________________
Jinabhadra Gani's
[ The third
Vayubhuti-The hetu vijnänatvāt" stated by you becomes nothing but a portion of the proposition to be proved in that case.
.: 160 :•
" "
Acarya-It is not so. The particular is pointed out in this case; and when particular is emphasized, the hetu stated there-in is common e. g., the varnätmaka sabda is anitya because of its sabdatva as in the case of a meghasabda. Similarly, in the proposition that bālavijnāna is similar to other · vijnānas, only a particular case of vijnana is emphasized and vijnana in general is not emphasized, consequently this does not form a part of the proposition as it forms in the case of anityah sabdah sabdatvat.”
66
पढमो थणाहिलासो अण्णाहाराहिलासपुवोऽयं ।
जह संपयाहिलासोऽणुभूइओ सोय देहहिओ ॥ ११४॥ (१६६२)
Padhamo thaṇāhilāso anṇāhārāhilāsapuvvo'yam | Jaha sampayāhilāso'nubhūio so ya dehahio ॥ 114 ॥ ( 1662 ) ] [ प्रथमः स्तनाभिलाषोऽन्याहाराभिलाषपूर्वोऽयम् ।
यथा सांप्रताभिलाषोऽनुभूतितः स च देहाधिकः ॥ ११४ ॥ (१६६२) Prathamaḥ stanābhilaṣo'nyāhārābhilaṣapūrvo'yami Yatha sampratabhilaso 'nubhūtitah sa ca dehadhika || 114 (1662) ]
Trans.—114 The first desire ( of the child ) to suck the breasts (of mother) is like the desire in the present case just similar to other desires for food on account of (the same) experience. And that desire is distinct from body. ( 1662 )
टीका- गौतम ! आद्यः स्तनाभिलाषो बालस्वायमन्याभिलाषपूर्वकः, अनुभूतेः - अनुभवात्मकत्वात्, सांप्रताभिलाषवदिति । अथवा, "अभिलाषत्वात् " इत्ययमनुक्तोऽपि हेतुद्रष्टव्यः, इह योऽभिलाषः सोऽन्याभिलाषपूर्वको दृष्टः, यथा सांप्रताभिलाषः, यदभिलाषपूर्वक श्चायमाद्यः स्तनाभिलाषः स शरीरादन्य एव, पूर्वशरीरपरित्यागेऽपीहत्याभिलापकारणत्वात् । ज्ञानगुणश्चा
