________________
.: 224 :.
Jinabhadra Gani's
[The fourth इति । हन्त ! इत्थमपि हतोऽसि, यत स्वो भावः स्वभावस्ततः स्व- परभावाभ्युपगमात् शून्यताभ्युपगमहानिः । न च वन्ध्यापुत्र कल्पानामर्थानां स्वभाव - परिकल्पना युक्तेति । भवतु वाऽपेक्षा, तथापि शून्यताऽसिद्धिः || १६५ ॥ ( १७१३ ) ॥
D. C—If there is absolute negation in the world, what is the use of apekṣa in apprehending hrasva etc. to the apekṣā of dirgha etc.? For, the very conception of apekṣā is contrary to the absolute negation.
Vyakta :—Apprehending hrasva, dirgha etc. by means of apekṣa is very natural.
"
root cause in cases
Acarya: :-— That is not so, O Vyakta ! Svabhāva is the like fire burns " "The sky does not burn etc. But, that is not applicable to the above-named example of the apprehension of hrasva, dirgha etc. Hence, svabhava should not be blamed in such cases. It is absurd to assume svabhāva in the apprehension of non-existent objects like vandhyāputra.
Svabhava means existence of one's own self. The rest can be distinguished as parabhava-the existence of everything else. Apart from your belief in apekṣa, the principle of sarvas'unyata would be violated even from this point of view.
How ?
होज्जावेक्खाओ वा विण्णाणं वाभिहाणमेत्तं वा ।
दीहं ति व हस्संति व न उसत्ता सेसधम्मा वा ॥ १६६ ॥ (१७१४)
Hojjāvekkhāo vā vinṇānam vābhihānamettam vā
Dîham ti va hassam ti va na u sattā sesadhammā vā ||166|| (1714)
[ भवेदपेक्षातो वा विज्ञानं वाभिधानमात्रं वा ।
दीर्घमिति वा इस्वमिति वा न तु सत्ता शेषधर्मा वा || १६६ || (१७१४)
