________________
218
INDIAN LOGIC
His criticism is as follows : 'Again God is said to act like a father. But who ever heard of a father who in dealing with his children could not transcend their merits and demerits.'26 Prof. Ingalls seems to be obsessed with the later Nyāya-Vaiseșika idea of God who gives to a living being a proper fruit of its past action, who does not transgress the deserts of living beings. (d) na cātmakalpăd anyaḥ kalpaḥ
sambhavati/na tāvad asya buddhiń vinā kaścid dharmo lingabhūtah Sakya upapādayitum/ āgamāc ca drastā boddhā sarvajñātā īśvara
iti / buddhyādibhis cātmalingair nirupākhyam iśvararn partyaksānumānāgamavişayātītar kaḥ Śakta upapādayitum ?
Explanation : Isvara is ātman (soul) only. He is not an independent, substance different from ātman because he does not possess any such quality other than buddhi (intellect, knowledge) as could prove him an independent substance other than soul-substance. Isvara possesses buddhi and buddhi is a special quality (visesaguna) of atman. In scriptures too, buddhi has been given as a quality of Isvara. Scriptures describe him as drastā (seer), boddhā (knower) and sarvajñātā (omniscient). Thus even scriptures have not mentioned any such quality as could prove him an independent substance. If he were devoid of buddhi, etc. which serve as logical reason to prove soul, he will become unreal, non-existent, beyond the ken of perception, inference and scriptural testimony; as a result, who will be able to prove him ?
Here Vätsyāyana has accepted Isvara as sarvajña. So the question arises as to whether he regards jīvanmukta as sarvajña.
The person who knows all substances with all their states --past, present and furure, is sarvajña. By 'sarvajña', generally what we mean is this. We cannot definitely say as to whether Vatsyāyana has in mind this meaning of 'sarvajña' in this context. This much is certain that the meaning of the term 'sarvajña' is different in different contexts in Vätsyāyana's Bhāsya. 'Sense-organs grasp their specific respective objects only, that is, eyes grasp rūpa, tongue grasps rasa, so on and so forth. On the other hand, ātman is sarvajña, that is, it grasps all the
