Logical and Historical Significance of Jaina Philosophical Tradition

Author(s): K K Dixit
Publisher: Z_Mahavir_Jain_Vidyalay_Suvarna_Mahotsav_Granth_Part_1_012002.pdf and Mahavir_Jain_Vidyalay_Suvarna_

Page 7

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE JAINA PHILOSOPHICAL TRADITION
empirical phenomenon while its attributes represent the quality-aspect or the mode-aspect of the phenomenon.3
(iv) On the question of the universal features exhibited by the empirical phenomena he maintained that a universal feature exhibited by certain particular phenomena is but the mode called similarity in relation to the rest' which each of these phenomena comes to assume.
27
On closer perusal it turns out that differences among the Indian empiricists on the question of permanence and transience were more vital than those of the remaining three questions.
As a matter of fact; we can even say that on these last three questions the positions adopted by the Nyāya-Vaišeṣika, the Buddhist and the Jaina schools were vitally the same and can easily be translated from one into another.
The reason for it is that all these three schools seek to explain away as was done by their transcendentalist rivals-the phenomenon of the composition of a body out of certain component parts, the phenomenon of a particular feature belonging to a particular entity, and the phenomenon of a universal feature belonging to a group of entities; in each of these cases the Nyaya-Vaisesika offered his. explanation by speaking of these or those independent entities (of the form of substance, qualities, actions, universals) entering into the relationship technically called Samavaya, the Buddhist by speaking of these or those conventional usages being adopted, and the Jaina by speaking of these or those substances assuming different modes. There is no denying that each of these modes of speech has its own advantages and disadvantages, but to think-as will be done by the partisans of the three schools in question-that the idea sought to be onveyed by these different modes of speech is not the same seemc fraught with confusion..
Then we come to the Nyaya-Vaišeṣika, the Buddhist and the Jaina treatments of the question of permanence and transience.
On
Certain Jaina scholars make no distinction between quality-aspect and mode-aspect; on their view it can be said that the attributes of a substance represent the mode-aspect of an empirical phenomenon, On the other hand, those Jaina scholars who distinguish between quality-aspect and mode-aspect tend to identify quality-aspect with substance-aspect, but but since an express distinction between substance-aspect and quality-aspect is necessary to their position the above formulation may be taken to represent this very position.