Sutra 3 2 50

From IKS BHU
Revision as of 01:03, 18 April 2025 by imported>Vij (Added/updated by bot page Sutra_3_2_50)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Sutra 3_2_50

Original Text:

त्वक्पर्यन्तत्वाच्छरीरस्य केशनखादि एव प्रसङ्गः

Word-by-Word Breakdown

Sanskrit Term Transliteration Hindi Meaning English Meaning
त्वक् tvak त्वचा – शरीर को ढकने वाली बाहरी परत skin – the outer covering of the body
पर्यन्तत्वात् paryantatvāt सीमा होने के कारण – सीमितता के कारण due to being the limit/boundary
शरीरस्य śarīrasya शरीर का – देह का of the body
केश-नख-आदि keśa-nakha-ādi बाल, नख आदि – सिर के बाल, नाखून आदि hair, nails, etc.
एव eva ही – केवल only, exclusively
प्रसङ्गः prasaṅgaḥ अनिवार्य निष्कर्ष – आवश्यक परिणाम necessary consequence, inevitable implication

Concept List

  • त्वक्पर्यन्तत्व (skin as boundary)
  • शरीर (body)
  • केश (hair)
  • नख (nails)
  • प्रसङ्ग (necessary consequence)

Subject–Verb–Object Triples

  • त्वक्पर्यन्तत्व (skin as boundary) – determines – शरीर (body)
  • शरीर (body) – includes – केश-नख-आदि (hair, nails, etc.)
  • त्वक्पर्यन्तत्व (skin as boundary) – leads to – केश-नख-आदि एव प्रसङ्ग (only hair and nails as consequence)

Triple Tables

Hindi

विषय (S) संबंध (V) वस्तु (O)
त्वक्पर्यन्तत्व निर्धारित करता है शरीर
शरीर सम्मिलित करता है केश-नख-आदि
त्वक्पर्यन्तत्व परिणामस्वरूप लाता है केश-नख-आदि एव प्रसङ्ग

English

Subject (S) Relation (V) Object (O)
Skin as boundary determines body
Body includes hair, nails, etc.
Skin as boundary leads to only hair and nails as consequence

Translation/Explanation

Hindi

इस सूत्र में कहा गया है कि यदि शरीर की सीमा त्वचा तक ही मानी जाए, तो केवल बाल और नख जैसे अंग ही शरीर के अंग माने जाएंगे, क्योंकि वे त्वचा के बाहर स्थित हैं। यह निष्कर्ष तर्क के अनुसार उचित नहीं है, क्योंकि शरीर की परिभाषा इतनी सीमित नहीं होनी चाहिए।

English

This sūtra states that if the body is defined only up to the skin, then only entities like hair and nails, which are external to the skin, would be considered as part of the body. Such a conclusion is not logically acceptable, as the definition of the body should not be so narrowly confined.