________________
Shri Mahavir Jain Aradhana Kendra
www.kobatirth.org
Acharya Shri Kailashsagarsuri Gyanmandir
Pārva-Mīmārsā
429
it. The doer and the doer alone can be the enjoyer. The agent is generally supposed to be involved in movement due to his activity. But Kumārila Bhațța denies any movement in the agent himself. He says“Therefore, even though the soul may not itself move, yet it may be the performer (of actions); just as even though Devadatta is not cut (or pierced by the sword), yet he is held to be the performer (of the cutting).”! Kumārila proves with the aid of the illustration given above, that though the soul moves others, it need not itself move or be involved in any kind of movement. Just as Devadatta, though he cuts many other things with his sword, it does not follows that he himself is cut by it, similarly the soul may act as an agent to other things by applying movement, but from that it does not follow that it itself undergoes any change. The soul is therefore, the unmoved mover of things. S. Dasgupta explains the above point in the following way and says that though the soul is the agent, it is only indirectly “The objection is sometimes raised that if the soul is omnipresent how can it be called an agent or a mover ? But Mīmāmsā does not admit that movement means atomic motion, for, the principle of movement is the energy which moves the atoms, and this is possessed by the omnipresent soul. It is by the energy imparted by it to the body that the latter moves. So it is that though the soul does not move it is called an agent on account of the fact
1 S'lokavārtika - Section 18/87, p. 397. English Tr. Ganganath Jha.
For Private And Personal
