Tarkatarangini

SR No.: 002581
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Gunratna, Vasant G Parikh
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2001
Total Pages: 306
Language: Sanskrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Philosophy
File Size: 15 MB

Page 16

15
quoting the relevant sūtra from Pāṇini.28 In this discussion, he also shows the fundamental difference between Karmadharaya and Itaretaradvandva and concludes that the compound in the sūtra is Itaretaradvandva.
This shows that Gn. is well conversant with the Pāṇiniya grammar, though Jainas generally studied the system of Hemacandra. (III) Mokshvāda
Moksha through Tattvagnāna
The first sūtra of N. S. as quoted by Ke., tells that the right knowledge of the sixteen categories leads to the final beautitude.29 Ke. merely explains the meaning of the word Nihśreyasādhigama. Gv., however, takes up the discussion 30 and tries to solve the problem that how the knowledge of the sixteen categories is responsible for the final beautitude
Šāstra and Tattvagnāna
According to Gv., in the beginning Šāstra is the main source for Tattvagnāna.31 However, Sastra is not a synonym for Tattvagnāna. Śastra in a way produces Vyāpāra, which is a door in the attainment of Tattvagnāna, ultimately leading to Moksha.
Here, Gv. warns against the notion that Šāstra as well as Tattvagnāna is direct cause of Moksha. According to him Šāstra consists of words which are momentary according to Nyāya system. The Moksha comes at the end, i. e., after Tattvagnāna is produced, and, therefore, the ablative in Tattvagnānāt should not be understood in the sense of “Hetu”, but in the sense of “Prayojakaiva". He goes a step further and declares that even Mithyāgnánadhvaṁsa cannot be the Vyāpāra for Tattvagnāna, as it does not start immediately after Tattvagnāna. He also dispenses with Sravana, Manana and Nididhyāsana as direct means of Moksha.32
Gn. faithfully follows Gv. in this matter. He explains later's view more clearly by adding a few remarks of his own. With Gv. he also draws our attention to the fact that though ablative case in “Tattvagnānāt" is in the sequel of “Prayojakatva" there is no Lakshanā to be understood in the process. That, Sastra as well as Tattvagnāna is “Prayojaka" and not "Janaka" of the Moksha can be easily understood from the word itself. This shows