Book Title: Studies in Indian Philosophy
Author(s): Dalsukh Malvania, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

View full book text
Previous | Next

Page 78
________________ Tamas and Chaya in the Jaina view 51 is known to be dark, and so on; so it cannot be established as being aqueous in character. And once it is established that it is not aqueous in character there is nothing against even cool touch which is different in characteristic from the cool touch of water being present here. Even as the neither hot nor cool touch though present in earth (prthivi) is with some subpeculiarity present in wind, even so in this case also a special kind of cool touch can be present in chāyā. Otherwise there would be the contingency of wind having to be subsumed under earth. Thus it is established that chāyā does have touch. Thus the argument, "Chāyā does not have the quality of dark colour, because it is devoid of touch' is not proper; and there. fore the quality of dark colour is established. Similarly, it can be said to have number, size, separateness, conjunction, disjunction, posteriority, priority, momentum, etc. Therefore also because chāyā has qualities, it is proved to be a substance. In this connection, a Prābhākara (follower of Prabhākara) says : "Chāyā may be a substance but it cannot properly be a substance over and above light, earth, space, etc." Vādi-Devasūri's retort to this is that it is only a gesture of his showing off his upstart, capricious scholarship. For this could be said if only the portion of earth and the like were apprehended as chāyā, or if there were no proof in support of the existence of chayā as distinct from the portion of the earth and the like. The first is not proper, as it is not established. We do not see chāyā as in apposition with the portion of the earth or the like-'the portion of earth is chāyā'. On the contrary we have the apprehension, Chāyā is on the portion of the earth or the like' which shows that they are two distinct things. It cannot be said that this latter apprehension is a false, one, whereas an apprehension of the former sort would be non-erroneous--for such an apprehension is not there at all. This stand of the Prābhākara is like giving up a morsel in hand and wanting to lick the toes, and so deserves to be ignored by the intelligent. And this is really strange that though this one is proud of being a Jain Education International For Private & Personal Use Only www.jainelibrary.org

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352