________________
Vada ]
Gañadharavada
·
111 ?
karana ) is the topic of consideration and not the objects which are only the instrumental causes, such as the form (rūpa ), the light ( aloka ) etc.
The opponent will argue—“The pleasure, the pain, etc., are also of the nature of effects (like the body, etc. ). Herice, since they have no physical form, we would argue that the karman is also devoid of a physical form, because the rise of something devoid of a physical form is not possible (or reasonable) as taking place from something which has a physical form. Nor is it possible that one and the same thing be both mūrta (possessed of a physical form ) and a-mūrta (devoid of a physical form ) since that would be self-contradictory. "
To this objection we reply :-Indeed, for this very reason, the intimate or essential cause only is taken as the topic of our consideration and we have excluded the discussion of the instrumental cause. As the pleasure, the pain, etc., are the properties of the soul ( Atman), the soul alone is their essential cause, while karman is only the instrumental cause, while karman is only the instrumental cause of the pleasure, the pain, etc., just as are the food, the drink, the poison of a snake, etc. Thus there is no flaw in our doctrine. 1625
The Ācārya mentions also other arguments proving the physical nature ( mūrtatva ) of an action ( karman ):-- तह सुहसंवित्तीओ संबंधे वेयणुब्भवाओ य । ashaIETOT137Ì TETOTTAISĪT Quoti II VCHI (-882€)
आहार इवानल इव घडु व्व नेहाइकयबलाहाणो । खीरमिवोदाहरणाई कम्मरूवित्तगमगाइं ॥ ७९ ॥ (१६२७) Taha suhasamvittîo sambandhe veyanubbhavāo ya i Bajjhabalāhāņão pariņāmāo ya vinneyam 11 71 ( 1626 ) Ahāra ivānala iva ghadu vya nehāi kaya balāhāno 1 Khîramivodāharaṇāim kammarūvittagamagāim 11 79 ( 1627 )