________________
.: 166 :
Jinabhadra Gani's [The third टीका-इह यो जातिस्मरो जीवः स प्राग्भविकशरीरविगमेऽपि सति न विगत इति प्रतिज्ञा । 'सरणाउ त्ति' स्मरणादिति हेतुः। यथा बालजाती बालजन्मनि वृत्तं स्मरतीति बालजातिस्मरणो वृद्ध इति दृष्टान्तः । यथा वा, स्वदेशे मालवकमध्यदेशादौ वृत्तं विदेशेऽपि गतो नरः स्मरन् न विगतः । इदमुक्तं भवति-योऽन्यदेश-कालाद्यनुभूतमर्थ स्मरति सोऽविनष्टो दृष्टः, यथा बालकालानुभूतानामर्थानामनुस्मर्ता वृद्धाद्यवस्थायां देवदत्तः। यस्तु विनष्टो नासौ किञ्चिदनुस्मरति, यथा जन्मानन्तरमेवोपरतः। न च पूर्वपूर्वक्षणानुभूतमाहितसंस्कारा उत्तरोत्तरक्षणाः स्मरन्तीति वक्तव्यम् , पूर्व-पूर्वक्षणानां सर्वनिरन्वयविनाशेन सर्वथा विनष्टत्वात् , उत्तरोत्तरक्षणानां सर्वथाऽन्यत्वात् । न चान्यानुभूतमन्योऽनुस्मरति, देवदत्तानुभूतस्य यज्ञदत्तानुस्मरणप्रसङ्गादिति ॥ १२३ (१६७१)॥
D. C.-Here, the proposition is that the Soul that remembers former existence, cannot vanish even after the disappearance of the former body by virtue of its smaranasakti. Just as an old person who remembers his state of childhood does not himself perish even if childhood has vanished, or just as a person who recollects in a foreign country the incidents that happened in his own country, does not himself perish even if the incidents are no more existing, so also, the Soul that remembers former existence does not vanish even if the body of former existence has already vanished. In short, one who recollects incidents that happened in former time and place is vidyamāna (existing ) like Devadatta who is able to recollect his experiences of childhood in old age. But, if he be only the anusmartā nothing can be recollected in the next life as he himself is not alive in that existence.
Again, it is not correct to say that all experiences of former moments are recollected in the later moments, as former moments are absolutely separate from the later moments and they disappear as soon as their relations with the later ones disappear.
