On the term Buddhivipari-nāma and the problem of illusory change

7/28/2019 On the term Buddhivipari-nma and the problem of illusory change

1/13

O N T H E T E R M B U D D H I V I P A R I N A M A A N D T H E P R O B L E MO F I L L U S O R Y C H A N G E

byD A V ID S E Y F O R T R U E G G

ParisD u r i n g r e c e n t y e a rs t h e V e d ~ n t i c d o c t r i n e o f il lu s o r y a p p e a r a n c e (v ivar ta)a n d t h e p r o b l e m s c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e i d e a o f il l u so r y ch a n g e , c a u s a t i o na n d d i s c o n t i n u i ty h a v e r ec e iv e d a c o n s id e r a b l e a m o u n t o f at t e n ti o n . I nt h e c o u r s e o f t h is w o r k s e v er a l sc h o o l s o f t h o u g h t - n o t a b l y t h e e a r l yA d v a i t ic a n d t h e B u d d h i s t - h a v e b e e n t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t ; b u t t h e I n d i a nl in g u is ts a n d p h i l o s o p h e r s o f g r a m m a r a p p e a r t o h a v e b e e n s o m e w h a tn e g l ec t ed , a l t h o u g h , a s h a s b e e n n o t e d , B h a r t r h a r i , t h e g r a m m a r i a na u t h o r o f t h e VdkyapadTya, i s p e r h a p s t h e f i r st t o u s e t h e t e r m vivar tatei n a n i l l u s i o n i s t i c c o n t e x t 1 a n d d e s p it e t h e f a c t t h a t t h e i m p o r t a n c e o fPa ta f i j a l i ' s Mahdbhd.sya f o r t h e h i s t o r y o f I n d i a n p h i l o s o p h y w a s r e c o g -n i s e d l o n g a g o . ~

I t w i l l b e r e c a l l e d t h a t t h e t r e a t is e s t h a t d e a l c h i e fl y w i t h t h e p h o n o -l o g ic a l f e a t u r es o f w o r d s i n c o m b i n a t i o n i n t h e V e d i c sam.h i t , s w i t h r e g a r dt o t h e i r f o r m i n i s o l a t i o n t h u s s a f e g u a r d i n g t h e f o r m a n d r e c i t a t i o n o ft h e s e t e x t s, t h e P f f t ti ~ t k h y a s , d e s c r i b e t h e c h a n g e i n sam.dh i o f o n e s o u n di n t o a n o t h e r , f o r e x a m p l e i > y b e f o r e a v o w e l . T h i s l in g u i s ti c p r o c e s si s n o r m a l l y e x p re s s e d b y m o s t o f th e P r ~ t i ~ k h y a s i n a c o r r e s p o n d i n gm a n n e r . T h e .~gvedaprdt iddkhya ru l e s : amum i t i t adbhdvam uk tam, ya-thdntaram ( 1 . 5 6 ) , " ( O n e s h o u l d u n d e r s t a n d t h a t ) t h e e x p r e s s i o n ' t h i s t ot h a t ' m e a n s b e c o m i n g t h a t , w i t h r e f e re n c e t o t h e s o u n d w h i c h ( in it s re -l a t i o n ) s t a n d s n e a r e s t t o i t " . 3 E l s e w h e r e i n t h e R V P r . t h e t e r m vikdra" m o d i f i c a t i o n " is u se d , e .g . i n 2 .5 w h e r e m e n t i o n i s m a d e o f t h e vikdra-gdstra, t h a t is o f t h e r u l e o f t h e m o d i f i c a t io n o f s o u n d s , a n d i n 1 1.4 4 w h e r ee u p h o n i c m o d i f ic a t io n s i n t h e tcramapdt.ha a r e d e s c r i b e d . T h e s a m e t y p eo f s t a t e m e n t i s t o b e f o u n d i n t h e Tai t t i r[yaprdt i~akhya w h e r e w e r e a datl~ vikd rasy a (1 .28) , " a m [i.e . t h e a c c u s a t iv e ] m a k e s t h e n a m e o f a p r o d u c t

Cf. P. Hacker, Vivarta (A AW L [Mainz], Wiesbaden, 1953).2 Cf. O. Strauss, Festschrift Garbe 0Erlang en, 1927), p. 94.a ~gvedapratigakhya,ed. and transl, by Mangal Deva Shastri (Punjab Or. Series,Lahore).


2/13

2 7 2 DAVID SEYFORT RUEGGo f a l t e r a t i o n " : H e r e t h e e l e m e n t t h a t u n d e r g o e s a m o d i f i c a t io n is c a ll e dth e v i k d r i n ( 1 . 2 3 ) a n d a p p e a r s i n t h e n o m i n a t i v e c a s e :

T h e V d j a s a n e y i p r d t i g d k h y a , p r o b a b l y a n e a rl ie r w o r k o f th e v a r t t i k a -k d r a K g t y ~ y a n a , a l s o la y s d o w n t h a t b y t h e a c c u s a t iv e a m o d i f i c a ti o n i si n d i c a t e d ( 1 . 1 3 3 : t a m i t i v i k d r a . h ; cf . 1 .142: v il cd r f y a t h d s a n n a m ) . T h eu n i f o r m i t y o f d e s c r i p t i o n i n t h e V P r . i s h o w e v e r b r o k e n b y t h e r u l e 1 .1 36.s a.s t.h f s t h d n e y o g d ( = P ~.n in i 1 . 1 .4 9 ) ; b u t t h i s e x c e p t i o n c a n b e e x p l a i n e da s a n i n t e r p o l a t i o n : T h e ~ a u n a k f y d - C a t u r a d h y d y i k a ( w h i c h w a s p u b -l is h e d b y W . D . W h i t n e y u n d e r t h e ti tl e A t h a r v a v e d a p r d t tY d k h y a ) 7 a l s od i ff e rs f r o m t h e n o r m a l t y p e o f P r g t ig ~ k h y a d e s c r i p t i o n w i t h it s r u l ed n t a r y e o a v r t t i . h ( 1.9 5 ), " c o n v e r s i o n is a c c o r d i n g t o p r o x i m i t y " , s I t isf u r t h e r m o r e n o t e w o r t h y t h a t t h is P r . a l so m a k e s u s e o f t h e P~n . n e a n t y p eo f f o r m u l a t i o n b y u s i n g th e n o m i n a t i v e c a s e t o i n d ic a t e t h e e l e m e n ts u b s t i t u t e d a n d t h e g e n e t i v e t o r e p r e s e n t t h e e l e m e n t b e i n g c h a n g e d ( a si n 3. 39 q u o t e d b e l o w ) . H o w e v e r , it s c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e p r o c e s s o f s a m . d h ic h a n g e is i n t h e la s t a n a l y s is a p p a r e n t l y i d e n t ic a l w i t h t h a t o f t h e o t h e rP r ., f o r w i t h r e f e re n c e t o f o r m s in t h e p a d a a n d k r a m a t e x t s l i k e p a r i - e t i :p a r y e t i , a b h i - a im i : a b h y a i m i , e t c . i t s ays p a d d n t a v i k r t d n d m ( 4 . 8 1 ) , " r e s t o -r a t i o n i s m a d e [ b e f o r e a p a u s e ( v i r a m e ) : 4 .7 9 ] o f a l t e r a t i o n s t a k i n g p l a c ea t th e e n d o f a w o r d " . T h i s ru l e i s t o b e r e a d t o g e t h e r w i t h 3 .3 9 s v a r en d m h l o ' n t a . h s t h d , " b e f o r e a v o w e l , a n a l t e ra n t v o w e l b e c o m e s a s e m i -v o w e l " . T h i s is th e o n l y p a s s a g e i n t h e C a t u r a d h y d y i k d i n w h i c h a d e r i v a t i v eo f vi -k .r- i s u s e d i n t h i s s e n s e , w h i l e i m 1 . 6 3 a n d i n 2 . 8 4 t h e t e r m d d e g a isu s ed . ~ T h e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e o n t h i s m a t t e r b e t w e e n t h is P r . a n d t h e u s a g eo f P ~ n i n iis p r o b a b l y t o b e e x p l a i n e d b y t h e f a c t t h a t , w h i le t h e P r f i ti g ~ k h y a sa r e a l l p r e s u m a b l y p o s t - P g . n i n e a n i n t h e i r p r e s e n t f o r m , x9 t h e C a t u r a d h -y d y i k ~ a p p e a r s t o f o l l o w t h e A . s ! d d h y d y ~ esp ec i a l l y c lose ly . 1~4 Taitt iriyapratigakhya, ed. and transl, by W. D. Whitney, J A O S , 9 (1871).5 a hkara agam avikarilopinam, "aO [i.e. the nom inative] makes the nam e of an in-crement, o r o f an element suffering alteration or elision".6 So P. Thieme, ZDIVIG, 89 (1935), p. *22* n. 3.7 On this text and another Atharvavedapratigakhya v. Sfu'ya K~nta, Atharvapratiga-k h y a (Laho re, 1939), Intr od . p. 31 ft. an d p. 61 if.a Ed. and transl. W. D. Whitney, J A O S , 7 (1862). - Th e u se of this derivative fro mvl't- here is noteworthy. In 1.8 and 1.40, however, Whitney translates the term vl"tti by"authorized usage" and "treatment" respectively.1.63: ~a.tpurasor ukaro 'n tyasya dagadagayor ade~ag ca m ~rdhanya.h , "the f inal of$a$ and puras becomes u before da ta and d a t a respectively, with substitution of a retro -flex for th e following initial"; 2.84: yur taistvamadivarjam, "[s becomes a :2.81] also before form s of the second personal pronou ns, excepting in tais tram etc." .- Cf. AtharvapratiL ed. Sfirya kftnta 2.17, wh ile vikl'ta appears in 3.26. - Elsewhere inthe Pr~ t i~khy as d d e g a means "indication".lo V .P. Thieme, P&nini and the Veda (Allahabad, 1935), p. 95 ; L. Reno u, J A , 1938,p. 171-176; Sfa'ya K~nta, op. cit., Introd. p. 61-66.


3/13

T t ~ T E R M buddhiv iparin , ama 273T h e f o r m u l a t i o n b y m e a n s o f t h e a c c u s a ti v e t h u s a p p e a r s a s th e c o u n t e r -

p a r t i n t h e l i n g u i st i c f i el d o f t h e S fi m k h y a d o c t r i n e o f v i k d r a / p a r i . n a m a o rr e a l t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f a c a u s e i n t o it s p r o d u c t ( s a t k d r y a v d d a ) . 12

N o w t h is t y p e o f f o r m u l a t i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f th e P r ~ t i g ft k h y a s d i ff e rsi n t h e o r y f r o m t h e p a r a l l e l o n e f o u n d i n t h e A. s t . d d h y d ) q w h e r e P f m . i n ir e g u l a t e s t h e p r o c e s s o f d d e d a o r g r a m m a t i c a l su b s t i tu t i o n b y th e sf~traw h i c h r e a d s . s a . s t . h i s t h d n e y o g d ( 1 .1 .4 9 ). I n o t h e r w o r d s , in o r d e r t o e x p r e s st h e p r o c e s s o f s u b s t i tu t i o n , t h e P r f tt i g g k h y a s u s e t h e s e c o n d c a s e w h i c his s a id to c o n n o t e a t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f o n e s o u n d i n t o a n o t h e r , w h i l eP ~ n . i n i u s e s t h e s i x t h c a s e ( w h i c h i s n o t a k d r a k a ) t o e x p r e s s t h e e l e m e n tr e p l a c e d . I n t h e A . s { d d h y d y ~ t h e p r o c e s s o f s u b s t i t u t i o n i s f u r t h e r d e f i n e db y t h e s a t r a 1.1.50 s t h d n e ' n t a r a t a m a . h , " ( l e s u b s t i t u t n o n s p 6 c i f i 6 q u i e s t

m e t t r e ) ~t l a p l a c e ( d e t e l d ' e n t r e p l u s i e u r s 6 1 4 m e nt s 6 n o n c 4 s e s t c e l u i q u i )e s t l e p l u s p r o c h e ( d u d i t e l e m e n t ) " ( R e n o u ) . W h i l e t h e A s . t . d d h y d y i t h u st r e a t s o f s u b s t i t u t i o n i n t h e f u l l s e n s e , t h e P r f tt i g ft k h y a s f o r t h e i r p a r td e s c r i b e p r i n c i p a l l y o n e a s p e c t o f s u b s t i t u t i o n - t h e s a m . d h i c h a n g e s - ,s in c e t h e y " d e a l w i t h th e q u a l it ie s o f n o u n s , v e r b s , p r e p o s i t i o n s a n dp a r ti c le s in e u p h o n i c m o d i f i c a t io n a n d i n d i s c o n n e c t i o n " ( C a t u r a d h y d y i k d1.1 : catur1.~dn.~p a d a j d t d n d t. n n d m d k h y d t o p a s a r g a n i p d t d n d m , s a . m d h y a p a d y a ug un . a u p r d t i j f i a m ) .

T h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , t h e o r e t i c a l o r o t h e r w i s e , t h a t m a y h a v e l e d P ~ . n i n it o p r e f e r s u c h a f o r m u l a t i o n h a v e t o t h e w r i t e r ' s k n o w l e d g e n e v e r b e e nm a d e c l ea r , lz b u t t hi s f o r m u l a t i o n a p p e a r s t o b e o f p o t e n t i a l t h e o r e t ic a ls ig n i fi c an c e a n d w a s o f i m p o r t a n c e t o t h e l a t e r p h i lo s o p h e r s o f g r a m m a r .

A l r e a d y t h e M a h d b h d . s y a o f P a t a f i ja l i h a s s o m e in t e r e s t i n g o b s e r v a t i o n st o m a k e o n t h is s u b j ec t i n it s c o m m e n t a r y o n K f i t y g y a n a ' s v d r t t i k a s o nth e s f t t r a 1.1.56 s t h d n i v a d d d e d o ' n a l v i d h a u . T h i s s a t r a p r e s c r i b e s t h a t t h es u b s t i t u t e ( d d e d a - ) i s t o b e t r e a t e d l i k e t h e o r i g i n a l ( s t h a n i n ) e x c e p t i nc e r t a i n c a s es o f p a r t i c u l a r g r a m m a t i c a l p r o c e s se s i n t h e A. s t . d d h y d y L I nt h is c o n n e x i o n , h o w e v e r , a r is e s t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e p e r e n n i t y o r p e r -m a n e n c e ( n i t y a t v a ) o f w o r d s . I f w e s p e a k o f s u b s t it u t io n , h o w is it p o s s ib l et o m a i n t a i n t h a t a w o r d i s n i t y a , a s h a s b e e n d o n e f o r e x a m p l e a t th e b e -~ Cf. Thieme, ibid., p. 94-95; Sfarya Kfm ta, ibid., p. 62-63.i~ The theory of the permanence of var.nas is however known to the R VPr. 13.14:eke var.nafz chadvatikan na karyan; but the S~r0khya also speaks of a pari.nftmanityatabeside the kat.asthanityatd. - In the g k t a n t r a (64) vikara is opposed to prak f t i . V. alsoVMbh., vartt. 16 on 1.1.66.xa See nevertheless Thiem e, Z D k I G , 89 (1935), p. *22 *-*23*. - In the older gram -matical terminology, as is seen from the VMbh., vikara occasionally = adega, e.g.vartt. 16 ad 1.1.66 (with prakr t i ) and vdrtt. 17 ad gS 5. On the term s derived fro mvi-k f- amongst the P~iniyas v . L . Renou, Terminologie grammatieale du sanskrit,p. 275-276.


4/13

274 DAVID SEYFORT RUEGGginning of the Mahdbhd.sya? As K~ty~yana puts it in an dk.sepavdrt t ika,the system of original and substitute is inadmissible in view of the doctrineof the permanence of words (anupapannam. s thdnydde~atvam, ni tyatvd t ) .

Katy~yana first proposes to justi fy this usage by comparing it with theeveryday usage according to which we say, for example, that a pupil isin the place of the teacher or that p~t~ka-grass is pressed in a sacrificeinstead of s o m a , although we do not wish to imply that the teacher orthe s o m a have ceased to exist.

The following vdr t t i ka TM however abandons this empirically foundedjustification and seeks to explain the t heory of substitution. The M a h d -bhd.sya accordingly speaks here of a kdryavipar#.Tdma. The question is,what is this k d r y a which, when changed, still permits us to speak of sub-stitution while at the same time maintaining the well established doctrineof the permanence of the word accepted by the Vaiyakara.nas as well asby the Mim~ msakas. Patafijali answers this question only rather brieflyby stating that it is buddhi, knowledge that changes. Unfortunately hedoes not enlarge on this matter as much as we might wish him to, but onlyequates the terms b u d d h i and s a m p r a t y a y a "concept" and then comparesthe process to the situation where a speaker talks to a listener first aboutsome mango trees and then about some fig trees. In the listener's mind,Patafijali explains, the notion of the mango tree is removed and that ofthe fig tree is substituted, although in fact both continue to exist. Thus,just as the buddhi s change when different words connected with theirrespective referents are uttered, so in grammar the b u d d h i of as t i is sub-stituted by the b u d d h i of b h a va t i in certain conditions defined by Pa.nini'ssf~tra 2.4.52 without it being necessary to consider these words imper-manent (sa.h 'as ter bhft.h' [2.4.52] i tyanendst ibuddhyd bhavat ibuddhim, prat i -pa dy ate ; sa ta ta .h pa @ at i buddhydst im, cdpakLsyamd.na.m bhav at# .n c6pa-dhiyamdna.m ni tya eva ca svasm in vi .saye ' s t i r n i tyo bhavatig ca; budd his tvasya vipari .namyate).

Patafijali does not make this theory of viparigdma the basis of anyphilosophical doctrine but introduces it merely to explain a particulardifficulty raised by the Varttikakara. The theory is therefore purely lin-guistic or rather "psycho-linguistic" in import and does not lay claim,in the somewhat rudimentary form in which it appears in the M a h d b h d c y a ,to any general epistemological or ontological validity.

The theoretical significance of this notion did not however escape theattention of the commentators on the M a h d b h d r especially Kaiya~a andN~tge~abha.t~a.t~ Accordi ng to the Nir~aya S~gara Press ed. of 1951, this vartt , is a bha~ya-vdrttika.


5/13

THE TERM buddhiviparin, dm a 275K a i y a t. a i n h is c o m m e n t a r y o n t h i s p a s s a g e o f t h e Bhd.sya s a y s t h a t , i n

s u c h a s i t u a t i o n , k n o w l e d g e - q u a l i t i e s a r e s u p e r i m p o s e d o n t h e o b j e c t s b yt h e l i s t e n e r ; a n d h e a d d s t h a t t h e o b j e c t i v e w o r l d i s n o t c o n d i t i o n e d i ni t se l f b y v i r t u e o f t h is p r o c e s s , t h u s n o t i n v o l v i n g h i m s e l f h e r e i n a d i s -c u s s i o n o n t h e o b j e c t i v e r e a l i t y o f artha (buddhidharm~.h keva lam ar the~upratip attgva gdd dro pya nte, na tu tadva~dd arthdndm, tathdvasthdnarn).K a i y a ~ a ' s v i e w p o i n t t h u s a p p e a r s t o b e f a r r e m o v e d f r o m e x t r e m e il lu s io n -i s m o r a dLstisf.st.ivdda, s

N 5 g e g a a m p l i f ie s th i s s t a t e m e n t b y s a y i n g t h a t t h e w i t h d r a w a l (apakar.sa)a n d t h e p r o d u c t i o n (upadhdna = utpat t i ) o f t h e buddhi i s s u p e r i m p o s e do n t h e m a n g o a n d f ig t re e s a n d t h a t s i m i l a r ly th e r e i s a s u p e r i m p o s i t i o no n w o r d s o f th e s y s t e m o f o r i g in a l a n d s u b s t it u t e i n v o l v in g a m e n t a lo r i g i n a t i o n a n d d e s t r u c t i o n (buddhigatotpddavindga). T h i s s u p e r i m p o s i -t i o n o f buddhidharmas w h i c h i s t h u s d e d u c e d i s s a i d t o b e d u e t o k n o w -l e d ge a n d u s a g e ; t h e r e fo r e , i n v i ew o f t h e f a c t th a t t h e n o t i o n o f a p r e v i o u se x i s t e n c e i s t h e r e b y o n l y s u p e r i m p o s e d (dropitabhf~tapf~rvatvawavah~ra),t h e p e r m a n e n c e o f w o r d s i s n o t a n n u l l e d .

F u r t h e r m o r e , i t is t o b e n o t e d t h a t K a i y at .a i n h is Pradfpa o n a n o t h e rs e c t i o n o f t h e Mah~bh6~y a ( u n d e r v6r t t i ka 5 o n t h e sfm'a 1 .1 .20) sub-s t an t iv i s e s P a ta f i ja l i ' s e x p r e s s io n q u o t e d a b o v e a n d s p e a k s o f a buddhivi-parin, tim a - a t e r m w h i c h i n i t s f o r m a t l e a s t r e c a l l s t h e vij~na parin , t~mao f V a s u b a n d h u a n d t h e V i j fi fm a v ~ td in s . I t w i ll b e o f in t e r e s t t o s e e h o wK a i y a t .a , A n n a m b h a t . .t a a n d N f tg e g a u n d e r s t a n d t h i s e x p r e s s i o n a n d t h ep r o c e s s d e n o t e d b y i t .

I n h is c o m m e n t a r y u n d e r v~r t t i ka 5 o n t h e sfttra 1 . 1 . 2 0 P a t a f i j a l i h a sa ls o t r e a te d o f t h e p r o b l e m o f th e p e r m a n e n c e o f w o r d s w i th r e g a rd t o t h et h e o r y o f g r a m m a t i c a l s u b s t i tu t i o n a n d r e c a p i tu l a t e s b y q u o t i n g a v e r set h a t i s r e f e r r e d t o a s anutant ra b y H a r iv r .s a b h a, th e c o m m e n t a t o r o n t h eV dk y apad t y a ( 1 .2 3 ) w h o i s p r e s u m a b l y id e n t i c a l w i t h B h a r t r h a r i h i m s e l f.T h i s anutant ra s t a n z a s t a t e s t h a t a l l s u b s t i t u t e s a r e i n r e a l it y o f a w h o l ew o r d 16 a n d n o t o f a p a r t ; t h a t i s, s u b s t i t u t io n r e la t e s t o a m e a n i n g f u lx~ This realistic standpoint m ay be due to the fact that the Mimgm . ak a influencewhich was strong during the earliest period o f Ind ian gramm atical though t con tinuedto be felt even at this late date, long afte r Bhartrhari and Man..danamigra (see below).S. N . D asgup ta suggests that the lat ter may hav e been the originator of the d.ratisrst.ischool, H ist. o f Indian Philosophy,II (Camb ridge, 1932), p. 52 and p. 84.

Elsewhere Kaiya ta states that the meaning of a word refers to a m ental image whichassumes the form of the object (buddhipratibh~sa.h ~abd~rthab; ya da y ada ~abdauccaritas taddrthakgtra buddhir upaHtyate).16 According to the comm entators pada means here no t only a complete word (sup-tiOanta) but includes also the parts making up a word, e.g. the stem and suffix.Furthermore, according to N ftge~a on paribhas.a 13 (yatr~neka vidham antarya.m


6/13

276 DAVID SEYFORT RUEGGlinguistic whole and not to a n isolated element ( s a r v e s a r v a p a d d d e ~ dd d k . s f p u t r a s y a p d n. in e.h / e k a d e ~ a v i k d r e h i n it y at v an . ~ n 6 p a p a d y a t e ) 3 ~

It is at this point that Kaiyat.a observes that Patafijali 's int ent ion is toreject the theory of the modification ( v i k d r a ) of a part and that it is theb u d d h i that is changed; the notion of d d e i a was resorted to in order touphold the theory of the permanence of words ( . . . v i k d r d b h d v a p r a t i -p d d a n a p a r a m e t a t ; b u d dh iv ip a ri .n d m a m d tr a m , s t h d n y d d e g d g a m d g a m i b h d -v a d v d r e n a k r i y a t e ) . Kaiyat.a accordingly concludes that the term s t h d n a(in 1.1.49) is to be interpret ed as indi cati ng not a r eplace ment by de-struction ( n i v r t t i ) but rather by eventual application or contingency( p r a s a h g a ) . Foll owing Kaiya.ta, Annambha.t.ta observes in his P r a d i p o d d y o -t a n a that in reali ty permanent words are touched by the imposit ion ofimperm anenc e only in gramm ar in the process of word form ation ( p r a k r i -y d k d l a ) . In his subco mmen tary on the P r a d f p a , Nage~a equates thed d e d a p a k ~ a , the doctr ine of grammatical substi tution, with the psycho-linguistic b u d d h i v i p a r in , d m a p a k . s a . And he also remarks that, from thetatra sthdnata antaryazn balfyab, Paribhas.endugekhara, ed. F. Kielhorn, p. 13.13), asubstitute is essentially that which is capable of expressing the meaning of the original(sthanyarthabhidhanasa marthasya iv6degat6ti s idd ha nta t . . . ) .~7 Contrast TaittirfyapratiL 1.56 var~asya vikaralopau, "alteration and omission areof a single sound".This discussion in the VMbh arose in connexion with the question why we are towrite pranidarayati when we write pra.nidapayatL The sCttra 1.1.20 dadha ghv adapteaches that roots having the form dd- and dha- have the technical nameghu, except fort he roo t s da - "cu t " a nd da ( i) - "c l ean" . B y v i r tue o f t h i s ghusa~ jaa the na o f t he upasargan i preceded b y p r a becomes cerebralised (.natva: 8.4.17 with 8.4.1). This being the case,it would seem that we should write *pra.nidarayati because the root dr- "pierce"takes in the causative by v.rddhi the form d~t (1.1.1) + r (1.1.51) = dhr; the varttikasamanagabdaprati~edhaO therefore observes that similar g a b d a s O . e . sounds [~ruti]according to Kaiya~a) are to be expressly excepted from this rule. The followingvart t ika however remarks that this express mention is after a ll unnecessary sincemeaning is to be taken into account when applying the rules in question ( samana-Jabdaprati~edho 'rthavadgraha.nat) . Patafijali explains that, whereas da- or dha- re-ferred to in 1.1.20 are meaningful, the element d~ o f d a r a y a t i is meaningless. - Again,this express exclusion is not necessary becausep r a is to be considered an upasarga onlywhen linked to a verbal action ( k r i ya : 1.4.59) which is not the case here (anupasargadva); for in pranidarayat i pra is an upasarga not of d~ but of dar-.Now the objection is made tha t this will also be true of the element dfi inpra.nida-p a y a t i and that, since it is therefore notghu, .natva will also not take place in this word.The next vartt, shows that this does not in fact happen because an increment is appliedto a meaningful unit and becomes subordinate to it (na v~rthavato h y O gam as, tadgun, -b h ~ t a s . . . ) . It is shown that the substitute, here dapayati , has the meaning of theoriginal and that the ghusarojga therefore applies equally to i t: a vocable withagama issubstituted for one without; it is a different vocable, but it has the same meaning(gabdantarair iha bhavitavya.m; ta tra ~abd~ ntare gabdan tarasya pratipatt ir yuktCt, gtdegastarhfme bhavi~yant i anagamakanart t sagamaka.h) . Here Patafijali quotes in hissiddhantopasa.mh~rabhasya the anutantra stanza given above.


7/13

THE TERMb u d d h i v i p a r O . T d m a 277point of view of fictitious word formation, there is no rejection of theartificial system of increments etc. ( k a l p it a p r a k r i y d d a d d y d . m t u n a k a lp i -t d g a m a t v d d i v y a v a h d r a t y d g a h . . .).1 8

The importance of this doctrine to the philosophers of grammar is thusclear: the doctrine of the b u d d h i v i p a r i . n d m a possessed considerable theo-retical value and was resorted to in order to obviate the necessity of ad-mitting any transformation of the permanent i a b d a - an eventuality thatwould undermine the whole foundation of the grammatical g d s t r a .

These considerat ions app ear to indicate that the well know n philosophicalopposition between the v i v a r t a v d d a of the Advaita and the continuousv i k d r a / p a r i n , d m a of the S~tm.khya s a t k d r y a v d d a had a counterpart ingrammatica l thought. This divergence seems to be already reflected inthe different ways the Pr~tigakhyas and Pa.nini follow when formulatingparallel cases of linguistic subs titution: for the for mer it is a question o fmodification ( v i k d r a , VPr. 1.133), while for the latter, and above all forthe philosophers of grammar, it is a question of substitution affecting atotality (VMbh on 1.1.20) and based on the change o f the b u d d h i (VMbhon 1.1.56). It is even possible tha t the latt er theory, though still removedfrom the classical doctrines of illusory change and causation, served asa stepping stone leading to th em ? 9 F or the shift from a considerat ion ofexternal things and the transformations they undergo to a considerationof a meaningful mental totality is clearly of great philosophical impor-tance. On the other hand, the type of form ulat ion involving the not ionof a v i k d r a adequately served the purpose of treatises like the Pffttig~khyaswhich, though very detailed and precise in their phonetic observations,concerned themselves hardly at all with linguistic theory and had as theirprincipal object the description and preservation of the texts of theirrespective ~ d k h ~ s in their s a . m h i t d , p a d a and k r a m a forms.18 Kaiya~a emarks that just as Devadatta does not change his name even if he shouldperchance lose a limb, so a meaningful word remains what it is despite the grammaticaloperations it may undergo.x9 In this connexion it may be noted that an interesting example of a link between aconsideration of causation and grammatico-philosophical hought is to be found in the4th chapter of the Gau.dapadiyakarikas which deals with the alataganti and the doctrineof non-origination. There t is said that verbal denomination(prajftapti) does not reallyhave an exterior objective cause (nimitta, 4.25), for the mind never really comes incontact with such a cause (4.26-27); hence, since mind does not originate in relationwith an external world (4.28, cf. 46) in the process of denomination, the doctrine oforigination is inadmissible (4.29), and the ajativ5da set forth in the third chapter is tobe accepted. It might be added that the alatacakra or Catherine-wheel image appearsin the Lank~vataras~tra (ed. Nanjio, Kyoto 1923) p. 96 beside references to v~iftaptiand namamatra . The context is also similar in VP 1.130; for a parallel passagefrom Ma.nqlanamigra'sBrahmasiddhi see below.


8/13

278 DAV ID SEYFORT RUEG GI n t hi s c o n t e x t it w i ll p e r h a p s n o t b e w i t h o u t i n t e re s t t o c o m p a r e t h e

g r a m m a t i c o - p h i l o s o p h i c a l buddhiviparivdma t h e o r y w i t h t h e vij~dnapari-.ndma o f th e V i j fi a n a v ~ d in s . A s h a s b e e n s e e n a b o v e , t h e buddhivipari.ndmat h e o r y w a s a c c e p t e d i n o r d e r t o p r e c l u d e a l l p o s s i b il it y o f a t r a n s f o r m a t i o no f t h e gabda . T h i s gabda i s c h a n g e l e s s , w h i l e l i n g u i s t i c u s a g e e m p l o y sa l t e rn a t i v e ly fo r e x a m p l e f o r m s d e r iv e d f r o m t h e r o o t s as- a n d bhft- inc e r t a i n c o n d i t i o n s d e f i n e d b y t h e A.sfddhydy~, t h u s a f f e c ti n g t h e v e r b a lk n o w l e d g e o f t h e l is te n e r. T h i s p r o c e s s is c o m p a r e d w i th t h e c h a n g e i na l i s t e n e r ' s k n o w l e d g e a c c o r d i n g t o w h a t i s b e i n g s a i d - a c i r c u m s t a n c ew h i c h i s n o t h o w e v e r n e c e s s a r i ly to b e u n d e r s t o o d a s a ff e c t in g t h e o b j e c ti ts e l f. T h u s w h i l e K a i y a . t a e x p l a i n s t h a t t h e buddhidharmas a r e s u p e r -i m p o s e d o n t h e s e o b j e c t s , t h e r e is n o h i n t o f t h e t h e o r y t h a t t h e o b j e c te x is ts o n l y b y v i r t u e o f i ts b e i n g p e r c e i v e d o r k n o w n . K a i y a t .a a p p e a r st h e n t o s p e a k h e r e a s i f e x t e r n a l o b je c t s w e re d e n o t e d b y w o r d s a n d w e r er e a l ; h e t h e r e b y k e e p s h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n h a r m o n y w i t h t h e r e a l i s t i co u t l o o k o n t h e gabddrthasambandha p r e v a l e n t a m o n g s t t h e V a i y ~ k a ra .n a sa s w e l l a s t h e M i m ~ . m s a k as a t t h e t i m e o f t h e c o m p o s i t i o n o f t h e M a h d -bhd.sya. T h i s p o i n t o f v ie w is h o w e v e r n o t t h e n o r m a l o n e o f t h e p h i l o s o -p h e r s o f g r a m m a r , a n d i t w o u l d b e in t er e st in g t o k n o w h o w B h a r t r h a r ii n h i s c o m m e n t a r y o n t h e Mahdbhd.sya d e a l t w i t h t h o s e p a s s a g e s t o b ef o u n d e s p e c i a l ly i n t h e Paspagdhnika w h i c h s t a n d c l o s e t o t h e M i m ~ m s a k av i ew. ~0

T h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e Vij~dnavddin i s d i f f e r e n t . W h i l e h i s vijgdna is ins o m e r e s p e c t s c o m p a r a b l e t o t h e buddhi o f t h e p h i l o so p h e r g r a m m a r i a n ,t h e r e i s i n t h e f o r m e r ' s s y s t e m n o t h i n g t o c o r r e s p o n d t o t h e p e r m a n e n tgabda a n d i ts c o r r e l a t e t h e artha, b e i t e x t e r n a l (bdhya) o r m e n t a l (bauddha).T h o u g h V a s u b a n d h u i n h i s Trim.gikd c o n c e i v e s o f t h e vijhdnapari~dmaa s r e a l, t h e r e i s t h e r e n o d i r e c t p a r a l le l t o th e g r a m m a r i a n ' s gabda w h i c hu n d e r g o e s o n l y a prasahga-change b y v i r t u e o f t h e buddhiviparin.dma.W h e r e a s K a i y a .t a m e r e l y h o ld s t h a t t h e buddhi-qualities a r e s u p e r i m p o s e do n t h e artha, V a s u b a n d h u a n d h is c o m m e n t a t o r S th i r a m a t i sp e a k o f a ni m a g i n a r y a t t r i b u t i o n o f a n e g o o r o f e le m e n t s o n t h e c o n s c io u s n e s s -n a t u r e : dtmadharmopacdro hi vividh o ya.h pravartate, vij~dnapari.ndme

20 K aiy a|a 's interpretation could not however remain altogether untouched b y thegrammatico-philosophical doctrine prevalent after Bhartrhari, and he speaks of asuperimposition of mental elements. - On this somew hat obscure and difficult point,see above no te 15 and the writer's Contributions ~ l'histoire de la philosophie linguistiqueindienne (to app ear in the Publications de l 'Institu t de Civilisation Indienne, Sorbonn e,Paris), p. 6 -9 (o n N~g e~a's view ), p. 65-67 (on Bhartrhari), p. 84 (on Puo yar~ja'sinterpretation of Bha rtrhari).


9/13

T H E T E R M b u d d h i v i p a r i n . d m a 2 7 9' s a u . . . ( T r i m . ~ i k d , v . 1 ). ~ I n d e e d i t is j u s t t h i s v i jgdnapar in , d m a t h a t r e n d e r sp o s s i b l e t h e ( as it w e r e m e t a p h o r i c a l ) a p p l i c a t i o n ( u p a c d r a ) o f t h e d t m a na n d t h e d h a r m a s , f o r it i s t h e i r s u b s t r a t u m . ~ T h u s , w h i l e a c c o r d i n g t ot h e V i j f i ~ n a v ~ t d i n s t h e v i j~dna i s t h e s o u r c e ( d l a y a v i j h d n a ) o f a ll , i n c l u d i n gt h e s e v e n f u n c t i o n a l c o n s e i o u s n e s s e s (prav l" t t i v i j~dna) o u t s i d e o f w h i c h~1 In Triro~ika v. 1 v~i~anapari.name s t h e r e a d i n g a d o p t e d b y S . I A v i ; i t w a s e m e n d e d t oopari.n~mo b y " D i g n a g a " i n t h e I H Q , 4 / 1 ( 1 9 28 ) ; b u t t h i s c o r r e c t i o n w a s l a t e r r e j e c t e db y L 6 v i, w h o r e f e rs t o S t h i r a m a t i ' s c o m m e n t a r y a n d t ra n s la t e s ' L a M 6 t a p h o r e d e st e r m e s " S o l " e t " E s s e n c e " q u i f o n c t io n n e e n t a n t d e f a g o n s - c ' e s t s u r l a T r a n s f o r m a -t i o n d e la N o t a t i o n q u ' e l l e ( se p r o d u i t ) ' ; v . Ma tdriauxpottr l'dtude du systdme Vij~apti-mata ( P a ri s , 1 9 32 ) p . 6 3 a n d n . 1 . - H o w e v e r , s u c h d o e s n o t a p p e a r t o b e e x a c t l y t h em e a n i n g a s u n d e r s t o o d b y a t le a s t p a r t o f t h e T i b e t a n t r a d i t i o n ; M i - p h a m f o r e x a m p l e ,in h i s Sum-{u-pai chig-leur byas-pai m ~han-'grel ( fo l . 1b - 2 a , v o l . ga o f t h e Ajitagastra.m),q u o t e s a n d e x p l a i n s t h e f i r st v e r s e o f t h e Tri~?tAika a s f o l l o w s : b d a g - t u gdags-pa daf t6hos - s u f i e r - ' dogs -pa / s na -chogs -pa ste bdag da~ srog dan skye-ba-po sogs bdag dat~phu~i kha ms sky e-m ~hed sogs ~hos-su dogs-pa d a g n i g a f f b y u f i - b a / d e thams-{ad ni m a r e -par ~es -pa r gyur -pa ~id-do de-las g~an-du reed-doll . . . A l l t h e se m e t a p h o r s (v iz .atman, skandha e t c . ) a r e n o t h i n g b u t t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s (gyur-pa) w h i c h a r e p r o d u c e di n t h e vijgdna; a p a r t f r o m t h e l a t t e r n o t h i n g e x i s t s .I f t h is i n t e r p re t a t i o n ( w h i c h z p p a r e n t l y c o n f ir m s t h e o n e p r o p o s e d b y " D i g n ~ g a " )w e r e t o b e f o l l o w e d , th e t r a n s l a t i o n c o u l d r e a d "L a m 6 t a p h o r e . . , c ' es t l a t r an s f or m a -t i o n d ar ts l a N o t a t i o n ' . T h a t i s, i n s t e a d o f t h e upacdra b e i n g p r o d u c e d o n t h e b a s i s o f apari.nama o f vijgana, upacara cons i s t s in the pari.nama o f vU~ana. T h i s p o i n t , t h o u g h o fi m p o r t a n c e , c a n n o t b e g o n e i n t o i n d e t a i l h e r e , th e i m p o r t a n t t h i n g b e i n g f o r t h e p r e s e n tt o n o t e t h a t f o r t h e V i j fi ~ n a v ~ d in a l l n a m i n g ( w h i c h is a c c o r d i n g t o t h i s d o c t r i n e b a s i c -a l l y m e t a p h o r i c a l ) i s l i n k e d w i t h t h e vijganapari.nama. ( M o r e o v e r , t h e f a c t t h a t gyur-pai s h e r e u s e d t o t r a n s l a t e pari~.~ama s h o w s h o w v a g u e t h e T i b e t a n t r a n s l a t i o n s c a n b ew h e n t r a n s l a t i n g t h e S a n s k r i t t e c h n i c a l t e r m s b e l o n g i n g t o t h e g r o u p pari t jam a- v ivarta;s imi la r ly vivartate in Vakyapadiya i . 1 w a s r e n d e r e d b y t h e e x p r e s s io n yo~s-su 'gyur-ba,w h i c h i s n o r m a l l y t h e e q u i v a l e n t ofpari-.nam-. T h i s w o u l d a p p e a r t o i n d i c at e t h a t s o m eB u d d h i s t s a t l e a s t , e v e n a s l a t e a s t h e p e r i o d o f t h e T i b e t a n t r a n s l a t io n s , w e r e s t il l u n -a w a r e o f ( o r p e r h a p s r a t h e r u n i m p r e s s e d b y ? ) t h e s u b t l e d i s t i n c ti o n s i m p l i e d b y t h et e r m s vivarta a n d pari.n~ma.)

I n v i e w o f t h i s i t i s n o d o u b t p o s s i b le t o c o m p a r e t h e d o c t r i n e o f t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n(parOr6ma = anyathatva: S t h i ra m a t i ) o f t h e r e a l vij~ana i n t h e f o r m o f a n u n r e a lupacara w i t h B h a r t r h a r i ' s d o c t r i n e o f i l l u s o r y m a n i f e s t a t i o n (vi-v~t-) p r o c e e d i n g f r o mt h e r e a l Aabdatattva- brahm an, a s h a s b e e n d o n e f o r i n s t a n c e b y P . H a c k e r , Vivarta,p . 2 0 0 - 2 0 1 ; b u t t h e h i s t o r i c a l l i n k b e t w e e n t h e s e t w o t h e o r i e s n e v e r th e l e s s r e m a i n ss o m e w h a t u n c l e a r i n v i e w o f t h e d i f f e r e n t b a c k g r o u n d s a n d p r e m i s se s o f t h e t w os y st e m s. W h e n t h e p h i lo s o p h e r s o f g r a m m a r t r a n sc e n d e d t h e buddhiviparit.Tama t h e o r y( se e b e lo w ) , t h e y w e r e n o t n e c e s s a ri l y u n d e r t h e i n f l u e n c e o f V a s u b a n d h u ; f o r t h e i rd o c t r i n e c a n b e e x p l a i n e d i n g r e a t p a r t a s a d e v e l o p m e n t , a g a i n s t t h e b a c k g r o u n d o fc o n t e m p o r a r y I n d i a n p h i l o s o p h i c a l t h o u g h t , o f i de a s c o n t a in e d i n g e r m i n t h e e a r li e rg r a m m a t i c a l t e x ts .C o m p a r e v . 1 7 w h e r e t h e vijganaparit.lama i s s a id to be vikalpa; Lafikavat~ras~trap . 4 6 w h e r e t h e r e a l tr a n s f o r m a t i o n o f th e alayavijgana i s den ied ; c f . La V a l l6e P ous s in ,Vij~aptimatratasiddhi ( P a ri s , 1 9 28 -2 9) , p . 3 8 ; G . T u c c i , N o t e s o n t h e L a f k ~ v a t ~ r a ,I H Q , 1928, p . 550-551.2~ S th i r am at i on Tri.rngika v. 1 (p . 16 , ed . S . L6v i) upacarasya niradharasyasambhavadavagya~.n v~i~anapari~.tamo vastu to 'st y upa gan tavyo yatrdtm adha rmo pac~ ra.h prav artate.


10/13

2 8 0 DAV ID SEYFORT RUEGGn o t h i n g r e a ll y e x is ts , f o r t h e g r a m m a r i a n t h e f u n d a m e n t a l r e a li ty is c o n -s t i t u t e d b y t h e p e r m a n e n t A a b d a t h e m o d i f ic a t io n s o f w h i ch i n g r a m m a ra r e e x p l a i n e d b y t h e a d e ~ a / b u d d h i v i p a r i n . a m a t h e o r y .

N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e s e d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t h e t w o t h e o r i e s , t o g e t h e r w i t ht h e d i f fi c u lt ie s c a u s e d b y P a t a f i j a l i ' s t e r s e n e s s o f e x p r e s s i o n , s h o u l d n o tm a k e u s o v e r l o o k t h e s i g n i fi c an c e o f th i s c o n c e p t in t h e h i s t o r y o f id e a sl e a d i n g t o t h e l a t e r d o c t r i n e s o f c h a n g e a n d c a u s a t i o n . 2aT o i l lu s t r a te t h i s , a p a s s a g e f r o m t h e B r a h m a s i d d h i w h e r e M a n . .d a n a m i ~r as ta t e s h is d o c t r in e o f t h e w o r d - n a t u r e m a y b e a d d u c e d . 24 T h o u g h a fu l lq u o t a t i o n a n d a d e t a il e d s t u d y o f th i s p a s s a g e m u s t b e r e s e rv e d f o r a n o t h e ro c c a s io n , i t sh o u l d a t l e a st b e m e n t i o n e d s in c e it s p e a k s o f t h e t h e o r y o fv ipar in , dm a i n c o n n e x i o n w i t h t h e v e r b a l n a t u r e o f b r a h m a n a n d t h e w o r l d .I n t h e f i r s t v e r s e o f t h e B r a h m a s i d d h i t h e e x p r e s s i o n a k . s a r a i s u s e d , a n dM a . n.d a n a p r o c e e d s t o e x p l a i n t h e s i g n i fi c a n c e o f t h is e p i t h e t u n d e r t w oh e a d s : i t m a y r e f e r e i t h e r t o t h e v e r b a l n a t u r e ( g a b d d t m a t d ) o r t o t h ei m m u t a b i l i t y o f b r a h m a n .

I n c o n f o r m i t y w i t h t h e f ir st e x p l a n a t i o n i t is s h o w n t h a t ju s t a s v i k d r a sa r e i n h e r e n t l y c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e i r o r i g i n a l ( p r a k r t i r f t p d n v i t d v i k d r d . h ) ,s o t h e w o r l d i s i n h e r e n t l y c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e w o r d - f o r m ( v d g r a p a ) i n a s -m u c h a s t h e t h in g s o f t h e w o r l d a r e p e r c e i v e d b y t h e m i n d ( v i j ~ d n a ) w h i c his c o l o u r e d b y it . I t is t h e r e f o r e t o b e c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e w o r l d is a ne v o l u t e ( v i p a r i n . r i m a ) o r a n a p p e a r a n c e ( v i v a r t a ) o f v d c . F o r w o r d i s n o ta m e r e m e a n s t o k n o w l e d g e l i k e s i g h t s in c e , i n th e a b s e n c e o f g a b d a , t h e r ec a n b e n o c o n s c i o u s p e r c e p t i o n o f a r t h a a t a l l; 2~ n o r i s w o r d t o b e c o m -p a r e d t o s m o k e w h i c h i n d ic a t es f i re b y m e a n s o f a n i n f e re n c e b e c a u s et h e n a t u r e o f th e r e l a t i o n i n t h e t w o c a s e s i s q u i t e d i f fe r e n t. I n a d d i t i o n ,i n t e n t i o n a l a c t i o n ( p r a v r t t i ) c a n o n l y r e la t e to a d e t e r m i n a t e ' th i s ' , a n dt h is d e t e r m i n a t i o n is s h o w n t o b e l in k e d w i t h v e r b a l c o l o r a t i o n i n c lu d i n gt h e s u b t l e v e r b a l i m p r e s s i o n s r e c e i v e d i n a p r e v i o u s l if e a n d l o c a t e d i n t h e" h e a r t " . I n t h is w a y th e w o r l d , p e r c e i v e d a s i t is t h r o u g h t h e a g e n c y o f

M oreove r, for the Sautrfintika-Yoggtcgtra ogicians, all verbal designation takes placeby upacara or transfer since a name, im plying as it does determinate thought (namakal-p a n a etc.), ca nno t refer to th e instantaneous thing-in-itself (svalak.sana) which alone isarthakriyakarin. - This conception bears a certain resemblance to the grammarians'distinction between the vastumatra and the abhidheyartha.,3 Cf. abo ve n. 19. - Th e passage of the VM bh itself which deals with the k a r y a -vipari.nama was noted b y O. Strauss, Z D M G , 81 (192 7), p. 134--135.24 Brahmasiddhi, ed. S. Kuppuswam i Sastri (Mad ras, 1937), p. 16-19.t5 Th e com m . by ~af lkhap~oi says na ca ~abdanullekhe ghat .adyarthollekho " tL


11/13

THE TERM buddhiviparin, am a 281w o r d , i s s a i d t o b e a v i var t a o f vdc . ~8 M o r e o v e r , M a n.d . a n a o b s e r v e s t h a tt h e r e a r e p u r e l y c o n v e n t i o n a l ( v y d v a h d r i k a ) r e f e r e n t s w h i c h e x i s t o n l y a sgabdavivartas. T a k i n g t h e m a s th e b a s i s o f a g e n e r a li s a ti o n , w e m a y c o n -c l u d e t h a t t h e s a m e is t r u e o f a ll ar t has . T h e c o n v e n t i o n a l a r e d i v id e d i n tof o u r c l a s s e s : i n j u n c t i o n a n d p r o h i b i t i o n (vidhini .sedhau, e .g . k u r y d t , n ak u r y ~ t ) , s y n t a g m a t i c m e a n i n g ( v d k y d r t h a ) , a g g r e g a t e s ( samf~ha, e .g . v a n a" w o o d " ) , a n d n o n - e n t i a s u c h a s t h e C a t h e r i n e - w h e e l ( a l d t a c a k r a ) o r t h eh o r n s o f t h e h a r e . V i d h i a n d nis .edha a r e c o n s i d e r e d t o b e e s s e n t i a l l ya c t i o n ( p r a v H t i ) a n d c e s s a t i o n (n ivr t t i ) , a n d t h e y c a n n o t b e s a i d t o r e f e rs p e c if ic a U y t o t h e p a s t , t o t h e p r e s e n t o r t o t h e f u t u r e . V i d h i a n d ni .sedhaa r e a c c o r d i n g l y o n l y p r a t i b h d c o n f o r m i n g to a c t io n a n d c e s s a ti o n a n dd e v o i d o f a n e x t e r n a l o b j e c t . N e v e r t h e l e s s , i t c a n n o t b e s a i d t h a t th i sp r a t i b h d i s a l t o g e t h e r w i t h o u t a n o b j e c t ( d l a m b a n a ) , f o r i t c o n s i s t s e s s e n -t ia l ly i n k n o w l e d g e ; a n d t h e r e c a n b e n o k n o w l e d g e in th e a b s e n c e o f t h eo b j e c t k n o w n . I t i s t h e r e f o r e p r o p e r t o s a y t h a t i t is t h e w o r d - e s s e n c e(gabda t a t t va ) t h a t m a n i f e s t s (avabhdsa t e ) i n s u c h a n d s u c h a f o r m i n c o n -f o r m i t y w i t h a c t i o n a n d c e s s a t i o n f r o m a c t io n . - A g a i n , a s r eg a r d s s y n -t a g m a t i c m e a n i n g , i t c a n b e s a i d t h a t t h e v d k t a t t v a a p p e a r s ( v i var t a t e )i n a g i v e n f o r m i n a s m u c h a s n o d e t e r m i n a t e c o n c e p t ( v i k a l p a p r a t y a y a )c a n e x i st w i t h o u t v e r b a l c o l o r a ti o n . A n d t h e s a m e is s h o w n t o a p p l y a ls ot o a g g r e g a t e s a n d t o n o n - e n t i a .

T h e w h o l e d i s c u s s i o n im p l i c it l y r e f e r s b a c k t o B h a r t r h a r i ' s V d k y a p a d ? y a ,e s p e c i a l ly w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o t h e d e f i n it e k n o w l e d g e t h a t e m e r g e s a f t e r aw o r d h a s b e e n a p p l i e d t o t h e a b s t r a c t m u s i c a l n o t e s c a ll e d .sa.dja e t c . a n dt o t h i n g s l ik e c o w s e t c . I n f a c t i t is i n o r d e r t o o b t a i n d e a r a n d d e f i n i tek n o w l e d g e t h a t co w h e r d s , s h e p h e r d s a n d o t h e r s a p p l y n a m e s . A c c o r d -i n g ly , t h e q u a l i t y o f th i n k i n g b e l o n g i n g t o t h e i n t e l le c t i s s a i d t o d e p e n do n w o r d - f o rm (vdgr f tpddh~nam eva c i tag c i t i t vam) . - A c c o r d i n g t o a n o t h e rv i ew m e n t i o n e d b y M a . n da n a , t h o u g h t (c i t i ) i s a p o w e r o f vdc ; h e n c e a l lo b j e c ts o f k n o w l e d g e a r e i n h e r e n t ly c o n n e c t e d w i t h th e vt~grapa, a n d a l li s e i t h e r a n e v o l u t e ( v i kdra) o r a n a p p e a r a n c e ( v i var t a ) o f vdc, j u s t a s o nt h e o n e h a n d p o t s a r e t h e e v o l u te s o f c l a y a n d o n t h e o t h e r t h e m o o n s t ob e s e e n r e fl e ct e d i n th e r i p p l e s o f w a t e r a r e a p p e a r a n c e s o f th e m o o n .

A c c o r d i n g t o t h e o t h e r i n t e r p r e t a ti o n , t h e e p i th e t ak.sara m e a n s " i m m u -t a b l e " . B e c a u s e th e u s e o f t h e s im i l e o f t h e c l a y m i g h t l e a d t o t h e c o n -c l u s i o n t h a t b r a h m a n i s s u b j e c t t o c h a n g e , i t i s e x p l i c i t l y s t a t e d t o b e,6 According to Saflkhap~.ni 's comm ., though b oth vipari.narna and vivarta are con-sidered her e, the vivarta interpretation is Man.~tanami~ra's ow n . Fo r other juxta-positions of vipari.nama and vivartana see p. 7.24 an d p. 8.8-9; cf. JAO S, 78 (1958),p. 140.


12/13

28 2 DAVID SEYFORTRUEGGi m m u t a b l e . N o w i t is su g g e st e d i n r e p l y t h a t p e r m a n e n c e i s n o t r e a ll yu n t e n a b l e e v e n i n t h is c a s e b e c a u s e t h e e s s e n ce h a s n o t b e e n d e s t r o y e d ,a s h a s b e e n e x p l a i n e d i n t h e m a x i m yasmin v ikr iyamd.ne 'p i ta t t va .m nav i h a n ya t e t a d a p i n i t y a m ' t h a t t h i n g i s p e r m a n e n t t h e e s s e n c e o f w h i c h i sn o t d e s t r o y e d w h e n i t i s m o d i f i e d '. T h o u g h M a .n .d a na a d m i t s t h e t r u t ho f t h i s p r in c i p l e w h e n a p p l i e d t o i t s p r o p e r s p h e r e , h e n e v e r t h e l es s c o n -s i d er s t h a t t h e r e i s i m p e r m a n e n c e i f t h e r e is t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a s a w h o l eb e c a u s e o f t h e a b s e n c e i n s u c h a c a s e o f t h a t d t m a r a p a w h i c h i s u n a f f e c t e d(v i~uddha); a n d h e a d d s t h a t p e r m a n e n c e is a f o r t i o r i d e s t ro y e d sh o u l dw e a s s u m e t h e c h a n g e o f a s i ng l e p a r t (ekadeAaparin. ati ) b e c a u s e w e t h e r e b yi m p l y t h e e x is te n c e o f p ar ts . A c c o r d i n g l y p u r it y , p e r m a n e n c e a n d o n e n e ssa p p l y t o b r a h ma n a s t h e y d o t o t h e dkd~a wh i c h , d e s p i t e f i c t i t i o u s d e t e r -r u i n a t i o n , is r e a l ly f r e e o f i t a n d i s u n p a r t i c u l a r i s e d . I t is r a t h e r c o r r e c tt o s a y t h a t t h e f i ct i ti o u s t ra n s f o r m a t i o n o f a s in g l e p a r t i s i m a g i n a r y( k a l p a n a y a ) .

I t w i l l i m m e d i a t e l y b e s e e n f r o m t h is b r i e f s u m m a r y o f M a .n d a n am i ~ ra 'sd i s c u ss i o n t h a t t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s s e t f o r t h i n t h i s t w o - f o l d i n t e r p r e t a t i o no f t h e t e r m ak.sara b e l o n g t o t h e gabdddvai ta p o s i t i o n a n d a r e d i f f e r e n tf r o m t h o s e p r e v a i l i n g in t h e p a s s a g e s q u o t e d e a r l i e r f r o m t h e M a h d b h d . s y aw i t h t h e i r f r e q u e n t M i m ~ m . s~t a n d S a . m k h y a e c h o e s . Ne v e r t h e l e s s t h i sp a s sa g e t a k e n f r o m t h e B r a h m a s i d d h i i s o f i n t e r e st i n t h e p r e s e n t c o n t e x tb e c a u s e t h e r e is t o b e f o u n d i n i t a c l e a r l i n k w i t h t h e p r o b l e m s t r e a t e d i nth e Mahdbhd.sya: t h e m e n t i o n o f th e p r i n ci p l e t h a t a t h in g , t h o u g h m o d i -f ie d , m a y y e t b e p e r m a n e n t p r o v i d e d i ts e s s en c e i s n o t d e s t r o y e d i s a p p a -r e n t ly a f re e q u o t a t i o n f r o m t h e Bhd .sya, ~7 a n d t h e e x p r e s s i o n vipari.ndma,w h i c h a p p e a r s h e r e t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e t e r m vivar ta, r e f e r s a l s o i n p a r t t ot h e p s y c h o - l in g u i s t i c p r o c e s s . T h e gabdddvai ta h o w e v e r h a s h e r e t r a n s -c e n d e d t h e i d e a o f a buddhiviparin.dma a n d e x a m i n e s t h e c o n c e p t o f av ipar i~dma a n d o f a vivar ta o f vdc, t h a t i s t o s a y o f t h e s u b t l e w o r d .T h e t e x ts b r o u g h t t o g e t h e r h e r e fu r n i s h t h e n o n e m o r e e x a m p l e o f t h ec l o s e c o n n e x i o n e x i s t i n g b e t w e e n t h e e a r l y V e d ~ n t i c p h i l o s o p h y a n dg r a m m a t i c a l t h o u g h t t o t h o s e a l r e a d y k n o w n , f o r e x a m p l e t h e c l o se li n ke x is ti n g i n t h e R g v e d a b e t w e e n t h e c o n c e p t o f m d y d a n d s p e c u l a t i o n o n27 VM bh on the vdr tt, sid dh e gabddrthasambandhe (ed NS P p. 63-64):athavd n~dameva nityalak.sa.nam dh ruva ~ kM.astham avicd ly anapd yopajanavikdry anu tpa tty avrddhyavyayayogi yat tan nitya m iti . tad api nitya.m yasmi.ms tattva.m na vihanyate. - T hesame expressions recur in the VM bh under the satras 1.1.20 (ed. NSP p. 289) and1.1.56(ed. NS P p .451). T hese passages discuss the kM.astha- and the parieama-nityatd,as does the Sh mkhya. The VM bh also treats o f ekade~avlklti in its comm. under1.1.56 (ed. NSP p. 451) and else w here (e.g. under ~S 2).


13/13

r i m T nn M buddhiviparin, dm a 283s p e e c h ( e. g . R V 5 . 40 . 6 a n d 1 0 .7 1 .5 ) a n d t h e u s e b y t h e g r a m m a r i a nB h a r t ~ h a r i o f t h e t e r m vivar tate i n t h e f i r s t v e r s e o f t h e V dk y apad i y a .T h o u g h m u c h m o r e r e s e a r c h w i l l b e r e q u i r e d t o t r a c e i n d e t a i l a l l t h ed e v e l o p m e n t s a n d v a r i a t io n s o f th e s e t h e o r ie s i n t h e p h i l o s o p h e r s o fg r a m m a r a n d e l s e w h e r e , i t d o e s n o t s e e m t o o f a r f e t c h e d a t p r e s e n t t os u p p o s e , i n v ie w o f th e a b o v e m e n t i o n e d l i n k s, t h a t t h e g r a m m a t i c a ls c h o o ls w e r e o c c u p i e d t o a c e r t a i n e x t e n t w i t h t h e p r o b l e m o f c h a n g e a n dc a u s a t i o n i n t h e p e r i o d o f a b o u t h a l f a m i l l en i u m t h a t s e p a r a te s t h eVdkyapad~ya f r o m t h e Mahdbhds.ya. 28 F u r t h e r m o r e , i t m a y t h u s a p p e a ru n n e c e s s a r y t o e x p l a in t h e vivar ta c o n c e p t o f B h a r t r h a r i , M a . n .d a n am i ~ raa n d t h e A d v a i t a a s a h is t o r ic a l d e v e l o p m e n t in g r e a t p a r t f r o m t h e vijgdna-parin, dm a o f V a s u b a n d h u a n d t h e V i jf ia n av ~ d in s . F o r t h e p r o b l e m , asw e l l a s t h e q u e s t i o n o f i n t e r c o n n e x i o n i n th i s m a t t e r b e t w e e n B r ~ t h m a n ic a la n d B u d d h i s t th o u g h t , i s t h u s p u t b a c k t o t h e t i m e o f th e Mahdbhd.sya,t h a t i s p r o b a b l y t o t h e 2 n d - l s t c e n t u ri e s B .C . i f t h e c u r r e n t c h r o n o l o g yi s t o b e a c c e p t e d . A n d , a s h a s b e e n s e e n , t h e P ~t.n in ea n m e t h o d o f f o r m u -l a ti n g th e p r o c e s s o f s u b s ti t u t io n a s o p p o s e d t o t h e n o r m a l P r ~ t i ~ k h y am e t h o d i s a l s o o f p o t e n t i a l s i g n if i ca n c e i n t h i s r e s p e c t. 29

I n s h o r t , i t c a n b e s a i d t h a t t h is t h e o r y o f a t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f t he c o n -s c i o u s n e s s (buddhivipar#.zdma) w a s d e v e l o p e d f r o m a r e a l i s t i c p o s i t i o na s s u m i n g t h e r e a l i t y a n d p e r m a n e n c e o f 'th e w o r d (gabda), t h e o b j e c t(ar tha, i .e . as dk r t i ) a n d t h e i r c o n n e x i o n ( sambandha) . I t w o u l d s e e mt h a t t h is t h e o r y w a s t h e n b y p a s s e d b y t h e p h i l o s o p h e r s o f g r a m m a r b e -g i n n i n g w i t h B h a r t t : h a r i , s i n c e i t w a s n o l o n g e r r e q u i r e d i n t h e l i g h t o fth e gabdabrahma- a n d sphot.a-vdda. H o w e v e r , t h o u g h t h e t h e o r y it s el fw a s t h u s r e n d e r e d u n n e s s a r y , t h e t e n d e n c y i t re p r e s e n ts o f s tu d y i n gm e n t a l p r o c e s s e s r a t h e r t h a n e x t e r n a l o b j e c t s w a s t o r e m a i n c h a r a c t e r -i st ic o f t h e l a te r p h i l o s o p h e r s o f g r a m m a r w h o , i n t h e i r d o c t r i n e o f sphot.a,e m p h a s i s e t h e s u b t l e w o r d a n d i t s c o r r e l a t e , t h e m e n t a l o b j e c t .

28 Cf. also V P 3.7 karma. 45ff.; P. C h. C hakravarti, Philosophy o f San skrit Grammar(Calcutta, 1930), p. 262ff. (and my Contributions t~ l'his toire . . . . p . 62-64) .29 Th. Stcherbatsky thought it possible to trace in the A~;t.adhydyi a distinctionbetween pratiyatna ( = sa to gutzdntaradhanam) and sa.mskfta ( = sa ta utkar.sadhdnam)corresponding to the difference established by the Budd hists between upakdra andsa~sk ara; v. Cen tral Conception of B uddhism (London, 1923), p. 22 n. 1 and p. 69 n. 2.

On the term Buddhivipari-nāma and the problem of illusory change

Documents

Transcript of On the term Buddhivipari-nāma and the problem of illusory change