________________
The Jaina Philosophy of Sentence : (77) sentence terms have no existence whatsoever. The second view held by Nyaya, Samkhya, etc. regards a sentence as made of unit-parts, i.e. words and terms. According to them, the terms, which are independent units in themselves, are very important parts of a sentence. There are however, differences of opinion between these philosophers as to which is the crux of sentence. Is it the kriya-pada or ākhyāta-pada (a verbal form or construct) or is it the subject (uddeśya-pada) of a sentence? Prabhācandra on the basis of Vākyapadīya has criticised the following theories regarding the definition and nature of a sentence.
(1) Kriyapada (a verbal form or construct) as the crux of a sentence: According to some philosophers, the verbal forms (kriyā-pada or ākhyāta-pada) is the crux of sentence. It is only capable of carrying meaning of a sentence. In the absence of a verb the meaning of a sentence cannot be made clear. Therefore, in the comprehension of meaning of a sentence, only the verb is primary and other terms are secondary.
While criticising this view, Prabhācandra asks whether the verbal construct is a sentence irrespective of other terms or it is a sentence relative to other terms? The first view can be criticised on two grounds, firstly, if the verb is not relative to other terms, it would cease to be a term and will not be able to take the form of a sentence. Secondly, if we regard verbal construct (äkhyātapada) non-relative to other terms itself as a sentence, then there will be complete absence of ākhyātapada in a sentence. Because, the verb is that which defines the natural relation between the subject and the predicate or say, between the subject and the verb itself. If the verb is non-relative to the subject or the predicate terms, it will lose its status being a verb because in that case it will not be able to indicate its relation with them. Further, if the verb is a sentence in relation to other forms, it is relative absolutely or partly? If it is sentence being partly relative then it will be quite similar to the Jaina view and if it is a sentence being absolute relative, then it will cease to be a sentence because of complete relativity it would lack the very quality of a sentence and the contextual meaning, which is derived from the verb. In that case it would only be a half sentence for being completely relative it will need some other entity to make its meaning understandable. Being dependent on some other entity, it will not fulfil the nature of a sentence because a
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
