________________
48
Jaina Theory of Multiple Facets of Reality and Truth granted that a single entity is possessed of both aspects of existence' and 'non-existence', a single entity might exist as anything, only the aspect of 'existence' being emphasized.
Nor should it be here held by the maintainers of absolute existence, that 'non-existence' is unestablished: because the necessity of recognizing two-fold aspect of existence'and non-existence'is, though in different capacities such as svadravya and paradravyaetc., established by argument (yukti) like probans. If one wants to prove evanescence (anityatva) by means of probans, say 'existence', the latter cannot be probans without the notion of 'non-existence of it in its counterinstance' (vipakṣāsattva). Thus 'existence of an entity is impossible without its counterpart viz. 'non-existence', and vice versa. Of these correlative natures 'existence' and 'non-existence', which is to be taken as primary (pradhāna) or as secondary (upasarjana, guna) chiefly depends on the intention of expounder. Such is the gist of the second formula. (RA IV, 16; SBT pp.9-11) Third and fourth Formula When an entity is described successively in view of four kinds of standpoint in its intrinsical and extrinsical capacities, there comes into being the third formula of syādvāda like 'An entity like a pot does exist in one respect, and does not exist in another respect.' When ‘existence' and 'non-existence' are, with equal primacy, predicated of a single entity simultaneously, there is no proper word to meet the demand. Thus a pair of attributes 'existence' and 'non-existence' cannot be expressed with regard to a single entity by the term 'exists', because that is incompetent for the expression of ‘non-existence'; neither by
does not exist, because that has no capacity for expressing 'existence'. Nor can it be urged that there is such a term capable of expressing both 'existence' and 'non-existence' simultaneously with prominence, as the term 'puspadanta' denotes the sun and the moon in the same breath; because the term in question is competent for the expression of two things one after the other. Neither does the above argument apply to the case where 'sat' as declared in the sutra 'saty-sānayoḥ sat (Pāṇini, III, ii, 127) stands for both 'saty' and 'sāna' terminations simultaneously, because it does present both terminations
OUTY WIL equal
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
