________________
Section 3 तृतीय परिच्छेद
Fault in accepting the objects of knowledge as absolutely permanent (nityatva-ekānta):
नित्यत्वैकान्तपक्षेऽपि विक्रिया नोपपद्यते ।
प्रागेव कारकाभावः क्व प्रमाणं क्व तत्फलम् ॥३७॥
सामान्यार्थ ( यदि यह माना जाए कि पदार्थ सर्वथा नित्य है तो - ) नित्यत्वैकान्त पक्ष में विक्रिया की उत्पत्ति नहीं हो सकती है। जब पहले ही कारक का अभाव है (अवस्था न बदले तो कारकों का सद्भाव बनता ही नहीं है) तब प्रमाण और प्रमाण का फल (प्रमिति ) ये दोनों कहाँ बन सकते हैं?
If the objects of knowledge are supposed to be absolutely permanent (nityatva-ekanta) then there cannot be any modifications in them; when already there is the absence of the agent (kāraka) for a modification how can one have the possibility of a valid source of knowledge (pramāna) and its fruit (pramāna-phala i.e., correct notion-pramiti)?
Only an object which has general (samanya-dravya) as well as particular (viśesa - paryāya) attributes can be the subject of knowledge. The general (dravya) without its modification (paryāya) and modification (paryāya) without its general (dravya) cannot be the subject of valid knowledge; only their combination can be the subject of valid knowledge.
The conception of prama or valid knowledge implies three
67
