________________
INTRODUCTION
139
of matter as “the self's karman”. In other words, the karmic matter belongs to the soul because of acts performed by the soul. This view also regards the self as “the agent [karta] of the evolution of matter and appropriator and renouncer thereof”. This description consists in describing the non-pure state of soul substance (PS 189 AC). In other words, from vyavahara naya, the self is viewed as the agent of material (pudgala) karma and their modifications.
Both these viewpoints, Amrtachandra adds, are correct since substance is conceived in both pure and impure forms (PS 189 AC). In this manner, Kundakunda exhibits the absence of opposition (virodha) between nishchaya naya (NN) and vyavahara naya (VN) (atha nishchaya vyavahara avirodham darshayati) (Introductory remark of both Amrtachandra and Jayasena to PS 189 and SS 58-60).
That nishchaya naya (NN) and vyavahara naya (VN) are the internal and external aspects of the same reality and therefore complementary and not contradictory or opposed to each other, is also emphasized in other places. Thus, “if one wants to follow the tenets and principles of Jainism, one should not give up VN or NN. Abandoning VN will amount to undermining the path of rules and guidelines (tirtha) laid down by the worthy Lord. The abandonment of NN undermines one's understanding of the tattvassit.e. the reality of the things as they are or the nature of principles of life (SS 12 AC). The Jaina concept of syadavada (method of conditional predication) is destructive of the opposition between the two nayas (ubhaya naya virodha dhvansini) (SSK 4).
Padmaprabhadeva, the commentator of Niyamsara, also finds no contradiction between nishchaya and vyavahara naya (commentary on NS 187). He emphasizes that the teaching of relying only on one naya is not worth accepting; only the teaching which relies on both the standpoints is grahya (acceptable) (commentary on NS 19).
Though nishchaya naya and vyavahara naya are apparently contrary perspectives (sapratipaksha) (PKS 8) to one another or may seem to be irreconcilable aspects (pratisiddha, SS 272), the doctrine of anekant reconciles the apparently contradictory viewpoints because they coexist in the same object as inalienable parts thereof. They do not negate, deny or repudiate each other. (Repudiate implies a disowning or casting off as untrue, unauthorized, or unworthy of acceptance.)
To negare is to deny the existence, truth, or fact of something.
