Jaina Epistemology

SR No.: 006738
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Indra Chandra Shastri
Publisher: Parshwanath Vidyapith
Publication Year: 1990
Total Pages: 516
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 21 MB

Page 200

The Gen, ral Conception of Knowledge 175 mination as an individual factor related with the subject only Kundah unda's View Explained
Kundakunda maintains that whatever knows the object, is knowledge. It modifies itself and all the objects stand in knowledge. The two commentators, Amộtacandra and Jayasena take different courses to explain it. Amộtacandra takes the position of Sautrāntika and holds that knowledge takes the form of object. This change in form is caused by the object; and consequently the latter stands in knowledge. Standing in know edge according to this interpretation is to be reflected in knowledge.
But this view goes against the Jaina position in two ways, Firstly, the Jainas do not admit the knowledge as taking the form of object. The Jaina logician have criticised the Sautrāntika bitterly, on this very issue, Jñeyā kāra, as we have already stated, is not a mode of jñāna but, the state of being qualified. Secondly, the Jaina does not admit object as the cause of knowledge, to which the above interpretation naturally leads.
Jayasena's interpretation is more logical. He holds that the statement that all bjects stand in knowledge should not be taken in literal sense. It is only an allegorical statement just as we say that mirror contains the jar. As a matter of fact the mirror does not hold the jar but, only gets its reflection. Similarly, the object does not stand in knowledge. It is only manifested in it. He only means that a cognition never appears without having an object as its data'ım. Whenever there is a cognition it must be associated with some object. Thus, an object in the form of datum must stand in knowledge. It does not mean that Kundakunda is in favour of the theory of representation. This confusion rises from the Jayasena's simile of mirror. Bat, we should note that Jayasena writes "ādarśa bimbamiva" and not "pratibimbamiva'. He does not say that the object stands in knowledge just like the reflection of an object. He says that the object itself stands in the mirror.