________________
JAINA ONTOLOGY
(iv) A General Evaluation of the non-Jaina philosophical views
We have already noted that Vidyananda was a thorough student of the contemporary systems of Indian philosophy. As a matter of fact, what is most conspicuous about his treatment of problems is to a great extent the result of his acquaintance with these systems; (the other factors responsible for it are Vidyananda's mastery over the traditional Jaina views and his remarkably keen insight). But we have already referred to Vidyananda's encounter with the rival philosophical views that took place in connection with the elaboration of Anekantavāda and the doctrine of pramāņas. What remains to be spoken of is his miscellaneous evaluation of the rival views. The remarkable thing is that the cases of such miscellaneous evaluation are abundant, not a surprising fact when we keep in mind Vidyananda's versatility. As has already been hinted, so far as repudiating the reality of the empirical world is concerned Vidyananda found essential kinship between the Vijñānavādī and Sunyavādi Buddhists and the Brahmavādī Vedāntists. On numerous occasions he has separately criticised the three views in question and that proves his acquaintance with the niceties exhibited by each. And yet he bracketed them togather for a good reason. Thus while criticising Vijñānavāda Vidyānanda argues that a tenet like this, that is, a tenet repudiating the reality of the physical world can be defended only at the expense of all logic and that this makes it a bedfellow of Sunyavāda (and Tattvo paplavavāda) with its open aversion for all logic; the argument can easily be extended to cover a system like Brahmavāda, Again, Vidyananda undertakes an elaborate criticism of the Nyaya-Vaišeṣika doctrine of God47 and the Mimamsa doctrine of Vedapauruşeyatvavāda, 48 two doctrines that were respectively characteristic of the systems in question. At the same time, Vidyananda undertakes an elaborate defence of the Jaina thesis on the possibility of omniscience,49 a defence intended to repel the Mimamsaka's criticism on this count. Lastly, Vidyananda criticises at length the materialist doctrine of Bhutacaitanyavada50 which too was a fit target of all these philosophers who believed in the reality of soul, mokşa, etc. As a matter of fact, there is hardly a contemporary philosophical school whose most characteristic philosophical views Vidyananda does not criticise -- and at length in some part or other of his Tattvarthaslokavārtika; and here lies the lasting value of this text.
154
—
With Vidyananda comes to an end the second stage of Logic and the fact needs being estimated soberly. For Vidyananda was not only the last representative of the stage in question he was also its most learned representative. Certainly, it is in his writings that this memorable period in the history of Indian philosophy stands reflected in an adequate manner. Those who came before him made way for him and in this sense they did what nobody else did, but it was he who really proved equal to the task of the
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
