| Part ofa series on |
| Buddhism |
|---|
 |
| Part ofa series on |
| Jainism |
|---|
 |
Ethics Ethics of Jainism
|
Major sects |
As a philosophical termanavastha refers to the non-finality of a proposition or endless series of statements orregressus ad infinitum (infinite regress).[1][2][3] In theHindi language,anavastha meansnothingness.[4]
Anavastha (Sanskrit: अनवस्था) is aSanskrit nominal compound derived from the verbStha (meaningstanding,resting,grounded orfounded). The expression literally means: that which does not stand down, non-resting, unstable, holding no definite position, un-grounded or without foundation. It can also mean unsettled condition or character or absence of finality or conclusion.
In Indian thought and Indian logicAnavastha is an important doctrine. All major schools of philosophy have examined and commented upon this concept and laid down guidelines so as to avoid the endless series of statements and propositions and the non-finality of those propositions. Certain aphorisms ofPāṇini, in hisAshtadhyayi indicate thatasiddhatva leads toanavastha since rules which cause endless repetition of application cannot be there because application of a rule should certainly result in finality. The word अत्रatra of Sutra 6.4.22 indicates that two rules must have the same आश्रयāśraya or place of operation but where their places of operation are different they are notasiddha to each other.[5]
The automatic application ofsutras (rules of grammar) to take place without generating unintended results requires the establishment of a particular sequence among the rules and also the provision for cyclical application as well as blocking of some rules whenever it is desirable to do so. Panini orders rules and methods for their activation, reactivation and non-activation, and provides that the results brought about by some rules will not be 'known' to certain other rules, so that the question of these other rules becoming activated does not arise. The best example of the application of this method is known asAsiddhatva.[6] He uses the concept ofAsiddhatva to prevent the application of a rule on the substitute, to enable its application on a substituent and to mandate its application.[7] According to Kiparsky's definitions,Asiddhatva implies 'no order of taking effect' sinceasiddha means 'not having taken effect'.
TheUpanishads speak about the two-fold Brahman, the one with attributes called theSaguna Brahman, and the other without attributes called theNirguna Brahman only to deny and accept these two to state that Brahman is One.Brahman is calledNirguna because Brahman has not the threeGunas ofPrakrti, and not because Brahman has got nogunas absolutely; in order to prove the substantive existence of Brahman (prameya), Brahman is calledSaguna even though there is absence ofGunas in Brahman (aprameya). Brahman is One, and Oneness cannot be confounded with non-oneness; also oneness does not require another oneness to differentiate through second oneness or a third to differentiate the second oneness, otherwise there will be no end or conclusion.
This fallacy isAnavastha or infinite regress. TheVedas advise that Brahman must be looked at in one and one mode only.[8] In created things differences are of three kinds – 1) Existing in oneself, 2) difference in species and 3) difference in genus. In three words denoting a) 'oneness of Brahman', thesvajatiya-bheda, b) 'restriction', thesvagata-bheda and 3) 'rejection of duality', thevijatiya-bheda, these three differences are negated by the Sruti texts (Panchadasi Stanzas II.20&21).[9] The created things are many, a chain of causes and effects is also present, but to avoid the fallacy ofanavastha, it is necessary to consider Brahman as the root cause.[10]
Vedanta does not admit the existence of the relation ofsamvaya (the inseparable inherence or concomitant cause or combining force) as subsisting between two different entities such as substance and qualities. In his Brahmasutra-bhashya II.ii.13,Sankara explains that if asamvaya relation is to be admitted to connect two things, then anothersamvaya would be necessary to connect it with either of the two entities that it intended to connect. Thus, there are two kinds ofAnavastha - thePramaniki, the valid infinite, and theApramaniki, the vicious infinite.[11] Knowledge isChaitanya (anubhuti) i.e.Consciousness, and consciousness reveals the reality of objects. An object cannot be talked about if it does not exist.
Any attempt to find out whether the second knowledge that reveals the first knowledge identical with it is a separate knowledge or not leads toanavastha. Because the first knowledge is a revelation, there is no second knowledge that reveals the first knowledge.[12]Consciousness cannot be perceived, it perceives itself and is not perceived by any greater source; thelogical fallacy ofAnavastha (an endless series of cause and effect) would exist if it were to be said that Consciousness requires another source of perception (Devi GitaIV.12-13).[13] If there is no eternal First Cause, the logical fallacy ofAnavastha Dosha is inevitable. Brahman, the First cause, has no origin (Brahma Sutra II.3.9)[14] Thus, a thing cannot be at the same time the object and the subject of action. Consciousness i.e.Chaitanya, is self-illuminating and it illuminates others by its own illumination.[15]Kumārila Bhaṭṭa enquires, if an omniscient person exists that person can become comprehensible only to some other omniscient personality, and so on.[16]
InYoga, Ecstasy is the yogic visualization of a deity. And, the beginning five states of ecstasy induced byCakra are – birth, childhood, youth, maturity and adulthood; the 6th isunmana ( also said to denote the dreaming state) meaning agitation or excitement when the devotee often swoons; and when this occurs and when the strong desire to experience the ultimateparabrahman holds complete sway then the 7th state i.e.manollasa (extreme exhilaration) or anavastha (the state beyond states or state without qualities or locale)(also said to denote the dreamless sleep) is reached (Kularnava-tantra. Stanza 82).[17]Patanjali calls the unsteadiness of intelligence as the unsettled state ofanavastha because due tovritti the tracing of the steady state of the Self is difficult and therefore the splendour of the Self is doubted.[18]
According toHemachandra, Anavastha is aDosha, a defect or fault along withvirodha,vaiyadhikarana,samkara,samsaya,vyatikara,apratipatti andabhava.[19] It is also one of the dialectical principles applied alongsideatmasraya,anyonyasraya,cakraka,atiprasanga,ubhayatahspasa and the like employed by logicians from very early times.[20] Sriharsa explains that dialectical reasoning, which has its foundation in pervasion, can lead to contradiction when the reasoning becomes fallacious, it is the limit of doubt; and since differing unwanted contrary options create new doubts difficult to resolve which lead toanavastha or infinite regress and there is the absence of finality.
The argument that contradiction cannot block an infinite regress is rejected; it is the doubter's own behaviour that process the lie to the doubt, that blocks it (pratibandhaka).[21] According to the Jains, in theJiva five states are possible which can manifest themselves simultaneously of these theAudayika-bhava is the state which is the consequence of the unhindered realization of theKarman, which state comprises all accidental attributes of theJiva which become apparent with theudaya ofkarman. This particular state has 21 sub-species beginning withasiddhatva, which is the state of unholiness, when the spiritual perfection is lacking.[22]
Nagarjuna states that if there is a characteristic of the conditioned other than origination (utpada), existence (stithi), and destruction (bhanga), there would be infinite regress (anavastha). If there is no such characteristic, these are not conditioned (na samskrta). The quest to find the origination of origination which originations are all conditioned bydharma is a never-ending cycle and leads to infinite regress.[23] And that, whenever one wants to know how cognitions are grasped by other cognitions that attempt will lead toanavastha i.e. infinite regress, because if anything in objective experience with the particular property of acting on itself cannot be cited one has no grounds to assert that something that cannot be experienced has that unthinkable property. Ifpramanas are established through otherpramanas it would result in infinite regress, then nothing can be established.
Negation can be of an existent self-nature, if that self-nature does not exist it cannot be negated; the negation of non-existent entity is established without words.(Vigrha-vyartani Karika Stanza 11).[24] TheAbhidharma system which attributessvabhava todharma because dharmas, the foundational components of the world, are independent of causes and conditions in a specific sense, retains the concept that dependently originated entities (pratityasamutpanna) are separate from the dependently designated entities (prajnaptisat). Nagarjuna tends to equate lack ofsvabhava with dependence on causes and conditions and not with parts, and his argument that dependently originated things lackedsvabhava and wereprajnaptisat or conventionally existing entities, and that alldharmas areprajnapisat does lead to an infinite regress oranavastha and is, therefore, not valid.Samyutta Nikaya summarises the doctrine of 'dependent-origination' in terms of the necessary conditions for something to be, which doctrine is applied bySarvastivadins to determine whether or not an entity ultimately existed.[25]
.svg)
