Sarvarthasiddhi

SR No.: 001443
Original Sutra Author: Devnandi Maharaj
Author: Fulchandra Jain Shastri
Publisher: Bharatiya Gyanpith
Publication Year: 1997
Total Pages: 568
Language: Hindi, Sanskrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari, Philosophy, Tattvartha Sutra, & Tattvarth
File Size: 14 MB

Page 195

- 111281801 प्रथमोऽध्यायः
118 वा स्यात् अनेकार्थग्राहि वा । यदि प्रत्यर्थवशवति, सर्वज्ञत्वमस्य नास्ति योगिनः, ज्ञेयस्यानन्त्यात् । अथानेकार्थग्राहि, या प्रतिज्ञा
. "विजानाति न विज्ञानमेकमर्थद्वयं यथा । एकमर्थं विजानाति न विज्ञानद्वयं तथा।" 'सा हीयते।
8180. अथवा "क्षणिका: सर्वसंस्काराः" इति प्रतिज्ञा हीयते; अनेकक्षण' वृत्त्येकविज्ञानाभ्युपगमात् । अनेकार्थग्रहणं हि क्रमेणेति। युगपदेति चेत् । योऽस्य जन्मक्षणः स आत्मलाभार्थ एव। लब्धात्मलाभ हि किचित्स्वकार्य प्रति व्याप्रियते। प्रदीपवदिति चेत् । तस्याप्यनेकभगविषयतायां सत्यामेव प्रकाश्यप्रकाशनाभ्युपगमात् । विकल्पातीतत्वात्तस्य शून्यताप्रसंगश्च ।
रहता।
इस योगीके सर्वज्ञताका अभाव होता है, क्योंकि ज्ञेय अनन्त हैं। और यदि अनेक अर्थोंको युगपत् जामता है तो जो यह प्रतिज्ञा है कि 'जिस प्रकार एक विज्ञान दो अर्थोंको नहीं जानता है उसी प्रकार दो विज्ञान एक अर्थ को नहीं जानते हैं ।' वह नहीं रहती।
$180. अथवा 'सब पदार्थ क्षणिक हैं' यह प्रतिज्ञा नहीं रहती, क्योंकि आपके मतमें अनेक क्षणतक रहनेवाला एक विज्ञान स्वीकार किया गया है। अतः अनेक पदार्थोंका ग्रहण क्रमसे ही
है। शंका-अनेक पदार्थोंका ग्रहण एक साथ हो जायगा। समाधान-जो ज्ञानकी उत्पत्तिका समय है उस समय तो वह स्वरूप लाभ ही करता है, क्योंकि कोई भी पदार्थ स्वरूपलाभ करने के पश्चात् ही अपने कार्यके प्रति व्यापार करता है। शंका-विज्ञान दीपके समान है, अतः उसमें दोनों बातें एक साथ बन जायेंगी। समाधान-नहीं, क्योंकि उसके अनेक क्षण तक रहनेपर ही प्रकाश्यभूत पदार्थोंका प्रकाशन करना स्वीकार किया गया है। यदि ज्ञानको विकल्पातीत माना जाता है तो शून्यताकी प्राप्ति होती है।
विशेषार्थ-इस सूत्रमें कौन-कौन ज्ञान प्रत्यक्ष हैं यह बतलाया गया है। प्रसंगसे इसकी दीकामें इन विशेषताओंपर प्रकाश डाला गया है--
1. अक्ष शब्दका अर्थ । 2. प्रत्यक्ष शब्दकी व्युत्पत्ति। 3. अक्ष शब्दका अर्थ इन्द्रिय या मनको निमिस कर प्रत्यक्ष शब्दका लक्षण करनेपर क्या दोष आते हैं इनका निर्देश । 4. आगमसे सर्वज्ञता नहीं बनती, किन्तु आगम प्रत्यक्षज्ञानपूर्वक ही प्राप्त होता है इसका निर्देश । 5. बौद्धोंके द्वारा माने गये प्रत्यक्षके लक्षणको स्वीकार करनेपर क्या दोष प्राप्त होते हैं इसकी चर्चा । 6. प्रसंगसे बौद्धोंके यहाँ सर्वशता कैसे नहीं बनती और प्रतिज्ञाहानि दोष कैसे आता है इसका निर्देश । तीसरी बातको स्पष्ट करते हुए जो कुछ लिखा है उसका भाव यह है कि प्रत्यक्षज्ञानको इन्द्रियनिमित्तक या मननिमित्तक मानने पर सर्वज्ञता नहीं बनती । वेद ही भूत, भविष्यत्, वर्तमान, दूरवर्ती, सूक्ष्म इत्यादि अर्थोका ज्ञान कराने में समर्थ है। इससे सकल पदार्थों का ज्ञान हो जाता है। इसलिए इन्द्रियजन्य ज्ञान और मनोजन्य ज्ञानको प्रत्यक्ष मानने में कोई आपत्ति नहीं है ऐसा मीमांसक मानते हैं। परन्तु उनका ऐसा मानना समोचीन नहीं है, क्योंकि आगम प्रत्यक्ष ज्ञान के बिना नहीं बन सकता है। यह बात चोथो विशेषता द्वारा बतलायी गयी है। बौद्ध भी अक्षका अर्थ इन्द्रिय करके इन्द्रियजन्य ज्ञानको प्रत्यक्ष मानते हैं, परन्तु उनका ऐसा मानना क्यों समीचीन नहीं है यह पांचवीं विशेषता द्वारा बतलाया गया है । शेष कथन सुगम है।
1. 'क्षणिकाः सर्वसंस्कारा: स्थिराणां कुत: क्रिया। भूतियेषां क्रिया सैव कारक सैव चोच्यते ।' ... 2. क्षणवत्येक-म.।

Translation AI Generated

- Chapter 1
118. It could be that it grasps multiple meanings. If it is due to the opposite meaning, then the yogi does not have omniscience, because the knowable is infinite. And if it grasps multiple meanings, then the vow, "Just as one knowledge does not know two meanings, so two knowledges do not know one meaning," is negated.
8180. Or the vow, "All formations are momentary," is negated; because according to your view, one knowledge that exists for many moments is accepted. For grasping multiple meanings is only in sequence. If it is simultaneous, then the moment of its birth is only for the attainment of the self. Because after attaining the self, it is engaged in some action of its own. If it is like a lamp, then even in the case of its being the object of many parts, the acceptance of the illuminating and the illuminated is true. Because of its being beyond alternatives, there is also the implication of its emptiness.
It does not remain.
This yogi does not have omniscience, because the knowable is infinite. And if it grasps multiple meanings simultaneously, then the vow, "Just as one knowledge does not know two meanings, so two knowledges do not know one meaning," is negated.
$180. Or the vow, "All formations are momentary," is negated; because according to your view, one knowledge that exists for many moments is accepted. Therefore, the grasping of multiple objects is only in sequence.
Doubt-The grasping of multiple objects will happen simultaneously.
Solution-At the time of the birth of knowledge, it only attains its own nature, because any object only engages in its own action after attaining its own nature.
Doubt-Knowledge is like a lamp, therefore both things will happen simultaneously.
Solution-No, because it is accepted that it illuminates the objects to be illuminated only when it exists for many moments. If knowledge is considered to be beyond alternatives, then emptiness is attained.
Special Meaning-In this sutra, it is explained which knowledges are direct. In the context, light is shed on these characteristics in its commentary.
1. The meaning of the word 'aksha'. 2. The etymology of the word 'pratyaksha'. 3. The meaning of the word 'aksha' and the defects that arise when the word 'pratyaksha' is defined as the sense organ or mind. 4. Omniscience is not attained through scripture, but scripture is attained only after direct knowledge. 5. Discussion of the defects that arise when the definition of direct knowledge as accepted by the Buddhists is accepted. 6. In the context, how omniscience is not attained in the case of the Buddhists and how the defect of negation of the vow arises. The meaning of what is written while clarifying the third point is that omniscience is not attained by considering direct knowledge to be caused by the sense organs or mind. The Vedas are capable of giving knowledge of the past, future, present, distant, subtle, etc. This gives knowledge of all objects. Therefore, there is no objection to considering sense-organ-generated knowledge and mind-generated knowledge as direct knowledge. The Mimamsakas believe this. But their belief is not appropriate, because scripture cannot be attained without direct knowledge. This is explained by the fourth characteristic. The Buddhists also consider the meaning of 'aksha' to be the sense organ and consider sense-organ-generated knowledge to be direct knowledge, but why their belief is not appropriate is explained by the fifth characteristic. The remaining statement is easy to understand.
1. 'Kshanika: sarvasankhara: sthiraanam kuta: kriya. Bhutiesham kriya saiwa karaka saiwa cocyate.' ... 2. Kshanavatyek-m.