Sambodhi 1996 Vol 20

Author(s): Jitendra B Shah, N M Kansara
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 75

Vol. xx, 1996
HERETICAL CONCEPTION OF...
actions of beings, then a question arises that when Isvara created the world whether the jīvas were endowed with karma or not? In the case of the former the next question will be who is the author of their karmas ? If it is argued that karma were the acts of different jīvas, it will not be compatible with the argument that Iśvara is responsible for actions in this world. How can it be accepted that Iśvara is merciful or compassionate and some jīvas suffer and some are happy; some travel in the right path and some on the wrong path. How can we account this to the Iśvara who is said to be omniscient and compassionate. Why does he not stop the unrighteous ? All this shows that Naiyāyikas are wrong and Isvara appears to be biased, devoid of justice and intelligence, and is unmerciful. Refuting the doctrine of Sankhyas that the whole creation is produced from the principle of Pradhāna or Prakịti it can be argued that how the intangible Prakrti can produce diverse phenomena such as the seed, mountain etc., which are tangible. The principle of Pradhāna is said to be tangible the question arises how it is created ? If it is created by A or B and so on it leads to ad infinitum again. In such case, why the world should not be regarded as eternal. It is argued by the followers of Sankhya that Prakyti is the combination of sattva, rajas and tamas in equal proportions. To state that the various tattvas like Mahat can be derived from the principle of Pradhana cannot be accepted. Instead of arguing that the universe is produced froin the principle of Pradhāna why can it not be said that the cause of diverse phenomena in their innate nature of the principle of Niyati. The argument that the world is created by Self-born one is also unsound because the definition of 'Svayambhū or Self-born is ambiguous and if the Self-born is defined as eternal, how can the non-dual produce the world of duality? When it cannot be accepted that the Self-born cannot be the creator of the universe, how can it be said that Lord Yama or the principle of Māyā which are the by-products of the Self-born can create the universe ? Another speculation that the world has emerged from Hiranyagarbha also appears as meaningless because in the absence of the five elements in the beginning how can the primordial egg was produced and how can the origins of different elements can be explained ? Another contention of the Tirthikas and the Brālumaņas that the four castes of Brāhmaṇa, Ksatriya etc., have emerged from different organs of Brahmā is also absurd because it is inexperiencial and illogical. The creation of the world by Vism also does not stand up to the logical analysis. For instance when Visnu was lying on the primordial water the question arises who has created the element water ? If the element of water is said to be in existence since eternity why the other elements did not appear