Indian Logic - 2

Continuing the series on Indian logic, I am going to make a small jump and move on to the AnekantavAda or the idea of relative pluralism spearheaded by the Jains in India. As far as I have understood it is one of the earliest set of theories(430-350 BC) that introduces conclusions between black and white and introduces the concept of uncertainty. The Jaina philosopher Bhadrabahu is credited as the chief architect of this system. The easiest introduction to this logic lies in the concept of 'nayavada' or the theory of standpoints and the analogy that is used to explain this is that of the Elephant and the four blind men. Each one is correct from their standpoint. According to them, nothing can be affirmed absolutely as an affirmation is true only under certain conditions and limitations. So a statement such as 'The pot exists' may be true from various standpoints like geographical standpoint, or at a level of abstraction or a position in time. A pot (or for that matter a pot hole) existing in Chennai might not be existing in Mumbai so the existence is essentially based on the standpoint of Chennai or Mumbai. Naya may be Dravyanaya or paryayanaya. If one is an author writing the draft of a book, with loose sheets one can still refer to it collectively as 'a book'(dravya) at a higher level of abstraction. Or one could refer to a particular page or a sheet or a quality of a book at a lower level of abstraction. These again have subtypes. Once we understand the nayavada or theory of standpoints we could potentially move to their seven predicates. The central idea in this scheme is the Saptabhanga or the seven predicates which are as follows:

• May be it is - SyAd asti


• May be it is not - SyAd nAsti


• May be it is and may be it is not - SyAd asti nAsti ca


• May be it is indeterminate - syAd avyaktavyah


• May be it is and it is indeterminate - syAd asti ca avyaktavyasca


• May be it is not and it is indeterminate - syAd nAsti ca avyakavasca


• May be it is, it is not and is indeterminate - syAd asti nAsti ca avyaktavasca

Of course if one applies symbols and uses a formulaic approach this could resemble an indeterminate equation. Some earlier scholars have also compared this to the statistical tabulation of the results of the toss of a coin which served as an early basis. If one were to form a truth table of sorts one would end up with true, false, true and false, neutral, true and neutral, false and neutral, true false and neutral. In set theory's parlance this is equivalent to a bit taking on the values, true, false or null and forming a powerset with the set of { true, false, null}. Thus for every naya or standpoint there are as many alternatives as indicated by Syadvada.

I am not going into the ontological and epistemological dimensions of each of these schools ie whether they believe in beings, their understanding of perception etc but merely trying to formulate the thought processes of Ancient Logic. Once again this set of posts is not an attempt at aggrandizement of old glory but to understand how the human mind has evolved complex thoughts over several centuries and how common strands of such thought process exists, evolve and develop over the ages.

Related post:

Indian Logic Part 1

Rival Ragas

I meant to continue my post on Indian Logic but a parallel track had me muddled so that will have to wait.. Warning : This post assumes that you know some background about the evolution of the two ragas of South Indian Music ie Varali and Kalyani. It might not make much sense otherwise.

Fiction:
VaraLi was very upset, infact she was fuming. She floated high, picking up the strands of her Madhyama and descended almost with a thud. She almost tripped over and quickly dusted herself off lest there would be some Chyuta panchama somewhere. At the thought of the word Chyuta Panchama Madhyama she got even more irritated. It was all the fault of that Ramamatya, she thought to herself. If only, he had called her madhyama, the 'Pratimadhyama' this Kalyani would not be going around gloating that she was the earliest known pratimadhyama mela. Now, this Ramamatya chose to expose the fact that she in her original form had only shuddha swaras and then introduced this neither-here nor there terminology and called it chyuta panchama madhyama. Why O why could'nt he have called it the Pratimadhyama and be done with it, she wailed. Then she thought, 'well Venkatamakhi called the note Varali madhyama that in itself should tell a thing or two to that Kalyani that it was after me that her madhyama was named'. She thought fondly of Venkatamakhi, as the one man who stood up for her.
" Had he not recognized the qualities or the lack of them in that Kalyani and called her unfit for githa, thaya and prabandha and composing? She of alien origins has now become identified with all that is auspicious all because a rebellious bunch did not heed to the words of that wise man. Well, even if all those people composed in her also composed in me she simply won the popular vote and stole the numbers game. Only Shyama Shastri had been the fairest of the lot and atleast made sure he did not compose 10 in her and 3 in me unlike these others. And look at me , I am encased in a bunch of superstitions and people don't even teach me to their students lest the guru-shishya relationship would be broken."

Ruing and bemoaning her fate, she descended into the mandhara sthayis of depression and floated right back into that instrument that produced her. She was senseless that she was not even awake to listen to the applause that followed.

Fact:
I am genuinely confused. Which is the earliest pratimadhyama raga - Varali or Kalyani. Technically speaking it might be Varali but the pratimadhyamafied Varali came into existence at the same time as this Kalyani. So it is one of those questions that defies a clear answer. Yet compositions in Kalyani (matrubhutayya of the pretrinity period) does seem to predate Varali in its current form.

Update: Narada's Sangita Makaranda apparently mentions Varali. So varali it is.