________________
exhaustively express all the multi-dimensional characteristics of particular object. These are the central points of difference concerning methodology and the outlook between the Jain and the Husserlian viewpoint.
Naya deals with a particular aspect of an object , which the cognizer has in view.It is an opinion or viewpoint expressive of a partial truth of the object i.e., jñāturābhiprāya and vastvainsagrāhī. How then can one retrieve the total knowledge of object as given at the very outset in intuition? To have the total knowledge in terms of the nayas seems impossible because the nayas are not only numerous, but infinite in number. In the āgama literature, we get ample elucidation of anekāntavāda and syādvāda. Words of Jina are never indifferent to naya. Every Sentence of agama is explained through nayas. The object in its wholeness is known through valid cognition (pramāna) in the first stance, and subsequently the same object is cognized in parts through the nayas (viewpoints). All our knowledge is synthetic in the beginning, and becomes analytic at the next stage. There must thus be some way of abridging all these infinite viewpoints and constructing a total and compact view of reality. There must be a way of making a samksepa or samāsa of the views. But a word can convey only one characteristic at a particular time and in this way, words can express the characteristics of reality only successively. The full scale and simultaneous expression of all the characteristics of reality is never possible by language. This view is parallel with the Jain view of avaktavya or inexplicable.
Illuminator of Jain Tenets. Ed. Nathmal. Translation of Jain Siddhanta
Dipikā, 10.18. ? Mahāprajña, Ācārya. Jain Darśana Aur Anekant. Ed. Muni Dulharaj.
Churu: Ādarśa Sahitya Sanga Publication, 2000, p. 25. 3 Saptabhangi Tarangini, op.cit., p. 15, avaktavyatvam cāstittvanāstitvavi
laksanam.
104
