मूलमध्यमककारिका (आचार्य नागार्जुन - चन्द्रकीर्ति प्रणीत प्रसन्नपदा व्याख्या सहित)

Page 312

Page 2, l. 4— This work aims at explaining the doctrine of प्रतीत्यसमुत्पाद
characterised by the eight epithets, viz., अनिरोध, अनुत्पाद, अनुच्छेद, अशाश्वत, अनेकार्थ,
अनानार्थ, अनागम and अनिर्गम, all negative terms, meaning devoid of निरोध, destruction
etc.
**Page 2, l. 10—**स्थाणुः, eternal. स्थास्नु also means the same. **L. 12—**उपसर्गवशेन
धात्वर्थविपरिणामात्, the meanings of roots undergo changes on account of prefixes. The
following stanza is also cited by स्थिरमति in his Commentary on मध्यान्तविभाग, p. 5.
Note Particularly the second line which in Pāṇinian school is प्रहारार्संहारविहारपरिहारवत्.
**Page 2, l. 16—**The term प्रतीत्यसमुत्पाद is here derived from प्रति + इ and
सम् + उद् + पद्. The part प्रतीत्य is a Gerund and means प्राप्य and अपेक्ष्य, and समुत्पाद
means birth, production; so the meaning of the entire expression is production
or origination dependent on certain conditions, or in short, dependent origination.
Page 2, l. 18. Another explanation of the term प्रतीत्यसमुत्पाद is cited
here which is : प्रति प्रति इत्यानां विनाशिनां समुत्पादः, production of objects which
perish again and again, which explanation suits certain passages cited here.
In अभिधर्मकोशव्याख्या this explanation is attributed to भदन्त श्रीलाभ. Here it is : अन्ये
पुनरिति भदन्तश्रीलाभः । प्रतिर्वीप्सार्थ इति । नानावाचिनामधिकरणानां सर्वेषां क्रियागुणाभ्यां व्यावृत्तिमच्छा
वीप्सा, तामयं प्रतियोतयति । इतौ गतौ साधवः इत्याः। तत्र साधुः [पा. ४. ४. ९८] इति यत्प्रत्ययः ।
इतौ विनष्टौ साधवः, अनवस्थाचिन इत्यर्थः । सम् उपसर्गः समवायर्थि द्योतयति । उत्पूर्वः पदिः प्रादुर्भावार्थम् ।
धात्वर्थपरिणामात् तां तां सामग्रीं प्रतीति प्रतेर्वीप्सार्थतां दर्शयति । इत्यानां 'विनश्वराणां' समवायेनोत्पादः
प्रतीत्यसमुत्पादः । न कश्चिदेकं एक उत्पद्यते, सहोत्पादनियमात्.
Candrakīrti, however, does not like this method of deriving the term,
particularly in passages like चक्षुः प्रतीत्य रूपाणि च उत्पद्यते चक्षुर्विज्ञानम्, as this explanation
does not convey the sense of वीप्सा. Further, if we take the word इत्य as ending in a
तद्धितप्रत्यय यत्, which then is not an indeclinable, and hence cannot form a compound
with समुत्पाद. Hence, the commentator holds that his explanation, viz. हेतुप्रत्ययापेक्षो
भावानामुत्पादः प्रतीत्यसमुत्पादार्थः, is the right one.
**Page 2, l. 2—**प्रतीत्यसमुत्पादं वो भिक्षवो देशयिष्यामि, cf. S. N. II. 1. 5. 2. 13.
**Page 2, l. 20—**यः प्रतीत्यसमुत्पादं पश्यति, स धर्मं पश्यति is found in शालिस्तम्बसूत्र.
Page 2, l, 21—इह तु etc. The passage contains the same argument as is
found in अभिधर्मकोशव्याख्या-प्रतिवार्त्सार्थ इत्येवमादिका कल्पना अत्रैव प्रतीत्यसमुत्पादसूत्रे युज्यते । इह
कथं भविष्यति ? चक्षुः प्रतीत्य रूपाणि च उत्पद्यते चक्षुर्विज्ञानमिति ? न हि प्रतीत्यानां चक्षूंषि प्रतीत्य चक्षूंषीति
समासः संभवति, अर्थायोगात् । चक्षुर्हि प्रतीत्य रूपाणि प्राप्य च उत्पद्यते चक्षुर्विज्ञानमित्ययमर्थो गम्यते.
Page 3, l. 1- यस्तु etc. This seems to be the view of भावविवेक who is now charged
hat he does not possess skill to reproduce correctly the views of the opponents
before attempting their refutation, परपक्षानुवादाकौशल. Ultimately, Candrakīrti says
that the term प्राप्य means अपेक्ष्य, and cites in support the authority of Nāgārjuna.
The whole page 3 is devoted to refute the interpretation of प्रतीत्यसमुत्पाद given by
भावविवेक.
Page 3, l. 18- यच्चापि स्वमतं व्यवस्थापितम्, i. e., the view of भावविवेक, viz., इदं प्रत्ययताथैः
प्रतीत्यसमुत्पादार्थः is not approved by Candrakīrti, because it does not explain the
term by correct derivation.
Page 4, l. 2- सांवृत्तानां पदार्थानाम् etc. All objects, according to Mādhyamikas, are
valid only from the point of view of संवृति, i. e., व्यवहार. संवृति is so called because it
obscures the true nature of things.
Page 4, l. 4-आर्यज्ञानापेक्षया, from the view-point of an ārya, i.e., Buddhist. In
other words, from the point of view of परमार्थ, as opposed to संवृति.

---

Page 313

**Page 1, l. 6-**In Mahāyāna system the entire universe is divided into three
spheres of existence, viz. (1) Kāmadhātu – the sphere of desire, (2) rūpadhātu –
the sphere of form and colour, and (3) ārūpyadhātu – the sphere of formless and
colourless beings. Asaṅga in his Yogācārabhūmi (73) has made the following
observations : trayo dhātavaḥ. Kāmadhātu rūpadhātur ārūpyadhātūr iti. He
has furnished an elaborate account of these three spheres of existence. The
word traidhātuka frequently occurs in the Laṅkā and it has been explained
as triple world by Suzuki. Cf. Bhrāntaṁ traidhātuke cittaṁ, 268, 34; Cittaṁ
hi traidhātukayonir etad, 268, 36.
P. 4, l, 10 – cittacaittānām, Caitta = belonging to mind, mental states.
It has been invariably compounded with Citta. The word cittacaitta occurs in the
Laṅkā (151). Cf. bāhyavicitrārthopalambhābhiniveśāc cittacaittakalāpo vikalpa-
saṁśabditaḥ pravartamānaḥ. Cf. also nirvikalpaḥ sadā yuktāś cittacaittavivarjitāḥ.
(Laṅkā, 269.38) mind and all possible varities of mental things; cf. citta-caitasika.
P. 14, l, 19. saṁvṛti = popular convention (Mookerjee, ASL., p. 51). The Dharma-
saṁgraha (95) has referred to two varieties of truth, viz. saṁvṛtisatya, empirical
truth and paramārthasatya, transcendental truth.
**P. 51, l. 2—**pravacana, doctrinal instruction, preaching sacred text.
**P. 53, l. 14—**ānimitta causeless (nimitta = cause)
**P. 53, l. 18—**Kumārga – see note elsewhere.
**P. 54, l. 1—**parikalpasvarūpa – see note elsewhere.
P. 54, l. 11—(niśrita) – see note elsewhere.
**P. 96, l. 18,—**asaṁskṛta. This word occurs in the Mahāyāna Buddhist Texts
both as a substantive or an adjective. It means unproduced, uncreated, uncondi-
tioned and the like. The Dharmasaṁgraha (32) has stated that there are three
asaṁskṛta (uncreated) objects, viz. ether (ākāśa), annihilation through reflection
(pratisaṁkhyā-nirodha), and annihilation without reflection (apratisaṁkhyā-ni-
rodha). That what passes under the name of pratisaṁkhyā-nirodha, is equivalent
to nirvāṇa. It is worth noting that the Laṅkāvatāra has enumerated the names
of ākāśa, apratisaṁkhyā-nirodha, and nirvāṇa-dhātu (instead of pratisaṁkhyā-
nirodha) as unproduced things. Cf. ākāśaṁ apratisaṁkhyānirodho nirvāṇadhātuś-
cā'nirodho'nutpannaḥ; na cā'tra kaścit saṁskṛto'saṁskṛto vā (Laṅkā, 197; 199).
Besides the Laṅkā (177) has used kṛtakam and akṛtakam in lieu of saṁskṛtam
and asaṁskṛtam. Cf. ākāśaṁ apratisāṁkhyānirodho nirvāṇaṁ bho Gautama
kṛtakam akṛtakam ?
Pratyaya : Cause. There is divergence of opinion regarding the precise
import of the two technical terms hetu and pratyaya so frequently employed in
Mahāyāna literature. A section of glossators holds that the immediate or proxi-
mate cause is called hetu and that the remote one passes under the name of
pratyaya. While another group of Mahāyānists have indiscriminately used them,
thus indicating identity of their meaning. Nāgārjuna in his Madhyamaka-śāstra
has set down four different varities of pratyayas, viz. (1) hetu-pratyaya, (2) ālam-
bana-pratyaya, (3) anantara-pratyaya and (4) adhipati-pratyaya. Candrakīrti in his
Prasannapadā (26) has explained these terms in extenso. He has observed that
what brings a thing into existence as an underlaying seed is to be regarded as hetu-
pratyaya with respect to its effect. A thing while coming into existence depends