Dharmakirtis Criticism Of Jaina Doctrine Of Multiplexity Of Reality Anekantavada

Author(s): Piotr Balcerowicz
Publisher: Piotr Balcerowicz

Page 9

Dharmakirti's criticism of the Jaina doctrine of multiplexity of reality (anekāntavāda)
Dharmakirti himself in PV 4.132ab in a related context, namely with reference to perception which has non-dual character: advayam sabalābhāsasyādṛṣṭer buddhijanmanaḥ / (*...for [we] do not see any production of cognitive awareness which has manifold representation."). That is why it is not improbable that that the compound sarvavastuśabalavādinaḥ may have stemmed from Dharmakirti himself.
On the other hand, the passage is not only absent from extant editions and manuscripts of PV/ PVSV but also is not referred to by Karnakagomin in his PVSVT. Although there is nothing in the passage as such that would speak against Dharmakirti as its author, we would need some independent additional confirmation in Buddhist sources to accept the passage (183) as genuine part of PVSV.
Interestingly, the passage AJP I 23,1-27,2 seems to be the only Jaina text which quotes any larger portion of PV/PVSV 181-184. Apart from this singular occurrence, Jaina authors quote only two PV verses: 182 (see n. 2) and 183 (see n. 7); in addition, Vādirājasūri in NViV 2.203 (233,1116) paraphrases the argument of verse 183 (see n. 8).
One has the impression that that the remaining verses of the PV passage on anekānta, and the whole commentary of PVSV, were either unknown to Jaina authors, with some notable exceptions, or did not stimulate them to any reaction or refutation. In view of the fact that only a restricted selection of verses from rival philosophical works are cited in Jaina works, at the same time their selection remains constant and always the same verses/passages are repeated (often with the same variae lectionis), this may confirm the prevailing tendency among Indian authors in general, especially after 7th/8th centuries, that they either relied on earlier quotations as they had been reproduced in earlier Jaina works or (2) relied on some anthologies that presented a selection of verses, which became the major source of information on rival schools, whereas direct, first-hand readership of original sources gradually became scarce.
1.3. A separate issue is the reliability of commentators of PV/PVSV. In the expositions of the verse PVSV 182 (the most often quoted verse of the whole passage) offered by commentators we encounter various interpretation of the expression ubhayarūpatve.
1.3.1. Dharmakirti's criticism directed against the Jaina doctrine of multiplexity of reality (anekäntavāda) follows his criticism of the Samkhya and verse 182 should be read in such context (verse 181 is merely an introduction which marks the change of the opponent, not the change of the topic: etenaiva ... kim apy ... pratikṣiptam). Accordingly, ubhayarūpatve should be taken to mean samanyaviseṣarapatve, especially in view of the following two passages, which directly precede PV/PVSV 181-184:
1 PV/PVSV5 3.179d-180c (58,23-59,2) = PV/PVSV, 3.177 (88,13-20) = PV/PVSV, 3.177d178c (260,16-261,9):
na hi kvacid asyaikāntiko bhedo 'bhedo vā vivekena vyavasthāpanāt – sāmānyam viseṣa iti.
yenätmana tayoḥ/
bhedaḥ sāmānyam ity etad yadi bhedas tadātmanā // 177 // bheda eva [178a]