________________
trhleyke ] Nyāya-Kusumānjali concerned. And it surely does not exist, when referred to the nature of another substance.
To believe that existence considered from the stand-point of one's own nature is the same as the non-existence admitted from the stand-point of another's nature is incorrect. For, this will directly go against the Bauddhas and the Naiyayikas who look upon Hetu as possessing three and five characteristics respectively, that is to say, they shall have to consider Sapaksha-Sattva and Vipaksha-vyavritti as the same.
મેચકમાં સ્પષ્ટ રીતે વિરૂદ્ધ વર્ણરચના જોતા છતાં, “સર્વ ધર્મ અને અસવ ધર્મનું જોડલું એક જ સ્થળે યુકત નથી” એમ એકાન્તમતરૂપ ઉગ્ર ભૂતથી પીડાયેલા મનુષ્યો સવતઃ પિકાર કરે છે. ખરેખર, વસ્તુ પિતાને સ્વરૂપની અપેક્ષાએ સત અને પારકાના સ્વરૂપની અપેક્ષાએ 24724 ud fax 3."-28 स्याद्वादः संशयवादो नास्तिसत्वासावधियं च संशयतया मन्दं विना को वदे ?
एकस्मिन् हि विरुद्धधर्मयुगलज्ञानं मतः संशयः। सत्चासत्वयुगं प्रसिध्यति यदैकस्मिन् प्रमाणात्तदा
व्याघातः क इहोदयेत् ? कथमिदंसंप्रत्ययः संशयः ! ॥२५॥
Who else but the dull-headed can mistake for doubt the notion of existence and non-existence ( arising in one and the same object when referred to from different points of view ), when doubt is considered as the knowledge of a couple of contradictory attributes in one and the same object? What harm can arise then, when the couple of existence
203
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
