Panchastikay

SR No.: 090326
Original Sutra Author: Kundkundacharya
Author: Shreelal Jain Vyakaranshastri
Publisher: Bharat Varshiya Anekant Vidwat Parishad
Total Pages: 421
Language: Hindi, Sanskrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari, Philosophy, & Religion
File Size: 11 MB

Page 115

पंचास्तिकाय प्राभृत संस्कृत तात्पर्यवृत्ति - २९
अथ यदेव पूर्वोक्तं निरुपाधिशानदर्शनवरून 'जाद समिति' वचनेन पुनरपि समर्थनं करोतिः -- जादो सयं स चेदा सव्वण्हू सव्वलोयदरिसी य - आत्मा हि निश्चयनयेन केवलज्ञानदर्शनसुखस्वभावस्तावत् इत्यंभूतोपि संसारावस्थायां कर्मावृतः सन् क्रमकरणव्यवधानजनितेन क्षायोपशमिकज्ञानेन किमपि किमपि जानाति तथाभूतदर्शनेन किमपि किमपि पश्यति तथा चेन्द्रियजनितं बाधासहितं पराधीनं मूर्तसुखं चानुभवति स एव चेतयितात्मा निश्चयनयेन स्वयमेव कालादिलब्धिवशात्सर्वज्ञो जातः सर्वदर्शी च जातः । एवं जातः सन् किंकरोति ? पावदि इंदियरहिदं अव्वाबाहं सगममुत्तं प्राप्नोति लभते । किं ? सुखमित्यध्याहारः । कथंभूतं सुखं ? इन्द्रियरहितं । पुनरपि कथं भूतं ? बाधारहितं । पुनरपि किं विशिष्टं ? स्वकमात्मत्वं । पुनश्च किंरूपं ? मूर्तेन्द्रियनिरपेक्षत्वादमूर्तं च । अत्र स्वयं जातमिति वचनेन पूर्वोक्तमेव निरुपाधित्वं समर्थितं । तथा च स्वयमेव सर्वज्ञो जातः सर्वदर्शी च जातो निश्चयनयेनेति पूर्वोक्तमेव सर्वज्ञत्वं सर्वदर्शित्वं च समर्थितमिति ।
१११
अथ भट्टचार्वाकमतानुसारी कश्चिदाह - नास्ति सर्वज्ञोऽनुपलब्धेः खरविषाणवत् । तत्र प्रत्युत्तरं दीयते - कुत्र सर्वज्ञो नास्त्यत्र देशे तथा चात्रकाले किं जगत्त्रये कालत्रये वा ? यद्यत्र देशे काले नास्तीति भण्यते तदा सम्मतमेव । अथ जगत्त्रये कालत्रयेपि नास्ति तत्कथं ज्ञातं भवता ? जगत्त्रयकालत्रयं सर्वज्ञरहितं ज्ञातं चेद्भवता तर्हि भवानेव सर्वज्ञः । कुत इति चेत् ? यो सौ जगत्त्रयं कालत्रयं जानाति स एव सर्वज्ञः, यदि पुनः सर्वज्ञरहितं जगत्त्रयं कालत्रयं न ज्ञातं भवता तर्हि जगत्त्रये कालत्रयेपि सर्वज्ञो नास्तीति कथं निषेधः क्रियते त्वया ।
अथ मतं—किमत्रोदाहरणं यथा कश्चिद्देवदत्तो घटरहितभूतलं चक्षुषा दृष्ट्वा पश्चाद् ब्रूते अत्र भूतले घटो नास्तीति युक्तमेव, अन्यः कोप्यंधः किमेवं ब्रूते अत्र भूतले घटो नास्त्यपि तु नैवं, तथा योसौ जगत्त्रयं कालत्रयं सर्वज्ञरहितं प्रत्यक्षेण जानाति स एव सर्वज्ञनिषेधे समर्थो, न चान्योऽन्ध इव, यस्तु जगत्त्रयं कालत्रयं जानाति स सर्वज्ञनिषेधं कथमपि न करोति । कस्मात् ? जगत्त्रयकालत्रयविषयपरिज्ञानसहितत्वेन स्वयमेव सर्वज्ञत्वादिति । किंचानुपलब्धेरिति हेतुवचनं तदयुक्तं । कथमिति चेत् ? किं भवतां सर्व ज्ञानुपलब्धिरुत जगत्त्रयकालत्रयवर्तिपुरुषाणां वा, यदि भवतामनुपलब्धिरेतावता सर्वज्ञाभावो न भवति । कथमिति चेत् ? परमाण्वादिसूक्ष्मपदार्थाः परचेतोवृत्तयश्च भवद्भिर्यदि न ज्ञायंते तर्हि किं न सन्ति अथ जगत्त्रयकालत्रयवर्तिपुरुषाणां सर्वज्ञानुपलब्धिस्तत्कथं ज्ञातं भवद्भिरिति पूर्वमेवं विचारितं तिष्ठति इति हेतुदूषणं । यदप्युक्तं खरविषाणवदिति दृष्टांतवचनं तदप्ययुक्तं । कथमिति चेत् ? खरे विषाणं नास्ति न सर्वत्र, गवादौ प्रत्यक्षेण दृश्यते तथा सर्वज्ञोपि विवक्षितदेशकाले नास्ति न च सर्वत्र इति संक्षेपेण हेतुदूषणं दृष्टांतदूषणं च ज्ञातव्यं ।

Translation AI Generated

## Pancastikaya Prabhruta Sanskrit Tatparyavritti - 29

**Now, what was said earlier, the meaning of the term "Jada Samiti" from the Nirupaadhi Shaan Darshan, is further supported by the statement: "Jada himself, if he is all-pervading, all-world-seeing, - the soul, by certainty, is of the nature of pure knowledge, pure vision, and pure bliss, - even though he is in the state of Samsara, covered by karma, he knows something or the other, by the knowledge that diminishes the obscurations caused by the interruption of the process of karma, he sees something or the other, by such vision, he experiences something or the other, the worldly bliss, which is dependent on the senses, and is full of obstacles, - the same soul, the knower, by certainty, becomes all-knowing by the power of time and attainment, and becomes all-seeing."**

**How does he, thus become, act? He attains, obtains, the sense-less, obstacle-less, self-contained, supreme bliss. What? Bliss, is the explanation. What kind of bliss? Sense-less. Again, how is it? Obstacle-less. Again, what is special about it? Its own self-nature. Again, what kind? It is formless, due to being independent of the gross senses.**

**Here, by the statement "he himself becomes", the earlier mentioned Nirupaadhitva (non-dependence) is supported. And, by the statement "he himself becomes all-knowing, all-seeing, by certainty", the earlier mentioned Sarvajnatva (all-knowingness) and Sarvadarshitva (all-seeingness) are supported.**

**Now, a follower of the Bhattacharvaka philosophy says: "There is no all-knowing, due to non-perception, like the horn of a hare."**

**To this, the reply is given: "Where is there no all-knowing? In this country, and in this time? Or, in the three worlds, and in the three times? If it is said that there is no all-knowing in this country, and in this time, then it is acceptable. But, if it is said that there is no all-knowing in the three worlds, and in the three times, then how do you know? If you know that the three worlds, and the three times, are devoid of an all-knowing, then you yourself are all-knowing. Why? Because, whoever knows the three worlds, and the three times, is the all-knowing. If, on the other hand, you do not know the three worlds, and the three times, devoid of an all-knowing, then how do you deny that there is no all-knowing in the three worlds, and in the three times?"**

**Now, the opinion is: "What is the example here? Just as someone, seeing a ground devoid of a pot, with his eyes, later says, "There is no pot on this ground", it is right. Another, who is blind, says, "There is no pot on this ground", but it is not so. Similarly, whoever knows the three worlds, and the three times, devoid of an all-knowing, by direct perception, is capable of denying the all-knowing, and not another, like a blind man. But, whoever knows the three worlds, and the three times, does not deny the all-knowing in any way. Why? Because, by having the knowledge of the three worlds, and the three times, he himself is all-knowing. And, the statement "due to non-perception", is not right. Why? Because, is the non-perception yours, or of the people who exist in the three worlds, and the three times? If the non-perception is yours, then there is no absence of the all-knowing. Why? Because, if you do not know the subtle things like atoms, and the thoughts of others, then do they not exist? Or, if the perception of the all-knowing is of the people who exist in the three worlds, and the three times, then how do you know it? This earlier thought remains. This is the refutation of the reason. And, the statement "like the horn of a hare", is also not right. Why? Because, the horn of a hare does not exist everywhere, it is seen directly in a cow, etc. Similarly, the all-knowing does not exist in the desired country, and time, and not everywhere. This is the refutation of the reason, and the refutation of the example, in short.**