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

Previous | Next

Page 311
________________ 284 Studies in Indian Philosophy uonameability thesis. But we have not been able to find any direct evidence that he did admit names with any alternative mode of significance. Could there be some indirect evidence ? One might look for indirect evidence in Bhartshari's own linguistic practice. He uses various Sanskrit expressions to introduce the significance relation and identify it to his readers. The first verse of our text introduces it as tesām sambandhah (their relation) the third verse calls it yogah sabdārthayoḥ (the relation of word and meaning), and so on. These are nominal expressions and so may be classified as names in our broad sense, with are prima facie counterexamples to Bl. And so, the argument would run, had Bhartshari been committed to Bl in full strength, and not merely to the weaker proposition SS 4a, he would have been committed to a principles which was inconsistent with his own linguistic practice. Therefore, the argument continues, we should regard the phrase " on the basis of a property (etc.)” as a restric tive clause, and construe the various names Bhartshari uses for the significance relation, as names which signify on some other basis. This indirect argument against attributing Bl to Bhartrhari, cannot be dismissed lightly. But a fuller reflection will show that it cannot be taken to be decisive either. In the first place at least one other verse of our text apparently implies an unqualified instance of the unnameability thesis, in connection with the inherence relation : 8 The relation called inherence, which extends beyonds the signifying function (vācyadharmāt ivartini) cannot be understood through words either by the speaker or by the person to whom the speech is addressed. (SS 19) Helārāja's commentary on this verse ends with the statement : " Therefore it (inherence ) is truly unsignifiable ( avācya )."9 This provides some evidence that Bhartshari was committed to : B2. The inherence relation is unnameable. Jain Education International For Private & Personal Use Only www.jainelibrary.org

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 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