Facets of Jain Philosophy Religion and Culture

SR No.: 002012
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Shreechand Rampuriya, Ashwini Kumar, T M Dak, Anil Dutt Mishra
Publisher: Jain Vishva Bharati
Publication Year: 1996
Total Pages: 400
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Philosophy, Religion, & Nyay
File Size: 23 MB

Page 193

176 Anekāntavāda and Syādvāda
position as the only truth intolerant of other truths and thus give rise to what is known as durnaya (wrong view). 58 The contingencies of naya (sunaya) ) and durnaya arise only when a knowledge situation is sought to be expressed in or understood through inadequate logical categories and linguistice symbols, which fail to express the kwnoledge in its pristine comprehensiveness unless their significance is rightly analysed. A right analysis leading to a comprehensive logical understanding and linguistic expression is called syādavāda,59 and what leads to only a partial apprehension and expression is 71. In other words, while the syādavāda is a complete logical estimate and linguistic expression of the real, the naya is only a partial logical estimate and linguistic expression of it. Now as the logico-linguistic analysis of reality is the subject matter of śrutajñāna, the syādavāda and the naya are regarded as the two aspects of the latter.61
A brief reference to the private-cum-public character of pramāna and naya and a further distinction between the two may be made here. A pramāna or a naya in its private character is knowledge or intuition62
though giving rise to TAT", is nevertheless, in its propositional form, a durnaya.
The distinction between sunaya and 441T is of course very meagre. A sunaya must recognise the reality of aspects other than the one expressed by itself, and in this respect its distinction from RT is nothing but formal. The element of neutrality or indifference (TTT) towards other plausible aspects as the distinctive feature of a sunaya is also not very important, because ultimately the indifference in the present context must be taken as conscious of other plausible aspects, and this consciousness is tantamount to an assertion of other aspects. The distinction thus, if any is only quantitative and not qualitative. The problem of facit may also be viewed from a different angle. Fabric T is of course an imperfect way of expression and as such it may be viewed as erroneous. The error must find place in its propositional expression and hence the proposition like 37714, Tirta and so on, as vehicles of its expression may be justified. The observations of NFT might have been influenced by those weighty considerations, and probably he did not think it necessary to diallate on
these details which obviously follow from his above statements. 59. For further information about syadvada and the meaning of the term syāt, see supra. 60. Cf. RIIET-Cherista r TOATTH-AM, 105. 61. Cf. TOFTESTTT YT: TOSHI
सम्पूर्णार्थविनिश्चायि स्याद्वादश्रुतमुच्यते॥ PATUTTATTHET, 30.
Also cf. उपयोगौ श्रुतस्य द्वौ स्याद्वादनयसंज्ञितौ। RITETS: HOSTEST eit fach STEFFETTUI SENTUELT, 62. Truly speaking, EITT stands for the whole scripture, parcare for the central non-absolutistic philosophy of the scripture, and naya for the specific philosophical
propositions that are knit together into the scripture. 62. We have used this term in the sense of pure cognition uninfluenced by any logical
abstraction.