________________
XX
Jaina Philosophy and Religion
by fanaticism, deluded by undue attachment to their schools or sects and afflicted with narrow outlook, do not naturally have liberal ten outlook inducing them to read the philosophical and religious works of others and hence are deprived of reading the Jaina works containing wholesome, noble and salutary teaching
I confidently express that the study of Indian philosophy remains utterly incomplete without the study of Jaina philosophy (and literature). Again, I impartially declare that the study of Jaina philosophical works is very useful in purifying and increasing one's fund of knowledge as also in finding the right path of spiritual poise and peace.
None has the right to own exclusively the field of philosophy. Nobody has monopoly on it. Anybody can acquire it. It is wrongly regarded as the exclusive possession of a particular group or sect. When a man respects only that system of philosophy, which he has acquired through family tradition, and does not cast even a glance at other systems of philosophy, he cannot be regarded as endowed with liberal attitude and catholicity of outlook. Development of knowledge and attainment of truth depend on the liberal attitude and wide study. The liberal attitude expresses itself in the words: 'Whatever is true is mine'. Truth is not confined to a particular race, class or sect. It is present everywhere without any obstruc tion. It is accessible to all irrespective of race, class, creed, sect, etc. Whose is Truth? It is his who realises it. Any literature permeated with and purified by Truth is the wealth which belongs to the whole world. Any man from whatever part of the world has the right to enjoy it.
Substance of the Work Though all great men are seekers and cognisers of truth, their search of it and their presentation of it are not identical. The style of presentation, which Buddha' adopted is different from that which Mahāvira had adopted. The special method Mahāvīra employed is called anekāntavāda (non-ab
1. It was the nature of Buddha to remain aloof from the mutually conflicting doctrines,
This is the reason why he at once called the current metaphysical questions presented before him as in a way 'untouchable' (i.e. inexplicable or unanswerable). For example, he could not call the soul eternal; and if he called it non-eternal, the doctrine of its complete destruction on the death of the body—the doctrine accepted by the materialists akin to Carvākas—would force itself upon him. So, he called all such questions unanswerable and made the complete destruction of the cycle of birth and death the subject-matter of his teachings. On the other hand, it was the nature of
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
