Mahavira Jain Vidyalay Suvarna Mahotsav Granth Part 1

SR No.: 012002
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Mahavir Jain Vidyalaya Mumbai
Publisher: Mahavir Jain Vidyalay
Publication Year: 1968
Total Pages: 950
Language: Gujarati
Classification: Smruti_Granth & Articles
File Size: 30 MB

Page 480

SVABHAVAVĀDA (NATURALISM): A STUDY : 19
the cornerstone of Jaina philosophy. Sīlāņka26, writing as an advocate of Niyativāda, disposes of Svabhāvavāda as follows:
"Moreover the causing of joy and sorrow cannot be ascribed to inherent character (svabhava). For is this different from a man or the same as he ? If it is different it is not capable of causing the joy and sorrow which befall him, on account of that difference. Nor (if it is) the same (as he). For, if it were, it would be a mere man.
"If happiness is experienced as a result of human activity there should be no difference in the reward (of equal exertion), nor should there be lack of reward when equal effort is exerted, whether by servants, merchants or peasants, etc. Yet it is often seen that even when no means of livelihood such as service, etc., is followed, rich reward is obtained. So nothing is achieved by human effort."
In the Nyāyamañjarī27 Jayanta dismisses this doctrine of Svabhāva and establishes that of Adrsta or Karman. Jayanta is well-known as a superb writer on Nyaya. This great logician, however, succumbs to the temptation of ascribing a manifestly weak argument to the Svabhāvavadin, who argues : "The opening of a babe's mouth is spontaneous—natural like the blooming of a lotus bud." The Siddhantin refutes it saying that the blooming of a lotus bud is caused by the touch of the sun's rays and that it is not spontaneous or natural.
That the doctrine of Svabhāva once enjoyed immense popularity and exerted great influence on the thinkers of those times would be patent to any impartial student of the Bhagavadgita. The Gitā takes recourse to the doctrine of Svabhāva in defending the difference in respective func
26 तथा स्वभावस्यापि सुखदुःखादिकर्तृत्वानुपपत्तिः । यतोऽसौ स्वभावः पुरुषाद् भिन्नोऽभिन्नो वा। यदि भिन्नो न पुरुषाश्रिते सुखदुःखे कर्तुमलं तस्माद् भिन्नत्वादिति । नाप्यभिन्नः । अभेदे पुरुष एव स्यात् तस्य चाकर्तृत्वमुक्तमेव ।
-Silānka's Commentary to Sūtrakytānga : folio 31 (a) यदि पुरुषकारकृतं सुखायनुभूयेत ततः सेवकवणिकर्षकादीनां समाने पुरुषकारे सति फलप्राप्तिसदृश्यं फलाप्राप्तिश्च न भवेत् । कस्यचित्तु सेवादिव्यापाराभावेऽपि विशिष्टफलावाप्तिदृश्यत इति । अतो न पुरुषकारात् किञ्चिदासाद्यते।
-Śilānka's Commentary to Sūtrakrtānga: folios 30 (b) and 31 (a) 27 नन कमलमुकुलविकासादिवत्स्वाभाविकमेव शिशोर्मुखविकाशादिकार्य स्यात्, स्वाभाविकं नाम किमुच्यते
fefe funèafara a I........ न चायस्कान्तदृष्टान्तसमाश्रयेण स्वाभाविकमेतद्वालकस्य कुचकलशनिमित्तोपसर्पणमिति वक्तुमुचितमनन्तरमेव निरस्तत्वात् । -Jayanta's Nyāyamañjarī (Prameyaprakarana, pp. 41-42,
KSS ed. 1936)