________________
BANERJEE : ANEKĀNTAVĀDA AND LANGUAGE
125
From the point of view of his son he is a father, and from the point of view of his father he is a son. Similarly, with regard to his other designations. In the same manner substance is permanent from the point of view of general properties. From the point of view of its specific modes it is not permanent. Hence there is no contradiction. These two, the general and the particular, somehow, are different as well as identical. Thus these form the cause of wordly intercourse.
"A question is raised. That which exists is governed by the doctrine of manifold points of view (relative pluralism). Therefore, it is proper that molecules are formed from matter by division and union. But there is this doubt. Are molecules of two atoms and so on formed by mere union, or is there any peculiarity? The reply is this. When there is union of actions, these atoms are transformed by combination in one object, which is a molecule. If it is so, what is it that certain atoms combine and certain others do not, though all of them are of the nature of matter? Though the atoms are not different as far as their nature as matter is concerned, combination is established on the basis of capacity derived from the effect of mutual differences among infinite modes".
But in the Pravacana-sāra and in the Pancāstikāya of Kundakunda (2nd A.D.), the sevenfold propositions came into existence.
In the Golden age of Jain philosophy (bet. 6th and 10th centuries A.D.), we have two outstanding pioneers on Jain philosophy, Siddhasena Divākara (a Svetāmbara) and Samantabhadra (a Digambara), both belonging to 6th and 7th centuries A.D. Siddhasena Divākara's two works, namely, Nyāyāvatāra and Sammati-tarka commented on by Siddharşi (10th century A.D.) and Abhayadevasdri (10th century A.D.) respectively, are famous Jain logical texts. Samantabhadra (also belonging to the same period) wrote Apta-mimāṁsā in which the Jainistic philosophy of Syāduāda was explained.
