________________
ARGUMENTS BASED ON..
209
The attempt of the Mimāṁsakas to prove the non-existence of the omniscient suffers from the defects of over-simplification and self contradiction. This is explained as follows: non-apprehension (abhāva) is either absoulte (prasajya-pratişedha) or relative (paryudāsa). If it is absolute, i.e., complete absence of the cognition it cannot become either the cognition or the means of cognition anything at all, and hence it cannot prove the non-existence of the omniscient being. Absolute nonapprehension will imply absolute non-existence (atyantābhāva) of the omniscience like sky-lotus. But the Mimaṁsakas cannot afford to accept this position since they do posit omniscience in the Vedas. Hence any attempt to prove the non-existence of omniscience through absolute non-apprehension will quite upset and also contradict the position of the Mimāṁsakas.
But if it is relative, standing for the negation of the entity in the shape of the means of cognition - even so it would be quite unreliable because wha1 it declares non-existent, may be shown to be existent by another means of cognition. In relative non-existence if one is denied, its counter-correlative has to be asserted. This way, by proving the non-existence of omniscience, one has to assert the existence of omniscience by disproving it.
Then the relative non-apprehension may be either (a) free from the evidence of five pramāņas ( pramāņa-pancaka-rahita) or (b) of a different type. If it be the former, it can be again of two types : (i) totally free from the evidence of five pramānas and (ii) negating the evidence of five pramāņas. If the formel is the case, it cannot prove the object of knowledge (prameya) since it is totally free from the evidence of any of the five pramānas. Without pramānas, there cannot be proof of the object of knowledge. But if the latter is the case (ie. negating the evidence of five pramāņas), it can be either one's personal cognition or universal. If it be the former (i.e., personal), it cannot say anything about the mind or knowledge of other people. But if it concerns universality, it will be the cognition of omniscience.
JCO-27 Jain Education International For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
