________________
A Special Relevance of Suttani päta for Jaina Studies
91
might or might not be valid but it certainly resulted in their attributing to the word kevalin meaning which it did not possess originally. In any case, the word as thus understood remained confined to the Jaina camp; (the later Buddhist authors simply gave up this word and even when of them would attribute omniscience to Buddha they used in this connection not this word but the simple word sarvajña.)
(7) Certain passages of Suttanipāta tend to throw light on az aspect of the growth af Jaina epistemological thy'ght. The later Jaina authors divide cognition into two types- viz. darśana and jñana and they divide jñāna into an ordinary type and an extraordinary type; the ordinary type of jñana is divided into two sub-types-viz. mati and śruta. Now the origin of the words darśana, multi and śruta is to be traced in that old series of adjectives diftham, suyam, muyam, vinnāyam--wbich twice occurs in Acārānga I and the origin of the words mati and śruta is also to be traced in the expression 'atha puna tam janejja sahasammuiyae paravāgaraneņam annassa vā antike socca' which too occurs twice in the same text. The noteworthy thing is that the series of adjectives dittham, sutam, mutam, viññātam, (wholly or in part) frequently occurs in Suttanipāta IV and V (e. g. in vy. 790, 793, 797, 798, 802, 812,839-40, 887,901, 1078, 1086, 1122) and the word sammuti too occurs several times in Suttanipāta (e. g. in 897, 904, 911) while the word mutima occurs in Suttanipāta 61, 321, 539, 385. Of course, in these Suitanipāta passages the cognition characterized as dittham, sutam, mutam, viññātam has generally come in for condemnation-- the one exce tion occuiring in 1122 where such congnition is attributed to Buddha himself: similarly, the cognition called sammuti has here always come in for condemnatiou, (on the other hand, muttima is apparently a commendatory epithet). What all this signifies can be a matter of dispute. Maybe the authors of these passages wanted to condemn all humanly attained cognition on account of its vacuity, maybe they wanted to condemn it on account of its relativity. But in any case, they must have meant dittha, suta, muta, viññāta possibly qualify humanly attained cognition and that sammuti is a possible case of humanly attained cognition, aud in this they would be one with the authors of Acārānga I who on their part had no intention to condemn all humanly attained cognition either on account of its alleged vacuity or on account of its alleged relativity. It seems that diftha stood for the type of cog attained through vision, muta for the type of cogition attained through one's own cogitation, and suta for the type of cognition attained on the basis of someone else's testimony. As for sammuti it seems to have been but a later synonym for the muta type of cogoition; (its lateness is supported by the consideration that by the time it made its appearance sammuti perhaps became a better comprehensible word than it and so the
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
