit

this work, and to the Right Hon'ble V. S. Srinivasa

Sastri, P.C., C.H., LL.D., the Vice-Chancellor,

for

graciously permitting me to dedicate this work

to him.

Lastly,

T have

to

express

my

sincere

thanks

to the Superintendent, St. Joseph's

Industrial

School Press, Trichinopoly, for and get-up of the work.

the

neat

printing

UNIVERSITY,

ANKAMALAINAGAR.

1-12-1935.

")

)

^

T

A

__

V ' A ' ^AMASWAMI SASTRI. Editor.

 

CONTENT S

 
 

Pages

FOREWOKD

 

.

.

.

XIII-XV

INTRODUCTORY NOTE

.

.

. XVII-XIX

INTRODUCTION

.

.

.

.1-19 7

TEXT

.

.

.

.

\-\\\

APPENDIX

I

.

.

.

1- 7

II

.

.

.

9-1 0

I ll

...

.

11

IV

...

.

12-2 2

V

.

.

23-2 5

ERRATA

.

.

.

.

.26-2 8

INDEX

OF

AUTHORS

.

.

.

29-3 0

INDEX

OF

WORKS

.

.

.

31-3 3

GENERAL INDEX

 

.

.

.

34-5 0

BIBLIOGRAPHY

.

.

.

.51-5 4

FOREWOR D

BY

Mahämahopädhyäya

S. KUPPUSWAMI SASTRI, M.A., I.E-S. (Retired)

 

TN

compliance

with

the

request

of

my

friend

and

former 1

pupil

Mr.

V.

A.

Ramaswami

Sastri,

M.A.,

Mimäms ä

Siromani,

Lecture r

in

Sanskrit

of

the

Annamala i

University,

Anna-

malainagar,

Chidambaram,

I

gladly

write

this

short

Foreword.

 
 

Mr.

V.

A. Ramaswami

Sastri

ha s

rendered

a

highly

valuable

service

to

Sanskrit

scholars

who are

interested

in

the

study

of

advanced

Sästraic

texts

in

the

original,

by

bringing

out

a

very

reliable

edition

of

Väcaspatimisra's

Tattvabindu,

together

 

with

the

commentary

called

Tattvavibhävanä

by

Parameävar a

II,

of

the

Keral a

country.

Väcaspatimisra

belongs

to

the

middle

of

the

ninth

century

A. D.

and

Para -

mesvara

II

flourished

 

in

the

Porkulam

village

of Kunnankulam,

near Guruväyür,

in

the

Cochin

State,

in

the

former

half

of

the

fifteenth

cen-

tur y

A.D .

 
 

Väcaspatimisra's

Tattvabindu

is

a

short

and

highly

difficult

text.

I n

his

characteristically

rhythmi c

 

and

stately

diction,

Väcaspatimisra

reviews

in

the

Tattvabindu,

 

the

Vaiyäkarana

doctrine

of

Sphota,

mainly

as

expounded

by

Bhartrhari

and

Mandanamisra,

and

amplifies

and

reaffirms

Kumärila's criticism

of Sphota

doctrine.

Bhartrhari

and

Mandana

in

their

exposition

of

XIV

FOREWORD

 

the

sphota

doctrine worked out fully

the

 

onto-

logical

implication

involved

in

wha t

may

 

be

described,

in

terms

of

modern

psychology,

as

a

Gestalt

view

of

the

experience

relating

to

the

complete

and

self-contained

significative

unit,

called

sentence

(väkya), by

establishing

the

doc-

trine

of ßabdadvaita

 

and

reconciling

it

with

the

Upanisadic

doctrine

of Brahmädvaita.

The

sub-

stantival

pluralism

of

the

Mimämsakas,

both

of

the

schools

of Kumarila

and Prabhäkara,

set

its

face

against

all

kinds

of Advaitism

and

was

opposed

to

Bhartrhari's

Sabdädvaita.

 

Though

Väcaspatimisra was one of the greatest

Advaitins

and was

dominated,

in

a

large

measure, by

the

spirit

of

philosophical

accommodation

which

characterised

Mandana's

great

Advaitic classic—

Brahmasiddhi,

he

chose

to

maintain,

in

his

Tattvabindu,

the

attitude

which

 

Kumärila

adopted

towards

the

doctrine

 

of

Sphota

in

his

Slokavarttika.

 
 

The Commentary—Tattvavibhävanä—which

is

incorporated

in

this

edition, is lucid and

very

helpful

in understanding

the

text

of

Vacaspati-

misra.

Though this commentary

is

generally

reliable,

it

must

be

said

tha t the learned

com-

mentator

nods

in

some

places.

 

For

instance,

at

page

96

of

the

text,

the

commentator

ha s

adopted

snrteRtft

a

defective

 

reading—" T§**rrHT%rT ff

^TT^TCT

**?%: wl\M4 ";

and

he

ha s

entirely

missed

the

meaning

of

the

technical

terms

used in

this

text.

By

the way

it

may

be

observed

tha t

the

correct reading of this text is :—"

 
 

as

given

in

the

footnote;

and

tha t

this

text

refers

to

the

three

types

of

cognitions which

are capable

of being

reproduced

in memory—viz., qgsrera", sr^TTHsrerc and srr^srerc

and

FOREWORD

XV

which

Prasastapäda

 

describes

in

his

Padartha-

dharmasangraha-

in

the

Samskära

section

of

the

gunagrantha.

The

elaborate

and

scholarly introduction,

giving

a historical

sketch

of

the

Mlmamsa

liter-

ature,

and

the

thorough-going

analysis

of

the

Tattvabindu,

in English, which

the

learned

editor

ha s

prefixed

to

his

edition

of

the

work,

greatly

enhance

book

of

the value of

I

this

edition

as an important

reference.

heartily

congratulate

Mr.

Ramaswami

Sastri

 

on

this

substantial

 

and

scholarly

contribution,

which

he

ha s

made,

in

his

edition

of

the

Tattvabindu,

to

the

printed

Sästr a

literature

in

Samskrit

and

to

the

study

of Indian

Philosophy

 

in

general.

 

The typographical execution and the get-up of the book reflect great credit on the Printers, St. Joseph's Industrial School Press, Trichinopoly.

5, NORTH

MAD A

STREET,^

MYLAPORE,

MADRAS.

19-11-35.

[

)

S. KUPPUSWAMI SASTRL

INTRODUCTOR Y

NOT E

BY

PROF. K.

R.

PISHAROTI, M.A.,

L.T.,

Head of the Department of Sanskrit and Dean of

 

the Faculty of

Oriental Studies,

 

HTHE

Tattvabindu

of

Väcaspatimisra

with

the

 

commentary called Tattvavibhävanä

of

Para -

meSvara

II

öf

Payyü r

Bhattamana ,

rightly

styled

Mimämsäcakravartin,

 

is

here

issued

for

the

first

time

as Annamala i

University

Sanskrit

Series

No.

Ill,

and

I

have

great

pleasure

to

commend

it

to

the

public.

The

first

of

the

series was

Kulasekhara's

Mukundamalä,

a

hymn

of praise

to

Mukunda,

and

the

second,

Sabhä-

pativüäsanätßka,

a

glorification

of

Nataräja

and

this

inquiry

into

Trut h

embodied in

the

Tattva-

bindu

comes

fittingly

as

the

third.

The

Tattvabindu

of

Väcaspatimiära

is

the

most

authoritative

treatise

on

the

source

of

verbal

cognition

from

the

epistemological

stand-

point

of

the

Mlmamsakas

 

and

it

occupies

an

important

 

place

in

the

dialectic

literature

of

this

school

of

Indian

thought.

 

The

abstruse

problem discussed herein in the lofty and

pregnant

language

of

Väcaspati

ha s

always

made

the

work

a

hard

nut

to

crack

even

for

the

best

of

Mlmamsa scholars. A commentary giving an

authoritative

exposition

of

the

text

was

a

long-felt

desideratum,

and

this

is

now

supplied

by

the

publication

of

the

Tattvavibhävanä,

of

Mimämsäcakravarti

 

Parameävarabhatt a

tha n

whom a better exponent VacaspatimiSra could not

have had.

The present publication will,

therefore,

be welcomed

by

all

students

of

Mimamsäsästra.

XVIII

INTRODUCTORY NOTE

 

The work

has

been

edited

by

my

friend

and

colleague,

Veda-Mlmämsä

Öiromani V. A. Räma-

swami

Sastri,

M.A.,

Lecture r

in

Sanskrit.

He

ha s

brought

to bear

on this

publication

the

rare

combination

of

the

intensive

learning

of

a

Siro-

mani

and

the

critical

scholarship

of

a

Master

of

Arts.

As

the

publication

itself

will

bear

out,

the

work

has

taxed

all

the

critical

ingenuity

and

scholarship

of

the

editor

and

better

justice,

I

believe, could

not

in

the

circumstances

have

been

done

to

the

text

and

particularly

to

the

commentary.

 
 

The

introduction

is

fairly

long,

but

the

length

was

obviously

unavoidable, for

so

far

we

have

no

systematic

history

of

Mimämsäsästr a

presented

to us.

It stands

as

a

striking evidence

of

the

patience

and industry

of

the

editor;

for

he

ha s critically noticed with biographical details,

as far

as

available, nearly

seventy

authors,

more

or

less

in

chronological

sequence,

besides

telling

forth

in

Appendices

I

and

II

a

list

of

fifty

authors

and

works,

partially

or

imperfectly

known.

 

This

is

a matte r

of

no

small

credit

to

the

editor,

particularly

when

it

is

remembered

tha t

he

ha s

had

to

attend

to

his

usual

lecture

work

in

the

University

and

ha s

had

no

direct

and immediate

access

to

any manuscript

library.

It

is

possible tha t

all

his

conclusions

may

not

be

acceptable

and

some

of them may

even

prove

wrong in

the

light

of

fresh

evidence

tha t

ma y

be

forthcoming,

but

tha t

does

not

take

away

from

the

value

of

this

piece

of

pioneer

work.

I n

any

case

he

has

certainly

opened

up

a

pathway

in

the

tangled

forest

of

the

history

of

Mimärhsäöästra

and

to

tha t

extent,

at

least,

he

ha s

earned

the

thanks

of

all

students

of

this

 

INTRODUCTORY NOTE

 

XIX

branch

of

Sanskrit

literature.

Appendix

III

giving

an

alphabetical

index

of

the

Karikas

of

the

text,

Appendix

IV

setting

forth

the

quota-

tions

occurring

in

the

text

and commentary

with

their

sources

identified,

as

far

as

possible,

Appendix

V

suggesting

improved

readings

both

in

the

text

and

commentary

and

filling

up

to

the

extent

possible

lacunae

in

the

latte r

and

the

three

Indexes—these,

it

needs

scarcely

be

said,

add greatly

to

the

value

of

the

publication

to

the

critical

student.

 

It

is

a

matte r

of

great

gratification

to

me,

as

it

must

be

to

every

lover

of

Sanskrit,

tha t

the

Department

of

Sanskrit

of

the

Annamalai

University

ha s

been

enabled

to

contribute

its

own humble

share

in

the

further

elucidation

of

Sanskrit

literature

by

the

publication

of

un-

published works

and

for

this

the

thanks

of

the

Department

are

due

to

the

authorities

of

the

University.

 

DEPARTMENT

OF

SANSKRIT,')

ANNAMALAI

UNIVERSITY.

(

K.

RAMA

PISHAROTI.

 

1-12-35

)

INTRODUCTIO N

PAR T

I.

A SHORT HISTORY OF THE PÜRVA MIMÄMSÄ S'ASTRA

 

The

History

of

the Pürva

Mlmämsä

Öästra may

be

divided into—

 
 

(1)

Pre-Kumärila

period, from

the

earliest times

 

to

A. D. 600 ;

 
 

(2)

Kumärila period,

from

A. D. 600 to

900;

 

and

(3)

Post-Kumärila

period,

from

A. D.

900

to

the

 

present day.

 

'

I 'RUTH

was

passionately

pursued

in

Ancient

•*•

India.

He r

quest

after

trut h

gradually

led

to

the

development

of the

intuitionistic

and the

rationalistic

tendencies

 

and

ultimately

to

the

realisation

of

dharma

and

moksa,

thanks

to

the

emergence

of upanisads

in

the

philosophy

of atman.

two

tendencies

culminated

on

the

one

These side in the

Vedanta

Sütras

of

Bädaräyan a

and

on

the

other

in

Jaimini's

Pürvamimafnsa

Sütras.

The

latte r

mar k

the

development

 

and

culmination

of

the

influence

of

the

rationalistic

tendency on the

ritualistic aspect, both

exegetical

 

and

doctrinal.*

It

is probable

tha t

the

Acaryas

referred

to

by

Jaimini

might

have

composed

their

own Sütra s

of

vedic interpretation.

I n

all

probability,

Jaimini, like

Pänini

in

the

history of

Sanskrit

grammar,

summed

up

all

the

labours

of

his

predecessors

and

improved

on their

work

to

such

an

extent

tha t

he

became

the

only

Sütrakär a

in

this

realm

of

Indian

Thought.

 

* Vide MM. S. Kuppuswami Sastrigal's Indian Logic "—Introduction pp. VI & VII,

"A Primer of

2

INTRODUCTION

 

Mimämsä:

 

References

 

in

the

Vedic

Texts.

 
 

The

term

' mimämsä'

is

derived

from

the

 

nan—to

 

know—with

the

desiderative

suffix

' san';

 

and

it

means

the

desire

 

for

knowledge!

In most recensions of the Vedas

the Sannanta

 

root

' mimamsa'

 

is found

used

either

 

as

a noun

or a

verb

in

the

combined

sense

of desire

for

knowl-

edge

and

of

discussion.

 

The

 

Taittirlyasamhüä

of

the

Krsna

Yajurveda

understands

the

term

mlmamsante

 

in

this

sense :

thus

 

VII—5-7-1

says

" utsrjyäm

notsrjyämiti

 

mlmamsante

 

brahmavä-

dinah

 

taddhahuh

utsrjyäm

 

eveti" 2

VI—2-6-4

"vyävrtkämam

 

yam

pätre

 

talpe

mlmämse-

ran"

ha s

the

word

' mlmämseran'

used

in

the

sense

 

of

discussion;

 

II—5-3-7

 

introduces

a

doubtful

point

with

the

words

'

Brahmavädinah

vadanti'

without

using

the

verb

'mlmamsante' .

The

Tandyabrahmana

 

of

the

Säma

Veda

also

supports

 

the

same

view:

thus

 

VI—5-9

ha s

a

passage

with

the

word

 

mlmämseta'brähmanam

pätre

na

mlmämseta

' 3

and

in

XXIII—4-2

the

form

' mlmämseran'

is

employed :

 

" yah

talpe

udake

vivähe

mlmämseran

 

ta

etä

upeyuh

".

In

the

Kausitakibrähmana

 

of

the

Rg-Veda

the

verb

'mlmamsante'

and

the

noun

'mimämsä'

are found

used : II—9

states tha t

 

"

uditehotavyam

anuditam

 

iti

mlmamsante—they

 

investigate

(the

 

1.

Compare

Pänini's

sütra—' mänbadhadänsänbhyo dir-

ghah ca abhyäsasya' III—1.

6 ; and Kätyäyana's

Värttika—

* mäneh jijnäsäyäm'.

 

2.

"The expounders of Brahman discuss (the question)

whether (a day) should be omitted or not; on this (they)

say that

it

must be left out."—(P. V. KANE, P. M. System,

P. 2.)

 
 

3.

' One should not discuss the merits

of

a

brahmana'

 

PÜRVA MlMAMSA &ASTRA

 

ä

question)

whether

oblation

should

be

offered

to

Fire

when the

Sun rises or

before the

Sun rises

" ;

and

after

some

remarks

on

each

of

the

two

alternatives,

the

conclusion

is

arrived

at

tha t

"tasmät

anudite

hotavyam—the

oblation

should

be

offered

before

Sunrise " ;

XXVI—2

and

3

use

the words

' mlmämsä'

and ' Mlmamsante':

athato

goayusoh

mlmamsa' 1

 

'atha

kascit

sastre

va

anuvacane

pramattah

 

upahanyat

vicikitsa

va

syat

upahatam

abuddham

atikrantam

 

manyamano

manasa

vrttäntam

lksamäno

vinivrtya

upahatam

anupahatam

krtva

anantaryat

prayogah

syat

vrttäntat

iti

mlmamsante

 

' 2 .

In

XVIII—4

of

the

same

Brähmana

the

word

' mlmamsa'

 

is

found

used in

the

sense

of

discussion,

4 athatah

pari-

dhänasyaiva

mlmamsa

'

3 .

In the Kanva

recension

of

the

ßatapathabrähmana

of

the

Whit e

Yajur-

veda

the

word

mlmamsa

is used—'