OM-ARHAM

Chapter 5 – A Line of Demarcation between the first four and last four Yogadṛṣṭis [49 of 121]

(← ... https://www.om-arham.org/blog/view/13135/yogad%E1%B9%9B%E1%B9%A3%E1%B9%ADisamuccaya-von-haribhadra-suri)

Chapter 5.4 – The Fallacious argument (kutarka) [5 of 32]

Disqualities of a fallacious argument:[1]

1. It appears as a disease to the understanding (bodha).
2. It causes harm to the equanimity.
3. It disintegrates the faith in religious truths.
4. It gives rise to vanity.
5. In many ways it is an enemy of a soul in real sense.

Here, we may find a link among following sentences of the auto–commentary of our author. In verse 87 it is written that:

“kutarkaḥ cotasaḥ anekadhā vyaktaṃ bhāvaśatruḥ”.

In the auto–commentary on this verse Haribhadrasūri says that:

“kutarka – āgamanirapekṣā;
cotasaḥ – antaḥkaraṇasya;
bhāvaśatruṃ — paramārtharipuḥ;
anekadhā–āryāpavādādikāraṇena”||87||

In the auto–commentary on verse 141 our author defines the word āryāpavāda. It is said that

“...āryāpavādastu punaḥ–sarvajñaparibhavaḥ ityarthaḥ...”

In the auto–commentary on verse 87 our author simply states that since a fallacious argument [i.e., kutarka] is involved in doing repudiation of noble ones (āryāpavādā) and so on, it is an enemy of one’s inner mind. Further in auto–commentary on verse 141 Haribhadrasūri clarifies that by āryāpavāda he means sarvajñaparibhava.

[next part… → … https://www.om-arham.org/blog/view/13137/yogad%E1%B9%9B%E1%B9%A3%E1%B9%ADisamuccaya-by-haribhadra-suri]