Jaina Philosophy of Non Absolutism

SR No.: 001213
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Satkari Mookerjee, S N Dasgupta
Publisher: Motilal Banarasidas
Publication Year: 1978
Total Pages: 314
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Philosophy, B000, & B025
File Size: 18 MB

Page 272

250
The Jaina Philosophy of Non-Absolutism:
the blind force of causality to account for volitional activity. What he seeks to establish is that conceptual knowledge is out of touch with reality. But though independent of reality it possesses similarity of structure (äkārasārūpya) with a real. So a conception of fire inspires activity towards real fire and not anything else which lacks such similarity of structure. The Naiyāyika observes in reply that structural similarity of content and object cannot be the universal condition of selective activity. In erroneous cognition the object of activity has no structural similarity with the content of the cognition and yet the activity takes place. So the hypothesis of structural similarity is abortive. The Buddhist however rejoins that the objection of the Naiyāyika is only a cavil, since the causal relation between activity and structural similarity holds good in normal cases and erroneous cognition is only an exception. Even the Naiyāyika, who makes the cognition of the object the condition of activity, has to admit that the causal relation in question only holds between veridical cognition and successful activity. He must therefore admit that the law does not operate in cases of unsuccessful activity. If the Naiyāyika would appeal to the abnormal conditions that frustrate the operation of the causal law, the Buddhist would also offer the same explanation. So the problem is not peculiar to the Buddhist theory and has to be met by the Naiyāyika and the Buddhist alike. They will both have to make allowance for abnormal cases.
Udayana would submit that the hypothesis of structural similarity is preposterous. How can there be similarity, structural or otherwise, between consciousness and matter, which are possessed of diametrically opposed characteristics ? If there could be similarity, there would be no necessity for postulation of two different kinds of being, spirit and matter, as either of them would do. Similarity is possible only if there be a nucleus of identity in the midst of variations. The elemental identity in any two products is possible only if both of them were derived from an identical condition. But consciousness and its object cannot be supposed to be derived from a self-identical condition. Thus for instance smoke is the product of fire, but awareness of smoke may occur even in the absence of fire. The difference of causes proves the difference of the identity of the effects. So there can