________________
'Laksana'
563 the candra and sadrśa expressed by the same word. This abheda or tādātmyasampratyaya can not be obstructed by the bheda-jñāna, because its antidote vyañjanā also is present in the lakṣaṇā-sthala, which is not found in the upamāsthala: "śleşasthalaivā’trāpyekaśabdópādānótthasya vyañjanasya upāyatvād vaiyañjanika-bodhasya bādha-buddy apratibadhyattvāc ca.” (pp. 465, ibid). Once
andráhhinna-candra-sadrsábhinnatva' is accepted in mukha, also follows automatically, according to the maxim, 'tadabhinnábhinnam tad abhinnam'. In view of this, expressions such as, 'vaktre candramasi, sthite kim aparaḥ śītámśur ujjrmbhate' etc., that express tādātmya between the visaya and visayin are to be supported. Thus, this view of some ālamkārikas maintains the difference between the rūpaka and upamā because of the difference in their phala.
Jagannātha used such words as, "atra kecit”, in the beginning of the above view. This shows that he feels that there is no need of bringing in the difference of phala, when we can show the difference in sābda-bodha itself.
Jagannātha then gives the view of still others. He says, 'anye tu, candrā”dipadebhyah laksanayā candra-sadrśatvenā’pi rūpenópasthitānām mukhā"dīnām candratvena rūpeņaiva mukhā”dipadópasthāpitaiḥ saha abhedánvayabodho jāyāte...” (pp. 466, ibid).
These 'anye' or others hold that inspite of the general rule that the cognition of the meaning of the words - padárthopasthiti and the sābda-bodha that follows should be of similar form, it is suggested that, on the strength of the experience that laksyánvaya-bodha in the lakṣaṇā-sthala will be having sakyatávacchedaka (i.e. gangātva) as its prakāra; to be put in otherwise, the cognition of the laksyártha will be more in form of mukhyártha itself - “tat-tat-pada-laksanā-jñānasya tat-tat-padaśakyatā’vacchedaka-prakāraka-laksyánvaya-bodhatvávacchinnam prati hetutāyāḥ, padárthopasthiti-śābdabodhayoḥ samānā”kāratvasyā’nubhava-sākṣika-vailaksanyakalākṣaṇika-bodhā’tirikta-visayatāyāśca kalpanāt.” (pp. 466, ibid).
Thus in places like 'gangāyām ghosah', though the 'tata' (laksyártha) is first cognised with only tatatva, the final anvayabodha will be 'gangātva' to make it possible to suggest the śaitya, pāvanatva, etc. - 'ata eva gangāyām ghosa ity atra taţatvenā'pyupasthitasya tatasya gangātvenā'nvayabodhas tatprayojyaḥ śaitya pāvanatvā”di-pratyayaś ca samgacchate.” (pp. 466, ibid). By applying this principle in 'mukham candrah', the apprehension of identity-abheda-bodhabetween the face that is conveyed by 'candra' by laksanā (as candra-sadrśa) and the face that is expressed by the word 'mukha' (by abhidhā) will be restricted by
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
