________________
NATURE OF TIME
"As I see it, we are unlikely to reach any definite conclusions on these questions (Determinism vs. Freewill and the problem of causation) until we have a better understanding of the true nature of time"! these are the words of Sir James Jean, a great scientist. How can it be possible for a person like me to determine the nature of time ? So, my task here is to study what the great masters have said about the nature of time. While doing so I shall make a special attempt to explain the Jaina view at length. Western Views :
In the West, Aristotle maintains that time is closely connected with continuous movement. Time is the measure of this continuous movement. In other words, time is a breaking up of continuous movement (numerus motus). Movement presents two features : (i) Movement is an uninterrupted progress of the subject from potentiality to actuality. Thus movement bears the characteristic of unity. (ii) Movement, on the other hand, is also virtually multiple. One car
divide it into an indefinite number of parts. “Movement, then, • subjected to a simple mental division becomes a number or a multitude." Thus time is looked upon as made up of two elements, the one formal namely number (numerus), and the other material namely movement (motus).
In other words, we may say that according to Aristotle time is motion that admits of numeration.
"In fact, concrete (not-abstracted, rather not subjected to mental divison) time and movement are identical. Continuous movement does not at once appear under the formal aspect of temporal order. It has first to submit itself to a process of mental division. This mental division gives rise to the notion of succession. Nevertheless, this .division is not a real one, but belongs to the mental order and makes no change in the objective reality of continuous movement. I would like to suggest the comparison of this view with the one held by Bergson.
