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 |