________________
concerned with exhaustive and critical exposition of the Jain doctrine of naya specially syādvāda or saptabhangī naya. Umāsvāti (2nd cent.-3rd cent. B.C.) and other Jain philosophers have also treated this problem of naya quite clearly and critically..
Umāsvāti rightly thus asserted : "pramāna nayairadhigamaḥ". This means that pramāṇa and naya play their roles in acquisition of right knowledge. Pramāna is the means of valid knowledge whereas naya is the standpoint from which one knows things and beings. This conception of.naya is the unique feature of Jain logic and epistemology, but the problem of pramāṇa is tackled by all systems of Indian philosophy. So, the doctrine of naya deserves special attention here. Before discussing this doctrine further, it would be proper here to explain what is the distinction between a pramāṇa and a naya? A pramāna reveals the thing as a whole (sakala-grāhin), while a naya reveals only a portion of it (amsagrāhin). A naya is only a part of a pramāṇa and hence it cannot be identical with the pramāņa. A pramāṇa is compared to an ocean while nayas .or standpoints are like an ocean water kept in different pitchers.”
The non-relative onesided, view has created many problems in the field of philosophical thought. The anekānta philosophy provides a solution to those problems. It claims that every reality is multi-dimensional in itself, it means, it possesses infinite number of opposing attributes in the very same Reality. Except omniscient people general people can't comprehend all the aspects of any reality. So anekānta takes help of the weapon of naya i.e. choosing one perspective at a time.
According to the Jaina doctrine of anekānta, all knowledge except omniscience, is relative in its nature. All the perceptions which are true, but incomplete technically known as naya. In the words of Siddhasena, since a thing has infinite
Tattvārtha Sūtra of Umāsvāti. op.cit., sūtra-1.6. 2 Tattvārtharājavārtika of Akalamka. op.cit., sūtra-1.6, p. 118.
82
