Sahrdayaloka Part 01

SR No.: 006908
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Tapasvi Nandi
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2005
Total Pages: 602
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 14 MB

Page 291

266
SAHĶDAYĀLOKA sakala-tadīya-vyaktişv abhidhāyāḥ kalpane násti dosa iti vācyam. sāmānyapratyāsatter nirākaraṇāt. gaurava-dosasya anuddhārāt ca."
The following is the contention of the siddhāntin : It is not necessary to accept the sāmānya-laksana-pratyāsatti. Even without its help, the 'cakşus-samyoga' with one go-vyakti which is gotvā"śraya, can produce the cognition of other go-vyaktis which are at a distance, by the laukika-sannikarsa of samyukta-samavetasamavāya. Like-wise the go-vyaktis of distant time can be known by becoming buddhi-visaya through the same sambandha, because they also are gotvā”śraya. To know the go-vyakti as gorvā"śraya is inevitable even in the vyakti-bakti-vāda. Because a man may know the sakti of go-pada in only one vyakti at the first instance. But on a second occasion when he sees an elderly man ordering a young man saying 'gām ānaya', 'gām naya', 'gām badhāna', etc., and the young man brings, takes and ties the cow accordingly, he understands that the second cow also is having the gotva-jāti and that is being meant by the go-pada as the previous one. It may be contended, as explained above, that samānya-pratyāsatti is required for vyāpti-samsaya and vyāpti-jñāna etc. But the vyāpti jñāna can be had in the 'mahānasīya dhūma' in the dhūmatva-rūpa itself. It may be argued again that there can be no vyāpti-samsaya, because there is vyāpti-niścaya in the dhūma which is actually seen, and other dhūmas do not come to the mind of the perceiver (anupasthita). But this argument is unfounded, because even though there is vyāpti-niscaya in a particular dhūma, there is scope for vyāpti-samsaya by dhūmatva in general.
Moreover sāmānya cannot be taken as sambandha at all; because every sambandha invariably implies the existence of anuyogin and pratiyogin which are
the case of samanya. Again, we do not find also visista-buddhi which is produced by the sambandha.
Thus, in the absence of sāmānya-laksana-pratyāsatti, the vyabhicāra-dosa pointed out in vyakti-Śakti-vāda remains unanswered. Even if the 'samanyalaksana-pratyāsatti were to be accepted, where is the answer for the gaurava dosa raised above ? Because innumerable śaktis will have to be accepted according to the endless number of vyaktis.
Again Pandita Raja (PR.) refers to another argument of the pūrva-pakṣin in answer to the vyabhicāra-dosa and says that the persistence of the gauravadosa makes it useless. The argument of pūrvapakşin runs as follows : of the three things, sakti-graha, padārthopa-sthiti and śābda-bodha, each preceeding