________________
10
Early Jainism
11, No Special Epistemology
In connection with epistemology only two things offered by our texts deserve consideration, one throwing light on the later-day Jaina concept of the Jñana-types mati and śruta, the other throwing light on the later day Jaina concept of the cognition-type darsana and jñana (rather kevala-darśana and kevala-jñāna). Let us consider them one by one.
(i) Thus Acaranga I thrice speaks of one knowing (jānejjā) something sahasammaiyae paravagarenam annesim va amtike socca (1.7, 21.18, 28.9) in a similar context Sutrakṛtänga I once says 'sahasammate naccā... sūnettu vā (8.14), another time it says 'sayam samecca aduva' pi socca bhusejja' (13.19). Here we have an inkling into the working of the Jaina theoretician's mind at a time when the technical concepts of the jñana-types mati and śruta had not yet been formulated but was on way to being formulated. A close examination of these passages suggests that what was later called mati was conceived as a type of cognition in which one's own mental effort plays a part and a prominent part; as against this, what was later called śruta was conceived as a type of cognition in which communication on someone else's part or talking to somebody on someone else's part plays a part and a prominent part. As a consequence of the first consideration a bare sensory experience-since it involves no mental effort was kept outside the realm of mati. In general, cognition involving no mental effort was called darsana, that involving an amount of it was called jñana, and mati was classified as jñāna precisely because it involved some amount of mental effort. As a consequence of the second consideration just laid bare śruta-jñāna would have had two sub-types, but so far as this aspect of the matter was concerned the consideration. was not pressed and hence śruta-jñāna became just the jñana-type in which communication on someone else's part plays a pirt and a prominent part. Viewed in this light darsana, mati and śruta of the Jaina theoreticians should respectively correspond to pratyakṣa, an..mana etc. and sabda of the non-Jaina theoreticians; (this becomes particularly evident from a Daśavaikälika verse viz.5.76-where the alternative cognition-types (Called 'Jnana-types probably because there was no common concept covering both jñana and darśana) are darśana, mati, prati prccha, śravna -- here the last two being the two possible subtypes of śruta just sopken of).
(ii) We have already spoken enough of the distinction obtaining between darśana and jñana, but the word darśana occurs in none of the five passages from our texts discussed above. However the occurrence of the word janejja in Acaranga I and ṇacca in Sutrakṛtānga I does suggest that mati is a Jñana-type, and that is important. For Sutrakṛtänga I in its eulogy of Mahvira speaks of his ananta-jñana and ananta-darśana (6,3),
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
