Syadvada Manjari

Author(s): Mallishenacharya, F W Thomas
Publisher: Motilal Banarasidas

Page 50

1111. The categories of the Vaišeşikas (dubious) also, because absent from a doubtful contrary instance. Moreover, it is also 'repugnant' 54), because for the followers of the Quodammodo-doctrine there is nowhere absolute annihilation, since it is only as permanent through having the form of substance that existents are associated with origination and destruction. Consequently from the inference in question the conclusion in the form of annihilation of the qualities of awareness, etc., is not established.
Nor from Scripture such as "For not, surely, of one with a body", etc.55), because that is laid down with reference to successively linked mundane likings and dislikings, generated by the maturation of good and bad destiny. And in the state of Moksa there is only perfect liking, unequivocal and absolute, caused by the decline of all destiny; how is that precluded ? (55) And of the Scripture the sense is as follows: - 'To one with a body, the sell, which is in one or other position of the four states, there is not the destruction (a pahati), the nonexistence, of things liked and disliked, namely pleasure and pain, which are mutually linked together. For certainly pleasure and pain must be therein, and their close mutual relation is inferred from the making a (verbal) compound 56). "One without a body, one with self released; because of the word vă (surely) having the meaning of eva (only'), 'only one without a body'; 'dwelling's), occupying a sphere of realisation; "liked and disliked', mutually linked pleasure and pain, do not touch.
Here the gist is this: As, of course, in the worldly (samsārin) (self) there would be pleasure and pain mutually linked, not so in the liberated self; but only absolute (pure) (kevala) pleasure, simply from the non-existence of the body, which is the root of pain. But pleasure, as the own-nature of the self, abides; for the abiding of one's own own-form is Mokşa. And it is for this reason that 'without a body is stated. And the meaning of this Scripture should only so be substantiated (samarthaniya); since concurring in this (same) sense (artha) we find also a Smộti-text:
"Where there is absolute pleasure, apprehended by awareness, beyond the senses, That one should know as Mokşa, hard to be obtained by those of unperfected (akyta)
selves" 58). Nor is this word 'pleasure' applied simply to absence of pain; because there is nothing to veto the primary pleasure being what is spoken of, and because in such statements as "This person, freed from disease, is become happy, etc., it would follow that the use of the word pleased' (sukhin) would be tautological; since simply by saying 'freed from disease' the mere absence of pain is given.
Nor is the Moksa set forth by Your Worship approved as acceptable to men; for whoever would endeavour to render himself, like a stone, bereft of all consciousness of pleasure? (56) For that has the form of consciousness of pain, since in the absence of one of the two, pleasure or pain, the other is inevitable. This is why in the Sruti we have ridicule of you:
"Better it were to desire the state of a jackal in the lovely Vịndāvana;
Not the Vaiseșika Mokşa does Gautama wish to go to"). But as superior to Heaven, with its conditional, terminable, limited flow of bliss, and as with bliss the contrary of that, and with cognition unfading, the wise tell of Mokşa. But, if the
54) See note VI 2, and N.-sutra, I. ii. 6. 55) Quoted supra, p. 43. 56) In the Sanskrit passage 'things liked and disliked' is one compound word. $7) The author understood vāva santam in the iext as vā vasantam, for dwelling'.
58) Quoted also in Bhāsarvajña's Nyāya-sāra (ed. V. P. Vaidya, p. 31). The first line is also seen in Bhagavad-gita, V. 20 (Dhruva).
$) Cited in Haribhadra's Yoga-bindu, v. 138, as uttered by Gálava to his pupil Gautama.
4 Thomas, The Flower Spray