________________
Nandivardhan and so on. None of these statements is incorrect. All of them have been made, keeping in view some particular relation of the Lord with a specific person. It would therefore be futile for any one to deny any of those statements. None of them, however, singly presents the complete truth about the relations of the Lord. Real truth is the sum-total of all such statements. Syädväd therefore emphasizes that every statement can have some truth. We need to examine them from different viewpoints. It endeavors to find the relative truth out of the seemingly opposite views and wants to give justice to every view to the extent possible. Syädväd is thus the Jain theory of relativity propounded more than 2500 years ago. That justification of differing views from the different perspective is also known as Anekäntväd.
Making any statement from one single viewpoint is known in Jain traditions as Nay. The term denotes a particular viewpoint. As such there could be as many Nays as there are viewpoints. Broadly, however, they can be classified in two categories. Those relating to the substantial aspects are known as substantial or Dravyarthic Nay and those relating to the changing aspects are known as subjective or Paryayarthic Nay. The statement about the soul being eternal has been made from the Dravyarthic Nay; while that of its being ephemeral has been made from the Paryayarthic Nay. These two main categories are subdivided into seven sub-categories. Each of these seven Nays is supposed to present the truth of a phenomenon from a particular angle. The significance of this method lies in the fact that it leads to tolerance of the differing views. The students of history are aware of the havoc created on account of intolerance. How much blood has been spilled all over the world, simply because the people in power could not appreciate the differing views of others? Paradoxically enough, that was mostly done in the name of religion. It was conveniently forgotten that tolerance is the essence of religion. If they had learnt Syädväd, they could have accepted at least the partial truth of the differing views and avoided the bloodshed.
Jainism does not stop with the admissibility of different views. Its objective is to arrive at the complete truth, the absolute truth. That cannot be done without considering each and every viewpoint. If one fails to consider the truth of any single view, he cannot come to the complete truth. By enunciating Syädväd, Jainism tries to give appropriate justice to all the viewpoints about any phenomenon and eventually to derive the unequivocal, indisputable truth. This means to arriving at the final truth by synthesizing all the partial truths. For instance, after examining the different views about the soul, Jainism would state that as a substance soul is eternal but its states undergo changes from time to time. Thus, instead of leading to the uncertainty, Syädväd actually helps in leading to the ultimate certainty, where there is absolutely no scope for any doubt. It is the process of arriving at Ekänt truth through several Anekänt truths.
