DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.39769#0120
94
THE SECOND LECTURE.
Recon-
ciliation by
referring to
different
subject
matters.
rising sun should be seen. In general application how
ever, Paryudasa is' merely what we call an exception.
Jimutavahana uses Paryudasa in this sense in para
36, Sect. 1, Ch. VI, where he says that if you take
the several texts regarding self-acquisition as Paryudasa
(exceptions), then all possible cases of self-acquisitions
must be regarded as exceptions to partible property.
Having made this observation in the succeeding para.
(para. 37 ) he says that the several texts regarding self-
acquisitions are not meant as exceptions but are given
only ab illustrative instances. In the latter para. ( he
observes ) that where there is a negative rule embodying
a number of instances, but there is no exhaustive
enumeration of the cases which are intended to be
•covered thereby, the negative rule cannot be a
Faryudasa. ,The instances are merely in the nature
of an Arthav&da of a negative character.1
‘The principle of reconciliation by referring appar-
ently conflicting texts each to a different subject matter
1 RtrRTfTTRlkhRWTwkrwrRt
w r r ctwt sfkhr r
rArt wRRfffm mkRTTRErm fRfkwr
Hfg; ^ w TI f4wT cr^T c1%
^trIr! ^ ^nw<T ^rt<t
OO 'J o s s
sftRRcfkR Rg TffMfRRRWTRT RfR^^RTW TTTTTq
^RRdM S1 IR RT1RT RfRrKRMTgR-
nw. RRtRt r^rrrr vrvIrtrr g TiR-
Nq fkf%c[ ^rtfRR TiRfRRl%f%kfR rArtmIrr crarm rtrtrr-
^wcrrmR rr fTHRkftr kPr. vNttrrrr
RkskRWTfRRRRTRW RRRT RTRTCWRnfRRTRR^TfWRiR |
Dayabhaga paras. 36, 37. Sect. i. Ch. I.
THE SECOND LECTURE.
Recon-
ciliation by
referring to
different
subject
matters.
rising sun should be seen. In general application how
ever, Paryudasa is' merely what we call an exception.
Jimutavahana uses Paryudasa in this sense in para
36, Sect. 1, Ch. VI, where he says that if you take
the several texts regarding self-acquisition as Paryudasa
(exceptions), then all possible cases of self-acquisitions
must be regarded as exceptions to partible property.
Having made this observation in the succeeding para.
(para. 37 ) he says that the several texts regarding self-
acquisitions are not meant as exceptions but are given
only ab illustrative instances. In the latter para. ( he
observes ) that where there is a negative rule embodying
a number of instances, but there is no exhaustive
enumeration of the cases which are intended to be
•covered thereby, the negative rule cannot be a
Faryudasa. ,The instances are merely in the nature
of an Arthav&da of a negative character.1
‘The principle of reconciliation by referring appar-
ently conflicting texts each to a different subject matter
1 RtrRTfTTRlkhRWTwkrwrRt
w r r ctwt sfkhr r
rArt wRRfffm mkRTTRErm fRfkwr
Hfg; ^ w TI f4wT cr^T c1%
^trIr! ^ ^nw<T ^rt<t
OO 'J o s s
sftRRcfkR Rg TffMfRRRWTRT RfR^^RTW TTTTTq
^RRdM S1 IR RT1RT RfRrKRMTgR-
nw. RRtRt r^rrrr vrvIrtrr g TiR-
Nq fkf%c[ ^rtfRR TiRfRRl%f%kfR rArtmIrr crarm rtrtrr-
^wcrrmR rr fTHRkftr kPr. vNttrrrr
RkskRWTfRRRRTRW RRRT RTRTCWRnfRRTRR^TfWRiR |
Dayabhaga paras. 36, 37. Sect. i. Ch. I.