________________
"Tātparya"
421 this case, this explanation will involve the unwarranted assumption of two separate functions for the primary power called abhidhā - (pp. 94, ibid) -
It is therefore that the anvitábhidhānavādins hold that there is only one potency for words to express the meaning as related to the rest of the words. It is through recollection that we remember the meanings of words, and this is by rousing the mental impressions of previous experiences of the use of the words. As a matter of experience, normally we never come across words except as related in a sentence and that isolated words have no existence in normal speech-activity. The word-meaning and the relation to other words are both known through abhidhā.
The Bhātra school has objection to this position also (Tattvabindu, p. 95). They hold that eventhough we observe words functioning in different contexts of situations, in all of which they occur as related to a sentence, still we are able to understand the isolated senses of the individual words separately also. Otherwise, a word learnt through from its use in one context, cannot be applied in another context. Again, the very principle of recognition is based on our capacity to recognize something isolated from a given context. We are able to recognize a person in a place and time different from those when we had met him first. (Tattvabindu, pp. 116). It can be argued here, that we do recognize a person, may be for a second time, also in some given time and place, and not as isolated of all situations.
A further obiection raised against the anvitábhidhāna theory is that the meaning of a sentence can be known from the meanings of the words remembered eventhough the words might have been forgotten. Our experience says that in a long sentence we forget the earlier words used, but we remember their meanings and yet we arrive at the full sentence-sense. The Šāstradīpikā p. 153, observes :
"pūrvabhāgeșu vākyasya vismrtesy api drọyate, vākyárthávagatiḥ puņsām
padártha-smrtiśālinām." The relation of the words in a sentence is not the same as that of the letters in a word; for in case of a word we do not arrive at word-sense if we forget the initial letters. Abhihitánvaya-vāda :
The Bhāțţa-school of Mīmāmsakas and some Naiyāyikas support this theory. The Vākyártha section of the Nyāyaratnamālā and the Tattvabindu, Mānameyodaya
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
