Sudha Sagar Hindi English Jaina Dictionary

Author(s): Rameshchandra Jain
Publisher: Gyansagar Vagarth Vimarsh Kendra Byavar

Page 375

(356)
-
in all their aspects, therefore a special mode or form must be found. This, according to Jainas is their Syādvāda or the doctrine of many possibilities. स्याद्वाद – Syadavada, which literally signifies assertion of possibilities, seeks to ascertain the meaning of things from all possible standpoints. Things are neither existent nor non-existent absolutely. A thing may be said to exist in a certain way and to be non-existent in another way, and so forth. Syadvāda examines things from seven points of view, hence the doctrine is also called Sapta Bhan ginaya (Seven fold paralogism. It is stated as follows:- (1) May be, it is (Syadasti); (2) May be, it is not (Syad-nasti); (3) May be, it is, and it is not (Syad-asti-nasti); (4) may be, it is indescribable (Syadavaktavyam); (5) May be, it is and yet indescribable (Syād-asti avaktavyam ca); (6) May be, it is not, and also indescribable (Syad nasti ca avaktavyam ca); (7) May be, it is, and it is not, and also indescribable (Syād asti ca năsti ca avaktavyam ca). When a thing is to be established, we say "it is", when it is to be denied, we say "it is not". When a thing is to be established and denied in turn, we say "it is and it is not", when a thing is to be established and denied smilultaneously, we say," "it is indescribable". when a thing is to be established and yet described as indescribable, we say "it is, and yet indescribable". when a thing is to be denied and also declared as indescribable, we say "it is not, and also indescribable". When a thing is to be established and denied as well as declared indescribable at the same time,
ca
-
we say "it is and it is not, and also indescribable". Syad, which signifies "may be", denotes all these seven possibilities, that is a thing may be looked at from one of the above seven points of view, there being no eighth alternative. N. 30 (page 26-27) Objections against Syadvad-g के विरुद्ध आपत्तियाँ - वैयधिकरण्य - Dislocation, absence of a common abode : सामान्य and विशेष - One positive and the other negative in character - are opposed to each other and can not have a common abode or location, any more than heat and cold which never subsist together. You will perhaps explain that in a certain aspect a thing is an abode of सामान्य, and in another aspect it is an abode of विशेष. But then, we are entitled to ask: Is this done by a single nature of the thing or has that thing two natures corresponding to the two aspects? In the former case, the difficulty of वैयधिकरण्य remains status quo. In the latter, if two natures are required for the two aspects, two again will be required for each of the two natures, and so on ad infinitum. This is अनवथा.
Moreover, there is or confusion. That nature by which the thing becomes an abode of HTT, by it becomes an abode of both सामान्य and विशेष Which
is absurd, for the reason that it involves संकर or confusion between सामान्य and विशेष in a common abode. Next, there is the fault of for exchange of natures, Thus: by that very nature by which a thing is the abode of सामान्य, it would be the abode of विशेष