Nyaya-Vaisheshika categories (Study)
by Diptimani Goswami | 2014 | 61,072 words
This page relates 鈥楧ate of Annambhatta鈥� of the study on the Nyaya-Vaisheshika categories with special reference to the Tarkasangraha by Annambhatta. Both Nyaya and Vaisesika are schools of ancient Indian Philosophy, and accepted in their system various padarthas or objects of valid knowledge. This study investigates how the Tarkasamgraha reflects these categories in the combined Nyayavaisesika school.
Go directly to: Footnotes.
Date of 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补
础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 is the author of 罢补谤办补蝉补峁僩谤补丑补. No definite information about the date of 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 is found. He has not mentioned any previous writer or work which can enable us to ascertain his accurate date. R.B. Godbole gives some information without source about 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 in his Dictionary of Modern History of India. According to him 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 lived in the 15th century A.D.[1] Virupakshananda mentions, 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补鈥檚 date was 1600 A.D.[2]
顿岣峁囜笉丑颈谤腻箩补 艢腻蝉迟谤墨 also accepts this date.[3] But they do not give any source, only mention the date. From the writings of 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 it appears that he was later than both 骋补诲腻诲丑补谤补 and 痴颈艣惫补苍腻迟丑补.[4] In 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补鈥檚 work the influence of 骋补诲腻诲丑补谤补 and 搁补驳丑耻苍腻迟丑补 cam be perceived.[5] Moreover, 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 taught his pupils the works 罢补谤办补蝉补峁僩谤补丑补, 罢补谤办补诲墨辫颈办腻, 厂颈诲诲丑腻苍迟补-惭耻办迟腻惫补濒墨 and 骋腻诲补诲丑补谤墨 which are written by these writers. 罢补谤办补蝉补峁僩谤补丑补 and 罢补谤办补诲墨辫颈办腻 are known as B膩lagad膩dhar墨.[6] From this it may be assumed that the influence of 骋补诲腻诲丑补谤补 was in the 罢补谤办补蝉补峁僩谤补丑补. 骋补诲腻诲丑补谤补 most probably lived in the later part of the 16th century A.D. 痴颈艣惫补苍腻迟丑补鈥檚 date is 1634 A.D. Therefore, he could not flourish before the beginning of the 17th century A.D.[7]
Further, Raghunatha 艢颈谤辞尘补峁噄 was the author of 顿墨诲丑颈迟颈. His date was about the end of the 16th century or the beginning of the 17th century A.D.[8] 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 has quoted some sentences directly from 顿墨诲丑颈迟颈 in the 顿墨辫颈办腻.[9] Hence, 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 must be later than him. Thus, 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 flourished in the 17th century A.D.
S. Kuppusw膩mi 艢腻蝉迟谤颈 has mentioned the date of 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 as the later part of the seventeenth century A.D.[10] S.C. Vidyabhusana also supports this view and has stated that he has not flourished before the 17th century A.D.[11] He also mentions in A History of Indian Logic that one manuscript of the 罢补谤办补蝉补峁僩谤补丑补 gives the date 1724 A.D. It is found in the Weber鈥檚 Berlin Catalogue, No. 683.[12] Stein, mentions about a manuscript of 罢补谤办补蝉补峁僩谤补丑补 the date of which is 1740 A.D. Another manuscript of 罢补谤办补诲墨辫颈办腻, the date of which 1735 A.D. is found.[13] We find in the 顿墨辫颈办腻 a reference of a king named Tribhuvanatilaka.[14] However, no conclusive evidence about this king can be gathered. Vidyabhusana only mentions that he was a Pallava chief of 碍腻帽肠墨.[15] However, from our earlier discussions it can be said that 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 flourished in 17th century A.D.
Footnotes and references:
[1]:
Quoted in Athalye and Bodas, (ed.), 罢补谤办补蝉补峁僩谤补丑补,, p. Lx.
[2]:
Swami Virupakshananda,(ed.), 罢补谤办补蝉补峁僩谤补丑补, p. 7
[4]:
Vide, Athalye and Bodas, (ed.), 罢补谤办补蝉补峁僩谤补丑补,, p. Lx.
[5]:
cf. Bha峁弓acharya, Chandrodaya, The Elements of Indian Logic and Epistemology, p. iii
[6]:
Gajendragadkar, A. B. and Karmakar, R.D., 罢补谤办补蝉补峁僩谤补丑补, p. ii
[7]:
Ibid., ed., p. Lxii
[8]:
Ibid, p. Liii
[9]:
Vide, Ibid., p.Lxi
[10]:
Kuppuswami, S., A Primer of Indian Logic, p.Xli
[12]:
Ibid.
[13]:
Vide, Athalye and Bodas, (ed), 罢补谤办补蝉补峁僩谤补丑补, p. Lxiii
[14]:
k膩ncy膩峁� tribhuvanatilako bh奴patirity膩dau siddhe. 顿墨辫颈办腻, Ibid., pp. 50, 51
[15]:
cf. Vidyabhusana, Satish Chandra, A History of Indian Logic, p 388