________________
Vyañjanā-virodha or, opposition to suggestive power
765 yāvat-kārya-prasāritvāt tātparyam na tulā-dhịtam. - 4 bhrama dhārmika viśrabdham iti bhrami-krtā”spadam, nirvyāvștti katham vākyam nişedham upasarpati. - 5 pratipădyasya viśrāntir apekṣā-pūraņād yadi, vaktur vivakṣitā’prāpter a-viśrāntir na vā katham ? - 6 pauruṣeyasya vākyasya vivaksā-paratantratā, vaktrábhipreta-tātparyam
ataḥ kāvyasya yujyate. - 7 ato no rasā"dīnam kāvyena saha vyangya-vyañjaka, bhāvah; kim tarhi? bhāvya-bhāvaka-sambandhaḥ. kāvyam hi bhāvakam, bhāvyā rasā”dayaḥ. te hi svato bhavanta eva, bhāvakeșu visista-vibhāvā”di-matā kāvyena bhāvyante."
So, Dhanika explains citing seven kārikās from his now not available work called "Kavya-nirnya", that there is no need to postulate a special word-power called vyañjanā as 'tātparya' does everything expected of the former. We have quoted these kārikās in full. Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 present the vyañjanāvādin's primafacie view, while karikās 4, 6 and 7 present the siddhanta view of Dhanika. This can be elaborated as under :
In the first kārikā the vyañjanāvādin suggests that his opponent (i.e. the tātparyavādin, who is ‘siddhāntin' here) holds that as the implicit sense i.e. pratīyamāna sense or suggested sense i.e. vyañjanīya artha is covered up under tātparya or purport, there is no need to postulate the word-function called suggestion nor the entity called 'Dhvani' or principally suggested sense. But the vyañjanāvādin (i.e. prima-facie here) asks the tātparyavādin (kārika view 1, cd) that in such cases where the speaker's import is not directly heard, i.e. where in a piece of poetry the tātparya is not directly stated, but still due to ‘anyokti' i.e. concealed statement the implicit sense is suggested through vyañjanā, in such cases
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
