Anekanta Problem Of Meaning

Author(s): S M Shaha
Publisher: Z_Jain_Vidya_evam_Prakrit_014026_HR.pdf

Page 4

890
जैनविद्या एवं प्राकृत : अन्तरशास्त्रीय अध्ययन
It ought to be interpreted liberally, that is, in secondary, metaphorical or figurative sense. Thus Mimāṁsä lays down canons of interpretation in connection with determining what portion falls under these two heads namely, Vidhi and Arthavada, that is, the primary and secondary meanings respectively. It holds that only vidhis or injunctions are directly authoritative; for, they teach us what to do and what not to do. Sentences which merely state something are of no use; for, nobody gains thereby anything. Hence all the arthavādas are authoritative only in so far as they form a unitary passage with commond sentences. For example, the arthavada, 'vayu is a swift deity' forms a unitary passage with the injuction, 'one who wants prosperity should touch a goat relatingt o vayu', because taken independently the arthavada has no use, while taken as a corroborative statement of the injunction, it praises the god vayu and suggests that a rite in connection with god is highly praisaworthy."
Thus according to the Mimamsakas action is the guiding principle of interpreting a particular word or sentence and ascribing to it a primary or secondary meaning. In this respect they equally attach importance to contextual fectors as well as a purport also. Even they maintain that an action consists of parts; and words corresponding to them may be divided into parts if necessary to express their idea. consequently it follows that not only the meaning but even form of a word may also be indeterminate in nature. For example, the word 'svaha' may be divided into sva, à, ha meaning "(sva) the soul, (ā) leading to or associated with (ha, 'an exclamation of satisfaction) satisfaction." Hence it expresses the satisfaction of the soul with action, with result that it can eontinue to act. Similarly, if we divide the word dana into parts,-d, ā, na-the meaning would be "(d) sacrifice (a) associated with (na) the senses of knowledge;" and it would signify "the sacrifice or proper function of the senses of knowledge," and the idea becomes different from that of a "gift." These examples illustrate one of the mimāṁsic methods of interpretation which ascribes a special meaning to a common word by dividing it according to the context, purpose and purport. This indicates the indeterminate or anekantic aspect of their concept of meaning. The canons of interpretation laid down by the Mimāṁsakas are of great value not only to those who want to understand the veda aright but to all who are engaged in the work of finding out the exact import of fixed texts like legal codes."7
परिसंवाद -४