________________
53
as matter, to better emphasize the transiency of its forms, and then set out to build up a system of metaphy. sics upon this one sided emphasis; we should have something like the school of thought known as kshanikvada, which maintains that there is nothing permanent in nature, so that things must constantly arise out of and vanish into pure nothing. Here the confusion has obviously arisen from the ignoring of the fact that the impermanence of things is confined to their forms, and does not extend to their material or substance, This one instance suffices to demonstrate the principle of nayavada and to warn us against all such one-sided absolutisms. There are many sides of looking at a thing, and so there are many standpoints. The more important of these may be classified as follows:
CONFLUENCE OF OPPOSITES
STANDPOINT 1
Real or Scientific
(nischaya), e g., calling a pitcher of clay containing water, a pitcher of clay.
Dravyarthika (having reference
to substance and pure natural properties of things).
I Popular or vulgar (vyavahara), e.g., calling the pitcher of clay a pitcher of water, because of its containing
water.
Jain Education International
Paryayarthika (having reference to forms and modifications of things).
This is sufficient to give you an idea of nayavada, which is very essential for true metaphysics.
I shall now revert for a moment to the true function of Scripture which has already been touched upon to
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org