________________
The Concept of Mind in Jainism
127
The structural phase of the mind was recognised by the philosophers of India and the West as well. The Upanişadic philosophers supposed that mind for its formation depends on 'alimentation'.1: Mind was supposed to have been formed out of the food that we take—"annamayam manah." Food takes three different forms--the subtlest part becoming mind. According the Samkhya-yoga, buddhi, ahankāra and manas are products of praksti.18 Hiriyanna says that, according to this view, the functions that we describe mental are really mechanical processes of the physical organism, which assume a psychical character only when illuminated by the spirit. 14 In the Vedānta darsana, antahkarana is looked upon as bhautika. In Western thought also, there were philosophers who conceived of mind as material. Mind is formed of fine and exceedingly minute bodies. 16 The Jaina distinction between the dravya-manas and bhāva-manas can be compared to the description of mind given by C. D. Broad in his Mind and its Place in Nature. 16 According to him, mind has two factors --the bodily and the psychic. The bodily factor is described as the living brain and the nervous system; about the psychic factor, says Broad; it is sentience alone. Neither mental characteristics nor mental events seem to belong to it. Broad, however, seems to be vague regarding the psychic factor. Regarding the dravya-manas, we may refer to the view of McDougall who has likened it to the mental structure, though he was careful to suggest that the structure of the mind is a conceptual system.17
The problem of the instrumentality of mind for experience may next be considered. It was generally believed that mind is a sense-organ (indriya) like other sense-organs. In the Upanişads we find references to the mind as indriya. The Praśna-Upanişad mentions mind as the central sense organ. There were some philosophers who believed that manas, buddhi and ahamkāra together constitute the internal organ (antahkarana). The Nyāya-Vaišeșika systems regarded mind as an internal organ. Gautama did not include it in the list of sense-organs. Kanāda is silent on this issue. Vātsyāyana, on his part, included manas under the senses.
The Jainas believed that mind is a "no-indriya" in the sense that it is different from the 5 sense-organs. Its sense contents and functions are not entirely identical with those of indriyas. The prefix 'no' does not mean the absence in the negative sense: It is at times rendered as īşad. It is quasi-sense organ. They still accept the instrumental function of the mind. In the Gommațasāra (Jivakāņda), there is a brief description of the mind as no-indriya mental states, and events are possible through mind. But there is no external manifestation as in the case of other sense-organs. The function of mind is assimilative. 18 The Pramānamimamsā describes mind as the thing which grasps everything. In the vștti of the same it is said, "Manomindriyamiti no indriyamiti ca ucyate". 19 The Tattvārthasūtra describes this function as śruti-cognition. The function is also the mati-cognitions and its modes.20 The Jainas have accepted the instrumental nature of mind
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
