Gyanpramodika

SR No.: 001591
Original Sutra Author: Gyanpramod Gani
Author: R S Betai, Dalsukh Malvania, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1987
Total Pages: 274
Language: Sanskrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Literature
File Size: 11 MB

Page 23

14
(2) Very often his analysis of figures is very scholarly, as of 979-8.33-as; 3941
8.40-'60; -8.64-66; 34021-8.50; 47-8.902; fact4-8.983; 29-8.924. (3) In case of a sew, he takes care to compare one figure with another and stress
the similarity and difference. In this treatment, in comparison, boch the figures should be better clarified. This will be clear in his vrtti on, say 4.55; 4-112;
4.140 etc. (4) For further explanation and analysis, the Vșttikāra very often quotes one, two
or even three parallel definitions. Here, his main sources and authority are Vamana, Dandin, Rudrata, Mam mata etc. To illustrate a few JH4-8.98; 59%
8.00; fata-8.64; 368411-8.9); 14 -3.990; faqh-8,999, etc. (5) After analysing Vägbhata's illustrations, very often the Vrttikāra cites other
parallel illustrations and often proceeds to justify these. Here, in his justification, his main authority is the सर्वकषावृत्ति of Mallinatha on the शिशुपालवध of Mägha. He quotes profusely from the commentary. To guote a few,
fantaa1-8.59: afara -9.97; 1998-8.999 and in case many other figures. (6) Generally the Vrttikāra avoids prolixity in his comments; he is mostly to the point.
However, at places where necessary, he is elaborate. At a few places he is overelaborate as in his commentary on 4.107. But all the wbile, his effort is to analyse each figure fully and to bring to the forefront the very 314#17a or
7478411 of the figure as noted earlier. (7) He therefore rightly refers to and analyses the claim of so many figures of
sense not accepted by Vágbhața (4.150). He rejects some and includes some others in the figures accepted by Vagbhata on the ground of 249412 in each. Here, he seems to follow Hemacandra without naming bim, it is knwn that Hemacandra accepts just 29 figures and includes the rest i. e., in one, or the
other of these. (8) At times he criticses even Rudrați, as in opfat. In 10.1 of 16934T of
Rudrata, *2 is described But in the opinion of Juānapramodagani, it
is 9751x29. (9) In the analysis of certain figures, he clarifies why it is not the other one. Here
the Vșttikara's depth of perception and higher scholarship is betrayed. Hlust. rations of this are found in 4.89; 4.130; 4.148 etc.
All this shows that the analysis of Alankāras given by Jnānapramodagani is almost Ultra-modern. We can state without hesitation that the treatment here is like that in a 41€7.
It may be added at the end of these two topics that Jnänapramodagani has before him the Vrtti of Simhadevagani. At places he follows it, he even quotes but only few of its illustrations. But his aim throughout is to give a Vrtti far superior in analysis and interpretation and we can safely state that he is successful in big mission.