________________
Shri Mahavir Jain Aradhana Kendra
www.kobatirth.org
Acharya Shri Kailassagarsuri Gyanmandir
SATYASĀSANA-PARIKSÅ
either absolutely different from the latter or absolutely identical with it. In the latter case, the successive production of the evolutes would be impossible, because there is no corresponding succession in the prakşti. And in the former case, it would be illogical to regard them as evolved from the praksti, there being absolute cleavage between the two.
Now if the Samkhya philosopher admits the transformation to be neither different nor identical, and asserts that the prakřti transforms itself as mahat and the like, much like the straight or circular shapes assumed by a reptile, he would be abandoning his doctrine of absolutely eternal praksti.1 This would be tantamount to the admission of the doctrine of non-absolutism sponsored by the faina philosopher. .
The Samkhya doctrine of unchanging purlisa also does not commend itself to the Jaina. The puruşa should be conceived as permanent-cum-changing. We have already discussed the point in connection with our exposition of the doctrine of fluxisin.
7. The Vaiścșika Categories and Theism
The Vaiseșika school postulates six categories, viz, dravya ( substance ), guņa ( quality ), karman ( activity ), sāmānya ( universal ), višeşa (particularity) and samavāya ( inherence ), and asserts that the discriminative comprehension of these categories of truth is the condition of liberation. The soul has the nine specific qualities of buddhi ( knowledge ), sukha ( pleasure ), duḥkha (pain), icchā ( desire ), dveşa (aversion ), prayatna (effort ), dharma ( merit ), adharma (demerit ) and samskāra ( predispositions). On the absolute dissociation of these. qualities, the soul attains liberation and regains its natural state of freedom from contamination with these specific qualities. The school believes in the plurality of souls which are ubiquitous.
The Jaina philosopher observes that the Vaiseșika postulation of absolute difference between the parts ( avayava ) and the whole ( avayavin ), qualities and their substratum, action and the active, universal and the individual, is opposed to experience. We do not perceive the two terms as absolutely different from one another, though of course distinction is not denied. They must be admitted
1 atha na bhinno näpyabhinnah parināmah kevalam mahadādirūpeṇa pradhānam
pariņamati dandakundaladyākāraih sarpavad iti cet, tadetat svestanityaikāntabâdhakam-SSP, p. 32:
For Private And Personal Use Only
