Jaina Ontology

Author(s): K K Dixit
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 114

THE AGE OF LOGIC
The last author belonging to the second stage of the Ag& Br Tógic was Vidyānanda. As we have seen, Akalanka had conducted his thought-experiment on three different levels and in each case he was some sort of a pioneer. But Vidyānanda had received in heritage all that Akalanka was able to achieve. So the first task before him was to integrate into one whole the different strands of Akalanka's legacy and then there was the obvious task of augmenting the riches received by way of inheritance, Vidyānanda performed these tasks by composing two immortal works, viz. Tattvārthašlokavārtika which is a commentary on Tattvārthasūtra and Astasahasri which is a commentary on Astašati ( the latter written in such a style that the whole of Astašati stands incorporated within the body of Astasahasri). [Vidyānanda is also the author of several independent texts but they are not so important]. In Astasahasrī the pattern followed was broadly the same as that in Akalanka's Astašati inasmuch as here various non-Jaina philosophical positions were subjected to criticism in terms of the model set up by Aptamīmāṁsā; (only Vidyānanda's pene. tration into the depths of problems was decidedly superior). But in Tattvā. rthašlokavārtika, the earlier and the more important work, Vidyānanda planned his whole strategy by himself. Of course, there are occasions here when Vidyānada, like Akalanka, presents the Āgamic material in a language and style befitting the age of Logic - only doing so at a deeper level - but that is not so noteworthy. What is really noteworthy is that in this text Vidyānanda creates numerous occasions when he can launch an inde. pendent criticism against various non-Jaina positions. The idea is that in these cases, unlike in Astasahasri, Vidyānanda was not bound to attack his rivals only from the standpoint of Anekāntavādo. For example, in the course of his very long introductory remarks preceding the first aphorism Vidyān. anda maintains that only a Jaina Tirthankara is in a position to undertake religious preaching that is all valid; in this connection he shows how the same is impossible on the part of an omniscient being conceived after the fashion of the Sankhyas, of God conceived after the fashion of the NyāyaVaišeşikas, of a Buddha conceived after the fashion of the Buddhists'. Immediately afterwards it is maintained that only a soul conceived after the fashion of the Jaina can receive such a religious preaching; and in this connection Vidyānanda shows how the same is impossible on the part of a soul conceived after the fashion of the Carvākas, Buddhists, Nyāya-Vaisesi. kas, Mimāṁsakas, Sankhyas?. Both these disussions are extremely rich in philosophical content and yet the occasion for them is Vidyānanda's own free creation. Again, take Vidyānanda's commentary on the aphorism listing the six Anuyogadvāras viz. nirdeśa, svāmitva, sādhana, adhikarana, sthiti, vidhana. Students of the Agamic texts know what these items mean but Vidyānanda has nothing to do with that, for he has here thought fit to criticise the following six philosophical positions ;