________________
Vada ] Caņadharavāda
415 Trans.-364-365 Similarly, ( some would believe that ) both are different (from each other), or that the production of the mundane world would be due to (nothing else but its) soabhāva only In reply to that, it is said that the prodution of the inundane world) by virtune of (its, svabhāva, is not beilvable. And, Is that svabhava a (definite) object ? or causelessness (itself) ? or the property of an object ? If (it is taken as) an object, it is not an object, because it is non-apprehensible like a kha-puspa (1912-1913)
टीका-एवमेव केषाश्चिद् मतेन द्वे अपि भिन्ने स्वतन्त्र स्यातां पुण्यपापे, तत्कार्यभूतयोः सुख-दुःखयोयौंगपर्धनानुभवाभावात् । अतोऽनेनैवभिन्नकार्यदर्शनेन तत्कारणभूत्योः पुण्य-पापयोनिताऽनुमीयत इति । “होज्ज वेत्यादि" अथवा स्वभावत एव विनापि पुण्य-पापाभ्यां भवसंभूतिः-भववैचित्र्यस्य संभवः कैश्विदिष्यते । तदेवं दर्शिताः पञ्चापि पुण्य-पापविषया विकल्पाः । एतैश्व भ्रमितमनोमिः संशयो न कर्तव्यः, एकस्यैव चतुर्थविकल्पस्यादेयत्वात्, शेषाणां चानादेयत्वात् । अत एव प्रत्यासत्तिन्यायमङ्गीकृत्य पञ्चमविकल्पं तावद् दूषयितुमाह -" भण्णईत्यादि" भण्यतेऽत्रोत्तरम्-न स्वभावतो भवसंभूतिः, यतः स्वभावो वस्तुरूपो वामिमतो मवेदिति द्वितीयगाथायां संबन्धः, निष्कारणवा वा, वस्तुधों वा स्वभावोऽभिमतो भवेत् ? इति त्रयो विकल्पाः। तत्र यदि वस्तुरूपोऽयमिति प्रथमो विकल्पा तर्हि तकोऽसौ स्वमावो नास्ति, अनुपलम्भात्, खपुष्पवदिति ॥ ३६४-३६५ ॥ (१९१२.-१९१३)
5. C.-According to some, punya and bapa are independent of each other, because sukha and dukkha which are their respective kāryas or consequences are not experienced at one and the same time. So, when kiryas are found to be independent of each other, their respective causes should also be independent of each other by anumana.
Finally, there is one more theory that the expansion of this mundane world is not due to Karmis known as pāpa and
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
