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 146

कारिका ८५ ]
बाह्यार्थ भ्रान्ति-विषयक विशिष्ट प्रतिपत्ति है - भ्रान्ति-संज्ञाओंका भ्रान्तिरूप अर्थका अभाव माननेपर भ्रान्ति-संज्ञासे भ्रान्ति-प्रतिपत्तिका योग नहीं बन सकेगा और उस योगके न बननेसे प्रमाणत्वप्रतिपत्तिका प्रसंग उपस्थित होगा । अर्थात् भ्रान्तिको भी सम्यक्ज्ञान मानना पड़ेगा जो इष्ट तथा अबाधित नहीं । इससे खरविषाण ( गधे के सींग ), खपुष्प ( गगनकुसुम ) आदि शब्दों का भी स्वार्थरहित होना बाधित हो जाता है । उनका स्वार्थ अभाव है, उसको न माननेपर खर - विषाणादिके भावका प्रसंग उपस्थित होगा । अतः इन खरविषाणादिके साथ भी उक्त संज्ञात्व-हेतुका व्यभिचार नहीं है ।'
देवागम
संज्ञात्व हेतुमें व्यभिचार-दोषका निराकरण बुद्धि-शब्दार्थ-संज्ञास्तास्तिस्रो बुद्ध्यादिवाचिकाः । तुल्या बुद्धयादिबोधाश्च त्रयस्तत्प्रतिविम्बिकाः ||८५ ||
७७
' ( यदि कोई मीमांसक - मतानुसारी यह कहे कि अर्थ, शब्द और ज्ञान ये तीनों बराबरकी संज्ञाएँ हैं', जीव-अर्थं जीव- शब्द और जीव-बुद्धि तीनोंकी 'जीव' संज्ञा होनेपर अर्थ पदार्थक जीवशब्द ही सबाह्यार्थ प्रसिद्ध है - बुद्धि-पदार्थंक तथा शब्द-पदार्थंक नहीं, ऐसी स्थिति में संज्ञापना हेतुके विपक्षमें भी व्यापनेसे व्यभिचार दोष आता है; क्योंकि संज्ञात्व-हेतुको बुद्धि, शब्द और अर्थादिक विशेषण से रहित सामान्य रूपसे हेतु कहा गया है, तो ऐसा कहनेवाले भी यथार्थवादी नहीं हैं; क्योंकि ) बुद्धि, शब्द और अर्थ तीनोंकी सज्ञाएँ और बुद्धि-आदिसंज्ञा-जनित बुद्धि-आदिविषयक तीनों बोध भी सर्वत्र स्वव्यतिरिक्त बुद्धयादि विषयके प्रतिबिम्बक होते हैं- उच्चारित शब्दसे जो ( अव्यभिचरित ) निश्चित - बोध होता है वही उसका स्वार्थ है, अन्यथा शब्दके
१. अर्थाऽभिधान- प्रत्ययास्तुल्यनामानः इति ।

Translation AI Generated

## Karika 85:

**Specific understanding regarding the fallacy of external objects:** If the meaning of the fallacious terms is considered to be devoid of the fallacious form, then the fallacious term will not be able to produce the fallacious understanding, and the absence of this production will lead to the emergence of the understanding of proof. In other words, it will be necessary to consider the fallacy as correct knowledge, which is not desirable and unobstructed. This will hinder the absence of meaning in words like "kharvishaan" (horn of a donkey) and "khapushp" (sky flower). Their meaning is absent, and if this is not accepted, then the emergence of the meaning of "kharvishaan" etc. will be inevitable. Therefore, there is no contradiction in the said reason for the term with these "kharvishaan" etc.

**Devagam:**

**The elimination of the fault of contradiction in the reason for the term:** The three are intellect, word, and meaning, which are indicative of intellect etc. The three are intellect etc. knowledge, which are reflections of the three. ||85||

**77:**

(If a Mimamsa follower says that meaning, word, and knowledge are all equal terms), then in the case of the term "Jeev" being applied to the "Jeev" meaning, "Jeev" word, and "Jeev" intellect, the "Jeev" word, which is the meaning of the object, is known to be external, while the intellect and word are not. In such a situation, the contradiction fault arises due to the pervasiveness of the reason for the term in the opposite direction; because the reason for the term has been stated in a general form without any specific qualification of intellect, word, and meaning etc., then those who say so are not realists; because) the terms of intellect, word, and meaning, and the three knowledges related to intellect etc. arising from the terms of intellect etc., are all reflections of the object of intellect etc. other than themselves. The definite knowledge that arises from the uttered word (without contradiction) is its meaning, otherwise the word will be...