Thank you Shri.V.Sadagopan and Shri Hari Krishnan. Let me first mention the context where I encountered the word upalakshanam. It was in Shri S.M Srinivasa Chari's book Vishistadvaita & Advaita which, as I understand, deals with Shri Vedanta Desikan's assertion of Vishistadvaita in his work Satadusani. My knowledge of Indian or western philosophical traditions is meagre if not nothing. As I write the following I dont have the book in front of me. Please bear with any false representation due to my poor understanding or memory. When the author writes about the effect of rope-snake on the observer he mentions upalakshanam. My understanding at this point is that rope appearing as a snake is upalakshanam and its effect - fear - is upalakshya. Upalakshanam and its effect upalakshya cannot be syntactically linked. He translates upalakshanam as 'qualification per accidens' and contrasts it with viseshna( 'qualification per proprium'). At this point I realised the import of the word upalakshanam and my lack of full grasp of the word. I also came across sources that translated upalakshanam as metonymy or synechdoche. This doesnt satisfy me. I think these translations restrict the potential of the word. I would like to read/hear more on this word in both philosophical and religious/aesthetical usage. I sincerely hope such a discourse is within this mailing list's charter. Thank you in advance. with humble regards Jagadish --- Hari Krishnan <harikrishnan61@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Right Hon'ble Srinivasa Sastri equates the Sanskrit > upalakshana with the English synechdoche. Explaining how > the name 'Lakshmana' was synonymous with Rama and did not > need a separate mention, he cites how Lakshmana was sent > together with Rama, though Viswamitra asked only for Rama. > He points out that when Viswamitra speaks to the brothers > on the way, he addresses only Rama and not Lakshmana. Why > does he do so? Srinivasa Sastri says: > > "If he talks to them, he only says 'Rama, Raghava' > addressing the elder brother. It would be uncharitable to > assume that he did not like the presence of Lakshmana or > that he wished intentionally to ignore him. I suppose in > his mind too, as in the minds of everybody else, to speak > of Rama was to speak to the other brother too. You need > not specially have a form of address for it. As he gives > them instruction in various matters, he mentions Rama and > not Lakshmana, except once or twice and that when he uses > the dual number. Even when he taught them the great twin > mantras of Bala and Atibala, he taught them to Sri Rama. > The commentator, hard put to explain the matter, says that > Lakshmana is also included in the word Rama by Upalakshana, > the Sanskritic equivalent for one of the forms of the > English figure of speech, synecdoche. When Sri Rama is > mentioned, Lakshmana is also included in it." > > (Lectures on the Ramayana, Second Lecture, page 17) > > Now, synecdoche is defined thus "a figure of speech by > which a part is put for the whole (as fifty sail for fifty > ships), the whole for a part (as society for high society), > the species for the genus (as cutthroat for assassin), the > genus for the species (as a creature for a man), or the > name of the material for the thing made (as boards for > stage)" > > That is, when I say 'sail' by upalakshna I mean, 'ship' and > not just the sail. > > Regards, > > Hari Krishnan > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/VkWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SriRangaSri/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: SriRangaSri-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
srirangasri-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |