________________
1 SIDDHASENA DIVAKARA
69
no mention is made as to whom this doctrine belongs to and what sort of Advaita it was in the latter there is no mention of the word Advaita but Kapila doctrine has been mentioned as the Advaita doctrine..
In addition to all this one point seems to be noteworthy that the Āpta Mīmāṁsā while defining the nature of omniscience refers to his preachings as embodied in the Anekānta doctrine. T'he Sanmati also accepts the preachings of Jina omniscient as supreme, and also discusses Anekānta in this context. In Indian logic, the authenticity of a Sāstra is a subject of supreme interest. There is one doctrine which is in vogue from times immemorial and it is this that the Šāstra has no beginn. ing, that is to say, it is not the work of any human being. It is an authority in itself. This doctrine has for its advocate Jaimini. Another doctrine which is considered as opposed to Jaimini has been ad vocated by the Vaiseșikas, Naiyayikas and others. It says that the authenticity of a Šāstra doen not depend upon the fact that it is without beginning or that it is eternal, but it depends upon the reliability of the person who preaches it. Such a reliable creature is nobody else than God himself. Therefore, naturally a Šāstra is considered to be an authority only because it is brought into being by God. These two doctrines regard Śrutis (Vedas) as their authority and base their doctrines on them. The only difference is that the reasons assigned to this doctrine are different in each doctrine. The second doctrine that of the logician has this peculiarity in it that it accepts God as the creator of the Šāstras, and thus it says that the
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
