Akalanka as a Logician

Author(s): T G Kalghatgi
Publisher: Z_Pushkarmuni_Abhinandan_Granth_012012.pdf
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/250008/1

Page #1

4
00000.
Akalanka-as a Logician
६८३
Akalanka as a Logician
T. G. Kalghatgi
Professor and Head of the Department of Jainalogy and Prakrit, Manas Gangotri, Mysore 6 回
(I) Akalanka occupies a unique place in the development of Indian logic. He was one of the foremost Jaina logicians. If Kundakundācārya is to be considered as the father of Jaina logic, Akalanka cemented the foundations of Jaina logic and built a logical structure with depth and subtlety of thought. His writings are difficult to understand and even eminent logicians have expressed their profound admiration for the subtlety of thought and depth of vision in his writings. Prabhacandra, in the first part of his Nyayakumudacandra has expressed his admiration for Akalanka and said that he was fortunate to have been able to study the writings of Akalanka, although his writings are full of subtlety of thought.1 Vädirājasūri was amazed at the profoundity of thought expressed in the writings of Akalanka. It is difficult to express in our words the profoundity of thought contained in the writings of Akalankadeva. The writings of Akalanka are so difficult for understanding that 'ordinary persons like me would not be able to explain much less comment on the writings'.3 As Dharmakirti is for Buddhist logic, Akalanka is for the Jaina logic. In the Śravanabelagola inscription, it has been stated that Akalanka is the Brahaspati in the six darśanas After Acarya Pujyapāda Akalankadeva has been eulogised as the sun dispelling the darkness of ignorance arising out of the perversity of thought, as the sun clears darkness and gives light.5

(II) It is difficult to give a clear picture of the life-history of Akalanka. Similarly there is controversy regarding the period in which he lived. Some have suggested that Akalanka lived in the latter part of the 8th century on the basis of the interpretation on 'Vikramānka as 'samvat', as mentioned in the verse in the Akalankacarita. He has been considered as the contemporary of Rājā Dantidurga alia Krishṇarājā of the Rāṣṭrakūta dynasty. The other view suggested by Sri Jugal Kishore Mukhtar fixed his date as the seventh century A. D. on the basis of the interpretation of the word Vikramārka as 'vikramasamvat'. Pandit Kailāścandra Sastri is of the opinion that Akalanka's period must have been from 620 to 680 A.D. There is verse of Dhananjaya in which the Pramanaśastra of Akalanka has been mentioned with respect. Acarya Jinasena has mentioned the name of Akalanka in Adipuraṇa with reverence and gratitude. On the basis of the review of the various views about the date of Akalanka, Shri Nemichandra Sastri has suggested that Akalanka must have lived in the latter half of the seventh century.'
It is as much difficult to give a coherent and authentic picture of his life-story as it is difficult to determine the age in which he lived, but one thing is certain that he must have been from the south. There is the mention in the Räjävalikathe that Akalanka was the son of Purusottama the minister of the king Subhatunga of Manykheța. In the Prasasti of the first adhyaya of Tattvärtha-vārtika it has been suggested that he was the son of the king Laghuhavya, although it is difficult to identify the king. There is greater evidence to consider him as the son of the minister of the king Subhatunga.10 Some interesting incidents have been described in the Kathakosa of Prabhacandra. Akalanka and Nişkalanka were two brothers. When they came of age, the parents tried to pursuade them for marriage. But they refused to get married and enter into the life of "gṛhastha', because once when they had gone along with their parents to a muni, the parents had taken the vow of brahmacarya for the period of one week in their presence. The boys insisted that the vow once taken is always valid and it opplies to them also, although they

O

Page #2

६८४
थी पुष्करमुनि अभिनन्दन ग्रन्थ : षष्ठम खण्ड
were very young at the time when the parents took the vrata in the presence of the muni. The two brothers remained unmarried and devoted themselves to the sudy of śāstras. They joined the Buddhist Academy for the study of the Buddhist Nyāya, as Buddhism was in the ascendent stage at that time. Akalanka was a brilliant boy and was well-versed in the Jain philosophy. The two brothers had joined the Buddhist Academy in the guise of Buddhist scholars, as otherwise they would not have been admitted. But once, when the teacher was explaining the Saptabbangi nyaya of the Jainas, the lesson was not correctly taught. After the teacher left the class Akalanka quietly corrected the lesson. Later, the teacher got suspicious that the pupil who corrected the lesson must be a Jaina. The life of the two brothers was in danger due to the unhealthy and phanatic rivalry of Buddhists towards Jainas. They ran for life. But unfortunately Nişkalanka was caught and killed by the guards of the king. It was destined that Akalanka was to escape for the sake of the promotion of learning and the advancement of logic and metaphysics. Another interesting incident in his life has been narrated in which it was stated that Akalanka defeated the Buddbist scholars in the court of Himaśitala of Kalinga in logical and metaphysical discussions with the help of Yakşini Küşmandini. The Buddhist scholar was being assisted by the deity (goddess) Tārā.11 Apart from the story contents in the incident, the narration has to be looked at from an historical perspective. From the analysis of the narration it is clear that there was academic and sectional rivalry between the Buddhist and the Jaina sections of society for social and spiritual superemacy. It is also clear that the tantrik and the ritualistic aspects of religion had come to stay. The deities were invented and invoked for the sake of gaining superiority over one another. 'Para-spiritual' ritualistic practices became important in society-may be for the sake of retaining the supremacy of one's religion or for establishing faith in the 'para-spiritual' practices so that the common man would be satisfied.
(IU) We now consider the work of Akalanka in the field of logic and metapyhsics with special reference to the Jaina system of thought. Akalanka's contribution to the study of Jaina logic and philosophy is immense. His works may be studied from two points of view :-(a) his original works, and (b) his commentaries on the works of other great Ācāryas.
(a) His original works are :
1. Laghiyastraya with the notes. 2. Nyayaviniscaya with notes. 3. Siddhiviniscaya with notes.
4. Pramāṇasaṁgraha with notes. (b) Some the commentaries that he wrote, we may mention :
1. Tattvärthvārtika-sabhāsya.
2. Asfasati-devägamavstti.
Laghiyastraya is primarily a logical treatise with certain explanations of the epistemological implications of the logical concepts like naya and niksepa. The logical and epistemological critique of the theory of pramāna in the light of the Jaina analysis of the pramaņas is a special contribution of Akalanka in this work.
Laghiyastraya is a critique of knowledge. It gives critical analysis of the problem of knowledge in the light of logical and epistemological implications. It has three parts: (1) Prat äna praveśa, (2) Nyaya praveśa and (3) Niksepa praveśa. Pramana praveśa has four sections : (0) pratyaksa pariccheda, (ii) Vişaya pariccheda, (iii) paroksa pariccheda and (iv) Āgama pariccheda.
In the Njayakumudacandra, commentary on Laghiyastraya, Prabbācandra has mentioned the seven sections in the Laghiyastraya on the basis of the two-fold distinction in the Pravacana praveśa. Akalanka has also written a short treatise on the Laghiyasiraya which is primarily in the form of added noted to the work and not an independent work.

Page #3

+++
Akalanka-as a Logician
Jainism presents a many-folded approach to the understanding of the nature of reality. The Anekanta outlook is the very basis of the Jaina view of life. And Samyag-Jñana (right knowledge) is the essential characteristic of the soul. It is also the prerogative of the soul. Knowledge and the source of knowledge could be considered from two aspects: (a) pratyakşa (direct knowledge) and (b) parokşa (indirect knowledge.) Pratyakşa Jñana is the knowledge that the soul gets directly without the help of sense organs, as the sense organs are impediments to the attainment of perfect knowledge. However, with a view to accommodating the traditional views of other systems of Indian thought, knowledge gained directly by the soul without the help of the sense organs was termed as Mukhya pratyakşa, and sense experience was considered as Samvyavahāra pratyakşa. Akalanka has given an exhaustive and critical analysis of the two types of pratyaksas. He has also given critical exposition of the ontological problems of permanence and change, unity and diversity and the one and the many. Dravyarthikanaya leads to the unity and paryayarthikanaya presents the distinctions. The Jaina view of reality is comprehensive. Reality cannot be considered as mere unity nor mere diversity. It is unity and diversity. It is equally diversified. Similarly it is both eternal and non-eternal-eternal if looked at from the synthetic point of view, and non-eternal from the practical point of view (vyavahāranaya). Akalanka gives a critical exposition of the various forms of knowledge, like mati, smrti, samjñā and cinta. In the latter half of Laghtyastraya Akalanka has discussed the logical and epistemological implications of pramāņa and naya along with the fallacies involved therein. Nayabhasa has been critically examined. In this part, he has considered the presentation of the nature of reality given by the other Indian systems of thought from the different nayas. And to assert the exclusive truth of the expression of reality from a particular point of view is to be dogmatic. It is ekanta. For the Absolutist, assertion of reality as One. The Buddhist gives emphasis on the changing nature of reality as fundamental considered from the point of view of moments. Both give partial views of truth, not the whole truth. But to insist on the exclusive and the full truth for these presentations would be dogmatism and ekanta. The Logical positivists and the school of Analytic philosophy give the view of reality from point of view of linguistic analysis (sabdanaya). But it is not the whole truth. Akalanka, in his Laghiyastraya, has given an exhaustive and critical account of the logical and epistemological problems concerning the nature of reality in the light of his discussions of the problems in other schools of Indian philosophy.
६८५
In the Nikṣepa Vişaya Akalanka has discussed the problem regarding the nature and function of niksepa. One can strive for self-realisation through the understanding of the fundamental principles of Jainism by means of pramana, naya and niksepa. One can also understand the nature of jivadravya through the comprehension of the many facts of a thing. Akalanka has made subtle distinction between the assertion of the many facets of a thing and the assertion regarding the nature of a thing from a particular point of view. The former predication is the pramäṇavakya while the latter is the nayavakya. The pramäņavakya is the comprehensive predication of the nature of a thing as for example the statement 'Syadjiva eva' presents the predication of the Jivadravya. It is called 'sakaladeśa' predication. Nayaväkya presents the predication of a facet of the nature of Jivadravya, for example from a particular point of view. 'Syädastijīvaḥ' is predication of this types which is called Vikalädeśa predication. Such distinction is the special feature of the analysis of logical and epistemological concepts made by Akalanka.

Again, Akalanka gives a critical study of the logical and epistemological problems with special reference to the concepts in other Indian systems. In the works Nyayaviniścaya, Pramāṇasamgraha and Siddhiviniścava the Nyayaviniścyaya has three sections and problem of pratyaksa, anumana and sabda have been thoroughly discussed. Akalanka has refuted the Buddhist, Sämkhya and Yoga theories of the characteristics of pratyakṣa. While discussing the theory of inference he has given a comparative picture of the nature of anumana and the consequent implications of the validity or the fallacies thereon in the light of the criticism of the theories of inference in other schools of thought. In the third part of the Nyayaviniścya he has elucidated the

O
O
O

Page #4

६८६
श्री पुष्करमुनि अभिनन्दन ग्रन्थ : षष्ठम खण्ड
Jaina theory of Agama-pramana and refuted the 'apauruşeyatva' of Agamas as propounded by the Mimāṁsakas. He has also discussed the nature of moksa and other metaphysical problems as the fringe of the logical and epistemological discussions which are the primary problems of the book.
Pramanasargraha is a study of the epistemological problems of mati, śruta, smsti pratyabhijñā, tarka and the other fallacies involved in logical and psychological process of thinking. For instance, the fallacies like, asiddha, viruddha, vāda and jäti bave been analysed. The theories of causation as arising out of the discussions of the logical problems have been presented. There is again a discussion of the naya and niksepa as a corrolary of the total discussion.
Siddhivinếcaya has twelve parts. It gives a critical study of the same problems of logical and epistemological concepts like naya, pramāņa, pratykşa, pratyabhijñā, smsti, jalpa and other logical concepts.
In the logical discussion of the pramāņas, the question of pratyabhijñā to be considered as pramāna by the Jainas has been discussed. Upamāna is to be included in the 'Sådrśya pratyabhijñā' (recognition on the basis of similarities). Certain metaphysical problems concerning the nature of bondage of the soul to karmic particles which are material in nature and the possibility of presenting a coherent view of this problem has been critically studied. The Siddhiviniscaya is a comprehensive and critical treatise on logic and metaphysics, although the emphasis is primarily on the discussion of logical and epistemological problems. Akalanka by his three works on logic has established himself as the undisputed master of logic and the relentless critic of the inadequacies in the theories of other schools of Indian thought.
ly
Now we come to his two important commentaries which have brought him fame as philosophical commentator. The Tattvārthavārttika-sabhāşya and the Aştaśati have thrown greater light on the subtleties of thought as expressed in the Tattvārthasūtra of Umāswāmi and the Aptamimāṁsā of Samantabbadra.
Tattvārthavarttika-sabhâsya is a unique work which synthesises the explanatory notes in the form of vārttika and the commentaries on the sūtras of the Tattvārthasūtra of Umāswāmi. The work is based on the Sarvärthasiddhi of Pujyapāda. On the basis of the presentational statements of Sarvärthasiddhi Akalanka has formulated the explanatory notes and has commented elaborately on these explanatory notes. It is, in fact, a compendium of Sarvärthasiddhi. And it would be easier to understand the intricacies of the discussions in the Tattrarthavarttika-sabhāşya only when we have a thorough understanding of the Sarvärthasiddhi.
Tattvārthavārttika has ten parts based on the ten chapters of the Tattvärthasútra. The cardinal note of this work is the confidence of the author to present solutions of all the problems in the light of the Anekānta attitude, specially in discussing the metaphysical problems. 13 In discussing the metaphysical problems raised in the Tattvärthasütra and in the Sarvärthasiddhi, several contemporary philosophers of the age have been referred to such the Akriyāvädins, Ajñānavādins, Vinayāvādins and the Kriyāvādins. Cosmological problems like the structure of the Universe have been elaborately presented. Here we are reminded of the exhaustive presentation of the constitution of the Universe as presented in the Tiloyapannatti. Akalanka has shown his masterly ability as a logician and a critic in the Tattvārthavärttika.
Aptamimāṁså of Acārya Samantabhadra is a scholarly exposition of Anekantdarśana. And Astašati presents a critique and an enthusiastic exposition of the assertions of Acārya Samantabhadra in the Aptamīmaṁsā. The Aştašati is so called because it contains 800 slokas. This work presents a critique of the several philosophical theories like Dvait-advaita, Säśvataaśāśvata, Daiva-puruşārtha and Pāpa-punya and many other views. Vigorous presentation of the anekānta view is the cardinal note of this work.14
OO

Page #5

Akalanka--as a Logician
€50
(IV) The style of Akalanka is thoughtful, cryptic and difficult to understand. He is more concerned with the analysis, critical study and with the presentation of the subtleties of thought than with the flourish of language. Yet his writings are not bereft flourish and we find subtle and meaningful satire against the writings of other schools of thought.
The writings of Akalanka have been an important landmark in the development of logic and metaphysics. His works have contributed to the effective presentation of the development of Jaina logic and metaphysics, in the perspective of the problem in other systems of Indian thought.
Anekānta is the foundational principle on Jainism. It permeates the very texture of Jaina thought and life. In the context of the present day development of logic and linguistic analysis as metaphysical theory, it would be necessary to study the contributions of Akalanka afresh in the light of the modern developments in logic.
Akalanka showed the catholicity of outlook in understanding the problems of other views of thought as expressed in the controversies in the Indian systems of philosophy. Without entering into the controversy regarding the original intention of the author in the verse given below, we might with confidence say that Akalanka did express the magnanimity of thought and catho. licity of outlook
Yo viśvam vedävedyam janana jala nidherbhanginah paradsvä Pourvāparya viruddham vacanamanupsmam nişkalańkam yadiyam 11 Tam vande sådhuvandyam salalagunanidhim dhvastadośadvişantam Buddham vā Vardhamānam Satadalanilayam Keśavam vă Sivam vā 11
Notes and References 1. Nyāyak umudacandra IV Adhyāya.
"Trailokyodaravartivastuvisayajñānaprabbävedyayo, dusprāpopyakalanka devasaraņihi prāptotra punyodayāt Svabhyastasca vivecitaśca śataśaḥ sönantaviryoktito
Bhuyānme nayanitidattamanasatadbodhasiddhipadah 11" 2. Nyāyaviniscayavivarana of Vadirājasuri
"Güdhamarthamakalanka vāngmayāgadha bhüminihitam tadarhimām
Vyanjayatyamalamanantaviryaväk dīpavartiranićam pade pade 11" 3. Ibid. :............
"Bhùyobhedanayāvagāhana devasya yadvängmayam
Kastadvistarato vivicya vaditum mandam prabhrmādršaha 11" 4. Nemicandra Shastri : Tirthankara Mahāvira aur Unaki Acārya Paramparā (Jaina Vidvat
Parisad 1974.) Vol. II. pp. 300. "Şaftarkeşvakalanka devavibhudhah saksadayam bhūtale."
quoted from Jaina Silalekha Saṁgraha, Part. I. Vo. 47. 5. Jaina Silalekha Sangraha : inscription 108. as quoted by Nemicandra Shastri :
"Tatah param Sastravidām munināmagresarobudakalankasūrihi
Mithyāndhakkärasthagitākhilārthābā prakāśitā yasya vacomayükhehe" 6. Akalanka Carita mentioned as A.D. 778.
"Vikramärkaśakābdiyasatasaptapramajusi
Kale Akalankayatino Bauddhairvadó mahānbhut ” 7. Dhananjaya Namamālā as quoted by Nemicandra Shastri in his Tirthankara Mahavira aur Unaki Ācārya Parampara p. 305.
"Pramāṇamakalankasya Pujyapādasya laksanam
Dhanañjaya kavehe kāvya Ratnatrayamapaścimam!” 8. Jinasena : Adipurāna (Bharatiya Jñanapeetha) 1/53.
"Bhattākalankasripalapātrakesariņām guņāba | Viduşām hrdayarudbā hārayantētimirmalāhā "

Page #6

६८८
श्री पुष्करमुनि अभिनन्दन ग्रन्थ : षष्ठम खण्ड
9. Nemicandra Shastri : Tirthankara Mahāvīra aur Unaki Acārya Paramparā. Vol II. p 306. 10. Tattvārthavårttikaprasasti.
"Jiyacciramakalnakabrahmā Laghuhavvanrpativaratanayah
Anavaratanikhilajananutavidhah prasastjanahrdah " Also see Aradhanakathākosa. 11. Rājāvalikathe 12. Nyāyakumudacandra, part I, of Prabhācandra 13. Tattvarthavārtika (Bharatiya Jñanapeetha) 1, 6-7. 14. Astašati (Bharatiya Jaina Siddhanta Prakashan Samiti Kashi) 1914, Karika. 109. .
"Yatsat tatsarvamanekāntātmakam vastutattvam sarvathā tadarthakriyākāritvāt Na kincitdekāntam vastutattvam sarvatha tadarthakriyasambhavāt 11 Nasti sadekantaha sarvavyāpäravirodhaprasangāt asadekantavaditi Vidhinā pratişedhena
vā
vastutattvam nyamyate 11"
-
VOOO--------------------------- ------ --------
It is human effort which leads to liberation. Though no action takes place in seclusion and human beings are also affected by circu. mstances and environments, yet the main factor, however remains human effort. Here we accept the existence of freedom of will over circumstances.
The reality is that that no object can interfere with the working of another object, whether animate or inanimate. So the self, accordingly is the agent of its own actions and modifications.
Thus the acceptance of the freedom of will glorifies the human $ efforts.
o-------- -0---- - --0----------------------------
0-
h