Jain Journal 2001 07

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

Page 54

BHATTACHARYA:HARIBHADRA'S VIEWS ON SVABHĀVAVĀDA AND THE LOKĀYATA 49
other doctrines, viz. kāla-, svabhāva-, niyati- and karma-vāda-s and devotes a whole section to them.15 However, he never associates bhūtavāda (materialism) with suabhāvavāda. Säntarakṣita, too, it should be remembered, dealt with the doctrines of svabhāva and Lokāyata in two distinct chapters, seperated by sixteen chapters between them (Tattvasangraha, Chs. 4 and 22 respectively). But Santaraksita, like all Buddhist philosophers, makes svabhāva appear as identical with accident. Haribhadra does nothing of the kind, although there seems to be a rejection of free will.16 Let us look at Haribhadra's exposition of svabhāva first :
na svabhāvātirekena garbha-bālasubhā-dikam/ yat kincijjayate loke tadasau karanam kila// 2. (?) 169 sarvabhāvāh svabhāvena svasvabhāve tathā tatha/ varttante'tha nivarttante kāmacara-paranmukhāh// 2.170 na vineha svabhāvena mudgapaktira-pisyate/ tathākālādibhāve'pi nasvamaşasya sā yatah// 2.171 atatsvabhāvāt tadbhāve' tiprasamgo'nivā-ritahy tulye tatra mrdaḥ kumbho na pațādityayuktimat//17 2.172
Without inherent nature, there is no conception, boyhood and the understanding of) what is beneficial, etc. (i.e., manhood). It (sc. inherent nature) is the cause of whatever is born in this world.
All entities exist in their own being and cease to exist due to their inherent nature, irrespective of (free) will.
Without this inherent nature even mudga (a kind of bean) cannot be cooked, just as notwithstanding the presence of (all other necessary elements like) time, etc. aśvamāsa (?) is not (cooked).
Acceptance of an effect even in the absence of inherent nature (as
15. See ibid., stavaka 2, v. 164-93, pp. 45-53. 16. See ibid., v. 170 cd. 17. Cf. Gunaratna (n5). p. 11 : Moreover, in ordinary life as well, even the
cooking of mudga is not found to be possible without the action of) time, but only in course of time'. (Translated in Carvaka/Lokāyata, ed. Debiprasad Chattopadhyaya and Mrinalkanti Gangopadhyaya, New Delhi : Indian Council of Philosophical Research, 1990, p. 294). Gunaraina also cites four verses from Sastravārtā. 2.165, 167, 168 and 166 (in this order) after the passage referred to above (p. 11). Haribhadra polemicizes against the view of the kalavādin in 2.171 (cf. Gunaratna, pp. 13-17) which again is controverted in v. 175 by the niyativadin and in v. 179 by the karmavādin. The meanings of asvamasa and kankaduka-mudga (Gunaratna, p. 13, 15) are not clear. Dixit renders (in Hindi) mudga as mumga and asvamaşa as mumga ka kuta They seem to refer to some kinds of bean, Phaseolus mungo (L), black gram and Phaseolus radiatus (L) respectively.