Jinamanjari 1998 09 No 18

Author(s): Jinamanjari
Publisher: Canada Bramhi Jain Society Publication

Page 21

been prevalent side by side : one is jñāna and the other is pramāņa, both being rooted in utterly different sources and traditions. In the Agama texts of later period, however, some efforts were evidently made to adjust the differences, by including one into the other, or by identifying each subdivision of one category with that of the other. Umāsvāti secms to be the first to be successful to compromise such diversity, to a certain extent, and many efforts were made for that purpose by his successors like Siddhasena Divākara, Jinabhara, Akalanka etc. Take for instance the above-mentioned śruta which was originally included in the five-fold jñāna, it has come to be identified with the idea of āgama (=sabda), probably taking into allowance the conception of pramāņa of the philosophical systems. Similar is the case of Vādideva, who identifies śruta with āgama (IV.1 ff., VIII.1). And he explains that a word (dhvani, sabda) always conveys its meanings from affirmative and negative aspects, dependent on a set of seven-fold proposition (IV.13). That is, according to him, syūdvāda or nava is always based on the last mentioned knowledge viz. āguma or śruta. It is not a merc knowledge or its resultant cognition, but it invariably has to assume a form of verbal expression.
Upon Vādideva's autocommentary Svādvādaratnākara, Ratnaprabha made a short gloss (Laghu- tīkā) in 1181 C.E., or rather, an abridged compendium called Ratnākarāvatārikā, but the greater part of its descriptions are taken almost verbatim from the former work. Such reproductions are not only limited to Ratnākarāvatārikū, but are often enough referred to in the Svadvādamañjari of Mallişeņa (written in 1292 C.E., on the afore-said Vitarāgastuti), Saptabhangi-tarangiņi of Vimaladāsa (16-17th cent.? C.E.) and Nyāyakhandakhādya of Yasovijaya (1608-1688 C.E.).
As has been explained briefly in the preceding passages, the notion of svādvāda is interpreted in various ways, and its various uses might be, for convenience sakc, grouped under the following headings.
i) In the Jaina Agama texts, the term <siya> is used only for polemical purpose, and the emphasis is laid on manifold nature of reality held by the Jaina metaphysics.
ii) Jaina logic is formally interpreted by three divisions : pramāņa dealing with perception and inference ; and syāsvāda representing two kinds of expressional form of reality. That is, syādvāda and naya are regarded as the expressions of the wholc aspect and of the partial aspect of reality respectively. Though it is quite uncertain to the writer which
For Privatele personal Use Only