________________
37763/1, 6429-HT 2010
51
one word that discribes one characteristics of that object and hold the remaining characters to be identical with it. On the other hand, in the Incomplete judgement, we speak of truth as relative to our standpoint. In short, the complete judgement is the object of valid knowledge (Pramana) and the Incomplete judgement is the object of aspectal knowledge (Naya). Hence the non-absolute is constituted of the absolute as its elements and as such would not be possible if there were no absolutes.
Here we can solve this difficulty by analysing the nature of unconditionality of the statment "all statements are conditional", which is quite different from the normal meaning of unconditionality. This is like the idea contained in the passage-- "I do not know myself", where there is no contradicion betwen "knowledge" and "ignorance". In the sentence. "I am undecided", there is at least one decision that I am undecided. Similarly, the categoricality behind a disjunctive judgement (A man is either good or bad), is not like the categoricality of an ordinary categorical judgement like "The horse is red". True the basis is always categorical but this categoricality does never clash with the proposition being disjunctive. When a logical positivist says that "there is no metaphysics", philosophy enters through the back-door. In short, the uncoditionality in the statement "All statements are conditional" is quite different from the normal conditionality. Ther are primarily tow sources to understnad the worldsenses and reason, ceosly connected with two grades of reality-existence and essence (Existentialism) or existence and reality (Hegel). Existence is actuality or actual verification, which is unconditional, absolute and categorical. There is no alternation or condition. But on the level of thought or reason or essence, there may be alternatives. But we cannot live in the world of thought alone and forget existence. We must also have something other than thought or reason which is unreason or irrationality. Behind reason, there is always the unreason, which we can give the name of faith (as suggested by Kant, Herder, Jacobi etc.). There are many grounds of faith-one being the Scripture. Scripture differs from one another. Jainas must stick to their position. Here is definiteness. However, we cannot expect such definiteness with reason because it only offers alternative pictures-- Jaina, Advaita, Vaisesikas. All are equally possible. In order to avoid indefiniteness we stick to one such possibility which is chosen for us by the community to which we belong or by some superior intuition. Thus there comes unconditionality. However, another may choose another pos
