Kavyanushasana Critical Study

SR No.: 001713
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: A N Upadhye
Publisher: A N Upadhye
Publication Year: 1987
Total Pages: 558
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Literature, & Kavya
File Size: 10 MB

Page 144

The Process of Indication
Explaining the process of Indication in Gangayam ghoṣaḥ and Kuntaḥ praviśanti, both stock examples used in the Kavyaprakāśa, in terms of Mukhyārthabadha, Nimitta and Prayojana, Hemachandra goes on to state in the gloss that since a village cannot be situated on Ganga (Pravaha) and since spears cannot enter, the primary sense is found incompatible and set aside. Then due to nearness of the bank to the stream and the association of spears with the holders or bearers of spears (soldiers) which is the Nimitta or Sambandha, the sense of Gangatata and Kuntavantaḥ arises which is apprehended in such a way as to suggest (the purpose of) the attributes of sacredness and fierceness of the place and the person (in question) respectively, which is the purpose of resorting to this secondary process.
Not every Sense can be Termed 'Laksyärtha'
It will be seen that in Hemachandra's definition of Gaunī and Lakṣaṇa the term Nimitta is used in connection with the second condition which requires that the two meanings must be connected, in the sense of Mukhyartha or Tadyoga which means Abhidheyasambandha. The compliance with this condition is important because if there is no connection between the two (Vācya and Lakṣya) senses, every sense could become Lakṣyärtha. These connections are five : Abhidheya-sambandha (Gangayam ghoṣaḥ), Sadṛśya-Sambandha (Gaurvahikaḥ), Samavayasambandha or Sahacarya (Kuntaḥ pravišanti), Vaiparityasambandha (Bhadramukha means Abhadramukha) and Kriyayoga (Satrughnastvam).
Lakṣaṇā not to be Confused with Implication Etc.
After illustrating the Sutra on Lakṣyartha, Hemachandra reproduces verbatim from Mammata's Kavyaprakāśa (II. 11 ff) an argument to justify that Lakṣaṇa is an independent power of word and is not to be confused with implication or any other logical method of cognition. The argument here concerns Mammata's attack on the views of Mukulabhaṭṭa, the author of
119