________________
:281
Vada ]
Ganadharavāda [ घटसत्ता घटधर्मस्ततोऽनन्यः पटादितो भिन्नः।
अस्तीति तेन भणिते को घट एवेति नियमोऽयम् ? ॥१७४॥ (१७२२) Gbatasattā ghatadharmastato'nanyaḥ pațādito bhinnaḥ | Astiti tena bhanitd ko ghata ardti niyamo'yam ? 174 (1722)]
Trans.--174 Existence of ghata is a property of ghata. So, (it is) non-separable (from ghata), (and) distinct from pata etc. By saying, therefore, that “ It exists ", how could you frame a rule that there exists ghata alone ? (1722)
टीका-घटास्तित्वलक्षणा घटसत्ता घटस्य धर्मः, स च ततो घटादनन्योऽभिन्नः, पटादिभ्यस्तु सर्वेभ्योऽपि भिन्नः। तेन ततो “घटोऽस्ति" इति भणिते 'घट एव' इति “घट एवास्ति" इति कोऽयं नियम?निजनिजसत्तायाः पटादिष्वपि भावात् तेऽपि सन्त्येवेति भावः ॥१७४॥ (१७२२)
___D. C.-Astitva is the property of ghata, and hence, it is non-separable from ghata but distinct from objects like pata etc. So, when it is said that "ghata exists ", you cannot assert that ghata alone exists. For, the property of astitva is present in objects like pața also, and hence they too are existing. जं वा जदत्थि तं तं घडो त्ति सव्वघडयापसंगो को। भणिए घडोत्थि व कहं सव्वत्थित्तावरोहो त्ति ॥१७५॥ (१७२३) Jam va jadatthi tam tam ghado tti savvaghadayāpasango kol Bhanie ghadotthi va kaham savvatthittavaroho tti ? 175 (1728) [यदा यदस्ति तत्तद् घट इति सर्वघटताप्रसङ्गः कः।
भणिते घटोऽस्ति वा कथं सर्वास्तित्वावरोध इति ? ॥१७५।। (१७२३) Yadvā yadasti tattad ghata iti sarvaghatatāprasangah kaḥ 1 Bhanite gbato'sti va katham sarvāstitvavarodha iti? 175 (1723)]
Trans.-175 Or, by saying that whatever exists is ghata, how would the occasion of all being ghata arise ? Or, by
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
