________________
Parikshamukham
205 meaning is that Nästika indicates the man who denies the authority of the Vedas*.
Now, if we accept the meaning of Nāstika as one who does not accept Paraloka (existence after death), Karma and the fruits of Karma, we cannot say that Jaina and Baudha philosophies are Nāstika philosophies for both of these systems of philosophy accept these.
Again, if we interpret ‘Nästika' to mean 'denying the existence of iśvara', the Sankhya as well as Mimāmsā systems of philosophy should be taken as Nāstika philosophies as neither Kapila nor Jaimini has accepted the existence of a creator (îśvara). But we have shown above that these two systems of philosophy have not been excluded from the list of six philosophies on such a ground.
The conclusion is therefore inevitable that to call Bauddha and Jaina philosophies "Nāstika", the third interpretation of the word "Nāstika" viz. denying the authority of the Vedas, must be accepted, for these philosophies do not accept the Vedas as eternal or as infallible. The Bauddhas accept two Pramāṇas, Pratyaksa and Anumāna and do not accept the authority of the Vedas. In Jain philosophy Agam (words, signs etc. of an Apta or reliable person), has been accepted as a variety of Pramāņa but the authority of the Vedas has not been accepted.
But this exclusion of Jain philosophy was effected at a very late stage. We find that its doctrines were attempted to be refuted in the Vedanta-sutras and Kumārila and Sankarācharya levelled their arguments against certain Jain views such as existence of omniscient beings. There cannot be any doubt that all the different systems of philosophy whether the same were Astika or Nāstika according to different interpretations were thoroughly studied and in conferences before saints, kings and scholars, discussions and refutations of various doctrines were of very frequent occurrence. We find in Saktisangama Tantra (between 1555 to 1604 A.D.) that Jaina philosophy was taken as one of Kāli Darśanas. Even Jayanta Bhatta the celebrated Hindu aut Nyâya-manjari (9th century) accepted Jaina philosophy to be authoritative.
The name “Nyāya" came to be applied later to a system of philosophy which dealt with logic. The original name was "Anviksiki" from Anviksā (discussion). Fruitless Tarka Vidyå was always discouraged but that Anvikșiki which will lead to the attainment of a knowledge of self was always regarded as a subject to be learnt. In Manu-samhitâ we find that a King should learn Anvikșiki. Rājasekhara in his Kavya-mîmâmsa has mentioned that Anvikșiki knowledge is of two kinds, being of the nature of Pūrvapakșa and Uttarapakșa and that Jaina, Bauddha and Chārvāka systems are of the former and Sankhya, Nyāya and Vaišeșika systems are of the latter kind.
* Tiffaeit aafra: 1
- Institute of Manu.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
