Impact Of Nyaya And Vaisesika School On Jaina Philosophy - Book Summary

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Impact of Nyaya and Vaisesika School on Jaina Philosophy" by Sagarmal Jain:

The book "Impact of Nyaya and Vaisesika School on Jaina Philosophy" by Sagarmal Jain explores the historical and philosophical interactions between Jainism and the Nyaya and Vaisesika schools of Indian philosophy.

Early Independence and Divergent Origins:

Ancient Roots of Jainism: The text emphasizes that Jaina philosophy has a history spanning 2600 years, with its fundamental metaphysical and epistemological concepts traceable back to Lord Pārsvanātha (8th century BC), predating Mahāvīra (6th century BC). This ancient origin means that the foundational concepts of Jaina metaphysics and epistemology, such as Paśīcāstikāyavāda (doctrine of five existents), Nava-tattva (nine categories), Sadji vanikāya (six kinds of living beings), and Pascajñāna (five kinds of knowledge), were not influenced by the Nyaya and Vaisesika schools. Instead, influences on these early concepts can be traced to earlier Upanishads, early Buddhism, and other contemporary Śramanic traditions.
Independent Emergence: Jainism and Buddhism are presented as having independent origins, emerging in opposition to the sanctity of Vedic lore and the oppressive priestly class, rather than being directly influenced by each other in their inception. While sharing similarities like the repudiation of Vedic authority and a pessimistic outlook, they are sister religions of the same Śramanic tradition.
Contrasting Approaches: Both Jainism and Buddhism are noted for their Vibhajyavāda (analytical approach) and their effort to counter one-sided views. Buddha's negative approach led to Śūnyavāda (nihilism) but ultimately to the "middle path." Mahāvīra's positive approach culminated in Anekāntavāda (non-absolutism). Both Anekāntavāda and the middle path are fundamentally absent in the Nyaya-Vaisesika schools.

Phases of Jaina Philosophy and Nyaya-Vaisesika Influence:

The author outlines four phases of Jaina philosophical development, and the impact of Nyaya-Vaisesika is primarily seen in the later phases:

Āgamic Philosophy (5th century BC to 3rd century AD): This phase is purely Āgamic, with no discernible impact from Nyaya-Vaisesika.
Logical Presentation of Jaina Philosophy and Anekantavada (4th century AD to 7th century AD): Some impacts of Nyaya-Vaisesika begin to appear on Jaina metaphysical and epistemological concepts.
Critical Evaluation of Other Schools (8th century AD to 15th century AD): Jaina thinkers critically engaged with Nyaya and Vaisesika, adopting some of their concepts while also synthesizing them with their own theories like Anekāntavāda, leading to new theories like Sadasadkāryavāda and Parataḥ-svatah-prāṇāyavāda. This phase also involved strong criticism of the one-sidedness of Nyaya-Vaisesika doctrines.
Application of Navya-Nyaya Technique (17th to 18th century AD): Jaina philosophers adopted the Navya-Nyāya (Neo-logic) techniques developed by Gangesa Upādhyāya for a more sound and logical presentation of their doctrines. This was a significant new turn, and Jaina scholars were deeply influenced by this powerful intellectual trend.

Specific Areas of Influence:

Metaphysics:
- Substance (Dravya): While words like 'sat', 'dravya', and 'astikāya' existed in different traditions, the adoption of the term 'dravya' in Jaina philosophy for substance is seen as an influence from Nyaya-Vaisesika. Jainism defines six substances, while Vaisesika has nine. Common substances like ākāśa (space), kāla (time), and ātman (soul) are shared, with the inclusion of kāla as an independent substance potentially stemming from Vaisesika. However, this was debated within Jainism, with some initially considering time a mode rather than an independent substance.
- Conceptualization of Guna and Paryaya: Jainas adopted the Nyaya-Vaisesika concept of substance possessing attributes (guna) and modes (paryāya) but modified it. Unlike Nyaya, Jainas view guna and paryāya as interchangeable aspects of the same reality, not distinct entities. They also reject the Nyaya idea that all attributes are destroyed with a substance and newly emerge with a new substance.
Epistemology (Pramāṇas):
- Early Independence: The five-fold knowledge (Pañcajñāna) in Jainism, originating from Pārsvanātha, was not influenced by Nyaya. Even in the Tattvärthasūtra, which establishes these as pramāṇas, there's no conceptual impact from Nyaya.
- Two-fold Classification: The Tattvärthasūtra's acceptance of two broad categories of pramāṇas (direct - pratyakṣa, and indirect - parokṣa) appears to be an influence of Vaisesika. However, the author argues against this being a direct conceptual borrowing. Jainas see knowledge itself as pramāṇa, whereas Nyaya-Vaisesika views pramāṇa as the means of knowledge.
- Meaning of Pratyaksa and Paroksa: Umāsvāti's definitions of pratyakṣa and parokṣa differ from Nyaya's. For Umāsvāti, knowledge gained through senses and mind is indirect (parokṣa), unlike the Nyaya view.
- Later Adoption of Nyaya Categories: The first significant impact on Jaina epistemology appears in later canonical works (3rd-4th century AD). The previously pure five-fold division of knowledge began to incorporate external influences, particularly a two-fold classification. The Anuyogadvara-sūtra saw the four-fold division of Nyaya (Pratyakṣa, Anumāna, Agama, Upamāna) gain prominence, adopted wholesale by Jaina thinkers.
- Sense Cognition and Inference: The inclusion of sense-cognition into pratyakṣa in the Nandisutra (5th century AD) follows the Nyaya tradition. Jaina thinkers also agreed with Nyaya on the five organs of inference (anūmāna), though they also developed a unique concept of ten organs. The adoption of the three-fold division of inference (parvavat, sesavat, samanyato-drsta) from Nyaya is also noted in later Jaina canonical works.
- Navya-Nyaya Technique: The most profound influence is the adoption of Navya-Nyāya techniques by scholars like Upadhyaya Yasovijaya and Vimaladasa in the 17th-18th centuries AD. Works like Yasovijaya's Anekantavyavastha and Vimaladasa's Saptabhangitarangini exemplify this integration, revitalizing Jaina logic and philosophy.

Conclusion:

The book concludes by asserting that no philosophy exists in a vacuum, and Jaina philosophy, like others, has been influenced by earlier and contemporary schools. While Jainas have sometimes adopted terminology and ideas from Nyaya-Vaisesika, they have consistently synthesized them within their own philosophical framework, often modifying them to align with their core doctrines like Anekāntavāda. The author stresses the importance of intellectual honesty in tracing these influences based on chronological development. The impact is evident, particularly in the later phases of Jaina philosophy, in both metaphysical conceptualizations and epistemological methodologies, culminating in the adoption of the sophisticated Navya-Nyāya techniques.