Dharmakirtis Criticism Of Jaina Doctrine Of Multiplexity Of Reality Anekantavada

Author(s): Piotr Balcerowicz
Publisher: Piotr Balcerowicz

Page 14

14
Piotr Balcerowicz
(c) Pann 784 (195,21ff.): caupaesie nam khamdhe siya carime no acarime siya avattavvae no carimāim no
acarimäim no avattavvayāim, ... siya carimăim ca acarime ya siya carimāim ca acarimäim ca siya carime ya
avattavvae ya siya carime ya avattavvayāim ca ..., etc. (d) AņD 415 (166,22ff.): tathā nam je te baddhellayā te nam siyā atthi siyā natthi, jai atthi jahannenam ego vā do vā
tinni vā... (e) AņD 473 (p. 182): siyā dhammapadeso siyā adhammapadeso siyā āgāsapadeso siya jīvapadeso siya
khamdhapadeso. Occasionally, similar three basic angles (bhanga) are mentioned, however, the modal operator syāt (siya, siyā) is missing, which may reflect an earler historical layer: (f) Pann 781-788 (p. 194ff.), e.g. 194,25ff.: paramāņupoggale nam bhamte! kim carime acarime avattavaye
carimāim acarimāim avattavayāim, udāhu carime ya acarime ya udahu carime ya acarimăim ca udahu carimāim
ca acarime ya udāju carimāi ca acarimāim ca..., etc. (g) Viy 8.2.29 (337,20ff.): jīvā ņam bhamte! kim nāņi annāņi? goyamā jīvā nāni vi, annāņi vi. These three basic angles (bhanga) are subsequently permuted so that, in a full version of the doctrine of the modal description (syādvāda, saptabhangī), the total of seven basic angles is reached.
Perhaps the earliest non-Canonical occurrences of the basic angles (bhanga), some of them including the modal operator syāt, are to be found in works ascribed to Kundakunda (between 3th6th centuries). (h) PSSä, 14 already offers what is later known as pramānasaptabhangi":
In a certain sense, [the substance) is...; [in a certain sense, the substance) is not ...; [in a certain 'sense, the substance] is both; [in a certain sense, the substance) is inexpressible; and further, [in a certain sense, the substance is the triplet of these (sc. is predicated of according to the permutations of the these). [In such a
manner), the substance is, as one should realise, possible as seven-angled on account of the description.54 (i) Another example is found in PSa 2.22-23:
[22] From the substance-expressive viewpoint everything is a substance. From the mode-expressive viewpoint, (any thing] becomes different. It is (nevertheless) non-different, because it consists in that (substance in the time of its (existence]. [23] The substance is said - on account of any particular mode - to be..., and not to be..., and again [the substance) becomes inexpressible; but further (the substance) is both, (viz. is... and is not... at the same time) or is otherwise, (viz. any other permutation of the three basic angles (bhanga)]."
53 See NC 254ab (p. 128): satteva humti bhangā pamānanayadunayabhedajuttävi/ ("There are as many as seven
conditional perspectives with divisions with respect to cognitive criteria, viewpoints and defective viewpoints.') and
SBT 1.7: iyam eva pramänasaptabhangi nayasaptabhangīti ca kathyate. Cf. Balcerowicz 2003b: 37. 54 PSSā, 14 (p. 30): siya atthi natthi uhayam avvattavvam puno ya tattidayam /
davvam khu sattabhamgam ādesavasena sambhavadi // $ The verse is rather obscure. Another possibility to translate it as follows: 'From the substance-expressive viewpoint
and from the mode-expressive viewpoint, any substance is [both] different and non-different, because [the particular consists in that [universal] in the time of its [existence],' where annam corresponds to visesam and anannam to sāmānyam. The difficulty with that translation is that the idea it renders is that everything is different from the substance-expressive viewpoint, and everything is the same from the mode-expressive viewpoint.' On the other hand dravyārthika relates to sāmānya, whereas paryāyārthika to visesa (comp. p. 16, STP 3.57), which finally yields a contradiction. That is why the commentators Amrtasena and Jayasena (p. 144-145) are at pains to relate
dravyārthika-sāmänya-ananya and paryayarthika anya-viseșa. 30 PSa 2.22-23 (p. 146ff.): davvatthiena savvam davvam tam paijayatthiena puno /
havadi ya annam anannam takkāle tammayattādo // 22 //