Jaina Philosophy of Language

Author(s): Sagarmal Jain
Publisher: Parshwanath Vidyapith

Page 84

(58) : Jaina Philosophy of Language words indicate the individuals, objects, facts, events, activities and emotions. Generally the word (sabda), its meaning (vācyārtha) and the object (vişaya) all have their independent existence. Jainas hold that the word is different from its denotation and the objects to be denoted. There is relation of vācya-vācaka (expressed-expressive) in word and its meaning, and this relation means that both are neither absolutely identical nor absolutely different. Jainas opine that the two realities in spite of having their independent entity can be related to each other. According to them, neither the word is of objec-form nor the object is of word-form. Neither they accept that the real world is (vastu-jagat) generated by word (Nāda) nor they accept the identity between the real world and word. Similarly, the word and the meanings are neither evolved from each other (tadutpatti) nor they are identical. Yet, the Jainas do accept the expressedexpressive relation in word and its meaning. Because, if there is no relation, the word cannot denote its meaning. The relation between the word and its meaning does not mean that the word transforms itself in the from of meaning. According to Jainas, there is certain relation between the word and its meaning but no such relation, which could claim that the word takes place of its meaning. There may be following three types of relations between the word and its denotation. (1) Tādātmya-sambandha (Relation of identity) (2) Tadutpatti-sambandha (Relation of evolved their from) (3) Vācya-vācaka-sambandha (Relation of expressed-expressive)
The grammarians maintain that there is identity between the word and its denotation. But the Jainas, refuting this contention argue that there can not be relation of identity between the word and its denotation, because in that case with the pronunciation of word the object denoted by it, must be realised. Nyāyakumudacandra has raised this question and describes that with the pronunciation of the word modaka (a kind of sweet) one does not realise its sweetness, thus, there is no identity between the word and its denotation. Similarly, in the word and its denotation the relation of tadutpatti (evolved there from) is also not possible. Neither the object of denotation is evolved from the word, nor the word is evolved from the object of denotation. The word and its denotation both have independent existence from each other. Thus, there can not be accepted the relation of tadutpatti between the word and the object of denotation.