________________
Vada ] Gañadharavada
.: 243 :: sāmagri, too, does not exist, because everything becomes s'ūnya at the end.
Bhagavan :-This belief of yours O Vyakta ! is totally wrong. For, constituents like kantha, ostha, talu etc, which form sāmagrî as well as vacana are directly perceptible. Hence, how could the existence of samagrî be denied ?
Vyakta :-One could perceive even an a-vidyamäna object on account of kāma, svapna, bhaya, unmāda, or a-vidya, but in fact that does not exist.
Bhagavān :-If it is so, O Vyakta ! why is the sāmagrî that produces the hair of a tortoise not produced ? A-vidyamānatā is common in both the cases. So, either this sämagrî should be apprehended like the sāmagrî that produces vacana or both should not be apprehended. Or, why should not the fault of viparyaya ( contrariety ) take place when the sāmagri that produces the hair of a tortoise is apprehended and the one that produces vacana is not ?
But, सामग्गिमओ वत्ता वयणं चत्थि जइ तो कओ सुण्णं । अह नत्थि केण भणि वयणाभावे सुयं केण ?॥१८५।।(१७३३) Sāmaggimao vattā vayaņam catthi jai to kao sunnam i Aha natthi kena bhaniam vayaņābhāve suyam kena ? u1850(1733) [सामग्रीमयो वक्ता वचनं चास्ति यदि ततः कुतः शून्यम् ।
अथ नास्ति केन भणितं वचनाभावे श्रुतं केन ? ॥१८५॥ (१७३३) Sāmagrîmayo vaktā vacanam cāsti yadi tatah kutaḥ śūnyam| Atha năsti kena bhaạitam vacanabhāve śrutam kena ? 111851(1733)]
Trans.—185 And, if the speaker-accompanied by a group of constituent parts-as well as the speech exist, whence is the sūnyatā ( produced ) ? On the other hand, if they do not exist, in absence of ( speaker as well as ) words, by whom is the sūnyata pronounced (and) by whom is (it) heard ? (1733)