Nirgrantha-2

SR No.: 522702
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: M A Dhaky, Jitendra B Shah
Publisher: Shardaben Chimanbhai Educational Research Centre
Publication Year: 1996
Total Pages: 326
Language: English, Hindi, Gujarati
Classification: Magazine, India_Nirgrantha, & India
File Size: 14 MB

Page 28

Vol. II-1996
Refutation of the....
तथापि सुगतो वन्द्यो मृगः खाद्यो यथेष्यते । तथा वस्तुबलादेव भेदाभेदव्यवस्थितेः । चोदितो दधि खादेति किमुष्ट्रमभिधावति ॥
"Without properly understanding the prima facie view, if a person criticises that view, then he is only a vidūsaka and not a critic. Buddha was born as a deer and deer was born as Buddha, and yet Buddha is adorable and the deer is only food. Similarly, due to the strength of an entity with its difference and non-difference specified, nobody would eat a camel if he is implored to eat curds."
As Amrtacandra (eakly 10th cent. A. D.) elucidates : qa na Taa 3766 267 तदेवानेकं, यदेव सत् तदेवासत्, यदेव नित्यं तदेवानित्यं, इत्येक वस्तुनिष्पादक-परस्परविरुद्धशक्तिद्वयप्रकाशमनेकान्तः।
Or as one acārya clarified with an illustration of a cowherd woman churning the curds:
एकेनाकर्षयन्ती श्लथयन्ती वस्तुत्वमितरेण । अन्तेन जयति जैनीनीतिर्मन्थानुनेत्रमिव गोपी ।'
The Jaina system of thought, while de-emphasizing one strand of thought, emphasizes another thought, just like a cowherd woman, while churning the curds, straightens one end of a rope, loosening the other end. So Saptabhanginaya is employed either from the point of view of Sakalādeśa or Vikalādeśa, that is, from a holistic point of view or from a partial point of view. Syādvāda is a holistic point of view. Syädvāda is dependent upon the Saptabhanganaya as ācārya Samantabhadra (c.550600 A. D.) says : 6795 TRT: P&T : 18 So, Syādvāda attempts to accommodate all differing points of view and hence this characteristic is, in fact, an ornament or a plus point, स्यात्कारः सत्यलांछनः and not a flaw as Sankarācārya tried to make it out to be.
Further, Sańkarācārya argues that pursuing the Syādvāda to its logical conclusion would lead one to doubt the doubting self, as there would be indeterminacy regarding the number of astikāyas and their nature and so forth, and thereby Syādavāda would topsyturvy everything in the Jaina system of thought, by its own indeterminate nature. Sankarācārya's incisive logical faculty seems to be flawless; but, he does not seem to notice that such a situation is inherent in the doctrine itself. In fact, this possibility of Sydvāda applying its own doctrine to itself has been perceived in the Jaina system of thought. Samantabhadra, perceiving this possibility, or rather contingency, writes :
अनेकान्तेऽप्यनेकान्तः प्रमाणनयसाधनः । अनेकान्तः प्रमाणात्ते तदेकान्तेऽपितान्नयात् ॥10
From the point of view of pramāna, it is anekānta, and from the point of view
Jain Education Intemational