Jaina Philosophy of Language

Author(s): Sagarmal Jain
Publisher: Parshwanath Vidyapith

Page 93

Jaina Philosophy of Word : (67) then the question arises as to whose reflection is it? Is it the reflection of the objects of absolute individuality (svalakṣaṇa) or of the universal? It cannot be the reflection of svalaksaņa because absolute individuality is of the form of exclusion, hence negative, whereas reflection is unitary and positive. Further, if it is reflection of svalakşaņa (absolute individuality), then it should be identical with svalakṣaṇa but you deny the identity of word with svalakṣaṇa. Again, if it is reflection of universal, you have already denied the existence of universal, and which is not existent, how that can be reflected? If the Buddhists say that due to perseverance of object into non-object there may be inclination in external word, then it would be not valid. Contrary to it, if they consider perseverance to the external world, then they endorse the Jaina contention.
(4) If the function of the word is atadvyāvrtti (exclusion of the idea, which does not deserve it) only, then it would be only of a negative form; but we find in everything both of existential and non-existential characteristics. According to the Jainas, the determination of the nature of an object is done by the affirmation of Svacatuștaya i.e. dravya (substance), kşetra (space), kāla (time) and bhāva (state) and the negation of paracatuştaya. If the word denotes an object, we will have to determine its meaning by both the affirmative and negative processes, for every affirmation is relative to negation and every negation is relative to affirmation. Affirmation without negation and negation without affirmation are not complete. Therefore, the Buddhists have to accept an affirmative aspect in their theory of apoha. The function of a word is not only to negate the false or other meanings but also to present its own meaning. The word should be regarded as expressing the objects in its own nature.
(5) Apoha cannot be a negation. In practical life, also we find that on hearing the word, 'cow' we directly comprehend the meaning of cow. We don't reach to its meaning by the negating buffalo, horse etc. Though the meanings of the word cow can be understand by the negation of ‘not cow' or other than cow, but this does also mean that all the cows have the same characteristics. The similarity of characteristics can be judged by the affirmative process only.
(6) Again, to postulate a relation between the word and its meaning does not mean that the both are the same. The Jainas have recognised the