________________
1 SIDDHASENA DIVĀKARA
75
it is said that the Kapila doctrine being dependent on Dravyāstika Naya and the Bauddha doctrine being depen: dent an Paryāya Naya are both unreliable. Now the question arises if these two doctrines are unreliable, what about the third doctrine that of Kaņāda which depends upon both tbese Nayas. The reply to this question is given in the Gathā 49 of Sanmati. If this Gäthä is considered as a quotation from other works the unreliability or otherwise of the Kaņāda doctrine remains undecided. It must, therefore, be regarded as originally belonging to the text of Sanmati. Now the answer to the same question in the Bháşya is already given in the verse 2194 and that too with the name of Kaņāda and there is no point in saying the same thing again elsewhere in the Bhāşya. The only conclusion, therefore, is this that this verse 2195 has been taken from Sanmati by the Bbāsyakāra. Aagain the gathā "afu ygat farhad (San. 3. 52) dealing with Sat and Asat perfectly fits in with the context of Sanmati, while the same occurring in Bhāşya does not suit the context at all. There are other Gāthās also, with a slight change in Sanmati and Bháşya ; for instance :
"जावइआ वयणवहा तावइया चेव होंति णयवाया। 51989 vya ar anasara Traha 11" San. 3. 47. "
From G. 2105 the discussion of cause and effect begins. Between these two mentioned above occars Gatha No 2104 which does not fit in with the context. Moreover the purport of Gatha No. 2104 is again mentioned as the final view in Gatha from 2109 to 2111 This show that Gatha No. 2104 is superfluous. And the purport of G. 2195 is clearly seen in Gathā No. 2194.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
