KOLËCALA MALLINËTHA’S CONTRIBUTION

TO THE NYËYA-VAIáEâIKA LITERATURE1

Dr. PTGY. Sampathkumaracharyulu
Associate Professor, Dept. of Nyaya,
Rashtriya Sanskrit Vidyapeetha, Tirupati.(India)

ABSTRACT

Kol¡cala Mallin¡tha S£rin (1450 A.D.) is not only a well-known commentator on the five
Mah¡kavya-s of Sanskrit literature, but also a great scholar of Ny¡ya-Vai¿eÀika Philosophy. His
contribution to the field of Ny¡ya-Vai¿eÀika is remarkable. But it is less known to the scholarly
world. By the titles Mah¡mahop¡dhy¡ya, Padav¡kyapram¡¸ap¡r¡v¡rap¡r¢¸a, he is identified as a
sound scholar. As well as the Pancamah¡k¡vya-s, he has in fact also commented on the
Pra¿astap¡dabh¡Àya on the Vai¿e¿ikas£tra of Ka¸¡da and T¡rkikarakÀ¡ of Varadar¡ja (1150
A.D.). These commentaries are called by names NikaÀ¡ and NiÀka¸¶ak¡ respectively.

Varadar¡ja the son of Sri R¡madeva Mishra is famous as Bodhanik¡ra. He is the early
commentator on Udayana’s Ny¡yakusum¡µjali. He also has composed an independent Nyaya
treatise called T¡rkikarakÀ¡. (in 161 verses) along with an auto-commentary by name
S¡rasa´graha, defending the Ny¡ya theory from the attack of Buddhists, Jains and other
Philosophers. This text has received a great attention of the scholars and more than thirteen people
have commented on it, among which Mallin¡tha’s commentary also noteworthy. The others are:
Jµ¡nap£r¸a, Nidhin¡tha, Balabhadra, Cennubha¶¶a, R¡me¿vara, Sarasvat¢t¢rtha, Hariharad¢kÀita,
Vin¡yakabha¶¶a, N¤siÆha¶hakkura, Sundarar¡ja, and the son of Annam bhatta. Among all these
commentaries, T¡rkikarakÀ¡, has been edited first with the commentaries of Mallin¡tha and
Jn¡napurna, by Sri Vindhyesvariprasada Dvivedin from Pandit series, Varanasi, in 1900.
Secondly it was edited with the commentaries of Chennu Bhatta and Ramesvara by Kishorenatha
Jha, from Sri Kameshvarasimha Darbhaga Sanskrit Visvavidyalaya, in 2001. Thirdly it is edited
and published by Dr. PTGY. Sampathkumaracharyulu, from Tirupati, with the commentary Vivrti
of Harihara Dikshita, in 2004.

Mallin¡tha’s approach and the style of his commentary is unique. He decides the text with
perfect readings and supports with several views of earliers. Here I would like to present the
views of Mallin¡tha from his commentary on T¡rkikarakÀ¡.
                                                            
1
 
Paper presented in the 7th Annual International Conference of Philosophy, 28-31, May
2012, conducted by the ATHENS INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, ATHENS, GREECE.  
1 
 
 KOLËCALA MALLINËTHA’S CONTRIBUTION
TO THE NYËYA-VAIáEâIKA LITERATURE
Dr. PTGY. Sampathkumaracharyulu
Associate Professor, Dept. of Nyaya,
Rashtriya Sanskrit Vidyapeetha, Tirupati.(India)

Kol¡cala Mallin¡tha (1450 A.D.), the well-known scholar of Sanskrit Literature, though
famous for his excellent commentaries on Paµcamah¡k¡vya-s of K¡lid¡sa, M¡gha and Bh¡ravi,
is very less known to the field, as a scholar of Ny¡ya- Vai¿eÀika Philosophy. He has been
honored with the titles ‘mah¡mahop¡dhy¡ya’ and ‘pada-v¡kya-pram¡¸a-par¡v¡rap¡r¢¸a’ i.e a
great scholar of the ¿¡stra-s, in the branches of Sanskrit Grammar, Logic, Philosophy and
others. His self-confidence is well known to the scholars of Sanskrit, by his statement which can
be seen commonly, in all of his writings, as follows:

v¡¸¢Æ k¡¸abhuj¢m aj¢ga¸ad av¡s¡s¢c ca vaiy¡sik¢m

antas tantram araÆsta pannagagav¢gumpheÀu c¡j¡gar¢t /
v¡c¡m ¡kalayad rahasyam akhilaÆ ya¿c¡kÀap¡dasphur¡Æ
loke'bh£d yad upajµam eva viduÀ¡Æ saujanyajanyaÆ ya¿aÅ //
He named his commentaries ideally with particular names, showing a witness to his
scholarship, as Saµj¢vin¢. Ghant¡patha, Sarvankasa, Jiv¡tu, Sarvapathina etc. He commented
K¡lid¡sa’s three poems: Raghuvansa, Kum¡rasambhava and Meghasandesa with a single title

Saµj¢vin¢, Bh¡ravi’s Kir¡t¡rjuniya with the name Ghant¡patha, M¡gha’s Sisup¡lavadha with
the name Sarva´kaÀ¡, and Harsha’s Naishadhiyacarita with the name Jiv¡tu. The purpose of
commenting these poems is to develop the dull-minded students. He adds as follows:

mallin¡thakaviÅ so'yaÆ mand¡tm¡nujigh¤kÀay¡ /

vy¡caÀ¶e k¡lid¡s¢yaÆ k¡vyatrayam an¡kulam //

2 
 
 It is experienced by the scholars that all of his commentaries are lucid, informative and
very much helpful for the learners and scholars of Sanskrit language. He declares confidently at
the commencement of his commentaries that he never comments without any base or unwanted
matters. His statement is as follows:

n¡m£laÆ likhyate kiµcit n¡napekÀitam ucyate (Saµj¢vin¢ on Raghuvamsa )

Along with the commentaries, he wrote some independent works also in Sanskrit.

Likewise he has commentated on Ny¡ya-Vai¿eÀika Philosophy also. He commented on

Prasastapadabhasya on the Vai¿eÀika S£tra-s of Kanada, with the name NikaÀ¡, and on
T¡rkikarakÀ¡ of Varadar¡ja, with the title NiÀka¸¶ak¡. These two commentaries are proving
Mallin¡tha’s scholarship in the field of Ny¡ya- Vai¿eÀika Philosophy.

Mallin¡tha mentions himself that he belongs to the Kol¡cala family. Kol¡cala

is the Sanskrit name to the village Pandip¡du in Warangal district of Andhra Pradesh.
He lived in the middle of fifteenth Century. He has written several works as:
1-3: Saµj¢vini. - RaghuvaÆ¿a-Kum¡rasambhava-M®ghasand®¿¡n¡Æ vy¡khy¡,
4: NikaÀ¡ - Pra¿astap¡dabh¡Àyavy¡khy¡,
5: NiÀka¸¶ak¡ - T¡rkikarakÀ¡vy¡khy¡,
6: Gha¸¶¡patham - Kir¡t¡rjun¢yavy¡khy¡,
7: Sarva´kaÀ¡ - ¿i¿up¡lavadhavy¡khy¡ ,
8: J¢v¡tu - NaiÀadh¢yacaritavy¡khy¡,
9: Taral¡ - Ek¡va½¢vy¡khy¡,
10: Sarvapathina - Bha¶¶ik¡vyavy¡khy¡.
11: Com on Tantravartika
12: Com on Svaramanjariparimala and
13: Vaisyavamsasudhakara.

3 
 
T¡rkikarakÀ¡ of Varadar¡ja:
Varadar¡ja (1150 A.D.), son of R¡madeva, wrote two works in the Ny¡ya-
Vai¿eÀika Literature. One is T¡rkikarakÀ¡ - an individual manual and the second is
B°dhan¢ – a commentary on Udayana’s Ny¡yakusum¡µjali. T¡rkikarakÀ¡ is written
with the influence of V¡chaspati, Udayana and other early writers of Ny¡ya
Philosophy. He mentions the reason in writing T¡rkikarakÀ¡, is to summarize the
nyaya theories, for the sake of protection to the later logicians, because the early
texts, Bh¡Àya, V¡rtika and others are very tuff in understanding and heavy in size.
His statement in the concluding verse of T¡rkikarakÀ¡, is as follows:
¡lo·ya dustaragabh¢ratar¡n nibandh¡n
v¡caspater udayanasya tath¡ pareÀ¡m /
s¡ro may¡’tra samag¤hyata v¡vad£kair
2
nityaÆkath¡su vijig¢Àubhir eÀa dh¡ryaÅ//
“The text T¡rkikarakÀ¡ is to be hold ever by the dialicts at their debates for
success, as the gist has been taken by me here, having verified the tuff texts of
V¡caspati, Udayana and others.”

Varadar¡ja’s commentary on Udayana’s Ny¡yakusum¡µjali, might be the

earliest commentary so far available. Here the author mentions his father’s name as
Srir¡madeva and his native place is Mithil¡. He justifies the reason in writing his
commentary, that the text of Udayana is tuff and difficult to understand for the
foreigners of Mithil¡. By that he claims his nativity of Mithil¡ as well as Udayana. He
mentions at the commencement of his commentary Bodhani, as follows:
audayane pathi gahane vaide¿ikaÅ pratipadaÆ skhalati/

tasya krte krtir esa kusumanjalibodhani jayati //

                                                            

2
  T¡rkikarakÀ¡, p. 260 

4 
 
 T¡rkikarakÀ¡, is written in 161 verses, explaining the Ny¡yasutra-s of
Gautama, in three chapters. First chapter covers the fourteen catagories of Nyaya
philosophy, from pram¡na to chala, and the remaining two chapters deal with j¡ti and
nigrahasth¡na respectively. Varadaraja refers his T¡rkikarakÀ¡, in his commentary
Bodhani on Ny¡yakusum¡µjali.
Varadar¡ja’s T¡rkikarakÀ¡ has received a great attention of the scholars at that
time and has been commented by several scholars. More than thirteen commentaries
are found that available. Among these commentaries, only four commentaries have
been yet published. They are Jµ¡nap£r¸a’s Laghud¢pik¡; Mallin¡tha’s NiÀka¸¶ak¡,
Chennubhatta;s T¢k¡ and Harihara D¢kÀita’s Vivriti.

Jµ¡nap£r¸a and Mallin¡tha, the earlier commentators of T¡rkikarakÀ¡, record

the fact that Varadar¡ja has written T¡rkikarakÀ¡, at first in the form of verses and
later he has appended an auto-commentary - S¡rasa´graha to that in a prose form,
influenced by Udayana. Jµ¡nap£r¸a in his commentary - Laghud¢pik¡ on
T¡rkikarakÀ¡, mentions this as follows:
pur¡ varadar¡jena ny¡ya¿¡str¡rthasa´graha/
k¤taÅ paratvat° d¤À¶v¡ pady¡n¡Æ durgrah¡rthat¡m//
tenaiva racit¡ vy¡khy¡ s¡ ca ¿¡strapadaÆ gat¡/
tataÅ tadarthasiddhyarthaÆ karomi laghud¢pik¡m// 3
Mallin¡tha also in his commentary NiÀka¸¶ak¡ on T¡rkikarakÀ¡, says that the
K¡rik¡-s have been written first and the auto-commentary has been appended later to
that.
iha khalu tatrabhav¡n b¡l¡nukamp¢ varadar¡jaÅ sakalany¡ya¿¡stra-
rahasyopadidikÀay¡ svaviracitat¡rkikarakÀ¡¿lokavy¡khy¡n¡ya s¡rasa´grahaÆ n¡ma
prakara¸agrantham ¡rabham¡¸aÅ ... 4

                                                            
3
   Laghud¢pik¡, p. 

4
   NiÀka¸¶ak¡, p. 2 
5 
 
 Mallin¡tha is the scholar, who refers Varadar¡ja’s Ny¡yakusum¡µjali-
bodhani, for the first time.
kathaÆ tarhi sm¤ter ananubhavatven¡pr¡m¡¸yam ity uktaÆ pr¡k,
abhyupagamyav¡deneti rahasyam. etac ca granthak¤taiva spaÀ¶¢k¤taÆ
ny¡yakusum¡µjali¶¢k¡y¡m ity ¡st¡Æ t¡vat. (NiÀka¸¶ak¡, p. 46)
T¡rkikarakÀ¡vy¡khy¡ - NiÀka¸¶ak¡.
Mallin¡tha wrote the commentary NiÀka¸¶ak¡, after completing the
commentaries on Pancak¡vya-s, and NikaÀ¡, the commentary on
Parasastap¡dabh¡sya. He, refers to these commentaries on Pancak¡vya-s, in his
commentary NiÀka¸¶ak¡.5
It is also known that Mallin¡tha has also commented on Pra¿astap¡dabh¡Àya,
with the title NikaÀ¡. Though the text is now not extinct, it is only evident by the
reference in NiÀka¸¶ak¡. Mallin¡tha refers his commentary NikaÀ¡, for more than
three times, in NiÀka¸¶ak¡ 6. Once the name is wrongly mentioned by the copiest as
NiÀka¸¶ak¡, instead of NikaÀ¡.
Mallin¡tha justifies the title NiÀka¸¶ak¡, the commentary on T¡rkikarakÀ¡,
that which removes all the thrones in the way of logic.7 NiÀka¸¶ak¡ is available in
                                                            
5
  spaÀ¶¢k¤taÆ caitad asm¡bhiÅ paµcak¡vy¡di¶¢k¡su - alaÆ mah¢p¡la tava ¿rame¸a
ity¡dau. (NiÀka¸¶ak¡, p. 39) 
6
  pra¿astap¡dabh¡ÀyanikaÀ¡¶¢k¡y¡Æ asm¡bhiÅ vy¡khy¡t¡rtho draÀ¶avyaÅ .
(NiÀka¸¶ak¡, p. 76)
dikk¡las¡dhanaprapaµcas tu asmatpra¸¢tapra¿astap¡dabh¡Àya (NiÀka¸¶ik¡y¡Æ )
nikaÀ® dÀ¶avyaÅ. (NiÀka¸¶ak¡, p. 139)
r£p¡dyudde¿akramastu nikaÀe draÀ¶avyaÅ. (NiÀka¸¶ak¡, pp. 141-142) 
7
  ¿r¢mallin¡thakavir eÀa kar°ti ¶¢k¡Æ v¡¸¢ga¸e¿acara¸¡mburuh¡valamb¢/
ni¿¿eÀaka¸¶akanir¡kara¸ena n¡mn¡ niÀka¸¶ak¡Æ varadar¡janibandhanasya//
(NiÀka¸¶ak¡, p. 1)  
6 
 
print only up to the first chapter.8 But he refers the second and third chapters also in
the first chapter.9 By this it is evident that Mallin¡tha has commented T¡rkikarakÀ¡ in
full, for the three chapters.
Mallin¡tha’s style of commentary is indeed peculiar than others. His
commentary NiÀka¸¶ak¡ shows his proficiency in sastras, and his intension in
bringing out the central idea of the author even to the common student. In the
benedictory verse itself he has focused on the ideas of the author giving the clues, as
follows:
nam¡mi param¡tm¡naÆ svataÅ sarv¡rthavedinam /
vidy¡n¡m ¡dikart¡raÆ nimittaÆ jagat¡m api // (T¡.Ra. K¡rik¡ 1)
param¡tm¡nam iti. paramaÅ sarvotk¤À¶o j¢v¡tmabhyo vi¿iÀ¶aÅ, tam ¡tm¡nam
¢¿varam ity arthaÅ. sanmahatparamety¡din¡ sam¡saÅ. paramatve hetum¡ha -
sarv¡rthavedinam iti. yogis¡dh¡ra¸yaÆ pariharati - svataÅ iti. nityasarvajµatay¡
sv¡bh¡vikam asya s¡rvajµyam. na tu yogapras¡d¡s¡ditam iti bh¡vaÅ.
tatsadbh¡ve pram¡¸advayaÆ s£cayati - vidy¡n¡miti. caturda¿avidy¡n¡map¢ti
bh¡vaÅ. ¡dikart¡ram - sarg¡dau pra¸et¡raÆ, tath¡ jagat¡Æ - janimat¡Æ nimittam
¡dikart¡ram. ¢¿varaÅ sarvavidy¡n¡m, tasm¡t tapastepan¡ccatv¡ro ved¡ ¡j¡yanta. yato
v¡ im¡ni bh£t¡ni j¡yante ity¡di¿ruter iti bh¡vaÅ.
Here he shows two inferences in existence of God. One is the Source of the
Knowledge and the other is creator of the universe.
etena vaidikaÅ sandarbhaÅ kenacit pra¸¢taÅ, sandarbhatv¡t, r¡m¡ya¸avat.
tath¡ a´kur¡dikaÆ sarvaÆ sakart¤kaÆ k¡ryatv¡t gha¶avat ityanum¡nadvay¡t
¢¿varasiddhir iti bh¡vaÅ. (NiÀka¸¶ak¡, p. 2)
                                                            
8
   iti
padav¡kyapram¡¸ap¡r¡v¡rap¡r¢¸a-¿r¢mah¡mahop¡dhy¡ya-kol¡cala-mallin¡tha-
s£riviracit¡y¡Æ varadar¡j¢yas¡rasa´grahavy¡khy¡y¡Æ niÀka¸¶ak¡sam¡khy¡y¡Æ
prathamaÅ paricchedaÅ sam¡ptaÅ. (NiÀka¸¶ak¡, p. 246)
9
  etat sarvaÆ j¡tiparicchede spaÀ¶¢bhaviÀyati. (NiÀka¸¶ak¡, p. 190)

etac ca nigrah¡nte spaÀ¶¢bhaviÀyati. (NiÀka¸¶ak¡, p. 209) 

7 
 
 Mallin¡tha explains each and every word of the text, with etimology when
and all necessary. For example the derivation of the word ni¿¿reyasa – liberation is
shown grammatically as follows:
ni¿citaÆ ¿reyo niÅ¿reyasam. acatur¡din¡ nip¡tan¡t s¡dhuÅ. (NiÀka¸¶ak¡, p. 4)
param¡tm¡nam - sanmahatparamety¡din¡ sam¡saÅ, (NiÀka¸¶ak¡, p. 2)
Ào·a¿apad¡rth¡n¡m - diksa´khye saµjµ¡y¡miti sam¡saÅ, saptarÀivat. anyath¡
bahutv¡dy asiddheÅ. Yad v¡ p£ra¸apratyay¡nto'yaÆ Ào·a¿a¿abdaÅ. teÀ¡Æ ca
pratyekam eva Ào·a¿asa´khy¡p£rakatv¡t sarve Ào·a¿¡Å te ca pad¡rth¡¿ceti vigrahaÅ.
The enumeration and the order of sixteen categories of Gautama, in
Ny¡yasutra I.1.1, are justified by Mallin¡tha here as follows:
pram¡¸aÆ vin¡ pramey¡siddheÅ. viÀayaÆ vin¡ pram¡¸¡prav¤tteÅ.
asandigdhasy¡pratipipitsitatv¡t. pratipatte¿ca d¤À¶¡ntamukhatv¡t.
avayav¡diniyamasya siddh¡nt¡nus¡ritv¡t. pram¡kara¸a¿ar¢ranirvartak¡´gatv¡t.
pram¡¸¡nugr¡hakatv¡t. tatphalatv¡t. tasy¡pi kath¡s¡dhyatve . v¡dasya
tarkanir¸ayaphalatv¡t. jalpasya ubhayapakÀas¡dhanavattvas¡my¡t. vita¸·¡y¡Å
kath¡p¡ri¿eÀy¡t. nigrahasth¡neÀu sad¡ heyatv¡t doÀeÀu laghutv¡t. phalatv¡c ceti
pram¡¸¡dipad¡rthodde¿akramaÅ. (NiÀka¸¶ak¡, p. 4)

The Silent features of NiÀka¸¶ak¡:

Varadar¡ja defines pram¡¸a – the instrument of Knowledge that as the means
or locus of valid knowledge and pervaded by it. Mallin¡tha comments that the word
‘v¡’ in the k¡rik¡ means ‘and’. It is not that an instrument of knowledge is either a
means or the locus, because it is the both. 10
                                                            
10
iha ¿loke v¡¿abd¡t pram¡vy¡ptapad¡v¤tty¡ ca s¡dhanam¡¿rayo v¡ anyatarat
pram¡vy¡ptaÆ pram¡¸amiti vr¢hiyavavat aicchiko vikalpaÅ prat¢yate. tadasat.
ubhayapr¡m¡¸yav¡din¡m anyatar¡vy¡vy¡pteÅ apasiddh¡nt¡ccety¡¿a´kya s¡dhanam
¡¿raya¿ceti dvayamapi pram¡vy¡ptaÆ pram¡¸am. v¡¿abda¿c¡rthaÅ. (p. 6)
8 
 
 Varadar¡ja actually states that one of the two descriptions can be accepted as
the definition. 11 Mallin¡tha says that “an instrument of knowledge is pervaded by
knowledge” is the definition, and the remaining is example.12 In this support he refers
to two passages from Ny¡yasutra (II.1.26) and Ny¡yakusum¡µjal¢ (IV,6).13
While interpreting Udayana’s passage - perception of the object as it is the
instrument of knowledge (NK 4.1), Mallin¡tha remarks that perception is by itself a
valid awareness, since it does not require anything else to indicate the object.
Memory is not a valid instrument because it is always depends on perception.14
Here Varadar¡ja gives an example – y¡citakama¸·anakaman¢yam eva, that
means like a discussion of borrowed ornament. Mallin¡tha explains the word clearly
than other commentators.15
Mallin¡tha justifies the order in which the instruments of knowledge are
enumerated by Gautama in Ny¡yas£tra 1.1.3, saying that the perception forms the
basis for all instruments of knowledge and so it is listed first. Inference comes next,

                                                            
11
pram¡vy¡pyapad¡v¤tti¿ca pratyekaÆ vi¿®Àa¸¡rtheti matv¡ vy¡caÀ¶e -
s¡dhan¡¿rayayor iti.
12
s¡dhan¡¿rayayoranyataratvaÆ n¡ma tadubhayavyatiriktatv¡nadhikara¸atvam.
evaÆ c¡nugat¡rthal¡bh¡t n¡nyatara¿abd¡rthakha¸·an¡vak¡¿aÅ. s¡dhanapadasya
sphu¶ameva kara¸avy¡ptiÅ. ¿eÀamativy¡ptinir¡s¡rtham. (p. 7)
13
mantr¡yurvedapr¡m¡¸yavat tatpr¡m¡¸yam ¡ptapr¡m¡¸y¡t. (Ny¡yas£tra, 2.1.26)
tanme pram¡maÆ ¿ivaÅ) (Nyayakusum¡µjaliÅ, 4.6)
14
nanu ko’yaÆ niyamaÅ ayath¡rth¡pi anubh£tir®va pram¡, na tu sm¤tiÅ, nityam
anubhavap¡ratantry¡t. taduktam ¡c¡ryaiÅ -
yath¡rth¡nubhavo m¡namanapekÀatay°cyate. iti.
15
y¡citaketi. y¡citakama¸·anavat asthiratv¡t aprayojakamityarthaÅ. y¡µcay¡
labdhaÆ y¡citakam. apamityay¡citak¡bhy¡Æ kakkan¡viti kakpratyayaÅ. (p. 46)
9 
 
since all other instruments depend up on it except perception. Comparison is
enumerated before Verbal testimony in order to show its individuality.16
Mallin¡tha rightly identifies the quotations that are given by Varadar¡ja, than
other commentators. Sometimes he points out the mistaken references of others too.
Mallin¡tha notes a mistake committed by some scholars in locating the source
of the definition of upadhi cited in the text. They locate it as coming from Kira¸¡val¢,
while in fact it seems from Ëtmatattvaviveka. Mallin¡tha remarks that these scholars
display their inability to look into the source of these passages.17
Mallin¡tha refers to the definition of definition as given by Udayana in
Ny¡yakusum¡µjal¢ and criticizes those who trace it to the section in Kira¸¡val¢. He
tries to show that this definition can be traced to the influence of V¡caspati Mi¿ra’s
T¡tparya¶¢k¡.18
Varadar¡ja says that some scholars hold that apprehension (upalabdhi) and
non-apprehension (anupalabdhi) are independent causes of doubt. Mallin¡tha remarks
                                                            
16
tatra sarvapram¡¸opaj¢vyatv¡t pratyakÀasya pr¡thamyam.
taditarapram¡mopaj¢vyatvas¡my¡t pratyakÀ¡nantaryamanum¡nasya. p¤thakpram¡¸a-
d¡r·hyas£can¡rthaÆ upam¡nasya ¿abd¡t pr¡thamyaÆ, pari¿eÀ¡t ¿abdasy¡nte nive¿a
iti. (p. 55)
17
atr¡pi s¡dhyavy¡pakatve sati s¡dhan¡vy¡pakatvam®va bha´gyantare¸oktam
tad®tad ¡tmatatvavivekepyuktamity¡ha - anyatra tviti. --- ayaÆ kira¸¡v¢grantha iti
kai¿cit uktam. tad ¡karadar¿an¡¿aktivilasitamityap¡stam. tat ny¡yakusum¡µjalau
etallakÀa¸oktyanantaraÆ up¡dhi¿abdaprav¤ttinimittaÆ coktam. (p. 68)
18
ayamapyekaÅ kira¸¡val¢grantha ¡tmaprakara¸astha iti kai¿cit uttu¸·atu¸·aiÅ
¡khy¡tam, tathaiva vy¡khy¡taÆ ca. tadapi ¡kar¡parijµ¡navaµcan¡s¡hasavil¡sa eva
ity¡st¡m. ¡di¿abdena yat kira¸¡valy¡Æ p¤thiv¢prakara¸e kevalavyatirekiviÀaya eva
lakÀa¸amity¡di tath¡ c¡c¡ryav¡caspati¶¢k¡y¡Æ sam¡n¡sam¡naj¡t¢yavyavacchedo
lakÀa¸¡rtha iti tatsarvaÆ sa´g¤hyate. ¡c¡ryaiÅ udayanav¡caspatiprabh¤tibhiÅ. (p. 77)
10 
 
that this refers to the view of Bh¡sarvajna, according to whom doubt is of five kinds
according to five causes. These two causes are causes of a general nature, and thus
should be included under the sam¡nadharma of Ny¡yasutra 1.1.23.19
Mallin¡tha remarks that mistimed (k¡l¡tita) is not a fallacious reason
according to the followers of Kan¡da. It is a fallacious statement of the hypothesis
(pratijµ¡bh¡sa) since the stating of paksa alone is involved.20
In NiÀka¸¶ak¡, while commenting the text, Mallin¡tha has referred to several
earlier authors and texts of Ny¡ya Philosophy and other, in his support. They are:
Pra¿astap¡da, JayantaBhatta, Bh¡sarvajna, Udayana, V¡caspati, Kum¡rila,
Prabh¡kara, Sabarasv¡min, S¡likan¡tha, and the texts such as Kiaranavali,
Ëtmatattvatik¡, Ny¡yakusum¡µjali, Ny¡yaparisista, Prabodhasiddhi,
Prakaranapancik¡, Ny¡soddyota etc. This is all proves the scholarship of Mallin¡tha
in Ny¡ya-Vai¿eÀika Philosophy.

                                                            
19
atha bh¡sarvajµ¡ya saÆ¿ayap¡µcavidhyaÆ kartumanuvadati - kecittviti. ---
upalabdhyanupalabdhyoÅ sadasats¡dh¡ra¸adharmatv¡t sam¡nadharm¡ntarbh¡va
ityarthaÅ. (p. 167)
20
k¡¸¡d¡stu k¡l¡t¢to na hetv¡bh¡saÅ pakÀavacanasyaiva duÀ¶atv¡t pratijµ¡bh¡sa iti
bha¸anti. (p. 230)
11 
 
REFERENCES & BIBLIOGRAPHY:

a) Primary Sources:
T¡rkikarakÀ¡ of Varadaraja with an auto commentary S¡rasa´graha,
NiÀka¸¶ak¡ of Mallinatha and Laghud¢pik¡ of Jµ¡nap£r¸a, edited by
Vindhyeswariprasad Dvivedi, Varanasi, 1903.
T¡rkikarakÀ¡ of Varadaraja with an auto commentary S¡rasa´graha, and
Chennubhatta’s commentary, edited by Kishorenatha Jha, Allahabad, 2003.
T¡rkikarakÀ¡ of Varadaraja, with an auto-commentary S¡rasa´graha, and
Vivriti of Harihara Dikshita, edited by Dr. PTGY. Sampathkumaracharyulu,
Haripriya Publications, Tirupati, 2004.

b) Secondary Sources:

Karl H. Potter: T¡rkikarakÀ¡ of Varadaraja, summarized in English,

Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Vol. II. Ny¡ya-Vai¿®Àika. Pp. 629-640,
Motilal Banarasi Das, New Delhi, 2003.
NCV. Narasimhachary: Mallinatha – A Study. Rastriya Sanskrit Vidyapeetha,
Tirupati, 2002.

Satishcandra Vidyabhushan: T¡rkikarakÀ¡ of Varadaraja, summarized in

English, History of Indian Logic, pp. 373-380.
Umesh Mishra: History of Indian Philosophy, Allahabad, 1966.

Varadachary, V.: Date of Varadaraja. Indian Historical Quarterly, 58, 1962,

pp. 71-75.

Varadachary, V.: Nishkantaka on Varadaraja’s T¡rkikarakÀ¡, Summarized in

Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Vol. VI. Indian Philosophical Analysis
Ny¡ya-Vai¿®Àika from Gangesa to Raghunatha Siromani. Pp. 465-470.

12