________________
120
JAINA ONTOLOGY
Chapter XIV
This chapter too brings forth no new doctrine but simply says that the old circle of criticism and counter-criticism can now repeat itself and that the repetition itself can go on for ever. The conclusion to be drawn is that the doctrines earlier set forth will lead one nowhere when taken in isolation, for in that case a rival will never be late to appear on the scene; on the other hand, these doctrines become important instruments of discovery when they join hands with each other as is the case when syadvādī Jaina weilds them.
This roughest outline of the contents of Nayacakra does no justice to the powerful array of arguments marshalled by Mallavadi on behalf of these so many doctrines in the relevant parts of his text. But it should suffiice for our present purpose. For it can now easily be seen that the doctrines in question are all more or less influential doctrines of Mallavadi's times. Certainly, the doctrines of niyati, kāla and svabhāva were at least as old as Svetasvatara Upanisad, the doctrine of puruṣādvaitavāda (with no tinge of mayāvāda) was the culmination point of the Upanisadic speculation, while the doctrine of bhāvādvaitavada (with its strong tinge of māyādvāda) represented that trend of post-Upanisadic Brahmanical speculation which ultimately led to the formulation of māyāvāda at the hands of Gauḍapāda, Sankara and their disciples. Similarly, Sankhya and Vaiseṣika were two systems that dominated the Brahmin's philosophical speculation for the pretty long period of time - the former in the immediate post-Upanisadic era, the latter sometimes afterwards. And Dinnaga doubtless ushered in a real revolution in the Buddhist philosophical camp, a revolution for which the ground was prepared by the Abhidharmika speculations on the one hand and the Sunyavāda-Vijñānavāda speculations on the other. Lastly, a pre-occupation with the problems of grammar was leading certain thinkers in the direction of formulating philosophical positions of a far-reaching type; of these positions the most wellknown and perhaps the most daring - was that of Bhartṛhari but the position maintained in the chapter V of Nayacakra seems to be another such position. A close study of Nayacakra leaves no doubt that Mallavadi was thoroughly acquainted with all these most important contemporary tendencies of Indian philosophy.
But when all is said and done it remains to be pointed out that it would have been better if Mallavadi wrote his text in the form of a uniform exposition-cum-criticism of the philosophical systems in question -not in the form of one system criticising another and then presenting its own case. Of course, it is well known to the students of Indian philosophy that much criticism that is here usually levelled against a system is common criticism that can be shared by all who choose to criticise this system; even then there are always parts of such criticism that can be levelled by one author
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
