Aptamimansa Critique of an Authority Bhasya

Author(s): Samantbhadracharya, Akalankadev, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: Jagruti Dilip Sheth Dr

Page 43

CRITIQUE OF AN AUTHORITY त्पत्तिर्नाम? तत्र समानः पर्यनुयोगः, सदसतोरनुत्पत्तेः, निष्पन्नखपुष्पवत्। सतः पुनर्गुणान्तराधानमनेकं क्रमशोऽप्यनुभवतः किंविरुध्येत?,क्षणस्थायिनः कस्यचिदेवग्राह्यग्राहकाकारवैश्वरूप्यानभ्युपगमेऽपिसंविदितज्ञानस्य ग्राह्यग्राहकाकारविवेकंपरोक्षं बिभ्राणस्य सामर्थ्यप्राप्तेः, अन्यथा शून्यसंविदोर्विप्रतिषेधात् । तदयं क्षणस्थायि कारणं स्वसत्तायां कार्यं कुर्वत्
अभ्युपगच्छन् क्रमोत्पत्तिमुपरुणद्धि, सकलजगदेकक्षणवृत्तिप्रसङ्गात्। कारणस्य कार्यकालप्राप्तौ क्षणभङ्गभङ्गानुषङ्गात्, तदप्राप्नुवतस्तत्कृतौ व्यलीककल्पनाविशेषेण कूटस्थानतिशायनात् । ततः सुभाषितं कुशलाद्यसंभूतिरेकान्तग्रहरक्तेष्विति ॥८॥
Comment on verses 1-8 These verses are not an organic part of the discussion carried on by Samantabhadra in the present text. For really speaking, they contain little else than the author's expression of faith in the correctness of the Jaina philosophical tradition. However, the procedure here adopted by Samantabhadra is in some sense revealing. In the verse 1 we are told that certain characteristic qualifications of the Jaina tirthankaras (to some one of whom the whole of the present text is addressed) are shared even by a juggler, in the verse 2 that some of them are shared even by an ordinary celestial being, in the verse 3 that some of them are shared even by other sect-founders. In the verse 4 it has been argued that it is possible for a person to get rid of all spiritual defilement whatsoever, in the verse 5 that it is possible for a person to become omniscient. In the verse 6 it is claimed that a Jaina tīrthankara is free from all spiritual defilement and is an omniscient- of which the proof is that his teaching does not come in conflict either with the scriptural texts or with logic. Now leaving aside the question of scriptural texts (for it may be doubted as to which ones are meant) the claim amounts to asserting that the Jaina philosophical teaching conforms to the canons laid down by the science of Logic, and the assertion is significant in its own place. In the verse 7 it is said that the teachings patronized by the non-Jaina traditions are in conflict with the findings of plain experience; this appeal to experience is again significant even if one might at times feel that the Jaina is not being sair in his criticism of an adversary - particularly in case this advcrsary himself happens to be an empiricist. In the verse 8 it is said that the non-Jaina traditions fail to account for the generally accepted phenomena of the cthico-religious sphere; in a way this criticism is but a corollary of that urged in the verse 7, but it is instructive to note how much attention is paid to ethico-religious matters by an Indian philosopher in his criticism of his rivals.