________________
190
JAINA THEORIES OF REALITY AND KNOWLEDGE
it lays itself open to the combined evils' of both Identity-view and Difference-view.
The initial error of ubhayavāda is, from the Jaina point of view, the acceptance of the idea that dravya and guņa (paryāya) are 'completely independent” despite the alleged 'dependence' of the latter (guņa) on the former.
Besides robbing dravya and paryāya of their mutual dependence as complementary elements in an entity, this idea of absolute independence between dravya and paryāya leads the Vaiseșika to resort to a metaphysical tour de force, viz.,
1. Referring to the fictitiousness (kalpanāksta) and falsity
(mȚşārthatā) of the Identity-view (abhedavāda) and Differenceview (bhedavada or paryāyavāda or dravyavāda) individually Arcața observes :
abhedasyāparityāge bhedaḥ syāt kalpanākṣtaḥ / tasyāvitathabhāve vā syādabhede mỊşārthatā //
HBT, p. 106, kā. 20. Although the substance of this criticism against the two extreme views is the same as that of Siddhasena's criticism in his gā. 49 (supra, p. 187, f.n. 5), Arcața treats the Jaina, as already noted, as the main target of this as well as of the following charge:
bhedābhedoktadoşaś ca tayor iştāḥ kathań na vā /
pratyekam ye prasajyante dvayor bhāvāḥ katham na te // Ibid., ka. 25 (for a slight variation of the second line of this ka., as quoted by Hemacandra, see PMHS, p. 29, and p. 804, line 18).
Both Hemacandra and Municandra agree with this criticism against ubhayavāda : dravyaparyāyavādayoś ca yo dosah sa ubhayavāde'pi samanah. PMHS, p. 29. idamuktam bhavatikevalābhedapakşe abhedapakşe ca ye prāgeva nirūpitā doşās ta ubhayapakşābhyupagamam sutarāṁ prāpnuvanti | AJPV on
Haribhadra's com. on AJP, Vol. I, p. 13. 2. dravyagunayor asaňkīrṇasvabhāvatvāt / HBT, p. 107.
dravyaguņādibhyo vyāvsttarūpāņi / TBV, p. 656. Cf. also supra, p. 187, f n. 1.
