New Dimensions in Jaina Logic

Author(s): Mahaprajna Acharya, Nathmal Tatia
Publisher: Today and Tommorrow Printers and Publishers

Page 112

104
New Dimensions in Jaina Logic
exclusively a species of knowledge acquired through the spiritual efforts of a yogi in this life. But excluding this type of clairvoyance the other cases of clairvoyance and also mind reading can be compared with the yogic perception of the Buddhists and the preception born of yoga of the Neo Naiyāyikas.
The concept of kevalajñāna (omniscience) has been very critically assessed by the ancient as well as modern thinkers. There is a vast literature both in favour and against this issue. The meaning of the expression kevalajñāna is usually identified with the knowledge of everything, i.e. omniscience. One who knows all, knows the dharma of necessity. The Mimāmsakas assert that a human being cannot be omniscient and as such he cannot know the dharma. The Buddhist philosophers make a different approach to the problem. Dignāga, for instance, argues that an ordinary human being, even an arhat, can at best know the dharma but can never be omniscient. The case of the Buddha stands apart. One need not accept the validity of the Vedas for the knowledge of the nature of dharma. The standpoint of the Jaina philosopher is quite different from the two. According to him a human being is capable of acquiring omniscience and the omniscient one has necessarily the knowledge of dharma. In fact the ultimate proof of the knowledge of dharma is omniscience itself.
Acārya Kundakunda has explained omniscience on the basis of the nayas (viewpoints). According to the practical or pragmatic viewpoint (vyavahāra naya) the kevalin (omniscient) knows everything, but according to the ultimate viewpoint (naiscayika naya) the kevalin knows himself alone. The implication is that the kevalin is omniscient from the practical viewpoint (vyavahāra naya) and the knower of himself alone from the ultimate viewpoint (naiscayika naya)28.
All philosophies believing in the independent existence of the soul or a principle of conciousness accept super-sensuous perception or the direct experience of reality. The point of controversy is whether they believe in omniscience, that is, the knowledge of everything. Different interpretations have been proposed regarding the meaning of 'everything in the context of omniscience. In the Jaina tradition 'everything' implies that the kevalajñāna knows all substances, the entire space and time and all modes.29 Not only the Mimāmsakas but all the Buddhists differ from the Jainas in respect of this all-comprehensiveness of omniscience. The Nyāya and Samkhya systems also have their own standpoint on this issue.