Jethalal S. Zaveri
Prof. Muni Mahendra Kumar
satthaṃ ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi jamhā satthaṃ ṇa yāṇade kiṃci.
tamhā aṇṇaṃ ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ satthaṃ jiṇā viṃti..83
saddo ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi jamhā saddo ṇa yāṇade kiṃci.
tamhā aṇṇaṃ ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ saddaṃ jῑṇā viṃti..84
rūvaṃ ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi jamhā rūvaṃ ṇa yāṇade kiṃci.
tamhā aṇṇaṃ ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ rūvaṃ jῑṇā viṃti..85
vaṇṇo ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi jamhā vaṇṇo ṇa yāṇade kiṃci.
tamhā aṇṇaṃ ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ vaṇṇaṃ jῑṇā viṃti..86
gaṃdho ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi jamhā gaṃdho ṇa yāṇade kiṃci.
tamhā aṇṇaṃ ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ gaṃdhaṃ jῑṇā viṃti..87
ṇa raso du hodi ṇāṇaṃ jamhā du raso ṇa yāṇade kiṃci.
tamhā aṇṇaṃ ṇāṇaṃ rasaṃ ca aṇṇaṃ jῑṇā viṃti..88
phāso ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi jamhā phāso ṇa yāṇade kiṃci.
tamhā aṇṇaṃ ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ phāsaṃ jῑṇā viṃti..89
kammaṃ ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi jamhā kammaṃ ṇa yāṇade kiṃci.
tamhā aṇṇaṃ ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ kammaṃ jῑṇā viṃti..90
dhammo ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi jamhā dhammo ṇa yāṇade kiṃci.
tamhā aṇṇaṃ ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ dhammaṃ jῑṇā viṃti..91
ṇāṇamadhammo ṇa havadi jamhādhāmmo ṇa yāṇade kiṃci.
tamhā aṇṇaṃ ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃdhamaṃ jῑṇā viṃti..92
kālo ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi jamhā kālo ṇa yāṇade kiṃci.
tamhā aṇṇaṃ ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ khālaṃ jῑṇā viṃti..93
āyāsaṃ pi ṇa ṇāṇaṃ jamhāyāsaṃ ṇa yāṇade kiṃci.
tamhāyāsaṃ aṇṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ ṇāṇaṃ jῑṇā viṃti..94
ṇajjhavasāṇaṃ ṇāṇaṃ ajjhavasāṇaṃ acedaṇaṃ jamhā.
tamhā aṇṇaṃ ṇāṇaṃ ajjhavasāṇaṃ tahā aṇṇaṃ..95
jamhā jāṇadi ṇiccaṃ tamhā jῑvo du jāṇago ṇāṇῑ.
ṇāṇaṃ ca jāṇayādo avvadirittaṃ muṇedavvaṃ..96
ṇāṇaṃ sammādiṭṭhi du saṃjamaṃ suttamaṃgapuvvagadaṃ.
dhammādhammaṃ ca tahā pavvajjaṃ abbhuvetti buhā..97
(Satthaṃ ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi) The scripture is not knowledge, (jamhā satthaṃ kiṃci ṇa yāṇade) because the scripture, [being non-conscious,] is incapable of knowing anything; (tamhā ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ satthaṃ aṇṇaṃ jiṇā viṃti) and, therefore, the omniscient have declared that knowledge is different from scripture.
(Saddo ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi) Sound is not knowledge, (jamhā saddo kiṃci ṇa yāṇade) because sound, [being non-conscious,] is incapable of knowing anything; (tamhā ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ saddaṃ aṇṇaṃ jiṇā viṃti) and, therefore, the omniscient have declared that knowledge is different from sound.
(Rūvaṃ ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi) Visual form is not knowledge, (jamhā rūvaṃ kiṃci ṇa yāṇade) because visual form, [being non-conscious,] is incapable of knowing anything; (tamhā ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ rūvaṃ aṇṇaṃ jiṇā viṃti) and, therefore, the omniscient have declared that knowledge is different from visual form.
(Vaṇṇo ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi) Colour is not knowledge, (jamhā vaṇṇo kiṃci ṇa yāṇade) because colour, [being non-conscious,] is incapable of knowing anything; (tamhā ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ saddaṃ aṇṇaṃ jiṇā viṃti) and, therefore, the omniscient have declared that knowledge is different from colour.
(Gaṃdho ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi) Odour is not knowledge, (jamhā gaṃdho kiṃci ṇa yāṇade) because odour, [being non-conscious,] is incapable of knowing anything, (tamhā ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ gaṃdhaṃ aṇṇaṃ jiṇā viṃti) and, therefore, the omniscient have declared that knowledge is different from odour.
(Raso du ṇāṇaṃ ṇa hodi) Taste is not knowledge, (jamhā raso kiṃci ṇa yāṇade) because taste, [being non-conscious,] is incapable of knowing anything; (tamhā ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ ca rasaṃ aṇṇaṃ jiṇā viṃti) and, therefore, the omniscient have declared that knowledge is different from taste.
(Phāso ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi) Touch is not knowledge, (jamhā phāso kiṃci ṇa yāṇade) because touch, [being non-conscious,] is incapable of knowing anything; (tamhā ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ phāsaṃ aṇṇaṃ jiṇā viṃti) and, therefore, the omniscient have declared that knowledge is different from touch.
(Kammaṃ ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi) Karma is not knowledge, (jamhā kammaṃ kiṃci ṇa yāṇade) because karma, [being non-conscious,] is not capable of knowing anything; (tamhā ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ kammaṃ aṇṇaṃ jiṇā viṃti) and, therefore, the omniscient have declared that knowledge is different from karma.
(Dhammo ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi) Dharmāstikāya, [the substance which assists motion] is not knowledge, (jamhā dhammo kiṃci ṇa yāṇade) because, [being non-conscious,] it is incapable of knowing anything; (tamhā ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ dhammaṃ aṇṇaṃ jiṇā viṃti) and, therefore, the omniscients have declared that knowledge is different from dharmastikdya.
(Adhammo ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi) Adharmāstikāya, [the substance which assists rest] is not knowledge, (jamhā adhammo kiṃci ṇa yāṇade) because, [being non-conscious,] it is incapable of knowing anything; (tamhā ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ adhammaṃ aṇṇaṃ jiṇā viṃti) and, therefore, the omniscient have declared that knowledge is different from adharmāstikāya.
(Kālo ṇāṇaṃ ṇa havadi) Time is not knowledge, (jamhā kālo kiṃci ṇa yāṇade) because time, [being non-conscious,] is not capable of knowing anything; (tamhā ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ kālo aṇṇaṃ jiṇā viṃti) and, therefore, the omniscient have declared that knowledge is different from time.
(Āyāsaṃ pi ṇāṇaṃ ṇa) Space is not knowledge, (jamhā āyāsaṃ kiṃci ṇa yāṇade) because space, [being non-conscious,] is not capable of knowing anything; (tamhā āyāsaṃ aṇṇaṃ ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ jiṇā viṃti) and, therefore, the omniscient have declared that knowledge is different from space.
(Ajjhavasāṇaṃ ṇāṇaṃ ṇa) An impulse is not knowledge, (jamhā ajjhavasāṇaṃ acedaṇaṃ) because impulse, [being non-conscious,] is not capable of knowing anything; (tamhā ṇāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ tahā ajjhavasāṇaṃ aṇṇaṃ) and, therefore, the omniscient have declared that knowledge is different from impulse.
(Jamhā ṇiccaṃ jāṇādi tamhā jāṇago jῑvo du ṇāṇῑ) Since the soul always knows, the knower soul is possessed of knowledge, [absence of knowledge is unnatural to soul] (ṇāṇaṃ jāṇayādo avvadirittaṃ muṇedavvaṃ) [and that is why] one should understand that the knowledge is never different from the knower.
(Buhā ṇāṇuṃ du sammādiṭṭhiṃ saṃjamaṃ aṃgapuvvagadaṃ suttaṃ dhammādhammaṃ ca tahā pavvajjaṃ abbhuvetti) And the wise [gaṇadharas] believe that [right] knowledge itself is identical to right belief, spiritual discipline (saṃyama), the original twelve scriptures (aṅgapraviṣṭa) which include the pūrvā, dharma, [the right path] and adharma [its opposite] and the asceticism (pravrajyā).
Annotations:
Throughout this book the author has attached extreme importance to the nature of pure self and its inalienable attribute knowledge. He has taken great pains to depict the knowledge to be distinct from other things on the one hand and its intrinsic oneness with the pure self—Samayasāra—on the other. Hence in the above verses he has given an infallible criterion by which pure knowledge can be distinguished from every other thing. In the first set of verses, he enumerates a number of things different from the knowledge. At first sight this may appear to be negative and may prompt us to object that they tell us only what knowledge is not and leaves us quite in the dark as to what it is. But no true and significant negative judgment is merely negative; all significant negation is really exclusion resting upon a positive basis. And the author himself, in the last, two verses declares the affirmative criterion also, clearly stating what knowledge is.
This positive criterion emphasizes the intrinsic identity between the knower and the knowledge, i.e., between the soul and its main characteristic-the knowledge. We have, on more than one occasion, dealt with the relation between a substance and its quality. Suffice here to say that the knower is neither absolutely one nor absolutely different from its attribute, the knowledge.
Thus, though, the knower and knowledge are two, they are identical. This criterion further leads to the identity of the knowledge with some other modifications/states of the soul. Thus, right belief and right conduct which conjointly with right knowledge, constitute the right path to final emancipation, are also identical with knowledge.
It should be noted that the soul, the knowledge and the right path are all characterized by consciousness, and are therefore quite different from non-conscious objects. A long list of non-conscious objects is given in these verses to emphasize their difference from knowledge. While each of these can become the object of knowledge, none can be predicated as the subject of knowledge, i.e., the knower, because being non-conscious, they are incapable of knowing anything.
In the last verse, while identifying knowledge with right belief etc., the author has implied that the goal of emancipation must be realized by the progressive purification of the knowledge till the soul shines in its full splendor and attains omniscience, which intuits all substances with all their modes. Nothing remains unknown. At this stage the soul would experience the whole of real existence directly as a system with internal consistency and structure but without any reference to anything beyond itself.
