________________
Vada ]
Gaṇadharavada
• 535:•
would have lost its sense as found in the case of assertions like “ Sukha-duhkha do not affect the vandhyāputra.” The adjective, therefore, is befitting 'as'arira' only if it means "mukta-jiva". Your interpreting the expression by dissolving it as ‘vā a-vasantam ' is thus useless, while our interpretation is perfectly proper. This proves the existence of mokṣa which separates jiva and karmana s'arira and that of mukta-jiva also. If the existence of jiva were denied, Veda-vacanas would prove worthless as shown above. ॥ 473 ॥ ( 2021 )
The opponent said
एवं पि होज मुत्तो निस्सुह - दुक्खत्तणं तु तद्वत्थं । तं नो पिय-प्पियाई जम्हा पुणे - यरकयाई ॥ ४७४॥(२०२२)
नाणाबाहत्तणओ न फुसति वीयराय - दोसस्स । तस्स प्पियमप्पियं वा मुत्तसुहं को पसंगोऽत्थ ? ॥ ४७५॥ (२०२३)
Evam pi hojja mutto nissuha-dukkhattanam tu tadavattham Tam no piya - 'ppiyāim jamhā punneyarakayāim ॥ 474 ॥ ( 2022 ) Nānā'bāhattanaï na phusanti viyarāya-dosassai Tasya ppiyamappiyam vā muttasuham ko pasarigo 'ttha? ॥475u
[ एवमपि भवेद् मुक्तो निःसुख-दुःखत्वं तु तदवस्थम् ।
तद् नो प्रिया - प्रिये यस्मात् पुण्ये - तरकृते ।। ४७४ ।। (२०२२) ज्ञानाsनाबाधत्वतो न स्पृशतो वीतराग-द्वेषस्य ।
तस्य प्रियमप्रियं वा मुक्तसुखं कः प्रसङ्गोऽत्र १ ।।४७५ ।। (२०२३)
Evamapi bhaved mukto niḥsukha-duḥkhatvam tu tadavastham I Tad no priya'-priye yasmat punye-tarakrite | 474 || (2022 )] Jnānā'nābādhātvato na spriśato vitaraga-dvesasya | Tasya priyamapriyam vā muktasukham kah prasañgotra ? ॥475॥
Trans.—474-475. Such being a mukta soul, it will have no happiness and misery. ( But ) it is not (so), as likes and
