[Buddha-l] Prapanca

[Dan Lusthaus]

Oh, for goodness sake Richard!

> (Lusthaus's amusing excursion into Nagarjuna
> seems a prime example of prapanca on steroids.)

As all experts on Nagarjuna -- as you claim yourself to be -- would
recognize, he doesn't use the word prapanca in a simplistic, vague,
merely-demeaning manner, but has several very precise psycho-linguistic
problems in mind. That particular passage in MMK is one of the places where
he illustrates the proliferation of linguistic categories into independent
metaphysical realities.

I pointed out one Nyaya counterpart to this diffusion of the root k.r. Let
me offer another from the Caraka-sa.mhitaa [CS] (that medical text mentioned
a ways back when we choked on raw food, which is also the first Indian text
to introduce pramana theory). In the redacted version that has come down to
us, it has strong affinities with Samkhya thought, not Nyaya, so this
illustrates that the problem Nagarjuna is diagnosing was pervasive (one can
survey the literature of the time to find many more such examples).

In the Vimaana-sthaanam chapter of CS (ch. 8) -- during its first sustained
discussion of vaada (debate) and pramana, v.68 states (this time I am using
Priyavrat Sharma's edition and translation):

"Now (I) shall explain some topics for the knowledge of physicians because
the wise commend initiation of all actions with prior knowledge [this is one
Dharmakirti's sources -- DL]. If after knowing well kaara.na, kara.na,
kaaryayoni, kaarya, kaaryaphala, anubandha, de"sa, kaala, prav.rtti and
upaaya one proceeds for some action, he obtains the desired fruit and
subsequent benefit in that without any great effort."

Let's leave for another day the role that this plays in Dharmakirti's
orientation (later commentaries on CS cite "Saantarak.sita's Tattvasamgraha
during their treatment of yukti-pramana as a better formulated version of
the same idea, etc.), and the usage of upaaya here (in its non-Buddhist
implications), and even the parallel between "obtaining desired fruit" via
karma in this passage and Buddha's advice on how a couple can stay together
for lifetimes recently discussed on this e-list). Instead, a quick glance at
the list indicates that it consists of ten items, five of which are k.r
derivatives. The context is karma, action, the most emblematic and inclusive
form of the k.r root in noun form. CS now goes on to provide a short
definition of each:

"Kaara.na (doer) is that who does a thing, he is the cause and agent. (69)"
tatra kaara.na.m naama tad yad karoti, sa eva hetu.h, sa kartaa ||

Note in the definition, two additional k.r derivatives occur: karoti (does)
and kartaa (agent). If you go back and check the MMK verse, you will find
that he uses kaara.na twice there, with pretty much the two meanings
(cause=hetu and 'the doing doer") Anyone starting to understand what
Nagarjuna is pointing to as prapanca? And why he argues that that often
involves tautology? Continuing:

"Kara.na (instrument) is that which serves as equipment for the doer making
effort for performing the action. (70)"
kara.na.m punastad yadupakara.naayopakalpade kartu.h kaaryaabhinirv.rttau
prayatamaanasya ||

Can you find the k.r derivatives?
(hint: upakara.na = the act of doing anything for another, doing a service
or favour, helping, assisting, benefiting; instrument, implement, ...
apparatus, paraphernalia; etc. There are still three more derivatives aside
from kara.na in that sentence. Note also how v.r roots are beginning to spin
around in conjunction.)

"Kaaryayoni (original source) is that which is converted into action after
transformation. (71)"
kaaryayonistu saa yaa vik.riyamaa.naa kaaryatvamaapadyate ||

Two more. In English we get words other action for many of these terms, but
anyone reading this in Sanskrit is watching k.r dance into a variety of
differing postures.

"Kaarya (act) is that with the object of performing which the doer proceeds.
(72)"
kaarye tu tadyasyaabhiniv.rttim-abhisandhaaya kartaa pravartate ||

K.r continues to morph into v.r. (abhinivrtti, pravartate). Are they paired
dancers or tag team? Here, their purposefulness is joined by a new term,
abdhisandhaaya, a higher purpose, a design or interest. So action (k.r.) and
spinning (v.r) are being given direction. They are trying to get somewhere.

"Kaaryaphala (result of act) is that with the object of which the action is
performed. (73)"
kaaryaphala.m punastad yatprayojanaa kaaryaabhiniv.rttir-i.syate ||

And here kaarya has tapped abhisandhaaya on the shoulder, reassuming its
role as abhiniv.rtti's partner, but with the addition of prayojana, another
term for goal, purpose, with additional nuances of causality, instigation,
and effectiveness. We end in a threesome (not monogamy).

Had Richard bothered to check the references I made to the Ka"sikav.rtti by
Jayaditya and Vamana (sometimes taken as a "Buddhist" grammar text, as
opposed to the "Hindu" variety) -- and I believe there is downloadable
online version on GRETIL -- he would have seen that the term prapanca in
those phrases indicates carrying out diversification into further
declensional and conjugational forms, precisely the usage I am attributing
to Nagarjuna.

So I'll leave it for others to decide who is indulging in "prime examples of
prapanca," [whether or not on steroids]. The one who can show the actual
usage with the key texts in question, or the one who offers a pop-psych
confabulation ["The bottom line for me is that when I use the term
"prapanca" (perhaps idiosyncratically) ... but I have no textual basis.
Mostly I'm just making stuff up here. (That's my preferred methodology in
all important matters.)"]

Try arguments and evidence instead of jocular put-downs next time (known in
the universe beyond buddha-l as sneers and jeers). It's more seemly.

Dan