Fundamentals Of Jainism

SR No.: 034058
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Champat Rai Jain
Publisher: Veer Nirvan Bharti
Publication Year: 1974
Total Pages: 129
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 5 MB

Page 16

FUNDAMENTALS OF JAINISM
(3) Syad asti nästi (affirmation of oxistence from one point of view and of non-existence from another),
(4) Syadavaktarya (somehow the thing is indescribable),
(5) Syádasti avaktavya (a combination of the first and the fourth forms of predication),
(6) Syānnästi arak tarya (a combination of the second and the fourth forms), and
(7) Syâdasti māsti avaktarra (a combination of the first, second and fourth forms of judgment).
This sevenfold system of predication is called the Saptabhangi (literally, the seven-branched), and stands in the same relation to philosophy as grammar does to spccch.
We shall now proceed to describe the fallacies of the seven kinds of naras (stand-points) enunierated above. These are also seven in number, that is to say one for each naya. Taken in the same order as their corresponding nayas, they may be descibed as follows :
(1) Naigamabhâsa, the fallacy of the Naigama naya, consists in making an actual division in thought between the general and special properties of things, as for instance to speak of the existence and consciousness of a soul as if they were two separate things.
(2) Sangrâhâbhâsa occurs when we describc the general properties of a thing as constituting it solely. For instance it is incorrect to maintain that a tree can be constitued by the general qualities common to all trees, since an actual tree will have to be a particular kind of trec, and not the idea of tree-ness in general.
(3) Vyavalarâbhâsa consists in making a wrong division of species
(4) Rijusutrabhasa arises when we deny the permanence of things altogether. These philosophers who hold that there is no "being" but only "becoming in the world have fallen into this kind of error.
(5) Sabdâbhâsu occurs when we deal with words without Tegard to their number, gender, tense, ctc. For instance, to take the Hebrew Elohim, which is pluralistic in form, as representing one individual Being would be an error of the Sabdâbhâsa type.
(6) Sambhirudabhâsa lies in treating apparently synonymous