Jain Journal 1998 10

Author(s): Jain Bhawan Publication
Publisher: Jain Bhawan Publication

Page 31

62
JAIN JOURNAL : Vol-XXXIII, No. 2 October 1998 (viparyaya), ellipsis (vyäsesa), acceptance (anumata), explanation (vyākhyāna), derivation (nirvacana), illustration (nidarśana), exception (apavarga), the author's own technical terms (sua-samjñā), prima facie view (pūrvapakşa), rejoinder (uttarapaksa), conclusion (ekānta), reference to a subsequent portion (anāgatavekşana), reference to a previous portion (atikrāntāvekşana), command (niyoga), alternative (vikalpa), compounding together (samuccaya), and determinable fact (ühya). He has explained and illustrated them in the subsequent portion of the chapter. Most of these points are not only modern, but are also instructive for writing any dissertation. In short, all these points can be reduced to three small sastras; such as, i) pada-sāstra (i.e. vyakarana and kosa), ii) vākya-Šāstra (i.e. Mimāmsā and Alankāra), and iii) pramāna-śāstra (i.e. Darsana or Philosophy). Practically, all these points are essential for writing a dissertation.
In the Yukti-dipikā (6th or 7th cent. A.D.), composed after Dinnāga (450-520 A.D.) and before Vācaspati (841 A.D.), similar type of statement is made, but from the point of view of philosophical question. It is stated in the introductory explanation (upodghāta-vivsti) that a treatise like Yukti-dipikā, should follow certain principles in establishing the author's arguments :
sūtra-pramāņā-vayav-opapattir-anyūnatā samsaya-nirnayokti/ uddeśa-nirdesam anukramasca samjñopadeśaviha tantra-sampat//
"a dissertation is to be made in a nutshell (sūtra) with pramāna (full of proofs) and avayava (limbs); it must raise some doubts (upapatti) and without any deficiency (anyūnata); it must remove all apprehensions (samsaya) and establish (nirnaya) truth (ukti); it must have a purpose or proposition (uddeśa) and a detailed exposition (nirdesa); the subject matter must be described in a methodical order (anukrama) and a definition (samjñā) and the result of one's own investigation (upadeśa) must be delineated."
All these procedures show how this author is methodical in composing a philosophical treatise. To put it in modern terminology, I can say that in ancient period the authors were cautious and meticulous in composing a treatise in order to make it authoritative and authentic. It must have a proposition and a conclusion through verification and logical argument by removing doubts.
In a similar way, Kumārila (700 A.D.) in his Sloka-vārttika has laid down some principles, based on common logical grounds to be adopted while interpreting some sästras. It is stated :
jñātārtham jñāta-sambandham śrotum śrotā pravartate / granthādāu tena vaktavyaḥ sambandhaḥ saprayojanah //