________________
( 204 )
the others' views on the basis of non-absolutism. The word Syat (Siya in Pali), which indicates the definite standpoint towards the probelems, is also used in the Cala Rahulovadamutta of the Majjhima Nikāya, where the two types of the Tejodhatu are pointed out in definite way. 114 It seems that the word Syat originally belonged to the Jainas and was later used by the Buddhists in a particular sense. The defect of self-contradiction in Syadvāda conception of the Jainas is a criticism levelled against it by the Buddhists. It happened so, only because of ignorance of the meaning of Syat. As a matter of fact, the Jainas had concentrated their attention on the controversial points in different theories of then philosophers and had tried to examine their views from different standpoints. By this method the Jainas could figure out the real nature of reality and consider the problem in a non-violent way. The refutation of Syadvāda in Buddhist literature
The Buddhist Acāryas at different times criticised the Syadvada conception of the Jainas on the grounds of selfcontradiction, commingling, doubt, etc. The main arguments of the foremost Buddhist logicians were as follows: Nāgārjuna and Syādvada
Acārya Kundakunda and Umāsvāti were among the earliest who established clearly the theory of the triple character (production, destruction, and permanence) of reality in Jainism, Nagārjuna ( about 150-250 A. D.), the propounder of Sanyavāda made the charge that the theory of triple character is itself a self-contradictoy formula, as it cannot be associated with reality, since such a thesis is faulty on account of anavasthadosa (regressus ad infinitum ).115 Dharmakirti and Syādvāda
In the Pramāna-Vārtika ( svavrtti) Dharmakirti remarks that the Anekantavāda is mere non-sensical talk ( pralāpamatra ). He says in the course of refuting the Bhedabhedavada theory that the Digambaras ( Jainas-Anhrikas ), who present
