________________
179
is acceptable to a certain extent and this is in this way. It has been seen that the effect is pre-existent in some sense and that it is not pro-existent also in some sense. The Vedantists, however, take a negative view of the position and say that the effect is, therefore, neither preexistent nor not pre-existent; from this, they would firstly conclude that the effect is Anirvachaniya or indescribable and in the next place, that it is unreal. The Jainas, on the contrary, prefer to take a more realistic view and face the facts as they are i. e. as they are experienced, - which are that the effect is pre-existent in some sense and that it is not pre-existent in some sense. They would combine these two facts and in light of the fourth form of predication, say that the effect is Avaktavya or inexpressible. This Jaina view sounds something like the Vedānta view. According to both, the effect cannot be exactly defined in language and the Vedanta theory would be unobjectionable certainly in this sense. Unfortunately, the Vedanta goos definitely towards absolutism and contends that the ‘indescribability of the effect means its ' unreality? The Jainas, on the contrary, maintain that the inexpressibility' of the effect is not absolute, that the effect is inexpressible
the bottobrt is
inexpressible
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
