________________
Vyañjanā-virodha or, opposition to suggestive power
717 in such instances can neither be arrived at through inference nor recollection - “na ca smrtir iyam, an-anubhūte tad a-yogāt, niyamā'pratipatter vaktur etat vivaksitam ity adhyavasāyábhāva-prasangāc ca, iti asti tāvad atra sabdasya eva vyāpāraḥ.”
Abhinavagupta categorically says that in the apprehension of the motive there cannot be the agency of either inference or recollection but it can be the result only of the power of word alone, and it has to be vyañjanā.
It may be noted that Abhinavagupta while rejecting the case of inference, takes into account the 'śāstrīya' form of anumiti, i.e. he rejects the case of 'tarkánumiti'. But we have seen that Mahimā says that here we have what we may say, a case of ‘kāvyánumiti' and not 'tarkánumiti'. He pooh-poohes the efforts of those who are seeking the shelter of tarkánumiti here. For him, even in ordinary parlance there is a sort of inference, working at popular level, which is not absolutely scientific. When a child arrives late after playing in the evening and when, for example he sees the shoes of his father, he realises through popular inference that his father has arrived.Or, when we hear a sort of noise in the water tap, we know through inferencial process of the popular brand, that water will soon flow through the tap; or through a special sound, we imagine that a compartment of a train is either joined or disjoined from the other one. These are popular instances of inference. So also in poetry, “tatraiva rantum eva gatā’si” is apprehended through what Mahimā calls “kāvyánumiti” which is a loose form of anumiti accepted in our practical life at every stage. Dr. Rawaprasadjee is a staunch supporter of this kāyyanumiti. The only point is that whether we accept this “loose anumāna” or call it by some other name such as 'tātparva' of Dhananjaya or 'vyañjana' of Anandavardhana. The fact is that there is 'sabda' involved and hence it has to be a sabda-vāpāra as pointed out by Abhinavagupta in case of poetry or any use of language. Of course, when we hear a sound from the water-tap, or when we see the shoes of a father, or when we hear a noise of joining or disjoining of a compartment, we may or, even may not, accept the case of a loose anumāna, but in case of poetry which is the province of a use of word, a meaningful word by a poet, we have to name it differently such as vyañjanā to distinguish it from tarkánumiti, or pratyakşa, or smrti, etc. Even kävyánumiti is certainly not tarkánumiti or scientific inference of the logicians. So, it is just a quarrel over naming. The rose, is a rose, is a rose and will smell as sweet; call it by any other name ! So, for the present, and on our part, we will choose to travel with Abhinavagupta and call is vyañjanā, a word-power.
Abhinavagupta observes in favour of vyañjanā as follows : "asti tāvad atra śabdasyaiva vyāpāraḥ. vyāpāraś ca nábhidhā”tmā, samayábhāvāt, na tātparyā”tmā,
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org