________________
10
TATTVA-KAUMUDI
[v
वात्स्यायन's instance of शेषवत्, vis. शब्द is a गुण, 1s rejected by वाच० in bis तात्पर्यटीका (p. 183, काशीसंस्कृतसीरीज ). According to him शेषवत् or परिशेष stands for व्यतिरेक्यनुमान, The inference of शब्द being a गुण 1s not a व्यतिरेक्यनुमान but अन्वयव्यतिरोक. Thecorrect example of 1960, therefore, is that the qualities'desire etc., reside in the आत्मन्. These qualities cannot reside in पृथिवी, जल, तेजस् and वायु ; nor can they reside in आकाश, because the qualities of the latter are perceived by the external senseorgan (ear). Similarly the desire etc. being partajuts cannot be the qualities of दिशा, काल and मनस्-for the qualities of the latter three द्रव्यs are साधारण. Thus ultimately the desire etc., reside in the nineth द्रव्य, vis., आत्मन्. So there beingno सपक्ष of आत्मन् It is an instance of व्यतिरेक्यनुमान. जय० and गौड० agree with the first explanation of वाक्यायन. गोड and माठर explain शेषवत् differently -समुद्रादेकं जलपलं लवणमासाथ शेषस्याप्यस्ति लवणभाव इति (गोड०)॥.
लिङ्गलिभिपूर्वकम्-वाच° would read one more लिङ्गि i. e. लिङ्ग लिङ्गिालिङ्गिपूर्वकम् . गोड has a curious explanation to offer-तदनुमानं लिङ्गापूर्वकं यत्र लिङ्गेन लिङ्गी अनुमीयते. यथा दण्डेन यतिः। लिङ्गिापूर्वकं च यत्र लिगिन्ना लिङ्ग-मनुमीयते, यथा दृष्टा यति, अस्येदं त्रिदण्डमिति । जय० agrees with it. It enumerates seven kinds of AFFIS which ought to exist between the for and the fit. They are
(1) स्वस्वामिभाव as between राजा and पुरुष. (2) प्रकृतिविकार ,, , यव , सक्तु. (3) कार्यकारणभाव ,
वत्स. (4) पात्रपात्रिक
परिवृद् , त्रिविष्टब्ध. (5) साहचर्य
चक्रवाक , चकवाकी. (6) प्रतिद्वन्द्वि
शीत
उष्ण. (7) निमित्तनैमित्तिक ..
भोज्य , भोजक. The conversation between आवव्य and जैगीषव्य, referred to by वाच०, occurs in व्यासभाष्य on यो. सू. ३. १८.
The अयुक्तs mentioned by चाच. are
(a) शाक्यभिक्षुs or the Buddhist monks, described in the विवेकविलास, vil 275 (as quoted in the सर्वदर्शनसंग्रह ) as
धनु
