Jain Journal 1993 04

SR No.: 520110
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Jain Bhawan Publication
Publisher: Jain Bhawan Publication
Publication Year: 1993
Total Pages: 67
Language: English
Classification: Magazine, India_Jain Journal, & India
File Size: 4 MB

Page 61

220
In the appendix to the Atmakhyati'-commentary of Samayasara Acarya Amṛtacandra writes on this principle as follows:
"Syadvāda is the uninterrupted prescription of the Arhantas to establish the nature of all objects. According to this, because of their being multifaceted in nature all objects are multifaceted. What is 'that' may not be that, what is one may be many, what is existent may be non-existent, what is eternal may be transient. In this manner, the manifestation of two contradictory qualities in an object which imparts to its objectivity is Anekānta."
JAIN JOURNAL
Further the same Acarya Amṛtacandra in his original book Puruşārtha Siddhyupaya has offered salutation to this great principle of anekänta as under :
"I bow to 'anekanta' (the manysided view of Jaina philosophy) which is the root basis of the Highest scripture, which dispels the wrong notions about elephant of persons born blind and which removes the contradictions amongst all those who entertain one-sided or limited points of view."'s
The famous parable of six blind persons who went to ascertain the shape and form of an elephant is known to all of us. Each touching one part of the elephant maintained that only his conception was right and the others were wrong. The fact was that each of them had only grasped a portion of the body of the elephant and formed only a partial conception, which though true partially, was not the whole truth. Each one of them had a limited but not a perfect knowledge of the elephant as a whole. The man with eyes who could see the whole of the elephant all at once explained to each one of the blind persons that though correctly asserting a part, he was ignorant of the whole truth and thus helped them to understand the whole truth.
The vast majority of philosophers are so very much engrossed in their own theories that they would not care to look beyond. Each is so very partial, one sided and prejudiced that he would not, like a
2 Samayasara Atmakhyāti, p. 571-572.
3 Puruşartha Siddhyupaya, Verse 2.