Book Title: Studies in Indian Philosophy
Author(s): Dalsukh Malvania, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

View full book text
Previous | Next

Page 116
________________ On reasoning from anvaya... 89 uses (7) does not intend to say that things which, because of their conflicting properties, cannot be related as qualifier and qualificand, are so related. Since the significand of tvam is said to be qualified by what tad signifies, the former has to be something not susceptible of suffering; since tad is linked with tvam in (7), it cannot be understood to refer to something that is removed, so that it must refer to the inner self.32 In other words, the conflict is eliminated by ones understanding to be set aside the conflicting properties in the signi. ficands of tad and tvam. Once this is done, one is left with a single unqualified entity, the self. Thus interpreted, (7) teaches that there is no distinction between one self and the ultimate self, Brahman. As (7) speaks of a single self, so (15) 22131217 19157: The ether in the pot is the great ether.' speaks of a single ether. This sentence too is of the type 'X is Y', in which two terms have a single referent. The terms of (15) immediately refer to ether which is in a water pot and the great ether. There is an obvious conflict of qualities, so that the significands in question cannot properly be qualifier and qualificand. To understand (15), then, one must set aside these conflicting properties. Thus, one is left with ether pure and simple, so that (15) is understood to say there is no difference between the ether in a pot and the great ether.33 In that they speak of unqualified entities, (7) and (15) are obviously different from (106), which speaks of a qualified thing, a blue lotus. Now, any sentence such as ( 106 ) has a relational meaning proper to the sentence (vākyārtha) over and above the meanings of its components. There are two major views concerning such a sentence meaning. According to some, it is a differentiation of one entity from another, an exclusion of possible entities (bheda); others say it is a combining of entities (samsarga). Suppose that nila of itself signifies any blue-black thing at all, utpala any lotus at all. Linking the two terms in (106) has the effect of narrowing down possible referents, excluding blue things other than lotuses and a lotus SP-12 Jain Education International For Private & Personal Use Only www.jainelibrary.org

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352