________________
Vada ]
Gañadharavada
.: 205 :
“Yavad dpiśyam parastāvad bhāgah sa ca na dřiśyate 1
Tena te nābhilapyā hi bhavaḥ sarve svabhavataḥ ! "
So, you have a doubt in the existence of Bhuta eto, and according to your belief, they are non-existent. This finishes the pūrvapaksa ( the argument of the opponent )
Now follows the refutation of the argumentमा कुरु वियत्त! संसयमसइ न संसयसमुब्भवो जुत्तो। खकुसुम-खरसिंगेसु व, जुत्तो सो थाणु-पुरिसेसु ॥१४९॥(१६९६) Mā kuru Viyatta ! samsayamasai na samsayasamubbhavo jutto 1 Khakusuma-kharasingesu va jutto so thāņu-purisesu ||1491(1697)
[मा कुरु व्यक्त ! संशयमसति न संशयसमुद्भवो युक्तः।
खकुसुम-खरशृङ्गयोरिव युक्तः स स्थाणु-पुरुषयोः॥१४९॥(१६९७) Mā kuru Vyakta ! samsayamasati na samsayasamudbhavo yuktahi Khakusuma-kharasrigayoriva yuktah sa sthānu-purusayoh ||1491]
Trans.--149 O Vyakta! Do not entertain doubt, The doubt about non-existent (objects) is improper as in the case of kha-kusuma (flower of the sky) and kharaśrrga (horn of an ass ). It is proper (only) with regard to (existent objects like ) sthānu and purusa. ( 1697)
टीका-आयुष्मन व्यक्त ! मा कृथाः संशयं-मा भूताभावं बुध्यस्व, गतोऽसति भूतकदम्बके संशयः खकुसुम-खरविषाणयोरिव न युक्तः, अपि त्वभावनिश्चय एव स्यात् । सत्स्वेव च भूतेषु स्थाणु-पुरुषादिष्विव संशयो युक्तः । यदि पुनरसत्यपि वस्तुनि संदेहः स्यात् तदाऽविशेषेण खरविषाणादिष्वपि स्यादिति भावः ॥ १४९ ॥ (१६९७ ) ॥
D. C.-0 long-lived Vayakta ! Don't be dubious about the existence of Blütas. Because the doubt about non-existent objects is totally unjustifiable as in the case of kha-kusuma and kharas'rnga where abhāva is already fixed up. It can be
