Studies in Jaina Philosophy

SR No.: 001616
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Nathmal Tatia
Publisher: Jain Cultural Research Society
Publication Year: 1951
Total Pages: 366
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Philosophy, Knowledge, Yoga, & Epistemology
File Size: 9 MB

Page 170

III. VII]
AVIDYĀ IN THE BUDDHIST SCHOOL
133
parikalpa (awareness of the duality) exists and also that duality does not exist. That there is sanklesa (afflictions is a fact too apparent to deny, and it is also a verity that this sankleśa is due to the awareness of the duality of the perceived and the perceiver. On the cessation of this awareness there is cessation of sankleśa and consequently there is emancipation. But how can this awareness cease if it is there in its own right? If the awareness of duality is an immutable fact, there is no possibility of emancipation. Again, if this awareness did not exist at all there would be no real existence of sanklesa. It, therefore, follows that the awareness is neither an immutable fact nor an unreal fiction. It is there quâ basic defect or a fault or abhūtaparikalpa (unreal imagination) as it is called. The logical argument of this position can be put in this form: 'There is sankleśa as well as an urge from within to get rid of this sankleśa and attain mukti (emancipation). The sanklesa presupposes some defect as its cause. The nature of this cause is deduced from the consideration of the conditions of this sorrowful and miserable existence. There is misery and sorrow so long as there is the awareness of the duality of the perceiver and the perceived, subject and object, I and mine ; and if this duality is an immutable fact, there is no reason why the awareness of it should cease to exist. It is, however, established by the evidence of experience as well as logical arguments that there is no duality. Now the awareness of duality remains. This awareness is the ultimate cause of all sankleśa.' But then the problem is, why is there this awareness of duality at all? This question has not been dealt with explicitly. But, as is usual elsewhere, the Buddhists took resort to the conception of the beginninglessness of the world and consequently to the beginninglessness of this awareness of duality. But the problem can be answered in yet a different way. The reality is as it is. The world is only an appearance. There is, in reality, neither sankleśa (afflictions) nor vyavadāna (freedom from afflictions), neither bandha (bondage) normokşa (emancipation). Hence there is also not the awareness of duality. It is as much an appearance as its product viz. the phenomenal universe. The Lankāvatāra says: 'There is neither sankleśa (impurity) nor śuddhi (purification) because there is non-existence of all things (dharmas).'? There is neither emancipation nor bondage.''
i Cf..... grāhya-grähakatvena paśvādeh pratibhåso yadi punar evam paramarthataḥ syad evam sati nityaḥ samklesaḥ syāt. tathā ca nirvāņābhävaḥ, evam bhräntimätrasyā py abhāve sam kleśābhāvo nityarn ca vyavadanam prasajyate. evam co 'bhayathā 'pi mokşarthinām vyartho yatnaḥ syāt. ato 'bhūtaparikalpo 'sti dvayam ca na vidyata ity avasyam abhyupagantavyam.-Ibid., pp. 18-19.
? abhāvāt sarvadharmāņām saṁklešo nā 'sti suddhi ca.-LA, X. 137a-b. 3 na mokṣo na ca bandhanam-LA, X. 275.