________________
'Vyañjanā'
677
of word, as seen in Anandavardhana (i.e. Dhvanyaloka) and in Abhinavagupta (i.e. in Locana on the Dhv.).
Anandavardhana, in Dhv. II. 2 observes that the soul of suggestion, 'with meant expressed sense (i.e. vivakṣitábhidheya) is two-fold, (i) of 'unnoticeable sequence' (i.e. asamlakṣya-krama) and (ii) of 'noticeable sequence'. (i.e. samlaksya-krama). This samlaksya-krama-dhvani or suggestion with noticeable sequence is further sub-divided into (i) śabda-śakti-mula, or 'that which is based on the power of word, and (ii) artha-śakti-mula or, 'that which is based on the power of sense.' (Dhv. II. 20). In Dhv. II. 21, the author observes that with the acceptance of sabda-śaktimula-dhvani, or suggestion based on the power of word, the scope of the figure, 'double entendre' or śleṣa would not be completely robbed off. For both operate in separate fields. The author says -
"Only that instance wherein is present a figure that is not expressed directly by any word, but conveyed solely by the suggestive power of the word itself, should be regarded as suggestion based on the power of word."
For, only a figure which is conveyed by the power of the word is intended by us to form an instance of suggestion based on the power of the word and not that all ideas so convyed are instances of this suggestion. If two ideas are manifested (simultaneously) as a result of the power of word, we have only an instance of double entendre. Thus Anandavardhana distinguishes clearly between the scope of śabda-śakti-müla-dhvani or suggestion based on the power of word, and that of śleṣa, or double entendre. He then tries to suggest that in fact, Bhaṭṭa Udbhata has pointed out that the name double entendre can apply to such instances too wherein we get the idea of another figure through the particular figure present there. And, in view of this, one might again doubt whether suggestion based upon the power of word (i.e. sabda-śakti-mūla-dhvani) can be left with any independent scope at all. To remove such a doubt, the word 'suggestive' has been used in the text. So, the idea is All instances wherein, through the power of sound, only an expressed figure is conveyed by another expressed figure, should be brought under the province of double entendre. But such instances where a new figure which appears thus to be quite different from an expressed one, will come under the scope of suggestion based upon the power of word... Even a suggested figure will not become an instance of resonance like suggestion based on the power of word, if it also gets expressed at the same time by other expressions. In such instances, we will find only expressed figure like evasive speech (vakrokti). He observes: (vṛtti, Dhv. II. 21) (pp. 72, ibid): tad ayam arthaḥ yatra śabda-śaktyā sākṣād
-
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
-
www.jainelibrary.org
