Gandharavada

SR No.: 006739
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Esther A Solomon
Publisher: Gujarat Vidyasabha
Publication Year: 1966
Total Pages: 400
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 18 MB

Page 168

79
as when we say "There is no jar', it is implied that it is existent - but elsewhere. What is utterly non-existent is also not negated, e. g. the sixth element which is non-existent like the ass's horn. But the jiva is negated, therefore it must be existent (1573).
Yet, it may be urged, we do say 'the ass's horn does not exist' and if as has been said by Mahavira, that which is negated must be an existent thing, then ass's horn must be real, existent. True, when anything is negated anywhere, it is its conjunction, inherence, genus (universal) or particular that is negated in the present substratum, even while it does exist elsewhere. For example, In 'Devadatta is not in the house', the conjunction of 'Devadatta' and 'house' is negatived, though they themselves are existent entities. Similarly when we say, 'The ass's horn does not exist' what is negativel is merely the relation of inherence of 'ass' and 'horn' which are existent. So also in 'Another moon does not exist, by negating another moon we are denying merely the class-concept ('moonness'), but the utter non-existence of moon is not thereby established. And in 'Pearls of the size of jar do not exist', the particularity of 'being of the size of a jar' is negatived of pearls, but there is no question of denying existence to pearls. This being so, even when we say, "The soul does not exist', we are negating merely the conjunction of the existent soul with something somewhere, e. g. The soul does not exist in the body', and not rejecting outright the existence of the soul.
Even with this explanation there is likely to be an objection. If what is negatived must be an existent object, then were someone to say to Indrabhūti, 'You are not the lord of the three worlds," he should be the lord of the three worlds as lordship of the three worlds has been negatived. The point has not been properly grasped by the objector. What is negatived is only the particular, viz. 'lordship of the three worlds' of Indrabhuti, as 'being of the size of a jar' is negatived of pearls. There is not the utter denial of lordship, since even Indrabhūti can be the lord or master of his own disciples and followers.