________________
[84]
6. The position taken by the Jainas towards the problem of Being is as follows. Being they contend, is joined to production, continuation, and destruction (sad utpadadhrauvya-vinashayuktam ), and they call their theory the theory of indefiniteness ( anekantavada) in contradistinction to the theory of permanency (nityavada) of the Vedantists, and to the theory of transitoriness (vinashavada ) of the Buddhists. Their opinion comes to this, Existing things are permanents only as regards their substance, but their accidents or qualities originate and perish. To explain: any material thing continues for ever to exist as matter, which matter, however, may assume any shape and quality. Thus clay as substance may be regarded as permanent, but the form of a jar of clay, or its colour, may come into existence and perish.
7. The Jain theory of Being appears thus to be merely the statement of the common-sense view, and it would be hard to believe that great importance was attached to it. Still it is regarded as the metaphysical basis of their philosophy. Its significance comes out more clearly when we regard it in relation to the doctrines of Syadvada, and of the Nayas.
8. Syadvada is frequently used as a synonym of Jainapravachana (e. g. at a latter date in the
Shree Sudharmaswami Gyanbhandar-Umara, Surat
www.umaragyanbhandar.com
