________________
Vada ]
Gaṇadharavada
punya but on account of its own svabhava. According to this theory, there is nothing like Karma.
.: 417:
Your doubt has sprung up from five different opinions stated above. But that is not justifiable. For, out of those five theories, none except the fourth one is acceptible. The expansion of bhava by means of its svabhava as laid down in the fifth theory, is also not acceptible. Because, in that case, svabhāva should either be a definite object (vastu) or causelessness (niskāranatā), or the property of a definite object (vastu-dharma). Since svabhāva is absolutely imperceptible like a kha-puspa, it can never exist as a definite object. || 364365 (1912-1913)
Then,
अचंतमणुवद्धो वि अह तओ अस्थि नत्थि किं कम्मं ? | हेऊ व तदत्थित्ते जो नणु कम्मस्स वि स एव ॥ ३६६ ॥ (१९९४) कम्मस्स वाभिहाणं होज सभावो ति होउ को दोसो ? | पइनिययागाराओ न य सो कत्ता घडस्लेव ॥ ३६७॥ (१९१५) मुत्तो अमुत्तो व तओ जइ मुत्तो तोऽभिहाणओ भिन्नो । कम्मत्ति सहावो त्तिय जइ वाऽमुत्तो न कत्ता तो ॥३६८॥ (१९१६) देहाणं वोमं पिव, जुत्ता कज्जाइओ य मुत्तिमया । अह सो निक्कारणया तो खरसिंगादओ होंतु ॥ ३६९ ॥ (१९१७)
अह वत्थूणो स धम्मो परिणामो तो स कम्म- जीवाणं । पुने - राभिहाणो कारण - कज्जाणुमेओ सो ॥ ३७० ॥ (१९१८) किरियाणं कारणओ देहाईणं च कज्जभावाओ । कम्मं मद्भिहियं तिय पडिवज्ज तमग्गिभूइ व ॥ ३७१॥ (१९१९)
53
