________________
'Laksana'
575 According to both these views, there will be the apprehension of 'mukhatva' and candratva directly, where as in sāropa-sthala the candratva is cognised indirectly through 'candra-sadrśa', which is taken as the differentiating factor between sāropā and sādhyavasānikā. - "matadvaye'py asmin mukhā"dau' candrarvabhānasāmagryā, mukhatvā”deḥ svadharmasya bhānam na nivāryate. ittham caikasmin dharmini candratvā"dīnām mukhatva"dinām ca sāksad bhānam eva sāropāto'sya vicchedakam”. (R.G. pp. 499. ibid) - Thus the śābda-bodha in 'candra-raji., is "candratvavān mukhatvavān ca mukha-padárthah'. But for the ālamkārikas, the 'mukhatva' is completely concealed by 'candratva' just like the suktitva at the time of the apprehension of silver in the mother of pearl, and so there can be no cognition of the same in the śābda-bodha. Accordingly, therefore, the difference between sāropā and sadhyavasānā is that mukhatva is cognized in the former while it is totally hidden in the latter.
Thus, the discussion on laksanā which started with the śāstrakāras such as the Vaiyākaranas, Mimāmsakas and Naiyāyikas, and for whom it was only applied to the problem of language, takes a marvellous turn when discussed by the ālamkārikas who discuss laksanā from the point of view of a poetic expression. Laksaņā which started as a dosa with the Mimamsakas becomes a source of beauty with the poets, and later giants like Appayya and Jagannātha maintain the balance between śāstra and aesthetics, while discussing the śābdabodha on one hand of some varieties of lakșana, of course as evidenced in poetic illustrations, and the poetic beauty capped by the prayojana on the other, maintaining the aesthetic analysis.
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
