________________
Jaina Logic
327
types, viz. mati, etc.
Now let us explain the universally useful and important theory called
1. Anuyogadvārasutra mentions four pramānas (types of valid knowledge), viz. pratyakşa
(perception), anumāna (inference), upamāna (analogy) and agama (verbal testimony). Their treatment is similar to that found in Gautama's Nyāya philosophy. Sthânăngasutra (Sthāna 4, Uddeśa 3) also mentions the above enumerated four pramānas. But elsewhere (Sthāna 2, Uddeśa 1) it mentions two pramānas viz., pratyakşa (perceptual or direct) and paroksa (non-perceptual or indirect). And the mention of these two pramānas certainly occurs in Nandisutra. Bhagavatīsutra (Sataka 5, Uddeśa 3) mentions the above-mentioned four pramānas, referring to the authority of Anuyogadvārasutra. The special type of pratyakșa (perception), viz., samuyavahārika pratyakșa (empirical perception) finds mention for the first time in Jinabhadragani's Viseșāvasyakabhäsya. But it is based on Nandīsütra, because Nandīsūtra includes sense perception in both the divisions, viz., pratyaksa and parokşa. From all the above discussion, we can arrive at the conclusion that the problem of knowledge has been treated in the Jaina tradition in two ways, viz., that based on the Agamic classification, and that based on the logical classification. The treatment where knowledge is divided into mati, śruta, etc. is the one based on the Āgamic classification, the treatment where it is divided into pramānas like perception (pratyakşa), etc., is the one based on the logical classification. The fivefold division of knowledge into mati, śruta, etc. is rooted in the scriptures and is very old. On the other hand, the classification of knowledge into pratyakşa, etc. evinces the influence of the age of logic. At the time when Agamas were edited (sankalana) portions containing the fourfold classification of pramānas, as also those containing the twofold classification, found entrance in Sthänānga and Bhagavati. (In Bhagavatisūtra, we come across portions where Räipaseņaia, Pannavaņā, Nandi, Jivabhigama, Anuyogadvārasūtra are found quoted by name in support, but these Raipaseņaia, etc., were composed very late after the composition of Bhagavatīsutra. This shows that these portions were inserted in Bhagavatīsūtra when Agamas were edited.) However, even though both these classifications had found place in the Agamic texts, the Jaina teachers chiefly gave special thought to the twofold classification. The obvious reason for this is that the fourfold classification really belongs to the Nyāya system and is therefore referred to by Umāsvāti in his Tattvārthabhāsya (I. 6) as a nayavādāntara (view of another philosophical system)-, while the twofold classification is the Jaina teachers' own. The twofold classification has been accepted in Tattvārthasutra and other Jaina works. And in this manner it has been firmly established in the Jaina tradition. The same twofold classification is there in Nandisutra. But the speciality of Nandisutra is that it incorporated in its treatment an important point. The point is that pratyakşapramāna is here sub-divided into two types, viz., noindriya-pratyakşa (non-sensory perception which covers avadhi, etc.) and indriya-pratyaksa (sensory perception). But it has been borrowed by it from the earlier work, Anuyogadvārasutra. It is so because the author of Anuyogadvārasūtra divides pratyakșa-pramana into two types, viz., indriyapratyaksa and noindriya-pratyakșa after having mentioned four pramāņas, viz., pratyakșa, anumāna, upamāna and āgama. And it is on the basis of this classification of pratyaksa
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
