________________
95
On reasoning from anvaya... reason is that the method contains a defect in logical exacti. tude, and the other is that his technical terms are loanwords from Grammarians or Naiyāyikas."66 The logical defect is said to arise because (7) and (10a) are not precisely comparable, since the primary meanings of nila and aśva are compatible. There are, then, two major points to discuss: (a) Reasoning by anvaya and vyatireka serves, according to the scholars cited, to keep those senses of terms in utterances like (7) which are compatible and to exclude those which are not compatible. (b) According to one scholar, later Advaitins gave up "San. kara's anvayavyatireka method” in favour of another "method", jahadajahallaksaņā.
There is no evidence to support points (a). Śarkara does indeed say that the two terms linked in (7) preclude (vārayetām 'keep from each other') as properties of the referents of tvam and tad respectively being one who suffers paip and not being the inner self; see above with note 50. He also says this is because tvam is connected with (yogāt) a word, tad, which signifies one devoid of pain and because tad is connected with (yuteh) tvam, which signifies an ipner self; see above with note 49. It is remarkable that he does not mention anvaya and vyatireka as means of bringing about such exclusion. Similarly, Sureśvara says tvam in (7) signifies someone with the property of not suffering pain because the referent of tad is here a qualifier (visesaņāt) of tvam's referent and that tad here refers to a being with the property of innerness because it is juxtaposed (samnidheḥ) with tvam; see above with note 32. He does not mention anvaya and Vyatireka as a means of bringing this about. Moreover, as I have pointed out, Sureśvara does go into deatils on how one uses anvaya and vyatireka. Thus, he says adept tbinkers should recognize that the physical body is not the self because it does not continue to be present (ananvyayāt) in a dream; see above with note 15. Similar, in showing that ego-consciousness is not a property of the true self, he says this does not continue to be present (nänveti) in two states,
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
