Jaina Kaara.naikaantavaada?

[Dominic Goodall]

I should like to find corroborative evidence for Raamaka.n.tha's
interpretation of Nare"svarapariik.sa 1:3cd: `vyavasthaapayitu.m
"sakyo naayamekaantavaadibhi.h' (`This [scil. worldly activity
(vyavahaara)] cannot be accounted for by ekaantavaadins.').

Raamaka.n.tha, who may not be familiar with all the positions that
Sadyojyoti.h attacks, identifies this as a reference to Jaina thinkers who
believe that effects come about from a single `cause' that is a
composite bundle of all the conditions that precede them, for his
introduction to the above-cited hemistich is as follows:

atha kim anena kriyaakaarakavi"se.savaadena? saamagriilak.sa.naa hi
biijaadayo 'rthaas tattadavasthaayuktaa eva vi"si.s.tam
a"nkuraadikaarya.m praagbhaavamaatre.na kaara.natayaa kari.syanti, iti
kaara.naikaantavaadino jainaa.h| tad ayukta.m yata.h:---

`And if [someone interjects]: what need is there of a theory of particular
causal factors that determine an action? For entities [that bring about
effects], such as seeds, which make up a composite bundle of all [that is
necessary to generate a given effect], will only in certain particular
states generate their particular effect---a sprout, for example---being
causes simply by virtue of existing before [their effects].  This the
Jainas who hold the one-sided view [of the kaarakas] that they are [all
just] causes [maintain].'

Can someone give me any references to a discussion of such a Jaina
point of view?

Dominic Goodall.