FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   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   >>   >|  
n houses unexpectedly, so it could not be said that the cooking was undertaken for them), (10) _Naigamana_ (non-injury is therefore the greatest virtue) (Vidyabhu@sa@na's _Indian Logic_). These are persuasive statements which are often actually adopted in a discussion, but from a formal point of view many of these are irrelevant. When Vatsyayana in his _Nyayasutrabha@sya_, I. 1. 32, says that Gautama introduced the doctrine of five propositions as against the doctrine of ten propositions as held by other logicians, he probably had this Jaina view in his mind.] [Footnote 2: See _Jainatarkavarttika_, and _Parik@samukhasutrav@rtti_, and _@Sa@ddars'anasamuccaya_ with Gu@naratna on Jainism.] 187 which could not non-existent. In fact production of effect was with them the only definition of existence (being). Theoretically each unit of effect being different from any other unit of effect they supposed that there was a succession of different units of effect or, what is the same thing, acknowledged a succession of new substances every moment. All things were thus momentary. The Jains urged that the reason why the production of effect may be regarded as the only proof of being is that we can assert only that thing the existence of which is indicated by a corresponding experience. When we have a unit of experience we suppose the existence of the object as its ground. This being so, the theoretical analysis of the Buddhists that each unit of effect produced in us is not exactly the same at each new point of time, and that therefore all things are momentary, is fallacious; for experience shows that not all of an object is found to be changing every moment; some part of it (e.g. gold in a gold ornament) is found to remain permanent while other parts (e.g. its form as earrings or bangles) are seen to undergo change. How in the face of such an experience can we assert that the whole thing vanishes every moment and that new things are being renewed at each succeeding moment? Hence leaving aside mere abstract and unfounded speculations, if we look to experience we find that the conception of being or existence involves a notion of permanence associated with change--_paryaya_ (acquirement of new qualities and the loss of old ones). The Jains hold that the defects of other systems lie in this, that they interpret experience only from one particular standpoint (_naya_) whereas they alone carefully weigh experience from all points
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   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   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

experience

 

effect

 

existence

 

moment

 
things
 
propositions
 

succession

 

doctrine

 

change

 

production


momentary

 
object
 

assert

 

suppose

 
produced
 

remain

 
permanent
 
ornament
 
Buddhists
 

unexpectedly


fallacious

 

houses

 
analysis
 

theoretical

 

ground

 
changing
 

undergo

 

defects

 
qualities
 
acquirement

notion
 

permanence

 
paryaya
 
systems
 

carefully

 

points

 

interpret

 

standpoint

 
involves
 

conception


vanishes

 
earrings
 

bangles

 

renewed

 

succeeding

 

speculations

 

unfounded

 

abstract

 

leaving

 

introduced