________________
5
interpretation offered by others of this compound. His words are: "anye vyacakşate-sankalpalakṣaṇena phalena saphalaḥ saprayojano brahmastambarombho yasya...". And on p. 13 he tells us that some accept the reading 'kakodaravat' and explain it in the sense of a serpent (sarpa).
Important Authors and Works referred to in the Commentary 1. UDBHATA
Cakradhara refers to Udbhata on pp. 19, 43, 180, 197, 198. On p. 19 he informs us that by the term 'sub kşitacorvakas Jayanta means Udbhata and others.
On p. 43 he tells us that by the term carvakad hurta' Jayanta means Udbhata, This makes it quite clear that there were not two groups of cārvākas, viz. susikşita and dhurta as both the adjectives are here applied to one and the same person. Again, here we are told that this Udbhaça has written a commentary (vivrti) on the Lokayatasutra. From what Cakradhara has said here it follows that Udbhata's interpretation of the aphorisms was novel. For instance, the first two aphorisms are explained by him quite differently abandoning the usually accepted sense. According to him the term 'tattva' occurring in the first aphorism suggests pramāṇaprameya-sankhya-lakṣaṇa-niyamāšakyakaraṇīyata'. The word 'it' occurring in the second aphorism indicates, according to him, the indefinite number of prameyas (prameyaniyama pratipadaka).
On p. 197 it is said that the aphorism from the Lokayatasutra, viz. 'bhütebhyas caitanyam' is interpreted by him as bhutartham caitanyam'. Thus he means to say that caitanya which is an independent entity helps the physical elements in constructing the body (caitanyam soatantram eva Sartrarambhakabhato pakārakam iti). It is really surprising to know that there were carvakas who believed in the independent reality of caitanya.
On p. 198 he is recognised as the upholder of the view that adṛsta (=dharma) is a property of the material elements. His view is quoted in his own words. The quotation is as follows: sarträrambhakakāraṇānām eva bhūtānāṁ sa kascit tadyko vicitrasukhaduḥkhopabhogado dharmaḥ svabhavavišeşa ity arthaḥ.
On p. 180 Cakradhara tells us that Udbhaça himself has justified the usages of the forms like "jobha', 'ctrṇa', 'varenya'. Could we surmise that he was well versed in the science of Sanskrit Grammar also and that he wrote a work on Sanskrit Grammar ?
From the above description it follows that Udbhata was a carvaka. He wrote a commentary on the Lokaуatasutra. In this commentary he interpreted the aphorisms of Lokayatasutra in such a way as even the Carvaka
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
