________________
136
exist. It cannot even be said that everything being non-existent the cognition of the fore-part is illusory; for if it be so, all things being equally non-existent, there should be the cognition, though illusory of the fore part of the ass's horn. Either both must be cognised, as they are equally non-existent, or there should be just the reverse situation, viz the fore part of ass's horn should be cognised and the fore part of pillar, etc. should not be seen. But this is not what we find and so it cannot be accepted that everything is void (1739).
What an inference is this, 'The fore part too does not exist, for the hind part is not seen’? How can one set aside by inference what is established by direct perception ? One can never demonstrate by inference that fire is cold. It would be more reasonable to say "The hind part exists because the fore part is cognised; .'Fore-part' is relative, it can exist only if the bind part is there; if the fore part is cognised, its existence establishes that of the hind part too. It is not also reasonable to imagine a fore part of this fore part and so on infinitely unless the existence of the hind part is admitted. Moreover it cannot be said that a thing does not exist simply because it is not perceived. Non-perception can be accounted for in a number of ways (1740).
If everything is non-existent, how can one talk of fore, hind or middle parts; it cannot be from another's point of view also for with Nihilism there cannot be anything like one's own or another's point of view. If such parts are accepted Nihilism cannot be admitted; and if they are not admitted, there is no sense in imagining such parts of a non-existent thing as in the case of ass's horn. If everything is void, why is the fore part alone seen and not the hind part? Why is there not non-perception of both or the reverse position, viz the hind part being seen and not the fore part ? (1741-43).
If it be accepted as a rule that a thing does not exist if it is not seen then the existence of crystal, etc. will have to be recognised as their hind part is seen; if even their existence is not admitted then the reason 'because it is not perceived'
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
