________________
'Laksanā
561 Thus Mammata has suddhā-upādāna-laksanā equivalent to a-jahatsvārthā, then
-laksana-laksanā which equates with jahatsvartha in the Rasa-gangadhara Śuddhā-sāropā, śuddhā-sādhyavasānā, gauņi-sāropā and gaunī-sādhyavasānā are found in common.
As already discussed earlier, Jagannatha also accepts, following Mammața, the existence of a special relation over and above that of sādņśya, etc. between the mukhyártha and laksyártha.
Jagannātha then proceeds to discuss the verbal explanation or 'śābda-bodha' that is seen in example of sāropa-laksanā, such as 'mukham candrah', which illustrates 'gaunī sāropā', and 'pure'smin saudha-śikhare...' etc. which illustrates 'gauņi-sādhyavasānā. He says that in gauņī-sāropā the śābda-bodha is of the form of 'candra-sadrśā bhinnam mukham ! He says that in gauņi-sāropā-laksanā, there is secondary meaning collected from the visayi-pada viz. 'candra' and it means 'candra-sadrśa'. The relation between the two is that of 'abheda', or identity. The direct perception of 'bheda' or non-identity cannot obliterate this perception of identity arrived at through vyañjanā. Thus the bādha-buddhi is not 'pratibandhaka' of 'abheda-bodha'. Thus 'laksyártha' is correlated through abheda sambandha with objects such as 'mukha' which are characterized by such qualities as 'mukhatva' etc., brought about by words such as 'mukha'. Jagannātha observes that here, if we go for the laksyártha such as 'candrasādssya' or 'similarity with moon', which is expressive of quality - i.e. dharma-vācaka, in place of the dharmi-vācaka-laksyártha viz. 'candra-sadrśa' i.e. 'similar to the moon', then, that laksyártha (i.e. 'indicated sense which is dharma-vācaka) will not be correlated with 'mukha', i.e. correlation will not be possible here. The reason is that 'sādrśya' and 'mukha' can have only abheda-relation between them. Now if we resort to the lakṣaṇā of sāděśya-dharma then it will have only one relation with 'mukha' such as that of visesana-višesyabhāva, which in its turn is necessarily bheda'-rūpa. The idea is that as in a sentence viz. 'candra-sadrśam mukham''sadęśam' and 'mukham' being in aposition or same vibhakti, there is 'a-bheda' relation between them and between 'candra-sadrśyam' and 'mukham', there can not be the same relation. So, 'sāc
be the same relation. So, 'sadrśvábhinnam mukham' is a sābda-bodha which is not possible here as between these two there is no 'abheda'relation.
Dr. Ramachandrudu (pp. 262, 263 ibid) puts it as follows : “Here the upamānavācaka (candrah) expreses by laksanā the sense 'candrasadríah', and the word 'mukha' expresses the sense 'face' by abhidh, only. Ultimately there will be an abhedánvaya between the lakṣaṇópasthitártha (candra-sadrśa) and the sense
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
