________________
52
Jainism As Metaphilosophy have emerged, wherever systems of philosophy have flourished, wherever philosophical problems have been subjected to continuing discussions, we find philosophers grouping themselves into different schools. Affiliation to the divergent schools have invariably also meant owing allegiance to them. Commitments to certain basic tenets have resulted in virulent criticisms as well as strong condemnations of those schools, thinkers or proponents who have no such commitments. Accepting certain fundamental positions has had the effect of defending them against criticisms and also of looking out for loop-holes in the critics' positions.
Division of philosophers in the sense indicated has had a divisive effect inasmuch as their work has not been considered to have been conducive to the development of a coherent structure of thought but as having contributed, - though imperceptibly, to the emergence of sharply divided points of view. By the very nature of the stance they have all taken from the commencement of their inquiries, the prospects of reconciliation' not to speak of 'synthesis' seem t have been bleak. The hopelessness of the situation is that possibilitics of different schools working in harmony and for a common purpose (of pursuing the aim of philosophy) seem to get ruled out altogether, thanks to the enthusiasm with which specific standpoints are taken and the vehemence with which they are defended.
Such developments in the philosophic scene have been time and again subjected to critical reviews and these have led to meta-philosophical trends explicitly coming out with statements in regard to the way philosophies and philosophers should procecd or indicate, by implication, the pitfalls to be avoided by leaders of thought.
The spirit of the vibhajya method adopted by Mahāvīra is now easy to discern. Mahāvīra scems to point out that a dispassionate observation and a careful analysis of the so-called opposed schools of thought would indicate that if many points of vicw have been taken, if emphases have been laid on come ideas as against others, development of diverse perspectives could not be helped. Rather than analysing the situation as holding within it no potential for reconciliation and portending interminable controversies and polemics, Mahāvīra seems to have assessed the situation as quite promising. He scems to have found scope for viewing them all as together contributing lo the enrichment of our knowledge of Reality.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
