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 352

232]
सर्वार्थसिद्धौ
[5133 § 589
संबन्धा जनकत्वजन्यत्वादिनिमित्ता न विरुध्यन्ते ; अर्पणाभेदात् । पुत्रापेक्षया पिता, पित्रपेक्षया पुत्र इत्येवमादिः । तथा द्रव्यमपि सामान्यार्पणया नित्यम्, विशेषार्पणयानित्यमिति नास्ति विरोधः । तौ च सामान्यविशेषौ कथंचिद् भेदाभेदाभ्यां व्यवहारहेतु भवतः ।
8589. अत्राह, सतोऽनेकनयव्यवहारतन्त्रत्वात् उपपन्ना भेदसंघातेभ्यः सतां 'स्कन्धात्मनोत्पत्तिः । इदं तु संदिग्धम्, किं संघातः संयोगादेव द्वयणुकादिलक्षणो भवति, उत कश्चिद्विशेषोऽवनियत इति ? उच्यते, 'सति संयोगे बन्धादेकत्वपरिणामात्मकात्संघातो निष्पद्यते । यद्येवमिदमुच्यतां, कुतो नु खलु पुद्गलजात्यपरित्यागे' संयोगे च सति भवति केषांचिद् बन्धोऽन्येषां च नेति ? उच्यते, यस्मात्तेषां पुद्गलात्माविशेषेऽप्यनन्तपर्यायाणां परस्परविलक्षणपरिणामादाहितसामर्थ्याद्भवन्प्रतीतः -
स्निग्धरूक्षत्वाद् बन्धः ॥ 330
$ 590. बाह्याभ्यन्तरकारणवशात् स्नेहपर्यायाविर्भावात् स्निह्यते' स्मेति स्निग्धः । तथा रूक्षणाद्रक्षः । स्निग्धश्च रूक्षश्च स्निग्धरुक्षौ । तयोर्भावः स्निग्धरूक्षत्वम् । स्निग्धत्वं चिक्कणगुणलक्षणः पर्यायः । तद्विपरीतपरिणामो रूक्षत्वम् । 'स्निग्धरूक्षत्वात्' इति हेतुनिर्देश: । तत्कृतो
प्रकार है -- जैसे देवदत्तके पिता, पुत्र, भाई और भान्जे इसी प्रकार और भी जनकत्व और जम्यत्व आदिके निमित्तसे होने वाले सम्बन्ध विरोधको प्राप्त नहीं होते । जब जिस धर्मकी प्रधानता होती है उस समय उसमें वह धर्म माना जाता है। उदाहरणार्थ- पुत्रकी अपेक्षा वह पिता है और पिताकी अपेक्षा वह पुत्र है आदि । उसी प्रकार द्रव्य भी सामान्यकी अपेक्षा नित्य है और विशेषकी अपेक्षा अनित्य है, इसलिए कोई विरोध नहीं है । वे सामान्य और विशेष कथंचित् भेद और अभदकी अपेक्षा ही व्यवहारके कारण होते हैं ।
8589. शंका - सत् अनेक प्रकारके नयके व्यवहारके आधीन होनेसे भेद, संघात और भेद-संघातसे स्कन्धोंकी उत्पत्ति भले ही बन जावे परन्तु यह संदिग्ध है कि द्वयणुक आदि लक्षणवाला संघात संयोगसे ही होता है या उसमें और कोई विशेषता है ? समाधान-संयोगके होनेपर एकत्व परिणमन रूप बन्धसे संघातकी उत्पत्ति होती है । शंका-यदि ऐसा है तो यह बतलाइए कि सब पुद्गलजाति होकर भी उनका संयोग होनेपर किन्हींका बन्ध होता है और किन्हींका नहीं होता, इसका क्या कारण है ? समाधान—चूँकि वे सब जातिसे पुद्गल हैं तो भी उनकी जो अनन्त पर्यायें हैं उनका परस्पर विलक्षण परिणमन होता है, इसलिए उससे जो सामर्थ्य उत्पन्न होती है उससे ऐसा प्रतीत होता है कि-
स्निग्धत्व और रूक्षत्वसे बन्ध होता है ॥33॥
8 590. बाह्य और आभ्यन्तर कारणसे जो स्नेह पर्याय उत्पन्न होती है उससे पुद्गल स्निग्ध कहलाता है । इसकी व्युत्पत्ति 'स्निह्यते स्मेति स्निग्ध:' होगी । तथा रूखापनके कारण पुद्गल रूक्ष कहा जाता है । स्निग्ध पुद्गलका धर्म स्निग्धत्व है और रूक्ष पुद्गलका धर्म रुक्षत्व है। पुद्गलकी चिकने गुणरूप जो पर्याय है वह स्निग्धत्व है और इससे जो विपरीत परिणमन है वह रूक्षत्व है । सूत्रमें 'स्निग्धरूक्षत्वात्' इस प्रकार हेतुपरक निर्देश किया है । तात्पर्य यह है कि
1. स्कन्धानामेवोत्प - दि. 1, दि. 2, आ. । 2. - कुतोऽत्र खलु दि. 1, दि. 2 1 3 -त्यागे सति मु. । 4. - ह्यतेऽस्मिन्निति मु.

Translation AI Generated

[232]
**Sarvarthasiddhi**
[5133 § 589
Relationships arising from causes like fatherhood and sonship do not contradict each other; due to the non-difference of the object of application. For example, with respect to the son, he is the father, and with respect to the father, he is the son, and so on. Similarly, there is no contradiction in the fact that a substance is eternal with respect to the general and non-eternal with respect to the particular. These general and particular are, in some way, the cause of the transaction due to their difference and non-difference.
8589. Here it is said, due to the fact that the real is subject to the transaction of many kinds of Nayas, the origin of the Skandhas from the aggregates of differences is justified. But this is doubtful, whether the aggregate is only due to combination, characterized by dyads, etc., or whether there is some other specific characteristic? It is said, "When there is combination, the aggregate arises from the bondage that is characterized by the result of oneness. Even if this is said, why then, in the case of the abandonment of the Pudgala-jati, is there bondage for some and not for others when there is combination? It is said, because even though they are all Pudgalas in terms of their jati, their infinite Paryayas undergo mutually distinct transformations, and therefore, the power that arises from this makes it appear that -
Bondage arises from the qualities of being oily and rough. || 330
$ 590. Due to external and internal causes, the oily Paryaya appears, and therefore, it is called oily. Similarly, due to roughness, it is called rough. The oily and the rough are oily-rough. Their state is the quality of being oily-rough. The quality of being oily is the Paryaya characterized by the quality of being slippery. The opposite transformation of this is the quality of being rough. The reason is indicated in the sutra, "From the quality of being oily-rough." This is the cause of
The type is like Devadatta's father, son, brother, and nephew. Similarly, there are other relationships arising from causes like fatherhood and sonship, which do not lead to contradiction. When a particular dharma is predominant, it is considered in that context. For example, with respect to the son, he is the father, and with respect to the father, he is the son, and so on. Similarly, a substance is eternal with respect to the general and non-eternal with respect to the particular, so there is no contradiction. These general and particular are, in some way, the cause of the transaction due to their difference and non-difference.
8589. Doubt - Since the real is subject to the transaction of many kinds of Nayas, the origin of the Skandhas from the aggregates of differences, and the aggregates of differences themselves, may be justified, but it is doubtful whether the aggregate characterized by dyads, etc., is only due to combination, or whether there is some other specific characteristic? Solution - When there is combination, the aggregate arises from the bondage that is characterized by the result of oneness. Doubt - If this is the case, then explain why, even though all Pudgalas are of the same jati, there is bondage for some and not for others when there is combination? Solution - Because even though they are all Pudgalas in terms of their jati, their infinite Paryayas undergo mutually distinct transformations, and therefore, the power that arises from this makes it appear that -
Bondage arises from the qualities of being oily and rough. || 33 ||
8 590. Due to external and internal causes, the oily Paryaya appears, and therefore, it is called oily. Its etymology is "snihyate smeti snigdha". Similarly, due to roughness, it is called rough. The oily Pudgala's dharma is oiliness, and the rough Pudgala's dharma is roughness. The Paryaya of the Pudgala that is characterized by the quality of being slippery is oiliness, and the opposite transformation of this is roughness. The sutra indicates the reason as "snigdharukshatvat". The meaning is that
1. Skandhanamevutpa - di. 1, di. 2, a. | 2. - kuto'tra khalu di. 1, di. 2 1 3 -tyage sati mu. | 4. - hyate'sminniti mu.