Applied Philosophy Of Anekanta: 4.1 Relativity of Language and Anekānta

A thing has innumerable number of characteristics. Every object possesses innumerable positive and negative characters. It is not possible for an ordinary person to know all of them. We know only some qualities of the substance. To know all the aspects of substance is to become omniscient. We are all imperfect human beings; we cannot comprehend an object in its totality and our view of it is limited. Human knowledge at its best is after all partial knowledge and it is not free from error and illusion. To view a thing not only from a single point of view, but to examine it from all possible points of view is the real meaning of the doctrine of anekāntavāda.

Anekānta is a scientific analysis of the many sidedness of truth and its multiple dimensions and perspectives.'Anekānta' means multi-sided views. 'Syādvād' is composed of two words - 'syāt' means from a certain point of view or from a certain angle of vision and the word 'vāda' denotes the system of thought. Emphasizing the limits of ordinary knowledge, Jain philosophy presents the theory that truth is relative to the perspective (naya) from which it is known. Furthermore, because reality is many sided and our knowledge is true only from a limited perspective. So all knowledge claims are only relative. In simple terminology, it can be said that anekānta teaches, the process of formation of holistic outlook and syādvāda acts as the medium of exchange of the viewpoints and expression of intended meaning. The anekāntic perspective of holistic understanding of the objective world and subjective world needs to undergo four steps:

1. Dispassionate perception of phenomenal world.
2. Understanding of an object from multi-dimensional viewpoints.
3. Correct usage of linguistic tools of expression to avoid ambiguities and inconsistencies.
4. Understanding the intention of the speaker and the use of words and statements in a certain context.

When one tries to trace out the historicity of linguistic tools used by Jains for knowledge and analysis of the world of affairs, it can be divided under three heads. There are two views regarding this issue. Umāsvāti in his book, Tattvārthasūtra refers to two means of getting knowledge, pramāṇa and naya - pramāṇanairadhigamḥ.^[1] Pramāṇa refers to the apprehension of reality or valid knowledge. Naya refers to the different aspects of considering things. While explaining nayas, he said: ‘sarvamekaṃ sadviśeṣāt’,^[2] that is, all is one because they are sat and have equal existence. In the Sthānāṅgasūtra, we get sūtras such as these: there is one soul, there is one loka (universe). For compatibility of these sūtras, we have to depend on saṇgraha naya, this naya regards all soul as one. So, according to it, ‘ege āyā’ ^[3] sūtra can be accepted. Here, it is to be noted that with the help of saṇgraha naya above-mentioned sūtras can be co-related without crossing the limits of āgama principles. Nayacakra of Māiladhavala considers three means of knowledge namely, pramana,naya and nikshepa as essential for knowing any reality.^[4]

Reality is multifaceted, any absolute assertion about the reality will not cover the aspects simultaneously. In the words of Siddhasena, since a thing has infinite characters, it is comprehended only by the omniscient. But a thing becomes the subject matter of a naya, when it is conceived from one particular standpoint. Therefore to comprehend the true nature of Reality, this doctrine of anekānta sparked a revolution in the thoughts of (363) contemporary philosophical schools prevailing during the period of Mahavira also. Mahavira applied the linguistic tool of ‘syat’ and tried to perceive and understand each statement with dispassionate outlook and arrived at the conclusion that without taking into consideration the different naya-s (view points of substance, space, time and modes), one cannot arrive at the truth.

Ācārya Siddhasena (6th-7th cent. A.D.) has supported absolute unity at the existential level, where there remain no distinction, except pure existence. So Jain logicians don’t agree with the statement that relativity is anekānta rather, they believe that relativity is the outcome of anekānta philosophy. Moreover Jain logician denote anekānta with the term, ‘jātyantara’^[5] i.e. it is unique,neither relative nor absolute. Mahapragya says that the Jains do not see things in black and white only. Their vision is not restricted to true-false, but the third dimension of relative-truth is added to it. Relativity is actually outcome of anekānta.

Nayavāda is a significant contribution of the Jain logic and epistemology. It helps to understand the nature of an object in a comprehensive way. It is the basis of the principle of anekānta as already mentioned by Siddhasena Divākara in his work. Māilla Dhavala in his Nayacakra approves the very same statement with addition to an illustration. For example as the essence of all the scriptures is alphabet; samyaktva (Right-world -view) is the basis of all the penances, lead is the basis of all the metals and likewise naya is the basis or essence of anekānta.^[6]

Lord Mahāvīra, the preceptor, through his enlightenment, articulated  way of expressing the truth, which seems absolutists in appearance and non-absolutist in approach. The methodology is recognized as sevenfold dialectic through which multiple aspects of a truth can be expressed. The only condition is that, when one quality becomes dominant in expression, the rest would be secondary at that time.^[7] Ācārya Amṛtchandra (10th cent. A.D.), expounded anekānta with a folk imagery and imaging of a seemingly common occurrence in our lives in the countryside at one time in every home and now remains only in the romance of Lord Krishna. The imagery is how the churning process takes place. The churning process in Vṛndāvan, the churning process which brought the amṛt by churning the ocean. The example of milk-maid given by Amṛtchandra is worth quoting here. He says:

ekenākarṣayantī ślattayantī vastutattvamitareṇa,
antena jayati jainī nītirmanthānnetramiva gopī.^[8]

It means that the lady while churning, parts one hand in front and other hand goes behind, by this constant process of the two hands, one going forward and one going backward, there is the triumph of anekānta.

Ācārya Mahāprajña also quoted a living example to prove the arpitānarpita view of the anekānta philosophy as mentioned in Tattvārtha Sūtra.^[9] In our daily routine, we experience that when we walk, if the left foot is in front automatically the right will be behind, by this constant process of the two legs, one going forward and one going backward, actual motion occurs. If a person tries to keep both his legs in front, then it is obvious he will fall down. So the practical application of anekānta even in motion can be observed in each step of our life.^[10]