Sambodhi 1977 Vol 06

SR No.: 520756
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Dalsukh Malvania, H C Bhayani, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1977
Total Pages: 420
Language: English, Sanskrit, Prakrit, Gujarati
Classification: Magazine, India_Sambodhi, & India
File Size: 16 MB

Page 227

Jaina Conception of Space and Time
Buddhists, who too recognized the abovementioned four mahabhūlas only raised akaša to the status of asanskrta (eternal) dharma (element),2 thus putting at stake its bhautikatya (materiality). So, for them akaśa is a nonmaterial non-spiritual (rather non-psychical) element. Jainas too follow this old tradition of four mahabhūtas and hence maintain that akaśa is not pud gala (matter), it is an independent substance.
The upholders of the view of four mahabhūtas maintain that sabda is not a quality; it is a mode or an aspect of these four mahabhūtas. So, akaśa was not needed as a substratum of sabdaguna. Hence, before these philosophers there arose a question as to what fuaction the substance akaśa is required to perform, All these philosophers declared that its function is to provide room to all other substances. It functions as a cotainer of all other substances. It offers obtruction to no substance. All bodies can move freely in it.
The first group of philosophers think that the akuša-mahabhūta which is the substratum of sabda could not play the entirely different role, viz. to function as a condition of our cognitions of relative spatial positions of materiai bodies. They seized upon an old idea of dik found in the Rgveda and the Upanişads. In the Rgveda dik was regarded as that which made possible our knowledge of relative spatial positions of material bodies and gave rise to the notions of far and near,8 These philosophers accepted dik to account for our cognitions of relative spatial positions of materjal bodies. According to the Sankhya dik is produced from akaša etc.“ (i, e. five mahabhūtas) along with the material bodies, In the absence of all the material bodies, there is no dik. In this sense, dik is dependent on material bodies. In other words, we may say that it is an aspect of material bodies. The Sankhya view of dik, understood and interpreted in this way, comes very near to the Theravada view of ukasa. The Vaišeşika view of dik differs from the Sankbya view of it in that the Vaišeşika dik is not produced from akaśa etc. ; it is an eternal independent non-material substance, it exists even before the production of material bodies i, e, even in pralaya.
The second group of philosophers maintain that their akaśa which allows material bodies to occupy their positions in it can very well function as a condition of our cognitions of relative spatial positions of these bodies, So, they have not posited dik as an independent substance besides akasa
2 Ibid. p. 90 3 a 4. 34. 8; 2. RU. 3?; po. 62. X; . ROR8, .69. 4 दिक्कालावाकाशादिभ्यः । साङ्ख्यसूत्र २.१२