________________
52
The Jaina Philosophy of Non-Absolutism
they are to be bound by a relation. So the terms of a relation are neither absolutely identical nor absolutely different. Absolute identity of the relata would annul the duality of the terms, which is a necessary condition of relation. Absolute difference, on the other hand, would never allow the terms to come into a point of contact, which is again the presupposition of relation. Thus the affirmation of absolute unity of the cognition in spite of its relation to different contents is only an imperfect statement of a fact. It is one and many at the same time. The denial of unity on the ground of the incompatibility of its coexistence with diversity would, on the other hand, split up all unity into a multiplicity. And as multiplicity implies the existence of multiple unities, the unities in their turn would again be split up, if there be no unity anywhere. Apart from the consideration that entities are constantly undergoing change of attributes and aspects and thus there is no unity which is not related to a diversity, the epistemological diversity in respect of one and the same thing would also lead to the same result. A supposed self-identical object as viewed by a person from a distance presents a different picture from that which is obtained by the same person situated in close vicinity to it. The same diversity of presentation is also obtained by different persons placed in different positions. It is quite legitimate to argue that the object varies with its presentation, or to convert the proposition, that the variation of presentation is due to the variation of the object. The consequence would be unavoidable that there is no unity anywhere - either in the internal cognition or in the external object, as the unity in question is never found apart from variation and as variation is deemed, on the hypothesis under consideration, to be incompatible with unity. Even change in external relation entails change in the nature of an entity. External or internal, relation connotes the emergence of a novel quality in the relata, no matter that the quality is relational and not original. That a term stands in one relation to a second term and in another relation to a third implies that the term comes to have the quality of standing in those relations. Thus every change in relation or in the relata would bring about a qualitative change in the terms. In the example cited above, the supposed selfsame object, as viewed by different
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
