siddhantabindu /136
This page has not been fully proofread.
98
सिद्धान्तविन्दु
the witness. Because of this difference in the
impressions it is different from the witness.
१७६. जागरणे त्वन्तःकरणस्य प्रमात्राश्रितकार्योपादानकोटौ प्रवेशात्तद्भेदेन
प्रमातृभेद एव । साक्षिण एव चाधिकोपाधिविशिष्टस्य प्रमातृत्वात्र प्रति-
सन्धानानुपपत्तिरिति ॥
1
मातृमानप्रभेदेऽपि प्रतिभेदेहं न भिद्यते ।
साक्षी बबाह्यार्थवद्यस्मात् स आत्मेत्युच्यते ततः ॥
व्यभिचारो मिथो यद्वत् प्रमात्रादेः स्वसाक्षिकः ।
सर्वमात्राद्यभाबार्थसाक्षित्वान्न तथात्मनः ॥
इति वार्तिककारपादैर्व्यवहारदशायामपि
तद्भेदकल्पनं केषांचिद्वयामोह एवेत्यवधेयम् ।
176. In the state of waking, the mind is included in
the group of substantial causes of the products based
on the cognizer and is therefore different from the
cognizer.
The witness only with added adjuncts becomes
the congizer, therefore, it is not unreasonable to
attribute memory to it.
"The witness does not differ from body to body
though the cognizer and the means of knowing do
differ; (in this it is) like the object; therefore it is
called the Self. The variation of the cognizer and
such other categories and their absence also are seen
by the witness; but not the absence of itself because
it is the Self." ( B.u.v. iii. 4, 54, 55). Thus, the
revered author of Vārtika has refuted multiplicity of
the witness even in the waking state. Therefore, the
view of some who would construct distinctions in the
witness in the deep sleep is to be understood only as a
great delusion.
साक्षिभेदनिराकरणात् सुषुप्तौ
सिद्धान्तविन्दु
the witness. Because of this difference in the
impressions it is different from the witness.
१७६. जागरणे त्वन्तःकरणस्य प्रमात्राश्रितकार्योपादानकोटौ प्रवेशात्तद्भेदेन
प्रमातृभेद एव । साक्षिण एव चाधिकोपाधिविशिष्टस्य प्रमातृत्वात्र प्रति-
सन्धानानुपपत्तिरिति ॥
1
मातृमानप्रभेदेऽपि प्रतिभेदेहं न भिद्यते ।
साक्षी बबाह्यार्थवद्यस्मात् स आत्मेत्युच्यते ततः ॥
व्यभिचारो मिथो यद्वत् प्रमात्रादेः स्वसाक्षिकः ।
सर्वमात्राद्यभाबार्थसाक्षित्वान्न तथात्मनः ॥
इति वार्तिककारपादैर्व्यवहारदशायामपि
तद्भेदकल्पनं केषांचिद्वयामोह एवेत्यवधेयम् ।
176. In the state of waking, the mind is included in
the group of substantial causes of the products based
on the cognizer and is therefore different from the
cognizer.
The witness only with added adjuncts becomes
the congizer, therefore, it is not unreasonable to
attribute memory to it.
"The witness does not differ from body to body
though the cognizer and the means of knowing do
differ; (in this it is) like the object; therefore it is
called the Self. The variation of the cognizer and
such other categories and their absence also are seen
by the witness; but not the absence of itself because
it is the Self." ( B.u.v. iii. 4, 54, 55). Thus, the
revered author of Vārtika has refuted multiplicity of
the witness even in the waking state. Therefore, the
view of some who would construct distinctions in the
witness in the deep sleep is to be understood only as a
great delusion.
साक्षिभेदनिराकरणात् सुषुप्तौ