Mahavira Jayanti Smarika 1978

SR No.: 014024
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Bhanvarlal Polyaka
Publisher: Rajasthan Jain Sabha Jaipur
Publication Year: 1978
Total Pages: 300
Language: Hindi, English
Classification: Seminar & Articles
File Size: 7 MB

Page 269

also be uncreated and eternal even having parts like the sky.
duct, like a pot or house, is made by some agent. As the world is a product, it must also have an intelligent creator and that is God. But according to Jainism, this argument is unscund, because the minor premise (i.e., 'The world is a product') is unproved. How can we regard the world to be a product? F.W. Thomas puts the Jaina argument in this resp.ct in the following words, “Whereas first
it is said by the opponent that earth, etc., have an intelligent maker, because they are products, like a pot, etc., is unproved, because there is no apprehension of a comprehension. For it is agreed by all the disputants that ‘only in the case of comprehensicas and well established by proof will the Middle Term his Major Term.''4 Bertrand Russell has also argued in the same vein. According to him, if every event must have a cause, one may ask the cause of God also. And if God can be conceived to be without cause, the world also can very we'l be con- ceived to be without cause. What is the harm in supposing that the world itself is uncreated and without cause ?
(2) The existence of a Creator God has been posed on the anology of the pot and the patmaker, but this analogy is not fe,fect because both the pot and the potter are perceptible objects, whereas God is not an object of perception. Fu ther, the potter or the agent who produces anything, has a bidy. Now, God as an agent should also have a body is perceptible or imperceptible ? The first alternative is obviously false, because there is a contradiction by perception. If we hold that He is an imperceptible being, then it is also unsound because if the reason or the ground be perceptible things, the consequent or the object of conclusion will also be perceptible. If God is supposed to be imperceptible, the analogy of pot and pot-maker does nct hold good. The potter is p.rceived to have a body and if God is without to have a body and it go a body, there is disagreement between example and exempl.fied. For forms of products, pot, etc., are seen to have makers with bodies, and, if without a body, how can he have the capacity for producing a product ? According to Hume, the causal argument based on the an: logy of house and housemaker is cbviously absurd. He asks, "C. n you pretend to show any such simila.ity between the fabric of a
The Naiyayikas maintain the world is created is like a product, because it has parts. Now the Jainas answer that the Naiyayika themselves maintain that the sky is uncreated although it has parts. Similarly, the world can
महावीर जयन्ती स्मारिका 78
2-153