New Dimensions in Jaina Logic

Author(s): Mahaprajna Acharya, Nathmal Tatia
Publisher: Today and Tommorrow Printers and Publishers

Page 39

Jaina Logic of Philosophical Period
31
viz. red, which is given prominence intentionally by subordinating the other attributes which are, however, not denied. Here the red colour of the jar does not segregate the other attributes from the latter, but while describing the jar as red the particle 'syāt' is indicative of the other attributes which constitute the complete jar. The function of the particle 'syāt' is to bring home the existence of all other attributes left out in the proposition under reference which ascribes a particular attribute to the subject. Similarly the proposition 'in some respect the jar exists' (syād asti ghatah), the attribute of existence is not isolated from the other attributes of the jar, because in that case the jar will lose its jarhood. What is predicated of the jar in the above proposition is not absolute existence, but only an existence which is of a particular kind. The jar is not an eternal thing and as such eternal existence cannot be predicated of it. It is in order to specify the nature of the predicate to obviate misunderstanding of any kind that the particle 'syat' is prefixed to the proposition. The only way of describing an object in its wholeness is prominently to predicate a particular attribute, tacitly implying the others, and consequently an object can be regarded as inexpressible and expressible at the same time. The object qua its tacitly-implied attributes is inexpressible while with reference to the attribute expressly ascribed it is expressible. In popular parlance, which is frequently based on relative references, we describe a thing with reference to a particular attribute without any reference to the other attributes. In such modes of description there is nothing which is inexpressible. Such descriptions are called 'nayas' while the description of a thing in its totality through a single attribute is called 'syādvāda'.25 The development of these two methods of describing a thing fully or partially is an important upshot of the philosophy of 'anekānta'.
Dimenions of Synthesis
The Buddhists, the Naiyāyikas and the Mimāmsakas devoted their energies to the act of self-defence and the refutation of others. These debates were full of stringent sarcasms and bitter taunts. Such methods of debate were not liked by the Jaina philosophers as devotees of non-violence. Their attitude was dominated by the āgamic dictum that those who praise their own doctrines and disparage the doctrines of others do not solve any problem.26 The Jaina thinkers did not enter the arena of such debates for a long time. They restricted their intellectual activities in their own limits as silent spectators of the arguments and counter-arguments between the followers of the different schools. But in course of time for the