Jain Journal 1999 07

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

Page 64

JAIN JOURNAL: Vol-XXXIV, No. 1 July 1999
The origin of Indian logic could be traced from the Vedic literature in whose later stage between 900-600 B.C. a sort of logical idea primarilly emphasizing Jñāna-marga, "path of knowledge", developed. This speculation of logic was in an embryonic stage till we come to Nyāya-system of Gautama, whose date, though varies from the 2nd cent. B.C. to 2nd cent. A.D., is, in a sense, very near to Umāsväti. Before this logical system there arose other heretic systems as well whose pioneers were Cārvāka (650 B.C.), Akṣapāda (650 B.C.), Kapila (650 B.C.) and Kanāda (550 B.C.). All these heretic logicians considered pramāņa as something which can be perceived by direct knowledge. Gautama, the first logician in ancient India, in his Nyaya-sutra, for the first time formulated different categories of knowledge in a systematic manner. Actually, his logical system was greatly appreciated by Vätsyāyana (2nd/3rd A.D.) who in his commentary on the Nyāyasūtra has elaborated the sixteen categories for the acquisition of knowledge of which pramāņa is the first. In the opinion of Gautama, the knowledge of these sixteen categories is the way to getting (adhigamah) of nihsreyasa which is nothing but mokṣa (emancipation). It is actually at this juncture of logical atmosphere Umāsväti flourished. So it is no wonder that Umāsväti started his book with the conception of mokṣa as it was done by Gautama.
62
Umāsvāti considers logic as a pramāṇa-sastra which is the vital force for acquiring knowledge of this universe. In his book divided into ten sections, the different aspects of Jain logic are treated. He begins his book with the conception of mokṣa which can be attained by samyag-darśana, samyag-jñāna and samyak-caritra. Some scholars think that the word samyak used once at the beginning of the first sūtra should not be associated with other two words like jñāna and caritra, because the word samyak is used only once in the sutra. To this class of people it can be answered that in a dvandva compound, if any nipata or particles or any additional word is used either in the beginning or at the end, then that word should be construed to be also with each member of the compound by the dictum-dvandvādāu dvandvante ca śrūyamāņam padam pratyekam abhisambadhyate. So the word samyak used in the beginning of the sutra should be added to every other member of the duandva compound. So we have samyagjñāna and samyak-cāritra as well. It seems strange, but nevertheless perfectly true that Pujyapada (6th cent. A.D.) in his commentary entitled Sarvārthasiddhi did not raise this problem for obvious reason that it was so common at that time that it was not necessary that this point should be elaborated in his commentary.
One of the major contributions of Umāsväti is his definition of sat