________________
on ad infinitum. This will create a chaotic situation. Thus, while trying to gain a point, you will loose the ground or root and destroy the basis of Lakṣaṇā. As for stating that the indicated sense together with the Prayojana is the subject of Indication, it is untenable. Why? Because Viṣaya and Prayojana (Mammaṭa's Jñana and Phala) are poles apart. That is to say, the province of Lakṣaṇa is altogether different from the Prayojana or purpose of a Lakṣaṇā. For example, in direct perception, the Ghața, a pot, is the subject of perception, and its knowledge is its Prayojana 'Jñānasya viṣayo hyanyat phalamanyad udahṛtam.' This Prayojana is Arthāvagamana or Prakatyam or Samvittiḥconsciousness of the Ghata. It, therefore, stands to reason that another Vyāpāra (Vyañjana) must be posited and accepted to make up for the incapacity of either Gauṇīvṛtti or Lakṣaṇāvṛtti to yield a Lakṣyartha (Gangatira) together with Prayojana (Visiste lakṣaṇā naiva) and that power is Vyañjana or Vyañjanam.
We may do well to remember that Hemachandra has practically paraphrased and abridged a long disquisition on Vyañjana afforded by the Kāvyaprakāśa (II. 14-18). Abhidhāmālā and Lakṣaṇāmālā: Both Śābdi
It will be seen that the above argument convincingly establishes that the Lakṣaṇāmālā vyañjanā is as much Śabdi as the Abhidhamula is, and so Hemachandra's definition and explanation of the twofold Sabdaśaktimūla is fully justified.
The Function of Perception
Hemachandra has mentioned the words Arthadhigatiḥ, Prakatyam and Samvittiḥ in connection with the explication of the Prayojana of the Pratyakṣādi pramāṇa. In the Viveka Commentary (p. 66) our author states that, according to the Naiyāyikas, Arthadhigati or understanding the meaning of an object is the purpose of direct perception. According to Bhāṭṭa Mimāṁsakas, it is the revelation of the object and according
Jain Education International
162
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
