A CONSIDERATION to PRATYAYA-SARGA' Esho

A CONSIDERATION TO PRATYAYA-SARGA'

Esho YAMAGUCHI

'Pratyaya -sarga' means, in parinama-vada of Samkhya, the intellectual creation of mahat (=buddhi). In texts of Yoga, Buddhism and other scho- (1) ols, the word pratyaya' (that by which anything is known i. e. buddhi) was used as one of the most important terms that indicate the characteristics of each school, and it seems to connect directly with 'pratyaya-sarga' which is going to de described, that experience (bhoga) is qualified in (2) yoga as 'pratyaya which does not distinguish sattva from purusa'. But the compound 'pratyaya-sarga' can not be found in this school. This compound is noteworthy in its being used to make the creatures judge, critisize and become aware about their own samsara and parinama that they transmigrate (sarnsarati)s as linga (subtle body). We, the creatures, transmigrate as lirnga in the three worlds (tri-lokas) i. e. heaven (deva), human (manusya) and animal (tiryac). How do the creatures undergo transmigration as linga? It is answered in the following Karikas. By virtue (is obtained) ascent to higher planes; by vice, descent to the (3)l ower; from wisdom (results) beatitude; and bondage from the reverse.

(1) Brahma-sutra, 2, 2, 19; 3, 3, 1. Yoga-sutra, 1, 10; 18; 19; 2, 20; 3, 2; 12; 17; 19; 35; 4, 27. Vaisesika-sutra, 3, 2, 11; 12; 7, 2, 20. The Chinese translation for 'pratyaya' in Buddhism is yuan which means, in general, a cause. But yuan which is used in the phrase 'the four types of cause' does not mean a 'cause'. (2) Yoga-s., 3, 35: sattva-purusayor atyanta-samkirnayoh-pratyaya-aviseso bhogah. (3) Karika, 44: dharmena gamanam urdhvam gamanam adhastad bhavaty adharmena,/ jnanena capavargo viparyayad isyate bandhah// -979- A CONSIDERATION TO 'PRATYAYA-SARGA' (E. YAMAGUCHI) (17)

From dispassion results absorption into prakrti; from passionate attachment, transmigration; from power, non-impediment (of desires); (4) and from the reverse, the contrary. These Karikas define how various appearances the creatures have, i. e. define the way and the condition of the creatures, appearing variously as liriga. Eight causes (nimittas: dharma etc.) and eight effects (naimittikas: ascent etc.) are in the sphere of discision and choice (adhyavasaya) of the cre- (5) atures as their general principle of causality. How, among these eight causes and effects, which ought to be gained?- This question is concerned in general character and essence of eight causalities. As for this question, the following Karika should be noticed at first. This is an intellectual creation, distinguished by error, disability, contentment and perfection. By the hostile influence of the (6)inequalities of attributes, the different forms of this creation become fifty. (7) Here; nimitta-naimittikas (causalities) divided into eight are not only

(4) Karika, 45: vairagyat, prakrti-layah samsaro bhavati rajasad ragat/ aisvaryad avighato viparyayad tad-viparyayah// Cf. my article, "A Consideration of Dharma, Adharma, Jnana and Ajnana", JIBS, Vol. XIV, No. 2, 1966,pp. 948, 946. Jha, G., Tattvakaumudi of Vacaspatimisra, pp. 85ff. (5) This means, in Indian philosophy, a model which is fit generally for every world. (6) Karika, 46: esa pratyayasargo viparyayasaktitustisiddhyakhyah/ gunavaisamya-vimardat tasya ca bheda-sto pancasat// Cf. G (audapada,) Bh (asya, p. 26), Y (ukti) D (ipika, p. 152), V (acaspa- timisra,) T, (attvakaumudi, p. 62) and N (arayanatirtha,) C (andrika, p. 36); cp. S (uvarna) S (aptati) S (astra), by N. Aiya. Sastra, p. 64. M (atha- ra,) V (rtti, p. 63) and S (ankara,) J (ayamangala, p. 49) read vimardena for vimardat, and omit ca. Takakusu suggests that according to Paramartha, the reading gun.avaisamyavimarsa may be supposed, cf. SSS,ibid. But this is a problem. (7) Cf. Karikas, 42-45. 1) dharma (virtue). gamanam urdhvam (ascent) 2) adharma (vice). gamanam adhastat (descent) 3) jnana (wisdom). apavarga (beatitude) 4) viparyaya (reverse). bandha (bondage) 5) vairagya (dispassion). prakrti-laya (absorption into prakrti) 6) raio-raga (passionate attachment). sam8ara (transmigration) 7) aisvarya (power). avighata (non-impediment) 8) viparyaya (reverse). viparyasa (contrary) -978- (18) A CONSIDERATION TO 'PRATYAYA-SARGA' (E. YAMAGUCHI) defined generally, but separated particularly. What characters, on earth, do eight nimitta-naimittikas have? It is answered by 'pratyaya-sarga' i. e. 'esa pratyaya-sargah'. In this passage, we can see the essence of nimitta-naimittikas. That is, nimitta-naimittikas are 'sargas' based upon buddhi (=nimitta-cause-) and their essence exists in buddhi. Here, we can see, nimitta-naimittikas are fixed on the parinama-order of prakrti on account of being caused by buddhi. The following question, therefore, will be significant; what role do these (nimitta-naimittikas) play in the parinama system based upon satkaryavada? It is already suggested in the fact that eight nimitta-naimittikas characterized as 'pratyaya-sarga' are (8)di vided into four i. e. viparyaya, asakti, tusti and siddhi. These fours are denotations of nimitta-naimittikas (=pratyaya-sargas): for it does not mean that they directly summerize eight nimitta-naimittikas into four, but that they generalize again nimitta-naimittikas characterized as 'pratyaya-sargas' into four (viparyaya etc.). Though it is necessary for me to describe about this problem in detail, in this case I will pay attention to the fact that these fours (viparyaya etc.) are explained allegorically in relation to adhy- (s) avasaya (definite cognition) which is the function of buddhi. According to a commentary, viparyaya means a ignorance i. e. doubt that a man who want to do adhyavasaya can not do it. Asakti means anadhyavasaya coming from destruction of sense-organs and a ignorance i. e. doubt being contrary to tusti and siddhi. Tusti means that a man who should do adhyavasaya stops doing it and stays in adhyavasaya of anadhyavasaya. And siddhi means completion of adhyavasaya. In this way, these fours (viparyaya etc.) are explained as characters of buddhi in relation to adhyavasaya. That is, these fours are nothing

(8) Cf. Karikas, 47ff: I. viparyaya (error) II. asakti (disability) III. tusti (contentment) IV. siddhi (perfection) (9) Karika, 23a: adhyavasayo buddhih. Cf. Karika, 5a: prativisaya-adhyavasayo drstam (Perception is definite sense-cognition i. e., cognition of par- ticular objects through the senses). -977- A CONSIDERATION TO 'PRATYAYA-SARGA' (E. YAMAGUCHI) (19) but those of buddhi; viparyaya of buddhi, asakti of buddhi, tusti of buddhi and siddhi of buddhi. Therefore, when 'pratyaya-sargas' defining nimitta- naimittikas are divided into four (viparyaya etc.), it is obvious that (10) pratyaya-sargas' are placed in the first part of parinama-order of prakrti. And this fact is,, also, suggested by the unbalance of guna (guna-vaisamya) Guna-vaisamya means triguna-vaisamya. It is the mark which distinguishes vyakta consisting of triguna i. e. mahadadi (=buddhi etc.) from avyakta consisting of triguna i. e. pradhana (=prakrti) Pradhana consisting of triguna is triguna-avaisamya i. e. triguna-samya. A commentator calls this condition triguna-samya-avastha'(the condition of eguilibrium of trigunas). Pradhana the condition of which is triguna-samya-avastha becomes triguna-vaisamya by the connection with purusa, which means parinama of prakrti, and with which the origination and the transformation of vyakta (i. e. buddhi etc.) begin. Guna-vaisamya in this Karika characterizes nimitta-naimittikas (=pratyaya-sargas) consiting of triguna. Therefore, nimitta-naimittikas should be said to be divided into four (viparyaya etc.) because of being guna-vaisamya. It is impossible for us to think of nimitta-naimittikas the condition of which is not guna-vaisamya. But it is neither clearly told in Karika and nor mentioned by any commentator what is the guna-vaisamya and how are these fours (viparyaya etc.) established by it. When nimitta-naimittikas were divided into eight in the above, triguna-vaisamya was concretely divided by sattva-guna-pradhana and tamas-guna-pradhana. But, in this case, the concrete division of guna-vaisamya is not indicated. It may be thought that the establishment of fours (viparyaya etc.) is concretely explained by the concrete division of guna-vaisamya. But the concrete division of guna-vaisamya which ought to be explained in this case, must have a ground different from sattva-guna-pradhana and tamas-guna-pradhana in the above. Otherwise, it could not be understood why these fours

(10) Karikas, 22-23. Cf. my articles, "The Development of Theroies of Pari- nama-vada in Samkhya", I, II, The Ritsumeikan Bungaku, Nos. 249, 252, 1966. -976- (20) A CONSIDERATION TO 'PRATYAYA-SARGA' (E. YAMAGUCHI)

(viparyaya etc.) are described, separating from eight divisions of nimitta- naimittikas. And what does it mean that the concrete division of guna- vaisamya has such a ground different from these two (sattva-guna-pradhana and tamas-guna-pradhana)? It is noteworthy that the ground for division which is relatively different from these two (for example, the ground for division which esta- blishes two kinds of divisions as sattvaness-rajasness and rajasness-tamasness) is, as a matter of fact, meaningless. Such a ground for division offers us the following question about eight nimitta-naimittikas (=pratyaya-sarga) established by two division of sattvaness-tamasness etc.; which of eight nimitta-naimittikas corresponds to which of fours (viparyaya etc.)? Theref ore, these fours must have the ground for division whish is different from sattva-guna-pradhana and tamas-guna-pradhana. But what is this ground for division that is different from sattva-guna-pradhana and tamas- guna-pradhana? It is clearly suggested by guna-vaisamya. Guna-vaisamya is, i n general, triguna-asamya which is different from triguna-samya, and it does not mean only pradhana (excess) of a certain guna in triguna. Guna-vaisamya can exist also in definite sattva-guna-pradhana, rajas-guna- pradhana or tamas-guna-pradhana. Generally speaking,' based upon vaisamya of triguna, divisions (fifty divisions) of fours (viparyaya etc.) are established. Therefore, though these fours consist of triguna, it is not right that these are directly divided only by sattvaness-tamasness etc. Nowadays the following Karikas (Karikas, 46ff.) are said to have per- (11) haps been added later on. They often state their reasons for this opinion as following; as 'pratyaya-sargas' are already divided in previous two Karikas and Karika 23, the later part (i. e. Karikas 46ff.) is meaningless though the ways of division are not same. But I can not support this view. My opinion is indicated in the above investigation. And it will be more clearly understood by the consideration to Karikas 47 ff. which explain 'pratyaya-sargas' from viparyaya to siddhi.

(11) Keith, A. B., The Samkhya System, 1924, pp. 96ff.

-975- A CONSIDERATION TO 'PRATYAYA-SARGA' (E. YAMAGUCHI) (21)

As for so divisions of 'pratyaya-sargas', the following KAri kas are noteworthy. There are five forms of error; twentyeight of disability, arising from the (12) imperfection of the organs; contentment has nine forms; and perfection eight. Of error there are eight forms, as also of delusion; extreme delusion (13) is ten-fold; gloom is eighteen-fold; and so is also utter darkness. The injuries of the eleven organs, together with those of buddhi, are pronounced to be disability; the injuries of buddhi (itself) are seventeen, (14) brought about by the reversion of contentment and perfection. Nine forms of contentment are set forth: four internal, relating severally to nature (prakrti), means (upadana), time (kala) and luck (bhagya); and (15)f ive external, relating to abstinence from objects of sense. The eight powers (i. e. means of acquiring them) are reasoning, oral instruction, study, three-f old suppression of pain, acqusition of friends, and (16) purity. The three before mentioned(error etc.)are checks to these (powers). It is obvious that among these four 'pratyaya-sargas' siddhi only should be obtained, and that, on the contrary, viparyaya, asakti and tusti which cause to obstruct men from gaining siddhi should be rejected (heya),

(12) Karika, 47: pafica viparyaya-bheda bhavanty asaktis ca karana-vaikalyat/ astavirnsati-bheda tustir navadhastadha siddhih// MV reads asaktes for asaktis, and so Gbh (cf. SSS, p. 66). NC reads tu, for ca. We can see here fifty subdivisions of pratyaya-sargas. 5 forms of viparyaya (error) 28 of asakti (disability)- 9 of tusti (contentment) 8 of siddhi (perfection) 50 of pratyaya-sarga (intellectual creation) (13) Karika, -48: bhedas tamaso' sta-vidho mohasya ca dasa-vidho mahamohah/ tamisro' stadasadha tatha bhavaty andha-tamisrah// (14) Karika, 49: ekadasendriya-vadha saha buddhi-vadhair asaktir uddista/ saptadasa-vadha buddher viparyayat tustisiddhinam// (15) Karika, 50: adhyatmikas catasrah prakrty-upadana-kala-bhagyakhyah/ bahya visayoparamat pan-ca navatustayo 'bhihitah// VT and NC read abhimatah for abhihitah. (16) Karika, 51: uhah sabdo 'dhyayanam duhkha-vighatastrayah suhrt-praptih/ danam ca sidhayo'stau siddheh purvo'nkusas trividhah// -974- (22) A CONSIDERATION TO 'PRATYAYA-SARGA' (E. YAMAGUCHI) as it is said the former three kinds (of pratyaya-sargas) are checks to siddhi (siddheh purvo'rnkusas trividhah). 'Pratyaya-sargas', as stated above, are divided into four (i. e. viparyaya, asakti, tusti and siddhi), and these fours are subdivided into five, twentyeight, nine and eight respectively. (17) Subdivisions, therefore, amount to fifty in all, and in these fifty three divisions (viparyaya, asakti and tus ti) and f ourtytwo subdivisions (which belong to these threes) except siddhi (which has eight subdivisions)(18)should be all rejected. Only siddhi should be obtained. Because the knowledge which is the right way to emancipation (moksa) is gained only by siddhi. In the above investigation we can see the contents of 'pratyaya-sarga' and (19) critical summary to it.

(17) Cf. Karikas, 47f. and n. 12. (18) 1 uha (reasoning), 2 sabda (oral instruction), 3 adhyayana (study), 4- 6 duhkha-vighata-traya (three-fold suppression of pain), 7 suhrt-prapti (acquisition of friends), 8 dana (purity). These are surely inana-marga (way of knowledge or wisdom) in Sathkhya aiming at moksa (extinction of pain). Cf. Karikas, 1; 2; 37; 64ff. (19) In this paper at first I intend to describe, in detail, the critical attitude of the theory of nimitta-naimittika (=pratyaya-sarga) in four divisions of ' pratyaya-sarga'. But due to the limitation of space, to my great regret, I can not analyse completely each of four divisions and can only suggest, at' any rate, the critical attitude of the theory of 'pratyaya-sarga'. The theory of 'pratyaya-sarga' corresponds, in a whole, to the theory of four noble truths (satya) pain, the cause (of pain), the extinction (of pain) and the way to the extinction-, which clarifies every fallacy (asatya). This theory clarifies pain and the cause (of pain) which are in the causality of delusion in the world, and the extinction (of pain) and the way to the extinction which are in the causality of enlightenment. Viparyaya, asakti and tusti correspond to pain and the cause (of pain), and siddhi to the extinction (of pain) and the way to the, extinction. One has regret- tably failed to point it out that Samkhya and Buddhism can be clearly compared one another as a philosophy aiming at jnana-phala-moksa. -973-