________________
18
The Jaina Philosophy of Non-Absolutism
reals are concrete facts embodying the universals in themselves. In fact, the Jaina would go further and maintain that particulars have being, because universals form an essential ingredient of them. As has been observed by an ancient thinker the universal is the very life of particulars. A cow is not recognised as a cow unless it is known to be informed with the universal, cowhood. When it is seen at a distance too great to allow a distinct perception of all its features, it is perceived to be an individual, which cannot be classed under the head of cow or not-cow.! This shows that particulars cannot be bereft of universals, which alone give them the status of reality. The knowledge of the universal again in the particular gives in one glimpse the knowledge of all the individuals as possessed of the universal. Each individual may exhibit variations, but in spite and in the midst of these variations the universal is cognized as the essential factor. There is no ground for denying its objectivity. The Buddhist contention that the universal is only a subjective idea fails to explain why the different individuals belonging to a class should generate one self-identical idea of a universal. If the cow-universal be as unreal as the horse-universal, why should not the horse-universal be felt as affiliated to cows and the cowuniversal to horses. The Buddhist has no convincing answer. But the situation admits of an easy explanation if the universal is regarded as an essential part of a real and the assumption of the idealist that reals are particulars and universals are contributions of pure thought is rejected.
We have endeavoured to explain that the knowledge of universality can be accounted for by experience. Now the knowledge of the element of necessity remains to be examined. We have shown how the Laws of Thought are to be qualified by so many provisos in order to make them applicable to reality. But it must be admitted that in spite of the provisos or rather within the framework of the provisos the laws hold as a matter of necessity. A pen, subject to the limitations of time, place, intrinsic nature and determinations, which may be termed as its
1. na hi gauh svarūpeṇa gauh, nāpy agauḥ, gotvābhisambandhāt tu gauh Bhartřhari. Comp. the elucidation by Jagannatha in his Rasagangādhara p. 144 (Nirnayasagara Press, 1916).
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
