1.2.15
Nyāya Sūtra / Adhyāya 1 / 1.2.15
वाक्छलमेवोपचारच्छलं तदविशेषात्
vākchalam evopacāracchalaṃ tad aviśeṣāt
The line
The objection says that figurative quibble is just verbal quibble, because the two do not differ.
नेपालीमा
आक्षेप भन्छ कि लाक्षणिक छल नै वाक्छल हो, किनकि दुवैमा फरक छैन।
Where it sits
vākchala (वाक्छल) and upacāracchala (उपचारच्छल) from 1.2.11, defined in 1.2.12 and 1.2.14, are both in force. tat refers to the identification just made.
Split: vāk-chalam (वाक्-छलम्) + eva (एव) + upacāra-chalam (उपचार-छलम्) + tat (तत्) + aviśeṣāt (अविशेषात्)
Sanskrit, in depth
The words
| Word | Grammar | Sense |
|---|---|---|
| vāk-chalam (वाक्-छलम्) | nominative singular, neuter | verbal quibble |
| eva (एव) | indeclinable | itself, just |
| upacāra-chalam (उपचार-छलम्) | nominative singular, neuter | figurative quibble |
| tat (तत्) | nominative singular, neuter | that |
| aviśeṣāt (अविशेषात्) | ablative singular, neuter | because of the absence of a difference |
The phrases
This line is an objection, not the final account. The objector says upacāracchala (उपचारच्छल) is vākchala (वाक्छल) eva. The figurative case is just more play on words.
The reason offered is aviśeṣa (अविशेष), that there is no difference. tat gathers the claim. Both quibbles invent a meaning the speaker did not intend and block the statement. The reply is in the next two lines.
Sanskrit in this line
eva restricts the predicate. eva plus upacāra (उपचार) is recited evopacāra (एवोपचार). chalam before tat is recited with anusvāra (अनुस्वार), and tat before aviśeṣāt (अविशेषात्) is recited tad.
Say it back
State the objection in the objector's words before you take the reply.
Next
1.2.16. The reply: that is not so, because the two quibbles are different things.