Jaina Literature and Philosophy a Critical Approach

Author(s): Sagarmal Jain
Publisher: Parshwanath Vidyapith

Page 52

46
Aspects of Jainology: Volume VI
moveable in nature they are thought of as trasa. The moveable nature of vayu is so apparent that it is called trasa, first of all out of five one sensed beings. By minute observations, it is seen that fire too has a tendency of gradual expansion through fuel so it is also included into trasa (mobile). But the move-ment of water is regarded as possible only due to the low level of the earth so movement is not its own nature. Therefore, water, like the vegetation is also taken as sthāvara (immobile ). As the movement in air and fire is inherent so these two are considered as trasa and other as sthavaras. Further when the two or more sensed jivas are recognised as immobile (sthavara) the problem of reconciling this view with Agamic statements arose. In the Svetambara schools this reconciliation is marked as the basis of the distinction of labdhi and gati. From the standpoint of the labdhi, air and fire are viewed as immobile (sthavara) but viewed from the angle of movement (gati) they remain mobile (trasa). In the Dhavala commentary of Digambara tradition (c. 10th) the problem is solved differently. It is said that the basis of calling air and fire as sthavara, is not their movement but their Nama-karma origin. Jayasenācārya, the commentator of pañcastikāya of Kundakunda, solves the problem by making a distinction between niscayanaya and vyavahara-naya. According to him, the earth, water and vegetation are included into pañca sthavara because of their Nama-karma origin, but air and fire classification under pañcasthavars are only from the practical point of view (vyavahāra). From niścayanaya they are trasa as they actually appear to be mobile. All these excercises really are worthwhile
attempts to reconcile the differences, cropped of during respective contentions of the ancient and the later scriptures.
So far as the question of different classifications of jivas are concerned they are crystalised during the c. 3rd-10th. In that period the concepts of
Jivasthana, Märgaṇāsthāna, Guṇasthāna have also developed. Wherever these topics have been discussed in the Anga-Agamas such as Bhagavati etc. the reference has been made to Anga-bahya Agamas (External authorities) such as Prajñāpanā etc. It confirms that these theories are developed after the c. 2nd. First they are discussed in the Anga-bahya Agamas and afterwards at the time of Valabhi-vācanā they are included in Anga-agamas with the note that for detailed discussions relevant Anga-bahya scriptures are to be seen.
Jaina Theory of Guṇasthäna and its Developement The doctrine of fourteen stages of spiritual development (Gunasthana) is one of the most popular theories of Jainism. Except Samaväyänga, none of the canonical work refers to this theory. Scholars are of the strong opinion that the reference relating to Gunasthana found in Samavāyānga is an interpolation incorporated at the time of second Valabhi Council (c. 5th A. D. ). The Niryuktis are also silent about this theory, except the present edition of Avasakaniryukti wherein, two gathās mention the names of these fourteen Gunasthanas. This is remarkable that till the time of Haribhadra's commentary on Avasyaka Niryukti, these two gathās were not accepted as Niryukti gāthās as in his commentary, he has clearly mentioned that these gathās has been quoted by him from the Sangrahani-sutra.
It seems that till the c. 4th A. D. the concept of these fourteen stages of spiritual development has not come into existence. Umāsvāti's Tattvārthasūtra throwing light on almost every aspect of Jaina philosophy and religion including various stages of spiritual development does not mention the fourteen Gunasthanas as such. The same is the case with its auto-commentary. Though in the ninth chapter of the Tattvärthasutra the author has mentioned four, seven and ten stages of spiritual development, yet he does not make any mention of these fourteen stages in it.