________________
The Logical Background of Jaina Philosophy
19
context, certainly has being as a pen, and not as a not-pen and thus has an exclusive character. It thus satisfies the requirements of the Laws of Thought. A pen is a pen and thus satisfies the Law of Identity. A pen is not not-pen and thus satisfies the Law of Contradiction. A pen again is a determinate existent as a pen and not an indeterminate nothing-being both pen and notpen. It thus satisfies the Law of Excluded Middle. It is a truism that what holds good of the pen, holds with equal certitude of all existents. We are intuitively certain that the nature of things cannot be otherwise. What is then the source of the certitude of necessity ? The idealist or the pseudo-idealist is of the opinion that the certitude is due to the fact that the laws are a priori known. But the Jaina does not believe in the a priori validity of these laws or in the existence of pure intuition absolutely unmixed with empirical elements. But can empirical knowledge satisfy the claim of necessity that is undoubtedly felt to attend these Laws of Thought ?
Whatever is, is', 'A is A', are the formulas of the Law of Identity. The Jaina thinks that the element of necessity follows from an analysis of the nature of A. The being of A is a part of it and so long as there will be A, A will have being. So the universality and necessity of A being A follows from the very nature of A. The being of A and its specific determination are known when A is known. It is also known that bereft of this nature, A will cease to be A. So the predicate being an amplification of the nature of A, or, in other words, the proposition being analytical, the necessity of the predicate is only a matter of deduction. As regards the Law of Contradiction, it is also not synthetic. A has a being that is determinate and definite. Determinate being implies being in a particular context and non-being outside this context. If A were not a being even in its own context, it would not be A. So the Law of Contradiction follows from the determinate character of its being as known from experience. The Law of Excluded Middle likewise follows as a deduction from its very nature. Even if the laws be regarded as synthetic propositions, there is no difficulty in accounting for the element of necessity. One need not necessarily adopt Kant's solution that the necessity is due to the a priori necessity of our ways of thought. One can easily explain
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
