New Dimensions in Jaina Logic

Author(s): Mahaprajna Acharya, Nathmal Tatia
Publisher: Today and Tommorrow Printers and Publishers

Page 65

Doctrine of Navas 57
existent, there being nothing called substance as the substratum of those modes. If on the basis of the predominance of black colour in it a crow is called black, then even the blankets, that are predominantly black, should be classed with the crows. The predominance of a particular mode cannot be accepted as the essence of another subordinate mode that is co-existent with it.
6. Impossibility of Substantive-Adjective Relationship
The admission of substantive-adjective relationship between two different modes would entail promiscuity of thought. And in the case of identical modes, such relationship is out of the question.
7. Absence of Cognitum-Cognition Relationship
A cognition does not know an unrelated object. Had it done so, the same cognition would have cognised all kinds of things, and this would destroy the possibility of a determinate congition. A cognition cannot also cognise a related object, because the latter ceases to exist when the former is supposed to cognise it. The cognitum-cognition relationship is based on causality. A cognition can know its cognitum only when the latter has presented itself to the former. But with the passing away of the moment of such presentation, both the cognition and cognitum are things of the past. The question of a cognition knowing its cognitum in such a situation does not simply arise.
8. Absence of Denocatum-Denotative Relationship
The meaning conventionally related to a word cannot be the connotation of the latter. This is so because the relationship determined between a word and its meaning is a thing of the past when the word is requisitioned for use at a subsequent moment. In short, the temporal diversity stands in the way of establishing any relationship between the word and meaning. And the admission of a meaning that is unrelated to the word would cause nothing but confusion. An unrelated meaning, therefore, cannot be the connotation of a word,
A word is not produced by the meaning (idea or thing). It is produced by the palate, tongue, lip etc. This is self-evident. The meaning (idea or thing) also is not produced by the word. The meaning is there even before the production of the word. There is thus no causal relationship between the word and the meaning.
The relation of identity also does not obtain between the word and meaning. They also exist apart in point of space. There is