Is Inexplicability Otherwise Otherwise Inexplicable

Author(s): Piotr Balcerowicz
Publisher: Piotr Balcerowicz

Page 1

PIOTR BALCEROWICZ
IS 'INEXPLICABILITY OTHERWISE (ANYATHANUPAPATTI) OTHERWISE INEXPLICABLE?"
In the 8th century we can observe a sudden change in the Jaina epistemology. This was brought about by the introduction of a new model of inference (anumana), based on a new interpretation of the logical reason (het). The logical reason has been from now on defined as 'inexplicability otherwise' (anyathanupapatti, anyathanupapannatva), and its sole feature is its inseparable connection (avindbhava) with the inferable property (sadhya), which is known though suppositional knowledge (tarka, uha). This triple innovation is found in Siddhasena Mahämati's Nyayavatard, Akalanka's Laghiyas-trayd, Vidyananda's Yukty-anusasana-tika and in Manikyanandin's Pariksámukha-sutra, just to mention but a few..
1. Pătrasvamin, the innovator?
The way (i.e. with the word iritam) Siddhasena Mahamati in his Nyayavatara (which would seem at first to be the original source) refers to the idea of anyathanupapatti indicates that he was not the innovator (NA 22ab: anyathanupapannatvam hetor lakṣaṇam iritam/). These innovations apparently go back to a certain Pätrasvämin3, as it is attested by Santarakṣita, who mentions a Pătrasvamin as the source of the idea, see TSa (1).1364 (p. 405.1): anyathêty-ädinä pätrasvämimatam asankate... This is further attested also by Jaina sources, in particular by Vädideva-süri. Apparently the treatise in question is the lost Tri-laksana-kadarthand, conceived to refute the Buddhist idea of tri-laksana-hen, and apparently the only available fragments of the work are to be found in Tattva-sangraha 1364-1379 (pp. 405-407).
[1364] If "inexplicability otherwise" is there, then [the logical reason] is
seen to be the correct logical reason: if it is not present, then also the triple [logical reason] is not [the correct logical reason]. Therefore, the three characteristics (of the logical reason] are impotent. [1365] What possesses "inexplicability otherwise" is accepted as [the
correct] logical reason. This [correct logical reason) is something possessed of one characteristic [only], not [something] possessed of four characteristics or of any other [number].
[1367] The relation of inseparable connection is not at all [present] in the tree forms of [the logical reason]; [the relation] is observed exclusively in
Journal of Indian Philosophy 31: 343-380, 2003.
2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.