Shraman Bhagvana Mahavira Part 4

Author(s): Ratnaprabhvijay, D P Thaker
Publisher: Parimal Publication
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/008005/1

Page #1
SRAMANA BHAGAVAN MAHAVIRA HIS LIFE AND TEACHING For Private Personal Use Only

Page #2
The Universities Commission Ministry of Education Snowdon Government of India: Snowdon, Simla I 27th July 1949. My dear Sir, I thank you very much for your letter of the 21st July, and the set of books you sent to me. I am sorry to say that I have not been able to read them with the care and attention that they deserve. But I have seen enough to know that they must be of great value to students of religious thought. With regards, Your Sincerely sd (Radhakrishanan)

Page #3
SRAMANA BHAGAVAN MAHAVIRA HIS LIFE AND TEACHING BY MUNI RATNA-PRABHA VIJAYA VOLUME IV NIHNAVA--VADA PARIMAL PUBLICATIONS DELHI INDIA LIVI

Page #4
We would like to put on record our heart felt gratitude to Muni Shilchandra Vijaya Gani, a family member of the author, for arranging the permission to publish the present volumes Price Rs 2000/- for set of six volumes First Published, 1948-50 Reprint Edition, 1989 Published by K. L. Joshi For Parimal Publications 27/28 Shakti Nagar, Delhi-110007 Distributed by Radha Publications 4378/4B, Murari Lal Street, Ansari Road Darya Ganj, New Delhi-110002 Phone 261839 Printer: Delux Offset Printers Old Rohtak Road, Daya Basti Delhi-110035.

Page #5
PREFACE The Text of Nihnavavada. Sources. It is now & welkgon a fact that Risabhadeva Swami, the first Tirthankara of the present series, was the founder of the Jaina Canon. It was during his regime that the Sacred Works of the Jaidas came into existence. After him, the Sacred Works increased in number and quality when the religion was exalted to high rank, but they were reduced considerably in times of disorder and anarchy. Generally speaking, preachings of all the Tirthankaras happened to be of the same kind, and their lives were almost similar to each other in principal characteristics. Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira, the elder contemporary of Gautama Buddha, was the last, but Supreme Tirthankara in their whole dy'pasty. Like His predecessors, He too had got his preachings composed in books. His Ganadharas or principal disciples arranged those preachings in twelve Angas, the last one being divided into fourteen Parvas. The Absolute Knowledge of these Poryas began to fade gradually till at last it was totally extinct. Arya Jambo Swami was the last Kovalin. After him there were half a dozen Pattadharas designated as SrutaKavalins. Then there were ten Dasaporvins, possessing the knowledge of ten Parvas only. Arya Vajra Swami was the last Dasaparvin, after whom the knowledge of Parvas began to fade quickly. Devarddhigani Ksamasramana was the last of the type which possessed the knowledge of one Parva only. Thus, when the knowledge of the original preaching of sramana Bhagavan Mahavira was fast disappearing, it wa rightly felt by some of his successors to commit those preachings to writings. As a result of such efforts, forty-five Sacred Works

Page #6
came into existence : 11 Angas, 12 Upangas, 10 Prakirnas, 6 Cheda-Sotras, 2 Sotras, and 4 Mola-Sotras.x Of these, the four Mala-Satras arc considered as the Original Satras or Commandn ents, because they are primarily needed to guide the Jaina Monks in their religious practices. Avasyaka, Dasavaikalika, Uttaradhyayana and Pinda Niryukti (or Ogha Niryukti) are the four Mala Satras. According to Weber, the order or compa sition of these Sotras is this ---(1) Uttaradhyayana (2) Avasyaka (3) Dasavaikalika and (4) Pinda Niryukti. Though Avasyaka Satra is not the oldest of the four Mola Satras, it is the most important of all, as its name suggests. Samayika (Samaiya), Caturvimsati Stava (Cauvisattho), Vandanaka (Vandanayam), Pratikramana (Padikkamana), Kayotsarga (Ka. ussayga) and Pratyakhyana (Paccakkhana) are the six divisions of the Avasyaka Sutra. It should be noted that though all these Satras were dedacted into books by Ganadharas they were originally preached by sramana Bhagavan Mahavira.* Bhadrabahu Swami had already written a Niryukti on tho Avasyaka Sotras and a number of Cornis were also composed by several authors as detailed commentaries on the Avasyaka Sotra. Still, however, Jinabhadra-gaai Ksamasramana felt the need of ellucidating the Original Niryukti; hence he wrote & Bhasya or Commentary in gathas or verse on the Niryukti. Since this was an additional Bhasya to the Niryukti, which itself was a Commcntary on the Avasyaka Sotra, it was known as Visesavasyaka Bhasya. The whole work runs into 3603 gathas or verses. It could further be divided into several sub-sections such as Pithika, * In addition to these, some enumerate 20 more Prakirnas, 12 Niryuktis, and several more arriving at the total number of 84. Again in order to supplement the information supplied by thosc 84 agamas, there are several other works known as Nigamas or Upanisads which, in turn, are 36 in all and bring the total number to 120. Vide mot i fa T TART for foreo TUTETTE TI tassAmiNA u nicchayanayassa tatto jao'NaNNaM // 3382 // (at fainaFTE 12)

Page #7
Varavarika, Upasargas, Samacari (of ten varieties ), Cana dhara-vada, Ganadharas, Nihnavas, Nihnava-vada, sesa Upod ghata, Niryukti and a-svadhyaya Nir yukti. Of these. Ganadhara vada and Nihnayavada are the most important of all, because they viscuss, both positively and negatively, several philosophical topics that are vitally connected with the Jaina ayamas. Ganadharavada and Nihnavavada. Although both the Vadas ultimately point to the comme goal of the realisation of truth there is a great contrast between Canadhara-vada and Nilnavavada in so far as their subject, method of discussion, debators, and the consequences of clobato are concerned. These points of contrast could bc explained briefly as follows:-- Ganadharavada leals with positive type of discussion" while Nihnavavada deals with negative type of discussion. Because Ganadharavada strengthens the hands of Jaina Agamas hy asserting certain cardinal virtues of the Jaina Religion, while Nihnava. vada tries to repudliate the principle of Jainism in one way or the other weakening thereby its influence amongst the people. Discussions in G. V. are based on the interpretations of certain Vodavacanas, while those in N. V. are based on the interpretations of the Jaina Agamas. Ganadharas enjoy the proud privi. lege of entering into debate with sramana Bhagavan Malavira Ilimself, while Nihnavas enter into controversy with the Precept or of one Gaccha or the other. Ganadharas entertain honest doubts in their minds from the beginning and hence accept the principles of Tirthankara as soon as they are convinced; while Nihnavas, in most cases, do not leave their rigid beliefs in spite of any number of solid arguments advanced by their opponents. Debates of Ganadharas, therefore, seem to have generated for the realisation of truth, while those of Nihnavas are caused out of jealousy, anger, vanity or infatuation in many cases. Thus, love of truth is at the root of G. V., while insinuation of truth seems to be the root of N. V. It will, therefore, be seen that all the Ganadharas argue with their Celebrated l'rcceptor frankly

Page #8
4 with true desire for knowledge, and hence they do not hesitate in accepting the Diksa ultimately when all their doubts are dispelled; while Nihnavas deliberately try to hide the truth in order to refute the theory of the Tirthankara, as they want to establish their own theory amongst the monks and create disruption in the Gaccha. Faith in Agamas is the guiding spirit of Ganadharas, while scepticism is the main characteristic of Nihnavas. In G. V., the debators are non-Jaina persons who are initiated into Jainism at the end, while in N. V. the debators are not only Jainas but the learned Jaina monks themselves who abandon the Jaina church and try to establish their own School. Logic, pure and simple, brings the debators to the right path in G. V., while physical punishment brings the debators to the right path in many cases in N. V. In G. V., the discussions are held on a very high level as they treat philosophical subjects from beginning to end; while in N. V., the discussions sometimes fall to the level of mere logical tricks employed for refuting a small argument related to a certain statement of agama. Ganadharas never went against the Jaina canon; on the contrary they sponsored the movement of establishing its influence over the masses by dedacting the principles of preachings of Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira into books. It was not so with Nihnavas. Since they were prominent monks holding strong influence over the public, the Nihnavas actually propagated their wrongly-based theories amongst the dull-witted monks and defiled certain portions of the Giaccha by dragging some of its members on their sides. Rohagupta and Sivabhati are the glaring instances of this type. In short, the tendency of being at perfect agreement with the preachings of Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira signifies the character of Ganadharas; while that of being at disagreement with the same, either in part or in toto, reflects the character of Nihnavas. Utility of Nihnavavada-- It will appear from the points of contrast stated above that

Page #9
Nihnavavada has proved detrimental to the cause of Jainism. Although there is very little sympathy for Nihnavas amongst Jainas, it should be remembered that these intellectual outlaws have indirectly helped to strengthen the ground of Jainism by their apparent harsh activities. Nihnayavada is not a mere quarrel. But it is an intellectual debate in which the real essence of the religious precepts are to test. After having passed through the hard rest of the fire of Nihnavavada, lustre of the precep. ts of the Jaina Canon has become brighter instead of becoming faint. Secondly, Nihnavas and their thoughts have clone gooil turn to the followers of Jainism by holding a torch-light in the form of their plight as Nihnnvas and warning them thereby of the disastrous consequences of running the risk that they had undertaken. Thirdly, Nihnavavada draws our attention to one intrinsic weakness that is more or less inherent in every human being that of not putting into practice that we actually believe. Eventually such instances remind us of our own hypocrisy which is but another form of Nihnavavada and make us introvert for a while to think if we could ever overcome the inconsistency of behaviour. Fourthly, the study of Nihnavavada helps to cultivate intellectual robustness. Like Nihnavas one should learn to accept nothing without being convinced of it. Leaving aside their prejudicial temperament, Nihnavas possessed a remarkable quality of not accepting truth as it comes but only after intellectual test and direct experience. Their defeats teach us that there is one universal standard of testing truth and that is anekantavaria, or all-embracive point of view. Fifthly, the story of each one of the Nihnavas is very interesting and provides literary flavour in between philosophical discussions. Being more realistic, it appeals to the common reader much more than mere enumeration or ellucidation of religious precepts. Thus the study of Nihnavavada Lears importance from various sides. Slimmary of the text A brief summary of the life-events and thoughts of different Nihnavas could be drawn as follows:--

Page #10
Jamuli was the first Nihnava. He was the son-in-law of Sramuoa Bhagavan Mahavira on the one hand and his nephew on the other. He was conversant with eleven Angas. 1 [e was the heard of a retinue of 500 monks while luis wife was the chef of 1000 nuns. Once, after having separatoil from Sramana Bhaguvan Malavira withont his consent, as he was laul own with high fever, he crdered his followers to preparo a bed for him. While the monks were spreading the bed for him, he questiones them as to whether the band was really. The monks said 'yes'. But, in the heat of fever, Jamali assorted that what was being spread could not be said tv have been actually spreard. Eventually le retised to accept the welkroun <Page #11
form can alone be called Jiva. The preceptor tries to remove his inisbelief by repeated assertions that it is not the last portion that brings about the completion of a living being, but each and every constituent of it, helps to do so, as cach part of an ubject can never be taken as different from the object according to Evanbhata Naya. Tisyagupta does not feel convinced and hence is expelled from the Gaccha. Thereafter he begins to wander here and there propagating his theory of 'Antya-praule. satva' and finally arrives at the city of Amalakalpa, where he is invited for dinner by a sravaka called Mitrasri, who, by offer ing him the last portions of various articles of food, drink etc. opens his eyes and compels him to come to the riglic path. Arya Asadhacarya was the pioncer of a third type of Nilnavas known as Avyaktas. He happened to be a preceptor in the Paulasadha church of the city of Sveta vika. While teaching the practice of agauha yoga to his pupils, Asadhacarya Jied on account of acute pain in heart and attained dirvvine form in tho Nalinigulma region of Saudharma deva-luka. But when he know by means of Avadhi jnana that his pupils were engrossed in the study of yoga, he condescended to return to his original hunan furm anel proceeded with his work. So, the god in dis. guise of a preceptor taught the aims, explanations, anil commanl. wents of the Holy Writ. Ultimately, at the tinic of departure he informed the sadhus of his asamyata-idvatva and beggel their apology. The young sadhus became sceptical at this instance. They began to doubt their own fellow brothers on the plea that one could never ascertain whether one was samyata or asamyata. They decided, therefore, not to respect anyone. The sthaviras tried to persuade these young sceptics in several ways but it was all in vain. Consequently the Ayaktava'lins had to be expelled from the gaccha. Thereafter, on their arrival at Rajagriha, King Balabhadra scot for these Nihnavas and orilercel them to be killed under the feet of elephants. For, the king argued, it could not be ascertained as to whether they were sadhus or

Page #12
thieves. The Nihnavas then pleaded that they were real padhus. The king replied that if they were real sadhus they ought to have respected their own sthaviras as real sadhus. This made the Avyaktas leave their false belief and join the gaccha after tendering due apology. Arya Asvamitra was the fourth Nihnava. He was the pupil of Acarya Mahagiri of the yaksa temple in the city of Mithila. While studying the Naipunika chapter of the Anupravada Parva, Asvamitra came across a statement dealing with the discussion of Chinna and chedanaka, which asserted that "all the Narakas of the present convention will perish and so will all the deities." On reading this, Asvamitra conjectured that if all the Narakas were to perish, all other living beings would as well meet destruction as soon as they were born. Consequently, he thought, they would not be able to attain the rewards of good and evil deeds. In this way, he began to draw several conclusions on false conjectures. The preceptor proved the absurdity of his theory by pointing out various in-consistencies in accepting the entire deotrution of an abject at the end of a particular condition of time, asserted by the Ksanikaksaya vada of Asvamitra from the point of view of Rijustutra Naya. Asvamitra, however, did not give up his false notion, and was subsequently expelled from the Gaccha. Thereafter, in the city of Rajagriha, the watchmen caught hold of Asvamitra and hit him and his retinue alleging them to be burglars. Asvamitra pleaded that they were none but sravakas helonging to a particuler gaccha. But the watchmen refused to believe on the strength of their own theory and retorted that those sramanas and the gaccha had already perished there and then only. This brought Asvamitra to senses and he joined the original church by tendering due apology. Arya Gaigacarya was the fifth Nihnava. He propounded the theory of Dvaikriyas viz. that of two processes taking place simultaneously. In a village on the bank of river Ulluka, there lived a monk named Dhanagiri who had a pupil called Gangacarya. Once, while crossing the river, Gangacarya, bald-headed as he was, felt the heat of sunshine on his head, and the cold of

Page #13
9 river-water on his feet. At this time, he formed a wrong notion that both the experiences took place simultaneously, and contradicted thereby the precept of Agamas which had laid down that two processes of feeling could never take place simultaneously. He reported the theory to his preceptor and quoted his personal experience in support of it. The preceptor replied that the processes of undergoing two different feelings seem to work simulta neously on account of one's own inability to mark the subtle gap of time between the two as well as the quickness of mind. He established the validity of Agamas and refuted the nis-belief of Dvaikriya by proving an important principle of perception that there can never be more than one upayoga or application of mind, at one time, explaining the difference between general and definite types, of knowledge. Eventually, he was compelled by Maninaga to give up his false notion, and Gangacarya had to do so out of fear. Ultimately, he resorted to his original school after tendering the apology. Rohagupta, the pioneer of Vaisesika System, was known as the Sixth Nihnava. He entered into controversy with a mendicaut ascetic in the court of king Balasri of the city of Antaranjika and defeated him by establishing the theory of three categories successfully. The defeated mendicant was expelled from the city, while victorious Rohagupta went to his preceptor and narrated the whole incident before him. Acarya Srigupta inquired about the theory of Trairasikas. So, Rohagupta explained that he had established the existence of three categories of Jiva viz. Jiva, Ajiva and Nojiva, by means of various tricks and examples. The Acarya congratulated him on the success, but at the time he advised Rohagupta to declare before the people that although he had proved the validity of the Trairasika theory, they should not follow the same, as it went against the Jaina Agamas. Rohagupta declined to do so. Consequently, Acarya had to enter into controversy with him in the Royal court. They discussed the principle of Trairasikas at length for six months. Ultimately, it was agreed by both the parties to approach the kutrikapana (Universal Shop) where all the objects existing in same For Private Personal Use Only

Page #14
10 three lokas were available. Accordingly, the Acarya asked for nojiva at the Kutrikapana but it was not available. Consequeutly, Rohagupta was declared as Nihnava and was expelled from the gaccha in a humiliating condition. He attracted a number of followers by propagating the Trairasika theory and started a separate school of Vaisesikas which, unlike Jaina Ayamas, esta blished the principle of six entities viz. Dravya, Guna, Karma, Samanya, Visesa and Samavaya. Gostha-Mahila was the Seventh Nihnava. He belonged to the Iksugriha Gaccha of Dasapura Nagara. He was angry with the preceptor Raksitasari for having appointed Durbalika Puspamitra as the head of the Gaccha after him. So, when Puspawitra gave sermons on the eighth and ninth Porvas, Gustha -Mahila did not even care to listen to him. He heard the same from Vindhya who had carefully attended and understood the sermons. In course of discussion of the Karmapravada parva, when he heard from Vindhya that Karman is tied, attached and infused with all the regions of Jiva, he contradicted that principle of agama and tried to assert that Karman was attached to Jiva only on the surface like the skin of a snake. He did not accept the relation of Jiva, and Karnan as that of milk and water or that of fire and iron. Further, he objected to the predicament which laid down that the practice of pratyakhyana is to be followed by all the monks in mind, speech, and action till the end of their life, and asserted that the sanctity of the vow could be preserved only if it were to be practised without a time-linit. Vindhya tried to explain the purport of the agama, but GosthaMahila: did not listen to him. The matter was then reported to Acarya Durbalika Puspamitra. The Acarya repudiated the viewpoint of Gostha Mahila by means of various pramanas and pro. pounded the commandment of Scriptures that pratyakhyana could never continue after (leath on the ground that Muktatma is free from duty of observing vow after leaving the mundane workl. But Gostha Mahila arrogantly rejected the Acarya's view-point and quoted the authority of Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira in support of his own. Eventnally it was decided in the assembly

Page #15
11 of sthaviras to refer the matter to Tirthankara Simandara Swami And it was done so through a goddess, who brought the verdict of the Tirthankara in favour of the Acarya, Gostha Mahila, who refused to accept even the authority of Tirthankara Bhagavan, was then declared as Seventh Nihnava, and was immediately expelled from the Gaccha. He remained as a Nihnava till the end of his life. Botika is a peculiar type of Nihnavas which gave rise to the sect of Digambaras. Sivabhuti was the pioneer of that sect. Originally, he happened to be a Royal attendant in the city of Rathavirapura, He was very irregular in his habits. He used to come home after midnight. So, his wife was very much unhappy. Once when he came home late at night his mother rebuked him and did not allow him to enter the house. Sivabhuti left the home in pride and anger. He came near an Upasraya where he found the Jaina Sadhus engrossed in their study at that late hour. Acarya Krisnasuri was the head of the gaccha. Sivabbuti approached the ascetics and requested them to initiale him into asceticism. The ascetics refused to give him diksa at the first instance, but subsequently Sivabhuti got himself initiated into gaccha. Once, when all the Sadhus were on Vihara, Sivabhuti received a blanket as present from a king. Sivabhuti was so much fascinated towards the new blanket that he kept it with him in spite of the preceptor forbidding him to do so. Once, when Siva bhuti was away, the preceptor took out his blanket, cut it into pieces and distributed the same amongst the sadhus. Sivabhuti's mind was greatly perturbed at this. He then heared the discourse of preceptor on Jinakalpika, and the apparel of a sadhu. Sivabhuti boasted to become Jinakalpika by complete renunciation. Accordingly, he gave up all his clothes and stayed in the garden without clothes. The Acarya and several other sthaviras tried to disuade him from giving up clothes by explaining the true spirit of nisparigraha in various ways. But out of vanity and passion, Sivabhuti did not listen to him. His sister also followed

Page #16
12 the brother in this respect but she was subsequeutly asked to put on garments. Thus Sivabluci sponsored the sect of Digambaras, He had initiate I two pupils viz. Kaundinya and Kottayira, who prolonged the sect by tradition. Commentaries-- Three cowmentaries are said to have been written on the text of Sri Visesavasyaka Bhasya. The author himself is said to have written a commentary on his own work, but unfortunately, his commentary is not available at present. The second commentary has been written by Kotyacarya (or Silankacarya) the manuscript of which dated 1136 V. S. is presereved in the Bhaularkar Research Institute, Poona, in a tattered condition. This commentary has not been published as yet. The only commentary that has been published and popularly accepted at present is that of Maladhari Hemacandracarya. Malaihari Hewacancracarya. is different form Kali-kalasarvajna Hemacandracarya, the welknown author of Dvyasraya. Originally, he was known as Svetanibaracarya Bhattaraka. His workelly name was Pralyumina and in the prime of his youth, it is said, he was a minister. By the advice of Sri Ambayaleva sori he renounced the worldly life and having left his four wives, he entered the ascetic life. Siddharaja Jayasimha, the great monarch of Gujarat, of the twelfth century V. S., was highly impressed by his great personality and wide-spread wellversedress. The Author-His Life, Works, and Date. Life Jinabhadragani Ksamasramana is the author of this splendid work. Very little is known about his life. Yet, there is no doubt that the author was a highly-esteemed scholar of his aget + Here are the tributes paid to him by several commentators:(i) francutfor FA NAINHUATTHETI yaH zrutAjItamuhaH zauriH sindhoH sudhAmiva // 1 // -- Tilakacarya in his Avasayaka Vritti.

Page #17
13 He was the first Jaina writer and preacher who had consis. tently attempted to interprete and explain the principles of the Jaina Canon in such a manner as to appeal to the intellect of the people. That is to say, he did not instruct his pupils or followers only in a traditional way without caring for the inner motive or spirit of the preachings. Though he preached the same old traditional principles of the Jaina Canon, he interpreted and explained them in a logical way so as to appeal to their intellect. He was, therefore, accepted by the people as an unparalleled preacher and scholar of the ago, and hence was awarded the title of "yugapradhana". His knowledge was not confined to the religious lore, but he was well-versed in the sciences of mathematics, etymology, prosody, and phonology also.t Still, however, Acarya Jinabhadragani was the staunch and orthoclox upholder of the traditional Jaina Canon. Though he knew many sciences, his extensive knowledge and intelligence were taken advantage of only for establishing the authenticity (ii) vAkyairvizeSAtizayairthizvasandehahAribhiH / jinamudaM jinabhadra kiM kSamAzramaNaM stuve / -Muni-Candra Suri in Amara Caritra, (iii) jinavacananataM viSamaM bhAvArtha yo vivicya ziSyebhyaH / itthamupAdizadamalaM paropakArekakRtacetAH / / taM namata bodhajaladhi guNamaMdiramakhilavAgminAM zreSTham / caraNazriyopagUDhaM jinabhadragaNikSamAzramaNam // -Malayagiri Suri in his Commentary on Brihat Ksetra Samasa. $ Vide namaha ya aNuoga-dharaM jugappahANaM pahANanANAyamayaM / savva-sui-sattha-kusalaM dasaNa-nANovaogamaggammiThiyaM // -Siddhasona Sari in his Carni on Jitakalpasatra, + Vide sa-samaya pr-smyaag:-livi-gnniy-chnd-shnimmaao| dasasu vi disAsu jassa ya aNubhogo (aNuvamo) bhaNaha jspddho| (Ibid)

Page #18
anil validity of the Jaina Ayamas. He is therefore, taken as one of the pioneer agama-pradhana or orthodox Acaryas He used to take the support of logical illustrations and inferences only partially in the sense that such illustrations or inferences were quoted only if they strengthened the view-point of the tra litional Jaina Ayamas, and were rejected if they went against the trarlitional preachmgs. The example of his predecessor Sidihasena Divakara is welknown. Swihasena was it freewindled but logical interpreter. His works are full of original thoughts and independent ideas irrespective of their being different from or similar to the traditional Jaina Agamay. The theory that Absolute Knowledige anl Absolute Perception do not tuke place simultaneouly but one after the other, has been proved by him by the help of logical inferences and concrete illustra tiuns. Sid lhasena thus went against the traditional view of the Jaina Aganas acoording to which the Kevala-Jrana and the Kevali-Darsana took place simultaneously. Jinabhaciragani Ksuunasraniana repudiates the theory of Siddhasena Divakara in his Visesavasyaka Bhasya and re-establishes the original theory of the Jaina Agamas that Kevala Darsana and Kavala Jrana take place simultaneously. Jinabhadragani is, thus, well-renowned us the up-holder of the Jaina traditions. That Jinabhadrayani Ksamasramana was an orator of established reputation is known from several sources. The commentatur Hewcandracarya Malarlhari refers to Jinabha lragani us" Upa Jinabhadra Ksamasramanah Vyakhyatarah ". Another commentatur named Kotyacarya, who has written a commentary on the Visesavasyaka Bhasya, pays him a tribute to the same offect in the last verse of his commentary. He says. * Vide TTEHTITA-Faso gaf-TRA-FATEHTITUTAII jiNabhaddakhamAsamaNaM khamAsamaNANaM nihANamiva ekaM // **(Ibid) Also vile Jitakalpasatra Elitor's Preface, p 7. SS Vide uratorias (TITTER ) fooi Vide " Short History of Jaina Literature" Ed, by M, D, Desai, p. 152, foot-note.

Page #19
15 bhASyaM sAmAyikasya sphuTavikaTa padArthopagRDha bRhacazrImatpUjyairakAri kSatakaluSadhiyAM bhUrisaMskAradhAri / tasya byAkhyAnamAtra kimapi vivadhatA yammayA puNyamApta pretyAhaM dvAg labheyaM paramaparimitAM prItimatraya tena // No more information is available about the life of this great Acarya. Works-- Jinabhastragaai Ksamasramana is said to have composed the following works : (i) Visesa vasyaka Bhasya This welknown work has been ranked as one of the most important and highly esteemed works of Jainism. The auther himself wrote a commentary on this Bhasya in Sanskrit. Jinabhadrayani has earned the reputation as a commentator mainly from this work. For, wherever he has been referred to as Bhasyakara, the references have been quoted from Visesavasyaka Bhasya. But as has been suggested in the Preface to the Jita Kalpa Sotra* it is not improbable if Jinabhadragani Ksamasramana had composed other bhasyas as well. Take, for example, the following verse from the Visesavasayaka Bhasya poggala-modaya-dante pharusagavaDasAlabhaMjane ceva / thINAddhiyassa e e dihatA hoMti nAyabvA // 235 // In this verse, the examples of poggala ( flesh ) modaya (sueet-balls ) lanta (teeth ) pharusaga (a potter) and vadasala (the branch of a tree ) have not been explained in details by the commentators. Acarya Hemacandra Maladhari suggestively remarks that " etAnyudAharaNAni vizeSato nizIthAdavaseyAni" (These examples should be understood in cletails from Niseetha ). Kotyacaryat also leaves the remark unexplained merely by saying "farsftet aTTA: " (We shall explain this in Niseetha ). * Vide Jita Kalpa Sutra, Preface, Page 9. Whose commentary has not been published, but is preserv. ed in the Bhandarkar Research Institute, Poona.

Page #20
The question arises as to who is the author of Niserth. The trailition does not give the credit of authorship cither to Hopacandracarya Malalhari or t. Kotyacirya. So, it is probable that the conumentary must have been written by Jwabharracrani and the sentence "fagftet TTH: " found in the commentary of Kot vacarya, might have originally belonged to the comincntary written by Sri Jual,hailrayani Ksamasramana limself. (ii) Brihat Saingralani-- This work runs in almost 500 verses. Acarya Malayagiri Sari has written a commentary on this work in Sanshrit The work along with the Commentary has already been publisher. (iii) Bribat Kshtra-Samasa--This is also a simular work. Acarya Sri Malayayiri Sori anci others have written commentaries and the work along with the cornmentaries is publisherl. (iv) Jita Kalpa Satra --This work lays down various roli. glous practices to be followed by the Jaina mvuks. The work is also dealmg with the ten types of remonstration. The subject of remonstration has alrearly buen treated in the Chela-sotra and other works. Jnabhadragani scerns to have composait this work with a view to treat the subject in a precise and compretiensive manner. The oldest commentary arailable on this work at present is the corni of Sid.Thasena in Prakrit. In his Corni, Sid.lhasena reinarks at one place that thero existed sine other corns also, before he comp.scd his one, but that is not available at present. On this Carni of Sildhascna, Sri Can Ira Sari has written explanatory notes in Sanskrit. Besides the corni of Siddhagena, there is one moro curni available m Prakrit verses. It is difficult to say whether it is the saine cirni that he refers to or it is different from his own. Nothing is known about the author and the late of composition 6 ahavA bitiyacunnikarA-bhippAraNa cattvAri vi sutteNa va ghiyaa|

Page #21
17 either from the portion in the beginning or one at the end. (v) Visesanavah:--This book is a miscellaneous work comprised into nearly 400 Prakrit verses and is not published as yet. In al lition to the above-luentioned five works, soine people consider Dhyana-sataka which has been incorporated by Acarya Maharaja Haribhadra Suri in his commentary on the Avasyaka Sutras, als to be the composition of Jinabhadragani Ksama-sra mani. But there are not sufficient evidences to convince us of his authorship of Dhayan:!-Sataka. Date There are no definite mcans that help us to fix the exact late of Jmabhadragani ksawa-sramana. Still, however, the tradition of various Pattavalis throws considerable light on the problem. The trulition of the Pattavalis written after the sixteenth century (V. S.) tells us that Jinabhabragasi ksamasramana flourished 1115 years after the Nirvana of Sramana Bhagavan Mahivira. This fixes the date somewhere about 645 V. S. There is another theory which assigns to Jina bhallragani 500 years carlier than his commentator Maladhari Hemacandracarya who is said to have flourished in 1175 V. S. according to this theory also, Jipabhadragani Ksama-sramana must have Anurisheit somewhere about 650-675 V. S. The author of Tapagaccha Pattavali places Jinabharlragari ksama-sramana as the contemporary of Acarya Srivian Haribhadra Sari who is said to have written a commentary on Dhyana Sataka. According to this view, Jinabhadra Gani had lived a long life of 104 years and though Acarya Haribhadra Suri was senior to him by 60 or 65 years, both of them : * At the end of this bhasya the only reference is this: saM. 1720 varSe mArgazIrSa zudi 1 zukravAsare adyahe zrIpattaje li. zrI moDha jhAtinA kAzIdAsAtmejana aMbAdattena / zubhaM bhavatu / zivamastu / (Jita Kalpa Satra, Preface P. 17)

Page #22
18 happened to be contemporaries on account of the long life of Jinabha lragaai.' This view is not sound because Haribhadra Sari vid not, in fact, flourish in 530 V. S. or 580 V. S. but he Hourisherl between 757 and 875 V. S. as has been suggestel. Secondly, Srimau Haribhadrat Sori bas frequently yhotel Jirabhaclrag'ani's satis in his Avasyaka Vritti. It is, therefirre, Jear that Jinabhadragani diil not in any case fourish after Haribhair. Suri. According to other Pattavalis, all of Jinabharlragani, Haribhadra Siri, Devardilhigaai Ksanasramana, Silankacarya and Kala kacarya happened to be contemporaries. But the history of the development of Jamism shows that the theory is wrongly based. The date of Sriman Haribhadra Siri has been fixel as the latter halt of the eighth and the first half of the 9th century V. S. Jinbhadrayani las been placed in the latter half of the 7th and the first half of the 8th century V. S. Devarkhiyani ksaina srumini and Kalakacarya are said to have fourished in the beginning of the 6th century V. S. Leaving others sile, let us consiler if Jinabhadrayani anul Silaikacarva lappened to tourisli at the same time. The tradition says that Sikukacarya has the priest of Vanaraja, the king of Anahillapura Patiind. If this is true, the date of Silankacarya falls somewhere near 800 V. S. This places Silankacarya undoulbteille its the contemporary of Acarya Sree Hariblaclra Suriji. Now some of the Pattavalis refer to silankacarya as the pupil of Jinabhalay ni Ksimmasrumam. If this silaikacaryd is the same is the commentator Kotyacarya, several references about Jinabhaulragari found in his commentary on the Visesavasyaka Bhasya, do not in any way lear? us to believe that silankacarya was the pupil of Jinabhadrayani. Unfortunately, the first and last portions of this commentary are torn out, but in coursc of liis commentary the commentator refers tu Jinabladragani Ksama. sraniuma at several places. e. So * Vice Sri Tapagachchha Pattavali, Vol I. page 98. i Vile Sitakalpa Sutra, Preface, pp. 14-15.

Page #23
(i) jinabhadragaNikSamAbhramaNapUjyapAdaistu nokam / (ii) ata eva pUjyapAdaiH svaTIkAyAM prAyopagrahaNaM kRtam / (iii) kSamAzramaNaTIkA tvIyam / (iv) kSamAzramaNaTIkApIyam / (v) zrImatkSamAzramaNapUjyapAdAnAmabhiprAyo lakSaNIya : 19 Although these references show how much respect the commentator had for Jinabhadragani Ksamasramana, they do not in any way lead us to believe that Jinabhadragani was his preceptor. On the contrary, we find a reference which shows a considerable gulf of time between the dates of Jinabhadragani and Silankacarya. The reference is this: bhASyAnanuyAyi pAThAntaramidaM agrataH, evamanenaiva vRddhikrameNetyAderarvAk, na cedaM bhUyasISu pratiSu dRzyate // This reference shows that there were various readings of Visesavasyaka Bhasya in the time of Silaikacarya, which means that a considerable period of time must have elapsed after the composition of the Visesavasyaka Bhasya. This, therefore, prevents us from accepting the view that Jinabhadragani Ksamasramana was the preceptor and hence the contemporary of Silamkacarya. Thus there are many difficulties in accepting Jinabhadragani as the contemporary of Silankacarya or even that of Haribhadra suriji and others. It is, therefore, proper to believe that unless and until there is no evidence against the belief of the tradition, there is no objection in accepting the date of Jinabhadragani Ksamasramana as roughly about the second half of the seventh century V. S. It is hoped that transltiteration, translation, and the digest of Sanskrit commentary attached to each verse will prove useful to the students of Jaina Philosophy. Gujarat College, } AHMEDABAD. 27th October 1947. Ibid p. 15. For Private Personal Use Only D. P. Thaker

Page #24
CONTENTS 66 92 1. Chapter I Introductory 2. Chapter II Discussion with the First Nihnava. 3. Chapter III Discussion with the Second Nihnava. 4. Chapter IV Discussion with the Third Nihnava. 5. Chapter V Discussion with the Fourth Nihnava 6. Chapter VI Discussion with the Fifth Nibnava. 7. Chapter VII Discussion with the Sixth Nihnava. 8. Chapter VIII Discussion with the Seventh Nihnava. 9. Chapter IX Discussion with Botika Nihnava. 10. Chapter X Summary of Claims and Interallegations of Nihnavas. 129 159 219 269 829-340

Page #25
bhamAzramaNa zrIjinabhadragaNisanhandha : ||nihvvaad // shriimldhaarihemcndrsuurikRtttiikaasmlkRtH| Musta UnrTGS ksamasrumana Jirubhudra Gani's NIHNAVA-VADA Along with Maladharin Hemchandra Sari's Commentary Chapter I. Introductory Before proceeding with the actual nibhavavAda Nihnava-vada (i. e, the discussions of the Nihnavas) it is encuinbent to note in short, the life-history of each of the different types of Nihnavas and also to lay down the contest to which those discussions have been related. evaM vihiyapuhattehiM rakikhayajehiM pUsamittehiM / Thavie gaNimmi kira gohamAhilo paDiniveseNaM // 1 // 2296 // so micchattodayao sattamao niNhavo smuppnnnno| ke anecha bhagie pasaMgao niNhauppattI // 2 // 2297 // 1. Evam vihiya puhattehim Rakkhiyajjehim Pasamittehim 1 Tihvie ganimmi kira Gotthanahito padinivesenam 2296,

Page #26
Jinabhadra Gani's . The first 2. So micchattodayao sattamao Ninhavo samuppanno i ___Ke anne cha bbhanie pasanigato ninha-uppatti. 2297. [evaM vihitapRthaktvai rakSitAH puSpamitre / sthApitegaNini kila goSThAmA halaH pratinivezena // 1 // 2296 // sa mithyAtvodayataH saptamako nirdavaH samutpannaH / ke'nye SaD bhaNitAH prasaGgato nihmavotpattiH // 2 // 2297 // 1. Evam vihitaprithaktve Raksittaryaih Puspamitre / Sthapite ganini kila Gosthamahilah pratinivesena, 2296. 2. Sa mithya-tvodayatah saptamako nihnavah samutppannah. ____Ke' anye sad bhanittah prasangto ninhnavotpattih 2, 2297 ] Trans 1-2. Thus, indeed, when (Durbalika) Puspamitra was appointed to the post of a preceptor by Arya-Raksita suri who had instructed his pupils in the use of the different Anuyogas. Gosthamahila through a wrong impression became the seventh Nihnava on account of the pre loninence of Mithyatva (Wrong Belief). (The pupil asks ): -- Who are the other six ? " Incidentally the origins of the Nihnavas are described. 2296-2297. TIkA 1 2 evamuktaprakAreNa vihitAnuyoyogapRyakatvairAyarakSita miAvaM yiyAsubhita-taila-vallaghaTAdiprarUpaNAM sakalagacchasamakSaM vidhAya durvalikApuSpamitre gaNinyAcArya sthApite yo mathurAnagayAmUnyatIrthakena saha "vacasvI" iti kRtvA vAdadAnAthaM suribhinijamAtulako goSThAmAhilA preSita AsIt, sa yazaH zeSeSu sUriSu prati vAdinaM jitvA samAgataH san "mAmavaMbhUtaM vacasvinaM paritajyAnyo'yamRSimUkakalpaH sUribhirAcArya upavezitaH, tatpazya kIdRzaM taiH kRtam" ityabhiprAyataH, tathA tataMraca ghRtaghaTAdiprarUpaNAM zrutvA pratinivezena gADhAnuzayena yo mithyAtvAdayo jAtastasmAda / sa goSThAmAhilaH saptamo nimavaH samutpanaH / nanu yadyayaM saptamaH, tarhi kenye SaD ? ityAzaGkaya prasaGgato nisavotpattibhaMNyate / ityekA prastAvanA // 2296+2297. Digest of CommentaryThe Context in short, runs as follows:--

Page #27
Vada ] Nihanavavada : 3: Having explained to his pupil Durbalika Puspamitra ( durbalikApuSpamitra ) the various rs Nayas (or philosophical systems through which the objects are perceived) and Anuyogas -the different methods of exposition of various subjects in details, Acarya Arya-Raksitasuri anand andzfuraeft appointed him as his successor to the post of preceptorship at Mathura (Muttra). 66 At this time, Gosthamahilang, the seventh Nihnavawho, in his wordly life happened to be the maternal uncle of Acarya Maharaja Arya Raksitasuriji and who was one of the most learned pupils of the Acarya,-c -comes to him after having defeated a non-Jain adversary in a controversial discussion to which he was sent by the Acarya, and remarks with vanity Why should the preceptor appoint a shy and weak person like Durbalika Puspamitra, as an Acarya, leaving aside a smart and eloquent person like me?" Being incidentally impelled by personal hatred and vanity, he further tries to hide and refute the Truth propagated by all the Tirthankaras and the Preceptor, and as a result of that, he turns out to be a Nihnava. For, one who tries to deny and disbelieve the truthful theories merely by hiding the truth out of sheer vanity is called a fa Nihnava. Gosthamahila was the seventh Nihnava. In connection with the story of this Nihnava, the author describes in details, the life-history as well as the discussions of each of the other six types of Nihnavas, in regular order. 1-2 (2296-2297.) ahavA coeha nayANuoganiNhavaNao kahaM guravo / a fe faogafa, wung ant a aifa afufa ||3||239611 a a fasymqung aufa si yo qufa faugas | micchAbhinivesAo sa niNhavo bahurayAi vya ||4|| 2299| 3. Ahava coei Nayanuoganinhavanao kaham guravo i Na hi ninhavati, bhannai jao na jampanti natthi tti 2298 4. Na ya micchabhavanae vayanti jo puna payam pi ninhavai | Micchabhinivesao sa nihhavo Bahurayai vva | 2299 For Private Personal Use Only

Page #28
Jinabhadra Gani's [ The first [athavA codayati nayAnuyoganimavataH kathaM guravaH / na hi nilavA iti,bhaNyate yato na jalpanti na santIti // 3 // 2298 // na ca mithyAbhAvanayA vadanti ya punaH padamapi ninute / bhidhyAbhinivezAt sa nimavo bahuratAdiriva // 4 // 2299 // 3. Athava codayati nayanuyoganihnavatah, katham guravah | Na hi nihnava: iti, bhanyate yato na jalpanti na santiti 3 (2298) 4. Na ca mithyabhavanaya vadanti ya punah padampi nihnutel Mithyabhinivesat sa nihnavo Bahuratadiriva 4 (2299) ]. Trans. 3-4. Or, (if one asks) "Why are not the gurus nihnavas, on account of their hiding the nayas and anuyogas? ( The reply is )-" They do not say that the nayas and anuyogas are not (existing ). They do not also say so, on account of feelings of Mithyatva. He, who hides even a syllable by obstinately insisting on through Mithyatva, is a Nihnava like Bahuratas eto. TIkA 3-4 athaveti prstaavnaantrsuuckH| para: prerayati-nanu nayAnuyoganihavAt kathamAryarakSitaguravo na nihavA bhaNyante ? atrottaram-yato "na santi nayAnuyogAH" iti te na jalapanti, nApi mithyAtvabhAvanayA mithyAminivedena te kizcid vadanti / kintu pravacanahitArthameva nayAnuyogagopanaM tairvihitam / yaH punarmithyAbhinivezAdekamapi jinoktaM padaM nihanute sa bahuranAdivajamAlayAdivad nihaba eveti / / 2298 // 2299 // The author, then, ennumerates the various types of nihnavas as follows:bahuraya paesa anvatta sAmucchA duga tiga abaddhiA cev| . eersi niggamaNaM vocchAmi ahANupulvIe // 5 // // 2300 // Bahuraya paesa avvata samuccha duga tiga abaddhia ceva Edsim niggamanam vocchani ahanupuvvid 5. (2300). bahuratA pradezA avyaktA sAmucchedA dvaikriyAstrairAzikA abdvikaav| eteSAM nirgamanaM vakSye'thAnupurdhyA // 5 // 2300 //

Page #29
Vada ] Bahurata pradesa avyakta samuccheda dvaikriya strairasika abaddhikascaiva | Nihnavavada Etesam nirgamanam vaksye' aahanupurvya 5 (2300) ]. Trans. 5 Bahuratas (or those who uphold the theory of the Long Range of time); Pradeass (or those who attribute consiousness to the last pradesa only ); Avyaktas (or those having dubious and unfirm opinions); Samucchedas (or those who believe in the utter im-permanence of everything ); Dvaikriyas (or those who attribute two actions to one object at the same time); Trairasikas or those who uphold the theory of three categories. viz-Jiva is free from the bondage of Karma). Now, I shall describe the production ( of each one) of them in serial order (2300). : 5: 46 46 66 TIkA 5 ' bahuraya si' ekasmin kriyAsamaye vastu notpadyate, kintu bahubhiH kriyAsamayaiH ityabhyupagamAd bahuSu samayepu ratAH sakA bahuratA dIrghakAlavastu prabhavaprarUpakA ityarthaH / paesa ti" pUrvapadalopAjIvapradezA iti draSTavyam, yathA vIro mahAvIra iti / eka eva caramapradezo jIva ityabhyupagamAjjIvaH pradezo yeSAM te jIvamadezA nihmavAzcaramapradezajIvaprarUpiNa iti hRdayam / avyatta ci" uttarapadalopAdavyaktamatA yathA bhImo bhImasena iti / na jJAyate'tra ko'pi saMyataH ko'pyasaMyata ityavyaktasyaiva sarvasyA * yupagamAd na vyaktamavyaktamasphuTam, avyaktaM mataM yeSAM te'vyaktamatAH saMyata / saMyatAdyavagame saMdigdhabuddhaya ityarthaH / samucchatti " ekadezena samudAyasya gamyamAnatvAdutpattyanantarameva sAmastyena prakarSatazchedaH samucchado vastuvinAzaH, samucchedamadhIyate, tadvedino vA, ityaNpratyaye sAmucchedAH kSaNakSayibhAvaprarUpakA ityarthaH / 'duga ti' uttarapadalopAdekasminnapi samaye kriyAdvayAnubhavAbhyupagamAd dvikriyAH, ekasamaye dve kriye samudite dvikriyam, tadadhIyate tadvedino vA daukriyAH kAlabhedena kriyAdvayAnubhavaprarUpiNa iti bhAvaH / " tiga ci" trairAzikAH, jIvAsjIvanojIva bhedAt trayorAzayaH samAhRtAstrirAzi tatprayojana meSAM te trairAzikA jIvA'jIvanojIvarAzitrayakhyApakA iti tAtparyam / " abadviati" spRSTaM jIvena karma na skandhavad baddhamabaddhameva yeSAmasti vadanti betyabaddhikAH spRSTakarmavipAkaprarUpakA ityartha iti / ete sapta nihavAH / eteSAM nirgamanamutpatti mAnupUrvyA yathAkramaM vakSye // 5 // 2300 // For Private Personal Use Only

Page #30
Jinabhadra Gani's ( The first The author now gives the names of persons with whom theories originated. bahuraya jamAlipabhavA jIvapaesA ya tIsaguttAo / avvattA''sADhAo sAmuccheA asmittaao||6|| 2301 // gaMgAo dokiriyA chalugA terAsiANa uppttii| therA ya goTThamAhila puhamabaddhaM paruviMti // 7 // 2302 // 6. Bahuraya Jamali pabhava, Jivapaesa ya Tisaguttao | Avvatta" sadhao samucchea Asamittao 2801. 7. Gangao dokiriya Ghhaluga Terasiana uppatti / ___Thera ya Gotthamahila puttha-mabaddham paravinti 2302. bahuratA jamAliprabhavA jIvapradezAzca tiSyaguptAt / avyaktA ASADhAt sAmucchedA azvamitrAt // 6 // 2301 // gAdU TraikriyAH SaDalUkAt trairaashikaanaamutpttiH| sthavirAzca goSThAmAhilA spRSThamabaddhaM ca prarUpayanti // 7 // // 2302 // 6. Bahurata Jamaliprabhava Jivapradesasca Tisyaguptat. Avyakta asadhat Samuccheda Asvamitrat (2301). Gangad dyaikriyah Sadulukat trairasikanamutpattih. 7. Sthavirasca Gosthamahila sprsthamabaddham ca prarupayanti 7 (2302)] Trans 6-7. Bahuratis had been led by Jamali and Jivapradesas by Tisyagupta. Avyaktas (originated) from Asadha. Samucchedas from Asvamitra, Dvaikriyas from Ganga and Trairasikas from Saduluka. While the Sthaviras who describe the Jiva to be free from (the boundages of) Karma happen to be the followers of Gostahila. (2301-2302.) TIkA. 6-7 bahuratA jamAliprabhavAH, jamAlerAcAryataH prabhava utpattipeSAM te jamAlimabhavAH / jIvapradezAH punastiSyaguptAdutpamAH / avyaktA ASADhAt / sAmucchedA azvamitrAditi / gaGgAd dvaikriyAH / SaDalUkAt trairAzikAnAmutpatiH / sthavirAzca goSThAmAhilAH spRSTamabaddhaM prarupayanti 'karma' iti gamyate / paraviMsa

Page #31
Vada Nihnava-vada vA iti pAThAntaraM vA / tato goSThAmAhilAdAvadvakA jAtA iti sAmathyAI gamyata iti // 2301-2302 // Place and time as regards their coming into existence are now described. sAvatthI usamapuraM seambiA mihila ullugAtIraM / puramaMtaraMji dasaura rahavIrapuraM ca nayarAiM // 8 // 2303 // codasa solasa vAsA codA-vIsuttarA ya duNNi syaa| aTThAvIsA ya duve paMceva sayAya coAlA // 9 // 2304 // paMcasayA culasIo chacava sayA navuttarA huti| nANuppattIe duve uppannA nivvue sesA // 10 // 2305 // 8. Savatthi Usabhapuram Seambia Mihila Ullugatiram i __Puramantaranji Dasaura Rahavirapuram ca nayaraim 2308. 9. Coddasa solalsa vasa codda-visuttara ya dunni saya | Atthavisa ya duve panceva sayaa ya coa 2304. 10. Pancasaya culaslo cchacceva saya navuttara huntil Nanuppattie duve uppanna nivvue sesa 2305. zrAvastI RSamapura zvetavikA mithilollukAtIram / puramantaraJjikA dazapuraM rathavIrapuraM ca nagarANi / // 8 // // 2303 // caturvaza SoDaza varSANi caturdaza-viMzatyuttare ca dve zate / aSTAviMzatyA cadve pazcaiva zatAnica ca tushctvaaaarshtii||9||2304|| pazazatAni caturazItyA SaDeva zatAni navottarANi bhavanti / jJAnotpattau dvAbutpannau nivRte zeSAH // 10 // 2305 // 8. Sravasti Risabhapuram Svetavika Mithilollu'Ratiram. Puramantaranjika Dasapuram Rathavirapuram ca naga rani 8. (2303) 9. Caturdasa sodasa. varsani caturdasa-vinsatyuttare ca dve sate | Astavinsatya ca ve pancaiva satani ca catuscatvarinsapa 9 (2804).

Page #32
18: Jinabhadra Gani's ( The first 10. Panca satani caturasitya saleva satani navottrani bhavantt i Jninatpattau dvavutpannau nirvrite sesah. 10 (2305) ] Trans-3-9-10. Srivasti, Risabhapura, Sretavika, Mithila, Ullukatira Antarajjika, Dasap'ira, an! Rithavirapira (are) the (respective) plases ( where they cans into existence as Nihnavas Fourteen, sixteen, two hundred and fourteen, two hundred and twenty, two hun tred and twenty eight, five hundred and forty four, five hundred and-eighty tour, and six hundred and Nine ( are respectively ) the n'imbers of years (alter Sramini 'Bhagavan Mahavira obtainel Kevala Jnana. So, two of the Nihnavas came into existence during the period of) Kevala Jnana of Sraminu Bhagavan Mahavira and the rest appeared after his Nirvana (2303-2305). TIkA-8 zrAvastI, RSabhapuram , zvatavikA, mithilA, ullukAtIram , pura* mantaraJjikA, dazapuram , rathavIrapuraM cote / etAnyaSTau nagarANi nihavAnAM yathAyogamutpattisthAnAni boddhavyAni / aSTamaM nagaraM dravyAlegamAtreNApi bhimAnAM sarvApalApinAM mahAmithyAdazAM vakSyamANAnAM boTekanihavAnAM lApavArthamutpattisthAnamuktamiti // // 8 // 2303 // TIkA 9-10 caturdaza varSANi / tathA SoDaza varSANi / tathA " codA vIsu. tarAya duNNi saya tti" caturdazASike dve zate, kiMzatyuttare ca dve zate vANAm iti gamyate / tathA, aSTAviMzatyadhike ca dve zate, tathA paJceva zatAni catubatvAriMzadadhikAni, pazca zatAni caturazItyadhikAni, SaT caiva zatAni navottarANibhavanti / etAvatA vyavadhAna-kAlena jJAnotpattarArabhyAyo dvau nihavau samutpabho / zeSAstu SaD bhavanti zrImanmahAvIra nivRte nirvANakAlAdArabhya uktazeSeNa yathotena vyavadhAnakAlenotpanA / idamuktaM bhavati-zrI manmahAvIrasya kevalotpacecatudezabhivaratikrAntabahuratA : samutpannAH, SoDazAmavaSatikrAntIvapradezAH samutpannAH, bhagavata eva nirvANakAlAt zeSeNa caturdazAdhika varSazatadvayAdinA kAle. nAtikAntena zeSA avyaktAdayo nihavAH samutpamA iti // 2304-2305 // Foot-note 1. It should be noted that while ennurnerating the types and the names of the leaders, the author has considered seven types only. These seven types of Nihnavas are called

Page #33
Vada ] Nihnayavada :9: estfattend Desavisamvali, because they have disagreement in certain minor portions of the Sidilhantas. But here he has given the place and time as regards Botikas, also. The Butikas are called preferat Sarvavisamvadi as they have entire total (lis. agreement with the Siddhantas. D. C. The following Table shows the above-inentioned details about Nihnavas in a precise way: TABLE Name of tho Pioneer's Place Time Nihnava- name type Desavisamvadi (ar farsianet) 1 Bahurata Jamali Sravasti 14 years after the attainment of Kevala Jnana by Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira 2 Jivapradesa Tisyagupta Risabha | 16 years Do pura 3 Avyakta Asadhaca- | Svetavika 24 years after the gua Nirvana of Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira 4 Samucche-Asvamitra-l Mithila 220 years Do dika carya 5 Dvaikriya Gangacarya Ullukatira 228 , 6 Trairasika Saduluka. Antaranjika 544 , carya 7 Abaddhika Gostha Dasapura 584 , DO mahila Sarvavisamvadi (Fifa caret) Botika Rathavira | 609 years Do pura The life-history of each of the above-mentioned Nihnavas will be describer in the following chapters just hefore the commencement of their respective discussions.

Page #34
Chapter II prathama nihnava vaktavyatA Discussion with the First Nihnava coisa vAsANi tayA jiNeNa upADiyassa nANassa / to bahurayANa diTThI sAvatthIe samuppannA // 11 // 2306 // 11. Coddasa vasani taya Jinena uppadiyassa nanassa 1 To Bahurayana ditthi Savatthie samuppanna || (2306) [caturdaza varSANi tadA jinenotpAditasya jJAnasya / tato bahuratAnAM dRSTiH zrAvastyAmutpannA // 11 // 2306 // 11. Caturdasa varsani tada Jine-not-paditasya jnanasya. Tato Bahuratanam dristi Sravastyamutpanna 11 (2306). ] Trans. 11. Then, after fourteen years (had passed) since the Tirthankara (Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira) had attained Absolute Knowledge, the theory of Bahuratas came into existence in Sravasti 2306. TIkA 11 caturdaza varSANi tadA jinena zrImanmahAvIreNotpAditasya kevalajJAnasya tato'trAntare bahuratanihvavAnAM darzanaM dRSTiH zrAvastyAM nagayoM samutpanneti // 2306 // The origin of the theory :jihA sudaMsaNa jamAliNoja sAvatthItiMdugujANe / paMca sayA ya sahassaM DhaMkeNa jamAli mottUNaM // 12 // 2307 // 12 Jittha Sudamsana Jamalinojja Sayatthitindugujjane i Pancasaya ya sahassam Dhankena Jamali mottinam 2307

Page #35
:11: Vada] Nihnavavada [jyeSThA sudarzanA jamAliranavadyA shraavstiitendukodyaane| paJcazatAni ca sahasraM DhaGkena jamAli muktvA // 12 // 2307 // 12. Jyestha Sudarsana Jamaliranavadya Sruvasti-Taindukodyane i Pancasatani ca sahasram Dhankena Jamalim muktva (2307)] TRANS. 12. Jyestha (alias) Sudarsana (alias) Anavadya and Jamali ( developed the theory of Bahuratas ) in the Tainduka garden of Sravasti. Five hundred (monks) and one thousand (nuns) excepting Jamali (were advised) by Dhanika (2307) , TIkA 12 vyAkhyA--atra bhAvArthastAvat kathAnakenocyate-ihaiva bharatakSetre kuNDapuraM nAma nagaram / tatra bhagavataH zrImanmahAvIrasya bhAgineyo jamAlirnAma rAjaputra AsIt / tasya ca bhAryA zrImanmahAvIrasya duhitA / tasyAzca jyeSTheti vA, sudarzaneti vA, anavadyAGgIti vA nAmeti / tatra paJcazatapuruSaparivAro jamAlibhagavato mahAvIrasyAntike pravrajyAM jagrAha / sudarzanApi sahalastrIparivArA tadanu prabajitA / tatazcaikAdazasvaGgeSvadhIteSu jamAlinA bhagavAn vihArArthamutkalApitaH / tato bhagavatA tUSNImAsthAya na kiJcit pratyuttaramadAyi / tata evamamutkalito'pi paJcazatasAdhuparivRto nirgataH zrImanmahAvIrAntikAt / grAmAnugrAma ca paryaTan gataH zrAvastInagaryAm / tatra ca taindukAbhidhAnodyAne koSTakanAni caitye sthitaH / tatazca tatra tasyAnta-prAntAhAraistIvo rogAtaGkaH samutpanaH / tena ca na zakrotyupaviSTaH sthAtum / tato babhANa zramaNAn-"manimittaM zIghrameva saMstArakamAstRNIta yena tatra tiSThAmi" / tatastaiH kartumArabdho'sau / bADhaMca dAhajvarAbhibhUtenA jamAlinA pRSTam "saMstRtaH saMstArako na vA ?" iti / sAdhubhizca saMstRtaprAyatvAdardhasaMstute'pi proktam "saMstRtaH" iti / tato'sau vedanAvihvalitacetA utthAya natra tiSThAsurardhasaMstRtaM tad dRSTvA kruddhaH "kriyamANaM kRtam" ityAdi siddhAntavacanaM smRtvA mithyAtvamohanIyo dayato vakSyamANayuktivitithamiti cintayAmAsa / tataH sthavirairvakSyamANAbhireva yuktibhiH pratibodhito yadA kathamapi na pravibudhyate tadA gatAstaM parityajya bhagavatsamIpe / anye tu tatsamIpa eva sthitAH / sudarzanApi tadA tatreva zrAvaka DhaGkakumbhakAragRha AsIt / jamAlyanurAgeNa ca tanmatameva prapannA DhaGkamapi tad grAhayitu prvRttaa| tato Dhakkena 'mithyAtvamupagateyam' iti jJAtvA proktam-" nedRzaM kimapi vayaM

Page #36
:12: Jinabhadra Gani's [ The first jaaniimH'| anyadA cApAkAgnimadhye mRdbhAjanodvartana-parAvartane kurvatA'GgArakamekaM prakSipya tatraiva pradeze svAdhyAyaM kurvatyAH sudarzanAyAH saMghATyazcalo dgdhH| tatastayA proktam-"zrAvaka ! kiM tvayA madIyasaMghATI dagdhA ?' / tenom-nanu dahyamAnamadagdham 'iti bhavatAM siddhAntaH, tataH kva kena tvadIyA saMghATI dagdhA ?' ityAdi taduktaM paribhAvya saMbuddhA'sau " samyak preritA'smi" ityabhidhAya mithyAduSkRtaM dadAti / jamAliM ca gatvA prajJApayati / yadA cAsau kathamapi na prajJApyate tadAsau saparivArA, zeSasAdhavazcaikAkinaM jamAliM muktvA bhagavatsamIpaM jagmuH / * jamAlistu bahujanaM vyudgrAhyAnAlocitapratikrAntaH kAlaM kRtvA kilbiSikadeveSUtpanaH / vyAkhyAprajJaptyAgamA caitacaritaM vistarato'vaseyamiti / eSa saMgrahagAthAbhAvArthaH / akSarArthastvayam-"jeTThA sudaMsaNa jamAliNo jatti" jyeSThA, sudarzanA, anavadyoGgIti jamAligRhiNInAmAni / anye tu vyAcakSate-'jyeSThA mahatI sudarzanA nAma bhagavataH zrImanmahAvIrasya bhaginI tasyAH putro jamAliH, anavadyAGgI nAma bhagavato duhitA jamAligRhiNI' iti / zrAvastyAM nagaryA taindukodyAne 'jamAlinivadRSTirutpanA' iti vAkyazeSaH / tatra paJcazatAni sAdhUnAM, sahasraM cAryikANAm , eteSAM madhye yaH svayaM na pratibuddhastaM jamAli muktatvA DhaGkana prtibodhitH| iti niyuktigAthAsaptakArthaH // 2307 / / 1 Or, it may be interpreted thus :--The elder (sister) Sudarsana. Jamali and (his wife) Anavadya (developed) the theory of Bahuratas (vide Acaranga Sutra 1005) Digest of Commentary. The following story illustrates the full details of this verse - In this Bharata-ksetra there was a city named Kundapura. Jamali, the nephew (i. e. sister's son) of Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira was a prince of that city. His wife happened to be the daughter of Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira. She had three different names viz- Jyestha, Sudarsana and Anavadyangi. Jamali accompanied by five hundred males and Sudarsana along with one thousand females accepted Diksa at the hands of Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira. After finishing the study of eleven Angas, Jamali requested the Tirthankara to grant him permission to go on vihara (alone), Bhagavan remained silent and did not

Page #37
Vada ] Nihnavavada :13: respond to it. In spite of that, Jamali left the company of) Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira and went out for Vihara alone with his five hundred sthaviras. Wandering from place to place Jamali Muni at last, came to the city of Sravasti, where in the garden of Tainduka, he stayed in a Caitya named Kosthaka. There, on account of dry and stale food that he was taking, Jamali Acarya, was laid down with high fever. He, being unable to sit, asked his followers to prepare a bed for him immediately. The bed was being prepared by the monks. In the mean while, due to excessive heat of fever, Jamali Acarya, repeatedly questioned the monks "Is the bed prepared or not?" The monks, who had already prepared half the bed, and were busy preparing the whole of it, replied " Yes, it is prepared." But Jamali, whose mind was not stealy, on account of exoessive pain, was enraged at the sight of the half-spreal bed that was being spread fully. At that very moment, he denied the truth of the theory of " Kriyamanam kritama which was already preached by great Tirthankaras and asserted that Kriyamana or that which is being produced is not krita or actually produced. Some of the old sthaviras tried to persuade him not to do so, but it was of no avail. Consequently, some of them, went back to Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira, while others stuck to Jamali's theory and stayed with him. Sudarsana, too, stayed with him, in the house of the potter Dhanka who also happened to be a Sravaka. She being attached to Jamali, followed Jamali's theory, and further attempted to persuade Dhanka to follow Jamali. But Dhanka was shrewd enough to know that Sudarsana was under the influence of mithyatva of vanity like Jamali. So, he cleverly escaped by saying, " We cannot compre hend such things." 2 praznaH-se gUNaM bhaMte ! calamANe calie ? udIrijamANe udIrie ? veijamANe vedae ? pahIjamANe pahINe! chijamANe chinne ? bhijamANe bhinne ? DajhamANe daDDhe ? mijamANe maDe ? nijarijamANe nijiNNe? uttaraH-haMtA, goyamA! calamANe calie, jAva nijarijamANe nijinnnne| (bhagavatIsUtra (paJcama ana] prathama khaNDaM prathama zataka, prathamohezaka.)

Page #38
:14: Jinabhadra Gani's [The first One day while arranging the earthen pots in the kiln (apaka) Dhanka threw a piece of burning coal on Sudarsana, who was sitting nearly engrossed in her studies. As a result of that, a border of Sudarsana's garment was burnt. Immediately she remarked "O, Sravaka ! why did you burn my garment ?" Dhanka replied "That which is burning, is not actually burnt according to you. So, who burnt your garment and when?" When told like this, by Dhanka, Surlarsana realised the truth and said apologetically "Really Sravaka! you have ied me to the Right Path, I was under a disillusion." Repenting, thus, she went to Jamali and expressed her realisation to him and tried her best to bring him to the right path. But Jamali did not listen to her. Consequently, Sudarsana had to leave Jamali alone and join Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira along with her retinue of nuns. Gravlually, all the monks returned to sramana Bhagavan Mahavira, and Jamali was left out alone at the end. Finally, without repenting for the sins that he had committed by leading a number of persons astray, Janali passed away from this world (died) and assumed the form of Tejamali Kilbisika, a low type of god thereafter3. 3. The Kilbisika gods are of three types: (1) Those enjoying duration of three palyopamas (2) Those of the category of three Sagaropanis; and (3) Those of the category of thirteen Sagaropanas. Those of the First type would stay above the luminary gods and below the regions of Saudharma and lsana deva-lokas. Those of the Second type rrside above the regions of Saudharma and Isana deva-lokas and below the regions of Sanat Kumara and Mahendra deva-lokas. Those of the Third Type reside above the regions of Brahma and below the region of Lantaka deva-loka. Jivas, who oppose or defame a preceptor, teacher, family or a group of persons and those who preach a lot of falsehood out of sheer vanity, deceiving themselves as well as others by leading the life of a saint, but do not repent of their misdeeds till death,

Page #39
Vada ] Nihnavavada :15 This story has been described in details in the Vyakhyaprajnapti. The reader may refer to it for more details. The reference of the story of Jamali is also found in other works such as Avasyaka Sutra with the commentaries of Kotyacarya, Haribhadra Surji, and Malayagiri Suriji also. But there is no vital difference between the various descriptions given in those works except a few details here and there. The standard story related by the Vyakhyaprajnapti almost covers up all the accounts of Jamalis life and theory. It is therefore, essential , give a brief summary of the story related therein. It runs as follows:-- Jamali was a Ksatriya by caste. He was born in Ksatriya Kundagrama. He was rich, and had an impressive personality. He had eight wives, all of whom were of equal charm. When he came to know one day that Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira had come to the Brahmana Kundagrama and was preaching the truthful principles of Jainism and that many people had been there to listen to him and to pay their respects. Jamali also went to listen to the preachings of the great Tirthankara, and was immediately induced to accept the Diksa. His parents though distressed by his decision, could not prevent him. Then the ceremony of the acceptance of Diksa was performed with proper care and dignity. After taking Diksa, Jamali Muni studied eleven Angas under Bhagvan Mahavira Swamiji. assume the form of one of the three type of Kilbisika ( or low ) category of gods. Kilbisika gods have to take four or five more turns in the categoriesof Narakas, Tiryancas Manusyas and Devas before attaining Siddhatva or Buddhatva. But, at the same time, several of them have to wander in this beginningless and endless mundane world also. Vide Bhagavati Sutra, Fifth Anga, Third Khanda, Ninth Sataka, Uddesaka 33 Sutras 38-43. ] 4. Vide Bhagavati Satra Anga 5. Khanda HI Sataka IX. Uddlesaka XXXIIT..Sa. 8-46.

Page #40
Jinabhadra Gani's [The first Then, on one day, Jamali requested Sramana Bhagavau Mahavira to grant him permission to go on vihara also. But Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira remained silent and did not speak a single word of assent or refusal. As a result of that, Jamali goes out for vihara with a number of sthaviras, and comes to the city of Sravasti, where living in a caitya named Kosthaka in the Tain luka garden, he falls ill on account of taking dry and stale food. Being unable to sit, he orders for a bed, to be prepared for him. When he asked the sthaviras as to whether the bed was ready or not; the sthaviras who had already spread half the bed and were actually spreading the whole of it, replied that the bed was prepared. Jamali seeing that the whole bed was not prepared, gets angry, and refuses the theory of "Kriyamanam kritam" which was already preached by Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira. :16: He starts his own theory of Bahuratas and argues that since a thing which is being done (Kriyamana) has to pass through the process of production until it is completely done (Krita). So, he says, it is not proper to assert that Kriyamana is krita. Some of the old sthaviras tried to dissuade him from this wrong path but Jamali did not yield. Consequently some of them left him, while others including his wife Sudarsana stuck to him for some time and ultimately, they too, went back to Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira, leaving Jamali alone. goes to Then, after recovery, Jamali the city of Campa where Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira was staying in a caitya called Puranabhadra. Coming to Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira, Jamali says, "I do not move in cognito like many of your Sramnas. But I move like a Kevalin with my own knowledge and perception. The Tirthankara replies. If you are a real Kevalin, answer, these questions :-- Ques. I. Is the Loka eternal or not? Ques. II. Is Jiva eternal or not? For Private Personal Use Only

Page #41
Vada ] Nihnavavada :17: Jaunali was confused at these questions and he could not utter a single word. Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira, then, remarked :- 'I have a number of pupils, who are incognito), and who can easily answer these questions. But none of them boasts like you, that he is a Sarvajna, or a Jina or a Kevalin." Explaining the questions Bhagavan says :- " Loka is eternal because it is not possible to say that there was no loka in the past, there is no loka at present and will be no loka in future. On the other hand, since loka suffers destruction and creation in turn, it is azAzvata a-sasvata or im-permanent also. The same is the case with Jiva." Jamali does not put faith in the explanation offered by the Tirthankara anil goes away from him. Leading the life, however, of a strict Sramana for a long time and preaching his own doctrine, wherever he went Jamali at last met with death, without repenting for his misdeeds and attained the life of the third type of Kilbisika-deva in the Lantaka region. He will be able to attain Siddhatva after passing through four or five bhavas of tiryancas, manusyas and devas. Jyestha, Sudarsana and Anavadyangi are the three names of Jamali's wife. Others interpret that Sudarsaya was the Jestha or elder sister of Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira and she happened to be the mother of Jamali. Anavadyangi, the daughter of Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira was Jamali's wifes. 5. samaNassa NaM bhagavao mahAvIrassa pittiyae supAte kAsavagotteNa / samaNassa NaM bhagavao mahAvIrajeDe bhAyA gaMdivaddhaNe kAsavagotteNaM / samaNassa NaM bhagavao mahAvIrassajeTThA bhaiNI sudaMsaNA kAsavagotteNaM !......samaNassa gaM bhagavao mahAvIrassa dhUyA kAsavagotteNaM, tIse NaM do NAmadhejA evamAhijaMti tAM jahA-aNojA ti vA piyadaMsaNA ti vA / samaNassa gaM bhagavao NatuI-kosiya gotteNaM, tIse NaM do NAmadhejA evamAhijaMti, taM jahA sesavai ti vA, jasavatI ti vA // 1005 // zrI AcArAGgasUtra

Page #42
:18: Jinabhadra Gani's [The first Now Jamali explains his Bahurata theory :sakkhaM ciya saMthAro na kaJjamANo kau tti me jmhaa| beijamAli savvaM na kajamANaM kayaM tmhaa||13||2308|| 13. Sakkham ciya santharo na kajjamans kan tti me jamha 1 Bei Jjamali sarvam na kajjamanam kayam tauha 2308 [sAkSa deva saMstarona kriyamANaH kRta iti mama yasmAt / bravIti jamAliH savaina kriyamANaM kRtaM tasmAt // 13 // 2308 // 13. Saksadeva samstaro na kriyamanah krita iti mana yasmati Braviti Jamalih sarvam na kriyamanam kritam tasmat 13 2303] Trans 13. Jamali says that . Since the bal which is being prepared, does not (actually) happen to have been prepared in my presence, everything that is being prepared cannot be said to have been (actually) prepareul" (2308) (Thus, according to Actranga Sutra, Sudarsana was the name of Bhagavan's elder sister ant Bhagavan's daughter ( who was married to Jamali) had two names viz Anavalya ani Priyadarsana. In other words, Sudarsana was the name of Jamali's mother and Anavadya an! Priyadarsana were the two names of his wife according to the second story. The first theory asserts, as mentioned befors, that Jyestha, Sudarsana and Anavadya are the three names of Javiali's wife, who also happened to be Bhagavan's daughter. The commentators of the Avasyaka Satra viz Sriman Hari. bhadra Soriji, Malayagiriji, and Maladharin Hemacandra Sari interpret the verse in the light of this theory and merely quote the second interpretation as the theory of others. But they do not discuss the validity of them. Bhagavati Sutra is completely silent on this point. Hence it is very difficult to arrive at a definite conclusion about the names of Jamali's wife and mother. However, we think it better to take Jyestha' as an adjective than take it as a proper noun and thus follow the view of Acaranga Sutra. It is not improbable, if the author of Avasyaka Sutra had confounded Sudarsana with Priyadarsana -Tr. 1

Page #43
Vada ] Nihnavavada :19: TIkA:- 13 ' me jamha ti' yasmAd mama sAkSAt pratyakSamevedaM vRttaM yadutakambalAstaraNarUpaH saMstArakaH kriyamANaM kRtaM na bhavati, kintu kRtameva kRtamucyate / tato bhagavatyAdiSu yaduktam-calamANe calie, uIrijamANe uIrie, behajamANe veie (calayamAne calitam, udIryamANe udIritam, vedyamAne veditam ) bhagavatyAM prathamazatake prathamodveze / ityAdi, tat sarvaM mithyetyabhiprAya iti // 2308|| D. C. Jamali :--It is clearly evident that the bed (of blankets etc.) which is being spread at present, has not actually been spread. We can, therefore, easily remark that all objects that are being prepared or that are under the process of preparation, cannot be said to have been actually prepared, but those that have been already prepared could alone be said to have been prepared. The doctrine of Caliyamane calitam, Udiryamane udiritam etc. explained in the Bhagavati Sutra(r) will therefore prove invalid. 13 (2308) There are other faults, also, in accepting Kriyamanam kritam"-- "2 jasseha kajz2amANaM kayaM ti teNeha vijamANassa / karaNakiriyA pavanA tahA ya bahudosa paDivattI ||14|| 2309 // 14 Jasseha kajjamanam kayam ti teneha vijjamanassa Karana kiriya pavanna taha ya bahudosapadivatti 2309. [yasyeha kriyamANaM kRtamiti teneha vidyamAnasya / karaNakriyA prapannA tathA ca bahudoSapratipattiH // 14 // 2309 // 14. Yasyeh kriyamanam kritamiti teneha vidyamanasya. Karanakriya prapanna tatha ca bahudosa pratipattih 14 (2309) ] 88 Trans. 14 (He who accepts) that which is being done (kriyamana) has already been done (krita ) ( shall accept ) the process of accomplishment (in case) of an object (which) already exists, and thus (will give rise to ) numerous faults. 2309. Sutra Anga V Khanda I Sataka I 6. Vide Bhagavati Satra L For Private Personal Use Only

Page #44
:20: Jinabhadra Gani's [ 'The first TIkA-14 iha yasya vAdinaH "kriyamANaM vastu kRtam" ityabhyupagamaH, teneha vidyamAnasya sataH karaNarUpAH / kriyAH karaNakriyAH pratipamA aGgIkRtA / tathA ca sati vakSyamANAnAM bahUnAM doSANAM pratipattirabhyupagamarUpA katA bhavatIti // 2309 // D. C. One who accepts the principle of kriyamanam kritam' will accept Karana kriya or the process of preparation in case of a vidyamana object as well. And this will involve a number ef difficulties 14 (2309) Because, kayamiha na kajamANaM sambhAvAo ciraMtanaghaDovva / ahavA kayaM pi kIraha kIrau nicaM na ya samattI // 15 // 2310 // 15. Kayamiha na kajjamanam sabbhavao cirantana ghado vva | Ahava kayam pi kirai kirau niccam ya samatti 2310. [kRtamiha na kriyamANaM sadbhAvAcirantana ghaTa iva / athavA kRtamapi kriyate kriyatAM nityaM na ca samAptiH // 15 // 2310 // Kritaniha na kriyamanam sadbhavaccirantana ghata ival Athava kritamapi kriyate kriyatam nityam na ca samaptih ___ 15. (2310)] Trans. 15. That which has (already) been prepared (krita) could not be said as being prepared (kriyamana) on account of its being existent like a ghata (which is) prepared since long. Or (if it is said that) What has already been prepared (krita) is also prepared, let it be prepared (for ever) and there would be no end (of it) 2310. TIkA-15 iha kriyamANaM kRtaM na bhavatIti prtijnyaa| sadbhAvAt-kRtasya vidyamAnatvAditi hetuH / cirantanavaTavaditi dRSTAntaH / viparyaye vAdhakamAha-atha kRtamapi kriyata ityabhyupagamyate, tarhi nityamanavaratameva kriyatAM, kutatvAvizeSAt / evaM ca sati na kadAcidapi kAryakriyAparisamAptiriti // 2310 // D. C. What is krita cannot be said as kriyamana. For, an object which is krita is always ridyamana like a ghata prepar

Page #45
Vada] Nihuavavada :21: ed since long. In spite of that, an object which is already krita is also accomplished; it ought to be accomplished for ever and the process of accounplishment will never cease to operate 15 (2310). And, kiriyAvephallaM ti ya puvamabhUyaM ca dIsae hotaM / dIsai dIho ya jao kiriyAkAlo ghaDAINaM // 16 // 2311 // 16. Kiriyavephallam ti ya puvvamabhuyam ca dizno hontam || Disai diho ya jao kiriya kalo ghadainam 2311 || [kriyAvaiphalyamiti ca pUrvamabhUtaM ca dRzyate bhavat / dRzyate dIrghazca yataH kriyAkAlo ghaTAdInAm // 16 // 2311 // 16. Kriyavaiphalyamiti ca purvamablutam drisyate bhavati Drisyate dirghasca yatah kriyakalo ghadainam 16 (2311)] Trans. 16. If kriyamana is taken as kritu, the process (of accomplishment) will be useless. And that which did not exist before, will appear as comming into existence. Besides, on the other hand, the time of production of the objects like) ghata etc. will appear long. 2311. TIkA-16-yadi ca kriyamANaM kRtamiSyate, tarhi ghaTAdi kAryArtha yA mRnmardana-cakrabhramaNAdikA kriyA tasyA vaiphalyaM prAmoti, tatkAle kAryasya kRtatvAbhyupagamAt / prayoga:-iha yat kRtam, takriyA viphalaiva, yathA ciranipanaghaTe, kRtaM cAbhyupagamyate kriyAkAle kAryam, tato viphalA tatra kriyeti / kinna, kriyamANa-kRtavAdinA kRtasya vidyamAnasya kriyeti pratipAditaM bhavati / evaM ca pratyakSa-virodhaH, yasmAdutpattikAlAt pUrvamabhUtamavidyamAnameva kArya bhavajAyamAnaM dRzyata utpattikAle, tasmAt kriyamANamakRtameveti / kiJca, ArambhakriyAsamaya eva kAryamutpadyata iti tavAbhyupagama / etacAyuktam / kutaH ? / yasmAd ghaTAdikAryANAmutpadyamAnAnAM dIrgha eva nirvartanakriyAkAlo dRzyate iti // 2311 // D. C. If Kriyamanu is taken as kritul, there would be no utility of processes like grindling of clay, the rotating of wheel etc. for the production of ghata etc. Because, even at the time

Page #46
:22: Jinabhadra Gani's [ The first when the process of production is going on, it is already taken for granted that ghata has been produced. Secondly, the followers of the theory of " Kriyamanam hritam accept the Karya (which is a-ridyamana ) as existing as it thus gives rise to self contradiction. For, in such a case, a. karya which was a-vidyamana before the time of production, appears as being produced. And hence, the theory of Kriyamana kritam is not correct. Thirdly, those who believe in ' Kriyamanam kritam' believe that the Karya is produced at the very beginning of the process of production. But it is not correct to believe like that. Because, the period of production of the objects like ghata etc. appears very long, 16. (2311) And, nAraMbhe ciya dIsa na sivAdaddhAe dIsai tdNte| to nahi kiriyAkAle juttaM kajaM tadaMtammi // 17 // 2312 // 17. Narambhe cciya disai na sivadaddhae disai tadantd | To nahi kiriyakald juttam kajjam tadantammi. 2312. [nArambha eva dRzyate na zivAghaddhAyAM dRzyate tadante / tato nahi kriyAkAle yuktaM kArya tadante // 17 // 2312 // 17. Narambha eva drisyate na sivadyaddhayam drisyate tadante Tato nahi kriyakale yuktam karyam taclante. 17 (2312)] Trans. 17. An object like ghata is not seen just in the beginning, nor is it seen at the time of (production of forms such as) 'sivaka' etc; (but) is seen only at the end of that. It is, therefore, not proper to accept the (existence of) Kar. ya during the period of its production, but only at the end (2312) ____TIkA-17 nArambhakriyAsamaya eva ghaTAdi kArya bhavad dRzyate, nApi zivAghaddhAyAM-zivaka-sthAsa-koza-kuzUlAdi samayeSvapi na dRzyata ityarthaH / katarhi dRzyate ? ityAha-"tadaMte" dIrghakAlasyAnte ghaTAdikArya bhavad dRzyate /

Page #47
Vada] Nihnavavada :23: tasmAd na kriyAkAle kArya yuktam, tasya tadAnImadarzanAt / tadante tu dIkiyAkAlasyAnte yuktam kAryam , tadAnImeva tasya darzanAditi sakalajanasya pratya. kSamiddhamevedam / iti jamAlipUrvapakSAH // 2312 // D. C. An object like ghata is not seen as existing just in the beginning of the process of its pro-luction nor does it appear at the time of production of its intermediate forins such as sivaka-sthara kosa anil kusula-prior to the final form of ghata. It is seen only at the end of that long period of time which it takes during its process of proluction. It is therefore, not proper to aceept the existence of an object either in the beginning of the process of its production or in the intermediate stages of pro luction. A Karya is cxistent only at the end of the dirghakala or the long period of production. This is the end of the arguments of Jamali. 17 (2312). The old monks refute these arguments as follows :therANa mayaM nAkayamabhAvao kIrae khapuppha v| aha va akayaM pi kIrai kIrau to kharavisANaM pi // 18 // 2313 // 18. Therana mayam nakayamabhavan kirae khapuppham var Aha va akayam pi kirai kirau to kharavisanam pi (2313) [sthavirANAM mataM nAkRtamabhAvataH kriyate vapuSpamiva / athavA'kRtamapi kriyate kriyatAM tataH kharaviSANamapi // 18 // 2313 // 18. Sthaviranam matam nakrutamabhavatah kriyate khapuspamiva Athava: 'kritamapi kriyate kriyatam tatah kharavisanamapi 18 (2313)] Trans. 18. It is the belief of sthaviras that what is not be produced on account of its being non-existent like a khapuspa. Or, (if) an a-Krita (unaccmplished) object is even made, let the horn of an ass, also, be made 2313. TIkAH-18 sthavirAH zrutavRddhA gItArthAH sAdhavasteSAM mataMkuprarUpaNAM

Page #48
:24: Jinabha:Ira Gani's [The first kurvantaM jamAli ta evaM prajJApayantItyarthaH-nAkRtamavidyamAnaM dhAdikArya kriyate, asatazcAt, AkAzakusumavat / athAkRtamavidyamAnamapi kriyate, kriyatAM tarhi kharaviSANamapi, akRtatvAvizeSAditi // 2313 // D. C. Sthaviras: --An a-krita harya like that of a ghata is never done because it is a-ridyamana like hhapiispa. Still, however if an a-ridijamana object is also prolucel, a non-existent object like kharavisana should also be ma le on account of its having the common element of a-kritatra. 18 (2323) Refuting the possibility of the fault of "nitya kritatva? advanced by Jamali, the sthaviras continue :niccakiriyAidosA naNu tullA asai kahataragA vaa| puvvamabhUyaM ca na te dIsai kiM kharavisANaM pi? // 19 // 2314 // 19. Niccakiriyai dosa nanu tulla asai katthataraga val Puvvamabhuyam ca na te disai kim kharavisanam pi ? 2314 [nityakriyAdidoSA nanu tulyA asati kaSTatarakA vaa| pUrvamabhUtaM ca na tava dRzyate kiM kharaviSANamapi ? // 19 // 2314 // 19. Nitya kriyarli dosa nani tulya asati kastataraka val Parvamabhatam ca na tava drusyate kim kharavisanamapi? 19 (2314)] Trans. 19. The faults of nitya-kriya, etc. are in fact, equally possible in ( case of) a non-existent object also. Or say, they are more obstructive. And, (when) an object which is not produced at all, is seen by you, why should not the horn of an ass also be seen by you? (2314) TIkAH-19 nanbasatya'vidyamAne vastuni kAraNakriyAbhyupagame nityakriyAdidoSAH, AdizabdAta kriyA'parisamApti-kriyAvaiphalyaparigrahaH, AvayostulayAH samAH, yathA kRtapakSe tvayA dattAstathA'kRtapakSo'pyApatantItyarthaH / kiM tulayA eva ? / netyAha-kaSTatarakA vA / vidyamAne hi vastuni paryAya vizeSAdhAnadvAreNa kathaJcit karaNakriyAdhupa paMdyata eva, yathA "AkAzaM kuru, pAdau kuru, 7, Vidle verse 2310.

Page #49
(Vada Nihnavavada :25: pRSThaM kuru" ityAdi / avidyamAne tu sarvathA nAyaM nyAyaH saMbhavati, sarvathA'sacAt, kharaviSANavaditi / yadi ca pUrva kAraNAvasthAyAmabhUtamasat kArya jAyate, tarhi mRtpiNDAd ghaTavat kharaviSANamapi jAyamAnaM kiM na dRzyate, asaJcAvizeSAt / atha kharaviSANaM bhavad na dRzyate, tarhi ghaTopi tathaivAstu, viparyayo veti // 2314 // ____D. C. Sthaviras :-Possibility of the faults such as nitya kriyatra (Continuous process of doing ) Kriya-aparisamaptti (Imperfection of the process of production) and kriya-vaiphalyam (Futility of the process of production), shown by yous are not only equally possible, but all the more possible if you believe in the production of a non-existent object. In case of an existent object, it is possible that the Kriya or process of production may decrease comparatively owing to its taking another form. For example- when we say "Do the sky (i. e. keep the space ), "Do the legs " " Do the back" etc. the Kriya seems to slow down owing to its taking another form. This does not happen in case of an a-vidyamana object owing to its being non-existent like a khara-risana. Moreover, if an a-ridyamana Karya is produced during the condition of Karana etc. in the beginning, then, instead of ghata why should kharavisana be not seen as being produced from the lump of earth ? For, the quality of being non-existent is common with the khara-visana also. But this does not happen in reality. Your theory is not valid. (2314). In reply to the argument that the period of production of the objects like ghata etc. is long', the sthaviras explain that.paisamayauppannANaM paropparavilakkhANa subahUNaM / dIho kiriyAkAlo jai dIsaha kiM stha kuMbhassa ? // 20 // 2315 // 20. Paisamayauppannanam paropparavilakkhana subahunam ___Diho kiriyakalo jai disai kim ttha kumbhassa ? 2315. [pratisamayotpannAnAM parasparavilakSaNAnAM subahUnAm / dIrghaH kriyAkAlo yadi dRzyate kimatra kumbhasya ? // 20 // 2315 // 8. Vitle verse 2310. 9. Vidle verse 2311.

Page #50
:26: Jinabhadra Gani's [The first 20. Pratisamayotpannanam parasparavilaksananam subahunam 1 Dirghah kriyakalo yadi drisyate kimatra kumbhasya ? (2315)]. Trans. 20. If the period of the process of production of the numerous (karyas) that possess mutually distinct characteristics (and) that are (being) produced at every moment, appears to be long, how is ghata affected ( by that)? 2315. TIkA:-20 yadi nAma pratisamayotpannAnAM parasparavilakSaNasvarUpANAM subaDvAnAM zivaka-sthAsa-koza-kuzUlAdikAryakoTInAM kriyAkAla-niSThA-kAlayorekatvena pratiprArambhasamayaniSThAprAptAnAM dIrghakriyAkAlo dRzyate, tarhi kumbhasya gharasya kimatrAyAtam ? / idamuktaM bhavati-mRdAnayana-mardana-piNDa vidhAnAdikAla: sarvo'pi ghaTanirvartanakriyAkAla iti tavAbhiprAyaH / ayaM cAyukta eva / yatastatra pratisamayamanyAnyeva kAryANyArabhyante, niSpAdyante ca, kAryasya kAraNakAlaniSThAkAlayorekatvAt / ghaTastu paryantasamaya evArabhyate, tatraiva ca niSpadyate, iti ko'sya dI| nirvartanakriyAkAlaH iti // 20 // 2315 // ___D. C. Sthaviras :-If the period of production of the numerous Karyas such as Sivaka, sthasa, kosa and kusula10 etc. that are being prepared from time to time, is to be long, how is the period of production of ghata taken as long ? According to you, the period of processes such as that of collecting earth, pounding it, and forming a lump etc. is the same. But it is not so. For, the production of ghata starts only at the last moment. It is, therefore, not proper to believe that the kriya-kala of ghata is dirgha or long. Jamali:- Why is ghata not seen at the production of other Karyas, which are produced just prior to that? (2315) The answer is :annAraMbhe anaMkiha dIsau jaha ghaDo paDAraMbhe / sikAdajo na kuMbho kiha dIsae so tadaddhAe ? // 21 // 2316 // _____10. Various forms of earth before the actual form of ghata is produced.

Page #51
Vada ] Nihnavavada :27: 21. Annarambhe annam kiha disau jaha. ghado padarambhe | Sivakadao na kumbho kiha disae so tadaddhae ? (2316) [anyArambhe'nyat kathaM dRzyatAM yathA ghaTApaTArambhe / zivakAdayo na kumbhaH kathaM dRzyate sa tadaddhAyAm 1 // 21 // 2316 // 21. Anyarambhe'nyat katham drisyatam yatha ghatah patarambhe Sivakadayo na kumbhah katham drisyate sa tadaddhayam? 21 (2316)] Trans. 21. Just as ghata (is not seen) in the beginning of (the production of) pata how could a different Karya be found at the time of the production of a (totally) different Karya? Sivaka etc. are not ghata. Hence how could ghata be found at (the time of) their production ? 2316. TIkA:-21 anyasya zivakAderArambhe'nyad ghaTalakSaNaM kArya kathaM dRzyate / na hi paTArambhe ghaTaH kadAcidapi dRzyate / ataH kimucyate-'nAraMme ciya dIsai ti' / zivakAdayo'pi kumbharUpA na bhavanti, kintu tato'nya eveti kathaM tadaddhAyAmapyasau kumbho dRzyate / ata eva tadapyajJatayA procyate "na sivAdaddhAra" iti // 2316 // D. C. Just as a Karya like ghata is not seen at the time of the production of a Karya like pata, so also, a Karya like ghata etc. is not seen at the time of production of the Karyas like sivaka, eto, which are totally different from them 21 (2316). With regard to Jamali's contention that a Karya is seen only at the end of the long range of " Kriya-Kalali ", the sthaviras' explanation is this-- aMte ciya Araddho jai dIsaha tammi ceva ko doso| akayaM va saMpai gae kaha kIrau kaha va essami ? // 22 // 2317 // 22. Ante cciya araddho jai disai tammi ceva ko doso ? | Akayam va sampai gae kaha kirau kaha va essammi 2317. [anta evArabdho yadi dRzyate tasminneva ko dossH| akRtaM vA saMprati gate kathaM kriyatAM kathaM vaiSyati ? // 22 // 2317 // 11. Vide v 2312.

Page #52
:28: Jinabhadra Gani's [The first 22. Anta evarabho yadi drisyate tasminneva ko dosah ? Akritam va samprati gate katham kriyatam katham vais yati ? 22 (2317)] Trans. 22. If a karya started at the end, appears at that time only what objection (is there)? ( For ) otherwise ( va) how could (that which ) is not produced at the present time, possibly have been produced in the past or in future ? 2317 TIkA-22. anta eva kriyAkSaNe prArabdho ghaTo yadi tatreva dRzyate tarhi ko doSaH 1-na kazcidityarthaH / yaduktam-to na hi kiriyAkAle " ityAdi / tatrAha-'akayaM vetyAdi / yadi ca saMpati vartamAnakriyAkSaNe na kRtaM kAryamitIpyane tadA gatetikrAnte eSyati-anAgate ca kriyAkSaNe kathaM nAma tat kArya kriyatAm ? |-n kathazcidityarthaH / tathAhi-nAtIta-bhaviSyakriyAkSaNI kAryakArako, vinaSTAnutpannatvenAsattvAt , kharaviSANavat / ataH kathaM kriyAnte kArya syAt / tasmAt kriyamANeva kRtamiti / yadi ca kriyamANamapi na kRtam , ka tahiM kRtamiti vaktavyam / kriyAvigama iti cet / tadayuktam , tadAnIM kriyAyA asavAt / tadasatve'pi ca kAryotpattAviSyamANAyAM kriyArambhAt prAgapi kAryotpattiH syAt , kriyAsacAvizeSAt / atha saMpratisamayaH kriyamANakAlaH, tadanantarastu kRtakAlaH, na ca kriyamANakAle kAryamasti, ityataH khalavakRtaM kriyate na tu kRtamityabhidhatse / nanvetadiha praSTavyo'si kiM bhavataH kArya kriyayA kriyate uta tAmantareNApi bhavati / yadi kriyayA, tahiM kathaM so'nyatra samaye anyatra tu kAryam ? / na hi khadire cchedanakriyAyAM palAze cchedaHsamupajAyate / kiJca, "kriyoparame kArya bhavati, na tu kriyAsadbhAve" iti vadatA pratyutakAryotpattevighnahetuH kriyeti pratipAditaM bhavati / tatazca kAraNamapyakAraNamiti prtykssaadivirodhH| atha kriyAmantareNa kAryamupajAyata ityabhyupagamyate, tarhi ghaTAdikAryArthinA nirarthakaH sarvo'pi mRnmardana-piNDavidhAna-cakrAropaNabhramaNAdikriyArambhaH / ato na kartavyaM mumukSubhirapi tapaH-saMyamAdikriyAnuSThAnam , tadantareNApi muktisukhasiddheH / na caivam / tasmAt kriyAkAla eva kAryam, na punastaduparama iti // 2317 // ____D. C. There is no harm if a ghata which is being produced at the final moment, is believed to have appeared only at

Page #53
Vada] Nihnavavada that time. Here if it is believed that a Karya is not produced during the process of its production at the present time, it could neither have been produced at any time in the past nor at any time in future. For, the kriya-kala of the past or future is either perished or unproduced as the case may be. It is therefore, a-vidyamana like the horn of an ass. This shows that what is being done (Kriyamana) has alone been done (krita). For if Kriyamana is not krita, where is it done? Again, it is not proper to assert that Karya is produced after the Kriya is over. In spite of the absence of Kriya, if the production of a Karya is accepted, the Karya should have as well been produced before the beginning of Kriya, since there is Kriyabhava at that time also. :29 The present tense is known as Kriyamana-Kala and the period following it, is Krita-Kala or say Karya-Kala. If you say here that a Karya which was undone (till now) has been done but that which has already been done is not done, we ask you this question: Is the Karya produced with or without the help of kriya? If it is produced with the help of kriya, how could Kriya and Karya take place at different times? By putting a cut into the Khdira tree, a palasa tree is never cut off. It is also not true to say that Karya takes place after the Kriya is over, and is not actually produced in presence of Kriya. For, by saying so, Kriya will prove to be an obstruction rather than an instrument in the accomplishment of Karya and this will give rise to a number of self-contradictions. Lastly, if it is held that Karya is produced without the help of Kriya, the trouble undergone by a potter desirous of ghata, by way of bringing earth, pounding it, moulding it into a lump, placing the lump on the wheel and moving the wheel in a circle, would entirely turn futile. Following your ideology, one can say that those desirous of Final Emancipation, should not perform penances or observe self-control etc12. 12. The sentences of Veda such as agnihotraM juhuyAt svargakArmaH, For Private Personal Use Only

Page #54
Jinabhadra Gani's [ The first Because, according to you, the attainment of Moksa should follow without any Kriya. But it does not happen so. So, Karya comes into being during the process of production, and not after the process is over. :30: Jamali:-Right from the time of collecting earth to the time of its transformation into the form of ghata, the whole period is the time of production of ghata. The kriya-kala of ghata is therefore dirgha, according to me. It is not correct to say that a Karya is produced just from the time when the process of production has been started. The sthaviras reply as follows:-- paisamayakA koDIniravekkho ghaDagayAhilAso si / paisamayakajjakAlaM thUlamaI ghaDammi lAesi ||23|| 2318|| 23. Paisamaya kajja kodi niravekkho ghadagayahilaso si Pai samaya kajja kalam thulamai! ghadammi laesi 2318. [pratisamayakAryakoTInirapekSo ghaTagatAbhilASo'si / pratisamayakAryakAlaM sthUlamate ! ghaTe lagayasi ||23|| 2318 // 23. Prati samaya karya koti nirapekso ghata gatabhilaso ' sit Prati samaya karya kalam sthu lamate! ghate lagayasi 23 (2318)]. Trans. 23. Ignoring the numerous Karyas ( which are being) produced from time to time, you have been desirous of ghata. (And hence ) O dull-witted (Jamali) ! You are fusing the period (of production ) of the Karyas ( produced ) from time to time with (that of) ghata 2318. con TIkA - 23 hanta ! yadyapi pratisamayamanyAnyarUpAH kAryako vyastatrotpadyante, tathApi tannirapekSastvaM - niSprayojanatvenAvivakSitatvAdutpadyamAnA api tAstvaM na gaNayasItyarthaH / kutaH / yasmAd ghaTagatAbhilASo'si, saprayojanatvena tasyaiva pradhAnatayA vivacitatvAt / "baTa ihotpatsyate" ityevaM tatraiva tavAbhilASaH, ataH ekayA pUrNa yAhUtyA sarvAn kAmAnavApnoti and puNyaH puNyena karmaNA, pApaH pApena karmaNA etc. For Private Personal Use Only

Page #55
Vada ] Nihnavavada :31: pratisamaya kAryako TInAmadarzakatvena sthUlamate ! pratisamayakAryasaMbandhinamapi kAlaM sarvamapi ghaTe lagayasi - " sarvo'pyayaM ghaTotpattikAlaH " ityevamadhyavasyasi tvamatyarthaH, ato mithyAnubhavo'yaM tavetyabhiprAyaH, ekasAmayika eva ghaTotpattikAle bahusAmayikatvagrahaNena pravRtteH / atrAha - nanu pratisamayaM kAryakoTya utpadyamAnAstatra na kAzcana saMvedyante, kintvapAntarAle zivaka-sthAsa - kozAdIni kAnicideva kAryANi saMvedyante / satyam, kintu sthUlAnyeva zivakAdikAryANi, yAni tu pratisamayabhAkIni sUkSmakAryANi tAni cchadmastho vyaktyA nAvadhArayituM zaknoti, paraM pratisamayakAryANAM grAhakANyanantasiddha kevalinAM jJAnAnyutpadyante tAnyapi tatrApAntarAle kAryANyeva, iti ghaTanta eva pratisamayaM kAryakoTya iti // 2318 // D. C. Sthaviras--A series of different Karyas are produced from time to time during the process of production. But, you being desirous of ghata alone, do not look to these Karyas and give importance to ghata only. All the while during the process of production, you think that " ghata will be produced here." Since, O dull-witted Jamali, you do not apprehend the time during which the intermediate forms of ghata are prepared, you are confusing the full lengh of time (during which different Karyas are produced) with the period of production of gnate and therefore, you assert that "This whole period of time is the period of production of ghata alone. But your assertion is totally false, as the period of production of ghata is only a part of the whole period of the process of production. Jamali:-The whole series of Karyas produced from time to time is not seen but the Karyas like sivaka and sthasa alone are seen. "3 Sthaviras :----Karyas like sivaka etc. are sthala but those that are produced from time to time are suksma which could not be apprehended by a sthulamati (dull-witted) like you. The cognizance of ananta Siddha Kevali (who has attained Absolute Perception) alone can recognize these saksma Karyas. It should also be noted that the various Jnanas that apprehend these Karyas are themselves produced at various times

Page #56
:32: Jinabhadra Gani's [The first and therefore they are also Karyas. Hence, the theory that a series of Karyas is produced from time to tima, is valid and proper. 23 (2318). Jamali says:-- ko caramasamayaniyamo paDhame ciya to na kIrae kajjaM ? | nAkAraNaM ti kaLaM taM cevaM tammi se samae ||24|| 2319 // 24. Ko caramasamayaniyamo padhame cciya to na kirae kajjam ? | Nakaranam ti kajjam tam cevam tammi se samaye 2319. [kazcaramasamayaniyamaH prathama evaM tato na kriyate kAryam ? | nAkAraNamiti kArya tadeva tasmiMstasya samaye ||24|| 2319 // 24. Kascaramasamayaniyamah prathama eva tato na kriyate Karyam ? Nakaranamiti karyam tadeva tasminstasya samaye 24 (2319) ] Trans. 24. If the Kriya Kala is not taken as long" what is the utillty of the rule of the final instant? (In that case) why is Karya not done in the first instant (only)? (The answer is ) :- " Since Karya (cannot exist ) without Karana, tnat (i. e. the final moment ) itself is its ( ghatasya) Karana at that time. " 2319. TIkA - 24 nanu yadi kAryasya dIrghaH kriyAkAlo neSyate, kintvekasAmayika eva, tarhi ko'yaM caramasamayaniyamo yena tatraivotpadyate ghaTAdikAryam - na ghaTata evAyaM niyama ityarthaH / tata etanniyamAbhAvAt kiM prathamasamaya eva kAryaM na kriyate ? - api tu kriyata eveti kA kA nIyate / atrottaramAha-akAraNaM kArya na bhavati, taccAntya samaya eva 'se' tasya ghaTasya kAraNamasti na tatprathamasamaye, ataH kathaM tatrotpadyate ? | anvaya-vyatirekasamadhigamyo hi kArya -- kAraNa bhAtraH, anvaya-vyatirekAbhyAM cAntyasamaya evaM ghaTAdeH kAraNaM lakSyata iti tatraiva tadutpadyata iti yukta eva caramasamayaniyama iti // 2319 // D. C. Jamali:-If you do not believe that the Kriya-Kala of ghata For Private Personal Use Only

Page #57
[Vada Nihnavavada :33: is dirgha, why, should you make the rule that ghata is produced only at the last moment and not at the first? Sthaviras:-Karya cannot exist without Karana. Wherever there is no karana there is no karya also. The karana in case of karyas like ghata etc. is always found in the final instant and not in the first one. The karya, therefore, does not come into being in the first moment. The proposition that the production of karya takes place at the end is justified in this way. 24 (2319) Summarising the arguments, teNeha kajjamANaM niyameNa kathaM kathaM tu bhayaNijjaM / kiMcidiha kajja mANaM uvarayakiriyaM ca hujjA hi ||25|| 2320|| 25. Teneha kajjamanam niyamena kayam kayam tu bhayanijjam. / Kimcidiha kajjamanam uvarayakiriyam ca hujja hi (2320) [teneha kriyamANaM niyamena kRtaM kRtaM tu bhajanIyam / kiJcidiha kriyamANamuparatakriyaM caM bhavet ||25|| 2320 // 25. Teneha kriyamanam niyamena kritam kritam tu bhajaniyam Kimcidiha kriyamanamuparatakriyam ca bhavet 25 (2320) ] Trans. 25. That is why Kriyamana is ( said to be ) krita as a rule; while krita is alternately (so). Here some of it may be (described) as being done, while some would have the process stopped. 232.0. TIkA - 25 tenoktaprakAreNa kriyamANaM vartamAnakriyAkSaNabhAvi kArya niyamena kRttamevocyate, yattu kRtaM tad bhajanIyaM vikalpanIyam / katham ? ityAha - kiJcidiha kRtaM kriyApravRtakAlabhAvi kriyamANamucyate, anyat tUparatakriyaM cApAkAdyuttIrNa kRtaM ghaTAdikAryaM na kriyamANamucyate, uparatakriyatvAditi // 2320 // D. C. On account of the reasons stated above, the Karya which is being done at present, should certainly be called as krita. But that which has already been done, should be taken so only alternately. For, in that case, some of the work which For Private Personal Use Only

Page #58
:34: Jinabhadra Gani's [The first is done, could be said to have been done at the time of its process of being done, while the rest of the work as in the case of ghata which is taken down from the cakra etc. could not be taken as Kriyamana on account of its process of produetion being already ceased. 25 (2320). Now, applying all the views of Sthaviras to the case of bed, Jamali argues : jaM jattha nabhodese atthuvvai jattha jattha samayammi | taM tattha tathyamatthuyamatyuvvaMtaM pi taM caiva // 26 // 2321 // 26. Jam jattha nabhodese atthuvvai jattha jattha samayammi Tam tattha tatthamtthuyamatthuvvantam pi tam ceva (2321) [ yad yatra nabhodeza AstIryate yatra yatra samaye / tat tatra tatrAstIrNamAstIryamANamapi tadeva ||26||2321 // 26. Yad yatra nabhodesa astiryate yatra yatra samaye r Tat tatra tatrastirnamastiryamanamapi tadeva 26 ( 2321 ) ] Trans. 26. That which is spread in whatever space at whatever time, is (said to have been) spread and is also (said to be under the process of) being spread at that time and in that space. 2321. 64 TIkA - 26 AstIryamANasaMstArakasya yad yAvanmAtraM nabhodeze yatra yatra samaye " 'atthuvvaha" AstIryate tat tAvanmAtraM tasmin nabhodeze tatra tatra samaya AstIrNameva bhavati, AstIryamANamapi ca tadevocyate / idamuktaM bhavati - sarvo'pi saMstAraka AstIryamANo nAstIrNa iti " kriyamANaM kRtam" ityAdi mahAvIrabacanaM vyalIkameva jamAlirmanyate / etaccAyuktam, bhagavadvacanAbhiprAyAparijJAnAt / sarvanayAtmakaM hi bhagavadvacanam / tatazca " kriyamANamakRtam" ityapi bhagavAn kathazcid vyavahAranayamatena manyata eva paraM "calamANe calie, uIrijjamANe uIrie " ityAdisUtrANi nizcayanayamatenaiva pravRttAni / tanmatena ca kriyamANaM saMskRtam, ityAdi sarvamupapadyata eva / nizcayo hi manyate - prathamasamayAdeva ghaTaH kartuM nArabdhaH, kintu mRdAnayanamardanAdIni pratisamayaM parAparakAryANyArabhyante, teSAM ca madhye yad yatra samaye prArabhyate vat tatraiva niSpadyate, kAryakAla-niSThA For Private Personal Use Only

Page #59
:35: Vada ] Nihnavavada kAlayorekatvAt, anyathA pUrvoktadoSaprasaGgAt / tataHkriyamANaM kRtameva bhavati / evaM prastutaH saMstArako'pi nAghasamayAt sarvo'pi saMstarItumArabhyate, kintvaparApare tadavayavAH pratisamayamAstIryante, teSAM ca madhye yo yatra samaye'vayavaH saMstarItumArabhyate, tatraiva ca niSpadyata iti saMstIryamANaM saMstIrNameva bhavatIti // 2321 // D. C. When a particular bed is spread on & particular place at a particular time, it is said to have been spread at that time and place to a particular extent, and is also said to be under the process of being spread. That is to say, while some part of the bed has already been spread, another part is being spread. So, it is pointless to say that the whole bed has been spread. And, the theory of " Kriyamanam kritam" preached by Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira seems wrong to me. Sthaviras :-0 Jamali! You have not been able to grasp the real purport, of the Bhagavan's doctrines and that is why it seems wrong to you. The words of Bhagavan are propera sarvanayatmaka13 and hence it is possible to believe from the point of view of vyavahara 14 that kriyamana is not krita. But according to niscaya naya, 18 satras like "calamane calite" are preached and from this point of view, axions like kriyamanam kritam" and "samstiryamanam samstirnam" are justified. It should be carefully noted that the production of ghata does not start from the very first moment, but since Kriya-kala (period of production) and nistha-kala (period of completion) are the same, different karyas are produced at different times and each one of them is completed at the same tiine when it has started being produced. Otherwise,the faults mentioned before, would certainly arise. Taking the case of bed, we can say that the bed itself is not being spread in the beginning, but its different parts are spread one after the other. Each one of those parts is being spread at one moment as has also been spread at the same moment according to our theory " Kriyamanam kritam." The bed, as a whole, is said to 13. Containing all the points of view. 14. Practical point of viow. 15. Definite view-point.

Page #60
:36: Jinabhadra Gani's [The first have been spread only at the final moment, for, then and then only, the work of spreading is completely finished. So, it is perfectly true to assert that "What is being spread is already spread." 26 (2321) Moreover, bahuvatthattaraNavibhiNNadesakiriyAikanakoDINaM / maNNasi dIhaM kAlaM jai, saMthArassa kiM tassa ? // 27 // 2322 / / 27. Bahuvatthattarana vibhinnadesakiriyaikajjakodinam | Mannasi diham kalam jai, samtharassa kim tassa ? (2322) [bahuvastrAstaraNavibhinnadezakriyAdikAryakoTInAm / manyase dIrgha kAlaM yadi, saMstArasya kiM tasya ? // 27 // 2322 // 27. Bahuvastrastarana vibhinna desa kriyadi karyakotinam | Manyase dirgham kalam yadi, samstarasya kim tasya ? 27. (2322)] Trans. 27. If you think that the period ( of production ) of the series of Karyas such as that of spreading many clothcoverings at various places etc. is long, how is the bed ( as a whole ) concerned by that ? 2223. TIkA-27 yadi nAma bahuvaskhAstaraNavibhinna dezakriyAdikAryakoTInAM saMbandhinaM dIrghakAlaM manyase jAnAsi tvam, tataH saMstArakasya tasya kimAyAtam ? ityakSaraghaTanA / vibhinno dezo yAsAM tA vibhinna dezAstAzca tAH kriyAzca vibhibhadezakriyAH, vastrasyopalakSaNatvAt kambalAnAM cAstaraNaM vastra-kambalAstaraNaM tasya vibhinadezakriyA vastrakambalAstaraNavibhinnadezakriyAH, tadAdayazca tAH kAryakoTyazca bahuvastrakambalAstaraNavibhinadezakriyAdikAyakovya iti samAsastAsAmiti / AdizabdAsvagatAnekabhedakhyApakaH / kAryANAM ca koTisaMkhyatvamihApi pUrvavad bhAvanIyamiti // 2322 // D.C. Sthaviras :--If you take the period of production of the Karyas such as that of spreading a number of blankets, clothcoverings eto, to be long, it does not follow at all that the period of production of the bed, as a whole, should also be long.

Page #61
:37: Vada ] Nihnavavada Jamali:- According to you, various haryas take place in the beginning, while the actual bed is begun being spread only at the last moment and it is finished also at that moment according it you. Now, if the harya-hala and nitha-kala are the same, what makes me apprehend the kriya-kala of the bed as dirgha ? 27 (2332). Sthaviras reply-- paisamayakajjakoDIvimuho sNthaaryaahikyktro| paisamayakajjakAlaM kathaM saMthArammi lAesi ? // 28 // 2323 // 28. Pai samaya kajja kodi vimuho samtharayahihikayakajjo i Pai samaya kajja kalam katham samtharammi loesi ? (2313) [pratisamayakAryakoTivimukhaH sNstaarkaadhikRtkaaryH| pratisamayakAryakAlaM kathaM saMstArake lagayasi ? // 28 // 2323: 28. Prati samaya karya -koti vimukhah sanstarakadhikrita karyah Pratisamaya karyakalam katham samstarake lagayasi ? (2323)] Trans. 28. Being mainly careful of (the preparation of ) bed and indifferent to (the production of ) numerous Karyas ( that are produced) from time to time, why do you confuse the period ( of production ) of the Karyas produced from time to time, with that of the bed ? 2323. TIkA-28 gatArthA, navaraM saMstArakeNAdhikRtaM prastutaM kArya yasyAsau saMstAra. kAdhikRtakArya ini samAsaH // 2323 // What happened when Jamali was thus addressed with arguments? so ujjusuyanayamayaM amuNaMto na paDivajae jAhe / tAhe samaNA kei uvasaMpaNNA jiNaM ceva // 29 // 2324 // piyadasaNA vi paiNo'NurAgao tammayaM ciya pvnnnnaa| DhaMkohiyAgaNidaDDhavatthadesA tayaM bhaNai // 30 // 2325 // sAvaya ! saMghADI me tumae daDDha tti so vi ya tamAha / naNu tujjha DajjhamANaM daDaM ti mao na siddhaMto // 31 // 2326 //

Page #62
: : Jinabhadra Gani's [The firsi bajhaM na ramamANaM jai bigae'NAgae va kA saMkA / kAle tayabhAvAo saMghADI kammi te daDDhA 1 // 32 // 2327 / / 29. So Ujjusuyanayamayanr amuranto na padivajjae jahe | Tahe samana kei uvasampama Jinam ceva (2324) 30. Piyadamsana vi paino'muragao tammayam ciya pavanna i Dhaikovahiyagamidaddhavatthadesa tayam bharai (2325) Savaya samghadi me tumae dadoha tti so vi ya tanaha | Naru tujjha dajjhanayam daddhan ti mao na siddhanto (2326) 32. Daddham na dajjhankanam jai vigae' magae va ka sanka Kale tayabhavao samghadi kammi te daddha? (2327) [sa RjusUtranayamatamajAnan na pratipadyate yAvat / tAvat zramaNAH kepyupasaMpannA jinameva / / 29 // 2324 // priyadarzanApi patyuranurAgatastanmateva prpnnaa| DakopahitAmidagdhavastradezA taM bhaNati // 30 // 2325 / / zrAvaka ! saMghATI me tvayA dagdheti so'pi ca tAmAha / nanu tava dayamAnaM dagdhamiti mato na siddhAntaH ||3shaa2326|| dagdhaM na dahyamAnaM yadi vigate'nAgate vA kA zaGkA / kAle tadabhAvAt saMghATI kasmiMste dagdhA ? // 32 // 2327 // 29. Sa Rijusutranayamatamajanan na pratipadyate yavat i Tavat sramanah ke'pyupasam panna Jinameva (2324) 30. Priyadarsanapi patyuranuragatastanniateva prapanna / Dhankopahitagni dagdha vastra desa tam bhanati (2325) 31. Sravaka i samghati me tvaya dagdheti so'pi ca tamaha Nanu tava dahyamanam dagdhamiti mato na siddhantah (2326) 32. Dagdham na dahyamanam yadi vigate' nagate va ka sanka | Kale tadabhavat samghati kasminste dagdha ? (2327)] Trans. 29-30-31-32. Being ignorant of the Rijusatrass point of view, when he does not accept (the principle of 16. According to the Naya theories of the Fainas, there are seven points of view for the comprehension of an object. Rijusu

Page #63
Vada Nihnavavada kriyamanam kritam) several of the monks returned to the Tirthankara. Priyadarsana1 along with others follows his doctrine on account of her love for him. When she gets a border of her garment burnt by (a spark of) fire thrown by Dhanka, she says "O sravaka! you have burnt my garment. He replies "You do not believe in (the principle of) dahyamana dagdha. :39: " Thus, when a burning (object) is not (said to have) burnt, how could you suspect that your garment is burnt in past or future on account of its being absent (then)? (2324-2327). TIkA - 29-30-31 - 32 catakhopa gAthA gatArthAH navaramRjusUtro nizcayanayavizeSaH / " piyadaMsaNA vitti" Aha- nanu pUrve " sudarzanA " iti tra Naya is one of them. The seven nayas could be briefly explained as follows: (1) Naigama Naya-enables the combined comprehension of samanya and visesa. (2) Sangraha Naya offers only a samanya or general outlook. (3) Vyavahara Naya gives only a visesa or practical point of view. (4) Rijusutra Naya means a direct or straight-forward outlook of an object in its present condition. From this view-point, an object is directly perceived in its present condition. (5) Sabda Naya recognizes an object only on etymological strength. (6) Samabhiradha Naya explains numerous interpretations of the same word by virtue of different paryayas. (7) Evambhuta Naya explains the meaning of a word by means of vyutpatti or derivation. It should be noted that the first four nayas are padarthagrahi, while the remaining are Sabdarthagraki. 17. According to Bhasyakara, Priyadarsana, Jyestha, Sudarsana and Anavadyangi are the different names of Jamali's wife. (For more details Vide Foot Note 4.) For Private Personal Use Only

Page #64
Jinabhadra Gani's :40: [ The first tasyA nAma proktam, kathamidAnIM "priyadarzanA" ityucyate ? | satyam, kintvidamapi tasyA nAma draSTavyam / tathA coktam - "teyasiriM ca surUvaM jaNai ya piyadaMsaNaM dhUyaM" iti / " DhaMkovahiyetyAdi " - svAdhyAyapauruSIM kurvatyAstasyA ApAkAd gRhItvA DhaMGkenopahitaH kSipto yo'gnistena dagdho vastradezo yasyAH sA DhaGkopahitAgnidagdhavastra dezA satI taM DhaGkaM bhaNati / so'pi tAM priyadarzanAmAha-daDDhamityAdicaturtha gAthAyAM ayaM bhAvArthaH nanu yadi dadyamAnaM dAhakriyAkSaNe vartamAne vastraM na dagdhamiti bhavadbhirucyate, tato vigata uparate, anAgate vA bhaviSyati dAikriyAkAle kA zaGkA vastradAhaviSayA, tadabhAvAna dAhakriyAyA vinaSTAnutpannatvena sarvathA'bhAvAdityarthaH / ato vartamAnA'tItAnAgatalakSaNe kAlatraye'pyuktito'dagdhatvAt kasmin kAle Aye ! te tava saMghATI mayA dagdhetyucyatAm ? iti || 2324|| 2325 / / D. C. Rijusutra Naya is characterised by niscaya naya and it helps us to comprehend an object clearly as it happens to be at present. * Priyadarsana is also the name of Jamali's wife in addition to Sudarsana which has already been referred to above. In reply to her querry, as to why Dhanka burnt her gar. ment, Dhanka asserts that "dahyamana is not dagdha" according to the Bahurata school of thought. So, according to your theory, your garment which is dahya mana or burning at present, could not be said to have been burnt. Nor should you take it to have been burnt in past or future. For, in the past as well as in future, the process of burning would be absent. Then, at what time did I burn your garment, O respectable lady ? ( 2324 - 2327). ahavA na ujjhamANaM daDDhaM dAhakiriyAsamattIe / kiriyA bhAve daDaDhaM jai daDDhaM kiM na telukaM ? ||33|| 2328|| 33. Ahava na dajjhamanam daddham dahakiriyasamattie | Kiriya'bhave dadcham jai daddham kim na telukkam ? ( 2328) For Private Personal Use Only

Page #65
:41. [ Vada Nihnavavada [athavA na dahyamAnaM dagdhaM dAhakriyAsamAptau / / kriyA'bhAve dagdhaM yadi dagdhaM kiM na trailokyam // 33 // // 2328 / / 33. Athava na dahyamanam dagdham dahakriyasamaptau 1 Kriya'bhave dagdham yadi dagdham kim na trailokyain. (2328)] ___ Trans. 33. Or, (if you say that) a burning object is is burnt at the end of the process of burning. If it is burnt in absence of the process ( of burning ), why is the Universe not burnt ? 2328. TIkA-33 athavaivaM brUSe-dahyamAnaM na dagdham , kintu dAhakriyAsamAptau dagdham / nanvevaM sati dAhakriyA'bhAve dagdhamityuktaM bhavati / etaccAyuktam, yato yadi dAhakriyA'bhAve dagdham , tarhi trailokyamapi kiM na "dagdham" ityatrApi saMbadhyate, yathA vasne tathA trailAkye'pi dAha kriyA'bhAvasya tulayatvAditi // 2328 // __D. C. If you argue that "an object which is being burnt, is not burnt now, but it is burnt only when the process of burning has ceased, that is not proper. For, if it burns in absence of dahakriya, why should not the whole Universe be taken as burnt on necount of the absence of daha-kriya common therein ? 33 (2328) ujjusuyanayamayAo vIrajiNiMdavayaNAvalaMbINaM / junjeja ujjhamANaM daDDhaM vottuM na tujjha tti // 34 // 2329 // 1. Ujjusuyanayamayai Vira-jinindavayanavalambinam | ____ Jujjejja dajjhamanam daddham vottum na tujjha tti. (2:329) [RjusUtranayamatAd vIrajinendravacanAvalambinAm / yujyate damAnaM dagdhaM vaktuM na taveti // 34 // 2329 / / 34. Rijusatranayamnatad Vira-jinendravacanavalambinam Yujyate dahyamanam dagdham vaktum na taveti. (2329) ] Trans. 34. The followers of the great Tirthankara Sramana Bhagavar. Mahavira, are fit to say, that dahyamana is dagdha from the point of view of Rijusutra system. But you cannot say so. 2329.

Page #66
:42: Jinabhadra Gani's [The first TIkA-uttAnArthA // 2329 // Because, samae samae jo jo deso'gaNibhAvamei DajjhamANassa / taM tammi DajjhamANaM dardU pi tameva tattheva // 35 // 2330 // 35. Samae samae jojo jojo deso'ganibhavamei dajjhanmanassa | Tam tammi dajjhamanam daddham pi tameva tattheva (2330) [samaye samaye yo yo dezo'gnibhAvameti dahyamAnasya / tat tasmin dahyamAnaM dagdhamapi tadeva tatraiva // 35 // 2330 // 35. Samaye samaye yo yo deso'gnibhavameti dahyamanasyal __Tat tasmin dahyamanam dagdhamapi tadeva tatraiva (2330)] Trans. 35. According to Rijusutra naya, whatever part of the burning (object) is being burnt at whatever time, is said to have been burnt. Hence that which is burnt in it, is said to have been burnt there and at that moment only. 2330. TIkA-35 yo yo dAhyasya paTAderdezastantvAdiH samaye samaye'gnibhAvametidahyata ityarthaH, tattaddezarUpaM vastu tasmin samaye dahyamAnaM bhaNyate tathA dagdhamapi tadeva vastu tasminneva samaye bhaNyate / ato dahyamAnameva dagdham / yattu dezamAtre'pi dagdhe saMghATI me "dagdhA" iti tvaM vadasi, tat saMghATyekadeze'pi saMghATI zabdopacArAditi mantavyamiti // 2330 // D. C. From the point of view of the Rijusutra system, au object is comprehended only in its present condition. So, when a. particular part, say, thread of the * garment is burning at a particular time, it is said to have burnt actually. Dahynana is said as dagdha in this sense. When only a part of your garment is burnt, you say that your garment is burnt, and thus you take the part of the garinent as the (whole) garument itself. We can therefore, say that-- niyameNa DajjhamANaM daDDe daDDhaM tu hoi bhayaNijjaM / kiMcidiha DajjhamANaM uvarayadAhaM ca hujjA hi // 36 // 2331 //

Page #67
Vada Nihnavavada :43: 36. Niyamena dajjhamanam laddham daddham tu hoi bhaya nijjam Kimeidiha dajjhamanamuvarayadaham ca hujja hi (2331) [niyamena dahyamAnaM dagdhaM dagdhaM tu bhavati bhajanIyam / kiJcidiha dahyamAnamuparatadAhaM ca bhavet // 36 // 2331 // :36. Niyamena dahyamanam dagdham lagrlham tu bhavati bhajaniyani i Kimcidiha dahyamanamuparatadaham ca bhavet (2331)] Trans. 36. As a rule, dahyamana is dagdha. But a dagdha is said to have been burnt ( only ) alternately. ( Because ) here, some (part) is (actually ) burning while some is ( actually ) void of (the process of ) burning. 2331. TIkA-vyAkhyA prAguktAnusAreNa kAryeti // 2331 // This has already been explained before 18. Thus explained by DhankaicchAmo saMbohaNamajo! piyadasaNAdao ddhNk| vottuM jamAlimekaM mottUNa gayA jiNasagAsaM // 37 // 2332 / / 37. Icchamo sambohanamajjo ! Piyadansanadao Dhankam i Vottum Jaunalimekkam mottona gaya Jinasagasam 2332. [icchAmAsaMbodhanamArya ! priyadarzanAdayo DhaGkam / uktvA jamAlimekaM muttvA gatA jinasakAzam // 37 // 2332 // 3'. Icchamah sambodhanamarya ! Priyadarsanadayo Dhaikam | Uktva Jamalimekam muktva gata Jina-sakasam (2332) ] Trans 37. Priyadarsana and others said ( apologetically), . () Revered Sir, we follow your advice" and leaving Jamali! alone, (they) went to the Tirthankara. 2332. End of the Discussion with the First Nihnava. 18. Vide verse 2320.

Page #68
Chapter III dvitIya nihnava vaktavyatA Discussion with the Second Nihnava. solasavAsANi tayA jiNeNa uppADiyassa nANassa / jIvapaesiyadiTThI.to usabhapure samuppaNNA // 38 // 2333 // rAyagihe guNasilae vasu caudasapubvi tIsagutte ya / AmalakappA nayarI mittasirI kUra-piuDAI // 39 // 2334 // 38. Solasavasani taya Jinena. uppadiyassa nanassa | Jivapaesiyaditthi to Usabhapure samuppanna (2333) 39. Rayagihe Gunasilae Vasu caudasapuvvi Tisagutte ya | ___ Amalakappa nayari Mittasiri kara-piudai (2334) [SoDazavarSANi tada jinenotpAditasya jJAnasya / jIvapradezikadRSTistata RSabhapure samutpannA // 38 // 2333 // rAjagRhe guNazilake vasuzcaturdazapUrvI tiSyaguptazca / AmalakalpA nagarI mitradhIH kUra-sikthAdinA // 39 // 2334 // 38. Sodasavarsani tada Jinenotpaditasya jnanasya | Jivapradesikadrististata Risabhapure samutpanna (233:3) 39. Rajagrihe Gunasilake Vasuscaturdasaparvi Tisyaguptasca | Amalakalpa nagari Mitrasrih kura-sikthadina (2334) ] Trans. 38-39. When sixteen years ( had passed ) since the Tirthankara had attained the Absolute Perception, the theory of Jivapradesikas came into existence in Risabliapura.

Page #69
i Vada Nihnavavada :45. Tisyagupta ( the pupil of) caturdasapurvi Vasu of the GunaSilaka caitya in (the city of ) Rajagriha ( was convinced ) by Mitrasri in tlie city of Amalakalpa by (offering himi) lumps of boiled rice etc. 12333-2334). TIkA-38-39 vyAkhyA-zrImanmahAvIrajinena tadA SoDazavarSANi kevalajJAnasyotpAditasyAbhUvan / tatazca rAjagRhAparanAmni RSabhapure nagare jIvapradezikadRSTiHsamutpaneti / kathamutpannA ? / ityAha-rAjagRhe nagare guNazilake caitye caturdazapUrviNo vasunAmAna AcAryAH samAgatAH, teSAM ca tiSyagupto nAma shissyH| sa ca tatra pUrvagatamAlApakaM vakSyamANasvarUpamadhIyAno vakSyamANayu bhirvipratipanno'saMbuddhaHparihRto gurubhirviharanAmalakalpAyAM nagaryA gtH| tatra mitra zrInAmnA zrAvakeNa kUra-piuDAdinA kUra-sikthAdidAnena pratibodhita ityarthaH // 2333 -2334 // D. C. Sixteen years had passed since the Tirthankara ( Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira) had attained Kevala Joana. 1. Like his predecessors, sramana Bhagavan Mahavira also had got his preachings composed in books. His Gana dharas or principal pupils arranged his preachings in twelve Angas. Of these twelve Angas, the twelfth Anga waa divided into fourteen Parvas. Both the sects of the Jainas-the Svetambaras as well as Digambaras-accept these Purvas as the oldest Sacred Works of the Jaina Canon. The tradition of the Svetambaras about these Purvas is this :-The fourteeu Purvas had been incorpotated in the Twelfth Ainga (the Dristivada) which was lost before 1000 A. V. But a detailed Table of its contents and consequently of the Parvas has survived in the Fourth Anga-the Samavayanga and in the Nandi Sutra. (Vide Weber. Indisch Studien XVI p. 341 ). We are further told by the tradition that Sthavira Arya Jambu Swami was the last Kevali and Sthavira Sthulabhadraji was the last sruta-kerali who knew all the twelve Angas along with the fourteen Parvas with their meanings and cxplanations of intricate subjects in his memory.

Page #70
-46. Jinabhadra Gani's a Gani's [The second There was a preceptor named Vasusuri in the Gunasilaka caitya of Rajagriha. He was well-versed in all the fourteen Purvas. He had a pupil named Tisyagupta. During the course of his study of the Purvas, Tisyagupta was once overcome by vanity, as a result of which, he left the caitya and came to the city of Amalakalpa. There, he was convinced (of the validity of the Acarya's view) by a Sravaka named Mitrasri who offered him lumps of boiled rice etc. 38-39 (2333-2334). The whole story is told in details as follows:AyappavAyapuvaM ahijamANassa tIsaguttassa / nayamayamayANamANassa dihimoho samuppaNNo // 40 // 2335 / / 40. Ayapparayapurvam ahijjamanassa Tisaguttassa i NayamayamayaNGamanassa ditghimoho samuppanno (2335) [AtmapravAdapUrvamadhIyAnastha tiSyaguptasya / nayamatamajAnato dRSTimohaH samutpannaH // 40 // 2335 // 40. Atnapravadaparvamadhiyanasya Tisyaguptasya | Nayamatamajanato dristimobah samutpannah (2335)] Trans. 40. While studying a Parva named Atma-pravada (Ayappavaya )Tisyagupta not knowing the (real purport of) a particular school of thought, was disillusioned. 2335. 2. Atma-pravada (Ayappavaya) is one of fourteen Porvas incorporated in the Purvagata section of Dristivada. Parikrama, Satra, Anuyoga, Parvagata and Colika are the five sections of Dristivada. Parvagata forms the inost important part of Dristivada, on account of its containing the following fourteen Parvas viz :-- 1. Utpada parva (Uppaya-parva). 2. Agrayaniya-parva (Aggeanatha-puvva) 3. Viryapravada-parva (Viriyappavaya puvva) 4. Atthinastippavayapuvva (Astinastipravada purva)

Page #71
I Vida Nahnavavada TIkA-40 AtmapravAdanAmakaM pUrvamadhIyAnasya viSyaguptasyAyaM sUtrAlApakaH sAmAyAtastadyathA-" eye bhaMte ! jIvapaese jIve si vattavvaM siyA / no iNaDhe smddhe| evaM do, tini jAva dasa, saMkhenA asaMkhejA bhaMte ! jIvapaesA jIva tti vatta siyA / no iNaDhe samaDhe, egapaesUNe vi paM jIve no jIve tti vattavyaM siyA, se keNaM aDhagaM 1 / jamhA NaM kamiNe paDipugne logAgAsapaesatulle jIve jIve ci vattavaM siyA, se teNaM aTeNaM" iti / (eko bhagavan ? jIvapadezo jIva iti vaktanyaM syAt / no ayamarthaH samarthaH / evaM dvau, trayo yAvad daza, saMkhyeyAH, asaMkhyeyA bhagavan ? jIvapradezA jIva iti vaktavya syAt ? / no ayamarthaH samarthaH, ekapadezono'pi jIvo no jIva iti vaktanyaM syAt / apa kenArthena ? / yasmAt kRtvaH paripUrNo lokAkAzapradezatulyo jIvo jIva iti vaktavyaM syAt tenaarthen)| amuM cAlApakamadhIyAnasya "kasyApi nayasyedamapi matam , na tu sarvanayAnAm" ityevamajAnatastiSyaguptasya mithyAtvodayAd dRSTadarzanasya moho viparyAsaH saMjAta iti // 2335 // D. C. During his study of a Parva, named Ayappavaya, Tisyagupta came across the following conversation : ___ "O Lord, could one portion of a living being be calledJiva? " No, that is not the correct view". "Then, O Lori' could the two, threc, ten or many portions of a living baing be called Jiva ? 5. Jnanapravada porva (Nanappavaya puvva) 6. Satya pravada purva (Saccappavaya puvva) 7. Atnjapravada purva (Ayappavaya puvva) 8. Karmapravada purva (Kammappavaya puvva) 9. Pratyakhyana pradada parva (Paccakkhanappavaya puvva) 10. Vidyapravadapurva (Vijjappavaya puvva) 11. Avandhya purve (Avanjjha puvva) 12. Pranavada purva (Panavaya puvva) 13. Kriya visala purva (Kiriya visala puvva) 14. Lokabindu sara (Logabindu sara)

Page #72
:18: Jinabhadra Gani's [The second "No, that is not the correct viuw. A living being even one portion less, cannot be said to be Jiva. It could be called Jiva only if it is complete (in form) like Loka and Akasa." Tasyagupta did not know that this statement was true only from one point of view, and not from all points of view. He, therefore, misinterpreted the above-mentioned alapaka and formed a wrongly-based theory as a result of that. 40 (2335) His theory is explaineri thus :-- egAdao paesA no jIvo no paesahINo dhi| jaM to sa jeNa puNNo sa eva jIvo paeso tti // 41 // 2336 // 41. Egadao paesa no Jivo no paesahino vil Jam to sa jena purno sa eva Jivo paeso tti (2336) [ekAdayaH pradezA no jIvo no pradezahIno'pi / yat tataH sa yena pUrNaH sa eva jIvaH pradeza iti // 41 // 2336 // 41. Ekadayah pradesa no Jivo no pradesahino'pi Yat tatah sa yena purnah sa eva Jivah pradesa iti (2336)] Trans. 41. One or more parts (of a living being ) cannot be said as Jiva. That which lacks ( some) part, is also not (Jiva). So, that ( part ) by which it becomes complete (in form), is alone called Jiva 2336 TIkA-41 yad yasmAdekAdayaH pradezAstAvajIvo na bhavati, ege bhaMte ! jIvapaese ityAdyAlApake niSiddhatvAt ; evaM yAvadekenApi pradezena hIno jIvo na bhavati, atraivAlApake nivAritatvAt / tatastasmAd yena kenApi caramapradezena sa jIvaH paripUrNa:kriyate sa eva pradezo jIvo na zeSa pradezAH etatsUtrAlApaka prAmANyAditi / evaM vipratipanno'sAviti // 2336 // D. C, Since the above-mentioned alapaka does not admit of one or more pradesas of a living being to be Jiva and since it does not allow a living being lacking in some part or the other, to be called as Jiva, we are led to believe that the last

Page #73
(Vada Nihuavavada : 49: pradesa should alone be called Jiva, because it makes the whole being complete in forin. Tisyagupta misinterprets the alapaka in this way and gets hiinself confused. 41 (2336). Then, guruNA'bhihio jaha te paDhamapaeso na saMmao jiiyo| to tappariNAmo ciya jIvo kahamaMtimapaeso ? // 42 // 2337 // 42. Guruna'bhihio jai te pad hamapaeso na sanmao Jivo i To tapparinamo cciya Jivo kahamantimapaeso ? 2337 [guruNA'bhihito yadi tava prathamapradezo na saMmato jIvaH / tatastatpariNAma eSa jIvaH kathamantimapradezaH ? // 42 // 2337 // 42. Guruna'bhihito yadi tava prathamapradeso na sammto Jivah | Tatastatparinama eva Jivah kathamantimapradesah ? (2337)] Trans. 42. He was told by the preceptor that " If you do not take the first part (of a living being) to be Jiva, how could the last portion which happens to be of the same consequence as that of the first one, be called Jiva ? 2337. TIkA-42 "ekontyapradezo jIvaH tadbhAvabhAvitvAjjIvatvasya" ityAdi bruvANastiSyagupto guruNA vasusUriNA'bhihitaH-hanta ! yadi te tava prathamo jIvapradezo jIvo na saMmataH, tatastantimo jIvapadezaH kathaM kena prakAreNa jIva: ?na ghaTata eva so'pi jIva ityarthaH / kutaH 1 tatpariNAma iti kRtvA / idamuktaM bhavati-bhavadabhimato'ntyapradezo'pi na jIvaH, anyapadezaistulyapariNAmatvAt , prathamAvanyapradezavaditi // 2337 / / D. C. In reply to the belief of Tisyagupta that the last portion-and not the other portions-alone should be taken as Jiva, Acarya Vasusuri explains : "0 Tisyagupta, if you do not take the first part (of a living being) as Jiva, it is not worthy of you to take the last part also as Jiva. Because, the last portion is of the same pari

Page #74
: 50: Jinabhadra Gani's [The second nama as that of the first one, and hence, is in no way different from the first one. 12 (2337) ahava sa jIvo kaha nAimo tti ko vA visesaheU te ? / aha pUraNo tti buddhI ekeko pUraNo tassa // 43 // 2338 // 43. Ahava sa jivo kaha naimo tti ko va visesaheu te ? Aha porano tti buddhi ekkekko purano tassa (2338) [athavA sa jIva kathaM nAdima iti vA vizeSahetustava / atha pUraNa iti buddhirekaikaH pUraNastasya // 43 // 2338 // 43. Athava sa jivah katham nadima iti va visesahetustava? I Atha purana iti buddhirekaikah puranastasya (2338)] Trans. 43. "Or, if that (portion) is Jiva, why not the first (one) also? Or, what is the distinctive purpose for holding such a view? Here, if the contention (is) that it is complete (in form) due to the last portion, ( The reply is that ) "It is complete (in form) by each and every portion" 2338. TIkA-43 athavA, so'ntimapradezaHkathaM jIvastvayA'bhyupagamyate, kathaM ca nanaikAdimaH prathamastadrUpatayeSyate 1 / nanvAdyo'pi pradezo jIva eveSyatAm , zeSapradezatulyapariNAmatvAt, antyapradezavaditi / ko vA'tra vizeSahetustava yena pradezatve tulye'pyantimo jIvo na prathamaH ? iti / atha vivakSitAsaMkhyeyapradezarAzerantyaH pradezaH pUraNa iti vizeSasadbhArataH sa jIvo na prathama iti taba buddhiH| tadayuktam , yato yathA'ntyaH pradezaH pUraNastathaikaikaprathamAdipradezastasya vivakSitajIvapradezarAzeH pUraNa eva, ekamapi pradezamantareNa tasyAparipUrtiriti // 2338 // D C. The Acarya:-According to you, the last portion is jiva in spite of its being similar, on what particular ground do you hold this belief ? Tisyagupta :-Since the last portion completes the range of innumerable portions of which a living being is composed, and the first portion does not do that, I hold the last pradesa to have jivatva.

Page #75
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 51: The Acarya :-You are labouring under a great disillusion by doing so. For, it is not the last pradesa alone, but each and every pradesa of which a living being is composed, that helps to compose and complete the perfect form of a living being. So, either each and every portion of the living being, shall have to be taken as Jiva, if we accept your views; or there would be nothing like jivatva in the last portion like other portions resulting in the absolute negation of jivatva 43 (2338) If we accept Jivatva in every single portion of a living being, there are other difficulties also - evaM jIvabahuttaM paijIvaM savvahA va tdbhaavo| icchAvivajao vA visamattaM savvasiddhI vA // 44 // 44. Evam jivabahuttam paijivani savvaha va tadabhavo i Icchavivajjao va visamattam savvasiddhi va. (2339) [evaM jIvabahutvaM pratijIvaM sarvathA vA tadabhAvaH / icchAviparyayo vA viSamatvaM sarvasiddhirvA // 44 // 2339 // 44. Evam jivabahutvam pratijivam sarvatha va tadabhavah | Icchaviparyayo va visamattvam sarvasiddhirva (2339) ] Trans. 44. In that case, every jiva will have to be taken as composed of numerous jivas. Or, there would be absolute negation of it If it is left to your free will, there would be reverse or ambiguous (statements) as well. Or, all the alternatives (will be proved ) 2339. TIkA-44 evaM sarvajIvapradezAnAM vivakSitapradezamAnapUraNatve'ntyapradezavat pratyekaM jIvatvAt pratijIvaM jIvabahutvamasaMkhyeyajIvAtmakaM prAmoti / athavA prathamAdipradezavadantyapradezasyApyajIvatve sarvathA tadabhAvo jIvAbhAvaH prasajati / atha pUraNatve samAne'pyantyapradeza eva jIvaH, zeSAstu pradezA ajIvA ityAgraho na mucyate, tarhi rAjAderivecchA bhavataH, yat pratibhAsate tadeva hi jalapyata iti / tathA ca sati viparyayo'pi kasmAd na bhavati, Adyo jIvaH antyastu pradezo'jIva

Page #76
: 52: Jinabhadra Gani's [The second iti ? | viSamatvaM vA kuto na bhavati-kecanApi pradezA jIvAH, kecittu ajIvA iti ? aniyamena sarvavikalpasiddhirvA kasmAd na bhavati, svecchayA sarvapakSANAmapi vaktuM zakyatvAt iti / / 2339 // D. C. If you take all the pradesas as having jivatva along with the last prrdesa, every jiva will have to be taken as composed of a number of other jivas. If you do not take them as jivas, there would be absolute negation of jivatva. Still, however, ignoring the fact that the last pradesa is, in no way, different from other pradesas, so far as purnatva is concerned, if you insist with your own sweet will that the last portion is jiva, and the rest are a-jivas, then, like the free will of kings etc. you could, as well, insist upon the reverse statement viz-that the first etc. are jivas and the last is a-jiva. Or, why not say vaguely that some of them are jivas and some are a jivas ? Or, you could prove the validity of all the possible alternatives. For, being dependent upon your free will, you can opine on all sides, 44 (2339) jaM savvahA na vIsuM samvesu vi taM na reNutellaM va / sesesu asanbhUo jIvo kahamaMtimaparase 1 // 45 // 2340 // 45. Jam savvaha na visum savvesu vi tam na renutellam vai Sesesu asabbhao jivo kahamantimapaese? (2340) [yat sarvathA na viSvak sarveSvapi tad na reNutailamiva / zeSeSvasadbhUto jIvaH kathamantimapradeze ? // 45 // 2340 // 45. Yat sarvatha na visvak sarvesvapi tad na renutailamivai Sesesyasadbhuto jivah kathamantimapradese ? (2340)] Trans 45. That which does not entirely exist separately, does not even exist in all parts (combined together ) like the (drop of) oil in sands. Similarly, when jiva is not present in other pa is, how could it exist in the last portion ? 2340. TIkA-45 yad viSvagekaikasminnavayave nAsti tat sarveSvapyavayaveSu samudi

Page #77
Vada ] Sihnawavarla : 53: teSu na bhavati, yathA reNukaNeSu pratyekamasat tatsamudAye bailam, nAsti ca prathamAdika ekaikasmin pradeze jIvatvam, tataHzeSeSu prathamAdipradezeSasajIvatvaM pariNAmAdinA tulye kayamakasmAdevAsminbevAntyapradeze samAyAtam / iti // 2340 // D. C Like the drop of oil in the particles of sand, that which is not present in each of the portions separately, does not even exist in all the portions combined together, Since you do not admit the existence of jivatva in portions such as the first one etc., how could jivatva be present in the last portion aocidentally in spite of its being siviilar to other portions in rispect of parivama etc. ? 15 (23-10). aha desao'vasesesu to vi kiha savvahaMtime jutto| aha tammi va jo heU sa eva sesesu vi samANo // 46 // 2341 // 46. Aha desury' vasesesu to vi kiha. savvahantime jutton ____Aha taumm va jo hed sa eva sesesu vi samano 2341. [atha dezato'vazeSeSu tato'pi kathaM sarvathAntime yuktaH / atha tasmin vA yo hetuH sa eva zeSeSvapi smaanH||46||2341|| 46. Atha desato'vasesesu tato'pi katham sarvathantime yuktah | Atha tasmin va yo hetuh sa eva sesesyapi samanah (2341) ] Trans. 46. If it is said that in the remaining portions jivatva exists partially, then also, how could it be wholly present in the last portion ? The same reason for jivatva as it is present in it ( the last portion), is present in other particles as well. 2341. TIkA-46 athAntyAdavazeSeSu prathamAdipadezeSu dezato jIvaH samastyeva, antyapradeze tu sarvAtmanA'sau samastIti vizeSaH / tato "jaM sabahA na vIsuM" ityetadasiddhamiti bhAvaH / atrottaramAha-tathApi kathamantyapradeze sarvAtmanA jIvo yuktaH ? / nanu tatrApi dezata evAsau yujyate, tasyApi pradezatvAt , prathamAdipradezavat / athAntyapradeze saMpUrNo jIva iSyate, tarhi tatra vadbhAve yo hetuH sa

Page #78
: 54: Jinabhadra Gani's [The second! zeSeSvapi prathamAdipradezeSu samAna eva, tulyadharmakatvAt / atasteSvapi pratipradezaM saMpUrNa jIvatvamantyapradezavat kiM neSyate ? iti // 2341 // D. C. Tisyagupta :-In all the portions except the last one of the living being, jivatva exists partially, while in the last portion it exists wholly. The Acarya:-That is not possible on grounds mentioned above. How could jiva exist in the last portion wholly, and in the rest of them partially? There also, it is proper to admit its existence partially as in the case of other portions. Hence, if the whole of jiva is taken as existing in the last portion, it should also be taken as existing wholly in other portions as well. 46. (2341 ). neha parasattaNao anto jIvoM jahAimapaeso | Aha summi nisiddhA sesA na u antimapaeso || 47||2342 // 47. Neha paesattanao anto jivo jahaimapaeso ahra suyammi risiddha sesa na u antimapaeso. (2342) [neha pradezatvato'ntyo jIvo yathAdimapradezaH / Aha zrute niSiddhAH zeSA na tvantimapradezaH ||47||2342 // 47. Neha pradesatvato 'ntyo jivo yathadimapradesah | Aha srute nisiddhah sesa na tvantimapradesah 47 (2342 ) } naNu ego tti nisiddho so vi sue jai suyaM pramANaM te / sutte savvapaesA bhaNiyA jIvo na carimo ti // 48 // 2343 // 48. Natu ego tti nisiddho so vi sue jai suyam pamanam te Sutte savvapaesa bhaniya jivo na carimo tti. (2343) [ nanveka iti niSiddhaH so'pi zrute yadi zrutaM pramANaM tava // sUtre sarvapradezA bhaNitA jIvo na carama iti // 48|| 2343 || 3. Vide verse 2340. For Private Personal Use Only

Page #79
Wada] Nihnavavada : 55: 48. Nanveka iti nisiddhah so'pi srute yadi srutam pramanam taval Sutre sarvapradesa bhaaita jivo na carama iti (2313) ] Trans. 47-48. Just as the first portion is not jiva on account of its (quality of ) being pradesa, the last portion is also not jiva (for the same reason ). If it is said that the remaining portions are excluded from the (said ) cornmandment, but the last portion is not excluded, (The answer is this )- If the coinmandment is accepted as an authority (by you), that (the last portion ) is, also, in fact, excluded from the commandment by virtue of its being one. In the (said; commandment all the pradesas (combined together ) have been stated as having jiva. Jiva does not, therefore, exist in the last portion alone (2342-2343). ____TIkA-47 ihAntyapradezo'pi na jIvaH, pradezatvAt , yathA prathamAdipradeza iti / Aha-nanvAgamabAdhiteyaM pratijJA, yataHpUrvoktAlApakarUpe zrUte zeSAH prathamAdipradezA jIvatvena niSiddhAH, na punarantyapradezaH, tasya tatra jIvatvAnujJAnAt / ataHkathaM prathamAdipradezavadantyasya jIvatvaniSedhaM manyAmahe ? iti // 342 TIkA-48 nanu so'pyantyapradeza zrute jIvatvena niSiddhaH / kutaH ? / ityAha-eka iti kRtvA / tathAhi-tatrevetthamuktam-"ege bhante ! jIvapaese jIve tti vattavyaM siyA ? / no iNaDhe samaDhe" iti / tato yadi zrutaM tava pramANam , tato'ntyapradezasyApi jIvatvaM neSTavyam , ekatvAt , prathamAdyanyatara pradezavat / kiJca, yadi zrutaM hanta ! pramANIkaroSi, tadA sarve'pi jIvapradezAH paripUrNA jIvatvena zrute bhaNitAH, na tveka eva caramapradezaH / tathA ca tatraivAbhihitam-"jamhANaM kasiNe paDipugne logAgAsapaesatulle jIve tti vattavyaM siyaa"| ataH zrutaprAmANyamicchatA bhavatA naika evAntyapradezo jIvatvenaiSTavya iti // 2343 D. C. Acarya -Like the first portion, the last portion also has no jivatva on account of its quality of being a pradesa. Tisyagupta :-But that does not go against the main sruta or commandment. Because, the sruta excludes pradesas such as the first one etc. from having jivatva, where as the last pradesa

Page #80
: 56: Jinabhadra Gani's [The second is not exeluded like that. So, why should we not take the last pradlesa as having jivatva ? The Acarya :-The last portion is also excluded from the sruta on account of its being a single pradesa. I would also like to draw your attention to the statement therin, that all the pradlesas combined together would form jwa, while one single last pradesa cannot do so. It has been stated, therefore, that " Jamha nam kasino padipanne Logagasapaesa-tulle jivotti vattavyany siya." Since you take this sruta as an authority, you cannot take the last portion alone as jiva. 47-48 (2342-2343). The same idea is then illustrated as follows : taMtU paDovayArI na samattapaDo ya samudiyA te u| samve samattapaDao savvapaesA tahA jiivo||49||2344|| 49. Tanta padovayari na samattapalo ya samudiya te u Savve samattapagao savvapaesa taha jivo (2344). itantuH paTopakArI na samastapaTazca samuditAste tu| sarve samastapaTakaH sarvapradezAstathA jIvaH // 49 // 2344 // 49. Tantun patopakari na samastapatasca samuditaste tut Sarve samasta patakah sarvapradesastatha jivah (2344) ] Trans, 49. Thread is a (helping ) constituent of pata, but it is not the whole pata itself. They are said to be pata (only) when they (i. e all the threads) are combined to. gether The same is the case with jiva and (its) constitu. ents. 2344. TIkA-49 ekastanturbhavati samastapaTopakArI, tamapyantareNa samastapaTasyAmAvAt / paraMsa sakatantuH samastapaTo na bhavati kintu te tantakA sarve'pi samuditAH samastapaTavyapadeza labhanta iti pratItameva / tathA jIvapradezo'pyeko

Page #81
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 57: jIvo na bhavati, kintu sarve'pi jIvapradezAH samuditA jIva iti // 2344 || D. CA thread of a pata is only a constituent of the pata as a whole. It cannot be said to be the whole pata. All the threads combined together form the pata Similarly, one single pradesa cannot be taken as jiva, but all the prodesas combined together form jiva. 49 (2344) evaM bhUyanayamayaM desa - paesA na vatthuNo bhinnA / NAvat ti mayA kasiNaM ciya vatthumi se || 50 ||2345 // jai taM pamANamevaM kasiNo jIvo ahovayArAo / dese vi sabvabuddhI pavaja sese vi to jIvaM // 51 // 2346 // 50. Evambhuyanayamayam desa - paesa na vatthuno bhinna i Tenavatthu tti maya kasinam ciya vatthumittham se (2345 ) 51. Jai tam pamanamevam kasino jivo ahovayarao / Dese vi savvabuddi pavajja sese vi to jivam (2346) [ evaM bhUtanayamataM deza-pradezau na vastuno bhinnau / tenAvastviti matau kRtsnameva vastviSTaM tasya // 50 // | 2345 // yadi tat pramANamevaM kRtsno jIvo'thopacArAt / deze'pi sarvabuddhiH prapadyasva zeSAnapi tato jIvam // 51 // 2316 // 50. Evambhutanayamatam desa-pradesau na vastuno bhinnaut Tenavastviti matau kritsnameva vastvistam tasya (2345 ) 51. Yadi tat pramanamevam kritsno jivo'thopacarat / Dese'pi sarvabuddhih prapadyasva sesanapi tato jivam (2346) | Trans. 50-51. According to the Evambhuta naya, various portions (of an object) are not different from the object. Hence, they are known as a--vastu (or non-objects). The whole (of an object) is alone accepted as vastu according to that (point of view ). If that is accepted by you, jiva too, For Private Personal Use Only

Page #82
: 58: Jinabhadra Gani's [The second is a whole ( being ). Still however, if the part is metaphorically understood as a whole, then, the remaining parts should also be taken as jiva 2345-2346. TIkA-50-51 evaMbhUtanayasyedaM mataM yaduta-deza -pradezA na vastuno bhinnAH, tena tAvavasturUpau matau / ato deza-pradezakalpanArahitaM kRtsnaM paripUrNameva vastu "se" tasyaivaMbhUtanayasyeSTam / tato yadi tadevaMbhUtanayamataM pramANaM jAnAsi tvam evaM tarhi kRtsnaH paripUrNo jIvo, na tvantyapradezamAtramiti pratipadyasva / atha "grAmo dagdhaH," "paTo dagdhaH," ityAdinyAyAdekadeze'pi samastavastUpacArAdantyapradezalakSaNe deze'pi samastajIvabuddhistatra pravartate, tarhi zeSe prathamAdipradeza upacArato jIvaM pratipadyasva, nyAyasya samAnatvAditi // 2345-2346 // D. C. According to the Evambhuta point of view, various parts of an object are not taken as different from the object. But a part is not taken as a whole by it. Desa-pradesas are, therefore, a-vastus according to this naya. The whole of an object without the consideration of desapradesas is alone taken as vastu. From this point of view, therefore, you should take jiva, existing in a whole and not in a part like the last pradesa. If, at this point, you take the point as a whole metaphorically, as in the case of an expressiou such as "A village is burnt" " A cloth is burnt " etc, you shall have to take jiva as existing in other pradesas also in the metaphorical sense. 50-51 (2345-2346). jatto va taduvayAro desUNe na u paesamettammi / jaha taMtUNammi paDe paDovayAro na taMtummi // 52 // 2347 // 52. Jatto va taduvayaro desune na u paesamettainmi! Jaha tantunammi pade padovayaro na tantummi (2317) 4. Evambhuta naya is a sabdartha-grahi naya and explains the meaning of a word from the point of view of vyutpatti or derivation. In other words, this naya interprets an object in the light of its strict etymological derivation.

Page #83
Vada] Nihnayavada : 59: [yato ghA tadupacAro dezone na tu pradezamAtre / yathA tantU na paTe paTopacAro na tantau // 52 // 2347 // 52. Yato va tadupacaro desone na tu pradesamatre | Yatha tantu na pate patopacaro na tantau (2347)] Trans. 52. Or, that ( sort of ) metaphorical interpretation is applicable ( to an object ) having less parts and not to a single part, just as a metaphorical interpretation is applicable to a pata having less threads but not to the thread itself 2347. TIkA-52 athavA, upacArAdapyeka evAntyapradezo jIvo na bhavati, kintu dezona eva jIve jIvopacAro yujyate, yathA tantubhiH katipayairune paTe paTopacAro dRzyate, na tvekasmiMstantumAtra iti // 2347 // D. C. Even by means of a metaphorical interpretation, the last portion does not become jiva, because the metaphorical interpretation is applicable to a jiva lacking in some parts, and not to one single portion. Take the example of tantu and pata. The metaphorical sense of pata could only be transposed to a pata having less parts, but it could not in any case be applied to a tantu. 52 (2347 ). The Acarya explained Tisyagupta in this way, but, iya paNNavio jAhe na pavajai so kao tao bjjho| tato AmalakappAe mittasiriNA suhovAyaM // 53 // 2348 // bhakakhaNa-pANa-ghaMjaNa-vatdhaMtAvayavalAbhio bhaNai / sAvaya ! vidhammiyA mhe kIsa tti tao bhaNai sddddho||54||2349|| naNu tujhaM siddhaMto pajaMtAvayavamittao'vayavI / jaha saccamiNaM to kA vihammaNA micchamiharA bhe // 55 // 2350 // 53. Iya pannavio jahe na pavajjai so kao tao bajjho 1 Tato Amalakappae Mittasirina suhovayai (2348)

Page #84
: 60 : Jinabhadra Gani's [The second 54. Bhakkhana -pana-vanjana-vatthantavayavalabhio bhanai i Savaya ! vidhammiya mhe kisa tti tao bhanai saddho (2319) 55. Nanu tujjham siddhanto pajjantavayavamittao'vayavi/ Jai saccaminam to ka vihammana micchamihara bhe (2350). [iti prajJApito yAvad na prapadyate sa kRtastato baayH| tata AmalakalpAyAM mitrazriyA sukhopAyam // 53 // 2348 // bhakSaNa-pAna-vyaJjana-vastrAntAvayavalAbhito bhaNati / zrAvaka ! vidharmitA vayaM kasmAdititato bhaNani shraaddhH||54||2349 nanu tava siddhAntaHparyantAvayavamAtrato'vayavI / yadi satyamidaM tatAkA vidharmatA mithyAtvamitarathA bhavatAm // 55 // 2350 // 53. Iti prajnapito yavad na prapadyate sa kritastato bahyah 1 Tata Amala-kalpayam Mitrasriya sukhopayam ( 23.18 ) 54. Bhaksana-pana-vyanjana-vastrantavayavalabhito bhanati 1. Sravaka! vidharmita vayam kasmaditi tato bhanati srarlihah 54 (2349) 55. Nanu tava siddhantah paryantavayavamatrato'vayavi, Yadi satyamidam tatah ka vidharmata mithyatvanitaratha bhavatam 55 (2350)] Trans. 53-54-55. In spite of his being, thus, instructed by (his) preceptor, when he was not convinced, he was excluded (from the Order of Monks ). Then, in (the city of) Amalakalpa, (he was invited ) by Misrasri for dinner ete. When offered the last portions of food, drinks, condiments and clothes, he said "O Sravakal why did you insult us by doing so ? The host replied "According to your theory, the last portion is the whole object. If it is true, how is the insult (made)? Otherwise, your theory is false."

Page #85
| Vada Nihnavavada :61: TIkA 53-54-55 gatArthA eva / navaramiti pUrvoktaprakAreNa gurubhiH prajJApitastiSyagupto yAvad na kiJcit pratipadyate tata udghATaya bAhyaH kRto viharanAmalakalpAM nagarI gatvA''mrasAlavane sthitaH / tatra mitrazrIzrAvakeNa "nihavo'yam" iti jJAtvA tatpratibodhanArtha gatvA nimantritaH-"yad madIyagRhe prakaraNamadya tatra bhavadbhiHsvayamAgantavyam / " tato gatAste tadgRhe / tena ca tatra tiSyaguptamupavezya mahAntaM saMbhramamupadarzayatA tatpurato bhakSya-bhojyA'na-pAnacyaJjana-vaskhAdivastunicayA vistAritAH / tatasteSAM madhye sarvatrAntyAvayavAn gRhItvA pratilAbhito'sau kUra-sikthAdinA pratilAbhita ityarthaH / tato bhaNatyabhidhatte-"he zrAvaka! vidharmitAH kimati tvayA vayamitthama ?" / tataHzrAddho bhaNati-"naNu tujjhmityaadi"| "micchamiharA bhe ci" anyathA yadi nedaM satyam , tadA sarvamapi mithyA bhavatAM bhASitamiti // 2348 // 2349 // 2350 // D. C. When Tisyagupta did not accept the explanation offered by the Acarya, as mentioned alove, he was turned out of the gaccha. Then, while wandering here and there, Tisyagupta came to the city of Amala-Kalpa where he lodged himself in the forest named Amrasala. There Mitrasri, a sravaka, apprehending that he was a nihnava, invited him to his place for dinner etc. in order to make him conscious of his error. After Tisyagupta entered his house, he placerl a pile of objects for food, drinks, condiments and clothes, in front of him. Then, from the midst of all those objects, the host took out the last portions of all the items and offered them to Tisyagupta. Being enraged at this act of the host, Tisyagupta said " () sra. vaka! what do you mean by insulting me like this? The host replied "It is, in fact, your theory that the last portion of an object means the object as a whole, how are you offended in that case ? For, otherwise, your theory would be false" 53 - 54-55. (2348-2349-2350) And, aMto'vayavo na kuNai samattakalaM ti jaina so'bhimo| saMvavahArAIe to tammi kao'vayavigAho // 56 // 2351 //

Page #86
: 62: Jinabhadra Gani's [The secondi 56. Anto'vayavo na kunai samattakajjam ti jai na so'bhimaol Samvavabaraie to tapini kao'vayavigaho ? (2351) [antyo'vayavo na karoti samastakAryamiti yadi na so'bhimataH / saMvyavahArAtIte tatastasmin kuto'vayavigrahaH ? // 56 // 2351 // 56. Antyo'vayavo na karoti samastakaryamti yadi na so'bhi matah | Samvyavaharatite tatastasmin kuto'vayaviyrahah ? (2351) ] Trans. 56. The last portion does not do the work of the whole. And, therefore, if it is not acceptible to you, how did you apprehend the object as a whole in that part in absence of dealing together ? (2351). TIkA-56 yadi nAmAntyAkyavaH samastasyApyavayavino yat sAdhyaM kArya tad na karoti, ityato'sau nAbhimato bhavatAm-kUra-pakvAnna-vastrAdInAM sikthasukumArikAdisUkSmakhaNDatantvAdirUpo'ntyAvayavo yadi na paritoSakage bhavatAmityarthaH, tahiM saMvyavahArAtIte tasminnantyAvayave kutaH kila samastAtrayavigraho bhavatAm ? iti // 2351 // D. C. On the ground that the last portion does not do the work of the whole, if the last portions of food, drink, clothes etc. do not satisfy you, (then), how is it that you apprehend the whole body of all the avayavas combined together into one avayava only ? 56 (2351). aMtimataMtU na paDo takajjAkaraNao jahA kuNbho| aha tayabhAve vi paDo so kiM na ghaDo khapuppha va // 57 // 2352 // va 57. Antimatanta na pado takkajjakaranao jaha kumbho | Aha tayabhave vi paco so kim na ghaco khapuppham (2352). [antimatanturna paTastatkAryAkaraNato yathA kumbhaH / atha tadabhAve'pi paTAsa kiM na ghaTaHkhapuSpaM vA 1 // 57 // 2352 //

Page #87
Nihnavavada :57. Antiatantura patastatkaryakaranato yatha kumbhah Atha tadabhave'pi patah sa kim na ghatah khapuspam va ? (2352) Vala Trans. 57. Like ghata, the last thread also could not be called pata in absence of its doing the work of pata. An in spite of that, if it is (taken as ) pata, why should that not 'be taken as ghata or khapuspa ? 2352 TIkA- 57 antya tantumAtraM na paTaH, tasya paTasya kAryaM zItatrANAdikaM tatkAryaM tasyAkaraNaM tatkAryAkaraNaM tasmAditi / yathA kumbho ghaTaH / atha tadabhAve'pi kAryAbhAve'pi tantuH paTa iSyate, tarhi kimityasau paTo ghaTaH khapuSpaM vA na bhavati, paTakAryAkatRtvasyAvizeSAditi ||2352 // D. C. Just as a ghata could not be called a pata, the last thread of a pata also could never be called pata on account of its inability to do the work of pata. Now, even in spite of its inability to do the karya of pata, if the last thread is pata, why should Khapuspa not be taken as pata on ground ? 57 (2352). taken as the same And, uvalaM bhavvavahArA bhAvAo natthi te khapuSkaM va / aMtAvayave'vayavI dihaMtAbhAvao vAvi // 58 // 2353 || 58. Uvalambhavvavaharabhavao natthi te khapuppham val Antavayave'vayavi ditt hantabhavao vavi (2353) [ upalambhavyavahArAbhAvAd nAsti tava khapuSpamiva / antyAvayave'vayavI dRSTAntAbhAvato vApi // 58 // 2353 // : 63 58. Upalambhavyavaharabhavad nasti tava khapuspamiva Antyavayave'vayavi dristantabhavato vapi (2353 ) ] Trans. 58. Like khapuspa, the whole is not ( present) in the last portion, in absence of perception, practical utility, and (apt) illustration. 2353. For Private Personal Use Only

Page #88
: 64 : Jinabhadra Gari's [The second TIkA-58 tavAbhimato'vayavI antyAvayave nAsti, upalabdhilakSaNaprAptasyAnupalabdheH, vyavahArAbhAvAca, khapuSpavaditi / athavA, "antyAvayavamAtra avayavI, avayavisaMpUrNahetutvAt" ityatra tAvad dRSTAntAbhAvAd na sAdhyasiddhiriti // 2353 D, C. Since the whole of an object is neither perceived, nor utilized in the last avayava, it cannot be taken as existing in the last portion. And, there is no illustration to prove your theory. 58 (2353) For. paJcakkhao'NumANAdAgamao vA pasiddhI atthANaM / savvappamANavisayAIyaM micchattamevaM me // 59 // 2354 // 39. Paccakkhao'rumanadagamao va pasiddhi atthanam ___Savvappamanavisayaiyam micchattamevam bhe (2354) [pratyakSato'numAnAdAgamato vA prasiddhirarthAnAm / sarvapramANaviSayAtItaM mithyAtvamevaM bhavatAm // 59 // 2354 // 59. Pratyksato'numanadagamato va prasiddhirarthanam 1 Sarvapramanavisayatitam mithyatvamevam bhavatam (2354)] Trans. 59. Establishment of (various ) interpretations is (possible ) either by means of direct proof or inference or by nieans of agamas. Your theory is thus worthless in absence of all (such.) authenticities 2354. TIkA-59 pratyakSAdipramANairarthAnAM siddhiH, tAni ca tvatpakSasAdhakena na pravartante / ataH sarvapramANaviSayAtItaM "me" bhavatAmabhimataM mithyAtvameveti // 2354 // D. C. Various interpretations are established on the strength of pratyaksa pramanas or agamas. Your theory being devoid of all such pramanas becomes utterly baseless. iya coiya saMbuddho khAmiyapaDilAbhio puNo vihinnaa| gaMtuM gurupAyamUlaM sasIsapariso paDikaMto / / 59 // 2355 //

Page #89
(Vada Nihlavavada : 65 60. Iya coiya sambuddho khamiya padilabhio puno vihina i Gantum gurupayamalam sa-sisapariso padikkanto (2355) [iti coditaH saMbuddha kSAmitapratilAbhitaH punarvidhinA / gatvA gurupAdamUlaM saziSyapariSat pratikrAntaH // 60 // 2355 // 60. Iti coditah sambuddhah ksamitapratilabhitah punarvidhina i Gatva gurupadamalam sa-sisyaparisat pratikrantah (2355)] Trans. 60. Being thus inspired and instructed, he was pardoned (for his errors ), and awarded presents by Mitrasri according to regular custom; (then), having gone near the soles of the preceptor's feet (and having) saluted, he returned along with his retinue of pupils. 2355. TIkA-60 iti preritaH saMbuddho'sau vihitakSamitakSAmitena mitratrItrAvaracA saMpUrNAnapradAnAdividhinA punarapi pratilAbhito gurupAdamUlaM gatvA ziSyapariSasameto vidhinA pratikrAntaH samyaga mArga apano guntike vijahAra // 2355 // D. C. When Tisyagupta was thus inspired and instructed by the Sravaka Mitrasri he was forgiven and awarded the full lumps of bhojana etc. by Mitrasri. Tisyagupta, then, saluted the preceptor, and returned with his pupils. End of the Discussion with the Second Nihnava.

Page #90
Chapter IV // tRtIyanihnavavaktavyatA // Discussion with the Third Nihnava. atha tRtIyanihnavavatavyatAmAha dasa do vAsasayA tahaA siddhiMgayassa vIrassa / to abbattayadiTThI seyaviAe samuppaNNA // 61 // 2356 // 61. Caudasa do vasasaya taia siddhim gayassa Virassa | To Avvattayaditthi Seyaviae samuppanna. (2356). [ caturdaza dve varSazate tadA siddhiM gatasya vIrasya / tato'vyaktadRSTiH zvetavikAyAM samutpannA // 61 // 2356 // 61. Caturdasa dve varsasate tada siddhim gatasya Virasya / 'Tato'vyaktakadristib Svetavikayam samutpanna (2356) ] Trans. 61. When two hundred and fourteen years ( had passed) since the Nirvana of Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira, the theory-of Avyaktas came into existence in (the city of) Svetavika. 2356. TIkA- 61 caturdazAdhikavarSazatadvayaM tadA zrImanmahAvIrasya siddhigatasyAsIt / tato'vyaktAbhidhAnanihnavAnAM dRSTirdazanarUpA zvetavikAyAM nagaryA samutpanneti // 2356 // Here is the story of the production of this theory.seyavipolAsAThe joge taddvisahiyayasUle ya / sohammanaliNigumme rAyagihe mUriyabalabhadde ||62||2357|| For Private Personal Use Only

Page #91
[ Vada Nihnatavada 67: 62. Seyavipolasalhe joge taddivasahiyayasule ya i Sohamma Nalinigumme Rayagihe Mariyabalabhadde (2357) [zvetavikApaulASADhe yoge tadivasahRdayazUle ca / saudharmanalinIgulme rAjagRhe mauryblbhdrH||62||2357|| 62. Svetavikapaulasadhe yoge taddivasahridayasule cal Saudharma Nalinigulme Rajagrihe MauryaBalabhadrah (2357)] ____ Trans. 62. While teaching (the practice of ) yogas in the Paulasadha ( church) of (the city of) Svetavika, when the preceptor passed away to the Nalinigulma (region) of the Saudharmas? (as a result of ) acute pains in his heart on the same day, Maurya Balabhadra brought them to the right path) in (the city of ) Rajagriha. 2357. TIkA-62 zvetavikAyA nagaryAH paulASADhacaitya AryASADhanAmAna AcAryAH sthitAH / teSAM ca bahvaH ziSyA AgADhayogAn prapannAH / aparavAcanAcAryAsace ca ta evAryASADhasUrayasteSAM vAcanAcAryatvaM pratipanAH / tathAvidhakarmavipAkatacaM te tatraiva divase rajanyAM hRdayazUlena kAlaM kRtvA saudharmadevaloke nalinIgulmavimAne devatvenotpannAH / na ca vijJAtAH kenApi gacchamadhye / tato'vadhinA prAktananyatikaraM vijJAya sAdhvanukampayA samAgatya tadeva zarIramadhiSThApyotthApya ca moktAstena sAghavaH-yathA-vairAtrikakAlaM gRhaNIta / tataH kRtaM sAdhubhistathaiva / zrutasyoddeza-samuddezA-'nujJAzca tadagrataH kRtAH / evaM divyaprabhAvatastena devena teSAM sAdhUnAM kAlabhaGgAdivighnaM rakSatA zIghrameva nistAritA yogaaH| tato'nena taccharIraM muktvA divaM gacchatA proktA sAdhavo; yathA-kSamaNIyaM sadantaiyadasaMyatena satA mayA''tmano vandanAdikAritAzcAritriNo yUyam / ahaM hyamukadine kAlaM kRtvA divaM gato yuSmadanukampayA'trAgataH, nistAritAzca bhvtaamaagaaddhyogaaH| ityAdhuktvA kSamayitvA ca svasthAnaM gataH / tataste sAdhavastaccharIrakaM pariSThApya cintayanti aho ! asaMyato bahukAlaM vnditH| taditthamanyatrApi zaGkA, ko 1. Region of the highest types of deities known as Saudharmas (For more details vide foot-note 3. verse 2807 Chapter II).

Page #92
:08: jinabhadra Gani's [The third jAnAti-"ko'pi saMyataH, ko'pyasaMyato devaH ? iti" / sarvasyApyavandanameva zreyaH, anyathA ghasaMyatavandanaM mRSAvAdazvasyAt / itthaM tathAvidhagurukarmodayAt te'pariNatamatayaH sAdhano'nyatAmataM pratipamAH parasparaM na vandante / tataHsthaviraiste'bhihitA: yadi parasmin sarvatra bhavatAM saMdehaH, tahiM yenoktam-"devo'ham" iti tatrApi bhavatAM kathaM na saMdehaH ? |-kiN sa devo'devo vA ? ini / yadi tena khayameva kathita-"ahaM devaH" tathA, devarUpaM ca pratyakSata eva dRSTam , iti na tatra saMdehaH / hanta ? yadyevam , tahiM ya evaM kathayanti "vayaM sAdhavaH" tathA, sAdhurUpaM pratyakSata eva dRzyate, te kaH sAdhutvasaMdehaH, yena parasparaM yUyaM na vandadhve ? / na ca sAdhukcanAt devakyanaM satyamiti zakyate vaktum / devavacanaM hi krIDAdyarthamanyathApi saMbhAvyate, na tu sAdhuvacanam , tadviratatvAt teSAmiti / evaM ca yuktibhiryAvad na prajJApyante tAvaduddhATaya bAhyAH kRtAH / paryaTantazca rAjagRhanagaraM gatAH / tatra ca mauryavaMzasaMbhUto balabhadro nAma rAjA / sa ca shraaddhH| tatastena te vijJAtA yathA'vyaktavAdino nihavA iha samAyAtA gulazilakacaitye tiSThanti / tatAkhapuruSAn preSya rAjakUla AnAyitAstena te kaTakamaddena mAraNArtha cAnujJAtAH / tato hastini kaTakeSu ca tanmardanArthamAnIteSu taiH proktam-"rAjan ? vayaM jAnImaH zrAvakastvam" tat kathamasmAn zramaNAnitthaM mArayasi / tato rAjJA pokam-"yuSmasiddhAntenaiva ko jAnAti kiM zrAvako'haM na vA / " bhavanto. 'pi ki caurAH, cArikAH, amimarA vA ? ityapi ko vetti ? / " taiH proktam"sAdhavI vayam / ' yadyevam , avyaktavAditayA kimiti parasparamapi yathAjyeSThaM bandanAdikaM na kultha ? / ityAdiniSThurairmubhizca vacanaiH proktAste nrptinaa| tataH saMvRddhA lajitAca nikitAH sanmArga pratipamAH / tato rAjJA proktam"bhavatAM saMvodhanArthamidaM mayA sarvamapi vihitam" iti kSamaNIyamiti // 2357 / / D. C. Arya Asadhacarya was the preceptor of the Paula. sadha church in the city of Svetavika. Many of his pupils learnt the practice of Agadha yogasa under him. Asalbacarya was 2. In order to attain a highly-esteemed position of a perfect ascetic, the Jaina sadhus practise a peculiar type of penances known as " Yogodrahana." Agadha yoga is one of the various processes of " Yogodvahana".

Page #93
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 69: thus their preceptor. On account of excessive strain taken by him in reading and teaching the practice of Agadha yoga, Arya Asadhacarya suffered from acute pain in his heart and he died on the same night. Consequently, he attained divine form in the Nalinigulma viman (region) of Saudharma deva-loka. This was not known to any one in the temple. Then having known the past incident by Avadhi Jnana3, Arya Asalhacarya took compassion on the sadhus who were practising yogas and entered the same body. Immediately after that, he got up and asked the sadhus to proceed with their lessons of the second half of the night. Thus, the god in disguise of a preceptor taught the Uddesa (ains ) Samuddesa (explanations ) and Anujna. (Commandment) of the Holy writ. Practices of all the stages According to Patanjali, yoga is defined to be "the preventing of the modifications of Citta or the thinking principle (which modifications arise through the three Pramanas-Perception, Inference, and Verbal testimony-as well as through incorrect ascertainment, fancy, sleep, and recollection) by abhyasa or the constant practice of keeping the mind in its unmodified state (clear as crystal when uncoloured by contact with other substances) and by vairagya or dispassion." This dispassion being obtained by praaidhana or devotedness to the Supreme Being, who is defined as a particular purusa or spirit unaffected by afflictions, works etc. The eight means or stages of Yoga or Mental Concentration are : -1. Yama (forbearance ) 2. Niyama (religious observances ) 3. Asana (postures ) 4. Pranayama (regulation of the breath) 5. Pratyahara (restraint of the senses) 6. Dharana ( steadying of the mind ) 7. Dhyana (contemplation) 8. Samadhi (profound meditation, which according to the Bhagwad Gita VI B. is to be practised by fixing the eyes on the tip of the nose. True Liberation is the cessation of matter and spirit or Kaivalya (isolation ) the self-mortification and asceticism connects it closely with Buddhism and Jainism (Vide pp. 821822 Sanskrit-English Dictionary by Sir Monier Williams ). 3. Perception attained by means of concentraction of attention,

Page #94
:70: Jinabhadra Gani's [ The third of yogas were completely taught in that way, saving thereby all the sadhus from the interruptions of time etc. by virtue of divine power. Finally, while going to heaven, after leaving the human body, he said to the sadhus " A-samyata (unrestrained) as I happen to be, I made you, who happen to be of high moral character, bow to me. Please pardon me for that act of mine. On the other day, I happened to meet with death and pass away to the heavenly regions, from where I condescended to come here out of sympathy for you and taught you all the practices of yoga." Having said so, he returned to his heavenly abode after being pardoned. After his departure, sitting around his borly, the sadhus began to think like this:- "Ohi an a-samyata (unrestrained ) deity has been respected for a long time. The same could be doubted in the case of others as well. For, who knows whether one is samyata or a-samyata? It is better, therefore, not to respect any body. By respecting an unrestrained deity, we would become liars." Consequently, short-witted as they were, all the sadhus resorted to indiscretion and did not even bow to each other as sadhus. Then, some of the old and wise sthaviras tried to explain them the right thing. The following conversation took place between them and the Nihnavas. . STHAVIRAS:-If you entertain such a doubt with regard to each and every one in this world, then, why not doubt the asceticism of the deity himself, when he introduced himself as a deity to you? Nihnavas :-There is no doubt about his being a deva, firstly because, he himself said that "I am a deity" and secondly because he was directly perceived as a deva. Sthaviras :-The same will be the case with sadhus also. Those who say that, " We are sadhus " and those who are recognized as sadhus directly from their appearance, should also

Page #95
[Vada Nihnavavada : 71: be taken as sadhus and so, you should not refrain from respecting each other as sadhus. And, you cannot assert that the word of a deva is more trust-worthy than that of a sadhu. A deva might tell a lic even for the sake of fun etc., but a sadhu being completely averted from falsehood, would never tell a falschood. Sthaviras tried to persuade them in many other ways, but they were not convinced. Those Avyakta-va*lins were, therefore, expelled from the Gaccha. Then, wandering here and there, they came to Rajagriha Nagara in course of time and stayed the re in the Guinasila caitya (temple of an yaksa). King Balabhadra of the Maurya Dynasty was a devotee of Jaina Dharma. So, as soon as he came to know of the arrival of the Nihnavas of the Sceptical Type, he called them with a view to bring them to the right path. When they were brought to his palace, the king ordered them to be killed by crushing them under the feet of elephants. When the retinue of elephants was brought there, in order to crush them, the king was thus told by the nihnavas "O king ' you are a devotee of Jaina Dharma. We are also Jaina sramanas. Then, why do you kill us ?" The king replied: "According to your principle, who knows whether I am a sravaka or not? And who knows if you are not thieves, spies or burglars ?" The Nihnavas said "We are certainly Sadhus and none else." The king replied :-If you are real Sadhus why do'n't you respect the elderly sadhus in your group?" On hearing such harsh and tender words of the king, the Nihnavas were roused and brought to the right path with all their doubts removed. Finally, the king said apologetically that he had to do all that for the benevolent purpose of rousing them from ignorance and hence he craved their pardon, which was duly awarded. 62. (2357). The same story is now described by the author in details :

Page #96
:72 Jinabhadra Gani's [The third guruNA devIbhUeNa samajarUveNa vAiyA sIsA / sambhAve parikahie avvattayadihiNo jAyA // 63 / / 2358 // 63. Guruna devibhuena samanaravena vaiya sisa. Sabbhave parikahie Avvattayaditthino jaya. 2358. [guruNA devIbhUtena zramaNarUpeNa vAditAH ziSyAH / sadbhAve parikathite'yaktakadRSTayo jAtAH // 63 // 2358 // 63. Guruna devibhutena sramanarupena vaditah sisyah | Sadbhave parikathite'vyaktaka drstayo jatah 63 (2358)] Trans. 63. The pupils were taught by the preceptor in disguise of a monk after he had attained divinity. When the fact was told (by him), they became sceptical. 2358. They began to raise doubts in this way :ko jANai ki sAhU devo vA to na vaMdaNijjo tti / hojA'saMjayanamaNaM hoja musAvAyamamugo tti // 64 // 2359 / / 64. Ko janai kim sahu devo va to na vandanijjo tti i Hojja'samjayanamanam hojja musavayamamugo tti (2359). [ko jAnAti kiM sAdhurdevo vA tato na vandanIya iti / bhavedasaMyatanamanaM bhaved mRSAvAdo'muka iti // 64 // 2359 / / 64. Ko janati kim sadhurdevo va tato na vandaniya iti Bhavedasamyatanamanam bhaved mrisavado'muka iti (2359) ] Trans. 64. Who knows whether a (particular) person is a sadhu or a deity ? He is, therefore, not worthy of bowings. (Because otherwise) either there would be bowing to an unrestrained (person) or there would be false presumption. (2359 ). TIkA-64 ko jAnAti-kimayaM sAdhuveSadhArI sAdhudevo vA ? nAstyevAtra nizcaya ityarthaH / na ca vaktavyam-sAdhurevAyam , tadveSa-samAcAradarzanAt , bhavAniva / ASADhadeve'pi sAdhuveSa-samAcAradarzanenAnaikAntikatvAt / tasmAd na

Page #97
Vada] Nihnavarada :73: ko'pi vandanIyaH, saMzayaviSayatvAt / yadi punarvandyate, tadA''ryASADhadevavandanaM syAt / tadamuko bavIti-bhASaNe ca mRSAvAdaH syAditi // 2359 // D. C. On seeing a person bearing the attire of a sadhu, one cannot decide whether he is a real monk or a deity in disguise of salbu. It is, therefore, not proper to bow to any one on acco unt of his being the object of doubt. For, if he is respected, it would turn out to be a bowing to an a-saymata (unrestrained) person like Asadha-dera; otherwise, while saying that " he is an ascetic, we would resort to falsehood 64 (2359). The sthaviras reply to the arguments of the Avyakta Nihnavas as follows: theravayaNaM jai pare saMdeho kiM suro tti sAhu tti / deve kahaM na saMkA kiM so devo na devo tti ? // 65 // 2360 // teNa kahiyaM ti va maI devo'haM rUvavArisaNAo ya / sAhu tti ahaM kahie samANarUvammi kA saMkA ? // 66 // 2361 // devassa va kiM vayaNaM saccaM ti na sAhurUvadhArissa / na paropparaM pi vandaha jaM jANantA vi jayau tti // 67 / 2362 / / 65. Theravayanam jai pare sandeho kim suro tti sahu tti ? | Deve kaham na sanka kim so devo na devo tti (2360) 66. Tena kahiyam ti va mai devo'ham ravadarisanao yal Sabu tti aham kahie samanaruvammi ka sanka ? 67. Devassa va kim vayanam saccam ti na sahuravadharissa 1 Na paropparam pi vandlaha jam jananta vi jayau tti (2362) [sthaviravacanaM yadi pare sandehaH kiM sura iti sAdhuriti / deve kathaM na zaGkA kiM sa devo na deva iti ? // 65 // 2360 // tena kathitamiti vA matirdevo'haM rUpadarzanAca / sAdhuriti kathaM kathite samAnarUpe kA zaGkA ? // 66 // 2361 // devasya vA kiM vacanaM satyamiti na saadhuruupdhaarinnH| na parasparamapIha vandadhve yanAnanto'pi yataya iti // 67 // 2362 //

Page #98
Jinabhadra Gani's [The third 65. Sthavira vacanain yadi pare sandehah kim sura iti sadhuriti?! Deve katham na sanka kim sa devo na deva iti ? (2360) 66. Tens kathitamiti va matirdevo'ham ropadarsanacca Sadhuriti katham kathite samanarupe ka sanka ? (2361) 57. Devasya va kim v0eanam satyaiti na sadhuropaharirah! Na parasparamapiha vanda lhve yajjananto'pi yataya iti. (2362)] Trans. 65-66-67. Sthaviras say that (if you entertain doubt about another person ) as to whether he is a deity or a sadhu, why not question the genuinity of a deity (also) as to whether he is a genuine deity or not? If it is your belief that since he himself says that "I am a deity" and since we saw the form of a deity, we did not doubt its validity; why should you raise the doubt when it is said that "I am a sadhu' and when the same body is (directly ) perceived? Or, is it, because, the word of a deity is true and that of an ascetic not so that you do not salute each other in spite of your knowing that " this is an ascetic." 2360-2361 2362. If you entertain doubts even about ascetics, who are pratyaksa, then, there is all the more reason for your doubt about jiva etc. that are paruksa : jIvAipayatthesu ya suhum-vvvhiy-vigitttthruuvesu| apaMtaparokkhesu ya kiha na jiNAisu bhe saMkA ? // 68 // 2363 // 68. Jivaipayatthesu ya suhuma-vvavahiya-vigittharuvesu i Accantaparokkhesu ya kiha na Jinaisu bhe sanka ? (2363) [sitaifacering **-grafia-fenced atyantaparokSeSu ca kathaM na jinAdiSu bhavatAM zaGkA ? // 68 // 2363 / / 68. Jivadipadarthesu ca saksma-vyavahita-vikristarapesu 1 Atyantaparuksesu ca katham na Jinadisu bhavatam sanka ? ( 2363 ) ]

Page #99
Vada] Nihnavavada Trans. 68. And, why should there be no doubt about objects such as jiva etc. whose bodies are subtle, obscute and drawn asunder, as well as, about Tirthankaras etc.. that are extremely remote (from the physical sight)? 68 (2363) Here if it is argued that there cannot be any doubt about Jiva etc. on the authority of the words of Jinas, the same will be the case with ascetics also tavvayagAo va maI naNu tavvayaNe susAhuvitto ti| Alaya-vihAra-samio samaNo'yaM vaMdaNinIti // 69 // 236 // 69. Tavvayanao va mai nanu tavvayane susahuvitto tti, Alaya-vihara--sanio samano'yam vandanijjo tti (2364) [tadvacanAd vA matirnanu tadvacane susAdhuvRtta iti / Alaya-vihArasametaH zramaNo'yaM vandanIya iti // 69 / 2364 // 69. Tadvacanad va matirnanu tadvacane susadhuvritta iti Alaya-viharasametah Sramano'yam vandaniys. Iti (2364)] Trans. 69. Or, if this belief is held (on the authority of) His words*, then according to his words, a devotee having (proper) dwelling and monastic establishment, and possess. ing right conduct of a (real) saint, is definitely worthy of bowings. 2364. TIkA-69 atha tadvacanAjinavacanAd na jIvAdyartheSu zakA / nanu yayevam , tadvacana idamapyasti yaduta-zobhanaM sAdhuvRttaM zramaNazIla yasyAsau susAdhuvaca iti hetoH "zramaNo'yam" iti nizcayAd vndniiyH| susAdhupatto'pi sa kathaM jJAyate ? ityAha-"Alaya-vihAra-samio" iti kRtvA / uktaMca AlayeNaM vihAreNaM ThANA caMkamaNeNa ya / sakA suvihiyaM nAuM bhAsAveNaieNa y||1|| iti // 2364 // 4. i. e. Tirthankara's.

Page #100
:76 Jinabhadra Gani's [The third D. C. If you say that you do not entertain doubt about the validity of jiva etc. on the authority of the words of Jinas, then, according to the Tirthankaras, one who possesses right conduct of an ascetic, is a real sadhu worthy of respect. Here, if it is asked " How is a person of right conduct of a saint, recognized ? The answer is- " By means of proper dwelling and monastic establishments, a real sramana is at once recognized. It is said "Alayenam viharenam thana cankamanena ya 1 Sakka suvihiyam naum bhasavenaiena ya #111 A real sramana (saint) is known from his alaya (dwelling) vihara (monastic establishments) movements from one place to another and courteous language ]. 69 (2364) jaha vA jiNidapaDimaM jiNaguNarahiyaM ti jANamANA vi / pariNAmavisuddhatthaM vaMdaha taha kiM na sAdhu pi ? // 70 // 2365 // hunja na vA sAhuttaM jaharUve natthi ceva paDimAe / sA kIsa vaMdaNijA jaisave kIsa paDiseho ? // 71 // 2366 // 70. Jaha va Jinindapaaimam Jinagunarahiyam ti janamana vil Parinamavisuddhattham vandaha taha kim na sadhum pi ? (2365) 71. Hujja na va sahuttam jairuve natthi ceva padimac Sa kisa vandanijji jairave kisa padiseho ? (2366) [yathA vA jinendrapratimAM jinaguNarahitAmiti jAnanto'pi / pariNAmavizuddhayartha vandadhve tathA kiM na sAdhumapi ? // 7 // 2365 // bhaved na vA sAdhutvaM yatirUpe nAstyeva pratimAyAm / sA kasmAd vandanIyA yatirUpe kasmAt pratiSedhaH // 7 // 2366 // 5. This verse is taken from the Avasyaka-niryukti Vide Verse 80. Vandanaka Niryukti in the Avasyaka-Niryukti. Also vide p. 529 v. 1148. Avasyaka sutra with the commentary of Haribhadra Suri Part II. Agamodaya Samiti Edition)

Page #101
Vada ] Nihnayavada :77: 70. Yatha va Jinendrapratimam Jinagunarahitamiti jananto'pil Parinamavisuddhyartham vandadhve tatha kim na sadhu mapi ? (2365) 71. Bhaved na va sadhutvam yatirape nastyeva pratimayam i Sa kasmail. vandaniya, yatirape kasmat pratisedhah (2366)] Trans. 70-71. Or, just as you worship the image of a Tirthankara for the sake of blissful result in spite of your knowing that the image of Tirthankara has no qualities of the Tirthankara, in the same way, why (should you) not respect a sadhu also? In the form of an ascetic, (real) qualities of a sadhu may or may not be (found ). But thats is altogether absent in the image. Why is the image, then, taken as worthy of worship, and what makes the form of an ascetic unworthy of respects? 2365-2366. TIkA-70-71 sugame, navaraM prathamagAthAyAM pratimAyAH sAdhurUpeNa saha vandanIyatve sAmyamuktam / dvitIyagAthAyAM tu sAdhurUpe vizeSa darzayati-yatirUpe pANini sAdhutvaM bhaved na vA ? iti saMdigdhameva / pratimAyAM tu jinatvaM nAstyeveti nizcayaH / tataH kimiti sA vandanIyA ?, yatirUpe ca kimiti vandana pratiSedhaH 1 // 2365-2366 // The opponent's answer isasaMjayajaharUve pAvANumaI maI na paDimAe / naNu devANugayAe paDimAe vi huna so doso // 72 // 2367 // 72. Asaijayajairave pavanumai mai na padimae | ___Nanu devanugayse padimae vi hujja so doso (2367) [asaMyatayatirUpe pApAnumatirmatirna pratimAyAm / nanu devAnugatAyAM pratimAyAmapi bhavet sa doSaH / / 72 // 2367 // 72. Asamyatayatirupe papanumatirmatirna pratimayam | Nanu devanugatayam pratimayamapi bhavet sa dosah (2367)] 6. Quality of a Tirthankara.

Page #102
: 78: Jinabhadra Gani's [The third TIkA- 72 - athaivaMbhUtA matiH parasya bhavet - asaMyata devAdhiSThite yatirUpe vandyamAne tadgavAsaMyamarUpapApAnumatirbhavati, na tvasau pratimAyAm / atrocyatenanu devatAdhiSThitapratimAyAmapyayamanumatilakSaNo doSo bhavedeveti // 2367 // D. C. Nihnavas.--While bowing to an a-samyata ( unrestrained ) deity in disguise of an ascetic, the fault of assenting to the sin of unrestraint would be committed. But that does not happen in case of worshipping an image of 8 Tirthankara. Sthaviras: -Even in case of an image inspired by a god or a Tirthankara, the same fault of assenting to the sin would certainly be committed. 72 (2367) aha paDimAe na doso jiNabuddhIe namao visuddhassa / to jairUvaM namao jaibuddhIe kahaM doso 1 // 73 // 2368 // 73. Aha padimae na doso Jinabuddie namao visuddhassa | To jairavam namao jaibuddhie kaham doso? ( 2366 ) [ atha pratimAyAM na doSo jinabuddhayA namato vizuddhasya / tato yatirUpaM namato yatibuddhadhA kathaM doSaH // 73|| 2368 / / 73. Atha pratimayam na doso Jinabuddhya namato visuddhasya 1 Tato yatirupam namato yatibuddhya katham dosah (2368 ) ] Trans. 73. If there is no fault in case of one who bows to an image taking it sincerely as a Tirthankara, then, how would a fault arise in case of one who bows to an ascetic taking him sincerely as an asectic ? 2368. TIkA- 73 atha pratimAyAM nAyamanumatilakSaNo doSaH / kiM kurvanaH 1 / namasyataH / kayA ? | jinabuddhayA / kathaMbhUtasya 1 / vizuddhasya - vizuddhAdhyavasAyasyaM / yadyevam, tato yatibuddhayA yatirUpaM vizuddhasya namasyataH ko dopaH, yena bhavantaH parasparaM na vandante ? / atrAparaH kazcidAha - yadyevam, liGgamAtradhAriNaM pArzvasthAdikamapi yatibuddhayA vizuddhasya namasyato na doSaH / tadayuktam- pArzvasthAdInAM samyagyatirUpasyApyabhAvAt / tadabhAvazca " AlaeNaM bihAreNa " For Private Personal Use Only

Page #103
Vada 1 Nibnavavada :79: ityAdiya tiliGgasyAnupalambhAt / tataH pratyakSadoSavataH pArzvasthAdIn bandamAnasya tat sAvadyAnujJAlakSaNo doSa eva / uktaM ca jaicelaM bagaliMgaM jANaMtassa namao havai doso / nirddhadharsa ya nAUNa vaMdamANe dhuko doso // 1 // ityAdi / pratimAyAstu doSA caraNAbhAvAt tadvandane sAvadhAnujJA'bhAvato na doSa iti // 2368 // D. C. Nihnavas :-The fault of assenting to the evil quality will not arise in case of bowing to an image of a Tirthankara with sincere apprehension of a Tirthankara in the image. Sthaviras: -If it is so, what harm is there in case of one bowing to a ascetic with the sincere apprehension of a sadhu in him, that you do not even respect each other as ascetics? Nihnavas :-If it is so, there would be no harm even in bowing to his own companion etc. with the sincere apprehension of an ascetic in him. Sthaviras :-That is not proper, companions etc. to not actually bear even a proper appearance of an ascetic. Nor are the actual symbols such as alaya, vihara etc. apprepended in him. Hence, one who bows to companions etc. that are clearly unworthy, commits the fault of assenting to the savadya' (censurable) resolution of an ascetic in them. It is said Jaicelam bagalingam janantassa namao havai doso Niddhamdhasam ya nauna vandamane dhuvo dosc 19 7. Savadya (censurable) Niravadya (blameless) 8. This verse is also quoted from Avasyaka Niryukti vide verse 65, Vandanka-niryukti in the Avasyaka Niryukti. Also vide page 526 verse 1137, Avasyaka Satra with the commentary of Srimad Haribhadra Sari Part II. There seems to be a slight alteration in the text of this For Private Personal Use Only

Page #104
:80: Jinabhadra Gani's [The third And, 377 visi foaie Ihrs at a hall AhAro-vahi-sajjA mA devakayA bhaveja Nhu // 74 // 2369 / / 74. Aha padimam pi na vandaha devasankai to na ghettavva i Aharo-vahi-sajja ma devakaya bhavejja Nhu (2369) [ Squaftaraf TeraTETTA A TESTT: 1 AhAro-padhi-zayyA mA devakRtA bhaveyurnu // 74 // 2369 / / 74. Atha pratimanapi na vandadhve devasankaya tato na grahi tavyah Abaro-padhi-sayya ma devakrita bhaveyurnu (2369). Trans. 74. If you do not respect an image (also) thinking it to be that of ) a deva, then, thinking that food, accessory articles, bed etc. might have been created by gods, they should not be taken (at all). 2369. GR-18 37 CFTATA a pesa 144, Era! Tela 11910 bhavAn, tahiM mA devakRtA bhaveyurityAhAro-padhi-zayyAdayo'pi na grAhyA iti // 2369 // D. C. If you become sceptical to the extent of not bowing even to an image, you should not tako food, accessory articles, bed etc. as they, too, might have been created by gols. 74 (2369) verse. Original reading of the verse found in the niryukti is this Jaha velambagalingam janantassa namao havai doso Niddhamdhasam iya nadna vandamane dhuvo dosoa, Instead of " Jaicelam bagalingam b, Instead of "ya." [One who bows to a wicked and hypocrite ascetic, in spite of his knowing him to be such, would commit a fault. Having once known the breach of trust, if one bows to him, he is definitely at fault. ] But in case of worshipping an image, no such fault would arise in absence of savadyanujna. 73 (2368)

Page #105
(Vada Nihnayavada :81: And too much of sceptical attitude will result in the negation of the whole vyavahara in this way ko jANai kiM bhattaM kimao kiM pANayaM jalaM mdym| kimalAbu mANikaM kiM sappo cIvaraM hAro ? // 75 // 2370 / / ko jANai kiM suddhaM kimasuddhaM kiM sajIvaM nijIvaM / kiM bhakkhaM kimabhAvaM pattamabhakkhaM tao savvaM // 76 // 2371 // 75. Ko janai kim bhattam kimao kim panayam jalam madyam | Kimalabu manikkam kim sappo civaram baro ? (2370) 76. Ko janai kim suddham kimasuddham kimi sajivam nijjivami Kim bhakkham kimabhakkham pattanabhakkham tao savvam (2371) [ko jAnAti kiM bhaktaM kRmayaH kiM pAnakaM jalaM magham / kimalAbu mANikyaM kiM sarpazcIvaraM hAraH 1 // 75 // 2370 // ko jAnAti kiM zuddhaM kimazuddhaM kiM sajIvaM nirjIvam / kiM bhakSyaM kimabhakSyaM prAptamabhakSyaM tataHsarvam / / 76 // 2371 // 75. Ko janati kim bhaktam krinayah kim panakam jalami madyam Kimalabu manikyam kim sarpascivaram harah? (2370) 76. Ko janati kim suddham kimasuddham kim sajivam nirjivam | Kim bhaksyam kinabhaksyam praptamabhaksyam tatah sarvam (2371) Trans 75-76. Who knows whether a particular thing is food or a worm? Whether a drinking substance is water or wine ? Whether one thing is a bottlegourd or a jewel? Whether (one thing is a serpent, a (piece of) garment or a necklace ? Who knows what is pure (and) what is impure, what is animate and what is inanimate, what is eatable and what is uneatable ? Everything turns out to be uneatable in that respect. 2370-2371.

Page #106
:82: Jinablalra Gani's [The third TIkA-75-76 ko jAnAti kimidaM bhakta kamayo vA.? ityAdyAzahAyA bhaktAdAvapi kRmyAdibhrAntyanivRtteH sarvamabhakSyameva prAptaM bhavataH / tathA, alAbucIvarAdau maNi-mANikya-sAdibhrAntya-nivRtteH sarvamabhogyaM ca prAptamiti // 2370-2371 // D. C. Since you are not able to remove illusions of worms jewels, serpents etc in an article of food, bottle-gourd, garments etc. everything would become forbidden to you 75-76 (2370-71) And, jahaNA vi na saMvAso seo pamayA-kusIlasaMkAe / hoja gihI vi jai tti ya tassAsIsA na dAyavvA 177 // 2372 // na ya so dikkheyavo bhavvo'bhavvo tti jeNa ko muNai ? / coru tti cAriu tti ya hoi jao paradAragAmi tti? // 78 // 2373 // ko jANai ko sIso ko va gurU to na tabviseso vi| gajho na covaeso ko jANai sacamaliyaM ti ? // 79 // 2374 // kiM bahuNA savva ciya saMdiddhaM jiNamayaM jirNidA ya / paraloya-sagga-mokkhA dikkhAe kimasthamAraMbho ? // 8 // 2375 / / aha saMti jiNavariMdA tavvayaNAo ya svvpddivttii| to tavvayaNAu ciya jaivaMdaNayaM kahaM na mayaM ? // 81 // 2376 // 77. Jaina vi na samvaso seo pamaya-kusilasankae i Hojja gihi vi jai tti ya tassasisa na dayavva. (2372) 78. Na ya so dikkheyavvo bhavvo'bhavvo tti jena ko munai? | Coru tti cariu tti ya hoi jao paradaragami tti? (2373) 79. Ko janai ko siso ko va guru to na tavviseso vil Gajjho na. covaeso ko janai saccamaliyam ti ? (2374) 80. Kim bahuna savvam ciya sandiddham Jinamayam Jininda ya 1 Paraloya-sagga-mokkha dikkhae kimatthamarambho? (2375) 81. Aha sarti Jinavarinda tavvayanao ya savvapadivatti | To tavvayanau ceiya jaivandanayan kaham na mayam ? (2376)

Page #107
[ Vada [ yatinApi na saMvAsaH zreyaH pramadA-kuzIlazaGkayA / bhaved gRhyapi yatiriti ca tasmAAzIrna dAtavyA // 77 // 2372 // Nihnavavada na ca sa dIkSitavyo bhavyo'bhavya iti yena ko jAnAti ? / caura iti cArika iti ca bhavati yako paradAragAmIti 1 // 78 // 2373 // :83: ko jAnAti kaH ziSyaH ko vA gurustato na tadvizeSo'pi / grAhyo na copadezaHko jAnAti satyamalIkamiti 1 // 79 // 2374 // kiM bahunA sarvameva saMdigdhaM jinamaMtaM jinendrAzca / paraloka - svarga- mokSA dIkSAyAH kimarthamArambhaH 1 ||80|| 2375 // atha santi jinavarendrAstadvacanAcca sarvapratipattiH / tatastadvacanAdeva yativandanakaM kathaM na matam ? // 81 // 2376 // 77. Yatinapi na samvasah sreyah pramadakusilasaikaya / Bhaved grihyapi yatiriti ca tasma asirna datavya (2372) 78. Na ca sa diksatavyo bhavyo' bhavya iti yena ko janati ? | Caura iti carika iti ca bhavati yako paradaragamiti ? (2373) 79. Ko janati kah sisyah ko va gurustato na tadviseso'pir Grahyo na copadesah ko janati satyamalikamiti ? (2374) 80. Kim bahuna sarvameva sandigdham jinamatam jinendrasca / Paraloka-Svarga - Moksa diksayab kim arthamarambhah ? (2375) 81. Atha santi jinavarendrastadvacanacca sarvapratipattih | Tatastad vacanadeva yati vandanakam katham na matam? (2376) Trans. 77-78-79-80-81. Doubting the misconduct of woman, it is not advisable even for an ascetic to associate (with them). Presuming that a householder may even happen to be an ascetic, blessing should not be conferred ( upon him ). Nobody should be (allowed to be) initiated as a pupil. For, who knows whether one is meritorious or wicked, a thief, a spy or a burgler? (And) who knows as to who is a pupil For Private Personal Use Only

Page #108
:84: Jinabhadra Gani's [ The third and who is the preceptor? So, there is no distinction between them also, His sermon is also not acceptable, because, who knows whether it is true or false? What more (should be said)? Tirthankaras, their principles, the other (future) world, heaven, Final Emancipation-all this is uncertain according to you. Then, what is the use of accepting diksa ( at all ) ? If you believe in the Tirthankara and if you take everything as existing on the authority of His words, why should bowing to an ascetic oe not accepted on the same authority ? (2372-2376) TIkA-77-78-79-80-81 sarvA apiprakaTArthAH / navaraM " jaiNA vi na saMvAso" ityAdinA'bhyupagamavirodho darzitaH / atha santi jinavarendrAH, tadvavacanasiddhatvAt teSAM tadvacanAdeva ca sarvasyApi paraloka - svarga - mokSAdeH pratipattirbhavati; evaM tarhi tadvacanAdeva yativandanamapi kasmAd na saMmatam ? iti ||2372||2373 / 2374 // 2375 // 2376 // D. C. If according to you, Tirthaikara exists, and if you' believe that the existence of all objects including, paraloka (future world ) Svarga ( heaven ) Moksa ( Final Emancipation) ete. is approved by him, there is no reason why the act of bowing to ascetics be not approved by him. 77-81 (2372-2376). Moreover, jaI jiNamayaM pamANaM muNi tti to bajjhakaraNaparisuddhaM / devaM pi vanyamANo visuddhabhAvo visuddho ti // 82 // 2377 // 2. Jai Jinamayam pamanam muni to bajjhakarana-parisuddhami ! Devan pi vandanano visuddhabhavo visuddho tti (2377) [ yadi jinamataM pramANaM muniriti tato bAhyakaraNaparizuddham / devamapi vandamAno vizuddhabhAvo vizuddha iti ||82||2377|| 82. Yadi jinamatam pramanam muniriti tato bahyakarana pari suddham | Devamapi vandamano visuddhabhavo visuddha iti (2377 ) ]

Page #109
Vada ] Nihnavavada Trans. 82 If you take the principles of the Tirthankaras as authentic, then even, he who bows to a god (appearing as ) purified by external means apprehending him sincerely as a sage, will be guiltless (2377). TIkA- 82 yadi jinamataM bhavatAM pramANam, tarhi (C 'muniH" ityanayA buddhayA Alaya - vihArAdi bAhyakaraNaparizuddhaM devamapi - amaramapi vandamAno, vizuddhabhAvo bhaved doSarahito vizuddha eva / uktaM cAgame paramarahassamisINaM samattagaNipiDagabhaviyasArANaM / pariNAmiyaM pamANaM nicchayamavalaMbamANANaM // 1 // ityAdi ||2377|| D. C. If you really follow the principles of the Tirthankaras, you shall have to accept even those who bow to a god who appears purified only externally on account of alaya, vihara etc. taking him to be a sage with a sincere heart, as guiltless. For, it is said in the Agamas-~ "Parama rahassamisinam samatta ganipidaga bhaviya saranam Parinamiyam pamanam nicchayamavalambamananam :85: 39 [ It is a great secret of sages who ( look upon ) the ( gomlike ) treasure-box of the preceptor (the entire (collection) of the twelve Angas as auspicious wealth, and a trust worthy authority for ascetics who depend on Niscaya ] 82 (2377) Or, jaha vA so jarU vo diTTho taha kittiyA surA anne ? | tumbhehiM diTThapuSvA savvasthApacao jaM bhe // 83 // 2378 // 83. Jaha va so jairuvo dittho taha kittiya sura anne ? | Tubbhehim ditthapuvva savvatthapaccao jam bhe ( 2378) [ yadi vA sa yatirUpo dRSTastathA kiyantaH surA anye ? yuSmAbhirdRSTapUrvAH sarvanApratyayo yad bhavatAm ||83||2378|| For Private Personal Use Only

Page #110
: 85 : Jinabhadra Gani's [The third 83. Yadi va sa yatirupo drist astatha kiyantah sura anye ? Yusmabhirdristapurvan sarvatrapratyayo yad bhavatam (2374) Trans. 83. Like that ( god ) in the form of an ascetic seen by you, how many more gods were seen by you in the past, that you did not put trust in anything ? (2378) TIkA- 83 'vA' ityathavA, yathA''ryASADhadevo yatirUpadharo'tra dRSTastathA kiyantaH surAstato'nye bhavadbhirdRSTapUrvAH, yadetAvanmAtreNApi sarvatrApratyayo " me " bhavatAm 1 / na hi kadAcit kathaJcit kacidAzcaryakalpe kasmiMzcit tathAvidhe dRSTe sarvatra tathA bhAvAzaGkA yujyata iti bhAvaH / tasmAd vyavahAranayamAzritya yuktaM bhavatAmanyonyavandanAdikam / uktaM ca nicchayao dubheyaM ko bhAve kammi vaTTae samaNo / saMvavahAro ya jujjaha jo puvvahio caritammi // 1 // ityAdi // 2378 || D. C. In addition to the preceptor Asadha-deva seen by you, in disguise of an ascetic, how many more gods did you see in the past that you entertain doubt about everything? It is not really worthy of you to entertain doubt like that when some one is seen like that at some time, in some way. Even from practical point of view, it is worthy of you to respect each other. For, it is said - Nicchayao dunneyam ko bhave kammi vattae samano Samvavaharo ya jujjai jo puvvatthio carittammi || [It is difficult to know definitely as to which ascetic lives in which Bhava (inclination of mind). But, one who is preeminent in character, is fit from practical point of view. ] 83 (2378) In support of the same argument, the author continueschaumatthasamayacajjA babahAranayANusAriNI savvA / taM taha samAyaraMto sujjhai sabbo bisuddha maNo ||84|| 2379 // For Private Personal Use Only

Page #111
Vada] Nihinavavada :87: saMvavahAro vi balI jamasuddhaM pi gahiyaM suyavihIe / koveina savvaNU vaMdai ya kayAi chaumatthaM // 85 // 2380 // nicchayavavahAranaovaNIyamihaM sAsaNaM jiNidANaM / egayaparicAo micchaM saMkAdao je ya // 86 // 2381 // jaha jiNamayaM pavajahaM to mA vavahAranayamayaM muyaha / vavahAraparicAe titthuccheo jao'vassaM // 87 // 2382 // 84. Chaumattha samaya cajja vavaharanayanusarini savval Tam taha samayaranto sujjhai savvo visuddhamano (2379) 85. Samvavaharo vi bali jamasuddham pi gahiyam suyavihie i Kovei na. savvannu vandai ya kayai chaumattham (2380) 86. Nicchaya vavahara naovaniyamiha sasanam Jinindanam 1 Egayapariccao niiccham sankadao je ya (2381) 87. Jaha Jinamayam pavajjaha to ma vavahara naya mayam muyaha i Vavaharapariccae titthuccheo jao' vassam. (2382) [chamasthasamayacaryA vyavahAranayAnusAriNI sarvA / tAM tathA samAcaran zudhyati sarvo vizuddhamanAH // 842379 // saMvyavahAro'pi balI yavazuddhamapi gRhItaM zrutavidhinA / kopayati na sarvajJo vandate ca kadAcicchamastham // 85 // 2380 // nizcayavyavahAranayopanItamiha sAsanaM jinedrANAm / ekataraparityAgo mithyAtvaM zaGkAdayo ye ca // 86 // 2381 // yadi jinamataM prapadyadhvaM tato mA vyavahAranayamataM muJcata / vyavahAraparityAge tIrthocchedo yato'vazyam / / 87 // 2382 // 84. Charlmasthasamaya carya vyavaharanayanusarini sarva i Tam tatha samacaran sudhyati sarvo visndahamanah (2379)

Page #112
: 88: Jinabhadra Gani's [ The third 85. Samvyavaharo'pi bali yadasuddhamapi grihitam srutavidhina | Kepayati na sarvagno vandate ca kadacicchadmastham (2380) 86. Niscayavyavahara nayopanitamiha sasanam Jinendranam / Ekatara parityago mithyatvam sankadayo ye ca (2381) 87. Yadi Jinamatam prapadyadhvam tato ma vyavaharamaya matam muncata | Vyavahara parityage Tirthocchelo yato'vasyam (2382) ] Trans 84-85-86-87. The whole routine of the engagements of an ascetic incognito is based upon practical point of view One who follows it sincerely becomes entirely pureminded. Mutual intercourse (of respecting each other) is also practicable. For, in case an impure (object) is apprehended by the commandment of holy writ, or in case if one bows to an ascetic incognito, the Omniscient does not disallow it. The commandment of Tirthankaras is based upon both the positive and practical view-points. It is useless to leave either of them and entertain doubts etc. (So), if you accept the commandment of Tirthankaras, then do not abandon the theory based upon practical point of view. Because, in abandoning the practical point of view, the authority of the Tirtha (Sri Sangha) itself will be exterminated (2379-2382 ) TIkA-84-85-86-87 - catakho'pi sugamAH / navaraM " koveItyAdi na kopayati nAmamANIkaroti na pariharati bhuGkta ityarthaH / "saMkAdau ityAdi" yespi zaGkA - kAGkSAdayaste hi mithyAtvamiti saMbandhaH // 2379 // 2380 // 2381 // 2382 // Then, iya te nAsaggAhaM muyaMti jAhe bahuM pi bhaNNaMtA / tA saMghaparicattA rAyagihe nivatiNA nAuM ||88|| 2383|| balabhaddeNagyAyA bhaNaMti sAvaya traM tavassi tti / mA kuru saMkramasaMkAruhesu bhaNie bhaNai rAyA ||89|| 2384|| For Private Personal Use Only ""

Page #113
:89: Vada ] Nihnayavada ko jANai ke tubbhe kiM corA cAriA abhimara tti| saMjayarUvacchaNNA ajamahaM me vivAemi // 90 // 2385 // nANa-cariyAhiM najjai samaNo'samaNo va kIsa jaannto| taM sAvaya ! saMdehaM karesi bhaNie nivo bhaNai // 11 // 2386 // tumbhaM ciya na parupparaM vIsaMbho sAhayo tti kaha majasaM / nANa-cariyAhiM jAyai corANa vi kiM na tA saMti ? // 9 // 2387 // uvauttio bhayAca ya pavvaNNA savvamayamasaggAhe / nivakhAmiyAbhigaMtuM gurumUlaM te paDikaMtA // 9 // 2388 // 88. Iya te nasaggaham muyanti jahe bahum pi bhannantar Ta sanghapariccatta Rayagihe nivatina naum (2383) 89. Balabhaddenagghaya bhananti savaya vam tavassi ttis Ma kuru sankamasankaruhesu bhaaie bhanai raya (2384) 90. Ko janai ke tubbhe kim cora caria abhimara tti Sanjayaravacchanna ajjamaham bhe vivaemi (2385) 91. Nana-cariyahim najjai samano'samano va kisa jananto | Tam savaya! sandeham karesi bhanie nivo bhanai (2386) 92. Tubbham ciya na parupparam visambho sahavo tti kaha majjhami Nana-cariyahim jayai corana vi kim na ta santi (2387) 93. Uvauttio bhayacca ya payvanna savvamayamasaggahe Nivakhamiyabhigantum gurumulam te paaikkanta (2388) [iti te nAsadgrahaM muzcanti yAvad bahvapi bhaNyamAnAH / tAvat saMghaparityaktA rAjagRhe nRpatinA jJAtvA // 8 // 2383 // balabhadreNAghrAtA bhaNanti zrAvaka ! vayaM tapasvina iti / mA kuru zaGkAmazaGkAruheSu bhaNite bhaNati rAjA // 89 // 2384 // ko jAnAti ke yUyaM kiM caurAzcArikA abhimarA iti / maMyamarUpacchannA adyAhaM bhavato vyApAdayAmi // 90 // 2385 //

Page #114
* 90: Jinabhadra Gani's The third jJAna-caryAbhyAM jJAyate zramaNo'zramaNo vA kasmAjAnan / tvaM zrAvaka ! saMdehaM karoSi bhaNite nRpo bhaNati // 91 // 2386 // yuSmAkameva na parasparaM visrambhaH sAdhava iti kathaM mama / jJAna-caryAbhyAM jAyate caurANAmapi kiM na te staH 1 // 92 // 2387 // upapattito bhayAcca prapannAH sarvamatamasadgrAhe / nRpakSAmitA abhigatya gurumUlaM te prtikraantaaH||13||2388|| 88. Iti te nasadgraham muncanti yavad bahvapi bhanyamanah 1 Tavat sanghaparityakta Rajagrihe nripatina jnatva (2383) 89. Balabhadrenaghrata bhananti sravaka! vayam tapasvina iti i Ma kuru sankamasaiikaruhesu bhanite bhanati raja (2384) 90. Ko janati ke yayam kim caurascarika abhimara iti i Samyamarapacchanna arlyahani bhavato vyspadayami (2385) 91. Jnana-caryabhyam jnayate sramano'sramano va kasmajjanan I Tvam Sravaka ! sandebam karosi bhanite nripo bhanati (2386) Yusmakameva na parasparam visrambhah sadhava iti katham mama l Jnana-caryabhyam jayate caurananapi kim na te stah? (2387) 93. Upapattito bhayacca prapannah sarvamatamasadgrahe 1 Nripaksamita abhigatya gurumalam te pratikrantah (2388)] Trans. 88-89-90-91-92-93. When they did not give up their mischievous belief in spite of their being persuaded in many ways, as stated above, they were expelled from the Sangha (Congregation ). When called by king Balabhadra, who had come to know (of their arrival) at Rajagriha, they said "O Sravaka! We are ascetics. Please do not suspect things that are beyond suspicion." The king replied-"Who knows as to who you are ? Who knows whether you are thieves, spies or burglars, in disguise of ascetics? I shall kill you to-day." " In spite of your knowing that an ascetic or otherwise, is known by (his ) knowledge and character, Osravaka! why

Page #115
Vada ] Nihnavavada :91: do you suspect us ?" When thus told, the king replied :"When you yourselves do not rely upon each other that you are (ascetics ), how can I trust you merely from knowledge and character ? Could they not be (found ) in thieves also ? (Thus persuaded) by means of trick and fear, (at last) they resorted to the right belief. Having abandoned their wrong belief, and having forgiven the king ( for his apparently harsh act), all of them returned to the original (school) of their preceptor (2383-2388 ). frefil-66-68-80-88-82-83 Haf spreytiraf:, ATAT I gari nRpatinA balamadreNa "te AgatAH" iti jJAtvA''ghrAtA AhUtAH "ke yUyam ?" iti pRSTAzca bhaNanti-he zrAvaka ! ityAdi / "nANa-cariyAhiM ti" jJAna-kriyAbhyAM yo bhavatAmapi "sAdhavaH" iti vikhambhaH parasparaM nAsti sa tAbhyAM kathaM mama jAyate / api ca, kiM te kRtrime jJAna-kriye caurANAmapi na sto-na bhvtH| iti // 2383 // 2384 // 2385 // 2386 // 2387 // 2388 // D. C. When king Balabhadra came to know that the Nihnavas had come to Rajagriha, he called them, and asked them" Who are you?" "O Sravaka ! We are ascetics etc." was the reply. With the threatening of killing them by crushing under the feet of elephants, the king said "Since you do not trust each other as ascetics on the standards of jnana and kriya, how can I take you to be ascetics on those standards ? Outward jna. na and kriya could be found in thieves as well." On hearing such words, they came to know their mistake and resorted to their original school of thought, abandoning their wrong theories for ever. End of the Discussion with the Third (type of) Nihnava,

Page #116
Chapter V caturtha nihnava vaktavyatA Discussion with the Fourth Nihnava. bIsA do vAsasayA taiyA siddhiM gayassa vIrassa / sAmucchedayavihI mihilapurIe samuppannA // 14 // 2389 // 94. Visa do vasasays taiya Siddhim gayassa. Virassa | Samuccheiyaditthi Mihilapurie samuppanna (2389) [viMzatyA dve varSazate tadA siddhiM gatasya vIrasya / sAmucchedikadRSTimithilApuryA samutpannA // 14 // 2389 // 94. Vimsatya dve varsasate tada Siddhim gatasya Virasya | SamucchedikadristirMithilapuryam samutpanna (2389)] Trans. 94. Theory of Samucchedikas came into existence in ( the city of) Mithila, two hundred and twenty years after Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira had attained Nirvana 2389. TIkA-94 viMzatyuttaraM varSazatadvayaM tadA siddhiM gatasya vIrasthAsIt / tato'. trAntare sAmucchedikadRSTimithilApuryA samutpanneti // 2389 // Here is the story of the production of this theorymihilAe lacchighare mahagiri koDinna Asamitte ya / neuNiyANuppavAe rAyagihe khaMDarakkhA ya // 95 // 2390 // 95. Mihilae Lacchighare Mahagiri Kodinna Asamitte yat Neuniyanupparae Rayagihe khandarakkha ya (2390)

Page #117
Vada ] Nihnavavada :98: [mithilAyAM lakSmIgRhe mahAgiriH kauNDinya ashvmitr| naipuNikamanupravAde rAjagRhe khaNDarakSAzca // 95 // 2390 // 95. Mithilayam Laksmigrihe Mahagirih Kaundinya Asvamitrascal Naipunikamanupravade Rajagrihe khandaraksasca (2890)] Trans. 95. There was (an Acarya named) Mahagiri in ( the caitya-temple of an Yaksa-named ) Laxmigriha in (the city of) Mithila. There were Kaundinya, and Asvamitra also. (While studying) the Naipunika (portion) of Anupravadal they. resorted to the principle of Samucchedas. And, Khandaraksas brought them to the right path in (the city of) Rajagriha. 2390. TIkA-95 mithilAnagayAM lakSmIgRhe caitye mahAgirisUrINAM kauNDinyo nAma ziSyaH sthitH| tasyApyazvamitro nAma ziSyo'nupravAdAbhidhAnapUrve naipuNika nAma vastu paThati sma / tatra cchiAcchedanakanayavaktavyatAyAmAlApakA:samAyAvAH, tadyathA-"paDappanasamayaneraiyA savve vocchijissaMti, evaM jAva vemANiya ci, evaM bIyAisamaesu vi vttvvN"| atra tasya cikitsA jAtA, tadyathA-pratyutpabasamayanArakAH sarve'pi tAvad vyavacchedaM prApsyanti, tatazca kutaH sukRta-duSkRta karmaphalavedanAm , utpAdAnantaraM sarvajIvAnAM nAzAt ? iti / evamAdikhamati. kalpitaM prarUpayan vakSyamANabhASyayuktibhirguruNA prajJApyamAno'pi yAvat kathamapi na prajJApyate tata uddhAyya saMghanAyaH kRtaH samucchedavAdaM prarUpayan kAmpilyapuranagaraM rAjagRhAparanAmakaM gataH / tatra ca khaNDarakSAbhidhAnAH zrAvakAH Asana, te zulakapAlAH / taizca te nihavAH samAgatA vijJAtA mArayituM caarndhaaH| tato mItairazcamitrAdimiste proktAH-"vayaM na jAnIma:-zrAvakA yUyam tarikamasmAn zramaNAn sato mArayatha ?" / tatastairuktam-"ye zramaNAste yuSmasidAntena 1. Like purvas, such as Virya-pravada, Asti-Nasti pravada, Jnana-pravada, Satya-pravada, Atma-pravada etc., Anu-pravada seems to belong to one of them. It is an independent parva, treating of Kriya, Jnana etc... 2. Neuniya or Naipunika is the name of a chapter in the said Anu-pravada purva.

Page #118
: 94: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fourth Hypoat, mi a TREAT: Harala ARATH: " | Tarital mit nijAgrahaH, saMbuddhAzca dattamithyAduSkRtA gatA gurupAdamUla iti // 2390 // D. C. Mahagiri-sari the preceptor of the Laksmigriha caitya in Mithila, had a pupil named Kaundinya, who, in turn had a pupil named Asvamitra. While studying the Naipunika chapter of the Anu-pravada parva, Asvamitra came across the following statement in course of a discussion of the principles of chinna and chedanaka ( Destroyed and destroyer): " Paduppanna samayaneraiya savve vocchijjissanti Evam java Vemaniya tti, evam biyaisamayesu vi vattavvam." [ All the Narakas (inhabitants of hell) of the present convention will perish, and so will all the deities. The same should be understood of those of other conventions as well. ] On reading this, Asvamitra conjectured that if all the Narakas of the present convention were to perish, all other living beings would also meet destruction, as soon as they were born. Consequently, they would not be able to attain the rewards of good and evil deeds. In this way, Asvamitra began to draw conclusions on false conjectures. His preceptor (Kaundinya) tried to persuade him by means of various tricks ( which will be told hereafter ), but Asvamitra was not convinced at all. He was, then, expelled from the Sangha ( Congregation). He, then, came to the city of Rajagriha (or Kampilyapuri). There the sravakas khan. daraksas, who were posted as customs watchmen, began to beat Asvamitra and his fellow-Nihnavas all of a sudden. "Do you not know us? Why do you beat us even though you are sravakas " said the Nihnavas. "Those that are sramanas have already perished according to your theory. You may be some other people like thieves etc. and hence, we are beating you," was the reply. Being afraid of this, they gave up their false notion, came to the right path and returned to the original school of their preceptor, after having excused the khandaraksas for the apparently harsh act. 95 (2390).

Page #119
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 95: Now, the author explains the above-mentioned account of Niryukti in details - neuNa maNuppavAe ahijjao vatthumAsa mittassa / egasamayAivoccheya suttao nAsapaDivattI // 96 // 2391 // upAyAnaMtarao savvaM ciya savvahA viNAsi tti / guruvayaNameganayamayameyaM micchaM na savvamayaM // 97 // 2392 // 96. Neunamanuppavae ahijjao vatthumasamittassa | Egasamayai-voccheyasuttao nasapadivatti (2391) 97. Uppayanantarao savvam ciya savvaha vinasi tti | Guruvayanameganayamayameyam miccham na savvamayam (2392) [ naipuNamanupravAde'dhIyAnasya vastvazvamitrasya / ekasamayAdivyavacchedasUtrato nAzapratipattiH // 96 // 2391 // utpAdAnantarataH sarvameva sarvathA vinAzIti // guruvacanamekanayamatametad mithyA na sarvamatam // 97 // 2392 // 96. Naipunamanupravade'dhiyanasya vastvasvamitrasya / Ekasamayadi-vyavacchedasutrato nasapratipattih (2391) 97. Utpadanantaratah sarvameva sarvatha vinasiti / Guruvacanamekanayamatametad mithya na sarvamatam (2392) Trans. 96-97. While studying the Naipunika chapter in the Anupravada (parva). Asvamitra derived the theory of (entire) destruction viz-that everything is entirely perishable after its production from the rule (laying down) the destruction (of an object) at one time etc. It is the opinion of the preceptor that it is false, because it is approved only by one point of view but not by all. ( 2391-2392 ). TIkA - 96-97 anupravAdapUrvamadhyagataM naipuNaM vastvadhIyAnasyAzvamitrasya pUrvoktAdekasamayAdivyavacchedasUtrAd nAzapratipattirutpannA / ko'rthaH 1 / ityAha"utpAdAnantarameva sarva vastu sarvathA vinazvararUpam" ityevaMbhUto bodhaH samutpannaH / For Private Personal Use Only

Page #120
:98 Jinabhadra Gani's [The fourth atra prati-vidhAnArtha guruvacanam- nanu pratisamayavinAzivaM vastUnAm ityetadekasyaiva kSaNakSayavAdina RjusUtranayasya matam , na tu sarvanayamatam , tato mithyAtvameveti // 2391 // 2392 // D. C. While studying the Naipunika portion of the Anupravada parva, Asvamitra derived a theory from the rule laying down the theory of destruction of objects of one convention that all objects of one convention vanish entirely-in all respects-as soon as they are produced. The preceptor persuaded him not to form such a wrong notion, and said "The theory of destructibility of objects at every moment, is laid down by the ksanaksaya-vadins only from one point of view viz-Rijusutra nayas, but it is not true from all points of view. So, it is false. Why is it Mithatva? na hi savvahA viNAsoddhApajjAyamettanAsammi / sa-para-pajAyANaMtadhammaNo vatthuNo jutto // 98 // 2393 // 98. Na hi savvaha vinaso'ddhapajjayamettanasammil Sa-para-pajjayanantadhammano vatthuno jutto (2393) [na hi sarvathA vinaasho'ddhaapryaaymaatrnaashe| sva-para-paryAyAnantadharmaNo vastuno yuktaH // 98 // 2393 // 98. Na hi sarvatha vinaso'ddhaparyayamatranase i Sva-para-paryayanantadharmano vastuno yuktah (2393) ] ___ Trans. 98. Merely at the end of a ( particular) condition of time, it is not proper to admit entire destruction of an object that has innumerable qualities on account of its own, as well as, of other's. paryaya (form) 2393. TIkA-98 na hi sarvathaiva vastuno vinAzo yuktaH / ka sati ? / ityAhaahAparyAyamAtranAze / tatrehAddhA nArakAdInAmutpatti-prathamAdisamayaH, sa eva 3. According to this system of philosophy an object is perceived in its present condition only.

Page #121
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 97 : paryAyamAnaM tasya nAzo'pagamastasmin sati / kathaMbhUtasya vastunaH ? ityAhakha-para-paryAyAnantadharmakasya / idamuktaM bhavati-yasminnera samaye tadnArakavastu prathamasamayanArakatvena samucchidyate tasminneva samaye dvitIyasamayanArakatvenotpadyate, jIvadravyatayA tvavatiSThate / ato yadi nAmAddhAparyAyamAtramucchinnam, tataHsarvasyApi vastunaH samucchede kimAyAtam , anantaparyAyAtmakasya vastuna ekaparyAyamAtrocchede sarvocchedasya dUraviruddhatvAt ? iti // 2393 // D. C. It is not at all proper to accept the entire destruction of an object merely because a particular condition ( say, bhata paryaya or past condition) of timeis over. Every object is possessed of innumerable qualities, say for example, whenever the Narakas perish as Narakas of the first condition (paryaya ) of time, they do not perish entirely but they are produced immediately as Narkas of the second condition of time, and thus continue to stay on as living matter. It is not proper, therefore, to believe that an object which has innumerable paryayas or forms at different conditions of time, vanishes entirely as soon as a particular paryaya or condition of time is over. 98 (2393) aha suttAu tti maI sutte naNu sAsayaM pi nidi8 / vatthu davvahAe asAsayaM pajjayahAe // 99 // 2394 // 99. Aha suttau tti mai sutte nanu sasayam pi nidittham | Vatthum davvatthae a-sasayam pajjayatthae (2394) [atha sUtrAditi matiH sUtre nanu zAzvatamapi nirdiSTam / vastu dravyArthatayA'zAzvataM paryAyArthatayA // 99 / 2394 // 99. Atha sutraditi matih satre nanu sasvatamapi nirdistami Vastu.dravyarthataya'sasvatam paryayarthataya (2394)). 4. According to Jaina Terminology, the word 'Addha' signifies Time. Acldhaparyaya signifies the paryaya or condition of time. e. g. Varlaniana paryaya ( Present condition) Bhuta paryaya (Past condition ) anil Bhavisya paryaya (Future condition).

Page #122
:98: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fourth ____ Trans. 99 If your belief is based upon (the afore-said) rule, it is also laid down in the rule that an object is imperishable by (virtue of its ) form 2394. TIkA-99 artha pUrvoktAlApakarUpAt sUtrAt sUtraprAmANyAt pratisamayaM sarvathA vastUcchedaH pratipAdyata iti tava matiH / nanu yadi sUtraM tava pramANam , tarhi sUtre dravyArthatayA zAzvatamapi vastvanyatroktameva, paryAyArthatayaiva cAzAzvatam , tathA ca sUtram-"neraiyANaM bhaMte ! kiM sAsayA, asAsayA ? / goyamA ! siya sAsayA, siya asaasyaa| se keNa?NaM / goyamA ! davbaTTayAe sAsayA, bhAvachAyAe asAsayA" iti // 2394 // D.C. According to you, an, object should be taken as entirely perished at every moment on the authority of the rule referred to befores. Now, if you take the sutra as an authority on this point there is another sutra also which describes an object as sasvata or imperishable by virtue of its being matter, and vinasvara or perishable by virtue of its form The satra runs as follows :Q. "Neraiyanam bhante ! kim sasaya a-sasaya ? A. Goyama ! siya sasaya, siya a-sasaya.. 5. Vide verse 2390. 6. The following alapaka is from Bhagvati Sutra :Q." Neraiya nam bhante ! kim sasaya a-sasaya ? A. Goyama ! siya sasaya siya a-sasaya. Q. Se kenatthenam bhante ! javaevam vuccai " Neraiya siya sasaya, siya a-sasaya ? A. Goyama! Avvocchitti nayatthayae sasaya, vocchittinayatt ha yae asasaya. Se tena-atthenam java siya sasaya siya a-sasaya.

Page #123
Vada] Nihnavavada :99: Q. Se kenatthenam ? A. Goyama ! Davvatthae sasaya, Bhavatthae 8-sasaya. [Q. O Lord ! are the Narakas perishable or imperishable ? A. O Gautama ! they might be perishable, as well as, imperish able also. Q. How could that be ? A. O Gautama ! they are imperishable on account of their __matter, and perishable so far as their form is concerned.] And, ittha pi na savvanAso samayAivisesaNaM jao'bhihiyaM / iharA na savvanAse samayAivisesaNaM juttaM // 100 // 2395 / / ko paDhamasamayanAraganAse bitisamayanArago nAma / na suro ghaDo abhAvo va hoi jaha savvahA naaso?||101||2396|| 100. Ittha vi na savvanaso samayaivisesanam jao'bhihiyami Ihara na savvanase samayaivisesanam juttam (2395) 101. Ko padhamasamayanaraganase bitisanayanarago nama l Na suro ghado abhavo va hoi jai savvaha naso ? (2396) [atrApi na sarvanAzaH samayAdivizeSaNaM yato'mihitam / itarathA na sarvanAze samayAdivizeSaNaM yuktam // 100 // 2395 // kAprathamasamayanArakanAze dvitIyasamayanArako nAma / na suro ghaTo'bhAvo vA bhavati yadi sarvathA nAzaH // 10 // 2396 // [ Bhagavati Satra Sataka 7 Udesaka 3, last portion] Gujarati Translation page 15 Part III. ] It will be noted on comparision that though both the alapakas differ slightly in readings, there is not the slightest difference between the two, so far ar the meanings of both the ala. pakas are concerned. ]

Page #124
: 100 Jinabhadra Gani's [The fourth 100. Atrapi na sarvanasah samayadivisesanam yato'bhihitani i Itaratha na sarvanase samayadivisesanam yuktam (2395) 101. Kah prathamasamayanarakanase dvitiyasamayanarako nama | Na suro ghato'bhavo va bhavati ya li sarvatha nasah ? (2396)] Trans. 100-101. Here also, since adjectives like samaya etc. are told, entire destruction could not (fit in). (For) otherwise, the adjectives like samaya etc. would be useless in (case of) entire destruction. How could a naraka of the second moment come into existence when the naraka of the first moment has (entirely) perished ? If there were entire destruction, there would be nothing like god, ghata or a-bhava (non-existence ) 2395-2396. TIkA-100-101 atrApi "prathamasamayanArakA vyavacchedaM yAsyanti" iti sUtre na sarvanAzaH sarvAtmanA nAzo gamyate / kutaH ? ityAha yato yasmAt samayAdivizeSaNamihitam, tato na sarvathA nAzo'tra gamyate, kintu prathamasamayanArakA vyavacchetsyanti / ko'rthH| prathamasamayanArakatvena vinazyanti / evaM dvitIyAdisamayanArakA api dvitIyAdisamayanArakatvenaiva vinaGkhyanti na tu sarvathA, dravyArthatayA zAzvatatvAt / itarathA sarvanAze'bhiyate prathamasamayAdivizeSaNaM na yuktaM syAditi / kathamayuktam ? ityAha-"ko paDhametyAdi" prathamasamayotpabhAnAM hi nArakANAM sarvathA vinAze ko nAma dvitIya-tRtIyAdisamayanArakaH ?! avasthitasyaiva hi kasyacit prathama-dvitIya-tRtIyAdisamayotpannavizeSaNaM yujyte| yadi tu sarvathA nAzaH tarhi prathamasamayotpananArakasya niranvayanAzena naSTatvAd dvitIyasamayotpano nAraka iti vyapadeSTuM kathaM yujyate, yannArakAt sarvathA vilakSatvAdasau suro ghaTo'bhAvo vA nocyate ? / surAdivyapadeze ca na dvitiiyaadismynaarkaaH| tasmAt prathama-dvitIya-tRtIyAdisamayotpannA iti vizeSaNaM kathazcidavasthitasyaiva nArakAyujyata ityasminnapi sUtre na nArakAdeH sarvocchedaH pratipAdyate / iti nirmUla eva nijAzubhakarmavipAkajanitastavaiSa vyAmoha iti // 239 // 2396 // D, C. In the satra laying down that the narakas of the first moment will meet destruction, entire destruction is not, at

Page #125
Vada ] Nihnavavada :101: all, implied. Adjectives viz first moment, second moment eto. mentioned therein are significant." By the expression that "Narakas of the first nioment will iaeet destruction," entire destruction of the narakas is not meant but it only means that the narakas of the first moment lose the property of being narakas at that time. Similarly those of the second moment lose the property of being narakas at the second moment and so on. But narakas would never perish entirely on account of their matter being indestructible, Thus, if the theory of entire destruction is admitted, adjectives such as prathama samaya, dvitiyasamaya eto. would not be justified. If the narakas that were produced at previous moments had perished entirely along with those moments, how could narakas of the second moment, and those of the third moment etc. come into existence? So, the adjectives viz prathama samayotpanna ( produced in the first moment) dvitiya samayotpanna (produced in the second moment) eto. would be justified only if the narakas were taken as the existent beings. In spite of all this, if you hold the theory of entire destruction, a naraka produced at the first moment, would perish entirely, and it would not leave any scope for the production of a naraka of the second moment. And if a naraka perishes entirely with the first moment, that which is produced at the second moment would be definitely different from the naraka ( itself ), and hence it would never be possible to recognize, a sura, a ghata or a-bhava from it. This proves that adjectives such as prathama samayutpanna, dvitiya samayotpanna eto. could be attributed only to an existing being and to none else. Thus, the sotra mentioned before, does not, in any way, imply entire destruction of narakas, at the end of a particular period of time. It is only due to futile embarassment produced in you, on account of your (past) misdeeds, that you are led to hold suoh wrong notions. 100-101 (2895-2396).

Page #126
: 102: Jinabhadra Gani's [ The fourth ahaba samANuppattI samANasaMtANao maI hokhA / ko savvA viNAse saMtANo kiM va sAmaNNaM ? ||12|| 2397 // 102. Ahava samanuppatti samanasantanao mai hojja | Ko gavvaha vinase santano kim va samarnam ? ( 2397). [ athavA samAnotpattiH samAnasaMtAnato matirbhavet / kaH sarvadhA vinAze saMtAnaH kiM vA sAmAnyam ? || 102 || 2397 // 102. Athava samanotpattih samanasantanato matirbhavet | Kah sarvatha vinase santanah kim va samayam ? ( 2397 ) ] Trans. 102. Or, the belief may be that (there is) production of similar (narakas) on account of similar offsprings. (But) in (case of ) absolute destruction, what is the utility of (even) an offspring or similarity? (2397). TIkA - 102 athavaivaMbhUtA matiH parasya bhaved, yaduta - nArakAdInAM pratisamayamaparAparasamAnakSaNotpattirbhavati / tatastayA samAnakSaNotpasyA yaH samAnakSaNasaMtatirUpaH saMtAnastasmAt saMtAnAt saMtAnamAzritya nArakAdeH kathaJcid dhaumyamantareNApi prathamadvitIyAdisamayotpannavizeSaNamupapadyata eva / atrottaramAha " ko samvahetyAdi " / nanu sarvathA vinAze samucchede'GgIkriyamANe kaH kasya saMtAnaH, kiM vA kasya samAnam / iti nirnibandhanamevedamucyate / na hi niranvayavinAze'vasthitAH kecanApi nArakAdikSaNAH santi, yAnAzrityedamucyate - " ayameSAM santAnaH, idaM cAsya samAnam" iti ||2397 // D. C. Asvamitra :-Since narakas etc. are created at similar moments one after the other, their santanas are also created in the form of productions of similar moments, and by virtue of those santanas, adjectives such as prathama samayotpanna etc. would be justified even without any object being taken as existent. Acarya:-When you accept the theory of entire destruction, who would be taken as whose offspring? And what would be

Page #127
Vada] Nihnavavada :103: similar to what ? For, in case of entire destruction, there would not exist any moment of production of narakas etc. by virtue of which, we can say that "This is their offspring or that is similar to this." 102 (2397) Because, saMtANiNo na bhiNNo jai saMtANo na nAma sNtaanno| aha bhiNNo na kakhaNio khaNio vA jai na sNtaanno|| 1.3 // 2398 // 103. Santanino na bhinno jai santano na nama santanor Aha bhinmo na kkhanio khanio va jai na santano. (2398) [saMtAnino na bhilo yadi saMtAno na nAma saMtAnaH / atha bhinnona kSaNikaH kSaNiko vA yadi na sNtaanH||10||2398|| 103. Santanino na bhinno yadi santano na nama santanahI Atha bhinno na ksanikah ksaniko va yadi na santanah (2398)] Trans. 103. If an offspring is not different from (its ) generator, it is not an offsping. And, if (it is) different, it would not be momentary; (for) if it is momentary, it would not be an offspring. 2398, TIkA-103 yadi saMtAnibhyo na bhinnaH kintvabhinnaH saMtAnaH, sahi na nAmAsau saMtAnaH, saMtAnibhyo'nAntarabhUtatvAt , tatkharUpavat / aya saMtAnimyo minaH saMtAnaH, tarhi kSaNiko'sau neSTavyaH, avasthitatvAmyupagamAt / aba kSaNiko'sAviSyate tarhi nAsau saMtAnaH, saMtAnivat / tatasta eva saMtAnAmAvapakSoktA doSA iti / tadeva sarvathocchede'bhyupagamyamAne saMtAna utpacata iti bhAvitam // 2398 // D. C. If a santana is not different from a santanin (generator) it would not be called a santana, as it wonld not possess a form independent of santanin. And if it is different from Santa

Page #128
* 104: Jinablialra Gani's [The fourth nin, it would not be taken as ksanika or transitory, because by accepting it as ksanika, its state of retention would be accepted. On the other hand, if a santana is taken as ksanika, it will no longer be existent like santanin anil difficulties arising from the state of non-existence of santana would crop up. So, there is no scope for the santana to exist in the milst of absolute destruction. 103 (2398) Continuing the same argument, the author states :--- puvvANugame samayA hunna na sA savvahA viNAsammi / aha sA na savvanAso teNa samaM vA naNu khapuppha // 104 // 2399 / / 104. Puvvanugame sanaya hujja na sa savvaha vinasamimi Aha sa na savvanaso tona samam va nanu khapuppham (2399) [pUrvAnugame samatA bhaved na sA sarvathA vinAze / atha sA na sarvanAzastena samaM vA nanu khapuSpam // 104 // 2399 // 104. Porvanugame samatabhaved na sa sarvatha vinase i Atha sa na sarvanasastena samam va nanu khapuspam (2399)] Trans. 104. Similarity is (possible ) only in (case of) its connection with the former (moment ), but not in the midst of) all-pervading destruction. And if it exists, there would be nothing like all-pervading destruction. Or else, even khapuspa would become similar to it. 2399. TIkA-104 yadi pUrvakSaNasyottarakSaNe kenApi rUpeNAnugamo'nvayo bhavet tadA tatrAnugame pUrvottarakSaNayoH samatA samAnarUpatA bhavet / sarvathA tu sarvAtmanA pUrvakSaNasya niranvayavinAze na sA samatottarakSaNasya yujyate / sA samatA tayorabhyupagamyate, tahiM tadrUpasya kathazcidavasthitatvAd na pUrvakSaNasya sarvathA vinaashH| atha sarvathA vinAze'pi tasyA samatA'bhyupagamyate, hanta ! tarhi tena sarvathA'bhAvIbhUtena pUrvakSaNena samaM tulyaM yujyate yadi, paraM khapuSpam , sarvathAbhAvarUpatayA dvayorapi tulyatvAditi // 2391 //

Page #129
Vada ] Nihnavavada :105: D. C. If the former moment is connected in any way with the later moment, there would be some sort of similarity between the former and later moments. But when there is absolute negation of the former moment, its similarity with the later moment has no place And, if there is any similarity between the two, the former moment will have to be taken as existing, awl hence, there would be no possibility of absolute negation. Still however, if this sort of similarity is accepted by you, in spite of there being absolute destruction, why should a nonexistent object like khapuspa, also, be not taken as similar to it as the property of being non-existent is comm on to both ? 104 (2399 ). For, aNNaviNAse aNNaM jai sarisaM hoi hou telu / tadasaMbaddhaM va maI so ni kao savvanAsammi? // 105 // 2400 // 105. Annavinase annam jai sarisam hoi hou telukkam | Tarlasambaddham va mai so vi kao savvanasammi ? (2400) [anyavinAze'nyad yadi sadRzaM bhavati bhavatu trailokyam / tadasaMbaddhaM vA matiH so'pi kutaH sarvanAze ? // 105 // 2400 // 105. Anyavinase'nyad yadi sadrisam bhavati bhavatu trailokyam | Tarlasambaddham va matih s'opi kutah sarvanase ? 105 (2400)] Trans. 105. If at the destruction of one thing, something else becomes similar (to it), even (the group of) three worlds would become similar to it. Or, if it is (accepted ) on account of its being urconnected-how is that even possible in the midst of all- pervading negation. 2400. TIkA-105 sarvathA niranvayavinAze ghaTAt paTa ivottarakSaNAt / sarvathA'nya eva pUrvakSaNastasmAccAnya evottarakSaNaH / tataH sarvathA'nyasya pUrvakSaNasya vinAze tasmAt sarvathAnyaduttarakSaNarUpaM yadi sadRzaM bhavatItyabhyupeyane, nahiM bhavatu trailokya

Page #130
: 106 Jinabhastra Guni's [The fourth mapi tatastatsadRzam , ananvayitve'yatvasya sarvatra tulyatvAt / atha tat trailokyaM prastutapUrvakSaNena saha dezAdivyavahitatvAdasaMbaddhamiti na tatsadRzam, uttarakSaNastu tena saha saMbaddha iti tatsadRza iti parasya matiH syAt / nanu so'pi pUrvottarakSaNayoH saMvandhaH pUrvasya sarvathA vinAze kutaH ?-na kutazcidityarthaH, tatsaMbandhAbhyupagame'nyasaMbandhAyogenAnanvayAbhyupagamaprasaGgAditi bhAvaH // 2400 // D. C. Acarya :-Just as a pata is totally different from a ghata, the former moment is different from later moment and vice versa. Now, even when the former moment is taken to have perished entirely, if it is held that the later moment which is absolutely different from it, is similar to the former moment, the group of the Three Worlds should also be taken as similar to it, because the property of being absolutely different (from the later moment) is common there also. Asvan) itra :-The group of the Three Worlds, could not be taken as similar to the former moment in question, because that is not connected with it by means of time, place etc., while later moment is taken as sinuilar to the former moment, because it is connected with the former moment by means of time. Acarya :--But how can the relation between former and later moments exist in spite of the former moment having entirely perished ? Such a relation can never exist without accepting the context, and hence, the state of retention or existence of the former moment in question, 105 (2400) Besides, kiha vA savvaM khaNiyaM viNNAyaM jai maI suyAu ti| tadasaMkhasamayasuttatthagahaNapariNAmao juttaM // 106 // 2401 // na u paisamayaviNAse jeNikiksakkharaM ciya payassa / saMkhAIyasAmaiyaM saMkhijjAiM payaM tAI // 107 // 2402 // saMkhijapayaM vakaM tadatthaggahaNapariNAmao hujjA / manvakambaNabhaMganANaM tadajuttaM samayanahassa // 108 // 2403 //

Page #131
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 107: 106. Kiha va savvam khaniyam vinnayam jai mai suyau til Tadasankhasamayasuttatthagahanaparinamao juttam (2401) 107. Na u paisamayavinase jenikkikkakkharam ciya payassa 1 Sankhaiyasamaiyam sunkhijjaim payam taim (2402) 106. Sankhijjapayam vakkam tadatthaggahanaparinamao hujja. 1 Savvakkhanabhangananam tadajuttam samayanatthassa. (2403) [kathaM vA sarva kSaNikaM vijJAtaM yadi matiH zrutAditi / tadasaMkhyasamayasUtrArthagrahaNapariNAmato yuktam // 106 // 2401 // na tu pratisamayavinAze yenaikaikAkSarameva padasya / saMkhyAtItasAmayika saMkhyAtAni padaM tAni // 107 // 2402 // saMkhyAtapadaM vAkyaM tadarthagrahaNapariNAmato bhavet / sarvakSaNabhaGgajJAnaM tadayuktaM samayanaSTasya // 108 // 2403 // 106. Katham va sarvam ksanikam vijnatam yadi natih sruta ditin Tadasankyasamayasutrarthagrahanaparinamato yuktam 106 (2401) 107. Na tu pratisarnayavinase yenaikaikak arameva padasyal Sankhyatitasamayikam sankhyatani padam tani 107 (2402) 108. Sankhyatapadam vakyam taclarthagrahanaparinamato bhavet Sarvaksanabhangaznanam tarlayuktam samayanastasya ___108 (2403)]. Trans. 106-107-108. Or, if it is asked "How is everything recognized as momentary?" (The answer is) "From the Holy writ." It is proper (to take it ) as a result of the comprehension of the meanings of innumerable sutras, but not (as a result of) the destruction (taking place ) at every moment. Each syllable of a word (is produced) at an incalcu. lable portion of time. A word consists of a definite number of those ( syllables ), and a sentence is composed of certain

Page #132
: 108: Jinabhaira Gani's [The fourth number of words. At the comprehension of its meaning, knowledge of all-pervading transitoriness (is attained). (But) that is misfitted to one (whose mind) perishes (soon after) the time of production 2401-2402-2403. TIkA-106-107-108 "vA" ityathavA, paryanuyujyate bhavAn / nanu "sarva vastu kSaNikam" ityetat kathaM bhavatA vijJAtamiti vaktavyam ? / zrutAditi cet / nanu tat zrutAdarthavijJAnamasaMkhyeyamamayaniSpanno yaH sUtrArthagrahaNapariNAmastasmAdeva yuktam , na tu ptismyvinaashe| idamuktaM bhavati-asaMkhyeyAneva samayAn yAvaccittasyAvasyAne "sarva kSaNikam" iti vijJAnopayogo yujyate, na tu patisamayocchede / atra kAraNamAha-yena yasmAt kAraNAt padasya sAvayavatvAt vatsaMbadhyekaikamapyakSaraM saMkhyAtItasAmayikamasaMkhyAtaH samayairniSpadyata ityarthaH, tAni cAkSarANi saMkhyAtAni samuditAni padaM bhavati / saMkhyAtaizca padairvAkyaM niSpadyate, tadarthagrahaNapariNAmAca vAkyArthagrahaNapariNAmAdityarthaH, sarvakSaNabhaGgajJAnaM bhavet / taccotpattisamayAnantarameva naSTasya samucchinnasya manaso'yuktameveti // 24011 // 2402 // 24031 // D. C. Asvamitra :-How coull you apprehend that everything is ksanika ? Acarya :-From the Holy writ. Apprehension of ksanikata from the Holy writings, is justifiable only as a result of the apprehension of the meanings of sutras, but not as a result of destruction taking place at every moment. Every syllable of a word is produced at an incalculable moment. A word consists of a number of such syllables and a sentence is made up of a number of words. When the meaning of such sentences is comprehended, knowledge of all-pervailing transitoriness is attained. But it should be noted that such a knowleilge is not attainable to one whose mind perishes soon after the time of its pruiluction. 106 - 108. (2401-2403) And,

Page #133
:109: Vada] Nihnavavasia tittI samo kilAmo sArikkha-vivakkha-paccayAINi / ajjhayaNaM zANa bhAvaNA ya kA savvanAsamni? // 109 // 2404 // 109. Titti samo kilamo sarikkha-vivakkha-paccayaini 1 Ajjhayanam jhana bhavana ya ka savvanasammi? (2404) [tRptiH zramaH klamaH sAdRzya-vipakSa-pratyayAdIni / __ adhyayanaM-dhyAnaM bhAvanA ca kA sarvanAze 1 // 109 // 2404 // 109. Triptih sramah klamah sadrisya-vipaksa-pratyayadini i Adhyayanam dhyanam bhavana ca ka sarvanasa ? 109 (2404)]. Trans. 109. And, in (the midst of) absolute destruction, ___how could satiety, exertion, languor, similarity, distinction, etc; as well as, study, meditation, and imagination exist ? (2404). ___TIkA-109 tRptirdhANiH, mArgagamanAdipravRttasya khedaH zramaH, klamo glAniH, sAdRzyaM sAdharmyam , vipakSo vaidharmyam, pratyayaH pratyabhijJAnAdi, AdizabdAt svnihitprtynumaargnn-smrnnaadiprigrhH| adhyayanaM punaHpunargranthAbhyAsaH, dhyAnamekAvalambane manAsthairyam , bhAvanA paunaH punyenAnityatvAdiprakArato bhavanarguNyaparibhAvanarUpA / etAni sarvANyapyutpattyanantarameva vastunaH sarvanAze'GgI kriyamANe kathamupapadyante ? iti // 2404 // D. C. If the theory of entire destruction of an object (at every moment ) is accepted, everything will be destroyed immediately after its production. Consequently, there will be no place for feelings like those of satiety, exertion or fatigue. There will be nothing like similarity, dissimilarity, belief or remembrance, and there will be no scope for study, meditation or imagination 109 (2404). aNNaNNo paigAsaM bhuttA aMte na so vi kA tittii| tan: gaMtAvo vi evaM iya saMvavahAravucchitI // 11 // 2405 //

Page #134
: 110: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fourth 110. Annanno paigasam bhutta ante na so vi ka titti ? Gantadao vi evam iya samvavaharavucchitti (2405) [anyo'nyaH pratigrAsaM bhoktA'nte na so'pi kA tRptiH / gantrAdayo'pyevamiti saMvyavahAravyucchittiH // 110 // 2405 // 110. Anyo'nyan pratigrasam bhokta'nte na so'pi ka triptih ?! Gantrailayo'pyevamiti samvyavaharavy ucshittih (2405)) Trans. 110. (In case of entire destruction) an eater would be different at every mouthful, (and) at the end (he would exist ) no more. (Hence) how could there be (the feeling of) satisfaction at all? The same will be the condition of those who move, ect. In this way, there would be violation of the (whole of ) vyavahara. 2405. TIkA-110 "grasu glasu adane" asanaM grAsaH kavalakSepaH, asyata iti yA grAsaH kvlH| tatazca pratigrAsaM pratikavalaM bhoktA devadattaH kSaNikatvAdanyazAnyazca bhavati, bhojanakriyAyAzcAnte paryante so'pi bhoktA sarvathA na bhavati, bhajikriyAvizeSaNasyAbhAve tadviziSTasya devadattasyApi sarvathocchedAt / tatazcaikasminantyakavalaprakSepe kA tRptiH, bhoktuzcAbhAvAt kasyAsau tRptiH| evamuktAnusAreNa mantrAdInAmapi zramAyabhAvaH svabuddhayA bhAvanIya iti / evaM samastalokavyavahArocchedaprasaktiriti // 2405 / / __D. C. In case of there being entire destruction (at every moment ), one who eats would be different at every mouthful of food on account of his being ksanika. In absence of the process of eating, the eater will also perish at the end. Hence, how could there be a feeling of satisfaction at the last mouthful, and in absence of eater, who will experience the feeling of satisfaction? In the same way, those who move would not feel exertion, and so on. Ultimately this would lead the entire vyavahara to nothing. Here the opponent would sayjeNaM ciya pahagAsaM bhinnA tittI ao ciya vinnaaso| tittIe tittassa ya evaM ciya savvasaMsiddhI // 111 // 2406 //

Page #135
Vacla] Nilma vava la : 111: 111. Jenam ciya paigasam bhinna titti ao ciya vinaso 1 Tittie tittassa ya evan ciya savvasamsiddhi (2106) yenaiva pratigrAsaM bhinnA tRptirata eva vinaashH| tRptestRptasya-caivameva srvsNsiddhiH||111||2406|| 111. Yonaiva pratigrasam bhinna triptirata cva vinasah ! Triptostriptasya caivameva sarvalsavisildhih (2406) ] __Trans. 1|| On the ground on which ( feeling of ) satisfaction is different from each mouthful, (the feeling of) satis. faction and the one who is satisfied attain destruction. The same will be the condition of everything. 2406. TIkA-111 yenaiva yata eva pratigrAsamanyo'nyazca bhoktA bhavati, aparAparA ca tRptimAtrA bhavati, ata eva tRptaH, tRptasya ca pratikSaNaM vinAzo'bhyupagamyate' smAbhiH, vizeSaNabhede vizeSyasyApyavazyaM bhedAt , anyathA vizeSaNabhedasyApyayogAt / pratikSaNavinAzitve tRptyAdyayogo'bhihita eveti cet / tadayuktam / kutaH ? ityAha-"evaM ciya sabasaMsiddhi ti" evameva pratikSaNavinAzitva eva sarvasyApi tRpti-zrama-klamAderlokavyavahArasyasaMsiddhiH / idamuktaM bhavati-tRptyAdivAsanAvAsitaH pUrvapUrvakSaNAduttarottarakSaNaH samutpadyate tAvat yAvat paryanta utkarSa. vantastRptyAdayo bhavanti / etaca kSaNikatva evopapadyate, na nityatve / nityasthAacyutA-'nutpanna-sthiraikasvabhAvatvena sarvadeva tRptyAdisadbhAvAt, sarvadaiva tadabhAvAdaveti // 2406 // D. C. Asvamitra :- Just as an cater of each monthful differs from another, so also, every portion of the feeling of satisfaction differs from another. This makes both the satisfaction and the satisficr, ksanika (destructible) at every moment. If the visesana. ( adjective ) is different, the viscsya (the object which is qualified by it) should alse be different; otherwise there would be no justification of visesana. Here it is not proper to advance the argument that feelings of satisfaction etc. could not exist in case of momcntariness

Page #136
: 112 Jinabhadra Gani's [The fourth taking place at every moment. Because, it is only in that condition (i. e. only in case of there being destructibility at every moment) that the worldly feelings of satisfaction, exertion, gloorminess etc., would be established. The later moments that are filled with feelings of satisfaction etc. are produced from the corresponding former moments, one after the other, until feelings of satisfaction etc. become extremely powerfal. All this is possi. ble only, if the object is perishable, instearl of its being imperishable or nitya. That which is nitya is nevet produced or destroyed but is always retained steadily, in one condition. In such a case, feelings of satisfaction etc. would either be wholly accepted or wholly rejected. 111 (2406) The answer is pugvillasadanAse vuDaDhI tittI ya kiMnimittA to?| aha sA vi te'Nuvattai savvaviNAso kahaM jutto ? // 112 // 2407 / / 112. Puvvillasavvanase vuddhi titti ya kimnimitta to ? | Aha sa vi te'nuvattai savvavinaso kahan jutto ? (2407) [pUrvasarvanAze vRddhistRptizca kiMnimittA tataH / atha sApi te'nuvartate sarvavinAzaH kathaM yuktaH // 112 // 2407 // 112. Parvasarvanase vriddhistriptisea kim-nimitta tatah ? | Atha sapi te'nuvartate sarvavinasah katham yuktah? 112 (2407)]. Trans 112 If there is entire destruction of the previous moments, how are the (gradual) rise, as well as, the (feeling of) satisfaction accounted for? And, if they, too, follow (the later moments) how will (the theory of) entire destruction be justified ? 2407. TIkA-112 "to ti" yadyevam, tataH pUrvakSaNasya sarvathA vinAMza uttarottarakSaNeSu tRptyAdInAM yA krameNa vRddhirutkarSavatI paryante tRptiH zramAdisaMbhUtizca sA kiMnimittA kiMkAraNA ? iti vaktavyam ? / pUrvapUrvakSaNenottarottarakSaNasya yA

Page #137
:113: Vada ] Nihnavavada tRptyAdivAsanA janyate tannimitteti cet / na, tasyAstadanantaratve pUrvapUrvakSaNanAze nAzAt / athottarottarakSaNeSu sAnuvartata eveti te tavAbhiprAyaH, tahiM pUrvapUrvakSaNasya sarvavinAzaH kathaM yukto vaktum , tadanantarabhUtatRptyAdivAsanAyA samanuvartanAt ? iti // 2407 // D. C. Acarya:-If it is so, how woull tho graulual development of the feelings of satisfaction etc. that are found during the respective later moments, and the production of the feelings of satisfuction etc. be accounted for ? Asvamitra :--Feelings of satisfaction etc. are produced by the instincts of satiety etc. produced in the later moments by means of former ones, Acarya :-That is not so. Since those instincts are similar to the corresponding former moments, they would perish along with those moments. Asvamitra :-Feelings of satisfaction etc., are produced in later moments, in as much as they are continued in the later moments after their production during the respective former moments. Acarya :- In believing so, as you assume the continuation of the feelings of satisfaction etc., that are similar to the former moments, you will not be able to justify the theory of entire destruction of an object along with the former moments during which it is produced. 112 (2407) Also, dikkhA va savvanAse kimatthamahavA maI vimokkhatthaM / so jai nAso savvassa to tao kiM va dikhAe ? // 113 // 2408 // 113. Dikkha ra savvanase kimatthamahava mai vimokkhattham| So jai naso savvassa to tao kim va dikkhae ? (2408)

Page #138
: 114: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fourth [dIkSA vA sarvanAze kimarthamathavA matirvimokSArtham / sa yadi nAzaH sarvasya tataH sakaH kiM vA dIkSayA ? // 113 // 2408 // 113. Diksa va sarvanasc kimarthamathava matirvinoksartham | Sa yadi nasah sarvasya tatah sakah kim v. diksaya ? ___]13 (2408)] Trans. 113. Or, in (case of) entire destruction, what is the utility of diksa ? Or, it may be) your belief that it is for the sake of Final Emancipation. If that (moksa) itself is (susceptible to) destruction, then, it would be (attainable) to all. And hence, what (would be) the purpose of diksa ? 2408 TIkA-113 dIkSA vA kSaNAnAM sarvanAze kimarthamiti vAcyam ? nirathikeyamiti bhAvaH / atha mokSArtha dIkSeti parasya matiH, tadyatrApi vaktavyam-sa mokSo nAzarUpo vA'bhyupagamyate, anAzarUpo vA ? / tatra "so jai nAso ti" sa mokSo yadi nAzarUpa iti pakSaH, "savvassa to ta u ti" tatastahiM tako'sau mokSaH sarvasyApi vastunaH svarasataH prayatnamantareNApi tvadabhiprAyeNa siddha eva, kiM dIkSAprayatnena iti // 2408 // D. C. According to your theory of entire destruction, diksa has no utility. If you argue that diksa is useful for the attain. ment of moksa, then, is that moksa. perishable or imperishable ? If it is perishable, it would become accessible to all living beings without any effort on their part, and then, it would lose its importance. 113 (2408). And, aha nico, na kkhaNiyaM to savvaM aha maI ssNtaanno| ahau tti tao dikkhA nissaMtANassa mukkho tti // 114 // 2409 / / 114. Aha niceo, na kkhaniyam to savvam aha mai sa-santanot Ahau tti tao dikkha nissantanassa mukkho tti. (2409) [atha nityo, na kSaNikaM tataH sarvamatha matiH svasaMtAnaH / ahata iti tato dIkSA niHsaMtAnasya mokSa iti // 114 // 2409 //

Page #139
Vada] Nihnavavada :115: 114. Atha nityo, na ksanikam tatah sarvamatha. matih svasantanahi Ahata iti tato diksa nihsantanasya moksa iti 114 (2409)] ___ Trans. 114. If it is imperishable, you cannot hold that everything is transitory. Here, it might be said that since one's own continuous range ( santati) does not break off, diksa becomes necessary (for the purpose of breaking it off.) (For) Final Emancipation (moksa) is attainable (only) to a nihsantana being (i e. one who does not possess the conti nuous range of birth, death etc. any more.) 2409 TIkA-114 atha nityo mokSaH "to ti" tatastarhi "sarvavastu kSaNikam" ityetad na bhavati, mokSeNaiva vyabhicArAt / atha sva AtmIyo vijJAna-vedanAsaMjJA-saMskAra-rUpAtmakaskandhasya saMtAno nAdyApi hataH, niHsaMtAnasyaiva ca mokSaH, ato niHsaMtAnArtha dIkSA vidhIyata iti // 2409 // D. C. ____Acarya :-If noksa is nitya, you cannot assert that everything is ksanika. Asvamitra :--Since moksa is attainable only to one who is nihsantana, diksa is useful for one to become nihsantana (One is said to be ninsantana when the continuous range of the moments of cognition, sentiments, consciousness, and perfection etc. with regard to an object, is cut off) The Acarya answers this argument as follows :chiNNeNAchiNNeNa va kiM saMtANeNa savvanadRssa / kiMcAbhAvIbhUyassa sa-para-saMtANaciMtAe ? // 115 // 2410 // 115. Chinnenachinnena va kim santanena savvanatthassa | Kincabhavibhuyassa sa-para-santanacintae ? (2410) [chinnenAcchinnena vA kiM saMtAnena sarvanaSTasya / kizcA'bhAvIbhUtasya sva-para-saMtAnacintayA ? // 115 // 2410 //

Page #140
: 116: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fourth 115. Cohinnenacchinnena va kim santanena sarvapastasyai Kinca'bhavibhutasya sva-para-santanacintaya ? 115 (2410)] Trans. 115. What is the use of santana being broken or unbroken to one who has perished entirely ? And, what is the good of worrying as to whether it is one's own santana or some one else's, when one is entirely reduced to nothing ? 2410. ___ TIkA-115 sarvanaSTasya sarvaprakAraivinAzamApatrasya cchinnena, acchinbhena vA, saMtAnena kiM prayojanam , yena saMtAnahananArtha dIkSAM gRhaNIyAt / kina, sarvathA'bhAvIbhUtasya kSaNabhaGguratayA sarvathA vinaSTasya kimanayA cintayA-ayaM vasaMtAnaH, ayaM tu parasaMtAnaH, ayaM tu na hataH, yenocyate-"sasaMtANo ahau ti to dikkhA" iti ? // 2410 // D. C. Acarya :--It is no use discussing as to whether santana is broken or unbroken, when one has entirely perished. And hence, what is the good of diksa also ? There is no sense in worrying that, " This is my santana" " That is another's santana" "This is broken" That is not broken" etc. when there is entire negation of everything. So, the expression that " Diksa is useful to one who is nihsantana," also proves futile. 115 (2410) savvaM pAyaM va khaNiyaM pavate nAsavarisaNAu ti| naNu itto ciya na khaNiyamaMle mAsovaladdhIo // 116 // 2411 // 116. Savvam payam va khaniyam pajjante nasadarisanau tti Nanu itto cciya na khaniyamante nasovaladdhio. (2411) [sarva paya iva kSaNikaM paryante nAzadarzanAditi / nanvita eva na kSaNikamante nAzopalabdheH // 116 / 2411 // 116. Sarvam paya iva ksanikam paryante nasadarsanaditil Nanvita eva na ksanikamante nasopalabdheh 116 (2411)] Trans. 116. Everything is momentary like milk on account of the apprehension of destruction at the end. On the same

Page #141
Vada] Nihnavavada : 117: ground, it is not momentary, because of the apprehension of destruction at the end." 2411. TIkA-116 sarva vastu kSaNikam , paryante nAzadarzanAt , payovaditi / Aha -nanu yadi vastUnAM paryante nAzo dRzyate, tarhi pratikSaNavinAzitve kimAyAtam , yena sarva kSaNikamucyate / satyam , kintvayamiha tadabhiprAyaH-paryante'mi ghaTAdInAM vinAzastAvad nirhetuka eva bhavati, mudrAdevinAzahetorayogAt, tathAhi-mudrAdinA kiM ghaTa eva kriyate, kapAlAni vA, tuccharUpo'bhAvo vA ? ityAdiyuktito vinAzasya nitukatvaM prAgauva darzitam / tato nirhetuko'sau bhavanAdita eva bhavatu, anyathA paryante'pi tadabhavanaprasaGgAditi paryante nAzadarzanAd hetoH kssnniktvsiddhiH| atra sUriH prAha-nanvetasmAdeva paryante nAzadarzanalakSaNAddhetorasmAbhiretanchakyate vaktum / kim ? ityAha-na kSaNikaM na pratikSaNaM vastu vinazyatItyarthaH, paryanta eva tamAzopalabdheH, ghaTAdivat / na ca yuktibAdhitatvAd prAnteyamupalabdhiriti zakyate vaktum , sarveSAM sarvatretthameva pravartanAt, yuktInAmevAnayA bAdhanAt , zUnyavAdiyuktivaditi // 2411 // D. C. Asvamitra :--Everything is transitory, like milk, because of the apprehension of destruction at the end. Acarya :--If the destruction of an object is apprehended at the end, how could that, and hence everything, be said to be momentary? Asvamitra :--The main purport of my argument is this. Destruction of objects like ghata etc. apprehended at the end, is causeless in absence of destructive instruments like hammer etc. If the instruments like hammer etc. work as the causes, causelessness of destruction could easily be established by arguments like this :- When an object is destroyed by means of hammer etc. What is produced ? Ghata, its fragments or the non-existence (itself)? This being causeless, destruction takes place in the beginning and is apprehended at the end. Thus, momentariness

Page #142
: 118: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fourth of an object is established, because of the apprehension of destruction at the end. Acarya :-We establish indestructibility of an object on the same ground on which you try to prove its transitariness. Since destruction of an object is apprehended at the end, it does not perish entirely at every moment like ghata etc. It is, also, not possible for you to say that such an apprehension is nothing but an illusion, because it is bound by logical limits. Because, the condition of all objects is the same everywhere. 116 (2411) And, iharAiDa ciya tao dIsejaMte vva kIsa va smaanno| savvaviNAse nAso dIsai aMte na so'nnattha ? // 117 // 2412 // 117. Iharaiu cciya tao disejjante vya kisa va samano Savvavinase naso disai ante na so'nnattha ? (2412) [itarathAdita eva sako dRzyetAnte iva kasmAd vA samAnaH / sarvavinAze nAzo dRzyate'nte na so'nyatra ? // 117 // 2412 // 117. Itarathadita eva sako drisyetante iva kasmad va samanah 1 Sarvavinase naso drisyate'nte na so'nyatra ? (2412)] Trans. 117. Otherwise, it would be seen right from the beginning, just as (it would be seen) at the end. Or, why would destruction be not seen anywhere else, but at the end, when the entire destruction (of an object) applies equally everywhere ? 2412. TIkA-117 itarathA yadi pratikSaNaM nAzo bhavet tadA yathA paryante sarveNApi bhavanasau dRzyate, tathA Adita evAdi-madhyeSu sarvatra tako'sau nAzo dRzyeta / atha paryante'sau dRzyate nAdi-madhyeSu, kiM kurmaH ? / tahiM praSTavyo'si / kim ? ityAha-"kIsa vetyAdi" kimiti cAso nAzo vastvabhAvarUpatayA sarvatra samAno niravazeSasvarUpo'pi san sarvavinAze mudgarAdinA vihite dRzyata upala. kSyate'nte paryante, na punaranyatrAdi-madhyeSu sarvatra bhavatA'bhyupagato'pyaso bhavanapalakSyata ityatra kAraNaM vAcyam ?, na punaH pAdaprasArikA zreyaskarIti bhAvaH // 2412 //

Page #143
Vala) Nihnavavarla :119: D. C. Acarya :--If the object is perishable at every moment, destruction ought to have been apprehended in the beginning, and in the middle, just as it is apprehended at the end. Asvamitra :---It is apprchcnded neither in the beginning, nor in the midille, but any how at the end. Acarya:--Though we believe that destruction (i. c. negation of an object) is equal in the beginning, as well as in the middle, how is it that it is apprehended only at the end, when beaten by hammer etc., and neither in the beginning nor at the middle ? 117 (2412) Also, aMte va savvanAso paDivaNaNo keNa jduvlddhiio| kappesi kkhaNaviNAsaM naNu panjAyaMtaraM taM pi // 118 // 2413 // 118. Ante va. savvanaso padivanno kena. jaduvaladdhio | ___Kappesi kkhanavinasam nanu pajjayantaram tam pi (2413) [ante vA sarvanAzaH pratipannaH kena yadupalabdheH / kalpayasi kSaNavinAzaM nanu paryAyAntaraM tadapi // 118 // 2413 // 118. Ante va sarvanasah pratipannah kena yadupalabdheh / Kalpayasi ksanavinasam nanu paryayantaram tadapi 118 (2413)] Trans. 118. Or, who has established (the theory of) entire destruction that you believe in transitariness (of an object ) by the apprehension (of destruction ) at the end ? In fact, that is nothing but another form (of the object) 2413. TIkA-118 yadi vA, bhoH kSaNabhaGgavAdin ! ante paryante'pi mudgarAdisaMnidhAne ghaTAdivastunaH sarvanAzaH sarvathA vinAzaH kena prativAdinA jainenAbhyupagataH? yadupalabdheryadarzanAvaSTambhena tvaM kSaNabhaGgarUpaM pratikSaNavinAzaM kalpayasi ghaTAdeH ? / yadi mudgarAdisaMnidhAne sarvavinAzastasya jainenAbhyupagamyate, tahiM tadavasthAyAM ghaTo na dRzyate, kapAlAnyeva ca dRzyanta ityetat kimiSyate ?

Page #144
* 120 Jinabhadra Gani's [The fourth ityAha-"navityAdi" nanvaho ! mRdUpatayA'vasthitasyaiva ghaTadravyasya bhUtabhaviSyadanantaparyAyApekSayA tadapi paryAyAntaraM paryAyavizeSa eva kapAlAni, na punastadAnI ghaTasya sarvathA vinAzaH, mRdUpatayA apyabhAvaprasaGgAt , tathA ca kapAlAnAmamudrUpatApatterityasiddhiH paryante sarvanAzasyeti // 2413 // D. C. Acarya :--Who has almitted the theory of entire destruction of an object that you establish transitariness (of an object) like ghata by apprehending its destruction at the end when beaten by ( an instrument like ) hammer ? Asvamitra :--If you do not believe in entire destruction fo an object like ghata when beaten by an instrument like hammer, how is it that instead of ghata, its fragments are seen ? Acarya:-Fragments of ghata are nothing but one of the various paryayas (forms) of ghata itself, existing primarily as earth. Ghata, therefore, does not vanish entirely at that time. If it vanished entirely at the first moment, when struck by hammer, it ought to vanish as earth also. Fragments of the vessel will also cease to exist as a paryaya of earth as a result of that. Thus, the theory that entire destruction is apprehended at the end, is proved to be logically false. 118 (2413) Besides, jesi va na paLate viNAsadarisaNamihaMbarAINaM / tatricanbhuvagamao savvakvaNaviNAsimayahANI // 119 // 2414 // 119. Jesim va na pajjante vinasadarisanamihambarainam / ___ Tanniccabbhuvagamay savvakkhanavinasimayahani. (2414) [yeSAM vA na paryante vinAzadarzanamihAmbarAdInAm / tanityAbhyupagamataH sarvakSaNavinAzimatahAniH // 119 // 2414 // 119. Yesam va na paryante vinasadarsanamihambaradinam i Tannityabhyupagamatah sarvaksanavinasimatahanih 119 (2414)]

Page #145
:121 Vada] Nihnavavada Trans. 119. Or, by apprehending sky etc., whose destruction is not apprehended at the end, as it is imperishable, (your) theory of entire destruction of everything would be refuted. 2414. TIkA-119 ghaTAdInAM tAvat paryante sarvanAzadarzanAt prasaGgenAdita eva pratikSaNanazvaratAM sAdhayati bhavAn , tato yeSAmambarAdInAM vyoma-kAla-digAdinAM paryante vinAzadarzanaM kadAcidapi nAsti, teSvasmAt prasaGgasAdhanAt pratisamayanazvaratvaM na sidhyati / tatasteSAM nityatvamevAbhyupagantavyam / tanityatvAbhyupagame ca "sarva kSaNikam" iti vyAptiparaM yad mataM bhavatastasya hAniraghaTamAnataiva prAmotIti // 2414 // ___D. C. By the example of ghata etc. you try to establish the theory that everything is ksanika. But elements like sky, time, space etc., are never apprehended as perishing at the end. You cannot apply your theory of entire destruction to them. On the contrary, you shall have to accept them as nitya or imperishable, refuting your own theory of sarva-ksanikata (all-pervading transitoriness ). 119 (2414) Also, pajjAyanayamayamiNaM jaM savvaM vigama-saMbhava-sahAvaM / davvaTTiyassa nicaM egayaramayaM ca micchattaM // 120 // 2415 // 120. Pajjayanayamayaminam jam savvam vigama-sambhava sahavami Davvatthiyassa niccam egayaramayam ca micchattam (2415) [paryAyanayamatamidaM yat sarva vigama-saMbhava-svabhAvam / dravyArthikasya nityamekataramataM ca mithyAtvam // 120 // 2415 // 120. Paryayanayamatamidam yat sarvam vigama-sambhava svabhavam | Dravyarthikasya nityamekataramatam ca Mithyatvam (2415)] Trans. 120. That everything is susceptible to destruction and production, is the opinion of the (followers) of the Paryaya

Page #146
: 122: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fourth naya (school). (But) according to a Dravyarthika it is imperishable. Either of the two view-points is wrong. 2415. 8 TIkA - 120 paryAyavAdina evaM nayasyedaM mataM yat tvaM brUSe:- sarvameva tribhuva nAntarargataM vastu vigama - saMbhava - svabhAvaM pratikSaNamutpadyate vinazyati cetyarthaH / dravyamevArtho yasya na paryAyA sa dravyArthikastasya tu dravyArthikanayasya tadeva sarva vastu nityaM matam / evaM ca sthite yad bhavAnekatarasyaiva paryAyanayasya pratikSaNavinazrAtvalakSaNaM matamabhyupagacchati tad midhyAtvameveti muzcedamiti bhAvaH // 2415 // D. C. Your view-point is like that of a follower of the Paryaya-naya school, which takes every object in this Universe as susceptible to production and destruction at every moment by its very nature. But according to the school of Dravyarthikas, dravya or the elementary substance, of which an object is made, (and not the paryayas or forms which an object exhibits at different times), is given importance. So, according to them, everything is nitya or eternal. 7. According to the followers of the Paryaya naya school or the school of Rotation, various forms that an object holds at various times, are taken as the object itself, rendering the object thereby as susceptible to production and destruction. the 8. Dravyarthika is one who takes dravya (matter) as artha (object; itself, that is to say, dravya or the elementary substance, of which an object is actually composed (and not the paryaya or form), is the object itself according to this school rendering it imperishable. In the Nyaya Philosophy, there are nine kinds of dravya viz Prithvi, Ap, Tejas, Vayu, Akasa, Kala, Dis, Atman, and Manah. But according to the Jainas, there are only six types of dravya viz- Dharmasti Kaya, 2. A-dharniasti Kaya, 3. Akasasti Kaya, 4. Pudgalasti Kaya, 5. Jivasti Kaya, and 6. Kala. For Private Personal Use Only

Page #147
Vada ] Nihnavavada :123: According to you, everything is ksaaika or destructible at every moment, as the paryaya vanishes soon after its production. Now, both these view-points are extreme and exclusive so far as entire Truth is concerned. As you cling to one of them exclusively, your argument is not true wholly, but partially only. And hence, it cannot be accepted as a general principle. 120 (2415). jamaNaMtapajjayamayaM vatthu bhuvaNaM va cittapariNAmaM / Thii-vibhava-bhaMgarUvaM nicAnicAito'bhimayaM / / 121 // 2416 // 121. Jamanantapajjayamnyam vatthum bhuvanam va cittapari namam 1 Thii-vibhava-bhangaruvam niceaniccaito'bhimayam (2416) [yadanantaparyavamayaM vastu bhuvanamiva citrapariNAmam / sthiti-vibhava-bhaGgarUpaM nityAnityAditato'bhimatam / / 121 // 2416 121. Yadanantaparyavamayam vastu bhuvanamiva citrapari namam | Sthiti-vibhava-bhangarapam nityanityaditatu'bhimatam, ____121 (2416)] Trans. 121. Since (every) object is possessed of innumerable forms like the Universe, it should be taken as possessed of variegated forms, perishable and imperishable, susceptible to retention, production, and destruction. 2416. TIkA-121 yad yasmAd naikAntataH paryAyamayaM, nApyekAntena dravyarUpam , kintvanantaparyAyaM sthityu-tpAda-vinAzarUpatvAdabhU-bhavana-vimAna-dvIpa-samudrAdirUpatayA tribhuvanamiva samastamapi vastu nityAnityAdirUpatayA vicitrapariNAmamanekasvarUpaM bhagavatAmabhimatam / ato'syaikAntavinazvaralakSaNaikarUpAbhyupagamo mithyAtvameveti // 2416 // ____D. C. Since an object is not exclusively paryaya-maya (or formed of external forms alone ) nor is it exclusively dravyamaya (or formed of mere matter), but it possesses innumerable

Page #148
: 124: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fourth forms that are nitya, as well as a-nitya, and that are susceptible to retention, production, and destruction like thsoe such as earth, sea, and planets etc, of the Universe. Hence, your assumption of an object as being exclusevely perishable is wrongly based. 121 (2416) Moreover, suha-dukkha-baMdha-mukkhA ubhayanayamayANuvaTTiNo juttaa| egayaraparicAe savvavvavahAravocchittI // 122 // 2417 // 122. Suha-dukkha-bandha-mukkha ubhayanayamayanuvattino jutta i Egayarapariccae savvavvavaharavocchitti. (2417) [sukha-duHkha-bandha-mokSA ubhayanayamatAnuvartino yuktaaH| ekataraparityAge sarvavyavahAravyucchittiH // 122 // 2417 // 122. Sukha-duhkha-bandha-moksa ubhayanayamatanuvartino yuktah 1 ___Ekataraparityage sarva-vyavaharavyucchittih 122 (2417)] Trans. 122. (Existence of) pleasure, pain, bondage, and Final Emancipation, is justifiable (only) to those who follow both the theories. By rejecting either of the two, there could be (absolute) destruction of all worldly affairs (vyavahara) 2417 TIkA-122 bhAvitAthaiveti // 2417 // Now, explaining the above proposition in details, the author states :-- na suhAi pajjayamae nAsAo savvahA mayasseva / na ya davvaTTiyapakkhe nizcattaNao nabhasseva // 123 // 2418 // 123. Na suhai pajjayamae nasao savvaha mayasseva | Na ya davvatthiyapakkhe nicoattanao nabhasseva (2418) [na sukhAdi paryavamate nAzAt sarvathA mRtasyeva / na ca dravyArthikapakSe nityatvato nabhasa iva // 123 // 2418 //

Page #149
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 125: 123. Na sukhadi paryavamate nasat sarvatha mritasyeva | Na ca dravyarthikapakse nityatvato nabhasa iva 123 (2418)] Trans. 123. According to the theory of paryayas, pleasure etc. do not (actually) exist on account of (their) entire destruction, like that of a dead being. And, that is not (acceptible) according to the theory of Dravyarthikas also, on account of their (their) being imperishable like sky. 2418. TIkA-123 ekasminneva paryAyanayamate'GgIkriyamANe na sukhAdi jagato ghaTata iti pratijJA, sukha-duHkha-bandha-mokSAdayo na ghaTanta ityarthaH / utpatyanantaraM sarvathA nAzAditi hetuH| mRtasyeveti dRSTAntaH / na ca dravyAthikanayapakSe kevale samAzrIyamANe mukhAdi ghaTate, ekAntanityatvenAvicalitarUpatvAt nabhasa iveti / tasmAd dravya-paryAyomayapakSa eva sarvamidamupapadyata ityayameva grAyaH, kevalaikanayapakSastu doSalakSakakSIkRtatvAt tyAjya eveti // 2418 // D.C. The proposition is that, worldly pleasure, pain, bondage, Final Emancipation etc., could never exist if the theory of paryaya naya is exclusively accepted. For, according to that theory, everything perishes completely like a dead being, immediately after its production. And pleasure etc., could not exist if the theory of Dravyarthikas is exclusively accepted. Because, according to that theory, everything would be imperishable like sky. All this is possible only if both the theories are accepted as supplementing each other. Resorting exclusively to either of the two, will result in a number of difficulties. 123 (2418) Then, again, the Sthaviras tried to persuade him from another point of view : jaha jiNamayaM pamANaM to mA davvaDhiyaM paricayasu / sapharasa va hoi jao tannAse savvanAso tti // 124 // 2419 // 124. Jai Jinamayam pamanam to ma davvatthiyam pariccayasur Sakkassa va hoi jad tannase savvanaso tti. (2419)

Page #150
: 126: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fourth [yadi jinamataM pramANaM tato mA dravyArthikaM prityaakssiiH| zAkyasyeva bhavati yatastannAze sarvanAza iti // 124 // 2419 // 124. Yadi Jinamatam pramanam tato ma dravyarthikam . pari tyaksihl Sakyasyeva bhavati yatastannase sarvanasa iti. (2419)] Trans. 124. If the principle of the Tirthankaras is (taken as) authentic by you, then, do not reject the theory of Dra. vyarthikas. For, in case of your believing in its destruction, like a Bauddha, all-pervading destruction will be attained 2419. TIkA-124 pUrvadarzitasUtrAlApakabhAvArthamajAnanApi vibhramitacittatayA tatprAmANyaM pUtkurvANaH kila jinavacanaprAmANyAvalambinamAtmAnaM manyate bhavAn / tad yadi hanta ! satyameva jinamataM bhavataH pramANam , tataH kevalaparyAyavAditayA jinamatAbhimatamapi dravyAstikanayaM mA parityAkSIH / dravyAstitvaM mA pratiSedhayetyarthaH, yato yasmAt zAkyasya bauddhasyeva tava tamAze dravyasya sarvathA vinAze svIkriyamANe "sandhanAso ti" sarvasyApi tRpti-zramAdevandha-mokSAdeca vyatrahArasya nAzo bhavati vilopaH prAmotItyarthaH // 2419 // D. C. In spite of your ignorance of the meaning of the statements of the aforesaid satra, if you really consider yourself as a follower of the Tirthankaras, and hence take the words of the Tirthankaras as authentic, then, by inclining yourself exclusively to the Paryaya-vada, do not reject the theory of Dravyarthikas, which is approved by the Tirthankaras, and do not try to refute the existence of dravya in vain. Because, like a Bauddha monk, if you take dravya as absolutely perishable, everything such as feelings of satisfaction, exertion etc., as well as, bondage, and Final Emancipation, will have no scope of existence. What happened, when Asvamitra was not convinced although he was persuaded with arguments-- iya paNNavio vijao na pavajaha kao tao bajjho / viharaMto rAyagihe nAuM to khaMDarakkhehiM // 125 // 2420 //

Page #151
: 127 Vada ] Nilnavavada gahio sIsehiM samaM ee himara tti jaMpamANehi / saMjayavesacchaNNA sajjhaM save samANeha // 126 // 2421 // amhe sAvaya ! jayao katthuppaNNA kahiM ca pabvaiyA / amugattha beMti saDDhA te vocchaNNA tayA ceva // 127 // 2422 // tubbhe tabvesadharA bhaNie bhayao sakAraNaM ca tti / paDivaNNA gurUmUlaM gaMtUNa tao paDikantA // 128 // 2423 // 125. Iya pannavio vi jao na pavajjai kao tao bajjho I ___ Viharanto Rayagihe naum to khandarakkhehim. (2420) 126. Gahio sischim samam ee'himara tti jampamanehim ! Sanjayavesacchanna sajjham savve samancha. (2421) 127. Amhe ! savaya! jayav katthuppanna kahim ca pavvaiya ! Amugattha benti saddha te vocchanna taya ceva. (2422) 128. Tubbhe tavvesadhara bhanie bhayao sakaranam ca tti i Padivanna gurumalam gantana tai padikkanta (2423) [iti prajJApito'pi yato na prapadyate sa kRtastato baahyH| viharan rAjagRhe jJAtvA tataHkhaNDarakSaH // 125 // 2420 // gRhItaHziSyaiHsamamete'bhimarA iti jlpdbhiH| saMyataveSacchannAH, sadyaHsarvAn samAnayeha // 126 // 2421 // vayaM zrAvaka ! yatayaH kutrotpannAH kadA ca pravrajitAH / amuntraka bruvanti zrAddhAste vyucchinnAstadaiva // 127 // 2422 // yUyaM tadveSadharA bhaNite bhayataH sakAraNaM ceti / pratipannA gurumUlaM gatvA tataH pratikrAntAH // 128 // 2423 // 125. Iti prajnapito'pi yato na. prapadyate sa kritastato bahyah / Viharan Rajagrihe jnatva tatah khandaraksaih. (2420) 126. Grihitah sisyaih samamete'bhimara iti jalpadbhih | Samyatavesacchannah, sadyah sarvan samanayeha (2421) 127. Vayam sravaka! yatayah kutrutpannah kada ca pravrajitah 1 Amutrakn brius anti sraddhaste vyucchinnastadaiva. (2422)

Page #152
: 128 : Jinabbarlra Gani's (The fourth 128. Yuyam tadvesadhara bbaaite bhayatah sakaranam ceti! Pratipanna gurumalam gatva tatah pratik rantah. (2423) ] Trans. 125-126-127-128. Although persuaded in this way by the preceptor as well as by Sthaviras, when he was not convinced, Asvamitra was expelled from the Sangha.x Then having apprehended his arrival at the city of Rajagriha, the khanda-raksakas (watchmen) caught him along with his pupils, saying that " These are burglers, in disguise of ascetics." " They should be brought here immediately." "O sravaka ! we are ascetics" said Asvamitra. "Whom do you belong to ?' and when were you initiated ? We belong to such and such a place and we were initiated at such and such a time." was the reply. They, being dead, have perished there and then only. You seem to be imposters (and hence should be punished. ) When thus told, they resorted to their original (school of) preceptor and got themselves re-initiated. 2420-2423. TIkAH-125-126-127-128 uktArthA eva, navaraM "bhaNie bhayao sakAraNaM ca ti" tai khaNDarakSazrAvakairevaM pUrvokte bhaNite sati bhayato bhayAt sakAraNaM ca sayuktikaM ca samAkAnuzAstirUpaM tadvacaH pratipannAste'zvamitrapramukhA nihavasAdhavaH // 2423 // End of the Discussion with the Fourth Nihnava. -99 * Congregation.

Page #153
Chapter VI // pnycmnihnvvktnytaa|| - Discussion with the Fifth Nihnava. aTThAvIsA do vAsasayA taiA siddhiM gayassa vIrassa / do kiriyANaM diTThI ullugatIre samuppaNNA // 129 // 2424 129. Atthavisa do vasasaya taia Siddhim gayasya Virassa i Do-kiriyanam ditthi Ullugatire samuppanna. (2424) [aSTAviMzatyA dve varSazate tadA siddhiM gatasya vIrasya / dvaikriyANAM dRSTirullukAtIre samutpannA // 129 // 2424 // 129. Astavimsatya dve varsasate tauda Siddhim gatasya Virasyal Dvaikriyanam drstir Ullukatire samutpanna. (2424)] Trans. 129. Then, was originated the theory of Dvaikriyasa, on the bank of the river Ulluka), two hundred and twentyeight years after (the Tirthankara) sramana Bhagavan Maha. vira had attained Nirvana. 2424. ___TIkA-129 aSTAviMzatyadhike dve varSazate tadA siddhiM gatasya zrImanmahAvIrasyAtrAntare dvaikriyAnihavAnAM dRSTirullukAtIre samutpameti // 2424 // naikheDajaNavaulluga mahAgiri dhaNagutta avagaMge ya / kiriyA do rAyagihe mahAnavotIra maNinAe // 130 // 2425 // 1. Who hold that two processes of feeling, work simultaneously. 2. Or in the city of Ullukatira according to another interpretation.

Page #154
:130: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fifth 130. Nai kheda janava Ulluga Mahagiri Dhanagutta Ajjagange ya Kiriya do Rayagihe Mahatavotira Maninae. (2425) [nadIkheTajanapadolluke mahAgirirdhanagupta AryagaGgazca / kriye do rAjagRhe mahAtapastIra maNinAgaH // 130 // 2425 // 130. Nadikhetajanapadollukc MahagirirDhanagupta Aryagain gascal Kriye do Rajagrihe Mahatapastira Maninagah. (2425)] Trans. 130. In the village named after (river) Ulluka, (there lived ) Mahagiri, Dhanagupta, and Arya-ganga (who upheld the theory of) two processes (taking place at one time ). Mani-naga (brought him to the right path) in Rajagriha near the stream (of) Mahatapastira. 2425. TIkA-130 ullukA nAma nadI tadupalakSito janapado'pyullukA / ullukAnadyAzcaikasmistIre dhUlipAkArAvRtanagaravizeSarUpaM kheTasthAnamAsIda, dvitIye tUllukAtIraM nAma nagaram / anye tvAhuH etadevollukAtIra dhUliprAkArakRtatvAt kheTamucyate / tatra ca mahAgiriziSyo dhanagupto nAma / asyApi ziSya AryagaGgo nAmAcAryaH / ayaM ca nadyAH pUrvataTe, tadAcAryastvaparataTe / tato'nyadA saratsamaye sarivandanArtha gacchan gaGgo nadImuttarati / sa ca khlvaattH| tatstasyopariSTAduSNena dakhate khallI / adhastAttu nadyAH zItalajalena shaitymutpdyte| tato'trAntare kathamapi mithyAtvamohanIyodayAdasau cintitavAn-aho ! siddhAnte yugapatkriyAdvAnubhavaH kila niSiddhaH, ahaMtvekasminneva samaye zaityamoSNaM ca vedayAmi, ato'nubhavaviruddhatvAd nedamAgamoktaM zobhanamAbhAti / iti vicintya gurubhyo nivedayAmAsa / tatastaivakSyamANayuktibhiH prajJApito'sau / yadA ca svAgrahagrastabuddhitvAd na kizcit pratipadyate / tadoddhAyya bAgha kRto viharan rAjagRhanagaramAgataH tatra ca mahAtapastIraprabhavanAgni prazravaNe maNinAganAno nAgasya caityamasti / tatsamIpe ca sthito gaGgaH parSatpurassaraM yugapatkriyAdvayavedanaM prarUpayati sma / tacca zrutvA prakupito maNinAgastamavAdIt-are duSTa zikSaka ! kimevaM prajJApayasi, yato'treva pradeze samavasRtena zrImadvardhamAnasvAminaikasmin samaye ekasyA eva kriyAyA vedanaM

Page #155
Vada ] Nihrravavada : 131: prarUpitam / tacceha sthitena mayApi zrutam / tat kiM tato'pi laSTataraH prarUpako bhavAn , yenaivaM yugapatkiyAdvayavedanaM prarUpayasi ? / tatparityajaitAM kUTaparUpaNAm , anyathA nAzayiSyAmi tvAm / ityAdi-taduditabhayavAkyairyuktivacanaizca prabuddho'sau mithyAduSkRtaM datvA gurumUlaM gatvA pratikrAnta iti // 2425 / / Digest of Commentary : D. C. 130. Ullukatira is interpreted in three ways :(1) On one of the banks of the river Ulluka, there was a place surrounded by a fort of dust. There was a city named Ullukatira. (3) Since Ullukatira was surrounded by heaps of dust, it was known as a Kheta; also*. There lived a sadhu named Dhanagiri in the above-mentioned city. He was the pupil of Acarya Mahagiri and he had a pupil named Gangacarya. Once upon a time, Arya Gangacarya was crossing the river Ulluka while going to pay his homage to his preceptor, who was staying on the opposite side of the river. Arya Gangacarya was bald-headed. It was autumn and the water of the river was cold. So, while crossing the river his bald head felt heat from sunshine, and his feet felt cold due to the river-water being cold. At this time, under the influence of Mithyatva Mohaniya (wrong belief caused by delusion), Gangacarya disbelieved the principle of Agamas that two processes of sensation could never take place simultaneously and thought that he felt the sensations of heat and cold at the same time. He reported the view-point to his preceptor and declared) that the principle of the Agamas was false on the ground that it was contrary to the actual experience which he had undergone. 3. Kheta=Village. 4. Of the three iuterpretations mentioned here, the commentator seems to have chosen the first one.

Page #156
: 132: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fifth The preceptor tried to convince him of the validity of the religious principle of the Agamas, but he dill not change his belief. Consequently, he was expelled from the Sangha. Then, during the course of his wanderings from place to place, he went to the city of Rajagriha. There, in the midst of an assembly gathered near the temple of a serpent-god named Maninaga situated on the bank of a spring named Mahatapastira, he preached his theory of dvikriya. Maninaga was highly enraged at the arguments of Gangacarya, anil he sail, "O wicked monk ! Why do you try to preach such an ignoble principle here? Do you claim yourself to be even a greater preacher the Great Tirthankara sriman Vardhamana Swani who laid down, in this city of Rajagriha, the principle that one and only one process of experience could take place at one time? What do you mean by preaching a false theory of two processes of experience working at one time? Give up holding such falsc notions or clse you will ruin yourself." Being afraid of Maninaga, and becoming cnlightened by sound reasoning, Arya Ganyacarya gave up his false belief and at last resorted to the school of his old preceptor after having excused Maninaga for his apparently harsh deed. 2425. Now, the whole story is narrated in detail. nAmullugamuttarato sarae sIyajalamajagaMgassa / sUrAbhitattasiraso sIusiNaveyaNobhayao // 131 // 2426 / / laggo'yamasaggAho jugavaM ubhayakiriyovaogo tti / jaM do vi samayameva ya sIusiNaveyaNAo me // 132 // 2427 // 131. Naimullugamuttarato sarae siyajalamajjagangassa Surabhitattasiraso si-usinaveyanobhayao. (2426) 132. Laygo'yamasaygaho jugavam ubhayakiriyoyavaogo tti Jam do vi samayaineva ya si-usinuveyanao me. (2427)

Page #157
Nihnavavada Vada] :133: [nadImullukAmuttarataH zaradi zItajalamAryagaGgasya / sUrAbhitaptazirasaH zItoSNavedanobhayataH // 131 // 2426 // lagno'yamasadgraho yugapadubhayakriyopayoga iti / yad dve api samakameva ca zItoSNavedane me // 132 // 2427 // 131. Nadimullukamuttaratah saradi sitajalamaryagangasya i Surabhitaptasirasah sitosnavedanobhayatah. (2426) 132. Lagno'yamasadgraho yugapadubhayakriyopayoga iti 1 Yad dve api samakameva ca sitosnavedane me. (2427)] Trans. 131-132. While crossing the cold waters of river Ulluka in Autumn, as he felt the sensations of cold as well as of heat, due to his head being heated by Sushine, Arya Ganga drew a false conclusion that "Since I have felt both the sensations-that of cold as well as of heat-at one time, the two processes of experience work simultaneously." (2426-2427) TIkA-131-132 gatArthe, navaramAryagaGgasya lamo'yamasadgraho yadutayugapatkriyAdvayasaMvedanopayogo'sti, yad yasmAd me mama dve api zItoSNavedane samakAlameva stH| prayogazcAtrayugapadubhayakriyAsaMvedanamasti, anubhavasiddhatvAt , mama pAdazirogatazItoSNakriyAsaMvedanavaditi // 2426 // 2427 // D. C. In support of his theory, (which is really speaking nothing but misapprehension ) Gangacarya argues as follows:---- " Since my head felt hot due to sunshine, and my feet felt cold at the same time due to cold waters running beneath, I felt both the sensations simultaneously. It is clear, therefore, that the processes of undergoing both the feelings are working simultaneously. This is supported by my practical experience." Then, taratamajogeNAyaM guruNA'bhihio tumaM na lakkhesi / samayAisuhamayAo maNo'ticalasuGamayAo ya // 13 // 2428 //

Page #158
: 134: [The fifth Taratamajogenayam guruna'bhihio tumam na lakkhesiI Samayaisuhumayao mano 'ticalasuhumayao ya. (2428 ) [ taratama yogenAyaM guruNA'bhihitastvaM na lakSayasi / samayAdi sUkSmatAto mano'ticalasUkSmatAtazca // 133 // 2428 // 133. 133. Jinabhadra Gani's Taratamayogenayam guruna'bhihitastvam na laksayasi Samay adisuksmatato mano 'ticalasuksmatatasca. (2428) ] Trans. 133. The acarya replied : "That takes place in ( regular) turn. You are (not able) to mark (it) due to exquisite unstability and subtlety of mind, as well as, subtlety of time etc. 2428. " TIkA- 133 guruNA'bhihito'sau - hanta ! yo'yaM yugapatkriyAdvayAnubhavastvayA gIyate sa taratamayogena krameNaiva bhavataH saMpadyate, na yugapat paraM sadapi kramabhavanamasya tvaM na lakSayasi, samayA -''valikAdeH kAlasya sUkSmatvAt, tathA manasazrAticalatvenAtisUkSmatvena cAzusaMcAritvAditi / tasmAt " anubhavasiddhatvAt ' ityasiddho'yaM heturiti // 2428|| D. C. Acarya Dhanagupta-Feeling of two sensations does not actually take place simultaneously as you represent, but both the sensations are felt one after the other. You are not able to mark such a process, because the period of interval between the two different experiences is extremely short, and the mind, which feels the two sensations one after the other, is fickle and subtle by its very nature. Your apprehension of the practical experience undergone by your own self, is therefore wrong and hence your theory is baseless. 133 (2428) suhumAsucaraM cittaM iMdiyadeseNa jeNa jaM kAlaM / saMbajjhai taM tammUttanANaheu ti no teNa // 134 // 2429 // uvalabhae kiriyAo jugavaM do dUrabhiNNadesAo / pAya - siroMgaya-sI upahaveyaNANu bhavaruvAo // 135 // 2430 // For Private Personal Use Only

Page #159
Vada ] 134. : 135: Suhumasucaram cittam indiyadesena jena jam kalam | Sambajjhai tam tammattananaheu tti no tena ( 2429) 135. Uvalabhae kiriyao jugavam do darabhinnadesao | Paya-sirogaya-siunhaveyananubhavaruva. (2430) [sUkSmAzucaraM cittamindriyadezena yena yasmin kAle / saMbadhyate tat tanmAtra jJAnaheturiti no tena // 134 // 2429 // upalabhate kriye yugapad dve dUra- bhinnadezAt / pAda - zirogatazItoSNavedanAnubhavarUpe // 135 // 2430 // 134. Nihnavavada 135. Saksmasucaram cittamindriyadesena yena yasmin kale ! Sambadhyate tat tanmatrajnanaheturiti no tena. (2429 ) Upalabhate kriye yugapad dve dara-bhinnadesat | Pada-sirogatasito-snavedananubhavarape. (2430) ] Trans. 134-135. Mind, subtle and quick (as it is ), becomes the cause of perception, only with regard to those senseorgans with which it is connected and that (period of) time (only) during which (the perception takes plase). So, two processes in the form of feeling heat and cold at head and feet ( respectively ), could not take place simultaneously, owing to the two places being extremely remote 2429-2430. TIkA - 134 - 135 sUkSmamAzucaraM ca cittaM manaH, tatra sUkSmaM sUkSmAtIndri yapudgalaskandhanirvacatvAt, AzucaraM ca zIghrasaMcaraNazIlatvAt / tatazca tadevaMbhUtaM cittaM yena yena kAyAdyAkArasparzanAdidravyendriyasaMbandhinA dezena saha yasmin kAle saMbadhyate saMyujyate tasmin kAle tanmAtrajJAnaheturbhavati yena sparzanAdidravyendriyadezena saMbadhyate tajjanyasyaiva zItAdiviSayasyoSNAdiviSayasya vaikataravijJAnasya heturjAyate, na tu yenendriyadezena saha satkAle svayaM tada na saMbaddhaM tajjanyajJAnasyApi heturityarthaH / iti zabdo vAkyasamAptyarthaH / yenaivam tena kAraNena no naiva dUrabhinnadeze dve kriye ko'pi yugapadupalabhate saMvedayata iti saMbandhaH / kathaMbhUte dve kriye ? ityAha- pAda - zirogatazItoSNavedanayoranubhavanamanubhavastadrUpe tadAtmike / atra prayogaH - iha pAda - zirogatazItoSNavedane yugapad na ko'pisaMve , For Private Personal Use Only

Page #160
: 136 : Jinalliatra Gani's [ The fifth dayate, bhinnadezatvAt , vindhya-himavacchikharasparzanakriyAdvayavaditi "anubhava siddhatvAt" ityasiddho'yaM heturiti // 2429 // 2430 // ___D. C. Mind is subtle, because it is beyond the perception of senses, and quick, because it moves swiftly. Such a mind becomes the cause of feeling heat, coll cte, as a result :of its contact with sense-organs, like that of touch ete; for a particular period of time during which the contact is maintainol. When it is not connected with the proper sense-organ, it does not work as the cause of perception by means of that seusc-organ. It is, thereforc, utterly impossible for anyone to un'lergo sensations of heat and cold simultaneously, at two extremely repote sense-organs like head and foet. Your arriment of personal experience is baseless from this view point also. 13-1:35 (2129--2-130) Morecver, upaogamao jIvo uvaujai jeNa jammi jaM kaalN| so tammaovaogo hoi jahiMdovaogammi // 136 // 2431 // 136. Uvaogamao jivo uvaujjai jena jamui jam kalam i So taminaovaogo hoi jahinduvao jammi. (2431) [upayogamayo jIva upayujyate yena yasmin yasmin kaale| sa tanmayopayogo bhavati yathendropayogena // 136 // 2431 // 136. Upayogamayo jiva upayujyate yena yasmin yasmin kale / Sa tanmayopayogo bhavati yathendropayogena (2431) ] Trans. 136. Whenever the soul which is upayoga-mayas, is engaged (with a particular sense-organ), it becomes applicable to that ( sense-organ) only, as in the case of (one under the ) employment of Indra. 2431. TIkA-136 upayogenaiva kevalena nivRtta upayogamayo jIvaH / tataH ma yena kenApi sparzanAdIndriyadezena karaNabhUtena yasmin zItoSNAdyanyataraviSaye "jaM 5. i. c. Complete hy application to or engagement with a sense-organ.

Page #161
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 137: kAlaM ti" yasmin kAla upayujyate sAvadhAno bhavati tanmayopayogI bhavatiyatra zItAdhantarArthaupayuktastanmayopayoga eva bhavati nAnyathopayukta ityarthaH / udAharaNamAha-"jahiM dovaogammi ti" yathendropayoge vartamAno mANavakastanmayopayoga eva bhavati, na punrrthaantrmyopyogH| idamatra tAtparyam-ekasmin kAla ekatraivArthaupayukto jIvaH saMbhavati, na tvarthAntare, pUrvoktasAMkaryAdidoSaprasaGgAt / tatazca yugapatkriyAdvayopayogAnubhavo'siddha eveti // 2431 // ___D. C. Jiva is upayoga-maya by nature. So, when it applies itself to a particular sense-organ, say, that of touch, and feels the sensation of, say, heat and cold, it is completely devoted to that sense-organ, and to those subjects of sensations at that time and is not utilized elsewhere. As for example, when a person, say, Manavaka is employed in the service of Indra, he is entirely at the disposal of Indra, and does not work for anyone else. Similarly, when the Soul is employed for the perception of a particular object, it remains entirely at the disposal of that indriya and the object concerned, so long as it is connected with them. In short, Jiva is applicable to one sense-organ at one time, and never to two at the same time. For, otherwise, faults like that of Sankarya etc. would arise. Thus, the theory of two kriyas taking place at one time, is invalid. so taduvaogamettovauttasatti tti tassamaM ceva / atyaMtarovaogaM jAu kahaM keNa vaMseNa ? // 137 // 2432 // 137. So taduvaogamettovauttasatti tti tassamam ceva Atthantarovaogam jau kaham kena vatnsena ? (2432) [sa tadupayogamAtropayuktazaktiriti tatsamameva / arthAntaropayogaM yAtu kathaM kena vAMzena ? // 137 // 2432 // 137. Sa tadupayogamatropayuktasaktiriti tatsamamevat Arthantaropayogam yatu katham kena vamsena ? (2432) ]

Page #162
:138: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fifth Trans. 137. How could that (Soul) with all its energy utilized at the disposal of one object, be utilized for another (either ) wholly or (even ) partially exactly along with it ? 2432. TIkA-137 sa jIvaH "taduvaogamettovauvasatti ti" tasya vivakSitaikArthasyopayogastadupayogaH sa eva tanmAtraM tatropayuktA vyApRtA niSThAM gatA zaktiryasya sa tadupayogamAtropayuktazaktiriti kRtvA kathaM tatsamakAlamevArthAntaraM upayogaM yAtu 1-na kathaJcidityarthaH, sAMkaryAdiprasaGgAt / kiJca, sarvairapi vapradezaikasminnarthaupayukto jIvaH kenodvaritenAMzenArthantaropayogaM vrajatu 1 / nAstyeva hi sa kazcidudvaritAMzo yena tatsamakamevArthAntaropayogamasau gacchediti bhAvaH // 2432 // D. C. Acarya:-When the Soul employs all its energy in the perception of one (object), it is not possible for it to work for the perception of another at the same time. And, since all the parts of Jiva are applied together at one place, it is not even possible to apply itself even partially at another place simultaneously. Ganga :-If two processes of perception do not work simultaneously, as you say, what makes me feel like that ? 137 (2432) The answer issamayAisuhumayAo manasi jugacaM ca bhinnakAlaM pi / uppaladalasayavehaM va jaha va tadalAyacakaM ti // 138 // 2433 // 138. Samayaisuhumayao mannasi jugavam ca bhinnakalam pii Uppaladalasayaveham va jaha va tadalayacakkam ti (2433) [samayAdisUkSmatAto manyase yugapaca bhinnakAlamapi / utpaladalazatavedhamiva yathA vA tadalAtacakramiti // 138 // 2433 // 138. Samayadisuksmatato manyase yuga pacca bhinnakalamapi | Utpaladalasatavedhamiva yatha va tadalatacakramiti (2433)]

Page #163
Vada ] Nihnavavada :139: ___ Trans. 138. On account of acute subtlety of time etc. you take an action taking place at different times as simultaneous as in the case of boring a hole into hundred petals of lotus or (rotating of) a circular series of (burning) coal. 2433. TIkA-138 samayAvalikAdikAlakRtavibhAgasya sUkSmatvAd bhinnakAlamapi kAlavibhAgena pravRttamapi kriyAdvayasaMvedanamutpalapatrazatavedhavad yugapat pravRttamiva manyase tvam / na hi utpalapatrazatamauttarAdharyeNa vyavasthApitaM sutIkSNayApi sUcyA chekena samarthenApi ca vedhakartA samakAlameva vidhyate, kintu kAlabhedena, uparyuparitane'viddhe'dhodhovartinaH patrasya vedhAyogAt , atha ca vedhakartA yugapad vihitameva vedhaM manyate, tadvedhanakAlabhedasya sUkSmatvena durlakSatvAt / yathA vA vat prasiddhamalAtacakraM kAlabhedena dikSu bhramadapi bhramaNakAlabhedasya sUkSmatvena duravagamatvAd nirantarabhramaNameva lakSyate / evamihApi zIto-SNakriyAnubhavakAlabhedasya sUkSmatvena duravaseyatvAd yugapadiva tadanubhavaM manyate bhavAniti // 2433 // D. C. Acarya:-When a strong person bores a hole into a hundred petals of lotus with a small needle after arranging the one over the other, he thinks that all the petals are pierced through simultaneously. But really speaking, that is not so. A petal beneath is not pierced unless and until the one above it is actually pierced through. Thus, really, every petal is pierced through one after the other, and hence, at different times. This difference in tine is so minute that the person boring the hole, is not able to mark it. So, also, when a circular series of burning coal is rotated, it does rotate in different directions at different times. But the timegap between every two directions is so small due to its quick speed, that one apprehends it only as moving constantly in one direction. The same is the case here also. Sensations of heat and cold are definitely felt at different times, but they are not so apprehended because of subtlety of time eto.

Page #164
: 140: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fifth Thus, you are wrong in believing that the two processes of perception take place simultaneously. 138 (2433) And, cittaM pi neMdiyAI samei samamaha ya khippacAri tti / samayaM va sukkasakkulidasaNe savvovaladdhi tti // 139 // 2434 // sabdiovalaMbhe jai saMcAro maNassa dullkkho| egeMdiovaogaMtarammi kiha hou sulakakho ? // 140 // 2435 // 139. Cittam pi nendiyaim samei samamaha ya khippacari ttis Samayam va sukkasakkulidasane savvovaladhi tti. (2434) 140. Savvendiovalambhe jai sancaro manassa dullakkho , Egendiovaogantarammi kiha hou sulakkho? (2435) [cittamapi nendriyANi sameti samamatha ca kSipracArIti / samakamiva zuSkazaSkulIdazane sarvopalabdhiriti // 139 // 2434 // sarvendriyopalambhe yadi saMcAro manaso durlkssH| ekendriyopayogAntare kathaM bhavatu sulakSaH // 140 // 2435 // 139. Cittamapi nendriyani sameti samamatha ca ksipracaritis Samakamiva suskasaskulidasane sarvopalabdhiriti (2434) 140. Sarvendriyopalambhe yadi sancaro manaso durlaksah Ekendriyopayogantare katham bhavatu sulaksah. (2435)] Trans. 139-140. Mind also does not combine itself with ( all the) sense-organs at the same time; ( but) since it is quick in movement, its connection with the sense-organs is apprehended as simultaneous, just as there is apprehension of (all) tastes at ( the time of ) eating dry sesamum cake. (And ), if the movement of mind is difficult to be traced at the (time of) perception of all sense-organs, how could it be easily apprehended in (case of) engagement with one sense-organ? (2434-2435) TIkA-139-140 cittamapi ca naivendriyANi samameva sameti mano'pi naivendriyaiH saha yugapat saMbadhyata ityarthaH / upalakSaNatvAd nApi ziraH-pAdAdibhiH

Page #165
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 141: sparzanendriyadezairyugapat saMbadhyate, atha ca kSipracAri zIghrasaMcaraNazIlaM taditi kRtvA samakamiva yugapadiva "sarvatra saMbaddhaM lakSyate" iti shessH| dRSTAntamAha"samayaM vetyaadi"| "samayaM vA" ityetadantaraM yojitamapyAcyA punarapIha yojyate / tatra vAzabdo yathArthe / yathAzabdazca dRSTAntopa-yAsArthe / yathA zuSka zaSkulikAdazane sarveSAmapi zaSkulikAgatarUpa-rasa-gandha-sparza-zabdAnAmupalabdhiH sarvopalabdhirasamakaM pravRttApi samakaM lakSyate, tathA'trApi manaH-ziraH-pAkSadibhiH sparzanendriyadezairindriyAntaraizca krameNa saMbadhyamAnamapi yugapat saMvadhyamAnaM lakSyata ityarthaH / idamatra hRdayam-iha dIrghA zuSkAM ca zaSkulikAM kasyacid bhakSayavastadrUpaM cakSuSA vIkSamANasya rUpajJAnamutpadyate, tadgandhaM ca ghrANenA''jighrato gandhajJAnam, tadrasaM ca rasanayA''khAdayato rasajJAnam , tatsparza ca sparzanena vedayataH sparzajJAnam , carcaNotthaM tacchabdaM ca zrRNavataH shbdjnyaanmupjaayte| etAni ca pazcApi jJAnAni krameNaiva jAyante, anyathA sAMkaryAdidoSapasaGgAt, matyAdijJAnopayogakAle cAvadhyAdhupayogasyApi prApteH, ekaM ca ghaTAdikamartha vikalpayatojjantAnAmapi ghaTAdyarthavikalpAnAM pravRttiprasaGgAca / na caitadasti / tataHkrameNa jAyamAnAnyapyetAni jJAnAni pratipattA "yugapadutpadyante" iti manyate, samapA''balikAdikAlavibhAgasya sUkSmatvAt / evamihApi ziraH pAdAdimiH sparzanendriyadezairindriyAntaraizca krameNa saMbadhyamAnamapi manaH pratipattA yugapat saMvadhyamAnamadhyavasyati / na tu tattvato'sau manasaH svabhAvaH, tathA coktam"-yugapajjJAnAnutpacirmanaso liGgam" iti / yadi coktanyAyena sarvendriyadvAreNotpadyamAna uphlamme krameNa saMcarato manasaH saMcAro durlakSaH, tarhi kathamekasyaida sparzanendriyamAtrasya zItavedanopayogAduSNavedanopayogarUpaupayogAntare janye tatsaMcArasulakSAsyAt , alakSyamANe ca tatkramasaMcAre zItoSNakriyAdvayopayogaviSayau yugapadadhyavasAyau bhavataH ? iti // 2434 // nyAkhyAtAthaiva // 2435 // D. C. Mind does not come in contact with all sense-organs at the same time. So, it is not possible for it to come in contact with the senses of touch at feet and head simultaneously. Since the movement of mind is extremely quick, mind appears as if it is connected with all the indriyas simultaneously. As for example, a person eating a sesamum cake, perceives form by morns

Page #166
: 142: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fifth of the sense of sight (eye), smell by the sense of smell (nose), taste by the sense of taste (tongue), touch by the sense of touch (skin), and sound by the sense of hearing (ear) while seeing, smelling, eating, touching, and, hearing the sound of chewing. All the five kinds of perception are attained, when the mind comes in contact with the respective five indriyas one after the other and not simultaneously. It is only due to the fact that mind is extremely quick in movement that it appears as if it is connected with all the indriyas simultaneously, but really speaking, that is not true. For, in that case, faults like sankarya would arise, while in course of perception of mati jnana etc; avadhi jnana would work with it simultaneously and while considering an object like ghata, innumerable ghatas would come up alternately without fail. But this does not actually happen in real life. "" Although the afore-mentioned perceptions are attained one after the other, the observer being unable to mark the subtle differences in time etc, apprehends all of them as produced simu. ltaneously. Here also, mind is employed in the senses of touch at head and feet respectively at different times. Still, however, one who feels the sensations of heat and cold, thinks that, mind is employed at both the places simultaneously. Really speaking, 'Non-production of many cognitions at one time is the (essential) quality of mind." Still, however, since the movement of mind passing from one object to another is difficult to be traced, the movement of mind from the cognition of heat to that of cold, becomes more difficult to be traced. In this way, it is only due to your inability to apprehend the movement of mind, that you seem to feel two sensations to-gether at one time that you labour under such misapprehensions. For, when it is not detected in case of perception of all the indriyas, it is much more difficult to detect in case of its applications to one indriya. 140 (2435) 6. For, it has already been said " Yugapajjnananutpattir-manas lingam. " For Private Personal Use Only

Page #167
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 143: Again the author states a mumber of difficulties in case of accepting the mind as applicable to more than one object at a time : annaviNiuttamaNNa viNiogaM lahai jai maNo teNaM / hasthipi dviyaM purao kimaNNacitto na lakkheha 1 // 141 // 2426 // 141. [ anyaviniyuktamanyaviniyogaM labhate yadi manastena / hastinamapi sthitaM purataH kimanyacitto na lakSayati ? || 141 || 2436 // 141. Annaviniuttamannaviniogam lahai jai mano tenam I Hatthim pi tthiyam purao kimannacitto na lakhei ? (2436) Anyaviniyuktamanyaviniyogam labhate yarli manastena | Hastinamapi sthitam puratah kimanyacitto na laksayati? (2436)] Trans. 141. If the mind engaged (already ) in (a particular) object, could be engaged in some other object at the same time, why could a person with his mind concentrated elsewhere, not observe an elephant standing in front of him ? 2436 " TIkA - 141 anyasmin zItavedanAdike'rthe viniyuktamupayuktamanyaviniyuktaM mano yadi " aNNaM ti " anya uSNa vedanAdiko 'rthastadviSayopayogo'nyastamanyaM viniyogamupayogaM labhate, " teNaM ti " tarhi kimityanyacitto'nyArthopayuktacitto devadattAdirhastinamapi purato vyavasthitaM na lakSayati / tasmAdekasminnarthaupayuktaM mano na kadAcidanyArthopayogaM labhata iti // 2436 // D. C. If the mind engaged in the process of feeling the sensation of cold is taken to have, been engaged in the process of feeling the sensation of heat at the same time, there is no reason why a person with his mind concentrated in a particular object, be not able to observe even an elephant standing in his very front. The main reason for this, is that the mind of the person being totally concentrated in some other object, it will not be able to recognize even objects like an elephant etc; standing even in his very front. 141 (2436).

Page #168
: 144 : Jinabhadra Gani's [The fifth viNiogantaralAbhe va kiM ttha niyameNa to samaM ceva / paivatthumasaMkhejA'NaMtA vA jaM na viNiogA ? // 142 // 2437 // 142. Viniigantaralabhe va kim tthu niyamena to samau ceval Paivatthumasaiikhejja'nanta va jam na vinioga ? (2437) [viniyogAntaralAbhe vA kimatra niyamena tataH samameva / prativastvasaMkhyeyA anantA vA yad na viniyogaa:?||142||2437|| 142. Viniyoganturalabhe va kimatra niyamena tatah samameval Prativastvasamkheya ananta va yad na viniyogah ? (2437) 1 Trans. 142. Or, if the (simultaneous ) application (of mind ) in another object (is accepted ), what is the use of the rule (of the application of two processes )? ( And ) then, why should innumerable or endless applications taking place simultaneously in (case of) each object be not accepted ? 2437. TIkA-142 ekopayogakAle viniyogAntarasyopayogAntarasya lAbhe veSyamANe "to ti" tataHkimatra kriyAdvayopayogalakSaNena niyamena, "jaM ti" yat prativastvasaMkhyeyA anantA vA samameva yugapadeva viniyogA neSyante / idamuktaM bhavati-yadi zItavedanopayogakAle uSNavedanopayogo'pISyate, tarhi kimatrAnena kriyAdvayopayoganaiyatyena, yadasaMkhyayA anantA vA prativastu yugapadupayogA na bhavanti, yathaikakAle dvitIyopayogastathA bahavo'pi bhavantviti bhAvaH / iha ca "davAo asaMkheje saMkhene yAvi pajjave lahai" iti vacanAdekasminnarthe samakAlamavadhijJAninaH kilotkRSTato'saMkhyeyA upayogAH prApnuvanti, zeSajJAninAMtvanantA ityabhiprAyavatA proktam-"paivatthumasaMkheja" ityAdi // 2437 // D. C. If it is accepted that the mind is engaged in another object at the same time when it is engaged in one, the rule regarding the employment of two different processes becomes useless. For, in that case, why not to accept innumerable applications of mind in case of (perception of ) each object ? It has already been said before that every object attains 7. Vide v. 760

Page #169
Vada ] Nihnavavada :145: countable or even uncountable paryayas. One possessing avadhi jnanas is able to observe a-samkhyeya oc innumerable forms at a time, while those possessing the remaining two kinds of knowledge', are able to apprehend ananta or endless paryayas at one time. 142 (2437) Now the author states the opponent's argument and refutes it :bahu-bahuvihAigahaNe naNuvaogabahuyA suebhihiaa| tamaNegaggahaNaM ciya uvaogANegayA nasthi // 1433 / 2438 // 143. Bahu-bahuvihaigahane nanuvaogabahuya sue'bhihia i Tamanegaggahanam ciya uva_ganegaya natthi. (2438) [bahu-bahuvidhAdigrahaNe nanUpayogabahutA zrute'bhihitA / tadanekagrahaNamevopayogAnekatA nAsti // 143 // 2438 // 143. Bahu-bahuvidhadigrahane nanapayogabahuta Srute'bhihital Tadanekagraharamevopayoganekata nasti. (2438)] Trans. 143. " Plurality of applications has already been sanctioned by the Holy Writ, in case of ) apprehension of numerous varieties etc." It is only the comprehension of numerous forms in general ( that is meant), (and) not the plurality of apprehensions." 2438. TIkA-143 nanu bahu-bahuvidha-kSiprA-'nizritA-'saMdigdha-dhruva setaravastugrahaNe pUrvamihaivAvagrahAdInAmanujJAne ekasminnupayogabahutA zrute'bhihitaiva, iti "paivatthumasaMkheja" ityAdi siddhasAdhanameva, iti pareNokte satyAha-"tamaNegetyAdi / tad bahuvidhAdirUpaM vastuno'nekaparyAyANAM sAmAnyarUpatayA grahaNa 8. Visual knowledge; direct knowledge of matter limited as to subject, place, time, and nature, i, e. without the help of the senses. 9. Viz. Manah-paryaya (Mental Knowledge),-the state of mental perception which preceds the attainment of Kevala Jnana (Perfect Knowledge) and Kevala Darsana. (Absolute Perception).

Page #170
: 146: Jinabhattra Gari's [The fifth mAtrameva jJAne upayogayogyatAmAtravyavasthApanameva, ekasmistu vastunyekakAla - payogAnekatA kApi nAsti, krameNaivopayogAnAM bhAvAditi // 14 // 2438 // D. C. Arya Ganga -While describing the process of avagraha (general apprehension ) etc, apprehension of plenty of paryayas, has already been laid down by the Holy Writ. Then, what harm is there if we accept innumerable or endless applications (of mind) at the same time ? Acarya:--That is not proper. For, in that rule, general apprehension of innumerable paryayas of an object (with regard to the perception of an object ) is meant; but plurality of the application of mind in one object at one time is not at all meant. Applications of mind are always made one after the other. 143 (2438) samayamaNegaragahaNaM jai sIosiNadugammi ko doso ? / keNa va bhaNiyaM doso uvaogaduge viyAroSyaM // 144 // 2439 // 144. Samayamanegaggahanam jai siosinadugammi ko doso ? | Kena va bhaniyam doso uvaogaduge viyaro'yam. (2439) [samakamanekagrahaNaM yadi zItoSNadvike ko doSaH / kena vA bhaNitaM doSa upayogadvike vicAro'yam // 144 // 2439 // 144. Samakamanekagrahanam yadi sitosnadvike ko dosah? 1 Kena va bhanitam dosa upayogadvike vicaro'yam (2439) ] Trans. 144. " If the simultaneous apprehension of many paryayas (is acceptible), what harm is there (in accepting) sensations of heat and cold (being felt ) simultaneously." Who says that there is any harm (in accepting so )? Here the question is of two upayogas or applications ( being simultaneous" 2439. TIkA-144 yadyAcArya ! samakaM yugapadanekeSAmarthAnAM grahaNaM tvayApyanujJAyate tadA zItoSNadvaye gRhyamANe ko doSaH yena gaGgAbhyupagamo pyate ? / sUrirAha

Page #171
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 147: " keNa vetyAdi " kena punarbhaNitam - hanta ! yat samakamanekArthagrahaNe doSaH ? gRhyante yugapadapi sAmAnyarUpatayA senA-vana-grAma-nagarAdivadane kerdhyA iti, etad na nivArayAmo vayamityarthaH, kevalamihopayogadvaye vicAro'yaM prastutaH / sa ca upayoga ekadA eka eva bhavati, na tvaneka iti / / 2439|| D. C. Arya Ganga-If you have no objection in admitting apprehension of numerous objects together at a time, what harm is there in accepting apprehension of the sensations of heat and cold together ? Acarya:- If you say like that, you have not understood the relevent point under consideration. There is no harm in admitting the apprehension of a number of objects at a time. Generally, objects like army, forests, villages etc. could be apprehended together. We do not doubt that view-point. What we object to, is the theory of accepting numerous upayogas or applications being made simultaneously. There can never be more than one upayoga or application at one time 144 (2439) Arya Ganga, then puts another question and Acarya replies :samayamaNegaggahaNe egANegovaogabheo ko 1 / sAmaNNamegajogo khaMdhAvArovaogo vva // 145 // 2440 // khaMdhAvAro'yaM sAmaNNamettamegovaogayA samayaM / pazvatthuvibhAgo puNa jo so'Negovaoga ti // 146 // 244 // 145. 146. Samayamanegaggahane eganegovaogabheo ko? Samannamegajogo khandhavarovaogo vva. (2440) Khandhavaro'yam samannamettamegovaogaya samayam | Paivatthuvibhago puna jo so negovaoga tti (2441) [ samakamanekagrahaNa ekAnekopayoga bhedaH kaH ? // . sAmAnyamekayogaH skandhAvAropayoga iva // 145 || 2440 || For Private Personal Use Only

Page #172
: 148: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fifth skandhAvAro'yaM sAmAnyamAtrame'kopayogatA samakam / prativastuvibhAgaH punaryaH so'nekopayoga iti // 146 // 2441 // 145. Samakamanekagrahana ekanekopayogabhedah kah ? | Samanyamekayogah skandhavaropayoga iva. (2440) 146. Skandhavaro'yam samanyamatrame'kopayogata samakami Prati-vastuvibhagaa punaryah so'nekopayoga iti (2441) ] Trans. 145-146. "While admitting the apprehension of many objects at a time, what is the sense in believing in distinction of one and many applications at a time. " General apprehension (constitutes ) one application as in the case of the apprehension of a retinue of army. (While apprehending that ) " This is a retinue of army " there is general apprehension only (constituting ) one application at a time. But that which is (contained in ) every portion of an object (gives rise to) plurality of application. (2440-2441) TIkA-145-146 nanu samakaM yugapadanekArthagrahaNe'bhyupagamyamAne ko'yamekAnekopayogamedo nAma, yenocyate-"uvaogANegayA natthi" iti ? / atrottaramAha-"sAmaNNamegajogo ti" yAsAmAnyopayogaH sa ekopayogo'bhidhIyate, skandhAvAropayogavaditi dRssttaantH| amumevArtha spaSTayati-"khaMdhAvAro'yamityAdi" samakaM yugapadeva 'skandhAvAro'yam' ityevaM yat sAmAnyaM sAmAnyamAtragrAhako ya upayoga ityarthaH, sa ekopayogatA bhaNyate / yaH punaH prativastu "ete hastinaH, amI azvAH, ime rathAH, ete padAtayaH, ete khaDga-kumbhAdayaH, zirastrANakavacAdayaH, paTa-kuTikAH, dhvajAH, patAkAH, DhakkA-saja-kAhalAdayaH, karama-rAsabhAdayazca ityAdiko vibhAgo bhedAdhyavasAyaH so'nekopayoga iti // 2440 // 2441 // D. C. Arya Ganga :- Apprehension of numerous objects is acceptible to you, as you say. Then, what is the sense in distinguishing between one and many upayogas working at one time? Acarya :-General apprehension of many objects at a time, constitutes only one application (of mind). After apprehending

Page #173
Vada] Nihnavavada :149: a retinue of army, when we say that " This is a retinue ot army," there is only one application of mind at a time. But when we apprehend each individual portion of it, by saying that "Those are the elephants," "Those are the horses", " These are chariots", " Here is infantry", " These are swords, pots etc." " Those are helmets, armours, tents, flags, banners, drums, conches, camels etc. the apprehension of each individual portion requires a separate application of mind, giving rise to plurality of application. 145-146 (2440-2441) te ciya na saMti samayaM sAmaNNANegagahaNamaviruddhaM / egamaNegaM pi tayaM tamhA sAmaNNabhAveNaM // 147 // 2442 // 147. Te cciya na santi samayam samannanegagahanamaviru ddham | Egamanegam pi tayam tamha samannabhavenam. (2442) [ta eva na santi samakaM sAmAnyAnekagrahaNamaviruddham / ekamanekamapi tat tasmAt sAmAnyabhAvena // 147 // 2442 // 147. Ta eva na santi samakam samanyanekagrahanamaviru ddham | Ekamanekamapi tat tasmat samanyabhavena. (2442)] Trans. 147. They do not come into existence simultane. ously. General apprehension of many objects is not objectionable. For, in that way, even numerous objects become one in general. 2442. TIkA-147 ta evAnekopayogAH samakaM yugapad na santi na bhavantIti niSidhyante'smAbhiH / yacu sAmAnyenAnekeSAmarthAnAM yugapad grahaNaM tadaviruddhameva 'tamha tti' tasmAd yugapadanekopayoganiSedhena kimuktaM bhavati ? ityAha-egamaNegaM pItyAdi' yadidaM skandhAvArAdupayoge yugapadanekArthagrahaNamasmAbhiranujJAyate 'tayaM ti' tadanekamapyanekArthagrahaNamapi sadityarthaH / "egaMti" ekameva tattvata ekArthagrahaNamevetyarthaH / kena ? ityAha-" sAmaNNabhAveNaM ti" sAmAnyarUpatayetyarthaH / ayamatra tAtparyArthaH-yadanekArthagrahaNamanujJAyate tat sAmAnyameva rUpamAzritya,

Page #174
: 150: Jinabhadra Gani's [ The fifth vizeSarUpatayA tvanekArthagrahaNaM nAstyeva ekasmin kAla ekasyaiva vizeSopayogasya sadbhAvAditi // 2442 // D. C. Acarya:-Our objection is against taking many upayogas to work siin ultaneously. But we do not contradict the acceptance of the general apprehension of numerous objects at a time. In case of examples such as "This is the retinue of army" etc. although we propose to apprehend numerous objects at a time, really speaking, it becomes the general apprehension of one aggregate object only. Thus, since there is only one application of mind in case of general apprehension, inany objects are perceived simultaneously. Bit simultaneous apprehension of many objects in particular is not possible, because there cannot be more than one upayoga in particular at one time. 147 (2442) Applying the same principle to the sensations of heat and cold, the author states, usiNeyaM sIyeyaM na vibhAgo novaogadugamitthaM / hoja samaM dugagahaNaM sAmaNNaM veyaNA me tti / 148 // 2443 // 148. Usineyam siyeyain na vibhago novaogaduganittham | Hojja samam dugagahanam samannam veyana mc tti. (2443) [uSNeyaM zIteNaM na vibhAgo nopayogadvimityam / bhavet samaM dvikagrahaNaM sAmAnyaM vedanA mameti // 148 // 2443 / / 148. Usmeyam sitenam na vibhago nopayogadvikamittham ! Bhavet samam dvikagrahanam samanyam vedana maneti. (2443) ] Trans. 148. (It is not possible) to divide it separately as " This is the sensation of heat, and "This is the sensa. tion of) cold ", and causing thereby two separate applications (of mind) to work simultaneously. Simultaneous apprehension

Page #175
:151: Vada ] Nihnavavada of the two is possible (only', if it is in the general form expressed as " I feel two sensations." 2443. TIkA-148 "uSNeyaM zIteyaM vedanA' ityevaM yo'sau vibhAgo meo'sau neSTaH-zItoSNavibhAge zItoSNavizeSarUpatayA yugapad grahaNaM neSTamityarthaH / ata eva tadviSayamupayogadvayaM yugapad neSTam / kiM yugapad vastudvayagrahaNaM sarvathA neSTam / naivam / kutaH ? ityAha-bhavet samaM yugapad vastudvayagrahaNam / kiM vizeSarUpatayA ? / na, ityAha-sAmAnyaM sAmAnyarUpatayetyarthaH / katham ? / "vedanA me mama vartate" ityevaM yugapad dvayagrahaNaM bhavet , na tu zItoSNavedanAvizeSarUpatayetyarthaH, yugapadu. payogadvayamasaGgAt , tatra ca doSANAmuktatvAditi // 2443 // D. C. It is not desirable to make two separate divisions and remark that "This is the sensation of heat" and "This is the sensation of cold" and thereby give rise to the simultaneous apprehension of both the sensations which is absolutely impossible. For, two separate upayogas of mind, which relate to both the sensations, could not take place simultaneously. Two sensations could be experienced only by saying in a general tone that "I feel two sensations." But the two sensations of heat and cold. could never be experienced simultaneously. 148 (2443) Now, explaining the difference between samanya or generad cognition and visesa or particular cognition, the author states : jaM sAmaNNavisesA vilakkhaNA tannibaMdhaNaM jaM ca / nANaM jaM ca vibhinnA sudUraovaggahA-'vAyA // 149 // 2444 // jaM ca visesannANaM sAmananANapuvvayamavassaM / to sAmaNNavisesannANAiM negasamayammi // 150 // 2455 // 149. Jam samanmavisesa vilakkhana tannibandhanam jam cal Nanam jam ca vibhinna suduraovaggaha'vaya. (2444) 150. Jam ca visesannanam samannananapuvvayamavassami To savannavisesannanaim negasamayammi. (2445)

Page #176
* 152: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fifth [yat sAmAnyavizeSau vilakSaNau tannivandhanaM yacca / jJAnaM yacca vibhinnau sudUrato'vagrahA'vAyau // 149 / 2444 // yacca vizeSajJAnaM sAmAnyajJAnapUrvakamavazyam / tataH sAmAnya-vizeSajJAne naikasamaye // 150 // 2445 // 149. Yat samanyu-visesau vilaksunau tannilyandlhunam yacca l Jnanani yacca vibhinau suduratu'vagraha'vayau (2444) 150. Yacca visesa-jnanam samanya-jnanapurvakamavasyam 1 Tatah samanya-visesa-jnanc naika samaye. (2445)] Trans. 149-150. Since general (apprehension) and particular (apprehension) are mutually distinct, the respective cog. nitions, viz avagraha (or general cognition ) and avaya (or definite cognition ) are also widely different (from each other), and since, definite cognition certainly follows the general cognition, the two cognitions (could not take place ) simultaneously (2444-2445) TIkA-149-150 "to ti" tasmAt sAmAnyagrAhakaM vizeSagrAhakaM ca jJAnaM dve api naikasamaye naikakAlaM bhavata iti dvitIyagAthAyAM saMbandhaH / kutaH? ityAha -"jaM sAmaNNetyAdi" yad yasmAt sAmAnya-vizeSau parasparamatIvavibhinnalakSaNau bhinnajAtIyau, ataH kathaM tAvekakAlamekajJAne pratibhAsete, ekatvaprasaGgAt , sAmAnyatatsvarUpavat vizeSatatsvarUpavad vA ? / mA'bhUt tatpratibhAsaH, tathApi tajjJAne yugapad bhaviSyata ityAha-yasmAcca tanivandhanaM sAmAnyavizeSahetukaM sarvamapi jJAnaM, tat kathaM tatpratibhAsamantareNotpadyeta ? sAmAnyavizeSajJAnayorekatvAdekakAlaM te bhaviSyata iti cet / tadayuktam / kutaH ? ityAha-yasmAca sudUra vibhinau sAmAnya-vizeSajJAnarUpAvavagrahA-'vAyau, iti kathaM samakAlaM bhavataH ? / yad yasmAcAvazyakaM sAmAnyagrAhakajJAnapUrvakameva vizeSagrAhakaM jJAnam , "nAnavagRhItamIhyate, nAnIhitaM nizcIyate" ityAdivacanAt / ataH kathaM tayoryugapat sambhavaH ? iti // 2444 // 2445 / / D. C. Acarya :--Samanya and visesa types of knowledge could

Page #177
Vada] : 153: never be attained simultaneously, because they are extremely distinct from each other. Nihnavavada Arya Ganga :-Since both happen to be jnanas, what harm in there if both are accepted to have been attained simultaneously? Acarya :--That is not possible. Samanya and visesa types of knowledge represent avagraha and apaya types of knowledge respectively. Both these types are extremely different from each other as avagraha results in general cognition while apaya results in definite or particular cognition. The general cognition always precedes the particular or definite cognition. For, it has already been said that "Without general apprehension, there is no definite apprehension, without which there is no definite ascertainment." For all these reasons, it is not possible to take both the processes of jnanas to operate simultaneously. 149-150 (24442445) Again, the opponent would ask- hoja na vilakkhaNAI samayaM sAmaNNa-bheyanANAI / bahuyANa ko viroho samayammi visesanANANaM 1 || 151 / / 2446 || 151. Hojja na vilakkhanaim samayam samanna-bheyananaim | Bahuyana ko viroho samayammi visesanananam ? (2446) [ bhavetAM na vilakSaNe samakaM sAmAnya-bhedajJAne / bahukAnAM ko virodhaH samaye vizeSajJAnAnAm ? // 151 // 2446 // 151. Bhavetam na vilaksane samakam samanya-bhedajnane i Bahukanan ko virodhah samaye visesajnananam? (2446) ] Trans. 151. There may not be simultaneous (applications) when there is wide difference between the general and definite types of knowledge. (But) what is the objection in (accepting) numerous knowledges of definite type, (being attained ) simuItaneously? 2446. For Private Personal Use Only

Page #178
: 154: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fifth ____TIkA-151 nanvAcArya ! evaM tahiM asti yaduta-sAmAnya vedanAmAtragrAhaka sAmAnyajJAnaM, zItoSNavedanAvizeSagrAhakaM vizeSajJAnarUpaM bhedajJAnaM ca, ityete dve api sudUravilakSaNatvAt samakaM yugapad na bhavataH, bahUnAM tu zItoSNAdivizeSajJAnAnAM samaya ekasmin kAle jAyamAnAnAM vizeSajJAnarUpatayA teSAM bahUnAmapi tulyatvena vailakSaNyAbhAvAt ko virodhaH, yena zItoSNavedanAvizeSajJAne yugapad gaGgasya niSidhyate ? iti // 2446 // D. C. Arya Ganga :-Since there is a wide difference between samanya-jnana or general knowledge which apprehends simple sensations only, and visesa-jinana or definite knowledge which apprehends a definite sensation like that of heat or cold, they may not be taken to have been attained simultaneously. But since there is no difference in various visesa-jnanas, what harm is there in accepting a number of viscsa-jnanas to have been attained simultaneously ? 151 (2446) The Acarya replies:-- lakkhaNabheyAu ciya mAmaNNaM ca jamaNegavisayaM ti / tamaghettuM na visesannANAI teNa samayammi // 152 // 2447 // to sAmanaggahaNANaMtaramIhiyamavei tambheyaM / iya sAmanavisesAvekkho jAvaMtimo meo // 153 // 2448 // 152. Lakkhanabheyau cciya samannam ca jamanegavisayam til Tamaghettum na visesannanaim tena samayammi. (2447) 153. To samannaggahananantaramihiyamavei tabbheyam | Iya samannavisesavekkho javantimo bheo. (2448) [lakSaNabhedAdeva sAmAnyaM yadanekaviSayamiti / tadagRhItvA na vizeSajJAnAni tena samaye // 152 // 2447 // tataHsAmAnyagrahaNAnantaramIhitamavaiti tadbhedam / iti sAmAnyavizeSApekSA yAvadantimo bhedaH // 153 // 2448 //

Page #179
Vada] Nihnavavada : 155: 152. Laksanabhedadeva sannanyam yadanekavisayamitis Tadagrihitva na visesa-jhanani tena. samaye. (2447) 153. Tatah samanyagrahananantaramihitamavaiti tadbhedam | Iti samanyavisesapeksa yavadantimo bhedah. (2448)] Trans. 152-153. Since samanya or general apprehension (constitutes) a number of subjects on account of various distinctive characteristics, (there is) no (possibility of) visesa jha. nas or definite cognitions (being attained) at the same time without attaining it. Then, definite apprehension attained after general apprehension, recognizes their distinction. Such an inter-dependence of samanya and visesa continues till final distinction. (2447-2448) ___TIkA-152-153 tena kAraNena samaya ekasmin kAle bahUni vizeSajJAnAni na bhavanti / kutaH ? ityAha-lakSaNaM zItoSNAdivizeSaNasvarUpaM tasya parasparaM medA bhinnatvAd na tadgrAhakANi jJAnAni samakaM bhavanti, yasmAcAnekaviSayamanekAdhAraM sAmAnyaM, ityatastadagRhItvA na vizeSajJAnasaMbhUtirastIti, ato'pi na yugapad vizeSajJAnAni / idamuktaM bhavati-pUrva vedanAsAmAnyaM gRhItvA tata IhAM pravizya "zIteyaM pAdayovedanA" iti vedanAvizeSaM nizcinoti / zirasyapi prathama vedanAsAmAnyaM gRhItvA tata IhAM pravizya " uSNeyamiha vedanA" ityadhyavasyati / na hi ghaTavizeSajJAnAdanantarameva paTAzrayasAmAnyarUpe'gRhIte paTavizeSajJAnamupajAyate " uggaho Iha avAo ya" ityamunaiva krameNa ghaTAdivizeSajJAnotpatyamidhAnAt / evaM ca sati vizeSajJAnAdanantaramapi vizeSajJAnaM notpadyate, AstAM punaH samakAlam , sAmAnyasyAnekavizeSAzrayatvAt / tacca pUrvamagRhItvA vizeSajJAnasyA. prasavAditi / yatathaivaM sAmAnye'gRhIte nAsti vizeSajJAnam , 'to ti' tataH sAmAnyagrahaNAntaramIhitaM tadbhedaM sAmAnyabhedaM ghaTatvAdisAmAnyAzrayaM ghaTAdivizeSamityarthaH, avaiti-"ghaTAdirevA'yam" ityeva nizcinotItyarthaH / tata uttarabhedApekSayA ghaTa eva sAmAnyam / tasmizca gRhIte IhitvA "dhAtujo'yam, na mAtaH" ityevaM nizcinoti / tato dhAtujo'pyuttarabhedApekSayA sAmAnyam / tasmiMzca gRhIte IhitvA 'tAmro'yaM na rAjatAdiH" itItthaM nizcinotIti / evaM sAmAnya-vizeSApekSA vASad kartavyA yAvadantimo bhedaH sa kazcit yadanantaramIhA na pravartate / tatavaM

Page #180
: 156: Jinabhadra Gani's [The fifth na kacid vizeSajJAnAnAM yugapatpravRttisaMbhavaH, sAmAnyarUpatayA tu samakAlamapi vizeSANAM grahaNaM bhavet , yathA senA, panamityAdi na tu yugapadupayoga ityuktameva / tathA ca bhitrakAle eva zItoSNavizeSajJAne / tato bhrAntameva samakAlaM zItoSNakriyAdvayavedanaM bhavata iti // 2447 // 2448 // D. C. A number of visesa jnanas could never be attained simultaneously. There are various reasons for this. Firstly, because there is a clear distinction between various characteristics such as those of heat, cold etc, their respective jnanas could not be attained simultaneously. Secondly, general apprehension contains a number of subjects. So, without its apprehension, the visesa-jnana or cognition in particular, could never be attained. On account of this reason also, many visesa jnanas are not attained at the same time. After apprehending a general sensation, one ascertains it as particular by saying that "There is a sensation of cold on my feet." Even in (case of) head, after apprehending a general sensation, one ascertains it in particular by saying that "Here I feel the sensation of heat." One cannot attain visesa jnana of pata even after the apprehension of the visesa jnana of ghata without apprehending the general form of pata. Thus, when visesa jnana is not produced even after a visesa jnana, how could that be attained at the same time? Samanya is full of many visesas, and without apprehending samanya at first, the visesa is not apprehended in any case, Since the attainment of visesa jnana is not possible without that of samanya, the definite apprehension attained after general apprehension, recognizes the various characteristics like ghata etc. contained in the general form of ghatatva etc. and then ascertains it as ghata. One more distinction of ghata is recognized after this. With regard to a further characteristic, ghata becomes samanya, after the apprehension of which, one ascertains it as "made of metal and not of earth" This form of metal

Page #181
Vadal Nihnavavada :15: apprehended as a visesa or distinct form of ghata again becomes & samanya form with regard to further distinction. After the apprehension of this, one ascertains it as " made of copper and not of silver," Such an inter-relation of samanya and visesa continues upto the last distinction, further than which, the definite apprehension becomes impossible. So, there is no possibility of many visesa joanas to be attained simultaneously, as stated above, but a simultaneous apprehension of a number of particular objects, such as an army, forest etc. is possible. Their upayogas cannot be simultaneous. Similarly, the visesa jnanas of the sensations of heat and coll are attained only at different times, and not simultaneously. Thus, your theory of accepting the processes of undergoing both the sensations at the same time, proves to be absolutely unfounded. 152-153 (2447-2448) Then, iya paNNavio vijao na pavajaha to tao ko bajho / to rAyagihe samayaM kiriyAo do parUvaMto // 154 // 2449 / / maNinAgeNAraddho bhaovavattio paDiyohio vottuM / icchAmo gurumUlaM gaMtUNa tao paDikaMto // 155 // 2450 // 154. Iya pannavio vi jao na pavajjai to tao kao bajjho 1 To Rayagihe samayam kiriyao do paravanto. (2449) 155. Maninagenaraddho bhaovavattio padibohio vottumi ___Icchamo gurumalam gantuna tai padikkanto. (2450) [iti prajJApito'pi yato na prapadyate tataHsako kRto bAdhaH / tato rAjagRhe samakaM kriye dve prarUpayan // 154 // 2449 / / maNinAgenArabdho bhayopapatitaH pratibodhita uktva // icchAmo gurumUlaM gatvA tataH pratikrAntaH // 155 // 2450 // 154. Iti prajnapito'pi yato na prapadyate tatah sako krito bahyahi ___Tato Rajagrihe samakam kriye ave prarapayan. (2449)

Page #182
: 158: Jinabhadra Gani's (The fifth 155. Maninagenarbdho bhayopapatitah pratibodhita uktva i Icchamo gurumdlam gatva tatah pratikrantah. (2450) ] Trans. 154-155. Although persuaded in this way, when (Arya Ganga) was not convinced, he was expelled from the Gaccha (Order of Monks). Then, while asserting ( his ) theory of two processes (of feeling ) being simultaneous, in Rajagriha he was threatened by Maninaga, and brought to the right path by means of threat Finally, he declared that "We wish to return to ( the school of our original preceptor and having eturned ( to him), at last he was re-initiated. End of the Discussion with the Fifth Nihnava.

Page #183
Chapter VII // sssstthnihnvvktvytaa|| Discussion with the Sixth Nihnava. paMcasayA coyAlA taiA siddhiM gayassa viirss| purimaMtaraMjiyAe terAsiyadiTThI uppannA // 156 // 2451 // 156. Pancasaya coyala taia Siddhin gayassa Virassa 1 Purimantaranjiyae terasiya ditthi uppanna (2451) [paJcazatAni catuzcatvAriMzatA tadA siddhiM gatasya dhIrasya / puryAmantaraJjikAyAM trairAzikahaSTirutpannA // 156 // 2451 // 156. Pancasatanicatuscatvarimsata tada Siddhim gatasya Virasya / Puryamantaranjikayam trairasikadrstirutpanna. (2451)] Trans. 156. The theory of Trairasikas (upholders of the principle of three categories ) was founded in the city of Antaranjika, five hundred and forty-four years after the Tir. thankara Sramana Bhagavan Mahayira Swami had attained Niravana. 2451. TIkA-156 paJcavarSazatAni catuzcatvAriMzadadhikAni tadA siddhiM gatasya zrImanmahAvIrasya, atrAntare'ntaraJjikAyAM puryA trairAzikadRSTirutpaneti // 2451 // D. C. Easy. 156 (2451) The story of the production of the theory of Trairasikas is narrated in detail as follows :

Page #184
: 160: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth purimaMtaraMji bhUyagiha balasirI sirigutta rohagutta ya / parivAyapohasAle ghosaNapaDisehaNA vAe // 157 / 2452 // 157. Purimantaranji Bhayagiha, Balasiri, Sirigutta Rohagutte yal Parivayapottasale ghosana panisehana vae. (2452) [puryantaraJjikA bhUtagRhaM balazrIH zrIgupto rohaguptazca / parivrAjakapozAlo ghoSaNapratiSedhanA vAdaH // 157 // 2452 // 157. Puryantaranjika Bhutagriham Bulasrih Srigupto Roha guptasca | ParivrajakaPottasalo ghosanapratisedhana valah. (2452)] Trans. 157. ( There was ) a city (named ) Antaranjika. Bhotagriha (was a temple ). Balasri ( was the king ), Srigupta ( was the Acarya), and Rohagupta ( his pupil). Discussion (took place ) with a parivrajaka (a mendicant ascetic ) named Pattsala (as a result of ) taking up (his) challenge. 2452. TIkA-157 saMgrahagAtheyam / asyAzca kathAnakAdartho'vaseyaH / tadamantaraJjikA nAma nagarI / tasyAzca bahirbhUtagRhaM nAma caityam / tatra ca zrIguptanAmAcAryaH sthitH| tasyAM ca nagaryA balazrI ma rAjA / zrIguptAcAryANAM ca rohagupto nAma ziSyo'nyatra grAme sthita AsIt / ato'sau guruvndnaarthmntrjhikaayaamaagtH| tatra caikaH parivrAjako lohapaTakenodaraM baddhavA jambUvRkSazAkhayA ca haste gRhItayA nagayo bhrAmyati / kimetat ? iti ca lokena pRSTo vadati"madIyodaramatIvajJAnena pUritatvAt sphuTatIti lohapaTTena baddham , jambUdvIpamadhye ca mama prativAdI nAsti" ityasyArthasya sUcanArtha jambUvRkSazAkhA haste gRhiitaa| tatastena parivrAjakena sarvasyAmapi nagaryAM "zUnyAHsarve'pi parapravAdAH, nAsti kazcid mama prativAdI" ityudghoSaNApUrvakaH paTahako dApitaH / lohapaTTabaddhapoTTajambUvRkSazAkhAyogAcca tasyaloke "poTTazAla" iti nAmajAtam / tatastatpaTahako nagarI pravizatA rohaguptena dRSTaH, udghoSaNA ca zrutA / tato "ahaM tena sAdhaM vAdaM dAsyAmi" ityabhidhAya gurUnapRSTvApi niSiddhastenAsau paTahakaH / gurusamIpaM cAgatyAlocayatA kathito'yaM vyatikarasteSAm / AcAryaiHproktam na yuktaM tvayA'nuSThitam , sa hi parivrAjako vAde nirjito'pi vidyAkhatikuzalatvAt tAbhirupatiThati / tasya caitAH saptavidyA bADhaM sphuranti // 2452 / /

Page #185
Vada ] Nihnayavada : 161: D. C. Outside the city of Antarad jika there was a temple known as Bhutagriha. There lived a preceptor named Sri Gupta. Sri Gupta had a pupil named Rohagupta, who stayed in some other village from where he usually came to pay his homage to the preceptor every now and then. Once upon a time when Rohagupta was coming to the city of Antaranjika in order to pay his usual homage to the preceptor, he saw a parivrajaka (a wandering ascetic) with an iron belt tied around his belly, and with a branch of the Jamba tree in his hand signifying thereby that his stomach was filled to the brim with knowledge, and that there was no body in the whole of Jambad| vipa who could defeat him. This mendicant was known as Potta sala in the city as his stomach was tide with an iron-belt. This Pottasala wandered throughout the city announcing his challenge with the beating of drum that "All my opponents have failed. There is no body who can return my challenge. On hearing this, Rohagupta took up the challenge even without consulting his preceptor. When he narrated the whole incident to his preceptor afterwards, the preceptor said, "You have incurred a risk by doing so." For, though defeated, Pottasala will harass you with various magical spells. 157 (2452) Because, vicchU ya sappe mUsaga migI varAhI ya kAga poyaaii| eyAhiM vijAhiM so ya parivAyago kusalo // 158 // 2453 // 158. Viccha ya sappe mosaga migi varahi ya kaga poyai i Eyahim vijjahim so ya parivayago kusalo. (2453) [vRzcikI sI mUSakI mRgI varAhI kAkI potaakii| etAbhirvidyAbhiH sa ca parivrAjakaH kuzalaH // 158 // 2453 // 158. Vrisciki sarpi musaki mrigi varahi kaki potaki | Etabhirvidyabhih sa ca parivrajakah kusalah. (2453) ] Trans. 158. That parivrajaka (mendicant) has achieved the magical spell of scorpion, serpent, mouse, deer, boar, crow and parrot. 2453.

Page #186
:162: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth TIkA-158 "vicchU yatti" vRzcikapradhAnA vidyA gRhyate / " sappe ti" sarpapradhAnA vidyA / "mUsage ti" mUSakapradhAnA / tathA mRgI nAma vidyA mRgI. rUpeNopaghAtakAriNI / evaM varAhI ca / "kAga poyAi ti' kAkavidyA, potAkIvidyA ca / potAkyAzakunikAH etAsu vidyAsu, etAbhirvA vidyAbhiH sa parivrAjakaH kuzala iti / tato rohaguptenoktam-" yadyevam, tata kimidAnIM naSTuM kApi zakyate ?, niSiddhastatpaTahakaH, yad bhavati tad bhavatu" / tataHsUribhiHproktamyadyevam , tahiM paThitasiddhA evaitAH sapta tatpratipakSavidyA gRhANa // 2453 // D. C. Acarya :--That parivrajaka (men licant) is proficient in magical spells of scorpions, serpents, mice, hoars, crows and parrots. Rohagupta :- If it is so, is there, now, any way to defeat him, any how? Since I have accepteil the challenge, let things happen as they do." Acarya:-If you desire so, you shall have to achieve the various counteracting spells that would overpower the abovenamed tricks successfully. 158 (2453) The counter-acting spells aremorI naulI birAlI vagghI sihI ya ulugi uvaaii| eAo vijAo giNha parivyAyamahaNIo // 159 // 2454 // 159. Mori nauli birali vagghi sihi ya ulugi uvai | Eao vijjao giana parivyayamahanio (2454) [morI nakulI biDAlI vyAghI siMhI colukI ulaavkii| etA vidyA gRhANa parivrAjakamathanI: // 159 // 2454 // 159. Mori nakuli bidali vyaghri simhi coluki ulavaki | Eta vidya grihana parivrajakamathanih. (2454) ] Trans 159. Achieve the under-mentioned (counter-acting) spells that (would ) vanquish the parivrajaka (mendicant) viz that of peacock, mangoose, cat, tiger, lion, owl and hawk. 2454.

Page #187
Vada] Nihnavavada : 16: TIkA-159 vRzcikANAM pratipakSabhUtA morIvidyA / sarpANAM tu pratipakSabhUtA nakulI / mUSakANAM biDAlI / evaM vyAghrI, siMhI, uluukii| "uvAi ti" potAkIpratipakSabhUtA ulAvakAdhAnA vidyetyrthH| etAH parivrAjakamathanIvidyA gRhANa tvam / iti sUriNA prokte gRhAti rohaguptaH / tathA rajoharaNaM cAbhimanya sUribhistasya samarpitam / abhihitazca yathA yadyanyadapi kizcit tatmaNItakSudravidyAkRtamupasargajAtamupatiSThate tadA tanivAraNArthametad mastakasyopari bhramaNIyam / tatazcaindrANAmapyajeyo bhaviSyasi, kimuta manuSyamAtrasya tasyeti / tatazca gato rAjasabhAM rohaguptaH / proktaM ca tatra tena-"kimeSa dumaka parivrAjako jAnAti / karotvayameva yadRkSayA pUrvapakSam , yenAhaM nirAkaromi / " tataH parivrAjakena cintitam-nipuNAHkhalvamI bhavanti, tadamISAmeva saMmataM pakSaM parigRhNAmi, yena nirAkatuM na zaknoti / vicintya cedamabhyadhAyi-" iha jIvAzcAjIvAzceti dvAveva rAzI, tathaivopalabhyamAnatvAt, zubhA-'zubhAdirAzidvayavat" ityAdi / tato rohaguptena tadbuddhiparibhavanArtha svasaMmato'ppayaM pakSo niraakRtH| katham ? iti cet / ucyate-asiddho'yaM hetuH, anyathopalambhAt , jIvA ajIvA nojIvAzceti rAzitrayadarzanAt / tatra jIvA narakatiryagAdayaH, ajIvAstu paramANu-ghaTAdayaH, nojIvAstu gRhakolikApucchAdayaH / tato jIvA-'jIva-nojIvarUpAstrayo rAzayaH, tathaivopalabhyamAnatvAt , adhama-madhyamo-ttamAdirAzitrayavat, ityAdiyuktiMbhiniSpraznavyAkaraNaH kRtvA jitaH parivrAjako rohaguptena / tato'sau kruddho vRzcikavidyayA rohaguptavinAzArtha vRzcikAn muJcati, tato rohaguptastatpratipakSabhUtamayUrIvidyayA mayUrAn muzcati / taizca vRzcikeSu hateSu parivrAjakAsAn muzcati / itarasta. pratighAtArtha nakulAna visRjati / evaM mUSakANAM biDAlAn, mRgINAM vyAghrAn , zUkarANAM siMhAn , kAkAnAmulUkAn, potakInAmulAvakAn muJcati / tato gardabhI muktA / tAM cAgacchantIM dRSTA rohaguptena rajoharaNaM mastakasyopari bhramayitvA tenaiva rajoharaNena tADitA satI parivAjakasyopari mUtra-purIpotsarga kRtvA gtaasau| tataH sabhApatinA, sabhyaiH, samastalokena ca nindyamAno, nagarAd nirvAsitaH parivrAjakaH // 2454 // D. C The spells of scorpions, serpents, mice deer, boars, cro ws, and parrots are respectively nullified by those of pea-cocks, mangeese, cats, tigers, lions, owls, and hawks. You should pick up all those spells properly if you want to defeat the parivrajaka.

Page #188
Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth UT Thus advised by the preceptor, Rohagupta studied all the methods. In addition to that, he was also supplied with a consecrated with a spell by his preceptor with instructions that he should wave it over his own head for the prevention of any other trouble created by parivrajaka. Rajoharana* : 164: Rohagupta, then, went to the Royal Assembly, and said "What does this poor mendicant know? Let him open any topic he likes, I will refute it. The shrewd parivrajaka knew that Rohagupta was very clever, and so, he thought of opening the tropic with the acceptance of Rohagupta's own principles, so that, Rohagupta would not be able to refute the same. He, then, opened the topic with this remark:- Like the two categories of good and evil, there are only two categories of (1) Jivas or animate beings and (2)A-jivas or in-animate ones in this world. This theory is acceptable to the Jainas, but for the sake of defeating the mendicant, Rohagupta refuted it by saying that all the objects in the Universe, could be divided into three categories :-Jiva, A-jiva and No -jiva. Hellish denizens, tiryancas manusyas etc come under the category of Jiva. Atoms, and ghata, pata etc are Ajivas and the dissected limbs such as a tail etc. of animals like house- lizard etc would come under the category of No-jiva. He argued that, like the three categories of best, medium, and the lowest, found in this world, there were three categories, of Jivas. A-Jivas, and No-jivas in the Universe. The parivrjaka was defeated' by such an unexpected argument. So, being naturally enraged at Rohigupta, the parivrajaka, let loose his scorpions upon him. Rohagupta removed them with the help of his pea-cocks. In this way, the mendicant tried to defy Rohagupta by means of serpent, mice, deer, boars, crows and parrots, while Rohagupta over-powered all of them by means of mangeese, cats, tigers, lions, owls, and hawks respectively. * Rajoharara a sacred broom of wool-threads always carried by Jaina Monks and Nuns for the purpose of cleaning beds, seats, etc. without inflicting any injury to vermin and insects which may happen to be there. For Private Personal Use Only

Page #189
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 165: Finally the parivrajaka released a she-ass to kill Rohagupta. But, on seeing the she-ass coming towards him, Rohagupta waved the Rajoharana (which his preceptor had given him) over his own head, and beat the she-ass with it, as a result of which, the she-ass ran away from him after passing urine and foeces etc. upon the parivrajaka. The parivrajaka, who was thus vanquished in all ways, was then, driven away from the city with great humiliation. 159 (2454) Now, the author proceeds to narrate the next incident in this connection- jeUNa pohazAlaM chalUo bhaNai gurumUlamAgaMtuM / vAyammi mae vijio suNaha jahAsau sahAmajjhe || 160 || 2455 // rAsidugagahiyapakkho taiyaM nojIvarAsimAdAya / gihakolikAipucchaccheodAharaNao'bhihie || 161 // 2456 // bhai gurU suTu kaya kiM puNa jeUNa kIsa nAbhihiyaM / ayamavasiddhaMto Ne tahao nojIvarAsi tti // 162 || 2457 // evaM gae vi gaMtuM parisAmajjhammi bhaNasu nAyaM Ne / sirddhato kiMtu mae buddhiM paribhUya so samio || 163 || 2458|| bahuso sa bhaNNamANo guruNA paDibhaNai kimavasiddhato / jai nAma jIvadeso nojIvo hujja ko doso ? // 164 // 2459 // 160. Jeana Pottasalam chalao bhanai gurumulamagantum | Vayammi mae vijio sunaha jahasau sahamajjhe. (2455) 161. Rasidugagahiyapakkho taiyam no-jivarasimadaya | GihakolikaipucchaccheOdaharanao 'bhihie. (2456) Bhanai guru sutthu kayam kim puna jeana kisa nabhihiyan Ayamavasiddhanto ne taio nojivarasi tti. (2457) 162. 163. Evam gae vi gantum parisamajjhammi bhanasu nayam ne Siddhanto kintu mae buddhim paribhaya so samio. (2458)

Page #190
:166: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth 164. Bahuso sa. bhannamano guruna padibhanai kimavasiddhantos Jai nama jiva-deso no-jiva hujja ko doso ? (2459) [jitvA poTTazAlaM SaDulUko bhaNati gurumuulmaagtH| vAde mayA vijitaH zRNuta yathA sa sabhAmadhye // 160 // 2455 / / rAzidvikagRhItapakSastRtIyaM nojIvarAzimAdAya / gRhakolikAdipucchacchedodAharaNatobhihite // 161 // 2456 // bhaNati guruH suSTu kRtaM kiM punarjitvA kasmAd nAbhihitam / ayamapasiddhAnto nastRtIyo nojIvarAziriti // 162 / / 2457 // evaM gate'pi gatvA pariSanmadhye bhaNa nA'yaM nH| siddhAntaH kintu mayA buddhiM paribhUya sa zamitaH // 163 / / 2458 // bahuzaH sa bhaNyamAno guruNA pratibhaNati kimpsiddhaantH| yadi nAma jIvadeze nojIvo bhavet ko doSaH 1 // 164 // 2459 // 160. Jitva Pottasalam Sadulako bhanati gurumulamagatahi Vade maya vijitah srunuta yatha sa sabhamadhye. (2455) 161. Rasidvikagrihitapaksastritiyam nojivarasimadaya || Grihakolikadipuccacchedodaharanato'bhihite. (2456) BhaNGati guruh susthu kritam kim punarjitva kasmad na. bhihitam | Ayamapasiddhanto nastritiyo nojivarasiriti. (2457) 163. Evam gate'pi gatva parisanmadhye bhana na'yam nah! Evam oats, Siddhantah kintu maya buddhim paribhuya sa samitah. (2458)] 164. Bahusah sa bhanyamano guruna pratibhanati kimapasindhanth || Yadi nama. jivadese no-jivo bhavet kinm dosah. (2459)] Trans. 160-161-162-163.164 Having defeated Pattasala, Sadu loka approached the preceptor, and said " (Please) hear how he is defeated by me in discussion in the Royal Assembly. (His) theory of two categories was refuted by me, resor ting to a third category of no-jiva with an illustration of the dis 162.

Page #191
vada] Nihvaravada : 167: sected tail of a house-lizard," "You have done a good deed by defeating hiin" said the preceptor, (but), then, why did you not declare that this principle of the third category (of) no-jiva was not acceptible to us? Even now, you may go to the Royal Assembly, and declare that, "That is not our principle, but (that was resorted to by me only temporarily ) in order to defy his talents, and bring down (his pride )." When persuaded by the preceptor in niany such ways, Rohagupta said "How (can you call it) a bad principle? What harm is there if we take a particular part of a living being to be No-jiva or slightly animate? (2455-2459). TIkA-160-161-162-163-164 vyAkhyA-poTTazAlaparivrAjakaM jitvA gurucaraNamUlamAgatya rohagupto'paranAmnA tu SaDulUko bhaNati-sa parivrAjakAdhamaH samastanRpasabhAmadhye yathA vAde mayA vijitastathA zRNuta yUyaM kathayAmIti / tadevAha-rAzidvayagRhItapakSaH sa parivrAjako mayA vAde vijita iti prAktanena saMbandhaH / kiM kRtvA ? ityAha-tRtIyaM jIvarAzimAdAya pakSIkRtya / kuto dRSTAntAdasau pakSIkRtya ? ityAha-gRhakolikAdInAM pucchameva chinnatvAcchedastadudAharaNatastadRSTAntAdityarthaH / evaM rohaguptenAbhihite gururbhaNati-suSTu kRtaM tvayA yadasau jitaH, kintu tatrottiSThatA tvayA kimetad nAbhihitam 1 / kim ? ityAha-tRtIyo nojIvarAziratyayaM "Ne ti" no'smAkamapasiddhAntaH jIvA'jIvalakSaNarAzidvayasyaivA'smasiddhAnte'bhihitatvAditi / tasmAdevaM gate'pyetAvatyapi gata ityarthaH, tatra pariSanmadhye gatvA bhaNa pratipAdaya "nAyaM Ne ti" no'smAkaM nAyaM siddhAntaH, kintu sa parivrAjakastabuddhiM paribhUya tiraskRtya zamita upazamaM nIto darpa tyAjita ityarthaH / evaM bahuzo'nekadhA guruNA bhaNyamAnaH sa rohaguptaH pratibhaNati pratyuttarayati-AcArya ? kimayamapasiddhAntaH ? / yadi hi nojIvalakSaNa tRtIyarAzyabhyupagame ko'pi doSaH syAt tadA syAdayamapasiddhAntaH, na caitadasti / kutaH 1 ityAha-yadi nAma gRhakolikApucchAdijIvadezo nojIva bhavet-nojIvatvenAbhyupagamyeta, tarhi ko doSaHsyAt ? na kamapi doSamatra pazyAma ityarthaH / tataHkimityapasiddhAntatve doSapahirAthaM punamA tatra preSayasi ? iti bhaavH|| 2455 / / 2456 // 2457 // 2458 // 2459 // D. C. Having defeated the parivrajaka known as Pottasala,

Page #192
: 168: Jinabhadra Gani's [ The sixth in discussion in the Royal Assembly, Rohagupta, who was also known as *Saduulka, came to the preceptor and requested him to hear the whole incident of his success. "His theory of two categories' he said" was refuted by me by advancing a third category of no-jiva supported by the example of a house lizard with its tail dissected." Acarya :-You have done a good deed by defeating him But while leaving the ass.lmbly at the end, why did you not declare that the theory of the third cacegory of No-jiva is not acceptable to us? Even, now, you may go to the assembly and declare that this is not our theory but it was advanced hy us only for the sake of bringing down the pride of Pottasala. Robagupta --Revered sir, how can we take as an unacceptable theory? What difficulty does it give rise to? For, if a dissected part like the tail of an animal like house-lizard were apprehended as no-jiva or slightly animate. I do not see any harm in holding the theory of three categories. 160-164 (2455-2459) Rohagupta, now tries to justify his theory in this way:jaM desanisehaparo nosabo jIvadavvadeso y| gihakoilAipucchaM vilakkhaNaM teNa nojIvo // 165 // 2460 // 165. Jam desanisehaparo nosa do jivadavvarleso ya ! Gihakoilaipuccham vilakkhanam tena no-jivo. (2460) (1 dalit t37067 fagsteam gRhakolikAdipucchaM vilakSaNaM tena nojIvaH // 165 // 2460 // 165. Yad desanised haparo nosabdo jivadravyadesasca | Grihakolikadipuccham vilaksanam tena no-jivah. (2460) ] Trans. 165. As the term 'no' suggests the removal of a portion and that (too) a portion of the animate body, the tail of a house-lizard etc. being separated (from the animate * Sadulaka- A believer in six substances with Uluka as his gotra, ie Rohagupta, who belonged to Uluka gotra.

Page #193
Vada ] Nihnavavada body of house-lizard etc.) should be taken as no-jiva (slightly animate) 2460. " TIkA- 165 yad yasmAd "nojIvaH ityatra nozabdo dezaniSedhaparo na tu sarvaniSedhaparaH, nojIvo jIvaikadezo, na tu sarvasyApi jIvasyAbhAva ityarthaH / bhavatvevaM dezaniSedhako nozabdaH, paraM gRhakolikAdipucchaM jIvadezo na bhaviSyatItyAzaGkayAha - jIvadravyaikadezazca gRhakolikAdipuccha, AdizandAcchinnapuruSAdihastAdayaH parigRhyante / kathaMbhUtaM tad gRhakolikAdipuccham ? ityAha-vilakSaNaM " jIvA - 'jIvebhyaH " iti gamyate; tathAhi na tAvaMda gRhakolikA dipucchaM jIvatvena vyapadeSTuM zakyate, tatkAryaikadezatvena tadvilakSaNatvAt / nApyajIva ityabhidhAtuM pAryate, sphuraNAdibhistebhyo'pi vilakSaNatvAt / yenaivam tena kAraNena pArizeSyAd nojIva etaducyata iti || 2460 // " D. C. Since 'no'1 signifies dissection of a particular portion and not of the whole body, negation of the whole jiva is not implied thereby. Such dissected portions being different from jiva (animate body) as well as from a-jiva ( inanimate body), should be taken as no-jiva. Since a tail dissected from the body of a house-lizard and a hand dissected from the body of a man, are only the portions of the respective jivas, they cannot be taken as jivas. They cannot be taken even under the category of a-jivas, because they move even after they are cut off from the animate bodies. : 169: Thus, being different from jiva and a-jiva, they are known as no-jiva or slightly animate bodies by the method of elimination. 165 (2460) It has also been sanctioned by the Holy Writ viz:dhammAidasavihAdesao ya deso vi jaM pihuM vatyuM / apihRnbhUo kiM puNa cchinnaM gihakoliyApucchaM 1 // 166 // 2461 // 166. Dhammaidasavihadesao ya deso vi jam pihum vatthum | Apibubbhuo kim puna cchinnam gihakoliyapuccham ? (2461) icchai jIvapaesaM nojIvaM jaM ca samabhirUDho vi / teNa tthi tao samae ghaDadeso noghaDo jaha vA // 167 // 2462 // For Private Personal Use Only

Page #194
: 170: Jinabhadra Gani's [ The sixth 167. Icchai jivapaesam no-jivam jam ca samabhirudho vi| Tena tthi tao samae ghada-deso no-ghado jaha va. (2462) [ dharmAdidazavidhAdezatazca dezo'pi yat pRthag vastu / apRthagmRtaH kiM punarichannaM gRhakolikApuccham ? // 166 // 2461 // icchati jIvapradezaM nojIvaM yaca samabhirUDho'pi / tenAsti sakaH samaye ghaTadezo noghaTo yathA vA // 167 // 2462|| 166. Dharmadidasavidhadesatasca deso'pi yat prithag vastu A-prithagbhritah kim punaschinnam grihakolikapuccham? 167. (2461) Icchati jivapradesam no-jivam yacca samabhirudho'pi t Tenasti sakah samaye ghata-deso no-ghato yatha va. (2462 ) ] Trans. 166-167. By the commandment of the ten varieties of the category of Dharmastikaya and others, when even a portion (actually) combined ( with the body ), is ( taken as) a separate entity, what to talk of the tail of a house-lizard that has already been cut off ( from the body ) ? The samabhiradha view-point also admits jivapradesa or a part of jiva as no-jiva. So, just as a portion of ghata is no ghata, a part of jiva should be taken as no-jiva, as a (matter of) principle. (2461-2462) TIkA - 166-167 vyAkhyA - cakArasya bhinnakramatvAd yad yasmAt kAraNAd dezo'pItyapizabdasyApi bhinnakramatvAd dharmAstikAyAdidezinaH "apihunbhUo ti" apRthagbhUto'pyekatvamApanno'pi dezaH " pihaM vatyuM ti" siddhAnte pRthag vastu " bhaNitaH " iti zeSaH, pRthagvastutvena nirdiSTha ityarthaH / kiMpunaryacchinnamAtmanaH pRthagbhUtaM kRtaM tad gRhakolikAdipucchaM pRthagvastu na bhaviSyati ? bhaviSyatyeveti / tacca jIvacchinnatvena pRthagbhUtatvAt, sphuraNAdinA cAjIvavilakSaNatvAt sAmarthyAd nojIva eveti bhAvaH / kutaH punarvacanAdeSa siddhAnte pRthag 1. For, 'no' means slight or little, and hence it does not signify the negation of the whole body, but only a portion of the whole. For Private Personal Use Only

Page #195
Vada ] Nihnavavada vastu bhaNitaH ? ityAha-" dhammAidasavihAdesau tti" dharmAstikAyAdinAmamUrtA jIvAnAM dazavidhAdezato dazavidhatvabhaNanAt / etaduktaM bhavati - ajIvaprarUpaNAM kurvadbhiruktaM paramamunibhiH - " ajIvA dubihA paNNattA, taM jahA- rUvi ajIvA ya, arUvi ajIvA ya / rUvi ajIvA cautrihA paNNattA, taM jahA -khaMdhA, desA, parasA, paramANupoggalA / arUvi ajIvA dasavihA paNNattA, taM jahA-dhammatthikAe, dhammatthikAyassa dese, dhammatthikAyassa paese, evamadhammatthikAe vi, AgAsatithakAe vi, addhAsamae " / tadevaM dharmAstikAyAdInAM dazavidhatvabhaNanena taddezasya pRthagvastutvamuktameva, anyathA dazavidhatvAnupapatteH / yadA ca dharmAstikAyAdInAM dezastebhyo'pRthagbhUto'pi pRthagvastUcyate, tahA gRhako likApucchAdikaM chinnatvena jIvAt pRthagbhUtaM sutarAM vastu bhavati / taca jIvA - 'jIvavilakSaNatvAd nojIva ityuktameveti / api ca, yad yasmAt kAraNAjjIvana dezaM nojIvaM samabhirUDhanayo'pIcchati, tena tasmAt tako'sau nojIvaH samaye siddhAnte'pyasti na punarmayaiva kevalenocyate, tathA cAnuyogadvAreSu pramANadvArAntargataM nayapramANaM vicArayatA proktam - " samabhirUDho sahanayaM bhaNai - jara kammadhAraeNa bhaNasi to evaM bhaNAhijIveya se pase yase sapae se nojIve " iti / tadanena pradezalakSaNo jIvaikadezo nojIva uktaH, yathA ghaTaikadezo noghaTa iti / tasmAdasti nojIvalakSaNastRtIyarAziH, yuktayA -''gamasiddhatvAt jIvA-jIvAditaccavaditi // 2461-2462 // 1 D. C. It has been laid down in Siddhantas that 'A-jiva duviha pannatta, tam jaha-Ruvi a-jiva ya, a-ravi a-jiva ya. Ravi a-jiva cauvviha pannatta, tam jaha-Khanda, desa, paesa, paramanu poggala. A-ravi a-jiva dasaviha pannatta, tam jaha 1. Dhammatthikae, 2. dhammatthikayassa dese, 3. dhammatthikayassa paese, 4. a-dhammatthi-kaye, 5, a-dhammatthikayassa dese, 6. a-dhammatthikayassa paese, 7. agasatthikae, 8. agasatthikayassa dese, 9. agasatthikayassa paese and 10. addhasamae. ' 99 66 [The a-jivas or inanimate objects are divided into two types: Corporeal (rupi) and in-corporeal (a-rapi). The corporeal a-jivas are of four types : -- 1. Elements ( Skandha ) 2. their parts-desas 3. their pradesas (bodies) and 4. their atoms (Paramanu pudgalas). The in-corporeal a- jivas (a-rapi a-jivas) are of ten types : 171:

Page #196
: 172: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth viz 1. *Dharmastikaya, 2. Dharmastikaya desa (part of Dharma stikaya), 3. Dharmastikaya pradesa (Body of Dharmastikaya) 4. A-dharmasti kaya, 5. A-dharmastikaya desa (part of A-dharma. sti kaya), 6. A-dharmasti kaya pradesa (body of a-dharmasti kaya), 7. Akasastikaya (predicament of space), 8. Akasasti kaya desa (part of Akasasti kaya), 9. Akasasti kaya pralesa ( body of Akasasti kaya, 10. Addha samaya (kala) the preilicament of time.] While describing the ten varieties of Dharmastikaya etc. mentioned above, although the desas or various portions of each one of them, are one with them, they are necessarily taken as completely different entities. So, there is all the more reason for taking parts like tail etc. of house-lizard etc, that have already been cut off from the main boilies of jivas as separate entities, which being naturally different from jivas, as well as a-jivas, may again be taken under the category of no-jivas. According to Samabhirudha nayas a part of the whole jiva is taken as no-jiva. Thus, the category of no-jiva is not only my conception, but it is laid down by the religious principles, as well. It has also been said in Anuyogadvara Sutra "Samabhira. dho saddanayam bhanai jai kammadharaena bhanasi to evam bhanahi. Jive ya se paese, ya se sa-paese no-jive." * Dharmastikaya. There is no English equivalent for the Jaina terms -Dharmastikaya and A-dharmastikaya. Dharmastikaya may be rendered as the cosmic principle which upholds (or simply conditions), the order of simultaneous (or consentaneous ) movements in the world answering somewhat to Leibneitz's Preestablished harmony. Dharmastikaya is not simply the accompanying cause of movements -it is something more-it is the cause (or condition) of the system of movements-the fact of an order in movements of Jiva and Pudgala. (-Dr. Seal.) A-dharmastikaya is the reverse of Dharmastikaya, 2. For detailed explanation of Samabhirudha naya. See Chapter I.

Page #197
Vada ] Nihnavavada :113: [ The samabhiradha naya explains the etymological interpre. tation. So, if you interprete it according to the Karmadharaya compound, dissolve it as follows:-Jivasca sa pradesasca tasya svapradeso no-jivah-a part of the animate body is no-jiva or slightly animate.] Thus one portion of jiva is called no-jiva, just as one part of ghata is no-ghata. So, there is a third category of no-jiva like jiva and a-jiva supported by the commandments of agamas. The Acarya replies to all these arguments in this way:jai te suyaM pamANaM to rAsI tesu tesu suttesu / do jIvA'jIvANaM na sue nojIrAsi tti // 16 // 2463 // 168. . Jai te suyain pamanam tu rasi tesu tesu suttesu ! ___Do jivajivanam na-sue nojivarasi tti. (2463) [yadi te zrutaM pramANaM tato rAzI teSu teSu suutressu| do jIvAjIvAnAM na zrute nojIvarAziriti // 168 // 2463 // 168. Yadi te srutain pramanam tato rasi tesu tesu satresu Do jiva'jivanam na srute no-jivarasiriti. (2463)] Trans. 168. If the Holy Writ is authentic (according) to you, then (only) two categories-of jivas and a-jivas-are laid down by the various commandments in the Siddhantas, (but) not the category of no-jivas. 2463. TIkA-168 "dhammAidasavihAdesao ya' ityAdyupanyAsAt sUtraprAmANyavAdI kila lakSye bhavAn / tad yadi satyameva tava sUtraM pramANam , tatastahiM te teSu sUtreSu jIvA-'jIvarUpI dvAveva rAzI prokto, tathA ca sthAnAMgasUtram-"duve rAsI paNNatvA taM jahA-jIvA ceva ajIvA ceva" / tathA, anuyogadvArastre'pyuktam"kaivihA NaM bhante ! davA paNNattA / goyamA ! duvihA paNNatA, taM jahA"jIvadavvA ya ajIvadavvA ya" / tathA, uttarAdhyayanasUtre cAbhihitam-"jIvA gheva ajIvA ya esa loe viyAhie" ityAyanyeSvapi sUtreSu draSTavyam / nojIvarAzistu tRtIya: zrute na kacidapyabhihitaH, tat kathaM tatsavaH prarUpaNA na bhuvA

Page #198
: 174: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth zAtanA ? iti / na ca dharmAstikAyAdInAM dezastebhyo bhinnaH ko'pyasti, vivakSAmAtreNaiva tasya minnavastutvakalpanAt // 2463 // D. C. Acarya :--Since you quot expressions like "dhammai dasa vihai etc., you seem to be a follower of the Holy Writ. If you really believe in the authenticity of its sutras, you should note that they are in favour of the two categories of jivas and a-jivas only. It is said in Sthananga Sutra3 that "Duve rasi pannattu tam jaha-Jiva ceva, A-jiva ceva." [Only two categories are taught; the category of Jivas and that of A-jivas. ] It has also been mentionerl in the Annyogadvara Satra " Kaiviha nam bhante 1 davva pannatta ? | Guyama I duviha pannatta, tam jaha-Jiva-davva ya, A-jiva davva ya." [ Of how many types are the elements, O Lord I known ? O Gautama ! They are of two types-Jivas and A-jivas. ] It is also said in the Uttaradhyayana Sutra* that "Jiva ceva A-jiva ya esa loe viyanie." [They (i. e. objects of the Universe) are known as Jivas and A-jivas in this world. ] We can quote similar instances from other Satras, but there is no reference of the third category of no-jivas in any part of the Holy Writ. So, if you try to establish its existence, you defy the authority of the Siddhantas. The desas of dharmastikaya etc. mentioned before, are not different from the bodies of those elements actually. They are merely imagined as different entities for the sake of argument. 3. Vide Sthananga Satra, Adhyayana 2. Uldesa 4. Sutra 95. page 81. (Agamodaya Samiti edition. ) 4. Vide Uttaradhyayana Sutra, Adhyayana 36 (Jiva-jiva vibhatti) Gatha 2.

Page #199
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 175: Similarly, tail etc. are also one with the bodies of animals like house-lizard etc. on account of their intimate connection with each other. 168 (2463) And hence, they are taken under the category of jiva and not of no-jiva ( as you say ), in the following way, gihakoliyAipucche chinnamma tadaMtarAla saMbaMdho / sutte'bhihio suhumAmuttattaNao tadaggahaNaM // 169 // 2464 // 169. Gihakoliyaipucche chinnammi tadantaralasambandho | Sutte'bhihio suhumanuttattanao tadaggahanam. (2464) [gRhako likAdipucche chinne tadantarAlasambandhaH / sUtre'bhihitaH sUkSmA mUrtatvatastadagrahaNam // 169 // 2464 // Grihakolikadipucche chinne tadantaralasambandhah | Satre'bhihitah suksma'mortatvatastadagrahanam. (2464) ] 169. Trans. 169. With regard to the tail of house-lizard etc. being cut off, the rule lays down their internal connection; (But) that is not apprehended on account of its being subtle and formless. 2464. TIkA - 169 gRhako likAdInAM pucchAdike'vayave churikAdinA chine'pi tayorgRhakolika pucchAdivastunoryadantarAlaM vicAlaM tatra jIvapradezAnAM saMbandhaH saMyogastadantarAlasambandhaH sUtre'bhihita eva / tathA ca bhagavatIsUtram - aha bhaMte ! kummA kummAvaliyA, gohA gohAvaliyA, goNe goNa / valiyA, maNuse maNusAvaliyA, mahise mahisAvaliyA, eesiM NaM duhA vA, tihA vA, saMkheahA asaMkheahA vA chinnANaM je aMtarA te vi NaM tehiM jIvapaesehiM phuDA | hantA phuDA / purise NaM bhaMte ! aMtare hattheNa vA, pAeNa vA, aMguliyAe vA, kaTTheNa vA, kiliMceNa vA, AmusamANe vA, saMmusamANe vA, AlihamANe vA vilihamANe vA, aNNayareNa vA tikkheNaM satthajAeNaM AchiMdamANe vA, vichiMdamANe vA agaNikAeNaM samoduhamANe tesiM jIvapaesANaM kiMci AbAhaM vivAhaM vA uppAei, viccheyaM vA kare ? | no iNa samaTThe / no khalu tattha satthaM saMkamai " iti / yadi nAmaivaM sUtre jIvapradezAnAM | tadantarAlasaMbandho'bhihitaH, tahiM tadantarAle te jIvapradezAH kimiti nopala For Private Personal Use Only

Page #200
: 176: Jinabhalra Gani's [The sixth bhyante ? ityAha-"suhumetyAdi" kArmaNazarIrasya sUkSmatvAt , jIvapradezAnAM cAmUrtatvAdantarAle teSAM jIvapradezAnAM satAmapyagrahaNaM tadagrahaNamiti // 2464 // D. C. Even when parts like tail etc. of animals like houselizard etc. have been dissected by means of instruments like knife ctc., the Satra, un loubtedly provides for the internal connection of atoms of jivas in the interincciary region between body and its parts. The Bhagavati Sutra speaks of the same principle:-- Aha bhante ! kumma kummavaliya, goha gohavaliya, goao gonavaliya, manuse manusavaliya, mahise mahisa valiya, eesim sam duha va, tiha va, asamkhejjaha va, chinnanain je antara te vi nam telim jivapaese him phuda (Hanta phuda ) Purise nam bhante ! antare hatthena va, paena va, anguliya va, katthena va, kilincena va, amusamaneva, samm'isamanu va, alihamane va, vilihamane va, annayarena va tikkhenam satthajaenam achimlamane va, vichinlamaneva, aganikacnun samo luhamane tesim jivapaesanam kimci abaham vi-baham va uppadi viccheyam va karei? (No inatthe sanatthe) No khali tattha sattham samkamai." [ And, O Lord ! are the tortoise, lizard, bullock, man, and buffalo respectively taken as ) their parts also ? Are they divided into two, three or innumerable particles of jiva, so that, they are ex. hibited as the particles of jiva, even in their intermediary regions ? Or, can a person commit any harm or obstruction or complete (lestruction by means of rubbing, crasing, licking, sucking, or even destroying it with a sharp weapon, or by means of his hand, foot, wrist etc? "No, that is not the right implication. A weapon does not go beyond that." ]5 5. Hai Fegrafeer Tenfor fa mal na caina kledayantyApo na zoSayati maarutH|| ---( fTHE recurtat)

Page #201
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 177: Thus, the Satra lays down the principle of the internal relation between the jiva and its pradesas in the intermediary regions between soul and body. But since Karmana body is incorporeal, the atoms of Jiva are not apprehended in spite of their being present in the intermediary regions These are not apprehended even from movements etc. as in the case of body, tail etc. 169 (2464) Because, gajjhA muttigayAo nAgAse jahA piivrssiio| taha jIvalakkhaNAI dehe na tadaMtarAlammi // 170 // 2465 // 170. Gajjha muttigayao nagase jaha paivarassio i Taha jivalakkhanaim dehe na tadantaralammi. (2465) [grAhyA mUrtigatA nAkAze yathA prdiiprshmyH| tathA jIvalakSaNAni dehe na tadantarAle // 170 // 2465 // 170. Grahya martigata nakase yatha pradiparasmayah | Tatha jivalaksanani dehe na tadantarale. (2465) ] Trans. 170. Just as rays of a lamp (become) apprehensible (only when ) accompanied by a concrete object, and not (when spread) in sky, so also, the characteristics of a living being, (become apprehensible) (only) in body, and not in (its) intermediary space. 2465. ____TIkA-170 iha bhU-kuDaya-varaNDakA-'ndhakArAdIni vastunyeva mUrtiyogAd muurtiruucynte| tatazca yathA mUrtigatA yathoktavastugatA evetyarthaH, pradIparazmayo grAdyA bhavanti, na tu kevala AkAze prasRtAH, tathA tenaiva prakAreNa jIvo lakSyate yaistAni jIvalakSaNAni bhASaNo-cchavAsa-niHzvAsa-dhAvana-valgana-sphuraNAdIni deha eva gRhyante na tu tadantarAla iti // 2465 // D. C. The rays of lightni proceeding from a lamp are perceived only when they come in contact with a concrete object like ground, a wall, verandah, or darkness, but not when spread in sky.

Page #202
Jinabhadra Gani's [ The sixth Similarly, various characteristics of a living being such as its speech, breathing in, breathing out, running, galloping, vibrating movements etc. are recognized only on body and not in its intermediary space 170 (2465 ) : 178: deharahiyaM na gives niratisao nAtisuhumadehaM va / na ya se hoi vivAhA jIvassa bhavantarAle vva // 179 // 2466 // 171. Deharahiyam na ginhai niratisa natisuhumadeham vat Na ya se hoi vibaha jivassa bhavantarale vva. (2466) [ deharahitaM na gRhNAti niratizayo nAtisUkSmadehamiva / na ca tasya bhavati vibAdhA jIvasya bhavAntarAla iva // 171 // 2466 // 171. Deharahitam na grihnati niratisayo natisaksmade hamiva1 Na ca tasya bhavati vibadha jivasya bhavantarala iva. (2466)] Trans. 171. Just as the soul is not able to apprehend a body having an extremely minute form, so also, a person who does not possess superhuman powers, is not able to perceive (a soul) without body. That soul is not damaged (in any way ) as in ( the case of its state) intermediary between (two) lives. 2466. TIkA- 171 dehAbhAve jIvalakSaNAnAmabhAvAd deharahitaM muktAtmAnaM chinnapucchAdyantarAlavartinaM vA jIvaM niratizayaH kevalajJAnAdya vizayarahito janturna gRhNAti / tathA, atisUkSmo deho yasya tamatisUkSmadehaM nigodAdijIvaM kArmaNakAyayoginaM vA jantuM nAsau gRhNAti / na ca "se" tasya jIvasyAntarAlavartiSu pradezeSvanantaradarzitasiddhAntasUtroktayuktyA kunsA - 'si - sellAdizastrairagni-jalAdimirvA vibAdhA pIDA kAcid bhavati, bhavAntarAle kArmaNazarIravartijIvapradezavaditi // 2466 // D. C A jiva is not perceptible, if it is not accompanied by body. So, a person who has not attained an excellenoe like Ab. solute Knowledge, is not able to perceive the soul unaccompanied by body. For Private Personal Use Only

Page #203
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 179: ____On the other hand, the soul is, also, not able to apprehend an object which is suksma or extremely minute in form. Like the atoms of jiva in the Karmana state, Jiva itself is not affected by spear, sword etc. or by fire, water etc. on the strength of the Satras mentioned before. Rohagupta :-Just as a separate piece of ghata fallen in the street, is known as no-ghata (or a part of ghata), why should tails etc of jivas like house-lizard etc. be.not taken as no-jivas (parts of Jiva ) when they have already been cut off from the respective main body? Acarya :--No. It is not proper to do so. 171 (2466) For, davyAmuttattAkayabhAvAdavikAradarisaNAo ya / aviNAsakAraNAhi ya nabhaso vva na khaMDaso naaso||172||2467.| 172. Davvanuttattakayabhavadavikaradarisanao yai Avinasakaranahi ya nabhaso vya na khandaso naso. (2467) [drvyaamuurttvaavkRtbhaavaadvikaardrshnaac| avinAzakAraNAca nabhasa iva na khaNDazo nAzaH // 172 // 246 // 172. Dravyamurtatvadakritabhavadavikaradarsanacca 1 Avinasakaranacca nabhasa iva na khandaso nasah. (2467)] Trans. 172. Since the matter (of which jiva is formed ) is abstract, and since it is immutable, indestructible, and sport taneous, like sky, it could not be destroyed by part. (2467) TIkA-172 khaNDazo jIvasya nAzo na bhavatIti pratijJA, amUrtadravyavAda, akRtakabhAvAt-akRtakavAdityarthaH, tathA ghaTAdeH kapAlAdivad vikAradarzanAbhAvAt, avinAzakAraNatvAca; vinAzakAraNAnAmani-sAdInAmamAvAtparya ityete hetavaH / sarveSu "namasa iva" iti dRSTAnta iti // 2467 // 6. Vide verse 2464. Again, // acchedyo'yamadAyo'yamakledyo'zoSya eva ca (zrImad bhagavad gItA)

Page #204
: 180 Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth D. C. Like sky, it is not possible to destroy soul, by means of dividing it, into various parts. Because, jiva is maile of ab stract matter, and it is immutable, indestructible, and spontaneous, like sky. 172 (2467) And if the theory of destruction by parts were acceptednAse ya savanAso jIvassa nAso ya jinmyccaao| tatto ya aNimukakho dikakhAvephalladosA ya // 17 // 2468 // 173. Nase ya savvanaso jivassa naso ya Jinamayaccio i Tatto ya animukkho dikkhavephalladosa ya. (2468) [nAze ca sarvanAzo jIvasya nAzazca jinmttyaagH| tatazcAnirmokSo dIkSAvaiphalyadoSAzca // 173 // 2468 // 173. Nase ca sarvanaso jivasya nasasen Jinumatatyagah | Tatascanirmokso diksavaiphalyadosasea. (2468)] Trans. 173. And in case of accepting this sort of destruction, there would also be entire destruction of jiva, (resulting in) the rejection of Jina mata (the Siddhantas of the Tirthankaras). Then, there would be nothing like Final Emancipation and faults such as the futility of the observance of Diksa (asceticism) etc. (would arise) 2468, TIkA-173 zastracchedAdinA jIvapradezasya nAze ceSyamANe kramazaH sarvanAzo'pi kadAcit tasya bhavet / tathAhi-yat khaNDazo nazyati tasya sarvanAzo dRSTaH, yathA ghaTAdeH, tathA ca tvayeSyate jIvaH, taMtaH sarvanAzastasya prAmoti / bhavatvetadapi, kiM na thUyate ? iti cet / tadayuktam / kutaH 1 ityAha-"nAso yetyAdi" sa ca jIvasya sarvanAzo na yuktaH, ysmaajinmttyaaghetutvaajinmttyaago'sau| jinamate hi jIvasya sataH sarvathA vinAzo'satazca sarvathotpAdaHsarvatra niSiddha eva / yadAha-"jIvA NaM-bhaMte / kiM vaDDaMti hAyaMti, avddhiyaa| goyamA? no vaDdaMti, no hAyaMti, atraTTiyA" ityAdi / ato jIvasya sarvathA nAze'bhyupagamyamAne jinamatatyAga eva syAt / tathA tatastatsarvanAzAdanirmokSo mokSAbhAvaH mAmoti, mumukSoH sarvathA nAzatA / mokSAbhAve ca dIkSAdikaSTAnuSTAnavaiphalyam, /

Page #205
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 181: krameNa ca sarveSAmapi jIvAnAM sarvanAze saMsArasya zUnyatAmAptiH, kRtasya ca zubhAzubhakarmaNo jIvasya sarvanAza evameva nAzAt kRtanAzaprasaGga ityAdi vAcyamiti, na jIvasya khaNDazo nAzaH / gRhakolikAdInAM pucchAdikhaNDasya pRthagbhUtatvena pratyakSata eva nAzo dRzyata iti cet / tadayuktam / audArikazarIrasyaiva hi tat khaNDamadhyakSato vIkSyate, na tu jIvasya, tasyAmUrtatvena kenApi khaNDayitumazakyatvAditi // 2468 // D. C. Acarya :-If a jiva were taken to have been damager by the blows of weapons ctc. it woull gradually meet with complete destruction. For, that which is partially destroyed, is naturally susceptible to complete clestriction, as in the case of ghata. So, if you take jiva to bc susceptible to partial clestruction, it would naturally become susceptible to completo destruction also. But looking to the Jaina Scriptures, this is entirely improper. According to them, neither complete destruction nor complete production of an existent being, is achieved. It is said, "Jiva nam bhanto 1 kim vaddhanti hayanti avatthiya ? etc. TO Lord ! are the jivas susceptibe to increase or destruction ? Or, do they, remain what they are ? "O Gautama! they neither increase, nor perish, but they remain what they are."] Thus, by accepting the view of complete destruction of jiva, you will chiefly violate the principle of the Jinas (Tirthankaras). Secondly, in that case, there would be nothing like Moksa. For, in absence of Jiva, who would attain Moksa ? And, when Moksa does not exist, nobody would see any sense in observing diksi and such other religious rites. Thirdly, with the destruction of all jivas one by one, the whole world will be deserted. Fourthly, in case of all pervadliny negation, since all the actions, good or cvil, will perish without yielding fruit, the fault of krita-nasa? will arise.

Page #206
: 182: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth Thus, it is utterly improper to believe in entire destruction of Jiva. Rohagupta :-Parts such as tail etc, of animals like houselizard etc., that have already been separated from their bodies, are apprehended as perished directly. Then, why do you refuse to take such parts as no-jvas ? Acarya-Such parts do not actually belong to Jiva, but they belong to the gross body which invests the soul. Since Jiva is a-marta, it is not possible to divide it into parts. 173 (2468) Again, Rohagupta raises a question and the Acarya replies - aha khaMdho iva saMghAya-bheyadhammA sa to vi smvesiN| avaropparasaMkarao suhAiguNasaMkaro patto // 174 // 2469 // 174. Aha khandho iva sanghaya-bheyadhamma sa to vi savresim Avaropparasankarao suhaigunasankaro patto. (2469) [su fira a pyra- A e antsto Hanni parasparasaMkarataH sukhAdiguNasaMkaraH prAptaH // 174 // 2469 // 174. Atha skandha iva sanghata-bhedadharma sa tato'pi sar. vesam Parasparasankaratah sukhadigunasankarah praptah. (2469) ] Trans. 174. And, if that is (taken as) susceptible to association and dissociation, like a concrete object, then also, on account of their inter-combination (with each other), all objects will attain inter-combination of the properties like happiness etc. 2469. TIkA-174 atha pudgalaskandha iva sAvayavatvAt sa jIvaH saMghAta-bhedadharmA'bhyupagamyate, tathA kvacid vivakSitapudgalaskandhe'nyaskandhagataM khaNDaM samAgatya 7. Apprehension of an object as destroyed, in spite of its being existent.

Page #207
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 18: saMhanyate saMbadhyate, tadgataM ca khaNDaM bhitvA'nyatra gacchati, evaM jIvasyApyanyajIvakhaMDaM saMhanyate, tadgataM tu bhidyata ityevaM saMghAtamedadharmA jIva iSyata iti / ataH khaNDazo nAze'pi saMghAtasyApi sadbhAvAd na tasya sarvanAza iti parasyAbhiprAyaH / atra kSaNamAha-"to vi savvesiM ityAdi" evamapi ca sati sarveSAmapi sarvalokavartinAM jIvAnAM parasparasaMkarataH sukhAdiguNasaMkaraH prAptaH / idamuktaM bhavati-yadaikaM jIvasambandhizubhAzubhakAnvitaM khaNDamanyajIvasya saMvadhyate, anyasambandhi tu khaNDaM tasya saMbadhyate, tadA tatsukhAdayo'nyasya prasajanti, anyasukhAdayastu tasya, ityevaM sarvajIvAnAM parasparaM sukhAdiguNasAMkayaM syAt / tathaikasya kRtanAzaH anyasyAkRtAbhyAgama ityAdi vAcyamiti // 2469 // D. C. Rohagupta :--Since Jiva appears as a borly of parts like a concrete object, there would be no harm if we take it as susceptible to association and dissociation. Just as a part of one pudgala-skandha is united with another, and sometimes dissa ciates itself from it, so also, some portion of a jiva combines itself wiih another jiva, while some other portion may dissociate itself from the jiva. Thus, since jiva is susceptible to association and dissociation, it will always be in contact with some portion or the other, even when some of its portions have already been dissociated from it. Thus, jiva will never perish entirely. Acarya :--In that case, jivas of the whole Universe, will attain inter-combination of properties like sukha etc., on account of their own inter-combination with each other. For, when a certain portion of one jiva, accompanied by good or evil action, is combined with some other jiva, its own properties of happiness or misery, etc., would be attached to another jiva, whose properties, in turn, would be attached to the first jiva. In this way, all jivas will undergo inter-combination of properties like sukha etc, resulting in the destruction of an action that has already been performed and attainment of another that was never performed. In order to stop such confusions, we should not take jiva to be susceptible to association and dissociation also, 174. (2469)

Page #208
: 184: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth ___Here there is another lifficulty also :--- aha avimuko vi tao nojIvo to paippaesaM te / jIvammi asaMkhejA nojIvA natthi jIvo te // 175 // 2470 // 175. Aha avimukko vi tao no-jivo to paippresam te i Jivammi asamkhejja no-jiva natthi jivo to. (2470) [athAvimukto'pi sako nojIvastataH pratipradezaM te| jIve'saMkhyeyA nojIvA nAsti jiivste||175||2470|| 175. Athavimukto'pi sako no-jivastatan pratipradesam te / Jive'samkhyeye no-jiva nasti jivaste. (2470) ] Trans. 175. And if Jiva is taken as no-jiva, in spite of its being unseparated (from its parts), then they, (no-jivas) would pervade every small atom, there would be innumerable no-jivas in a jiva, and (ultimately) there would be nothing like jiva. 2470. TIkA-175 athaitaddoSabhayAd na jIvasya cchedo'bhyupagamyate, kintvavimukto'pyavicchino'pi jIvasaMbaddho'pi tako'sau jIvadezo nojIvastvayeSyate, yathA dharmAstikAyAyekadezo nodharmAstikAyAdiH / tatastarhi pratipradezaM te tava nojIvasadbhAvAdekaikasminnAtmanyasaMkhyeyA nojIvAH prAptAH, tataste tava nAsti kApi jIvasaMbhavaH, sarveSAmapi jIvAnAM pratyekamasaMkhyeyanojIvatvamAptariti // 2470 // D. C. Rohagupta :--In order to prevent the difficulties mentioned before, you may not take jiva as lifferent from its sinall regions. But, just as a small part of Dharmastikaya, which is not actually different from dharmastikaya, is said to be no-dharinastikaya (a slight predicament of dharmastikaya ); what harm is there in taking a small 'region of jiva associated with jiva itself, as nojiva (or slightly animate )? . ___Acarya :--In that case, every small particle of the jiva being occupied by a number of no-jivas, there would be plenty of nojivas in one single jiva. And as the entire soul will be pervaded

Page #209
Vada] Nihnavavada :185: completely hy no-jivas, there would be nothing like jiva at the end. 175 (2470) Pointing out the possibility of one more difficulty, the auth-or states-- evamajIvA vi paippaesabheeNa noajIva tti| nathi ajIvA kei kayare te tinni rAsi tti ? // 17 // 2471 / / 176. Evamajiva vi paippacsabheena no-ajiva tti Natthi a-jiva koi kayare to tinni rasi tti? (2471) [evamajIvA api pratipradezabhedena noajIvA iti / na santyajIvAH kecit katare te trayo rAzaya iti ? // 176 // 2471 // 176. Evamajiva api pratipravesabhe lena no-ajiva iti i Na santyajivah kecit katare te trayo rasaya iti ? (2471)] Trans. 176. Similarly, a-jivas (or in-animate beings) will also become no-ajivas or slightly inanimate) by virtue of (there being ) distinction of every single particle. There would be nothing like a-jiva (or inanimate beings) left (in that case). ( And hence ), how would three categories be possible according to you? 2471. TIkA-176 evamajIvA api dharmAstikAyAdayo dvayaNukaskandhAdayo ghaTAdayazca pratipradezabhedato'jIvaikadezatvAd noajIvAH, ghaTaikadezanoghaTavaditi, ato'jIvAH kecanApi na santi, paramANUnAmapi pudgalAstikAyalakSaNAjIvaikadezatvena noajIvatvAt sarvatra noajInAmevopapadyamAnatvAt / tatazca katare te trayo rAzayaH-tvayA ye rAjasabhAyAM pratiSThitAH, uktanyAyena nojIva noajIvalakSaNarAzidvayasyaiva sadbhAvAt ? iti / tasmAd bahudoSaprasaGgAd na jIvazchidyata iti sthitam // 2471 // D. C. The same will be the case with a-jivas or the inanimate objects. A-jivas such as dharmastikaya etc., objects with aggregation of two atoms and gbata etc., would be known as no-jivas (or slightly inanimate objects) by virtue of their being

Page #210
:186: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth one or the other portions of a-jivas. Further, even atoms that are actual portions of an a-jiva object, woull be known as noajivas. Thus, in the whole of an a-jiva or inanimate object, noajivatva will be found in every atom, and there would be nothing like a-jivatva left at the end. Consequently, the thcory of three categories (viz Jiva, Ajiva and No-jiva) advanced by you in the Royal Assembly, will be refuted. For, according to this view of yours, there would be two categories only :-viz No-jivas and No-a-jivas which proves to be self-contradictory. So, all these difficulties drive us to the conclusion that jiva never perishes entirely, and that there can never exist a category of no-jiva in addition to those of Jiva anl A-jiva. 176 (2471) However, no-jiva cannot be said to exist. Because, chinno va hou jIvo kaha so tallakakhaNo vi nojIvo 1 / aha evamajIvassa vi deso to noajIvo tti // 177 // 2472 // evaM pi rAsao te na tinni cattAri saMpasajjaMti / jIvA tahA ajIvA, nojIvA no-ajIvA ya // 178 // 2473 // 177. Chinno va hau jivo kaha. so tallakkhane) vi no-jive) ? | Aha evamajivassa vi deso to no-a-jivo.tti. (2472) 178. Evam pi rasao te na tinni cattari sampasajjanti Jiva taha a-jiva, no-jiva no-a-jiva ya. (2473) [chinno vA bhavatu jIvaH kathaM sa tallakSaNo'pi nojIvaH / athaivamajIvasyApi dezastato noajIva iti // 177||2472 // evamapi rAzayaste na trayazcatvAraH saMprasajanti / jIvAstathA'jIvA nojIvA noajIvAzca // 178 // 2473 / / 177. Chinno va bhavatu jivah katham sa tallaksano'pi no-jivah | Athaivamajivasyapi desastato no-a-jiva iti. (2472) 178. Evamapi rasayaste na trayascatvarah samprasajanti | Jivastatha'jiva no-jiva no-a-jivasca. (2473) ]

Page #211
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 187: Trans. 177-178. Or, let jiva be ( taken as) dissected. How could that be (called ) no - jiva in spite of its being characterized by it? And if ( it is) so, then, a portion of a jiva will also become no-a-jiva. (But) even in that case, there would not be three categories (as proposed) by you. (There would be) four categories viz : 1. Jivas ( animate beings ) 2. A - jivas (in-animate beings) 3. No- jivas ( slightly animate) and 4. Noa-jivas (slightly inanimate). 2472-2473. 46 TIkA- 177-178 pucchAdyavayavacchedena cchinno'pi bhavatu gRhakolikAdijIvaH, kevalaM tasya jIvasya lakSaNAni sphuraNAdIni yasyAsau tallakSaNo'pi sannasau pucchAdidezaH kathaM kena hetunA nojIvo bhaNyate ? / idamuktaM bhavati - saMpUrNo'pi gRhakolika jIvaH sphuraNAdilakSaNaireva jIvo bhaNyate, sphuraNAdIni ca lakSaNAni cchinne tadavayave'pi pucchAdike dRzyante, atastallakSaNayukto'pyasau kimiti jIvo na bhaNyate yena nojIvakalpanA'tra vidhIyate ? iti / 'aha evamiti " athaivaM jIvalakSaNaiH sadbhirapi pucchAdikastadavayavo nojIva evaiSyate, na punaH svAgraha - styajyata ityarthaH / atra sUrirAha - " to tti " tatastarhi ajIvasyApi ghaTAderdezo noajIvaH prApnoti, jIvaikadezanojIvavaditi / astveva na kiJcid mama vinazyatIti cet / naivam / kutaH ityAha- evaM "pItyAdi " evamanyabhyupagamyamAne ye bhavatA traya eva rAzaya iSyante te na ghaTante, kintu catvAro rAzayaH saprasajanti tadyathA - jIvAH, tathA'jIvAH, nojIvAH, noajIvAceti || 2472 - 2473 // D. C. Acarya :--House-lizards etc. come under the category of jivas by virtue of their movements etc. in spite of their movements etc. in spite of their tail etc., being dissected. The parts like tail etc., that are cut off from the body, should also be known as jivas by virtue of their movement etc. It is absurd to know them as no jivas. Rohagupta:--Parts like tail etc., should definitely be called no-jivas in spite of their having characteristics of jivas. Acarya ::--In that case, a portion of an a-jiva object like ghata would be known as a-jiva.

Page #212
Jinabhadra Gani's [ The sixth Thus, according to this theory of yours, there would be four categories-viz Jiva, A- jiva, No-jiva and No-ajiva in stead of three mentioned by you in the Royal Assembly. 177-178 (24722473). : 188: Also, aha te ajIvadeso ajIvasAmaNNajAi-liGgo tti / bhinno vi ajIvo ciya na jIva deso vi kiM jIvo 1 / / 179 || 2474 // 179. Aha te ajivadeso ajivasamannajai-lingo tti | Bhinno vi a-jivo cciya na jivadeso vi kim jivo ? (2474) [ atha te'jIvadeso'jIvasAmAnyajAti-liGga iti / bhinno'pyajIva eva na jIvadezo'pi kiM jIvaH 1 / / 179 / / 2474 // 179. Atha te'jivadeso'jivasamanyajati-linga iti Bhinno'pyajiva eva na jivadeso 'pi kim jivah ? ( 2474) ] Trans. 179. And, if a portion of a jiva, though separated (from it), is a-jiva according to you by virtue of its species and gender being common to a-jiva, why not a portion of jiva also be taken as jiva ? 2474. TIkA - 179 atha te tavAjIvasya jIvaskandhAderdeza ekadezo bhinno'pi skandhAt pRthagbhUto'pyajIva eva na tu noajIvaH / kutaH ? ityAha- ajIvena sAmAnye jAti-liGge yasyAsAvajIvasAmAnyajAtiliGga iti kRtvA / tatrAjIvatvaM jAtiH, puMliGgalakSaNaM ca liGgam / etacca dvayamapyajIva - taddezayoH sAmAnyameva, tatastadevo'pyajIva eva / hanta ! yadyevam, tarhi jIvadezo'pi kimiti jIvo neSyate, tasyApi jIvena samAnajAti - liGgatvAditi // 2474 // D. C. Acarya :-When you take a part of a living being, though separated from its main body as a-jiva, and not as no-ajiva because its jati (species) and linga (gender) are common to a- jiva you have all the more reason to take a portion of jiva as jiva on account of their jati and linga being common. 179 (2474) For Private Personal Use Only

Page #213
:189: Vada] Nihnavavada In support of the same argument, the author oontinues chinnagihakoliyA vi hu jIvo tallakkhaNehiM sayalo va / aha deso tti na jIvo ajIvadeso tti no'jIvo // 180 // 2475 / / 180. Chinnagihakoliya vi hu jivo tallakkhanebim sayalo vya | Aha deso tti na jivo a-jivadeso tti no-a-jivo. (2475) [chinnagRhakolikApi khalu jIvastallakSaNaiH sakala iva / atha deza iti na jIvo'jIvadeza iti no-ajIvaH // 18 // 2475 // 180. Chinnagrihakolikapi khalu jivastallaksanaih sakala iva i Atha desa iti na jivo'jivadesa iti no-a-jivah. (2475)] Trans 180. Even a dissected house-lizard is, in fact, jwa (or an animate being) like the whole (house-lizard) by virtue of its characteristics (as a living being). And if it is not jiva because it happens to be a part (of jiva), a part of a-jiva will (probably) become no-a-jiva. 2475. TIkA-180 chinnagRhakolikApichinnaHpucchAdiko gRhakolikAdijIvA. vayavo'pItyarthaH / kim ? ityAha-jIvaH, iti pratijJA / hetumAha-"tallakkhaNehiM ti tallakSaNairhetubhUtaiH-sphuraNAditallakSaNayuktatvAdityarthaH / ? "sayalo va ti" yathA sakalaH paripUrNo'cchinno gRhakolikAdijIva ityarthaH, eSa dRSTAntaH / atha gRhakolikAdenIvasya pRcchAdikastadavayavo deza eveti kRtvA na bIba ilyate, saMpUrNasyaiva jIvatvAt / yadyevam , ajIvasyApi ghaTAdedekho no na vAvIyaH prAmoti, saMpUrNasyaivAjIvatvAt / tato'yamajIvadezo'pi no ajIva eva sAt, na tvabIvaH / tathA ca sati sa eva rAzicatuSTayaprasA iti // 2475 // D. C. ___Acarya :-Like the whole of house-lizard, its part (say . tail) cut off from the body, is also jiva, on acconnt of its movements etc. ___Rohagupta :-Since tail happens to be only a part of houselizard, it cannot be called jiva. Jivatva exists only in the whole of jiva.

Page #214
: 190: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth Acarya :-Then, a part of an a.jiva (or inanimate) object like ghata will also cease to be a-jiva and thus be probably called no-a-jiva, in which case again, there would be four categories : Jiva, A-jiva, No-jiva and No-a-jiva. 180 (2475) In reply to the argument that the system of samabhiradha naya accepts the jiva pradesa as no-jiva, nojIvaM ti na jIvAdaNNaM desamiha samabhirUDho vi / icchai bei samAsaM jeNa samANAhigaraNaM so // 181 // 2476 // jIve ya se paese, jIvapaese eva nojiivo| icchai na ya jIvadalaM tumaM va gihakoliyApucchaM // 182 // 2477 // na ya rAsibheyamicchai tumaM va nojIvamicchamANo vi / anno vi nao necchai jIvAjIvAhiyaM kiM pi // 183 // 2478 // 181. No-jtvam ti na jivadannam desamiha. samabhiradho vil Icchai bdi samasam jena samanahiyaranam so. (2476) 182. Jive ya se padse jivapudse eva no-jivon Icchai na ya jivadalam tumam va yihakoliyupucchan. (2477) 183. Na ya rasibheyamicchai tumam va no-jivamicchamano vil Anno vi nao necchai jivaji valiiyam kim pi. (2478) [nojIvamiti na jIvAdanyaM dezamiha samabhirUDho'pi / icchati bravIti samAsaM yena samAnAdhikaraNaM saH // 181 // 2476 // jIvazca sa pradezo jIvapradeza eva nojIvaH / icchati na ca jIvadalaM tvamiva gRhakolikApuccham // 182 // 2477 // na ca rAzibhedamicchati tvamiva nojIvamicchannapi / anyo'pi nayo necchati jIvAjIvAdhikaM kimapi // 183 // 2478 // 181. No-jivamiti na jivadanyam desamiha samabhirudho'pil ____ Icchati braviti sanmasam yena samanadhikaranam sah. (2476) 182. Jivasca sa pradeso jivapradesa eva no-jivah / Icchati na ca jivadalam tvamiva grihakolikapuccham. (2477)

Page #215
Vada] Nihnavavada :191: 183. N. ca rasibherlamicchati tvamiva no-jivamicchannapil Anyo'pi nayo necchati ji vajivalhikam kimapi. (2478) ] Trans. 181-182-183. Even the system of Samabhirudha naya (does) not ( take ) a part ( that is) different from jiva as no-jiva, but mentions it merely as a compound (laying down both of them) in the same case. According to that ( system ), the portion of that which is animate (jiva-pradesa) is no-jiva. (But) this does not accept a part of jiva like the tail of a house-lizard (which is separate from the body ) as no-jiva as you (assert ). Although admitting (the category of) no-jiva, this does not allow for difference in categories as you (allow). Other systems also do not admit anything beyond jiva and a-jiva (2476-2478) TIkA-181-182-183 vyAkhyA-iha "jIve ya se parase ya se sapaese nojIve" ityatrAnuyogadvAroktasUtrAlApake samabhirUDha nayo'pi nojIvamiti necchatIti sambandha-nojIvatvena neccha tItyarthaH / kaM karmatApanam ? / dezam / kathaMbhUtam ? / jIvAdanyaM jIvAd vyatiriktaM dezaM nojIva samabhirUDhanayo'pi necchati-kintvavyatirikta meva taM tsmaadicchtiityrthH| kuta etad vijJAyate ? ityAha-yena kAraNena deza-dezinoH karmadhAraNalakSaNaM samAnAdhikaraNameva samAsamasau samabhirUDhanayo bravItyabhyupagacchati, na punarbhegamAdiriva tatpuruSamityarthaH / samAnAdhikaraNasamAsazca nIlotpalAdInAmiva vizeSaNa-vizeSyANAmameda eva bhavati / ato jJAyate jIvAdananyarUpameva dezaM nojIva micchati samabhirUDha iti, evaM kathaM tRtIyarAziHsyAt ? iti / tadeva samabhirUDhAbhimataM samAnAdhikaraNasamAsaM darzayati-"jIve ya se ityAdi / jIvazcAsau pradezazca jIvapradezaH sa eva "nojIvo tti" sa eva jIvAdavyatirikto jIvapradezo nojIva ityevamicchati samabhirUDhanayaH, na punarjIvadalaM jIvAt pRthagbhUtaM tatkhaNDaM nojIvamicchatyaso, yathA gRhakolikAdInAM pucchAdikhaNDaM nojIvaM tvamicchasIti / api ca, nojIvamicchannapi samabhirUDhanayo yathA tvaM tathA nojIvAjIvarAzidayAd medaM necchati, kintu jIvAjIvalakSaNaM rAzidvayamevecchati, nojIvasyAtraivAntarbhAvAt / tathA'nyopi naigamAdinayojIvA-'jIvebhyo'dhikaM kimapi nojIvavastu necchatyeva / tatastvadIya evAyaM nUtanaHkazcid mArga iti // 2476 / / 2477 // 2478 //

Page #216
: 192: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth D. C. Even in the statement-viz Jive ya ye pose, ya se sapaese no-jive" of Anuyogadvara Sutra, the samabhiradha naya does not admit a part separated from jiva as no-jiva but only that which is intimately connected with jiva. This naya interpretes the statement thus:-A part of the animate region is no-jiva. Jiva-pradesa is here explained as a karmadharaya compound and not as a Tat-purusa one. Jiva therefore becomes the adjective of pradlesa, meaning thereby " Animate region." Thus, according to the samabhiradha naya, a part of the animate region is no-jiva, and it does not take anything different from the animate region as no-jiva as you take. How would the third category be found in such il case ? For, although, considering the existence of no--jiva, there is no difference between jiva and no-jiva according to the Samabhirudha naya. No-jiva is nothing but a part of jiva and hence there are only two categories viz jiva and a-jiva. (which naturally includes no-ji va.) Other nayas, also, do not admit anything like no-jiva as different from jiva anit a-jiva. The category of no-jiva therefore, seems to be an original conception of none but yourself. 181-183 (2476-2478) Even further than that, the Acarya argues :icchau va samabhirUDho desaM nojIvameganaiyaM tu / micchattaM sammattaM savvanayamayovaroheNaM // 184 // 2479 // taM jai samvanayamayaM jiNamayamicchasi pavana do raasii| payavippaDivattIe vi micchattaM kiM nu rAsIsu ? // 185 / / 2480 // 184. Icchau va samabhiradho desam no-jivameganaiyam tu ! Micchattam sammattam savvanayamayovarohenam. (2479) 185. Tam jai savvanayamayam Jinamayamicchasi pavajja do rasi Payavippalivattie vi micchattam kim nu rasisu? (2480) (39 a haftast ei alustainaperti di mithyAtvaM samyaktvaM sarvanayamatoparodhena // 184 // 2479 //

Page #217
Vada] Nihnavavada :193 tad yadi sarvanayamataM jinamatamicchasi prapadyasva dvau raashii| padavipratipattyA'pi mithyAtvaM kiM nu rAziSu // 185 // 2480 // 184. Icchatu va Samabhirudho desam no-jtvamaikanayikam tun Mithyatvam samyaktvam sarvanayamatoparodhena. (2479) 185. Tad yadi sarvanayamatum Jinamatamicchasi prapadya. sva dvau rasi i Padavipratipattya'pi Mithyatvam kim nu rasisu. (2480)] Trans. 184--185. Or, let the system of Samabhirudha (philosophy) admit (the existence of) no-jiva. ( But ) that being supported by one system (of philosophy) (alone), turns out to be false. That which is supported by all the (philoso'phical) systems, is accepted as true. So if you (really) wish (to follow) the principle of Tirthankaras, then accept (the theory of) two categories. For, even by twisting a syllable, (you are led to accept ) falsehood; what (to say ) about the theory of) categories. (2479-2480). TIkA-184-185 icchatu vA samabhirUDhanayastvamiva jIvAd bhitramapi taddezaM nojIvam / tathApyekanayasyedaM matamaikanayikam , mithyAtvaM caitanchAkyamatavat , ityato na tat pramANIkartavyam / samyaktvaM tu sarvanayamatAvarodhena samastanayamatasaMgraheNaiva bhavati / tato yadi sarvanayamayaM jinamataM pramANamicchasi tadA pratipadyasva jIvA'-jIvalakSaNo dvAveva rAzI, anyathA payamakkharaM pi eka pi jo na roei suttniddittuN| sesaM royanto'vi hu micchaTTiI muNeyavvo // 1 // iti vacanAt padavipatipatyApi mithyAtvamApadyate, kimuta sakaleSu rAziSu vipratipattyA tad na bhaviSyati ? iti // 2479 // 2480 // D. C. Acarya :--Or, let the Samabhirudha naya itself accept a part of jiva as no--jiva, like you. But that theory being supported by only one naya, will become utterly unacceptible like the theory of Sakyas. For, a principle which is jointly supported by all the

Page #218
:194: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth philosophical systems, is alone taken as acceptible. So, if you really want to follow the doctrine of the Tirthankaras which is supported by all the philosophical systems, you shall have to admit only two categories: 1. The catogory of jivas or animato beings and 2. The category of a-jivas or inanimate objects. Otherwise, Payamakkharam pi ekkam pi jo na rooi suttaniddittham Sesam royanto'vi hu micchadditthi muneyavvo II (If one dislikes only one syllable of a word in a satra, and likes the rest of the sutra, then also, his view-point should be recognized as false belief. ] According to this rule, if misinterpretation of even one sy llable results in acceptance of falschood, what to talk of misinterpreting the whole theory of categories ? 184-185 (2479-2480) evaM pi bhaNNamANo na pavajaha so jao tao gurunnaa| ciMtiyamayaM paNaTTho nAsihaI mA bahuM logaM // 186 // 2481 // toNaM rAyasabhAe niggiNhAmi bahulogapaJcakkhaM / bahujaNanAo'vasio hohI agejmapakkho tti // 187 // 2482 // to balasirinivapurao vAyaM nAovaNIyamaggANaM / kuNamANANamaIyA sIsA-''yariyANa chammAsA // 188 // 2483 // eko vi nAvasija jAhe to bhaNai naravaI naahN| satto sou sIyaMti rajakajANi me bhagavaM! // 189 // 2484 // guruNAbhihio bhavao suNAvaNathamiyamettiyaM bhaNiyaM / jaha sina satto souM to niggiNhAmi NaM kallaM // 19 // 2485 // 186. Evam pi bhannamano na pavvajjai so jao tao guruna i Cintiyamayam panattho nasi hai ma bahuin logam. (2481) 187. To nam rayasabhae nigginhami bahulogapaccakkham | Bahujananao'vasio hohi agejjhapakkho tti. (2482) 188. To Balasirinivapurao vayam naovaniyamagganam 1 Kunamananamalya sisa"yariyana chammasa. (2483)

Page #219
Vada ] 189 Nihnavavada Ekko vi navasijjai jahe to bhanai naravat naham Satto soum styanti rajjakajjani me bhagavam. (2484) 190. Guruna'bhihi bhava sunavanatthamiyamettiyam bhaniyam Jai si na satto soum to nigginhaminam kallam. (2485 ) [ evamapi bhaNyamAno na prapadyate sa yatastato guruNA / cintitamayaM pranaSTo nAzayatu mA bahuM lokam // 186 // 2481 // tato rAjasabhAyAM nigRhNAmi bahulokapratyakSam / bahujanajJAto'vasito bhavedagrAyapakSa iti // 187 // 2482 // tato balazrInRpapurato vAdaM nyAyopanItamArgANAm / kurvatAmatItAH ziSyAcAryANAM SaD mAsAH // 188 // 2483 // eko'pi nAvasadyate yadA tato bhaNati narapatirnAham / zaktaH zrotuM sIdanti rAjyakAryANi me bhagavan ! // 189 // 2484 // guruNA'bhihito bhavataH zrAvaNArthamidamiyad bhaNitam / yadyasi na zaktaH zrotuM tato nigRhNAmi kalye // 190 // 2485 // 186. 187. 188. 189. 190. : 195: Evamapi bhanyamano na prapadyate sa yatastato gurana! Cintitamayan pranasto nasayatu ma bahum lokam. (2481) Tato rajasabhayam nigrihnami bahulokapratyaksam i Bahujanajnato'vasito bhavedagrahyapaksa iti. (1482) Tato Balasrinripapurato vadam nyayopanitamarganam | Kurvatamatitab sisyacaryanam sadmasah. (2483) Eko'pi navasadyate yada tato bhanati narapatirnaham | saktah srotum sidanti rajyakaryani me - Bhagavan1 (2484) Guruna'bhihito bhavatah sravanarthamidamiyad bhanitam | Yadyasi na saktah srotum tato nigrihnami kalye. (2485 ) Trans. 186-187-188-189-190. Though persuaded in this way, when he was not convinced, the preceptor thought "This (man) has been corrupted, but let him not corrupt the world. I shall, therefore defeat him in the midst of many people in the Royal Assembly. He will be known to many people as

Page #220
: 196: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth defeated, (and hence) his theory will be unacceptible." Consequently, the preceptor and the pupil passed six months in discussion of (the various) systems of philosophy before the King Balasri. When neither of the two was defeated, the king said " Revered Sir, I cann't witness this any more. (My) stateaffairs are getting delayed." The preceptor replied " All this was told for your guidance. If you are not able to hear (any more), I shall defeat him to-morrow. (2481-2485) TIkA-186-187-188 - 189 - 190 prakaTArthA evaitAH, navaraM "bahujaNanAo'vasitti" bahujanasya jJAto vidito'vasito mayA jitaH sannagrAhya| vacanaH sarvasyApi bhaviSyati / " to balasirinivapurau ci" tato balazrInAmno rAjJaH purata ityarthaH / " nAovaNIyamamgANaM ti " nIyate saMvitti prApyate vastvanena iti nyAyaH prastutArthasAdhakaM pramANaM, yenopanyastena saMtopanIto DhaukitaH prasaGgenAgataH sakalasyApi tarkasya mArgo yeSAM te tathA teSAM nyAyopanItamArgANAM rohagupta - zrIguptasUrINAmiti // 2481|| 2482|| 2483||2484||2485 // D. C. The meaning is clear. Thinking that Rohapupta will not be listened to by any one if he is defeated in the public assembly, the preceptor discussed with him openly in the Royal Assembly of king Balasri, the principles of various philosophical systems constantly for six months. But when King Balasri showed his inability to witness the controversy anymore as this state-affairs were being delayed, the Acarya promised to defeat Rohagupta on the next day. 186-190 (2481-2485) Then, bIyadiNe beha gurU nariMda ? jaM mehaNIe sanbhUyaM / taM kuttiyAvaNe savvamatthi savvapyatIyamiyaM // 199 // 2486 // taM kuttiyAvaNasUro nojIvaM dehi jai na so natthi / aha bhaNai natthi to natthi kiMva heuppabagheNaM // 192 || 2487 // 8. The tracks of discussion of both were based upon Nyaya and hence their syllogism consisted of Pratijna, hetu, udaharana, upanaya and nigamana. For Private Personal Use Only

Page #221
:197: Vada] Nihnavayada taM maggijau mulleNa savvavatthUNi kittha kaalen| iya hou tti pavaNe nariMda-paivAi-parisAhiM // 193 // 2488 // sirigutteNaM chalugo chammAsA vikaTTiUNa vAe jio| aharaNa kuttiAvaNa coyAlasaeNa pucchANaM // 194 // 2489 / / 191. Biyadine bdi gura narinda ? jam meinte sabbhayam | Tam kattiyavane savvamatthi savvappatiyamiyam. (2486) 192. Tamkuttiyavanasaro no-jivam dehi jai na so natthit Aha bhanai natthi to natthi kimva heu ppabunddonam. (2487) 193. Tam maggijjau mullena savvavatthuni kintha kalenat Iya hou tti pavanne narinda-paivai-parisahim. (2488) 194. Siriguttenam Chalugo chammasa vikattiuna vae jiol Aharana kuttiavana coyalasaena pucchanam. (2489) ] [dvitIyadine bravIti gurunarenda ! yad medinyAM sadbhutam / tat kutrikApaNe sarvamasti sarvapratItamidam // 191 / 2486 // tat kutrikApaNasuro nojIvaM dehi yadi na sa naasti| atha bhaNati nAsti tato nAsti kiM vA hetu-pravandhena ? // 192 / / 2487 tad mAryantA mUlyena sarvavastUni kimatra kAlena ? / evaM bhavatviti prapanne narendra prativAdi-pariSadbhiH // 19 // 2488 // bhIguptena SaDalUkaH SaDmAsAn vikRSya vAde jitH| udAharaNAnAM kRtrikApaNe catuzcatvAriMzatAzatena pRcchAnAm // // 194 // 2489 // 191. Dvittyadine braviti gurur-narendral yad medinyam and bhatam Tat kutrikapane sarvamasti sarvapratitamidam. (2486) 192. Tat kutrikapanasaro no-jivam dehi yadi na ss nastil Atha bhanati nasti tato nasti kim va betu-prabandhena ? (2487)

Page #222
: 198: 193. Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth Tad margyantam mulyena sarvavastani kimatra kalena ? | Evam bhavatviti prapanne narendra-prativadi-parisadbhih. (2488) 194. Sriguptena Sadulukah sadmasan vikrisya vade jitah Udaharananam kutrikapane catuscatvarimsatasatena pricchanam. (2489)] Trans. 191-192-193-194. On the next day, the preceptor said "It is known to all that everything that exists on the earth is included in the Universal Shop (Kutrikapana)". Hence, if the deity (in charge) of the Universal shop supplies no-jiva (then), it is not (correct to assert that) no-jiva does not exist. And if he says that it is not (available), then (it should accepted that) no-jiva does not exist. What is the use of logical arguments? So, demand all things at (various) prices. Why waste time? When it was agreed upon by the Royal Assembly as well as the opposite party (with the words) "Let it be so." Saduluka was defeated by Srigupta with the questions of one hundred and fortyfour illustrations (set) at the Universal Shop after having passed six months in discussion. (2486 - 2489) TIkA - 191-192-193 - 194 vyAkhyA - dvitIya dine bravIti guruH zrIguptasUriH- narendra ! pRthivIpate !-iha medinyAM pRthivyAM yat kimapi sadbhUtaM vidyamAnaM vastu tat sarvamapi kutrikApaNe'stIti sarvajanasya bhavatAM ca pratItamevedam / tatra kUnAM svarga - pAtAla - martyabhUmInAM trikaM kutrikaM tAtsthyAt tadvayapadeza iti kRtvA tatsthalokA api kutrikamucyate, kutrikamApaNayati vyavaharati yatra essau kutrikApaNaH / athavA, dhAtu - jIva-mUla- lakSaNebhyastribhyo jAtaM trijaM sarvamapi vastvityarthaH, kau pRthivyAM trijamApaNayati vyavaharati yatra haTTe sa kRtri 9. Kutrikapana could be interpreted in this way :-Ku= Prithivi-Earth, world. Trika=Three, Trio-Kutrika-The three worlds (viz. Svarga, Mritya and Patala) Apana-Shop. Kutrikapana could thus conveniently be called Universal Shop where from all objects of the three words could be had.

Page #223
Vada] Nihnavavada : 199: " jApaNaH / asmitha kutrikApaNe vaNijaH kasyApi mantrAdyArAdhitaH siddho vyantarasuraH krAyakajanasamIhitaM sarvamapi vastu kuto'dhyAnIya saMpAdayati / tanmUlyadravyaM tu vaNigeva gRhNAti / anye tu vadanti - " vaNigrahitAH surAdhiSThitA eva ta ApaNA bhavanti / tato mUlyadravyamapi sa evaM vyantarasuraH svIkaroti " / evaM ca kutrikApaNAH pratiniyateSvevo athinI - bhRgukacchanagarAdisthAneSu kvApi kiyanto'pyAsan ityAgame'bhihitam / tatastasmAt kutrikApaNasuro yadi mUlyena yAcitaH san nojIvaM jIvAjIvavyatiriktavasturUpaM kamapi dadAti tadA'sau na nAstyapi tu nirvivAdamastyeva / athAyameva vadati - nAsti tadvayatiriktaH ko'pi nojIvastadA nAstyevAsau, kiM tatrAstitvasAdhanAya yuSmadrAjyaprayojanakSatikAriNA klezaphalena hetu prabandhopanyAsena 1 iti / tat tasmAd yAcyantAM mUlyena sarvavastuni kutrikAparaNasuraH, kimatra kAlena kAlavilambena ? ityarthaH / evaM gurubhirukte balazrInarendreNa prativAdinA rohaguptena sabhyaparSadA ca yuktiyuktatvAt, "evaM bhavatu " iti pravipatre zrIguptAcAryeNa SaDulUko rohaguptaM pUrva SaD mAsAn vikRSyAtivAdya vAde jito nigRhItaH / kena ? ityAha- kutrikApaNe yAni vakSyamANa bhU-jala - jvalanAdyAharaNAnyudAharaNAni tadviSayapRcchAnAM catuzcatvAriMzena zatena, prAkRtazailyA chandovandhAnu lompAdArSatvAdatra vyatyayena nirdeza iti || 2486|| 2487||2488 // 2489 // D. C. Next day, the preceptor Srt Guptacarya said "Oking 1 it is welknown that Kutrikapana supplies everything that exists in the three worlds. So, it will supply all that exists on the earth also. For ku means " world" and the three worlds are heaven-earth and-the nether-world, Apana means a shop. A shop where objects existing in the three worlds are sold is known as Kutrikapana. Or, it may be called Kutrijapana also. Since everything is produced from dhatu or primary substance, jiva or consciousness and mala or root, they could also be said to be trija (product of the three). A place on earth where all such objects are sold, is known as Kutrikapana. Such Kutrikapanas or Universal Shops, were usually managed by merchants who used to propitiate a Vyantara or semi-god 10 who would bring for them 10. There are eight classes of Vyantaras:-Pisaca. Bhata, Yaksa, Raksasa, Kinnara, Kimpurusa, Mahoraga and Gandharva. For Private Personal Use Only

Page #224
:200 Jinabhadra Gani's [ The sixth ang object required from anywhere in the three worlds. The maney procured by sale, was appropriated by the merchants concerned. According to another theory, these shops were managed by Vyantaras themselves and not by merchants. And hence, the money procured happened to be their property. It has been mentioned in the Agamas that such Universal Shops were situated at Ujjain and Broach. It was proposed :--"Let us approach such a shop and demand no-jiva as distinguished from jiva and a-jiva. If the god in charge supplies us the same, the existence of no-siva will be accepted. But if he refuses to believe in such an entity as "mo-jiva" we shall have to believe unanimously that no-jiva does not exist. Why waste time? Let us approach the Universal Shop and settle the dispute." King Balasri, Rohagupta and all the members of the Royal Assembly, consented to this proposal and proceeded to the Ku. trikapana. They demanded one hundred and forty-four objects by means of a number of questions but they could not get, no-siva as distinguished from " jiva" and "a-jiva." Consequently, Ror hagupta was defeated. 191-194 (2486-2489) The one hundred and forty-four questions referred to above are counted as follows:-- mU-jala-jalapAnila-naha-kAla-disA-''yA maNo ya dabaI / bhaNNaMti nadeyAiM sattarasa guNA ime aNNe // 195 // 2490 // rUpa-rasa-gaMdha-phAsA saMkhA parimANamahamaha-puhattaM ca / saMjoga-vibhAga-parA-'parattabuddhI suhaM dukkhaM // 196 // 2491 // icchA-dosa-payattA etto kammaM tayaM ca paMcavihaM / uklevaNa-vakkhevaNa-pasAraNA''kuMcaNaM-gamaNaM // 197 // 2492 // sattA-sAmANaM-piya-sAmaNNavisesayA-viseso ya / samabAno ya payasthA cha chattIsappameyA ya // 198 // 2493 //

Page #225
Vada] Nihnavavada : 201: pamaIe agAreNa ya nomArobhayanisehao savve / guNiA oyAlasayaM pucchANaM pucchio devo // 199 // 2494 // 195. Bhu-jala-jalana-nila-naha-kula-disa--aya-mano ya davvaim i Bhannanti naveyaim sattarasa guna ime anne. (2490) 196. Ruva-rasa-gandha-phasa-samkha parimanamamaha-puhu ttam ca ! Sanjoga-vibhaga-para-'paratta-buddhi-suham-dukkham. (2491) 197. Iccha-dosa-payatta etto kammam tayam ca pancavihami Ukkhevana-vakkhevana-pasarana"kuncanam gamanam.(2492) 198. Satta-samannam piya-samanmavisesays-viseso yat Samavao ya payattha cha chattisappabheya ya. (2493) 199. Pagaid agarena ya nogarobhayanisehao savvel Guniya oyalasayam pucchanam pucchio devo. (2494) [bhU-jala-jvalanA-'nila-nabhaH-kAla-digA-''tmAno-manazca dravyANi / bhaNyante navaitAni saptadazaguNA ime'nye // 195 // 2490 // rUpa-rasa-gaMdha-phAsA-saMkhA-pariNAma-mahat-pRthaktvaM ca / saMyoga-vibhAga-parA-'paratva-buddhayaH-sukha-duHkham // 196 // 2491 // icchA-dveSa-prayatnAvitaH karma tacca paJcavidham / utkSepaNA'-vakSepaNa-prasAraNA-''kuzcanAni-gamanam // 197 // 2492 // sattA sAmAnyamapi ca sAmAnya-vizeSakA-vizeSazca / samavAyazca padArthAH SaT SaTtriMzatprabhedAzca // 198 // 2493 / / prakRtyA'kAreNa ca nokArobhayaniSedhataH sarve / guNitAstvekacatvAriMzatAzataM pRcchAnAM pRSTo devaH // 199 // 2494 // 195. Bha--jala-jvalana-nila-nabhah-kala-diga-"tmano manasoa. dravyanis Bhanyante navaitani saptadasaguna ime'nye. (2490)

Page #226
: 202 : Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth 196. Rupa-rasa-gandha-phasa-samkha-parinamatha-mahat-pri thaktvam ca Samyoga-vibhaga-para -'paratva-buddhayah -sukhain - duh kham. (2491) 197. Iccba-dvesa - prayatnavitah karma tacca pancavidham Utksepana'vaksepana-prasarana-"kuncanani-gamanain. (2492) 198. Satta samanyamapi ca samanyavisesaka-visesasca 1 Samavayasca-padarthah sat sat trimsat prabhedasca. (2493) 199. Prakritya'karena ca nokarobhayanisedhatah sarve Gunitastvekacatvarimsatasatam pricchanam pristo devaa. (2494) Trans. 195-196-197-198-199. The deity (in charge ) was asked one hundred and forty-four questions as follows :-Earth, Water, Fire, Wind, Sky, Time, Direction, Soul, and Mind are called the nine main substances. Porm, Taste, Odour, Touch, Number, Shape, Length, Distinction, Combination, Separation, Remoteness, Vicinity, Intellect, Happiness, Misery, Desire, Aversion, and Effort--these are seventeen Gunas or properties. And there is Karman or Action which is of five varieties viz Those of 1. Throwing up, 2. Throwing down, 3. Expanding, 4. Contracting and 5. Moving. The samanya or Genus (divided into) generality of existence, general property, and (generality of) particular (elements). There are visesa (particularity ), and samanya (co-inherence). (Thus there are ) six (categories of) elements 11, of which there are thirty-six varieties. On multiplying these (thirty-six) by prakriti or the root-form, a-kara (i. e. prefixing 3 to the word ), no-kara (i. e prefixing at to the word), and both together (i. e. prefixing and at both to-gether), there will be one hundred and forty-four questions. (2490 - 2494 ) 11. According to Vaisesikas there are seven elements : Dravya (substance) Guna (quality ) Karman (action ) Samanya (Genus ) Visesa (partioularity) Samavaya (co-inherence and Abhava (Nonexistence Tainas do not admit abhava.

Page #227
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 203: TIkA-195-196-197-198-199 iha dravya-guNa-karma- sAmAnyavizeSa- samavAyalakSaNAH SaD mUlapadArthAstena SaDulUkena kalpitAH / tatra dravyaM navadhA / katham ? ityAha- " bhU-jaletyAdi " bhUmiH, jalam, jvalanaH, anilaH, nabhaH, kAlaH, dik, AtmA, manacetAni navadravyANi bhaNyante / guNAH saptadaza bhavanti, tadyathA - rUpaM, rasa, gandhaH, sparzaH, saMkhyA, parimANam, mahasvam, pRthakatvam, saMyogaH, vibhAgaH, parA -'paratve, buddhiH, sukham, duHkham, icchA, dveSaH, prayatnazceti / itaH karma tat punaH paJcavidham, tadyathA - utkSepaNam, avakSepaNam, AkuJzcanam, prasAraNam, gamanamiti / sAmAnyaM trividham, tadyathA sattA, sAmAnyam, sAmAnyavizeSazceti / tatra dravya-guNa-karmalakSaNeSu triSu padArtheSu sadbuddhihetuH sattA, sAmAnyaM dravyatva - guNatvAdi, sAmAnyavizeSastu pRthivItva, - jalatva. - kRSNatva - nIlatvAdyavAntarasAmAnyarUpa iti / anye tvitthaM sAmAnyasya traividhyamupavarNayanti - avikalpaM mahAsAmAnyam, tripadArthasadbuddhihetubhUtA sattA, sAmAnyavizeSo dravyatvAdi / mahAsAmAnya - sattayorvizeSaNavyatyaya ityanye / dravya-guNakarmapadArthatraya sadbuddhihetuH sAmAnyam, avikalpA sattetyarthaH / sAmAnyavizeSastu dravyatvAdirUpa eva / ityalaM prasaGgeneti / vizeSazcAntyaH / samavAyapadArthazreti / 9 tadevamete dravyAdayaH SaT padArthAH SaTtriMzatpramedA:-navAnAM dravyANAM saptadazAnAM guNAnAM paJcAnAM karmaNAM trayANAM sAmAnyAnAm, vizeSa - samavAyayo mIlane para triMzad vikalpA bhavantItyarthaH / ete ca sarve prakRtyA, akAreNa, nokAreNa, ubhayaniSedhatazcatyetazretubhiH prakArairguNitAH santo yaccatuzcatvAriMzaM zataM pRcchAnAM bhavati tat pRSTaH kutrikApaNadevaH / idamatra hRdayam - narahitaM zuddhaM padamiha prakRtirucyate, tayA zuddhapadarUpayA prakRtyA pRthivyAdayaH padArthAH pRcchayante, tadyathA - " pRthivIM dehi " ityAdi / tathA, luptasya naJaH sthAne yo'kArastena cAkAreNa saMyuktayA prakRtyA pRcchA vidhIyate, yathA " apRthivIM dehi " ityAdi / tathA nokAreNa saMyuktayA prakRtyA pRcchA yathA-" nopRthivIM dehi" ityAdi / tathA, nokArAskAralakSaNaM tadubhayaM tena yo'sau prakRtyA niSedhastasmAcca pRSTaH suro yathA - " noapRthivIM dehi " ityAdi / evaM jalAdiSvapi pratyekamete prakRtya-kAranokAro bhayaniSedhalakSaNAzcatvAraH pRcchAprakArA vaktavyA iti / etadabhiprAyavatA proktam - " savve guNio" iti / Aha- nanu pRthivIM dehi" ityAdikA yAcanA eva kathaM pRcchAH procyante 1 / satyam, kintu " pRthivIM dehi " ityAdi 88 "

Page #228
: 204: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth pAcagavArema pRthivyAyastitvamevAso devaH pRcchayate, "nojIca yAcito yadyasau jIvA-ujIkavyatirica taM dAsyati tadA'yamasti, nAnyathA ityevameva pratijJAtatyAt / tato yAcanA apyetAstatvataH pRcchA evetyadoSaH // 2490 // 2491 // 2492 // 2493 / 2494 // D. C. 1. Dravya (substance), 2. Guna (quality), 3. Karman (action), 4. Samanya (genus), 5. Visesa (particularity) and 6. Samavaya (cominherhace) are the six main categories under which all the objects are classed. There are nine kinds of dravya: 1. Earth, 2. Water, 3. Fire, 4. Wind, 5. Sky, 6. Time, 7. Space, 8. Soul and 9. Mind There are seventeen types of Guna :-1. Form, 2. Taste, 3. Odour, 4. Touch, 5. Number, 6. Shape, 7. Length, 8. Distinction, 9. Combination, 10. Separation, 11. Remoteness, 12. Vicinity, 13, Intellect, 14. Pleasure or Pain, 15. Desire, 16. Hatred and 17. Effort. Karman is divided into five types :--the acts of 1. Throwing up, 2. Throwing down, 3. Expanding, 4. Contracting and 5. Moving Sapanga is three-fold :- 1. Existence, 2. General Property and 3. Generality in particular. Three types of samanya are explained in two ways viz (1) Satta or existence means acceptance of dravya, guna and karman as existing. Samanya means quality of being dravya and guna etc. while samanya-visesa constitutes qualities of being prithvi, jala etc. (2) The general case of generality (mabasamanya ) covers everything and hence has no alternative. Satta or existence admits the various substances as dravya while dravyatva, guNGatva etc. constitute samanya-visesa. According to others, makasamanya and satta are exactly opposite to each other. Visesa is final distinction and samavaya is co-inherence or intimate connection,

Page #229
Vada] : 208: Thus, there are six main categories of substances of which there are thirty-six varieties in all. Each one of these, was demanded at the Kutrikapana (a) in its original form (b) with the prefix . (c) with the prefix (d) and with both the prefixes (and) together, one after the other. In this way, one hundred and forty-four questions in all, were put before the said Kutrikapana. Take for example the case of prithivi. While demanding prithivi, firstly, the element of prithivi is demanded, in its original form. Then the demands of A-prithivi (a-ft) Noprithivi (-qraft) and No-a-prithivi (-a-feft) are respectively made. -a Nihnavavada On demand of prithivi, its existence is inquired. Similarilyty, on demanding "no-jiva" if the deity in charge satisfies the demand, it is taken for granted that " no-jiva" exists. But if the demand is not fulfilled, the existence of no-jiva will be denied. It is, therefore, better to settle this dispute by putting such demands and save time. 195-199. (2490-2494) Now, explaining how the various demands were made and fulfilled, the author states gefa fa ty d?z zei fa erameng-fout fa | puDhavita so'puDhavIM dehi tti deha toyAI || 200 || 2495 || 200. Pudhavi tti dei letthum deso vi samanajai-lingo tti | Pudhavi tti so'pudhavim dehi tti dei toyaim. (2495) [ pRthivIti dadAti leSTuM dezo'pi samAnajAti - liGga iti / pRthivIti so'pRthivIM dehIti dadAti toyAdi // 200 // 2495 // 200. Prithiviti dadati lestum deso'pi samanajati-linga iti | Prithiviti so'prithivim dehiti dadati toyadi. (2495) ] Trans. 200. (On demanding) "earth he gives a lump of earth. (For), even a part is of the same genus and gender, (and hence) is nothing (but) prithivi. But when asked that "Give us a-prithivi" he supplies water etc. (2495) ""

Page #230
: 206: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth ___TIkA-200 pRthivIM yAcitaH kutrikApaNasuro leSTuM dadAti / Aha-aprastuta. - midam, anyasmin yAcite'nyasya pradAnAt / naivam / kutaH ityAha-" deso vItyAdi" dezo'pi leSTulakSaNaH "puDhavi ti" pRthivyeva mantavyA, pRthivItvalakSaNAyA jAteHstrIliGgalakSaNasya liGgasya ca samAnatvAt / iha yatra pRthivItva. jAtiHstrIliGgaM ca vartate tat 'pRthivI' iti vyavahavartavyam , yathA ratnaprabhAdi, tathA ca leSTuH, tasmAt pRthivIti / "apRthivIM dehi" ityevaM yAcito'sau devastoyAdi prayacchati // 2495 / / ___D. C. On demand of "prithivi", the deity in charge of the Kutrikapana supplies a lump of earth. Here, if it is objected that on demand of one thing, something else is given, it is not so. The clod which is but a portion of prithivi is nothing but prithivi as the genus and gender of both are common. On the demand that "Give (us) u-prithivi" the deity supplies water etc. 200 (2495) And in case of no-prithividesapaDisehapakkhe nopuDhavI dei leTTudesaM so| leDhuddavvAvekakho kIrai desovayAro se // 201 // 2496 // iharA puDhavi ciya so leTu vva smaannjaailkvnno| leTuvalaM ti va deso jai to leTU vi bhUdeso // 202 // 2497 // 201. Desapadisehapakkhd no-pudhavim ddi letthudesam sol Letthuddavavekkho kirai desovayaro se. (2496) 202. Ihara pudhavi cciya so letthu vva samannjailakkhanail Letthudalam ti va deso jai to letthu vi bhudeso. (2497) [dezapratiSedhapakSe nothivIM dadAti leSTudezaM sH| leSTudravyApekSaH kriyate dezopacAratastasya // 2011 // 2496 // itarathA pRthivyeva sa leSTuriva samAnajAtilakSaNataH / leSTudalamiti vA dezo yadi tato leSTurapi bhuudeshH||202||2497||

Page #231
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 207: 201. Desapratisedhapakse no-prithivi m dadati lestudesam sahi Lestudravyapcksah kriyate desopacaratastasya (2496) 202. Itaratha prithivyeva sa lasturiva samanajatilaksanatah | Lestudalamiti va deso yadi tato lesturapi bhudesah. (2497)] Trans 201-202. (On demanding ) "no-prithivi" in case of (interpreting it as ) the nagation of a part, he supplies a piece of clod on account of its usage as a portion with regard to clod as dravya. Otherwise, that (also) will be nothing but prithivi on account of its ( being characterised by the ) same genus and gender. Or, if the piece of clod is (taken ) merely (as) a portion then clod is also nothing but a portion of earth. (2496-2497) TIkA-201-202 nozabdasya dezapratiSedhapakSe nopRthivIM yAcito'nantaraM meva samastapRthivItvenopacaritasya lepToreva dezaM tatkhaNDarUpaM dadAtyasau devaH / Aha-nanu dezaniSedhapakSe nopRthivI taddeza eva gRhyate, yastu leSTudezaH sa pRthvIdezasyApi deza eva, na tu pRthvIdezaH, tat kathaM nopRthvIM yAcitastaM dadAti ? ityAha-"leT ThudavvetyAdi" leSTudravyApekSaH "se" tasya leSTudezasya dezopacAraH kriyate / idamuktaM bhavati-leSTau tAvadanantaroktayukteH saMpUrNapRthvIdravyatvamAro. pitam , tato leSTulakSaNapRthvIdravyApekSayA taddezasyApi pRthvIdezatvamupacaryate, itarathA'nyathA punaH paramArthato leSTuvat samAnajAtyAdilakSaNatvAditi pUrvoktahetoH so'pi leSTudezaH pRthvyeva mntvyaa| atha parAbhiprAyamAviSkRtya parihArArthamAha"leThudalaM ti va deso jai ti" yadi tu bhoH para ! tvaM manyase-yo'yaM leSTo dezaHsadalaM lepToreva khaNDamAtram , tataH samAnajAtilakSaNatve'pi nAsau pRthvIti / atra parihAramAha-"to leTU vi bhUdeso tti" tatastahiMpuDhavItti dei leTuM deso vi " ityAdau yaH pUrva leSTuH pRthvItvenoktaH so'pi bhuvaH pRthivyA deza eva / tatastvadabhiprAyeNa so'pi pRthvIdalarUpatvAd na pRthvI, leSTudezavaditi // 2496 / 2497 // ___D. C. When " no-prithivi is demanded, the deity-in-charge interpretes it as a negation of part and accordingly he supplies a portion of clod which was firstly taken as earth in general.

Page #232
: 208: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth Here, if it is objected that by the word "no-prithivi a part of prithivi would be understood, but since a piece of clod is the portion of a portion of earth, how could that be called "noprithvi? The reply is this:-Just as the substance of prithvi has been transposed upon clod as stated before, the sense of portion has been transposed upon a piece of clod. In other words, clod represents 'prithvi' and a piece of clod represents a portion of "prithvi" in this case; otherwise, really speaking, the portion of clod is nothing but "prithvi" as jati etc. of prithvi' are found in it also. The objection that a portion of clod could not be called 'prithvi' in spite of their jati etc. being common, is not proper. For, in that case, even clod which has already been taken as prithvi' before, will not be called prithvi' as it happens to be only a portion of prithvi'. 201-202 (2496-2497) 6 " " This argument is explained with illustrations-- dehi bhuvaM to bhaNie savvANeyA na yAvi sA savvA / sakkA sakeNa vi yANeu kimuya. vaseseNaM 1 || 203 || 2498 // 203. Dehi bhuvam to bhanie savvaneya na yavi sa savva | Sakka Sakkena vi yaneum kimuyavasesenam? (2498) [ dehi bhuvaM tato bhaNite sarvAneyA na cApi sA sarvA / zakyA zakreNApi cAnetuM kimutAvazeSeNa 1 // 203 // 2498 // 203. Dehi bhuvam tato bhanite sarvaneya na capi sa sarval Sakya Sakrenapi canotum kimutavasesena? (2498)] Trans. 203. On the demand that "Give (us) prithvi "the whole of earth should be brought. But (ca) since the whole of it could not brought even by Indra, what, then, to talk of the rest (of gods) 2498. TIkA - 203 yadi leSTurna pRthvI, tatastarhi "bhruvaM dehi" ityukte sarvApi saMpUrNA sA ''neyA prasajyate, na ca sA sarvA zakreNApyAnetuM zakyA, kimutAvazepeNa kutrikApaNadevAdimAtreNa 1 iti / tarhi kimatra tacvam ? iti bhavanta eva kathayantu iti // 2498 // For Private Personal Use Only

Page #233
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 209: ___D. C. If clod is not taken as earth, then, on saying that "Give (us) earth" the whole of earth should be supplied by him. But that is impossible. Even Indra will not be able to bring the whole of earth; what, then, to talk of the capacity of ordinary deities such as the one at the Kutrikapana etc. ? 203 (2498) Hence, jaha ghaDamANaya bhaNie na hi savvANayasaMbhavo kiMtu / desAivisiha ciya tamatthavasao samappei // 204 // 2499 // puDavi ti tahA bhanie tadegadese vi pmrnnksaao| leTummi jAyai maI jahA tahA kheTchudese vi // 20532500 / 204. Jaha ghadamanaya bhanic na hi savvanayasamblaavo kintu 1 Desaivisittham ciya tamatthavasai samappdi. (2499) 205. Pudhavi tti taha bhaaie tadegadese vi pagaranavasao 1 Letthummi jayai mat jaha taha letthudesd vi. (2500) [yathA ghaTamAnaya bhaNite na hi sarvAnayanasaMbhavaH kintu / dezAdiviziSTameva tamarthavazataH samarpayati // 204 // 2499 // pRthivIti tathA bhaNite tadekadeze'pi prakaraNavazAt / leSTau jAyate matiyathA tathA leSTudeze'pi // 205 // 2500 // 204. Yatha ghatamanaya bhaaite na hi sarvanayanasambhavah kintul Desadivisistameva tamarthavasatah samarpayati. (2499) 205. Prithiviti tatha bhanite tadekadosd'pi prakaranavasati Lestau jagate mati-r-yatha tatha lestudoso'pi. (2500) ] Trans. 204-205. Just as, on saying "Bring ghata ", there is no possibility of bringing all (ghats ) but he gives (only ) that one (which is) characterised by place etc. by means of usage, so also, on demand of 'prithvi', the purpose being attached to one of its parts, (the deity ) is inclined (to give) the ciod and consequently a piece of clod. (2499-2500)

Page #234
:210: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth TIkA-204-205 yathA sAmAnyena "ghaTamAnaya" "paTamAnaya" ityute'pi na khalu sarvasyApi ghaTasya sAmAnyatayaivAnayanasaMbhavo'sti, kintu sarvasyAnetumazakyatvAt prAyaH sarveNa prayojanAbhAvAca, arthavazAt sAmarthyata eva niyata. dezakAlAdhavacchinaM viziSTameva kazcid ghaTamAnIya samarpayati, tathA'trApi "pRthivIM dehi" iti bhaNite sarvasyAnetumazakyatvAt , prAyastayA prayojanAbhAvAcca yathA tadekadeze'pi pRthivyekAMze'pi leSTau devasya samarpaNamatirjAyate / kutaH ? ityAha-prakaraNavazAt , "anenApi tadekadezena leSTunA prastutArthaH setsyati" ityevaM prstaavvshaadityrthH| prakRtamAha-"tahA leThThadese vitti" yathA "pRthivIM dehi" ityukte sati pratipAditanyAyena tadekadeze'pi leSTau samarpaNa. matirjAyate tathA tenaiva prakAreNa "nopRthvIM dehi" ityukte tatkhaNDarUpe tadekadeze'pi samarpaNabuddhirutpadyata iti / / 2499 / 2500 // D. C. Ordinarily when a ghata or pata is demanded, by saying " Bring ghata" or " bring pata", all the ghatas or patas are not supplied. Nor is it meant so. Only a particular ghata belonging to a definite desa, kala etc. is supplied. Similarly, when it is said that "Give (us) prithvi ", the whole of prithvi is not asked for, and that is not physically possible also. Hence the deity is naturally inclined to give a lump of earth anticipating that the object of demand will be satisfied by it. The same is the case with the demand of "no-prithvi ". Just as, on demand of "prithvi", its portion-a lump of earthis given, on demand of "no-prithvi" a portion of the lump of earth is supplied with a view that the object of demand will be satisfied by it. 204-205 (2499-2500). Explaining how a portion of clod could be taken to serve the purpose of " no-prithvi", the author states leTchudavAvekkhAe taha vi taddesabhAvao tammi / uvayAro nopuDhavi puDhavi ciya jAilarUNao // 206 / 2501 // 206. Letthudavvavekkhae taha vi taddesabhavao tammi i Uvayaro no-pudhavi pudhavi cciya jailakkhanao. (2501)

Page #235
Vada] Nihnavavada :211: [leSTudravyApekSayA tathApi taddezabhAvatastasmin / upacAro nothivI pRthivyeva jAtilakSaNataH // 206 // 2501 // 206. Lestudravyapeksaya tathapi taldesabhavatastasmini Upacaro no-prithivi prithivyeva jatilaksanatah. (2501)] ___ Trans. 206. " No-prithvi " is nothing but " prithvi" from (the point of view of) general characteristics. Still, however, with regard to clod (as a) substance, the application (of no-prithvitva ), is made on that, because of its being a portion (of clod ). 2501. TIkA-206 yadyapi leSTekadezaH pRthivyeva, tathApi "uvayAro ti" tasmina leSTukadeze nopRthivItvasyopacAraH kriyateH ityarthaH / kayA ? ityAha-leSTudravyA pekSayA leSToH prAguktanyAyena yat pRthivIdravyatvamAropitaM tadapekSayetyarthaH / kutaH ? ityAha-taddezabhAvato leSTudravyaikadezatvAdityarthaH / prAguktanyAyena tAvalleSTureveha pRthvIdravyaM tadapekSayA ca tadekadeze nopRthvItyupacaryata iti bhAvaH / paramArthataHkhiyaM leSTrakadezalakSaNaM nopRthvyeva mantavyam , samAnajAtilakSaNatvAditi ko vai na manyate, asmAbhireva prAguktatvAt , idAnImapi ca smaryamANatvAt ? iti // 2501 // ___D. C. Although a portion of clod is nothing but " prithvi", an upacara of the property of no-prithivi' could be made to it. Since clod was a portion of prithvi, the property of prithvi was attributed to it. Now, taking clod as prithvi, the property of 'no-prithvi' will further be attributed to the portion of clod on the same ground. (2501) With regard to the implications of negation by prefixes art and 24, the author explains paDisehadugaM pagaI gamei jaM teNa noapuDhavi tti / bhaNie puDhavi tti gaIdesanisehe vi taddeso // 207 // 2502 // 207. Padisehalugam pagaim gamdi jam tena no-a-pudhavi tti Bhanie pudhavi tti gaidesanisdhd vi taddeso. (2502)

Page #236
* "212 Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth [pratiSedhadvikaM prakRtiM gamayati yat tena noapRthivIti / bhaNite prathivIti gatirvezaniSedhepi tadezaH // 207 // 2502 // 207. Pratisedhadvikan prakritim gamayati yat tena no-a-pri thivitil Bhanite prithiviti gatirdesaniledhe'pi taddesah. (2502)] ___Trans. 207. Since two negatives bring about the original sense, when no-a-prithvi' is uttered, prithvi is asserted. (So) even in (case of) negation of a portion, (the existence of) that portion (is implied ). 2502. TIkA-207 "dvo nau prakRtamartha gamayataH" iti vacanAd nokArAkAralakSaNaM pratiSedhadvayaM yasmAt prakRtiM gamayati-prakRtamevArtha pratipAdayatItyarthaH / tena kAraNena "noapRthvI" iti bhaNite nozabdasya sarvaniSedhaparatvAt pRthivIgatirmavati-pRthivyAH pratipattirbhavatItyarthaH / "desanisehe vi taddeso ti" dezaniSeSavAcake tu nozabde tasyA jalAdirUpAyA apRthivyA evottarapade zrUyamANAyA dezastaddezo gamyate, dezaniSedhake nozande noapRthivIti yAcite jalAdirUpApRthivyekadezaM devo dadAtItyarthaH // 2502 // D. C. Two negatives viz #1 and 3 would make one affirmative. No-a-prithvi' would, therefore, mean prithvi. Taking opt no to signify negation, of only a portion, no-aprithvi would mean a portion of a prithvi, i, e. a portion of water etc., as a consequence of which, the deity would give a portion of water etc. 207 (2502) Thus, uvayArAo tivihaM bhuvamabhuvaM nobhuvaM ca so dei / nicchayao bhuvamabhuvaM taha sAvayavAI savvAiM // 208 // 2503 / / 208. Uvayarao tiviham bhuvamabhuvam no-bhuvam ca so dei 1 Nicohayai bhuvamabhuvam taha savayavaim savvaim. (2503) [upacArAt trividhaM bhuvamabhuvaM nobhuvaM ca sa dadAti / nizcayato bhuvamabhu tathA sAvayavAni sarvANi // 208 // 2503 //

Page #237
Vada ] 208. Nihnavavada Upacarat trividham bhuvamabhuvam no-bhuvam dadati Niscayato bhuvamabhuvam tatha savayavani sarvani. (2503 ) ] : 213: Trans. 208. By ( way of ) formality, he supplies three types: prithvi, a-prithvi and no-prithvi, but practically prithvi and a-prithvi In that manner, all objects having portions (are arranged). 2503. " TIkA - 208 sa kutrikApaNadevo yAcitaH san vastu dadAti / katividham 1, kiMvA tat ityAha-trividhaM trimakAram, caturthasya noabhUpakSasya prathamapakSa evAntarbhAvAt / tatra bhuvaM leSTum abhuvaM jalAdi, nobhuvaM bhUmyekadezaM dadAti / kutaH ? ityAha-upacArAt vyavahAranayamatAzrAyaNAdityarthaH sa eva hi dezadezivyavahAraM manyate, na tu nizcaya iti bhAvaH / ata evAha - "nicchayau ityAdi" nizcayatastu bhuvamabhuvaM cetyevaM dvividhameva vastu dadAti tRtIyasya nobhUpakSasya deza - dezivyavahAraevopapadyamAnatvAt tasya ca nizcayana yenAnabhyupagamAditi / tadevaM " bhU-jala - jalaNa" ityAdau pRthivyAH prathamaM nirdiSTatvAt tAmadhikRtyoktam / atha zeSANi jalAdivastUnyadhikRtyAha " taha sAvayavAI vi" na kevalamitthaM vaM dadAvi, tathA zeSANyapi jalAdivastUni - "pagaIe agAreNaM" ityAdi prakAreNa vizeSyayAcitaH san vyavahAranayamatena yathoktavidhinA triprakArANi dadAti / kutaH ? iti cet / ucyate-yataH sAvayavAni sadezAnyetAni sarvANyapi jalAdivastUni / atastRtIyo'pi dezaviSayo dAnaprakAra eteSu saMbhavatIti bhAvaH / nizrayanayamatena tu dezadezivyavahArAbhAvAdetAnyapi jalAdIni dviprakArANyeva dadAtIti / tadevaM sAvayave vastUni prakAratrayeNa prakAradvayena ca yathoktarItyA dAnaM saMbhavati || 2503 // , ca sa D. C. The deity in charge of Kutrikapana satisfies demands of all objects in this way. On demand of prithvi', he supplies a lump of earth. On demand of a-prithvi, water etc., and on demand of ' no-prithvi' a portion of earth. Since " no-a-prithvi " either signifies ' prithvi' or water, as seen before, it would not be classed separately. Thus according to Vyavahara-naya which apprehends an object with the detailed apprehension of all its For Private Personal Use Only

Page #238
:214: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth parts, all objects coming under the categories of 'prithvi', 'aprithvi' and 'no-prithvi' are apprehended and hence supplied. ___ While, from the point of view of the Niseaya-naya, the objects are supplied either in the form of prithvi' or in the form of 'a-prithvi '. This leads us, therefore, to an important conclusion that the objects that have parts could be supplied either in two ways or in three ways, but those that have no parts could be given only in two ways. 208 (2503) Objects that have no parts could be given only in two ways. Because, jIvamajIvaM dAuM nojIvaM jAio puNarajIvaM / dei carimammi jIvaM na u nojIvaM sa jIvadalaM // 209 // 2504 // 209. Jivamajivam daum no-jivam jaio punarajivam | Dai carimammi jivam na u no-jivam sa jivadalam. (2504) [jIvamajIvaM dattvA nojIvaM yAcitaH punarajIvam / dadAti carame jIvaM na tu nojIvaM sa jIvadalam // 209 // 2504 // 209. Jivamajivam dattva " no-jivam" yacitah punarajivam | Dadati caramd jivam na tu no-jivam sa jivadalam. (2504)] ___ Trans. 209. After having given 'jiva' and 'a-jiva', he was requested (to give) no-jiva. He gives a-jiva again. In (case of) the last one, he supplies jiva but he does not give a part of jiva as no-jiva. 2504. TIkA-209 'jIvaM dehi' iti yAcitaH suro jIvaM zuka-sArikAdikaM dattvA 'ajIvaM dehi' iti yAcitastvajIvamupalakhaNDAdikaM dattvA kRtArtho jAyate / nojIvaM yAcitaH punarajIvamupalakhaNDAdikameva dadAti, nozabdasya sarvaniSedhaparatvAt / 'carame u' noajIvalakSaNe vikalpe jIvameva zukAdikaM dadAti, dvayonajoH prakRtArthagamakatvAt , nozabdasya ca sarvaniSedhakatvAditi, na tu sa kutrikApaNadevo jIvaM jIvadalaM jIvakhaNDarUpaM vApi vikalpe dadAti / iti jIvA-jIvalakSaNI dAveva rAzI, na tu tRtIyaH, asattvAt , kharaviSANavaditi // 2504 //

Page #239
Vada ] Nihnavavada :215: D. C. When 'jiva' is demanded, the deity-in-charge supplies birds like parrots etc. On demand of a-jiva, he gives a piece of earth or stone. On demand of no-jiva he again gives a piece of stone, interpreting no (no), to signify absolute negation. In case of no-a-jiva boing asked for, the deity supplies jiva liko parrot, taking 'no' and 'a' to-gether, signifying affirmation. But the deity does not supply a portion of jiva in any case. He does not interpret 'no-jiva' as a portion of jiva and supply the same accordingly. It will be noted here that on demand of four entities (jiva, a-jiva, no-jiva and no-a-jiva ), only two were supplicd in fact. The third was considered as non-existing like the horn of an ass, and hence was not supplied. 209. (2504) Then, to niggahio chaluo, gurU vi sakAramuttamaM ptto| dhiddhikArovahao chaluo vi sabhAhiM nicchUDho // 210 // 2505 // 210. To nigga hio Chaluo gura vi sakkaramuttamam patto i Dhiddhikkarovahao Chaluo vi sabha him nicchodho. (2505) [tato nigRhItaH SaDalUko gururapi satkAramuttamaM prAptaH / ghidhikAropahataH SaDulUko'pi sabhAto lisskaasitH||210||2505 210. Tato nigrihitah Sadulako gururapi satkaramuttamam pra ptah! Dhig dhikkaropahatah Saquluko'pi sabhato niskasitah. (2505)] Trans. 210. Hence Saduloka was defeated, and the preceptor was accorded the best of reception. And Sadulaka overcome with many humiliations, was (consequently) driven away from the Assembly. 2505. TIkA-210 tato yadA kutrikApaNasureNa jIvavyatirikto nojIvo na dattaH, asattvAt , tadA nigRhIto nirjitaH SaDulUkaH / gururapi zrIguptAcAryo naranAthAllokAca satkAramuttamaM prAptaH / SaDulUko'pi gurupratyanIkatvAvanapayuktadhikAropahato rAjasabhAto niSkAsita iti // 2505 //

Page #240
:216: Jinabhadra Gam's [The sixth D. C. When the deity-in-charge of the Kutrikapana did not supply no-jina' on grounds of non-existence, Rohagupta was declared as defeated. The preceptor Sri Guptacarya was greatly honoured by the King and the people. Rohagupta was eventually driven away from the Royal Assembly, with great humiliation. 210 (2505) Then, vAe parAjio so nivisao kArio nariMdeNa / ghosAviyaM ca nayare jayai jiNo vaddhamANo tti // 211 // 2506 // teNabhinivesAo samaivigappiyapayatthamAdAya / vahasesiyaM paNIyaM phAIkayamaNNamaNNehiM // 212 // 2507 // 211, Vae parajio so nivvisao kario narindena i Ghosaviyam ca nayare jayai Jino Vaddhamano tti. (2506) 212. Tenabhinivesai samaivigappiyapayatthamadaya | Vaisesiyam paniyam phaikayamannamannehim. (2507) [vAde parAjitaH sa nirviSayaH kArito narendreNa / ghoSitaM ca nagare jayati jino vardhamAna iti // 211 // 2506 // tenAbhinivezAt svamativikalpitapadArthamAdAya / vaizeSikaM praNItaM sphAtIkRtamanyAnyaiH // 212 // 2507 // 211. Vade parajitah sa nirvisayah karito narendrena i Ghositam ca nagare jayati Jino Vardhamana iti. (2506) 212. Tenabhini vesat svamativikalpitapadarthmadaya Vaisesikam pranitam sphatikritamanyanyaih. (2507)] Trans. 211-212. Defeated in discussion, as he was, the King discarded lim And, it was announced in the city that the Tirthankara Vardhamana (Swami) succeeds. Then taking (the six ) entities which were recognized by his own intellect and propagated by various followers of his, an alto-getter

Page #241
Vada 7 Nihnavarada :217: different theory was established by him, out of his (strong) adherence (to his own conviction ). (2506-2507) TIkA-211-212 sa rohagupto guruNA vAde parAjitaH san narapatinA nirviSayaH samAjJAtaH, paTahakena ca vAdyamAnena ghoSApitaM samastanagare "jayati jinaH zrImAn vardhamAnaH" iti / rohaguptasya ca vAde nirjitasyApi pratyanIkatodvejitena guruNA khelamallakaH zirasi sphoTitaH / tato bhasmakharaNDitavapuSA tenAbhinivezAt svamatikalpitAn dravyAdipadArthAnAzritya vaizeSikamataM praNItam / taccAnyAnyaistacchiSyAdibhiriyantaM kAlaM yAvat khyAtimAnItamiti // 2506 // 2507 // D. C. When Rohagupta was defeated by the preceptor, the king discarded his authority, and it was announced in the city with a beating of drum, that the great Tirthankara Vardhamana (Swami) succeeds. Although Rohagupta was defeated in discussion, the preceptor Sri Guptacarya was so much cnraged at him that he dashed an carthen pot ( full of ashes) against Rohagupta's head. Rohagupta went away with his body besmeared with ashes etc., and out of sheer adherence to his own convictions, he set out to propound an absolutely different theory (known as the Vaisesika system of philosophy ) which was spread by his followers after hiim. 211--212 (2506-2507) Finally explaining how Rohagupta came to be known as Suduldka, the author saysnAmeNa rohagutto gutteNa lappae sa coluuo| davAichappayatthovaesaNAo chalUu tti // 213 // 2508 213. Namena Rohagutto guttena lappad sa Colaod Davvaichappayatthovaesanao Chaluu tti. (2508) [nAnA rohagupto gotreNa lapyate sa colUkaH / dravyAdiSaTpadArthopadezanAt SaDulUka iti // 213 // 2508 //

Page #242
:218: Jinabhadra Gani's [The sixth 213. Namna Rohagupto gotrena lapyate sa Colukah | Dravyadisatpadarthopadesanat Sadulaka iti. (1508)] Trans. 213. He was known as Rohagupta by name, and Uloka by lineage. He was called Saduluka because he preached (the theory of) six entities, such as Dravya etc. 2508. TIkA-213 nAmA'sau rohagupto gotreNa punarulUkagotrasaMbhUtatvAisAvulUka (tyAlapyate-dravya-guNa-karma-sAmAnya-vizeSa-samavAya-lakSaNaSaTpadArthaprarUpaNena sidArthapradhAna ulUka baDDulUka ityayaM vyapadizyate // 2508 // D. C. His name was Rohagupta and his gotra was Ulaka. Since he preached the theory of six entities viz Dravya, Guna, Karman, Samanya, Visesa, and Samavaya, he was known as Saduloka. End of the Discussion with the Sixth Nihnava. -ee

Page #243
Chapter VIII // atha sptmnihnvvktvytaa|| Discussion with the Seventh Nihnava. paMcasayAculasIyA taiyA siddhiM gayassa vIrassa / to abaddhiyadiTThI dasauranayare samuppannA // 214 // 2509 / / 214. Pancasayaculasiya taiya Siddhin gayassa Virassa | To Abaddhiyaditthi Dasaura nayare saniuppanna. (2509) [paJcazatAni caturazItyadhikAni tadA siddhiM gatasya viisthaa| tato'vaddhikadRSTidazapuranagare samutpannA // 214 // 2509 // 214. Pascasatani caturasityadhikani tada Siddhim gatasya Virasya / Tato baddhikadristir-Dasapura nagard samutpanna (2509) ] Trans. 214. Then, the theory of the Abaddhika Nihnava came into existence in the city of Dasapura, five hundred, and eighty-four years, after Vira (Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira) had attained Final Emancipation. 2509. ___TIkA-214 paJcavarSazatAni caturazItyadhikAni tadA siddhiM gatasya mahAvIrasya tato'vaddhikanihnavadRSTidazapuranagare samutpanneti // 2509 // D. C. Clear. dasauranagarucchughare ajarakkhiya pUsamittatigayaM ca / goTThAmAhila navama-chamesu pucchA ya viMjhassa // 215 // 2510 // 215. Dasauranagarucchughare Ajjarakkhiya Pisamittatigayam ca i Gutthamahila navama-ithamesu puccha ya Vinjhassa. (2510)

Page #244
: 220 Jinabhadra Gani's [The seventh [dazapuranagara ikSugRhe AryarakSitaH puSpamitratrikaM ca / goSThAmAhilo'STama-navamayoH pRcchA ca vindhysy.||215||2510|| 215. Dasapuranagara Iksugrihe Arya-Raksitah Puspamitratrikam cal Gosthamahilo'stama-Navamayoh priccha ca Vindhyasya. (2510)] Trans. 215. Arya Raksita-suri was (a preceptor) in (a (a monastery named ) Iksugriha in (the) city (of) Dasapura. He had three (pupils named) Puspamitra (Ghiita-Puspamitra, Vastra Puspamitra, and Durbalika Puspamitra). Costha-Mahila had a discussion with (an ascetic named) Vindhya about the Eighth and Ninth ( Purvas ). 2510. TIkA-215 dazapuranagara ikSugRhe AryarakSitaH "dIkSAM jagrAha " iti zeSaH / tasya ca ghRtapuSpamitra-vastrapuSpamitra-durbalikApuSpamitralakSaNaM ziSyatrayaM babhUva / goSThAmAhilazca tacchiSyo'STame karmapravAdapUrve navame ca pratyAkhyAnapUrve vyAkhyAyamAne karmabandhavicAre pratyAkhyAnavicAre ca vipratipanno vidhipreritavAniti // 2510 // D. C. Arya Raksitasuri was conducting a monastery named Iksugriha in the city of Dasapura. He had three pupils named Ghrita-Puspamitra, Vastra-Puspamitra and Durbalika Puspamitra, respectively. Another prominent pupil-Gostha-Mahila ( who also happened to be the maternal uncle of AryaRaksitasari ) had a discussion with an ascetic named Vindhya on the Eighth and Ninth Purvas (viz Karmapravada-parva and Pratyakhyanapravada-purva respectively ).1 The whole story is narrated as follows :soUNa kAla dhammaM guruNo gacchammi pUsamittaM ca / ThAviyaM guruNA kila gohamAhilo macchariyabhAvo // 216 // 2511 // 216. Soona kaladhammam guruno gacchammi Pasamittam ca i Thaviyam guruna kila Gottha-mahilo macchariyabhavo. (2511) 1. For details about Parvas, Vide Introduction and also Chapter II Foot note 2.

Page #245
:221: Vada] Nihnavavada [zrutvA kAladharma gurorgacche puSpamitraM ca / sthApitaM guruNA kila goSThAmAhilo matsaritabhAvaH // 216 // 2511 // 216. Srutva kaladharmam guro-r-gacche Puspamitram ca | Sthapitam guruna kila Gustha-Mahilo matsaritabhavah. (2511)] ____Trans. 216. Having heard, that the preceptor (Arya Raksitasuri) had attained nirvana and that (Durbalika) Puspamitra had ( already ) been appointed by the preceptor (as an Acarya) in the accha ( Congregation-Saigha ), Gostha-Mahila was really excited with jealousy. 2511. TIkA-216 iha ca sarvAsAmapi gAthAnAM. bhAvArtha AryarakSitakathAnakAdavaseyaH / taca vistarato mUlAvazyakAdavagantavyam / saMkSepatastvihApi kizciducyate / tadyathA dazapuraM nAma nagaram / tatra ca somadevo nAma brAhmaNaH / tasya ca rudrasomA nAma bhAryA / sA ca jinavacanapratibuddhAzrAvikA / tayozca rakSito nAma catudezavidyAsthAnapAragaH putro babhUva / tena ca mAtRpreritena tosaliputrAcAryANAM samIpe dIkSA pratipamA / ekAdazAGgAni dRSTivAdo'pi yAvAn gurusamIpa AsIt tAvAn sarvo'pi gRhiitH| zeSastvAryavairasvAminaH samIpe'dhIto yAvad nava pUrvANi, tathA caturviMzatiyavikAni / tataH phalgurakSito nAma tadvandhukAraNArtha mAtrApreSitaH pravAjitazca / tato dvAvapi mAtApitsamIpe samAyAtau / tatazcAryarakSitena mAtApitarau tathA mAtulagoSThAmAhilapamukhaH sarvo'pi svajanavargaH pravAjitaH / evamaparAparAMzca pravAjayata AryarakSitasUrermahAn gaccho jAtaH / tatra ca gacche durbalikApuSpamitra-ghRtapuSpamitra-vastrapuSpamitrasaMjJAtrayaH puSpamitrA Asan / tatra durbalikApuSpamitreNa navapUrvANyadhItAni / iha ca gacche catvAraH puruSAH pradhAnatarAH, tadyathA-durbalikApuSpamitraH, vindhyaH, phalgurakSitaH, goSThAmAhilazceti / tatra ribhilikApuSpamitro vindhyasya vAcanAM daapitH| tasya ca tAM prayacchato guNanAbhAvAdAtmano navamapUrva glti| tataH sUribhirevaMbhUtasyApi prAjJassa yaditthaMsUtrArthavismRtiH saMpadyate tadA'zeSANAM sUtrANAM duruddharaH sUtrArthaH saMpatsyate, iti vicintya pUrvotakrameNAnuyogaH pArthakyena vyvsthaapitH| nayAzca prAyo

Page #246
: 222 : Jinabhadra Gani's [The seventh nigahitavibhAgAH kRtA iti / anyadA ca te AryarakSitasUrayo vihArakrameNa mathurAnagarI gatAH / tatra ca bhUtaguhAyAM vyantaragRhe sthitAH / itazca zakro mahAvidehe sImandharasvAmitIrthakarasamIpe nigodavaktavyatAM zrutvA vismitH| pRSThavAn-" kiM bhagavan ? bharatakSetre'pi sAMpratamamumatIvasUkSma nigodavicAraM ko'pi budhyate prarUpayati ca ? / tato bhagavatA proktam-prarUpayantyAryarakSitasUrayaH " / etacca zrutvA vismaya-kautuka-bhaktibharapUryamANamAnaso devendraH sthavirabrAhmaNarUpaM kRtvA sAdhuSu bhikSAcaryA gateSvAryarakSitasamIpamupayayau / tatastenAryarakSitasUrayo vanditvA pRSTAH-'bhagavan ? mahAn vyAdhirvartate, tenAhamanazanaM kartumicchAmi, tat kathayata mama kiyadAyuSkam ? iti / tato yavikeSvAyuHzreNAvupayogaM dattvA sUribhiAtam-nAyaM manuSyo vyantarAdirvA kintu dvisAgaropamasthitiko'sau saudhrmaadhiptiH| tatazca vArdhakyenAdhaH patite kareNa dhruvAvutkSipya nirIkSya ca proktam zako bhavAn / evaM cAbhihite tuSTena devAdhipatinA niveditaH sarvo'pi tIrthakarasamIpanigodazravaNAdivyatikaraH / tataH pRSTAH zakreNa nigodajIvAH / prarUpitAzca vistarataH / tatastuSTamAnasena surapatinA praNamya "brajAmi" iti prokte'mihitaM gurubhiH-'tiSThata kSaNamekaM, yAvat sAdhavaH samAgacchanti yena yuSmAmidRSTairidAnImapi devendrAgamanamastIti vijJAya sthairyamutpadyate teSAmiti / tatakhidazapatinA proktam-"bhadanta ! karomyevam , kevalaM svAbhAvikaM matsvarUpaM dRSvA'lpasatvA nidAnaM krissynti"| tato guruNA proktam-'tarhi nijAgamanasUcakaM kimapi cihnaM kRtvA vrajata' / tatastasyopAzrayasyAnyato'bhimukhaM dvAraM kRtvA gtstridshptiH| Agataizca sAdhubhiArAnyatvadarzanavismitaiH pRSTaiH kathitaM sarva sUribhiriti / anyadA ca te viharanto dazapuranagaramAgatAH / itazca mathurAnagayAM mAtApitrAdikamapi nAsti ityAdinAstikavAdaM prarUpayan vAdI samutthitaH / tatra ca prativAdinaH kasyacidabhAvAt saMdhenAryarakSitasUrayaH eva sAMpataM yugapradhAnA iti kRtvA tatsamIpe prastutavyatikarakathanAya sAdhusaGghATakaM preSitam / svayamatIvavRddhatvAd gantumazaktaiH "vAdalabdhisaMpannaH" iti kRtvA goSThAmAhilo nirUpitaH / tatra ca tena gatvA nigRhIto'sau vAdI / zrAvakaizcAyaM tatraiva varSAkAlaM kaaritH| ___ isazcAryarakSitasUribhirnijapaTTe durcalikApuSpamitraH sthApayitumadhyavasitaH / zeSastu svajamabhUtaH sAdhuvargo goSThAmAhilaM, phalgurakSitaM vA, tamIhate / tattatha

Page #247
Vada ] : 223: sarvamapi gacchamupavezya sUrayaH saMbodhayanti, tadyathA - " iha kila trayo ghaTA bhRtAH / tatraiko vallAnAm, dvitIyo tilasya, tRtIyastu ghRtasya / eteSu cAvAGmukheSu kRteSu vallAH sarve'pi nirgacchanti / tailaM tu kiJcid ghaTe'pi lagati / ghRtaM tu bahutaraM tatra lagati / tadahaM durbalikA puSpamitraM prati sUtrAtha samAzritya vallaghaTakalpaH saMjAtaH sadgatayoH samastayorapi tayostena grahaNAt / phalgurakSitaM tu prati tilaghaTakalpo'haM saMpannaH sarvayorapi sUtrArthayosnenAgrahaNAn / goSThAmAhilaM tu prati ghRtaghaTakalpo'hamabhUvam, bahutarayoH sUtrArthayormamApi pArzve'vasthAnAt / tasmAd madgatAzeSasUtrArtha saMpannatvAd durbalikApuSpamitra eva bhavatAM sUrirbhavatu " / 'icchAmaH" iti bhaNitvA taiH sarverapi pratipannamidam / sUribhiraNyabhihito durbalikA puSpamitrA " yathA'haM vartitaH phalgurakSite goSThAmAhile ca tathA bhavatA - mapi vartitavyam " / gaccho'pyabhihitaH - " yathA mayA sArdhaM bhavadbhirvartitaM tathA'nenApi sArdhaM vartitavyam / api ca, ahaM kRte'kRte vA nArUSyam, ayaM tu na sahiSyati, tataH sutarAmasya vinayena vartitavyam " / ityAdyanuzAstiM dattvA bhaktaM pratyAkhyAya devalokamupagatAH sUrayaH / tataH " Nihnavavada goSThA mAhilena ca zrutamidaM yathA - " guravaH paralokaM gatAH / tato mathurAtaH samAgatena pRSTamanena yathA - " ko gaNadharaH svapade sUribhinivezita: ? / " tataH sarvospi vallAdighaTaprarUpaNAdiko vyatikaraH samAkarNito 'lokAt / tacchravaNAzcAtIvadUno'sau sthitvA pRthak pratizraye, durbalikApuSpamitropAzraye taccaryopalambhArthaM - gataH / taizca sarvairapyabhyutthito'sau bhaNitazca yathA - ' tiSThata yUyamatrevopAzraye, kimiti pRthag vyavasthitAH ? / tacca necchatyasau / pRthagupAzrayavyavasthitazca durbalikApuSpamitrApavAdagrahaNAdinA vyudgrAhayati sAdhUn, na ca vyudgrAhayituM zaknoti / durbalikApuppamitrasamIpe cAbhimAnato na kiJcit zRNoti kintu vyAkhyAnamaNDalikAsthitasya cintanikAM kurvato vindhyasyAntike samAkarNayati / anyadA aSTama- navamapUrvayoH karma - pratyAkhyAnavicAre'bhinivezAd vipratipanno vakSyamANanItyA nivo jAtaH iti // atha prakRtagAthAkSarArtho'nuzrIyate - kAlo maraNaM tallakSaNo dharmaH paryAyaH kAladharmastaM gurorAryarakSitasya zrutvA, tathA puSpamitraM ca gacche'dhipatiM sthApitamAkarNya goSTa mAhilo matsaritabhAvaH saMjAtaH || 2511 //

Page #248
: 224 : Jinabhadra Gani's [The seventh D, C. Before proceeding to the story of the Seventh Nihnava, and his theory, it is necessary to narrate briefly the story of Arya Raksitacarya as told by the Original Avasyaka Satras : There was a Brahmin named Somadova in Dasapura nagara. His wife Rudrasoma, of whom Somadeva had a son named Raksita, was a devoted follower of the Tirthankaras. Raksita was proficient in all the fourteen lores. On the advice of his mother, he accepted dikna at the hands of Acarya Tosaliputra, under whose guidance he studied all the eleven Angas and whatever he could of the Twelfth Anga. In addition to that, he learnt nine purvas and twenty-four yavikas from Arya Vajraswani, His brother Falguraksita was also initiated as an ascetic when he came to Raksitasari. Then gradually both of them made all their relatives including their father, mother, and maternal uncle Gostha-Mahila accept diksa. Since a number of persons were initiated in this way, Arya Raksitasuri got his gaccha established. In the gaccha, there were three disciples named Puspamitra: Ghrita Puspamitra, Vastra Puspamitra, and Durbalika Puspamitra, of whom Durbalika Puspamitra was conversant with the nine Purvas. Durbalika Puspamitra, Vindhya, Falguraksita and Gosthamahila were the four chief ascetics in the gaccha. Durba lika Puspamitra was entrusted with the work of teaching parvas to Vindhya. In course of his teaching the ninth parva he found that he forgot his own study. Knowing this, the preceptor thought that if such an able disciple forgets the part of satras, 2. According to some, these fourteen vidyas are the Four Vedas, the six Vedangas, the Puranas, the Mimansa, Nyaya, and Dharma. Others add four Upavedas to these and take the vidyas to be eighteen in all. According to Manu Smriti they are five: (1) Trayi, the Triple Vedas. (2) Anviksiki, Logic and Metaphysics. (3) Dandaniti, the science of Government. (4) Vartta, practical arts such as Agriculture, Commerce, Medicine etc. and (5) Atma-vidyaKnowledge of Soul or Sublime Theological Truth. Vide Manu VIL. 43 !

Page #249
Vada ] Nihnayavada : 225: there is no wonder if all the sutras could not be committed to memory by anyone. Consequently, he divided all the sutras into four anuyogas3 as mentioned beforc. Then, Arya Raksitasari proceeded on vihara and stayed in a Vyantara griha in Bhutagupha at Mathura. In the mean time, once upon a time, while returning after paying his homages to Sri Simandhara Swami, in the regions of Mahavide ha, Indra (Saudharmendia) astonished at his wonderful discourse on "nigoda "4 asked the Tirthankara " O worthy Lord I docs anyone in the whole of Bharata-ksetra understand and explain the subtle form of 'nigoda' at present ?" "Arya Raksitasuri teaches it" was the reply. Saudharmendra impelled by surprise, curiosity, and devotion approached Arya Raksitasari in the attire of an old Brahmin, at the time when all the sadhus had retired for their meals. Having paid his respects, the Indra said " Revered Sir, I am suffering fron a fatal disease. So, I wish to observe fasts from to-morrow. Will you kindly tell me how long is the rest of my life?" Then, concentrating his mind on the category of age in yavikas, the Acarya recognized at once that he was neither a human being nor a Vyantara etc. but he was Saudharmendra-the lord of the Saudharna deva-loka-with an age-limit as long as two Sagaropams. He up-raised his lifted eye-brows, which werd bent down due to old age, looked at the Brahmin and said :--"You are none but Saudharmendra. Being pleased at this, Indra narrated the whole incident of Tirthankara Sri Simandhara Swami, from whom he had studied the forms of "nigoda beings." Indra asked the Acarya about the nature of nigoda' living beings also. The Acarya 3. These are (1) Dravyanuyoga, (2) Carana-karananuyoga, (3) Gaaitanuyoga and (4) Kathanuyoga. 4. The division of the Sotras into four anuyogas was done by Arya Raksitasari. But with reference to the knowledge of nigoda' some attribute superior knowledge of nigoda' to Arya Raksitasari, while others attribute it to Kalikacarya. For a detailed explantion of Nigoda', Vide Sranana Bhagavan Mahavira Vol. I Part I page 12.

Page #250
: 226 : Jinabhadra Gani's [The seventh explained the same in full details exactly in the same way as the Tirthankara had done. Indra said " Worthy sir ! you have told the same thing as the Tirthankara Sri Simandhara Swani did. Now I shall take your leave." The Acarya replied "But, O Lord of Deities ! Kindly wait till tbe inmates of the gaccha return. They will stick to the gaccha more firmly at your sight" The Indra replied "I will do like that, but what if the lower type of jivas humiliated me on sccing me in such an ordinary attire? Then the Acarya said . You are right. In that case, you may leave something as e token of your visit. Accordingly, Saudharmendra shifted the main-door of the upasraya from one direction to another, and went away, When the ascetics returned and found the main-door of the upasraya in the opposite direction, they were surprised. The Acarya, explained the whole incident, and satisfied their curiosity. Then, moving about from one place to another, the Acarya at last came baok to Dasapura nagara. :. In the mean-time, a great atheist rose up in Mathura, deny. ing even the existence of father and mother. When a competent combatant was not available, taking Acarya Raksitasari as Yuga pradhana' a deputation of ascetics was sent to him, to inform him of this incident. Due to his old age, he could not go there himself. So, he appointed Gostha-Mahila for the task. The atheist was defeated by Gostha-Mahila who passed his monsoon season at Mathura . On the other side, in Dasapura nagara Arya Raksitsari decided to appoint Durbalika Puspamitra as an Acarya after him, Many of his disciples were in favour of Gostha-Mahila and Phalguraksita. So, in order to convince them of his right choice, he called a meeting all the monks of the gaccha, and showing three pots full of different things, he said, "These are three pots. One is full of Valla (beans of winnowing corn), another is full of oil, and a third one is full of ghee (clarified butter ). When all of them are up-turned, all the beans from one will come out, oil contained in another pot will stick to the pot only to some

Page #251
Vada ) Nihnatarada : 227 : extent, while in the third pot a large quantity of ghee will be stuck. My tendency towards Durbalika Puspanitra is like that of the pot containing beans. That is to say, I have poured out all my knowledge into him and he has grasped the same very well. Since Phalguraksita has not been able to grasp the mean ing of all the sutras my tendency towards him is like that of the pot full of oil, and as most of the knowledge has stuck to me instead of being grasped by Gostha-Mahila, my behaviour towards him will be corresponding to that of the ghee-pot. Thus, since Durbalika Puspamitra has grasped all the knowledge that I possess, you shall have to honour him as an Acarya (preceptor) after me. The monks agreed upon this proposal saying "We all accept him as our Acarya." The Acarya, then, asked Durbalika Puspamitra to behave with Gostha-Mahila and Phalgumitra with the same respect as he did. On the other side, instructing the inmates of the gaccha to respect Durbalika Puspanitra in the same way, as they used to respect himself, he warned them that they should behave with him more humbly than they did with himself, as Durbalika Puspamitra would not tolerate a slight immodesty on their part as he himself used to tolerate at times. Having advised both the parties, in this way, Arya Raksitsari departed to heaven.. On hearing that Arya Raksitasari had departed to the other world, Gostha-Mahila returned to Dasapura nagara immediately. He inquired and came to know about the appointment of Durbalika Puspamitra as the Acarya of the gaccha. He was vitally afflicted by the news. So, he did not stay in the gaccha but he stayed outside and then he went to the gaccha-upasraya in order to see his fellow-asoetios. The ascetics at once received him with great warmth, and earnestly requested him to stop with them in the gaccha-upasraya. But Gostha-Mahila did not acoede to their request. Durbalika Puspamitra was giving sermons on the Eighth Parva (Pratya-khyana purva). Gostha-Mahila did not even care to listen to his sermons out of jealousy and impudence. He heard

Page #252
Jinabhadra Gani's [ The seventh the same from Vindhya who carefully attended and understood the sermons. 228: Once in course of discussion of the eighth and ninth parvas, Gostha-Mahila contradicted the Truth, laid down by the Original sutras, and hence he became a nihnava. 216 (2511) bIsuvasahie Thio chinnesaNaparo ya sa kayAe / viMjhassa suNai pAse'NubhAsamA Nassa vakkhANaM // 217 // 2512 // 217. Visuvasahie thio chiddannesanaparo ya sa kayael Vinjhassa sunai pase'nubhasamanassa vakkhanam ( 2512) [viSvagvasatau sthitarichadrAnveSaNaparaca sa kadAcit / vindhasya zRNoti pArzve'nubhASamANasya vyAkhyAnam // 217||2512 // 217. Visvagvasatau sthitaschidranvesanaparasca sa kadacit | Vindhasya Srinoti parsve'nubhasamanasya vyakhyanam. (2512)] Trans. 217. He, stopping at a separate place, and (always) bent on finding faults, sometimes heard the sermon from Vindhya who used to repeat (what Durbalika Puspamitra had said ) 2512. TIkA - 217 viSvagvasatau sthita chidrAnveSaNaparaH sa goSThAmAhilaH kadAcid vindhyasyAnubhASamANasya cintanikAM kurvataH pArzve vyAkhyAnaM zRNotIti // 2512 // D. C. Clear. Then, kammapadAyapubve baddhaM puDhaM nikAiyaM kammaM / jIva esehiM samaM sUIkalAvovamANAo // 218 // 2513 // uTTaNamukkerI saMthomo khavaNamaNubhavo bAvi / aNikAiyammi kamme nikAie pAyamaNubhavaNaM // 219 // 2514 // souM bhaNai sadosaM vakakhANamiNaM ti pAvai jao me / moklAbhASo jIvappaesa kammAvibhAgAo ||2202515 // For Private Personal Use Only

Page #253
Vasta] Nihnavavada 1229 218. Kammappavaya purve baddham puttham nikaiyam kapamami Jivapadsehim samam saikalavovamanao. (2413) 219. Uvvattanamuk koro santhomo khavanamanubhavo vavi/ Anikaiyammi kamme nikaie payamapubhavanam, (2514) 220. Soum bhagai sadosam vakkhanaminam ti pavai jao bhe Makkhabhavo Jivappaesakammavibhagao. (2515) [karmapravAvapUrSe baddhaM spRhaM nikAcitaM krm| jIvapradezaiH sayaM sUcIbalApopamAnAt // 218 // 2516 // apavartanamutkaraH saMstomaH kSapaNamamubhavo vApi / anikAcite karmaNi nikAcite prAyo'nubhavanam // 219 // 2514 // zrutvA bhaNati sadoSaM vyAkhyAnamidamiti prApnoti yo bhavana mokSAbhAbo jIvapradezakarmAvibhAgAt / / 220 // 2515 // 218. Karmapravadapurve baddham spristam pikaeitam karma Jivapradesaih samam sacikalapopamanat. (2513) 219. Apavartanamutkarah samstomah ksapanamanubhara vapit Anikacite karmani nikacite prayo'nubhavanam. (2514) 220. Srutva bhanati sa-dosam vyakhyanamidamiti prapnoti yato bhavatam Mok sabhavo jivapradesakarmavibhagat. (2515) Trans 218-219-220. In (course of discussion of the ) Karmapravada parva when he heard that Karman is tied (baddha) touched (sprista ) and infused (gikacda) with (a) the regions of jiva, like a bond of needles and that reduction, exaltation, transformation, destruction, or even perceptiga (of the final consequence) (could be worked ) upon an inde. pendent Karman, while that which has already been infused (with Jiva ) is probably suscoptible to the perception of final consequence only, he said "This sermon is faulty, For in case of Karman and the (various ) regions of siva being intimately connected ( with each other), there would be no thing like noksa." (2513-2515)

Page #254
:230: Jinabhadra Gani's [The seventh TIkA-218-219-220 iha karmapravAdanAmnyaSTame pUrva karmavicAre prastute durbalikApuSpamitra evaM vyAkhyAnayati, tadyathA-jIvapradezai samaM baddhaM baddhamAtrameva karma bhavati, yathA'kaSAyasyeryApathapratyayaM karma / tacca kAlAntarasthitimavApyaiva jIvapradezebhyo vighaTate, zuSkakuDayApatitacUrNamuSTivaditi / anyattu 'puDhe ti' "baddham" ityatrApi saMbadhyate / tatazca baddhaM spRSTaM cetyrthH| tatra baddhaM jIvena saha saMyogamAtramApanam , spRSTaM tu jIvapradezairAtmIkRtam / etaccetthaM baddhaM sat kAlAntareNa vighaTate, AdralepakuDye sasnehacUrNavaditi / "nikAiyaM ti" "baddhaM" "spRSTaM" "ca" ityatrApi saMbadhyate / tatazcAparaM kimapi karma baddhaM spRSTaM nikAcitaM bhavatItyarthaH / tatra tadeva badaspRSTaM gADhatarAdhyavasAyena baddhatvAdapavartanAdikaraNAyogyatAM nItaM nikAcitamucyate / idaM ca kAlAntare'pi vipAkato'nubhavamantareNa prAyo nApagacchati, gADhatarabaddhatvAt , AdrakuDyAzleSitanibiDaceTikAhastakavaditi / ayaM ca trividho'pi bandhaH sUcIkalApopamAnAd bhAvanIyaH, tadyathAguNA''veSTitasUcIkalApopamaM baddhamucyate, lohapaTTabaddhasUcIsaMghAtasadRzaM tu baddhaspRmityabhidhIyate, baddhaspRSTanikAcitaM tvagnitaptadhanAhatakoDIkRtasUcInicayasaMnibhaM bhAvanIyamiti / nanvanikAcitasya karmaNaH ko vizeSaH 1 ityAha-'ubaTTaNetyAdi' iha karmaviSayANyaSTau kAraNAni bhavanti / uktaM ca baMdhaNa-saMkamaNu-baTTaNA ya uvaTTaNA uIraNayA / uvasAvaNA nivattI nikAyaNA ca tti karaNAI // 1 // tatra nikAcite karmaNi sthityAdikhaNDanarUpA "ubaTTaNaM ti" apavartanA pravartate / tathA "ukkero ti" sthityAdivardhanarUpa utkoca udvartanA / tathA "saMthomo ti" asAtAdeH sAtAdau kSepaNarUpaH saMkramaH / tathA "khavaNaM ti" prakatyantarasaMkramitasya karmaga pradezodayena nirjaraNaM kSapaNam / tathA "aNubhavo ti" svena svena rUpega prakRtInAM vipAkato vedanAnubhAH / idaM copalakSa gAdIraNAdInAm / tadetAnyapavartanAdIni sarvANyanikAcite karmagi prAnti, nikAcite tu prAyo vipAkenAnubhava esa pravartate, na punarapavartanAdIni, ityanayovizeSaH / samAkIvikRSTatapasAmutkaTAdhyavasAyabalena "tavasA u nikAiyANaM pi" iti pacanA nikAcite'pi karmaNyapavartanAdikaraNapravRttirbhavatIti prAyograhaNam / tadatra vyAkhyAne kSIranIranyAyena vahnitaptAyogolakanyAyena vA jIvapradezaiH saha karma saMbaddhamiti paryavasitaM vindhyasamIpe zrutvA tathA vidhakarmodayAdabhinivezena

Page #255
Vada] Nihnavavada : 231: vipratipanna goSThAmA hilaH pratipAdayati- " nanu sadoSamidaM vyAkhyAnam, yasmAdevaM vyAkhyAyamAne bhavatAM mokSAbhAvaH prApnoti, jIvapradezaiH saha karmaNAmadhibhAgena tAdAtmyenAvasthAnAditi || 2513|| 2514 || 2515 D. C. In course of his lecture on Karma-pravada parva, Durbalika Puspamitra explains the relation between jiva and Karman as follows: Karman is attached to the jivapradesas only externally e. g. Karman constituting the observances of religious mendicant is tied to the holy regions of the jiva, only externally. It is separated from jiva soon after it comes in contact, like a handful of powder separating itself from a dry wall. Such a type of Karman is known as "badaha karman." There are some karmans which are connected with jiva pradesas more closely. They could be separated from the jiva pradesas after a long time, like a moist powder from a wet wall. These are known as 66 baddhasprista Karmans". Again, there are some which are completely infused into the jivapradesas. They have almost become one with the jivapradesas, and so, they could not be separated from the jiva pradesas without undergoing a change in their original condition. Such a type of Karman is known as baddha-sprista-nikacita "" Karman. 66 All the three types are better explained with the help of an illustration of a band of needles. Karman is baddha' like a band of needles with a piece of string tied round it. It is 'baddha sprista' like the same with a strap of iron fastened round it, and the condition of "baddha-sprista and nikacita, is like that of a band of needles heated red-hot and hammered in such a way, that all the needles are completely infused with one another. None of them could be separated from each other without undergoing a change in its original condition. The distinctive characteristics of an independent or anikacita karman, are described as follows: For Private Personal Use Only

Page #256
: 282: Jinabhadra Gani's [The seventh Bandhana-sankanjanu-vvattana ya uvattana tiranaya Uvasavana nivatti nikayana ca tti karanaim II [ It is susceptible to the processes of combination, transformation, division, exaltation, liberation, reduction, determination and even infusion. ] Thus, it is seen that an a-nikacita Karman which is separated from the Soul, is susceptible to processes of division, transformation, exaltation, and even the experience of undergoing a change in the original condition. But that which is nikacita is not susceptible to any such process except perhaps that of undergoing change of state. Still however, processes of division etc. could also be made to work upon nikacita Karman by the capas city of high penances. In the discourse as regard Karman, it is pointed out that the relation between jiva and karman resembles that of mik and water or fire and iron. When Gostha-Mahila heard this from Vindhya he contradicted this view in the light of the above theory of Karman. He said "This discourse is faulty. For, if jiva and karman were inseparable as said above, there would be nothing like theksa. In support of his belief, Gostha-Mahila proceeds :na hi kammaM jIvAo aveha avibhAgao paeso vva / tavaNavagamAvamukkho juttarmiNaM teNa vakkhANaM // 22 // 2516 // 221. Na hi kammam javdo avei avibhagao padso vrat Tadanavagamadamukkho juttaminana tena vakkhanam. (2516) na hi karma jIvAdapaikhavibhAgataH pradeza iva / tadanapagamAdramokSo yuktamidaM tena vyAkhyAnam // 221 // 2516 // 221. Na hi karma jivadapaityavibhagatah pradega ivas Tadanapagamadamokso yuktamidam tena vyakhyanam. (2516)] Trans. 221. Karman is not inseparable from Soul like its portion. In case of its ) being inseparable, there would be no Moksa. This discourse of mine is (thus) justified. 2516.

Page #257
:233: Vada ] Nihnavavada TIkA-221 "na hi-naiva karma jIvAdapaiti" iti pratijJA / avibhAgAdavayayogolakanyAyena jIvena saha tAdAtmyAdityarthaH, eSa hetuH| "paeso bya tti" jIvapradezarAzivadityarthaH, eSa dRSTAntaH / iha yad yena sahAvibhAgena vyavasthitaM na tat tato viyujyate, yathA jIvAt tatpradezAnikurambam , iSyate cAvibhAgo jIva-karmaNorbhavadbhiH, iti na tat tasmAd viyujyate / tatastadanapagamAt tasya karmaNo jIvAdanapagamAdaviyogAt sarvadaiva jIvAnAM sakarmakatvAd mokSAbhAvaH / tena tasmAdidamiha madIyaM vyAkhyAnaM katuM yuktamiti // 2516 / / D. C. According to you, Karman is intimately connected with jiva. Karman, in that case, will invariably be accompanying jiva and there will be no scope for jiva to attain Moksa. I shall therefore be justified in giving a discourse about it. (2516) The discourse is puTTho jahA abaddho kaMcuiNaM kaMcuo samannei / evaM puTThamaSaddhaM jIvaM kammaM samannei // 222 // 2517 // 222. Puttho jaha abaddho kancuinam kuncuo samanndil ____Evam putthamabaddhain jivam kammam samanndi. (2517) [spRSTo yathA'baddhaH kanukinaM kazrukA smnveti| evaM spRSTamabaddhaM jIvaM karma samanveti // 222||2517 // 222. Spristo yatha'baddhah kancukinam kancukah samanveti Evam spristamabaddham jivam karma. samanveti. (2517)] Trans. 222. Just as, the cast-off skin of a snake goes along with the snake even with a slight touch, so also, Karman though separate, goes with jiva (even) with a (slight) touch 2517. TIkA-222 yathAspRSTaH sparzanamAtreNa saMyukto'baddhaH kSIranIranyAyAdalolIbhUta eva kaJcuko viSadharanirmokaH kaJcukinaM viSadharaM samanveti samanugacchati, evaM karmApi spRSTaM sarpakacukavat sparzanamAtreNaiva saMyuktamabaddhaM vayayaH piNDAdinyAyAdalolIbhUtameva jIvaM samanveti, evameva mokSApapatteriti // 2517 //

Page #258
:234: Jinabhadra Gani's [The seventh D. C. The cast-off skin of a snake though separate but touched by the snake, is always accompanying the serpent. The same is the case with Karman, Although considered as external, Karman accompanies jiva everywhere even by slight touch giving rise thereby to the complete denial of Moksa. 222 (2517) Controversy about the Ninth Purva (Pratyakhyana purva ) is this :soUNa bhannamANaM paJcakkhANaM puNo navamapuvve / so jAvajIvavihiyaM tivihaM tiviheNa sAhUNaM // 223 / / 2518 // jaMpa pacarakhANaM aparimANAe hoi seyaM tu / jesiM tu parimANaM taM duheM AsasA hoi / / 224 // 2519 // 223. Soona bhannamanam paccakkhanam puno navamapuvve i So javajjivavihiyam tivibam tivihena sahunani, (2518) 224. Jampai paccakkhanam a-parimanae hoi seyain tu Jesim tu parimanam tam duttham asasa hoi. (2519) [zrutvA bhaNyamAnaM pratyAkhyAnaM punarnavamapUrve / / sa yAvajjIvavihitaM trividhaM trividhena sAdhUnAm // 223 // 2518 // jalapati pratyAkhyAnamaparimANatayA bhavati zreyastu / yeSAM tu parimANaM tad duSTamAzaMsA bhavati // 224 // 2519 // 223. Srutva bhanyamanam pratyakhyanam puna-r-navamapurve Sa yavajjivavihitam trividham trividhena sadhanam. (2518) 224. Jalpati pratyakhyanamaparimanataya bhavati sreyastu | Yesam tu parimanam tad dustamasamsa bhavati. (2519) ] Trans. 223-224. Having heard the discourse of the religious vow laid down in the Ninth Parva, to be observed, trividham (acting, commanding, consenting, either in the past, or the present, or the future) trividhena (in mind, speech and body ) by the ascetics till the end of their life, he objects that the vow becomes excellent by (virtue of ) its (being)

Page #259
Vada ] Nihnavavada :235: limitless. Those that are limited are spoiled by (the rise of) temptation. (2518-2519) TIkA-223 sa goSThAmAhilaH karmavicAre vipratipanaH punaranyadA navamapUrve "karemi bhante ! sAmAiyaM savvaM sAvajaM jogaM paccakkhAmi" ityAdi yAvajjIvA. vadhikaM sAdhUnAM saMbandhipratyAkhyAnaM bhaNyamAnaM vindhyasamIpe vicAryamANaM zRNoti // 2518 // TIkA-224 goSThAmAhilo jalpati-nanu pratyAkhyAnaM sarvamapyaparimANatayA'vadhirahitameva kriyamANaM zreyohetutvAt zreyaH zobhanaM bhavati / yeSAM tu vyAkhyAne yAvajIvAdiparimANamavadhividhIyate, teSAM matena tat pratyAkhyAnamAzaMsAdoSaduSTatvAd duSTaM sadoSaM prAmoti // 2518 // 2519 // D. C. In course of his listening to the Ninth parva from Vindhya, Gostha Mahila comes across the expression "Karemi bhante i sawaiyam savvam savajjam jogam paccakkhami etc., which lays down that the practice of pratyakhyana is to be followed trividham (by means of acting, commanding, or consenting) trividhena (in niind, speech and body ) by all the monks till the end of their life. He objects to this predicament and says that the religious vow appears excellent only if it is practised without a time-limit Those who preach the pratice of vow to be followed only till the end of lifc, spoil the sanctity of the same by giving rise to temptation. 223-224 (2518-2519) It is explained in details as followsAsaMsA jA puNNe sevissAmi tti dUsiyaM tIe / jeNa suyammi vi bhaNiyaM pariNAmAo asuddhaM tu // 225 // 2520 // 225. Asamsa ja punne sevissami tti dasiyam tie | Jena suyammi vi bhaniyam parinamai asuddham tu. (2520) [AzaMsA yA pUrNe seviSya iti dUSitaM tyaa| yena zrute'pi bhaNitaM pariNAmAdazuddhaM tu // 225 // 2520 // 225. Asamsa ya parne sevisya iti dusitam taya i ____Yena Srute'pi bhanitam parinamadasuddham tu. (2520)]

Page #260
Jinabhadra Grani's [ The seventh Trans. 225. It is defiled by the expectation that "I shall (be able to) enjoy at the end (of life)" That is why it is laid down in the Scriptures also, that (a vow) is (said to be) unholy on account of consequence. 2520. : 236: " TIkA - 225 " AzaMsAtaH pratyAkhyAnaM duSTam" ityuktam / tatrAzaMsA kA ? ityAha- 'jatti yaivaMvidhapariNAmarUpA / kathaMbhUtaH pariNAmaH ? ityAha- pUrNe pratyAkhyAne devalokAdau surAGganAsaMbhogAdibhogAnahaM seviSye " ityevaMbhUtapariNAmarUpA ca yA''zaMsA tayA pratyAkhyAnaM dUSitaM bhavati / kutaH ? ityAhaha-mena zrute'pyAgame'pi bhaNitam - duSTapariNAmAzuddheH pratyAkhyAnamazuddha bhavati / tathAgamaHsohI sarahaNA jANaNA ya viNae'NubhAsaNA ceva / aNupAlaNA visohI bhAvavisohI bhave chaTTo // 1 // tatra " paccakkhANaM savvannudesiyaM" ityAdinA zraddhAnAdiSu vyAkhyAteSu bhAvavizuddhe yad vyAkhyAnaM tat prakRtopayogIti darzate rAgeNa va doseNa va pariNAmena va na dUsiyaM jaM tu / vaM khalu pacakkhANaM bhAvavisuddhaM muNeyavvaM // 1 // iti / tadevaM vipratipannevaM goSThAmA hilena yat pUrvapakSIkRtaM tad vindhyena gatvA gurordurbalikA puSpamitrasya niveditam / guruNA cottarapakSabhUtaM sarvamapi pratividhAnaM tasyopadiSTam, tenApi gatvA gurUpadezena sarva goSThAmAhilasya pratipAditam / sa ca midhyAbhimAnAd gADhamAviSTo yAvad na kizcit pratipannavAn tAvad guruNA svayamAbhimukhyenokta iti // 2520 // D. C. The practice of pratyakhyana is defiled by means of expectation or desire in this way:-A person practising a religious vow during this life, would be cherishing a desire throughout that "When the pratyakhyana will be over at the end of this life, I shall be able to enjoy pleasures with damsels etc., in the divine world. "The practice of pratyakhyana is blotted by means of such motives. It is forbidden in the Agamas also. The Agama says-- Sohi saddahana janana ya vinae'nu bhasana ceva | Anupalana visohi bhavavisohi bhave chattho it

Page #261
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 237: [There are six types of purity:-1. Freedom from defilement, 2. (observance of) purificatory rites, 3. right knowledge, 4-5. modest speech and action and 6. purity of motive. ] Then explaining the purity of motive by means of expressions like pacchakkhanam savvannudesiyam." ( Religious vow is directed by Oniniscient) etc., it has been laid down that-- "Ragena va dosena va parinamena va na dusiyam jam tu ! Tam khalu paccakkhanam bhavavisuddhau muneyavvam II (That which is not blotted by passion, prejudice or (evil) consequence is, in fact known to have been (goaded by ) pure motive. ] When Gostha Mahila opposed the establishment of predicament of pratyakhyana, the matter was reported to the preceptor, Dur. balika Puspamitra, who sent a reply though Vindhya. But when Gostha Mahila was not convinced even by that, the preceptor himself had to come to the spot to defeat him. 225. (2520) viMjhaparipucchiyagurUvaesakahiyaM pi na paDivanno so| jAhe tAhe guruNA sayamutto pUsamitteNaM // 226 // 2521 // 226. Vinjjhaparipucchiyaguruvaesakahiyam pi na padivanno so i Jahe tahe guruna sayamutto Pasamittenam. (2521) [vindhyaparipRSTagurUpadezakathitamapi na pratipannaH sH| yadA tadA guruNA svayamuktaH puSpamitreNa // 226 // 2521 // 226. Vindhyaparipristagurupadesakathitamapi na pratipannah sah Yada tada guruna svayamuktah Puspamitrena. (2521)] Trans. 226. When he was not convinced even by the argument advanced by Vindhya advised by the preceptor, the preceptor (Durbalika) Puspamitra himself had to argue (with him). 2521.

Page #262
:238: Jinabhadra Gani's The seventh He asks-- kiM kaMcuo vva kammaM paippaesamaha jIvapajjate / paidesaM savvagayaM tadaMtarAlANavatthAo // 227 // 2522 // aha jIvavahiM to nANuvattae taM bhavaMtarAlammi / tadaNugamAbhAvAo bajjhaMgamalo vva suvvattaM // 228 // 2523 / / evaM savvavimukkho nikkAraNau vva svvsNsaaro| bhavamukkANaM ca puNo saMsaraNamao aNAsAso // 229 // 2524 // 2:27. Kim kancuo vya kanimam paippaesamaha jivapajjante il Paidesam savvagayam taclantaralanavatthao. (2522) 228. Aha jivabahin to nanuvattac tam bhavantaralammil Tadanugamabhavao bajjhangamalo vva suvvattam. (2528) 229. Evam savvavimukkho nikkaranau vva savva samsaron . Bhavamukkanam ca puno samsaranamao anasaso. (2524) [kiM kajhuka iva karma pratipradezamatha jIvaparyante / pratidezaM sarvagataM tadantarAlAnavasthAtaH // 227 // 2522 // atha jIva yahistato nAnuvartate tad bhavAntarAle / tadanugamAbhAvAd bAhyAGgamala iva suvyaktam // 228 // 2523 // evaM sarvavimokSo niSkAraNako vA srvsNsaarH| bhavamuktAnAM ca punaH saMsaraNamato'nAzvAsaH // 229 // 2524 // 227. Kim kancuka iva karma pratidesamatha jivaparyante Pratidesam sarvagatam tadautaralanavasthatah. (2522) 228. Atha jivabahistato nanuvartate tad bhavantarale | Tadanugamabhavad bahyangamala iva suvyaktam. (2523) Evam sarvavimokso niskaranako va sarvasainsarahi Bhavamuktanam ca punah samsaranamatn'nasvasah. (2524) ). Trans. 227-228-229. Is Karman (attached to) every por. tion of jiva like the cast-off skin of a snake or ) only) to the (out-ward) extreme of a jiva? If it is ( attached to)

Page #263
Vada ] Nihnavavada :239: every portion it would be pervading the whole (of !iva) on account of (its) intermediary portions not being raised. And if it is (attached to) the external surface of jiva, it is clear that it does not follow (jiva ) to the next world on account of its inability to accompany (soul ) like the filth on the exterior limb. In that case, there would be attainment of mundane world by all without any reason. And those who have already been finally emancipated from this mundane world, will have to come down to the mundane world again (proving) thereby futility ( of righteous deeds ) (2522-2524) TIkA-227-228-229 vyAkhyA-"puTTho jahA abaddho kaMcuiNaM" ityAdigAthAyAM kacukavat spRSTameva jIve karma na tu baddhamiti yaducyate bhavatA, tad vicAryate-kiM kaJcukavat spRSTaM karma jIvasya pratipradezaM vRttaM saducyate, AhosvijIvaparyante tvakparyanta eva vRttaM spRSTamiSyate ? iti dvyiigtiH| tatra yadi patidezaM vRttvatvAt spRSTamiSTam , tahiM jIve sarvagataM karma mAmoti, nabhovat / kutaH sarvagatam ? ityAha-" tadantarAletyAdi" tasya jIvasyAntarAlaM madhyaM tadantarAlaM tasyAnavasthAtaH tasya karmavyAptasyAnavasthAnAdanuddhAraNAdityarthaH / na hi patipradezaM vRtte karmaNi jIvasya ko'pi madhyapradeza uddharati / yena karmaNastatrAsarvagatatvaM syAt / tasmAdAkAzeneva karmaNA jIvasya pratidezaM vyAptatvAt tasya jIve sarvagatatvaM siddhameva / evaM ca sati sAdhyavikalatvAt ka ka dRSTAnto'saMbaddha eva prAmoti, sAdhyasya yathoktasparzanasya kaJcuke'bhAvAditi / dvitIyavikalpamadhikRtyAha-'ahetyAdi' atha jIvasya bahissvaparyante vRttatvAt kaJcukavat spRSTaM karmeSyate, tarhi bhavAd bhavAntaraM saMkrAmato'ntarAle tad nAnuvartate tadanuvattirna prAmoti tvaparyante vRttatvena tadanugamAbhAvAt , bAhyAGgamalavaditi suvyaktameva, bAlAnAmapi pratItatvAditi / bhavatvananuvRttiH kamoM bhavAntarAle ko doSa ? ityAha-" evamityAdi" evaM karmo'nanuvRttau satyAM sarveSAmapi jIvAnAM vimokSaH saMsArAbhAvaH prApnoti, saMsArakAraNasya karmaNo'bhAvAt / atha niSkAraNo'pi saMsAra iSyate, tarhi ye vratatapo-brahmacaryAdikaSTAnuSThAnAni kurvante teSAmapi sarveSAM saMsAra eva syAt , niSkAraNatvAvizeSAt / niSkAraNaM ca jAyamAnaM bhavamuktAnA. mapi siddhAnAmapi punarapi saMsaraNaM saMsAraH syAditi muktAvapyanAzvAsa iti // 2522 // 2523 // 2524 //

Page #264
: 240: Jinabhadra Gani's The seventh D. C. Acarya : If you believe that the relation between jiva and Karman is like that of cast-off skin and a snake, and not like that of water and milk, I put this question : Is Karman attached to jiva at all portions of jiva or is it attached only to the skin at the outward extreme of jiva ? If Karman were attached to jiva at all portions, none of the regions would be spared from the influence of Karman. This proves that the relation between Karman and jiva does not exist like that of a cast-off skin and snake. For, if Karman were to be connected like the cast-off skin to a snake on the surface of jiva, it would not be able to follow the soul to the other life. Now, when Karman does not go with jiva, all jivas will attain Moksa rendering samsara to nothing thereby. Thus, if the Samsara is accepted as existing without reason, persons observing celebacy, penances, and other religious rites etc., will have to come down to the mundane world. And, if the attainment of samsara takes place without any reason, even Muktatmas or free souls will have to come down to samsara indicating the futility of Moksa. 227-229 ( 2522-2524). There is another difficulty also, in taking Karman as existing on the surface of jiva :dehaMto jA veyaNA kammAbhAvammi kiMnimittA sA ? nikkAraNA vA jai to siddho vi na veynnaarhio||230||2525|| jai bajjhanimittA sA tadabhAve sA na hunja to aNto| viTThA ya sA subahuso bAhiM nivveyaNassAvi // 231 // 2546 // jaha vA vibhiNNadesaM pi veyaNaM kuNai kammamevaM to| kahamaNNasarIragayaM na veyaNaM kuNai aNNassa ? // 232 // 2527 // 230. Dobanto ja v@yana kammabhavammi kimnimitta sa ? 1 Nikkarana va jai to Siddho vi na v@yanarahio. (2525)

Page #265
Vada 1 Nihnavavada :241 231. Jai bajjhanimitta sa tadabhave sa na hujja to anton Dittha ya sa subahuso bahimnivveyarassavi. (2526) 232. Jai va vibhinnadesampi veyanam kunai kammamevam to 1 Kahamannasariragayam na vdyanam kunai annassa ? (2527) [dehAntaryA vedanA karmAbhAve kiMnimittA sA / niSkAraNA vA yadi tataH siddho'pi na vedanArahitaH // 230 // 2525 // yadi bAnimittA sA tadabhAve sA na bhavet tato'ntaH / dRSTvA ca sA subahuzo bahirnivedanasyApi // 231 // 2526 // yadi vA vibhinnadezAmapi vedanAM karoti karmevaM ttH| kathamanyazarIragatAM na vedanAM karotyanyasya ? // 232 // 2527 // 230. Dehantarya vedana karmabhave kimnimitta sa?! ____Niskarana va yadi tataa Siddho'pi na vddanarahitah. (2525) 231. Yadi bahyanimitta sa tadabhave sa na bhavet tato'ntah | Dristva ca sb subahuso bahirnivedanasyapi. (2526) 232. Yadi va vibhinnadesamapi vedanami karoti karmaivam tatah Kathamanyasariragatam na vedanam karotyanyasya ? (2527)] Trans. 230-231-232. Or, in absence of Karman, what is the cause of ailments (produced) in the body? If it is causeless, then, even the Accomplished (Soul) will not be free from ailment. If it is (due to) (some) external cause, then, internal ailment would not have been produced in its absence. But that wretched ( ailment) (is) frequently (experienced) even by one who is free from external ailment. Or, if Karman gives rise to ailment even at a different place, why should Karman of one body not produce ailment to an (absolutely) different body ? (2525-2557) TIkA-230-231-232 vyAkhyA-yadi kacukavad bahireva vartate karma, tadA dehasyAntarmadhye yA zUla-nAlagulmAdivedanA sA kiMnimiceti vaktavyam , madhye tatkAraNabhUtasya karmaNo'bhAvAt ? / atha niSkAraNApi dehAntarvedanA'bhyu

Page #266
:242 Jinabhadra Gani's [The seventh pagamyate, tatastahi siddho'pi na vedanArahitaH syAt niSkAraNatvAvizeSAditi / atha bAhyavedanAnimittA sA'ntarvedanA'bhyupagamyate, bahirvedanA hi laguDaghAtAdijanyA prAdurbhavantI madhye'pi vedanAM janayatyeveti yadi tavAbhiprAyaH, tarhi tadamAve laguDaghAtAdijanyavedanAvirahe sA'ntarvedanA na bhaved na jAyeta / astvevamiti cet / tadayuktam , yato dRSTA'sau bahuzaH zUlAdiprabhavAntavedanA / kasya ? ityAha "bAhimityAdi" bahinivedanasyApi bahila guDAdighAtajanya vedanArahitasyApI. tyarthaH / yadi hyayaM niyamaH syAd yaduna-bahirlaguDaghAtAdivedanAsadbhAva evAnta. vedanA prAdurastIti, tadA syAdapi tvadabhipretam / na caivam , yato'nubhUyate dRzyate ca bahirvedanA'bhAve'pi yathoktAntavedanA, tatastatkAraNabhUtena madhye karmaNApi bhAvyamiti siddho'smatpakSa iti / athaivaM manyase-histvaparyantavartyapi karma madhye'pi zUlAdivedanAM janayati na punarmadhye karmAsti / tadayuktam , yato yadi bahirvativibhinadezasthitamapi karmAnyasmin madhyalakSaNe dezAntare vedanA karotItyabhyupagamyate. evaM tarhi kathaM kena hetunA'nyazarIragataM karmAnyasya yajJadattAdevedanAM na karoti ?-nanu karotu nAma, evamapi dezAntaratvAvizeSAditi bhAvaH 2525 // 2526 // 2527 // D. C. Acarya :-If Karman is taken as existing only on the surface and not inside jiva, what is the cause of ailments such as gripe, tympanitis etc. experienced inside the human body! If the body is taken as susceptible to such ailments without any cause, like Karman etc., even Siddhatmas or Accomplished Souls, will not be taken as free from such ailments. Gostha Mahila :-Inner ailments are caused by outer ones such as those produced by blows of stick etc. Acarya :-In that case, there would be no possibility of inner ailment in absence of external ailment. But that is not so. Even if there is no external ailment, the inner ailment of gripe etc. is positively experienced. This shows that there is no such rule to the effect that inner ailment is caused only by the external ailment. It follows, therefore, that there does exist something like Karman which decidedly works as the cause of inner ail

Page #267
Vada] Nihnavavada :243 ment as well. So, it is not proper to believe that Karman does not exist in the body. Gostha Mahila :--Karman which is attached to the exterior surface (viz skin etc.) of body, causes the ailment inside the body and hence that is taken as the cause of interior ailment. Acarya :- This view of yours is also not correct. Karman existing outside the body (1. e. residing in a totally different body ) should not be taken as causing ailment inside the body, For, according to that rule, Karman residing in one's body would be the cause of ailment in another's body, as the distinction of place is common in both. 230-232 (2525-2527) aha taM saMcarai maI na bahiM to kaMcugo vva nizcatyaM / jaM ca jugavaM pi viyaNA savvabhi vi dIsaI dehe // 233 // 2528 // 233. Aha tam saicarai mai na bahim to kaicago vva niccatkhami ____Jam ca jugavam pi viyana savvammi vi disai dahd. (2528) [atha tat saMcarati matirna bahistataH kaJcaka iva nityastham / yA yugapadapi vedanA sarvasminnapi dRzyate dehe // 233 // 2528 // 233. Atha tat sancarati matirna bahistatah kancuka iva nityastham | Yacca yugapadapi vedana sarvasminnapi drisyate dehe. (2528)] ___Trans. 233. If it is said that it (i. e. Karman) moves (in and out), then, it would not be permanently existing outside (the body ) like a cast-off skin of a serpent. For, the ailment is experienced all over the body at one and the same time. (2528) TIkA-233 atha bhavato matiH-ekasya devadattazarIrasya bahirantazca saMcarati tatkarma, tatastatra bahirantazca vedanAM janayati, na zarIrAntare svAdhArazarIre bahirantazca saMcaraNAt , anyazarIre tvasaMcaraNAditi / atrocyate-"na bahimityAdi" tatastahi sarpasya kaJcakavajIvasya bahireva karma nityaM tiSThatIti nityasthitamiti yad bhavato mataM tad na prAmoti, kintu kadAcid bahiH kadAci tvantaH karmaNaH

Page #268
: 244 : Jinabhadra Gani's [The seventh saMcaraNAmyupagamAt , kaJcukavad bahireva tiSThati iti niyamasyAghaTanAt plavanI eva taditi bhAvaH / kiJca, karmaNaH saMcaraNamupapadyata iti // 2528 // D. C. Gostha Mahila :-Karman of one person, say Devadatta, moves inside and outside the body producing ailment both inside and outside the body (by his movements ). Karman of one person does not enter or affect the body of another in any way. Acarya :--In that case, the principle that Karman exists on the surface of body like the cast-off skin of a serpent, will be null and void. The principle of accepting Karman as moving inside at one time and outside at another, is not consistent with that of accepting it as existing only on the surface like the castoff skin of a snake. Secondly, if Karman moves in and out, the ailment should be felt one after the other. But that is not so. For, the ailments og used outside, as well as, inside the body as a result of striking a stick are felt simultaneously. So, it is not proper to take Karman as moving inside and outside the body. 233 (2528) There is another difficulty in taking Karman as movingna bhavaMtaramaNNei ya sarIrasaMcArao tadanilo cha / caliyaM nijariyaM ciya bhaNiyamakammaM ca jaM samae // 234 // 2529 // 234. Na bhavantaramannei ya sarirasancarao tadanilo vval Caliyam nijjariyam ciya bhaniyamakammam ca jam samad. (2529) [na bhavAntaramanveti ca zarIrasaMcAratastadanila iva / calitaM nirjIrNameva bhaNitamakarma ca yat samaye // 234 // 2529 // 234. Na bhavantaramanveti ca sarirasancaratastadanila iva i Calitam nirjirnameva bharitamakarma oa yat samaye. (2529) ] Trans. 234. Like the wind, moving in the body, it does not depart to the other world. For, it is said in the Scriptures

Page #269
Vada] Nihnavavada :245: that the moving (Karma ) is a nullified (Karman) or NonKarman. 2529. TIkA-234 kiJca, yadi saMcariSNukarmAbhyupagamyate, tarhi mRtasya tad bhavAntaraM nAnveti-bhavAntare tasyAnugamanaM na prAmotItyarthaH / zarIre saMcaraNAditi hetuH / anilavaditi dRSTAntaH / iha yat zarIre bahirantazca saMcarati na tad bhavAntaramanveti, yathocchavAsa-niHzvAsAnilaH, tathA ca karma, tasmAd na bhavAntaramanvetIti / Aha-nanvAgame'pi "calamANe calie" iti vacanAt karmaNazcalanamuktam , calanaM ca saMcaraNamevocyate, tat kimiti tadiha niSidhyate / tadayuktam , abhiprAyAparijJAnAdityAha-"caliyamityAdi" "neraIe jAva vemANie jIvAu caliyaM kammaM nijarai" ityAdivacanAt , tathA 'nirjIyamANaM nirjIrNam' iti vacanAJca yad yasmAt samaye Agame calitaM karma nirjIrNamuktaM tadakarmaiva bhaNitam, tacca madhye gatamapi na vedanAM janayitumalam , akarmaNo nabhaH paramAgvAderiva tatsAmarthyAbhAvAt / tasmAditthamanekadoSaduSTatvAdayuktaM karmaNaH saMcaraNamiti / ato madhye vyavasthitaM karmAstIti sthitam // 2529 // D. C. Acarya : If Karman is taken as dyamic, it would not accompany the Soul to the other world. Because, like inhalations and exalations, that which is moving in and out, cannot depart to the other world. Gostha-Mahila :--The assertion "Calamane calid "5 in the Agamas speaks for the dynamic character of Karman. Why do you attempt to deny it? Acarya :--You have not grasped the real sense of that assertion. "Calamand calid" etc. and Neraie java Veminie jivao caliyam kammam nijjarai" etc. indicate that all jivas right from the category of Narakas or hellish denizens to the Vaimanika divine beings, tend to nullify or destroy the (bondage of) dynamic karman. " Nirjiryamanam nirjiryam" implies that, that which is being destroyed, has already been destroyed. The agamas thus imply the dynamic character of Karman as a nullified 5. Vide Bhagawati Sutra, Sataka I Uddesaka I.

Page #270
: 246: Jinabhadra Gani's [The seventh Karman or Non-karman. You are not justifiied in holding the view of dynamic karman. (2529) Establishing the position of Karman, he says-aMto vi asthi kammaM viyaNAsanbhAvao tayAe vva / micchattAI paccayasambhAvao ya savvatya // 235 // 2530 // 235. Anto vi atthi kammam viyanasabbhavao tayae vvai Micchattaipaccayasabbhavao ya savyattha. (2530) [ antarapyasti karma vedanAsadbhAvatastvacIva / mithyAtvAdipratyaya sadbhAvAcca sarvatra || 235 // 2530 // 235. Antarpyasti karma ve lanasadbhavatastvaciva | Mithyatvadipratyayasadbhavacca sarvatra. (2530) ]. Trans. 235. Karman exists in the interior, as well as on the surface, because of the ( feeling of ) ailment. And, it exists all over the body on account of the motives like vanity etc. (2530) TIkA - 235 antarmadhye'pyasti karmeti pratijJA / vedanAsadbhAvAditi hetuH / tvacIveti dRSTAntaH / iha yatra vedanAsadbhAvastatrAsti karma, yathA tvakparyante, asti cAntarvedanA, tataH karmaNApi tatra bhavitavyameveti / kiJca mithyAtvAdibhiH pratyayaiH karma badhyate, te ca jIvasya yathA bahistanapradezeSu tathA madhyamadezeSvapi yathA madhyapradezeSu tathA bahiSpradezeSvapi sarvatra santi teSAmadhyavasAyavizeSarUpatvAt, adhyavasAyasya ca samastajIva gatatvAditi / tasmAd mithyAtvAdInAM karmabandhakAraNAnAM jIve sarvatra sadbhAvAt tatkAryabhUtaM karmApi sarvatraiva tatrAsti, na punarbahireva / tasmAd vahanyayaH piNDa-kSIranIrAdinyAyAjjIvena sahAvibhAgenaiva sthitaM karmeti pratipadyatAM satpakSaH, tyajyatAM mithyAbhimAna iti // 2530 // D. C. The proposition is that Karman exists in the interior, as well as, exterior regions of the body on account of the sensa tion of ailment felt inside, as well as, outside the body. Wherever there is ailment, there is Karman. So, Karman should exist all over the body, because ailment is felt by the body inside out. For Private Personal Use Only

Page #271
Vada] Nihnavavada :247: Karman is bound by motives such as Mithyatva eto. also. These motives exist on the inner, as well as, outer side of the body. Their karya viz Karman shoull, therefore, exist on the surface, as well as, inside the body. Hence, O Gostha Mahila, leave aside your vanity, and accept the truc principle that Karman is united with jiva like fire and iron-bar or water and milk. 235. (2530) Now, in reply to the argument that there would be negation of Moksa, if Karman were inseparably united with jiva, the Acarya says avibhAgatthassa vi se vimoyaNaM kaMcaNo-valANaM va / nANa-kiriyAhiM kIrai micchattAIhiM cAyANaM // 236 // 2531 // 236. Avibhagatthassa vi se vimoyanam kancano-valanam va 1 Nana-kiriyahim kirai micchattaihim cayanam. (2531) [avibhAgasthasyApi tasya vimocanaM kAJcano-palayoriva / jJAna-kriyAbhyAM kriyate mithyAtvAdibhizcAdAnam // 236 // 2531 // 236. Avibhagasthasyapi tasya vimocanam kancano-palayoriva i Jnana-kriyabhyam kriyate mithyatvadibhiscadanam. (2531) ). Trans. 236. Like (that of ) gold and stone ( united together), its separation (from jiva) is brought about by means of cognition and action in spite of its close contact (with jiva), while its re-union (with jiva) is (brought about) by ( means of ) vanity cut. 2531. TIkA-236 'se' tasya karmaNo jIvena sahAvibhAgena sthitasyApi kAno -palayoriva vimocanaM viyogo jJAna-kriyAbhyAM kriyate / tathA, tasyaiva karmaNo mithyAtvAdibhirAdAnaM grahaNaM jIvena saha saMyogo vidhIyata ityarthaH / idamatra hRdayam-iha jIvasyAvibhAgenAvasthAnaM dvidhA vidyate-AkAzena saha, karmaNA ca / tatrAkAzena saha yadavibhAgAvasthAnaM tad na viyujyata eva, saddhimavasthAnAt / yattu karmaNA sahAvibhAgAvasthAnaM tadapyabhavyAnAM na viyujyate / bhavyAnAM tu karmasaMyogastathAvidhajJAna-darzana-cAritra-tapaH-sAmagrIsadbhAve viyujyate, vahanyo

Page #272
Jinabhadra Gani's [ The seventh 1 SadhyAdisAmagrIsace kAJcano - palasaMyogavaditi / tathAvidhajJAnAdisA madhyabhAve tu bhavyAnAmapi karmasaMyogaH kadApi na nivartate, " no cetra NaM bhavasiddhiyavirahie loe bhavissa" itivacanAt / tarhi bhavyAH kathaM te vyapadizyante ? iti cet / ucyate - yogyatAmAtreNa / na ca yogyaH sarvo'pi vivakSitaparyAyeNa yujyate, pratimAdiparyAya yogyAnAmapi tathAvidhadAru - pASANAdInAM tadvidhasAmagryabhAve keSAJcit tadayogAdityalaM vistareNa prAgeva gaNadharavAde'syArthasya vistareNoktasvAt / tasmAt " karma jIvAd na viyujyate, anyonyAvibhAgenAvasthitatvAt, ityanaikAntikam, upAyato dRzyamAnaviyogaiH kSIranIrakAJcanopalAdibhirvyabhicArAt / nanu prastuto jIva - karmAvibhAgaH kenopAyena vighaTata iti cet / navabhihitameva "jJAna-kriyopAyataH" iti / mithyAtvAdibhihiM jIva-karma saMyogaH kriyate, midhyAtvAdivipakSabhUtAzca samyagjJAnAdayaH atastaistadviyogo yuktiyukta eva, anabhojanAdivipakSabhUtairlaGghanAdibhistajjanitAjIrNa saMyogavaditi // 236 / 2531 // * : 248: D. C. Acarya:--Jiva and Karnian are united together like gold and stone. They could be separated from each other by mcans of jnana and kriya. Jiva is inseparably united with two things:- (1) Akasa or space and (2) Karman or action. The contact of jiva with akasa is so intimate that it is never separated. In case of contact with Karma, that with the lower types of jivas is always inseparable, while that with the excellent ones, is bro..n off by means of excellent qualities such as knowledge, philosophy, character, penances etc. In case of these excellent qualities being absent, the bhavya or excellent jivas will not be separated from the bondage of Karman. Gostha Mahila :--Then, how could they be recognized as "bhavya?". Acarya:--They are known as bhavya by virtue of their fitness for the attainment of Moksa. But this does not mean that all attain a certain spiritual form only by virtue of their fitness. For Private Personal Use Only

Page #273
Vada] Nihnavavada :249: Just as, an idol could not be constructed without the necessary materials such as wood, stone etc., the excellent souls also could never be created in absence of certain necessary qualities. This leads us to the conclusion that Jiva and Karman are inseparably united with each other. Just as, water and milk and gold and stone, united together, are separated from each other with the help of proper means, Jiva and Karman are also separated from cach other with the help of jnana, darsana and caritra. Gostha Mahila :-Karman is attached to Jiva only on account of actions like those of bowing to false gods, as real ones, committing violence etc. But they are not separated from cach other by virtue of qualities such as sympathy, generosity selfrestraint etc. 236. (2531) The .Acarya replies :kaha vAdANe kiriyAsAphalaM neha tavidhAyammi / kiM purisagArasajjhaM tassevAsajjhamegaM to // 237 // 2532 // asubho tivvAIo jaha pariNAmo tdjnne'bhimo| taha tazviho ciya subho kiM neho tasvioge vi ? // 238 // 2533 // 237. Kaha vadane kiriyasaphallam ndha tavvidhayammil Kim purisagarasajjham tassevasajjamegam to. (2532) 238. Asubho tivvaio jaha parinamo tadajjane'bhimao Taha tivviho cciya subho kim nettho tavviogd vi? (2533) [kathaM vA''dAne kriyAsAphalyaM neha tdvidhaate| kiM puruSakArasAdhyaM tasyaivAsAdhyamekaM tataH // 237 // 2532 / / azubhastIvAdiko tathA pariNAmastadarjane'bhimataH / yathA tadvidha eva zubhaH kiM neSTastadviyoge'pi ? // 238 // 2533 // 237. Katham va"dane kriyasaphalyam ne ha tadvighate ___Kim purusakarasadhyam tasaivasadhyamekam tatah. (2532) 238. ASubhastivrailiko tatha parinamastadarjane' bhimatahi ___Yatha tadvidha eva Subhah kin nestastadviyogopi ? (2533)]

Page #274
Jinabhadra Gani's [The seventh Trans. 237-238. Or how is ( it that the ) success of action ( is accepted) in ( case of ) admitting Karman and not in ( case of ) its destruction ? (How is it that ) one action is inaccessible to an effort which achieves another? So, why don't you expect beneficial result in separating (Karman from jiva), just as you apprehend an extremely inauspicious result in ( case of ) accepting ( the existence of ) Karman ? (2532-2533). : 250: TIkA-237-238 vAzabdo yukterabhyuccaye / kathaM vA hanta ! karmaNa AdAne grahaNe hiMsAdikriyANAM sAphalyamiha tvayeSyate 1 na tu dayA dAnAdikriyANAM tadvighAte sAphalyamabhipreyate, kimatra rAjJAmAjJA prabhavati, na tu yuktiH ? | kiyA, idamapi praSTavyo'si kiM pApasthAnavyApRtapuruSakArasAdhyaM " evaM " itIhApi saMbadhyate, ekaM karmaNa AdAnamiSyate, ekaM tu yat tasya nirjaraNaM tat tasyaiva saMyamAdisthAnavihita puruSakAra syAsAdhvamiSyate ? ityetadapi vyaktamevezvara cevitaM bhavataH, svecchApravRtteH / upasaMhAracAha -" to ti" tasmAd yathA yena prakAreNa tIvra - manda - madhyama medabhinno'zubhaH pariNAmastadarjane tasya karmaNo'rjana supAdAnaM grahaNaM tatra heturbhavato'bhimataH tathA tenaiva prakAreNa tadviSa eva tIvrAdimedamitraH zumapariNAmo'zubhavipakSatvAt karmArjanavipakSabhUtaitadviyoge'pi hetuH kiM neSTaH 1nanu yuktiyuktatvAdeSTavya eveti bhAvaH / tasmAjIvena sahAvibhAgena sthita sthApi karmaNaH siddho viyoga iti / tadevaM nirAkRtA karmavicAraviSayAcitratipatiH // 2532||2533 // D. C. What is the definite purpose in accepting the validity of actions like committing violence etc., when the bondages of Karman are accepted, and why don't you accept the validity of actions such as expressing charity, sympathy etc. when the bondages of Karman are being destroyed? According to you, a sinful effort brings about the accomplishment of the bondages of Karman, while a meritorious deed such as that of charity or sympathy, does not bring about the destruction of bondages of Karman. This belief of yours is absurd. The whole view-point of yours about Karman is based upon such absurdity. Really speaking, the auspicious consequence of meritorious deeds des For Private Personal Use Only

Page #275
Vada ] Nihnavavada :231: troys the bondages of Karman, in the same way, as an inauspicious consequence of sinful deeds ) brings about the accomplishment of the bondages of Karman. This shows that Jiva and Karman though united intimately with each other, could be separated from each other by the help of proper means. 237238. (2532-2533). Now refuting the argunients advanced by Gostha Mabila, as regards the Pratyakhyana Parva, the Acarya stateskimaparimANaM sattI aNAgayaddhA ahaapriccheo?| jaha jAvadatthi sattI to naNu sacceva parimANaM // 239 // 2534 // satti-kiriyANumeo kAlo sUrakiriyANumeo vya / naNu aparimANahANI AsaMsA ceva tadapatthA // 240 // 2535 / / 239. Kimaparimanam satti anayayaddha ahapariccheo 1 Jai javarlatthi satti to nanu sacceva parimanam. (2534) 240. Satti-kiriyanuueo kalo surakiriyanuueo vva | Nanu a-parimanahani asamsa ceva tadavattha. (2535) [kima parimANaM zaktiranAgatAddhA'thAparicchedaH ? / yadi yAvadasti zaktistato nanu saiva parimANam // 239 // 2534 // zakti-kriyAnumeyaH kAlaH surakriyAnumeya iva / nanvapariNAmahAnirAzaMsA caiva tadavasthA // 240 // 2435 // 239. Kimaparinanam saktiranagataddha' thaparicchedah ? Yadi yavadasti saktistato nanu saiva parimanam. (2534) 240. Sakti-kriyanumeyah kalah surakriyanumeya ival Nanvaparinamahanirasamsa caiva tadavastha. (2535) 1 Trans. 239-240. What is (meant by ) a-parimana (imme asurable)? Is it (immeasurable) capacity, (or) the (immeasu rable) time that is not (yet) come, (or) the (unlimited).con. tinuance ? If (it means to exert) the capacity till it is finally exhausted, then, that itself becomes a limit. (The observan

Page #276
: 252: Jinabhadra Gani's [ The seventh ce of vow) is measured by the limits of energy and actions, just as, Time is measured by the movements of the Sun. (The principle of ) a-parimana is ( therefore ) violated, and in ( case of ) its acceptance, the (fault of ) desire will be produced. (2534-2535) TIkA - 239 - 240 yaduktam- " pratyAkhyAnaparimANameva vidhIyamAnaM zreyo bhavati iti / tatra pratividhIyate - kimidaM nAmAparimANaM ? - kiM zaktiryAvacchakromItyaparimANam ? uta sarvApyanAgatAddhA, AhosvidaparicchedaH 1 iti trayI gatiH / tatra yadi " yAvadasti zaktistAvadahamidaM na seviSye" ityaparimANa miSyate, tatastarhi nanu saiva zaktiH parimANamApannam, ato yadeva niSidhyate tadevAbhyupagatamiti / kutaH ? ityAha- " satItyAdi" " yAvacchakromi tAvadidaM na se vidhye" ityevaMbhUtayA hi zaktikriyayA pratyAkhyAnasyAvadhibhUtaH kAla evAnumIyate - yAvantaM kAlaM zaktistAvantaM kAlamidaM na seviSya ityarthaH / dRSTAntamAha-yathA sUryAdigati kriyayA samayA''valikAdiH kAlo'numIyate, tathA'trApi zaktikriyayA pratyAkhyAnAvadhikAla ityarthaH / astvevamiti cet / tadayuktam, yato nanvevaM sati tvayA pratijJAtasyAparimANapakSasya hAniH prApnoti, zaktikriyAnumitakAla parimANasyedAnIM svayamevAbhyupagamAditi / yaduktam r " taM dudvaM AsaMsA hoi " iti, tatrAha - " AsaMsetyAdi " nanuzaktirUpe'parimANe'pi tvayeSyamANe AzaMsAdoSastadavastha eva, " zakterUttarakAlamidaM sevi - Sye " ityAzaMsAyAstadavasthatvAditi || 2534 // 2535 // D. C. Gostha Mahila :-The pratyakhyana accomplished without any time-limit or the limit of energy is the most beneficial of all. Acarya :--What is a-parimana according to you ? Does it imply exerting till the last drop of energy? Or, is the whole of future time included in a-parimana? Or, is it that a-pariccheda or continuance without break, is a-parimana according to you? When you say that "I shall refrain from enjoying a particular pleasure till I have the capacity to do so," the pratyakhyana does not become a-parimana or limitless, but parimana or limited by the bounds of capacity expressed by means of actions.

Page #277
Vada ] Nihnavavada :253: Just as, the measurement of time is ascertained by the help of movements of the Sun etc., that of the limit of pratyakhyana is ascertained by the help of actions exerted by capacity. Thus, your theory of a-parimana or immeasurable pratyakhyana is refuted, and the fault of asamsa or expectation is all the while retai. ned therein, For, the person observing pratyakhyana would all the while be cherishing a desire in his heart tbat "after the whole of my energy is over in observing this vow, I shall be able to enjoy the objects of pleasure in the other world." 239- 240 (2534-2535) Not only that your theory is self-contradictory in this way, but there are other difficulties also jaha na vayabhaMgadoso mayassa taha jIvao vi sevaae| vayabhaMganimbhayAo paJcakkhANANavatthA ya // 24 / / 2536 // 241. Jaha na vayabhangadoso niayassa taha jivao vi sevaet Vayabhanganibbhayao paccakkhananavattha ya. (2536) [yathA na vratabhaGgadoSo mRtasya tathA jIvato'pi sevAyAm / vratabhaGganirbhayAt pratyAkhyAnAnavasthA ca // 241 // 2536 // 241. Yatha na vratabhangadoso mritasya tatha jivato'pi sevayam | ___Vratabhanganirbhayat pratyakhyananavastha ca. (2536)] ittiyamittI satti tti nAiyAro na yAvi pacchittaM / na ya savvavvayaniyamo egeNa vi saMjayatta tti // 242 // 2537 // 242. Ittiyamitti satti tti naiyaro na yavi pacchittami Na ya sayvavvayaniyanio eyena vi sanjayatta tti. (2537) [etAvanmAtrA zaktiriti nAticAro na cApi prAyazcittam / na ca sarvavrataniyama ekenApi saMyatatvAditi // 242 // 2537 // 242. Etavanmatra saktiriti naticaro na sapi prayascittami Na ya sarvavrataniyama dkenapi samyatatvaditi. (2537)] ___ Trans. 241-242. In cherishing (a desire) just as there is no fault of violation of a vow to a dead (being ), the living

Page #278
: 254: Jinabhadra Gani's [ The seventh (being) will also be free from fear of violating the vow, in (case of) enjoyment. And (thus), there would be confusion as regards observance of the vow. (On saying that) This much is my capacity", there would be neither excessive practice nor remonstration. And there would be no (necessity of) observing the rule of practising all vows, as (according to you) asceticism could be attained even by (observing) one vow. (2536 - 2537 ) . " itya " TIkA - 241 - 242 yathA mRtasya paJcatvamupagatasya suralokAdau surakA minIsaMbhogAdibhogAn bhuJjato'smatpakSe doSo na bhavati tathA zaktirUpamaparimANamabhyupagacchatastava mate jIvato'pi bhogopasevAyAM na doSaH prApnoti, " etAvatyeva mama zaktiH, ato matpratyAkhyAnasya pUrNatvAjjIvannapi bhunajmi bhogAn " bhiprAyavatastadabhyupagamena jIvato'pi bhogAnAsevamAnasya doSAnuSaGgo na syAdityarthaH / na caitad dRSTamiSTaM vA jinazAsane / kiJca, itthamabhyupagame " etAvatI mama zaktiH" ityavaSTambhavato vratabhaGganirbhayatvAt pratyAkhyAnAnavasthaiva syAt, " etAvatI mama zaktiH" iti bhogAsevanAt punaH pratyAkhyAnAt punarapyAsevanAt punaH pratyAkhyAnAditiM / kizva, vratAnAmaticAraH, tadAcaraNe ca prAyazcitam, ekatratabhaGge sarvavrata bhaGganiyamena sarvANyapi vratAni pAlanIyAni, iti yadAgamarUDhaM tat sarvamapi bhavadabhiprAyeNa na prApnotIti sayuktikaM darzayannAhaM" ittiyamittItyAdi " " etAvatyeva mama zaktirnAdhikA" ityadhyavasAyena pratisevAM kurvato'pi sAdhoH zaktyaparimANavAdino bhavato'bhiprAyeNa nAticAraH, na cApi vratabhaGgaH, na cApi prAyazcittam, tathA sarvavrata paripAlananiyamazca na syAt, zaktyavaSTambhAt, ekavrataparipAlanenApi tvadabhiprAyeNa saMyatatvAditi // 2536 // 2537 // "" D. C. According to us, there is no objection if a person enjoys pleasures with damsels in the heavenly regions after death. Similarly, there is no objection in accepting that a living being also could enjoy pleasure etc., according to you, who apprehend the limit of energy to be immeasurable. For, by plainly saying that" This much is my capacity and at the end of that much energy, my pratyakhyana will be over. So, there is no For Private Personal Use Only

Page #279
Vada ) Nihnavavada :255 : harm if I enjoy pleasures ", one would think that his duty was over, and you, too, would find no objection in accepting that view. But according to the Jaina Scriptures, that is not permissible. Moreover, on the plain assertion that "only this much-ani! nothing more-is my capacity" there would be no fear of violating the vow. But this would create confusion in the observance of vow. For, at first, one would enjoy pleasure by saying that, "my capacity is this much" and after some time, he would again accept the observance of pratyakhyana, and again, he would start enjoying on the same excuse, and so on, leading ultimately the observance of vow to confusion. Thus, according to you, those who act contrary to the roligious vow on the ground of a parimana pratyakhyana, will not be bound by excessive enjoyment, transgression of vow, or even remonstration. Nor, will they be required to abide by the lary of observance of all vows on the same ground. For according to you, the observance of one vow is enough for the attainment of asceticism. 241-242 (2536-2537). Taking the alternative interpretation of a-parimana as the Future Time or continuance, the Acarya states-- ahavA savvANAgayakAlaggahaNaM mayaM aparimANaM / teNApuNNapaiNNo mao vi bhaggavao nAma // 24 // 2538 // siddho vi saMjao ciya savvANAgayaddhasaMvaradharo tti / uttaraguNa-saMvaraNAbhAvo ciya samvahA ceva // 244 // 2539 // 243. Ahava savvanagayakalaggahanam mayam a--parimanam Tenapunnapainno nao vi bhaggavao nama. (2538) 244. Siddho vi sanjao coiya savranagayaddhasamvaradharo tti Uttaraguna-samvaranabhavo cciya savvaba cdva. (2539) [ apuar palata STEVI TATRATI tenApUrNapratijJo mRto'pi bhagavato nAma // 243 // 2538 //

Page #280
:256: Jinabhadra Gani's [The seventh siddho'pi saMyata eva sarvAnAgatAddhAsaMvaradhara iti / uttaraguNasaMvaraNAbhAva eva sarvathA caivam / / 244 // 2539 / / 243. Athava sarvanagatakalagrahaNGam matamaparimanam | Tenapornapratijno mrito'pi bhagnavrato nama. (2538) 244. Siddho'pi samyata e va sarvanayataddhasamvaradhara iti Uttaraguyasamvaranabhava dva sarvatha caivam. (2539)] Trans. 243-244 Or, ( let ) the a-parimana be taken to imply) all the ( Future) Time, that has not yet come. By (doing ) so, even a dead being with his pledge unfulfilled, will be definitely violating ( his ) vow. Moreover, a Siddha - being will be called a ( mere ) ascetic on account of (his ) holding the religious vow for all the time that has not come. And (thus), there would be entire negation of the subsidiary qualities. (2538-2539) TIkA-243-244 vyAkhyA-atha sarvasyApyanAgatakAlasya grahaNamaparimANaM bhavataH, tena tahiM mRto'pi devalokAdau bhogAnAsevamAnAH, 'nAma' ityAmantraNe, aho ? bhagavata eva sAdhuH, apUrNapratijJatvAt , sarvamapyanAgatakAlaM tadaparipAlanAditi suvyaktameveti / api ca, evaM siddho'pi saMyata eva prAmoti, sarvAnA gatAddhAsaMvaradharatvAt / asyApi srvaaddhaagRhiitprtyaakhyaankaalaabhyntrvrtitvaadi| tyarthaH / yAvajIvagRhIta viratikAlAbhyantaravatisAdhuvaditi dRSTAntaH svayameva draSTavyaH / bhavatu siddhaH saMtataH, ko doSaH 1 iti cet / tadayuktam , "siddhe no saMjae no asaMjae, no saMjayAsaMjae" iti vacanAditi / api ca, anyo'pi dossH| kaH ? ityAha-"uttaraguNetyAdi" uttara guNaH pauruSI-purimArdhe-kAsanAko-pavAsAditaporUpaH, saMvaraNaM bahubhirAkAraigRhItasyaikAsanAdipratyAkhyAnasya bhojanAnantaramAkArasaMkSepeNa svarUpam , uttaraguNazca saMvaraNaM cottaraguNa-saMvaraNe tayorevaM. sarvAnAgatAddhApatyAkhyAnapakSe'bhyupagamyamAne sarvathaivAbhAvaH prAmoti, pauruSyAdiSu sarvAnAgatAddhApratyAkhyAnatvAnupapatteH, ekAsanAdiSu punastadabhiprAyeNa sarvAddhApramANeSu saMvaraNaM kadAcidapi na ghaTata iti vyaktameveti // 2538 // 2539 // ___D. C. If, according to the second interpretation, you take a-parimana to mean all the future time that is to come, the

Page #281
Vada ) Nihnayavada :257 : pratyakhyana will naturally be said to have been observed in Future Time. In such a case, a person enjoying pleasures eto. in places like heavenly regions after death, will be said to have violated the vow. Because, he being engrossed in pleasures after his life is finished, will not be said to have observed the pratya. khyana for all the future time. According to this interpretation of a-parimana pratyakhyana, even Muktatma will be said to be holding the vow and hence will be called an ascetio. But that is against the practice of the agamas. For, it is said "Sidhe no sanjae, no a-sanjad, no sanjayasanjayo" [A Siddha being is not restrained, nor unrestrained, nor between the two. ] There will be another difficulty also. The subsidiary quality formed of penances such as paurusi (traoft) purimardha (FCAT), ekasanaka, upavasa etc., as well as, the samvarana would not be found at all during the whole of Future Period. For, according to you, the apprehension of pratyakhyana does not fit in paurusi etc. and samvarana does not fit in ekasana etc. 243-244 (2538- 2539 ). Taking the third interpretation, the Acarya replies as followsaparicchee vi samANa esa doso jao sue teNa / vayabhaMgabhayAu ciya jAvajjIvaM ti nidiLeM // 245 // 2540 // 245. Aparicchee vi samana esa doso jao sue tenam Vayabhangabhayau cciya javajjivam ti niddittham. (2540) [aparicchede'pi samAna eSa doSo yataH zrute tena / vratabhaGgabhayAdeva yAvajIvamiti nirdiSTam // 245 // 2540 // 245. Aparicchede'pi samana esa doso yatah srute tena i Vratabhangabhayaddva yavajjivamiti nirdistam. (2540) ] Trans. 245. In (case of taking) continuance without break also, the same fault (arises) That is why for fear

Page #282
:258: Jinabhadra Gani's [The seventh of violation of vow, (the words ) " yavajsivam ( till the end of life)" are mentioned in the Scriptures. 2540. TIkA-245 yato'paricchedarUpe'pyaparimANe'bhyupagamyamAne eSa sarvAnAgatAddhApratyAkhyAnoktadoSaH samAna eva tathAhi-kAlAparicchedenApi pratyAkhyAne kRte kiM ghaTikAdimAnaM kizcit kAlaM pratIkSya pratisevAM karotu, Ahosvit sarvamapyanAgatAddhApratyAkhyAnaM pAlayatu ? / yadyAdyaH pakSaH, tAnavasthA, yAvad hi ghaTikA pratIkSate tAvad dve ghaTike kiM na pratIkSane, yAvacca dve pratIkSate tAvat tisro'pi kiM na pratIkSate ? ityAdi / atha dvitIyapakSaH, tarhi mRtasyApi bhogAnAsevamAnasa vratabhaGga eva, siddhasyApi saMyatatvam, uttaraguNasaMvaraNAbhAvazcota ta eva doSAH / upasaMhAranAha-"sue teNetyAdi" tenaitAnaparimANapratyAkhyAnadoSAnabhivIkSya vratabhaGga bhayAdeva tripakSaparihAreNa zruta Agame "savvaM sAvajaM jogaM paJcakravAmi jAvajIvAe" ityatra sAdhupatyAkhyAnasya "yAvajIvam" iti parimANamAdiSTam / ato mucyatAmaparimANatAgraha iti // 2540 // D. C. Even if a-parimana is interpreted as a-paricched or continuance, the same difficulty (as in the case of the first two interpretations ), will arise. When there is no time-limit, should a person observing pratyakhyana enjoy pleasure after a definite period of time, say ghatika or should he observe the same for the whole of anagatakala (future time)? If it is said that one should enjoy pleasure after a definite time, say a yhatika, there would be a lot of confusion, on account of questions contending as to why not after two ghatikas, three gbahkas or even more ghatikas, and so on. Secondly, if it is said that one should observe pratyakhyana for the whole of "anagata kala" or the period of time that is yet to come, then those in the pra-loka will be said to have broken the vow on account of their enjoying pleasure etc., after death. The Muktatmans will be called ascetics and there would be absolute negation of uttara-guna and samvarana. Thus, a number of difficulties arises, if the theory of a-parimana pratyakhyana is accepted.

Page #283
Vadal Nihnavavada :259: It is, therefore, said in the agamas that-- "Savvain savajjan jogam pacoakkhami javajjivad" [I abandon all the disgraceful contact till the end of my life.] The commandment of the Holy Writ clearly indicates that the limit of observing vow for an ascetic is the end of his life. So, give up your false persistence for a-parimana pratyakhyana and abide by the commandment of the agamas. 245. (2540) The Acarya now proceeds to show that the fault of asansa or expectation does not arise in case of sa-parimana pratyakhyana etc. nAsaMsA sevissAmi kiMtu mA me mayassa vybhNgo| hohI, sureSu ko vA vayAvagAso vimukkassa ? // 246 // 2541 // 246. Nasansa sevissami kintu ma me mayassa vayabhangah | ___Hohi, suresu ko va vayavagaso vimukkassa ? (2541) [nAzaMsAM seviSye kintu mA me mRtasya vrtbhnggH| bhUt sureSu ko vA vratAvakAzo vimuktasya ? // 246 // 2541 / / 246. Nasamsanm sevisye kintu ma me mritasya vratabhangah | Bhut suresu ko va vratavakaso vimuktasya ? (2541)] Trans. 246. I do not cherish any desire, but ( while observing the vow, I only expect that) let there be no violation of vow after death in (the regions of) gods. And, where is the scope of (observing) a vow to a Siddha or Accomplished Soul ? 2541. TIkA-246 yAvajIvAvadhinA pratyAkhyAnaM kurvataH "maraNAnantaramahaM bhogAn seviSye" ityevaMbhUtA hanta ! na kacidAzaMsA vartate-naivaMbhUtena pariNAmena sAvadhikaM pratyAkhyAnaM karotItyarthaH, kintu "mA me mRtasya"-surepUtpannasya sato bhogAnAsevamAnasya vratabhaGgo bhaviSyAta " ityadhyavasAyena mA me vratamA statra bhUyAt" ityevaMbhUtenaiva zubhapariNAmenetthaMbhUtaM pratyAkhyAnaM karotItyarthaH / atastatra kA''zaMsA ? / sa hi viratyAvArakakarmaNaH kSayopazamAvasthatvAdana

Page #284
:260: Jinabhadra Gani's [The seventh svAyattaH, suraloke tvavazyaM tadudayAt parAyatta ityataH zakyatvAd yAvajjIvAvadhinA pratyAkhyAti, paratastvazakyatvAd na pratyAkhyAti, iti kathamAzaMsAdoSavAnayam ? iti / athaivaM bUyAstvam-kimitItthaM vratabhaGgAd vibhetyasau ? / ayaM hi mRto muktiM yAsyati, tatra ca kAmabhogAbhAvAd vratabhaGgAsaMbhava eva, iti kastasya vratabhaGga saMkSobhaH / tadayuktam , sAMpratamiha muktigamanAsaMbhavAt , mahAvideheSvapi sarvasyApi tadgamananizcayAyogAditi / atha ko'pi tAvad mukti gacchati, tasya ca vimuktasya madabhimate'parimANe pratyAkhyAne gRhyamANe muktAvapi mahAvratAnugamAdaparimANapratyAkhyAnasya saphalatA bhaviSyatIti cedityatrAha-"ko vA vayetyAdi" yo'pi muktiM gacchati tasyApi vimuktasya niSThitArthasya ko vratAnAmavakAza ? kiM vratAnAM sAphalyam ? tatkAryasya siddhatvAd na kizciditi bhAvaH / tasmAd muktigAminamapi pratyasaMgatamevAparimANapratyAkhyAnamiti / tadevaM mugdhamabhijJaM vA vyaktyA'napekSya sAmAnyenaivAparimANapratyAkhyAne kSaNAnyuktAni // 2541 // D. C. Acarya:--One who observes pratyakhyana till death, never cherishes a desire to enjoy pleasures after death. That is to say, his pratyakhyana is not defiled by means of any desire. On the contrary, he attaches good intention to his pratyakhyana, when he desires that his vow may not be violated after death while enjoying pleasures in the divine regions. On account of good intention, the fault of asamsa does not arise. It should be noted that the observance of vow is limited to this life, only with a definite purpose. The condition of the observer of pratyakhyana in the heavenly regions is different from his condition in this life. During his life, he being a vratadharin will be free from the bondages of Karman by virtue of his dispassion etc., but while enjoying in the heavenly regions, bondages of Karman will definitely arise and that will obstruct the observance of vow. This shows that the pratyakhyana is limited only to this life, and it is not possible to follow its practice in the next world. The theory of a-parimana or unlimited pratyakhyana is impracticable in this way.

Page #285
Vada ] .Nibnavavada : 261: Gostha Mabila :-Why should one be afraid of the violation of vow in the other world, while following the practice of pratyakhyana. It is likely that an observer of pratyakhyana pay attain Moksa after death, and thus he may not violate his vow in absence of enjoying. Acarya :-Your a. gunient is not valid. There is no possibility for any one to attain Moksa au this time. There is no rule even in a heavenly abode like Mahavideha-ksetra that all its inhabitant creatures will attain Moksa. Gostha Mahila :--Since great vows are already included in moksa, the theory of a-parimana pratyakhyana wil succeed without doubt. Acarya :-Even that is not correct. How could one who has already attained moksa, have any scope for the ubservance of vows ? As he has fulfilled all the metaphysical aims, he does not need the practice of pratyakhyana in any way. Thus, your theory of a-parimana pratyakhyana is not beneficial even to those who have been attaining Moksa. 246 (2541) Moreover, jo puNaravyayabhAvaM muNamANo'vassabhAvina bhaNai / SayamaparimANamevaM paJcakkhaM so musAvAI // 247 // 2542 // 247. Jo punaravyayabhavam munamano'vassabhavinam bhanai i Vayamnaparinanamevam paccakkham so musavai. (2542) [yaH punaravatabhAvaM.jAnannavazyaMbhAvinaM bhaNati / vratamaparimANamevaM pratyakSaM sa mRSAvAdI // 247 // 2542 // 247. Yah punaravratabhavam janannavasyambhavinam bhanatil Vratamaparimanamevam pratyaksam sah mrisavadi. (2542)] Trans. 247. One who accepts a vow, as a-parimana (to be observed permanently) in spite of his knowing the possibility of breaking the vow as certain (in future ), is an evident liar. 2542.

Page #286
: 262 : Jinabhadra Gani's [The seventh TIkA-247 yaH punaragre'pi kizcit zAstraparikarmitamatirvijJo vrataM gRhNAti, vijJatvAdeva ca " cIrNavataH suralokameva gacchati" ityavabudhyamAnaH sureSu cAvatabhAvamaviratibhAvamavazyaM bhAvinaM muNan jAnano'pi vrataM pratyAkhyAnamaparimANaM yAvajjIvaparimANarahitaM bhaNatyucarati, sa evaM bruvANaH pratyakSaM sAkSAdevaM mRSAvAdI, anyathAbhaNitvA'nyathAkaraNAditi // 2542 // D. C. When a person well-versed in Scriptures, says that the practice of pratyakhyana should be continued even after death for ever, in spite of his knowing that it will be certainly obst ructed while enjoying pleasures in the heavenly regions, he should be called a perfect liar. For, he says something else than what he actually bears in his mind, 247 (2542) Also, bhAko paJcakravANaM so jai maraNaparao vi to bhaggaM / aha natthi na nihissai jAvajIvaM ti to kIsa ? // 248 // 2543 // 248. Bhavo paecakkhanam so jai maranaparao vi to bhaggam | Aba natthi na niddissai javajjivam ti to kisa ? (2543) [bhAvaH pratyAkhyAnaM sa yadi maraNaparato'pi tatobhanam / atha nAsti na nirvizyate yAvajjIvamiti tataH kasmAt ? // 248 // // 2543 // 248. Bhavah pratyakhyanam sa yadi maranaparato'pi tato bha gmama Atha nasti na nirdisyate yavajjivamiti tatah kasmat? (2543) ___Trans. 248. Pratyakhyana is (nothing but) a dispassionate inclination (of mind ). If that (persists) even after death, the violation (of vows) certainly takes place. And if it is not so, why is it not mentioned as limited to this life? 2543. TIkA-248 bhAvazcaitasiko virAtipariNAmaH pratyAkhyAnamucyate, sa ca pratyAkhyAturyAvajjIvAvadhimevAsti, uta maraNaparato'pIti vaktavyam / yadyanantarapakSaH, varhi bhamaM tasya pratyAkhyAnam, suralokAdau bhogasevanAdakAyaMmAkI

Page #287
Vada ] Nibnavavada :268 tanaGga ityarthaH / athAghaH pakSaH, tahiM vacanenApi "yAvajjIvam" iti parimA praguNena nyAyena kiM na nirdizyate-kiM na kriyate, yenAnyacetasyanya tu pacanenocyate ? iti // 2543 // D. C. Inclination of mind tending to dispassion constitutes pratyakhyana. Does such a dispassionate tendency continue ever after (leath? Or, is it limited only upto the end of this life? If it is taken to persist even after death it is certain that the pra. ctice of pratyakhyana will be defiled by the enjoyment of pleasures in the divine regions. But if such a dispussionate inclination is taken to exist only in this life, there will be no fear of self-contradiction (as in the first case ), why not accept, then, that pratyakhyana is limited upto the end of life ? 248 (2543) jaDa annaheva bhAvo ceyao vayaNamanahA mAyA / kiM vAbhihie doso bhAvAo kiM vao guruyaM // 249 // 2544 // 249. Jai annaheva bhavo cdyai vayanamannaha maya / Kim va'bhihie doso bhavao kim vao guruyam. (2544) [yadyanyathaiva bhAvazcetayato vacanamanyathA maayaa| kiM vA'bhihite doSo bhAvAt kiM vaco gurukam ? // 249 // 2544 // 249. Yadyanyathaiva bhavascetayato vacanamanyatha maya | Kim vabhihite doso bhavat kim vaco gurukam ? (2544)] Trans. 249. When the inclination of mind is different and the (actual ) statement is different (that is nothing but) fraud. Or, what harm is there in making a statement ? Is word (even taken as) greater than feeling? 2544. TIkA-249 hanta ! yadyanyathaiva yAvajjIvAvadhika eva cetasi bhAvaH pratyAkhyAnapariNAmaH, anyathaiva ca yAvajjIvAvadhipariNAmarahitamevavacanam , toto. tayato jAnataH kevalaiva mAyA nizcIyate nAnyat phalaM dRzyate, anyathA vicintyAnyathA bhASaNAditi / athavA, praSTavyo'si tvam-kiM bhAve tathAsthite'pi "yAvajjIvAe" ityabhihite doSaH kazcid vIkSyate bhavatA, yena vacanenApi nedamami

Page #288
* 264 Jinabhadra Gani's [The seventh ghIyate / yadi vA, kiM bhAvAt sakAzAd "vau ti" vacanaM gurukaM pradhAnaM pazyasi tvaM, yena bhAve'nyathAsthite'pi vacanamanyathA'bhidadhAsi ? / etaccAyuktam , Agame mAvasyaiva prAmANyena, vacanasya svpraamaannyenaabhidhaanaaditi||2544|| D. C. Although you feel that the practice of pratyaklyana is limited to this life, you do not actually say so. On the contrary, you try to assert something different when you say that pratyakhyana is a-parimita or limitless. Why don't you say, without hesitation, that pratyakhyana is sa-parimana or limited Is it because you believe that words are greater than Truth? The aganas do not take vacana as authentic but bhava or actual feeling. 249 (2544). The agamas stateannattha nivaDie vaMjaNammi jo khalu maNogao bhAvo / taM khalu paJcakkhANaM, na pamANaM vaMjaNaM chalagA // 250 // 2545 // 250. Annattha nivadie vanjaammi jo khalu manogao bhavo i Tam khalu paccakkhanam, na pamanam vanjanam chalana. (2545) [anyatra nipatite vyaJjanaM yaH khalu manogato bhaavH| tat khalu pratyAkhyAnaM, na pramANaM vyaJjanaM chalanA // 250 // 2545 / / 250. Anyatra nipatite vyanjanam yah khalu manogato bhavahy Tat khalu pratyakhyanam, na pramasam vyanjanam chalana. (2545)] Trans. 250. When a statement is (made) with. regard to something else (than the real feeling ), that which is.the real feeling of mind ( should be taken as) real vow. Word is no standard on account of its being susceptible to deception. 2545 TIkA-250-iha kenApi trividhAhArAdipratyAkhyAnaM kartumadhyavasitam , adhikatarasaMyamakaraNAkSiptacetasA punaH " caturvidhamAhAraM pratyAkhyAmi" ityAdi vyaJjanaM zande uccritH| evaM ca mAnasabhAvAnanuvRttyA vyajane zande'nyatra

Page #289
Vada] Nihnayavada :265: nipatite'nyaviSaye samucArite yaH khalu pratyAkhyAnaviSayAne kampaSikSAtikrAntaH spaSTaH pratyAkhyAturmanogato bhAvastadeva pratyAkhyAnaM pramANaM-sa eva pratyAkhyAtRvivakSitapratyAkhyAnaviSayo manogato bhAvaH pramANam , na tu vyaJjanaM zabda ityarthaH / kuto na vyaJjanaM pramANam ? / yatazchalanA chalamAtraM tad vyaJjanamato'pramANam , mAvAnanurodhena pravRttatvAt / tadevamAgame'pi vacanasyAprAmANyenoktatvAd yadi yAvajIvAvadhiko manaso bhAvastvayeSyate tadA vacanenApi "yAvajIvam" ityuccAryatAm , kiM mithyAgraheNa ? iti // 2545 // D. C. Suppose somebody has decided in his mind to observe the vow of relinquishing three kinds of food and declares through mistake that "I relinquish four kinds of food.' In such a case, where the statement made is not consistent with the real object of mind, a wrong utterance of words should not be considered, but the real purpose formed in his mind should be given importance. Since such utterances are made without any fixed consideration of the real object of mind, they become (at times ) deceitful. Therefore, the agamas do not take vacana or verbal statement as really ) authentic but the true feeling in mind. Leaving aside your false persistence of verbal statement, you should, therefore, accept the true principle of sa-parimana pratyakhyana. 250 (2545). Then, iya paNNavio vina so jAhe saddahaI pUsamitteNa / annagaNattherehi ya kAuM to saMghasamavAyaM // 251 // 2546 // AhUya devayaM bei jANamANo vi paccayanimittaM / vaca jiNiMdaM pucchasu gayA''gayA sA parikahei // 252 // 2547 // saMgho sammAvAI gurUpurogo tti jiNavaro bhaNai / iyaro micchAvAI sattamao nihnavo'yaM ti // 253 // 2548 // eIsaM sAmatthaM katto gaMtuM jiNiMdamUlammi / beI kaDapUyaNAe saMgheNa tao kao Sajjho // 254 // 2549 // 251. Iya pannavis vi na so jahd saddahai Pasamittena | Annaganattherehi ya kaum to sanghasamavayam. (2546)

Page #290
: 266: Jinabhadra Gani's [ The seventh 252. Ahaya devayam bei janamano vi paccayanimittam | Vacca Jinindam pucchasu gaya"gaya sa parikahei. (2547) 253. Sangho sammavai gurapurogo tti Jinavaro bhanai | Iyaro micchavai sattamao nihnavo'yam ti. (2548). 254. Eisam samattham katto gantum Jinidamalammi | Bai Kadapuyanad, sanghena ta ka bajjho (2549 ) . [ iti prajJApito'pi na sa yAvat zraddhatte puSpamitreNa / anyagaNasthaviraizca kRtvA tataH saMghasamavAyam || 251||2546|| AhUya devatAM bavIti jAnannapi pratyayanimittam / vraja jinendraM pRccha gatA''gatA sA parikathayati // 252 || 2547|| saMghaH samyagvAdI gurupuroga iti jinavaro bhaNati / itaro mRSAvAdI saptamako nihavo'yamiti // 253 // 2548 // IdRzaM sAmarthya kuto gantuM jinendramUle / bravIti kaDapUtanAyAH saMghena tataH kRto bAhyaH || 254 || 2549|| 251. Iti prajnapito'pi na sa yavat sraddhatt) Puspamitrena | Anyaganasthaviraisca kritva tatah sanghasamavayam. (2546) 252. Ahuya devatam braviti janannapi pratyayanimittam | Vraja Jinendram priccha gata"gata sa parikathayati. (2547) 253. Sanghah samyagvadi gurupuroga iti Jinavaro bhanati { Itaro_mrisavadi saptamako nihnavo 'yamiti. (2548) 254. Idrisam samarthyam kuto gantum Jinendramule | Braviti Kadaputanayan, sanghena tatah krito bahyah. (2549) ] Trans. 251-252-253-254. Although persuaded in many such ways by Puspamitra and also by the old monks of other gacchas, when he did not put faith (in truth ), then, having gathered, to-gether, the whole Sangha (of Jaina monks), they called a goddess, and in spite of their knowing the real cause of faith they told her to go to Mahavideha and inquire of the Tirthaikara as to who was right. She went (to the Tir

Page #291
:267 Vadaj Nihnavavada thankara), came back, and declared that the gaccha led by the preceptor was right, the opponent was a liar, and she further said that, he was the Seventh Nihnava. "Whence could this wretched demons have this much capacity to go to the Tirthankara ? Gostha Mahila replied. As a result of this, he was expelled from the gaccha. 2546-2547-2548-2549. TIkA-251-252-253-254 catasRNAmapyAsAmakSarArthaH sugama eva bhAvArthastu kathAnakazeSAdavaseyaH taccedam-evaM yuktibhiH prajJApyamAno yAvadasau na kimapi zraddhatte, tAvat puSpamitrAcAryairanyagacchagatabahuzrutasthavirANAmantike niitH| tatastairapyukto'sau yAdRzaM sUrayaH prarUpayanti, AryarakSitasUribhirapi tAdRzameva prarUpitam , na hInAdhikam / tato goSThAmAhilenoktam "kiM yUvamRSayo jAnItha ? tIrthakaraistAdRzameva prarUpitam yAdRzamahaM prarUpayAmi / tataH sthavirairuktam-mithyAbhiniviSTo mA kArSIstIrthakarAzAtanAm, na kimapi tvaM jAnAsi / tataH sarvavipratipanne tasmin sarvairapi taiH saMghasamavAyaH kRtaH / sarveNApi ca saMghena devatAhAnArtha kAyotsargo vihitH| tato bhadrikA kAcit devatA samAgatA / sA vadati saMdizata, kiM karomi ? / tataH saMghaH prastutamartha jAnabapi sarvajanamatyayanimitvaM bravIti-mahAvidehe gatvA tIrthakaramApRcchakha,-ki durbalikApuSpamitrapramukhaH yad bhaNati tat satyam , uta yad goSThAmAhilo vadati ? / tatastayA proktam-mama mahAvidehe gamanAgamanaM kurvatyAH pratyUhapratighAtArthamanugrahaM kRtvA kAryotsarga kuruta, yenAhaM gacchAmi / tatastathaiva kRtaM saMghena / gatA ca sA / pRSTvA ca bhagavantaM pratyAgatA kathayati yaduta-tIrthakaraH samAdizati-"durbalikApuSpamitrapurassaraH saMghaH samyagvAdI, goSThAmAhilastu mithyAvAdI, saptamazcAyaM nihavaH" iti / tadetat zrutvA goSThAmAhilo bravIti-nanvalpardhikeyaM varAkI, kA nAmaitasyAH kaDapUtanAyAstIrthakarAntike gamanazaktiH ? iti / evamapi yAvadasau na kiJcid manyate tAvat saMghenoddhAhya bAhyaH kRtaH / anAlocitapratikrAntazca kAlaM gataH // 2546 // 2547 // 2548 // 2549 // 6. Katapatana is a kind of demon. It is believed that a Ksatriya not performing his duties well, is born after his death as such a goblin. It is a kind of preta or inhabitant of lower regions.

Page #292
: 268: Jinabhadra Gani's [The seventh D. C. When Gostha Mahila did not put faith in the words of Acarya Durbalika Puspainitra, sthaviras of the gaccha tried to convince him of the Truth exposed by the preceptor. But Gostha Mahila replied arrogantly You ascetics, what do you know?" The Tirthankaras have preached the same principle that I hold." The sthaviras said "Do not degrade the Tirthankaras by such words. You do not know the Truth. 66 Ultimately, the sthaviras called an assembly of all the monks, who propitiated a goddess with the help of Kayotsarga. The goddess came to them and asked them as to what she could do for them. The monks though knowing the truth requested her for convincing other people, to go to Mahavideha and ask the Tirthankara there, as to who was right. The goddess returned with a message within a short time, and declared that the gaccha led by the preceptor Durbalika Puspamitra was right and Gostha Mahila who had turned out as the Seventh Nihnava was a liar. 19 On hearing the message, Gostha-Mahila said" How could this wretch of a demon go to the Tirthankara? Then, when he refused to believe even in this, he was expelled from the gaccha. Finally, without returning to his original school, Gostha-Mahila wandered here and there, and died as a Nihnava without expiating himself for his sinful acts. End of the Discussion with the Seventh Nihnava. For Private Personal Use Only

Page #293
Chapter IX ulemy alfomfangererate Discussion with the Botika Nihnava. After dealing with the stories of the Seven nihnavas who contradicted the current religious ideals of Jainism as mentioned in the foregoing pages, the author now proceeds to give the story of another type of nihnavas ( viz Botika ) implied by the word (ca) in " Baburaya pacsa avvatta, samuccha duga tiga abaddhiya ceva"i eto, chanvAsasayAI navuttarAI taiA siddhiM gayassa viirss| to boDiyANa viTThI rahavIrapure samuppaNNA // 1 // 2550 // 1. Chhavvasasayaim navuttaraim taja Siddhim gayassa Virassa | To Bodiyana ditthi Rahavirapure samuppanna. (2550) [SaDvarSazatAni navottarANi tadA siddhiM gatasya viirsy| tato boTikAnAM dRSTI rathavIrapure samutpannA // 11 // 2550 // 1. Salvarsasatani navottarani tada Siddhim gatasya Virasya | . Tato Botikanam dristi Rathavirapurd samutpanna. (2550)] Trans. I. Then was produced a doctrine of Botikasa in Rathavirapura, six hundred and nine years after the Tirthan. kara ( Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira Swami) had attained nirvana. 2550. 1. Vide Chapter I. p. 9 (v. 2300). 2. Popularly known as Digambaras.

Page #294
:270: finabhadra Gani's [The Botika The story of the rise of Botika is given as follows : rahavIrapuraM nagaraM dIvagamujjANamanjakaNhe y| sivabhUhassuvahimmi pucchA therANa kahaNA ya // 2 // 2551 // boDiyasivabhUIo boDiyaliMgassa hoi uppttii| koDinna-koTTavIrA-paraMparAphAsamuppannA // 3 // 2552 // 2. Rahavirapuram nagaram Divagamujjanamajjakanhe ya i Sivabhaissuvahimmi puccha therana kahana ya. (2551) 3. Bodiya Sivabhaio Bodiyalingassa hoi uppatti || ___Kodinna-Kottavira paramparaphasamuppanna. (2552) [rathavIrapuraM nagaraM dIpakamudyAnamAryakRSNazca / zivabhUterupadhau pRcchA sthavirANAM kathanA ca // 2 // 2551 // voTikazivabhUte?TikaliGgasya bhvtyutpttiH| kauNDinya-koTTavIrAt paramparAsparzamutpannA // 3 // 2553 // 2. Rathavirapuram Nagaram Dipakamudyanamarya Krisnasca | ___ sivabhaterupadhau priecha sthaviranam kathana ca. (2551) 3. Botikasivabhite-r-Botikalingasya bhavatyutpattih | ____Kaundinya-Kotta-Virat paramparasparsamutpanna. (2552) ] TIkA-2-3 etadbhAvArthaH kathAnakagamyaH, taccedam-rathavIrapuraM nAma nagaram / taddhahizca dIpakAbhidhAnamudyAnam / tatra cAryakRSNanAmAnaH sUrayaH samAgatAH / tasmizca nagare sahasramallaH zivabhUtirnAmarAjasevakaH samasti / sa ca rAjaprasAdAd vilAsAn kurvan nagaramadhye paryaTati / rAtrezca praharadvaye'tikrAnte gRhamAgacchati / tata etadIyabhAryA tanmAtaraM bhaNati-nirveditA'haM tvatputreNa, na khalveSa rAtrI velAyAM kadAcidapyAgacchati / tata ujAgarakeNa bubhukSayA ca bAdhyamAnA pratyahaM tiSThAmi / tatastayA proktam-"vatse ! yadyevaM, tarhi tvamadya svapihi, svayamevAI jaagrissyaami"| tataH kRtaM vadhvA tathaiva, itarayAstu jAgratyA rAtripraharadvaye'tikrAnte samAgatya zivabhUtinA proktm-"dvaarmudghaattyt"| tataH prakupitayA mAtrA proktam-"durnayavidhe! yatratasyAM velAyAM dvArANyudghATitAni bhavanti tatra gaccha,

Page #295
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 271: 46 na punarevaM tava pRSTalagnaH ko'pyatra mariSyati " / tataH kopA'haGkArAbhyAM preryamANo sit nirgataH / paryaTatA codghATitadvAraH sAdhUpAzrayo dRSTaH / tatra ca sAdhavaH kAlagrahaNaM kurvanti / teSAM ca pArzve tena vanditvA vrataM yAcitam / taitha rAjavallabhaH, mAtrAdibhiramutkalitazca " iti na dattam / tataH khelamallakAd dIkSAM gRhItvA svayameva locaH kRtaH / sAdhubhirliGgaM samarpitam / vihRtAtha sarve'pyanyatra / kAlAntareNa punarapi ca tatrAgatAH / tato rAjJA zivabhUterbahumulyaM kambalaratnaM dattam / tata AcAryaiH zivabhUti ruktaH - kimanena tava sAdhUnAM mArgAdiSvanekAnarthahetunA gRhItena ? tatastena gurvapratibhAsenApi saMgopya mUrcchayA tad vidhRtam / gocaracaryAbhizcAgataH pratyahaM tadasau saMbhAlayati, na tu kAcidapi vyApArayati / tataH " gurubhirmUcchito'yamatra " iti jJAtvA'nyatradine tamanApRcchayaiva bahirgatasya parokSe tat kambalaratnaM pATayitvA sAdhUnAM pAdagroJchanakAni kRtAni / tato jJAtavyatikaraH kaSAyito'sau viSTati / anyadA ca sUrayo jinakalpikAn varNayanti, tadyathA jiNakappiyA ya duvidhA pANipAyA paDiggahadharA ya / pAuraNa pAuraNA ikkikA te bhave duvihA // 1 // duga tiga caukaM paNagaM nava dasa ekArasetra bArasagaM / ee aTTha vigappA jiNakappe hoMti uvahissa ||2|| iha keSAJcijjina kalpAnAM rajoharaNaM, mukhavastrikA ceti dvividha upadhiH, anyeSAM tu kalpena saha trividhaH, kalpadvayena tu saha caturvidhaH, kalpatrayeNa saha paJcavidhaH / keSAJcittu mukhavastrikA, rajoharaNaM ca, tathA, pattaM pattAbaMdhI pAyaTTavaNaM ca pAyakesariyA / paTalAI rattANaM ca gocchao pAyani jogo // 1 // iti saptavidhaH pAtraniryoga iti, evaM ca navavidhaH / kalpena tu saha dazavidhaH kalpadvayena sahaikAdazavidha, kalpatrayeNa tu samaM dvAdazavidhaupadhiH keSAzcijjinakalpanAmiti / tadetat zrutvA zivabhUtinA proktam - " yadyevam, tarhi kimidA nImaudhika aupagrahikazcaitAvAnupadhiH parigRhyate 1 / sa eva jinakalpaH kiM na kriyate ? / tato gurubhiruktam - jambUsvAmini vyavacchinno'sau saMhananAdyabhAvAt, sAMprataM na zakyata eva kartum " / tataH zivabhUtinA proktam - " mayi jIvati For Private Personal Use Only

Page #296
: 272: Jinabhadra Gani's [The Botika sa kiM vyavacchidyate ?, nanvahameva taM karomi, paralokArthinA sa eva niSparigrahoM jinakalpaH kartavyaH, kiM punaranena kaSAya-bhaya- mRcchadidoSa vidhinA parigrahA ? | ataeva zrute niSparigrahatvamuktam, acelakAya jinendrAH, ato'celataiva sundareti" / tato guruNA proktam- hanta 1 yadyevam, tarhi dehe'pi kaSAyabhaya-mUrcchAdayo doSAH kasyApi saMbhavanti iti so'pi vratagrahaNAnantarameva tyaktavyaH prApnoti / yaca zrute niSparigrahatvamuktaM tadapi dharmopakaraNeSvapi mUrcchA na kartavyA, mUrcchAbhAva eva niSparigrahatvamavaseyam, na punaH sarvathA dharmopakaraNasyApi tyAgaH | jinendrA api na sarvathaivAcelakA : " savve vi egadUseNa niggayA jiNavarA cauvvIsaM " ityAdi vacanAt / tadevaM guruNA sthaviraizva yathoktAbhirvakSyamANAmiva yuktibhiH prajJApyamAno'pi tathAvidhakaSAya mohAdikarmodayAd na svAgrahAd nivRto'sau, kintu cIvarANi parityajya nirgataH / tata bahirudyAne vyavasthitasyAsyottarA nAma bhaginI vandanAthaM gatA / sA ca tyaktacIvaraM saM bhrAtaramAlokya svayamapi cIrANi tyaktavatI / tato bhikSArthaM nagaramadhye praviSTAM gaNikA dRSTA / tata itthaM vivastrAM bIbhatsAmimAM dRSTvA mA loko'smAsu virAGgIt " ityanicchantyapi tayA vastraM paridhApitA'sau / tata eSa vyatikaro - sayA zivabhUterniveditaH / tato'nena " vivastrA yoSid nitarAM bIbhatsA'tilajjanIyA ca bhavati " iti vicintya proktA'sau - " tiSThatvitthamapi, na tyaktavyaM tvayaitad vastram / devatayA hi tavedaM pradattamiti / tataH zivabhUtinA kauNDinya- koTTavIranAmAno dvau ziSyau dIkSitau / 46 gAthAkSarArtho'pi kiJciducyate - " kauNDinyetyAdi kauNDinya va koTTavIrazreti " sarvo dvandvo vibhASayaikavad bhavati " iti vacanAt kauNDinya- koTTavIram, tasmAt kauNDinya- koTTavIrAt paramparAsparzamAcArya-ziSyasaMbandhalakSaNamadhikRtyotpannA saMjAtA / " boTakadRSTiH " ityadhyAhAraH / ityeva boTikAH samutpannAH ||2551 // 2552 // D. C. A detailed account of the rise of the Botika type of Nihnavas is given below: Once upon a time an Acarya named Arya Krisnasari had come to the city of Rathavirapura, and put up in the Dipaka garden outside the city. In the city, there lived a Royal atten For Private Personal Use Only

Page #297
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 273: dant named Sahasramalla Sivabhuti, who being the king's favo urite, wandered in the city till late at night. His wife was very much annoyed by his irregular conduct. She once complained of his irregularities to her mother-in-law saying that she had to wait for her husband till late after midnight, without taking food and sleep. The mother-in-law asked her to go to sleep, and she herself waited till her son returned. After midnight, Sivabhoti returned and asked her to open the door. The mother being enraged at his behaviour, replied "O impudent boy ! go wherever the doors are open for you at this hour. Nobody is going to die after you." Overwhelmed with anger and pride, he went away. In course of his wanderings, he found the doors of a Jaina Upasraya open at such a late hour. The Jaina sadhus were studying their lessons at that time. He approached them and requested them to initiate him into asceticism, The ascetics refused to give him diksa as he was a Royal attendant and the permi. ssion to do so was not sanctioned by his mother etc. Conse quently, Sivabhuti accepted diksa by himself from an earthen spittoon lying there. The ascetics supplied him with the necessary apparel of an ascetic, and subsequently he entered the Jaina gaccha, as a Jaina Sadhu. Next day, all the sadhus proceeded on vihara (going about from place to place ). In course of time, it so happened that they returned to the same place. The king received them with great respect, and gave Sivabhati a kambalaratna (a costly woollen shawl). The preceptor asked Sivabhuti to renounce it, as it would create trouble in several ways. Still, however, Sivabhuti kept the shawl secretly with him without the consent of the preceptor. Being very much attached to the shawl, Sivabhati used to see it carefully every day after returning from his begging tour etc. But he never used the same for fear of being detected. The preceptor knew that Sivabhati was deeply attached to the woollen shawl, so, once he took the shawl in Sivabhati's absence, tore it into several small pieces and gave each piece of the shawl to every sadhu for the purpose of cleaning his feet. When sivabhoti came to know of this, his mind was greatly perturbed.

Page #298
Jinabhadra Gani's [The Botika Then, once in course of his lecture on Jinakalpikas", the Acarya said: :274: Jinakappiya ya duviha panipaya padiggahadhara ya | Pauranamapaurana ikkiks te bhave duviha (1) Duga tiga caukka panagam nava dasa ekaraseva barasangam | Ed attha vigappa jinakappe honti uvahissa. (2) [There are two types of Jinakalpikas (1) One of these having their hands (to be used) as a vessel, and (2) the other of those who actually possess vessels of alms. Each one of these is again of two types :-(1) Those (covering their bodies) with garments, and (2) Those (going) without garments. A jinakalpika has an upadhi (a combination of articles) of two, three, four, five, nine, ten, and twelve varieties, (serviceable in the performance of his religious duties)] There are some ascetics who have only two upadhis: viz. a Rajoharana (a wollen chowry and a mukhavastrika (a piece of cloth folded to be kept before the mouth). With an addition " 3. Jinakalpikas are a variety of Jaina Sadhus who were strictly undergoing the principles of religious practices followed by the Tirthankaras irrespective of bodily discomforts and hardships. Before adopting these rigid religious practices, a Jinakalpi sadhu is required to undergo the following five tests-viz. (1) With regard to knowledge, he must have a thorough knowledge of at least nine-parvas from the beginning to the end, and also to repeat them from the end to the beginning. (2) With regard to austerities, he must have the strength to observe fasting lasting from one to several days at a time, and upto six months duration at a time, without any resulting weakness. (3) With regard to mental courage, he must remain in Kayotsarga in deserted depilitated buildings, public squares, burning places (for dead bodies) etc. and be undaunted by several difficult sufferings and hardships. (4) He should think that he is alone, none else is his companion, and (5) With regard to bodily strength, he must balance his entire body on his toe.

Page #299
radaj Nihnayavada : 273 : of one, two, and three kalpas (articles ) to the above-stated two upadhis or paraphernalias respectively. Again, there are some who in addition to rajoharana and muhapatti possess seven kinds of patras in this way : Pattam, pattabandho, payatthavanam ca payakesariya | Patalaim rayattanam ca goochao payq-nijjogo. (1) [Patram (alms-bowls, utensils etc.); patrabandhan (a square piece of cloth for fastening the patras together when cot in use and which can also be utilized for carrying them as in a sling, on a begging tour) Vern: Host; patrasthapanam (a square piece of woolen cloth abou 11x11 inches with pieces of cord attached at four corners for tying up the patras ); patrakesarita (a small woollen showrie, Vern: gsturt); patalakani ( oblong pisces of fine cloth 52" x 24". Three such pieces are to be used for the summer, four for winter, and five for the rainy season Vorn Tat); rajastranam ( a piece of cloth to be placed between each patra ); gucchakam (a square piece of woollen cloth similar to patrasthas pana, with a hole in the centre, but without cord useful for tying the patras together) are useful for Patras. ] This shows that there are nine kinds of upadhi. When one, two, and three types of Kalpa are respectively added to these nine varieties, there are ten, eleven and twelve upadhis in all, in case of several ascetics.' On hearing this, sivabhati said "If that is so, how is it that aughika (for daily use ) upadhi, and aupagrahika (for occa sinal use ) upadhi alone are apprehended? Why is not Jinakalpa itself attained." ? The preceptor replied :-Jinakalpa has disappeared with Jambu Swamie. And it is not possible to attain the game in absence of sufficient strength" eto. 4. Who died in Vira Samvat 64. The following ten precepts are said to have disappeared with Arya Jamba Swami-(1) Manahparyava Jrana, (2) Paramavadhi Jnana, (3) Pulaka Labdhi, (4) Aharaka Sarira labdhi, (5) Ksapakasroni, (6) Upasamasreni, (7)

Page #300
: 276: Jinabhadra Gani's [The Bofika Sivabhuti :-"How could that be when I am alive? I shall accomplish that. One who really desires to attain Moksa should observe the vow of Jinakalpa without any parigraha (possession) what-80-ever. What is the use of accepting objects that cause passions, fear, attachment etc ? This is the reason why the Soriptures have preached ideal nisparigraha (complete renouncement). The Tirthankaras have moved about without any garment or covering. It is, therefore, advisable to go without any covering what-so-ever. Acarya :- In that case, one should also abandon his body immediately after he undertakes to observe the vow. Because, vioes of passion, fear, and attachment eto. lie in the body as well. The principle of nisparigraha (complete renouncement) preached by the Scriptures, means to assert that one should not cherish attachment even in religious observances. Complete negation of attachment is itself nothing but a state of nisparigahata or complete abandonment of property. It should also be borne in mind that entire abandonment of religious observances, does not necessarily mean nisparigraha. The Tirthankaras do not really happen to be completely naked. This is seen from the statements like " Savve vi egadasena niggaya Jinavara cauvigam" etc., which prove that all the twenty-four Tirthankaras had come out with one divine garment. Sivabhati was persuaded by the preceptor and several other old Sadhus in many such ways, but out of vanity and passion, he did not give up his false notion of giving up garments etc. He stayed in the garden without a single garment to cover bis body. His sister, Uttara, who came to pay her respects to her brother found him in the naked condition. She, too, therefore, gave up her clothes. Then, while going about in the city for Jinakalpa, (8) The three kinds of samyama-(viz 1. Paribara visuddhi, 2. Saksmasamparaya and 3. Yathakhyata caritram) 9. Kovala Jhana and 10. Siddhi pada. Vide Sri Tapagacoha Pattavali p. Du 22. also Vide verse 2098.

Page #301
Vida ] Nihnavavada :27.7: alms :in that condition, a whore saw her. Thinking that she would affect her profession, the whore gave her a cloth to cover her body, in spite of her reluctance. Eventually she narrated the whole incident before her brother. Sivabboti thought at last, that & woman would look obscene and disgustful if she did not wear saloth, and asked her not to give up clothing. Then, after some days, Sivabbati initiated two of his pupils viz. Kaundinya and Kottavira who prolonged the sect by tradition. The whole account is disoussed in details as follows:uvahivimAgaM souM sivabhUI ajjknnhgurumuule| jiNakappiyAiyANaM maNai guruM kIsa neyANi // 2 // 2553 // jiNakappo'NucarijAi mocchino ti maNie puNo bhaNai / tatsattasmonchina bucchijjA kiM samatyassa ? // 5 // 2554 // 'pucchamma puzvamaNApucchachiNNakaMvalakasAyakalasio ceva / so pariggahao kasAya-mucchA-bhayAIyA // 6 // 2555 // bosA jo subahuyA sue ya bhaNiyamapariggahataM ti| jamacelA ya jiNivA tadabhihio jaM ca jiNakappo // 7 // 2556 // jaMpajiyAvelaparisaho muNI jaM ca tIhiM ThANehiM / alpaM dharikha megaMlao tamo'velayA seyA 2557 // 4. Urahivibhagam soum Sivabhui AjjaKarhagurumale i Jinakappiyaiyanam bhanai gurum kisa. ney anim? (2553) 5. Jinakappo'nucarijjai nocohinno tti bhanid puno bhanail Tadasattassocohijjau vucchijjai kim samatthassa? (2554) 6. Puodhassa puvvamanapuochachinnakambalakasayakalusio ceval So bdi pariggahai kasaya-mucobh-bhayaiya. (2555) 7. Doss jas subahuya sud ya bhaniyamapariggahattam ttin Januaoblaya Jininda tadabhihiz jam ca Jinakappo. (2656,

Page #302
:218: finabhadra Gani's [The Botika 8. Jam ca jiyacelaparisaho muni jam ca tihim thanehim / Vattham dharijja negantao tao'celaja seya. (2557) [upadhivibhAgaM zrutvA shivbhuutiraarykRssnngurumuule| jinakalpikAdikAnAM bhaNati guruM kasmAd nevAnIm ? // 4 // 2553 // jinakalpo'nucaryate nochinna iti bhaNite punarbhaNati / tadazaktasyocchidyatA vyucchidyate kathaM samarthasya 1 // 5 // 2554 // pRSTasya pUrvamanApRSTacchinnakambalakaSAyakaluSita eva / sa bravIti parigrahataH kaSAya-mUrchA-bhayAdikAH // 6 // 2555 // doSA yataH subahukAH zrute ca bhaNitamaparigrahatvamiti / yadacelAzca jinendrAstadabhihito yaca jinakalpaH ||nnaa2556|| yaJca jitAcela pariSaho muniryacca tribhiH sthAneH / vastraM dhArayed naikAntatastato'celatA zreyasI // 2557 // 4. Upadhivibhagam srutva SivabhatiraryaKrisnagurumole i Jinakalpikadikanam bhanati gurum kasnad nedanim ? (2543) 5. Jinakalpo'nucaryate nocchinna iti bhanite puna-r-bhanatil Tadasaktasyocchidyatam vyucchidyate katham samarthasya ? (2554) 6. Pristasya purvamanapristacchina kanubala kasaya kalusita eva Sa braviti parigrahatah kasaya-murccha-bhayadikah. (2555) 7. Dosa yatah subahukah srute ca bhanitamaparigrabatvamitil Yadacelasca Jinendrastadabhihito yacca Jinakalpah. (2556) 8. Yacca jitacelaparisaho muni-r-yacca tribhih sthanains Vastram dharayed naikantatastato celata srdyasi. (2557) Trans. 4-5-6-7-8. Having heard from the preceptor the section on upadhis (possession of necessary articles) of Jina kalpika etc. he (i. e. Sivabhati) puts the question before the preceptor " Why is Jinakalpa (rites of a Tirthankara) not accomplished now ? " It has died away" (was the reply). He said again :- Let it be dead to weak persons; why is it :

Page #303
Vada Nihnaravada :279 dead to a capable person?" He (i. e. Sivabhati), who was previously asked by the preceptor ( to renounce the woollen shawl) and whose mind was perturbed with passion as his ( costly) shawl was cut (into pieces) without his consent, says that " many faults such as passion, fear, attachment etc. (arise) from parigraha (possession of property ). That is why even in Scriptures, the doctrine of a-parigrahatva (renunciation of all worldly objects ) has been preached, the Tirthankaras (have moved about) without clothes, and they themselves have preached the Jinakalpa. Thus, one who has overcome the distress of naked condition, is (called). an ascetic, and since he would put on a garment at three places (i. e. on account of three reasons viz. out of shame, out of censure, and out of distress ! but not in solitude, it is, therefore, better to remain in the state of being without garments. (2553-2557) TIkA-4-5-6-7-8 sarvA apyuktArthA eva, navaraM "jaM ca jiNAceletyAdi" yasmAcca "jitAcelapariSaho muniH" ityAgame'bhihitam / jitAcelapariSahatvaM ca kila tyaktavastrasyaiva bhavatItyabhiprAyaH / yasmAca tribhireva sthAnairvakhadharaNamanujJAtamAgame naikAntataH, tathA cAgamavacanam-"tihiM ThANehiM vatthaM dharijA hIrivattiyaM, dugaMcchAvattiyaM, parIsahavattiyaM" / tatra hIrlA saMyamo vA pratyayo nimittaM yasya dhAraNasya tat tathA, jugupsA lokavihitA nindA sA pratyayo yasya tattathA, eva parISahAH zItoSNadaMzamazakAdayaH pratyayo yatra tattathA / upasaMharabAha-tasmAduktayuktibhyo'celataiva zreyaskarIti pUrvapakSaH // 2553 // 2554 // 2555 // 2556 // 2557 // D. C. An ascetic could be called " jitacela parisan" only if he has abandoned clothes. As regards wearing clothes on account of three reasons, the agamas say that " Tihim thanehim vattham dharijja hirivattiyam, dugamchavattiyam, parisahavattiyam. [One should put on garment at three places : where shame, censure and torture ( are counted ).

Page #304
:2801 Jinabhadra Gani's [The Botika The agamas, thus, allow the wearing of clothes on three grounds :-(1) If an ascetic requires (it) for maintaining restraint, or out of shame. (2) if he needs it for saving himself from public censure, and (3) If he wants to protect himself from phy. sical pain arising from exposure to heat, cold, or mosquitoes eto. Sivabhati says that he does not require clothes for any of tho three purposes mentioned here. Hence, he preferred absolute nakedness, to wearing even one garment. (2553-2557) Then, guruNAbhihio jA kasAyaheU pariggaho so te / to so deho ciya te kasAyauppattiheu tti // 9 // 2558 // 9. Guruna bhihis jai jam kasayahdu pariggaho so td / To so deho cciya te kasayauppatti heu tti. (2558) [guruNA'bhihito yadi yat kaSAyahetuH parigrahaH sa te| tataH sa deha eva te kaSAyotpattiheturiti // 9 // 2558 // 9. Guruna'bhihito yadi yat kasayahetuh parigrahah sa te i ____Tatah sa deha dva te kasayotpattihdturiti. (2558)] Trans. 9. He was told by the preceptor that "If the cause of passion were said to be ) parigraha according to you, then your body itself would become the same, as that too happened to give rise to passions." 2558. TIkA-9 guruNA'ryakRSNenAbhihitaH zivabhUtiH-yadi hanta ! yad yat kaSAyahetuH, tat tat te tava parigrahaH, sa ca mumukSuNA parihartavya evotyekAntaH / "to so ityAdi" tatastarhi svakIyo deha eva te tava svasthAtmano'pi kaSAyotpattiheturiti parigrahaH pariharaNIyazca prAmoti / ato'parigrahatvasya parigrahANAM cotsabA katheti // 2558 // D. C. Acarya :-If O Sivabhati I everything that happens to be the cause of passion is parigraha according to you, then, one who desires Moksa should renounce the body also, as the body gives rise to passions, and thus becomes parigraha. (2558)

Page #305
Vada ] Nihnsvarada :281 Or, why say about body alone asthi va kiM kiMci jae jassava tassa va kasAyakIya / vatyuM na hoja evaM dhammo vi tume na ghetavyo // 10 // 2559n jeNa kasAyanimittaM jiNo vi gosAla-saMgamAINaM / dhammo dhammaparA vi ya paDiNIyANaM jiNamayaM ca // 11 // 2560 // 10. Atthi va kim kinci jad jassa va tassa va kassyabiyaam jaml Vatthum na hojja evani dhamwo vi tume na ghdtavyo. (2569 11. Jena kasayanimittam Jino vi Gosala-Sangamainain: Dhammo dhammapara vi ya paliniyanam Jinamayam ca. (2560) [asti kA kiM kicijagati yasva vA tasya vA kapAcavInaM yt| vastu na bhavedevaM dharmo'pi tvayA na grahItavyaH // 10 // 2559 // yena kaSAyanimittaM jino'pi gozAla-saMgamAdInAm / dharmo dharmaparA api ca pratyanIkAnAM jinamataM ca // 11 // 25601 // 10. Asti va kim kincijjagati yasya va tasya va kasayabijam yati ___Vastu na bhavedevam dharno'pi tvaya na grahitavyah. (2559) 11. Yena kasayanimittam Jino'pi Gosala-Sangamadinam Dharmo dharmapara api ca pratyanikapam Jinamatam ca. (2560)] Trans. 10-11. Is there any object in (this) world that would not become the object of passion to one person or the other ? In that way, even religion should not be acceptable to you. Even a Jina becomes the cause of kagaya to Qosala and Sangama etc. Thus, religion, devotees of religion, and even doctrines (preached) by Tirthankaras ( would become ) the cause of evil motives to their opponents. (2559-2560) TIkA-10-11 kiM hi nAmaitApati jagati tad vastu, pan tyasya vA tasya yA kaSAyANAM bIjaM kAraNaM na bhavet 1 / evaM ca sati zruta-pAvimedamino

Page #306
: 282: Jinabhadra Grani's [ The Botika dharmo'pi tvayA na grahItavyaH, tasyApi kasyacit kaSAyahetutvAt / kutaH ? ityAha- ' jeNetyAdi' yena yasmAdAstAM tatpraNIto dharmaH, kintu sa tribhuvanabandhuniSkAraNavatsalaH sarvasaccAnAM jino'pi bhagavAMstIrthakaro'pi kliSTakarmaNAM gozAlaka - saMgamakAdInAM kaSAyanimittaM saMjAtaH / evaM dharmastatpraNItaH, taduktadharmaparA api tadekaniSThAH sAdhavaH, jinamataM ca dvAdazAGgIrUpam, sarvamapyetad gurukarmaNAM duHkhaikarUpadIrghabhava bhramaNabhAjAM pratyanIkAnAM jinazAsanapratikulavartinAM kaSAyanimittameva ityetadapyagrAhyaM prApnoti na caitadasti / tasmAt 'yat kaSAyahetustat parihartavyam" ityanekAnta eveti // 2559 // 2560 // 46. D. C. Acarya :- Is there any object in this world that would not happen to be a root of sin or stupidity to one person or the other? From that view-point, even religion will not be acceptable to you. Because, that would act as the cause of evil motive to somebody or the other. Even the Tirthankara himself happens to be the cause of kasaya to Gosalaka and Sangamaka etc. Thus, religion, its followers, and the doctrine of the Jinas along with twelve Angas, would become the cause of kasaya to those who oppose the Tirthankara and His doctrine. According to you, all this would be parigraha and hence should be renounced. But that does not actually happen. And, the principle that everything that gives rise to kasaya should be renounced, is not valid. 10-11 (2559-2560 ) Now, the Acarya tries to remove the doubt in the opponent's mind, and assert his own principles as follows : aha te na mokkhasAhaNamaIe gaMtho kasAyaheU vi / vatthAi mokkhasAhaNamaIe suddhaM kahaM gaMtho ? / / 12 / / 2561 / / 12. Aha te na Mokkhasahanamais gantho kasayahea vi Vatthai Mokkhasahanamaie suddham kaham gantho? ( 2561 ) [ atha te na mokSasAdhanamatyA granthaH kaSAyahetavo'pi / vastrAdimokSasAdhanamatyA zuddhaM kathaM granthaH ? || 12 || 2561 // For Private Personal Use Only

Page #307
Vada J 12. Atha to na Moksasadhanamatya granthah kasayahdtavo'pi | VastradiMoksasadhanamatya suddham katham grantha ? (2561)] Nihnavavada : Trans. 12. If they are not proved to be parigraha in spite of their being the cause of passion by virtue of their being the accessory means of (attaining) Moksa, how could pure clothes etc also be taken as parigraha from the point of view of their being recognized as the implements for (the attainment of) Moksa ? 2561. 283: TIkA - 12 atha manyethAH - te dehAdayo jinamatAntAH padArthAH kaSAyahetavospi santo na grantho na parigrahaH, mokSasAdhanamatyA gRhyamANatvAditi / hanta ! yadyevam, tarhi vastra - pAtrAdikamapyupakaraNaM zuddhameSaNIyaM mokSasAdhanabuddhayA gRjhamANaM kathaM granthaH 1 - na kathaJcidityarthaH, nyAyasya samAnatvAditi // 2561 // D. C. When we have not accepted deha etc. as parigraha in spite of their being the cause of kasaya on the ground that they happen to be the necessary implements for attaining Moksa, we should also accept clean clothes etc., as the implements required for the attainment of Moksa, and hence they should not be renounced by taking them as parigraha. 12. (2561) In reply to the argument that clothes etc. should be abandoned on account of their being the object of murccha or attachment, the Acarya says mucchAheU gaMtho jai to dehAio kahamagaMtho / mucchAvao, kahaM vA gaMtho vatthAdasaMgassa ? ||13|| 2562 // aha dehA-''hArAisu na mokkhasAhaNamaIe te mucchA / kA mokskhasAhaNesuM mucchA vatthAiesuM to ? || 14 || 2563 // aha kuNasi thullavatthAiesa mucchaM dhuvaM sarIre vi / ajadullabhayare kAhisi mucchaM viseseNaM // 15 // 2564 || basthA igaMdharahiyA dehA-''hArAhamittamucchAe / tiriya - sabarAdao naNu havaMti niraovagA bahuso // 16 // 2565 // For Private Personal Use Only

Page #308
* 284 : Jinabhadra Gani's [The Botika apariggahA vi parasaMtiesu mucchA-kasAya-dosehiM / aviNiggahiyappANo kammamalamagaMtamajjati // 17 // 2566 // dehatthavattha-mallA-'NulevaNA-''bharaNadhAriNo kei / uSasaggAisu muNao nissaMgA kevalamurviti // 18 // 2567 // 13. Mucchahea gantho jai to dehaii kahamaganthon Mucchavao, kabam va gantho vatthadasangassa ? (2562) 14. Aha-deha"haraisu na Mokkhasahanamaid te muccha | Ka Mokkhasahandsum muccha vatthaiesum to ? (2563) 15, Aha kinasi thullavatthaiosu muccbam dhuvam sarire vil Akkejjadullabhayare kahisi muccham visesenam. (2564) 16. Vatthaigantharahiya deha-"haraimittamucchae i Tiriya-sabaradao nanu havanti niraovaga bahuso. (2565) 17. A-pariggaha vi parasantiesu muccha-kasaya-dosehim! Aviniggahiyappano kammamalamanatamajjanti. (2566) 18. Dahatthavattha-Malla-'nulevana-"bharanadharino kei ___Uvasaggaisu munai nissanga Kevalamuvinti. (2567) [mUchoheturgranyo yadi tato dehAdikaH kathamagranthaH / mUcchAvatA, kathaM vA grantho vastrAyasahasya ? // 1 // 2562 // atha dehA-hArAviSu na mokSasAdhanamatyA te muuchii| kA mokSasAdhaneSu mUrchA vacAviveSu tataH ? // 14 // 2563 // atha karoSi sthUlavastrAdikeSu mUcchI dhruvaM zarIre'pi / akreyadurlabhatare kariSyasi sUrchA vizeSeNa // 15 // 2564 // vanAdigrantharahitA dehaa-'haaraadimaatrmuurchyaa| tiryak-zavarAdayo nanu bhavanti nirayopagA bahuzaH // 16 // 2565 // aparigrahA api parasatkeSu muurnn-kpaay-bossH| bhavivigrahItAtmanA karmamalamanantamarjayanti // 17 // 2566 //

Page #309
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 285: arpraa-aru- Tar-552770turfo: f i upasargAdiSu munayo niHsaGgAH kevalamupayanti // 18 // 2567 // 13. Murccha hetu-r-grantho yadi tato dehadikah kathamagranthah / Marcoavatah, katham va grantho vastradyasangasya ? (2562) 14. Atha deha"haradisu na Moksasadhanamatya te marccha i Ka Moksasadhanesu marcoba vastridikesi tatah ? (2563) 15. Atha karosi sthalavastradikesu marccham dhruvan sarire'pi Akreya durlabhatare karisyasi morccham visesena. (2564) 16. Vastradigrantharahita ddha"haradimatra marcchaya i Tiryak-sabaradayo nanu bhavanti uirayopaga bahusah. (2565) 17. A-parigraha api parasatkesu morcchakasaya dosaini Avinigrihitatmanah karmamalamanantamarjayanti. (2566) 18. Dahasthavastra-malya-'nulepana,"bharanad harinah kecit , Upasargadisu munayo ninsangah Kevalampayanti. (2567) ] Trans. 13-14-15-16-17-18. If the cause of attachment is parigraha, then, how could body etc. not become parigraha to one who has already got attachment, and how could clothes etc. become parigraha to a lonely ascetic ? If you do not bear attachment towards body, food etc., on the ground that they are necessery (instruments ) for the attainment of Moksa, then, what attachment is there on garments etc., that are equally necessary for the attainment of Moksa ? And, if you attach desire to external objects like garments etc, you will be doing so all the more to body, which is more precious (than clothes etc. ). The tiryancas (i. e. beasis, birds etc.) and savage people though without parigraha of clothes etc, very often go to hell only out of their attachment for body and food etc.. ( There are some, who though a-parigrali ( or not possessing anything whatso-ever ) by theniselves, earn a lot of (bondages of) Karman, because of their vices such as desire, passion, etc., while other ascetics with their bodies decorated with garments, garlands, besmearings, and orna.

Page #310
:286 Jinabhadra Gani's [The Botika ments etc. on the occasion of upasarga etc, attain the Absolute State of Existence unaccompanied (by anyone).. (25622557). TIkA-13-14-15-16-17-18 etAH sugamA eva, navaraM yadi yo mUchohetuH sa granthaH parigrahaH, parigrahatvAdeva ca tyAjyaH, tatastarhi "mucchAvau tti" mUrchAvato vakSyamANayuktyA mUchAyuktasya dehA-''hArAdikastava hanta ? kathamagranthaH / api tu grantha eva, tataH so'pi parityAjyaH prAmoti / kathaM vA mamatvamUrchArahitatvenAsaGgasya saGgavipramuktasya sAdhorvastrAdikaM grantho gIyate bhavatA ?-na bhavatyeva tayAbhUtasya tad grantha iti / atha dehA-''hArAdiSu te tava mUrchA nAsti, mokSasAdhanamatyA teSAM grahaNAt , tarhi mokSasAdhanatvena tulyepvapi vastrAdiSu tava hanta ! kA mUrchA ? iti / atha sthUleSu bAhyatvAt , kSaNamAtreNaivAgni-taskarAyupadravagamyatvAt , mulabhatvAt , katipayadinAnte svayameva vinAzadharmakatvAt zarIrAd nitarAM niHsAreSu vastrAdiSu mUchoM karoSi tvam, tarhi dhruvaM nizcitaM zarIre'pi vizeSato mUchoM kariSyasi / kuto vizeSeNa tatra tatkaraNamityAha-"akkejja dullabhayare ti" vibhaktivyatyayAt zarIrasyAkrayyatvAt krayeNAlabhyatvAt / na hi vastrAdivat zarIrakrayeNa kvApi labhyate / ata eva vastrAdhapekSayA durlabhataratvAt , tathA, tadapekSayaivAntaraGgatvAt , bahutaradinAvasthAyitvAt , viziSTatarakAryasAyakatvAca vizeSeNa zarIre mUcrchA kariSyasIti / atha dehAdimAtre yA mUrchA sA svalpaiva, vastrAdigranthamUrchA tu bahvI, tato dehAdimAtramUrchAsaMbhave'pi namazramaNakAH setsyanti, na bhavantaH, bahuparigrahatvAdityAha"vatthAi" ityAdi gAthAtrayam / ayamiha saMkSepArtha:-tiryak-zabarAdayo'lpaparigrahA api, tathA zeSamanuSyA api mahAdAriyopahatAH kliSTamanaso'vidyamAnatathAvidhaparigrahA apyanivigRhItAtmAno lomAdikaSAyavargavazIkatAH parasatkeSvapi vimaveSu mUrchAkaSAyAdidoSaiH karmamalamanantamarjayanti, tad bahUzo nirayopagA bhavanti, na mokSaprApakAH / anye tu mahAmunayaH kenacidupasargAdibuddhayA zarIrAsaJjitamahAmulyavatrA-''maraNa-mAlya-vilepanAdisaMyuktA api sarvasaGgavini kA nigRhItAtmAno jitalobhAdikaSAyaripakaH samAsAditavimalakevalAlokAH sidvimupagacchanti / tasmAdavazyAtmanAM kliSTamanasAM nAgnyamAtramidamakizcitkarameveti ||2562||256shaa256||2565||2566|2567||

Page #311
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 287 : D. C. When you believe that whatever happens to be the cause of morccha is parigraha, and hence should be renounced, how is it that body and food etc. of one attacked by delusion is considered as a-parigraha according to you ? For, if they happen to be parigraha they should be abandoned. But garments etc. of an ascetic, absolutely alone by himself, are not as causes of parigraha to him. If you say that there is no attachment for body etc. as they happen to be the necessary instruments for attaining Moksi, then clothes etc. should also be taken as instruments for attaining Moksa. There is no reason to take them as objects of morccha. When you attach delusion into clothes etc. that are far less important and that are easily susceptible to the attacks of fire, thief etc , and that are destructible in a short time, there is certainly all the more reason to attach delusion into body etc., that are more precious and more lastirg than clothes etc. * Secondly, if you say that delusion with regard to body etc. is very slight, and that with regards to clothes etc., is great, and therefore naked ascetics will attain Moksa in spite of their attachment into body etc., while those like us having clothes etc. will not attain Moksa, then, you should note that the tiryancas ( beasts and birds ) and the savage tribes of Bhils etc., who do not put on clothes etc. but who are attached only to body, and food etc., frequently attain hell. Persons suffering from poverty have to undergo ceaseless chain of Karman, on account of their souls being unrestrained due to their vices in the past life. On the other hand, great ascetics etc , attain Moksa of Ab solute Perception in spite of their being adorned by costly ornaments on the occasion of upasarga (a natural phenomenon supposed to forbode future evil). It should, therefore, be borne in mind, that mere renunciation of clothes does not help if the soul is impure. 13-18. (2562-2567) Then, in reply to the assertion that the wearing of clothes etc., should be given up as that, sometimes, causes fear eto., the Acarya states---

Page #312
:288: Jinabhadra Gani's [The Botika jai bhayaheka gaMtho to nANAINa taduvaghAIhiM / bhayamiha tAI gaMtho, dehassa ya sAvayAIhiM // 19 // 2568 // aha mokkhasAhaNamaIe na bhayaheU vi tANi te gyo| vatthAi mokkhasAhaNamaIe suddhaM kahaM gaMtho ? // 20 // 2569 / / 19. Jai bhayahea gantho to nanaina taduvaghaihimi ___Bhayaniha taim gantho, ddhassa ya savayaihim. (2568) 20. Aha Mokkhasahanamaiena bhaya heo vi tani te gantho i ___VatthaiMokkhasahana maid suddham kaham gantho ? (2569) [yadi bhayaheturgranthastato jJAnAdInAM tadupaghAtibhyaH / bhayamiti tAni grantho dehasya ca shvaapdaadibhyH||19||2568|| atha mokSasAdhanamatyA na bhayahetavo'pi tAni te granthaH / vastrAdimokSasAdhanamatyA zuddhaM kathaM granthaH 1 // 20 // 2569 // 19. Yadi bbayahetu-r-granthastato jnanadinam tadupaghatibhyah Bhayamiti tani grantho dehasya ca svapadadibhyah. (2568) 20. Atha Moksasadhanamatya na bhayahetavo'pi tani te granthah VastradiMoksasadhanamatya suddham katham granthah. (2569)] Trans 19-20. If that which causes fear is (known as ) parigraha, then, knowledge etc., being susceptible to fear from the opponents, and the body ( being susceptible to fear) from wild beasts etc., should be known as parigraha. And, if they are not object of parigraha in spite of their being causes of fear, because they act as the instruments for attaining Moksa, how could clothes etc., also be ( recognized as) objects of parigraha inspite of their being instruments for attaining Moksa? (2568-2569) TIkA-19-20 yadi yad bhayahetustad granthaH, tahiM jJAna-darzana-cAritrA nAmapi tadupapAtakebhyaH, dehasya ca zvApadAdibhyo bhayamasti, iti tAnyapi anya prApnuvanti / zeSa vyAkhyAtaprAyam // 2568 // 2569 //

Page #313
Vada ] Nihnaravada :289: D. C. If you believe that whatever becomes the cause of fear is parigraha, then, those having Knowledge, Perception and Character etc., would be susceptible to fear from their respective opponents, and body is susceptible to fear from beasts of prey. So, they should, also, be taken as objects of parigraha. (The remaining portion is clear ) 19-20. (2568-2569) In reply to the assertion that clothes etc., arc the causes of inauspicious or fierce meditation, and hence, they should be abandoned, the Acarya sayssArakkhaNANubaMdho rodajjhANaM ti te maI hujjaa| tullamiyaM dehAisu pasathamiha taM tahehAvi // 21 // 2570 // je jattiyA pagArA loe bhayaheavo avirayANaM / te ceva ya virayANaM pasatyabhAvANa mokkhAya // 22 // 2571 / / 21. Sarakkhananubandho roddajjhanam ti to mai hujja i Tullamiyam dehaisu pasatthamiha tam tah@havi. (2570) 22. Je jattiya pagara lod bhayahdavo a-virayanani | Te cova ya virayanam pasatthabhavana Mokkhaya. (2571) [saMrakSaNAnubandho raudradhyAnamiti te matirbhavet / tulyamidaM dehAdiSu prazastamiha tat tathehApi // 21 // 2570 // ye yAvantaH prakArA loke bhayahetavo'viratAnAm / ta eva ca viratAnAM prazastabhAvAnAM mokSAya // 22 // 2571 // 21. Samraksananubandho raudradhyanamiti te mati-r-bhavet | Tulyamidam dehadisu prasastaraiha tat tathdhapi. (2570) 22. Yo yavantah prakara loke bhayahetavo'viratanain i Ta dva ca viratanam prasastabhavanam Moksaya. (2571) ] Trans. 21-22. (Utility of clothes etc. ) in connection with preservation (of body etc.) may be considered as (inspired by) evil motive according to you. But this is common in body etc. also, (and hence ) it is desirable there, in the same

Page #314
:290 Jinabhadra Gani's [The Botika way, as it is here. (For), the various types of deeds that are causes of fear to unrestrained persons, are (helpful) for the (attainment of) Moksa to real ascetics having lofty ideals. (2570-2571). TIkA-21-22 vyAkhyA-ihAgame raudradhyAnaM caturvidhamuktam-tadyathA-"se kiM taM roddajjhANaM ? / roddajjhANe cauvihe pannatte; taM jahA-hiMsANubaMdhI, mosANubaMdhI, teyANubaMdhI, sArakkhANubaMdhI" tatra hiMsAyAH sattvavadhAdirUpAyA anubandhaH sAtatyena cintanaM yatra tad hiMsAnubandhi / mRSA'satyaM tasyAnubandho yatra tat tathA / steyaM caurya tasyAnuvandho yatra tat tathA / saMrakSaNaM sarvaiAraNAdyupAyaistaskarAdibhyo nijavittasya saMgopanaM tasyAnubandhaH sAtatyena cintanaM yatra raudradhyAne tat tathA / evaM ca sati saMrakSaNAnubandho raudradhyAnasya caturtho bhedaH / sa ca vastrAdau gRhIte kilAvazyaMbhAvI, raudradhyAnabhedatvAca raudradhyAnamiti / evaM raudradhyAnahetutvAi vastrAdikaM durgatihetuH, zastrAdivat , tato na grAhyamiti tava buddhibhavet tahiM yaduktayucyA raudradhyAnaM tadidaM devAnAM priya ! dehAdiSvapi tulyam , teSvapi jala-jvalana-malimluca-zvApadA-ahi-viSa-kaNTakAdibhyaH saMrakSaNAnupandhasya tulyatvAt / ataste'pi parityAjyAH prApnuvanti / atheha dehAdermokSa sAdhanAGgatvAd yatanayA tatsaMrakSaNAnubandhavidhAnaM prasastaM, na doSAya / yadyevam , tarhi tathA tenAgamaprasiddhena yatanAprakAreNehApi vastrAdau saMrakSaNAnubandhavidhAnaM kathaM na prazastam ? / tataH kathaM vastrAdayo'pi parityAjyAH ? iti / ayaivaM brUSevastrAdiparigraha eva mUrchAdidoSahetutvAllokasya "bhavabhramaNakAraNam" ityetadatipratItaM vastrAdiparigrahavataH sAdhorapi kathaM na syAt ? ityAha-"je jattiyetyAdi" / iha ye yAvantaH zayana-pAna-bhojana-gamanA-'vasthAna-mano-vAkkAyaceSTAdayaH prakArA aviratAnAmasaMyatAnAmaprazastAdhyavasAyavatAM loke bhayahetavo jAyante, ta eva tAvantaH prakArA viratAnAM saMyatAnAM prasastAdhyavasAyAnAM mokSAyaiva saMpadyante / tasmAd vastrAdikhIkAre'pi netarajanavat sAdhUnAM mUloccheditalomAdikapAya-bhaya-mohanIyAdidoSANAM tadudbhAvitadoSaH ko'pyanuSajyata iti 2570 // 2571 // D.C. Sivabhuti :-There are four types of Raudradhyana (evil moditation) mentioned in the agamas. They are deeds concerning

Page #315
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 291: (1) Violence (2) Falsehood (3) Theft, and (4) (Self) Preservation. Meditation in which violence by way of killing beasts and birds etc., is always thought of, is known as himsa-nubandhi raudradhyana. That in which falsehood is resorted to, is known as mrisanubandhi raudradhyana, while meditation wherein preseration of one's property from thieves etc. is invariably aimed at, is known as sanraksananubandhi raudradhyana. Acceptance of clothes etc., will also become the cause of raudradhyana. Like weapons etc., clothes etc., will, also, become the cause of satisfying evil motives, and that is why they should be renounced without hesitation. Acarya :--That sort of raudra-dhyana is common in body also, as the preservation of body from water, fire, robber, serpent, wild animals, poison, and thorns etc., is always sought. In that case, body too, shall have to be abandoned. Sivabhati :-Since body etc. happen to be the necessary instruments for attaining Moksa, it is commendable to preserve them carefully. Acarya :--Why not apply the same principle to clothes eto., as well ? As in the case of body etc., preservation of clothes eto; should, also, be commendable. Sivabhati :--Since clothes etc. become the cause of attachment, they are.objects of parigraha without doubt. I'hey, thus, become causes of many bhavas to ordinary poople, and consequently affect asectics having parigraha of clothes etc. It is, therefore, advisable to give them up. Acarya :--This belief of yours is exclusively one-sided, and hence should not be accepted. Various acts of sitting, sleeping, eating, drinking, going, stopping, and various movements of mind, speech, and body, become causes of fear to an unrestrained person who has low motives. But the same acts become belpful for the attainment of Moksa to real ascetics who have high ideals One who has subdued evil instincts from the beginning, is not liable

Page #316
:292: Jinabhadra Gani's [:The Botika to any faults what-so-ever, if he accepts clothes. 21-22 (25702571). Moreover, if you try to prove, with the help of the example of gold, that clothes etc. are parigraha, as they happen to be the causes of morecha, we prove gold etc. as a-purigraha on the same ground : AhAro vva na gaMtho dehatthaM visaghAyaNahAe / kaNagaM pi tahA juvaIdhammaMtevAsiNI me tti // 23 // 2572 / / 23. Aharo vva na gantho de hattham visaghayanatthaci Kanagampi taha juvaidhammantevasini me tti. (2572) [AhAra iva na grantho dehAthai vissghaatnaarthtyaa| kanakamapi tathA yuvatidharmAntevAsinI mameti // 23 // 2572 // 23. Ahara iva na grantho dehartham visaghatanarthataya i Kanakamapi tatha yuvati-r-dharmantevasini mameti. (2572)] Trans. 23. Like food, gold is not (the object of) parigraha as it is helpful to body, in as much as it is the antidote of poison. Similarly, young woman (is) also not an object of parigraha (to me ), when (1 take her to be) my pupil in the observance of religious duties. 2572. TIkA 23-kanakaM tathA yuvatizca dharmAntevAsinI me mameti buddhathA parigRhaNato na grantha iti saMbandhaH, eSA kila pratijJA / kutaH ? ityAha-dehArthamiti kRtvA, ayaM ca hetuH, dehArthatvAt-dehaprayojanatvAt-dehopakAritvAdityarthaH / nanu yuvatedehopakAritvaM kila pratItam , kanakasya tu tata katham ? ityAha-"visaghAyaNaDhAe ti" viSaghAtakatvAdityarthaH, uktaM ca visaghAya-rasAyaNa-maMgala-cchavi-NayA-payAhiNAvatte / gurue a DhajjhakuDhe aTTha suvaNNe guNA hoti // 1 // AhAravaditi dRSTAntaH / kanaka-yuvatyAdayo'pi na granthA, dehArthatvAt AhAravaditi tAtparyam // 2572 //

Page #317
Vada] Nihnavavada :293 D, C. Like food, gold and young woman, do not become parigraha, when they prove themselves helpful to the body. Gold is beneficial to body in as much as it acts as an antidote of poison. It has been said that -- Visaghaya-rasayana-mangala-cchavi-naya payahinavatte | Gurud a dhajjhakutthe attha suvanne guna honti. (1) [ Capacity as an antidote of poison, alchemic character, auspiciousness, brilliance, polity, property of turning clock-wise (from left to right), weight, and capacity of undergoing heat-these are the eight qualities of gold.] When a young woman is looked upon with a lofty ideal that she is a companion in performing religious rites, she does not, in any way, become the object of parigraha but she becomes helpful in the attainment of Moksa. 23 (2572). Finally, the Acarya explains the distinction between parigraha and a-parigraha and tries to remove the confusion from the opponent's mind:-- tamhA kimatthi vatthu gaMtho'gaMtho va savvahA loe ? / gaMtho'gaMtho va mao mucchamamucchAhiM nicchayao // 24 // 2573 / / vatthAI teNa jaM jaM saMjamasAhaNasarAga-dosassa / taM tamapariggaho ciya pariggaho jaM taduvaghAiM // 25 // 2574 // 24. Tamha kimatthi vatthum gantho'gantho va savvha lod?! Gantho'gantho va mai mucchamamucchahim nicchayao. (2573) 25. Vatthaim tena jam jam sanjamasahanasaraga-dosassa | Tam tampariggaho cciya pariggaho jam taduvaghaim. (2574) [tasmAt kimasti vastu grantho'grantho vA sarvathA loke / grantho'grantho vA mato mUrchA-'mUrchAbhyAM nishcytH||24||2573|| vastrAdi tena yad yat saMyamasAdhanasarAga-dveSasya / tat tadaparigraha eva parigraho yat tadupaghAti // 25 // 2574 //

Page #318
: 294: Jinabhadra Gani's [The Botika 24. Tasmat kimasti vastu grantho 'grantho va sarvatha loke ? Grantho'grantho va mato marccha'murechabhyam niscayatah. (2573) 25. Vastradi tena yad yat samyamasadhanasaraga-dvesasya | Tat tadaparigraha eva parigraho yat tadupaghati. (2574) Trans. 24-25. " Then, what objeci is there in this world that should be known as parigraha or a-parigraha in all respects? " Really speaking, parigraha or otherwise, is ascertained according to attachment or aversion. Hence, whatever like clothes etc. that happens to be useful in the observance of austerities to one who is devoid of passion and prejudice, should be recognized as a-parigraha. That which acts against it, is parigraha ( 2573-2574). TIkA - 24-25 vyAkhyA - tasmAt kiM nAma tad vastvasti loke yadAtmasvarUpeNa sarvathA grantho'grantho vA ? nAstyevaitadityarthaH / tatazca " murcchA pariggaho to ii vRttaM mahesiNA" ityAdivacanAd yatra vasu - dehA - SShAra-kanakAdau mUrcchA saMpadyate tad nizcayataH paramArthato granthaH / yatra tu sA nopajAyate tadagrantha iti / etadeva vyaktIkaroti - " vatthAI teNetyAdi " tena tasmAt / zeSaM sugamamiti // 2573 // 2574 // " D. C. There is not a single object in this world which can be recognized as parigraha or a-parigraha entirely by its own virtue. But by means of statements such as-" Muccha pariggaho vuitto ii vuttam mesia" etc. parigraha is ascertained on the standard of attachment to wealth,-body,-food-gold etc. Wherever such an attachment does not exist, there is a parigraha. We can, therefore, conclude that whenever clothes etc. help to attain Moksa, they should be known as a-parigraha, and whenever they act contratry, there is parigraha. 24-25. (2573-2574). kiM saMjamovayAraM kareha vatthAI jai maI suNasu / sIyattANaM tANaM jalaNa-taNagayANaM sattANaM ||26|| 2575 // taha nisi cAukAlaM sajjhAya - jhANa- sAhaNamisINaM / mahi-mahiyA - vAso -sA-rayAi rakkhAnimittaM ca ||27|| 2576 || For Private Personal Use Only

Page #319
:295: Vada ] Nihnavavada mayasaMvarujjhaNatthaM gilANapANovagAri vAbhimayaM / muhaputtiyAi cevaM parUvaNijaM jahAjogaM // 28 // 2577 // saMsattasattu-gorasa-pANaya-pANIyapANarakkhatthaM / parigalaNa-pANaghAyaNa-pacchAikammAiyANaM ca // 29 // 2578 // parihAratthaM pattaM gilANa-yAlAduvaggahatthaM ca / dANamayadhammasAhaNaM samayA cevaM paruSparao // 30 // 2579 // 26. Kim samyamovayaram karei vatthaim jai mai sunasu i Siyattanam tanam jalana-tanagayanam sattanam. (2575) 27. Taha nisi caukkalam sajjhaya-jhana-sahanamisinam i Mahi-mahiya-vaso-sa-rayai rakkha-nimittam ca. (2576) 28. Mayasamvarujjhanattham gilanapanovagari vabhimayam | Muhaputtiyai cdvam parlivanijjam jahajogam. (2577) 29. Samsattasattu-gorasa-panaya-piniyapanarakkhattham | Parigalana-panaghayana-pacchaikammaiyanam ca. (2576) 30. Pariharattham pattam gilana-baladuvaggahattham ca 1 Danamayadhanimasahanam samaya cevam parupparao. (2579, [kiM saMyamopakAraM karoti vastrAdi yadi matiH zRNu / zItatrANaM trANaM jvalana-tRNagatAnAM sattvAnAm // 26 // 2575 // tathA nizi catuSkAlaM svAdhyAya-dhyAna-sAdhanamRSINAm / mahI-mahikA-varSo-ra-rajaAdirakSAnimittaM ca // 27 // 2576 // mRtasaMvarojjhAnArtha glAnapANopakAri cAbhimatam / mukhavastrikAdi caivaM prarUpaNIyaM yathAyogam // 28 // 2577 // saMsaktasaktu-gorasa-pAnaka-pAnIya-prANirakSArtham / parigalana-prANaghAtana-pazcAtkarmAdikAnAM ca // 29 // 25781 parihArArtha pAtraM glAna-vAlAdyupagrahArthaM ca / dAnamayadharmasAdhanaM samatA caivaM parasparataH // 30 // 2579 / /

Page #320
: 296: Jinabhadra [The Botika 26. Kim samyamopakaram karoti vastra'li ya li znatih srunu i Sitatranam tranam jvalana-trinagatanam sattvanam. (2575) 27, Tatha nisi catuskalani svadhyaya-lhyana-sadhanamrisinam , Mahi-mahika-varso-sra-rajaa'liraksanimittam ca. (2576) 28. Mritasamvarojjhanartham glanapranopakari cabhimatami Mukhavastrikadi caivam prarupaniyam yathayogam. (2577) 29. Samsaktasaktu-gorasa-panaka-paniya-prani raksartham ! Parigalana-pranaghatana-pascatkarma likanam ca. (2578) 30. Pariharartham patram glana-bala lyupayraharthan cai Danamayadharmasadhanam samata caiva parasparatah. (2579) ] Trans. 26-27-28-29-30. If you ask as to how clothes etc. are useful in the practice of ) austerity, (then) listen (to nie). (They render) protection from cold (to ascetics ), and pro. tect creatures found in fire, and grass. (A garment) is also (necessary means of (conducting) study and meditation to the ascetics during all hours of night. It renders (them ) protection from clods of earth, rain, fog, and dust particles. (It is used ) in covering and carrying the corpse. (It is ) considered as useful to sick persons in that way, muhapatti. (a piece of cloth held between the nose and mouth to prevent dust, insects etc.) should, also, he (given) proper importance. Hence, a devoted ascetic ought to hold a vessel for the purpose of protecting insects found in milk, water, and such other drinks, in order to prevent it being spilt down, prevent killing of insects, and (avoid) faults like pascat Karman, and for the benefit of the sick and young. Mutual tolerance is cultivated only in this way. (2575-2579). TIkA-26-27-28-29-30 vyAkhyA-kaM nAma saMyamopakAraM karoti vastrAdikam ? iti yadi tava matiH, tarhi kathyate zRNu-sautrikaurNikakalpaistAvat zItArtAnAM trANaM sAdhUnAmArtadhyAnApaharaNaM kriyate / tathA jvalana-tRNAdIndhana gatAnAM sacAnAM trANaM rakSaNaM "kriyate" itIhApi dRzyate / idamuktaM bhavati,

Page #321
Vada ] Nihnavavada :297: yadi kalpA na bhaveyuH, tadA zItArtAH sAdhavo'gni-tRNAdIndhana-jvalantaM kuryuH / tatkaraNa cAvazyabhAvA tdgstvopghaatH| kalpaistu prAvRtaireSa na bhavatyeva, amitRNAdijvalanamantareNApi zItArtinivRtteriti / tathA "kAlacaukaM ukosae jahane tiyaM tu bodhavvaM" ityAdivacanAt samastarAtrijAgaraNaM kurvadbhiH sAdhubhizcatvAraH kAlA grahItavyAH / tacca himakaNamavarSiNi zIte patati catuSkAlaM gRhNatAM teSAmRSINAM / kalpAH prAvRtAH santo nirvighnaM svAdhyAyadhyAnasAdhanaM kurvanti, zItArtyapaharaNAditi / tathA "mahi ti" mahArAbAkSiptA sacitA pRthivI tasyAH patantyA rakSAnimittaM prAvRtAH kalpAH saMjAyante, mahikA dhUmikA, "vAsa tti" varSA vRSTiH, 'usa tti' AvazyAya: pratItaH rajo'pi sacittamISadAtAmranabhasaH patatIti pratItameva, AdizabdAt pradIpa-tejaH prabhRtInAM parigrahaH / eteSAM ca mahikAdigatAnAM saccAnAM rakSAnimittaM kalpAH saMjAyanta iti / tathA, mRtasya saMvaraNaM saMvaraM AcchAdanam , ujjhanaM bahirnayana tadartha vA zvetojjvalapracchAdanapaTikAdivasamabhihitam / glAnaprANopakAri ca tadamimataM paramagurUNAm / evaM mukha. vatrikA-rajoharaNAdi copakaraNaM samayAnusArataH saMyamopakAritvena yojyaM bhaNanIyam / tathA coktaM kalpabhASyAdiSu - kappA AyappamANA aDDAijjhAivitthaDA hatthA / do ceva sottiyA unio ya taio muNeyavvo // 1 // taNagahaNANalasevAnivAraNA dhammasukkajjhANaTThA / diTuM kappaggahaNaM gilANa-maraNaTTayA ceva // 2 // saMpAimarayareNupamajaNaTThA vayaMti muhapattiM / nAsaM ca muhaM ca baMdhai tIe vasahiM pamajaMto // 3 // AyANe nikkheve ThANanisIe suyapaTTasaMkoe / puvvaM pamajaNaTThA liMgaTThA ceva syaharaNaM // 4 // veuvvo'vAyejvAie hIkhadde pajapaNe ceva / tesiM aNuggahaTThA liMgudayaTThA ya paTTo ya // 5 // tatra prajanane mehane "veuvi ti" vaikriye vikRte, tathA, aprAvRte'nAvRte vAtike cotsUnatvabhAjane, hiyA lajjayA satyA khaDDe bRhatpramANe "liMgudayaTTha ti" strI darzarne liGgodayarakSaNArthaM ca paTolapaTTo mata iti /

Page #322
* 298 Jinabhadra Gani's (The Botika atha pAtrasya mAtrakasya ca saMyamopakAritvaM darzanAha-"saMsattetyAdi" / saMsaktasaktu-gorasa-drAkSAdipAnaka-pAnIyagatasatvamANarakSaNArtha pAtramiti saMbandhaH / pAtrAbhAve hi saMsaktagorasAdayo hastaevAnAbhogAdikAraNAd gRhItAH ka kriyeran ? tadgatasacAnAM prANavipattireva syAt / pAtre tu sati samayoktavidhinA te paristhApyante / tathA ca sati tadgatasattvaprANarakSA pAtreNa sidhyatIti / tathA pAtrAbhAve pANipuTa eva gRhItAnAM ghRta-gorasAdirasAnAM parigalane sati yat kunthu-kITakAdiprANaghAtanam , ye ca bhAjana-dhAvanAdibhiH pacAtkarmAdayo doSAsteSAM parihArArtha ca pAtramiSyate jagadgurubhiH / tathA, glAna-bAla-durbalavRddhAdyupagrahArthaM ca tadiSyate / pAtre hi sati gRhasthebhyaH pathyAdikaM samAnIya glAna-bAlAdInAmupagraha upaSTambhaH kriyate, tadabhAve punarasau na syAdeveti / aparazca, pAtre sati bhaktapAnAdikaM samAnIyAnyasya prayacchatAM sAdhUnAM dAnamaya dharmasya sAdhanaM siddhirbhavati, pAtrAbhAve caitad na syAt / tadasattve kasyApi kenacid bhakta-pAnAdidAnAsaMbhavAt / "samayA cevaM paruppara u ti" evaM ca pAtre parigrahe sati labdhimatAmalabdhimatAM ca zaktAnAmazaktAnAM ca vAstavyAnAM prAghUrNakAnAM ca sarveSAmapi sAdhUnAM parasparaM samatA svAsthyaM tulyatA bhavati / pAtre hi sati labdhimAn bhakta-pAnAdikaM samAnIyAlabdhimate dadAti / evaM zakto'zaktAya, vAstavyaH prAghUrNakAyaM tat prayacchati / iti sarveSAM sausthyam , pAtrAbhAve tu naitat , syaaditi| . iha ca pAtragrahaNasya guNakathanena mAtrakasyApi tatkathanaM kRtameva draSTavyam , prAyaH samAnaguNatvAt , uktaM ca- . chakAyarakkhaNaTThA pAyaggahaNaM jiNehi palataM / je ya guNA saMbhoe havaMti te pAyagahaNe vi // 1 // ataraMta-bAla-vuDDhA-sehAesA gurU a sahuvaggA / sAhAraNuggahA aladdhikAraNA pAyagahaNaM tu // 2 // Ayarie ya gilANe pAhuNae dullahe sahasadANe / saMsacamatcapANe mattagaparimogaNuNNA u // 3 // iti // 2575 // 2576 // 2577 // 2578 / 2579 //

Page #323
: 299: Vada ] Nihnavavada D. C. Sivabhati :-In what ways, are the garments and vessels useful to the practice of austerities? Acarya :--A cotton or woollen piece of cloth protects the mendicant from cold. It protects the life of small creatures abo. unding in fire, grass and food. If a mendicant does not wear a garment, he lits up fire for the purpose of protecting himself from cold, and by doing so, he kills small insects abounding there-in. On the other hand, if he has a piece of cloth to cover his body, he woulil prevent cold with it, without killing a single life. Secondly, if an ascetic wears a garment, he is liable to pass the whole night in study and meditation without any hindrance by cold, dust, rain, and fog etc. He will also be able to save insects flocking round the lawp with his garment. Thirdly, it has been laid down by the great preceptors that in covering or taking out a corpse, a white piece of cloth should be used. Such a piece of cloth is beneficial to sick persons also. In this way, muhapatti and rajoharana are useful in the practice of austerity and the same should be preached by you wherever you go. It has been said in the Kalpa-Bhasya that Kappa ayappamana addhai jjhaivitthada hattha | Do ceva sottiya unnio ya taid muneyavvo. (1) Tanagabananalasevanivarana dhammamsukkajjbanattba Dittham kappaggahaNGam gilana-maraNGacthaya ceva. (2) SampayamarayarenupamaijaNGattha vayanti muhapattimi Nasam ca muhamo ca bandhai tie vasabim pamajjanto, (3) Ayane nikkbeve thana nisie suyapatta sankoei Puvvam pamajjarattha lingatyba cdva rayaharanam. (4)

Page #324
:300: Jinabhadra Gani's [The Botika Veuvve'vayade vaie hikhadde pajanane ceva Tesim anuggahattha lingudayattha ya patto o. (5) [For the purpose of refraining from the use of fire produced by collecting straw, and for the observance of dharma-dhyana and sukla-dhyana, and also for the benefit of the sick, as well as (as a covering) for the dead, one should use a garment. The garments should be-two of cotton, and one woollen-as one's own self, and 21 hands broad. A sadhu' carries a muhapatti with the object of removing collected particles of dust and he ties it over his mouth and nostrils, while cleaning the upasraya. While taking an object, while removing it, while replacing it, while rearranging a bed-sheet disturbed from a bedding prepared for the night, and as an emblem of asceticism one should use a rajoharana. For the purpose of covering the exposed sexual organ of the male as well as of the female out of decency, and for covering the male organ excited by the sight of the female, a cola-patta a loin-cloth is necessary. All these garments are very useful for the preservation of samyama-dharma-duties of an ascetic. ] Uses of patra and matraka are now explained. If an ascetic possesses patra he can save the life of so many creatures found in milk, grapes etc. For if milk etc, is received in hands, the small insects abounding there-in will perish without doubt. But if milk etc. is received in some vessel insects etc. would be placed inside the vessel in stead of falling down. Secondly, when milk is received in hands the same would flow down on the ground, and give rise to small gernis resulting in the loss of more lives. Thirdly, in absence of vessels, faults like that of bondage of Karman eto, would arise. Fourthly, good turns like that of distributing food etc. to the sick and poor, could only be done with the help of a patra; in the absence of a patra it is not possible to do so.

Page #325
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 301: Thus, a patra becomes a necessary means of discharging charitable duty to ascetics who receive food from rich persons and distribute the same among the poor. Moreover, if there is a patra, it would be beneficial to mendicants of all categoriesthose who possess and who do not possess, the able as well as disabled ones, those staying in upasraya and those coming as guests. If a mendicant possussesa patra he can receive food into it, and impart the same to one who has not received food. Simi. larly, able-bodied monks would serve the disabled ones and church-inmate would treat a guest. In absence of patra, no such convenience is enjoyed. The same should be understoorl of watraka also, It has been said Chakkayarakkhanattha payaggbhananam Jinehim pannatam | Je ya guna sambhoc havanti te payagahane vi. (1) Ataranta-bala-viddha-sehaesa gura a sahuvagga 1 Saharanuggaha aladdhikarana paya-gahanam tu. (2) [The Tirthankara has deemed fit the acceptance of patra, fit for the purpose of protecting the bodies of the six varieties of living beings. Merits abounding in enjoyment are found in acceptance of patra also. But the patra should be accepted for (the benefit of) weak, young, old, new desciple, guests, and sick persons being advised by the preceptor on the grounds of security (of food etc.) in absence of a-labdhi, And, the acceptance of watra is allowed in case of preceptor being sick, an outsider being rare, and food and drink of real mendicant being given away in charity. ] 26-30. (2575-2578). In reply to the assertion that "sud bhaniyamapariggahattham" etc, the Acarya states-- apariggahayA sutte tti jA ya mucchA priggho'bhimo| savvadanvesu na sA kAyavvA suttasambhAvo // 31 // 2580 // 31. A-pariggahaya sutte tti jaya muccha pariggaho' bhimao Savvadavvesu na sa kayavva suttasabbhavo. (2580)

Page #326
: 302 : Jinabhadra Gani's (The Botika [aparigrahatA sUtre iti yA ca mUrchA parigraho'bhimataH / sarvadravyeSu na sA kartavyA sUtrasadbhAvaH // 31 // 2580 // 31. A-parigrabata satre iti ya ca marccha parigraho'bhimatah | Sarvadravyesu na sa kartavya satra-sadbhavah. (2580) ] Trans. 31. Non-acceptance implied in the sutra has taken murccha (attachinent) as parigraha. That it should not be practised in (case of) all objects, is the main purport of the sutra. 2580. TIkA-31 yA ca "savvAo pariggahAo veramaNaM" ityAdinA'parigrahatA sUtre prokteti tvayA gIyate, tatrApi mUcrchava parigrahatIrthakRtAmabhimato nAnyaH, sA ca mUrchA yathA vastre tathA sarveSvapi zarIrA-''hArAdiSu dravyeSu na kartavyeti sUtrasadbhAvaH sUtraparamArthaH, na punastvadabhimataH sarvathA vastraparityAgo'parigrahateti suutraamipraayH| tasmAdaparijJAtasUtrabhAvArtho mithyaiva khidyase tvamiti hRdayam // 2580 // D. C. The theory of a-parigrahata advocated by you with regard to assertions like "Savvao pariggabao veramanam " etc. laid down in the Satra is obtained only when murccha or attachmcnt has been completely removed. In other words, there is no parigraha without attachment. Attachment with regard to clothes etc. works in case of all objects including body, food, drink etc. The main purport of the Sotra is that one should abandon attachment. But it should be noted that the above-mentioned satra in no way, leads to establish that complete renunciation of clothes is a-parigraha. 31. (2580) ___In reply to " Jamacdla ya Jininda's etc. the Acarya saysnirupamadhisaMghayaNA cunaannaaisysttsNpnnnnaa| acchiddapANipattA jiNA jiyaparisahA savve // 32 // 2581 // tamhA jahuttadose pAvaMti na vattha-pattarahiyA vi / tadasAhaNaM ti tesiM to taggahaNaM na kuvvaMti // 33 // 2582 // 5. Vide v 2556. .

Page #327
Vada ] Nihnavavada :303: taha vi gahiegavatthA savathatitthovaesaNatthaM ti| abhinikkhamaMti satve tammi cue'celayA huMti // 34 // 2583 // 32. Nirupamadhiisanghayana caunanaisayasattasampanna i A-cchiildapanipatta Jina jiyaparisaha savve. (2581) 33. Tamha jahuttarloso pavanti na vattha-pattarahiya vi 1 Talasahanium ti tesim to tagguhanam na kuvvanti. (2582) 3.1. Taha vi vahidyavatthia savatthatitthovaesanattham til Abhinikkhamanti savve tammi cuc'cclaya hunti. (2583) [nirupamadhRtisaMhananAzcaturmAnA atizayasattvasaMpannAH / acchidrapANipAtrA jinA jitapariSahAH sarve // 32 // 2581 // tasmAd yathoktadoSAn prApnuvanti na vastra-pAvarahitA api / tadasAdhanamiti tepAM tatastadgrahaNaM na kuvanti // 33 // 2582 // tathApi gRhItaikayAtrA savastratIrthopadezanArthamiti / abhiniSkrAmanti sarve tasmiMzyute'celakA bhavanti // 34 // 2583 // 32. Nirupama dhriti samhananascati-r-jnana atisaya sattvasa m pannahi Acchidrapanipatra Jina jitaparisahah sarve. (2581) 33. Tasmad yathoktarlosan prapnuvanti na vastra-patrarahita api, Tarlasadhanauniti tesam tatastad grahanam na kurranti. (2582) 34. Tathapi grihitaikavastra sa-vastratirthopadesanarthamitin Abhiniskrananti sarve tasmimscyute'celaka bhavanti. (2583) Trans. 32-33-34. All the Tirthankaras possess exceptional fortitude, strength, and knowledge, with their compact hands as vessels, and since they are victorious over all sorts of strain, they are not susceptible to the afore-mentioned faults even though they (go) without a garment or vessel. These being useless to them are not accepted by them. Still however, in order to show that the inmates of the Church shall have to bear the garment for a long time, the Tirthankaras renounce (the world ) with one garment. When that is dro. pped automatically they go naked. (2581-2583).

Page #328
:304: Jinabhadra Gaji's [The Botiks TIkA-vyAkhyA-yasmAjinAstIrthakarAH sarve'pi nirupamadhRtisaMhananAzyasthAvasthAyAM caturthAnAH atizayasattvasaMpannAH, tathA'cchidraH pANireva pAtraM yeSAM tecchidrapANipAtrA jitasamasta-pariSahAca "tamha ti" tasmAd vastrAbhAve ye saMyamavirAdhanAdayo doSAH proktAstAn yathoktAn doSAMste vastra-pAtrarahitA api na prApnuvanti, ityatastastrAdikaM na sAdhanaM na sAdhakaM saMyamasya teSAM tIrthakarANAm / "to ti" tasmAdakizcitkaratvAt tasyAtmagatasaMyamasyAnupakAriNo vastrAdigrahaNaM na kurvanti tIrthakarA iti / nanu yadi te vastrAdigrahaNaM na kuvantItyu. cyate, tarhi " savve vi egadUseNa niggayA" ityAdi virudhyata ityAzaMkyAha"taha vItyAdi" yadyapi tatsaMyamasyAnupakArivastram, tathApi savastrameva tIrtha "savastrA eva sAdhavastIrthe ciraM bhaviSyanti" ityasyArthasyopadezanaM jJApanaM tadartha gRhItaikavastrAH sarve'pi tIrthakRto'bhiniSkrAmantIti / tasmiMzca vastrecyute kApi patite'velakA vastrarahitAste bhavanti, na punaH sarvadA / tataH "acelakAzca jinendrAH" ityaikAntikaM yaduktaM tad bhavato'nabhijJatvasUcakameveti bhAvaH // 2581 / / 2582 // 2583 // D. C. Your idea about Tirthankaras as absolutely acelaka is not quite correct. Even during their life incognito Tirthankaras are unusually bold, strong, and full of knowledge. Since they have subdued all the evil instincts they do not keep patra or vastra, and go with their compact hands as patra, and still they are not defiled by faults that would come in the way of the practice of austerities. Sivabhati :--Then, how do you say that all the Tirthankaras had renounced the world with one garment ? Acarya :--Although garment was not helpful to them in the practice of austerities etc, they, foreseeing that all the ascetios of the Church shall have to bear garments and vessels for a long time, accepted diksa with one garment. In course of time, if the garment drops down by itself, they become uncovered. But that does not mean that they were uncovered for all the time. This, your belief that Tirthankaras were absolutely uncovered for all the time exhibits nothing but ignorance on your part. 32-34. (2581-2583).

Page #329
Vada ] Nihnavavada :305: jiNakappiyAdao puNa sovahao svvkaalmegNto| uvagaraNamANamesiM purisAvikkhAe bahubheyaM // 35 // 2584 // 35. Jinakappiyadao puna sovahao savva-kalamdganto i ____Uvagaranamanamesim purisavikkhas bahubhdyam. (2584) [jinakalpikAdayaH punaH sopadhayaH sarvakAlamekAntaH / upakaraNamAnameSAM puruSApekSayA bahubhedam // 35 // 2584 // 35. Jinakalpikadayah punah sopadhayah sarvakalamdkantah | Upakaranamanamdsam purusapdksaya bahubhedam. (2584)] Trans. 35. And Jinakalpikas etc. are always exclusively full of (some ) instrument (or the other ). The standard of (their possessing) the instruments, depends upon the persons concerned, in various ways. 2584. TIkA-35 ayamatrAbhiprAyaH-tIrthakara dRSTAntAvaSTammena, jinakalpikodA haraNAvaSTammena ca tvamacelakatvaM pratipadyase / etacca sarva bhavato durbodhavilasitameva yatastIrthakarA api pUrvoktanyAyena na tAvadekAntato'celakAH / jinakalpikasvayaMbuddhAdayaH punaH sarvakAlamekAntena sopadhaya eveti / ata eva "duga tiga cauka paNagaM" ityAdinA pUrvameteSAmupakaraNamAnaM puruSApekSayA bahumedamuktam , na punaH sarvathA nirupakaraNatA / tadayaM yastvayA sarvathopakaratyAgaH kRtaH sa dRSTAntIkRtAnAM tIrthakara-jinakalpikAdInAmapi na dRzyate, kevalaM nUtanaH ko'pi tvadIya evAyaM mArga iti // 2584 // D. C. It has already been shown above that you cannot preach the doctrine of going without clothes by advancing the example of Tirthankaras. Jinakalpikas and svayambuddhas etc. have always been possessing some material or the other as an upakarana to the observance of samyama. The standard of accepting such upakaranas varies with different persons. But it is important to note that entire negation of upakarana has never been referred to. Thus, the Tirthankaras, by whose examples you have formed your belief, have also never been without upakarana. 35 (2584). .

Page #330
: 306: Jinabhadra Gani's Also, arahaMtA jamecelA teNAvelattaNaM jai mayaM te / to tavvayaNAu ciya niratisao hohi mA'celo ||36||2585 // 36. Arahanta jamacela tenacdlattanam jai mayam tel To tavvayanau cciya niratisao hohi ma'celo. (2585) [ arhanto yadacelAstenAcelatvaM yadi mataM te / tatastadvacanAdeva niratizayo bhUrmA'velaH ||36||2585 // 36. Arhanto yadacelastenacelatvam yadi matam te I Tatastadvacanadeva niratisayo bhu-r-ma'celah. (2585) [The Botika Trans. 36. If naked condition is acceptable to you because Tirthankaras were naked, then, on their own words, do not become absolutely uncovered as you are devoid of that excellence. (2585). TIkA-36 yad yasmAdaInto'velAbelarahitA nAgnyadhAriNAhartena tasmAt kAraNAdalatvaM navaM yadi taba mataM saMgatam, ArisayaM guruliMga sauseNa vi tAriga hoyavaM / na hi hoi buddhasIsI seyavaDo naggakhavaboM vA // 1 // iti vacanAditi / tatastarhi tadvacanAdeva tIrthaMkaropadezAdeva nirupamadhRtisaMhananAdyatizaya rahito'celoM namo mA bhUstvam / idamuktaM bhavati yadi tIrthaMkaraziSyatvAt tadveSastava pramANam, tarhi tata eva hetostadupadezo'pi bhavataH pramANamaiva / na hi gurUpadezamatikramya vartamAnaH ziSyo'mITArthasAdhako bhavati / paramagurUpadeza caivaM vartate - nirupamaSTati saMhananAdyakziyarahitenAcelakema naiva bhavitavyam / tat kiM tvamitthaM gurUpadezabAhyena nAgnenAtmAnaM vigopasIti // 2585 // D. C. Acarya ::-O Sivabhati! you have accepted naked condition, Because Tirthankaras were such. For, it has already been said that-~~~ Jarisayam gurulingam sisena vi tarisena hoyavvam | Na hi hoi Buddhasiso seyavado naggakhavano va. (1) For Private Personal Use Only

Page #331
Vada] Nihnavarada (A pupil should bear the same dress as (big) precaptar bears. A follower of Buddha would never be found with a white garment or naked. ] It is, therefore, in the fitness of things to follow the foot. steps of Tirthankaras. But if you don't possess the qualities such as full restraint and spiritual strength as they possess, do not accept nakedness on their own words. Being the follower of the Tirtharkara, if you initiate His dress and manners, you should behave according to his advice as well. Orre who behaves contrary to the advice of his preceptor, does not attain the fulfilment of his cherished desire. The great preceptors say that ono should never accept acelakatva, unless and until he has developed the necessary qualities of unequalled fortitude and strength. By accepting a-celakatva, why do you transgress the advice of the preceptors ? Sivabhati :- Just as it is necessary to behave according to the advice of the preceptor, one should certainly follow him in dress and manners also. 36 (2585). The Acarya says:rogI jahovaesa karei vaijassa ho arogI ya / *na ubesaM ariyaM kA kareha na ya pauNai karaMno // 37 // 2586 // taha jiNavenAesaM kuNamANo'bei kmmrogaao| na u tannevatthadharo tesimAesamakaraMto // 38 // 2587 // 37. Rogi jahovadsam karei vejjassa ho arogo ya i Na u vesam cariyam va karei na ya paunai karanto. (2586) 88. Taha Jinavejjadsam kunamand'vdi kammarogat Na u tannavatthadharo tesimaesamakaranto. (2587) [rogI yathopadezaM karoti vaidyasya bhavasyarogazca / na tu veSaM caritaM vA karoti na ca prakaroti kurvan // 37 // 2586 // tathA jimavaidyAdezaM kurvANo'paiti karmarogAt / na tu tannepathyadharasteSAmAdezamakurvan // 38 // 2587 //

Page #332
:308: Jinabhadra Gani's [The Botika 37. Rogi yathopadesam karoti vaidyasya bhatyarogasca | Na tu vesam caritam va karoti na ca prakaroti kurvan. (2586) 38. Tatha Jinavaidyaddsam kurvano'paiti karmarogati ___Na tu tannepathyadharastesamadesamakurvan. (2587)] Trans. 37-38. A sick person behaves according to the advice of a physician and cures himself, but (he) does not imitate him in dress and manners. Por, doing so does not cure him. Similarly, one who follows the advice of the Tirthankaraphysician, is cured from the disease of Karman, while one who imitates him in dress but does not behave according to his commandments, is not (cured) (of the malady of Kar. man). 2586-2587. TIkA-37-38 vyAkhyA-iha yathA rogI vaidyasyopadezaM karoti, tatkaraNamAtreNaiva ca rogAd vimucyate, na punarasau tadveSaM karoti, nApi taccaritamAcarati, na ca tat kurvANo'pyasau praguNIbhavati, pratyutakSapaNakAdau vaiye nAgnyAdikaM tadveSa kurvan sarvarasAMzca svecchayA tadvad bhujAnastacaritAnuSThAyI saMnipAtasyaiva mriyate / tasmAd vaidyopadezAnuSThAnameva rogiNo rogApagamahetuH / prastutayojanAmAha "tahetyAdi" tathA tenaiva prakAreNa jinavaidyasyAdezaM kurvANastadveSacarite anAcaramapi karmarogAdapaiti viyujyate, na punasteSAmAdezamakurvANastabhepathya-carite vimANo'pi tasmAd viyujyate, kevalaM tadyogyatArahitatvAttapathya-caritAbhyAM pravartamAna unmAdAdibhAjanameva bhavatIti // 2586 // 2587 // D. C. Acarya :- A sick person is cured of his illness only if he behaves according to the instructions of the physician. Imitating the physician in dress and manners (without following his instructions), does not help him in any way. By doing so, he would, on the coutrary, become the victim of delirium. Similarly, one who follows the instructions of the Tirthankara, without imitating his dress or external manners, is relieved of his bondages of Karman, while one wbo imitates the dress

Page #333
Vada ] Nihnavavada :309: and external manners without putting into practice the instruotions given by the Tirthankaras, is not able to escape from the clutches of Karman. On the contrary, such a person gives an impression of a mad man. 37-38 (2586-2587). And, if you claim to be the follower of Tirthankara's dress and manners, is your imitation similar to the behaviour of the Tirthankara wholly or partly? If it is so wholly, then you should note that-- na parovaesavasayA na ya chaumatthA parovaesa pi / diti, na ya sIsavaggaM dikkhaMti jiNA jahA savve // 39 // 2588 // taha sesehi vi savvaM kajaM jaha te hiM savvasAhammaM / evaM ca kao titthaM na cedacelo tti ko gAho ? // 40 // 2589 // 39. Na parovadsavasaya na ya chaumattha parovadsam pil ____Dinti, na ya sisavaggam dikkhanti Jina jaha savve. (2588) 40. Taha sdsdhi vi savvam kajjam jai tehim sarvasahammam | ____Evam ca kao tittham na cedacblo tti ko gaho ? (2589) [na paropadezavazagA na ca cchamasthAH paropadezaMpi / dadati, na ca ziSyavarga dIkSante jinA yathA sarve // 39 // 2588 // tathA zeSairapi sarva kArya yadi taiH sarvasAdharmyam / evaM ca kutaratIrtha na cedacela iti ko grahaH ? // 40 // 2589 // 39. Na paropadesavasaga na ca cchadmasthah paropadesam | Dadati, na ca sisyavargam diksante Jina yatha sarve. (2588) 40. Tatha se saira pi sarvam karyam yadi taih sarvasadharmyam Evam ca kutastirtham na cedacdla iti ko grahah ? (2589)] Trans. 39-40. Tirthankaras do not follow the instructions of others; nor do they give instructions during their chadmstha life (i. e. Eefore the acquisition of Kavala Jinana); nor do 1 hey initiate fupils. All this should be practised by their followers if 11:6) claim equality (with the Tithankaras) in

Page #334
:310: Jinabhadra Gani's [The Botika all respects. And, in that case, where is the scope for the existence of Tirth (the Jaina Church)? And, if there is no (church), where is the scope for insisting upon acelakatva (or nakedness)? (2588-2589). TIkA-39-40 vyAkhyA-yadi tairjinastIrthakareH saha liGga-caritAbhyAM sarvasAdhamyam , tahiM yathA te svayaMbuddhatvAd na paropadezavazagA:-na paropadezena vartante, na ca cchadmasthAvasthAyAM pratibodhArtha parasyApyupadezaM dadati, na ca ziSyavarga dIkSante, tathA zerairapi tacchiSya-praziSyaH sarvametat tvadabhiprAyeNa kArya karaNIyaM prAmoti / bhavatvevaM nahiM, ko doSa ? iti cet / ityAha-evaM ca sati kutastIrtham , kasyApi pratibodhAbhAvAd dIkSAdyabhAvAcca ? / "na cediti" atha na taiH saha sarvasAdhamyamityucyate, tarhi "acelo bhavAmyaham" iti kastava grahaH ? acintyatvAt taccaritasyeti // 2588 // 2589 // D. C. If you claim equality with Tirthankaras in all respects by following them in dress, panners etc., you must be able to practise everything that Tirthankaras were doing. In other words, like Tirthankaras, you should not accept instructions from others, should not give instructions to others as Tirthaikaras do during their chadmastha life, and should not initiate pupils as Tirthankaras do, except when they have acquired Kovala Timina. And, if such a thing happens there would be nothing like liksa etc, and ultimately the entire Jaina Church woull cease to exist in absence of imparting or receiving instructions etc.. On the other hand, if you accept that you are not in cquality with the Tirthankaras in all respects, you shall have to give up insisting upon accepting acelakatva in vain. 39-40 (2588-2589). Besides, jaha na jiNiMdehi samaM sesAisaehiM savvasAhammaM / taha liMgeNAbhimayaM carieNa vi kiM ci sAhammaM // 41 // 2590 // 41. Jaha na Jinindehim samam sesaisaehim savvasahammami Taha lingenabhimayam cariena vi kimci sahaumam. (2590)

Page #335
:311: Vada] Nihnavavada [yathA na jinendraiH samaM zeSAtizayaiH sarvasAdharmyam / tathA liGgenAbhimataM caritenApi kizcit sAdharmyam // 41 // 2590 // 41. Yatha na Jinondrain samam sdsatisayaih sarvasadharmyam / Tatha lingenabhimataw caritonapi kincit sadharmayam. (2590)] Trans. 41. (You have not acquired) equality with Tirthankaras in all respects, including the rest of their excellent qualities. But, you have accepted equality (only) to some extent so far as (their external) dress and manners are concerned. 2590. TIkA-41 yathA jinendraiH saha "nirutramadhiisaMghayaNA caunANAi sayasattasaMpaNNA" ityAdinA granthena pratipAditailiMgAcaritAcazeSairatizayaiH sarvasAdharmya nAbhimataM bhavataH, kiM tahiM ? kizcit sAdharmyameva, tathA tenaiva prakAreNa liGgena caritena ca kizcit sAdharmyameva taiH sahAbhimatamasmAkam , na tu sarvasAdharmyam , taca kiJcit sAdharmya liGgato locakaraNamAtreNa na punaracelatvena , caritreNa tveSaNIyAhAraparibhogA-'niyatavAsAdinA, na tu pANibhojitvena, niratizayatvena tadayogyatvAdasmadAdInAm / tasmAt kizcit sAdharmyasyoktanyAyenAnyathApi siddheH ko'celatAdyAgraho bhavataH ? iti // 2590 // D. C. If you do not claim cquality with Tirthankaras in all respects but aclmit the same to some extent, it is admissible to us. If you accept loca (plucking out of hair ) etc., you attain similarity to some extent, but you do not attain the same with the principle of acelakatva. You follow the Tirthankaras in dress an external behaviour when you renounce the dress and take food in hands or stay at undecided places, but since you do not possess the excellent qualities of a Tirthankara, you cannot be said to have attained complete equality with them. While nonsimilarity with the Tirthankaras could be proved in many other ways. So, why do you insist upon a-celakatva unnecessarily ? 41. (2590). Then, in reply to " Tadabhihis jam ca Jinakappo" ete, the Acarya admits that Jinakalpa has been laid by the Tirthankaras

Page #336
: 812 Jinabhadra Gani's [The Botika but explains as to how that Jinakalpa has been said and with regard to which persons uttamadhihasaMghayaNA putvavido'tisaiNo syaakaalN| jiNakappiyA vi kappaM kayaparikammA pavajaMti // 42 // 2591 // taM jai jiNavayaNAo pavanasi, pavana to sa chino tti / asthi tti kahaM pamANaM kaha vucchinno tti na pamANaM? // 43 // 2592 // 42. Uttamadhiisanghayana puvvavido'tisaino sayakalam | Jinakappiya vi kappam kayaparikamma pavajjanti. (2591) 43. Tam jai-Jinavayanao pavajjasi, pavajja to sa chinno tti Atthi tti kaham pamanam kaha vucchinno tti na pamanam ? (2592) [uttamadhRtisaMhananAH pUrvavido'tizayinaH sadAkAlam / jinakalpikA api kalpaM kRtaparikarmANa prapadyante // 42 // 2591 // tad yadi jinavacanAt prapadyase, prapadyasva tataH sa cchinna iti / astIti kathaM pramANaM kathaM vyucchinna iti na pramANam // 43 // 2592 // 42. Uttamadhritisamhananah purvavido'tisayinah sadakalam | ___Jinakalpika api kalpam kritaparikramanah prapadyante. (2591) 43. Tad yadi Jinavacanat prapadyase, prapadyasva tatah sa cchi nna iti Astiti katham pramanam katham vyucchinna iti na prama. nam. (2592). Trans. 42-43. Even Jinkalpikas who prossess excellent fortitude, and (bodily) constitution, and who are conversent with (Nine) parvas, and who possess excellent qualities in Kalpa, and who have also undergone the (five) tests, always accept Jinakalpa. Following the words of the Tirtharkaras, if you accept it, then, (you should ) admit it to have been (already) perished. (For), what is the proof for establishing that it exists, and where is the proof (to show that) it has not perished ? (2591-2592).

Page #337
Vada ] Nihnavavada :318: TIkA-42-43 / vyAkhyAuttamatisaMhananAH pUrvavedino jaghanyato'pi kiJcinyUnanavapUrvapAThakA ityarthaH sarvadeva nirupamazaktyAdhatizayasaMpamA jinakalpikA api "taveNa sutteNa satteNa" ityAdi pUrvoktavidhinA kRtaparikamANa eva jinakalpaM pratipadyante, nAnyatheti na rathyApuruSakalpAnAM bhavAdRzAM jinakalpastIrthakarairanujJAta iti / tat tasmAd yadi jinavacanAdarhadupadezAnjinakalpaM pratipadyase tvam, tatastahiM "sa jinakalpo vyavacchinnaH" itIdamapi pratipadyakha / athaitad na pratipadyase, tahiM "jinakalpo'sti" iti kathaM tIrthakaravacanaM tava pramANam ? / kathaM ca "vyavacchinno'sau" iti na pramANam ? / nanvAgrahapizAcikAgrastaceSTitamidam ? svecchAmAtrapravRttatvAditi // 2591 // 2592 // D. C. Jinakalpikas, who possess the virtuous qualities like excellent fortitude and bodily constitution, who are conversent with Nine Purvas, and who possess excellent qualities, and who have also undergone the usual five tests, always admit the validity of Jinakalpa. The Tirthankaras have allowed the practice of Jinakalpa for such worthy persons, and not for unworthy persons like you. If you, therefore, believe in Jinakalpa, you should also admit the same to have already perished. For, otherwise, how could the words of the Tirthankaras laying down that Jinakalpa existed, be authentic to you? And, how could the view that it has not perished, be authentic on the other hand ? Sivabhati :-Existence of Jinakalpa has already been admitted in the agamas, but by which pramana (authoritative statement) is the destruction of Jinakalpa laid down by the Tirthankara? 42-43 (2591-2592). The Acarya replies :maNa-paramohi-pulAe-AhAraga-khavaga-uvasame-kappe / saMyamatiya-kevala-sijmaNA ya jaMbummi bucchiNNA // 44 // 2593 // 44. Mana-Paramohi-Pulad-Abaraga-Kbavaga-Uvasamd-Rappel Samyamatiya-Kdvala-Sijjhana ya Jambummi vucchinna. (2593) [mana:-paramAvadhi-pulAkA-AhAraka-kSapako-pazamA:-kalpaH / saMyamatrika-kevala-siddhayazca jambo vyucchinnAH // 44 // 2593 //

Page #338
:814: Jinabhadra Gani's [The Botika 44. Manah-Paramavadhi-Pulaka-Abaraka Ksapako-pasamah Kalpah 1 Samyamatrika-Kerala-Siddhayasca Jambau vyucchindah. (2593) Trans. 44. (1) Manah paryaya Jaana (the intermediary stage of mental perception-the highest stage of concentration, (2) Paramavadhi Jatana (attainment of high visual knowledge, (3) Pulaka Labdhi (supernatural power possessed by a Pulak variety of ascetics of crushing the army of a cakravartin, (4) Aharaka sarira (one of the five kinds of body, formed of very fine aharaka molecules assumed only by highly advanced ascetics, which enables them to approach a Master, for the purpose of solving their doubts, (5) Ksapaka-sreni ( spiritual advancement in which destruction of right conduct-deluding Karmas takes place, (6) Upasama-Sreni, (spiritual advancement in which subsidence of such Karmas takes place), (7) Jinakalpa ( the religious rites of a Tirthankara ), (8) Samyama trika ( trio of restraint consisting of parihara visuddhi (removal of evil instincts), soksma samparaya (experience of subtle conflicts ), and yathakhyata caritra (attainment of the prescribed conduct ), (9) Kevala ( the state of having attained Perfect Knowledge) and (10) Siddhipada-Moksa ( Final Emancipation-these ten precepts. disappeared after Jambu Swamie. TIkA-44 manaH paryAyajJAnam , paramAvadhiH, pulAkalabdhi, AhArakazarIram , kSapakazreNiH, upazamazreNiH, jinakalpa, parihAravizuddhika-sUkSmasaMparAya-yathAkhyAtalakSaNaM saMyamatrikam , kevalI, mokSagamanalakSaNA siddhizceti sarve'pyete padArthA jambUsvAmini vyavacchimA jambUsvAminaM yAvat pravRttAH, na tUttaratreti // 2593 // D. C. The ten precepts that have been mentioned above existed only upto the days of Arya Jamba Swami, (who died in Vira Samvat 64). After him, all these precepts are said to have vanished. 44 (2593). In reply to "a-celaka parisaha" the Acarya proceeds to say6. Vide vs 2551-2552 (foot note 4)

Page #339
:313: Vada ] Nibnavavada jaha celabhogamettAdajiAcelayaparisaho teNa / ajiyadigichAiparIsaho vi bhatAibhogAo // 45 // 2594 // evaM tuha na jiyaparIsahA jiNiMdA va savvahAvanaM / ahavA jo bhattAisu sa vihI cele vi kiM nehA ? // 46 // 2595 // jaha bhattAIvisuddhaM rAga-dosarahio nisevaMte / vijiyadinchiAiparIsaho muNI sapaDiyAro vi // 47 // 2596 // taha celaM parisuddhiM rAga-dosarahio suyavihIe / hoi jiyAcelaparisaho muNI sevamANo vi // 48 // 2597 // 45. Jai celabhogamettadajiacelayaparisaho tena 1 Ajiyadiginchaiparisaho vi bhattaibhogao. (2594) 46. Evam tuha na jiyaparisaha Jininda vi savvahavannam ___Ahava jo bhattaisu sa vihi cels vi kim nettha ? (2595) 47. Jaba bhattaivisuddham raga-dosarahio nisevanto I Vijiyadiginchaiparisaho muni sa-padiyaro vi. (2596). 48. Taha celam parisuddhim raga-dosarahio suyavihid i Hoi jiyacelaparisa ho muni sevamano vi. (2597). [yadi celabhogamAtrAdajitAcelakapariSahastena / ajitakSudAdiparISaho'pi bhaktAdibhogAt // 45 // 2594 // evaM tava na jitaparISahA jinendrA api sarvathApannam / athavA yo bhaktAdiSu sa vidhizcele'pi kiM neSTaH 1 // 46 // 2595 // yathA bhaktAdivizuddhaM rAga-dveSarahito niSevamANaH / vijitakSuvAdiparISaho muniH sapratikAro'pi // 47 // 2596 // tathA celaM parizuddhaM rAga-dveSarahitaH zrutavidhinA / bhavati jitAcelaparISaho muniH sevamAno'pi // 48 // 2597 // 45. Yadi cdlabhogamatradajitacdlakaparisaha stena | Ajitaksudadiparisaho'pi bhaktadi-bhogat. (2594)

Page #340
3316: Jinabhadra Grani's [The Botika 46. Evam tava na jitaparisaha Jinendra api sarvathapannam | Athava yo bhaktadisu sa vidhiscele'pi kim nestah ? (2595) 47. Yatha bhaktadivieuddham raga-dvesarahito nisevamanah 1 Vijitaksudadiparisaho munih sa-pratikaro'pi. (2596). 48. Tatha celam parisuddham raga-dvesarahitah srutavidhina| Bhavati jitacelaparisaho munih sevamano'pi. (2597) Trans. 45-46-47-48. By putting on a garment, if one is said to have been unable to overcome the strain of uncovered state, then, in taking food etc. he would as well be said to have been unable to overcome the distress of hunger etc. It would, therefore, follow according to you, that even Tirthankaras are not able to overcome the distress of hunger etc. Or, has the rule applied to the case of (accepting) food etc. disappeared in case of (accepting) the garment? Just as, a true ascetic is said to have conquered the strain of hunger etc. in spite of his taking the prescribed food on account of the lack of passion or aversion (towards the same), in the same way, an ascetic who accepts the garment according to his religious commandment, is said to have conquered the distress of naked condition (as he does so without any passion or aversion. (2594-2297). TIkA-45-46-47-48 vyAkhyA-jitAcelaparISaho munirbhavatIti vayamapi manyAmahe / kevalamidaM praSTavyo'si-kiM celabhogamAtreNApyajitAcelaparISahatvaM bhavati yena bhavatA sarvathA vanaparityAgaH kriyate, AhosvidaneSaNIyAdidoSaduSTavastraparibhogeNa ? / tatrAdyapakSe dUSaNamAha-"jaItyAdi" yadi celabhogamAtrAdapi tena sAdhunA''celakyaparISaho na jita iti tvayA procyate, tarhi bhaktAdiparibhogamAtrAdajitaMdigiMchAdiparISaho'pi tvadabhiprAyeNaiva sAdhuH syAt / etaduktaM bhavati --iha dezIvacanatvAd digiJchAzabdena kSut procyate, AdizabdAt pipAsAdiparigrahaH, / tatazca yadyeSaNIyAdiguNopetavastra-pAtra-parimogAjitAcelaparISaho neSyate, taseSaNAdiguNasaMpanamaktapAnAdiparibhogAjitakSut-pipAsAdipariSaho'pi na kazcijAgati syAt / bhavasvam, na kizcid naH kSayata iti cet / atrAha-"evami.

Page #341
Vada ] Nihnavavada :317: tyAdi" evaM sati tvadabhiprAyeNa jinendrA api bhagavanto nirupamatisaMhananAH sattvaikanidhayo na jitaparIpahA iti sarvaprakArairApanam / arkodgamAdidoSavipramuktaM vizuddhameSaNIyaM rAga-dveSarahito bhakta-pAnAdikaM sevamAno'pi jitakSut-pipAsAdiparISaho munirbhavati, tarhi yo'yaM bhaktAdiSu vidhirucyate sa celepi vane'pi bhaNyamAnaH kiM neSTaH kApi ?-nanu tadapyeSaNIyaM rAgAdidoSarahitaH parizuJjAno jitAcelaparISaho muniH syAdeveti bhaavH| etadeva vyaktIkurvabhAha-"jaha" ityAdi gAthAdvayaM spRSTam / navaraM "sapaDivAro vitti" bubhukSA-pipAsA-zItoSNAdinAM bhakta-pAna-vastrAdibhiH sUtroktayatanayA kRtaH pratIkAraH pratividhAnaM yena sa tathA / idaM ca DamarukamaNinyAyena gAthAdvayaM saMvadhyate / tasmAdaneSaNIyAdidoSaduSTavastraparimogeNaivAjitAcelaparISahatvaM bhavati, na tu sUtravidhinA tadupabhuJjata iti // 2594 // 2595 // 2596 // 2597 // D. C. ___Acarya:-We fully agree with you, in believing that a person who overcomes the distress arising from naked condition, should be known as a true ascetio. But in connection with the same, I ask you this question : Are you in favour of completely renouncing the garment, because according to you, one cannot be said to have overoome acelaka parisaha if he puts on a gar. ment? Or, do you hold the above-mentioned view in order to prevent the wearing of undesirable garments by the ascetics ? Taking the first alternative, if you are of the opinion of abandoning the garments on the ground that'"acelaka parisaha" could be said to bave been overcome only if the clothes are completely renounced, you are mistaken. According to this standard, even Tirthankaras will be said to have failed in overcoming the parisaha of hunger etc. in spite of their having the best qualities of courage and strength. Sivabhati :-An ascetic who takes the pure prescribed food and drink, etc., without any desire or aversion on his part, would be said to have subdued the pangs of hunger etc. Acarya :--The same standard should be applied to those who accept the presoribed garments without desire breversion

Page #342
: 318: Jinabhadra Gani's [The Botika on their parts. Why should they not be recognized to have overcome the pangs of being in an uncovered state? In short, we can plainly say that one who resists hunger, thirst, cold, and heat etc. with the help of food, water, garments etc., as directed by the religious rules, should be known to have overcome the respective parisaha. This shows that an ascetic is defeated by a-celaka parisaha only if he wears undesirable garments, but not if he accepts the same as directed by the religious rules. Sivabhuti:- If an ascetic accepts a garment, how could he be said to have undergone the strain of acelakatva? For, he is said to have endured the same only in absence of the garment. Acarya:--Your theory is wrong. 45-48 (2594-2597). Because, sadasaMtacelago'celago ya jaM loga-samayasaMsiddho / teNAcelA muNao saMtehiM, jiNA asaMtehi ||49|| 2598|| 49. Sadasantacelago'celayo ya jam loga-samayasamsiddho / Tenacela munao santehim, Jina asantehim. (2598) [sadasacelako'ce lakazca yalloka - samayasaMsiddhaH / tenAcelA munayaH sadbhiH, jinA asadbhiH ||49 // 2598 // 49. Sadasaccelako'celaksca yalloka-samayesamsiddhah | Tenacela munayah sadbhin Jina asadbhib. (2598) ] 1 Trans. 49. Naked condition with, as well as, without clothes is welknown in the world, as well as, in Scriptures. The ascetics are ( accepted as ) naked with garments, (while) Tirthankaras ( are naked ) without garments. 2598. TIkA- 49 saccAsacca sadasatI cele yasyAsau sadasaccelo yad yasmAlloke samaye cAcelakaH saMsiddhaH prasiddhaH / ca zabdaH prastAvanAyAm / sA ca kRtaiva / tena tasmAdiha munayaH sAmAnyasAdhavaH sadbhireva cailairupacArato'celA bhaNyante, jinAstu tIrthakarA asadbhivelairmukhyavRttyA'celA vyapadizyante / idamuktaM bhavati-ihAcelatvaM dvividham - mukhyam, upacaritaM ca / tatredAnIM mukhyamacelatvaM saMyamo -

Page #343
Vada) Nihnavavada : 319: pakAri na bhavati, ata aupacArikaM gRyate, mukhyaM tu jinAnAmeAsIditi / / 2598 // D. C. Acelakatva or uncovered state is recognized in two ways : (1) By actual abandonment of clothes, and (2) By custom. Tirthankaras are called a-celaka, on account of their complete abandonment of clothes. Ascetics who accept garments dispassionately on the ground that complete nakedness would not be beneficial to asceticism, are called acelaka hy custom, in spite of their putting on garments. 49 (2598). Also, parisuddha-juNNa-kucchiya-thovAniyayanabhogabhogehiM / muNao mucchArahiyA saMtehiM acelayA hoMti // 50 // 2599 // 50. Parisuddha-junna-kucchiya--thova'niyayannabhogabhogehim 1 * Munao muccharahiya santehim acelaya honti. (2599). [parizuddhajINeH kutsitaH stokairaniyatAnna bhoga bhogaiH / munayo mUrchArahitAH sadbhiracelakA bhavanti // 50 // 2599 // 50. Parisud Thai-r-jirnih kutsitaih stokaira-niyatannabhogabhogaih | Munayo murccharahitah sadbhiracelaka bhavanti. (2599) ] Trans. 50. The dispassionate ascetics become acelaka in spite of their putting on, a few clean, but old, and cheap clothes in a disorderly manner 2599. TIkA-50 munayaH sAdhavo mUrchArahitAH sadbhirapi celairupacArato'celakA bhavanti / kathaMbhUtaizcelaH ? ityAha-"parisuddha tti" luptavibhaktidarzanAt parizuddhaireSaNIyaiH, tathA jIrNairbahudivasaH, kutsitairasAraiH stokairgaNanAprabhAvato hInaistucchaiA "aniyayanabhogabhogehiM ti" aniyatabhogena kAdAcitkAsevanena bhogaH paribhogo yeSAM tAni tathA taiH| evaMbhUtaizcelaiH sadbhirapyupacArato'celakA munayo bhaNyante / tathA, "annabhogabhogehi ti" evamapi yojyate / tatazca lokarUDhaprakArAnyamakAreNa bhoga Asevanam , prakAralakSaNasya madhyapadasya lopAt, anyabhogastenAnyabhogena bhogaH paribhogo yeSAM tAni tathA tairapyevaMbhUtaizcelairavelakatvaM

Page #344
:3201 Jinabhadra Gani's [The Botika loka prasidameka, yathA kaTIvastreNa veSThitasiraso jalAvagADhapuruSasya / sAdhorapi kacchAvandhAmAvAda , kUrparAbhyAmagrabhAga eva colapaTTakasya dharaNAt , mastakasopari prAvaraNAdhabhAvAca lokarUDhaprakArAdanyaprakAreNa celabhAgo draSTavyaH / tadevaM "parisuddha-juNNa-kucchiya" ityAdivizeSaNaviziSTaiH sadbhirapi celaistathAvidhavastrAkAryAkaraNAd teSu mUrchA'bhAvAca munayo'celakA vyapadizyanta itIha tAtparyam // 2599 // D. C. Ascetics who put on a few clean but old, and worthless clothes, dispassionalely and in a disorderly manner, are recognized as acelaka out of custom. 50. (2599). Besides, jahajalamavagAhaMto bahucelo vi sirvetttthiykddilo| bhaNNai naro acelo taha muNao saMtacelA vi // 51 // 2660 // 51. Jaha.jalamaragshanto bahucdlo vi sirvetthiyakadillo / Bhannai naro acelo taha munad santacela vi. (2600). [yathA jalamavagAhamAno bahucelo'pi ziroveSTitakaTikaH / bhaNyate naro'celastathA munayaH sacelA api // 51 // 2600 // 51. Yatha jalamavagahamano bahucdlo'pi sirovestitakatikah / Bhanyate naro'celastatha munayah sacela api. (2600)). Trans. 51. Just as a person plunging into water with his lower garment turned round (his) head, is called naked in spite of his possessing many clothes, so also, the ascetics (are recognized ) as acelaka in spite of their possessing several garments. 2600. TIkA-gatArthA Also, taha thoSa-junna-kucchiyacelehi vi bhannae acelo tti / jahattara sAliya! lahuM do poti naggiyA mA tti // 52 // 2601 // 52. Aha thova-junna-kucchiyaodldhi vi bhannad acdlo ttis ___ Jahattara saliya lahum do pottim naggiya ma tti. (2601)

Page #345
Vada ] Nihnayavada : 321: Trans. 52. Similarly, one is said to be acela even with small, tattered, and worthless clothes, as in the case of a woman saying "O) weaver ! make haste, give me a saree; 1 (look) almost naked " 2601. TIkA-52 iyamapi sugamA, navaraM "jahattaretyAdi" dRSTAntaH, yaha kApi yoSit kaTIveSTitajIrNabahucchidrekasATikA kazcit kolikaM vadati-" tvarasva bhozAlika ! zIghro bhUtvA madIyapottI zATikAM nirvApya dadasva samarpaya, nanikA varte'ham" tadiha savastrAyAmapi yoSiti nAgnyavAcaka zabdapravRtteH "jassaTThA kIrai naggabhAvo muMDabhAvo ahAyaM, adattavaNayaM" ityAdyapi na virubhyata iti // 2601 // D. C. The " acdlakatva " attributed to the ascetics through tradition, could be understood from another example also. A wonian putting on a very old and tattered saree with many holes inside, would go to the weaver and say "O weaver! make haste in preparing my garment, because I look (almost) naked without it." Here the word 'naked' is used in spite of the woman putting on a garment; in the same way, ascetics are called acelaka even though they put on a garment. 52 (2601). Lastly, in reply to " Jam ca tihim thandhim vattham dhardjja" etc., the Acarya saysvihiyaM sue ciya jao dhareja tihiM kAraNehiM vatthaM ti| teNaM ciya tadavassaM niratisaeNaM dhareyavvaM // 53 // 2602 // jiNakappAjoggANaM hI-kuccha-parIsahA jao'vassaM / hI lajja tti va so saMjamo tavatthaM viseseNaM // 54 // 2603 // 53. Vihiyam sud cciya jao dharejja tihim karandhiin vattham til Tenam ciya tadavassam niratisaenam dhardyavvanz. (2602) 54. Jinakappajogganam hi-kuccha-parisaha jas vassame Hi lajja tti va so samjamo tadattham visesenam. (2603). [vihitaM zruta eva yato dharet tribhiH kAraNairvastramiti / tenaiva tadavazyaM niratizayena dhartavyam // 53 // 2602 //

Page #346
: 322: Jinabhadra Gani's [The Botika jinakalpAyogyAnAMhI-kutsA-parISahA yato'vazyam / hIrlajjeti vA sa saMyamastadartha vizeSeNa // 54 // 2603 / / 53. Vihitam sruta dva yato dhardt tribhih karanai-r-vastramiti i Tenaiva tadavasyam niratisayena dhartavyam. (2602). 54. Jinakalpayogyauam hri-kutsa-parisaha yato'vasyam | Hrirlajjdti va sa samyamastadartham visesena (2603) ]. Trauis. 53-54. Since it is laid down in the Scriptures, that (an ascetic ) should wear a garment on account of three reasons, he must certainly put it on in his own way. For, those who are unfit for (the practice of) Jinakalpa, should put on garments undoubtedly, for (the sake of) shame, (public) censure, and physical pain. For the sake of shame or restraint (one should do so) all the more. (2602-2603). TIkA-53-54 vyAkhyA-nanu "tribhiH kAraNairvastraM dharaNIyam" ityAgamoktaM darzayatA bhagavatA'smatpakSa eva samarthito bhavati, paraM zunyahRdayatvAd bhavAna na lakSayati / tathAhi-idAnIM vayamapi vaktuM zaknumaH-"tribhiH kAraNairvastraM gharet" iti sUtre'pi vihitaM pratipAditaM yato yasmAt tenaiva prakAreNa tad vastraM niratizayena tathAvidhadhRtisaMhananAdirahitena sAdhunA'vazyaM dharaNIyamiti / kutaH ityAha-yato yasmAd niratizayatvena jinakalpAyogyAnAM sAdhUnAM hI-kutsAparISaha-lakSaNaM vastradharaNakAraNaM pUrvAbhihitasvarUpamavazyameva saMbhavati / tato dharaNIyameva vastram / yadi vA, kutsA-parISahArthaM tad na dhriyate tathApi hIrlajjA, saca saMyamastadartha sAvad vizeSeNaiva vastraM dharaNIyam, anyathA'mijvalanAdinA bRhadasaMyamApatteriti // 2602 // 2603 // D. C. Acarya:---By saying that an ascetic should put on clothes for three reasons, you strengthen our case. You are not able to see that on account of the confusion in your mind. The sotra implies that an ordinary ascetic who does not possess the necessary fortitude and strength of a Tirthankara, and hence is unfit

Page #347
Vada ] Nihnavayada : 323: ( for the practice of) Jinakalpa, should put on garments for the sake of shame, (public) censure, and distress. He may not probably care for reproach and physical distress, but he should be very careful for shame or decency in order to practise perfect restraint. And, that is all the more reason why he should put on garments. Otherwise, there would be violence of austerity by means of litting up fire etc. 53-54 (2602-2603). Concluding his arguments, the Acarya explains-- jai jiNamayaM pamANaM tuha to mA muyasu btth-pttaaii| punvattadosajAlaM lambhisi mA samiighAyaM ca // 55 // 2604 // aNuvAleumasatto'patto na smttmesnnaasmiiN| vattharahiona samio nikkhevAdANavosaggA // 56 // 2605 // 55. Jai Jinamayam pamanam tuha to ma muyasu vattha-pattaims Puvvuttadosajalam labbhisi ma samiighayam ca. (2604) 56. Anuvaleumasatto'patto na samatta-mdsanasamiim | Vattharahio na samio nikkheva-danavosagga. (2605) [yadi jinamataM pramANaM taba tato mA muzca vastra-pAtrAdi / pUrvoktadoSajAlaM labdhA mA samitighAtaM ca // 55 // 2604 // anupAlayitumazakto'pAtro na samastAmeSaNAsamitim / vastrarahito na samito nikSepAdAnavyutsargaH // 56 // 2605 // 55. Yadi Jinamatam pramanam tava tato ma munica vastra-patradi 1 Purvoktadosajalam labdha ma samiti-ghatam ca. (2604) 56. Anupalayitumasakto'patro na samastamesanasamitim i Vastrarahito na samito niksepadanavyutsargaih. (2605) ] Trans. 55--56. If the theory of the Tirthankaras is acceptable to you, then, do 11ot (certainly) leave off clothes and vessels etc. Do not become susceptible to the faults mentioned before, and do not undergo violation of samiti' thereby. 7. The fules of irreproachable conduct as an ascetio.

Page #348
:324: Jinabhadra Gani's [The Botika Without vessel etc., (you) will not be able to practise the whole of Esana samitis, and without garment, (you will) not (be able) to practise niksopa ( careful placing), adana (accepling with care ), and vyutsarga (throwing away with due care). (2604-2605). TIkA-55-56 yadi jinamataM tava pramANam , tato vastrapAtrAdi mA muzca mA tyAkSIH / kutaH ? ityAha-"neNagahaNAnalasevA" ityAdinA pUrvamuktaM doSajAlaM mA labdhAH / tathA, samitighAtaM ca tatparityAge mA''pnuhi tvamiti / kasyAH punaH samiteH pAtrAdyabhAve vighAtaH 1 ityAha-"aNuvAle umityAdi" azakto'samartho bhavet / kiM kartum 1 / samastAM paripUrNAmeSaNAsamitimanupAlayitum / kathaMbhUtaH ? apAtraH paatrrhitH| punanikSepAdAnasamityA vyutsargasamityA ca samito na bhavet , upalakSaNatvAd bhASAsamityApi samito na bhavet , vastrAghamAve rajoharaNamukhavatrikAdhabhAvAt / tadabhAve ca yathoktasamititrayAsiddheriti // 2604 // 2605 // D. C. If the theory of Tirthankaras is acceptable to you, then, do not really abandon clothes, vessels etc; otherwise, you will be susceptible to faults that have already been mentionedo. You will also be violating the Samiti (Main Rule of an Ascetic's conduct) thereby. In absence of patra, you will not be able to follow the whole of dsana samiti and being unable to practise niksepa, adana and vyutsarga, you will not be able to per- . form bhasa samiti as well. In absence of vastra etc. like mukhaVastrika, rajoharana etc. you will be leaving a part of an ascetio's duties unperformed. Thus, without patra and vastra, you will be violating the principles of an ascetic's life. 55-56 (2604-2605). Then, 8. The rule of moderation in desires. 9. Vide verses 2575-2579 particularly the extracts taken from Kalpa Bhasya etc. beginning with " Kappa ayappamana."

Page #349
Vada] Nihnavavada :325: iya paNNavio vi pahuM so micchttokyaakuliybhaavo| jiNamayamasaddahaMto chaDDiyavattho samujjAo // 57 // 2606 // tassa bhagiNI samujhiyavasthA taha ceva tavaNurAgeNaM / saMpatthiyA niyatthA to gaNiyAe puNo muyaI // 58 // 2607 // tIe puNo vi baddhorasegavasthA puNo vichNdd'itii| acchaDa te teNaM ciya samuNuNNAyA dharesI ya // 59 // 2608 // koDina-kohavIre pajjAvesI ya doNi so siise| tatto paraMparAphAsao'vasesA samuppannA // 60 // 2609 // 57. Iya pannavjo vi bahum so micchattodayakuliyabhavo i Jinamayamasaddahanto chaddiyavattho samujjas. (2606). 58. Tassa bhagini samujjbiyavattha taha odva tadanuragenami Sampatthiya niyattha to ganiyae puno muyai. (2607) 59. Tid puno vi baddhorasegavattha puno vi vichanddinti i Acchau te tenam ciya samanunnaya dharosi ya. (2608) 60. Kodinna-Kottavird pajjavdsi ya domi so sisd | Tatto paramparaphasao'vasesa samuppanna. (2609). [iti prajJApito'pi bahu sa mithyaatvodyaakulitbhaavH| jinamatamazraddadhAnazcharditavastraH samudyAtaH // 57 // 2606 // tasya bhaginI samujJitavastrA tathaiva tadanurAgeNa / saMpasthitA nivasitA tato gaNikayA punarmuzcati // 58 // 2607 // tayA punarapi baddhorasekavastrA punshchrdyntii| tiSThatu te tenaiva samanujJAtA'dhArSIca // 59 // 2608 // kauNDinya-kohavIrau prAvAjayaca dvau sa shissyo| tataH paramparAspadavazeSAH samutpannAH // 60 // 2609 // 57. Iti prajnapito'pi bahu sa mithyatvo-dayakulitabhavani Jinamatamasraddhanascharditavastrah samudyatah. (2606)

Page #350
:326: Jinabhadra Gami's [The Botika 58. Tasya bhagini samujjhitavastra tathaiva tadanuragena 1 Samprasthita nivasita tato ganikaya puna-r-muficati. (2607) 59. Taya punarapi baddborasekavastra punaschardayanti | Tisthtu te tenaiva samanujnata'dharsicca. (2608) 60. Kaundinya-Kottavirau pravrajayacca dvau sa sisyaun Tatah paramparasparsadavasesah samutpannah. (2609) Trans. 57-58-59.-60. Although persuaded in many such ways, he, with his mind obsessed with vanity, did not put faith in the words of Tirthankaras, and went away, abandoning clothes. Following him, his sister also put off her clothes and went out. She was given a garment by a whore, but she put off the same again. She was again covered with a gar. ment on the breasts by that (whore), and again, she was (on the point of) leaving the same. (But) at the advice of Sivabhuti " Let it be worn by you," she accepted it. He, then, initiated two pupils, named Kaundinya and Kottavira, by whose tradition, the sect of the Digambaras was produced. (2606-2609). TIkA-57-58-59-60-etAzcataso'pi gatArthAH, navaraM 'samujjAu tti' tyaktavastra upAzrayAt samudyAto mirgtH| "niyatthA tti" tato gaNikayA nivasitA vastraM paridhApitetyarthaH / "tIe tti".tayA gaNikayA "baddhorasegavatya ti" baddhamurasyekaM vastraM yasyAH sA ttheti| "tato paraMparetyAdi" tataH paramparayA yo'sau sparzo guruziSyasaMbandhastasmAd boTikasaMtAnavartino'vazeSA boTikAH samutpamA iti / etAsAM ca boTikavyatikarasaMbaddhAnAM sarvAsAmapi gAthAnAmartha saMkSipya "iha yo yadarthI na sa tannimittopAdAnaM pratyanAdRtaH, yathA ghaTArthI mRtpiNDopAdAnaM pati, cAritrArthinazca yatayaH, tannimittaM ca cIvaramiti, na cAsyAsiddhatvam" ityAdinA sUtra-vastra-pAtrapAragrahaviSayaM vAdasthAnakaM vRddhairviracitamAste, tabottarAdhyayaneSu dvitIye parISahAdhyayane AcelakyaparISahe bRhaTTIkAyAM tadathinAnveSaNIyam / tathA, iha khalu yasya yatrAsaMbhavo na tasya tatra kAraNavaikalyam , yathA zuddhazilAyAM zAlyakurasya, asti ca tathAvidhastrISu mukteH

Page #351
Vada ] Nihnavavada : 327: kAraNAvaikalyam, na cAyamasiddho hetuH" ityAdinA viracitaM strInirvANaviSaya - mapi vAdasthAnakaM tatreva SazittamAdhyayane draSTavyamiti // 2606 // 2607 // 128 degC11780Q11 D. C. Sivabhati went out of the upasraya in the naked condition. He was followed by his sister in the same condition. A whore gave her a garment to cover her body but she did not bear the same. The whore again covered her breasts with a garment, which, too, was being rejected by her. But at last Sivabhati asked her to put on a garment and she did so. Sivabhuti had initiated two pupils named Kaundinya and Kottavira, who in their turn initiated others, and thus a chain of Botikas was continued till the whole of the sect (of Digambaras) was produced. Concluding the explanation of all the verses in connection with the discussion with Botika, the author says "Iha yo yadarthi na sa tannimittopadanam pratyanadritah yatha ghatarthi mritpindopadanam prati, caritrarthinasca yatayah tannimittam ca civaramiti, na casyasiddhatvam" etc. [He who is desirous of any particular object, is not indifferent towards the employment of cause of production, just as any one desirous of a ghata is not (indifferent) to the employment of a lump of clay, and also just as ascetics desirous of right conduct are not indifferent to clothes which are instruments (in the careful observance of vows.) It is not that this has not been proved ( beyond doubt) ]. A discussion on the subject of sutra-vastra-patra-parigraba composed etc. by, old eminent, experienced Acaryas can be found in the Parisaha Adhyayana of Uttaradhyayana Satra. Besides "Tha khalu yasya yatra-sambhavo na tasya tatra karanavaikalyam, yatha suddhasilayam salyankurasya, astica tathavidhastrisu mukteh karanaraikalyam, na cayamasiddho he tuh" eto.

Page #352
* 328 : Jinabhadra Gani's (The Botika (Whatever is really impossible here, has not lack of absence of cause of production, just as there is absence of cause of budding of rice-grains on a clean slab of stone. But there is an existence of cause of production in case of mukti to females. This hetu is also not unproved. A discussion on the subject of Nirvana for females can be seen in the thirty-sixth Adhyayana of Uttaradhyayana Satra.

Page #353
Chapter X Summary of Claims and interallegations of Nihnavas. evaM ee bhaNiyA usappiNIe u niNhagA satta / vIravarassa pakyaNe sesANaM pavayaNe na sthi // 1 // 2610 // 1. Evam dd bhaniya Usappinid u ninhaga satta | Viravarassa pavayana sesanam pavayand na tthi. (2610) [evamete bhaNitA avasarpiNyAM tu nihavAH sapta / vIravarasya pravacane zeSANAM pravacane na santi // 1 // 2610 // 1. Evamete bhanita Avasarpinyam tu nihnavah sapta | ____Viravarasya pravacand sesanam pravacand na santi. (2610)] Trans. I In this way, Seven Nihnavas are said to have existed in the Avasarpini age, during the regime of Vira Tirthaikara (Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira). No more (Nihnavas ) are said to have existed during the regime of other Tirthankaras. 2610. TIkA-1 evamuktena prakAreNaite'nantaroktAH kathitAH pratipAditA avasapiNyAmeva nivAH sapta, aSTamastu boTikazvazandasamucitAdikAraNAd na vivkssitH| vIravarasya pravacane tIrthe / zeSANAmahatAM pravacane "na sthiti" na santi, yA nAsti, "nihavasattA" iti zeSaH // 2610 // ___D. C. As mentioned in the foregoing pages, there have existed Seven Nihnavas in the Avasarpini age, during the regime

Page #354
:330: Jinabhadra Gani's of Sramaya Bhagavan Mahavira. Still however, the word cal expressed in the verse which ennumerated their names is interpreted by the author, as well as, commentator to include another type of Nihnavas, known as Botikas or Digambaras. Excepting these types, there has never been a single type more. 1. (2610) mottUNetto eka sesANaM jAvajIviyA ditttthii| ekekassa va etto do do dosA muNeyavvA // 2 // 2611 // 2. Mottandtto akkam sesanam javajiviya ditthit Ekkdkkassa ya dtto do do dosa muneyavva. (2611) [muktveta ekaM zeSANAM yAvajIvikA dRSTiH / ekaikasya caitasmAd dvau dvau doSau jJAtavyau // 2 // 2611 // 2. Muktvdta dkam sesanam yarajjivika dristihi . Ekaikasya caitasmad dvau dvau dosau jnatavgau. (2611). Trains. 2. Of them, barring one, all the rest believed in (observing austerities ) till the end of (their) life, each one of whom has been recognized as susceptible to two faults. 2611. TIkA-2 muktvaiSAmekaM goSThAmAhilaM nihavAdharma zeSANAM jamAliprabhRtInAM pratyAkhyAnamagIkRtya yAvajIvikA dRSTiH, nAparimANaM pratyAkhyAnaM te manyanta iti bhaavnaa| __ Aha-nanu pUrvoktAnusArata evedamavasIyate, kimarthamasyopanyAsaH ? iti / ucyate-pratyahamavazyaMkaraNIyatvena pratyAkhyAnasyopayogitvAd mA kazcit tathaiva pratipadyeta, tato jJApyate-nihavAnAmapi pratyAkhyAne yAvajjIvikaiva dRSTiH, ato nAparimANaM pratyAkhyAnaM vidheyamiti / "eno ti" ato'mISAM madhya ekaikasya nihavasya dvau dvau doSau muNitavyau jJAtavyau, sadoSasyApi svamatasyAbhyupagamaH, paramatasya punaranabhyupagama iti / iha ca bhAvArtha bhASyakAra eva vakSyati / iti niyuktigAthAdvayArthaH // 2611 // 1. Vide verse 2300.

Page #355
Nihnatavada :331: D. C. Excepting Gostha Mahila (who believed in unlimited practice of pratyakhyana ) all the Nihnavas have accepted the principle of observing pratyakhyana or vow till the end of his life. This is clearly understood from the original Niryukti, but in order to prevent people from following the wrong theory of Gostha Mahila, we beg to draw their attention to the fact that pratyakhyana should be always limited to this life, and it never extends to the next life. There is mutual allegation of faults to each one of thom in this way. One blames the other firstly because he sticks to his own misbelief, and secondly, because he does not accept the right belief of the other. 2. (2611) This is explained in details as follows :mottUNa gohamAhilamannasiM jAvajIvasaMvaraNaM / kammaM ca baddhapuDheM khIrodavadattaNA samayaM // 3 // 2612 / / mottuM jamAlimanne beMti kaDaM kajamANamevaM tu / ekeko ekeka necchai abaddhio donni // 4 // 2613 // avaropparaM sameyA do dose deti ekamekassa / paramayasaMpaDivattiM vipaDivAttaM ca samayammi // 5 // 2614 // 3. Mottuna Gottha Mahilamannesim javajivasanvarnam | Kammam ca baddhaputthan khirodavadattana samayam.(2612) 4. Mottum Jamalimannd benti kadam kajjamanamevam tu! Ekkekko ekkekkam necchai abaddhio donni. (2613) 5. Avaropparam samdya do dose detim okkamdkkassa | Paramayasampadivattim vipadivattim ca samayammi. (2614) [muktvA goSThAmAhilamanyeSAM yAvajjIvasaMvaraNam / karma ca baddhaspRSTaM kSIrodakavadAtmanA samakam // 3 // 2612 // muktvA jamAlimanye bruvanti kRtaM kriyamANamevaM tu| ekaikaM ekaikaM necchatyavaddhiko do // 4 // 2613 //

Page #356
: 332: Jinabhadra Gani's parasparaM sametA dvau doSI dadati ekaikasya / paramatasaMpratipatiM vipratipatiM ca svamate // 5 // 2614 // 3. Muktva Gostha Mahilamanyesam yavajjivasamvaranam 1 Karma ca baddhaspristam ksirodakavadatmana samakam. (2612) Muktva Jamalimanye bruvanti kritam kriyamanamevam tu ! Ekaika ekaikam necchatyabaddhiko dvau. (2613) 5. Parasparami sameta dvau dosau dadati dkaikasya i Paramatasampratipattim vipratipattim ca svamatd. (2614)] Trans. 3-4-5. All the Nihnavas excepting Gostha Mahila hold the observance of vow (to be limited till the end of this life, and (believe that) Karman is intimately united with Soul, like milk and water. Excepting Jamali, all believed that what is being done, has already been done (and so on). Each one of them disbelieves the other's principle, while the abaddhika misbelieves two (principles). So, when they meet, each one attributes two faults to the other by way of his disbelief of the other, and by way of his misbelief in his own principle. (2612-2614). TIkA-3-4-5 vyAkhyA-eteSAM madhye goSThAmAhilaM muktvA zeSANAM yAvajIvaM saMvaraNaM yAvajjIvaM pratyAkhyAnaM ' vidheyamityabhyupagama ityarthaH / tathA, goSThAmAhilAdanyeSAM karma ca saMmatam / kathaMbhUtam ? AtmanA samakaM jIvena sahabaddhaspRSTam / kiMvat 1 kSIrodakavaditi / goSThAmAhilastvetad dvitayamapi na manyata iti / jamAliprabhRtayastarhi kiM manyante ? kiM vA na manyante ? ityAha-"mottuM jamAlimityAdi" jamAli muktvA'nye tiSyaguptAdayaH kriyamANaM kRtaM manyante, jamAlistvetad na manyate, kintu kRtameva kRtamabhyupagacchati / evaM tiSyaguptaM muktvA zeSAH paripUrNa jIvamicchanti, tiSyaguptastu carameva pradezaM jIvaM manyanta ityAyagretaneSvapi sudhiyA'bhyUhya vAcyam / evaM "tu ti" tuzabdasya cazabdArthasvAdevaM ca sati kiM siddham ? ityAha-"ekeko ityAdi" ekaiko nihavaH zrImajjinoktapadArthAnAM madhye darzitanyAyenaikaikaM padArtha necchati / abadikastu

Page #357
Nihnavavada : 333: goSThA mAhila: pUrvadarzitau dvau padArthoM necchati, uktazeSAMstu padArthAn sarvAnapIcchatIti / tataH kim ? ityAha - " avaropparamityAdi " evaM ca satyekatrasametA militAH sarve'pi nihavA vivadantaH parasparamekaikasya dvau dvau doSau dadati prayacchanti / tatra bahuratAdeH prAdezikAdi: parastasya parasya yad mataM nijo'bhiprAyastadabhyupagamarUpA yA saMpratipattiH sA paramatasaMpratipattistAM parasparaM dUSayanti / tathA, bahuratAdeH svasyAtmano yad mataM tatra yA tadanabhyupagamarUpA parasya prAdezikAdervipratipattistAM dUSayanti / evaM ca sanyekaikasya dvau dvau doSau saMcadhyete / ayamatra bhAvArtha:- bahurataH prAdezikaM vakti, tatra dvau doSau - ekaM tAvat " kRtameva kRtam" iti madIyamataM nirdoSamapi na manyase, " carama eva pradezo jIvaH" ityAtmIyamataM tu sadoSamapi manyasa iti / evaM prAdeziko'pi bahuratasya vyatyayena dvau doSau dadAti / tathA, ayameva prAdeziko'vyaktavAdinaM vadati, tatra dvau doSau - sadopakhamatAbhyupagamaH, nirdoSamadIyamatAnabhyupagamaceti / evamavyaaise prAdezikasya vyatyayena dvau dakSeSau dadAti / evaM tAvad neyaM yAvat trairAzikosddhikaM vakti dvau doSau - sadoSasvamatAbhyupagamaH, nirdoSamadIyamatAnabhyupagAmazreti evamabaddhiko'pi trairAzikaM vyatyayena dvau doSau dadAtIti / evaM evaM bahuratAdayo'vyaktAdibhirapi saha dvikyogena kramazazcAraNIyAH, sarvatra ca dvikyoge yathoktadoSadvayapradAnaM parasparato vaktavyam / 1 Aha- nanvavaddhikaH spRSTAbaddhaM karma, parimANarahitaM ca pratyAkhyAnamiti dvau padArthoM necchatIti prAguktam / tatazcAsau pratiyogino nihnavasya trIn doSAn dadAti, pratiyogyapyasya trInetra doSAn prayacchatIti prApnoti / tathAhi - abaddhiko bahurataM vakti-tava trayo doSAH ekaM tAvad nirdoSamapi madabhyupagatapadArthadvayaM necchasi, aparaM ca svayaM sadoSamapi svAbhimataM padArtha kalpayasIti / evaM bahurato'pyavadvikasya vyatyayena doSatrayaM dadAtIti / evamavaddhikena saha pratiyoginAM vicAre sarvatra doSatrayaM prApnoti, tat kathaM ekaikasya dvau dvau doSau iti vyAptyA procyate 1--1 satyam, yadyabaddhikasya vyaktivivakSayA padArthadvayabhedena bhinnaM mataM vivakSyate, tadA yat tvaM vadasi tat tathaiva manyAmahe / yadA tu padArthadvaya medena manamapi tasya sAmAnyenaikaM matamAtraM vivakSyate tadA darzitanyAyenaikaikasya dvau dvau doSAviti sarvatra na virudhyata ityalaM vistareNeti // 2612||2613||2614 // D. C. All the Nihnavas excepting Gostha Mahila have acce For Private Personal Use Only

Page #358
: 334 : Jinabhadra Gani's pted the doctrine of sa-parimana pratyakhyana. They also admit the relation of Karina and Soul as intimate as that of water and milk. Gostha Mahila tries to refute both these theories. All the Nihnavas except Jamali hold the view that " kriyamana is krita while Jamali believes that krita alone could be recognized as krita. Those excepting Tisyagupta rightly believe that the whole region of Jiva is Jiva, while according to Tisyagupta, the last portion alone is Jiva. In this manner, when Gostha Mahila disbelieves two dootrines of the Tirthankara, each one of the rest disbelieves one. Since, each one of them holds a belief different from another, he attributes two faults to the other, For example, Jamali the Bahurata Nihnava, accuses Tisyagupta first of 'disbelieving his own doctrine of " krita is krita" and secondly of holding a wrong theory of "no-jiva". The pradesika nihnava (Tisyagupta) un the other hand, makes counterallegations on Jamali on the same grounds. Tisyagupta further attributes two faults of accepting a wrong belief and rejecting the right one to Avyaktavadin, who in his turn, accuses pradesika of similar faults. The same is the case with Trairasikas and others. It should be noted here that since the abaddhika Nihnava believes in sprista-baddha karman and a-parimana pratyakhyana he has to preach two doctrines. If these two doctrines are taken separately, he attributes three faults to the opponent who also in turn makes three allegations on him. On the other hand, if the two doctrines are taken together as one, the allegation and counter-allegation will be based on two faults only. This is explained by the author clearly on the consideration that the abaddhika blames the opponent in as much as he (i. e, the opponent ) disbelieves the two doctrines laid down by abaddhika and wrongly asserts his own theory which is not acceptable to anyone else. The opponent, too, blames the abaddhika on the same grounds. 8-5 (2612-2614).

Page #359
Nihnavavada :385 Also, abaddhiyassa dose diti tao so vi tini annss| tippabhii tu sameyA dose tippabhiie diti // 6 // 2615 // 6. Abaddhiyassa dose dinti tao so vi tinni annassa | Tippabhii tu samdya dosd tippabhid dinti. (2615) [avaddhikasya doSAn dadati tataH so'pi trInanyasya / triprabhRtayastu sametA doSAMntriprabhRtIn dadati // 6 // 2615 // 6. Abaddhikasya dosan dadati tatah so'pi trinanyasyal Triprabhritayastu samdta dosanstriprabhratin dadati. (2615)] Trans. 6. (The opponents) blame abaddhika. Therefore, he, too, attributes three faults to each one of them). When three or more Nihnavas meet (together ), each one of them tries to attribute three or more faults to the other. (2615) TIkA-6 'tautti' vyaktivivakSArUpeNa pUrvadarzitavidhinA trIn doSAnavaddhikasya bahuratAdayaH pratyekaM dadAti, so'pyabaddhikaskhIn doSAnanyasya bahuratAdeH pratyekaM dadAti / tadevaM dvayoH samuditayorepa vidhidarzitaH / yadA tu triprabhRtayaH samuditA bhavanti tadA ko vidhiH 1 ityAha-"tippabhiItyAdi" triprabhRtayastu samuditAstriprabhRtIn dopAna dadAti / idamatra hRdayam-bahuratAdiSu triSu samuditeSu bahurataH zeSAn vakti-nanu bhavatastrayo doSAH-kutsitanijanijamataprarUpaNAkRtI dvau, nirdoSamadIyamatavipratipattikRtastveka iti / evaM sarvatra triyoge upayujya vaktavyam / kevalamabaddhikena saha yastriyogastatra vyaktivivakSAyAmekadoSavRddhezvatvAro doSA vaktavyAH / tathA prabhRtigrahaNAcatuSka-paJcaka-SaSThaka-saptakayogeSvapi yathAsaMkhyaM catu-paJca-paTa-saptadoSA uktAnusArato bhaNanIyAH / kevalamavaddhikena saha catuSkAdiyoge vyaktivivakSAyAmekadoSavRddhathA pazcAdayo doSA vaacyaaH| iti gAthA catuSThayArthaH // 2615 // D. C. When the first three Nihnavas meet to-gether, each one of them alleges the other of three faults. Say, when Bahurata and the other two (excepting the abaddhikas) meet, each one of thens attributes three faults to the other, because each

Page #360
:386: Jinabhadra Gani's one preaches wrong ideals ( according to the other) and rejects the right belief (held by him). Thus, all these Nihnavas, barring abaddhikas, become susceptible to three faults, Now, when abaddhika joins the other two Nihnavas, he attributes four faults to either of the two, and becomes susceptible to four faults. In a group of four, five, six, and seven Nihnavas, each Nihnava attributes four, five, six, and seven faults respectively on the other. But whenever there is abaddhika in the above-mentioned group, one more fault is added. So, in case of four, tive, six, and seven Nihnavas ( including the abaddhika) each one alleges the other of five, six, seven, and eight faults respectively. 6. (2615). Explaining the purpose of Nihnavas' theories, the author proceedssatteyA diTThIo jaai-jraa-mrnn-gmbhvshiinnN| mUlaM saMsArassa u havaMti niggaMtharUveNa // 7 // 2616 // 7. Satteya ditthis jai-jara-marana gabbhavasahinam | ___Malam samsarassa u havanti niggantharavena. (2616) [saptaitA dRSTayo jAti-jarA-maraNa-garbhavasatInAm / mUlaM saMsArasya tu bhavantiM nirgrantharUpeNa // 7 // 2616 // 7. Saptaita dristayo jati-jara-marana-garbhavasatinam | Mulam samsarasya tu bhavanti nirgrantkarapena. (2616)). Trans. 7. (Theories of) all the seven Nihnavas happen to be the root-cause of birth, old age, death, and rebirth, and also of mundane world, even with an attire of an ascetic. 2616. TIkA-7. saptetA dRSTayaH saptanihnavadarzanAni, boTikAstu pUrvoktakAraNAd na vivakSitAH, mUlaM kAraNaM bhavatIti sNbndhH| kAsAm ? ityAha-jAti-jarAmaraNa-garbhavasatInAm / jAti nArakAdiSu yat prasUtimAtraM tadrUpA gRhyate, garbhavasatistu paJcendriya-tiryag-manuSyeSu garbhAvAsa iti na paunarutyam / tathA, saMsaraNaM

Page #361
Nihnavavada : 337: nArakAdiSu punaH punardhamaNaM saMsArastasya ca mUlametAH saptanivadRSTayo nirgrantharUpa mAtreNa / itiniyuktigAthArthaH // 2616 // D. C. Theories of all the Seven Nihnavas do not, in any way, lead to the attainment of Moksa, but they become the rootcause of the sainsara and its cycle of birth, old age, death, and re-birth. They happen to be mendicants only outwardly. Then the questiun arises as to whether Nihnavas should be considered as nicndicants, or as followers of some other religion, or as householders. The author explains that they are real mendicants. Really speaking, food meant for a mendicant is not acceptable to another mendicant. Nihnavas do not follow this rule. And, pavayaNanihUyANaM jaM tesiM kAriyaM jahiM jattha / bhajaM pariharaNAe mUle taha uttaraguNe ya // 8 // 2617 // 8. Pavayanawihayanam jam tesim kariyam jahim jattha | Bhajjanm pariharanad muld taha uttaragund ya. (2617) [pravacanAkizcitkaraNAM yat teSAM kAritaM yadA yatra / bhAjyaM pariharaNena mUle tathottaraguNe ca // 8 // 2617 // 8. Pravacanakincitkaranam yat tesam karitam yada yatra | Bhajyam pariharanena mald tathottaragune ca. (2617) ). Trans. 8. Whenever and wherever whatever is prepared for the (Nihnavas) who transgress the prescribed rules, should be alternatively given up, (as they affect) the original, as well as, the subsidiary predicaments. 2617. TIkA-8 'nihUya tti' dezIvacanamakizcitkarArthe, pravacane yayA bhaNita kriyAkalApaM pratyakiJcitkarANAM yadazanAdi teSAM nivAnAM kAritaM yasmin kAle yasmin kSetre, tad bhAjyaM vikalpanIyam / kayA ? / pariharaNayA vrjnyaa| kadAcit parihiyate vaLate, kadAcid neti / yadi loko na jAnAti yathaite nivA sAdhubhyo bhinAstadA parihiyate / atha tu jAnAti tadA na parihiyata iti / ayanA,

Page #362
:338: Jinabhadra Gani's pariharaNA paribhogo'bhidhIyate / yata uktam-"dhAraNayA uvabhogo pariharaNA vassa hoi paribhogo" iti / tatazca kadAcid parihiyate paribhujyate, kadAcid na, ityevaM pariharaNA / kiM punaritthaM bhAjyam ? ityAha-mUle mUlaguNaviSayamAdhAkamaudi, tathA uttaraguNe cottaraviSayaM krIta-kRtAdi / tato nete nivAH sAdhavaH, sadAyakRtasyaikAntenAkalpyatvAt / nApi gRhasthAH na vA tIrthAntarIyAH, tada yakRtasyAsAdhUnAmekAntena kalpyatvAt / tasmAdavyaktA evaiti // iti niryutigAthArthaH // 2617 // D. C. It has already been said above that Nihnavas are not real mendicants, because they do not satisfy the rule as. regards food etc. prescribed for the mendicants. Food etc. meant. for mendicants should never, as a rule, be accepted by others. While in case of Nihnavas, the same may or may not be accepted by others. When people do not know that these Nihnayas are different from real mendicants, food etc. prepared for them, must not be accepted by other mendicants, but when thay happen to realize the fact that Nihnavas are not real merdicants, foods etc. meant for them should be abandoned. Right from the original predicament like that of taking pledge etc. to the minor predicament like that of kritakrita etc. alternative acceptance (of food eto. meant for Nihnavas) is prescribed. In such a case, the Nihnavas are neither called sadhus nor.. grihasthas ( house-holders), nor the followers of some other religion, because their food etc. happen to be neither wholly acceptable nor wholly unacceptable, but somewhat acceptable to some other mendicants. So, they are known as avyaktas or indistinct. 8. (2617). The reason of placing them under this new category. is repeated, when the author again states that jattha visesaM jANai logo tesiM ca kuNai bhttaaii| taM kappai sAhUNaM sAmanakayaM punarakappaM // 9 // 2618 // 9. Jattha visesam janai logo tesim oa kunai bhattaim i Tam kappai sahapam samannayam punarakappam. (2618)

Page #363
:339: Nihnavavada [yantra vizeSa jAnAti lokasteSAM ca karoti bhktaadi| sat kalpate sAdhUnAM sAmAnyakRtaM punarakalpyam // 9 // 2618 // 9. Yatra visesam janati lokastesam ca karoti bhaktadi ! Tat kalpate sadhanam sapanyakritam punarakalpyam. (2618)] Trans. 9. Wherever people know in particular (that they are not real mendicants ), their food etc. become acceptable to other mendicants. But ordinarily that is not acceptable. 2618. TIkA-9. gatArthA, navaraM "sAmanakayaM ti" nihnavarUpatA vizeSeNa teSAmajJAtvA sAmAnyena yat kRtaM tadakalpyamityarthaH // 2618 // Lastly, with regard to food etc., prepared for Botikas the author says-- micchAdiTTIyANaM jaM tesiM kAriyaM jahiM jtth| savvaM pi tayaM sUddhaM mUle taha uttaraguNe ya // 10 // 2619 // bhinnamaya-liMga-cariyA micchadihitti boddiyaa'bhimyaa| jaM te kayamuddisiuM taM kappar3a jaM ca jaijoggaM // 11 // 2620 // 10. Micchadditthiyanam jam tesim kariyam jahim jattha i ___Savvam pi tayam suddhan mule taha uttaragune ya. (2619) 11. Bhinnamaya-linga-cariya-micchadditthi tti bodiya'bhimayan Jam te kayamuddisium tam kappai jam ca jai joggam. (2620) (mithyASTikAnAM yat teSAM kAritaM yadA ytr| sarvamapi tat zuddhaM mUlaM tathottaraguNe ca // 10 // 2619 // bhinnamatta-liMga-caryA-mithyAdRSTaya iti boTikA abhimtaaH| yat tAn kRtamuddizya tat kalpate yaca yatiyogyam // 11 // 2620 // 10. Mithyadristikanam yat tesam karitam yada yatra | Sarvamapi tat suddham malam tathottara gure ca. (2619) 11. Bhinnamata-linga-carya-mithyadristaya iti Botika abhi matahi Yat tan kritamuddisya tat kalpate yacca yatiyogyam. (2620)]

Page #364
:340: Jinabhadra Gani's Trans. 10-11. Whenever and where, whatever is prepared for mendicants preaching false doctrines, (snouid) entirely ( be taken) as pure according to original, as well as, accessory predicaments. Botikas are known as mithyadristikas on account of their doctrine, dress, and character being different. (Hence), whatever is meant for them becomes acceptable to other mendicants. (2619-2620) TIkA-10 mithyAdRSTInAM boTikAnAM yadazanAdi teSAM kAritaM yasminkAle yatrakSetre tad mUlaguNaviSayam , uttaraguNaviSayaM ca sarvamapi zuddhaM sAdhUnAM kalpanIyam // itiniyukti gAthArthaH TIkA-11 mataM ca liGgaM ca bhikSAgrahaNAdiviSayA caryA ca mata-liGgacaryAH, bhinnA mata-liMga-caryA yeSAM te tathAbhUtAH santo boTikA mithyAdRSTayo'bhimatAH, bhinnamatatvAdikAraNAt te niyuktikRtA mithyAdRSTitvena nirdiSTA ityarthaH / yacAzanAdi tAnuddizya kRtaM tat sAdhUnAM kalpate / Aha-nanu boTikAnuddizya sacitaM karkaTikA-dADimAdyapi kriyate, acitaM cAnantakAya-vRntAkAdyapi saMskRtya vidhIyate, tat kiM sarvamapi sAdhUnAM kalpate / na, ityAha-"jaM ca jaijoggaM ti" tAnuddizya kRtamapi yadeva yatInAM sAdhUnAM yogyamuktaM prAzukamekaNIyaM, samaye cAnujJAtaM, tadeva kalpate nAnyat // iti gAthArthaH // 2619 / 2620 // ---D. C. Everything prepared for mithya-dristikas is suddha. Botikas with their doctrine, dress, and behaviour in asking for alms etc., different from the real mendicants are, known as mith ya dristikas or false preachers. Hence whatever (food eto.) is prepared for them, becomes acceptable to other mendioants. Still however, it should be noted carefully that if the food happened to be raw vegetable like karkatika or cooked cucumber-pomegra nate etc, or ananta kaya like vrintaka (brinjal) the same would not be acceptable to other mendicants. Only that which is acon ptable to ascetics according to the prescribed rules, should be accepted by other mendicants and not anything else. 10-11. (2619-2620). 2. False preachers.

Page #365
Page 3 6 11 E2E 22 2 12 15 20 29 52 Line 2224. ~ 5 23 29 23 15 21 CORRECTIONS Incorrect describces avya mithyAtva mohanIyo dayato madhye . O ef khdira prrdesa For Private Personal Use Only Correct describes avyaktAH mithyAtva mohanIyodayato madhye to of khadira pradesa

Page #366

Page #367
INDEX. Abaddhikas, 5, 9, 332, 334, 335, Acarya Arya Jambi Swami-314 936. , Krisna Suri-272. Acelaka- 304, 319, 320, 321. >> >> Mabagiri-93, 130, Acelakatva- 307, 311, 318, 319, 131. 321. Raksita Suri-2, 3, Acelaka Parisaha- 317, 318. 224, 225, 226, 227 Addha-paryaya- 97.. Adana Samiti-324. Adharmasti-kaga- 122, 172. Agamas-280. A-jiva- 52, 164, 171, 185, 187, Akasastikaya- 122, 188, 200. Aharaka Sarira Labdhi-275, 314. Anavadya- 11, 12, 17. Amla Kalp.-45, 46, 60, 61. Antaranjika, 8, 9, 160, 161. Anupravada Purva- 93, 94, 95, Amrasala-61. 96. Asadha-deva-73. Anuyogas, 2, 3, 4. Avasyaka Sutra-15. A-parigraha-287, 292, 293, 294, Avasyaka Niryukti 76. 302. Baburatas-4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 16, 40. A-prithvi-205. Balasri-160, 196, 200. Asvamitra- 6, 9, 93, 94, 95, 96, Bhagavati Sutra-15, 19, 99, 166, 106, 108, 112, 113, 117, 199, 174. 120, 126, 128. Bhavisya Paryaya- 97. Avadhi Jnana- 6, 9, 69, 142, Bhasa Samiti- 324. 145. Bhuta Paryaya-97. Botikas-9, 269, 327, 330, 339, Avagraha- 146, 152, 153, 158. 340, Avyaktas-5, 6, 9, 66, 73, 75. Calamanam Calitam-19, 245. Avyakta-vadin-324. Chadmastha-310. Acarya Arya Asadhacarya-6, 9, Chaluga-6. 68, 69. Dahyamanam dagdham-39, 40, >> >> Dhanagupta- 130, 41, 43. 134. Ganga-6, 9, 130, Dasapura- 8, 9, 130, 131, 133, 147, 153 Desa-pradesas-58.

Page #368
: 344 : Jinabhdra Gani's Dasa-visavadi-9. Dhanagupta- 13, 130. Dhanka-11, 13, 14, 39, 40. Dharma-dhyana-300. Dharmastikaya-122, 170, 172. Digambaras-326, 330. Dravyas-122, 126, 204. Dravyastikaya Naya-122, 125, 126. Durbalika Puspamitra-2, 3, 220, 226, 227, 228, 237, 268. Dvaikriyas-5, 6, 9, 129, Dvitiya Samaya-101. Esana Samiti-324. Evambhuta Naya-57, 58. Gangacarya-6, 9, 131, 133, 138. Gosala-281, 282. Gostha Mahila-2, 3, 9, 220, 221, 224, 226, 227, 235, 237, 242, 243, 244, 246, 247, 248, 249, 252, 261, 267, 268, 331, 332, 333, 334. Gucchakan-275. Gunasilaka-45. Guptacarya-216. Haribhadra Suriji-15, 18. Hetu-328. Isana deva-loka-14. Jamali-6, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 23, 30, 31, 34, 37, 43. Jamali Acarya- 13, 19, 23, 30, 31, 32. Jamali Muni-13, 13. Jina-17, 73, 281. Jina Kalpikas-274, 275, 303, 305, 312, 313, 322, 323. Jiva-14, 17, 43, 48, 49, 56, 73, 76, 164, 187, 248, 249, Jive-pradesas-9, 44, 170, 192, 231. Jivastikaya-122. Jyostha-11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 39, Kalpa-312. Karman-332, 333. Karma Pravada Purva-229, 231. KaraNGa Kriya-20. Kasaya-281, 282. Kaundinya-93, 277, 326, 327. Kalikacarya-225. Karana-25, 32, 33. Karmana-177, 179. Karya-22, 23, 27, 31, 32, 33, 36. Kayotsarga-274. Kevala Jnana-8, 45, 145, 309. Kdvalins-16, 17. Khadira Tree-29. Khanna Raksas-128. Kha-puspa-23, 24, 63, 104, 105. Khara-visana-25. Kosa-26. Kosthaka-13, 16. Kattavira-326, 327. Kotyacarya-15.

Page #369
Nibnayavada : 345: Kriyamana-13, 16, 19, 20, 21, Narakas-88, 97, 100, 101, 102, 22, 39, 33, 35, 334. 103, 245. Kriya-25, 29, 30, 133, 137. Nihsantana-115. Kundapura-12. Nikacita-232. Kusula-26. Niksopa-324. Kutrikapana-199, 200, 205, 209. Nirvana-8, 129, 269. Ksanika-103, 104, 110, 115, 121. Niscaya Naya-85. Ksapaka-sreni-273, 314. Nisparigraha-276. Laxmigraha-93. Nitya-112, 115, 121, 124. Lantaka deva-loka-14, 17. No-a-jiva-164. Malayagiri Suriji - 15, 18. No-a-prithivi-205, 206, 210. Mahagiri-130. No-jiva-164, 166, 167, 168, 169, Maninaga-130, 132, 275. 172, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, Manah-paryaya Jilana-145, 275, 192, 193, 200, 205, 214, 216. 314. No-prithvi-212. Mathura-3, 225. Paramavadhi Jiana- 205, 206, Mati Jaana-142. 210, 212. Maurya Balabhadra-67, 71, 91. Parigraba-280, 282, 283, 284, Manavaka-137. 288, 289, 291, 293, 294, 296, Mithila-8, 9, 91, 94. 301, 302. Mithyatva-4, 13, 96, 247. Parimana-252. Mithya-drstikas-340. Parinama-53, 252. Mitrasr1-45, 60, 61, 65. Parisaba-317, 318. Moksa-233, 234, 240, 247, 248. Paryaya-96, 97, 120, 121, 125, 155, 146. Muhapatti-275, 276, 283, 287, Patalakani-275. 288, 293, 296, 299, 301. Mukhavastrika-91, 95, 324. Paulasadha-67. Mukti-328. Patra-275, 301, 312. Murccha-287, 292. Patra-bandhana-275. Naipunika-93, 96. Patra-kesarita-275. Nalinigulma-67, 69. Patra-sthapana-275.

Page #370
: 346: Jinabhadra Gani's Pradesas-5, 9, 46, 48, 49, 50, Sivaka-26, 27. 51, 52, 55, 101, 177, 231. Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira-8, Pramana-313. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, Prathama Samaya-51, 52, 53, 41, 91, 129, 269, 327, 330. 55, 101. Sravasti-8, 9, 10, 11, 16. Pratyaksa-64. Sri Guptacarya-160, 161, 198. Pratyakhyana-235, 236, 237, 252, Sri Sangba-88, 90, 94, 128, 266. 253, 254, 257, 260, 261, 262, Sukla-dhyana-300. 264, 331. Svetavika-8, 9, 67, 68, Pratyakhyana Purva-251. Saquluka-6, 9, 168, 198, 218. Prithvi-205, 206, 208, 209, 210, Saqulukacarya-9, 198. 212, 213. Sanganaka-281, 282. Priyadarsana-8, 9, 18, 39, 40, Samabhirudha Naya-170, 172, 43. 191, 192, 193. Pudgalastikaya-122, 172 Pulaka Labdhi-275, 314. Samavaya-218. Purnabhadra-16. Santana-104, 116. Rajastranam-275. Sa-parimana-264, 265. Rajoharana-274, 275, 299, 324, Sarvajna-17. 327. Sarva-visamvadi-9. Rathavira pura-8, 9, 269. Saudharama deva-loka-14. Raudra-dhyana-290, 291. Rajagriha-45, 67, 71, 90, 91, 93, Samanya-153, 155, 204, 218. 94, 128, 132. Samucchedika-6, 9, 92. Riju Sutra Naya-38, 39, 40, 41, Saree-321. 42, 96. Siddha-256, 257, 259. Risabhapura-8, 9, 45. Siddhanta-9. Rohagupta-160, 161, 162, 168, Siddhatma-276. 179, 182, 194, 196, 200, 216, Siddhi-pada-276, 314. 217. Sprista-baddha-334. Sarkarya-142. Sthananga Sutra-174. Sivabhuti-273, 276, 291, 299, Sthasa-26, 31. 304, 306, 307, 313, 318, 326, Sudarsana-11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17 327. 39, 40.

Page #371
Nihnayavada : 347: Suksma samparaya Caritra-276. Ulluka-tira-131. Svayambuddhas-305. Upadhis-274, 275. Tainduka-11, 13, 16. Upakarana-305. Tirtha-88. Upasama sreni-275, 314. Tirthankara-77 78, 79, 88, 126, Upayoga-146, 147, 148, 150, 151. 129, 194,225, 267, 268, 274, Uttaradhyana Sutra-174, 327. 275, 281, 283, 304, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 318,319, Vartamana Paryaya-97. 322, 324, 326, 329. Vastra-304, 324. Tirthankara Bhagavan Vastu-57. Simandara Swami-225. Vasu Suri-45, 46, 49. Tisyagupta-6, 9, 45, 46, 47, 48, Visesa-111, 153, 155, 204. 49, 50, 54, 59, 61, 65, 333, 334. Visesa Jnana-154, 155, 156. Trairasikas-5, 6, 9, 334. Vyakhya Prajnapti-15. Udiryanane Udiritam-19. Vyutsarga-354. Ulluka-129. Yatha-khyata Caritram-276. End.