Facets of Jain Philosophy Religion and Culture

Author(s): Shreechand Rampuriya, Ashwini Kumar, T M Dak, Anil Dutt Mishra
Publisher: Jain Vishva Bharati

Page 188

Anekānta, Svadvāda and Saptahhangi 171
Tattvärthavārtika,4' has discussed in detail the possible meanings cf the predicate ‘jar', which we shall here briefly notice. He states the proposition in the accredited form 'In some respect, this is jar. Here the object represented by the substantive this has two aspects---native (svaimu) and alien (parātma---which vary according to the intention of the cognizer or speaker. Thus (1) if the intended native aspect is the aspect expressed by the concept or the word “jar' (in its usual sense), the alien aspect is the aspect expressed by the concept or the word ‘non-jar'. In other words, the object in its native aspect is jar (svātmana syād ghațah), and in its alien aspect non-jar (parātmanā syadagnațah).SO The object thus is both jar and non-jar. The principle implied is that the object is a comprehensive fact which includes in itself the opposite characteristics like jar and non-jar. The object as determined by the particular characteristic cognized, that is, as determinandum is the native aspect, and the object as not so determined, that is, the non-determinandum is the alien aspect. Corresponding to the determinandum and the non-determinandum, there are also determinans and non-determinans. It is thus seen that the substantive and the adjective of a proposition have two aspects each-one positive, another negative. (2) If, again, the irtended native aspect of the object is the aspect expressed by the word “jar' as an ad hoc symbol, the corresponding alien aspect would be the aspect expressed by the word 'non-jar' as a symbol standing for the usual or any other conventional or attributed meaning of the word “jar'. The upshot is the same as in the first analysis, viz., the object in its native aspect is ‘jar' and in its alien aspect “non-jar'. Similarly (3) if the intended native aspect of the object is the aspect expressed by the word “jar' standing for the jar-particular, the alien aspect would be the aspect expressed by the word 'non-jar' standing for the jar-universal. Here also the object in its native aspect is 'jar', and in its alien aspect
Johnson's view of judgment or proposition, expressed here, is indebted to the views of Bradley and Bosanguet, as he himself has admitted in the following words: "Our conclusion, briefly expressed, is that any proposition characterises some fact, so that the relation of proposition to fact is the same as that of adjective to substantive. Bradley has represented a proposition as ultimately an adjective characterising Reality, and Bosanquet as an adjective characterising that frag.nent of Reality with which we are in immediate contact. In adopting the principle that a proposition may be said, in general, to characterise a fact, I am including with some
modification what is common to these two points of view.''-Logic, Part I, p. 14. 49. TV, I. 6(5). 50. तत्र स्वात्मना स्याघटः परात्मना स्याद् अघटः को वा घटस्य स्वात्मा, को वा परात्मा ?
RETTHETTY F it: FETISHT, Targa: Ħ RIGHT TIC: --TV, I. 6(5).