________________
568
SAHRDAYĀLOKA But against this, the navīnas observe that, putting aside certain alamkāras such as utpreksā and the like, in alamkāras such as atiśayokti, apahnuti etc., merely on the strength of acquired knowledge - i.e. 'āhāryajñāna', the śābda-bodha can be justified (= upapatti). In the same way in rūpaka also this key is applicable and hence there is no compulsion to resort to laksaņā here (bījábhāva). To accept laksaņā at such places goes against common experience also.
The idea is this. When the Navīnas say that, 'utpreksady atirikta-atiśayoktiapahnattva-ādişu iva āhārya-jñānena upapattau, laksaņāyām bījábhāvād anubhavavirodhāc ca (R.G. pp. 467, ibid) - it becomes clear that in such alamkāras as utpreksā, sa-samdeha, etc. there is no escape from laksaņā even according to the Navīnas. The reason behind this is that in āhāryajñāna there should be the quality of certainty according to the normal opinion of the Naiyāyikas, who define āhāryajñāna as - "badhakālinecchājanyam jñānam.” (Nyayakośa, pp. 36). This means that, it is āhārya-jñāna, when we hold a clearly contradicted matter as not contradicted, through our desire or intelligence. For example the cognition such as 'the lake is on fire' - 'hrdo vahnimān iti jñānam'. Now even in the absence of fire in a lake, if we hold that there is fire in it, this sort of belief is only acquired - āhārya jñāna. From this point of view, the figures such as utprekṣā, sa-samdeha, etc. are purely āhārya-jñana, because when one says that, 'the darkness is like smoke', one knows that darkness is not smoke. But he knowingly imagines the darkness to be smoke. But the fancy in utpreksā is not of the form of a certainty and in āhāryajñāna what is recquired is certainty-or niscaya, according to the Naiyāyikas. Keeping this in mind the Navīnas have suggested that it is advisable to accept laksaņā in utpreksa.
Jagannātha further argues that in rūpaka alamkāra such as 'mukham candrah', according to the laksanavādins there is laksana on the upamāna-vācaka word, viz. 'candra' in the sense of 'candra-saděśa'. This is the opinion of the prācīnas : ‘api ca upamānavācakasya candrā"dipadasya rūpake, upamānasadrśe laksaņā iti hi prācām samayaḥ - (R.G. pp. 467, ibid). Now, continues Jagannātha, in the laksyártha viz. candra-sadřśa, the avacchedaka dharma - i.e. speciality in quality is sādņśya : 'tatra laksyarávacchedakam sādrśyam'. It is of the form of 'common quality' naturally - 'tac ca samāna-dharma-rūpam'. This is so because if 'sādrsya' which is an avacchedaka-dharma is not explained as 'samāna-dharma', then the rūpaka alamkāra based on 'common qualities' - 'or 'sādharmya', will not take place at all.
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
