________________
Vyañjanā-virodha or, opposition to suggestive power
755 miśrita, i.e. based on identification (due to similarity) or not based on identification. We have noticed that Vidyānātha had observed that : "gauņa-vịttir api laksanā-prabheda eva. sambandhā'nupapatti mülakatvāt. yathā agnir mānavaka iti.” (pp. 33, Edn. S. Chandrasekhara Satrigal, Madras, 1914) - On this Kumāraswami observes : "gauna-vrtcir laksanāto bhinnā iti prābhākarāh. tadayuktam. tasyā laksanāyām eva antarbhāvāt.” (pp. 33, ibid)
Dhanika continues in the vein of the Dhvanikāra, and suggests that if the apprehension of rasā"di were to take place through direct expression (i.e. yadi vācyatvena rasa-pratipattiḥ syāt), then this apprehension should have occurred in case of even those who are not cultured and who are initiated only with reference to the province of direct-expression only - kevala-vācya-vācaka-bhāva-mātravyutpanna- cetasām api a-rasikānām rasā"svādo bhavet. But this is not the case.
So, the dhvanivādins suggest that for apprehension of rasa, etc. vyañjanā has to be accepted : "ataḥ kecid abhidhā-laksaņā-gaunībhyo vācyántara-parikalpitasaktibhyo vyatiriktam vyañjakatva-lakṣaṇam sabda-vyāpāram rasálamkāra-vastuvisayam icchanti." Dhanika gives a summary of the views of the Dhvanivādins who postulate a separate word-power called vyañjanā and cites three illustrations from the Dhvanyāloka in support of vyañjanā. "vivrnvatī śaila-sutā’pi” is an illustration of rasā”di apprehension, while "bhama dhammia...", and "lāvanya-kānti-- paripūrita." etc. are illustrations of vastu-dhvani and alamkāra-dhvani respectively.
Avaloka further observes that for the vyañjanāvādin, this apprehension of threefold suggestion of rasā”di, vastu, and alamkāra can not be the result of arthāpatti i.e. presumption. - "na ca asau arthāpatti-janyā, anupapadyamānárthápekşábhāvāt. - i.e. This is not a case of presumption, for there is no apeksā or expectancy of a part of meaning and hence it is not a case of 'arthāpatti'.
Nor is rasapratīti congruent with sentence-sense : nā’pi vākyárthatvam vyangyasya, for suggested sense is a matter of third stage of realization : "trtīyakaksā-visayatvāt”. First comes the vācyārtha, the second stage is that of sentencesense and the suggested falls in the third stage.
Here onwards, Dhanika's rejoinder to the vyañjanāvāda starts..
Before we start analysing Dhanika's view, it may be recalled that Mammata, while dealing with the dirgha-dīrghatara-vyāpāravādin's views, had contended that the purport of a sentence has to be found with reference to words actually used in a sentence and not with reference to words not read actually in a sentence. This was the exact meaning of the injunction 'yatparaḥ śabdaḥ sa sabdárthah',
e.
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
