Dr. Samani Shashi Pragya
All quests for the truth have remained quests for the methods to get to truth. No goal can be achieved without first identifying the method with which to do so. Truth is the goal, knowledge is the method. Truth comes from the knowledge of the senses and its definiteness, from thoughts. This knowledge is neither the truth nor a myth. In relative terms, it is the truth and in absolute terms, it is the myth. The theory of ‘anekānta being a tool of speculating about the truth is a boon to the world of philosophy. It is an analytic approach to understand each and every aspect of our life and affairs of the world. One of the most revolutionary and radical thinkers of all times, Mahavira developed a unique method of analysis, which could be applied to any facet of our lives. He struck at the roots of blind faith, biased dogmas, and authoritative absolutism with the open minded principle of anekāntavad.
In the proposed research work, the three philosophical doctrines namely, anekāntavāda, nayavāda and syādvāda have been explained from the point of view of applied philosophy of life. Anekānta is the heart of Jain metaphysics and nayavāda and syādvāda are its main arteries or to use a happier metaphor, the bird of anekāntavāda can’t fly without its two wings of nayavāda and syādvāda. As far as my knowledge goes, anekānta and nayavāda are nothing but objective perspectives and syādvāda is a linguistic tool for expressing the anekāntic truth.This holistic perspective is a significant tool for solving problems. The need is to understand the efficiency of this tool. Lord Mahavira, from his strong intellectual and intuition power, recognized the fact that comprehensive perception, conception and expression and interpretation of phenomenal world is not possible for a common man. Along with this, he introspected upon the possible consequences that are going to occur due to the limitation of cognition and expression of the incidents of the world of affairs. He was well aware of the fact that, it will first of all lead to misconception, misunderstanding, misinterpretation, and nonadjustment. One sided dogmatic approach towards the world of objects and subjects subsequently results in problem of being intolerant to the views of others, disrespect for the human dignity, unconcern and negligent notion for the non-human world, the absence of existential emotional connectivity between man and man, man and nature, rational man and social man, ultimately leading towards making impossible the dream of attainment of peaceful co-existence.
Now the question arises, how has such a philosophy come into being and developed. It is clear and distinct that, no philosophy originated and merely flourished in any jungle. Each and every religion or philosophy searches favorable circumstances to get its origin. It is basically due to the two extreme streams of thoughts about reality i.e. absolute eternalism and absolute fluxism, which prepared a ground for its origination. Because non-relative one sided view has created many problems in the field of philosophical thought. It is to deny their independence that non- absolutism came into being.
No new philosophy becomes compatible in our day-to-day life with in a single day. Each philosophy finds its deserved place after facing and overcoming the criticisms of the society and get accustomed to it with the passage of time.The philosophyof anekānta came into being in the āgamic period. During Lord Mahavira’s era, there prevailed 363 types of diverse views of ideologies After that time period onwards anekānta philosophy gradually developed in the heart of society through the four periods, i.e. Agamic period, Philosophical period, Anekānta Vyavastha period and Navya-Nyaya period up to the modern period. It is in the philosophical period, that ĀcāryaUmāsvāti was first to give the implicit definition of anekānta in Tattvārtha Sūtra as arpitānarpitasiddheh’, which means when primary qualities of a reality are in focus, the secondary qualities remain in the margin,because we can’t express all the characteristics of a particular reality due to the limitation of our language. So an endeavour is made to trace out the history and the development of the theory of anekānta, according to the dates of ācāryas and it is really an interesting depiction of the gradual evolution of the anekantic thought from the āgamic period upto the modern period.
Anekāntavāda is the basic structure of Jain metaphysics. It seeks to re-orient our logical attitude and asks us to accept the unification of contradictions’ as the true measure of Reality. How permanence, origination and cessation (impermanence) can logically reside in the same subject. Anekānta is the key to unlock the mystery of the paradoxical nature of reality. In the second chapter the metaphysical basis of anekānta and the criterion of functional reality is explained by quoting various points in its favour by different ācāryās in their specific time. The triple nature of reality is the heart of Jain metaphysics, which is the very foundation of Jain philosophy. The entire edifice of Jain theory of anekānta is based upon the Jain Metaphysics. So the triple characteristics (origination, cessation and permanence) of a Reality is discussed in detail by quoting logical definitions. In this chapter, the inter-relation of tripadi is being dealt with various examples cited by the ācaryā-sof philosophical age and other ācāryā-s from time to time. All the Jain ācaryā-sunanimously assert that permanent-cum-transitory nature of a Reality has a capacity of causal efficiency in three periods of time zone. Without understanding the anekānta in tripadi, we cannot get to the heart of Jaina philosophy. Moreover the brief explanation of the application of anekānta in the metaphysical world of permanence-cum-change is an important section of this chapter.
In the third chapter, Epiestemological Analysis of Anekāntavāda, I have tried to give a epistemological analysis of this anekāntic principle. Mahavira the jina, propounded the philosophy of anekānta to attain the truth of multi-dimensional aspects of reality. He reflected upon the multi- dimensional nature of reality and applied two types of perspectives to explain the reality.From the substantial or transcendental point of view, reality is eternal and from the conventional or its modal point of view, reality under goes change. So we have seen or experienced that change presupposes the persistence of an underlying substance. So permanence is to be accounted as an element always present in an object together with the change. But change means the cessation of a previous mode or attribute and the coming into being of a new mode or attribute. The affirmation of the triple characteristics has, therefore, nothing paradoxical about it.
Basically Mahavira’s enlightened interpretation of rendering solutions to the questions put forth before him, by his disciples and laypersons is really a path breaking. Bhagavati Sūtrā,which is considered as the encyclopedia of Jainism, is a scriptural text, where Mahavira used this significant and efficacious tool of ‘siya’ or ‘syad’ and paved the path of understanding everything from the multi-dimensional perspective. The very nature of each and every subjective and objective reality of world inherently possesses infinite attributes and modes. From endless ages,infinite attributes and modes possessed by every object keep on changing without giving up their eternal and perpetual essence.The fundamental substance remains the same generating various concepts and percepts. It acquires different shapes but the base of independent existence remains unaltered. Every moment both are undergoing change and it will continue to change in the endless future without giving up its eternal, perpetual essence. The theory of anekānta is dealt as a theory of Co-existence and Relativity in this chapter from the point of view of its social relevance.
Moreover the dictum that no word of the Jina is independent of naya (a particular view point) is the reputed principle of āgamic exegesis.[1] The world of experience is constituted by pairs of opposites as quoted in the Thāṇaṁ Sūtra “yat sat tat sa pratipak·aṁ”[2] i.e. It is in the nature of object that the opposing pairs co-exist, then why not two persons having different opinions, interest, habits, thoughts, hobbies can live together peacefully. The anekāntavāda and nayavāda are the two complementary processes forming a natural and inevitable development of the relativistic pre-supposition of the Jain doctrines. The analysis of the seven nayas and seven predictions or propositions will provide us the clarity that every judgement is relative to that particular aspect from which it is seen or observed. One who emphasizes only on his/her own viewpoint and conception of truth, brushing aside all other viewpoints can be guided in the right path through the naya and syad standpoint. The acceptance of relativistic conception of truth in letter and spirit would certainly desist one from treating his own partial view of truth as being absolute one. It is rejecting others viewpoints which is the main cause of commotion all around the world.
The forth chapter, Anekānta in the Philosophy of the West, is an humble effort to interpret the comparative study of P Western philosophers’ thinking with the Jain concept of naya and syād perspective. During the process of research, I found that how the post modern philosopher Husserl (1859-1938) also speaks in Jain tune that 'object as phenomenon has infinitely manifold noematic aspects'. According to Husserl, noesis (each standpoint) with regard to an object are infinite in number so also are the cases of nayas. Nayas are also infinite in number. In this regard Husserl really embraces the Jain view of anekānta i.e. 'anantadharmātmakaṁ vastu' without any inconsistency. In addition to this, Husserl says nothing new when he asserts that full knowledge of an object as a system of infinite noemata is never possible, that each noema in its reference to other noemata gives us only an idea of the object in its totality and that the ultimate unity of perception is never a matter of experience but always remains an ideal except in the case of kevalins and not in respect of the ordinary knower. Therefore Husserl's conception of noesis is strictly parallel to Jaina concept of naya. Noesis has been defined as a meaning giving intention and the Jain view of naya has been defined as jñāturabhiprāya i.e. intention of the knower. Noesis gives only a partial presentation (noema) of the object, similar is the case with naya, which is parallel with the Husserlian view.
So it is mentioned how the western philosophers’ view seem to be running in parallel with the concept of anekāntic relativity of perspective of co-existence of opposites, relativity of meaning of word and impossibility of exhaustive expression of any object in a given moment as accepted by respective philosophers namely, French Philosopher Claude Levi Strauss (1829-1902), Phenomenologist Philosopher Husserl (1859-1938),Wittgenstein (1889-1951), Existentialist Philosopher Jean Paul Sartre (1905-1980), the Post Structuralist Philosopher Derrida (1931-2004),whose views are compared and discussed in brief. Initially it may seem that the discussion is beyond the subject matter of the research undertaken, but for anekāntic inter-cultural dialogue we need to look into the Analogous Hermeneutics i.e. the anekāntic way of interpretation which can collaborate different cultures keeping its independent identity in a single whole for a better understanding between different cultures and doesn't give privileged treatment to anyone particular thinking. Thus anekānta rejects absolutism and fundamentalism. It teaches to respect alternative viewpoints even when we disagree with them. This mindset cultivates an attitude of tolerance, openness and co-operation, which helps to build bridges rather than walls, cohesion rather than conflict.
During the then period of Mahavira near about 363 schools of philosophies were prevailing. It was a tradition to ponder philosophically over every conundrum. But in those days, philosophers did not think of Yoga or its application as a task of philosophy. It was considered different from philosophy. Philosophy was understood as explaining the truths of substance, while Yoga was understood as training in meditation as accepted in Sānkhya and Yoga philosophy. One cannot say this division was right. Because of this narrow view, the scope of philosophy was limited to the understanding of the process of creation of Universe and its fundamental substances namely, soul and matter, its nature and its logical utility and so forth.In reality,“Philosophy is that which can present a comprehensive picture of all the truths of life”[3]. The philosophy with which we have no connection and through which our present day problems cannot be solved, that philosophy may be useful for some extra-terrestrial,but definitely not useful for man. Indeed a philosophy of matter cannot be life’s philosophy. Unless this narrow definition of philosophy is reconsidered, it will not serve any purpose in contemporary times. Today it is essential to change this vision of what use can that philosophy be, which does not touch on problems? How can that which is so cut-off from problems of life, be called a philosophy at all? “Ācārya Mahaphajňa rightly said, the last step of the intellect (reasoning), is the first step of the applied philosophy.”
The several future generations will be grateful to the holistic thinking of the twentieth century’s contemporary thinkers, who incorporated the concept of applied philosophy, within the arena or purview of philosophy.Ācārya Mahāprajña rightly said, “Anekānta is not just a philosophy, but a manual for good life”.[4] So an elaborate explanation has been made as how the application of multi-dimensional philosophy of anekānta can act as a remote control in solving the burning problems of today.The theory of anekānta teaches to give due respect to the views of others and always try to keep yourself in the shoes of others and behave likewise. So the fifth chapter deals with the Applied Philosophy of Anekānta, in which it is hinted upon, how the actions backed up by anekantic perspective is the ultimate solution to the world problems. In this age of intolerance, the theory of anekānta has become the necessity of the present day of culture. We see everyone wanting to impose one’s own views on others which is the cause of social anarchy, family quarrels, religious riots, political problems and commercial disharmony. The theory of anekānta is dealt as a theory of Co-existence, Relativity, Reconciliation, Tolerance, Equanimity in this chapter from the point of view of its social relevance.
Achievement of happiness, peace and harmony and well ordered society is the innate wish of each and every individual. The way to achieve this innate goal lies in understanding the theory of anekānta. With the spec of anekānta, we can be able to perceive the tinge of truth in the views and thoughts of others. It is Jain philosophy’s great contribution to the world of conflicts. There are many revolutions that had been taken place in the heart of history, but the practical application of anekāntic life style can bring about a great revolution in the society, by giving an effective solution to the problem of tension, miscommunication, familial quarrels, religious riots, organizational strikes, difference of views among the political parties, and communities and so forth, in the world.
Moreover in the fifth chapter, the heart of proposed work, a wide implication of anekāntic perspective in resolving the individual problems to global problems is explained in detail. It is highlighted as how the doctrine of anekānta works for change of vision at individual level, for developing the culture of tolerance at family level, for attaining peaceful-co-existence at social level, in resolving communal riot at religious level, for achieving universal brotherhood at national and international level, these burning issues have been dealt from the modern perspective. In various other fields also the role of anekānta is dealt with namely, in the secularism, in conflict resolution, in non-violent communication, in education, in successful management, in leadership, and so on and so forth.
In my opinion anekāntic perspective and syādvāda way of expression seems to be necessary for developing mutual understanding. Thus humble efforts are drawn out to break the narrow walls of anekānta, which were confined within the domain of intellectual and philosophical debate, to the domain of philosophy of life. Along with this an endeavour is also made to explain how under the umbrella of anekānta, all antagonists, one-sided view-holders come and sit together on one platform breaking the system barrier which divide the entire human race. I have clearly highlighted the doctrine of anekānta as an understanding which urges individuals to study different religions, cultures, customs, rituals, cults, schools of thought and trace out the underlying points of agreements and disagreements so that one can have an inter-cultural dialogue from the point of view of agreements rather than remain in watertight compartment of thoughts.
Thus anekānta philosophy is a comprehensive perspective of looking at the world of objects and world of thoughts. It is a life’s philosophy and is applicable in our common sense experience. So, anekāntavād is actually a way of looking at life and the world. It is an analytical tool, which examines the different conflicting opinions in objective ways and studies how far and in which way each opinion is valid. It is win-win approach and not win-lose approach. It tries to understand the views of others impartially, dispassionately and thereby enhance and widen the mental horizon as well as open-mindedness. As in the past, so even today and years to come, Jainism is destined to play a vital role in the intellectual, social and cultural transformation of the human beings. Hence, a correct understanding, exploration and application of anekānta will certainly be fruitful for the welfare of the humanity. It will lead to the establishment of a peaceful world-order. To inculcate the spirit of tolerance as also the attitude of appreciation of other’s point of view is the need of the hour, which may be made possible by understanding and following the philosophy of anekānta.
So an endeavor is made at my disposal to highlight the holistic approach of understanding each and every situations of life and providing rational and practical solutions to the present burning problems through anekānta vs intellectual ahiṃsā at the mental level, non-violent communication at the speech level and relative tolerance and respect for the views of others at social level and developing the attitude of equanimity for the lives of all levels of beings at global level.
