________________
Āptamīmāṁsā
The nature of reality can be predicated only through a sentence that incorporates both the affirmation and negation, depending on the point of view:
तदतद्वस्तु वागेषा तदेवेत्यनुशासी ।
न सत्या स्यान्मृषावाक्यैः कथं तत्त्वार्थदेशना ॥ ११० ॥
सामान्यार्थ - वस्तु तत् और अतत् (सत् और असत् आदि) रूप है। जो वाक्य वस्तु को सर्वथा तत्-रूप ( सत् - नित्यादि - रूप) अथवा सर्वथा अतत्-रूप (असत्-अनित्यादि-रूप) ही प्रतिपादित करता है वह सत्य नहीं है। ऐसे मिथ्या वचनों के द्वारा तत्त्वार्थ (तत्त्व-स्वरूप) का प्रतिपादन कैसे हो सकता है ?
The nature of reality is such that it can be predicated only through a sentence that incorporates both the affirmation ('that is' – tat) and negation ( ' that is not' – atat), depending on the point of view. (In case a sentence predicates affirmation, affirmation is the primary theme and negation is present but as a secondary theme; in case a sentence predicates negation, negation is the primary theme and affirmation is present but as a secondary theme.) A predication that takes the absolutist view of either affirmation or negation is not true. And how can one describe the nature of reality through such a false sentence?
Acarya Samantabhadra's Svayambhūstotra:
तदेव च स्यान्न तदेव च स्यात् तथाप्रतीतेस्तव तत्कथञ्चित् । नात्यन्तमन्यत्वमनन्यता च विधेर्निषेधस्य च शून्यदोषात् ॥
170
(9-2-42)
O Lord Suvidhinatha ! Your description of reality postulates that, as established by experience, there is the
