Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Advaitasiddhi 3.187

Advaitasiddhi 3.187

Language
Sanskrit

3.187

na ca- `aduḥkhamasukha'mityādau prākṛtasukhaniṣedhavadatrāpi prākṛtāvayavaniṣedhaparatā, anyathā `śṛṇoti paśyatī'ti vākyaśeṣavirodhaḥ syāditi vācyam, ānandādirūpatāpratipādakaśrutivirodhena tatra saṅkocavadatra saṅkocakāraṇābhāvāt, śravaṇadarśanayoḥ śabdarūpasākṣitvamātreṇa upapatterna tadvirodhaḥ. anyathā tvanmate'pi brahmaṇi cakṣurādisādhyajñānānaṅgīkāreṇa tadvirodho duṣpariharaḥ syāt. ata eva- `arūpo'prākṛtaśce'ti smṛtyaivārūpaśrutigatyukteḥ nārūpamityanena rūpamātraniṣedha iti- nirastam, smṛterupāsyaparatvena jñeyabrahmapratipādikāyāḥ śruteḥ saṅkoce kāraṇābhāvāt, śrutismṛtyoratulyabalatvācca, pratyuta `yattadadreśya'mityādinā paravidyāviṣayasya vigrahavattvaprati pādanavirodhācca. kiñca bhagavadvigraho na nityaḥ, mahattve sati rūpavattvād, vigrahatvādvā, nityatābodhakatvābhimataśruteranyathāsiddheruktatvācca. na ca prākṛtatvamupādhiḥ, sādhanavyāpakatvāt. sāvayavatvādapi na nityatvam. na ca śrutibalāt kvacit sāvayavo'pi nityaḥ, śrutyanyathāsiddheruktatvāt. nanu- avayava upādānaṃ cet, brahmavigrahe nāstyeva; ekadeśamātraṃ ced, gaganātmādau vyabhicāraḥ, tayorapyekadeśasattvāt. na copādānātiriktasyaikadeśasyaivābhāvaḥ, upādānatantvanyahastavitastyādi parimāṇasyaikadeśasya pāṭādāvanubhavāditi- cenna, upādānatantūnāmeva hastavitastyādiparimāṇavatāmanubhavāt. gaganādau saṃyogitvādinā yadekadeśasādhanaṃ tadiṣṭameva, asmābhistatra sāvayavatvānityatvayoraṅgīkārāt.

And it cannot be said: Just as in statements like 'having neither sorrow nor happiness' there is negation of material happiness, here too the intention is to negate material limbs; otherwise, there would be contradiction with the supplementary statement, 'He hears, he sees.' For, just as restriction [of the meaning] occurs there due to contradiction with scriptures declaring the nature of [Brahman] to be bliss and so forth, here there is no reason for restriction; and because hearing and seeing are accounted for merely by being the witness of sound and form, there is no contradiction with that. Otherwise, even on your view, because cognition produced by the eye and other organs is not admitted in Brahman, that contradiction would be difficult to avoid. For this very reason, the claim that—because the Smṛti itself states the purport of the 'formless' scripture by 'Formless and non-material'—form as such is not negated by the phrase 'not having form', is refuted; for because the Smṛti is concerned with the object of meditation, there is no reason for restricting the scripture that teaches Brahman as the object of knowledge, and because scripture and Smṛti are not of equal strength; moreover, on the contrary, it would contradict the teaching that the object of the higher knowledge has a bodily form, in texts beginning with 'That which is invisible...'. Furthermore, the body of the Lord is not eternal, because, being large, it possesses color/form, or because it is a body; and because it has already been stated that the scriptures supposed to teach its eternality are explained otherwise. Nor is being material an adjunct (upādhi), because it pervades the probans (sādhana). It is also not eternal because it possesses parts. Nor can it be said that, by the power of scripture, in some case even that which has parts is eternal; for it has been stated that the scripture is explained otherwise. Objection: If a 'part' means a material cause, it simply does not exist in the body of Brahman; if it means merely a portion, there is deviation (vyabhicāra) in the case of space, the self, and so on, since they too have portions; nor can it be said that there is no portion distinct from a material cause, because in a cloth and the like a portion measuring a cubit, a span, and so on is experienced distinct from the constituent threads. Reply: No; for it is only the constituent threads that are experienced as possessing the measurement of a cubit, a span, and so on. As for the proof of a portion in space and so on through being possessed of conjunction and the like, that is indeed acceptable to us, because we admit that space possesses parts and is non-eternal.

English (machine translation) (machine translation)

Translations (1)