From Sources of Indian tradition:

The following example of Jain dialectic is taken from the Great Legend (Mahapurana), a lengthy poem in excellent Sanskrit, composed by the Digambara teacher Jinasena in the ninth century. This work is modeled on the Hindu Puranas and consists mainly of cosmology and legends of the patriarchs, Tirthankaras, and other great men of former days. Like the Hindu Puranas again, it contains numerous philosophical and polemic excursi of which the following passage is one.

From Mahapurana, 4.16-31, 38-40:

Some foolish men declare that Creator made the world.
The doctrine that the world was created is ill-advised and should be rejected.

If God created the world, where was he before the creation?
If you say he was transcendent then, and needed no support, where is he now?

No single being had the skill to make the world -
For how can an immaterial god create that which is material?
(A very common line of argument among the Jains. One type of substance cannot produce another with completely different characteristics.)

How could God have made this world without any raw material?
If you say that he made this first, and then the world, you are faced with an endless regression.
(He had previously to make the raw-material of the raw-material, and so on. The endless regression is a type of fallacy as well known in Hindu logic as in Western.)

If you declare that this raw material arose naturally you fall into another fallacy,
For the whole universe might thus have been its own creator, and have arisen quite naturally.

If God created the world by an act of his own will, without any raw material,
Then it is just his will and nothing else—and who will believe this silly stuff?

If he is ever perfect and complete, how could the will to create have arisen in him?

If, on the other hand, he is not perfect, he could no more create the universe than a potter could.

If he is formless, actionless, and all-embracing, how could he have created the world?
Such a soul, devoid of all modality, would have no desire to create anything.

If he is perfect, he does not strive for the three aims of man (Righteousness (dharma), profit (artha), and pleasure (kama), a traditional Indian classification.),
So what advantage would he gain by creating the universe?

If you say that he created to no purpose because it was his nature to do so, then God is pointless.

If he created in some kind of sport, it was the sport of a foolish child, leading to trouble (an attack on the Vedanta doctrine of creation).

If he created because of the karma of embodied beings [acquired in a previous creation],
He is not the Almighty Lord, but subordinate to something else...

If out of love for living beings and need of them he made the world,
Why did he not take creation wholly blissful, free from misfortune?

If he were transcendent he would not create, for he would be free;
Nor if involved in transmigration, for then he would not be almighty.

Thus the doctrine that the world was created by God
Makes no sense at all.

And God commits great sin in slaying the children whom he himself created.
If you say that he slays only to destroy evil beings, why did he create such beings in the first place?

Good men should combat the believer in divine creation, maddened by an evil doctrine.

Know that the world is uncreated, as time itself is, without beginning or end, and is based on the principles, life and the rest.

Uncreated and indestructible, it endures under the compulsion of its own nature,
Divided into three sections—hell, earth, and heaven.

  • hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/56706/19211 We have nothing to disagree with him : D Oct 24, 2023 at 5:13
  • @SethuSrivatsaKoduru , We completely disagree with St. Jinasena. Sri Shankara had clearly refuted sankya , in many places in Brahma sutra ,esp. on the position of Pradhana, an insentient second entity, unfolds to create the world.. According to Vedanta, God is the supreme creator and ruler (Ishwara whose inscrutable power is Maya/Prakriti - Strength/Power isn't a distinct entity apart from one who possesses it ) As Jinas do not agree Veda Vakhyas as Pramana , God(Ishwara) wouldn't fit into ambit of their proof of knowledge
    – Athrey
    Oct 24, 2023 at 7:06


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .