Jain Journal 2005 01

Author(s): Jain Bhawan Publication
Publisher: Jain Bhawan Publication

Page 27

126
JAIN JOURNAL VOL-XXXIX, NO. 3 JANUARY.. 2005
views about these questions whether they were answered or not. Some scholars are of the openion that all such questions were answered by Buddha in the Madhyamika way. The difference between Buddhism and Jainism lies in the fact that the former while accepting the middle path rejected the extremes altogether. whereas Jainism accepted both ends of extremes, and thereby made a reconciliation between both extremes. Jainism introduced the theory of Syādvāda. It does not mean doubt. It means "may be or may not be". According to Jainācārya Siddhasena Divākara, Vaiseṣikas only combine the standpoints, but do not synthesize them. The Jains, on the other hand, synthesize the two and build a coherent whole. Siddhasen also said that the Vaiseṣakas and Bauddhas are correct in so far as they point out the faults and fallacies of the Sankhya view of casuality and the Sankhaya philosophers are correct to the extent that they criticize the Buddhists and the Vaiseṣikas. But when these two views of casualty (satkāryavāda and asatkāryavāvāda) are adjusted together in compliance with the Anekanta method, the result would be the True Insight i. e., samyag darsana or Omniscience. Seven standpoints were used for expressing Anekānta.
1.
2.
Possibly existent,
Possibly non-existent,
3. Possibly both existent as well as non-existent,
4.
Possibly inexpressible,
5. Possible existent but inexpressible,
6.
Possibly non-existent but inexpressible,
7. Possibly existent as well as non-existent but is inexpressible.
The Madhyamika philosopher Nāgārjuna in his Mādhyamikakārikā defines it as "everything is true, and not true, both everything is true and not true; or neither is true, nor is true. This is the teaching of Buddha."
These seven standpoints can be summed up in four different positions: