________________
172
NYAYA AND JAINA EPISTEMOLOGY
philosophy of language the relation between a word and its meaning may be discussed. In Indian philosophy there are different views regarding import of the words. According to grammarian view the whole order is the manifestation of word and whatever exists is expressible. This is an extreme view. Another extreme theory is the Upanisadic view that reality is absolutely inexpressible by means of words. As against these views, the Jainas strike the balance by maintaining that reality is both expressible and inexpressible. This is not merely not inconsistent but it is philosophy of consistency par excellence. This can be proved by considering the Jaina view of the relation between a word and its meaning. Jaina position is one word expresses one meaning only. Sometimes a word conveys more meaning than one. But then it should be regarded not as one word but as many words as the number of meanings it appears to convey. This relation is designated by Jaina writers as 'ekārthatvaniyama'' The etymological standpoint confirms this view. No single word can have two meanings. Two or more meanings can have same lingustic symbols like two different persons having the same name. The words expressing different meanings are different in spite of common linguistic symbols. Thus, as regards the import of the words, Jaina view is different from the views held by other schools. The question is whether meaning of word is in the word as a natural power or it is a matter of convention. Jainas take the middle position as against Mīmāṁsākas on the one hand and Naiyāyikās on the other. Mīmāṁsākas maintain that meaning of a word is in the word as a natural power while Naiyāyikās maintain that it is conventional. Reconciling these two extremes, Jainas maintain that a word has potentiality to convey its natural meaning. Still it needs the aid of convention for its discovery and use. In other words, though power is natural, it is made
