Pravachanasara

SR No.: 003289
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: A N Upadhye
Publisher: Shrimad Rajchandra Ashram
Publication Year: 1964
Total Pages: 612
Language: Hindi, Sanskrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari
File Size: 16 MB

Page 116

Introduction
83
is not (p.87:) traced, so far as I am guided by the Ardhamāgadhi Dictionary, in the Svetāmbara canon; but however the seeds of that tenet are there. Bhagavatīsūtra mentions the three primary predications.1 Prof. A. B. Dhruva says that there is a reference to Syādvāda in Sūtrakstānga-niryukti, but I have not been able to trace it there: I think he is perhaps misled by the definition of kriyāvāda etc. in verse No. 118.2 Kundakunda mentions full-fledged Syädvāda in Pañcāstikāya and Pravacanasāra, and the former gives the name Saptabhanga.3 There is no explicit reference to Syādvāda in Tattvārthasūtras; it is said to be implied by the sūtra: arpitānarpita-siddheḥ (V, 32). Later authors like Samantabhadra, Siddhasena, Akalanka, Haribhadra, Vidyānanda have fully discussed it in their works. Philosophical evolution needs that Nayavāda should come first and Syādvāda next; but the references collected here do not warrant any conclusion like that; and even the Jaina authors say that they are the two wings of Anekānta.
COUNTERPARTS OF SYĀDVADA ELSEWHERE DISCUSSED.-Attempts have been made to detect the counterparts of the doctrine of manifold predication in other systems of thought. According to Sāmaññaphalasutta a statement clearly indicating his extreme agnostic attitude is put in the mouth of Sañjaya Belatthiputta that he used to say: 'atthi' ti pi no, 'natthi' ti pi me no, 'atthi ca natthi ca' ti pi me no, 'nevatthi na natthi' ti pi me no. This is considered by some as the forerunner of Syādvāda which is the positive form of it as shaped by Mahavira. Prof. Dhruva mentions another view of equivocators who would neither declare anything to be good, nor to be bad, but on a question being put to them on this or that they resort to eel-wriggling by equivocation and say 'I do not take it thus. I do not take it the other way. But I advance no different opinion. And I do not deny your position. And I do not say it is neither the one or the other'. Because it is attributed to 'some recluses and Brāhmaṇas', Prof. Dhruva has concluded that Syādvāda, whose erroneous form is given above, had non-Jaina beginnings. I admit the first part that it is a perverted parallel of Syādvāda, but the second part that it had non-Jaina beginnings is not guaranteed by the evidences. It is clear that Prof. Dhruva is led to this surmise by the word Brāhmaṇa, but the other word ‘recluse should not be ignored. He gives the translated form ‘recluse', and in all probability the original word must have been 'sramana'. I may have here a digression on the word Šramaņa. It occurs very often in Buddhistic texts. It means a non-Brahmanic ascetic; Buddha is often addressed by non-Buddhists as Sramaņa; it designates those who are opposed to Brāhmaṇas, who are casteless, and who do not recognise the Vedas but attack (p. 88:] their superiority. Turn
1 Jaina Sāhitya Samsodhaka I, 4; Sanmatiprakarana p. 441, especially the foot-notes on that
page and the next. Dhruva's Intro. of Syüdvädamañjari p. 77. 2 Süyagadam Ed. by Dr. P. L. Vaidya, Poona. 3 Pañcāstikāya 14 and 72. 4 Jacobi: SBE. 45 Intro. p. 46; Belvalkar: Brahmasūtra-bhāsya II, ii, notes, p. 114; and
Dhruva: Ibidem Intro. p. 76. 5 See PTS Pali Dictionary under samano. 6 Dutt: Early Buddhist Monachism pp. 64 and 69.