Agam 45 Chulika 02 Anuyogdwar Sutra

SR No.: 006568
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Nathmal Tatia
Publisher: Research Institute of Prakrit Jainology & Ahimsa Mujjaffarpur
Publication Year: 1970
Total Pages: 312
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Agam, Canon, & agam_anuyogdwar
File Size: 18 MB

Page 240

--476)
STANDARD OF STANDPOINTS (NAYAPPAMĀNA)
177
From the (standpoint of) ujjusua, he lives in those space-points of space, which he is occupying.
From the (standpoints of the) three saddanayas, he lives in his own self.
This is the standpoint) by the illustration of abode.
476. Then what is the standpoint) by the illustration of spacepoints ?? (The standpoint) by the illustration of space-point is (as follows) :
The negama' says: 'The space-point is of the six (substances), viz. (1) space-point of the substance of) dhamma , (2) space-point of (the substance of) adhamma, (3) space-point of (the substance of) agāsa, (4) space-point of (the substance of) a soul, (5) space-point of a material body, and (6) space-point of a parti(of these five substances).'
To the negama speaking thus, the samgaha says: "What you say, viz. "The space-point is of the six' is not (correct). Why? Becuase. (your last category, viz.) 'space-point of a part', is of any one substance (and not of any other thing). What is the example in point ? (The reply is): (Suppose) my ass is purchased by the servant; (here) the servant is also mine, the ass is also mine (and so the proposition is redundant). Therefore don't say: 'The space-point is of the six (substances); (but) say: 'The space-point is of the five (substances), viz. (1) space-point of dhamma, (2) space-point of ahamma (sic space-point of ăgăsa, (4) space-point of a soul, and (5) space-point of a material body'."
To the samguha, speaking thus, the vavahāra says: “What you say, viz. "The space-point is of the five (substances)' is not correct). Why? Your statement The space-point is of the five (substances)' would be proper if (the particular space-point were common to all the five substances) as (is the case with) a common property belonging to a group of five persons-such as silver, or gold, or money, or grains. You should not therefore say "The space-point is of the five (substances)', but you should say: 'The space-point is of five kinds, viz. (1) space. point of dhamma, (2) space-point of ahamma, (3) space-point of agāsa, (4) space-point of a soul, and (5) space-point of a material body'.”
To the vavahāra, speaking thus the ujjusua says: "What you say, viz. 'The space-point is of five kinds' is not correct). Why? Because
1. Vide supra, sutta No. 473. 2. Here 'the negama' means 'the person speaking from the standpoint of negama'.
The expression 'the samgaha' etc. are also to be under-stood similarly.
12