Biology in Jaina Treatise on Reals

SR No.: 001656
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: N L Jain
Publisher: Parshwanath Vidyapith
Publication Year: 1999
Total Pages: 210
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Religion, & Biology
File Size: 13 MB

Page 85

Biology in Jaina Treatise on Reals
the same way, the conscious soul transform into knowledge etc. without loosing its nature. Thus, there is no contradiction in the concept of same-to-same transformations. 14. If this (same-to-same transformation) is not agreed, all the entities will loose their transfomation character. This will lead to the possibility of their eternality resulting in the loss of the ways of the world of action and actor etc. Moreover, if same-to-different transformation in accepted, there will be confusion in the nature of all entities.
Both these ponts are not desirable. Hence, same-to-same transfomation should be taken as proved and accepted. 15. Q. It is observed that there is a differentia for an existing object only just like the stick of Devadatta (for him, both of which are existing). There can be no differentia for non-existing entities like the horns of the hare. For this aphorism 2.8, the object soul is not amenable to proof. In its absence, how the consciousness may be called a differentia. 16. The non-existence of soul can be proved by the fact that there is no originating cause for it like the hair crest of the frog. Morever, even if it exists, the differentia of consciousness for it cannot be possible because it has an unstable nature. The consciousness means knowledge and conation, both of which are momentary. Any momentary quality cannot be differentia. In the absence of differentia, the entity will also be non-existent. It can be illustrated by the following question-answer :
"Which is the house of Devadatta" ? "It is that house where there is a crow on the top.
This reply means if the crow flies away from the house, there will be no house of Devadatta. Similarly, the momentary qualities of knowledge and conation are not there, the soul itself will have no existence. 18. A. All the above logic is not correct. The existence of soul cannot be negated as there are flaws in the logic of the disputants. For example, the middle term (proband) of the syllogism- there is no soul because it has no cause of origin like the hair-crest of the frog- is infested with fallacies of unprovenness, contratiety and inconclusion.
The polyviewist Jainas hold that the soul has origin. There is no substantive soul different from modes of human or hellish beings etc. And these modes originate from wrong faith etc. Thus, the probans 'there is no cause for origin' stands unproved. The probans is also unproved with respect to substratum as there is no soul as substratum and modes cannot be substratum of different modes. Secondly, whatever entities like post etc. exist, they do exist because of their own nature. There is no cause for their existence. The existents are always non-causal. Thus, non-causality is contradictory with existent substantivity. There is nothing which exists and has a cause of origin. If an entity exists, there is no necessity for its cause.
80