Syadwad - Book Summary | JainGPT

Here is a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text on Syadvada, presented in English:

The book "Syadvada" by Dr. Satyadev Mishra, published as part of the Z_Deshbhushanji_Maharaj_Abhinandan_Granth, explores the fundamental Jain philosophical concept of Syadvada. The text begins by highlighting that the pursuit of truth is a core characteristic of Indian philosophy, and truth has two aspects: substance (dravya) and mode (paryaya).

Differing Philosophical Perspectives on Truth:

Advaita Vedanta: Considers substance as the ultimate reality (paramarthika satya) and modes as illusory.
Buddhism: Regards modes as the ultimate reality and substance as illusory.
Other Philosophers: Seem to refute and affirm these absolute viewpoints.
Jain Philosophers: As syncretic thinkers, they posit that truth is characterized by origination (utpatti), decay (vyaya), and permanence (dhrauvya). They proclaim the ultimate reality of both substance and modes, establishing their doctrine as Anekantavada (non-one-sidedness).

Anekantavada and Syadvada:

Anekantavada: Literally means "the statement of many or infinite attributes of an object." According to Jain philosophy, every object, whether it be a living being, matter, sensory world, or soul, is subject to origination, decay, and permanence. It is possessed of contradictory attributes such as permanence-impermanence, oneness-multiplicity, existence-non-existence. An object that appears permanent is also impermanent, and vice-versa. The acceptance of these dialectical contradictions within an object is Anekantavada.
Syadvada: Is the style of expression of Anekantavada, which progressively reveals the diverse functions of an object and accepts their truth from various perspectives. Anekantavada and Syadvada are complementary; Anekantavada on the plane of objects of knowledge is Syadvada on the plane of means of knowledge.

The Origin and Development of Syadvada:

Syadvada is an ancient and widely discussed principle in Jain philosophy. Its clear indications are found in the oldest Jain scriptures. The Bhagavati Sutra discusses its three modes, and Bhadrabahu specifically mentions it in the Sutrakritanga. Kundakundacharya and Samantabhadra have elaborately discussed its seven modes. Jain logicians like Siddhasena Divakara, Akalanka, and Vidyānanda have further systematized it.

The Meaning of "Syat":

Syadvada is derived from "Syat" and "Vada." "Syat" is a Nipata (indeclinable particle) that can be used in various meanings like non-one-sidedness, affirmation, consideration, etc. Here, it signifies non-one-sidedness (anekanta). "Syat" can also denote "somewhere" (desha) and "sometime" (kala), and is used in the sense of possibility and doubt. However, in the context of Syadvada, "Syat" is not to be understood as doubt. It means non-one-sidedness, which is a definite knowledge of an object possessing infinite attributes. Therefore, the word "Syat" itself signifies definiteness (nishchayarthak) when understood in this context. Possibility and relativity are also associated with this meaning of "Syat."

The Function of "Syat":

The word "Syat" is used with every sentence structure that describes a subject to indicate two things:

Affirmation cannot be without negation, and negation cannot be without affirmation.
The inherent attributes (permanence or generality) and transient attributes (origination and decay or specificity) are relative. Neither origination and decay without permanence, nor permanence without origination and decay, can be found anywhere.

The nature of an object is not all-encompassing (sarvatmak). Therefore, affirmation of an object is from its own nature (svarupa), and negation is from another nature (pararupa). The continuous process of origination and decay means that the object is affirmed from the perspective of its generated mode and negated from the perspective of its ungenerated or past mode. Syadvada posits that affirmation and negation are attributes of the object itself. The affirmation of fire means "fire is in this place." Based on the evidence of smoke, we infer the presence of fire. However, Syadvada's affirmation and negation are not tied to specific time and place, but to the determination of its own nature. Fire, wherever and whenever it exists, is so by its own nature. Its affirmation depends on its constituent elements, and its negation depends on elements that are not its constituents. Both affirmation and negation occur simultaneously within an object. The affirmation mode is present, so it exists in its own nature, and the negation mode is present, so its nature is not affected by others. This is the essence of the object's being. The word "Syat" indicates this characteristic related to its inherent nature.

Alternative Names and the Principle of Division (Vibhagavada/Bhajnavada):

"Vibhagavada" and "Bhajnavada" are alternative names for Syadvada. Lord Mahavira himself answered many questions using the method of Vibhagavada. When asked whether sleeping or waking is better, Mahavira responded that it depends on the individual: sleeping is better for unethical beings, and waking is better for ethical beings. This is a segmented answer, not a one-sided one. According to Bhajnavada, one-sided rules regarding the distinction and non-distinction between substance and attributes are not acceptable. Both distinction and non-distinction exist. If substance and attribute are identical, they become one, making sentences like "attribute in substance" impossible. If they are distinct, sentences like "this attribute belongs to this substance" cannot be formed.

The Seven Modes of Syadvada (Saptabhangi):

An object is inherently manifold (anekatmaka). What appears sweet is also bitter; what appears soft is also hard. A lamp that flickers and appears momentary also possesses permanence as a substance. The principle of Anekanta is based on the premise that seemingly contradictory pairs have an inseparable relationship. However, these contradictory pairs cannot be expressed simultaneously. To express them simultaneously, language requires sequentiality and relativity. This relative mode of expression is Syadvada, which has the following seven alternatives, classified as affirmation (asti), negation (nasti), and indescribable (avaktavya):

Syat asti eva: It exists, from some perspective.
Syat nasti eva: It does not exist, from some perspective.
Syat asti eva syat nasti eva: It exists and it does not exist, from some perspective.
Syat avaktavya eva: It is indescribable, from some perspective.
Syat asti eva syat avaktavya eva: It exists and it is indescribable, from some perspective.
Syat nasti eva syat avaktavya eva: It does not exist and it is indescribable, from some perspective.
Syat asti eva syat nasti eva syat avaktavya eva: It exists, it does not exist, and it is indescribable, from some perspective.

These seven modes are known as Saptabhangi. The first four are the primary modes, and the last three are extensions of these. A practical example is given of three people standing together. When asked if one is the father, he replies, "Yes, from the perspective of my son, I am the father. But from the perspective of this father, I am not the father. I am and I am not the father. But since both cannot be said at once, what should I say?"

The Syadvada of a Pot (Ghata):

A classical Jain example is that of a pot (ghata), whose nature is explained through Saptabhangi:

Syat asti eva ghatah: The pot exists in some way.
Syat nasti eva patatah: The pot does not exist in some way (e.g., as a pot of clay).
Syat asti eva ghatah syat nasti eva patatah: The pot exists in some way and does not exist in some way.
Syat avaktavya eva ghatah: The pot is indescribable in some way.
Syat asti eva ghatah syat avaktavya eva ghatah: The pot exists and is indescribable.
Syat nasti eva ghatah syat avaktavya eva ghatah: The pot does not exist and is indescribable.
Syat asti eva ghatah syat nasti eva ghatah syat avaktavya eva ghatah: The pot exists, does not exist, and is indescribable.

The phrase "Syat asti eva ghatah" (The pot exists, from some perspective) uses "Ghata" as the subject and "asti" as the adjective. The word "eva" (only/indeed) with the adjective confirms the attribute of existence. If "Syat" were omitted, it would imply an absolute affirmation of existence, which is not the Jain view, as a pot possesses other attributes besides existence. The use of "Syat" negates this potential misinterpretation and broadens the meaning conveyed by "eva." The combined use of "Syat" and "eva" ensures the unambiguous assertion of the intended attribute and the inclusion of other unstated attributes.

The Nature of Affirmation and Negation:

The first mode of Saptabhangi emphasizes affirmation, and the second emphasizes negation. An object is affirmed from the perspective of its essence and negated from the perspective of its non-essence. Both affirmation and negation are attributes of the object. The pot exists from the perspective of its own substance (swa-dravya) – this is affirmation. But from the perspective of another substance (para-dravya), the pot does not exist – this is negation. Negation is understood as a relative mode, dependent on something else. However, negation is inherently vested in the substance. If a substance were only existing and not non-existing, it could not maintain its substance. Negation is used in reference to "other," hence it is a relative or externally caused mode. It acts as a protective shield for the object, preventing one existence from being mixed with another. The affirmations "the pot exists from its own substance" and "the pot does not exist from another substance" highlight the relativity of the pot. Because it is relative, it cannot be said that in the moment of its existence, its non-existence is absent. Both existence and non-existence (affirmation and negation) are simultaneous, but there is no single word to express both at once. Hence, the indescribable mode (avaktavya) is used to convey both attributes simultaneously, implying that they exist together but cannot be articulated together.

Conclusion on Syadvada's Significance:

The essence of the preceding discussion is that the modes of Syadvada (existence, non-existence, indescribable) depend on the substance, space, time, and modes of the pot. From the perspective of the substance, space, time, and modes of its formation, the pot exists. However, in relation to other substances, spaces, times, and modes, it does not exist. Thus, the pot possesses both existence and non-existence, and since these dual attributes cannot be expressed together, it is also indescribable.

The three primary modes are existence, non-existence, and indescribable. The remaining four modes are derived from the combination and non-combination of these, making their separate discussion unnecessary. Saptabhangi allows for the simultaneous expression of an object's positive and negative aspects, general and specific attributes, eternal and ephemeral nature, and expressible and inexpressible qualities.

From the given examples, it can be concluded that Syadvada is as significant in resolving complex philosophical puzzles as it is in resolving the intricate problems of life. Being experientially verifiable and relatively established, it is the language of the practical world. Despite this, due to sectarian biases, some philosophers have harshly criticized it. Shāntarakṣita called the Syadvada viewpoint the prattling of a madman, as it attempts to unite contradictory attributes like existence-non-existence, one-many, distinction-non-distinction, and general-specific. Shankaracharya equated Syadvada with skepticism, arguing that contradictory attributes like cold and heat cannot coexist in the same object simultaneously. If objects are considered to have contradictory attributes, then heaven and liberation would also be subject to alternative states of existence-non-existence and permanence-impermanence. Ramanujacharya also considered Syadvada illogical, believing that contradictory attributes like existence and non-existence cannot coexist like shadow and sunlight.

However, upon deeper consideration, these criticisms are found to be inconsistent. Syadvada does not claim that an object is simultaneously hot and cold in the same respect. For example, water is cold in comparison to hot milk or tea, and warm in comparison to ice. It does not mean that coldness and warmth coexist within the water simultaneously. Rather, water is cold and warm in relation to other objects. Critics like Shāntarakṣita opposed Syadvada because they failed to understand this difference in perspective. Mallisena, in response to these critics, stated that when an object is described as existing, it is in relation to its own form, substance, space, time, and mode. Its non-existence is described in relation to the form, substance, space, time, and mode of another object. Therefore, there is no scope for contradiction. Moreover, as previously stated, the meaning of "Syat" is not "perhaps," "possibly," or "sometimes." In the context of Syadvada, it means "in some way" or "from some perspective." Therefore, equating Syadvada with skepticism is misleading. Skepticism involves a doubtful knowledge of many mutually contradictory attributes occurring simultaneously, due to the absence of supportive and refuting evidence, leading to an uncertain state. Syadvada, however, involves definite knowledge of relatively opposed attributes. It grasps the object according to a definite system without wavering between perspectives.

Shankaracharya's criticism of Syadvada is considered more inappropriate because he himself propounded the doctrine of the falsity and truthfulness of the world of names and forms from the perspective of the ultimate reality and conventional reality. Furthermore, the influence of the major modes of Syadvada is observed in his doctrine of the ineffable (anirvachaniyata). While scholars have compared Syadvada with the philosophies of thinkers like Bhartriprpancha, Nagarjuna, Hegel, Kant, Diderot, Spencer, Heraclitus, and Whitehead, this is beyond the scope of the current discussion.

The study of Syadvada is highly significant in the context of scientific relativity. Scientists acknowledge that we can know and analyze the nature of an object not from a one-sided but from a non-one-sided (anekanta) perspective. In scientific laboratories, it has been observed that objects are filled with multiple attributes and qualities. Renowned scientists like Einstein, through their discovery of the principle of relativity, have proven the existence of infinite energy and qualities even within a tiny atom. Professor P.C. Mahalanobis has presented Syadvada's Saptabhangi as the foundation of statistical principles.

The conclusion of this study is that Syadvada is a practical and scientific principle of object-attribute analysis, and due to these characteristics, it represents excellent and popular Indian thought.