________________
22
post, man has not been established), then there should be absence of doubt (also).
(1702) If it is argued that a doubt can arise even when nothing is existent, as it does in a dream, (the reply is) it is not so. In a dream it is caused by memory, etc.; there is not utter non-existence there (too).
(1703) Experienced things, perceived things, things much thought about (or worried about), things heard of, disorder of humours, (influence of some) deity, marshy land, merit, demerit - these are the causes of a dream; but not non-existence (of things).
(1704) Dream is positive existence, because it is of the nature of knowledge, like the knowledge of jar. Or, it is brought about by the instrumental causes mentioned above and so is positively existent as the jar is.
(1705-6) And if everything were non-existent, how could there have been such empirical utterances as 'This is dreain, (that) non-dream, true, false; Gandharva-city, Pataliputra; literally true, figurative; effect, cause; what is to be established, what establishes; doer; speaker, statement, what is to be stated; another's stand-point and one's own stand-point'?
(1707) Or how could these have been determined as certain features — stability (or solidity of earth), fluidity (of water), heat (of tejas), movement (of wind), colourlessness (of ether); and how could it be determined that sound, etc. are knowables, and that organs of hearing etc. are the instruments of knowledge ?
(1708) And if there is but Void, why is there not the same position for all (all as dream or as non-dream, etc,) or or just the opposite position, or non-cognition of everything ? And how can you say that (knowledge of) Void is true or that knowledge of objects as existent is false.
(1709) And how could there be the notion of own, other, both; and how could objects be non-established mutually ? If it is
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
