·BHAVAN'S LIBRARY
This book is valuable and
NOT to be ISSUED
out of the Library
without Special Permission

·Visua.Bharat. Studies No 9
CHANG-CHEN LUN
KARATALARATNA
OR
The JewrL IN HAND
(A Logico-Philosophical Treatise of The Madhyamaka School)
BY
ACARYA BHAVAVIVEKA
Translated into Sapskrit
from
The Chinese version of USUEN TSANG
(AD 602-604 )
BY
1
N. AIYASWAMI SASTRI
Professor, Vista-Bharair-Cheena Dhavana
HIT!
ss
R.
5534233
Afina
VISVA-BHARATI
SANTINIKETAN

·TO BE NAD OL
THE VISVA-BUARATI PUBLISEING DEPARTUCNT
G/3, DWARKANATU TAGORE LANC, CALOUTIA
Price Rupees Five
(Reprinted from the 14522 Bharalt Annals II)
Publisbed by The Vista Bharata
Printed by I'rabhathumar Mukerjee at the Santipiletan
Press, Santiniketan, Birbhnm

·CONTENTS 1-XVI INTRODUCTION fi Madhyamaka and its Carly sources 2 Two Schools 3 Buddhist Logic and its Early Authorities 4 The Author and His Inte 5 Big Sautrgntika attı tude 6 References to the Author 7 His Works 8 The Present Treatise 1 93 67 101 INGLISI SUMMARY SANSKRTA TEXT- Chap 1 Chap 2 ADDITIONAL NOTES INDICES APPENDIX (CHINESE) ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS ERRATA 105 121 123 ·INTRODUCTION 1 The Buddha s preacbing 13 characteriged 93 moderate path 170iding the two oxtremes Fiz indulgence in sensuel pleasares and taking to the hab taal practico of self mortification Whon attempts woro mado to interpret and find out the true import of the Master & teachings in the days of the past Acurya Nistrjuna claimed to have atrook at the depth of the Master & nbteranoes and atgled bis interpreta tion as moderate Madhyamaka and accordingly his treatise in verses was designated Madhyamakasistra or keriki Nagarjuna 8 main contribution to the evolation of Buddhist thought is an emphasis on Prajaa tho ultimate knowledgo derived from understandig the true nature of things in their real perspective Sanyata This Sünyant za his opinion is ooly & aynonym for depondant originatioa Pratiya samutpada The Sunyatı doctrine 18 not quite unfamiliar with the earlier Buddhists They take it for narratmya faoyote as an cqarvalent for dependant origination is quite as innovation of Nagarjuna Tho Sanyata doctrine ho boya has been introduced by Buddhas as an antidots for all wrong views and beliefs (N & XIII 8) It appears that Nagarjuna 19 quite right 10 B0 Baying since 16 can approprately corroborated from somo earlier utterances of the Buddha When Diglapaths a Porivrdjaka o & Conroy, his conviction to the Budaha not to ontertaid Ady view the lattor romarks that many persons professicg not to entertain any view 10stead of giving up that view entertain a new one and there are a few persong who having given up that viow do not at all entortalo & hew one The Buddha further points out that a man stroking himsolf to any one of the tbroo y10178 (1 सब्य मे न खमति 2 एन्ब मे खमति, 3 एकच मे पति एकच्च मे न खमति) would sve ro to quarrel and in order to avoid any quarrel ho should givo ap that view and not entertail & Dew one Noto the passago in conclusion विमुत्तचित्तो न केन वि सवदति न केन चि विपति। ये २ लोके पुत तेन बोहरति apura fa MIP soo ·INTRODUCTION 1 Tho Buddha's preaching 19 gharacterised as "moderate path" avoiding the two oxtremos, yiz, Indalgonde in Bosal pleasures and taking to the habitual practice of sell mortification When attempts word made to interpret and find out the true import of the Master's tonchings in the days of the past Acarga Nagarjans claimed to have atruok at tho depth of the Nastor's utteranoes and styled his interpretation as' modorato 'Madhyamaka, and accordingly his treatise in verses was designated "Madhyamakaśkstra" or kirika Nagfrjuna's main contribution to the opololion of Buddhist thought is an empha919 on Praji& the ultimate knowledge derived from understanding tho truo nature of things in their regl porspective yiz Sanyala This Sanyala. 10 his opinion, $s oply synonym for "deropdapt origination", Pratiya samutpada. The Sunyatı doctrine is not quite unfamiliar Witha tho earlier Buddhists They take it for nairaimya sanyata as an equivalent for "dependant origination" is quite an innovation of Nagtrjana Tho Sanyata doctrine, bo saye, bas been introduced by Buddhas ng an antidoto for all wrong views and beliefs (MK XIII, 8) It nppears that Nagarjuna is quito right 10 80 saying since it can appropriately corroboratod from some earlier utterances of the Buddha When Dighanakha a Parivıdjaba e & Convoye his congiction to the Buddha not to entertalo any view the latter remarks that many persons professing oot to entertaio aoy view fostead of giving up that view entortaia & now ope and there are a few porsons who haviac given up that viow do not at all entertain Dew The Buddha furthor porats out that a man sticking himself to any one of the throo views (: सब्य मे न समति, 2 अन्य गे समति, 3 एकच मे खमति एकश्च मे न खमति) would give rise to # qurrel, and in order to Avoid any quarrel lie should give up that 718w, and not entertain a cow one, Note the passage in conclusion विमुत्तचितो न केन चि सवति न केन चि विवति । य च लोके वृत्त वेन बोहरति eru fai M. I. p. 500 one ·[ 1 ] Here we may rest fully conpinced of the fact that Nagarjuna's stand 13 fattingly and antecedently endorsed by the Master The Instance of Dighsnakha 19 also cited by Bharariveka on p 48 Moreorer e food many verses collected in the Suttanipata which beyond any shadow of doubt lend support to the negativo attitude advocated by Nightjans Some of such verses are deserved to bo cited here न कप्पयन्ति न पुरेश्वरन्ति अच्चन्तसुद्धोति न ते वदन्ति । श्रादानगन्य गथित विमज्ज आस न कुन्ति कुहिं चि लोके ॥ 794 माणे पि सो निस्सय नौ करोति । 800 . न कैप्पयन्ति न पुरेसरन्ति धम्मा पि तेस न पटिच्छितासे । न प्राणो सोलवतेन नेय्यो पारगतो न पच्चेति तादोति ॥ 803 सव्यत्य मुनि अनिस्सितो न पिय पुब्बति नो विमप्पियम्। ॥ 811 विसैनिकत्या पन ये चरन्ति दिट्ठोहि दिहि भविरुज्झमाना। 833 The conversation between the Buddha and Magandiya is very interesting where the Master says न दिहिया न मुतिया न घाणेन सीलबतेनापि न सुद्धिमाह । अदिहिया भस्मुतिया अनाणा असीलता अन्वता नो वि तेन एते च सिग्ज अनुग्गहाय सन्तो भनिस्साय भवं न जप्पे ॥ 839 ससयधम्मेसु विसेनिभूतो य किचि दिहि व सुत मत पा । स पन्नभारो मुनि विष्पयुत्तो न कपियो नूपरतो म पत्तियो ॥ 914 From these citations it appears that Nagarjupa's absoluta negati. viam is not without its counterpart in the earlier canonical literatura According to the Madhyamika Prāsaigikas a map of spiritual career abould not adhere to any proposition of bis own hut may relate the other's one reducing it to an absurdity The noa adherence to any vion by an ascette 13 sulficiently stressed in the verses of the same book Read e Perges 892874876883892894903901918 It may incidentally be pointed out that bo should not engage himself on debata ·[111] with any body with a vion to establishing any thesis of bie ond The Toason for this 19 fully demonstrated 10 verses 821-839, op Dighanakhagutta M I 74 p 499 Almost the same attitude 19 advocated by the Madhyamika Prasaógikas Absolute negativ19m therefore 18 not & whimsical creation of Nagorjana though he has made it into a grand aystem that would stand eyory ecrutiny of critics A candidato for Bodhi should view things as devoid of any substantiality and get himself detached from all sorts of discriminativo thoughts and assortions When the mind 18 dbus made complotoly alool, then it is stated that the non dualistic and undivided principle Bhinos forth Thug the doctrine of Sanyats helps a canditate to achieve that goal Henco it 18 only a means to the end end not the end itgoll, o MK XIII, & cd, as also well stressed in the presont treatise This position of the systom quite accords with the Buddha's repeated warning in different discourses : पुरोपम धम्म......निस्थरत्याय, न गहणत्याय ..धम्मा पि पहातवा पागेर अधम्मा। (May. I. 22 Agoladdapamasutta 39 [abatadh eahkhayasatta ) It 18 interesting to note that some such idea aleo stregsod in the other school of thought, op Suvarnasa ptatı, pp 26. 101 येन सजसि तत्यज ॥ ? There are two methods to uphold the non substantiality of things ag advocated by Nagarjuna The first method, viz prasanga was started by Aoirya Buddhapalita in the first half of the 6th century AD. and bucodesfally maintained by Adrya Candrakiet: in the first helt of the 7th century AD The Second one Damely the svatantra anumana mothod wie founded by Bhavaviyeka, 650 600 A D. the author of tho presont troat130 The advocatos of the former method maintain that Sanyata could be established only by means of prasanga, le reductio ad absurdum of all thegos arguments and examples of the opponents, and bola that po tbesis argument or crample of their own sa poggiblo (M. Vitti, pp 16, 18, 34 ) for the reason that absolute truth could not be abgorted by any of the disourlise thoughts, The latter school, on the other hand, criticising the prasanga method, pleada that Sinyata may also be established by means of an indepondant inferenco in spite of the indescribable obaractor of the absolato truth, hence tho school goes andor the name of Svatantrika Tbis melbod of inferenco bas pot mon ·[ iv ] favour with Capdrakırtı, the celebrated interpretor of Nagarjuds who attacks vebemently Bbiyavireks and upholds Buddhapalita'a stand. point. 8 Buddhist logicians claim that their logical theories hare, of course in a caricature form, been endorsed by their Naster bimgelt. In support of this some scriptural passages are also atted and elaoidated.1 The logical tradition, preserved in Chinese Buddhist literature also supports the above claim ? It is well-known that the Buddha vas & Hetuv&dio. One of his foremost disciples chanted & song in bus praise 1. BeG Dharmakitti, Pramaparartiks,I,256,d वृत्ति:-नीलसमझो पुरुषो नील जानाति नो तु नौलमिति । इति ध्रुवता प्रत्यक्षं दर्शितम् । भनुमान नोकम् ।..शन्याः परप्रवादा इत्यादिना शब्दादेरेव निषेधात् प्रयोगस्य परार्थानुमानरूपस्य दर्शनाद्वागमेऽस्यानुमानस्य निर्देशः कृत एष भगवता । तमेव प्रयोगमाह। ......यत्किश्चिदुदयात्मकम् । निरोधधर्म सवे तदित्यादावनेकधा 1 287a-b. अनुमानायो लिामविनाभावर क्षणम्। ध्याप्तिप्रदर्शनात् हेतो. साध्येनोकच तत् स्फुटम् ॥ 287 c-f. पृ......हेतीरुदयधर्मरत्वस्य साध्येन निरोधधर्मकत्वेन व्याप्त: प्रदर्शनात् यत्किञ्चिदुदयधर्म तत् सर्व निरोधधर्मक- (महावग्ग I, 1.8) मित्यादिना स्फुटः प्रव्यको दर्शितः। The first passage quoted above is attributed to some Abbidharma book of. Pram vartika, l'arista. P 618 (J, BORS Vol XXVI). Tbe defipition of kāryanumāna is given in this Agamaio verso: धूमेन ज्ञायते यक्षिः सलिलय पलाच्या। निमित्तायते गोने पोधिसत्त्व च धीमतः ॥ ned The Bolhlsattvanimittas are given by Cedratirti, see Madhya makarattra VI 4-5 with references thereto The following agamat gives the definition of Byabbivahetu भनित्या बत सस्काग उत्साव्ययधमिगः । उत्सय हि निरुध्यन्ते ते घ्युपशमः सुखम् ॥ red Some similar treatment in also mado by Kamalallia, tee Tattras Padilla ·[v] proclaiming to the world that his Master & unique contribution lung in hla discovery of an altimate hetu cause for all evil things (dharmah) that ero produced by causog The universo in his viet is merely a Berles of causes and effects ( dampaccayala ) Ona may witnegs in all Ins D19courses tho argumentative and peregasite character of big spooch Ils art of dobato and logical thioking aro fully exbibitod when his opponents are eqaally equippe 1 Once Saccaka a follower of Night ta doctrino comig to conduct a debates (tada) with the Buddha to combat the latter 8 views on impermanence and don gubstantiality of things ( sabbe samkhard anicca sabbe dhamma anatia May 1, 35 p 227) Ho is reported to have held the viow that rupa is the soul and 80 &lgo vedana vutana The Buddha refutes it by pointing out its glaring tallicies and sequences with his ugaal method of illustrations and similes Again Upali house holder disciple of Nighanta goos to the Buddha for debato on relative strength of the bodily vocal and mentai actions Nighontae contention is that the bodily action is more ginfal than tho others two Upali wanted to establish it relating the Budaba's VIOW The Buddha remarkably rradicates the obvious inconsistoocios with Nighanta a standpoint and makes Upali convinced of them A 2 1 From the Buddha downward broadly speaking five stages may be men tioned in the evolution of Baddhist logical theories Bandha-Astaghops upto GOO AN (alter Nirvana ) Works Four Agnmas and Illdayana Sastra: 2 Nagarjana Plngals apto 600 A N Works Bladbyomata Staten (Vlgrabayjávartant) SatasLetra and Drsdagamakbal or- kåya ) 8 Maitreys-Vasubandha-Gupasti upto 1000 A N Works PrakscapiryapaciśAstra Upiyib daya and Tarkadastra 4 Didd:82--Bandhuprabba &gotra (? Opto 1100 A N Works Ny gamukba Nyagsprarest Vaipulya Satašastravyakhya and Prajnipradips (of Bhataviseka ) 6 Dharmshirti-Devabanda () apto 1500 A N Nametoos works (Cited from La Change yoik on Hetardyas atpplied by Ir Ega a devoted Chinese scholar Chibabbayan) 8 Sacenta s pride la debate is nicely described at the beginning of the Botta P 277 11 6–12 Aod on p 224 180-P 229 1 6 mam etālam Samanam Gota. mam tūdena tādan ökaddhisāmy wyyalka with thyce similes ·man cannot destroy with a strord the whole popalation of Nålandı within a moment, bat a śramaga can do so with minotanda mental deed Then the Buddha proves that manodanda 18 greater in effect than kayadanda, bodily deed (M8). S 56 ). Similarly a prince, Abhaya by name was urged by Nigbanta Nathaputta to conduct a debate with the Buddha on whether or not the Tathagata would atter unpleasant word If the Buddha replies to this qaestion in negativo, ask : why did Devapotta become enraged ? The prince carried out the plot by inviting the Buddha to his house The question was really crucial The Baddha won over him by giving an examplo of the child who hurts himself fooligbly ( Maj 8 59). All the above and other conversations would certainly testify to 03 the Buddha's acquaintance with the art of debate, of course, in a timehonoured fashion His theory of dharmacakşus is always put in a form of concomitanos यतिचि पमुदयधम्म, सम्ब त निरोधधम्म ति। Nuch more interesting point is that the concomitance is used togother with upanaya sentence : सो इति पटिसचिखति : इदं पि खो पन अभिसखत अमिसंचेतायत, य खो पन किचि अभिसखते, अभिसचेतयित, तदनिय , निरोधधम्म ति पजानाति । Idam in the first sentence refers to four dhy&pas, four Brabmavibarag and three Arapyadhy&pas One may note that eväntt and upanaya sentences are used in an order just reverso of the later days' usugo Or it may be a praltjfia sentence expressing the presence of probans in the paksa and suggestiog thereby the necessary presence of probandum by showing the positive concomitance afterwarde (NA) 1, S 52 ) A Bhikha named Sati entertained & wrong view of eurana and thought that only one tuliang rong and trademigrates from ODO birth to another The Baddha having heard it from his disciples pursuaded Sati to give it up and exhorted his disciples that viñina 18 paftocasamuppanna, I o produced due to causes and conditions Но further elucidates the idea by saying that when cijħana arises depending on the eye, eto it 19 etyled as eye consciouscc89, add 80 also the other, ear consciousness eto The fire, es being produced on account of wood, it 19 termed wood fire ( kafthagos ), so algo sakalagpı, tinagar, thusagos, sanlaraggi Then this concomitance is also shown 1 bhniam ·[vii] sdam aharasambhatan, aharanırodha hirodhadhammam IIo farther oxhorts ono should not cling to this statement becauso dhamma has boon proachod a boat to reach the goal and not the goal by itself. It is quito probable that the later logicians like Vasabandhu and Dioniga taking the above sample 18 & sposi men explain the term pratyaks with more appropriate osamples. Therelore it appears that the days of Boldha were fully rifo with logical, philosophical speculations and debatos. It has also been recognised that there were many other philosophical sohools, such as Altyakas, Nighantas and Pariørdjakas. eto who wers fally adopt in Buch an art I may add one more instance in this period, vz Yaska, tho rodowood author of the Nirukta (o 500 B O ) Ho urco a formal logio just liko a good logician of later days to disprove the whole structure of the argument set out by Kantes, who argues that the Vedlo hymns aro moapingless with sufficient proofs Ytska relates all ono by opo patting his own viow in a syllogietro form : Mantra arthavantah, sabdasamanyat eta. 80 it 19 not proper to contend that' tho period of Buddha wag pot familiar with formal logio or como suob method of logic Now it becomes evident that tho tradition fathering upon the Buddha thological theories of Buddhists is not without foundation It ig @leo statod that until the time of Vasubaudbu logical theories ood roles of debato wero uncertain ( Kwel.ci, Comment on N Pravesa, r 26 ) Then Dianaga aystomalized every thing conneoted with logic and modo 10 mecientific eystom Of course he took his stand on Vijltand as the busia principle so much so big school came to be known as Nytyłnusiri Vilboavada It does not, howyoyer follor that he propounded that bystem for the first time because we have already in Vaegbandhu's Vimálka the system. obly discussed and established. 4. What Dinnig? did for tho Vijūtoavada Bhavayıveka did in the cause of the Madhyamaka doctrine Ele la as much reputed in the fiold of logio as Dioniga Littlo 18 known about his personst history except what the Chinese travellers speak of him Yaang Chanug tells ps that be vag Dalira of South India and a popior contemporary of Dharmapilo ( Yatters, II, p 222) According to Huali's Life, ja & great stone mountaio not far to the South of the capital of the Dhanrkuinka krogiom Bbiyavitek& rosta in the palace of Astras awaiting ·[ viii & the time when Maitreys Bodhisattva shall reach perfeot wisdom and explain some difüculties in his way (Life of Yuang Chasog Beal. trans p 137) Iching also mentions him as one of the Acāryas in the middle age (Record, p 181 ) His name is variously pronounced He 18 lnown in Chinese as Po pi fi-cia-Bb.rayireka and in Tibetan as Bhavya or Bhavyakara The following informations are gathered by Prof L Y Poussin - Dipakara Indian monk translator in the convent of Ta-Yuan, gives this account Recently in India in the content of Nalanda, thero are two masters Silabhadra and Jöldaprabha by name The first follows the tradition of Maitreya and Assanga at distance and of Dbafmapila and Nanda immediately which asserts that only the Dharmalaksana Mahayana 18 the ultimate and definite teaching (ntartha ) The second tradition supports the views of Manzughoşa and Nagarjuna at distanco and of Pingala and Bhavavivela directly It considers the nirlaksana Mahayana as startha (This Tiew 18 fully demonstrated in the Nvitti Prajāápradips of Jianaprabha Note the same title as that of Bhiraviveka's comment) According to Satrag Ilko the Bandhinirmocana and Sastras like the Yoga bästra of Agadiga Silabhadra establishes three teacblogs 1 Little Vehicle, against Atmam of Tirthikas, % Prajna school recognises that the Imaginary la rold of its proper Dature but does not pose the being of dependant perfect 8 Sandhlpirmocana cto real doctrine of Babásana three lalcanas three absences of proper pature To firm reality of things produced by cateca ia to fall in the cutremity of cileteoca to su that all tàlags aro poid ja to fall in the extremity of the Ford In flee to say at the samo time tacuity of imaginary and the cxistence of dependap! and perfcct is the maiddle path n furtha 5 JpIdaprabba establishes tres teachings in this order - 1 Tor those gatelles , thought and object are real , 2 Dharmaladşana Mahnfans the object is told but thought in real the system of Vijodyards, becausc bearere of still feable faculty are not capable entering into equal true void 8 lo the third per ol Mabijába withoal Lakşap8s thooght and object all the two are rold equally of the 68mO AYON In other words the Daddha broke at first the proper nature', substantialism of Tirtbitae in teaching the existence of things prodaced by causes Then be broke adhesion to the exlatence of those thinge teaching that they have oply existence of designation ( rraj aptsaiti ) In fine he saye these things are rold of proper nature equal of onlque BaTORT The second system admits one perceptible (upalabhya ) It is not really of definita sense ·[ 1x) b According to I'a trang treatise on Laikivatóra Teisbo 1790 p 430 3 7 24 there have been four syetems Dl arratråta Nigirudh and Devs Aganga and Vasubandhu Asvaglioşa and Siramati Theso masters of the South and the North of the country admit some things void and othera existance and are not capable to barmonize In tbo country of West the master Bbiyaviyaka according to the Satras of Prata supports limsell on the systems of Nagarjuna eto and makes treatise Prajółpradipa and Karatalezatna, and establishes one reasoning showing the paratantra void The master Dharmapila rolying upon the system of Arniga etc mahes t e treatise Vijbaptimitrh [ edibil Aod establishes ono Tengoping showing the dependent (paratantra ) not void Their disciples Indaprabha and Briabhadra adopt these sys toms and the tradition 18 not interruptei Tho account goos further that there is no conflict in fact betweon the two ayetama because Asadga has interpreted Nagarjuna ( Nano 1243 ) and Vasu ( - Vagabandhu) hos commented on Tryadora's Šatasastra ( Nango 1188 ) But mor of posterior days do not understand the intention and tboy attach them. 201 vos to tboso words and contradict themselves (Joyau Introductory ) 5 AB proviously stated Bh&saviveka has pleaded for a pow mo thod the method of indorondent reasoning to prove vocuity as against tho prabanga method of Buddhapalıta which falls woll in line with Nagarjuna a thinking for the reason of this innovation ho is put abovo the Madhyamikas by certain Tibetan authors It 18 stated that the Svatantrikas aro ole selfied by cortain Tibotan Writors into two branches tho Svitantrika Sautrintika and Avatantrıka Yogacárhs Bbiyaviveks is eaid to be of the former group and Santaraknita of the latter The distinction reats not on the conception of absolute truth but on the theories of relative truth The first branch adopte in relative truth the position of Beutraalikas ( the cristance of the exterior world and the negation of abansåttaa ) while the second tho Yogácara position ( inexistence of exterior world) ( Obertillor Sublime Science p 83 Btchordataky Short treatise 31 34 293 328 370 oited by L v cflonemor be sometimer criticises that the Madhyamika 111 comprebenda culty Thia diatinction though it fe claimed to be highly atthoritative cannot be Lakon to be an accurata 'one ·Poussin op cut ) Poussia 10 support of the statement says that Bh&&- viveka teacbez the doctrine of intellect receptacle reservoir of seeds (cf. below, text p 75 ) which doctrine distinguishes the logacaras from the Sautrāptikas So his metaphysics 19 Vadhyamiha and his psychology 18 Yog&cīra. Poussin 19 wrong 10 saying that his psychology 18 Yogăcăra It may not be far from trath of Bhavayıreha 19 styled as Svatantrika Cautrintika For the Saatrantikas are credited to have postulated A subtle consciousness which surrives in Nirrana (Th Stcherbatsby Nirvana p 30 J Masuda Vasumitra & Bud Sacts p 69 No 3 of the Sautrantiba school and n 1) The author of the present treatise seems to echo the same view when he says (op np 29 87) that after effecting the elimipation process in a prescribed manner the Yogin enters finally into the flow of knowledge which is not in its own sell nature It Inay be evident from this passage that the author distinctly Bides with the view that there is a pure knowlodge flowing inwardly and immune from contamination of any sort and which shipcs forth in the altimate state of Yogic Career So it is quite ant to call him a Cantrantika in his psychology I may incidentally add here that the forerunners of the subtle knowledge theory of the Sautrāptikas are the Val dsanglihas who baro liketrise entertained some 'original consciousness ( Mnlavrana ) The Sautriotikas has given at the designation of elarasaskandha which 18 more or less similar to the purified Jilapasyalahşapa of Bharaviveka According to the Sautrintihas it is the substance of transmigration from which the current five skandhas are ovoked (Mabuda Vasa mitra p 68 n 1) The same piev 13 beld by Sab Bhikkhu amongst the earlier Buddhists le prolesses that the Master has taught that one consciousness runs from birth to birth There are very many clear indications in the Pali Nıkaya works to prove that the Naster bas abaigoed some prominence to Vijñāna though it 19 placed on a par with other skandhas In bis discourse to hassapa the Master speaks of three possessions ( sampada ) in order silasampada cittas (-samahy os later 2563) Ang matus This Asst possession 1 expand thus: माणदरसनाय चित्त अभिनोहरति, अभिनितामेति। सो एप पजानाति 'अय मे पायो रूपो चातुम्महाभूतिको.... इ८ पन मे विश्याण एत्य सित एत्य पटिपद्धति ।

·[ xi ] The pagenge goes furtber that this is parfa, and there is nothing more to call in this life According to this discourso, Jianadassana, tosight so to knowleige 18 the final sampada for monk. bood, 1 e Samaffa This jfianadassana has been gradually relegated to the background, and celovimuttt, mind-deliverance has lostond oono to the forefront, cr Maj 1, Sutta 29, p 197 · इद ब्रह्मचरिय न मागदरउनानिमरा, या च खो भय भिक्खवे अपुष्पा चेतोषिमुत्ति, qazay........, 1 Sometimes four dhyānas and four drapyadhylaas are said to be of greator importance than hianadassana So this insight into bow. ledge, which beg beon eclipsed in the course of centuries is duly 1818ted on govoral times and the preciso process to retrace it 18 algo proscribed by Bhara viveke by devotiog hrs prosent entire work to this @ubsect Ho is even inclined to remork that if & yogia attajad a perfect peight (samyahdarśana ) into adamantine knowledge in its true norspective, he may be taken to have fulfilled all other porrections and eight constituents of the Aryan path, even though he is not engaged in their actual performances, Beep 98 where he relioz for th13 view on the Bodhisattvapitake and Brabrospariprccha The attitude of our author is quito in contrast with some perhaps lator Afadhyamika Acarga9 like Alartraj auláthr who orphasizo batu pralia and paramitas 19 equally important (o Bhavagatikrinti, Introduction XXV, XXXVI) Some similar balanced Attitude opponrs to have beon maintained by earlier Buddhists Soqadanda, for example argues on bohalf of the Master Sila and Pajima are mutually punifying and make one a true Brálımın Dig Sonadandasutta. सेग्यथा पि गोतम हत्येन वा हत्य धोपेथ्य पादेन या पाद धोपेय्य एवमेव सीलपरिषोता पन्या, पन्नापरियोत सोल .... । to which position the Master accords he consent Ono may tako notice here of Brahmanical parallelism ja the idea of Jfianalarmasa. muccaya in Pre Sadları Vedantie thought We should not however, mistake that Bhavaviveba desires thero to discord all the preliminary noty. What be seems to hint 18 that a correct grasping of things in accordanco with the true ultimate knowledge is more fundamental than anything alse ·( sill 1 1185 has succumbed to the error condemned by the Laúkávatāra ( 154, 165 ) of tnking to the letters (vatharuta ) this declaration "bich does not wish to say what it says" Ho bas created Mabiyana alaksana (dovold of three lakanas ) admitting raratantra and parintspanna in the relative truth, considering them vold in the absolute truth. (Siddhi, 188 189 ) tie is "& total negator', ha mistakes Sunyata anii destroyed scriptura and reason (Siddhi, 432 ) Ha thraks tuat all alarmas aro only one existence of designation (prajfaptisut)--au untenable opzion (Siddhi, 654 555 ). Howoror his doctrine is not in contradiction with "Middle Path", for bo admits existenco so relative truth (Siddhi, 4 ), Yogāciras' middlo path on p 419 of the Syddhi Koue ki cordemos that Ebavavivoks has pusbed Madhyamike tossards Nibilism which Nagarjuna ignored (Joyau, Introductory) 7. There are numerous works claiming Bhavaviveka's authorslup, of which the following ara notewortby. Projāapradipamalsmadhyamaka yrttı, comm on Malamadhya makakarika of Nagarjuna, Chinogo translation, Nanjo, Tibetan, Mdo 18 Cordior 339 The first part of Tub Version 19 published by Wallegger, Biblio (adica 1919 2 Jewel in Lland, Karatalaratna Napjio, 1237 No Tibetan translation is known 3 Madhyamakabrdayakanki with auto comment, Tarkajvali Mdo 19. Cordier 300 is an independent work, very valuable for bistorical studies of big contemporary philosophical thoughts Its Sanskrt original 18 recently brought from Tibet by Rahula Sankrtyayana 4 Madhyamakaretpapradipa, Mdo 18 Cordier 299 6 Nilayabbedavibhangavyaklıy: 8 # description of the 18 schools of Buddhism trasslated into English from the Tibetan, Ado 90 Cordier $14 by Rocshill in his life of Buidha Its authenticity is doubted by L Y Poussin O Madliyemakárthasangrade 13 a short treatise in 10 vorges on double truth and its sub truths tracslated into Sanskrit and English and published with Tibetan version by N Argaswami Sastra in the Journal of Or Ress Madras Vol Y pp 41 fr 7. Tattvaarptavatárt tmico relerred to so the present treat190, ·[ 1 ] PP 68 76, and the Siddharts of Msojogboşahasayajra speaks of it as the comment on Madhyamakahidaja ( o p 58, n 112 ) The exact title of the present treatise is not ascertained it has been translated into Chinese Chang Cheng lun, Chang means 'palm' and Cheng jewel', 'gom', etc So I have pat into Sanskrit Karalalaralna Karatala for palm is quite familiar 19 the expression libe Karalala. malaka, etc The simple word kara 19 also sometimes used for palm for the sake of metro in the expression like karabadara saminam etc I have, however, retained the form Karatala haging in view the Satrs passages like Karatalasamstham cited in the J yrttı p 476 11 11, 13 Cp also the expression ar lhamalakam karalalagatam in the Kalpa námendatikt p 149 ( XXVII) The raison d'etre of the treatise as tho author says, is to provide persons of keen intellect with proper guides to enter iato the Truth(Dbarmata) for which purpose some persons persistantly take to the codes of traditional interpretations of much complicated scriptures Listening reasoning and concentrating are the threo main factors to achieve the goal After listening to the scripture one should concentrate on the true nature of things with the aid of proper reasoniDg waktınıdhyapts which is the same as anumana according to Bhavya He has also instructed the man of Bodhi career how he should reply to all objections he may confront with in the course of his reasoning This gives the author an opportunity to review all the possible arguments that bis opponents both contemporary and ancient could offer against the propoetion The treatise is therefore doubly interesting to us Almost all philosophers of his opposite camp are given a place 10 it to pro. nounce their views on the proposition A majority of them are tentioned by name Yet there are many others who are mentioned in vagte terms ag anye kecit, etc whom we can bardly identity The most interestiog ope of such references is that he distinguishes the advocates of Pralti ani Paruşa from proper classical Saublyas Their main differences appear to be that Pralsts and Puruş& are imperceptible for the latter while they are othertyise for the former We know that Ašvaghoşa has described & form of Sankhys system which may be sery nearer to the Praksti-Purusasáda of Bharja Pralfti of Ašvagboşa's Account ( Bad carita XII, 18 ) 18 the same as the five great elements, ·[IV] oto and hence it is porceptiblo It bes been well pointed out elsewliero that the Suvarnasaptati tha standard text of the classical Sankhya system must have been familiar with Bhársviveka (v pp 79 80 no 77 79 80 and my Further Notes on the Suvarnagapta to in the Jour of SV O Institute Tirupati Vol VI No 2 p 81 85 ) 8 It tyas in 1933 1939 when I was appointel Professor of Buddhist Stulto Chinabhayana that I undertook to stady this work of Bhavya a brief account of which I presented to All India Oriental Conference Tirupati 1939 under the title 31 avaviveha and 1113 [ethod of Exposition When I was again apjointed in 1915 Chinese Research Fellow under & new scheme of studies sponsored by tho Nalionel Government of Cluna i took opportunity to reviso and publish tho work in the Visvabharatı Aonals newly started under alorementioned scheme Meenwhile I cine to know that the work has beon translated into French and published by Prof rours de le Ven6o Poussin in his Mélanges Chinois et Buddhique Vol II a copy of which I procured on loan from the University of Bombay by the kind ofhco of tho Director Chuabhavada In røviging I compared Poussin e Ironoh translation with my Sanskrit rendering and improved whore lio loft doubtful The work being of technical charactor requires a hand ling epocially trained in the technical branch of Indian Studios I havo also made an endeavour to incorporate all his useful reforences and notes into my present publication in order that mino mny sorve to be an uptodate one Besides I have also consulted an anonymous commen tory in Chinese which is uplortunately incomplete and available only on the second chaptor My foot potos and additional ootes will tostify to wbat extent I bavo improved and interpreted the tert and Buoceeded in my task I hope that the learned readers will themselves see bow lucid and elucidative Bharga s method of argument 18 oven in the translation of 60 loguistically unfamilier language as Chinose and how much more uscial purposo would have been served if the Sanskrit winnad of the work wars ramyard Tha Chinese tas J bovə made use of for my Sanskrit rendering is that published along with incom pleto commentary alorementioned by Tho Satra opgraving Instituta Nanking 9th year of the Chinose Republic gan shen first month of autamp preserved in the Chinese Library of Obipabhavana, Sants Diketan ·( xvi 1 Now it behores the to offer my sincere thanks to the authorities of the Visrabharatt, more specially to S; Rathindranath Tagore, General Secretary, Vibya bharati and Prof Tan Yun Shan Director Ch nabhavana who were responsible for giving me an opportuoity to make my work complete and accessible to the learned public My tbanks are due to Dr P C Bagcbt Director, Pesearch Studies, Visvabharatı for his kind suggestion to 1890e the book separatels as Pastabharat: Nemour. Our Press at Saptsaisetan also deserves our thanks for speedy execution of the prot106 work of the book As no Chinese types are available in our Press I hare all the Chinese words cited in the foot notes printed elsewhere and added ng Appendix for the convenience of Scholars' relerences I bare also prepared a Chinese Index of all the technical and other authorized terms with their Sapsht equivalents, with a hors that may have occasion to publish it in futuro 1st Feb 1948 Saatiaiketan N Alyaswami Sastrı ·KARATALARATNA OF BHAVYA SUMMARY OF TAL TREATISE CHAPTER I The author, at the outset of his treatise, narrates the main purpose of his composition as follows. When one (Bodhisattva ) realises the supermundane and undiscriminating knowledge, he can conceive the moral faculties of all living beings which are varied 10 regard to aspiration, temperament and conduct, and can destroy all the passions that are operatiag either to one's own self or in the self of others which may be latent or potent, and which would cause a great number of miseries And he can take up for the benefit of others the vow of practising the secret duties of a holy man In order to realise such supermundane knowledge, one ought to apply constantly the collyrium of unperverted view of Singata which destroys the film (or eye discase ) of all the wrong views In order to have it onc should resort to Prajiā, supreme knowledge consisting of learning which expels the objective nature of all objects Now some persons by dint of sight interpretation determining the sense of the wider and complicated texts, enter into the Truth ( dharmata ), and practise constantly and diligently the meditation followed by progress , but in such interpretation they get very much tired mentally There are other persons who are of very keen intellect, although they have not entered into the Truth In order to offer facilities to the latter for entering into the Truth by realising the Sünyata, the author says that he composed in brief this Sāstra, Karatalaratna ·VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS As this treatise is intended for the most part to prove the validity of inference for establishing the Madhyamaka Truth, funyată independently, and to reply to all objections to it put forth by opponents, the author sets forth in this verse his main thesis in a formal syllogism I a Thesis The composite ( samskrta ) elements are void from the standpoint of Absolute Truth b Reason Because they are origioated through causes and conditions c Example Just like things magically created (majavat ) II a Thesis Uncomposite ( asamskrta ) elements are unrcal from the viewpoint of Absolute Truth b Reason Because they are non products C Example Just like flower in the sky Now the author offers the following remarks by way of explaining the first thesis I There are number of speculations regarding the classification of thiags both in the Buddhist and Buddhist philosophical systems, they are to be divided in brief into two categories, Viz composite and non compo- The worldlings without understanding their real nature attribute some reality to them and entertain manifold wrong views An ignorant painter, for example, paints some terrible forms of Yakşas and Piſacas, or paints image of a beautiful lady or person and imagioing that those fotms exist in reality becomes either terrified or attracted But when men realise the real nature of the composite and uncomposite things according to Absolute Truth, they just like a wise painter do not imagine that the objects so painted do really exist, and not being caught into the net of wrong views like a sill worm which is envelopped itself in nonsite an ·KARATALARATNA OF BHAVYA 3 its cocoon, are capable of entering into the supermundane knowledge In order to elucidate this meaning the real nature ) of the composite element which is already disputed, the author sets forth the first thesis further, he says that all men in the world equally accept it as bhuva , he also admits it as such empirically In the worldly experience the origination through causes and conditions is accepted as real and hence all the people including shepherd and cowherd know that the composite elements, cye, etc that are brought under category of the Empirical Truth are as substantially existant (dravyasar ) The author therefore qualifies his proposition as "from the standpoint of Absolute Truth”, lest it should contradict the actual experience of the world What is scal and proper character is called real nature (tattva), 1t 15 only the Absolute Truth The above proposition is made from the viewpoint of this Absolute Truth, not of the Empirical Truth Things that are produced through concatenation of conditions are called composite elements, i e twelve bases omitting some parts of the dharmayatana Things magically created and illusory in appearance are also accepted as such by opponents , the author says that if his proposition relates to those illusory things, it will incur a logical defect called siddha-sadhana So his proposition is directed to those composite things which are accepted by opponents as really and substantially existent, eg the composite element, in regard to the base of eye it is discussed whether it is really substantial or void It is void The term void is a synonym of what is bereft of its own nature and 15 “illusory in appearance' such is the proposition of the author Things that originate through causes and conditions, ·3 VISVA BHARATI ANN ALS no which are einpirically true, my statement does not go against the experiences current amongst common people Again three kinds of contradiction are raised and answered (3) It does not contradict our sacred tests, because it has been accepted by our scriptures (4) It does not contradict the sacred text of other philosophers since all the systems of thought are intended to criticise others' systems and to establish theit own (s) Nor does it contradict the experiences of the ordinary folk because philosophical discussions and investigations will follow closely the experiences of the worldlings in determing the true natures of things, eg Buddhists hold things to be momentary and of no soul, Vaisesikas, rupa, etc are other than dratya etc and Sānhhyas, buddhı is acetara, what is extinguished and what is not yet originated ate all real This is why I qualified my proposition as "from the standpoint of Absolute Truth” 2. To an objection that there is no subject ( dharmin) for him who maintains that the eye basis is really void and hence It is a logical defect called paksadosa, and also it is hetudosa, there being no receptacle of the reason, the author replies that the eye, etc in general as current amongst common people are accepted as subject, and some attribute pertaining to it as reason, so the defect that you stated is only an appareat and fallacious one The crooked (Brahmanic ) logicians raise an objection of mutual contradiction of the proposition and reason in this syllogism If eye, etc are void, how can they be produced by causes and conditions? If they are so produced, how can they be void? If however that objection is removed, then your proposition involves either absence of a parallel example of uoproving of the reason, eg sound is eternal, 3 ·KARATALARATNA OF BHAVYA 7 because all things are non-eternal. This syllogism cxhibits the reason because the sound is not all things and hence indicates the defect of the reason since the sound is also included in the category of all things. There is no parallel example. How can a thing be eternal and non-all ? The author replies that the reason and example are well proved as they are very well understood by every ordinary man. 4. Svabhāvavādins say : the organ of eye is endowed with its own nature, because it discharges its own function. Things devoid of svabhāva do not discharge the function just like a son of barten woman. Bhavya says: IF you establish thereby the apparent aature of the eye, etc, known to all common people, conventionally, then it will incur the defect of siddbasādhana. If you do so from the view.point of reality, there will be no parallel example. Nor may your object be proved from the absence of non-parallel example ; e. g. the advocate of the eternal sound says : sound is eterpal, because it is audible; pot, etc. are non-eternal and not audible; sound on the other hand is audible and hence eternal. Your reason has been contradicted by its opposite reason, viz. kertakatva, being a product, which exists in all parallel examples known to the world. This contradictory reason proves that all things, cyc, etc, including sound are to be brought under the category of common parlance of the world; because they all possess the same false nature. So far the author replies to some fallacies relating the subject (paksa ). III. Now some fallacics relating to the reason are met with, 1. Some ( logicians) object that the proposition: all composite clements are void, includes also your teason and example, as they all are of the same category ; so your inference is imperfect. The author replies that if his .propo- ·6 VISVA BHARATI ANNALS no which are empirically true, my statement does not go against the experiences cutrent amongst common people Again three kinds of contradiction are raised and answered (3) It does not contradict our sacred texts, because it has been accepted by our scriptures (4) It does not contradict the sacred text of other philosophers since all the systems of thought are intended to criticise others' systems and to establish their own (s) Nor does it contradict the experiences of the ordinary folk because philosophical discussions and investigations will follow closely the experiences of the worldlings in determining the true natures of things, eg Buddhists hold things to be momentary and of no soul, Vaišesikas, rupa, etc are other than dravja etc, and Sankhyas, buddha is acetana, what is extinguished and what is not yet originated are all real This is why I qualified my proposition as "from the standpoint of Absolute Truth' 2 To an objection that there is no subject ( dharmın) for him who maintains that the eye basis is really void and hence It is a logical defect called paksadosa, and also it is hetudosa, there being no receptacle of the reason, the author replies that the eye, etc in general as current amongst common people are accepted as subject, and some attribute pertaining to it as reason, so the defect that you stated is only an apparent and fallacious one The crooked (Brahmanic ) logicians raise an objec tion of mutual contradiction of the proposition and reason in this syllogism If eye, etc are void, how can they be pro duced by causes and conditions ? If they are so produced, how can they be void? If however that objection is removed, then your proposition involves either absence of a parallel example or unproving of the reason, eg sound 13 cternal, 3 ·KARATALARATNA OF BHAVYA Fou establish because all things are non eternal This syllogism exhibits the reason because the sound is not all things and hence indicates the defect of the cason since the sound is also included in the category of all things There is no parallel example How can a thing be cternal and non all » The author replies that the reason and example are well proved as they are very well understood by every ordinary man 4 Svabhavavadins say the organ of eye is endowed with its own nature, because it discharges its owa function Things devoid of svabhāva do not discharge the function just like a son of barten woman Bhavya says If thereby the apparent nature of the eye, etc known to all common people, conventionally, then it will incur the defect of siddhasadbana If you do so from the view point of reality, there will be no parallel example Nor may your object be proved from the absence of non parallel example, e g the advocate of the eternal sound says sound is eternal, because it is audible, pot, etc are non eternal and sot audible, sound on the other hand is audible and hence eternal Your reason has been contradicted by its opposite season, viz értakatva, being a product, which exists 10 all parallel examples known to the world This contradictory teason proves that all things, eye, etc including sound are to be brought under the category of common parlance of the So world, because they all possess the same false nature far the author replies to some fallacies relating the subject (paksa) I Now some fallacies relauag to the season and met with 1 Some ( logicians ) object that the proposition all composite elements are void, includes also your reason and example, as they all are of the same category, so your inference is imperfect The author replies that if his propo·co VISVA-DHARATI ANNALS 2. sition goes : the eye is void because it is void of its nature, then it may entail an asiddhidoşa for reason. Mãyā, etc. are given as example, not as subject for demonstrating therein our probandnm in which case there will be an unnecessary attempt on author's part of proving a thing which is already admitted ( siddhasādhanagarrara ). Some low-witted (logicians ) pass the following criticism : The proposition proving non-substantiality of the composite things also proves the same for the reason which becomes therefore asiddha, non-existent. This criticism, says the author,' is only apparent and not valid ; because similar defect may be pointed out with all other logicians. For example, ( ancient) followers of Jina establish that all samskāras are of no soul, because they are products of causes (sahetuka). Though this reason also comes under samskāra, yet it 'was admitted as a valid reason. Sãnhhyas hold the evolutes (cyakta ) as constituted of three gunas, because they are different from cetana. This reason too is vyakta, but not considered to be invalid. Vai esikas also maintain that the sound is non-eternal, because it is produced. The formulation of this reason is constituted of words and so it becomes non-eternal. No dialectician would admit this kind of objection as valid. If they do so, nobody can establish any proposition. 3. Some other (logicians) say that your reason, pratitysamutpannatra, will not prove your probandum, as it is itself devoid of its own nature just like the word uttered by the son of barren woman. The author i answers The reason in your syllogism is ossddba for you; if you formulate it as accepted by your opponent, you should explain it in more definite terms. If it means total non-existence, therc will be no reason at all. Or if it means a false appearance, then ·KARATALARATNA OF BHAVYA 0 it lacks a parallel example; since the word uttered by the son of barren woman is absolutely non-existent. Further it becomes inconclusive with nirmitasabda, word of Buddha's created persons because it educates and does benefit to innumerable beings even if it lacks its own nature. And a reason that is accepted only by one party, will not at all prove probandum. And again your reason is made invalid by contradictory reference, and involves also a logical defect called atiprasanga. Here the author gives some illustrations to demonstrate that reason would be valid only when it is accepted by both parties. 4. Some crooked logician again says : If svabhāra sänga is probandum, no probans will be established just like the word uttered by the son of barten woman. Probans is also included into the samskrta category, so it becomes sadhyasama, equal to probandum, i. c. devoid of ;its own nature, Author's reply goes : This so-called defect in thesis has been pointed out by the implied argument of the previous opponent the futility of which has been fully demonstrated. IV. Some môre fallacies of proposition are answered : some ( ancient Buddhist logicians ) say, that the meaning of your proposition is not clear. (1) All the composite elements are in reality non-existent substance ; if that is the sense of the thesis, this sentence itself destroys your probandum, and incurs a defect of paksa, called svavacananırodha, contradiction by one's own word, just like a proposition establishing that all words are false. (2) If the sense of your proposition is that all composite elements are totally non-existent, then you, denying every thing completely, fall into the wrong view of apavāda. (1) With regard to the first alternative, the author 2 ·10 ** VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS remarks that Buddha has freely used in the verse, e. g. atma bi átmano nátha, etc, the word ātmā, soul, which is nothing but. miód, citta. However, in reality 10-soul theory is established ; his utterences are not blamed as svavacananirodba. Similarly I also accept the eye etc. as existent in the worldly activities; however I establish it as void from the vicwangle of reality of saints. The author has cited some three more. utterances of the Buddha which may be charged with similar logical fallacy ; yet they are accepted by our opponents as quite valid and logical. The Sārkhyas also have to adopt the same procedure. They maintain that the evolutes are endowed with three guņas. This formulation of proposition too falls into the category of vyakta and is constituted of three guņas. If it is not of three guņas, vyakta also will not be of that nature. Though there is such defect, yet their proposition is not at all regarded as blame-worthy. Our disputant, 'without making his own thesis.free from the said fallacy, tries to frame some more charges, such 'as: all the composite elements being in reality non-substances, the sentence of this proposition becomes noc-substance. The disputant who directs such charge against other's proposition without removing his own defect is just like a man who, when he is charged by you as a thief, replies that you are also a thief. This procedure of discussion should not be adopted in a critical and logical javestigation. (2) As to the second alternative, my meaning of the proposition has already been explained ; void does not mean a total non-existence, but it is only a synonym of non-substaptial, and illusory appearance. And I do not deay that all things never exist in all aspects. So your objection is no more valid.

·KARATALARATNA ON BHAVYA 2. Some other Acaryas taise this objection : If things as you said, are non-substantial like the māyā, etc. they are non-existent, hence you fall into the wrong idea of noncxistence. This objcction, says the author, is raised lest only the desired object of the Sünyavāda should be accomplished, though both parties are confronted with the same fallacy. To deny the Absolute Trath evolves a greater sin. This nega.. tive expressiond enies what is current in the world. However you attach greater importance to its injunctional aspect. But I stress more on its negative aspect. This negative expression could indicate only one idça--the negation of the existences ; its force of expressing the idea is fulfilled and nothing more comes out into operation to express another idea,. e. g. the cxpression "there does not exist picce, : of, white cloth" would denote only the absence of white cloth and not necessarily the existeace of red cloth, or blue cloth. In this branch of science we disprove the supposed ceal oature of all things in order to remove the wrong idea of Eternalism; we also deny the unreal nature in order to shun the wrong belief of Nihilism. Again both these, natures, real and unrcal combined, are also disproved so that these two beliefs combined may be avoided. , With a view to put an end to all other falsc beliefs, all the meatal phenomena are negated. All such phenomena being stopped, the mind automatically ceases to operate any longer. Au utterence of Buddha has been cited to this effect. 3. Somebody else says that the advocate of, the Süayatā doctrine, although he is desirous of acquiring discriminative wisdom, always discriminates things composite and uncomposite as void, and thus he nullifies this cherished object, This objection too is not valid as I have already seplied to it fully and attingly.

·VISYA-BHARATI ANNALS V: One more objection relating to the argument. Somc other ( logicians ) say : the reason for proving súnyatā is unproved either conventionally or in reality both from the viewpoint of one's own system or that of others'. The author meets this remark thus : All the logiciaas have agreed on the fact that a reason is to be employed which is valid for both parties and with general attributes, not taking into account all other particulars. For example, (1)The Vaiścsikas prove that sound is non-eteroal because it is prodact of effort. The advocate of the eternal sound with a view to disprove the season, questions whether it is produced by throat, etc. or by stick, etc.' (2) So also the Sänkhyas prove that five organs of living beings are not products of matter, because they are faculties (indriyatvät) like the faculty of mind. The opponent who advocates that human organs are material products, criticises whether the reason (indriyana ) is endowed with the nature of great elements, or with three gunas. All such criticisms are futile and indicate only a false disproviog of reasons.. The same is the case with your criticism. VI (1) Some objections on the example are 'mct with. Some Acāryas who are self-posed as very intelligent, blind of love for their own system, and incapable of assessing the value of the gem, like scriptures-raise objection as to the example: Things such as Bower, fruit, lump of clay, etc. which by force of magic power tum into different objects like elephant, house, etc. arc devoid of their own gaturcs. This we do not accept. There is no parallel example, because your example ' lacks probandum. If you say that those magically created things are spoken of as void in so far as they lack the nature of the real elephant, etc. then the cyc, etc. are said to be yoid ooly in the sense they lack the 1 ·KARATALIRATNA OF BHAVYA nature of others. In this case your thesis becomes siddhasädband proving what is already proved. The author replies : The objects like elephant, etc. which are created depending upon things like lomp of clay, etc. are devoid of their natures, as accepted even by you, hence my example is proved and probandum also proyed. If you say again that those magically created things, though they are devoid of the nature of such other real things, are not however devoid of their own saturc, you must then explaia satisfactorily why they lack the form and character in which they appear. But you have accepted that things like fruits, flower, and others do not lack the form and character in which they appear. So you must admit that those magically created things, elephant, etc. are also possessed of the 'nature of such teal things, since they appear in such forms. But in fact they are not seal. So it follows that all magically created things are devoid of theic own nature. Thus my czample is proved correct and my probandum is also accomplished. (2) Some others having a diferent view of Sinya, argue that the magically created persons are not real persons and are hence void; yet they are not devoid of their own nature since they exist in the form of a person of illusosy appcarance, So your example is agaja unproved. The author retorts whether those illusory persons are dependent products or otherwisc; if they are dependent products, why do you call them illusory? Is it for the rcason that they do not exist as they appear to us? Do you not see that the eye etc. are dependeat products not existiog as they appear to us? Therefore they are proved as devoid of their nature. Again they argue that it is alright with illusory persons, but the case with eye, etc, is different. Because there is so ·KARATALARATNA OP BHAVYA manifest in one and the same place. Nor can it be possible by way of unmanifesting ( hiding ) process, because when one process of pot is hidden, other process of basin will also be hidden. So your thesis that everything is in the nature of everything is absurd. (3) You also must admit that the place where the manifestation of illusory person is at work, is devoid of the manifestation of real person. Therefore my example is proved and my proposition is also established. Your theory of omnipresence of sense organs is not admissiblc, because cach of them is always assigned to and associated with a fixed place. VIII. The Yogiciras argue the following : (1) If your proposition is meant to express that all composite elements are void in as much as they originate through causes and conditions, not by selves, and hence are devoid of the nature of origination, we do not dispute it and it falls in lioe with our opinion. (2) So says our Master that aspect of which a thing is devoid is unreal; this aspect which serves as a receptacle of the false imputation is real". Tateation of the saying is this : the imputed aspect of the dependent aspect is non-existent. There is nothing speakable corresponding to our speeches and there is no speech corresponding to tho speakablc. Therefore the imputed aspect that abides in the dependent aspect is originally unreal. What is poid (of the imputed aspect ) and is of dependent origination is existent in its dature. All the worldly conventional talks as to the matter, feeling, ideation and others are based upon and emanated from this paratantra aspect. If this aspect also is said to be.non-existent, all the said conventional talks would be baseless and senseless. You will then deserve to be excommunicated from the fold of co-religionists.

·14 VISVA BHARATI ANNALS other real eye, in contrast with which you may say this eye is illusory Bhavya says-Yes, it is so , yet we experience in the world that the absence of one's owa nature and dependent origination--always behave as probandum and probans This fact has been illustrated by the said example simply as a sort of pointer to the gederal principle If you again analyse the particulars of example and irgue on that basis, you will fall into the pit of a logical fallacy called vikalpasa majati, which shows clearly your light mindedness This fallacy is further illustrated by some disputes between Vaibesibas and Mimamsakas regarding eternity of the sound VII Thc Sankhyas object to the validity of the reason and example They hold (1) that things are evolved and trans formed from Mahat, etc and so the reason the dependent of origination is unproved, (2) that everything may be possessed thenature (triguna) of everything, and (3) that the seose organs may be present everywhere , even in the illusory person its nature is present and so your example also is unproved Bhavya replies (1) You must admit that a cognition of visual object is produced by causes, but not manifested Things lihe pot, ctc are produced by different causes, lump of clay, wheel etc Manifesting factors are not material causes, eg a lamp, etc are got the material causes for the ornaments like bangle, etc just as the cogaition is produced by different causes not manifested so also are the eye, etc Hence there 18 no question of reason being uoproved (2) Your second proposition that everything is in the nature of everything is untenable It cannot be possible by 27 of manifesing process for the followmg reason Since there is present a manifesting process of pot in a place where a basin exists Again one and the same pot may extend to so many leagues of space A pot and a basin would ·KARATALARATNA OP DHAVYA manifest in one and the same place. Nor can it be possible by way of unmanifesting (hiding) process, because when one process of pot is hidden, other process of basin will also be hidden. So your thesis that everything is in the nature of everything is absurd. (3) You also must admit that the place where the manifestation of illusory person is at work, is devoid of the manifestation of real person. Therefore my cxample is proved and my proposition is also established. Your theory of omnipresence of sense organs is not admissible, because cach of them is always assigned to and associated with 2 fixed place. VIII. The Yogācāras argue the following: (1) If your proposition is meant to express that all composite elements ate void in as much as they originate through causes and conditions, not by selves, and hence are devoid of the nature of origination, we do not dispute it and it falls in line with our opinion. (a) So says our Master-"that aspect of which 2 thing is devoid is unreal; this aspect which serves as a seceptacle of the false imputation is real". Intention of the saying is this : the imputed aspect of the dependent aspect is non-csistent. There is nothing speakable corresponding to our specches and there is no speech corresponding to tho spcakable. Therefore the imputed aspect that abides in the dependeat aspect is originally unreal. What is void (of the imputed aspect ) and is of dependent origination is existent in its nature. All the worlds correntional walks as to the matter, feeling, ideation and others are based upon and emanated from this paratantra aspect. If this aspect also is said to be , non-cxistent, all the said conventional talks would be baseless and scoscless. You will then deserve to be ascommunicated from the fold of co-religionists.

·16 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS Now the author retorts on the above remarks : (1) If you hold that composite elements like the cye, etc. are void because there does not exist in the paratantra any nature like the eye, etc. which is not originated by causes and remains always unextinguished, then you are proving what is already proved. You are 'no better theorists than the Sankhyas and Vaiśesikas who also maintain similac theories (viz. absence of the nature that we actually perceive). You said that the eye etc. are non-products and devoid of their natures, because they are void by themselve. So you must state that they are void by absence of the nature of nonorigination ( anutpattinibsvabhavatab ), not by absence of the nature of origination as you stated. If composite things while in the process of origination, have really the nature of origination, how can you say that they are devoid of the nature of origination ? If they do not have it really, their nature does not at all exist ; so you need not proclaim that there is nothing but mind. If you however adhere to it,' you will have a defect of proposition. If the paratantra aspect is devoid by itself of the nature of origination and in non-existent, it is said to be void ; then you will be proving. what is already proved. Similarly what is originated through causes and conditions is in reality not void for you and it will be deprived of the term Sinya. As regards my contencannot frame any such charge. Therefore your Temark that my proposition falls in line with your (Yogācāra ) opinion is only a delusion. (2) As to the passage above quoted, Jens fimam, etc. I may sap that if you accept as real entity things like the eyes, etc. which are originated by virtue of causes and conditions and which all people know as such, even ordinary men will be in possession of knowledge of the colightened men tion, ·KARATALARATNA OF BHAYYA 17 (Buddha ) Worldly things appear to us as if they are created, from the viewpoint of koowledge of the calightened persons who have realised the Absolute Truth Therefore it is declared that, that which is devoid of this dependent aspect is unreal in order to guard against falling into extremity of eternalism Similarly this dependent aspect is said to be real in order to guard against fallag xato another extremity of Nihilism Things like the cyc, etc which arc originated by virtue of causes and conditions, and which are included into the category of the empirical truth, are real and not totally unreal like the flower in the sky Wc, however, prove them to be void only from the standpoint of the Absolute Truth It is therefore said that this aspect which serves as basis of false imputation is real In this manner non substantiality of things has been proclaimed in conformity with Truth by the Leader of men and gods Being granted that the dependent aspect is real in this sense, your words become a good doctrine and I also accept this kind of reality As two kinds of accumulations of virtue and wisdomn are brought under the principle of lokānwartana, following the world, and the basic principle upon which all false thlags are imagracd 15 estab lished to be real by way of worldly convention ( samyrtyupacara ), all things that are talked of in the world (Prajſlaptıdbarma) are empirically real That I do not dispute Therefore there is no room for the charge you made against me that I deserve to be cxcommunicated from the fold of co religionists If you say that the magically created things are of indescribable nature, they cannot prove your thesis, 1 do not see any reason why they should be of indescribable gaturc If you adhere to it again, 20 intelligent person ca 2$ 3 ·18 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS i our disprove the soul and others that are styled to be of indescribable nature by Tirthikas If you accept all dependently originated things as rcal, Nor objects like magically crcated persons will be all real is it possible to say that one thing is in the possession of the nature of some thing else, e g a cow does not possess the characteristics of an ass Nor do we dispute with you with regard to your remark that there is nothing speakable corresponding to speeches, etc so your negation on this account incurs a siddhas adbanadosa If you insist that the negation is necessary because many defilements become operative by virtue of one's attachment towards the aspects imagined on account of speeches and the speakable, you are thoroughly mistaken No animal kingdom is in the possession of speeches The main factor for defilement is only the absence of correctly grasping things in their right aspects There are many arguments and principles that may be quite pleasing and satisfactory and there are many varied, holy and subtle teachings Amongst them the teaching relating to the imputed aspect is only partly profitable, not universally Therefore there is no need of further arguing the imputed aspect as void IX Some other Acaryas offer the following criticism If the eye is for you real substantially, then follows a loss of your proposition and the asoning becomes inconclusive If it is unreal, it would be devoid of its nature and your negation becomes baseless The author observes in replying It is not so According to Buddha's saylög thete is nothing that is true and there is nothing that is false hare nothing in reality to establish whether true or unthue As there is nothing to be denied in your opinion by the said Ieasoning there is no necessity for negation But my ·RRRATALARATNA OP DJIA VYA 19 negation points out after investigation pros and coms that the thing to be aegated is originally devoid of its own nature, but does not destroy its nature into pieces. It is not proper to argue that because there do not exist things to be illumi- Aated, the illuminating factor also does not exist. Nor 'is it possible to state that things that are illuminated are created by illuminating factor. Therefore even in the absence of things that are to be negated, my own negation may exist. According to my conception probandum, probans, deniable, denial, criticism and all other means of logic may exist empirically.. I accept the inference as a proving factor because you have accepted its validity. I for onc admit that cvery thing is possible empirically. Thus ing proposition has been proved quite logical and reasonable as there. is no room for any criticism against my syllogism stated above, Then the author in conclusion points out that the pratityasamnipannatva is not the only reason to prove qur proposition. There are also other reasons, such as perishability, etc. and they are to be employed as the case may requite. After mecting an objection raised by somebody that thc сус is substantially rcal on account of its having definite function and profit, by saying that such reasoning could not be provided with parallel example, the author instructs a yogin as follows: X. Yogin should meditate that all the other eleven bases, car, etc. are devoid of their own nature just like the eyc-basis and penetrate and enter into the non-substantially of all their natures. Then he should repeat the same process of meditation over all other dharmas, skandha, dhātu, doctrine of dependent origination, smrty pastbāna, samyak. pradhāna, rdbipada upto sarvajnajñāna, and cater into the pon.

·20 VISYA BHARATI ANNALS the power as substantiality of their natures By virtue of meditation in this manner, the meditatot, though catered into non substaptiality of all aatures, is still deficient in Bhavana, force of meditation So he should repeatedly practice it and acquire of meditation Having acquired it in a short time he dispells all impurities, doubts, and ill conceived ideas about the composite elements A yogin, at the moment of enteriog into Adbi multi, the sixth of ten stages of a Bodhisattva, feels immense joy As he is far atray from any attachmeat towards the characteristic marks of all the separate composite elements of existence and he 15 far from conceiving any idea, during the performance of charity, (1) of the object, donor and receiver, and also (2) of the donor, receiver and the result of charity, he becomes purified in respect of two fold three spheres and acquires immeasurable accumulations of virtues and wisdom Furthermore not being resolved to wards any fruit of this world or of that world, worshipping his desired, virtuous and honoured gods, not having any wrong ideas regarding agency of gunas, Atman, Alaheśvata or atoms, be performs charities on a grand scale. It has been pointed out here by giviog citations that only the person that is absolutely free from any wrong idea of entities (bhavadharma ) is capable of walking along the path of Bodhisattvas Now he should meditate that what is devoid of its own nature is unborn what is unbora is not bound by three limitations of past, present and future, having meditated in a manner that is pure for all three times, and being pure in respect of two fold three spheres, he walks into the Maha Bodhi which is not bound by any limitations of past, present and future ·CHAPTER II 1. The author in this chapter seeks to establish nonsubstantiality of uncomposite things, ether, etc. and therefore takes up the discussion of the second propositioa set forth in the second half of the first verse, viz. • Thesis . Uncomposite ( asamskrta) things are unreal (from the viewpoint of Absolute Truth ). Reason: Because they are non-products, Example · Just like flower in the sky After explaining the import of each term in this proposition, the author points out that the above-mentioned argument is not only onc; there are also many others, akrtakatva, akárıtratva, etc ; but the anupada 'non production' is mentioned as argument by way of particularisation (upalaksana )--just as one says "Guard thesc curds from crows' with the intention that it should be guarded also from others, cats, rats, etc, because the curds are to be protected in all events. II. Now Bhāvaviveka commences to meet one by one the objections raised by his opponents, the Vaibhâsikas, Sautrântikas, Yogācāras, Sankhyas and Vaišeşikas and others 1. The following is the objection made by the Vaibhāsılas : The uncomposite thiog is non-substantial, i c a nonentity;such being your proposition, the ether-base-attainment (ākāsāyatanasamapattı ) becomes objectless, in the absence of its object, the ether, how is it possible to say that it exists > And it has been defined as anăvrti, absence of any obstructing element, The author replies. If you formulate this syllogism : the ether-base-attainment is endowed with a real object, or with a substantial entity, because of this attainment, or ·22 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS met because this attainment has something as its object, just like other attainments or their objects. This syllogism is defective in respect of the homogeneous example, because all other attainments and their objects are declared to bc void in as much as they are composite things. We examined the nature of ether from the standpoint of Absolute Truth. My proposition can be established cmpirically also. Therefore the positive character of the cther held by the opponent cannot be maintained, since the argument : because the attainment has something as the object has invariably beca with its opposite argument just mentioned. 2. The followers of our sect and of others' sect say this : It follows from your syllogismo that whichever is originated is substance. If you contend that a thing originated is also non-substance, then your argument loses its value, as it does not pervade all the homogeneous subjects. This is only an apparent objection, says the author. It may be taken for certain that all non-originated things are non-substances, and not that all the non-substances arc non-originated. The reason, prayatnānantarijakatra, is accepted as a valid argument, though it is not present in all homogeneous subjects. 3. Some rcalistic thinker argues : The ether and flower are both well-known in the world; heace they are not nonsubstances though they are not experienced as being associated together. So the proposition cannot be proved with the aid of the example, sky-flower. The author replies that the word, khapuspa, should be taken as, a genitive compound, meaning 'a flower pertaining to the ether. The flower as such being non-existent, the example is not lacking. The Yogia, by these reasonings, should enter into the ·KARATALARATNA OT BHAVYA 23 non-substantiality of the ether. The same method of reasoning is to be applied to the non-substantiality of other three uncomposite things, Pratisankbranirodha, etc. 4. The Vaibhāşikas say: Buddha has declared that there is a destruction by means of knowledge which serves as azztedote to the removal of the idea of composite things. If you deny that, you will fall in the contradiction to your own doctrine. The author says : This is not right. The Master has declared so empirically in order to instil in the mind of disciples 2 fecling of disgust for the composite things and also to kindle a feeling of joy for the uncomposite things. The Master stated the unconditioned Nirvana as existent just in the same manner as he stated that apparitional beings exist. The denial of Pratisankhyānirodha is made from the absolute standpoint. The Master has also declared to this effect : I declare as ignorant those who consier the Nitvāņa as something of a real entity. Thus my denial does not incur any contradiction. SThe wicked logicians put the objection : Because an uncomposite thing is non-cntity, your proposition lacks the subject ; because the sky-fower is also a non-entity, there is no parallel example. Thus your probandum, probans and instance become defective. This objection is not admissible ; for, the uncomposite things, ether, etc. arc empirically accepted as existent by virtue of their talks current in the world, 6. The Vaibhāşikas again say that Pratisankhyanirodha is a real entity, as it serves as object for the path and an antedote to defiling things. No non-entity would do this act. This is also not admissible. If you hold that having function, and being real entity are concomittant, that concomittance is vitiated in the case ·24 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS of an apparitional being which possesess isome specific function even though it is a non-entity. 7. The Sautrāntikas remark that this syllogism is defective and proving what is already proved. If we say that it is characterised by the absence of some obstructing elements, the said defect will be removed because this character is disputed as such. However, my proposition disproves not only the current notion of its substantiality, but its gon-substantiality also. 8. The Tämraśātiyas say that the ether is constituted of some matter in the intermediate space, and it is a composite thing. So your denial of uncomposite thing evolves the defect called Siddhasadhana. This theory is incorrect and has already been refuted in the previous chapter." 9. The Vātsīputrīgas agree in many points with the Vaibhāsikas and need not be taken for refutation. 10. The Yogācaras semark that there does not exist another truth upon one truth. Suchness is only the ultimate truth of all things (dharma), hence it is proper to say that suchness is trully void, but it is improper to say that it is non-substantial. How can the supramundane and undiscriminative knowledge be feasonably stated to be endowed with an object which is non-substantial? It is not indeed reasonable, says the author. Just as you hold that the supramundane knowledge cannot be stated to be endowed with a non-composite object, so also it cannot be of a composite object. Nor is it logical to conceive suchness as substance. It is hard to prove the substantiality of suchness If „you adhere to it, knowledge with it as object cannot be supramundane, because it becomes conditioned in as much as it is endowed with some object just like any other ordinary knowledge. The author cites passages to this effect from some sūtras. 1 ·KARATALARATNĄ, OF BHAVIA 25 . He further points out that suchness is not an ultimate truth in so far as it becomes an object of some knowledge. If you explain it as Sūnya, because it is devoid of something else, its kaowledge will be only an ordinary opc. So suchness is an end to and suppression of all discriminations, and it is not substantially, existing. If you say that suchness is substantially existing, even though it is beyond our common patlance, then you are advocating only the soul theory of! Tirthikas in the modified name of suchness. 11. Some co-religionists and followers of the Small Vehicle remark that all the elements that are brought under twelve bases, both composite and non-composite are indeed substances; because a man realising the four noble truths with sixteen aspects and training himself in the two paths of darsana and bhāvanā, removes all the defiling clements of three spheres of existence that are removable by means of the path of insight and the path of meditation, and thus becomes free from all kinds of ills. If one does not elucidate that all the elements of existence are only non-substantial, who would give up this delusion and gain this beacfit. If. you do not accept non-substantiality of all the separate clements of existence, there will be co scope for removing the veil of knowable things, and then our master would have been only partly released. III. Thus a yogio should.penetrate and enter into the non-substantiality of other uncomposite things postulated by Tirthikas, such as Prakſti, Puruşa, atoms, Supreme Lord, . time, quartes, some living beings and others, 1. Now the advocates of Prakrti and Puruşa put this objection. Accordiag to our conception, three clements are transformed into sky-flower, so it is not a non-entity. In that case you are denied a homogeneous example because 4 ·26 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS to the sky-flower, a real entity goes in contrast with your probandum. The author meets the objection by putting these counter-questions : Do you accept the sky-lower as existent or non-existent? If you accept the first alternative, your thesis contradicts the common sense. If you accept the latter, your contention that there is no homogeneous example for my thesis is wrong. Nor is it proper to say that because the three elements are real entities, their product, sky-fower is also a real entity. This will show your low-wittedness 1 • 2. The Sinkhyas advocate the following: We do not try, prove that Prakști or Purusa is experienced by senses; yet we can prove it by means of inference thus: The evolutes are caused by some substance, e. g. some pieces of sandal wood. Similarly they are intended for some enjoyer, because they are enjoyable things. All the enjoyable things are intended for some enjoger, c. g. prepared food and drink. Thus your proposition goes in contradiction experience. Now the author replies : If you try to establish your proposition in a general manner, and do not particularise that substance, then it evolves a fallacy of Siddhasadhana. If you particularise it and say that it is pleasure-element, etc. there will be no homogeneous example for your proposition. And your argument is also constituted of different matters. So your acceptance of Puruşa as argument falls to the ground. 3. The Vaiścsikas argue that the signs, breathing etc. are always concomittant with the possessor of signs, because they are sigas, just like the sight of smoke. The author meets this in the same manner as in the previous case. He says : If it is meant to prove the possessos in a general way, it incurs Siddhasādhana, and if the possessor is qualified as eternal, pervades, etc., there is the absence of homogeneous example. to our common ·KARLA CALARATNA OF BHAVIA 27 + By the same mechod of reasoning time, quarter, ether and others are to be disproved 4 Again the Vaišesikas plead that atoms and mind are upcomposite things Your argument--the lack of ongination, cannot be proved by itself If you say that these two things are included in the category of composite things, then the reason to prove non substantiality of things, because of their origination through causes and conditions, becomes unproved for us, your opponent, and hence the sphere for applying non substantiality will be limited The author retorts to these remarks that such defects may be removed, if we accept the mind and atoms as uncomposite things even in the sphere of empirical experience You may prove the mind but not as an uncomposite thing, because it serves as a factor for effecting knowledge just like the material things There are also other reasons to prove its composite nature Similatly atoms are not uncomposito clements, because they serve as productive factors just like any other material cause, c 6 threads § Just as the categories postulated by the Sankhyas and Vaišesikas are refuted, so also those of the Naked-bodied Tixthuhas, etc are to be understood as non substantial by appropriate reasonings IV Thus Yogin should refute all the objections, and by the aid of rightful inference should penetrate and entet non substantiality of the uncompositc clements postulated by one's owo school of thought as well as by others Though he has in this manner entered into the principle of non substantiality by virtue of knowledge acquired through learning, he is unable to cut at root the veil of the removables (1. e fiyavarana), so he should try to develop the strcogth of meditation of higher type into ·28 VISVA BHARATI ANNALS I Then the author explains the method of acquiring the wisdom constituted of meditation Wheo, again the image of the composite and uncomposite things appears as one aspect before the mind's cye of the yogin, he should suppress it by looking upon it as void of its nature, and thus he enters into its original non substantiality on the plea that all elements of existence are aloof from any nature, and then he gradually eaters into the principle of non-duality by dwelling upon things as bereft of any aspect By process of meditation on this model he is able to suppress the image of either composite or uncomposite things in such a way as it will never anse again Though the yogin does not dwell on it, he is not yet absolutely free from flow of consciousness which is staged with a tendency of running towards an object 10 as much as the discriminative thought of non substantiality, etc are still operating As he is yet not in the possession of unshakable knowledge, he is removed from supramundane undiscrimi nătive knowledge by persistence of discriminative thought In order to remove this handicap he should reason thus when things are void of their own nature, the thought discriminative of non substantiality is also not a real entity, as it has been conditioned by causes like the magically created ogs Meditatiog in this manner, he suppresses the thought which discriminates non substantiality etc By suppressing it he avoids the two extreme points of 'void' and 'non void', and no more looks at things in the yoidoess etc Theo a long passage is cited from the Sata sahasrika prainaparamila in support of this statement. The yogia, when he avoids the two extreme points, moyes in the path of moderation This path is termed 'form aspect of ·KARATALARATNA OP BHAYYA 29 less' as it is free from the grasp of composite and non-composite things ; 'matchless' as there is nothing that may be compared with it, 'supportless' because there is neither supporter not supported, 'lmageless', because there persists no image whatever of either composite things or uncompo site things, etc and it is named also 'consciousless' since no consciousness of any kind is at work there Then follow two citations which reveal the true character of this middle path Yogio who is traloed 10 avoiding the twin extremes and ris walking in the concept of non duality, entertains the thought of non-duality concept Being aware of this also as an obstacle to acquire supramundanc undiscriminative knowledge, he suppresses that concept also Therefore he enters into the realisation of never functioning and runningtowards an object, and stays in the flow of knowledge which is now in its own baturc 2 Though he practises meditation on unperverted non substantiality he should not do it with the sole aim of perceiving it with his mind's eye , dow his meditation is called 'absolute object meditation' is ated to substantiate the above idea 3 The Yogācāras determine that the supramundane undiscriminative khowledge is al6of from the grasper and the grasped Yogin keeping up the idea of reality ( dhatn) in it, should take to meditation Others critically analysing it declare that such type of knowledge cannot be called extra supramundane knowledge in'as much as it is still coloured with the thought of some discrimination A passage is here- cited to elicit the true nature of Absolute Truth which forms the wisdom cyc, and by this wisdom cye he acquires neither composite wor Then a long passage + 1 ·30 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS uncomposite things. On account of reasoning and scripturc yogin should put a stop even to such determination. The wise men again declare that extra-supramundanc knowledge is not in reality an entity, as it is used by causes like some magically created things. So he should suppress that knowledge too. So also he should suppress that knowledge which destroys the said determination as it is similarly yet defective of its being caught into the idea of an eatity. 4. When all such notions arc stopped, there arises no further intellection (pratipatti) as to the imageless objectivity because of the absence of causes and conditions, No other notion whatever can possibly arise in the absence of intellection. That is called koowledge in accordance with Truth. Some scriptural passages are cited to make the said premises further clear. Then yogia, abiding neither in beart or mind, nor in cousciousness or knowledge, is spoken of as a good farer in ,undiscriminating wisdom. When he fares not being caught in any sphere (of mental activity ), he obtains from Tathāgata, well-awakened, the instruction Icgarding the Truth. A citation from some Sūtra goes to strengthen the statement. Thus wisdom-faring is termed a status of Aryan silence. To make further clear that silence a quotation has bcen drawn from a Sūtra. So" (a) Vhen examined through these , rcasonings and scriptures, all the composite and'uncomposite things do not constitute cither the mind or wisdom, and again either discriminative thought or undiscriminative thought in its objective nature For him who knows things in this manner, rays of wisdom-sup dispet all the darkness of ignorance.

·31 KARATALARATNA OF BHAVYA (b) The wise, by not grasping the object images of the mind and wisdom, fares in a wisdom undiscriminating, and lacks any sphere of faring, but fares 6 Having explained the above verse in detail, the author describes the nature of the wisdom result yogin, because of his faring in an undiscriminating wisdom, though not faring fares, and though fanog, does not fare He 15 aloof from thoughts of all objccts whatever and abides in an absolute negation of all things just the the cther He, just like one entered into the samādby (or samapattı) of complete suppression, views all things in their orginal nature Dharma body of Buddhas is unthinkable, unlimited, non dual, abodeless, imagcless, unperceryable, etc Thus yogin vicwing it, though he sces, docs not scc in fact, and though he does not see anything, he secs, and though he is sccing docs not sce 7 Yogin having taken to a rightful view of things accumulatcs immense store of merits, and increases the unlimited resultant happiness He is intent solely on selfpurification and puts an end to all unhappiness of all beings, and like the Bbaisayaraja he abounds in mulufarious rightful aspiracions hen the author furnishes in the light of above discussion an interpretation of the Aryan eightfold path It is the sightful view which is correct insight into the form body of Tathagatas, having no image of ens and non-ens Το suppress all discursive thoughts is rightful thought Rightful speech is to realise inwardly saying that all things are beyond speeches Rightful act is not to commence any act bodily, rocally and wentally To live on that all things are bereft of origination and destruction which are also devad of ·32 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS 1 their nature is rightful living. Not to commit oneself to any effort and device on the plea that all things are not brought up by efforts is rightful effort. The rightful memory is an absence of any brooding or reflection of ens or non-ens, and that all things lack any objectivity for any intellectual perception. The tightful meditation is not to make any resolve this or that way by not grasping all thiogs in all aspects. The man who views in this manner is said to practise the eightfold Aryan Path. The man who views things thus fulfils also six perfections. Perfection in charity consists in doing away with all objects (nimitta) in all aspects, and in removing all defiling elements. Perfection in observing is to suppress all the supporting things of knowledge, and an attention to the attitude of nonperceiving. Non-forbearing any feeling of the knowledgc-supporting things is perfection in forbearence, Perfection in energy consists in expelling, all movements by aot taking or giving up anything. Perfection in meditation is constituted of an absolute negation of abiding anywhere by virtue of lack of attention whatever towards anything. Perfection in wisdom lies in aloofness from the twin images (of ens and non-ens) and not giving rise to any description of anything. Further detailed exposition of these sis perfections is to be found in the Discourse of Brabmaparıprecba. The author then conciades : Well abiding in the manner just described becomes the source of unbound things' ( apramana) as has been stated by Buddha in the Discourse of Unbound Things : These are a great goal, great benefit and immense advantages. So the wise man knowing things in accordance with Truth and being atteatirc, should take to the course of training.* + • The amargement loto different sections and tobeections in this chapter 10 based on the commentary which will be studied later on in full.

·श्रोरस्तु महायानकरतलरत्नम् [सस्तपरीक्षा] सन्तत- सर्वसत्यानामर्याय समारब्धानुतरमहायोधिप्रणिधानः कृषिनिधासद्वितोपचारसक्षुभ्यदु जस्प्रचण्डमारूतसक्षभितवित्तसन्तानान् मिथ्याष्ट्रिजालजालतान ससारपना पक्षरितानप्रमाणदु खदौमनस्यविष दिग्धशल्यव्यथितान् लोकान् समालाक्य भयवरितानि सर्वाणि प्रज्ञापिनिर्मुक्कानि इत्यत रिशुद्धाकाशत् शान्तसप्राय शिव शान्तं सुन्न परमाणेसत्यनयमाश्रये। फरुणाप्रणिधान पयस्थितचित्त तपसमुदय द्रप न क्षमे। स्वपरसन्तानपरेशद्गढ ग्धमुमुक्षया अनिवृत्तिपरिभते अति शान्तानघनचक्रपाले अध्याशयसुखे विहरन अपारससारमहाणये घस्तु प्रणिहित तना [F 16 ] प्रमाणदु खस्कन्धविपत्तिपरुपयेदनोयनिर्मोत यज- सदशममङ्गुर पोयमारमे। सम्योधिप्रतिवेधाय ईदृशो परीक्षा । लोकोत्तराधिकरपज्ञानसाक्ष कारे। एर हि माधिगतपूर्वान् सबसत्यानामिन्द्रियाधिमुक्तिधातुचर्यामेदान प्रजानाति । -सपरसन्तानोत्पन्नसर्वसयासननिर्वासनानि दुखसमुदय- मूलानि फ्लेशज्ञालानि च भिनत्ति। परायश्च महापुरुषवतचर्यादसमा- दानप्रणिधानश्चोत्पादयति। पर्व लोकोत्तराविकल्पज्ञानसाक्षात्काराय सर्व. 1 -Ohu vu so hing Poussia takes the phrase to mean dhadacaratas and compares Kota 1 47 See also Mad utthp 623.8-10 2 14 maya "principle", law' eto - Tathagatagarbhakaya, cl Bod. Fanyika p 316 16 This is phaladhuta prasta Ibrd B Yu 'to page over', 'get over' 'exceed" ote 4 Lattianam, sakat katot: tada oto - ·VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS 34 मिथ्यादृष्टि फामलध्वंस्यविपरीतशन्यतादर्शनाञ्जनौपघमरश्य सञ्चिन्त्य प्रयुज्यात्। एवमविपरीतशून्यतादर्शनाञ्जनौषधप्रयोगाय सालम्पन- स्वभावापसारिणों ध्रुतमयी प्रशामाश्रयेत् । ततः केचित् निपुलस्तार्थनिर्धारिव्याख्याद्वारसमाधयेण धर्मता प्रविश्य पुनः पुन विशिष्ट प्रयोगभावनामारभन्ते । विपुलस्तार्थनिर्धारि- व्याख्यायां प्रत्युपन्नमहाश्रमकौसीधचित्ता भन्ति । फेचित् पुनः अप्रविष्ट- धर्मता अपि तीक्ष्णेन्द्रियाः। तेषां [f 2.] सुखेन शुन्यतासाक्षाकारणाशु. धर्मताप्रवेशाय इदं करतलरतशास्त्र संक्षिप्त विरच्यते ॥ तत्यत' संस्कृताः शून्या मायावत् प्रत्ययोद्भगात् । असंस्कृतास्त्वसद्भूता अनुत्पादा खपुप्परत ॥ स्वपरपक्षयोस्तविशेपयो यद्यपि यहव परिकल्पिता यादा भवन्ति । तथापि प्रमेया विषयाः सक्षिप्य द्विविधाः संस्कृता असंस्कृता इति । भूदा. परमाथसत्त्वनयेन संस्कृतासंस्कृतानाविपरीतस्यभावं सम्यग- प्रजानन्तो धर्माणा स्वभाव विशेषान् मृपा गृहीत्या विविधमिथ्याष्टि- जालानि संवर्धयन्ति । यथा लोके पामरश्चिनकार:10 भयानक. यक्षपिशाव. विम्य स्त्रीपुरुषविम्ब या रचयित्वा घ्याकीणनेत्रः [सन् ] घस्तुत अस्तोति संक्षुभितमनस्को भवति। वस्तुत्वेन प्रहणात् स्वयं चक्तिो मति । संरज्य वा तेषु विषयेषु बहूनि गणनातीतानि पिपुलानि विकल्प. 5 Or luca - Ese disease 6 The first of three aspects of prajra effected by aptopa lela , 6c8 Stbira mati Trimeikebhi$&, P 26and Haribhadra Abh Aloka, p3923 7 Lat an end-asmat 8. ys gut "Having entered' 9 Or tilesaprayogabharana as Poussin suggested 10 Lit curacanya Abh Aloka p 392. mayalara tra Vigrabarya partiol 23 27 with yrttı : the same smile, mayalara Poasbin com. pares MahEy Anarinsaks. ( Eastern Bud 1926, 66, 1997, 163).

·KARATALARATNA OP BHAVYA दृष्टिजालानि उत्पादयति। यदा परमार्थसत्यनयेन संस्कृतासंस्कृतानाम: विपरोतमा सम्यम् जानन्ति । [b] तदा लोके पण्डितचित्रकार- पत् तान् वस्तुस्वभारतोऽस्तोति न गृहन्ति । नापि यथोक्त: संस्कृता- संकृतविपर्यः विभिन्ममिथ्याष्टिजाले स्वयधनेन कोशेषक्रिमिवत यध्यन्ते । तदभावात् निम्किल्पप्रज्ञाप्रवेश:17 सिध्यति । इममर्थ विवादिवचरं संस्कृतं प्रकाशयितु लौकिकः विपयेऽस्मिन विकल्पस्य बहुश उत्थापितत्वाद् इदं वचनमाह। तत्त्वतः संस्कृताः शून्या मायावत् प्रत्ययोद्वगत् । इति । तन लौकिकाः सम भाग्मभ्युपगच्छन्ति । अहमपि संवृतिसदभ्युप- गच्छामि। सावृतप्रत्यक्षेण प्रतीत्यसमुत्पादस्य याभ्युपगमात् संवृति- सत्यान्तर्गतं चक्षुरादि सस्रतं गाजपालादयः सधै साधारण मानन्ति चक्षुरादि स्टतं द्रव्यसदिति। अत एवं स्यपक्षाम्युपगमः प्रत्यक्षप्रमाण- साधारणशानं मा विरोधीद् इति तत्त्वावच्छिन्न प्रतिक्षा। तात्त्विकाथे- स्वभावस्तत्वमुच्यते। तदेव परमार्थसत्यम्। परमाथतः संस्कृताः शून्या न सतित इति प्रतिज्ञा प्रत्ययसामग्रीसिद्धा भावाः शतकत्वात्। संस्टवा इत्याख्यायन्ते [तानि) पर द्वादशायतनानि निहाय [F3a ] धर्मायतनंक्देशमानम्। आकाशः प्रतिसंख्याऽप्रतिसंख्यानिरोधी तथता चात्र पुनहिपताः। परसंमतो मिथ्याप्रतिभासो मायादिसस्मृतः स शून्य इति चेत् प्रतिक्षा, सिद्धसाधन- 11. Cl. Labktvatara, 163 (LVP) 19 Lat atuprarefacarya 19 So also by Haribhadrs, Abu Aloka, o 886 Or abhi samskztatrot.

·36 VISYA-BHARATI ANNALS दोप:15 1 4:16 घरपरिकल्पितः संस्कृतः परमार्थतः सत्स्वभावः [स] पक्षः19 स्थाप्यते। तयधा चक्षुरायननमेकः संस्कृतः परमार्थतो वस्तु वा शून्य घेति विवार्यते। शून्यः नि.खमावामिथ्याप्रतिभास1 इति पर्यायाः । इयं प्रतिशा। प्रतीत्यसमुत्पाः स्त्रीपुरुषाजमृगा मायावस्वादयोऽप्रकटिततात्त्वि- फस्वभावाभावामासाः। [प्रसिद्ध ] साध्यसाधनधर्माण:20 सर्वे संस्कृता साधर्म्यदृष्टान्ताः । अतो मायादिति इत्युच्यते [ दृष्टान्तः ]। यथासंभवं साध्यसाधनधर्मसाम्य 15 Lit doşat 16 Lut yads 17. Or, dravyasan. 18 Vig vyärartini, 29, vrthiyatha trayoktam bhalah, tatha mama syarl na mama kacid astı pratika 1 So also Dharmapala comment on Sataşastra vaipulya, VIII, 6: bharata abhyupagatatrat stdhyatı mama pakşak. 19 Or. tatatha or abhrtapratibhasa Dharmapala also.takes sunya, missradhata and natraimya as synonyms by using expression ratralmjaftinya frequently. Ibid, VIII 20 Here the autlior seems to hiot at the definition of distanta, viz. prasıdlhasa lhyasadhanadharmarałpa which agrees with one given by a •later Naryayika Dinakars anvayadratantah sathyasadhanobhaya. rattanistaya v Nyayakoba Cr Abb Aloka p 395 • drstantah bhayadharmanergatih Bhimahe, Karyalatkara, v. 26 • Sadhyasadhanadharmabkyam stdiho drtanta ucyatel N Virtika, 139 (Cal ed.): Siddho drstanta ttvanvel 21 Dharmapola also uses miyd as esample in this connection, (Sata raipu comm ad2) A more logical explanation of mayopama is given by Hanbhadra Abh Aloka, p 143 22 Lityathayogam 23 -dratanta See Upayabrdaya Tucel, p bdrstanto retidhahi sampfirno drsantal amshadt The unthor seems to mean the latter Variety here , cp Bhamahs, V, 24 .... samanyad pacaryatel N. Vertika, P 122 ( Cal. ed.)... lat tulyah 11 era styuepate!

·KARATALARATNA OP BHAVYA 37 प्रज्ञाप्यते । प्राप्तिसाम्यात्म न सर्वे सदृशद्दष्टान्तधर्मा दुःसंभव1:25 संभवेयुः। तद्यया यदन्ति चन्द्रवत् स्त्रोमु चार इति। न सधै दुःसंभवाश्चन्द्रधमो मुसे संभयेयुः। श्लोकयन्यमनुएत्य एतत्सदृशष्टान्तकथानस्य एयफमः। भनेन श्लोका) संक्षिप्या [ कथन ] मूलफमित्यतो न दोपः ।। 24. Kia shuo tong ku-Poussin romarks : Je ne vois pas le sense des quatre mots que je suute kia chouo tong kort prrco quo nous parlons conventionallement de similitude .?? Now as I rendered them, there is na dificulty with regard to these characters. 25. mnan ling na 1 sambhaveyuk. put ko vt the same repented in the next sentence. CI Nyyahindu II, 9 with Tika, where sapaksa is explained almost to this effect. 26 Here Poussin remarks thag : Ici une ligne et demie qui présente des aimcultés On pnut traduire: ślokanudandharinam sadharmyadpstanta ucyode 1 hom Iramenn ſlokardhena milasthanasamkrepa sto na dosah 1 "Pour des raisons metriques, l'exemple pareil est dit avant l'argu. ment] C'est dans cet ordre ( anormal) que, per la demi-atropho, l'essential est résumé, il n'y a dono pas fauts"-Lo régle est de dire l'argument d'abord, l'exemple sosuito, mais la metrique exige an autre ordre According to the N Satra V, 2, 11 ( avayavadiparyaso vacanam praplakalam ) to formulate syllogism in an order other the fized one entale #nigraha thana called aprūptakala This is the reason why tbe author takes pains to justly it Note Udyotakara's remarks here: Sastravakyant arthasangraharthan upadiyante I eto which intend to in B1st on the pecessity of the fixed order of syllogism Our author appears to refer to some such teoorks ol an earlier autbor in the bentenco; anena,.. 49 doşah 1 97, Lit, dankepomtilaspadam, ·38 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS [f b} प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नः साध्यधर्मों। इदं स्थापयितु हेतुरुज्यते प्रत्ययोद्धनादुः इति। हेत्वादिमित्ययः सम्भूय जायमानत्वात् प्रतीत्य- समुत्पन्न इति नाम्ना उच्यते । [यः ] प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नः [स] प्रत्ययाभि- व्यक्त:291 विपक्षे प्रतिषेधाय बंधस्यदृष्टान्तः स्थाप्यते। विपक्षामागत् मति- 28 Nagarppna establishes Snnyata on the argument of resstabhatatra, Vig vyavartini 121.22 Haribhadra uses 29 reagon elanekasvabha. carahttatow, Abh Aloks. p 394 However on p656 he adopts a similar prayoga as berein which may be worth notice here : ये प्रतीत्यममुराज रते परमार्थतोऽपिचाररमणीयाः । तद्यथा मायाशरनिर्मिताः करभादयः । तथा चामो सर्वे पादयो भावा इति सभावहेतु । यथादर्शनं प्रतोयोटाददर्शनालासिद्धो हेतु। सपा भावान्न विरुद्ध । पूर्वप्रबन्धेन (P. 385) विक्षे पाचप्रमाणादर्शनात् अनेकान्तिकथन भवति । 29. The author has made some distioction between abhtvyakts and skara of larra on 1 13b beloy. But here we sad atpada and abhızyaltt ab synonyms I doubt concetness of the Chinese text hero 80 Lit dipaksapratisedhaya c Pratiņavārtika vitti, III, 18. vardharmyavacanena crpakse hetrabhatah kathyate 1 Poussin bas made these reperis. Le sense de l'expression tcho yi p'in, tipalsapratsgedha (?) ( Dans Tucci's Index, Mre Diopiga, pratışedha est traduit en Tibetain par l'equivalent de asaltia ) est determin$ par cotre texto, 2693,3fetme expression 274,218 qurbest pasclar, According to Dbarmottara pratesediha 19 an equitaleat of abhąza, bia comment on Nriyabindn, II, 19 But tapakyapratipedha on 1. Ba (Chin ) below must be taken into orpakse helupratışedha, not pratışedha of tipalsa itgelt ·KARATALARATNA OF BHAVIA 19 यथा पेधार्थः सिद्ध इति नोच्यते । पिनादकाले प्राप्त्या विपक्षमुक्ता अनुमान- व्यवस्थापनेऽपि नास्ति दोषः।. फथमत्रानुमान ध्यनस्थाप्यते । उच्यते । चक्षुरायतनं वत्यतःस्वभार. शन्यम् । प्रतीत्यसमुत्पमत्वात् । प्रतोत्यसामुत्पन्नाः सर्वऽपि तत्वत. स्वभाव. शून्या इति गधाजपालानाजनानामपि झातम् । फश्चितिष्टिमन्त्रीपधिपलाधिष्ठित: । तृणवृक्षमृत्पिण्डादि- पदार्थः प्रत्ययई श्यानि स्त्रीपुरुषहस्त्यधराजकुलारामउनजलान्यादि- लक्षणानि मूढजनमोहनानि नानामायावस्तूनि सृजति । यदि तेपो रसमायः किञ्चित् वस्तुप्सन, न रिपर्यय: स्यात्। अतो भगवानाह। सबै धर्माः अचव श्यामापाः प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नाः निस्वभानाः । पण्डित प्रतीत्यसमुत्पाद पश्यति स धर्मतां पश्यति । य: पश्यति धर्मतां [14] स पश्यति शून्यताम् । यः पश्यति शून्यताम् स पश्यति बुद्धम् । थवावोचत । 31. Donaga Nsayamakha ad 5. rada anitya + paksah) alabadya satira vadinam pratt 127.8t mipaksahl yadı nastı sah 1 tatra mot vartade ilt kutaram asandıqdan ilyadogah (Sanskrit 18 mipe) Tucci, Eng trans n 27 Prr vartika III 25 Tadabhaie ca tanner vacanadapı ladgalth 1 Vrati arastuns ir masiusatta kıtadhyate nuptiis tu vulta: atak sa dharminam antarenapi tasimatrotop: gamynta era siokaver, Niralan 27 Prpalsashatatascanavyatareko na kathyats 1 Haribhadrs, Abh Aloha r 385 makes clear how the reason 18 not sandıqdhavyatt. reka in the absence of dipalsu Vyaktiviveka“ Kasi ed p 395 33 Nagarjuna distinguishes uprahakala and orakhyanakala, Mad. IV.89 93 MVrts} pp 250 14, 91B 12 Nadbyamatiratara, my 8 text p 22 Ahb Aloka p 387 34 Read in Chinese pa ( R 145 ) for p: ( R 60 ) as ta p 110, 12 35 -Jhantm 36thstamba entra my Sans text, Ported elso in Vig vydyarlint, 22, ad 55, I vitti, p 160 ·40 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS यः प्रत्यये जोयति स हयजातो न तस्य उत्पादु स्यमायतोऽस्ति । यः प्रत्ययाधोनु स शून्य उक्तो यः शुन्यतां पश्यति सोऽप्रमत्तः ॥ इति अब सौ अशून्यमा दनो दूपणमाहुः। सर्ने संस्कृताः शन्या इति यदि साध्यते तदा रूपादिन स्यात्। शशटलालम्पनप्रत्यक्षज्ञानोत्पत्तायतो. ऽसिद्धिरत् रूपाद्यालम्पनाकारप्रत्यक्षबुद्धिरपि3 नोत्पद्यत। स तु वस्तुसन् इति प्रत्येकमनुभुपते। तस्मात् तर पक्ष धर्मतारिलोमा प्रत्यक्षप्रमाण- याधदुए. साधारणप्रतोतिबाधदुरश्च। सगराजपालादिमि समभायमान चक्षादिरूपं नास्तीत्यपहारात । पण्डिते. पक्षपातविष मुत्एम तटस्थमतिभिः सञ्चिन्तनीयम्-मम प्रतिज्ञा कि स्वसन्तानोत्पलप्रत्यक्षप्रमाण राधिका किं घा परसन्तानोत्पन्न- प्रत्यक्षप्रमाणयाधिका । [f4b] यदि स्नसन्तानोत्पन्न प्रत्यक्षप्रमाणयाधिका । प्रत्यक्षबुद्धयः परमार्थतः स्वभावशून्याः, प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नत्वात् अयस्तुप्रत्यक्ष- स्वप्नप्रत्यक्षबुद्धिवत् । अतो मम प्रतिज्ञा न स्वसन्तानोत्पन्न प्रत्यक्षपाधिका । in the 87 This semi praktit verse from the Anarataptahrdaya ( Nanj'o No 437 ) 19 cited by Candrakırtı in his M. Vrtti pp 299, 491, 600 504 (stabharanutpatlım sandhūya sartadharmah tanyah ) M. Avatara p 229 in Catubśataka ( Vidhusekhara ) p 294 Bodbi. caryavatars IS, 2 and Sut basita BAngraha, iol 28 (LOMuséon) (L. VP). Some similar verge from a Sastra 19 also cited by Maitreya in his comment on Bhava Sankranti, P 37 with potes Poussin farther points out that in the above rer second pada reads according to Tib atpada erabhavata s's meaning that which is not origipated by causes 1s utpattinisrabhara 38 Ssu abhasa, also akara , the latter term 19 more suitablo bere 99 Bod palajiks, p 491 dharmatah cana alomayats tad Buddha. vacanam 40 Haribhadra aleo raises some similar three fold budha to this proposition (1) Pratyakşabalha, (2) Anumanabadha, (3) Praltlıbadha, Abh Aloks p 337. 41 Lit paksagrahana ·KARATALARATNA OF BHAVTA 41 यधुच्यते परसन्तानोत्पन्नमत्यक्षयाधिकेति। अविशुद्धवक्षुष्कस्य त [] बहुप्रतिमास:-[पया) तैमिरिकस्य द्रष्टोऽसत्केशोण्डकचन्द्र [दया] दिमिथ्या- प्रतिमासः प्रत्यक्ष वाधते इति न्यायतो युज्यते । अतो न मम प्रतिज्ञा पर- संतानोत्पन्न प्रत्यक्षवाधिकापि। यदि सामान्यत उच्यते यथा मूढजनादिसर्वव्यवहारोत्पन्न प्रत्यक्षमिति । इदं सांतं न यायते इति न पाधप्रसङ्ग । साधारणतोतिषाघदुष्ट इति वचनमपि न युतम् । या च्यते स्यशास्त्रसाधारणक्षानविरोध इति। [तदपि न न्याय्यम् । स्वशास्त्रसंमतत्वात् , स्वशास्त्रविरोधे स्वप्रतिशाविरोधेऽपि नैव साधारण- प्रतीतिविरोधदोपः। परशास्त्रसाधारणमानविरोध इत्युच्यते चेत् [ Sa Jन युक्तम् । सर्प- যা খাযাযােয়লবিদ্ধাের্থ। गवाजपालादिसाधारपाप्रतीतिपिरोध इति चेत् तदपि न न्याध्यम् । जिनौरसाः साधयन्ति क्षणिका: सर्यसंस्कारा: मनात्मका निस्सस्याच सर्वधर्माः इति । वैशेषिका:-द्रव्यभिन्नो कयादिः भावमेदो न्यादिरिति । साडया:-युधिरचेतना, निरुद्धमस्या सर्व मन्यसदिति । एवमादिप्रकारेण सविस्तरं स्वपक्षमतिपादनं सयुक्तिकमाए साधारणशानाधक नाम 52 It appoate that Poubela's text differs from ours, 81000 be 189 translated artimira lor avriddha. 43 The same reply in Abu Aloka, p888 Note on p 88 tba Verse: निर्माप्रवे हि पम्प मैव तत्प्रतिषिष्यते। विद्यमानस्य नो युफ कस्य चिरपतिषेधनम् ।। इति न्याया। 44. Lik Açanastraddha. 45 Poussin translates : rupsaec sout des espbees de drarya. Les drawyag, eto. sont des espéces des bbaye. They say that rupa fa a separate category. So I put is socordingly. 6 ·42 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS पकल्यम्। तथा तु नाभ्युपगम्यते । नात्र परमार्थसत्यत धर्माणा परोक्षा आगोपालादिसाधारणानुयन्धिनो। प्रतिज्ञायाच परमार्थसत्यावच्छेदस्य साधितत्वान्नं यथोकविरोधदोपप्रसङ्ग । ततश्च नास्ति स्वप्रतिज्ञा. विरोधदोष ॥ अन्य पुनराह। परमार्थतश्चक्षुरायतन शन्यमिति स्वभावशून्यतावादिनो धर्मो न सिध्यतीति पक्षदोष । आश्रयो न सिध्यतीति हेतुदोषश्चेति । एतन्न युज्यते। आगोपालादि [b] [जन ] साधारणप्रतीतिप्रसिद्ध- चक्षुरादिसामान्यस्य पक्षत्वात् तद्धर्मस्य हेतुत्येनोक्तत्वात् धर्यसिद्धिपक्ष- दोपामासोऽयम् । माश्रयासिद्धिहेतुदोपामासश्च ॥ असन्यायिका इदं दूषण पुर्वन्ति। यदि चक्षुरादि परमार्थत शून्यम् , प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नत्याद् इति । चक्षुरादीनां शून्यत्वे फथ प्रतीत्यसमु- त्पन्नत्वम् । प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नत्वे कथं शून्यत्वम् । एय प्रतिज्ञाहेत्यो. पिरोधात् पुन प्रतिज्ञाविरोधदोष 48 सिद्ध । एतत्प्रतिशादोपव्युत्थाने प्रयोग हैतो साधर्म्यदृष्टान्ताभाषम् असिद्धि- 46 0p Candrakirtis remarks Tattrapicarakale tu lokasya apramanatrat na tena badha sakyale kartum 1 M vett p 153 13 47 Ibd p 27 Tf where this argument has been criticised by Capdrakirti 48 See N Satra V 24 N Vartikaad126 Kumarila raises thle objection against VIJV&DAT DID Blokay Niralam 1645 with comment p254 49 This is an obvious reference to DIDDaga who holds the same viow Nyayamokha ad 1 Tucci p 8 All three commentators on Slokar attribats thus prayoga to S&Bibyas and its criticism to Buddhists 1. Dibnaga See Niralam 164 5 It 19 sometimes attribated totabdikss Tueel Nyayamukha n 19 A long discussion on this Prayopa see Pram Virtiks IV 173 188 with wrti pp 475481 ·KARATALARATNA OF EHAVIA 41 दोघा ख्यापयति । यथा शब्दः नित्यः सर्वानित्यत्वाद् इति । अयं प्रयोगः "असर्वत्वादिति हेतु व्यापयन् (न) प्रत्याययत्ति हेतोरसिद्धिदोपम् । शब्दस्य सर्वस्मिन् संग्रहात्।। समदृष्टान्तोऽपि [पा] नास्ति फतमन् नित्यम- सर्वञ्चेति । इति। नेता ज्यते। प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नत्वादिति हेतोः मायावदिति दृष्टान्तस्य च सर्वसाधारण शातत्यात् हेतुद्वष्टान्ती सिद्धी । तस्मात भवतां पूपणं न विदुषां मनस्तर्पयेत् ॥ [6a ] स्वभाववादिनः पुनपणमाः। भयता प्रत्येतव्यं [यत् ] चन- रिन्दियं सस्वभावं सकारिणत्वात् । निःस्यमाया न सकारियाः यथा पध्यापुत्रः। चभुश्च सकारित्रं यचक्षुर्विज्ञानजनकम्। यथोक्सफारिप्रत्य- हेतुना चनुस्सस्वमावं निश्चीयत इति । यदीद साधयति तं यः विना शिक्षा सिद्धः गवाजपलादिमतिक्षातः स्वमारः, संपतितः साधयति चक्षुरादिसंस्कृतं सस्वभावमिति। तदा सिद्धसाधनम् । यदि परमार्थतः, नास्ति साधर्म्य- दृष्टान्तः। फेलं विपक्षप्रतिपेधेन इष्टार्थसिद्धिर्न युज्यते। यथा नित्य- शब्दवादिनो घदन्ति-शान्दो नित्यः श्रावणत्वात् । घटादिरनित्यः अश्रावणः । शब्दस्तु श्रावणत्वात् नित्यत्वमाय इति । तथापि लोकसाधारण्येन शाते समदृष्टान्ते सन् कृतकत्यादिति विरुद्धहेतुः साधयति शक्षुरादि सर्व लोफ- व्यवहारसंगृहीतत्वमामिति ॥ 50 ming lao Roussla says that the phrase 19 Dormally paft . Koba, XXII,363,33,102, Buddhi, IV.1707, 2006 But I have put 15 pratyayaya, or prakalaya, which is also met with A Chip texts Our Chinese text adds bere pegative particle pui, before ming liao whlob 18 UDDocessary and incorrect It appears Poussin's text doos pot have it 61 Didnige adde : sadhyarkadebitat auddhır nama hefudora 1 ·44 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS अन्ये पुनर्दूपणमाहु । मस्यता शुन्या इति हेतु या दृष्टान्त या सर्व अन्तर्मावयति तुल्यजातायत्वात् [6b] इत्यनुमानन्यूनतादोष इति । श्लोरेड- स्मिन् ममाणफले सामान्यत उक्ते । परीक्षायां प्रमाणे साध्यमाने घ चक्षु रादि पकैक पक्ष पृथक् स्थाप्यते । भवो नाय दोप । सर्वसस्थतस्य पक्षन्येन सामान्यत स्थापनेऽपि नाय दोष । प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नत्वादिति हेतुस्मयपक्ष- सम्मत इति नासिद्ध । यधुच्यते चनु शून्यं स्वभावशून्यत्यादिति ' [तदा] 52 Poussin bas noted that the following objections have been put by Buddha bimselt Laskavatara Sutra 166 167 Le Bodhisattva no dort pas établir la proposition (protsjina ) Tous les Abarmas sont non produits vides 8108 nature propre ( anutpanna sinya asrabhata ) Il y aurait pratytahans car le proposition fait partie de tous les ahamas car la proposition & pour raison à etre les abaring L. Bodhisattva doit enseigner que les dbarmas existent la maniere des pages et des reves (māyasvapnacad bhatopadeba ) Op Bod avatara IX 139 141 Grousset Philosophies Indiennes 263 278 298 Garbe Sanhya-philosophie 203 ( ad 1 44 47 refutation des Madhyamikas ) eto 53 *Anata a nigrabasthina N Satra y 2 12 64 -yathadarśanam 65 An answer to the above objection seems to be this Though the distraction between the source of knowledge and its regult 18 not possible for the advocate of Sartafanyata yet it may be possible if we take things in general ag current in common parlance Such distraction can be roads when we are engaged in a logical discussion and in assertaining the source of knowledge Tho author has stated more than once tbat things should be taken into Bcooppt in their general sense as current in the world when one 18 to formulate syllogism see p 49 1 above ad and 11b 126 below Ve may read profitably here Kumrla o l ne sumanyasya ca hetutram na syat pakşarkadetta ! (Slošey Nurſlam 27) with Rafiks Бба As stated in Vig vybvartiol, see note 28 above ·XARATALARATNA OF DHAVYA अस्य यथोक्तहेतोरसिद्धिःस्यात् । नापि दृष्टान्तो नास्तीति। मायादे- [दान्तस्य ] सत्त्यात्। यदि यथोक्तं दृष्टान्त साधयितुं मायादिः पक्षः स्वीक्रियते। तदा सिद्धसाधनदोषगौरवं स्यात् ।। फेचिदल्पमा इदं दूपणमाहुः। सर्व संस्कृतं स्वभावशून्यमिति यदि स्थाप्यते। हेतोः संस्कृनत्यात तत्स्वभावोऽपि शून्यः । तदा हेतुरसिद्धि- दापयानिति। अयमसिध्याभासः न तात्त्विकासिद्धिः। यथा जिनपुत्राः साधयन्ति सर्वसंस्कारा निरात्मकाः सहेतुफत्वादिति । अयं हेतुः संस्कारे- प्वन्ततः निरात्मकत्वाथ असिद्धिदोफ्यान् इति दूपणमस्त्येव । सांख्याः पुनःस्थापयन्ति व्यक्ताः सत्त्वरजस्तमस्स्वभावाः चेतनभिन्नत्यानुba इति । अयं हेतुळक्त घन्तर्भूतः [7] सत्त्वादिस्वमायवत्वाच असिद्धि- दोपवानिति अस्त्येय दूषणम्। घंशेपिका अपि स्थापयन्ति शब्दः थनित्यः कृतकत्वादिति [अप्रापि] अयं हेतुः शब्दप्रयोगात्मकः अनिस्यत्वाचासिद्धिदोपवानिति दूपणमस्ति । परमादिप्रकारेपा प्रतिवादिनः महतापि यत्नेन वादिनि दोष स्थापयितु यतन्ते । यथोकन्यायो नात्यन्त परवाद भडंतु शक्रोति । अस्ति चेदयं न्यायः, फुत्र फः स्थापयेदनुमान स्थामीष्टमुक्तयुक्तिमजकम् ॥ पुन फेचिद्द पणमाहुः । प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नत्वादित्ययं हेतु ने साध्यायं साध. यितु शमोति । स्वभावशून्यत्वात् । पन्ध्यापुरोशरितशब्दवदिति । अयं हेतुः शस्यतोऽसिद्धिदोषयान् । यधुच्यते परपक्षाभ्युपगतो हेतुर्भवतीति । तदपि न युज्यते । परपक्षत उक्तस्य स्वभावान्यत्वादित्यस्य कोऽर्थः । 56. Nasaha saitva atma tri dharmastvete sathelukarı cited in Vimsik& bha$ya, p 5, M. yrtti, p 965,4 56a. The same prayoga is mentioned in Pram. vár, yrtti ad III, 18Gp 953. 67. -svapakataha 58. Lit. apufatarthah ·46 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS यद्यविद्यमानार्थक इति हेत्वर्थः [तदा ] नास्ति हेतोरसिद्धि.। हितोरेच ] अविद्यमानत्वात्। यदि मिथ्याप्रतिभासमानार्थक इति हेत्वर्थः । पन्ध्यापुत्रोच्चरितशब्दस्यात्यन्तमसत्त्वाद् अयं दृष्टान्तः [7b] साधनधर्म विकल' । निर्मितशब्देनानकान्तिकदोपश्च । अप्रमाणानां सत्त्वानां शिक्षक हितकरत्यात्। किञ्च न परपक्षमात्रसम्मतो हेतुः परपक्षासंमत- हेतुनत् साध्यं साधयति अन्यतरासिद्धत्वात् । विरुद्धानुमानयाधितत्वाद् अतिप्रसङ्गदोपानुगतत्वाच॥ यथा साध्यते०० प्रज्ञादयो न चित्तसंप्रयुकाः संस्कारस्कन्धान्तर्भावात नामकायादिवत् । आकाशादयोऽनित्या गुणाश्रयत्वात् पृथिव्यादिवत् । आत्मा अचेतन अप्रकाशवृत्तित्वात् प्रधानपद् इति। सर्वपक्षविनाश्ययं प्रकारो दोषानुपाती। अत उभयपक्षसम्मतान हेतुरास्थ्य इति स्थितम् । अनेन न्यायेन यथोक्तो दोपो न प्रसज्यते ॥ अन्य पुनरसन्नैयायिकः पक्षदोषमाविष्फुर्वन्नाद । यदि स्वभावशून्य साध्यं, साधन न सिध्यति पन्ध्यापुत्रोधरितशब्दयत्। साधन [ 8 a] संस्कृतेऽन्तर्भूतमिति तत्साध्यसमं स्वभावशून्यम्। सर्वशून्यत्वात् साध्यं साधन सर्व न सिद्धम् इति । [ यदेष ] साध्यसाधनधर्मनिराकरणं तदेव धर्मिस्वलक्षणनिराकरणमिति पक्षदोष आविष्कृतः। तस्य हेतोः स्वपरयो. रसिद्धत्वात्, अनेकान्तिकत्वात् , दृष्टान्तदोषात् समनन्तरपूर्वोकरश न 68a Cf Prama vartika, IV, I-2 with vritt 69. LtMahadosa 60. The prayoga seems to ksre been made by Santrantikas 61. Theory of Diopiga. Nyiyamukha ad 2, PramIpay yrtti p293,2 6. Mutth p 35_n 2 62 This refers to soabharafangattva mentioned in the previous Bection.

·KARATALARATNA OF BHAVYA 47 युज्यते [इदं दूपणन् ] । इदं दूषण ] मान्तरमपि न स्वपक्षदोप निगहते ॥ अन्य, पुनः प्रयोगान्तरमभ्युपगम्य स्वपक्षदोष निगृहमान एवमाह । परमार्थतः संस्कृताः शून्या इत्युत्पतिशापचनस्य कोऽर्थ:। यदि परमार्थतः सर्वेऽपि संस्कृताः अभावद्रव्याणि इति प्रतितार्थः । इदं वचनमपि पुनः संस्कृतेऽन्तर्मावात् संस्कृतसमममावद्रव्यं स्यात् । इदं वचन स्वसाध्यायें मिनत्तीति स्ववचनविरोधो नाम पक्षदोपः। यथा समुक्त' मृपा इति साधनम् । यदि तत्त्वतः सर्वे संस्थता अत्यन्ताभावरूपा05 [8b ] इति पतिज्ञार्थः। तदा सर्वविद्यमानमित्यपरादः । एवं च साध्यं मिथ्याष्टि- पतनम् । इति। अत्र यथोक्तमा आत्मा हि आत्मनो नायः को नु नाथः परो भवेत् । आत्मना हि सुदान्तेन स्वर्ग प्रामोति पण्डित.66 ॥ इति । तत् व्यवहारतश्चित्तमात्माण इत्युच्यते । परमार्थ तस्तु नराम्यं साध्यते 68 Lit artho na jalah 64 Or asad bhalah Some similar objection by Udyotakara, N. vartika, 481 6ta Of Nyyerukke ad ver I. 66 Or atyantavidyamana pu-tu. $• 66 Quoted in Bod Paijik& p 489 (Gathayam uktam) Pouksia compares Dhammapada, 160, UdEnavagga XXIII, Kosa, 1 74. Bee II. vrtti, 354, along with one more verse to the same effect, ie proving the existence of an empirical soul even for Buddhists 67 Op Bod Panike p 481 • citlam evdhankaraststataya asyat. mopadeserta uktam ·48 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS इति न स्वरचनविरोध प्रतिज्ञादोप। इदमप्येवम् । सांतस्वमायत वक्ष- रादिकमस्तीत्युच्यते । परमार्थ तस्तु तच्छ्न्यं साध्यते । अतो नास्ति दोषः । किञ्च यथोक्तम् । सर्ये उत्पत्तिधर्माणो मरणप्रतिशरणा इति । मुनिनोकं न मृपा। आभ्यन्तरं बाह्य श्चोत्पन्न मरणप्रतिशरण युज्यते, अव्यभिचारित्वात् । सा साध्यन्नतिशा स्वप्रत्यायिकापि मरणप्रतिशरणा इत्यभ्युपगमान् नास्ति स्यपवनविरोध. प्रतिज्ञादोप। एवमिदमपि । परमार्थत संस्कृताः शून्याः प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नत्वादिति प्रतिज्ञापन प्रतीत्य- समुत्पन्न सत् स्यभावशून्यं युज्यते अव्यभिचारित्यात् । इदं प्रतिज्ञापन स्वप्रत्यायकमपि स्वभावशून्यमित्यभ्युपगमात् न स्वयं [9] प्रतिशा- भङ्गदोषः ॥ यथा ब्राह्मण आह। सर्व भगवन मे न क्षमते० इति। भगवानाह। इदं वस्तु ब्राह्मण ते क्षमते न वा। अब ग्राह्मण माह इदं [चेत ] घस्तु क्षमते ( तदपि ] सयं मे न क्षमत इति। तद्वचन स्यप्रतिभातरस्तुविरोधीति स्योक्तगदोपो भवेत्। न तु सपत्रायं दोषोऽस्ति । अन्यत्र चाह भगवान् । भनात्मका: सर्वसंस्कारा इति । पुनरन्यवाह । अनित्या. सर्वसंस्कारा उत्पादव्ययमिण 2 इति। तथा नो चेत् युद्धोऽपि संस्कारान् "अनात्मका" "अनित्या" इति पदन् यथोकदोपवान् स्यात् । न तु स दोपोऽस्ति । यथा संस्काराणामात्मत्यनित्यत्वप्रतिषेधक प्रति. हायवर्नर सदेवानात्मफमनित्यम् इष्टत्याता पवमिदं संस्कृताः शून्या 68 pu hsiangle Poussia has baggested aryatrila for this. 63 See Vig vyavartiot, ad 23 tor similar answer 70 MNikaya, Vol I Dighanakha Butta p497.11 810. 71 Or abhyapagsta-tohsti 72 Anarmanah 3Qrradharmaḥ styagamat Nytti p 65, 9, M. Patralshkara XVIII. 101 72s Cited in f writi, p. 3911 73 tumo po taitama ·KARATALARATNA OP BHAVYA 49 इत्यभिधायक प्रतिशाववनमपि स्वभावशून्यमिष्टम्। तत्तु स्वाभ्युपगतार्थ- मनुकूलयेत् । तस्मात् भवदुक्कः “इदं वचनं स्वसाध्या भिनत्ति इत्ययं हेतुरसिद्धः ॥ किञ्च यथा साट्ख्याः स्थापयन्ति व्यक्ता सत्त्वादिस्वभावा इति । व्यक सत्यादिस्वभावश्चत, प्रतिज्ञापचनेना [b] पि तत्सत्वादिस्वभावेन भवितव्यम् । साध्यप्रतिशावचनं न तत्स्वभावचेत्, व्यकमपि तत्स्वभावं न स्यात्। इति दूपणे सत्यपि प्रतिमा नैवं दुष्टा। यथा संस्कृता अनित्या अनात्मका इति साधनं न तथोक्तप्रतिज्ञादोषयत् । एवमिदमपि नोक्तदोपवत् । इत्याशयस्य इष्टत्वात् । किश्च स यादी साध्यमप्रसाध्य पुनर्दूपणमाह। यदि परमार्थतः संस्कृता अवस्तूनि, उक्त संस्कृतावस्तुत्ववचनमपि अवस्तु स्यात्। इति। इदं दूपण न स्यपक्षदोपमपाकरोति । किन्तु मिथ्या पदसि परपक्ष तथादुए इति । यथा लोके कश्चिन्मुग्धस्तेन आवृतसूक्ष्मेक्षिक यात्मशोधनासमर्थः परस्मिन् दोपमारोपयितु युक्ति स्थापयति त्वमपि स्तेन इति वदति। नायं परीक्षोद्धितो ग्रन्थः ॥ अपि चोक्त तेन। यदि तत्त्वतः सर्वे संस्थता अत्यन्ताभावरूपा इति प्रतिज्ञार्थः। तदा सर्वविद्यमानमित्यपवादः। एवञ्च साध्य मिध्याहृष्टि- पतनमिति। तत्र प्रतिक्षार्थः यथा पूर्व विस्तरश उक्तः शून्यश्च निस्स्वभावः- मिध्याप्रतिभास इति पर्यायाः इति । न सवथा [roa] पिनास्तीत्यपोधते । तस्मान भवतेवं दूषण कार्यम् ॥ अन्ये पुनः केचिदाचार्याः प्राइमन्याः इदं दृषणमाहुः। यदि परमार्थतः . Vig. vpävartini. p. 11, ad 23 76. This is a kind of nigrahasthang called matantna, N. Satra. V, 2, 20, with Bhaşya. N, Kobe 76. See p. 48 above, the second alternative under pratuMartha. 77. See p6 abore, 1 ·50 *VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS अहन्तु पदामि असत्त्व- संस्कृता: मायादिवत् शून्याः निस्स्वभावाः, तदा न सन्ति । स्वीकारात् सुतरामभाषदृष्टि भवति। इति। ते स्वपक्षदोपप्रच्छादनेच्छया अपवाद नाटयन्ति उभयो? एत्वेऽपि मा शून्यवादिनः साध्य प्रमाणेन सिव्यतु इति। परमार्थसत्यापवादस्य अतिदुष्टत्वात् । इदं नास्तीति पवनं प्रसक्तार्थप्रतिपेधकम् । तद्वचनं विधिप्रधानं गृहासि । प्रतिपेधनधानमिदं वचनम्। अस्य नास्तीति यवनस्य फेवलसचाप्रतिषेधेन शक्तिरयसिता, मार्थान्तरप्रकाशनव्यापारः। यथा लोक आह । नास्ति शुक्लः पट इति । न ग्राह्यमिदं यवनं कृष्ण पर्ट प्रकाशयतीति । [येन ] वक्तः प्रतिज्ञादोष' कुर्यात्791 नास्ति शुक्लः परः इति पचनस्य शुक्लपटप्रतिधे- नैव शक्तिरसता, नास्ति व्यापारान्तरं कृष्णपट रक्तपटं नीलपट वा प्रकाशयितुम् ॥ शास्त्रऽस्मिन् परमार्थतः संस्कृतधातौ शाध्यत्तदृष्टयन्तपरिहाराय [rob ] भावस्वभावः प्रतिपिध्यते। एवमन्यत्र उच्छेदद्दष्टयन्तपरिहारायs0 अभाव- म्वभावस्य प्रतिषेधः । अन्तद्वयपरिहाराय च भावाभावस्वभावौ युगपत्प्रति- पिध्येते । अपशिष्टमिथ्याग्रहदोपपरिहाराय यावत् सर्वचित्तगोवराः प्रति- विध्यन्ते। यदा गोचरा निरुद्धाः, चित्त समनुनिरुध्यते। अन्यत्राह [भगवान् ] मानन्दम् । यदा मावस्यमावग्रहः तदा शाश्वतान्तपातः । यदा अभावस्वभावग्रहः तदा उच्छेदान्तपातः । एच- मन्यवाह काश्यपम्। अस्तीति [ काश्यप ] अयमेकोऽन्तः, नास्तीति . 78 Or abhalaptlaprasajvaprataşedha The game 18 repeated in thechap. II. I. 76,1 10. Cl. I. atti, p 393,10-18: , na cayam asydsatiram pratipadayamah 1 kim larht, parapankalpılam sattsam asya nitakurman 1 sto. 79. Or taktari pratijfadoçakaram...tacanam. 1 80. CI. M. Intti, p 427, 10: Tatasco bharabhyupagame sath sa era lasralocchedaprasango durnituro dharatam...I ·KARATALARATNA OF BAVIA 1 . [फाश्यप ] अयं। दितीयोऽन्तः। एवमाधागमात् उक्तवान्यायाच मम प्रतिशा पपादूषितमभापष्टिदोपान्य [मपि ] न स्पृशति ॥ केचित् [अन्ये ] स्वपक्षं न्यायदूषणसमुदायमविभाव्य निपुणमाच्छा. दयन्तः पुनरेतदन्ति। स्यमापरान्यतावादा नित्यमविकल्पमा प्रार्थय- मानोऽपि सदा विकल्पपति सयं संस्थता असंस्नाः स्वभावान्या इति । एवं परिफल्पितमिथ्याविकल्पस्थापनेन स्येष्ठप्रतिशा इन्तीति । दिशस्यापि [दूपणस्य ] प्रतिषेधानाय दोषः॥ [11] अन्ये पुनराधः उनः शन्यहेतुः यदि या संगृतितः अथया परमार्थतः म्यतः परतध हेतुरसिद्धः । इति। उभयपक्षसाधारणाभ्युपगतः उत्सएविशेषणसामान्यलक्षणधर्मगुमेन हेतुरिति गेयापियोरभ्युपगतत्वात् भयता साधितं दूपणमसिद्धिदोपामास: न तारिवामिद्धिः । शेषिकाः साधयन्ति शब्दोऽनित्यः एतान्यादिति । शब्दनित्यत्ववादी तंदुरपदन हेत्व विकल्पयति कण्ठादिना एतः उत दण्यादिना रत इति । पय विफलिलता हत्यसिदिः॥ यथा पा साड्या पदन्ति धोत्रादीनि पक्ष यथा 81 Cl. Sam N. II, 17. sabbam afthits kho kaccayana ayam eko anto sabbam patthull ayam dutiyo anto, eto sriti, p. 270, 7 and Katyapsparivarta, p. 90. S 60: ssttt katyapa ayam ekondahl natfis ayamdestiyentahi(L.V. P ). CpMpti, P. 358, 10. 82. Il kşamaya adrifta 83 Or nurikalpikaprajlam. 84. le yads sameſtitai, pirato uldhah 1 yadı paramarthatah, trato anidhah 1 85. Candratirti refors to that our author intends to conyoy la this passage, At. ritr. P. 29-29. rtere the relerence is made in connection with the proposition (pratum ) It is also equally to be Applied to sadhsna and drrianta. ct.ps with noko 95 belore. 80. See Nayamathaad 9.

·52 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS सत्त्वानामिन्द्रियाणि न रूपारब्धानिश इन्द्रियत्यात् मनइन्द्रियवत् । चक्षुरादि. पञ्चेन्द्रियाणां रूपारम्भवादी तं दुष्ट वदति । इन्द्रियत्वादिति हेतुः यदि महाभूतस्वभावः उत सत्त्वादिस्यभार इति । एवं विकल्पितो हेतुः स्वतः परतश्च असिद्धः। तद्विविधमपि वचनमसिद्धिदोपाभासदोषो न तात्त्विका- सिद्धिरित्यतो न युज्यते। पपमिद [ मस्मद्ववन ] मपि ॥ अन्ये पुनराचार्याः प्राज्ञ मन्याः स्यपक्षस्नेहान्धीकृतप्रज्ञाचक्षुष्काः [1] सदुपदेशरलस्थवाद क्षुद्रधीरणयो महानिविशेषमविवेचयन्तः मृपाप्रकटितं- साध्यदृष्टान्तदोपा आहुः। मन्त्रीपधिवलाधिष्ठिताः पुष्पफलमृत्पिण्डादि- पदार्या विविधहस्त्यश्वशशादिरूपनिमित्तोपदर्शकाः स्वभानशून्या इति नास्मत्पक्षाभ्युपगतम् । तदा समदृष्टान्तविकलः [ तव पक्षः ], साध्याभावात् । अथ यदि मायाहस्त्यश्वादिनिमित्तानि [तद] न्यवास्तविकइस्त्यश्वादि- स्वभावयुकानि न भवन्ति इत्यतः शून्या उच्यन्त इति । चक्षुरादिकमपि तथा अन्यस्वभावरहित्वात् स्वभावशून्यं भवेत्। तदा पक्षदोषः, सिद्ध- साधनत्वात् । इति तद्दूपर्ण न युज्यते। मन्त्रीपधिवलाधिष्ठितान् पुष्पफल- मृत्पिण्डादिपदार्थान् प्रतीत्य समुत्पन्नानि हस्त्यश्वादिनिमित्तानि [ तात्त्विक ] इस्त्यादिस्वभावशून्यानि इप्टान्तत्वेन उभ्यन्त इत्यतः साध्यार्थः सिद्धः । अथ यदि पुनर्वदसि मायाक्तहस्त्यश्वादिवस्तूनि यद्यपि अन्यताविक- हस्त्यश्वादिस्वमायानि न भवन्ति, तथापि न यकज्यं तत्स्वभावशन्यत्वात एतत्स्वभावोऽपि शून्य इति। [ये ] तलक्षणाफारा दृश्यन्ते [] तथाविधपदार्थस्वभावाः फर्य न भवन्ति ।, यथा भवताभ्युपगताः पुष्प- फलादिपदार्थाः। तथा चेत् मायानिमित [12-1 हस्त्यश्यादिवस्तूनि 83.astance Parwar suggests. apratyarupa. 88. Dirty reeds 89. This part of objection is toade cleair in the next section, 90. Ators convenient expression : Vevallakranakarah etc.

·3 KARATALARATNA OF BHAVIA तात्त्विकतयाभूतहस्त्यभ्यादिस्यमानि स्युः। फिन्तु न तात्त्विकानि इत्यतः मर्याणि मायाकृतहस्त्यश्वपश्यादिवस्तूनि स्वभावशून्यानीति ज्ञायते । तस्माद्यथायद्ययोक्ता दृष्टान्तेन साध्यायः सिध्यति। नापि सिद्धसाधनदोषः । चक्षुरादिसंस्कृतानां स्वभावशून्यत्वेन शून्यत्वस्थापनात् ॥ अन्ये पुनः फेचित् शून्यान्तरमतयो दृष्टान्तदोष' प्रत्यवस्थापयन्ति । यद्यपि मायापुरुषा न तात्त्विकपुरुषा इत्यतः शून्या उच्यन्ते। तथापि ते मायापुरुष न स्वभावशून्या अभूतप्रतिभासिपुगपलक्षणरूपेण सत्त्वात् । भनया युन्या साध्यपदाथासिद्धिः, दृष्टान्तासिद्धः इति। इदानीं ते प्रष्टव्याः किमिमानि अभूतप्रतिभासिमायापुरुषलक्षणरूपाणि प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नानि उत ने ति। ते प्रतिवदेयुः प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नानीति। तथा चेत्कस्मात् पुनर- भूतानि नाम । यतो यया प्रतिभासोनिन तथा सन्ति । न चास्ति ननु चक्षुरा. दियमपि प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्न, यथा प्रतिभासि न तथास्ति चेति । [ए] समदृष्टान्तस्य सिद्धत्यात् स्वभावशून्य [12b ] ता सिध्यतीति भयतास्थयम् ॥ ते पदन्ति नास्थेय [मिद] म् । यतो मायापुरुषा न तास्विकपुरुषवत्संभा- पनीया: । तान् तात्विकपुरुपानपश्य इसे अभूता इत्यतः शून्या उच्यन्ते । न भयतां सिद्ध पूर्वोक्तचक्षरादिसंस्थतान् विहाय अन्ये चक्षरादिसंस्हताः सन्ति इति यान् सम्यक् संभायनीयान् अपेक्ष्य इमे च दिसंस्टताः . 91. easlubhuta, tastutah or gathavat ththiytu. 93. - 1-kung-kur.che Or esparila Poussin gives Istao for lung and syg that artsico-ridagdha (.-5,1140-dagdha, , translation ot Tib, word); and giving a variant kung for tsiao, he suggests to correct into hoet, intelligence. But our text bas kung hu both together making the saggestion loadmisible, 93. I follow bors the Cbinese ponctuation. Poussin has done differently. 94. Littin-ri ·VISVA BHARATI ANNALS 34 स्वभावशून्या इति यवनमास्योयेत इति । यद्यपि उकानिमान चक्षुरादौर विहाय अन्ये चक्षुरादयो न सन्ति । तथापि ईदृशस्वभावशून्यत्वप्रतीत्यसमुत्पादयो साध्यसाधनमायो सिद्धौ । केवरमनेनोदाहरणेन उदाहार्यार्थ प्रदर्शयितु- मलम् । यदि दृान्तधर्मान्तर विकल्पयसि तदा विपरपसमजाति दोप सिध्यति [य] प्रतिवादिन स्वप्रमालाघय प्रदर्शयेत्। यथा वैशेषिक आह शब्द अनित्य कृतकत्वात् घटादिवत् इति। [ तत्र ] घटादि मृत्पिण्ड- चप्रादिना निष्पादित पक्य उमलभ्यते मुसल नाश्योऽनित्यश्च । शब्दस्तु म तथा, नानित्य इति वचनं न दूषण स्यात् । [एव ] मल्यापि दृप्रान्त धर्मान्तरविफल्पत्यात् विकल्पसमजातिदोष सिध्येत् । अत [13] भास्थेय चक्षुरादय स्वभावशून्या इति । स्वभावशून्यताया प्रतीत्यसमुत्पाद हेत्यव्यभिचारात् । यथा दण्लक्षण प्रतिषिद्धपूर्वस्वभावम् , तथा इदमपि स्यात्। तस्मात् भवता पवन न स्वपक्षदोपोपालम्भान्नियतितुमलम् ॥ सावा एव दूपयन्ति । अस्मामि स्थाप्यते महदादिपरिणामा व्यक्ता [अत ] प्रतात्यसमुत्पन्नत्यहेतोरसिद्धि । सर्वस्यापि सवरूपत्वात् इन्द्रियाणा सर्वायतनव्यापित्यात् तस्मिन् मायापुरुपेऽपि एतद्र पमस्तीति स्वभावशून्यमिदमिति स्थापनस्य नास्ति साधर्म्यदृष्टान्त । इति ॥ रुपबुद्धिरादाय परोक्ष्यते। तथाहि रूपबुद्धय न प्रत्ययाभिव्यक्ता तदन्य प्रत्ययाननुसत्य विकृतत्वात् । यथा भृत्पिण्डदण्डचक्रकुलालमनइच्छा अत्र 95 N Satra V 14 N Kosa p 630 It is now clear that in getting forth any proposit on no particolars should be taken into account of the sadhya sadhana and dystanta This is witat is meant by utsrstausdesana stated previously see p 51 above with note 85 Nyayamakha gives the same example for the gati see ad 39 96 Amilar objection viz real ty of this example 18 raised in the Abb Alaka p 385 from the pies point of Vijana vAda Op Pram Artika III 162 { where the Sãokbyes are said to plead for the fact that many exist in the form of one bhara-pradhana ·EARATALARATNA OF BHAVIA " यथा सत्यादिविभिन्न प्रत्ययाननुसृत्य घटफपालादयो महान्तोऽल्पा या भवन्ति । एवं [ये ] चक्षुरादिनानाप्रत्ययाः, ताननुसृत्य रूपबद्धयो नाना विक्रियन्ते । यतः चक्षुषस्तमःप्रकाशानुसृत्य बुद्धस्तक्ष्ण्यं मान्य या। नोलादिरूप- विषयविशेपाननुसृत्य [ 13 bनीलायामासबुद्धिः स्पष्ट विक्रियतेगा इश्यते हि लोके पदमिमिव्यक्ता:93 पदार्थाः न तत्प्रत्यय विशेषविस्ताः । विविधाः कङ्कयाकुण्डलादिपदार्थाः प्रदीपोषधिरतसूर्याचभिव्यक्ताः । तथा रूपबुद्धिः । यथा रूपशुद्धिः परीक्षिता। तथा चक्षुरादिरपि। भयमर्थ सिद्ध इति वस्तुतो लोफसाधारणं ज्ञायते । अतः उक्ततोना. सिद्धिदोषः । किश भवता उक्त सर्व सर्वरूपामत्यादि । फिमाभव्यक्तिगृत्या किंवा तिरोहितवृत्त्या । यद्यमिव्यक्तिवृत्त्या सर्व सर्वस्वरूपं गृहीप्यसि । यथा घटप्रदेशे घटामिव्यक्तिवृत्तिरस्ति । तथा कपालप्रदेशेऽपि एतद्धटामि- व्यक्तिवृत्तिः स्यात् । विभुस्यरूपत्वात्। योऽयमुक्तो घटः सोऽप्रमाणशत- सहस्त्रयोजनान्यपि व्याप्नुयात् । घटादिप्रदेशेऽपि फपालाघभिव्यकि- युगपत् स्यात् । न च घटाभिव्यकोस्तिरोहितत्वात् फपालाघभिव्यक्तिरपि तिरोहिता । महत्परिमाणत्वात् । महत्परिमाप [वा] तिरोहित- महत्परिमाणं परिणतं स्यात् । घटायभिव्यक्तः कपालाघभिव्यक्तितिरस्टत. त्वात् सर्वदेशकालयोर [ 14 a] नुपलम्मः स्यात् । तस्मादभिव्यकि- पत्त्या सचं सर्वात्मकमिति भवत्पक्षो न युज्यते । यदि तिरोहितवृत्त्या सच सर्वात्ममिति प्रहीप्यसि। एवं गृहोतं विस्तृतविचारेण100 परिशेयमिदं सत्यमसत्यं पेति। ग्रन्यपरिफ्लेशमयेन 10 न विस्तरशः परीक्ष्यते। 97 Ussen-harena To become modified perceptibly 98 Sorhmen. 99 Oh! "According to" 100 Lit. vicaram apekipa 101. Yen jang "Trouble of composition ·16 VISYA-BHARATI ANNALS भवत्पक्षेऽपि अभ्युपगम्यते मायापुरपाभिव्यक्तिप्रदेश तात्त्विकपुरपा- भिव्यक्तिशन्य इति । मया स्थापितदृष्टान्तस्य नासिद्धिदोपः। तस्मात्साध्या स्वभावशून्यता सिद्धा। भवान् साण्याचार्योऽपि नोत्सृष्टाश्रयः,102 नेन्द्रियाण्यपि सर्वायतन- व्यापीनि 1103 साधिष्ठानत्वहेतोः । यथा इन्द्रियमाश्रयाश्रितम्। तथा सत्त्वरजस्तमोमोहा भान्ति बुद्धिकारफत्वहेतो:101 इत्यादिना बहवो विविधज्ञापकहेतवः सविस्तरं वक्तव्याः । इन्द्रियाणां सईयतनव्यापित्य. भङ्गात् । मायापुरुषे नेन्द्रियरूपाणि [इति ] न साध्यशून्यता साधम्र्य- दृष्टान्ताभारश्च । तस्मादेवं भवान् यितथविकल्पं त्या पिशावपीडितचेष्टां105 फरोति। 10योगाचारा एपमाहुः। भवान साधयति तत्त्वतः संस्कृताः शून्याः प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नत्वादिति । [ 14 b] संस्कृतधर्माः प्रतीत्य- समुत्पन्नाः न स्वयंभाधाः, उत्पत्तिनिःस्वभाषा इति ते शून्याः साध्यन्ते इत्ययमः, तदा प्रसिध्यति योगावागणामर्थः न्यायसंघादीति। तथा चाह "येन हि शून्यं तदसद्भायात्, यथ शून्यं तत्सद्भावात् इति । एवं शन्यता शास्त्रा देवमनुष्याणां यथाभूतमुक्तम् । अस्योपदेशस्याशयः परिवारिपत- 103 102. Chu place, tou cha "to throw and transmit" Poussin oopneote this sentanoe along with the previong One Ny punctuation ie according to the Chinese Ope Yu $0 So 18 to be taken in the sense of place, adhışthana 104 Poussin interprets quite differently these sentences 103 Fang isng demon à la forme d'un petit en fant de couleur brune, aux yeux rouges et aux longues oreilles ( L V P.) 108 Lt yogalastracarya. 107 This is from Yogasattra, Wogibars, P 47.-Bays poussip.

·KARATALARATNA OF BHAVIA 17 गृहीतः परतन्यस्वभावो मूलतोऽ सन्, अतत्स्वभावत्वात् । ययामिधान 03 - ममिधेयस्यभावाभावात्, यथाभिधेयञ्चाभिधानस्वभावाभावात परतन्त्र. स्थमारे परिफरिपतगृहीतस्लमाः प्रतितोऽसन । येन शून्यं तत] मिथ्या. कल्पितं यस्तु तदसत्स्वभावः । यच शून्यं प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्न वस्तु तत्स- स्वभावः । यदीदमसत्, तदा नोच्छेदो निरोधो वा, कि केन 10 शून्यं भविष्यति। [यत् ] प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्न वस्तु तदेव परतन्त्रस्वभावं नाम । ततो रूपवेदनासंशादिस्वभावविशेषोपवारात्मिका प्रवृत्तिर्भवति ॥110 यदोद- 1118सत् , प्राप्तिधर्मीऽप्यसन् । [19][तदा ] नास्तिकः अकथ्यो भाति असंवास्यः [ साह्मचारिणाम् [। स्वयं दुर्गती पतति । परानपि पातयति । एवं परिकल्पितगृहीतस्वभावः शून्यः परतन्त्रम्बमापश्च सन् इति सिद्धि निपु न्याय्या । परतन्त्रस्वभानोऽप्यविद्यमानत्यात् शून्य. साध्यते । इति यद्ययं घचनार्थः, तदा ययोक्तदोपपाते पतितोऽसि भगवदुपदेशापवाददोपश्च साधितमानसि। इति ॥ तत्र अन्ययानमस्थानिको तोधियश्च सचनाकाक्षिभिः निर्मत्सरस्सह भूयमा निराद। क पुनर्वाद एकयानमस्थितराचार्यः। पादस्य प्राप्त फाल- -108 Astitva with regard to paratantra aspect and nastitva with regard to parikalptta aspect M writi p 2746 109 Lit kutra kim šunyam tcyeta 1 110 Ohsa-la-hsty = spacaratmtkar The phrase 18 suggested by Pouseup 111. Parsly identical with these PABBeges of Yogulastre (Wogibata p 46). तेषां प्राप्त्यधिष्टानस्य पस्तुमात्रस्याभावात सब प्रज्ञप्ति : सण सर्व न भवति ।... प्रशस्तित्वापवादाच प्रधाननास्तिको वेदितव्यः । स एघ नास्तिक सन् अक्थ्यो भवति, भसेवास्यो विज्ञान तमाशाचारिणम्... (ested by Pousan) 8 ·de VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS त्यादिदं किश्चित्समधायते। यथा सतत्यामृतावतारे विस्तरेण विकल्पि- तत्यानाधिकं विचार्यते। पवन विस्तारसंत्रस्तानामप्रीतिकरत्वात्।18 | संस्कृतधर्माः प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नाः न स्वयंभावा, उत्पत्तिनि स्वभावा इति ते शून्याः साध्यन्ते इति वचनस्यास्य फोऽर्थः। यदि वक्षुरादिसंस्कृताः परतन्त्रे अहेतुसमुत्पन्नानां सदा अनिरुद्धानां चक्षुरादिस्वभावानामत्यन्तम. सत्वात् शून्या उच्यन्ते इत्ययमर्थः । [15 bतदा सिद्धसाधनम् । सजातीयसांख्यधैशेषिकादिपक्षेप्यपि [तथा] अभ्युपगतत्वात। उच्यते तु चक्षुरादिरएतका स्वभावशून्यः शून्यत्वात् इति । वक्तव्यञ्चानुत्पत्ति नि स्वभावत. शून्य इति। न वक्तव्यमुत्पत्तिनि स्वमायत: ते शून्या इति । यदि तेपूत्पद्यमानेपु115 परमार्थत 116उत्पत्तिस्यभावोऽस्ति । कथमुच्यते उत्पत्तिनि स्वमाय इति । यदि नास्त्युत्पत्तिर्वस्तुतः । स्यैवाभावान - कन्या विज्ञनिमात्रता। तथा चेत्स्वप्रतिशाविरोधदोष । यदि परतन्त्रं स्वयमुत्पत्तिस्वभावशून्यमविधमानमित्यतः शून्यमुच्यते । तत्स्वरुप 112 This seems to be a treatise of this author, Bharya Poussin remarks the following : Cet ouvrage p'est pas sigbalé, semble t il dans Jes Catalogues Chinos . maslo Siddhantado Malyughosabasasara, II. 107b 1, attribue à Bhavye un dos ma siin po risa horel de find bdud risur hjug pa - Nadhymakahrdavarsitt tattramptavatara Je ne penge pas que ce sot un autre homde Tarkayrala ( Oordier, 300) qus lanteur du Siddbinta nomme par son nom, rfog ge hbar ba 113 Poussin has included this para in the section of Prirvapaksi? Folloting the Chiaese punctuation I have put it in the section of Siddhantın The Art antara to te conveyed ag 18 the previous pasange. vads caksuradisamakrtah I Poussim interprets otherwise 116 Lat uithatesu or prarytteşti 116 Lt BrabhEra utpathih-sabharalah utpattsh ·KARATALARATNA OP BHAVYA 19 तदा सिद्धसाधनदोपः। तथा परेभ्यः 11 प्रत्ययेभ्य उत्पन्नस्य [परतन्त्रस्य] वस्तुत मशून्यत्वात् न शून्यता नाम स्यात्। मम तुन तथा । कथं 118प्रलपसि योगाचाराणामर्थः 119सिध्यतीति । किञ्च यथोक्तम्। "येन हि शुन्यं तदसद्भावात्, यश शून्यं तत्सदायात्" इत्यादि । यदि हेतुप्रत्ययवलेनोत्पन्नाचक्षुरादयः सर्वलोकसाधारणं घस्तुसन्तः स्वीक्रियन्ते । प्याला बुद्धशानगोचराः स्युः । सांवृतं सस्वभावा- भासं प्रदृश्यमानं [16 a] परमार्थसत्यबुद्धज्ञानपर्येपणया मायापुरुष- पदत्यन्तमसत्स्वभावम्। तस्मादुक्तं "येन शून्यं तदसत्स्वभावात' इति शाश्वतान्तदोषपातप्रतिपेधाधम् । शाश्वतान्तदोपपरिहाराय तदसत्स्वभाव- पवनवत् उच्छेदान्तदोषपातपरिहारायापि धरनं तत्सद्भायात् इति। तथाहि हेतुप्रत्यययलोत्पन्नाचक्षुरादयः संवृतिसत्यपरिगृहीताः सस्वभावा न खपुष्प- घदत्यन्तासत्स्यभावपदार्थाः । तस्वतः परं तान् शून्यान् साधयामः । तस्मादुक्तं “यय शून्यं तत्सदायात्। इत्येवं स्वभावशून्यता शास्त्रा देवमनुष्याणां यथाभूतमुक्क" मिति। एतदर्थक परतन्त्रः सत्स्वभाव इति यदि यदसि तदा साधूक्त भवति । ईदुशखभायस्य मयापि स्योहतत्वात् । 121लोकानुवर्तनपचनसंगृहीतत्वात् पुण्यसानसंमादयस्य, संवृत्युपवारत - 117. Op. M. vrtti, p 444. Vijdana vide'pi kalptasvabhavasya Suryatram, aprattyasamutpannatval, lainırskadurcandradidarsanaval 118 Shu Shanghai ed reads me ohramyast, bich 18 adapted 1a Talebo ed. £$ Poussin keys. 119. This is the remark of Siddhantta against Parvapaksin, repeating the latter's own words expressed at the commandement of Purvapaksa , Bes p, 56, para 3 sbove. So there is no need of un. Decolgary assumption as done by Pousain 120. Chao-Buddha- Pratthruddha. 121. Cp. Lokduyartanagathis 18 Mad. Ayatera, my Skt. text, P.40, And M. Trti, P.648.

·60 VISVA-BHARATT ANNALS आश्रयस्य सत्त्वस्थापनात् प्राप्तिधर्मोऽपि सन् । तथा च "यदीदमसत्, प्रज्ञप्तिधर्मोऽप्यसन् तदा नास्तिकः अकथ्य" इत्येवमादिदोप. सर्यो न सिभ्यति। किञ्च यदि साधयसि परतन्त्रं [16 b] संवृत्या सत्स्वभावम्, सदा सिद्धसाधनम्। यदि तं परमार्थतः सत्स्वभावं साधयसि, साधर्म्य- दृष्टान्तहानिः। यथा ऐकान्तिकसत्स्वभावग्रहः प्रतिपिद्धः [ तथा । ऐका. न्तिकासत्स्वभावोऽपि प्रतिपेयितव्यः । तस्मात् नोत्कर्षापकर्षाभ्यामुक्त- 122 परतन्त्रस्थमावस्यापवादः स्यात। यदि वदसि अनभिलाप्यस्वभारानां मायादीनां समदृष्टान्तत्वाभावात् मम प्रतिज्ञा न साधयेत् [साध्यम् ] इति। अनमिलाप्यस्वभाव[ स्वे] युक्तपसिद्धया नास्ति दोषः । तथा चेत् तीथिकः परिगृहीतमनभिलाप्य- स्वभावमात्मादिकं कः प्रतिपेढुं शक्नुयात् । यतः तेऽपि बदन्ति सत्स्वभाव मात्माहि. न घुद्ध र्नापि घचसो गोचर12 इति । यदि प्रत्यययलोत्पन्नः सर्वः परतन्त्रस्यभावः परमार्थतः सत्स्यभार इति । 122 Poussin compares this with two passages, one from the Bodhienttrabbami, Wogibara, p 48. na bhutan aparadats radhilam larcti ma nyansharot na utksipalt na praksipatt 1 and the other from Nagaryana . Naraneyam atah lift ctt mikseptadyam na kolicana (Melanges Chinois et Buddliques, I, p 387, 994 ) This verse is also cited in the Buddhagotra of lasubandhu, see bis ad notes, p 145 The source of this verge 18 now found to be Abh Alanlāra of daitreya, V. 21, cited in the Aloka, P 499 123 This is a plain reference to the Adrastic doctrine of the soul of ineffable character It follows that the Yogacaras hold things magically created to be of ineffable nature (cp M Satralapkira. XI, 1630), which theory spresrs to be similar to the anirracariyakhyals theory of Advaiting Haribbadra says that the conception of sanyata bas been extended eren to the Nirvana, test it should incur & prade- Sikafanyta like that of the Tirtbikas , Abb Aloka, 144. Cf passages of Prazo paramitas cited in Bod panziba, p 379.

·KARATALARATNA OF BHAVYA 61 मायापुरुषस्तालिकपुरुषस्वमायः स्यात् । [स] अन्यस्वभार इति चेन् न च युज्यते । गवि गभस्वभावायोगात् । फूलकास्तकस्वभाषी सदायासदायो सस्वगायनिःस्वभानी चोभा युगपत्संगृह्ययाताम् । एवं [भवतः ] साध्य साधर्म्यष्टान्तविहीनं सिद्धसाधनं या इति दोपतयोपलि- सम् । अतो न युज्यते। किञ्च [17] प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नान् संस्कृतधर्मान् परमार्थतः सस्वभावान् यद्यभ्युपगच्छसि । कृतकत्वहेतुः तान् स्वभावशून्यान् प्रदर्शयन् तेषां सत्स्वभाव निराकरोति। अतः साध्यप्रतिशाविरोधोऽनुमान- दोपः। प्रतीत्यसमुत्पनाः संवृतितः सस्वभावाः सर्वसाधारणं शाता, यदि परमाधुसन्तः परिगृह्यन्ते। अनेन न्यायेन तत्प्रतिशाभङ्गः स्यात् । नेमं वाद ते परिगृहोयुः। परमार्थतो द्विविधस्यापि विकल्पस्यान्याय्यत्वात् । किञ्च यथाभिधानमभिधेयस्वभावाभावः ययामिधेयमभिधानस्वभावा- भाव इति यथोक्तम् , अत्र न विचिकित्सन्ते प्रतिवादिनः। अतः प्रतिषेध- यवनस्य सिद्धसाधनदोपः । यथोक्तत्वात्परतन्त्रस्यभाये परिकल्पित- गृहीतस्यभारः प्रतितोऽसन् इत्यत्रापि परवादिनो न विचिकित्सन्ते । अतः प्रतिपेधवचनस्यापि सिद्धसाधनदोपः। अभिधानाभिधेयपरिकल्पित- स्वभावग्रहयलात् संक्लेशा जायन्ते। अतः प्रतिपेध आवश्यक इति चेत तदपि न युक्तम् । न हि पशुपक्ष्यादयो जानन्त्यभिधानाभिधेयसंसर्गम् । विषयस्य योनिशोऽग्रहणमेव हि [17b] संक्लेशजननम् । सन्ति विविधा अतिमनोरमाः [न्यायाः ]। सन्ति च विविधानि सूक्ष्मा- ज्यार्यवचनानि । [तेषु] परिकल्पितस्वभावशून्यतोपदेशः अल्पांशेन हितकरः न सर्वशः। अतो न फेवलमहं तं शून्यं साधयामि। । किन्तु अतः । 194. - Ayontso manastira, cf. Pratity&samutpeda atra cited in M, Trti,P 452, 7.

·62 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS परतन्त्रमपि ।] इत्यलं प्रासनिकेन 125 प्रस्तं विचारयामः 1126 पचं यथोकन्यायेन साधितं चक्षु. स्वभावशून्य मिति ॥ अन्ये पुनराचार्या भावस्वभावप्रतिषेधस्यास्यैवं दूपणमापादयन्त माहुः । यदीदं [चक्षः ] घस्तुसत्, प्रतिज्ञाहानिः, हेतोरनेकान्तिकासिद्धिः। यद्य. वस्तुसत् निःस्वभावमेव, असिद्ध दूपणम्। इति । तदपि न युक्तम् । यथा भगवानाह । जानीहि सर्व ब्राह्मण यथोक्तं सत्यमसत्यमिति। अहं पदामि न सत्यं न मृषा इति। अनेन वचनेन उक्तवक्ष्यमाणयुक्तिभिश्च परमार्थतः सत्यमसत्यमिति न व्यवस्थितम् । अतो नैवं यथोकदोपः । [18] किन्च भवदाशयेन उकयुतिपतिपेध्याभावात् प्रतिषेधोऽपि नास्ति 13 न च प्रतिषेधेऽसति प्रतिषेध्यं पुनरस्ति । किन्तु प्रतिपेध्यस्य प्रतितो निःस्वभाव. त्यात् प्रतिषेधोऽपि नास्ति । प्रतिषेधः केवलं विचार्य शापयति19 प्रतिपेध्यं प्रतितो नि.मावमिति । न नाशयति प्रतिषेध्यस्य स्वभावम् । यथाह । न योधिसत्त्यः शून्यतया सर्वधर्मान् शून्यान्150 करोति । अपितु सर्वधर्माः प्रकृतितः स्वभावशून्याः। इति यायद्विस्तरः । The expression 125 Lit tiryagvada 126 Lat ricărayema prakrta (or gyu) radam 19 repeated in the second chap op f 7b, 1,7 ( Chin, text) 127. Ct. Psyrecchediks, 37. na satyam na mrsa, Ratna rall inar yrtti, p 359 • Dystafrutadyan munina na satyam na mpsoditam (LVP). 128 cr the line In Abh. Aloka, p.61 : Nisedhyabharatah spastam na medhyo'sts tattratahi(IL V. P.) Ct also Vig. ryavartint, G4. Ibid, vrtti ad65 130 Kasyapaparivarta, p.94, $63 nasanyataya sarradharman finyan karots, dharma era fanyak , cited in d. titti, p 248, (L V.P.), M. Avatara ad VI 34 Cp. PrsjMapārammta • Bodhisattra...eram pratyatekşate 1 na rupaftnyataya rapan anyam 1 rūpam era $unyam I cited in Bod. pajki, P 416,1 129 ·KARATALARAZNA OF THAYYA 63 फिञ्च यथा प्रकाशयित्रा प्रकाश्यानां प्रकाशने न पहुं युक्त प्रकाश्यानां घटपटादीनामभायात् प्रकाशयितापि नास्तीति। [ तथा ] न च पतं युवं पकाश्यपदार्याः प्रकृतितोऽसन्तः इदानीं सन्तीति 13 मम च साध्यं प्रतिषेधः प्रतिषेध्यं साधनं दूपण12 सविपर्यासमविपर्यासं सर्व संवृतिसत्। यदि साध्यं साधन प्रतिपेयसि, तदा स्वप्रतिशायाधः । इदं प्रतिपेधाचनमसाधनं युज्यते असत्स्यमावत्यात् यध्यापुत्रो- शरितशम्दवत् । [इति चेत् ] भानेवानुमान साधनमिति स्वीकरोति । ममापि तथा स्यात् संवृतिसत्त्वात । पूर्वोक्तरीत्या विपुलविवादा निराकृताः । विपुलस्तार्था दुर्ग्रहत्वात् भरसंत्रासकाः । [rB b} एवं पूर्वोक्तानुमानस्य न दूपणावरणानि सन्तीत्यतः प्रतिक्षा तत्त्वतश्चक्षुरायतनं स्वमायशून्यमिति न्यायसंसिद्धा। प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नत्वात इति साध्यहेतुः संक्षेपोपलक्षणम् । चक्षुरादीनां वक्तव्यस्थमावप्रतिषेधाय अन्येऽपि हेतवः सन्ति यदुत विनाशित्यात् अनुप्रत्ययं विभक्तत्वात् अभिनिवृत्त- त्यात् भाधे सति मृपाशानोत्यापकत्वात् इति। पभि तुमि यथायोग प्रतिपक्षमनुसृत्य निपुर्ण प्रतियेद्धव्यम् । अन्यः कश्चिदाह। चक्षुः वस्तुतः सस्वभावम्, तल्लक्षणहेतुफलानां हएत्वात् न स्यमावशून्यम् । { यत् ] प्रत्यक्षलक्षणादिक, [वत् ] प्रत्यक्ष गएम्। चक्षुरादीनां लक्षणादीनि च प्रत्यक्ष सन्ति। तस्मात् चक्षुरादीनि न स्थमावशून्यानि । इति। भस्य परमार्थतः समदृष्टान्ताभावात् सस्समाय- [ता] 188न सिध्यति। यदि सांवृतज्ञानत सत्स्वभावम्, तदा सिद्ध- 131 Cp. Udyotakara's remarks. na kyayam walljakasya dharmo vad vyangyam vastu karyat I apu anyato bhalfan hefur vanakts I na ha pradipo' santam artham garnyitva prakalayatt 1 N. Varthka,P 619 132 Or khapeans. 193 Similar objection and anster have already been made on p.48, pareg ·64 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS १ साधनम्। समदृष्टान्ते हेतुसिद्धि विरद्धा। समदृष्टान्तस्य संवृतिमात्र- स्वभावत्वात् । यथा तत्त्वतश्चक्षुरायतनं स्वमानशून्यम् , तथा श्रापमाणजिहाकायमनो. रूपशब्दगन्धरस [19] स्पर्शायतनधर्मायतनानि च स्वभावशून्यानि । इत्येवं योगाचारी स्वभारशून्यतां प्रविशेत् 1184 सामान्यविशेषाभ्यां तत्त्वतः सिद्धानि स्कन्धधातुप्रतीत्यसमुत्पादस्मृत्युपस्थानसम्यक्पहाणऋद्धिपाद- इन्द्रिययलयोध्यङ्गपारमितासर समाधिधारणोमुखसयमतिसंविदशयलपैशार- द्यावेणिकधर्मादीनि सर्वज्ञानानि195 व स्थमावशून्यानि इत्येचं योगी स्वभावशून्यतां प्रविशेत् । तोथिकपरिकल्पिताः महदहङ्कारतन्मात्रेन्द्रियमहाभूत16 द्रव्यगुण- फर्मादयः संस्कृतपदार्थाः सर्वेऽपि द्वादशायतनान्तर्गताः, तलक्षणत्वात् । इत्येवं योगी स्वभावशन्यतां प्रविशेत् ॥ एवं [ योगो] चिन्तायलात्137 स्वभावशून्यतां प्रविष्टोऽपि भावना- घलविकल:1891 यथा पक्षिणः जन्मारम्भे पक्षं प्रयोक्तुमसमर्थाः इत्यत पुनस्त्वरितं प्रयोगयलमभ्यस्यन्ति189 । यथा या तैमिरिफः तिमिरनि- 131. TVL-94 prateća Poussin has rendered it "pénétrer comprendre" (arakram, pratiskand) 195 Of Bod paniks, p 979 : (Bhagaratyam uktam)... sa cet miroanadars kaścid dharmo erfasfatarah syat, tam api aham mayopamam srapnopaman radams with pote thereon 196 Ken shsh-Indriya, dravya Poussin is wrong in taking these terms for malabhata and tattro respectively 137. Second aspect of the Prajīt, cintamayı effected by pushtrntdhyanti (-anumana), Sthiramsti, Trimbikabhasya, p 26 18B Third sepect, bharanamayı effected by samadhi, Ibid. Forsgia refers to the Kosa VI,145 189 Or bhatanabalam abhyasyatt ( vogl] ·KARATALARATNA OP DHAVYA 61 राकारि भैषज्यास् प्रतिपक्षात् लम्धवक्षुःप्रसादः महास्यूलफेशमशकादोन-110 पोहा [19b विषयान् सम्पर पश्यति। तथा त्यरितं भावनापलाभ्यासात संरतनिमित्तप्रहमलविचित्सामिथ्याशानानि निराकरोति । तत्त्वयोगी1 अमिमुण्यारम्भे12 अपरप्रत्यये परमप्रोतिमुखं घेदयमानः समंस्तनिमित्तग्रहविरहात् सर्वदेयदायकप्रतिग्राहकप्रहविरहात् सर्व- दायकमतिप्राहकदानफलमहापरहाय विविधप्रिमण्डलपरिशुद्धः सप्रमाण- विविधपुण्यशानसंभार! भारसंग्रह समारभते। सादृष्टफलानध्यवसितः दृश्ययस्तु भाविफलानभिरतः ज्यान इशान गुणिनो नानादेवांध निपेत्रमाण: गुणःकर्ता, मारमा फर्ता महेश्वरः परमाणुः स्वभावादि [ फर्ता] इति मिथ्याग्रहरहितः सदा अभ्यस्यति महास्यागम् । शादि यस्तु सम् उक्तरक्ष्यमाणयुकिमिः साक्षात्करोति सर्वसंस्कृतासंस्थतखण्यखण्डन- भर्माणां स्वमायन्यत्यात् । , 140 Lit kala madaka patanga, cl. A vytti o 850, 8; larmırskopalabdhakešamalakad: 141, Or Tattvayapacaron 143 Tho olxth stage of the ten bhamit to which the whole 6th Ohap of Madh Avatars has been devoted 143. Biddhi, 626,629 Abh Aloka, p 198, Pranan 100000, p 92: anupalambhayogena danasya, davakasya pratigrahakasya ca trimanlalaparisuddhya danaparamita pariptirita bharatt, Lalita, p 217 ( Bib, Ind ), Bikpies mreca 183 Bodbheeryavatirap 45 With regard to second tried, I 13 pot found as such in any text but it might bo nonnt by adı in this passage dalydoyapratigrahakadtritayanuvalam. bhena Bod Papuik, P 146 (EVP) Op Satralankara ad XIII, 29 : pratspattuk pralspatiaoyasya pratipattesca apakalpana frim. andalaparsinddhar redataryal 144 Dåpa, fila end kpdati constitute punyasambhara and dhana etc JADA. which are barseteriged saugalapadasuhanopavab #la, Bod Padjik, pp 344-5 and 343 ·66 VISVA-BHARATT ANNALS - यथाह भगवान् । न भवितव्यं योधिसत्त्वेन दानप्रतिपत्ती सुप्रतिष्ठितेन अत्यन्ताभावप्रतिष्ठितेन दानं दातव्यम्। [ 201] इति यावद्विस्तरः। फिञ्च भगवानाह। [येषां ] योधिसत्त्वानां सत्त्वसंज्ञा प्रपतते न [ते ] तात्त्विक. योधिसत्त्वव्यपेदश्या.। इति। आह च भगवान् । यत्किञ्चनभावधर्म- विगत:146 बोधिसत्त्वयानप्रस्थानकुशलो नाम । योधिसत्त्वा. पुनर्न परिनिर्वाणाफाक्षया ब्रह्मवयं चरन्ति। परं प्रीताः खलु47 धातुके संसारे। इति। एवं सर्व संस्कृताः स्वभावशून्या इति सम्यक भावनां भावयित्या पुनः सम्यक् भारयेत् यत्या नास्ति स्वभावः तस्य नास्त्युत्पादः। यस्य नास्त्युत्पादः तन्नातीतानागतप्रत्युत्पन्नम् त्रिपध्वसु अप्रतिघम् इति । {पये ] श्यध्वविशुद्धलक्षणं119 .सम्यक् भावयित्या, पूर्वोकाविपरीतयुक्तया- ध्येण त्रिमण्डलपरिशुद्धो महाबोधिमभिगच्छति । यथा पृच्छति । फर्य मञ्जुश्रीः योधिसत्त्वो महायोधिमभिगच्छति। उत्तरमाह । यथाम्राह्मण योधि: स्यात् । पुनराह । कथं नाम योधिर्भवति । उत्तरमाह । इयं ब्राह्मण मातीता नानागता यावत्मत्युत्पन्ना। इति । तस्मात् योधिसत्त्वः त्र्यध्व- विशुद्धलक्षण'भापयित्वा त्रिमण्डलपरिशुद्धो महायोधिमभिगच्छेत् ।। [20] महायानफरतलरले अपमखण्डः ॥ 145 Vajracobediks na vastupratt sthitena danam dataryam (LV P) Op M Satraleak&ra, extract in the zote 143 abore 146 Well pointed out in Prajiapăramits cited 12 Bod People DP 427-423, Myrtti p 289 3 and Samadhiraja Satra Ibid 11 5 14 117 Op Satrālapkere, XVII, 49 148 Tuus 18 an abridged statement of Kabyapa parirarte, $ 102, p 149 Op Ratnacada cited in the Sik Sam p 234, 1, 16.17 149 Lit trin adhrano vsluddhalaksanan or nsmattan 160 Bodhi is given as sitolls in this line yatha bodhsa tatha kyesa tanta fuddha prabhi stara I Bod Pappis p 522, op. Ash Alors p430 ·महायानकरतलरत्नम् [असंस्कृतपरीक्षा] एवमुक्त योगी सामान्यतः संस्थतान् स्यमावशून्यान प्रविशेत् इति । न तु असंस्कृतान् स्वमायशन्यान् प्रविशेदिति। अप्रदशिते प्रवेशो न संभवेत। अप्रवेशे निविकल्पप्रज्ञाप्रवेशो नेय सिध्येत् । प्रदर्शनार्थ पुनराह । असंस्कृतास्त्वसद्ध ता अनुत्पादाः खपुष्पवत् ।। भत्र प्रतिज्ञापचनव्यवच्छेदक पूर्वोकं तस्यत इत्येव । व्यवच्छेदावश्यफता- तात्पर्य च यथापूर्व झयम् । तत्त्वतः असंस्स्ताः शून्याः साध्यन्ते, न संवृतितः । न संस्थता असंस्कृताः, संस्कृतविपरीता असंस्कृतपदार्थाः। त पवाफाश प्रतिसंख्यानिरोधोऽमतिसंख्यानिरोधस्तथता । यदुत निराकृतपूर्वधर्मा- यतनेफदेशः। आकाशस्य स्यभायशून्यताप्रवेशः पूर्व प्रदश्यते । [1 b ] प्रदर्शनस्य सुकर- स्यात् ,सप्रतिघदव्यामावमानस्याकाशनाम्ना लोकसाधारणं स्थापितत्याच । एतदयशिष्टासंस्कृतस्वभावशून्यताप्रवेशस्य द्वारं भवेत् । लोकशातः माकाशस्तत्त्वतः शून्यः असत्स्यमाय इतोयं प्रतिक्षा । एतत्साध्य तत्त्वत 1. Lt. yads apradarshtam, 30-purkarisha 2. Cp. Note 33 below. The theory of Sazy atividing on Akafa. Pouggin's Document d' Abhidharma, BEFO, 1930, p. 274, 2. & 4. Note albo Yagomitra's remark: stamatan tu sapralighadradyabhavanairam akalam ttyabhsprayo lakhyatel, 28. 3. Lit, anena.

·VISYA-BHARATI ANNALS 68 असद्भुत आकाश इति । पक्षद्वयाभ्युपगतः अनुत्पादात्, प्रज्ञप्ति सिद्धानुत्पाद धर्मत्वाद्वा इति हेतुः। खपुष्पमसद्भुतमनुत्पन्नति समद्गुष्टान्तः सिद्धः । विपक्षे प्रतिपेधाय चैधर्म्यदृष्टान्तः स्थाप्यते इत्यतो नोच्यते इति यथा- पूर्व क्षयम् । फयमत्रानुमानं व्यवस्थाप्यते । तथाहि आफाशस्तत्वतोऽसद्भुतः, अनुत्पादात् । । ये ] अनुत्पन्ना [स्ते सर्वेऽपि ] असत्स्यभावाः खपुष्परत् इति मूढा विद्वांसश्च समं जानन्ति । अनुत्पादादित्यय साध्यहेतुरुपलक्षणम् । अन्येऽपि हेतव सन्ति अकृतकत्वात् अारित्रत्वात् अनिरुद्धविनाशित्वात् इति। पवमादयो हेतवः असंस्कृतस्वभावं व्यवह्रियमाणं प्रतिपेयन्ति । तस्माद्यथायोग हेतुत्वेन लभ्यन्ते। यथा [ 2 2 ] फापेभ्यो दधि रक्ष्यता. मिति पचनं रक्षणीयस्य [दनः ] भनुपघातत्यात तजातीययिष्ठाल- भूपिकादोनपि प्रतिपिध्यात् । पैभापिकाः सर्वे इटं दूषयन्ति। असंस्कृतोऽसत्स्वभावोऽभावपदार्थ इति यदि प्रतिज्ञा साध्या। तदा आकाशायतनसमापत्तिनिरालम्पना' सतो फथमस्तीति लभ्येत । तथा "आफाशमनावृति "3 इति तु लक्षणमस्ति । इति । पद्ययमनुमानप्रयोग' आकाशायतनसमापत्ति पस्त्ययलम्यना द्रष्यसहि- 4 POD$10 wrongly construes this phrase along with Akasa H Sadhya 18 admitted by both parties, thero is nothing to be proved Such proriog will incur Siddhagadhanadosa 5 Lueh cha ming-hsiang. (Lit Sanksipya namalaksana addhatana) The game expression is used in the first chap in the same context. . p63. para 3, above 8 The is the well-known example for upalakara given in the bastalo literature Chinese will read literally thus bharata kara Inthamdam dadhi raksyatam kako ma upasarpate its 1 7. The first of the trupyas, o Kosa rill, 149, 209.213 (LV.P.) 8 Kola, Tıb I. Ed Tatra akasam anatytth.

·KARATALARATNA OF BHAVIA पया या। एतत्समापत्तित्वात. एतत्समापत्त गलम्पनविषयत्वाखा, यथान्या: समापत्तयः, यथा या तदालम्पनम् इति । अन्याः समापत्तयः तदालम्बन संस्स्तत्वात् स्वभावशून्या विचारिता एच, तदा समदृष्टान्तविरहः । भयं परमार्थत आकाशलक्षणविचारः। यदि संवृत्यापि साध्यम् माफाश- मसमृतम्, अनुत्पादात खपुष्पवत् इति। अनेनानुमानेन तवयस्थापितः- सदापो न सिध्यति । अनेन च मदुक्तहेतुना भवदुक्तः समापराम्पनाविषय. त्यादिति हेतुः धिरुद्धाव्यमिवारि [ 2 b] दुष्टः। तस्मान्मया पूर्व साधि- तोऽय:सिद्धः। याकामावात् । स्यपरनिकायिनं इदमाहुः। यदि तत्त्यत आकाशमसद्भूतमनुत्पादात् अनेन घचनेन उत्पन्न सर्व सद्भूतम् इत्यर्यादापद्यते।।. यदि ' वदसि उत्पन्नमप्यसद्भूतमिति। तदाय हेतु ने सर्वसपक्षव्यापोति हेतुत्यां- सिद्धिः। इति ॥ अयमापत्तिसमजातिदोपो [नाम ] असिद्धिदोषा- भासः। अनुत्पन्नानि सर्वाणि अस तानि इतोदं निर्धारितम्, न तु निर्धारितम् असद्भूतानि सर्वाणि अनुत्पन्नानोति । प्रयत्नानन्तरीयतत्य सर्वसपक्षाव्याप्यपि हेतुः स्वोकियते । तस्मादययदोपः ॥ अन्यः कश्चिद, पयति । आकाशं सरयमावम् , लोयसाधारणं शातत्यात् । इति। 9. -Vaibhasika 10 Marthapalis : chun 11. It does not exist in the vidyut, lightning, whrob is sapaksa to the pohghayaBimilarly composite thing is non substancer yet it is originated through causes and conditions 12 Some philosophers like Sabaragyimin apd Koparıla, sto who hold the realistic view of the Universe, F. Sebarabudaya I, (airalazbada yada )and Kumarıla's Tantra vārtika, al satyadhikarana , Udyotakare, Ny&yayartika, p 340 .

·70 VISVA-BHARAT ANNALS पुष्पमंपि सस्वभावम् उत्पलादेलोके। प्रत्यक्षत्वात्। आकाशं पुष्पश्चोभे असंयुक्तेऽपि न निःस्वभावे। अतः वपुष्पदृष्टान्तेन न साध्यं सिध्यति । इति। इदं दूपर्ण न युज्यते। अयं वपुष्पदृष्टान्तः पष्ठीतत्पुरुषाश्रयेण व्याख्यायते [5] खस्य पुष्प खपुष्पमिति। तस्यासत्त्वात् न दृष्टान्तस्या- भावः ॥ अनया युक्तया योगी आकाशस्यमावशून्यतामयतरेत्। [ तथा] प्रतिसंख्यानिरोधादिविविधासंस्कृताना स्वभावशून्यतानयोऽव्ययतार्यः ।। भाषिकाः प्रतिसंख्या निरोधासंस्कृतस्य [शून्यता] मक्षममाणा इदं दूपर्ण पुनः फुर्वन्ति । भगवानवोचत् । अस्ति प्रतिसंख्यानिरोधः संस्कृतप्रतिपक्षः। भतो निस्सरणं नाम। यद्यपदसि नास्तीति। तदा भवतां समयविरोधः। किश्च भगवतीकम्। नन्दिराग तृष्णाया: क्षयो निरोधः शान्तं प्रणीत निर्वाणं नाम | इति। फर्थ पर्दास नास्तीति ॥ तत्र भगवता संस्कृतविषये पिनेयानामुद गभावनांप्रयायत असंस्कृतविषये प्रीतिमनुकूलयितु च संवृतित उक्तम् । अस्ति प्रतिसंख्या- निरोधो निस्सरण शान्तं प्रणीतं निर्वाणमिति । यथा भगवानाह सन्ति निर्मितसत्वा18 इति। तथैवाह अस्स्यसंस्कृतं निर्वाणमिति। [एवं ] तदस्तित्वस्वाकारात् न प्रतिज्ञाविरोधदोषः। तत्वतस्तु मतिसंख्यानिरोधः प्रतिषिध्यते। अतो भगवानाह । [3b] [ये ] सत्त्वा निर्वाण भावतः पर्यषन्ते [ तान् ] अहं पदामि मोहपुरुपान् । । 19. Wepo.lo. 14. Taigbo od. reads : vedana ( L V. P. ). So also reada Shanghai 6. 18. -Wei-(-miso).Cp. f. oreti, p. 525 : swarandirigasaha. yantayatramaiyadruyal, etc, Nal, I, (64) p. 436, 3. 16. Or nirveda, 17. -visamyoga of Kosa, I. 18. Kobs, IX, 258 ( L.V. P.).

·KARATALARATNA OF BHAVYA 71 . तोथिकपुत्रान्19 इति । पेयालम्। किशाह। संसार तथागत न निर्वाण- पर्यवसन्नं पश्येत् । निर्वाणयवनं प्रशप्त्या स्थापितम्। तत्रात्यन्तं नास्ति निर्वाणस्यमावः इति। पेयालम् । नाप्यार्यसत्यापवाददोषः। सुखदुःख- योरत्यन्तानुत्पादन निःसरणं निर्वाण शान्तं प्रणीतमपिपरीतमिति संवृतित उक्तत्वात् । न तु परमार्थतो ययन सुखदुःसपोरत्यन्तानुत्पादन प्रतिशान्तं निरुद्धं निरोधसत्यं नाम इति । अनेनागमेन उक्तयुक्त्या च नास्ति परमार्थतः प्रतिसंग्यानिरोधः इति वचनस्य नास्त्ययं दोप 22 ॥ अन्येऽसन्नैयायिका एवं दूषयन्ति । असंस्कृतास्त्वसभृता इति साध्य- प्रतिज्ञा। असंस्मृतं असदिति साध्यासिद्धिः, आश्रयासिद्धिः, सपुष्पस्या- सत्त्वात् [दृष्टान्त ] धर्म्यसिद्धिश्च । इति साम्यहेतुदृष्टान्ताः सर्वेऽपि दुष्टाः। इति । इदं दूपणं ने युक्तम्। संज्ञाप्राप्तवलेन सप्रतिघदव्या- भावमात्र 23 29 [42] माफाशं स्थापयामः । अश्या प्रतिसंख्यया उत्पन्नयलेशा- भायमान प्रतिसंख्या निरोध साधयामः । सर्वप्रत्ययवैकल्येन उत्पत्ति. धर्माणामभायमात्रमप्रतिसंख्यानिरोधम् । सर्वग्रहामायमात्र तथताम् । संशाप्रशसियलेन भाकाशादयः संवृतिसिद्धाः सन्ति इत्यभ्युपगमात् ॥ 19 Cl. Satra cited to AI. Yrtti, 841 Tad me bhagavan mohapurusa { yo ) szakhyale dharmnulnaye pragrajya tirths kadrslau nipatlah nıy. tanam bhavatah parveçantel fad yatha tlebhyah tarlam kątrat sarpth 1 atrantaparinirvytesu sarvadharmoya ye nirvanam margants dham abhimankan tirthikar ets radame 1 20 Toossip "Le Tathigats de voit pas le Sameira et la Nirvapa." 21. Shen-thrao -Aryaissans-agams Sabaya virodha 23. Cr. Noteesbove 24 POGBBin soggests with query : sarvopaiathyandstitva 25 Chia-ls : Or arpacarıka. 26 My pudotustion is according to the Chinese text Potsgip connects this sentence with the following one ·VISVA-BHARATT ANNALS अप्रकाशितविशेष साधारणाभ्युपगमयलेन सामान्यतः सिद्धो धर्मों। विशेषप्रतिषेधः साधारणाप्रतीत प्रतिज्ञाधर्म.71 अनुत्पादादयः साधारणं प्रतोताः पक्षधर्मा.1 तस्मानास्ति प्रतिशाहेतुदोष । उक्त खपुष्पं असदपि अनुत्पादादिधर्मको धमों। निःस्वभावत्यात् । अनेन साध्यसाधनमारः सिध्यति। अतो नास्ति धर्यसिद्धिदोपः ।। वैभाषिकाः पुनरेवं पदन्ति। इदमप्ययुक्तम् । प्रतिसंख्यानिरोधः वस्तुसन्23 मार्गालम्बनत्वेन क्लेशपिरोधित्यात्। नावस्तुधर्मा एतदतिः स्यात् । इति। मायमारवन मिदं, विपक्षप्रतिरोधात् [40] आकाशस्य सत्स्वमायहेतु प्रतिपेधात् पूर्वमेव खण्डितमिति न युक्ततरें प्राहाम् ॥ सौत्रान्तिका लपं माफाशादयोऽसत्स्वभाना इति स्थापने इद वदन्ति । ईदृशानुमानं सिद्धसाधनदुएम् । सप्रतिघरूपाधमावस्वभावात्मका इति यदि पवनम्।। न सिद्धसाधनम् । तदभावस्य विवादात्म इति । असंस्थता असद्भूता इति [ मम] प्रतिज्ञायचनमिदं सत्स्यमाघमहं सन्निराफरोति असत्स्यमावग्रहमपि निराकृत्यापपदति। 27. -Sadhyadharma,lit pakadharma 29 Or dratyasar Op Kola, V, 8a 1 (L V. P) 29 In criticising the prayona ot Akasa being reality, lack of Samadretanta was pointed out (op 69 para 1 Abavo ), bat here in criticising the reality of pralisankh merodha lack of upakya has been revealed when probandum 18 sad ripaksa will be asad, viz nirmitido which has a specific lanction erea though it is asdd 30 Ku which I have taken in the sense of hetu 31 This clearly shows that thero are some minor divisions amongst the Seutrintikag Pausia refers their opinions to Kota, 1.279 39 Lit racanarthab 39 Pen to argue', "quarrelbout".

·KARATALARATNA OF DHAVYA 73 ताम्रशाटीयाः पुनरेवं पदन्ति । छिद्ररूपमाकाशमुच्यते । तदस्ति संस्थतम् मतो मरतोऽसंस्कृतनिराफरणं सिद्धसाधनदुएम् । इति । संस्कृत- स्थमावस्य यथापूर्व निरामतत्वात् न युतम् ।। घासीपुत्रीया धैभाषिक सह यहुषु वादेपु समानाः त इव निराफरणीया योगाचारा इदं चदन्ति । परमार्थे न पुनः परमार्थोऽस्ति । तयतैय [*] धर्माणां परमार्थ इत्यतः परमार्थतस्तथता मान्यमिति पचनं न्याय्यम् । नतु पुनस्तथता न सत्स्यगाय इति । फयं लोकोचरनिर्षिफल्पशाने सत्पृष्ठलब्धविशुद्धलौकिकानशासंस्कृतविषयालम्वनं युज्येत । इति । ने घस्तुतो न्याय्यम्। यथोच्यते इदं शानमसंस्कृतविषयालम्बनं न युज्यत इति । तथा इदं शान संस्तविषयालम्यनमपि न युज्यते । न तथता दन्यसती इति प्रदो युक्तः। अस्या यस्तुसत्तायाः दुस्साधनत्वात् । तथता- 84 Seo Kose,I,49. (V.P.) 35 Lt graha, or grahya Oi Kobovyakhye, I, 5: Neruana ia only so asamskyta for Vatsipatrlyas 36 Ponggia remarks • "Dans une btolie, il n'y a pas une second 6toffe". Le sens parait btre "on peut dire que le Paramartha (Tathato ) est vido, parce qu'il n'y a pas ube Tathats de la Tathats". Lob Yogaciras expliquent tout aftrement la vacuité du Parını panda (ou Talhati ), Siddhi, 643, Yogasatra, T6, P. 710,3. 37. On the twojkaras and thor objects, Bidabi, 583-600, Dhar. mapbla on Centurisa, 247, 1, 18,248, 8.8.(LV.P.). 18. Bhepghai ed. and probably Taisho od. also read : shsh, -laukrkafortan-dam. 10 ·74 VISTA-BHARATI ANNALS लम्बनं ज्ञान न तत्त्वतो.लोकोत्तरनिर्विकल्पज्ञान, सालम्बनत्वेन संस्कृत- त्वात् । एतदालम्बनशानवत् । तस्मात् सूत्रमाह। कि मञ्जुश्रीः प्रशावभुः पश्यति। आह। अत्यन्ता- भाव [रूपं] प्रज्ञाव_पैन । पश्येत् । पुनराह । फवमन्मञ्ज थोः परमार्थ- सत्यम्। आह । यत्र ज्ञानस्याप्यप्रवार । फः पुनर्वादोऽक्षराणाम्। पुनराह। स्थागतो ब्राह्मण न योधिमभिसमेति । किचाह सूत्रम् । फतमन्मञ्जुश्राः सत्यदर्शनम् । आह । यत्र धर्मस्यादर्शनम् । एतजातीय. सूत्राणामाशयगृहीतारो [ 3.] न स्वीकुयु रिद निर्विकल्पकं ज्ञानमभिसमेति तथतालम्बनञ्चति। किच सा तथता न परमार्थः आलम्बनत्वात् , रूपादिषत् । यदुक्त भवता परमार्थे न पुनः परमार्थोऽस्ति इति। यद्यनेन धवनेन अस्मिन् तदभावात् { इदं ] शून्य मिति शून्यसमाख्या, पटे ने पुनः पटोऽस्तोति गवाजपालादयोऽपि सामान्यतो जानन्ति। तेऽपि सत्य- किञ्च मिथ्यादष्टिविपक्षत्वात् एवं शून्य[ तो ]पदेशः । परमार्थे न पुनः परमार्थोऽस्तीति तजातीयमिथ्याष्टिसमायोगस्यासंभवात् , दर्शिन. स्युः। - 39 Or Salambanalvat 40 Sams difference of reading Rs noted in the nots 38 abore, Poussin gaya that he would translate the 'phrase into Skt. lokalamhann kanattat I would, 'hosteser, suggest a more idiomatio skt laukikalambana - Sochtan 1 Seo Şatasabasriba, p 295 (I V.P) 49 Lit atra 43 See the discourse of Bhagavant to Nadjaert 10 Aryadhytyita. murtisatra. Al miti,295-298 in what manner one should see the truths (LV p) 41 Poussin suggests the phrase : lalra tadabharat (lat) fanyar ucyale . 1 'M818 la premier Kong fait dificulté', 45 Laškos egtre, 282: Sarte syuh tattradaršina) 1 ·KARATALARATNA OP BHAVYA . साउथता चन तत्प्रतिषेधको न स्यात् एवं शून्य[ तो ]पदेशः । सत्स्यमावा पूर्वोकानुमानविरोधात् ।। न तथागतः पश्यति संसारं यावनिर्वाणम्। संप्रजानाति च भाव- विपर्ययोत्पन्नक्लेशविगतं प्रत्यात्यन्ताजाविस्वभावम् । एवं संप्रज्ञानस्वरूपं प्रहत्यात्यन्तमसंप्रज्ञान नवासप्रशानमिति। अनेनागमेन तथता सर्व विकल्पो- पशममा [6] न सत्स्वभावा इति झयम्। मान्वयतो न व्यतिरेकातः सत्स्यमावस्तथता आश्रयपरावृत्तिलक्षणो धर्मकाय:49 सिद्धयति । शून्यता- दर्शन प्रतिपक्षमार्गलाभात सर्वावकल्पपरिकरिपतवोजाश्रये विपाकविज्ञानेश विकल्पादियीजानि निश्शेषमुपशाम्यन्ति । हेतुप्रत्ययाभावादत्ययन्तानुत्पादः . 4G, Op. Satyadvayāpatára, M viti, p. 374 Malljuśct expłaxng to Devapatra : yatsama paramarthatah talhata dharmadhatuḥ alyantom jatrica tatsamanı paramarthatak pancanantaryanı...l 47 Or nirodhamatram 48. fer-lt-fer.yu. shth-ksin Poussin translates the first part, fes la fer yeou "Tatbata-aon pas a part d'étre, non pas étro" and connecting, the second part che sing along with the next word read, bhatatathata. I have rendered it as above following the Chinese punctuation Further his rendering fals (-fes ls yeoui ) into "non pas à part d'étre" 18 far from correct. It means simply separation', 'absence of anything', not "partly separation', etc. since la is uod in contrast with ja, I have put them uyatıreka and annaya respectively 49. Biddhi, 606. Abrayaparavritm anutpadam vadamı aham- Ladkavatsra, 203 (comp 266, 276,284, 322, 338, L. V. P.), 50. Poussin remarks : 'Dans Abhidharma, le chemin "contreca. rrant" qui est la vue des quatre verités, expulse la passion, il est suivi d'un chemin de delivranco, utmuktımarga : delivranca qui régulte de l' expulsion, Kosa, Index, p. 81. 51. Another name of Alayavijiang, Siddhi, 166. .

·76 VISTA-BHARATI ANNALS प्रहत्यानुत्पाद प्रकृत्या सदास्थिति नाम वथागतः श्राश्रयपरावृत्तिः धर्मकाय इति । यथोक्तं सूत्रे । तथागत इति मञ्जुश्रीः अत्यन्तं प्रत्याजातिपदम् । नित्यमनुत्पत्तिधर्म इदमुच्यते तथागत इति ॥ यदि वदसि तथता व्यवहारविनिमुक्कापि सत्स्वमाया इति । तदा तीर्थफानामात्मानमेष तयता इति संज्ञाविशेपेण व्यवहरसि। यथा सा तथता सत्स्वभावाऽपि परमार्थतोऽसिद्धसदादिविकल्पा । तथात्मापि। तेऽपि हि मन्यन्ते-आत्मा विभुनित्य कर्ता भोक्तापि विकल्पमुक्त , अभिलाप- गोचरानास्पदत्वात् विकल्पबुद्ध्यनाभ्यनत्वाश विकल्पमुक्त इत्याख्यायते । इति। उक्त हि सदागमे। [6] [यत्र घायन प्रवरति चित्त मनध न पश्यति स आत्मा इति। तलक्षणे आत्मनि पुनर्वदसि तथतालम्पन- शानान्मुक्ति लभते नात्मालम्यनज्ञानात् फेन विशेपेणेदम् । सर्वथा नास्तीत्युच्यते । [ उमयोः ] सत्स्वभावत्वात् । फेवलं पक्षपातेन एवं पदसि। अतो नाहं सश्रद्धं स्वीकरोमि। एवं तथता आत्मसरूपा वस्तुसती नास्तीत्यलं विवादेन । सत्या विपुलयतार्थीद्विग्ना दुर्म हत्यात् । अतत्वामृता- 'घतारे च विचारितपूर्वम् [इदम]। 62 Praktisnutya of Siddhi, 701 (LVP) 53 Comp Vajracchedika. Tathats its subhate bhitatathatavah. Anutradadharmatayah dharmocchedasya alyanlanutpannasya elada ahuracanaml 54 Op. La hayatara 77, where one sees that the doctrine of Tathigatagarbha 18 similar to Atmarids (LVP). 55 Cp Kaths up VI 1 Naivatdea na manasa praptum sakyah, eto Kene I, 48, Broad braadyaka III, 7, 17, 20 66 - Pin Wu Shanghai ed teada ping wu 37 Thre work is already mentioned by the author, zee note 113 in the first chapt p b8. 59 Lut okalpitam .

·KARATALARATNA OF BIAYYA 77 फेचित्स्ययूय्या होनयानिनः पुनरेवं पदन्ति । द्वादशायतनसंगृहीताः संस्कतासंस्ता नियमेन सस्वभानराः। यस्मात् फश्चित् दुःसादिषोड़शा. फारकचतुरार्यसत्य दर्शनमारनामार्गद्वयं प्रयोगेनाभ्यसन् दर्शनमायना- हेयान् सर्वधातुफसंगृहोतान् फ्लेशपहीन् निरन्धानः उपशमितसर्वत्र- धातुकदु.पो माति। इति। सर्वधर्माः स्वभावशून्या इति यदि न संदर्शयेयम् । फस्त्यजेदिमं दोयम् । को या पुनरभ्यसेदिमं गुणम् । पानत्रये संभारेन्द्रियस्वभावा-[ 7 ] धिमुक्तिविमिन्नेऽपि अमिसमयः भायमार्गश्चा भिन्न. इति तु सर्वे यपं श्रद्दधामहे । क्लेशावरणप्रहाणस्येष्ट- त्वात्।। संवृतिनयेन स मार्गो विभिन्नः। यदि धर्मनैरात्म्यावतारमपा. फरोपि शेयावरणस्याग्रहाणात् शास्ता प्रादेशिकविमुक्त. स्यात् । ननु मुक्तिमु तरमिन्नेति कि नोपदिष्टम् । सत्यमुपदिष्टम् । फ्लेशावरण. पिमुक्तिसाम्यादेवमुक्तम् । न तु सर्वप्रकारेण। यथा रोमकूपो मदाफाशेन तुलितोऽपि नाभिन्न.१ तथा नो चेत् विशिष्ठफलमियानारम्भिमा , 69 Lit euam. co This is tho remark of Heayanists, Vasumitra, Traitedes Beotes, Masuda, V.37.JX, 23.8,3,Siddhi, 702 (LV P.) G1 On the two ararapay see Siddhi, 664 (LV P.) 62 Pousain translates Dans ce cas, le Grand Maitre devrait enseignor uno dolivranco partiallo" Bot Ck eng meang 'lo accomplish', Dot 'to tosch' eto 63 Poussin pute this and tho previous sentence in one para under the remarks of Tiinayapists My punctration 18 based on the Chiness opo in the present edition of the sout C4 Or. Varpapárbayardada F V Thomas, Ind, Apt 1903. ( vol 39 ), 316 at lloernle, USS Rowsins, 78 - रोमकूम गुच्छणानाश प्रतिविम्वयेत् , ate. 65 Ses Kosa VI, 197,277, on astesamarga.-Ascetio obtaing Fimoktis successively. (L. V. P.).

·VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS 78 ऋद्ध्यमिशा स्यात् । साक्षात्कृतवन तत्त्वपर्यन्त स्यात् इत्यलं प्रासङ्गिकेन । प्रकृतं विवारयामः॥ योगी स्वसमयकल्पितमाकाशादिकं शून्यं प्रविष्ट इव परसमयकल्पितान् प्रतिपुरुषपरमाप्वीश्वरफालदिग्जीवादिपदार्थान शून्यान् प्रविशेत् । तत्र प्रकृतिपुरुपवादिन इदं दूषणमाहु'। अस्मत्पक्षे विधातर सब 17bARपुष्पयत्परिणता [इति ] नासत्खपुष्पम् । तस्य सत्त्वेन सम- दष्टान्तो न सिध्यति साध्यविरोधात् । इति । इदानी पर्यनुयोक्तव्यम् [यत् ] त्वयोर्क त्रिधातव सर्वं खपुष्पवत्परिणता इति । फिमेकं त्रिधातु [ मयं] खपुष्पमस्तोति । । तब पक्षस्य साधारणप्रतोतियाधात् न युज्यते। यदि वदति विधातु [ मयं ] खपुष्पं नास्तीति। तदा न सिध्यति समदृशन्त इति तय मूलपक्षस्य हानिः । यदि पदसि न हानि। खपुष्पमतच्छन्द उक्तनिधातूनां CG Podsed constrdes this along with the best word and translates Ce qui est realia6 per rddbu abbuje ne serait pas vraiment dsbizitz! Elo further remarks the translation is doubtful De referg to Angattars II, 274 la mujfa (na) et rimukts font sacchekatavua parl abhaye,, My translathon is based on Chinese punebuation and Byatas 67 Note this 19 an early Sankhya school prior to the olassical Sankhyas mentioned in the text section 68 Orkhapusakaram, or-bhiasm 69 Or paryanuyoga Poussin refers to Kola XXI, 68 8, Nytyabindu, 74. NKoss 70 See additional Notes for explanation Poussin taking this word along with the next one translates parce que la seur du ciel la dature des trois abitas degignés par le mot abhara, inexisteace", This interpretation stands Apconnected with paryanuyoga raised in tho pert Bentence So following the Chinese panctuation I have interpretod it so as to suit with the context, ·KARATALARATNA OF BHAYTA 79 सस्वमावत्वात् । तदापि विचारणीयम्। किमाह भवान् महं पदामि खपुष्पं नास्ति साधर्म्यदृष्टान्त इति । किं था पपुष्पमस्ति साधर्म्यदृष्टान्त इति । यदि आह भवान् अहं पदामि सपुष्यं नास्ति साधम्य॑दृष्टान्त इति। दुष्टो विचार:1| खपुष्पस्य साधर्म्यदृष्टान्तत्येन फवनात्। यदि घा वदामि खपुष्पमस्ति साधर्म्यदृष्टान्त इति। तदा न विधातु [मयम् ] । न यकन्यं विधातूना मारत्वात् तदपि माय इति । इदं वचनं तव स्वप्रशालाघवं प्रकाशयति । सतप्रतिपेधः प्रतिपेधप्रधानः प्रतिपेध्यं प्रतिपिध्य चरितार्थ: । [8a ] न पुनः प्रतिपेध्यव्यतिरिक झापयितुं समर्थ: । एवं धवनदूपणं पूर्वमेव व्याख्यातम् । अतः माशने श्रद्धेयम् ॥ साड्याः पुनरेयं वदन्ति । न घयं यद्यपि साधयामः प्रधान पुरयं या साक्षात्मत्यभेण। तथापि साधारणप्रतीत्या विकारगणप्रयोगेना तं है 71. Or pariksa. The cen89 requires word which would suggest the idea of attitada 73. -prasavapratisedha, 800 N. Kosa, 1st chap n. 78 sbove, p.50. 73. Lit. Ksinašaktikah 1 74. OL. Premapavirtika, III, Na caps tabdo dvayakrt, with rriti. Tippapi: na tu ekah sabdah urdhspralışedhakrt. Soo Ibid, p 350 tho distinction betwega parytetust and pratışedha. 75. 800 obap.I.P.50. Parol. 76, Oh'sn-hsten Intimately showing, eto. chin means sometimea 'one's owe sell - spa : in this case it may bo pot as svapralyakşa. 77. Sea Saakbyakarikag, Suparpa gaptati, ver. 15, five prayogas with rogard to Pradhaba, vor 17 anothor 1178 prayogea lor Puruga, ·80 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS वस्तुसन्त साधयाम । तथा हि। व्यता सहेतुका साजात्यात् । सर्वे सजातीया भावा सत्ताहेतुका दृष्टा । यथा चन्दनखण्डादय 79 | व्यकाश्व सजातीया इति सत्ताहेतुका । एव व्यक्तानि सभोक्त कानि। उपभोग्य- त्वात् । उपभोग्यानि सर्वाणि सभोक्तकानि दृष्टानि । यथा ब्राह्मणोप भोग्यमनपानव्यक्तम् उपभोग्यत्वात् सभोक्तफम् । इति पूर्वोक्तानुमान प्रतिप्रमाणयाधितम् । इति । इदं सवृत्या" यदि सामान्यरूपेण व्यकानि सत्ताहेतुकानि साधयसि । न विशेष विचारयसि । तदा सिद्धसाधनम् । यदि व्यक्तानि [8b] 84सुसादि- हेतुफानि साधयसि। तदा नास्ति समदृष्टान्त । हेतुरपि न सिध्यति । 78 Salta pradhanakhya sea Pramana pártıke vrtti ad 111 186 od Poussn gives referenss to Siddhi I 97 ( Theory of Vashikas) 10 DJ80 8Qggests for sajatya satprakara with query Løre s@alya is the Bamo ng tamanraya of the Sankhyakarık15 79 This thola prayoga including the example is the same as Bhedanam samantryavart - samasvabhavatrat) in the Suvarpasaptath vor 15021 80 The same prayoga 18 intendod in sanghatasya pararthattat Surarpasaptati rer 17 with comment where the same example is giren Ibid p 25 81 Pousain bas locluded this sentence in the section of siddhanta which fact is dao to wrong punctuation in his text 82 Lit Idam samrytam or Samoylilah eto 63 Satlatamanyasya anışıddhatrat C Pram&pavārtika vrttu III 1890d 81 Saltvadiveetasatta cl Pram rar Titi III 1880d 1890b 85 - Heluh ananrayal Ibid also p 353 Tippadi 6 Atha sallayak samanya sadhye sid/katadhyata ato riseşah sadhyah 1 Latvs ananayot sadhyalanyo titaniuk ato na tatta I The game is the opinion of Vagubapdbp and Didnoga, Ibid IV 32 39 pp 426 429 ·KARATALARATNA OP BHAVYA 81 सुखादिजाते भयानभ्युपगमात् । यद्यनुमानना हेतु साधपसि। चत्वारः स्कन्धाः सुखदुःखमोहात्मका: । एतत्स्कन्धस्वभावत्वात् , वेदनास्कन्धयत् । इति । उक्तो मोहो न वेदनास्कन्धान्तर्गत इति समदृष्टान्तासिद्धिः । किञ्च तव पुरुषो नानारूपाणां सञ्चितार्थ एव [स] एव ससातार्थः । अनेन पुरुषहेतुसिद्धिरनेकान्तिफो। तष मुसादिः प्रत्येकमुभयपक्षयो में संभवति । एतत्स्कन्धस्वमाव- त्वादिति हेतुता न सिध्यति। यश परमार्थतोऽस्ति चन्दनखण्डः सत्ताहेतुफ इति। [तस् ] ' न साधारणाभ्युपगतमित्यतो दृष्टान्तासिद्धिः । किञ्च संवृत्या सामान्यरूपेण व्यक्तानि सोपभोकृकानि साधयसि । न विशेष विचारयति । तदा सिद्धसाधनम् । भोकभावस्य लोकप्रतीतत्वात् । यदि साधयसि व्यक्तानि नित्यविभुचेतनस्वभावभोक्तकानि साधयसि । समदृष्टान्तासिद्धिः । एवंरूपब्राह्मणानां साधारणानभ्युपगमात् । यदि परमार्थतः, समद्रप्टान्तोऽसिद्धः। 'मनपानभोक्तुः सत्स्वभावस्य [१] साधारणानभ्युपगमात् । [ अतः] पूर्णोक्तानुमान न सबाधकप्रति- प्रमाणकम् ॥ 86 I. Bukbedyatmalagdjatyahetuh This remerk je also intended in the heturanandayah of Dhermakirti, see previous note 87 Pram vir vrtti ad III 18 bed where acelanatvads 19 to be employed for the same purpose 88. Saltvarajastamas in the terminology of Sankhyas, 89 TP neng Pous Bip has interpreted 11 a slightly different manner "ils ( Sukha, etc.) re penvent paa, prist part, totrs le tujet de] proposition distinctes, parce qu'ils sont des skapd bas" He seems to ignore er "two". The author intends to point out the tard reason, etatskar. dharvabharatta 18 pot proved because the characler, bukba, etc. can not be existent individually for both parties. 90 Lit vadt 11 ·82 JEWEL IN HAND : घेशेषिका पुनरेवं घदन्ति । प्राणापाननिमेपोन्मेपमनोगतीन्द्रियविकारा- दिलिङ्गानि नियतलिङ्गोनि । लिङ्गत्वात् धूमदर्शनादि[लिङ्गवत् । इति । संवृत्या यदि सामान्यरूपेण तानि लिङ्गानि लिङ्गिनियतानि साघयसि। न विशेष विचारयसि। तदा सिद्धसाधनम्। संवृत्ती साधारणप्रतोतात्मा- म्भावस्या भावात् । यदि साधयसि तानिलिदानि नित्यविभुसुखाद्या- श्रयात्मलिङ्गीनि। तदा नास्ति समदृष्टान्त.। साध्यस्य धाधात् । यदि परमार्थतः । तदापि दृष्टान्तासिद्धिदोषः । अनेनैव न्यायेन फालदिगा- फाशादयः प्रतिषेध्याः॥ पुनशेषिका एवं दूषयन्ति । परमाणून् मनधासंस्कृतान् साधयामः । शून्यसाधनहेतुः अनुत्पादादिति स्वतोऽसिद्धः । यद्याह इमाघुमी संस्कृतान्तर्गताविति। प्रोत्यसमुत्पनत्वादिति शून्यसाधनहेतुः परतो. ऽसिद्धहेतुः। इति शून्यतावतारः प्रादेशिक: स्यात् । इति ॥ पदि मनः परमाणुश्च संवृतावपि अभ्युपगम्यते असंस्कृत इति । 91. 800 Vaifesika Sutras. III, 2, 4,Abh. Rosaryakhya LG, Ui, Vaisesika Philosophy. P 48 ni, where be points out this portion of our text Poussin says that editions. Sung. Yuan, and Ming have ming, jirana for long of our text, of Taisho and Shenghai eds 92. It is worth noticing of Viwazabbitzu's remers to the cat effect in bus Saakhyapraracanabhaaya I,198: Narvan ptitusasya sudhanam apekzıtam 1 Oetandpalape jagadandhyaprasangato bhoktarı arampadarthe samanyato Bauddhanam aps acioadati dharma ica i dharmo ha samanyato Bauddhatraps svikriyatel (BI. p.93 ) 93. See Ui, Vaišeşiks Philosophy, pp. 140, 147. 94. Sratah by itsell. 95. Parata) from the Vaiſeşikas' point of view. 96. Podagin everest: mandathagiya which 18 improbable. The phrase bas alreaby been found twice : see, pp. 61.1 21. and 77, 1. 3.

·KARATALARATNA OF BHATTA 83 भवेदिदं दूपणम्। साध्यता मनः तथापि नासंस्कृतम्। सानजनकहेतुत्वात् रूपादिवत् । एवं पदार्यसामान्यस्वभावत्वात् स्मृतिजनकहेतुत्वात् इत्याद- योऽन्येऽपि हेतयो यथोचितं यकव्याः। परमाणवोऽपि नासंस्थताः पारम्भ फहेतुत्वात् तन्त्यादिवत्। एवमन्येऽपि संयोगवियोगसंख्यासामान्यादि- हेतुयो यथोचित [ हेतुत्येन ] यकव्याः। प्रथणुकंग जन्यं धा स्यूलपदार्थः न नित्यहेतुः। जन्यत्यात् घटादिवत् । पयमन्येऽपि यतकत्वात् विनाशित्यात् सहेतुकत्यादित्या दिहेतपो यथायोगं यकव्याः। अनेन न्यायेन परेण मिथ्या- फल्पिता मनःपरमाणपश्च स्यमापशून्याः। तस्मानास्ति यथोकदोषः ।। पूर्वोकसांज्यवैशेषिकशास्त्रपदार्थप्रतिषेधफनानायुलियत् अचेलका दिन शास्त्रकल्पितपदार्था गपि यथायोग शून्याः साधयितव्या ॥ [ 10 ] एवं दूपणानि निराशत्य योगी सम्यगनुमानयलेन स्वपरोभय- समयफल्पितानसंस्कृतान् स्वभावशून्यान् प्रविशेत् । श्रुतसिदशानद्वारबलेन स्वभावशून्यतां प्रविष्टोऽपि विशिष्टमावनायल. पिकलो न हेयावरण समुच्छेत्तुं शक्नुयात्। अतः पुनस्त्वरितं विशिष्ट- भावनायलमभ्यसेत् ॥ यद्यत्र संस्थतासंस्थतनिमित्त मेकाकारयत् सान्तरनिरन्तर या पुनः 97. Or it may read syntactically dovanukarabdhas stalapadartho na nityahetukah 1 But I do no! think that it 19 the probable aengo lotonded to be convoyed by the author It appears that the anthor frios to prove impormenopt the biopary stoms which are maintained as porganent by some philosophers, cp Dharmapala's Comment on Alambanapartkes, pp. 23, 60 with uote 10. UI, Vaisesits Philosophy, PP. 129,191. 99. The commentary says: The naked-bodied Tirthita is Nirgrantha. 99. The same on p. 64, para 4 of tbe ebap. I. 100. Or.laksana.

·JEWEL IN HAND : घेशेषिका पुनरेवं वदन्ति । प्राणापाननिमेपोन्मेपमनोगतीन्द्रियविकारा- दिलिङ्गानिक नियतलिङ्गोनि । लिङ्गत्वात् धूमदर्शनादिलिट्रीयत् । इति । संवृत्या यदि सामान्यरूपेपा तान लिङ्गानि लिशिनियतानि साधयति । न विशेष विचारयसि। तदा सिद्धसाधनम्। संवृत्ती साधारणप्रतीतात्मा- 9-मावस्या भावात् । यदि साधयसि तानिलिङ्गानि नित्यविभुसुखाद्या- श्रयात्मलिङ्गीनि । तदा नास्ति समदृष्टान्त । साध्यस्य याधात् । यदि परमार्थतः । तदापि दृष्टान्तासिद्धिदोपः । अनेनेच न्यायेन फालदिगा- काशादयः प्रतिध्याः पुनर्वैशेषिका एवं दूपयन्ति। परमाणून् मनश्वासंस्स्तान् साधयामः । शून्यसाधनहेतुः अनुत्पादादिति भस्वतोऽसिद्धः। यद्याह इमायुमी संस्टतान्तर्गताविति। प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नत्यादिति शून्यसाधनहेतुः 95 परतो. ऽसिद्धहेतुः। इति शून्यतावतारः 'प्रादेशिक: स्यात् । इति ॥ पदि मनः परमाणुश्च संवृतावपि अभ्युपगम्यते असंस्कृत इति । 91 See Vaisesika Sutras, III 2.4 , Abh Kossryakhya 16, UI, VAIBABIks Philosopby.p 480 I, where he points out this portion of our text Ponssin Bays that editions Sapg, Yuan, and fing have ming, strana for ling of our text, of Taisho and Shenghai eds 92 It is worth noticing of Vullinabhikṣu's remark to the same effect in bra Saakhyapraracanabbasya I 138. Naucam partişasya sadhanam apekystam 1 Cetanapalane jagadandhyaprasangato bhoktars ahampadartha samanyato Bauddhanam aps avitadat 1 dharma iva 1 dharmo no sumanyato Bauddharraps stikriyatel ( (BI ,93 See Ui, Varbesika Philosopby. pp 140,147 94 Sratah by itselt 95, Paratah from the Vaibesitas' point of viety 96 Potsin suggests mandabhagtyd which 18 improbable The pbrage has alreaby been found twice see, PP 61 1 21 and 77, I 3. p.931 ·83 KARATALARATNA OF BIAYYA भवेदिदं दूपणम्। साध्यता मनः तथापि नासंस्थतम् । इानजनपहेतुत्यात् रूपादिवत् । एवं पदार्पसामान्यस्यमावत्वात् स्मृतिजनकहेतुत्वात् इत्याद- योऽन्येऽपि हेतो यथोचितं वक्तव्याः। परमाणयोऽपि नासंस्कृताः थारम्भ कहेतुत्वात् तन्त्यादिवत्। एपमन्येऽपि संयोगवियोगसंरयासामान्यादि- हेतुको यथोचित [ हेतुत्वेन ] वक्तव्याः। द्वयणुश जन्यं या स्थूलपदार्थः न नित्यहेतुः। जन्यत्वात् घटादिवत् । एवमन्येऽपि मृतकत्वात् विनाशित्यात् सहेतुपत्यादित्यादिहेतयो ययायोगं पकव्याः। अनेन न्यायेन परेण मिप्या- फल्पिता मनःपरमाणवध स्वभावान्याः। तस्मातास्ति ययोक्तदोपः ॥ पूक्तिसांख्ययैशेषिकशास्त्रपदार्थप्रतिषेधकनानायुक्तिवत् अचेलकादि शास्त्रकल्पितपदार्था अपि यथायोग शून्याः साधयितव्या ॥ [ 10 ] एवं दूषणानि निरारत्य योगी सम्यगनुमानयलेन स्वपरोभय. समयकल्पितानसंस्टतान् स्वभावशून्यान् प्रयिशेन् । ध्रुतसिद्धशानद्वारवलेन स्वमारशून्यतां प्रविष्टोऽपि विशिष्टमारनायल- विकलो न हयावरण समुच्छेत्तुं शक्नुयात। अतः पुनस्त्वरितं विशिष्ट- भावनायलमभ्यसेत॥ पद्या संस्कृतासंस्टतनिमित्त100 मेकाकारयत् सान्तरनिरन्तर या पुनः 97. Or it may road syntactically dryanukarabdhas sthalapadartho na nityahetukah 1 But I do not think that it is the probablo denso intended to be conveyod by the satbor It appears that the author tries to prova impermenent the biopary stoms wbich are maintained ng permanent by some pbilosopbers, cp Dharmapala's Comment on Alambanapariks, pp. 23. Go with note 10, Ui, Vaisenka Philosophy, 129,131. 99. The commentary Bays: The osted-bodied Tirthika j. Nirgranths. 99. The same o0P.Ci, psra 4 ol the obap. I. 100. Or, lakhara.

·84 JEWEL IN HAND : । समुदाचरति। तदा तन् स्वभावशून्यं योनिशो मापयत्या निमित्त निराकृत्यानभिव्य कुर्यात् । धर्माणा विविक्तस्वभारत्वान् तत्प्रातिशून्य. [ता] प्रविशति । प्रतिशून्यत्वात् असिद्धनिमित्ता बनिमित्ता भवंति। अनिमित्तत्वात् अप्रणिहिताः सन्तोऽप्रणिधाना भवन्ति। विविकनिमित्तमलत्वात् विविक्ताः। विविकनिमित्तस्यात् तत्प्रतीत्य जातानां क्लेशानामत्यन्तमजातत्वात् शान्ताः । अनुत्पनस्वभारत्या- दनुत्पन्नाः। अनुत्पादात् नानित्या न दुखा नापि निरात्मकाः। [ros ] अनुत्पादाच न सनिमित्ताः। अनिमित्तत्यात् अनिमित्त कलक्षणचर्यया सर्वधर्मान् मानयित्वा अद्वयेऽवतरति। एतलक्षणवर्यया 101भावनाविशेष- मभ्यसन् एवमभिवृद्धभावनाविशेषबलत्यात् स्थूलनिमित्त निरादत्य अनभिव्यक्त फरोति । अनेन अनाचरितमाकारं फरोति यदुत संस्कृतस्या- संस्कृतस्य वाकारग्रहः। यथा तैमिरिफः स्थूलतिमिरमपहाय विशुद्धनेयः थागतपूर्वान् ग्राहकारान् न पश्यति ॥ यद्यपि अत्र रब्धाप्रतिष्ठानों [योगी]। तथापि शून्यतादिविकल्प- समुदाचारेण 10सामोगचित्तसन्तानं पुनर्वर्तते । शून्यतादिविकल्पसमुदाचारावृतलोकोत्तरनिर्विकल्पप्रशो भवति। सनिपुणं सम्यक्पदाणं प्रहातुमेयं प्रत्ययेक्षेत । परमार्थत स्वभावशून्येऽर्थे शून्यता- अलब्धानलज्ञान:109 101 Similar expreseion on pp 34,1583,1 13. 102 Functioning and rapping toward an object 103 Putengltao-chthi The frst two characters sre aksobhya, Anitura in the f Vyutpattı The sense 19 that the Ascetic has not yet obtained the eighth stage, acala bbomi Siddhi, 616 (LVP.) Bat Poussin leaves untranslated the last two characters Ascetic has not get obtained the motionless state of mind, because it 18 still sadhoga, TUDDIDg towards sp object.

·KARATALARATNA OP BHAVIA भावनया दिविकल्पोऽपि न यस्तुसन्। प्रतीत्यसमुत्पन्नत्वात् मायादिवत् । एवं पुनः शून्यतादिविकल्पं निराफरोति । तनिराकरणात् शून्याशून्यताद्यन्तद्वयविविका न पुनः शून्यतायाकारेण [114 ] धर्मान प्रत्यवेक्षते । ययोतम, 105प्रापारमितायाम् समुदाचरन् रूपं108 न समनुपश्यति नित्य- मिति नानित्यमिति, न समनुपश्यति सुपमिति न दुःपमिति । समनुपश्यति आत्मेति न अनात्मेति । न समनुपश्यति शान्तमिति नाशान्तमिति । न समनुपश्यति शून्यमिति नारन्यमिति । न समनु. पश्यति निमित्तमिनि नानिमितमिति । न समनुपश्यति प्रणिहितमिति नाप्रणिशित मिति । न समनुपश्यति यियितामिति नाविविक्त मिति । पयं... येदनासंशासंस्कारयिमानानि सर्वे रूपशम्दगन्धरसस्पष्टव्यधर्माः सर्याणि चक्षुःश्रोत्रप्राणजिहाफायमनांसि, दानशीलक्षमावीर्यध्यानप्रशा. पारमितास्मृत्युपधान108 सम्यक प्रदाणद्धिपादेन्द्रिययलयोध्यगमार्गाल107 Tra 104. See Kota, VIII, 188, Sanyatainmyata-samadha succeeding to Śanyata-samadhi ( L. V P) 105 Sce SataeShasrika, pp 765.872 sbore the formule goes : Praj. haparamalayam caran arape carstil naripasya namstle carathi rupam mtyamatscarath1 na reipam anityam sti carats I ma rupam sukhanth carathi no ripam duhkham iti caratı 1 eto, Tho formula is repented with regard to orch of the following items · redann, sanina, eto upto mahakarund. Op passages ciled in the Bodhtcar. pafijika, 127: Frarianaramatayam caran rupam bharathna Bhatrayatni etc. Cp. Bhatapratyareka described In Kasyapsp pp 83.85 106. Lit Bape. 107. Prajap hss also included 18 dhatus, 6 dhatus, prthartdhatu, etc, and 12 pidioas, 108 Ibid. After this 18 $anyatos bro mentioned. 109. Ibid. Mentioved as astreamarpa.. After this truths are mentioned.

·86 JEWEL IN HAND: ध्याना110 रूप्यसमापत्त्यात मिना112 दशव लवैशारद्यसप्रतिसंधि- 11 दावेणिकावुधर्मसर्वसमाधिधारणीमुखसर्वज्ञानानि15 न समनुपश्यति नित्यमिति नानित्यमिति। इति विस्तरः। य एवमन्तद्वयविविक्त' स चिरं मध्यमार्या [प्रतिपदि] साधु चरति । अयमन्तद्वयरहितो [ u b ] मध्यममार्गनय.~-यथापूर्वमुक्तानुमानहयेन संस्कृतासंस्कृतरूपराश्यभावात् अरूपी नामोच्यते। अरूपित्वेन भावादि- सर्व विकल्पानामभावात् नास्ति फश्विद्धर्मः यादृशः स, तादृशोऽयमपीति मिथो निदर्शनार्हः । अतोऽनिदर्शनो नाम । अभानस्वभावत्वादा- श्रयाधयिभावाप्रसिद्धया प्रतिष्ठा नास्तीत्यतोऽप्रतिष्ठो नाम । यदि संस्कृतलक्षणमसंस्कृतलक्षणं घा, यदि विकरिपतमविकल्पितं घा, यदि विकरपकमविकल्पकं वा इत्येवमादिनिमित्तप्रशानं न समाचरतीति अनाभासो नाम । सर्वभाषानिमित्तामापनिमित्तविविकविषयकविज्ञान- स्यानुत्पन्नत्वात् अविज्ञप्तिको नाम । अरूपत्यादमूर्तत्वाविभागनिकेतामाबाद- निघतो नाम1161 यथा भगवान् फाश्यपमाह । नित्यमिति [ फाश्यप ] अयमेको- ऽन्तः । अनित्यमिति [काश्यप] अयं द्वितीयोऽन्तः। यदेनयोद्धयो- 110 Ibid After this come apretadas 111. Ibid Atter this come 2 more items i na vimokşegu carat: manup Orvaushararampattışu caran ... I na fanvatanimittapranthita Osmoksequcarate ...! 118 Ibid After this come gamidis end dharapimukas 113 Ibid Mentioned as Tathagatabala, Ibid After comes na mahakarunayam caratt......1 116 Ibid This is not includea in the list 116 Poussin draws attontion to the last passage in the text not identified in the Appendix to Mah Satrålankára ( ed 8 Levi) where the mirtikalpajtiana 18 80 qualified 88 madhyama pratipat here Op Natzakota cited in the Sikşas p 234 8 2. Cittam ki Katyapa arnpam andarlanam apraligham asuhaptıkan apraturthitam anı ketam 1 ·87 KARATALARATNA OF BHAVYA [नित्यानित्ययो] मध्यं तदरूपि अनिदर्शनमनामासमविज्ञप्तिकमप्रतिष्ठ- मनिकेतम्। इयमुच्यते [ काश्यप ] मध्यमा प्रतिपद् धर्माणां भूतप्रत्यवेक्षा । [ 12 a] यावत् अस्ताति [काश्यप] अयमेकोऽन्तः । नास्तोत्यय द्वितीयोऽन्त इति विस्तरः । किचाह भगवान् काश्यपम् । विद्याविद्या च द्वेन स्तः, द्वयविशेषेऽत्र न संप्रज्ञानम्। इयमुच्यते [ काश्यप ] मध्यमा प्रतिपत्त । [य] एवमन्तद्वय विवेककुशलः [ तस्य ] अद्वयसंज्ञायां 'विहरमाणस्य समुत्पन्नोऽ द्वयसंशाविकल्पः। [त] मपि जानाति लोकोतरनिर्विकल्प- शानस्य शान्तविहारस्यावरणमिति । [अतो ] यथोक्तहेतुमाशु समुच्छेदयति । तत्समुच्छेदात् ॥ इदमेवमिति नास्ति विकल्पः, सों द्वयवचनमनोजल्पश्च , शाम्यति। साक्षात्करोति धर्माणां भूतस्वभावमनाभोगमनामासमनिमित्त प्रपञ्चविनिमुक्तम् । एतदालम्यनेऽनाभोगसाक्षात्कारं प्रविश्य स्वलक्षण- 120ज्ञानस्रोतसि विहरति॥ अविपरीतशून्यतामावनामभ्यसनपि नैव शून्यतां साक्षात्कुर्यात् । तदा परमार्थध्यान 11नामोच्यते । 117. Kibyepaparıvarta od Stael-Holstein, pp 86-90. 118 This passage is not traceable in the Kásyapapar, as such. I however, suppose that this may be an adaptation of $ 68 : Bhalacıttam at....... I abhataotttam sta .....I yatra Kalyapa na cetana na mano na bijnanamn i syam tcyale .....1 119. Lit. evam evam. 120. Ormanasrotasstalaksans tsharats or pratatasthaist 121. Astaskhasriks, P 970 • ra Bodhisattvena Mahasattrena Sunyata sakat kartavya Op Dassbhumika, Rabder, 61. (LV.P.) Op. .alto passages in the Astasshasr:ka, p_379 : Bodhisattvo...na Suryatam saksatkaroti l nanimittam saksatkaroti......!

·90 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS पवमादिग्रहे 198निरुद्धे, 14क्षातव्यानिमित्तविषयतापि 185प्रतिपत्ति- विहोना। हेतुप्रत्ययवैकल्यात् । अन्यद् ज्ञान [मपि न जायते प्रतिपत्य- भावात् । तस्मात् यथाभूतपतिपत्तिरित्युच्यते । [14] यथाह भगवान् । पतमा यथाभूतप्रतिपत्तिः। यद्धर्माणाम- त्यन्ताप्रतिपत्तिः इयमुच्यते यथाभूतप्रतिपत्तिः । किञ्च यथाह सूत्रम् । तथागतो बोधिमत्यन्तं नाभिसमेति।। यथा [६] मञ्जुश्रीपरिपृच्छा। सत्यदर्शिमिः फतमद्दष्टव्यम् । आह। न को ऽपि धर्मों द्रव्यः। फस्मात् । पृथग्जनदृश्यं सर्व मृषा। 13 यददर्शनं तत् सत्यदर्शनम्। यथा । 138 Poussin construes this phrase along with the previou8 Bontence This is not admissible 184 Bee above p89,13 135 FTsing chreh The exact equipalent of this phrase in Sanskıt 18 not known I bave done si 'pradipatti in the sense of karetra according to the explanation given in the Chinese Ency Dictionary ( Chinese edition) p 1081, col 1 The Dictionary explains by guoting coms authority It 18 Bome sort of functioning of the mind," etc (cutta. kriyaoisèsa, this Skt phrase 18 mile) It goes further • "Function 18 called hsing chièh" Image 18 called aspect (pratıbımbam akarah ) CP Pram var mitti, IV, 160, 467 - arthanamaprattpated Poussin makes those remarks souvement intellection, hang-liar Expliqué ci dessous comme synonyme de satyodarsána, abhssamaya, figure dans deux 10x1ques de Rosenberg, associé aux diz fraddhas (state próli minaire aux terres ), glogo de Biddbi, X, 14b 16a : "Arant l'entrée dans les terres le pense feit heig Liar, par concéquent diatingue le deux vides , à la suit de hongoksas, les images apperats- Bpt, .."-Oi deshout 88 place entre samadhi prajfa, et Ghana'saksaškara --kias hing, adhimukti carya , cho-kras, natupana, cheno kiai, pratipadana, kiat ou, sampratipatts 186 Cheng-shsh bhuta. satya tattva, etc 197 Sams quotation on p74,16 "- 138. Ltdsyamana Beep 74,37, the same idea emphasized ·KARATALARATNA OR BHAVIA १५ पुनः पृच्छति। फयमभिसमये153 योगः करणीय | · माह । यद् प्रानं नास्ति फोऽपि धर्मः चेतना विकल्पः इति । पवममिसमये योगः करणीयः । पुनः पृच्छति। फतमः1 साक्षात्रताभिसमयः । थाह। 142य: सर्व- धर्मसमता पश्यति । पुनः पृच्छति । फिमस्ति सर्वधर्मसमतादर्शी । आह । नास्ति सर्वधर्मसमतादों। यद्यस्ति यदर्शनम् तदसमतादर्शनं स्यात् । यथाभूतप्रतिपत्तिः सत्यदर्शनममिसमयश्च सर्व समानार्थकम्। इति । योगी तस्मिन् समये चित्त मनसि विज्ञाने हाने(या अचरन जिविकल्प- फप्रशां सम्यक् चरतोत्युच्यते। [40] यदेव मगोचरं चरति तदा तथागतादर्हतः सम्यकसंयुद्धात् तत्त्वव्याकरणं लमते। यथाह सूत्रम्। फर्य भगवन् बोधिसत्त्वः अनुत्तमा सम्यक संयोधि भावयित्या तथागतेभ्योऽहत्सम्यक्संयुद्धेभ्यस्तत्व- ध्याकरणं लगते। बोधिसत्वो ब्राहायर यदस्मिन् समये न जाती वरति न निरोधे चरति । न पुराले चरति नाशले चरति । न लोके चरति न लोकोत्तरे चरति। न सानवे चरति नानानवे चरति । न सावध चरतिन निरव चरति। न संस्कृते चरति नासंस्थते चरति। न योगे 139 No csse ending in Chinese. 140. Saitwa-cetana 142. It may be done. katham Bab Ibo senso requires kalamak 142 Lit Yads 149 Lit Yadı astı defyan tada aramatidarśanam sadhyel. 144 Poussin suggests , samyakpratipanna. 145. Poussia notes that sohsin is normally gooara, Vyutpatti, 19,8, Kosa, XVIII. 1888 grahye XXVI, 12b1 'On arret" Il se ment #80s avoir do lisa où il se mouge" Comp Prajnd en 8000, p 369: Yo bhagavan evam carath 348 tvact carats!-Male dans Ladkivatire, 168 (Suzuki, Studies, 401 ) le jalossa medicar çarjita, set dit "dobarassé de soud hing, et cet traduction de souo hirug mouvement" samudicara, pracăra convient mieux peut etre au texto, Ordessoup 133.

·94 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS , सम्यक् प्रहाणद्धि पादेन्द्रियवलयोध्यङ्गमाङ्गपारमितासर्वाभिशादशबलवंशा- रद्यावेणिकबुद्धधर्म [ 164] समाधिधारणीमुखानि स्रोतापन. सरदागा. म्यनागामो यदि पार्हन् , यानि विद्यन्ते मार्गफलानि [तानि ] सामान्यतो विशेषतो घा एकजातोयानि । इति विस्तरो यावत्सर्वज्ञानम् । सर्वधर्माणामविपरीतस्यमापं सम्यक् प्रजानातीवि प्राज्ञः। 1पञ्चम्या निमित्तपरित्यागो हेतुप्रत्यय उच्यते। अपरिग्रह इति अपरिग्रहणमदर्शनम् । सैव नद्धप्रज्ञा परि 16sकल्परहितेत्यथः । अनुपादानहेतुना कि साक्षा- त्कियते। प्रज्ञावारो निर्विकल्पमचरित्या चरत्ययम् ॥ प्रशति । सेव निर्विकल्पकज्ञानम् । सदा सर्वविक्ल्पषियुक्तोऽपि बुद्धप्रकर्ष शम्त्या शालमिति नार! अकारानिमित्तानभिधानाव- भासी। 16॥विषयसमुत्यनिमित्त सभावविकल्पस्याप्यभावात् निर्विकल्प इत्याख्या। अप्रतिष्ठितोऽपि अवस्थान्तरेण प्राप्त्या नाम व्यवस्थाप्यते । 158 Thig explanation of the saffis must come after the explads. tion of pratipadıka according to the Sanskrit test This 19 it appears due to the order in the Chinese translation 169 Or arthaparikalparahita 160 Poussin suggests sarrarıkaipabuddha-samdropa-qırıkta This is based on wrong puoctuation 161 The passage 18 ill understood by Poussin on account of wrong punctuation 162 According to Vaibháşikas three Vikalpse srabhararı, abhinirüparart anusia yanatı See Kosuryakhya p 67 and the note 129 above स ·KARATALARATNA OF BHAVYA 95 मिति। यथा निम्तो दीप: निरुद्धोऽईन इति। युद्धमाका: म्पपदारत उक्तः। सन्तानस्यात्य निविषयक इत्याया यथा विकरपान सरिफापक- तय मानसानमनुत्पन्नगति चयेत्युच्यते। [160 ] भनया शानवयंया अदृष्टम्यारधर्मस्यमायमर्गकारनिमित्तत्यान् नाप्या पायतोति। तदेयादर्शने तत्वदर्शनमित्युच्यते । यथायन साक्षारतन्यात् । नादर्शन मियान्यलक्षण. सपिकल्पा निर्विकल्प था • तत्त्वदर्शनं सिध्यति ! तयता यदि इत्यस्यमाग, न याव्यमहश्यास्यमाघेति । यपि संगृतित: ममताह टिम्सत्यष्टिरित्युच्यने , तथापि गृहीतव्यमिय. मसमष्टिस्तस्यरधिरित्युच्यत इति। म साणि, हरयानि तत्वानि । 18सविरितिहेनुल्यात, या । 103 "Lo 1000 ne parait pas douteur Cest par metaphore qp on parlo do l'extinction de la lampo, do Nirrina da saat poinna ertinc tion et Nirvana n'ont aucun rapport aseo quol 2, 101 ( comp Koda, 11, 281) Do meme on ne peut atribuer ! Prajne qui que co 8011 (IVP) This is rathor an imposed interpretation, According to the last provillus line it is to be interpreted that a dipa dos not orlat altor extinction, yet it is said that dim 13 estinguished, so also Arhan 161 Pousua suggests with query Buddhisandropa "Les ideallopa adventices, 10 Tie bas not probably sell anderstood the Chincio rhrase chido-hun iseng The iro! io characters mean burdhafinn. bardha in the KBM of prabulka "enlightenet one" e Kolayithfk. p 3, 8. This phraso is already and trich I p 10b lust line and I1. p 16a line 6 (Chines tott) The Iset two characters I have taken for mak 1750 here, Rosenberg Det. 1919 sathika So Samaropa is not only 40 equiraloni lor them 163. Lasciatła (or tp dina ), AIRA 166 This is an objection by YogIdrus 167. Inchio drlya In the prenots clates it 14 lochten 168 Chi karoymak2. Ders kus lt for 14 mrd. Not, kan for rd in tokarti.

·96 VISTA-BHARATI ANNALS मरीचिकासु जलम् । -[भत.] सर्वाणि दृश्यानि न तत्त्वानि। तथता यदि दृश्यस्वभावा, न दृश्यनिमित्तग्रहस्तत्त्वदृष्टिः सिध्यति। यद्यदृश्या, न पक्तव्यं तथता साक्षादर्शन मिति । दर्शनादर्शनयो 169 फयं नाम साम्यम् । शान170 संस्कृतम् तथता चासंस्कृता इति स्वभावचेपम्यम् । यदि दर्शनम्, 'विषमदर्शन[मेव ] सिध्येत् । सर्यान् धर्मस्वभावान् पश्यतीति दर्शनमपि सर्वथा तदा अजाति- स्वभावकम् । अत एवमदर्शनमेर प्रशप्त्या [ 172 ] दर्शनमुच्यते । इति' न घेपम्यम् । सर्वधर्मा अनभिसमया इत्येकक्षणसाक्षात्कार एव सत्या. भिसमयो नाम न दूपयितव्य मात्मस्वेदनमिति। दु साधनत्यात् । ज्ञान ज्ञानस्या तत्त्वासाक्षात्कारकं स्यात् । द्विविधमपि न दृश्य- विषयस्वभावम् । अभिन्नत्वाइ युगपत्सर्वसाक्षात्कारः। यदि परमार्थत , विषयनिमित्तावमासो ज्ञान प्रकृतितोऽजातिस्वभावम् । अतो नाभिसमयो न च प्रतिलाम 1780 यथाह सूत्रम् । न त्यया अभिसमयेनाधिगमेन घा तथागते दशनं फार्यम् । अयं फायः सर्वचपियातीत16 इति हि ब्राह्मण तथागतो योधिमूले सुनिषण्णः साक्षात्करोति सर्वधर्मान् अधिगम्यान् सर्वमिथ्या- 169 Lt adokya Poussin renders this passage thos: "Voir ce QOL n'est pas visible, est-ce-là ce que vous nommoz adequet? But this is not the benea intended in the sentence 170 Io derived from darjana 171, See question to this effect on P 91,5 173 Or prakabana, darsana 179 This te not clear eten from the comment which introduces it simply wa, tatha hs Pousain puts it "Lo Bavoir de pent pas realiger la vial dature du savoir' My rendering is strictly e coording to the Chinesa syatar 174, Jhana and vuşaya, according to the comment Or adhigama 176M. mittip 641,36 na Yogacarah ... kasyacid dharmasya praptim scchati na abhısama yam 1 175 ·KARATALARATNA OF BHAVIA . 97. विपर्याससमुत्पनक्लेशसमुच्छेदम्। एवमादि सूत्रमपि सर्वथा अनुसतव्यम् । इत्यले प्रासङ्गिकेन । प्ररतं विचारयामः॥ चरण नाम भ्रमणम्। चरणं नास्तीति अचरितम् । प्रतिपत्ति- विहीनम् नामिनिवृत्तम्। निर्विकल्पकप्रशोऽनिमित्तं चरन्नेव घरति178 इत्यतोऽचरित एव चरतीत्युच्यते । अनेन तु संक्षिप्योक्तं पूर्वयत् [ 17b] प्रहाणसंसिद्धफलम् ॥ योगाचार एवमविकल्पप्रज्ञावारिस्थात् अचरप्लपि चरति, चरन्नेव न चरति। सर्वालम्बनमनस्कारवियितः सर्वधर्माणामत्यन्ताभाषप्रतिष्ठितः तथथाकाश:180 | सर्पपरिफल्पापगतो पिशुद्धः शान्तो निरोधसमापत्ति प्रविष्ट इय सर्वधर्मस्वभावान पश्यति । युद्धानां धर्मकायोऽचिन्त्यः अपरिच्छिन्नः181 मध्यः अनालयः अलक्षणः अश्यः अविशतिका अनुत्पादः अनिरुद्धः, अनुदयव्ययः182 परिशुद्धः शान्तः निर्विशेष8 अपिग्ध:18 अनाभासः समलवीरणविगत:1851 सर्वयुद्धि- प्रशामिलापविषयमार्गातीत:1861 पयं पश्यन्नपि न पश्यति यत् फिञ्चन । अपश्यन्नपि पश्यति पश्यन्नेव न पश्यति ।। . 177.yuth. Poussia • "isplacor-fonler" 178. Bataeshssuka, p. 766 • na carala ritpe tiparimatiol na rupamnslyam.sts caratst yo tipo carati 4% nimitte caralt ... 1 Astaechasrika, p. 401 , daya camudacdra na pravartanto i va evam caral sa na kracit caralı 1 179. Lt.idan. 180. Povssin: Tadyatha-kale. 181. Rosav,1620, 8lddhi,x,16b6IL.V.P.), 182, Nirutpath kşuya (L. Y.P). 189, Omitted by Poussin. 184. Another reading: anumitia-Sanghai and Taisho ds. This readlog is supported by the comment, 186. "Detaut-souiltur" (ILV.P.). 186. Or Budahaprajmans on p.05.1. 13 ·58 JEWIL IN HAND : एवं सम्यग्दर्शनपरिगृहीतत्वात् अप्रमाणपुण्यराशिमभिवर्धयति अनन्तं- प्रणीतसुखफलमुपचिनोति। 187विशुद्ध्येकरसः परदुःसं नाशयति भैपज्य राज व सर्व [ 18 a] सम्यक्प्रार्थना1 प्रणिधानयहुलः । एवं तथागतधर्मकायसम्यगवलोकनं सर्वधर्माणां भावामायनिमित्ता- दर्शित्वात सम्यग्दृष्टिरित्युच्यते। सर्वपरिकल्पानामुपशमः सम्यक् संकल्पः । सर्वधर्मा निमपञ्चाः सर्वामिलापसंप्रशान्ता इति साक्षात्कारः सम्यग्वाक् । सर्वधर्मा अमृतफस्वभाषा इति कायपाड्मनोमिस्तद्धतुकर्माकरणं सम्यक् कान्तः। सर्वधर्मा 18 अनुदया अव्ययाः, यश्च धर्मस्वभाव उदयो व्ययञ्च [स] सदानुत्पन्नः [इति ] सम्यगाजीवः। सर्वधर्मा अनारम्भा इति 190चीयोपायानभिसंस्कारः सम्यग्व्यायामः । सर्वधर्माणामत्यन्तासाक्षा- दर्शनविषयता भावाभावमननविगमो यत्किञ्चन निश्चयामावः सम्यम् ध्यानम् । एवं सम्यक् पश्यन् तथा मायाप्टाशिफमार्गमभ्यस्यति । अर्थोऽयं विस्तरेण यथा योधिसत्यापिटफे तत्र तत्र देशितः।। एवं सम्यक् पश्यन् न फेवलमार्यापाङ्गमार्गमभ्यस्यति [18b ] संक्षिप्योक्ता पट्पारमिता अपि परिपूरयति । 191अप्रयोगेऽपि घस्त्वस्ति। कथमयमर्थः । 191तथा हि। सर्वप्रकारनिमित्तानि विसृजति सर्वक्लेशांश्चोत्सृजति इतीयं नाम दानपारमिता॥ सर्यालम्बनानि घ्युपशमयति। अनुपलम्भभावनां मनसिफरोति । इयं शीलपारमिता॥ सर्वालम्वनानां घेदनां न क्षमते । . 187. Ponesia takes this compound as adjective to phala Bul, I have done it otherwise according to the comment 189 It prarthita 189 Tseno, trddhi, upacaya, chsen, hrasa dpacaya Poussin's rendering of this passage does not accord with the Ohigeso, sgatas 190 yong mong-Ita according to Rosenberg, Poussin puts it "energe"-tirya 191-191. This portion is lett out by Poresin - ·KARATALARÁTNA OF BEIAYYA 99 श्यं क्षान्तिपारमिता ॥ अनुपादानमनुत्सर्गश्च सर्वचर्या निस्सरति । इयं वीर्यपारमिता । सर्वमनस्कारासमुदावारेणात्यन्ताप्रतिष्ठानम् । इयं ध्यानपारमिता। सर्वधर्माणां प्रपञ्चानुत्यानं द्वयनिमित्तविविकासा] इयं प्रज्ञापारमिता ॥ भयमों विस्तरशो यथा ब्रह्मपरिपृच्छास्त्रादौ तत्र तत्र देशितः। एवं 198मुविहारोऽप्रमाणाद्वारं भवति। अपरिमितसूत्रे भगवता विस्त- रेणोक्तम् । महाहितबहुल: 14समृद्धो भवति । इति] । शानिनो यथावत्वं जानीयु प्रमादविरहिताश्च शिक्षामारमेरन्199 ॥ [इति ] महायानफरतलरत्नशास्त्रम् 1 समाप्तम् ] -[0]:- 192 Biksasamrecays 125, do (Csoma) 13-Compare la pratique des Paramitas dapa Gruddbotpada 9,2 13b ( L V. P.) 199-199. Lelt out by Poussin 194 JOB I havo suggested samyddhs tontatively ·58 JEWFL IN HAND : एवं सम्यग्दर्शनपरिगृहीतत्वात् अप्रमाणपुण्यराशिमभिवर्धयति अनन्त: प्रणीतसुखफलमुपचिनोति। 16पिशुध्येकरसः परदुःखं नाशयति भैषज्य- राज इव सर्व [ 18 a] सम्यक्प्रार्थना138 प्रणिधानबहुलः । एवं तथागतधर्मकायसम्यगवलोकनं सर्वधर्माणां भावाभावनिमित्ता- दर्शित्वात सम्यग्दृष्टिरित्युच्यते। सर्वपरिकल्पानामुपशमः सम्यक् संकरपः । सर्वधर्मा निष्प्रपञ्चाः सामिलापसंप्रशान्ता इति साक्षात्कार: सम्यावान् । सर्वधर्मा अमृतफस्वभावा इति फायवाड्मनोभिस्तद्धेतुकर्माकरणं सम्यक् फर्मान्तः। सर्वधर्मा 18अनुदया अव्ययाः, यश्च धर्मस्वमाय उदयो व्ययश्च [स] सदानुत्पन्नः [इति] सम्यगाजीयः। सर्वधर्मा अनारम्भा इति 190वीयोपायानभिसंस्कारः सम्यग्व्यायामः । सर्वधर्माणामत्यन्तासाक्षा- दर्शनविषयता भावाभावमननविंगमो यत्किञ्चन निश्चयाभावः सम्यम् ध्यानम् । एवं सम्यक् पश्यन् तथा आर्याप्याट्रिकमार्गमभ्यस्यति। अर्थोऽयं विस्तरेण यथा योधिसत्त्वपिटफे तत्र तत्र देशितः ॥ एवं सम्यक् पश्यन् न फेवलमार्याष्टाङ्गमार्गमभ्यस्यति [18 ] संक्षिप्योक्ता पटपारमिता अपि परिपूरयति। 191अप्रयोगेऽपि घस्त्यस्ति। कथमयमर्थः। 19तथा हि। सर्वप्रकारनिमित्तानि विसृजति सर्वक्लेशांचोत्सृजति इतीयं नाम दानपारमिता। सर्यालम्यनानि व्युपशमयति। अनुपलम्भमायनां मनसिकरोति । इयं शीलपारमिता॥ सर्वालम्बनानां घेदनां न क्षमते। 187. Poussia takes this compound as adjective to phala But, I bave done it otherwise according to the comment. 168 Lat. prarthila 169. Tseng, uddhi, upacaya, chief, hrasa apacaya, Poussin's renderlag of this presege does not accord with the Chinese, syntax. 190 vong mong-tita according to Rosenberg Poussin puts it 'energis"-firya. 191-191. This portion is lelt out by Poussin.

·KARATALARÁTNA OP BHAYYA 99 इयं क्षान्तिपारमिता ॥ अनुपादानमनुत्सर्गश्च सर्वचर्या निस्तरति । इयं घार्यपारमिता ॥ सर्वमनस्कारासमुदाचारेणात्यन्ताप्रतिष्ठानम् । ध्यानपारमिता॥ सर्वधर्माणां प्रपञ्चानुत्थान द्वयनिमित्तविविक[ता] इयं प्रज्ञापारमिता ॥ अयमों विस्तरशो यथा ब्रह्मपरि192पृच्छासूत्रादौ तत्र तत्र देशितः। एवं 10सुविहारोऽप्रमाणद्वारं भवति। अपरिमितसूत्रे भगवता विस्त- रेणोक्तम् । महाहितयहुलै: 11समृद्धो भवति । [इति] । शानिनो यथातत्त्वं जानीयुः प्रमादविरहिताश्च शिक्षामारमेन ॥ [इति ] महायानफरतलरत्नशास्तम् [ समाप्तम् । -:[0]:- 19 Sirsxsimuceays, 125, Ndo (Csoma ), 13.-Compare la pratique des Paramitas dang Sraddhotpada, 3, 2, 18b (L V.P.) 193--193. Lott out by Pousala 194. Jao-t. I have suggested samsddks tentatively, ·ADDITIONAL NOTES P.34.2.6 Kobsryakhya, INP 2,123: श्रवणं फ्रमेण ध्रुतचिन्ताभावनामयप्रशोत्पादनार्थम्। तदुत्पादनं क्लेशहाणार्यम् । तत्पुनः सर्वदुःखोपशमलक्षणनिर्याणार्थम् । इति प्रयोजननिष्ठा॥ Ibld, p9,114: तत्र श्रुतप्रयोगजा ध्रुतमयो। युक्तिनिध्यानप्रयोगजा चिन्तामयी। भावनाप्रयोगजा भायतामयी। etc. P 39,60p Pramspavartiks, II, 365. मन्त्रायु पप्लुताक्षाणां यथा मृच्छकलादयः । अन्यथैवाव- भासन्ते तद् परहिता अपि ॥ वृत्ति-अन्यथा सुवर्णादित्वेन । P. 99. 10-12. Road in Maj. 28, Mabahatthipadopana Satta · युत्त पनेतं भगवता:- यो पटिश्चसमुप्पादं पस्सति। स धर्म पस्सति । यो धम्म पस्सति सो पटिन्चसमुप्पाद पस्सति । p. 190 P.44 2 Anumananydrata is explained dhiferently in the Pramaps. Vartika P. 47, 14_n.67. The some in the Kosaryikhya. I, P, 28, 8: मात्मशब्दो हि चित्तमात्मेत्युपवर्यत इति यक्ष्यते । Cp Ibid, p 77,20 (मा.) अहङ्कारसंनिध्यत्वात् चित्तमात्मेत्युपचर्यते । (व्या-) अदवारसंनिश्श्रय आत्मेत्यात्मवादिनः संकल्पयन्ति । Op this statement in the Kathopanigad, III Badkhya doctrin, P.48, 16.10.Cp May Vol 1,p 227 P.67, 100p Beluramati's Trimsiksbbasya : विज्ञानं पुन प्रतीत्यसमुत्पनत्वात् द्रव्यतोऽस्तीत्यन्युपेयम् । p2116 P.61, 19, ADE Koss, Bhsays III, 27,243,15. अयोनिशो मनस्कारहेतुका अविद्योक्ता सूत्रान्तरे इति । and pal, 15. अन्यः पुनराह (=भदन्तश्रीलाम' ) अयोनिशो मनमागे हेतुरविद्याया उक्त सत्रान्तरे।

·102 JEWEL IN HAND : . P. 62, 6 This ides 18 Tell expressed in the Sattanipåla 843 : सञ्चति खो ब्राह्मण किं पदेय्य, मुसाति पा सो विवदेथ घेन । यस्मि सम विसमचापि नत्यिस फेन वादं पटिसंयुजेय्य ॥ P.69,14 Cp Nyayamukhaad ter.7, Tucel, Translation, P 30. P 71,2ct- निर्वाणस्य महायाने प्रतिषिद्धत्वात्- -Abhis. Aloka, p 57. P 71,14 तथताभावस्तथता इत्यत एव निर्देशस्य हस्वत्वमित्याचार्यवसुबन्धुः। Abhis. Aloka, p 369 P. 77.10Cp. on explanation in Abh. Kosaryanhya II, 44,283 (भा-) कथं पुनर्भगवानुभयतो भागविमुकः। (व्या-) फ्लेशा- घरणं समापत्यावरणश्चोभयतो भाग.। ततो विमुक्तः । P 77,12,064 It will be interesting to note the whole context here. निर्वाणसामान्यगतैस्ततोऽन्यैरपि पुद्गलैः । तवातुलघुद्धधर्मरन्तर सुमहामहम् ॥ शून्यतामात्रसादृश्यात् यदि नाधिक्यता भवेत्। रोमकूपाणुकच्छिद्र पाफाशं प्रतिबिम्बयेत् ॥ P.78, 12 The Statement: Khaptuspa etc. is rather ambiguous as it stande in the Chinese. The commentary explains it as follows: "If you say it is not lost," etc parports to relate the capporting factor, "If you say it is not lost" is stated towards the Vadin's ( -Sastra ucarya) tormer statement of the existence of sky flower being lost " So [ Prativsain ] nor says it is not lost. "Sky-Power-non-existent term" etc explains the factor of its not being lost "The term" ( Sabda) means the statement of the term That is to say { my] statement of non existent sky-floker can combat the statement of the non-existent sky flower of the Vedia, by explaining that it is the same as the Indhult of the real nature Then the nature ( stabhava) of sky-flower is not non existent The Vedio's samadystanta cannot be established ·KARATALÁRATNA OP B11AVYA 103 8o my original pakça is not lost. This is the re-etatement of the supporting factor of the Pratlvadin by the Vadin. It appears now that we may congtrue the sentenco bere 10 the Skt. text thus: असत्यपुप्पमिति शन्दोक्तत्रिधातूनां सस्यमावत्यात् । If this my reading is accepted, tho stop put after sabda, Sheng in the Chipeco text must be omitted. The commentary also appears to support this conjucturo. P. 83, 8. n 97. Op. Pram. Varsytti ad IP, 167: Deyanukadekramena karyadravyasamyogaparamparaya ca dravjam tilpadyate Doyanuka is cometimos called parent atom. Though it 18 prodact, yet it is the same as the original atom in quality, there is nothing newly added and croated in the combipation of two atomas (Op. the extract from Kwelci's commentary on the Vijiptımatrata. vimbika of Vasubandba in the Valsesika Philosophy, p 129. with noto 3 ) According to Sridhara "& single atom and three atoms have no productiveness, and a doyanuka must codzin with another dvyanuka to produce any of the thinca in the world " Ibid p. 190 It appears that our author, Bhavnviveka wants to disprovo gome such view of the dvyanuka atoms in this passage Dr E. Di draws attention to the fact that Bhavayıveka does not call single atoms drapya, but two atoms and three atoms are so called , ( Op Nadjo, No 1085, Prajwapradipa; Pp. 60a, 91 'b ) Ibid 131 According to Dbarmepāla dryanuka is perceptible, but sotarakşıta—Kemalafilas take it to be imperceptiblo, Bee Alambanaparikşd, p 60 with Note, 10 One may refer profitably to my paper : Saskardobarya on Bud. Idealism, in the Jour. of 8 V. O Institute, Tirupati, Vol I, part 2, for some discussion on atomio theory P. 88,18 o 123 J Masude points out that the samyaktva-nsyama is the first stage of the Daréanam&rga The word nyama has been apolysed into nis+ama ame meaning "rawness", is the pa88100 or that iodriya which did not ripe The Aryan path can transcend the rawnees, therefore it is called nıyame And he says that the samyaktua is interpreted to mean nirvana or Eryat path, 600 bis translation of Vasumitra's Bad, Sects, pp. 27, S, and 409, P. 89, 8, P. 90, 6 Thero is only ono quotation 80 far from this Satra, namely in the M. yritl, p 616, 1-4. Some Sutra of this name ·104 JEWEL IN HAND : in Nedjio's Catalogue No 264-265-No 172 in the Cat the Tib Bud Capods Japan P 91, 10 Cp Haribhadra's remark: धर्मतेषा सम्यक् प्रतिपन्नसमाधे. योगिनो बुद्धाफरक्रियत इति । Abb Aloka p 62 and see Astas&basrik& p 13 19 P 97,1 Doubtfal passages of the Satras should be interpreted in the light of the other passages whose imports could not at all be doubtful. this 18 one of the principles adopted in the science of interpretation Haribhadra informs us that the same has been sanctioned by Buddha himsell. प्रदेशान्तरे भगवताभिहितम्-सूत्रं मिक्षन सूनान्तरेण व्याख्या- तव्यम् fa i Ibid p. 45 P 97 5 Op Similar expression in Brhadaraxyaka IV, 3 23 यई तन्न पश्यति, पश्यन् चै तन्न पश्यति । नहि द्रष्टु दष्टे विपरिलोपो विद्यते। अविनाशित्वात् । This appears to be the eame as the ekakpapasākgatkara ( p 96 ) of our author P 98 13 Nothing is known about the Bodhisattvapitaks only reference to it 18 in Rosenberg's Vocabulary p 899, o 3, and the Dictionary of Chin Bod terms by W E Soutbill and L Hodous where it is simply mentioned P 99 4 No 168 in the Catalogue of the Tib Bud Canons Sendai Japan 1934 There is No Obinege version known to us ·INDICES

·TABLE OF INDICES
I. Canonical Quotations.
II. Acāryas.
III. Sanskrit Index
IV. English Index:
V. Bibliography.

·found CANONICAL QUOTATIONS CHAPTER-I > ► , 16 P, 39 9. Bhagavan the... on non-substantiality of dharmas and on Dharmata-Sanpaia-Buddha P 40, 1-2 Yah pratyayair idyalt... P. 47,12 13. Atma hi atmono natha) .. P, 48 3. Yathoktam ou concomitance of birth and decay 11-13 (M Nikaya ).. A dodiel doos not inour the contradio. tion of one's own proposition P. 48 16 Bhagavin .. Anatmakas sarasamskarahi Anityas sartasamskarah P. 60, 17-19 Bhagavan...on two antas P. U6, 15. D 69,4 Yena śanyan . na śrnyata. P. 62, 6 Bhagapan...on denial of true and false . 13. On Dharma Dot being made void by means of volan099 P.66, 1. Bhagavan...on the method of charity by . Bodhisattva. 3. ...On worthiness for becoming & Bodhisattva. .. On Bodhisattva's preference to the worldly Borvice 13. On Bodbi devord of time limitations ID 31 10 1. CHAPTER-II 22 16 16 P 63, 15 Akulam andophil from Abh, Kosa. P. 70,8 Bbagayin.. on Pratisantby pisodbs. .) 10. Oo Nirvops 14. On mitmetasaitua, 17, On negation of existonce to Nirvâ a. P 71, 1-3 On Nirvios mere a concept 2.94,9 Slevom ( - Maliyniriqaziprecha 2 Imr. Ve Faltid eyg 4. On Ceramirthagstys not within the domain of dឱpa G Oa Bodbi not obtainable, 7-8 On seeing of Truth being an absence of dbarpos. seeing P. 76, 3-6 ( Agama) On sampraskana J 91 ·108 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS 10 P. 76, 2. Sitte...on Tathigats, a status of absolute absence of birth, ► ,9. Tadigame..on the soul not reached by the mind and speech. P. 85.6. Prajħapäramitayam... (Šatas. ) on Bodhisattva's non.. conception of any aspect of any thing. P. 56, 14. Bhagarath... ( Kaśyapapar. ) on madhyama pratipad. P. 87, 5, On the same topic. P. 88. 1. On Boddhisattva's not taking any object for meditation por realisation of any coal. P. 89, 7. Sætre. od ParamExtbasatya P. 89, 8, Danijustipanprccha op'the wisdom-eye. *P. 90, 4, Bhagavan...on true intellection pratipait: ). P. 90,5 Sadra...on Tathagata's not perceiving Bodhe. P. 90.6 Manjuſripariprccha on seeing the truth. P. 91. 10. Satra...on Bodhisattva's having instruction from Buddhas, P. 92, 8. ... On the negation of dharma and kaya and on the meaning of Aryas' silence, P. 93, 9. Satre...on the mind insoparable from digorimination, P. 96; 14, On Tathagatakayadarśaps. P. 98, 13. Bodhisattraputaka on true interpretation of eight-lola path. P. 99, 4. Brahmoporsprccha on trpe interpretation of six paramitas 5 .

·1
INDEX OT ĀCĀRYAS
Aciryes whose opinions are cited in the foot actos
(abbreviated below n )
Udyotakara 37 a 26 47 64 63 131
Kamalagila Ad Notes
Kuntaka ( Vyaktıviveka ) 39 31
Kuminile 39 A 31 41 n 48 42 49 44 66, 69 12
Candrakirti 39 n 33 40 37 42 nn 46 47 61 n 85
Dioniga 39 n 31 42 n 49 43 51 46 61 80 a 85
Dinakara 36 20
Dharmakirti passim under Pramipavārtika and Nydyabında
Dharmapala 36 n 18 19 21 73 97 83 97
Dharmottara 98 o 30
Nagarjuna 38 28 39 n 32 44 558 60 122
Buddha 44 a 62
Bhaaglis 30 on 20 29
Bh&veviToka Ad Notes
Naztreya 40 o 37 60 122
Yabomatra 67 23 89 129
Vabubandbn 46 56 60 D122 80D 85
Vasumitra 9770
V1j0nabbikgu 82 62
Sabaragvamın 69 12
Santarakşıta Ad N
Sridhara
Sthiramat 64 n 137

·असर्वत्वाव 43,.. 14 III SANSKRIT INDEX The first figure refers to pages and the next to lines. अकथ्य 37,8,60, 2. असंस्कृत 13, 1.3. अगोचर 91, 9, 2. 145392, 6. अवलज्ञान 84,15. आकाश 67, 10--11, 1.2%3 अचेलक 83,9. 7I, IB73018 -आयतनसमापत्ति 68, 16. अञ्जन 34,2. अद्वय 84,9%3 87,7-8. आगम 1,1; 71,6375.53 अनवतप्तहृद्य (M.S.) 40,0.37. 76,9389, 12. अधिष्ठित 39,6. आत्मन् 47, 123860, 123; अनभिलाप्य 60,9.10. 6,9376, 5, 10, II,82, अनिर्वचनोयख्याति 60, n. 123. a.१.; (वित्त) 47, 43; अनुत्पत्तिनिस्स्यमाय 58, 8. -बाद 76,n.543 अनुमान 39,3363,73 68, -संवेदन 96, 9. 5, 16,69, 5. 72,113 आनन्द 50,18. 81,5383,113B आमास 93, 10. =युकिनिध्यप्ति 64,n. 138. आमोग 84.15; 87, 11-12. -न्यूनता 44,2, आर्यसत्य 71,33773. अन्त०,12-11,259 आश्रयपरावृत्ति 73,7,n. 49%; 76, । 9-103; 83,3,86,4,5, 15, इन्द्रियत्वात् 52, I. अन्ययान57,15. इष्टदेव 65, 8. अप्रतिसंख्यानिरोध 71, 14. उत्पत्तिनिस्स्वभाव 56, 13358,9. अप्रमत्त40,2. उपलक्षण 63, 12; 68, 7, 1.6. अमिता SI, nn.85,9578, 1. ऋद्धि 39,6378, 1. अभिमुखी 63,4. एकयानप्रस्थानिक 7, 16. अभिव्यकि 38, 0.29 फाश्यप 86,143 87,5. 59,5-7,11. फाय (तथागत-) 96,15. अमिसमय 11.7191,2,6,73 फायेन साक्षात्र 92, 10. 96, 12, 14. अर्थापत्ति 69, 10;-सम 69, 12. भईन 95, 1, 1.163. अत्यवादिन 40, 3. 4 फामल 34,2. केशोण्डुक 41,2. फौशेयमिमि 357 4. क्लेश 61, 17377,43 -आवरण 77, II असंपास्य 57.9.

·INDICES III दीप 9, 1. 1 रात्म्य 77,9. :-आयतन - सपुष्प 34, 10% 59,11367, तमिरिक 41,2; 84, 12. 4370, 2-472,4378, विधातु 78,1,-79,6: 6-79, 103 Ad. Notes. त्रिमण्डलपरिशुद्धि 65,6566, 12. गवाजपाल 3310%; 395540, त्र्यध्य 6, . 7:41,13374,13. दर्शन (by convention) गुण 63,9. 96,73-मागे 77,3. चित 10,15393, 1-6. चित्रकार 34,153735,2. दृष्टान्त 36, an. 20-26%3; 80,85. जिनपुत्र 41, 15345, 6. द्रव्यसत् 35,12. शान (लौकिफलोकोत्तर)73, धर्म 82, 2.92; 92,9;-काय 75, 8-9374,13; 7376, 1897, 11, 98;-ता by convention 94. II. 34, 7-8 ; 39, 11; 40,6, -लोतस् 87, 13. शापकहेतु 56, 7. -समता 91,47 तत्त्व 380 14. 17. -दर्शन 955-6; धमापद 47, 0.66. --दृष्टि 95, 8-10%; 96, 1. धातुसंज्ञा 88, 16, -व्याकरण 91, 10,927. 6. तत्त्वामृतावतार 58,176,14. ध्यान 88, 1-14. तथता 35,1871, 143731 ध्यापितमुष्टिसूत्र, भार्य-(M. S.) 74, 6,11374,1075, I, 1.43. 5376,4-1013395,73 नय 33,6; 34,13. 96,3. नामकाय 46,9. तथागत 71,974,6375, नास्तिक 37,8860, 2. 3376,2791, 10392, निकायिन् , सपर-699. 6396, 14- निरोधसमापत्ति 97.9. -मेकाय 33, n. 2,76. n.54. निमितशब्द 46, 4, तानशाटीय 73, . नियाण 70, 11, 13, 183; 71, 2, 43 तीक्ष्णेन्द्रिय 54.7. 73. तिरोहितवृत्ति 9, 11, 20, निर्विकल्प 33, 11, 16; } • Bur तीथिक 57,15360, 11; 64, 16; 86, n. 1163; 87,83B 10. -पुत्र 71, 1976,3. 88, 7%; nominally 4, तूपणीभाव 92, 8, 13. I. धी, ·VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS नरात्म्य 47, 14. . -काशान 89,4,13594 10. प्रतोतियाध 40,73; 41, 7, II. नेप्यायिक 42, 10346, 12311, 12; प्रत्यक्ष 41, 5. 62, 8, 71, 8. प्रत्यक्षवाध 40,6341, 4. प्रत्यक्षबुद्धि 40, 5. पक्ष 36, 1. प्रधान 79,11. परतन्त्रस्वभाव 57, 1-12; 58, 14; प्रयत्नानन्तरोयफत्व 69, 14. 59, 14, 60, 3, 8. प्रादेशिक 82, 12. परमाणु 63,93 82, 13383,3, 8. प्राप्तकाल 57,16. परमार्थ 89,53B-सत्य 33,6; 34, फलसाक्षात्किया 88, 13. 13333, 14,74,4; 89,7:-ध्यान याल 59,6. 87, 16, बुद्धशान 59,6. परिकल्पितस्वभाव 61, योधि 66, 14; 74,590,6; महा- पशुपक्ष्यादि 61, 8. 66, 12-16;-मूल 96. 163 पारमिता, पर-98,19. -सत्त्व 66,3-4 पुरुष 79, 11,81,4. योधिसत्त्वभूमि (M.S.) 6o, n. 122. प्रकृतिपुरुषवादिन 78, 5. ब्रह्मवर्य 66, 6. प्रशप्ति 37,1;--धर्म 60, 1-2. ब्रह्मपरिपृच्छा ( M.S.) 99, 4. प्रशा 34 3, 2.6%; 9354:94, 8, - ब्राह्मण 48, II; 62,6%3 66, 133B 10 as the sun 93, 13 74,6396,15. -चक्षुस् 74, 3-43; 89, 8-11. भगवन्त् 39,9%3 48, II 1530, 7.62,65 66, 1, 3-4. प्रणिधान 33,16398,.. 70, 8, 12, 14; 86, 14; 87.1. प्रतिज्ञा 35, 13, 19; I, n. 833; भाव 35,9. भावना 34,583, 13, 15%3; 84,93 83,28-मार्ग 77. -हेत्वोविरोध 42, 12, nn. 48-49. भैपज्यराज 98, 2, प्रतिपद, मध्यमा-86,4; 87, 2–6. म घोपसिद्धान्त (MM.S.) 58, 2. 12. प्रतिपत्ति १०, I, . 135; यथाभूत- मन्जुश्री 74, 3, 4, 7. 90,43 --परिपृच्छा (M.S.)89,8790, 6. प्रतिषेध 50, 5-11; 62,9-11; मतानुशा 49, 1.75. 63,3379,7. मध्यम see प्रतिपद् and मागे. प्रतिसंख्यानिरोध 70, 8, 17371, 7, मनस् 82, 12; 83,1,8;-इन्द्रियपत 13172,6. -प्रफ 94,1, -विरोध-41,9; -हानि 44, 1.52. 21.

·INDICES 13 । मन्त्र39, 6. लोकानुवर्तन 591 16. मरीचिकासु जलम् 96, 1. पन्ध्यापुत्र 63, 6. महत्परिमाण 5, I. वर्णनाइवर्णन 77, n. 64, Ad. N. महदादि 54, 13. वात्सीपुत्रीय 73, 4, n. 33. महापुरुषवत 33, 14. बाद 57, 16. महेश्वर 65,9. पादिन 49, 10. मानसशान चर्या 95, 3. farien ( Three ) 94, n. 162. माया 34,938,. विकल्पसम 34,49. -पुरुष 56, 1, 8:59,7361,I, विज्ञप्तिमानता 58, 13. 89, 14. विपक्ष 38,539,1. मार्ग 77, 8-93 मध्यम--85,5%3; 87.1 विपाकविज्ञान 75, 8. अष्टाङ्गमार्ग 98, 14. विपुलस्त 34, 45. मिथ्याग्रह 50, 15. विरुद्धाव्यभिचारिन् 69, 7. मुक्ति 77, I. विवादकाल 39,1, 1. 32. मुनिन् 48, 3. वीर्य 33,10. बंधाधान्त 38,. मूढ34,1341,5 मृत्पिण्ड 54, 6, 17, वैभाषिक 68, 13370,7372,63 यक्षपिशाचयिम्य 34, 15, 73,4. वैशेपिक 41, 16%; 45, 12%3SI, 143; धनत्रय 77.7. युक्तयागम 92, 14. 54,5358, 7, 82, ',9%883,9. योगशास्त्र ( M. S.) 56, 2. 1073; व्यङ्गय, व्यञ्जक 63, 1. IBI. व्यक्त 45,9349,4354, 14; 80, योगाचार 56, 7, 11593737 1-2,7. 6; 88, 16;-चारिन 64, व्याख्या 34, 4, 6. शक्ति योगिन् 64, 8, 12163,4367, 13 शब्दयादिन, नित्य-43,153 51, 14. 70,5578,3383, I84, शशङ्ग 40,4. शाब्दिक 42, 1. 49. 14391,7. शास्त्रविरोध 41, 9. योनिशोऽग्रहण 61, 19, 2. 124. शास्तृ 56, 16;58, 14. शिक्षा 43, 1 99, 8. रलचूड (AM.S.) 66, n. 148. रोमकूप 77, 12. शन्यता-बुद्ध 39, 12;--विकल्प 84. रुपदि 55, 2,7. 16; 85,2. 15 57,n.IN. 9, 1, to, 3,8,12, रत्नकूट 86,n. 16.

·संप्रज्ञान75,4. 114 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS -साक्षात्क 87, 14, 1. 121; 88, 18. सर्वरूप 54, 14, 55, 10. शून्यपर्याय 36,43 49, 19. सर्वानित्यत्वात् 43, I. शून्यवादिन 50,311,4. सर्या स्तियादिन् 67, 0.2 संवृतिसत् 63,4. सांख्य 41,17345,9349,335, संवृतिनय 77.9. 16854,13356,4358,73 संवृत्युपवार 59, 16. 79, 11; 83.9. संस्कृत 35, 6. साजात्य 80,1,2.78. साध्यमिन् 38, I, संयोघ33, II. साध्यप्रतिज्ञाविरोध 6r, 8. संयोधि I, II; 93,6. सूत्र 743,6376, 2. संभार 59,16365, 7, n. 144. सौत्रान्तिक 72 to. सत्ता 80, 1,2,7,2.78%381, 8, स्तेन 49,13,14. nm.83, 86. स्वभाववादिन 43, 8, सत्य see आर्य ;-दर्शन 74,7391, स्वभावविफल्प 89,37940 12. 6,-अभिसमय 96,9. स्वभाषादि 6,9. सत्ययावतार ( M.S.) 71, 11.46. स्वयूथ्य 77, L सन्तान 40, 10,1341, 1. हीनयानिन् 77, 1. समतादर्शिन 91,45 हेतु (उभयसम्मत) 46,5,1035149, समनुपश्यति 85, pastim. 10968,2. समन्वय 80,20.78-79. हेयावरण 83, 14. समयविरोध 70,9. सम्यक्त्वनियाम 88, 12, n. 123, Ad. N.

·IV ENGLISH INDEX NB figure refers to pages Abbimukhi 20 Absolute objoot meditation 29 Akaritratys 21 Akitakatve 21 Antidote 23 Anatpattipiggyabhave 16 Abutpada 21 Animal kingdom 18 Apavida 9 Apparitional being 24 Aadabi 8 Atoms 20,26,27. Atipragadge 9 Attainment 21, 23 Acaryas 11, 12, 13 Atastyatada samapattı 21 Aryen silence 30 Aspect sixteen 25 see dependent imputed Ass 18 Atman 10, 20 Beliefs 11 Bhavadharma 20 BHAVANA path of-25 Bha198jyarija 31 Bodbi, mabo. 20,-Sattva 20 Buddha 4, 6, 8, 18, 23 Buddbi 6 Buddblata 6 B Charity 20 Oitta 10. Cocoon 3 Collurium 1, Concomitance 29 Contradiction 6 Conventional talk 16 CoDgcioneles29 Cow 18 Darkans path of-25 Debate 4 Doflement 18 Dependent aspect 16, 17. Dharma 5, Dharma body or Norm body 31, Dhermata 1, Dharmin 6 Dbatu ides of-29 Disgust 25 Disputant 10 Dream 5 Enligbtened men 16 17 Lternalism 17 Ether 21, 22 23, 31 Eye defect or disease 16 Excommunicated 15 17. Experience 6 Extremes, two - 28, 29, Force (faktı) 11 Fortalese 29 Gem-like scripture 12 Goal 32 Gode 20 Illuminating factor 19 Illusory person 13 15 Image 29 Imageless 29 Impated aspect 15, 18 Indriyatya 12 Indescribable 17 Insight 25 ·176 VISYA-BHARATI ANNALS Instruction 90 Intermediate epaco 24 Jtey&yarada 27 Khapuspa 22 Knowledge (Bupranandane )1 3 24 29 30 ( unghakable ) 28 Krtakatya 7 Leader 17 Logic means of -19 Logic an 6 7 8 12 23 Lokānuvarlana 17 Madhyamaka Magic power 12 Magically created 12 13 17 18 28 30 Magolan 4 Mabovers 20 Master 16 23 25 Material cause 14 Matohless 29 MLy& B Meditation 1 Mind 11 16 27 30 (faculty) 12 Mimemtaka 14 Naked bod ed 27 Negation 19 Nihil gm 11 17 Nirmitagabda 9 Nirvana 23 Non all Non entity 23 Non duality principle of-28 29 Non substantiality 28 29 Non poid 28 Omnipresence theory of-15 Painter 2 Paksa 79 Paratadtrs 15 16 Particolarisation (upalakşaps) 21 Path of moderation 28 -cigbtfold 31 32 Perceptive 5 Perceptional 6 Perfection 6 32 Pointer 14 Purnşa 25 26 Prajiaptıdbarm17 Prajuk 1 Praktı 25 26 Pratipattı 30 Pratisarkbanirodbe 23 Pratityasamutpabbatva 8 19 Prayatpinaptariyakatys 22. Propos tion 21 22, 29 Realistio thinker 22 Reason (heta) 12 Running towards sa object 29 Sadhyagama 9 Sabetuka 8 Samidbi 31 Semyrtyupacbre 17 Sandalwood 26 Skólhy, 6 8 10 12 14 16 28, 37 Saraskāra 8 Sautriotike 34 Science 11 Siddhesadbane 7 8 13 18 24 28 Suik worin 2 Self purification 31 Sky flower 25 26 Soul 18 25 Speeche 16 18 Speakable 15 18 Sphere three-20 Stream of elements 6 Sucbdesz 24 25 ·INDICES 117 . Banya 16, 25, (vord) 10, 25:--- 1, 2, 5, 8, 11, 12,-yade 11, Sapportless 29 Supreme lord 20 Syllogism 2, 7, 21, 22 Srabbivavidin 7 STavacapavirodha 9, 10 Tamraćatiya 24. Tatbagata 30, 31. Thief 10. Times, three-20 Tirtbika 18, 25, 27 Triguna 14. Truth 1 Noble--28 Vaibhaska 21, 23, 24. Vagogika 6, 8, 12, 14, 16, 26, 27, Våtsfputrigs 24. Vehicle, appall-25 Veil of kpowable things 25 Vikalpagemajali 14 Void, Bee Buaya Vyakta 8, 10 Wisdom-eye 29. Wisdom faring 80 Wisdom-resultant 31. Wisdom-un 30, Worldling 2 Yepe sanyar etc. 16 Yogacara 16, 24, 29. Yogin 19, 20, 22, 25, 27 28, 29, 30, 31.

·176 VISVA-BHARATI ANNALS lostruction 30 Intermediate space 24 JBoy&yaraps 27 Kbapasps 22 Knowledge (supranandado ) 1 3 24 29 30 ( unshstable ) 28 Kitakatya 7 Leader 17 Logic means of --19 Logician 6 7 8 12 23 Lokānuvartans 17 Madhyamaks 2 Magic power 12 Magically created 12 13 17 18 28 30 Magician 4 Mabesver 20 Master 15 23 25 Material cause 14 Matchless 29 Mega B Neditation 1 Miod 11 16 27 30 (teculty) 12 Mimamsaka 14 Naked bodied 27 Negation 19 Nihiligm 11 17 Nirmita sa bda 9 Nr.02 23 Non all 7 Non entity 23 Non duality principle of 28 29 Non substantiality 28 29 Non void 28 Omnipresence theory of-15 Painter 2 Paksa 79 Paratantra 15 16 Particularisation (opalakşaps) 21 Path of moderation 28 -eightfold 31, 32 Perceptive 5 Perceptional 5 Perfection 6 32 Pointer 14 Porusa 25 26 Prajñaptıdharma 17 Prají: 1 Praktı 25 26 Pratipatt: 30 Pratsakbapirodha 23 Pratityasamutpabpalva 8 19 Prayatnagadtariyakatve 22 Proposition 21 22 23 Realistio thinker 22 Reason (hetu) 12 Running towards an object 29 Sadhyasama 9 Sabetaks 8 Samadhi 31 Samurtyapacárs 17 Sandalwood 26 Sinthya 6 8 10 12 14 16 26, 27 Samskirs 8 Sautraotika 24 Science 11 Siddhasadhana 7 8 13 18 24 28 SiIk worin 2 Self purification 31 Sky flower 25 26 Soul 18 25 Speeche 15 1B Speakable 15 18 Sphere three-20 Stream of elements 5 Suchberg 24 25 ·INDICES 117 Sanys 16, 26., (void) 10, 28.-t. 1, 2, 6, 8, 11, 12,-&da 11. Supportlege 29 Supreme lord 25 Syllogian 2, 7, 21, 22 Svabharavidia 7 Svavadana virodha 9, 10 Tecrašatyk 24 Tathagats 30. 31. Thief 10. Times, three--20 Tirtbiks 18, 25, 27, Triguna 14. Truth 1 Nable-25 Vaibhagis 21, 23, 24 Vaikeusika 6, 8, 12, 14, 16, 26, 27. VAtsiputrlyk 24. Vebiole, small-26 Veil ol kpowable things 25 Vikalpasanajati 14 Void, gee Bunya Vyakta 8, 10 Wiadom-oye 29 Wisdom.faring 80. Wisdom-resultant 31. Wagdom-sun 30, Worldling 2 Yeaa kanya. eto 10 Yogáctra 15, 24. 29 Yogin 19, 20, 22, 25, 27 28, 29, 30, 31.

·BIBLIOGRAPHY The following books are consulted in preparing the foot notes end Introduction Abhidharmakoś with Yalomitra s Comment Chap I (BB) II III (ed N Datt). Abhisamayalankára by Maitreya (BB) Abhisamayslankaraloka by Haribbadrs (GOS) Astas&basriktprojb&piramita (BI) Alambansparik & with Dharmapšla s Comment ed N A 9£gtrı (ALS) Upanışads Brhadara yako Katha Kene (ALS) Opayahrdaya-Pre Dioniga Bad Texts (GOS) KAyyalaukára by Bbanata ed Nagapatha Sastri Tanjore Ktbyapaparivarta ed Stael Eolstein Taptraybrtıka by Kumaris (Chowhomba edo ) Trimsikubbasya by 8thiramati ed 8 Levi Digbanıksys (PTS) Nirukta by Yaska poops 1921 Nyayakosa Nyayabindu with Dbarmotlara 6 Comment (BB) NyAyamukha by Doodga (Eng Trang by Tucci and Sanskrit rendering unpublisbed) Nyyavirtaka by Udyotahara ( Kasi edo ) Ny&yasotras with Botęya Pramanavarliks by Dherazakirta with Vitti ed R Sankrtyayaba Bodbicaryavatara by Sentidoya with Padjike (BI) Bhayasankrantigatra ed N A &ostu (ALS) Maybımanilaya (PTS) Nadhyamalekarıla with Prasannapada (BB) Madhysmak&vatira by Oandrabut ( Tab ed BB ) Skt rendering partly bg N A Sustri Mabaylos Satralankara ed , Levi Lantavatara Satrs ed Nanjio Vigrahary pertani by Nagarjuna ed R Sapkrityayans Vaišeşik: Satrs by Kapids (Eesi ed )

·INDICES
119
Verlesika philosophy by I UI
Vyaktivivoka by Kuntaks Caloutta edp 1928
Satastheerikaprajiapiramita (BI)
Šatagtatravaipulya by Dharmepāla (Chinese text)
Sabara bbagya (Chowk edo )
Saligtarbagatrs (Restored Skt text by N A Sastri )
Slokavårtika by Kumarila ( Chowk ed )
Sık$19amnocaya by Sentideya (BB)
Sankhyakarika Bayar aguptatſ ed N A Bastrı
Sinkhyapravacadabhyasa by Vijianabhikga (BI)
Suttanipata ( PTS )
MSS Remajng of Buddist Literature ed Hoernle Oxford
Pre Dırniga Bad Logical toxts ed G Tucci (608)
Dooumont d' Abhidhorma by L V Poussin BEFEO 1930
L Abhidharmakoka de Vagabandhut traduit par L V Pouagia Paris
1923-1931
Mélanges Chipols et Buddhique Vol II ed L V Poubeln
Vegumitra 8 Baddhist Sects trags by J Meenda Asia Major Vol II
A Chinese commentary ( Boonymous) on The Karatalaratna
published by the Satra engraving Institute
9th year of Chinese Republio Napkio China
Chinese Inoyclopaedia Dictionary ( Chinese edition)
An Introduction to the study of Buddhism part I Vocabulary
bylo Rosenberg Tokyo 1916

·APPENDIX KARATALARATNA Chap 1 [P. N. P. N. 的, 的, 1 緒有所行 192, 異空蒸汽 53. 4,彼 3. 的。 97,顯現異 33, 3. 的, 34. 8,已入 98, 所致 5. 37, 24, 假設同故 90,换 55 101, 文煩 87. 25, 難令…不可…有 58. 68, 34, 被for 彼 102,总投资 58 40. 33. 似 103,有所 66. 105,魍魎 43. 60,阴了 的, 47, 65, 都無所有 110,假立性 59. 66,不相離 118.……迷 48. 的, . 71,所許 120,現 48. 73,同役 164 134,插入 的, 87,所造色 (64.13%,报资 的, 1,宜 ·APPEYDIX KARATALARATNA Chap. II 2. N. P. N. 1, 若不示 8. 9,無能 63. 略舉名招 4, 103, 舞動了知 63. 10, 蒙涉 83. 123, 正離生 70, 18,親 0, 135,7際 70, 15,微妙(妙) 90. 13,其實 71. 21, 聖教 1. 140, 71. 25,促元 03 163.瑟 72. 30,故 104, 瓷器增益 72 33. 辯 95。 107,可見……所見 73. 33.世 for 此 163,起解因故 41,所見 6. 173, . 49,非實性… | 17. 177,(避履) ……… 3. 189,增……减 75, 66,……並 8. 190,勇猛 7月 76, 報現 8, 14,饒益 19 ·ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS . Page line 32, 29 Read "innumerable discourses". 41,'2. वेशमशक as on p,63,l. I. 47, 6. After स्यात् , add : यदि उर्फ पचनं नाभावग्यमिति, संस्कृता अपि माभार- द्रव्याणि इति...... 49, 13. Read परिचोदित for लात- 52,6. Or स्वपक्षरागतृश्या- 56, 14. Lit. इति चेदयमर्थः 57.. Read परिकलितः परतन्त्रखभावे...... "3,10. , परिकल्पितस्वभावः 19. तदा पुनः सिद्ध- 64, 13. चिन्ताप्रश्चिय- 15.0 83, 14-S यत्नेन foraरितं. 6, 8. Note some observations on the Buddhist conception of gods by E. J. Thomas, Life of Buddha, p. 208. 66, 6. The Chinese may syntactically read : कथम् for परम् Add विस्तर : after इति । 77, II. Read विमुक्ति and note Maj. II, 90, P, 129 : एरथ......न विधि मानाकरण वदामि यदिदं विमुत्तिया विमुतिम् । 78, 9. After--मयं add : खपुष्पमस्ति उत न । यदि पति " " 76, 3. -: 84, 17.0 97, 6. सम्यक्प्रदाण = सम्मापधान in Pali. 96, II. साक्षात्कार = Anubhava of Advaitins, v. S. Radhakrsnan, Indian Philosophy, II, p. 310-11. 97,4. Lit. निमित्तमचरन...... 98, ir. After यक्तिधन add : चिन्तनाभावः सम्यवरमृतिः। सकारवर्यधर्मानुपादानेन यक्तियन 97, 7. Read conveniently यथाभूत 123 ·ERRATA 39.6. " " " 9. 26, " 1.28. " . . 14.16. " P.L. 2. 32. Read enveloped' 4. 19. 'converse' 8. 26. Pratitya svavacanavirodha' 'undiscriminative' 12.24. 'gem like 'of' before the nature.' 'is' for 'in' 20.9. Abbimaebil 23.17. 'consider' 32. 'concomtance 34.13. 'परणार्धसत्य' 7. 'क्षात्कार' •35.10. 'सांवृत' 38. 2. 'प्राय 'इपिद्धि- 43.12. 'पाल' 48. . 'या' 1. 1. रितोय' 12.13. हित' 14. . 'आस्यीयेत 14.13. 'सख्य' ".13. 'एक' for टक 'भारमादि' 61 .. 'सो याताम्' 70. 12. 'उद्वेग 'सत्ताहेतु 82. I3. Insert [b] before सना- 88. Read everywhere fafua for farezca " 16.20. 60. 13. " " " 8o. 1. " " " " " " "