Doctrines
Anekantavada
Also Known As Many-sidedness · non-one-sidedness · the doctrine of manifold aspectsOriginal Term anekantavada (Sanskrit, the doctrine of non-singleness)
Mind, Self and Emptiness
Citation Formats
General Reference
APA Style
BibTeX
Origin 400 to 800 CE
Anekantavada holds that any existing thing has infinitely many aspects, that a knower approaches it from a standpoint, and that a statement made from a standpoint is therefore true of what it sees and silent about the rest. Complete knowledge of a thing from all standpoints at once is kevala jnana and is not available to anyone still embodied and unliberated. Everyone else is speaking partially, including the speaker.
The illustration the tradition uses is the group of blind men and the elephant. Each reports honestly, a pillar, a rope, a fan, a wall, and each is correct about what he touched and wrong only in taking his part for the whole. The moral drawn is not that they are all mistaken but that the mistake is the leap from a true report to an exclusive claim.
The technical apparatus is naya, the doctrine of standpoints, which enumerates the perspectives from which a thing can be truly described, as a substance, as a mode, in general, in particular, as named, as presently functioning. Naya is not a list of opinions; it is a claim that these are all legitimate angles onto one object, and Jain philosophical writing uses it to show where two schools that appear to contradict each other are in fact describing different aspects.
It is regularly misdescribed as relativism, and it is not one. Jainism holds firmly determinate doctrines: that souls exist, that karma is material, that violence binds, that liberation is real. Anekantavada is a claim about the adequacy of statements to an inexhaustibly complex reality, not a claim that nothing is settled. What it produces is a tradition structurally disinclined to treat disagreement as heresy, and it has been offered by modern Jain writers as a resource for religious pluralism, an application the classical texts did not have in view, since they deployed it mainly to win arguments against Buddhists and Vedantins.
Facts
Status
Status Within the TraditionDefined and binding within this tradition 1Tradition: Jainism Definitional for the tradition: reality has innumerable aspects and no single standpoint exhausts it Doctrinal CategoryMind, Self and Emptiness 1 Origins
Origin Period Learn More
Reality Has Innumerable Aspects
Anekantavada, "non-one-sidedness," or the doctrine of many-sidedness, is Jainism's claim that reality is manifold and that no single statement can capture it whole. Any given proposition is made from a particular standpoint and grasps a real but partial aspect of things; competing claims are therefore usually partial views rather than simple errors. It is Jainism's most exported idea, frequently invoked as a charter for tolerance, and, its exponents argue, its most misread.
The doctrine has a metaphysical basis in the Jain account of substance: every real thing has innumerable qualities and passes through endless changes while remaining itself, so that it can truly be described as permanent (in its substance) and as impermanent (in its modes), depending on the aspect one attends to. The famous parable of the blind men and the elephant, one grasping the trunk and calling it a snake, another the leg and calling it a pillar, is one the Jains adopted to make exactly this point: each report is accurate to what was touched and wrong only in claiming to be the whole. Knowledge short of omniscience is standpoint-bound, and wisdom begins in recognising this.
Syadvada, and the Charge of Self-Refutation
Anekantavada is worked out through two tools. Nayavada is the doctrine of standpoints, the disciplined analysis of the particular viewpoint from which any claim is true. Syadvada is the sevenfold scheme of conditional predication, each of its seven forms prefaced by syat, "in some respect" or "from a certain standpoint": in some respect a thing is; in some respect it is not; in some respect it both is and is not; in some respect it is inexpressible; and the combinations of these. The syat operator is the heart of the system, marking every assertion as made under a specified condition rather than absolutely.
Rival philosophers attacked it as incoherent. Buddhist logicians such as Dharmakirti, and later the Advaitin Shankara, pressed the objection that a doctrine which makes everything both true and not-true must say the same of itself, and so collapses. The Jain reply is that syat qualifies without contradicting: each of the seven predications is asserted flatly from its own standpoint, and the scheme catalogues compatible partial truths rather than affirming and denying the same thing in the same respect. The atlas also notes a modern misreading: anekantavada is often flattened into a generic relativism or an "all religions are equally true" slogan, whereas in its own setting it is a precise logic of standpoints, not a refusal to make claims.
Cross-Tradition Connections
Affirmed By
Reconciliation: affirmed Belief -> contested Doctrine concept (Anekantavada).
Belongs to Tradition
That reality has innumerable aspects and no single statement captures it is shared Jain epistemology, held identically across both principal traditions.
That reality has innumerable aspects and no single statement captures it is shared Jain epistemology, held identically across both principal traditions.
Sources
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.
View At A Past Year
Choose a year to see this entry's facts and connections as the atlas records them at that moment: what it held then, what it held instead, and what it had not yet adopted. Choose Present for the current record.