________________
"Tātparya"
393
abhihitānvayavādin holds that the mental impression (= manovāsanā) by itself does not create the smộti or memory of the objects of experiences that were known or unknown earlier. It just makes for the remembrance of the padárthas of a given pada-samūha qualified by ākāńksā, yogyatā, etc., Thus, padártha-smrti goes with (i.e. is shakştā) äkānksā"di, and thus only (i.e. ākākṣā”di-traya-sahakrta) makes for the knowledge of the vākyártha.
As for the argument that if padártha-jñāna is caused by smrti, which is different from padas, then, in that case, it will not be capable of causing knowledge of the vākyártha, for in case, if it is held capable of this, then we will have to accept this as the seventh pramāna over and above the six held by the Mimāmsā darśana, or the sabda-pramana will have to be included in this novel pramāna, and this is not noticed by Sabara and others, who have not accepted padártha as a separate pramāna because they have already mentioned āgama-pramāna which could have been only a sub-variety of the new padartha-pramāņa., - "nanu uktam na mānántaránubhūtānām artha-rūpāņām vākyártha-dhi-prasava-sāmarthyam upalabdham, upalambhe vā saptama-pramāņa-prasangah, āgamasya vā tatraiva antarbhāvah. tad eva pratyaksā”dibhiḥ saha tulya-kaksyatayā upanyasanīyam, na tu agamaḥ tadbhedaḥ." - (tattvabindu, pp. 120) - and also that if agama-pramāņa is a sub-variety of padártha, then, padártha should be mentioned along with other five pramānas, and this means casting aspersions on the scholarship and omniscience (i.e. vidvattā and sarvajñatva) of Bhagavān Bhāsyakāra. Moreover, if we take padártha-jñāna as the nimitta of vākyártha-jñāna, then we will have to accept either three vrttis or two such as (i) the first sakti that helps the pada to give its individual meanings and (ii) the second that causes its memory and (iii) the third that correlates, or at least the two that give padártha-jñāna and vākyárthajñāna respectively, while on the part of the anvitábhidhāna-vāda, only one śakti is required and thus there is no kalpanā-gaurava or the contingency of imagining many vịttis : "tathā ca tisrah saktayah, dve vā. padānām hi rāvad artharūpábhidhāna-rūpā śaktiḥ, tad artha-rūpāņam anyonyánvaya-saktiḥ, tad-ādhānaśaktiś ca aparā padānām eva iti. smārakatva-pakse tu uktam sakti-dvayam. anvitábhidhāna-pakse tu padānām ekā eva Śaktiḥ, tat kalpanālāghavāt - etad eva nyāyyam.” (pp. 123, ibid) -
Vācaspati gives the following reply : The abhihitánvayavādin holds that only one sakti as mentioned by the Prābhākaras cannot be connected with the anvaya or correlation. For thus, as anvaya or correlation is just one and identical with reference to different padas, we will have to accept the position in which all the
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
