Book Title: Jainism in Buddhist Literature
Author(s): Bhagchandra Jain Bhaskar
Publisher: Alok Prakashan

Previous | Next

Page 214
________________ ( 195 ) being questioned resort to verbal jugglery and eelwriggling) on four grounds 89 The Commentary of the Dighanikaya presents its two alternative explanations. According to first, Amaravikkhepika are those who are confused by their endless beliefs and words. The second explanation gives meaning that like a fish named amara, the theory of Amaravikkhepikā runs hither and thither without arriving at a definite conclusion.90 The first of these schools is defined thus: "Herein a certain recluse or brahmin does not understand, as it really is, that this is good (kusalan ) or this is evil (akusalam). It occurs to him: I do not understand what is good or evil as it really is. Not understanding what is good or evil, as it really is, if I were to assert that this is good and this is evil, that will be due to my likes, desires, aversions or resentments. If it were due to my likes, desires, aversions, or resentments, it would be wrong. And if I were wrong, it would cause me worry ( vighuto) and worry would be a moral danger to me (antarayo ). Thus, through fear of lying ( muṣāvadabhaya), and the abhorrence of being lying, he does not assert anything to be good or evil and on questions being put to him on this or that matter he resorts to verbal jugglery and eel-wriggling, saying: I do not say so, I do not say this, I do not say otherwise, I do not say no, I deny the denials (I do not say, "no no" ).91 According to this school, it is impossible to achieve knowledge which is a hinderance to heavan or salvation (Saggassa c'eva maggassa ca antarayo ).92 The second and the third school of sceptics do not assert anything to be good or evil through fear of involvement (upadanabhaya) and a fear of interrogation in debate (anuyogabhayā). The fourth school of Sceptics followed the philosophy of Sanjaya Belaṭṭhiputta who fails to give a definite answer to any metaphysical question put to him. His fourfold scheme or the five-fold formula of denial is based on the negative aspects which are as follows :98

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326