________________
due to imperialism, colonialism, etc, but they are different issues and they have to be discussed with reference to Edward Said' famous work Orientalism (1978) or other works of thinkers of post-colonialism.
1
Sukhlalji's Approach
In his preface to the notes on Pramānamīmāmsa (Shah, N, 2002; 297-301), Sukhlalji points out that he had studied philosophy according to the old style of Pandits and surely he derived many advantages from such training. But he also found out that he had not paid proper attention to his inability to make out " how as a result of mutual discussion and criticism, the various philosophical systems of India influenced one another either negatively or positively". Awareness of such a shortcoming forced him to "traverse a new path". It consisted firstly in understanding the basic texts of the system concerned and then trying "H to determine the historical interconnection between the philosophical issues and to make a comparative study of these issues as discussed by the various philosophical systems."
(Shah; 2002; p, 298). Sukhlalji's method of understanding and explaining Indian philosophical traditions is historical, developmental and comparative (Shah; 2002; p, 299). He has claimed that that even for understanding the Jaina standpoint, we have to use the comparative and historical method of understanding various non-Jaina traditions of Indian philosophy. The same applies to the studies of non-Jaina systems. For an accurate understanding and analysis of the philosophical problems of the non-Jaina traditions, we have to attend to some of the arguments of the Jaina thinkers against the main claims of non - Jaina traditions.
2
Sukhlalji's Classifications of Indian Philosophies.
If we want to locate the standpoint of any Indian philosophical system, we must first place that system within the broad metaphysical, epistemological classifications of the various systems of Indian philosophy and then we can trace the history of any philosophical problem within the Indian philosophical system under consideration and between the systems of the Indian tradition. If, for example, we first understand the history of the problem of perception from within the Jaina system and then compare it with the Non-Jaina systems, we find that the Jaina philosophy is a metaphysical realism, and therefore, the objects of perception are transcendentally real for them. No Jaina thinker will therefore endorse Vijñānavāda (empirical idealism) of some of the Buddhists. This and other such examples analyzed by Sukhlalji highlight the importance of various types of classifications of Indian systems and Sukhlalji has made an important contribution to this area by his historical and comparative methods.
Sukhlalji, in his Introduction, has rightly emphasized the different
286