Page Text
________________
:: 254 :
___Jinabhadra Gani's [The fourth middle portions exist ? And if it is said so in the opinion of others, whence is the distinction between one's own opinion and another's opinion ? If the front, rear, and the middle portions are accepted as existing, there would be no sūnyata at all. And, if they are not proved ( to be existing ) why alternatives about (non-existent objects like) kharavisāņa ? Or, in the midst of the negation of all objects, why is the front portion apprehended and why not the rear one? Or, why not absolute non-apprehension of both ? Or, why not the reverse ( apprehension ) also ? ( 1741-1743 ).
Also, परभागदरिसणं वा फलिहाईणं ति ते धुवं संति । जइ वा ते वि न संता परभागादरिसणमहेऊ ? ॥१९६॥(१७४४) सवादरिसणउ चिय न भण्णइ कीस, भणई तन्नाम । पुत्वब्भुवगयहाणी पञ्चक्खविरोहओ चेव ॥ १९७ ॥ (१७४५) Parabhāgadarisanam vā phalıhāînam ti te dhuvam santi Jai vā te vi na santā parbhāgadarisana maheū ? 196 11 ( 1744) Savvādarisanäu cciya na bhannaikîsa bhanai tannāma l Puvvabbhuvagayahāņi paccakkhavirohao ceva il 197 11 ( 1745 ) [परभागदर्शनं वा स्फटिकादीनामिति ते ध्रुवं सन्ति ।
यदि वा तेऽपि न सन्तः परभागादर्शनमहेतुः ।। १९६ ॥ (१७४४) ‘सर्वादर्शनत एव न भण्यते कस्मात् , भणति तन्नाम ।
पूर्वाभ्युपगतहानिः प्रत्यक्षविरोधतश्चैव ॥ १९७ ॥ (१७४५) Parabhāgadarśanam vā sphatikādināmiti te dhruvam santi / Yadi vă te’pi na santaḥ parabhāgadarśanamahetuḥ 1119611 (1744)] Sarvadarśanata eva na bhaṇyate kasmät, bhaņati tannámai Pūrvabhyugatabāņih pratyaksavirodhataścaiva il 197 11 ( 1745 ) ]
Trans.-196-197 Or, since the rear portions of ( objects
| SR No. | 011044 |
| Book Title | Gandharwad |
| Original Sutra Author | N/A |
| Author | Ratnaprabhvijay, D P Thaker |
| Publisher | Jain Granth Prakashak Sabha |
| Publication Year | 1942 |
| Total Pages | 579 |
| Language | English |
| Classification | Book_English |
| File Size | 63 MB |