Jaina Theory of Multiple Facets of Reality and Truth

SR No.: 001746
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Nagin J Shah
Publisher: B L Institute of Indology
Publication Year: 2000
Total Pages: 168
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Philosophy, & Nyay
File Size: 12 MB

Page 22

Jaina Theory of Multiple Facets of Reality and Truth between them. The hallmark of Jainism is, therefore, the attempted reconciliation between the opposites.
It would be better to start with some traditional descriptions of the concept of anekānta. An alternative name is syādvāda. Samantabhadra describes it as a position that gives up by all means any categorically asserted view' (sarvathaikāntatyāgāt) and is dependent (for its establishment) upon the method of sevenfold predication' (Aptamīmāmsā, 104). Mallisena says that it is a doctrine that recognizes that each element of reality is characterized by many (mutually opposite) predicates, such as permanence and impermanence, or being and nonbeing. It is sometimes called vastu-sabala theory (SDM, p.13), that underlines the manifold nature of reality. Manifoldness in this context is understood to include mutually contradictory properties. Hence on the face of it, it seems to be a direct challenge to the law of contradiction. However, this seeming challenge should not be construed as an invitation to jump into the ocean of irrationality and unintelligibility. Attempts have been made by an array of powerful Jaina philosophers over the ages to make it rationally acceptable. We will see how.
Gunaratna Sūri, in his Comm. on Haribhadra's Sarva-darśanasamgraha says that the Jaina doctrine is to show that the mutually opposite characterization of reality by the rival philosophers should be reconciled, for, depending upon different points of view, reality can be discovered to have both natures, being and non-being, permanent and impermanent, general and particular, expressible and inexpressible. The Jainas argue that there are actually seriously held philosophical positions, which are mutually opposed. For example, we can place the Advaita Vedānta at one end of the spectrum, as they hold Brahman, the ultimate reality, to be non-dual, permanent, substantial, and an all-inclusive being. This is where the 'being' doctrine culminates. The Buddhists, on the other hand, are at the other end of the spectrum. Their doctrine of momentariness (as well as emptiness) is also the culmination of the 'non-being' doctrine, which can