Jinamanjari 2001 04 No 23

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

Page 83

of eleven papers by distinguished scholars, and of interest, it may be easily noted that papers of scholars like Profs. D.S. Kothari (The Complementarity Principle and Jaina Theory of Syādvāda), K.C. Bhattacharya (The Jaina Theory of Anekānta), Atsushi Uno (A Study of Syādvāda), V.M. Kulakarni (Relativity and Absolutism), P.P. Gokhale (The Logical Structure of Syādvāda), V. Vekatachalam (The Seven-Plank Epistemological Frame: A Search for its Rationale) and B.K. Matilal (Anekānta: Both Yes and No?) bring out new venues for the understanding of this Jaina doctrine of Anekānta. Dr. Nagin J. Shah in the 'Introduction' to the book has aptly defined this doctrine as that which "synthesizes conflicting views to arrive at the whole truth
the harmony of conflicting views “ A refreshing addition to the study of Jain Logic and Epistemology.
Biology in Jaina Treatise on Reals. Dr. N.L. Jain. P.V. Institute, Varanasi and Digambar Jaina Samaj, Chennai 600079, 1999. Pp. 204 with appendix and index. ISBN 81-86715-44-4.
In the history of Indian literature, TattvārthādhigamaSūtra of Umāswāmin, also called Umāsvāti, is one the important texts. The technical terms employed in it belong exclusively to Jainism. There are about ten known commentaries on this text, dated from 450 C.E to 1688 C.E. Sarvārthasiddhi of Pūjyapāda (450-530 C.E.) and Tattvātika Rājvārtika of Akalanka (720-780 C.E.) are important ones.
Biology in Jaina Treatise on Reals is the English translation of Tattvātika Rājvārtika, Hindi edition published in 1957. Based on reconciliation of different treatises on Tattvārthādhigama-Sūtra, the author has selected 53 aphorisms, which, according to him, deal mainly on biological definitions and explanations of living beings based on volitional character, gender and transmigration.
The book points out scientific aspects of Jain religion, in particular that of the biologic nature, which in large part is grounded in Jaina religious philosophy with abundant technical terms. However, the English translation appears to be constrained by repetitive and fluid phrases. Had the author maintained all technical terms in Prākrit with English equivalents in parentheses or provided a glossary and be less
79