On Date And Works Of Naiyayika Sanskarasvamin

This article by Ernst Steinkellner, titled "On the Date and Works of the Naiyāyika Sankarasvāmin," delves into the scholarly work of Sankarasvāmin, a philosopher from the Nyāya school. Steinkellner aims to pinpoint Sankarasvāmin's temporal placement and the extent of his literary contributions, building upon his earlier research and a recent note by Katsumi Mimaki.

Steinkellner categorizes Sankarasvāmin's surviving fragments into three main groups:

1. General Nyāya Topics: Fragments covering the entire scope of Nyāya epistemology and natural science. These are primarily found in the Tattvasangrahapañjikā and discuss concepts like perception (pratyakşa), the self (ātman), universals (sāmānya), speech (vākya), and the nature of God. Steinkellner suggests these fragments likely originate from Sankarasvāmin's commentary (ṭīkā) on the Nyāyabhāṣya, addressing both Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika categories.

2. Proof of God's Existence ("Iśvarasiddhi"): Fragments focused on arguments for the existence of God.

3. Refutation of Buddhist Arguments: Fragments dedicated to refuting the Buddhist proof of momentariness ("kṣaṇabhaṅgasiddhi") and supporting the proof of permanence ("sthirasiddhi").

A crucial distinction is made between the first group of fragments and the latter two. While the first group is believed to stem from a comprehensive commentary, the second and third groups are seen as emanating from independent essays addressing specific proofs. The latter fragments are found in the works of authors like Karnaśṛigomin, Jñānaśrīmitra, Ratnakirti, and Durvekamiśra, but notably not in Kamalaśīla's writings. Steinkellner considers this absence a significant clue for dating.

Steinkellner argues that Sankarasvāmin was the first known Naiyāyika to systematically engage with Buddhist arguments, particularly those of Dharmakīrti. His work on refuting momentariness, hypothetically titled Kṣaṇabhaṅgasiddhidūṣaṇam, is considered foundational for later Nyāya thinkers. This essay likely focused heavily on refuting Buddhist claims, with sections on co-operative causes and the proof of permanence.

The article then addresses the dating of Sankarasvāmin. Steinkellner's central argument is based on the silence of later Buddhist scholars like Śāntarakṣita and Kamalaśīla regarding Sankarasvāmin's polemical works (Kṣaṇabhaṅgasiddhidūṣaṇam and Iśvarasiddhiḥ). While Kamalaśīla does quote Sankarasvāmin's Nyāyabhāṣyaṭīkā, he does not engage with his critiques of Dharmakīrti. Steinkellner concludes that this silence implies Śāntarakṣita and Kamalaśīla were unaware of these specific works.

Since Śāntarakṣita's Tattvasangraha was likely written before 763 AD, and Kamalaśīla's commentary finished before his departure for Tibet around 790 AD (and likely before 765 AD), Steinkellner posits that Sankarasvāmin's Kṣaṇabhaṅgasiddhidūṣaṇam and Iśvarasiddhiḥ must have been written after 765 AD. This leads to an estimated period of literary activity for Sankarasvāmin between 750 and 770 AD, with a potential upper limit of 790 AD. His lifespan is consequently estimated between 720/730 to 780/790 AD.

The article briefly considers the evidence from Karnaśṛigomin, which might suggest an earlier date for Sankarasvāmin. However, Steinkellner refutes the proposed dating of Karnaśṛigomin and suggests that Karnaśṛigomin was a contemporary of Dharmottara (around 750-810 AD).

In summary, Steinkellner's research identifies Sankarasvāmin as a significant figure in the Nyāya school, credited with pioneering systematic refutations of key Buddhist arguments. By analyzing the citation patterns of his Buddhist contemporaries, Steinkellner proposes a dating for Sankarasvāmin's major philosophical works and his lifespan, placing him in the latter half of the 8th century AD, and significantly, after Dharmakīrti's philosophical influence had begun to be fully engaged with by the Nyāya tradition.