Jaina Concept of Omniscience

SR No.: 001547
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Ramjee Singh
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1974
Total Pages: 258
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Philosophy, & Knowledge
File Size: 17 MB

Page 242

CONCLUSION
229
friend of his is at most good guess and not definite knowledge.ar Locke's argument that there may be man who chooses to do some thing which without knowing that it is within his power to do otherwise (e.g., "if a man chooses to stay in the room without knowing that the room is locked) 28 seems to reconcile necessity with freedom but in fact it is a reconciliation of ignorance and knowledge and hence it cannot work in the context. Lufact, what is forseen (i.e., known conclusively) is necessarya, and what is necessary is outside the scope of ethics.
If it is said that it is not because God foreknows what he foreknows that men act as they do: it is because men act as they do that God foreknows what He foreknows,”30 it will create a very awkward situation in which man's actions would determine God's knowledge. We can also apply this to human omniscience. There it will create greater complications. It will mean that knowledge of the omniscient being is not unfettered but determined by the actions of other men. Different people perform different actions, often quite contrary to that of their fellows. This will create a difficult situation for the cognising mind if it is to be so determined.
To say that the omniscient being is one who is justified in believing an infinitely large number of true synthetic pro. positions is not only vague but also self-contradictory. For example, it all dependas upon the belief in one proposition at least : "Nothing is uuknown to him”. But this is to admit
27 See, Fred Newman's article “Omniscience is possible", Australisian
Journnl of Philosophy, Sydney, Vol, 42, No. 1, May 1964. 28 See, Nelson Pike's article "Divine Omniscience and Voluntary Action”
The Philosophical Quarterly, Cornell, Vol. LXXIV, No. 1, Jan. 1965,
p. 32 29 cf. Leibnitz, Theodici, part I, Sec. 27. 30 Luis de Molina, Concordia Liberi Arbitri, quoted from Nelson Pike's
article, Ibid., p. 38, cf. Boethius, Consolatio Philosophiae, Bk. V, Sec. 3, para. 2.).