Sarvajñaḥ

This term, is used to refer to both Buddha and Arhata. Jainas argue that a person, who is interested in Puruṣārtha (the ultimate purpose of a person’s life, i.e. Mokṣa), should not follow Bauddhadarśanam but Jainadarśanam of Arhata.

Hemacandrasūri, in his Āptaniścayālaṅkāra defines Arhata –

सर्वज्ञो जितरागादिदोषस्त्रैलोक्यपूजितः। यथास्थितार्थवादी च देवोऽर्हन् परमेश्वरः॥
sarvajño jitarāgādidoṣastrailokyapūjitaḥ।
yathāsthitārthavādī ca devo’rhan parameśvaraḥ॥

The one, who, knows everything, conquered Rāga (interest in mundane things) etc. vices, worshipped in three worlds, speaks the truth, shining, capable and Parameśvara (lord of the universe) is Arhata.

Tautātīta (Kumārila?) vehemently refuted the concept / designation of Sarvajña (all-knowing) –

सर्वज्ञो दृश्यते तावन्नेदानीमस्मदादिभिः।
दृष्टो न चैकदेशोऽस्ति लिङ्गं वा योऽनुमापयेत्॥
न चागमविधिः कश्चिन्नित्यसर्वज्ञबोधकः।
न च तत्रार्थवादानां तात्पर्यमपि कल्प्यते॥
न चान्यार्थप्रधानैस्तैस्तदस्तित्वं विधीयते।
न चानुवदितुं शक्यः पूर्वमन्यैरबोधितः॥
sarvajño dṛśyate tāvannedānīmasmadādibhiḥ।
dṛṣṭo na caikadeśo’sti liṅgaṃ vā yo’numāpayet॥
na cāgamavidhiḥ kaścinnityasarvajñabodhakaḥ।
na ca tatrārthavādānāṃ tātparyamapi kalpyate॥
na cānyārthapradhānaistaistadastittvaṃ vidhīyate।
na cānuvadituṃ śakyaḥ pūrvamanyairabodhitaḥ॥

Today we do not see any Sarvajña (Pratyakṣapramāṇa or Perception does not work). If a part is seen as a sign then it is possible to infer but no such sign is there for Sarvajña, so Anumāna (Inference) also failed. Even by Śabdapramāṇa (statement), since there is no any injunction which ordains Sarvajñatva (the property of Sarvajña) on an eternal basis either in Veda or Śāstra, it is not possible to accept. Nor is there any Arthavāda (Vedic sentence of commendation) of which the purport would be Sarvajña. There is also no any sentence proposing something else as important but proposes Sarvajña. Anuvāda (saying again a thing said earlier) cannot be there without an earlier reference to Sarvajña.

अनादेरागमस्यार्थो न च सर्वज्ञ आदिमान्। कृत्रिमेण त्वसत्येन स कथं प्रतिपाद्यते॥
anāderāgamasyārtho na ca sarvajña ādimān।
kṛtrimeṇa tvasatyena sa kathaṃ pratipādyate॥

A person, like Arhata, having a beginning cannot be proposed by an Āgama (Veda) which is beginningless (eternal). If he is proposed by an Āgama (Jainadarśanam), which has got beginning, artificial and untruthful, how can it be authoritative?

अथ तद्वचनेनैव सर्वज्ञोऽज्ञैः प्रतीयते। प्रकल्प्यते कथं सिद्धिरन्योन्याश्रयदोषतः॥
atha tadvacanenaiva sarvajño’jñaiḥ pratīyate।
prakalpyate kathaṃ siddhiranyonyāśrayadoṣataḥ॥

If the layman came to know by Sarvajña’s words only that he is Sarvajña then it is not possible due to the defect of interdependency.

सर्वज्ञोक्ततया वाक्यं सत्यं, तेन तदस्तिता।
कथं तदुभयं विद्ध्येत् सिद्धमूलान्तरादृते॥
sarvajñoktatayā vākyaṃ satyaṃ, tena tadastitā।
kathaṃ tadubhayaṃ viddhyet siddhamūlāntarādṛte॥

Without another authoritative text how both the things are possible – the sentence is true as it is said by Sarvajña and since the sentence is authoritative he is Sarvajña (interdependency).

असर्वज्ञप्रणीतात्तु वचनान्मूलवर्जितात्।
सर्वज्ञमवगच्छन्तः स्ववाक्यात् किं न जानते॥
asarvajñapraṇītāttu vacanānmūlavarjitāt।
sarvajñamavagacchantaḥ svavākyāt kiṃ na jānate॥

Why can’t the people, who come to know that someone is Sarvajña by the words of a non-Sarvajña ,which are baseless, know him as Sarvajña by their own words?

सर्वज्ञसदृशं कञ्चिद्यदि पश्येम सम्प्रति।
उपमानेन सर्वज्ञं जानीयाम ततो वयम्॥
sarvajñasadṛśaṃ kañcidyadi paśyema samprati।
upamānena sarvajñaṃ jānīyāma tato vayam॥

Not even Upamānapramāṇam (Simile) is helpful in this regard – today if we find something that is equal to a Sarvajña then we would know that someone is Sarvajña (we do not find one today).

उपदेशोऽपि बुद्धस्य धर्माधर्मादिगोचरः। अन्यथा नोपपद्येत सार्वज्ञ्यं यदि नाभवत्॥
एवमर्थापत्तिरपि प्रमाणं नात्र युज्यते। उपदेशस्य सत्यत्वं यतो नाध्यक्षमीक्ष्यते॥
upadeśo’pi buddhasya dharmādharmādigocaraḥ।
anyathā nopapadyeta sārvajñyaṃ yadi nābhavat॥
evamarthāpattirapi pramāṇaṃ nātra yujyate।
upadeśasya satyatvaṃ yato nādhyakṣamīkṣyate॥

Even through Arthāpattipramāṇam (Implication), it is not possible to know the Sarvajñatva – If there was no Sarvajñatva then Buddha would (could) not have preached Dharma and Adharma – this kind of Arthāpatti is not possible as there is no any Pratyakṣapramāṇam (Perception) to decide that whatever Buddha preached is true.

(In this context it may be noted that the refutation of the concept of Sarvajña by Tautātīta is applicable to both Buddha and Arhata).

Jainas counter Tautātīta by holding that just like Ātmā, which can perceive all the things, after all the Jñānas (cognitions) that hinder the perception are gone, Arhata can also be Sarvajña after all the obstacles are gone, i.e. through Anumānapramāṇam, it is possible to accept that Arhata is Sarvajña. All the obstacles (layers of non-cognition) can be thwarted through Ratnatrayam (the three gems), viz. Samyagdarśanam (full confidence in the teachings of Arhata), Samyagjñānam (knowing the real form and nature of things, without confusion or doubt), Samyakcaritam (doing activities to kill the sins that caused the mundane life).

While supporting Sarvajña, Jainas refute the concept of Īśvara as the creator of the universe – Is Kartā (creator of the universe) one or many? If it is one then there will be under -application in a building etc. as there are many engineers. If there are many Kartās then there will be chaos in the universe as due to difference of opinion each thing will be built in different ways by different people. And when all the people have got equal capacity, since one can carry on the work, the rest are not useful. Vītarāgastuti (verse 6) says the following –

कर्तास्ति कश्चित् जगतः, स चैकः, स सर्वगः, स स्ववशः, स नित्यः।
इमाः कुहेवाकविडम्बनाः स्युस्तेषां न येषामनुशासकस्त्वम्॥
kartāsti kaścit jagataḥ, sa caikaḥ, sa sarvagaḥ, sa svavaśaḥ, sa nityaḥ।
imāḥ kuhevākaviḍambanāḥ syusteṣāṃ na yeṣāmanuśāsakastvam॥

Arhata! the people, to whom you are not the preacher, suffer from obstinacy and speak ridiculously thus – there is a creator (Kartā) to the universe, he is only one, he is all-pervading, he is his own controller and eternal.

Elsewhere it is stated –

कर्ता न तावदिह कोऽपि यथेच्छया वा दृष्टोऽन्यथा कटकृतावपि तत्प्रसङ्गः।
कार्यं किमत्र भवताऽपि च तक्षकाद्यैः आहत्य च त्रिभुवनं पुरुषः करोति॥
kartā na tāvadiha ko’pi yathecchayā vā
dṛṣṭo’nyathā kaṭakṛtāvapi tatprasaṅgaḥ।
kāryaṃ kimatra bhavatā’pi ca takṣakādyaiḥ
āhatya ca tribhuvanaṃ puruṣaḥ karoti॥

Nobody, who can build the universe at will, is seen. If you argue that you guess, even if such a person is not seen, then he should come and weave the mat also. Then what is the use of yourself, the carpenter etc.? That person should build all the three worlds.

Therefore, by the strength of Ratnatrayam the cover is removed and thus it is possible that he becomes Sarvajña. In the handbook of Jainas, called Paramāgamasāra, it is stated that Ratnatrayam (only) is useful for Mokṣa –

सम्यग्दर्शनज्ञानचारित्राणि मोक्षमार्गः
samyagdarśanajñānacāritrāṇi mokṣamārgaḥ

Samyagdarśanam, Samyagjñānam and Samyakcāritram are together the path of Mokṣa (not separately).

Yogadeva explains Ratnatrayam –

सम्यग्दर्शनम् – येन रूपेण जीवाद्यर्थः व्यवस्थितः तेन रूपेण अर्हता प्रतिपादिते तत्वार्थे विपरीताभिनिवेशरहितत्वाद्यपरपर्यायं श्रद्धानं सम्यग्दर्शनम्। तथा च तत्त्वार्थसूत्रम् – “तत्त्वार्थं श्रद्धानं सम्यग्दर्शनम्” इति।
samyagdarśanam – yena rūpeṇa jīvādyarthaḥ vyavasthitaḥ tena rūpeṇa arhatā pratipādite tatvārthe viparītābhiniveśarahitatvādyaparaparyāyaṃ śraddhānaṃ samyagdarśanam। tathā ca tattvārthasūtram – “tattvārthaṃ śraddhānaṃ samyagdarśanam” iti।

Samyagdarśanam means complete confidence (Śraddhānam) in the real thing, preached by Arhata, in the form in which the living things etc. separately exist. Absence of a negative and obstinate opinion is (a synonym of) Śraddhānam. Tattvārthasūtram says the deep interest for the truth is Samyagdarśanam.

सम्यग्ज्ञानम् – येन स्वभावेन जीवादयः पदार्थाः व्यवस्थिताः तेन स्वभावेन मोहसंशयरहितत्वेन अवगमः सम्यग्ज्ञानम्। यथोक्तम् –
यथावस्थिततत्त्वानां संक्षेपाद्विस्तरेण वा।
योऽवबोधस्तमत्राहुः सम्यग्ज्ञानं मनीषिणः॥
samyagjñānam – yena svabhāvena jīvādayaḥ padārthāḥ vyavasthitāḥ tena svabhāvena mohasaṃśayarahitatvena avagamaḥ samyagjñānam। yathoktam –
yathāvasthitatattvānāṃ saṃkṣepādvistareṇa vā। yo’vabodhastamatrāhuḥ samyagjñānaṃ manīṣiṇaḥ॥

Knowing the things, i.e. creatures etc., by their real nature, without illusion or doubt is called Samyagjñānam. It is explained –
Knowing the things by their real nature, briefly or elaborately, is said to be Samyagjñānam by scholars —

सम्यक्चारित्रम् – संसरणकर्मोच्छित्तौ उद्यतस्य श्रद्दधानस्य ज्ञानवतः पापगमनकारणक्रियानिर्वृत्तिः सम्यक्चारित्रम्। तदेतत् सप्रपञ्चमुक्तम् अर्हता –
सर्वथावद्ययोगानां त्यागश्चारित्रमुच्यते।
कीर्तितं तदहिंसादिव्रतभेदेन पञ्चधा॥
samyakcāritram – saṃsaraṇakarmocchittau udyatasya śraddadhānasya jñānavataḥ pāpagamanakāraṇakriyānirvṛttiḥ samyakcāritram. tadetat saprapañcamuktam arhatā –
sarvathāvadyayogānāṃ tyāgaścāritramucyate।
kīrtitaṃ tadahiṃsādivratabhedena pañcadhā॥

“Performing activities that cause destruction of sins by a Jñānī (a person with spiritual cognition) with deep involvement and who had decided to destroy the Karmas (activities) that are the cause of mundane life” is called Samyakcārtiram. Arhata elaborated Samyakcāritram thus –
Snapping connections related to sin completely is called Cāritram and it is divided into five like Ahiṃsāvratam (a way of life wherein non-violence is the theme) etc.

अहिंसासूनृतास्तेयब्रह्मचर्यापरिग्रहाः।
ahiṃsāsūnṛtāsteyabrahmacaryāparigrahāḥ।

Ahiṃsā (non-violence), Satyam (truth), Asteyam (not stealing anything), Brahmacaryam (celibacy) and Aparigraha (not accepting anything from others) – are the five vratas.

अहिंसा – न यत्प्रमादयोगेन जीवितव्यपरोपणम्। चराणां स्थावराणां च तदहिंसाव्रतं मतम्।
ahiṃsā – na yatpramādayogena jīvitavyaparopaṇam।
carāṇāṃ sthāvarāṇāṃ ca tadahiṃsāvrataṃ matam।

Not killing the beings, both moving and stable (trees etc.) even by mistake is called Ahiṃsā.

सूनृतव्रतम् – प्रियं पथ्यं वचस्तथ्यं सूनृतं व्रतमुच्यते। तत्तथ्यमपि नो तथ्यमप्रियं चाहितं च यत् ॥
sūnṛtavratam – priyaṃ pathyaṃ vacastathyaṃ sūnṛtaṃ vratamucyate।
tattathyamapi no tathyamapriyaṃ cāhitaṃ ca yat ॥

Speaking words, that are liked by others, good for them and true, is called Sūnṛtavratam. The word, which is neither liked nor good, even if true, is not true.

अस्तेयव्रतम् –
अनादानमदत्तस्य अस्तेयव्रतमुदीरितम्।
बाह्याः प्राणा नृणामर्थः हरता तं हता हि ते॥
asteyavratam – anādānamadattasya asteyavratamudīritam।
bāhyāḥ prāṇā nṛṇāmarthaḥ haratā taṃ hatā hi te॥

Not taking a thing that is not offered is called Asteyavratam. For people, money (wealth) is the life outside. One who steals that is a killer of them.

ब्रह्मचर्यव्रतम् –
दिव्यौदरिककामानां कृतानुमतकारितैः।
मनोवाक्कायतः त्यागः ब्रह्माष्टादशधा मतम्॥
brahmacaryavratam – divyaudarikakāmānāṃ kṛtānumatakāritaiḥ। manovākkāyataḥ tyāgaḥ brahmāṣṭādaśadhā matam॥

Renouncing the mundane enjoyments, that are to be experienced by another body or this body, caused by activities performed by self, accepted by others and done through others, by mind, speech and body, is called Bramhacaryavratam and it is of eighteen types.

अपरिग्रहव्रतम् –
सर्वभावेषु मूर्छायाः त्यागः स्यादपरिग्रहः।
यदसत्स्वपि जायेत मूर्छया चित्तविप्लवः॥
aparigrahavratam – sarvabhāveṣu mūrchāyāḥ tyāgaḥ syādaparigrahaḥ।
yadasatsvapi jāyeta mūrchayā cittaviplavaḥ॥

Renouncing the desire in all things, living and non-loving, inner and outer, is called Aparigraha. The reason is, even by guessing there will be desire also in things that do not exist at all and it causes worry in the mind.

महाव्रतानि – मोक्षः (Mahāvratāni – Mokṣaḥ)

भावनाभिर्भावितानि पञ्चभिः पञ्चधा क्रमात्।
महाव्रतानि लोकस्य साध्यन्त्यव्ययं पदम्॥
bhāvanābhirbhāvitāni pañcabhiḥ pañcadhā kramāt।
mahāvratāni lokasya sādhyantyavyayaṃ padam॥

The said five Mahāvratas (great ways of ascetic life) investigated in five ways by five notions would achieve Mokṣa, that is unending.

Here in Jainadarśanam, briefly there will be two things – Jīva and Ajīva (Cit and Acit). Jīva is in the form of cognition (Jñānam) and Ajīva is in the form of Jaḍa (the one without Jñānam). Padmanandi explains –

चिदचिद् द्वे परे तत्त्वे विवेकस्तद्विवेचनम्। उपादेयमुपादेयं हेयं हेयं च कुर्वतः॥
हेयं हि कर्तू रागादि तत्कार्यमविवेकिता। उपादेयं परं ज्योतिरुपयोगैकलक्षणम्॥
cidacid dve pare tattve vivekastadvivecanam।
upādeyamupādeyaṃ heyaṃ heyaṃ ca kurvataḥ॥
heyaṃ hi kartū rāgādi tatkāryamavivekitā।
upādeyaṃ paraṃ jyotirupayogaikalakṣaṇam॥

Cit and Acit (Jñānam and the one not having Jñānam) are the two important things. Distinguishing between the two is Viveka (wisdom). The one who is trying for Mokṣa should take which is to be taken and should discard which is to be discarded. The Kartā (one who endeavours for Mokṣa) should renounce Rāga (desire for something) etc. because they cause foolishness. One should know the great light, i.e. Ātmā (Soul), which is in the form of Upayoga. The Jñānam (perception of ghaṭa / pot etc. with their form) and Darśanam (indirect cognition of a thing without form etc. or nirākāraparokṣapratyaya) are called Upayoga.

The gist of Arhata’s teachings can be summarized in two sentences – Āsrava is the cause of mundane life whereas Saṃvara is the cause of Mokṣa –

आस्रवः स्रोतसो द्वारं संवृणोतीति संवरः। आस्रवो भवहेतुः स्यात् संवरो मोक्षकारणम्।
इतीयमार्हती सृष्टिः अन्यदस्याः प्रपञ्चनम्॥
āsravaḥ srotaso dvāraṃ saṃvṛṇotīti saṃvaraḥ।
āsravo bhavahetuḥ syāt saṃvaro mokṣakāraṇam।
itīyamārhatī sṛṣṭiḥ anyadasyāḥ prapañcanam॥

Āsrava is the gate for the stream of Karmas (activities). The one which envelops Āsrava is called Saṃvara. Āsrava is the cause of mundane life whereas Saṃvara is that of Mokṣa. This is the main theme of Arhata and the rest is just elaboration of the same.

Jainas accept Saṃvara and Nirjarā as the two causes of Mokṣa –

संसारबीजभूतानां कर्मणां जरणादिह। निर्जरा संमता . . . ॥
saṃsārabījabhūtānāṃ karmaṇāṃ jaraṇādiha। nirjarā saṃmatā . . . ॥

Destroying the Karmas (activities), which are the cause of mundane life, here only, is called Nirjarā.

Here is Tattvārthasūtram (10.2.5) –

बन्धहेत्वभावनिर्जराभ्यां कृत्स्नकर्मविप्रमोक्षणं मोक्षः।
तदनन्तरमूर्ध्वं गच्छन्त्यालोकान्तात्।
bandhahetvabhāvanirjarābhyāṃ kṛtsnakarmavipramokṣaṇaṃ mokṣaḥ। tadanantaramūrdhvaṃ gacchantyālokāntāt।

Since there are no any causes of worldly bindings, relief from all Karmas through Nirjarā is Mokṣa. After all the Karmas are destroyed, the person would go up into the fag end of all the worlds.

गत्वा गत्वा निवर्तन्ते चन्द्रसूर्यादयो ग्रहाः।
अद्यापि न निवर्तन्ते त्वलोकाकाशमागताः॥ (पदमञ्जरी)
gatvā gatvā nivartante candrasūryādayo grahāḥ।
adyāpi na nivartante tvalokākāśamāgatāḥ॥ (padamañjarī)

Planets such as Moon, Sun etc. keep on going and returning. But the Ātmās (souls), that went into the space without light are not returning even today.

स्याद्वादः (Syādvādaḥ)

Jainas apply a norm called Saptabhaṅgīnaya to all the things of the universe. Syādvāda has got Saptabhaṅgīnaya as its base. Except Jainas, all others, i.e. followers of all other Darśanas, accept Ekāntavāda (theory of decision) –

• Sāṃkhyas, who follow Satkāryavāda, hold that the things do always exist.
• Naiyāyikas follow Asatkāryavāda and hold that before birth things will not be there, after birth they will be there for some time and after later they perish and do not exist at all.
• Advaitavedāntins argue that things are indefinable (Anirvacanīya) as Māyā (a capacity of Brahman) is the basic cause (Upādānakāraṇam) of the universe. Water is seen in mirage due to Māyā and later it is known that there is none. Therefore, things in the universe are non-existent during existence itself. Existence and non-existence are mutually contradictory. As such it is not possible to express in words that both of them exist at the same time – and thus they (the things) are indefinable.

If all the above people say “ghaṭaḥ asti” (the pot is there) Jainas add the term “syāt” and say “ghaṭaḥ syādasti” (pot may be existing and this may be a pot), i.e. Anekānta is indecision. Ekānta means decision.

The term “syāt” is a Nipāta (a readymade word that is pronounced by Pāṇini without offering the structure, i.e. root and suffix) and looks like the verbal form of the root “asa” (to be) that denotes Anekānta (indecision). Since it looks like its verbal counterpart it is called “Tiṅantapratirūpaka” (a replica of verbal form) –

वाक्येष्वनेकान्तद्योती गम्यं प्रति विशेषणम्।
स्यान्निपातोऽर्थयोगित्वात् तिङन्तप्रतिरूपकः॥
vākyeṣvanekāntadyotī gamyaṃ prati viśeṣaṇam।
syānnipāto’rthayogitvāt tiṅantapratirūpakaḥ॥

The replica of Tiṅanta (a verbal form – as + vidhiliṅ – prathamapuruṣaika-vacanam), “syāt” is a Nipāta. In sentences this will be qualifier of Vidheya (the qualified) and suggests Anekāntatva (the property of indecisiveness).

Thus it becomes meaningful. If the term “syāt” denotes Ekāntatva (the property of decisiveness) then it would be rendered useless in sentences such as “syādasti” as the word “asti” in it, denotes Ekāntatva. If the Nipāta suggests Anekāntatva then it means “kathaṃcit” and the sentence “syādasti” means “kathaṃcidasti” (in one way it is there). Thus the term “syāt” would not be rendered redundant –

स्याद्वादः सर्वथैकान्तत्यागात्किंवृत्तचिद्विधेः।
सप्तभङ्गिनयापेक्षः हेयाहेयविशेषकृत्॥
syādvādaḥ sarvathaikāntatyāgātkiṃvṛttacidvidheḥ।
saptabhaṅginayāpekṣaḥ heyāheyaviśeṣakṛt॥

By adding a suffix “tham” on the root “kim” (kimaśca – Pāṇinisūtram 5.3.25) the word “katham” has formed. “cit” is added to that and we get “kathaṃcit”, which means “in one way”. The term “syāt” means “kathaṃcit”. The Syādvāda that has formed by completely giving up Ekānta, requires Saptabhaṅgīnaya and clearly denotes – this is to be taken and this is not to be taken.

“Ghaṭaḥ asti” (the pot is there) is not a correct usage. Because anyway ghaṭa is there. Then it will be like using “ghaṭaḥ kalaśaḥ” (pot pot) – the word “ghaṭaḥ” means “the pot is there” and “asti” also means “the pot is there”, i.e. “ghaṭaḥ”. So “ghaṭaḥ asti” is a sentence of two synonyms, which is not acceptable. Then “ghaṭaḥ nāsti” (there is no pot) is also not a correct sentence as there cannot be both existence and non-existence at a single point of time – “ghaṭaḥ” means “there is a pot” and “nāsti” means “there is no pot”. Then “ghaṭaḥ nāsti” means “there is a pot and there is no pot” – and this is not acceptable. The following verse explains the above concept –

घटोऽस्तीति न वक्तव्यं सन्नेव हि यतो घटः।
नास्तीत्यपि न वक्तव्यं विरोधात्सदसत्त्वयोः॥
ghaṭo’stīti na vaktavyaṃ sanneva hi yato ghaṭaḥ।
nāstītyapi na vaktavyaṃ virodhātsadasattvayoḥ॥

In Syādvādamañjarī, Ācārya says –

अनेकान्तात्मके वस्तु गोचरः सर्वसंविदाम्।
एकदेशविशिष्टोऽर्थो नयस्य विषयो मतः॥
न्यायानामेकनिष्ठानां प्रवृत्तौ श्रुतवर्त्मनि।
सम्पूर्णार्थविनिश्चायि स्याद्वस्तु श्रुतमुच्यते॥
anekāntātmake vastu gocaraḥ sarvasaṃvidām।
ekadeśaviśiṣṭo’rtho nayasya viṣayo mataḥ॥
nyāyānāmekaniṣṭhānāṃ pravṛttau śrutavartmani।
sampūrṇārthaviniścāyi syādvastu śrutamucyate॥

An indecisive thing only is available in all kinds of cognitions. In Saptabhaṅgīnaya a thing that is connected with a part only is the subject. When, in the path of Pramāṇas (Means of Knowledge), there are many norms to denote a part (existence etc.), the Syādvastu that decides the complete meaning, i.e. the thing, such as “ghaṭa” etc., denoted by the (seven) sentences, is called Śrutam, i.e. authoritative.

सप्तभङ्गीनयः (Saptabhaṅgīnayaḥ)

Proposing non-contradiction to a contradiction in the form of existence and non-existence in a single thing is called Bhaṅga. The norm, which has got seven such proposals is called Saptabhaṅgīnaya or Saptabhaṅginaya or Saptabhaṅganaya –

स्यादस्ति। स्यान्नास्ति। स्यादस्ति च नास्ति च। स्यादवक्तव्यः। स्यादस्ति चावक्तव्यः। स्यान्नास्ति चावक्तव्यः। स्यादस्ति च नास्ति च चावक्तव्यः।
syādasti। syānnāsti। syādasti ca nāsti ca। syādavaktavyaḥ। syādasti cāvaktavyaḥ। syānnāsti cāvaktavyaḥ। syādasti ca nāsti ca cāvaktavyaḥ।

It may be. It may not be. It may be, may be not. Probably it may not be spoken of. It may be and it may also not be possible to say. It may not be and it may also not be possible to say. It may be, may be not, and may not be possible to say.

Anantavīryācārya proposed thus –

तद्विधानविवक्षायां स्यादस्तीति गतिर्भवेत्।
स्यान्नास्तीति प्रयोगः स्यात्तन्निषेधे विवक्षिते॥
क्रमेणोभयवाञ्छायां प्रयोगः समुदायभाक्।
युगपत्तद्विवक्षायां स्यादवाच्यमशक्तितः॥
आद्यावाच्यविवक्षायां पञ्चमो भङ्ग इष्यते।
अन्त्यावाच्यविवक्षायां षष्ठभङ्गसमुद्भवः॥
समुच्चयेन युक्तश्च सप्तमो भङ्ग उच्यते।
tadvidhānavivakṣāyāṃ syādastīti gatirbhavet।
syānnāstīti prayogaḥ syāttanniṣedhe vivakṣite॥
krameṇobhayavāñchāyāṃ prayogaḥ samudāyabhāk।
yugapattadvivakṣāyāṃ syādavācyamaśaktitaḥ॥
ādyāvācyavivakṣāyāṃ pañcamo bhaṅga iṣyate।
antyāvācyavivakṣāyāṃ ṣaṣṭhabhaṅgasamudbhavaḥ॥
samuccayena yuktaśca saptamo bhaṅga ucyate।

1. When one wants to have a Vidhi (injunction) of things then the Bhaṅga will be “syāt asti”. “Ghaṭaḥ syādasti” means “pot may be there, this may be a pot”.
2. When one wants a Niṣedha (restriction) of things, then there will be the usage “syāt nāsti”. “Ghaṭaḥ syānnāsti” means “it may not be a pot”.
3. When both Vidhi and Niṣedha are to be denoted then there will be the combination of both – “syāt asti ca syāt nāsti ca”. “Ghaṭaḥ syāt asti ca syāt nāsti ca” means “it may be a pot, may not be too”.
4. When one wants to denote both Vidhi and Niṣedha simultaneously, since it is not possible, there will be the usage “syāt avaktavyaḥ”. “Ghaṭaḥ syāt avaktavyaḥ” means “probably the pot cannot be said”.
5. When it is the first one, i.e. asti, and not possible to say, then the usage will be “syāt asti ca avaktavyaśca”. “Ghaṭaḥ syāt asti ca avaktavyaśca” means “it may be a pot, may be, also not possible to say”.
6. When it is the second one, i.e. nāsti, and not possible to say then the usage will be “syāt nāsti syāt avaktavyaśca”. “Ghaṭaḥ syāt nāsti syāt avaktavyaśca” means “it may not be a pot, also may not be possible to say”.
7. When one wants to say all the three simultaneously then the usage will be “syādasti, syānnāsti, sayādavaktavyaśca”. “Ghaṭaḥ syādasti, syānnāsti, sayādavaktavyaśca” means “pot may be there, may not be there and may not be possible to say”.

जैनमतम् (Jainamatam)

Jinadattasūri offered the gist of Jainamatam (the theory of Jainas) –

बलभोगोपभोगानामुभयोर्दानलाभयोः।
अन्तरायस्तथा निद्रा भीरज्ञानं जुगुप्सितम्॥
हिंसा रत्यरती रागद्वेषावविरतिः स्मरः।
शोको मिथ्यात्वमेतेऽष्टादश दोषा न यस्य सः॥
जिनो देवो गुरुः सम्यक् तत्त्वज्ञानोपदेशकः।
ज्ञानदर्शनचारित्राण्यपवर्गस्य वर्तनी॥
balabhogopabhogānāmubhayordānalābhayoḥ।
antarāyastathā nidrā bhīrajñānaṃ jugupsitam॥
hiṃsā ratyaratī rāgadveṣāvaviratiḥ smaraḥ।
śoko mithyātvamete’ṣṭādaśa doṣā na yasya saḥ॥
jino devo guruḥ samyak tattvajñānopadeśakaḥ। jñānadarśanacāritrāṇyapavargasya vartanī॥ ।

Obstruction of strength, enjoyment, comfort of sense organs, contribution and profit; sleep, fear, ignorance, hate, violence, desire, dissatisfaction, love, hatred, aversion to worldly desires, sex, worry and unreality – a God devoid of these eighteen vices who conquered the sense organs (=Jina) and teacher is the good preacher of the noumenon of reality. Samyagjñānam (a cognition without confusion), Samyagdarśanam (belief in the teachings of Arhata) and Samyakcāritram (keeping away from sin) – are the path (not paths) of Mokṣa.

स्याद्वादस्य प्रमाणे द्वे प्रत्याक्षमनुमाऽपि च।
नित्यानित्यात्मकं सर्वं नव तत्त्वानि सप्त वा॥
जीवाजीवौ पुण्यपापे चास्रवः संवरोऽपि च।
बन्धो निर्जरणं मुक्तिरेषां व्याख्याधुनोच्यते॥
syādvādasya pramāṇe dve pratyākṣamanumā’pi ca।
nityānityātmakaṃ sarvaṃ nava tattvāni sapta vā॥
jīvājīvau puṇyapāpe cāsravaḥ saṃvaro’pi ca।
bandho nirjaraṇaṃ muktireṣāṃ vyākhyādhunocyate॥

Perception and Inference are the two Pramāṇas (Means of Knowledge) for Syādvāda. Everything in the universe is both eternal and non-eternal. Tattvas (real things) are nine or seven. Living things, non-living things, Puṇyam (opposite of sin), sin, Āsrava, Saṃvara, binding, Nirjaraṇam (destroying) and Mokṣa are the tattvas. Now they are being commented.

चेतनालक्षणो जीवः स्यादजीवस्तदन्यकः।
सत्कर्मपुद्गलाः पुण्यं पापं तस्य विपर्ययः॥
आस्रवः स्रोतसो द्वारः संवृणोतीति संवरः।
प्रवेशः कर्मणां बन्धः निर्जरस्तद्वियोजनम्॥
अष्टकर्मक्षयान्मोक्षः अथान्तर्भावस्य कैश्चन।
पुण्यस्य संवरे पापस्यास्रवे क्रियते पुनः॥
cetanālakṣaṇo jīvaḥ syādajīvastadanyakaḥ।
satkarmapudgalāḥ puṇyaṃ pāpaṃ tasya viparyayaḥ॥
āsravaḥ srotaso dvāraḥ saṃvṛṇotīti saṃvaraḥ।
praveśaḥ karmaṇāṃ bandhaḥ nirjarastadviyojanam॥
aṣṭakarmakṣayānmokṣaḥ athāntarbhāvasya kaiścana।
puṇyasya saṃvare pāpasyāsrave kriyate punaḥ॥

Jīva is in the form of consciousness. Ajīva is the one without consciousness. The atoms or compounds of good Karma (activity) are Puṇyam. The atoms or compounds of bad Karma are Pāpam (sin). Āsrava is the gate of the stream of Karmas. The one which envelops Āsrava is Saṃvara. Entry of Karmas into the soul is Bandha. Relieving Bandha is Nirjara. Mokṣa is achieved through destroying the eight kinds of Karmas. Some scholars included Puṇya in Saṃvara and Pāpa in Āsrava and accepted seven tattvas.

लब्धानन्तचतुष्कस्य लोकागूढस्य चात्मनः।
क्षीणाष्टकर्मणो मुक्तिः निर्व्यावृत्तिर्जिनोदिता॥
सरजोहरणा भैक्षभुजः लुञ्चितमूर्धजाः।
श्वेताम्बराः क्षमाशीलाः निःसङ्गा जैनसाधवः॥
labdhānantacatuṣkasya lokāgūḍhasya cātmanaḥ।
kṣīṇāṣṭakarmaṇo muktiḥ nirvyāvṛttirjinoditā॥
sarajoharaṇā bhaikṣabhujaḥ luñcitamūrdhajāḥ।
śvetāmbarāḥ kṣamāśīlāḥ niḥsaṅgā jainasādhavaḥ॥

Cognition, faith, strength and comfort are called Anantacatuṣṭaya and the Ātmā which has got the same, not bound in this space connected with universe, got all the eight Karmas destroyed, would have non-returning Mokṣa – this is said by Jina (Arhata). The Jain monks, who hold the sweeping instrument, consume alms, have hair pulled out, patient, have no relation with anybody, wear white clothes and therefore are called Śvetāmbaras.

लुञ्चिताः पिच्छिकाहस्ताः पाणिपात्रा दिगम्बराः।
ऊर्ध्वाशिनो गृहे दातुः द्वितीयाः स्युर्जिनर्षयः॥
luñcitāḥ picchikāhastāḥ pāṇipātrā digambarāḥ।
ūrdhvāśino gṛhe dātuḥ dvitīyāḥ syurjinarṣayaḥ॥

The Jain monks, of the other type, have their hair pulled out, hold a feather, use hands as vessels, eat food while standing in the house of the donor and since they go naked, are called Digambaras.

भुङ्क्ते न केवली न स्त्री मोक्षमेति दिगम्बरः। प्राहुरेषामयं भेदो महाञ्श्वेताम्बरैः सह॥
bhuṅkte na kevalī na strī mokṣameti digambaraḥ।
prāhureṣāmayaṃ bhedo mahāñśvetāmbaraiḥ saha॥

The Digambara, with cognition, the cause of Mokṣa, does not eat; women do not get Mokṣa (she gets after a birth of a man, through practice) – scholars say this is the difference with Śvetāmbaras.

Bibliography

Sarvadarśanasaṅgraha of Sāyaṇamādhava with a Sanskrit Introduction and Commentary by Vasudeva Sastri Abhyankar, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune, 1978.
Sarvadarśanasaṅgraha, English Translation by Cowell and Gough (without Śaṃkara’s System), London, 1914.