365bet娱乐

According to 厂腻峁僰丑测补 philosophy, 笔耻谤耻峁�a is not one, there is the multiplicity of 笔耻谤耻峁�as and all of them are infinite, unchangeable, all pervasive and eternal. It admits 笔耻谤耻峁�a as different in each body, having their different organs and actions and separate birth and death. Except the Advaita Vedanta, all other dar艣a峁嘺s believe in the plurality of selves.

莫艣varak峁涐梗峁嘺, in his 厂腻峁僰丑测补k膩rik膩 states about the plurality of Self (笔耻谤耻峁�a). The plurality of Self follows from the distributive nature of the incidence of birth and death and of the endowment of the instruments of cognition, action etc.^[1]

V膩caspati Mi艣ra supports that the birth of 笔耻谤耻峁�a consists in its connection with a new set of body, sense organs, mind etc., formed of a composite particular nature. It does not mean modification, since it is essentially unchangeable. In the same way also death consists of the giving up the body and the rest. It cannot mean destruction as 笔耻谤耻峁�a is unchangeable and eternal. The sense organs are thirteen, beginning with the great principle. The definite adjustment of their body etc., is connected with only one 笔耻谤耻峁�a. If the 笔耻谤耻峁�a were one and the same in all body, then on the birth of one all would be born and on the death of one, all would die.^[2] 骋补耻岣峚辫腻诲补 remarks if there were one soul, then when one were born, all would be born, when one will die, all would die, if there is any defect in the vital insturments of one, such as deafness, blindness, dumbness mutilation, or lameness, then all would be blind, deaf, dumb but this is not seen and therefore multiplicity of soul is demonstrated.^[3]

Anima Sengupta states that we can not say that there is one spirit only and that this one spirit appeals as many due to the imposition of different 耻辫腻诲丑颈蝉 on it. In the case of space, limited by a chair, the chair can be removed and the portion of space can be saved from limitation by such a removal of its 耻辫腻诲丑颈. Even then there is the possibility of that this same portions of space may, again, be limited by the imposition of some other thing on it. So if one spirit is recognized, bondage and liberation, limitation and freedom will become absured and meaningless.^[4]

The next argument is in support of plurality of selves is related to the activity of the selves. Though activity is a function of the internal organs, yet it is here attributed to the spirit. Hence, it is argued that if the self were one, the activity of man would lead to the same activity in all other men.^[5]

Again, the 厂腻峁僰丑测补 argues that the self must be many because there is diversity due to the three attributes. Some persons have the abundance of sattva e.g., the gods. Others again abound in the rajas, e.g., human beings and some others again have tamas in abundance, e.g., animals. This diversity due to the distribution of the 驳耻峁嘺蝉 in various entities could not be explained if the spirit were one and the same in all.^[6] So the 笔耻谤耻峁�a is not one, but many. Hence, different arguments are advocated by 厂腻峁僰丑测补 to show the plurality of 笔耻谤耻峁�a.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

jananamara峁嘺nakara峁吥乶膩峁� pratiniyam膩dyugapatprav峁泃e艣ca/
puru峁�abahutva峁� 蝉颈诲诲丑补峁� traigu峁噛aviparyay膩ccaiva// 厂腻峁僰丑测补k膩rik膩 , 18

[2]:

tes膩峁� janmamar峁嘺kara峁嚹乶膩峁� pratiniyamo 惫测补惫补蝉迟丑腻鈥︹�︹�︹�︹��.. mriyam膩峁噀 ca mriyeran. 厂腻峁僰丑测补tattva-办补耻尘耻诲墨 on Ibid.

[3]:

janma ca 尘补谤补峁嘺峁� ca 办补谤补峁嚹乶颈 ca janmamara峁嘺办补谤补峁嚹乶颈 te峁Ｄ佱箖 prati niyam膩t pratyekaniyam膩dityartha岣�. yadyeka峁� eva 腻迟尘腻 sy膩ttat ekasya janmani sarva eva j膩yeran ekasy mara峁噀 sarve鈥檖i mriyeran ekasya kara峁嘺vaikalpe b膩dhiy膩rndhatvam奴katvaku峁嘺tvakha峁僯a tvalak峁�a峁噀 sarve鈥檖i b膩dhir膩ndhaku峁噄kha峁僯膩岣� syurna caiva bhavati tasm膩jjanmamara峁嘺kara峁嚹佱箖 pratiniyam膩t puru峁�abahutva峁� 蝉颈诲诲丑补峁�/ 骋补耻岣峚辫腻诲补bh膩峁�ya on Ibid.

[4]:

Sengupta, Dr Anima, Classical 厂腻峁僰丑测补: A Critical Study, p. 86

[5]:

tath膩 ca tasminnekatra 艣ar墨re prayatam膩ne鈥︹�︹��.艣ar墨r膩峁噄 yugapacc膩layet/ 厂腻峁僰丑测补tattva-办补耻尘耻诲墨 on 厂腻峁僰丑测补k膩rik膩 , 18

[6]:

kecitkhalu sattvnik膩y膩岣� sattvavahul膩岣�, yathordhvasrotasa岣モ�︹�︹��. 辫耻谤耻峁�a岣� sy膩t, puru峁�abhede tvayamado峁�a iti/ Ibid.