________________
Svayambhūstotra
O Lord Śreyānsanātha! The conflict between the two contradictory points of view is resolved by illustration (dystānta)* The absolutistic point of view, however, is not amenable to such illustration**. Only your doctrine of manifold points of view or non-absolutism (anekāntavāda)*** is able to establish the reality of substances.
*Illustration (drstānta) helps to prove a thing through
universal concomitance (vyāpti), which is a kind of relationship between the major term (sādhya) and the middle term (hetu or sādhana). For example, we infer fire (which is the major term or sādhya) from smoke (which is the middle term or hetu) through the relationship of universal concomitance, viz., “where there is fire, there is smoke”.
**In trying to establish absolutism through illustration, we
must accept a major term (sādhya) and a middle term (hetu or sādhana). This contradicts the view that there is nothing but one (advaitavāda). The use of the major term and the middle term in order to reason out and establish advaitavāda must bring in duality, the very opposite of the doctrine of absolutism.
***The appreciation of multiple attributes in a single
substance is the bedrock of anekāntavāda in Jaina philosophy.
76
