________________
2014.5. ] Nyāya-Kusumānjali
Who in this world is really well-versed in proving the non-validity of Smriti ? Is not Smriti like Pratyaksha free from contradiction ? Pratyaksha grasps the objects already realized by Anumana. Anumana, too, deals with the objects of Tarka. Is there no repetition in these cases? ( 13 )
Notes:--Some persons do not recognise Smriti as Pramana, for, they think that it is viciated as it deals with the objects already considered by another Praonana ( that is to say, it is Grihita-grahin ). If we were to reject Smriti on this ground, we shall be forced to reject even Pratyaksha as it deals with the objects of Anumana. For instance, we infer that this mountain must be fiery because it is smoky. After some time, we may go to that very place and corroborate the fact by Pratyaksha. Will Pratyaksha on that account cease to be Pramana ? Sometimes another objection is raised in recognising Smriti as Pramana. The objection that is mentioned is that it deals with the objects that do not exist at the moment under consideration. But, it can be easily seen how ill-based this objection is. Consider the case of the inference, viz., that at this place it must have rained, for, the ground is wet. Is it necessarily raining when this inference is being drawn ? Is it not that this inference is valid, is Pramanu, even when its object is not present ?
સ્મરણ પ્રમાણનું સમર્થન–
“સ્મૃતિનું પ્રામાણ્ય દૂર કરવામાં નિપુણ પૃથ્વીમાં કાણું છે? શું સ્મૃતિ પ્રત્યક્ષની માફક વિસંવાદરહિત નથી ? અનુમાનગૃહીત
150
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
