25.11
Mūlamadhyamakakārikā / 25. Nirvāṇa (निर्वाण) / 25.11
भवेदभावो भावश् च निर्वाणमुभयं यदि भवेदभावो भावश् च मोक्षस् तच् च न युज्यते
bhaved abhāvo bhāvaś ca nirvāṇam ubhayaṃ yadi bhaved abhāvo bhāvaś ca mokṣas tac ca na yujyate
The line
If nirvāṇa (निर्वाण) were both nonexistent and existent, then release would be both nonexistent and existent. And that does not fit.
नेपालीमा
यदि निर्वाण नभएको र भएको दुवै हुन्थ्यो भने मोक्ष पनि नभएको र भएको दुवै हुन्थ्यो। त्यो मिल्दैन।
Where it sits
25.10 said neither. 25.11 refuses both. 25.12 says both would be upādāya (उपादाय), and nirvāṇa (निर्वाण) is not upādāya (उपादाय).
Split: bhavet (भवेत्) + abhāvaḥ (अभावः) + bhāvaḥ (भावः) + ca (च) + nirvāṇam (निर्वाणम्) + ubhayam (उभयम्) + yadi (यदि) + bhavet (भवेत्) + abhāvaḥ (अभावः) + bhāvaḥ (भावः) + ca (च) + mokṣaḥ (मोक्षः) + tat (तत्) + ca (च) + na (न) + yujyate (युज्यते)
Sanskrit, in depth
The words
| Word | Grammar | Sense |
|---|---|---|
| bhavet (भवेत्) | optative, third person singular | it would be. |
| abhāvaḥ (अभावः) | nominative singular, masculine | a nonexistent. |
| bhāvaḥ (भावः) | nominative singular, masculine | an existent. |
| ca (च) | indeclinable | and. |
| nirvāṇam (निर्वाणम्) | nominative singular, neuter | nirvāṇa (निर्वाण). |
| ubhayam (उभयम्) | nominative singular, neuter | both. |
| yadi (यदि) | indeclinable | if. |
| bhavet (भवेत्) | optative, third person singular | it would be. |
| abhāvaḥ (अभावः) | nominative singular, masculine | a nonexistent. |
| bhāvaḥ (भावः) | nominative singular, masculine | an existent. |
| ca (च) | indeclinable | and. |
| mokṣaḥ (मोक्षः) | nominative singular, masculine | release. Written mokṣas (मोक्ष) before t (त्). |
| tat (तत्) | nominative singular, neuter | that. |
| ca (च) | indeclinable | and. |
| na (न) | indeclinable | not. |
| yujyate (युज्यते) | present passive, third person singular | it fits. |
The phrases
The third escape, after not-bhāva (भाव) and not-abhāva (अभाव), is both. The verse repeats the pair and says mokṣa (मोक्ष) would then be that pair. na yujyate (न युज्यते): it does not fit. The reasons are the next three verses.
Repetition is the style here. The second line is the consequence, not a new claim.
Sanskrit in this line
ubhayam (उभयम्) means both, as one item. yadi (यदि) at the end of the first line is still governing. Sanskrit often parks yadi (यदि) late.
Say it back
What third option, after existent and nonexistent, is refused?