________________
Non-Absolutism
35
non-entity and as such has neither an effect nor a characteristic, on the evidence of which it could be inferred. The absence of perception of a perceptible is held to be the source of such knowledge. But this is also a pretence. What is seen is the empty locus and this is believed to be the knowledge of nonexistence. The knowledge of non-existence in all cases is found on analysis to be an intellectual construction arising on the perception of something else; and as the independent existence of non-existence is only a contradiction in terms such intellectual constructions are to be definitely recognized as unfounded illusions.
The Jaina philosopher would submit that the elaborate arguments of the Vedāntist, may have succeeded in refuting the reality of non-existence as an independent category. But however successful may be his argument, he must believe in the difference of things. If he is to engage in a debate with an opponent and has to convince him by argument he must employ the logical syllogism, which consists of three terms. The difference of terms and of their logical value has also to be recognized by him. This implies that the denial of non-existence even as part and parcel of a real is only an academic pastime with him and not a sincere conviction.
The denial of pre-non-existence again would entail the existence of effect from the beginningless time and that of postnon-existence would make the effect continue unbroken without end. But origination and destruction of effects are experienced facts. Origination means the coming into existence of an event which was not in existence before and destruction means that an effect ceases to exist after having come into existence. If neither origination nor destruction can be repudiated without doing violence to experience, the reality of the two types of nonexistence must be accepted, as without them the two phenomena referred to cannot be understood. The Sänkhya philosopher maintains that things are neither produced nor destroyed. A non-existent cannot be made existent and an existent cannot be made to cease to exist, because a thing cannot surrender its nature and yet continue to be the same thing as before. So he interprets origination as manifestation of a pre-existent effect and destruction as relapse of the manifest into the unmanifest
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
