Dharmakirtis Criticism Of Jaina Doctrine Of Multiplexity Of Reality Anekantavada

Author(s): Piotr Balcerowicz
Publisher: Piotr Balcerowicz

Page 17

Dharmakini's criticism of the Jaina doctrine of multiplexity of reality (unekāntavāda)
17
important feature indispensable for the proper assessment of the doctrine of multiplexity of reality as the Jainas conceived of it. In the classical formulation of the theory we come across a set of four such parameters: substance (dravya) = S, place (ksetra) = P, time (kāla) = T, condition (bhāva) = C; see e.g. TT 5.31 (409,29ff.), RVār 4.42 (254,14ff.), SVM 23.113 (143,12) or JTBh 1.22 $ 63 (JTBh. p. 19; JTBh2, p. 19), DNCV 3.6. Interestingly, the concept of the parameters to specify the angle (bhanga) from which an object is analysed developed over some centuries, and as early as in the sixth century we find elaborated attempts to list them. That is done by Siddhasena Divāk ara, who treats of 8 such parameters:
The proper method of exposition of entities [in accordance with syādvāda) is based on substance, place, time,
condition as well as mode, aspect and relation, and also distinction. The list comprises more than four 'classical' parameters already mentioned. The parameters were an important device to show that method of the seven-fold modal description (syādvāda) was not trivial or beset with contradictions, but a rather complex analytical framework, which contained, alongside the seven angles (bhanga), a kind of second-level parametrisation. Historically speaking, the parameters evolved from the Canonical theory of descriptive standpoints (niksepa, nyāsa), the locus classicus of which is the enumeration found in the Tattvārthasūtra.67 3.6. Let us see how the angles of the seven-fold modal description were practically applied by Jaina authors prior to Dharmakīrti and what instances are used. Typical examples in genuine Jaina syātsentences are generally restricted to the terms: pata, ghata and kumbha. An interesting reference is found in Jinabhadra-ganin's Viseşāvas yakabhāsya (6th/7th century):
Being something the existence, non-existence and both [the existence and non-existence] of (a particular property of it) is emphasised through [the pitcher's] own mode and through the mode of something else, this (pitcher) is differentiated as "a pitcher," as "something else than a pitcher," as "something inexpressible" and as "both [a pitcher and something else than a pitcher].96*
STP 3.60: duvvyum khillum kälam bhavam pajjāyadesasamjoge /
bhedam ca paducca sumā bhāvanam pannavanapajjä // 6 TS 1.5: nämasthāpanādravyabhāvatas tannyāsah. Ample material on the niksepa is supplied in the monograph by
Bhatt 1978. 118 VABI 2232 (p. 910): sabbhäväsabbhävobhayappio saparapajjaobhayao
kumbhakumbhāvallavyobhayarūvāibheo so II Hemacundru Muladhürin aptly claborates on the verse in VĀVr 910,12 ff: saptabhangīm pratipadyala ily arihah, lad vatha - ürdinugrīväkapälakukşibudhnādiblih svaparyāyaih sadbhāvenārpito višeșitah kumbhah kumbho bhanyale - "san ghalal" ili pruihamo bhango bhavatity arthah. tathā pasādigalais Ivakirāņādibhih paraparyāyair asadbhavenärpilo višeşilo 'kumbho bhavali - sarvasyāpi ghatasya paraparyāyair asallvavivakṣāyām "asan ghatah" ili dvirryo bhango bhavality arthu. tathā sarvo 'pi ghatah svaparobhayaparyayaih sadbhäväsadbhavabhyām saltvāsalivablyüm arpito višeşilo yugapad vaktum isto 'vaktavyo bhavati, svaparaparyayasallväsaltvābhyām ekena kenūpy usāmerikenu sabdena sarvasväpi tasya yugapad vaktum asakyatvād iti. ete irayah sakalādeśāh. atha cuiūro 'pi vikulpädesal procyante... - 'The idea is that the author of the verse) demonstrates the seven-fold modal description, namely: a (particular pitcher is called "pitcher' when, being predicated of, it is emphasised, through its own modes such as an upward neck, a hull, a spherical shape, a base etc., as something existent (se, as something which is a member of a class A). That is what is meant by the first angle: "the vessel is existent as a E A]." Similarly, la particular pitcher is taken to be something else than a pitcher when, being predicated of, it is emphasised, through the modes of another [thing) such as the protection of the skin, as something non-existent (sc. as something which is a member of a class -A). When the expressive intent is to emphasise the non-existence (sc. its being something else) in the case of any pot whatever through the modes [typical] of another thing), that is