Bhagavana Mahavira and his Relevance in Modern Times

SR No.: 001595
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Narendra Bhanavat, Prem Suman Jain, V P Bhatt
Publisher: Akhil Bharat Varshiya Sadhumargi Jain Sangh
Publication Year: 1976
Total Pages: 236
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Philosophy, Discourse, & Articles
File Size: 13 MB

Page 44

Nayas Ways of Approach and Observation
own is a chimera. The sky-flower, a barren woman's son, a mare's nest are only names. They are never perceived by anybody. It is only individuals say a pen, a table, a jar a coat that we happen to
observe.
Moreover, the criterion of reality is found in causal efficiency. A universal ex-hypothesis has no causal efficiency. It is the individual cow that yields milk and not the so-called cowhood. It is the pen that writes and not penhood. The so-called universal are only hypostatized concepts which pass for real only because the mental inertia of the average man prevents him from the labour of judging their worth. Not only the verdict of experience is against these universals but also logic confutes their reality. Well, is the universal different from the particulars or identical with them? If it is identical, then it becomes the individual only, and if it be different it transpires to be an illusory fiction just like the ass's horn. A universal unrelated to individuals is an unthinkable concept, a mere name, an empty nonsense. Well, the opponent swears by the tree-universal or cow-universal or the pen-universal, but what is the tree-universal apart from the tree? If it be different from the trees it will be the negation of the tree and so, like the jar or pen, will cease to have any connection with the tree. No honest thinker can think of a tree which is not the oak or the mango or the teak etc. Nobody can conceive of a triangle which is neither equallateral nor isosceles nor scalene. Experience is the proof of existence of a thing, and not pure thought. Experience always confronts individuals and not universals. A universal without an individual is an unperceived fact. This analytic empirical approach is sponsored by the nominalists and conceptualists. The Jaina philosopher convicts it of extremism because it puts the telescope on the blind eye like Nelson. The synthetic unity among the particulars of a class which renders classification possible cannot be ignored. Of course, the absolute identity of the universals in different individuals is not endorsed by the Jaina Philosopher. But he does not repudiate the universal as an unfounded concept. The universal is an empirical concept and must be given a status in the scheme of reality. The close resemblance of the individuals of a class is too pronounced and patent a fact to be dismissed without incurring the charge of infidelity to experience.
31
Now the particularistic approach which takes delight in the analysis of a real into particular component cannot stop short at the