________________
(iii) Vyavahāranaya
In contrast with the sangraha standpoint, the vyavahāra standpoint specializes itself in being concerned with the specific features of the object concerned, without, of course, losing sight of the fact that they cannot stand by themselves without the support of the generic properties in the larger setting of concrete reality. Vyavahāra is that naya by which the specific qualities of a thing are taken into consideration, not completely ignoring the general qualities of a thing, but by by-passing the general qualities of a thing. This naya is recognized by the Cārvāka school of Indian philosophy. It is analytic and particularistic in its approach. It is concerned with the actual present state of an object perceived . For example, when a person is asked to bring a mango fruit, he attempts to bring mango fruit only, but not any other fruit, although he is aware of the fact, that mango is only a species in the genus of fruit." (iv) Rjusūtra Naya
Rju-sūtra is that naya by which a thing is to be judged as it is, without looking into the past and future nature of the thing." As past is already lost and the future is not born yet.This naya does not refer to the past and future of the thing. The past is defunct and the future is unborn. And if experience be the proof of the existence of a thing, the past and future existence of a fact must be rejected as the real traits of the individuals. What we perceive is the present and so it is the present that can be real. Further more, the past has no causal efficiency and so also the future. The real, tree does not serve any purpose or give any advantage or disadvantage. So logical consistency demands that we should regard only that as real, which is existent in the present moment. This line of approach has been pursued by the Buddhist fluxist who declares all reals to be momentary in duration. This approach has been called Rjusūtra naya, that is,
visesātmakamevārthủ vyavahāras ca manyāte.
vīseșabhinnaṁ sāmānyam asatkharavişāņavant. NKV, kā.-8. ? Laghiyastrya of Akalaṁka, op.cit., verse-71. 3 Ibid, kārikās 9 and 10. 4 Ibid, 5.10.
88
