________________
Language and Truth: (129) "syat”as a sign of truth, because it makes our statements relative as well as beyond contradiction, thus true. At the same time, it makes the listener free from doubts. Lord Mahāvīra therefore, gave instructions to his disciples that they should use only such language, which is analytical (vibhajyavādī). Vibhajyavada (the theory of analysis) is that methodology of linguistic expressions which solves the questions by analysing them. Lord Mahāvīra and Lord Buddha both have given emphasis on the clarity of language. We have already discussed the theory of vibhajyavāda in chapter -1 in detail. It is that mode of proposition, which does not give one-sided judgements and analyse the question thoroughly. When it was asked to Buddha whether the householder is a seeker of nirvāṇa or the initiated one (pravrajita), the lord said if the householder and the pravrajita both are deceptive (mithyāvādi), they are not seeker of nirvāṇa (ārādhaka). Similarly, when Jayanti asked the Mahāvīra, whether is it good to sleep or to remain awake? He replied for some it is good to sleep and for some others, it is good to remain awake. It is good to sleep for sinners and good to remain awake for the religious people.18 The above examples make it clear that the theory of analysis (vibhajyavāda) is nothing but the method of replying the questions after analysing them. This analytical method shapes the thoughts and makes the various facets of truth clear. The modern linguistic analysis also to some extent, accepts this method of analysing the propositions. The principle object of language analysis is to make the ultimate parts/constituents of a statement clearer which are called as logical atoms. This method, after analysing the proposition, tries to bring out is real import. It is of course, true that the modern linguistic analysis is now a developed philosophy but its seeds can be found in the vibhajyavāda of the Buddha and the Mahāvīra. Not only this, the various facets of the language philosophy propounded by the Jainas, the Buddhists and the Grammarians, need serious consideration. The problem of the meaning of a word is seriously discussed by the Indian philosophers and it is really very important. No philosophy of language can ignore it. It is the need of the day to examine the developing language philosophy of the West in the context of Indian philosophy of language. We hope that by such a comparative linguistic study of the East and the West we may reach the threshold of truth.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
