International Journal Of Jaina Studies Vol 01 To 03 2005 To 2007

SR No.: 022773
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Peter Flugel
Publisher: Hindi Granth Karyalay
Publication Year: 2008
Total Pages: 202
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 19 MB

Page 42

commentary. In his analysis of the sophisticated structure of the text, and of the relationship of Mallavādin's twelve naya (vidhi) scheme to the older seven naya (viewpoint) scheme and Siddhasena Divākara's two naya scheme, Wezler comes to the conclusion that Frauwallner's interpretation in his Introduction to Jambūvjiaya's edition of the DNC Vol. I) of the 'terms' vidhi ('general affirmation'), niyama ('restriction'), and vidhi-niyama ('affirmation and restriction'), whose combination generates the twelve naya structure, is unconvincing: 'both these modes do not refer to classes of propositions, or statements, ... but to aspects of, or perspectives of, perceiving (real) objects. The "scheme" of the twelve aras of Mallavādin is ... basically of an ontological character (20). According to Mallavādin himself, it is grounded in the teachings of the Jina which encompass all other teachings, since 'The Jaina canon is the true Veda' (22).
Jayandra Soni ("Kundakunda and Umāsvāti on Anekânta-vāda') compares the philosophical terminology used by two of the most influential non-canonical Jaina authors, Kundakunda and Umāsvāti, and some of their commentators. He found that Kundakunda uses the word 'svād' explicitly, whereas Umāsvāti does not (wisely none of the authors in the volume translated syāt, a word that is discussed by J.C. Wright, Review of: Nagin J. Shah (ed.) Jaina theory of multiple facets of reality and truth (Anekāntavāda). Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas, 2000,' Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 63, 3, 2000: 435-437). Kundakunda uses naya only with reference to the 'canonical' (pace Balcerowicz, infra, p. 48) distinction between dravya (substance) and paryāva (modification), while Umāsvāti refers to the list of five (Digambara: seven) nayas (which Kundakunda also mentions). Without explicitly addressing the question of the historical evolution of the terminology of Jaina perspectivism, the author concludes that it is not clear whether syāt or naya has priority in Kundakunda (28), that the Digambara commentator Pūjyapāda (c. 5th-6th C.) first used the word anekânta (33), while the approaches of syād-vāda and of anekânta-vāda may or may not be 'implied' in the relevant passages of Umāsvāti's Tattvärtha-sūtra (28).
Through translations and analyses of the relevant explanations of sapta-bhangi in the classical treatises on Jaina logic, Piotr Balcerowicz' article 'Some Remarks on the Naya Method demonstrates that the well-known scheme of the 'sevenfold modal description' (sapta-bhangī) can be interpreted as an answer to the question 'how to relate the whole and its parts' (40), if the whole is to be understood as a multiplex reality, which can only be fully described through statements from different perspectives ('contexts'). The analysis shows convincingly that the (Digambara) Jaina scheme is arranged in form of a 'progressive indexation' of the semantic field of a statement, in which each viewpoint