________________
394 Jinabhadra Gaņi's
[The eighth Athavā yadindriyaņām pratyakşam kim tadéva pratyakşam ? I Upacāramātratrastat pratyakşamanindriyanı tathyam 134411 (1892)]
Trans.—344 Or, is it that what is preceptible to senses, is alone pratya kşa ? It is pratyaksa by virtue of ( mere ) usuage. The real pratyakşa is beyond ( the peroeption of ) senses. ( 1892 )
____टीका -अथवा, कि यदिन्द्रियाणां प्रत्यक्षं तदेव प्रत्यक्षमिष्यते भवता, मदीयं तु प्रत्यक्षं नाभ्युपगम्यते, अतीन्द्रियत्वात् । ननु महानयं विपर्यासः, यस्मादुपचारमात्रत एव तदिन्द्रियप्रत्यक्षं प्रत्यक्षतया व्यवहियते-यथाऽनुमाने बासधूमादिलिङ्गद्वारेण . बाह्यमग्नादिवस्तु बायते, नैवमत्र, तत उपचारात् प्रत्यक्षमिव • प्रत्यक्षमुच्यते । परमार्थतस्तुइदमपि परोक्षमेव, यतोऽक्षो जीवः, स चानुमानवदत्रापि वस्तुसाक्षाद् न पश्यति, किन्विन्द्रियद्वारेणैव, ततोऽतीन्द्रियमेव तथ्यं प्रत्यक्षमवगन्तव्यम्, तत्र जीवेन साक्षादेव वस्तुन उपलम्भादिति ॥ ३४४ ॥ (१८९२)
D. C --Since, that which is perceived, is beyond the perception of senses, you do not admit it, as according to you only, that which is indriya pratyakşa is pratykşa This is a great foly. Indriya-pratyaksa is recognized as pratyakşr by means of upacāra, similar to the case of auumāna, when objects like fire etc are apprehended by means of external indications of smoke etc. But the pratyaksa in my .case, is different from this. By means of mere upacara it is called pratykşa, but really speaking, it is paroksa as the cīksa ( i-e jivo ) does not apprehend the object directly as in the case of anumāna.
The atîdriya or that which is beyond perception by (means of ) sense-organs, should alone be accepted as pratyaksa as in that case, jiva directly perceives the object.
Akampita:-~-Athough in case of indriya-pratyaksa, jiva does not apprehend an object directly, indriyas are oudoudtedly able to recognize the object directly in such a case, why should we not consider indriya-pratya kşa to be the pratyakşa itself ! ॥ 344 ( 1892 ) ।
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
