Anekantavada: the Many-Sidedness of Perception

 The Jain concept of Anekantavada is certainly very interesting, and I do not think that it is without parallel in Chrsitainity...

For a brief definition:

Anekāntavāda (Hindi: अनेकान्तवाद, "many-sidedness") is the Jain doctrine about metaphysical truths that emerged in ancient India.[1] It states that the ultimate truth and reality is complex and has multiple aspects.[2] Anekantavada has also been interpreted to mean non-absolutism, "intellectual Ahimsa",[3] religious pluralism,[4] as well as a rejection of fanaticism that leads to terror attacks and mass violence.[5]...

According to Jainism, no single, specific statement can describe the nature of existence and the absolute truth. This knowledge (Kevala Jnana), it adds, is comprehended only by the Arihants. Other beings and their statements about absolute truth are incomplete, and at best a partial truth.[8] All knowledge claims, according to the anekāntavāda doctrine must be qualified in many ways, including being affirmed and denied.[9] Anekāntavāda is a fundamental doctrine of Jainism.

The origins of anekāntavāda can be traced back to the teachings of Mahāvīra (599–527 BCE), the 24th Jain Tīrthankara.[10] The dialectical concepts of syādvāda "conditioned viewpoints" and nayavāda "partial viewpoints" arose from anekāntavāda in the medieval era, providing Jainism with more detailed logical structure and expression. 

Wikipedia

A medieval depiction of the many-sidedness of perception and man's inability to actually understand it in its completeness, but here enlightened beings are theoretically properly observing all of it. 

While Christianity undoubtedly rejects Jain cosmology and the extremity of Jain ethics, I found the above aspect of Jainism to be rather inspiring, and it also reminded me of St. Gregory Palamas, who wrote:

80. The inspired and universal tongue of the divine theologians, St John of Damaskos, says in the second of his theological chapters: 'A man who would speak or hear anything about God should know with all clarity that in what concerns theology and the divine economy not all things are inexpressible and not all are capable of expression, and neither are all things unknowable nor are they all knowable. ' We know that those divine realities of which we desire to speak transcend speech, since such realities exist according to a principle that is transcendent. They are not outside the realm of speech by reason of some deficiency, but are beyond the conceptual power innate within us and to which we give utterance when speaking to others. For neither can our speech explain these realities by interpretation, nor does our innate conceptual power have the capacity to attain them of its own accord through investigation. Thus we should not permit ourselves to say anything concerning God, but rather we should have recourse to those who in the Spirit speak of the things of the Spirit, and this is the case even when our adversaries require some statement from us.

 St. Gregory Palamas, Topics of Natural and Theological Science and on the Moral and Ascetic Life: One Hundred and Fifty Texts, in the Philokalia Vol. IV, 

Further remembering that God encompasses everything, and understanding that significant parts of reality are actually not describable, we can conclude that there is, on some level, fundamental truths and knowledge that are not actually accessible. Naturally, we can observe events and we can come to conclusions about the obvious and the mundane, but no Christian can actually claim to be fully initiated into knowledge of the truth of reality. 

This also reminds me of a story of another Saint (it may actually have been St. Gregory Palamas) who asked God to show him his true self as God sees him, and then he had to pray for him to make it stop because it was so excruciating seeing the depths of his own imperfections and sins. 

Thus, if we understand that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23), we can essentially view all forms of human reasoning and perception as being flawed to some degree. This directly supports the concept of Anekantavada and encourages us towards always looking for some sort of middle ground and divestment from our own selfish interests that we know to actually be corrupt in the root.

Christianity should embrace the imperfect many-sided perceptions that we all have, but also emphasize that God alone can judge, and can perceive all that is happening in a way that is objective. But let me emphasize before we go that objectivity itself is a human concept and does not come close to the omniscient perception that God has, and how He would relate things back to the summum bonum, Truth, and Reality.