by the successive repetition, the word is finally ascertained
simultaneously with the last uttered letter." Therefore,
since Bhartrihari has shown in his first book that the
letters of a word [being many and successive] cannot
manifest the meaning of the word, as is implied by the
very phrase, "We gain such and such a meaning from
such and such a word," we are forced to assume the exist-
ence 2 of an indivisible spliota as a distinct category, which
has the power to manifest the word's meaning. All this
has been established in the discussion (in the Maha bhashya)
on " genus " (jdti), which aims at proving that the mean-
ing of all words is ultimately that summum genus, i.e., that

1 The ghatta is the place where house just as day dawns and is thus

dues and taxes are collected. Some caught. Hence the proverb means

one anxious to evade payment is uddesydsiddhi.

going by a private way by night, - In p. 143, line 13, I read sphota-

but he arrives at the tax-collector's kabhdvam for sphotdbhdvam.



THE PANINI-DARSANA. 215

existence whose characteristic is perfect knowledge of the
supreme reality l (Brahman).

" But if all words mean only that supreme existence, then
all words will be synonyms, having all the same meaning ;
and your grand logical ingenuity would produce an aston-
ishing result in demonstrating the uselessness of human,
language as laboriously using several words to no purpose
at the same time ! Thus it has been said

"The employment of synonymous terms at the same
time is to be condemned; for they only express
their meaning in turn and not by combina-
tion."

" Therefore this opinion of yours is really hardly worth
the trouble of refuting."

All this is only the ruminating of empty ether; for
just as the colourless crystal is affected by different objects
which colour it as blue, red, yellow, &c., so, since the sum-
mum genus, Brahman, is variously cognised through its
connection with different things, as severally identified
with each, we thus account for the use of the various con-
ventional words which arise from the different species, 2 as
cow, &c., these being " existence " (the summum genus) as
found in the individual cow, &c. To this purport we
have the following authoritative testimony

" Just as crystal, that colourless substance, when seve-
rally joined with blue, red, or yellow objects, is
seen as possessing that colour."

And so it has been said by Hari, " Existence [pure and
simple] being divided, when found in cows, &c., by reason
of its connection with different subjects, is called this or
that species, and on it all words depend. This they call
the meaning of the stem and of the root. This is exist-
ence, this the great soul ; and it is this which the affixed
tva, tal, &c., express" (Panini v. i, 119).'

1 Cf. Ballantyne's Transl. of the individual (vyakti) ; the Nydya holds
Mahabhashya, pp. 9, 32. that a word means an individual as

2 The Mimamsd holds that a word distinguished by such and such a
means the genus (jdti) and not the genus (or species).



216 THE SARVA-DARSANA-SANGRAHA.

" Existence " is that great summum genus which is found
in cows, horses, &c., differentiated by the various subjects
in which it resides; and the inferior species, "cow,"
"horse," &c., are not really different from it; for the
species " cow " and " horse " (gotva and afoatva) are not
really new subjects, but each is " existence " as residing
in the subject " cow " and " horse." Therefore all words, as
expressing definite meanings, ultimately rest on that one
summum genus existence, which is differentiated by the
various subjects, cows, &c., in which it resides ; and hence
"existence" is the meaning of the stem- word (prdtipadika).
A " root " is sometimes defined as that which expresses
bhdva ; l now, as bhdva is " existence," the meaning of a
root is really existence. 2 Others say that a root should be
defined as that which expresses " action " (kriyd) ; but here
again the meaning of a root will really be " existence,"
since this " action " will be a genus, as it is declared to
reside in many subjects, in accordance with the common
definition of a genus, in the line

" Others say that action (Tcriyd} is a genus, residing in
many individuals."

So, too, if we accept Panini's definition (v. i, 1 19), "Let
the affixes tva and tal come after a word [denoting any-
thing], when we speak of the nature (bhdva) thereof," it is
clear from the very fact that abstract terms ending in tva
or td [as asvatva and asvatd] are used in the sense of bhdva,
that they do express " existence." " This is pure exist-
ence " from its being free from all coming into being or
ceasing to be; it is eternal, since, as all phenomena are
developments thereof, it is devoid of any limit in space,
time, or substance: this existence is called "the great
soul." Such is the meaning of Hari's two kdrikds quoted
above. So, too, it is laid down in the discussion on sam-
bandha [in Hari's verses] that the ultimate meaning of ail

1 Cf. Rig- Veda Pratis. xii. 5. monly received definitions of some

2 He here is trying to show that grammatical terms,
bis view is confirmed by the com-



THE PANINI-DARSANA. 217

words is that something whose characteristic is perfect
knowledge of the real meaning of the word Substance.

"The true Eeality is ascertained by its illusory forms; the
true substance is declared by words through illusory dis-
guises ; as the object, ' Devadatta's house/ is apprehended
by a transitory cause of discrimination, 1 but by the word
'house' itself, the pure idea [without owners] is expressed." 2

So, too, the author of the Mahabhashya, when explaining
the Varttika, 3 ' : a word, its meaning, and its connection
being fixed," in the passage beginning " substance is eter-
nal," has shown that the meaning of all words is Brahman,
expressed by the word "substance" and determined by
various unreal 4 conditions [as " the nature of horse," &c.]

According to the opinion of Vajapyayana, who main-
tains that all words mean a genus, words like "cow,"
&c., 5 denote a genus which resides by intimate relation in
different substances ; and when this genus is apprehended,
through its connection with it we apprehend the particular
substance in which it resides. Words like " white," &c.,
denote a genus which similarly resides in qualities; through
the connection with genus we apprehend the quality, and
through the connection with the quality we apprehend
the individual substance. So in the case of words express-
ing particular names, in consequence of the recognition
that " this is the same person from his first coming into
existence to his final destruction, in spite of the difference
produced by the various states of childhood, youth, adoles-
cence, &c.," we must accept a fixed genus as Devadatta-
hood, 6 &c. [as directly denoted by them]. So, too, in words
expressing " action " a genus is denoted ; this is the root-
meaning, as in pathati, " he reads," &c., since we find here
a meaning common to all who read.

1 Since Devadatta is only its 4 In p. 145, line 8, read asatya
transient owner. for asn-attha.

2 So by the words "horse," "cow," 5 We have here the well-known
&c., Brahman is really meant, the four grammatical categories, jdti,
one abiding existence. ffuna, dravya or sanjnd, and kriyd.

3 Cf. Ballantyne's Mahabhashya, 6 ' But cf. Siddh. Muktav., p. 6,
pp. 44, 50. line 12.



2i8 THE SARVA-DARSANA-SANGRAHA.

In the doctrine of Vyadi, who maintained that words
meant individual things [and not classes or genera], the
individual thing is put forward as that which is primarily
denoted, while the genus is implied [as a characteristic
mark] ; and he thus avoids the alleged faults of " indefinite-
ness," and " wandering away from its proper subject." x

Both views are allowed by the great teacher Panini;
since in i. 2, 58, he accepts the theory that a word means
the genus, where he says that " when the singular is used
to express the class the plural may be optionally used "
[as in the sentence, " A Brahman is to be honoured," which
may equally run, " Brahmans are to be honoured "] ; while
in i. 2, 64, he accepts the theory that a word means the
individual thing, where he says, " In any individual case
there is but one retained of things similar in form " [i.e. r
the dual means Kama and Kama, and the plural means
Kama, and Kama and Kama; but we retain only one,
adding a dual or plural affix]. Grammar, in fact, being
adapted to all assemblies, can accept both theories with-
out being compromised. Therefore both theories are in a
sense true ; 2 but the real fact is that all words ultimately
mean the Supreme Brahman.

As it has been said

" Therefore under the divisions of the meanings of words,,
one true universal meaning, identical with the one
existent, shines out in many forms as the thing
denoted."

Hari also, in his chapter discussing samlandha, thus
describes the nature of this true meaning

1 Thus we read in the Siddhanta should not include ; if it is held to-

Muktitvali, p. 82, that the Mimamsa mean many individuals, it will have

holds that a word means the genus an endless variety of meanings and

and not the individual, since other- be "indefinite."

wise there would be vyabhichdra and ' 2 This seems the meaning of the

chmntya (cf. also Mahesachandra text as printed tasmdt dmyam sat-

Nyayaratna's note, Kdvya-prak;l.sa, yam, but I should prefer to read

p. 10). If a word is held to mean conjecturally tasmdd advayam sat-

only one individual, there will be the yam, "therefore non-duality is tha

first fault, as it will "wander away" truth."
and equally express others which it



THE PANINI-DARSANA. 219

"That meaning in which the subject, the object, and
the perception [which unites them] are insuscep-
tible of doubt, 1 that only is called the truth by
those who know the end of the three Vedas."
So too in his description of substance, he says
" That which remains as the Eeal during the presence
of modification, as the gold remains under the
form of the earring, that wherein change comes
and goes, that they call the Supreme Nature."
The essential unity of the word and its meaning is
maintained in order to preserve inviolate the non-duality
of all things which is a cardinal doctrine of our philo-
sophy.

"This [Supreme Nature] is the thing denoted by all
words, and it is identical with the word ; but the relation
of the two, while they are thus ultimately identical, varies
as does the relation of the two souls." 2

The meaning of this Karika is that Brahman is the
one object denoted by all words ; and this one object has
various differences imposed upon it according to each
particular form; but the conventional variety of the
differences produced by these illusory conditions is only
the result of ignorance. Non-duality is the true state ;
but through the power of " concealment " 3 [exercised by
illusion] at the time of the conventional use of words a
manifold expansion takes place, just as is the case during
sleep. Thus those skilled in Vedanta lore tell us
"As all the extended world of dreams is only the
development of illusion in me, so all this extended
waking world is a development of illusion like-
wise."

When the unchangeable Supreme Brahman is thus
known as the existent joy- thought and identical with the
individual soul, and when primeval ignorance is abolished,

1 Scil. they can only be the absolute 3 The Samvriti of the text seems

Brahman who alone exists. to correspond to the dvarana so fre-

- Soil, the individual soul (jtva) quent in Vedanta books,
and Brahman.



220 THE SARVA-DARSANA-SANGRAHA.

final bliss is accomplished, which is best defined as the
abiding in identity with this Brahman, according to the
text, "He who is well versed in the Word-Brahman
attains to the Supreme Brahman." x And thus we estab-
lish the fact that the " exposition of words " is the means
to final bliss.

Thus it has been said

" They call it the door of emancipation, the medicine
of the diseases of speech, the purifier of all sciences,
the science of sciences." 2
And so again

" This is the first foot-round of the stages of the ladder
of final bliss, this is the straight royal road of the
travellers to emancipation."

Therefore our final conclusion is that the Sastra of
grammar should be studied as being the means for attain-
ing the chief end of man. E. B. C.

1 This passage is quoted in the Upanishad, i. 3, I, where it is ex-
Maitri Upanishad, vi. 22. plained by Samkara as vidydsv adhi

2 Adhividyam occurs in Taitt. yad darfanam tad adhividyam.



( 221 )



CHAPTER XIV.

THE SANKHYA-DARlANA.

"BUT how can we accept the doctrine of illusory emana-
tion [thus held by the grammarians, following the guidance
of the ptirva and uttara Mimamsa schools], when the
system of development propounded by the Sankhyas is
still alive to oppose it ? " Such is their loud vaunt. Now
the Sastra of this school may be concisely said to maintain
four several kinds of existences, viz., that which is evol-
vent l only, that which is evolute only, that which is both
evolute and evolvent, and that which is neither, (a.) Of
these the first is that which is only evolvent, called the root-
evolvent or the primary ; it is not itself the evolute of any-
thing else. It evolves, hence it is called the evolvent
(prakriti) since it denotes in itself the equilibrium of the
three qualities, goodness, activity, and darkness. This is
expressed [in the Sankhya Karika], " the root-evolvent is
no evolute." It is called the root-evolvent, as being both
root and evolvent ; it is the root of all the various effects,
as the so-called " great one," &c., but of it, as the primary,
there is no root, as otherwise we should have a regressus
ad infinitum. Nor can you reply that such a regressus ad
infinitum is no objection, if, like the continued series of
seed and shoot, it can be proved by the evidence of our
senses, 2 because here there is no evidence to establish the
hypothesis. (&.) The " evolutes and evolvents " are the
great one, egoism, and the subtile elements, thus the

1 I borrow this term from Dr. I Tall.

2 Compare Kusumanjali, i. 4.



222 THE SARVA-DARSANA-SANGRAHA.

Sankhya Karika ( 3), " the seven, the great one, &c., are
evolute-evolvents." The seven are the seven principles,
called the great one, &c. Among these the great prin-
ciple, called also the intellect, 1 &c., is itself the evolute of
nature and the evolvent of egoism ; in the same manner
the principle egoism, called also " self-consciousness "
(dbhimdna), is the evolute of the great one, intellect ; but
this same principle, as affected by the quality of dark-
ness, is the evolvent of the five rudiments called subtile
elements ; and, as affected by the quality of goodness, it
is the evolvent of the eleven organs, viz., the five organs
of perception, the eye, ear, nose, tongue, and skin; the five
organs of action, the voice, hands, feet, anus, and genera-
tive organ; and the mind, partaking of the character of
both; nor can you object that in our arrangement the
third quality, activity, is idle, as it acts as a cause by
producing action in the others. This has been thus
declared by fsVara Krishna in his Karikas 2 ( 24-27),
" Self-consciousness is egoism. Thence proceeds a two-
fold creation, the elevenfold set and the five elemental
rudiments. From modified 3 egoism originates the class of
eleven imbued with goodness ; from egoism as the source
of the elements originate the rudimentary elements, and
these are affected by darkness ; but it is only from egoism
as affected by activity that the one and the other rise.
The intellectual organs are the eyes, the ears, the nose, the
tongue, and the skin ; those of action are the voice, feet,
hands, anus, and organ of generation. In this set is mind,
which has the character of each; it determines, and it
is an organ (like the other ten) from having a common

1 One great defect in the Sankhya 2 It is singular that this is Mad-
nomenclature is the ambiguity be- hava's principal Sankhya authority,
tween the-terms for intellect (buddhi) and not the Sai'ikhya Sutras,
and those for mind (manas). Mad- 3 Vaikrita is here a technical term
hava here applies to the former the meaning that goodness predominates
term antahkarana or " internal over darkness and activity. On
organ," the proper term for the this Karika, comp. Dr. Hall's pre-
latter. I have ventured to alter it face to the Sankhya-sdra, pp. 30-
in the translation. 35.



THE SANKHYA-DARSANA. 223

property with them." 1 All this has been explained at
length by the teacher Vachaspati Misra in the Sankhya-
tattva-kaumudi.

(c.) The " evolute only " means the five gross elements,
ether, &c., and the eleven organs, as said in the Karika,
"The evolute consists of sixteen;" that is, the set of six-
teen is evolute only, and not evolvent. Although it may
be said that earth, &c., are the evolvents of such produc-
tions as cows, jars, &c., yet these are not a different "prin-
ciple" (tattva) from earth, &c., and therefore earth, &c.,
are not what we term " evolvents ; " as the accepted idea
of an evolvent is that which is the material cause of a
separate principle ; and in cows, jars, &c., there is the
absence of being any such first principle, in consequence
of their being all alike gross [i.e., possessed of dimensions]
and perceptible to the senses. The five gross elements,
ether, &c., are respectively produced from sound, touch,
form, taste, and smell, each subtile element being accom-
panied by all those which precede it, and thus the gross
elements will have respectively one, two, three, four, and
five qualities. 2 The creation of the organs has been pre-
viously described. This is thus propounded in the San-
khya Kaiika ( 22)

" From nature springs the great one, from this egoism,
from this the set of sixteen, and from five among
the sixteen proceed the five gross elements."

(d.) The soul is neither, as is said in the Karika, "The
soul is neither evolvent nor evolute." That is, the soul,
being absolute, eternal, and subject to no development, is
itself neither the evolvent nor the evolute of aught beside.
Three kinds of proof are accepted as establishing these
twenty- five principles ; and thus the Karika ( 4).

"Perception, inference, and the testimony of worthy
persons are acknowledged to be the threefold proof, for

1 As produced, like them, from - Cf. Colebrooke Essays, voL i. p.

modified egoism. The reading sam- 256. The tanmdtras will reproduce

kalt.avikalpdtmakam must be cor- themselves as the respective qualities

rected by the Sdiikhya Kdrikd. of the gross elements.



224 THE SARVA-DARSANA-SANGRAHA.

they comprise every mode of demonstration. It is from
proof that there results belief of that which is to be
proven."

Here a fourfold discussion arises as to the true nature
of cause and effect. The Saugatas 1 maintain that the
existent is produced from the non-existent; the Naiya-
yikas, &c., that the (as yet) non-existent is produced from
the existent ; the Vedantins, that all effects are an illusory
emanation from the existent and not themselves really
existent; while the Sankhyas hold that the existent is
produced from the existent.

(#.) Now the first opinion is clearly untenable, since
that which is itself non-existent and unsubstantial can
never be a cause any more than the hare's horn; and, again,
the real and unreal can never be identical.

(b.) Nor can the non-existent be produced from the
existent ; since it is impossible that that which, previous
to the operation of the originating cause, was as non-
existent as a hare's horn should ever be produced, i.e.,
become connected with existence; for not even the cleverest
man living can make blue yellow. 2 If you say, " But are
not existence and non-existence attributes of the same
jar ? " this is incorrect, since we cannot use such an
expression as " its quality " in regard to a non-existent
subject, for it would certainly imply that the subject
itself did exist. Hence we conclude that the effect is
existent even previously to the operation of the cause,
which only produces the manifestation of this already
existent thing, just like the manifestation of the oil in
sesame seed by pressing, or of the milk in cows by milk-
ing. Again, there is no example whatever to prove the
production of a thing previously non-existent.

Moreover, the cause must produce its effect as being
either connected with it or not connected ; in the former

1 A name of the Buddhists. cannot be made a cow, nor a woman

2 I.e., the nature of a thing (Sva- a man.
bhdva) cannot be altered a man



THE SANKHYA-DARSANA. 225

alternative the effect's existence is settled by the rule
that connection can only be between two existent things ;
in the latter, any and every effect might arise from any
and every cause, as there is nothing to determine the
action of an unconnected thing. This has been thus put
by the Sankhya teacher : " From the supposed non-exist-
ence of the effect, it can have no connection with causes
which always accompany existence; and to him who
holds the production of a non-connected thing there arises
an utter want of determinateness." If you rejoin that " the
cause, though not connected with its effect, can yet pro-
duce it, where it has a capacity of so doing, and this capa-
city of producing is to be inferred from seeing the effect
actually produced," still this cannot be allowed, since in
such a case as " there is a capacity for producing oil in
sesame seeds," you cannot determine, while the oil is
non-existent, that there is this capacity in the sesame
seeds, whichever alternative you may accept as to their
being connected or not with the oil [since our before-men-
tioned dilemma will equally apply here].

From our tenet that the cause and effect are identical,
it follows that the effect does not exist distinct from the
cause ; thus the cloth is not something distinct from the
threads, as it abides in the latter [as its material cause] ;
but where this identity is not found, there we do not find
the relation of cause and effect ; thus a horse and a cow are
distinct from each other [for one is not produced from the
other, and therefore their qualities are not the same]; but
the cloth is an acknowledged effect, and therefore not any-
thing different from its cause. 1 If you object that, if this
were true, the separate threads ought to fulfil the office of
clothing, we reply, that the office of clothing is fulfilled by
the threads manifesting the nature of cloth when they are
placed in a particular arrangement. As the limbs of a
tortoise when they retire within its shell are concealed,

i I take arthdntaram here as kavdchaspati's note, Tattva Kau-
simply bhinnam (cf. Tarandtha Tar- mudi, p. 47).



226 THE SARVA-DARSANA-SANGRAHA.

and, when they come forth, are revealed, so the particular
effects, as cloth, &c., of a cause, as threads, &c., when they
come forth and are revealed, are said to be produced : and
when they retire and are concealed, they are said to be
destroyed ; but there is no such thing as the production
of the non-existent or the destruction of the existent. As
has been said in the Bhagavad Gita (ii. 16)

" There is no existence for the non-existent, nor non-
existence for. the existent."

And, in fact, it is by inference from its effects that we
establish the existence of the great evolvent, Nature (pra-
kriti). This has been said [in the Karika, 9]

" Effect exists, for what exists not can by no operation
of cause be brought into existence ; materials, too,
are selected which are fit for the purpose; every-
thing is not by every means possible; what is
capable does that to which it is competent; and
like is produced from like." l

Nor can we say [with the Vedantin] that the world is
an illusory emanation from the one existent Brahman,
because we have no contradictory evidence to preclude
by its superior validity the primd facie belief that the
external world is real [as we have in the case of mistaking
a rope for a snake, where a closer inspection will discover
the error] ; and again, where the subject and the attributed
nature are so dissimilar as the pure intelligent Brahman
and the unintelligent creation, we can no more allow the
supposed attribution to be possible than in the case of
gold and silver [which no one mistakes for each other].
Hence we conclude that an effect which is composed of