Hajarimalmuni Smruti Granth

Author(s): Shobhachad Bharilla
Publisher: Hajarimalmuni Smruti Granth Prakashan Samiti Byavar

Page 1017

❖❖❖❖❖❖❖❖❖*
*
६४ : मुनि श्रीहजारीमल स्मृति - प्रन्थ
Creator God and refute the theistic arguments of the Naiyayikas. The Naiyayika argument that the world is of the nature of an effect created by an intelligent agent who is God (Iśvara) cannot be accepted because :
1. I is difficult to understand the nature of the world as an effect as :
(a) if effect is to mean that which is made of parts (Sävayava) then even space is to be regarded as effect;
4.
Jain Education Intrizio
(b) if it means coherence of a cause of a thing which was previously non-existent, in that case one cannot speak of the world as effect as atoms are eternal.
(c) if it means that which is liable to change, then God would also be liable to change and he would need a creator to create him and another and so on ad infinitum. This leads to infinite regress.
2. Even supposing that the world as a whole is an effect and needs a cause, the cause need not be an intelligent one as God because :
(a) if he is intelligent as the human being is, then he would be full of imperfections, as human intelligence is not perfect;
(b) if his intelligence is not of the type of human intelligence but similar to it, then it
would not guarantee inference of the existence of God on similarity, as we cannot infer the existence of fire on the ground of seeing steam which is similar to smoke;
3. If an agent had created the world, he must have a body. For, we have never seen an intelligent agent without a body. If a God is to produce intelligence and will, this is also not possible without an embodied intelligence."
Even supposing a non-embodied being were to create the world by his intelligence, will and activity, there must be some motivation :
(c) we are led to vicious circle of argument if we can say that the world is such that we have a sense that some one made it, as we have to infer the sense from the fact of being created by God.
(a) if the motive is just a personal whim, then there would be no natural law or order in the world;
(b) if it is according to the moral actions of men, then he is goverened by moral order and is not independent;
(c) if it through mercy, there should have been a perfect world full of happiness;
(b) if men are to suffer by the effects of past actions (adṛsta) then the 'adṛsta' would take the place of God.
But, if God were to create the world without any motive but only for sport it would be a 'motiveless malignity'."
5. God's omnipresence and omniscience cannot also be accepted, because :
(a) if he is everywhere, he absorbs into himself everything into his own self, leaving nothing to exist outside him;
(b) his omniscience would make him experience hell, as he would know everything and his knowledge would be direct experience."
*
*** ** ***
***
www.tenegrary.org