________________
'Laksanā'
535
classification. While defining laksanā, he has also tried to improve upon Mammata. In his Sāhityadarpana II. 5, (pp. 35, Edn. with Laksmī tikā, Chawkhamba, Skt. Samsthāna, Varanasi, '85, Ācārya Krsnamohan śāstri) - Viśvanātha defines laksaņā as -
"mukhyárthabādhe tadyukto yayā’nyorthaḥ pratīyate, rūdheḥ prayojanās vā’sau
laksaņā śaktir arpitā.” (S.D. II. 5) - Lakşmi (pp. 35, ibid) observes : “mukhyárthasy abhidheyárthasya bādhe, anvayā’nupapattigrahe, tādrūpyeņa, tātparyávisayatve vā sati, rūdheḥ anādivặddha-vyavahāra-prasiddhi-vaśāt, prayojanād uddeśya-viśesad vā, yayā śaktyā, tadyuktah mukhyártha-sambandha-yuktah, anyaḥ, mukhyárthatávacchedakā'tiriktadharmávacchinno’rthaḥ pratīyate, buddhyate, asau sā, arpitā āropitā, mukhyárthavyavahita-laksyártha-visayakatvād arvācīnaiḥ śabdeșu kalpitā ity arthaḥ, śaktir vịttiḥ, laksaņā laksyate, jñāyate anyā iti tādrśī ucyate iti seṣaḥ. tathā ca abhidheyárthā’nvayā’nupapattigrahatve sati rūdhi-prayojanányatara-prayojyamukhyártha-sambandhavat tad atiriktárthe-pratipādaka-saktitvam laksanātvam. kārikákşarena tu, "yayā’nyorthaḥ pratīyate'sau laksaņā” iti lakṣaṇāyā laksanam. mukhyártha-bādhaḥ, mukhyártha-yoga), rūdhi-prayojanányatarac ceti trayam laksaņāyā hetuḥ. ādyayor danda-cakrā'di-nyāyena militayor eva kāraṇatvam, rūdhiprayojanayos tu 'trņåraņi-mani-nyāyena pratyekam eva kāraṇatvam.”
But we feel we cannot agree fully with Laksmī's observation, for, if 'yayā'nyorthaḥ pratiyate sā laksaņā' is to be taken as the definition part, then, we are afraid, it can be made applicable to vyañjanā as well. Even the word 'arpitā' also cannot exclude vyañjanā. So, the whole, - along with the conditions such as ‘mukhyárthabādhe tadyuktaḥ' and 'rūdheḥ prayojanād vā', - has to be taken as definition. Roughly, of course, we can says that, "yayā'nyorthaḥ pratīyate" is the definition, the three nimitta-hetus are rūdhi/prayojana, preceded by mukhyárthabādha and tad-yoga. 'arpitā sakti' is the description of laksanā. It cannot form part of the definition.
Viśvanātha goes to observe that 'mukhyártha-bādha' i.e. the fact of the primary sense being contradicted is the first condition for laksanā i.e. secondary or metaphorical usage. When the primary sense becomes inapplicable, either there is lack of correlation i.e. anvayā’nupapatti' in a sentence, or there is tātparyā’nupapatti' i.e. non-realisation of the speaker's intention as in case of,
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
