________________
PART 1]
THE UNDERCURRENTS OF JAINISM.
philosophers, and it is perhaps open to accurate and can only have sprung question whether in addition to the from an actual first-hand acquaintance combative part he was able also to with that Canon. In any case that is the carry out a large constructive program- oldest account of Jainism in non-Jain me especially in the realm of meta- texts that is to us available; and physics. It was already enough achie. (the theory of a wilful and malicious vement for the Syadvada to have misrepresentation apart ) there is no turned the tables against the free-think- reason why we should not regard it as ers and to have restored to pious men not untruly representing a tendency the peace of mind that was so violently in Jainism which was its weakest and disturbed by the thought-ferment of the most vulnerable spot. In its later the period: the bringing out of the presentation of course Syadvada be: implicit positive assumptions of the comes all that my critics claim for it; Syadvada by the Utpada-Vyaya- nay more: it becomes almost a platitude Dhrauvya doctrine ( which so closely which no body would care to seriously resembles the Samkhya view of reality) call into question; although just exactly is perhaps the work of the disciples why it should have been wedded to and commentators. [ It was under this the rather simple Jiva-Ajiva doctrine assumption that my original paper was and not with one subtler and more written; and although possibly the worthy of it needs explanation, paper may be admitted to contain some If all this is acceptable, there is no over-statements, the general position reason why the historical development can be overthrown only if traces of the of Jainism which I have presented and Utpada-Vyaya-Dhrauvya doctrine can which sets forth the great reforming be found in the teachings of Mahavira and reconstructing activily of the last himself, or if the Syadvada can be Jain Tirthankara in its truest light, not proved to be earlier than Mahavira. ] dissociating it from its surroundings,
Sankaracharya was a Bhashyakara should not also be regarded as an earnest and the account he has to give of effort to understand and not a purely Jainism represents merely an expanded ignorant and top-lofty essay to vilify form of the view of Jainism which is this great religion of India. as old as Badarayana the author of the Vedanta-sutras. The sutra-
H a ata *** In this reply I have not thought (II. ii. 33 ) has been interpreted by all it necessary to notice all the points the Bhashyakaras in the same manner, dealt with in the several criticisms. I and its very wording suggests that the am at present trying to study Jainism view here taken of Jainism is an an- in the original in nore systematic cient view which cannot havo been fashion, and if I discover that I have entirely a deliberate misrepresentation. been instrumental in spreading incorBadarayana may have perhaps failed rect notions about a religion which I to distinguish between the position of respect, I shall certainly take the first Sanjaya Bellatthiputta and that assum. opportunity to admit iny mistakes. ed by Mahavira, though it must be There is nothing wrong in being wrong. admitted that as far as Buddhism is In return I wish my critics would give concerned his acoount is surprisingly me credit for honest intentions,
ot formats
Aho ! Shrutgyanam
