Aptamimansa

SR No.: 001170
Original Sutra Author: Samantbhadracharya
Author: Jugalkishor Mukhtar
Publisher: Veer Seva Mandir Trust
Publication Year: 1978
Total Pages: 190
Language: Hindi, Sanskrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Philosophy
File Size: 9 MB

Page 126

देवागम
कारिका ६३ ] आदि अनेक अधिकरणोंमें उसका वर्तना नहीं बनता और प्रत्येकमें सर्वात्मकरूपसे वृत्तिके होने पर एक अवयवी आदिके बहुत्वका प्रसंग उपस्थित होता है-जितने अवयव उतने ही अवयवी ठहरते हैं, जितने संयोगी आदि गुणी उतने ही अनेक अवयवोंमें स्थित संयोगादि गुण ठहरते हैं और जितने सामान्यवान् अर्थ उतने ही सामान्य होने चाहिये । परन्तु ऐसा नहीं है। अतः एककी अनेकमें सर्वात्मक अथवा सर्वदेश वृत्ति माननेसे, आर्हतमतसे भिन्न जो सर्वथा एकान्तमत है उसमें दोष आता है। इस तरह एककी अनेकमें वृत्तिका मानना और न मानना दोनों ही सदोष ठहरते हैं । एकदेशरूप और सर्वात्मक वृत्तिसे भिन्न वृत्तिका अन्य कोई प्रकार नहीं है।'
( यदि वैशेषिकमतकी मान्यतानुसार समवाय-सम्बन्धको प्रकारान्तर माना जाय-यह कहा जाय कि समवाय-सम्बन्धके कारण अवयवी आदि अवयवादिकमें वर्तता है, बिना समवायसम्बन्धके वर्तनके अर्थका अभाव है तो यह कहना भी ठीक नहीं है; क्योंकि यहाँ भी वही प्रश्न पैदा होता है कि अवयवी आदिकी अवयवादिकमें वह समवायवृत्ति एकदेश है अथवा सर्वात्मक ? और दोनोंमें से किसी भी प्रकारकी समवायवृत्तिको मानने पर वही दोष घटित होता है, जिसे ऊपर बतलाया गया है।)
देश-काल-विशेषेऽपि स्यावृत्तियुत-सिद्धवत् । समान-देशता न स्यान्मूर्तकारण-कार्ययोः ॥६३।। ( यदि अवयवादि और अवयवी आदिमें सर्वथा भेद स्वीकार किया जाय तो) देश और कालकी अपेक्षासे भी उनमें-अवयवादि और अवयवी आदिमें-भेद मानना पड़ेगा और तब युत-सिद्धके समान-पृथक्-पृथक् आश्रयमें रहने वाले घट-वृक्षकी तरहउनमें भी वृत्ति ( समवाय-सम्बन्धकी वर्तना) माननी होगी।

Translation AI Generated

## Devagam Karika 63:

**It is not possible for a single entity to be present in multiple locations simultaneously, and if it were to be present in all locations, then the concept of multiplicity of parts would arise.** For example, if there are multiple parts, then there would be multiple parts, and if there are multiple qualities like conjunction, then there would be multiple qualities present in multiple parts. Similarly, if there are multiple entities with common characteristics, then they should all be common. However, this is not the case. Therefore, assuming that a single entity is present in multiple locations simultaneously, or that it is present in all locations, leads to contradictions in the Arhat path, which is completely distinct from other paths. In this way, both accepting and rejecting the presence of a single entity in multiple locations leads to contradictions. There is no other type of presence besides being present in a specific location or being present in all locations.

**(If, according to the Vaisheshika philosophy, the relationship of Samavaya is considered as a different type of relationship, and it is said that the presence of parts, etc., in the whole, etc., is due to the relationship of Samavaya, and that without the relationship of Samavaya, there is no meaning of presence, then this is also not correct. Because the same question arises here: Is the presence of Samavaya in the whole, etc., in the parts, etc., specific or universal? And accepting either type of Samavaya presence leads to the same contradictions mentioned above.)**

**Even if we consider the difference between parts, etc., and the whole, etc., to be absolute, then we would have to accept a difference between them in terms of space and time.** This would lead to the acceptance of presence (Samavaya relationship) in separate locations, like the presence of a pot and a tree in separate locations, which are both considered to be separate entities.