Abstract
AbstractThe thesis I will present is that, whatever its exact origins, the anekāntavāda was primarily (though not exclusively) used for two purposes: (1) to solve the “paradox of causality”, and (2) to classify non-Jaina systems of thought. The earliest texts in which the doctrine occurs present it as a solution to the paradox of causality. Only later do we find its use to classify non-Jaina philosophies.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference36 articles.
1. Balcerowicz, P. (2001). Two Siddhasenas and the authorship of the Nyāvāvatāra and the Saṃmati-tarka-prakaraṇa. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 29, 351–378. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017974708593.
2. Balcerowicz, P. (2008). Some remarks on the opening sections in Jaina epistemological treatises. In Walter Slaje (Ed.), Śāstrārambha: Inquiries into the preamble in Sanskrit (pp. 25–81). Harrassowitz.
3. Balcerowicz, P. (2016). Siddhasena Mahāmati and Akalaṅka Bhaṭṭa: A revolution in Jaina epistemology. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 44(5), 993–1039. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-015-9289-0.
4. Barbato, M. (2018). Jain approaches to Plurality. Brill / Rodopi.
5. Bhargava, D. (1973). Mahopādhyāya Yaśovijaya’s Jaina Tarka Bhāṣā. Motilal Banarasidas.