Abstract
This research explores Jaina philosophy’s concept of Sadāsatkāryavāda, which reconciles the opposing ideas of substance and mode. This notion challenges Indian perspectives on causality, emphasizing the complexity of existence and the interdependence of all phenomena. This analysis covers various aspects, including the duality of reality, Kundakundācarya‘s harmonization of conflicting views, and the relationship between the eternal soul and temporal body. Acknowledging multiple viewpoints and considering reality from both permanent and momentary perspectives are crucial in understanding reality. The Jaina text’s interpretation highlights the dynamism of reality, stressing the importance of recognizing interdependence. The findings showcase Jainism‘s unique perspective on causality, fostering a comprehensive and inclusive approach to understanding existence and its intricate patterns.
Introduction
The Jaina philosophical tradition presents a distinctive theory of causality referred to as ‘Sadāsatkāryavāda‘, which elucidates the dynamic interaction between existence and non-existence within the cause-effect nexus. This idea is juxtaposed with other schools of Indian philosophy, namely Sāṃkhya, which espouse the concept of “Satkāryavāda” (the theory of causality which says the effect exists in the cause), and Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika, which advocates for ‘Asatkāryavāda‘ (the theory of causality which says the effect does not exist in the cause.
According to the philosophical concept known as Sadāsatkāryavāda, the relationship between cause and effect is not characterised by complete distinction, but rather by the notion that they are manifestations of a shared underlying material undergoing metamorphosis. The latent state of the cause harbours the potential for the subsequent consequence, which materialises through a process of transformation. This process encompasses the enduring presence of specific elements of the cause (sat) as well as the emergence of novel elements (asat).
To exemplify this notion, let us contemplate the metamorphosis of a seed into a tree. The seed, in its dormant state, possesses the inherent capacity for the growth and development of a tree, yet it does not embody the tree in its entirety. The seed comprises a diverse array of constituents, including proteins, carbohydrates, and minerals, that serve as the fundamental building blocks for the subsequent growth and development of the tree. Nevertheless, the tree exhibits additional characteristics, like foliage, limbs, and an underground network of roots, that were absent in the initial seed.
While Jaina causality is often referred to as Sadāsatkāryavāda, encompassing the simultaneous existence of the existent and non-existent, it is also aptly described by the principles of Bhedābheda and Sādriśāsādrisa. Bhedābheda, meaning “both difference and non-difference,” underscores the paradoxical nature of cause and effect, recognizing their distinct identities while acknowledging their inherent interconnectedness. Sādriśāsādrisa, meaning “similar and dissimilar,” emphasizes the dual nature of cause and effect, highlighting their shared essence and unique characteristics.
These interwoven principles collectively paint a comprehensive picture of Jaina causality, revealing its intricate tapestry of interconnectedness, potential, and transformation. Jaina causality’s ability to encompass seemingly contradictory aspects of reality demonstrates the power of Anekāntavāda, the Jaina principle of non-one-sidedness, to embrace the multifaceted nature of truth.
Anekāntavāda and Syādvāda: Cornerstone of Jaina Causality
Within the domain of Indian philosophy, Jainism distinguishes itself via its distinctive and profound comprehension of the fundamental essence of reality. The core of Jaina philosophy is centred around the idea of Anekāntavāda, which embodies a non-absolutist/ non-one-sidedness perspective that acknowledges the intricate and diverse character of reality. The aforementioned principle holds significant significance for the concept of causality in Jaina philosophy, offering a structured framework for comprehending the intricate and subtle interactions between causes and their corresponding effects.
The philosophical concept of Anekāntavāda posits that a comprehensive understanding of reality is unattainable through the limited lens of a single solitude perspective. Any endeavour to accomplish this invariably results in the presentation of incomplete truths and biased perspectives. In contrast, Anekāntavāda promotes the adoption of diverse viewpoints that can be adopted in relation to reality, with each viewpoint offering distinct insights into the nature of truth. The comprehensive nature of this approach towards understanding reality holds significant relevance to the concept of causality in Jaina philosophy. Jaina philosophers acknowledge that the concept of causation is not characterised by a straightforward, linear progression, but rather manifests as an intricate network of interrelated elements. Each individual element has a distinct part in contributing to the occurrence of an event, and it is not appropriate to attribute the entire causation of the event to any single factor.
To elucidate this assertion, let us contemplate the instance of a botanical organism germinating from a seed. The seed might be regarded as the material cause of the plant, whereas sunlight and water can be regarded as instrumental causes. Nevertheless, Anekāntavāda serves as a reminder that these causative elements are not mutually exclusive, but rather exhibit interdependence. The seed, sunlight, and water each play distinct roles in the development of the plant.
Anekāntavāda, a philosophical concept rooted in Jainism, serves to reconcile perceived contradictions within the known causal links present in the world. For instance, an individual’s behaviour may be regarded as the primary factor contributing to a specific result, although external factors may also exert influence. Anekāntavāda acknowledges that the outcome is influenced by both the individual’s actions and external conditions, and neither can be regarded as the exclusive determinant.
The notion of Anekāntavāda holds significant ramifications that extend beyond the domain of causality. The framework presented below offers a comprehensive approach to comprehending a diverse array of philosophical matters, spanning from the fundamental basis of knowing to the ethical considerations surrounding human actions. The non-absolutist approach of Anekāntavāda promotes the cultivation of open-mindedness and discourages the tendency to hastily draw conclusions. Furthermore, it fosters a sense of modesty, acknowledging that our comprehension of the world is perpetually limited and open to modification.
Anekāntavāda serves as the fundamental principle of Jaina philosophy pertaining to causality. The multimodal method employed in this study offers a thorough and nuanced comprehension of the intricate interplay between various causes and their corresponding effects. By adopting the concept of Anekāntavāda, individuals are able to develop a more profound understanding and recognition of the complex interconnectedness of causal relationships that regulate the cosmos.
Jaina philosophers adhere to the principle of Anekāntavāda non-one sidedness, which significantly shapes their understanding of the idea of cause and effect. The Jaina philosophers have examined the concept of causality from various perspectives. These include the:
- instrumental cause (nimitta kāraṇa), material cause (upādāna kāraṇa),
- six factors (ṣaṭakaraka),
- substance (dravya), space or place (kṣetra), time (kāla), mode (bhāva),
- production (utpāda), annihilation (vyaya) and stability (dhrovya),
- group of five causes (samavāya).
Despite the significance of causality within the realm of Jaina philosophy, it is noteworthy that I have not seen any primary Jaina text that comprehensively explores the nature of causality in a complete manner. The concept of causality becomes apparent either when Jaina philosophers engage with other theories or subjects. They introduce the topic of causality within this context to elucidate and provide a comprehensive grasp of their primary subject matter. Alternatively, they engage in discussions about causality as a means to refute opposing views.
Sadāsatkāryavāda: Anekāntic approach towards Jaina Causality
In Jaina philosophy, everything is considered to be eternal- non eternal (nitya-anitya), universal-particular (sāmānya-viśeṣa), substance-modification (dravya–paryāyātmaka), identity-difference (bhedābheda).[2]The fundamental substance underlying the cause-effect relationship is Sadāsatkāryavāda, which is the very essence of reality. Thus, the principle of Sadāsatkāryavāda is also known as Satkāryavāda or Asatkāryavāda, depending on whether one views it from the perspective of substance or attribute.
1.On the basis of the nature of Reality
The Jaina philosophical viewpoint about causality, as expounded in the doctrine of Sadāsatkāryavāda, is firmly grounded in the comprehension of the fundamental nature of existence. According to Jainism, the perception of reality differs from the perspectives of Advaita Vedānta and Buddhism. Jainism posits that reality does not solely adhere to a static and timeless nature akin to AdvaitaVedānta, nor does it exclusively exhibit a permanent state of flux as observed in Buddhism. In contrast, Jainism asserts the philosophical standpoint that reality exhibits both perpetual existence and transitory nature, which is incorporated within the framework of “resultant eternality” or “nityānitya.”
Jainism posits that the universe is distinguished by its everlasting and timeless essence, lacking any identifiable genesis or definitive culmination. The universe is composed of six fundamental entities or substances. All six entities have enduring attributes; nevertheless, they experience an unending sequence of metamorphoses known as Paryāya. During the process of these transformations, there is no occurrence of either creation or destruction, and the fundamental characteristics or attributes of the underlying substances stay unchanged, commonly known as Guna (qualities). The phenomenon under consideration was expounded upon by Lord Mahavir in his Three Pronouncements, widely known as Tripadī.[3] He posited that the concept of Existence or Reality, also known as Sat, contains the fundamental aspects of appearance (Utpāda), disappearance (Vyaya), and persistence (Dhrauvya).
The concept in question is further elaborated by Ācārya Umāsvāmī/ Umāsvātī, who provides a definition of Reality as “appearance-disappearance-persistence.”[4] This implies that the construction of reality occurs from one vantage point while its deconstruction transpires from another. In Jaina philosophy, all things are perceived as embodying a dual nature characterised by their status as both product and expenditure. Consequently, they are regarded as holding the qualities of both eternal existence and impermanence concurrently. From the perspective of utpāda-vyaya, the object is considered asat, but from the perspective of dhrovya, it is considered sat.
To provide further elucidation on this notion, let us contemplate the instance of a bracelet crafted from a gold ingot. Throughout the course of the bracelet fabrication, the gold material experiences a notable metamorphosis, transitioning from its initial state as a compact solid ingot to a distinctive configuration characterised by a coiled shape. Notwithstanding this alteration, the gold substance stays unaltered in its classification or fundamental essence; it preserves its inherent attribute of “goldenness.” This exemplifies the Jaina concept that although external manifestations may undergo transformations, the fundamental essence or intrinsic nature stays unchanged.
The Jaina philosophical framework establishes a clear distinction between two categories of existence: Kutastha Nitya, denoting entities that remain unaltered and untouched by external influences, and Nityānitya, characterising objects that experience modifications while retaining their inherent essence. According to Jainism, the latter concept represents the authentic essence of existence.
Given this comprehension, we are now poised to examine the inquiry regarding the coexistence of perpetuity and transience within a singular entity. According to the Jaina viewpoint, this apparent contradictory position emerges due to our tendency to perceive objects in isolation, disregarding their connectivity and the cycles of change. Upon acknowledging the interconnectedness and susceptibility to change of all entities, it becomes evident that the attributes of perpetuity and transience are not inherently contradictory.
In summary, the Jaina philosophical principle known as Sadāsatkāryavāda presents a distinctive viewpoint on the concept of causation, which is based on an understanding of reality as simultaneously eternal and impermanent. Jainism, via its acceptance of this duality, offers a conceptual structure for understanding the intricacies of existence and the dynamic relationship between constancy and transformation. In essence, this philosophical perspective promotes the adoption of a more comprehensive and intricate perception of the surrounding universe, recognising the fluid and always changing essence of existence.
2. On the basis of Substantial and Modal Perspectives
Kundakundācarya, a prominent Jaina philosopher, has harmonized the seemingly contradictory aspects of Satkāryavāda and Asatkāryavāda in his work “Paṃcāstikāya“. He argues that from the substance perspective, Satkāryavāda is valid,[5] as the consciousness of a living being is never destroyed, and therefore, the living being is not completely new or different from its previous form. However, from the attribute perspective, Asatkāryavāda[6] is valid, as the attributes of a living being change over time, and therefore, the living being is not entirely the same as its previous form.
Furthermore, Kundakundācārya has clarified the concept of Sadāsatkāryavāda by explaining that the birth and death of a living being led to the destruction and creation of their respective bodies. When a living being takes rebirth, they abandon their previous body and assume a new one. This process highlights the dynamic nature of reality, where things are constantly changing while still maintaining some continuity.
According to Kundakunda, the soul is eternal and indestructible, and it goes through cycles of bondage and liberation. During the stages of bondage, the soul is trapped in the cycle of birth, death, and rebirth, and it experiences suffering due to its karma. However, when the soul achieves liberation, it breaks free from this cycle and attains ultimate happiness.
Kundakunda argues that the concept of Sadāsatkāryavāda helps to explain the relationship between the eternal soul and the temporary physical body. He posits that the soul is the real entity that undergoes transformations, while the physical body is merely made up of matter created by the soul’s karmic accumulations. In other words, the physical body is a manifestation of the soul’s past actions, and it serves as a vessel for the soul’s journey towards liberation.
Moreover, Kundakunda asserts that the concept of Sadāsatkāryavāda refutes the idea of annihilationism, which holds that the soul ceases to exist at the moment of death. Instead, he argues that the soul continues to exist even after death, albeit in a transformed state, and that it carries forward its karmic burden until it achieves liberation.
Jaina philosophers and spiritual leaders acknowledge the ontological reality of all beings, perceiving them as distinct and manifold entities. These beings are broadly classified into two categories: sentient and insentient. Fundamental considerations regarding individuals’ perspectives on reality are rooted in the subsequent factors:
- The acceptance of permanence, change, diversity, and identity or similarity concurrently is observed due to the consistent presence of particularity and universality or generality in our experiences.
- The examination is focused on an explanation that avoids the fallacy of a limited perspective on reality, as any generalisation about reality based on a single characteristic is susceptible to the error of ekānta.
- Consequently, this examination is grounded in the principle of acknowledging multiple viewpoints (Anekāntavāda).
- Therefore, it is necessary to consider reality from both a perspective of permanence (substance) and a perspective of momentariness (mode). Hence, it acknowledges the existence of both permanence and change.
3. On the basis of Power and Origin:
Paṃḍita Sukhalāla Saṃghavī’s view on Sadāsatkāryavāda[7] is that it is based on the concept of power and origin. According to him, action is existent from the perspective of power but non-existent from the perspective of origin. This means that the potential for something to happen is not present in the latent state before its origin.
He argues that effort is necessary for origination, and that work is non-existent in relation to origin, but existent in relation to power. This implies that whatever reason has the power to manifest work will result in its actualization, and not every imaginable possibility.
In other words, Paṃḍita Sukhalāla Saṃghavī’s interpretation of Sadāsatkāryavāda suggests that the cause and effect are not separate entities, but are interconnected and influencing each other. The cause has the power to bring about the effect, and the effect is not possible without the cause. However, the cause itself undergoes transformation in the process of bringing about the effect, and thus, the effect is not simply a repetition of the cause.
This view emphasizes the dynamic nature of reality, where things are constantly changing and evolving. It highlights the importance of understanding the interdependence of all phenomena and the ways in which they interact with each other to shape the world we experience.
In the context of a clay pot, the primary constituent is the clay material, whereas the alteration pertains to the pot’s configuration, enabling it to contain water. In this context, the clay serves as the substantive component of the pottery, while the shape represents the alteration that imparts the functional attributes to the vessel.
Jaina thinkers claim that the existence of a pot in its clay form predates its actual creation. In this context, the individual concurs with the perspective of Satkāryavāda, a philosophical doctrine positing that the nature of reality precludes its creation or production. Nevertheless, the clay does not inherently possess the shape or form of a pot until it undergoes the process of being moulded into that specific configuration. Hence, when adopting an alternative perspective, the pot is regarded as a manifestation of non-being.
The initiation of a pot’s existence is denoted by the potter’s act of moulding the clay into its desired form. The pot’s ultimate manifestation was not yet realised prior to its fabrication, yet, its inherent capacity resided inside the clay material. The term used to denote this possibility is Sadāsat, a composite of the notions of existence (Sat) and non-existence (Asat).
Hence, Jaina philosophers claim that Sadasat serves as the causal factor for pre-originating action. Put differently, the existence of a thing is contingent upon its inherent substance, and this inherent potentiality facilitates the entity’s materialisation through the act of creation.
In essence, Sadāsatkāryavāda is a philosophical notion within Jainism that elucidates the interplay between substance and form within the framework of reality and causation. The statement highlights the dual nature of objects, consisting of both substance and potentiality, and underscores that an object’s capacity for existence is inherent in its substance. The aforementioned potentiality leads to the emergence of the object’s manifestation via the act of creation, so establishing Sadasat as the catalyst for the antecedent action.
Identity-cum-difference (Bhedābheda): Anekāntic approach towards Jaina Causality
Vṛttikāra Abhayadevasūri, a prominent Jaina philosopher who lived in the 10th century. In his seminal work, “Sanmatitarkaprakarnam Vr̥ttī,” Abhayadevasurī argues that the cause and effect are not absolutely distinct entities.[8] Another important Jaina scholar who contributed to the understanding of this doctrine was Vādidevasurī. In his work, “Syādvādaratnākara,” Vādidevasurī refutes the idea of solitary distinction and solitary non-distinction of cause and effect. He argues that if the cause and effect were completely distinct, then they would have no connection whatsoever. On the other hand, if they were completely non-distinct, then there would be no possibility of change or transformation. Vādidevasurī proposes an Anekāntic approach, where the cause and effect are seen as interconnected, but still maintain their individual identities.[9]
Furthermore, in Viśeṣāvaśyaka Bhāṣya, the author explains that cause and effect are mutually exclusive and also integral. In Jaina philosophy, diversity of cause and effect has been accepted everywhere. This means that while the cause and effect may appear to be different, they are ultimately part of a larger whole and cannot be fully understood in isolation from one another.[10]
To further elucidate this concept, there is an example given in Viśeṣāvaśyaka Bhāṣya itself i.e., imagine a potter creating a clay pot. The clay and the pot are not separate entities, but rather they are different stages in the process of creation. The clay is the raw material, and the pot is the final product. However, the pot is not existent without the clay, and the clay is not existent without the pot. In this sense, the clay and the pot are both distinct and identical.[11]
In conclusion, the Jaina doctrine of “Sadāsadkaryavāda” offers a unique perspective on the concept of cause and effect. By positing that cause and effect are simultaneously different and identical, Jaina scholars such as Vīrsena, Abhayadevasurī and Vādidevasurī have provided a nuanced understanding of the interconnectedness of reality. Ultimately, this doctrine highlights the complex and multifaceted nature of reality, and encourages us to adopt a more holistic and integrated approach to understanding the world around us.
Conclusion
The Anekāntic approach to causation in Jainism, as demonstrated by the concepts of Sad-Asatkāryavāda, Sādriśāsādrisa, Bhedābheda and Sahbhāva-Krambhāva offers a thorough and intricate comprehension of the causative connection. In contrast to simplistic perspectives that present causality as either entirely distinct or entirely identical, Jainism acknowledges the intricate character of cause and effect, encompassing their concurrent presence, resemblance and disparity, as well as both distinction and non-distinction.
The philosophical concept of Sadāsatkāryavāda posits that the relationship between cause and effect is characterised by their simultaneous existence in a latent state within the cause itself. This notion serves to elucidate the process by which new entities come into being through the actualization of the latent potential inherent in their causes. The concept of Sādriśāsādrisa acknowledges the inherent interconnectedness of cause and effect, while also recognising their unique manifestations and roles, so accounting for the observed diversity in the world. Bhedābheda represents the culmination of these fundamental concepts, offering a comprehensive perspective on causality that acknowledges both the simultaneous distinctness and interconnectedness of cause and consequence.
The Anekāntic approach to causality in Jainism, characterised by its stress on many opposite perspectives and the avoidance of one-sidedness, offers a significant foundation for comprehending the intricate and dynamic nature of the universe in which we exist. The aforementioned concept promotes the exploration of complex interpretations and the acceptance of the intricate character of reality. This entails acknowledging that diverse viewpoints have the potential to unveil distinct facets of truth.
References
[1]* Assistant Professor- Center for Jain Studies,JAIN (Deemed-to- be University) Bangalore, Karnataka.
Pursuing PhD in Jain Vishva Bharati Institute (Deemed University), Ladnun.
M.Phil. (Gold Medallist) with UGC- JRF, Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri National Sanskrit University, New Delhi.
M.A. (Jainology and Comparative Religion & Philosophy), JVBI, Ladnun.
M.A. (Hindi), Vardhaman Mahaveer Open University, Kota.
Shastri [B.A. equivalent], Jagadguru Ramanandacharya Rajasthan Sanskrit University, formerly known as Rajasthan Sanskrit University, Jaipur.
According to Jaina philosophers, the concept of causality is deemed feasible only within the framework of anekantic substance. Regarding this matter, Harībhadrācarya states in his ṣaḍadarśanasamuccaya that-
“kāryakāraṇabhāve saṃbhavinī, kāryakāraṇabhāvaścārthakriyāsiddhau sidhyet ।arthakriyā ca nityasya kramākramābhyāṃ sahakāriṣu satsvasatsu ca janakājanakasvabhāvadvayānabhyupagamena nopapadyate ।anityasya tu sato’sato vā sā na ghaṭate।– SDS, P.389.
[3]uppannei vā, savagamei vā, dhuvei vā।।
[4]utpāda-vyaya-dhrauvyayuktaṃ sat।tatvārthasūtra 5/30
[5]evaṃ sado viṇāso asado jīvassa ṇatthi uppādo।Pan. G.19.
[6]evaṃ sado viṇāso asado jīvassa havadi uppādo।Pan. G.54.
[7] In the explanation of the Sanmati Prakran, vol.III, G.50-52.
[8] “kāraṇāt kārya anyat kathaṃcit ananyat ataeva tadatadrūpatayā sacca asacca iti – STPV, p. 705- 709.
[9] SVR, p. 803-807.
[10]jaṃ kajja–kāraṇāiṃ pajjāyā vatthuṇo jao te ya ।
anneṇanne ya mayā to kāraṇa – kajjabhayaṇeyaṃ ।।2103
Thus, cause and effect are mutually different and also integral. In Jain philosophy, difference and identity of cause and effect has been accepted everywhere.
[11]mṛdādirūpatayā sattva–prameyatvādibhiścānanyatvam – The commentary of above verse.
Bibliography
- Abhayadeva Surī. Sanmati Tarka Prakrnam Bhāga 3. Divya Darśana Trust, 2000.
- Haribhadrasūri. ṣaḍdarśana samuccaya. Edited by Maheṃdramuni. Bhāratīya Jñānapīṭha, 1981.
- Jinabhadragaṇi kṣamāśramaṇa caturvijaya. Viśeṣāvaśyaka Bhāṣya. Harśapuśpamr̥ita Jaina Granthamālā. 2004.
- Kundakundācārya. Paṃcāstikāya. Śrīmada Rājacaṃdra Āśrama, 1969.
- Umāsvāmī Ācārya. Tattvārtha Sūtra. Sāṃghavī, edited by Sukhalāla and K.K. Dīkṣita. L. D. Indology, Ahmedabad, 2000.
- Vādideva Surī. Syādvādaratnākara. Motīlāla Lāgā jī prakāśana.
Feature Image Credit: wikipedia.org
Tirtha Yatra & Conference On Jain Traditions
Watch video presentation of the above paper here:
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article belong to the author. Indic Today is neither responsible nor liable for the accuracy, completeness, suitability, or validity of any information in the article.
