Facets of Jain Philosophy Religion and Culture

Author(s): Shreechand Rampuriya, Ashwini Kumar, T M Dak, Anil Dutt Mishra
Publisher: Jain Vishva Bharati

Page 274

Non-Absolutism (Anekāntavāda) 257
chronological priority and the consequent problem of influence of one school upon the other. It must be admitted that the systematization of Jaina philosophical thought and logic is rather a later phenomenon We are concerned with the Masters of Jaina thought, who, as a matter of historical fact, flourished after Dignāga and Dharmakirti. This has been a source of advantage to Jaina thought. It had the opportunity to study afresh the implications of the philosophy of non-absolutism called anekantavāda, which seems to date back to a far remote past, But in spite of the chronological posteriority of the Jaina Masters, it must be admitted that the Jaina theory of sevenfold logical predication is the most original contribution of Jaina thought, which cannot be traced to the influence of other schools. In philosophy and other fields of abstract thought it is by no means the truth that the first is always the best or the most original. What we seek to emphasize is not the question of obligation this or that way, but the points of agreement among the different philosophies and their implications. It is undeniable that the Jaina siezes hold of these points of agreement and makes them proof of the inevitability of the truth of anekanta and not of personal or communal triumph.
The Särkhya believes in one Prakrti, the prius of the world of plurality, material and mental, standing in opposition to Puruşa, the eternal, unchanging spirit. This Praksti is the unity of three principles, called sattva, rajas and tamas, which are mutually opposed in respect of their nature and functions. The compresence of three opposite principles in the unity of Prakrti can be upheld only by the canons of non-absolutist logic as systematized by the Jaina. It is not suggested that the Sankhya is indebted to Jaina thought. But the position of the Sankhya is only an illutration of the validity of Jain a logic, no matter whether the Sankhya is conscious of it or not. Moreoever, the Sänkhya doctrine of the identity of substance in the midst of its changing modes is another illustration of the doctrine of identity in difference, which is another synonym of anekantavāda.
The Nyāya-Vaiseșika school, wbich swears by the infallibility of the Law of Contradiction as interpreted in absolutist logic, advocates a number of universals of the second grade in contradistinction to the highest universal, 'existence'. Now these secondary universals, e.g., substance-universal, quality-universal and action-universal, exercise a double function, which is mutually opposed. Substance-universal synthesizes all substances and at the same time separates them from other universals. So also the universals of the same grade. As regards