________________
310 Anekāntavāda and Svadvāda
"Syāt' cannot be rendered into English without losing some of its meaning.
Schools which build up their systems on the foundation of some single concept or the other which represents only one facet of the manysided truth in reality illustrate this narrow and dogmatic approach. Sāpeksavāda is another name for Syädvāda.
Statement of the Theory When we say 'This table exists' we cannot mean that this table exists absolutely and unconditionally. Our krowledge of the table is necessarily relative. The table has got innumerable characteristics out of which we can know only some. The table exists in itself as an absolutely real and infinitely complex reality, only our knowledge of it is relative. (Prof. Moore would say the table exists in an absolute sense. What he is not sure of is the analysis of the prop 'The table exists). For us the table must exist in its own matter as made of wood, in its own form as having a particular shape, length, breadth and height at a particular space and at a particular time. It does not exist in other matter, other form and at other space and time. So a table is both existent and non-existent viewed from different standpoints and there is no contradiction in it, (C.D. Sharma-A critical survey of Indian Philosophy).
Seven forms of judgement are distinguished in Jaina logic. Each judgement is relative and therefore it is preceded by the word 'Syāt. This is Syādvāda or Sapta-bhangi naya. The seven steps are as follows:
(1) Syādasti-Relatively, a thing is real. (2) Syannästi-Relatively, a thing is unreal. (3) Syadasticanastica-Realitively a thing is both real and
unreal. (4) Syādavaktavya sticanastica--Relatively a thing is
indescribable. (5) Syadasti ca a vaktavyam ca-Relatively a thing is real and
is indescribable. (6) Syānnasti ca avaktavyam—Relatively a thing is unreal and
is indescribable. (7) Syādasti ca nāsti ca avaktavyam-Relatively a thing is real,
unreal and indescribable. From the point of view of one's own substance everything is, while from the point of view of other's substance everything is not.
