Sahrdayaloka Part 01

SR No.: 006908
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Tapasvi Nandi
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2005
Total Pages: 602
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 14 MB

Page 214

Sabda-vyāpāra-vicāra
189
"arthaḥ śabdasya dvividhaḥ; svarūpam bahyaśca. tatra nimittad jāḍyāder gotvam vāhīke'py anuṣajyate, śabdas tu go-tvameva'bhidhatte iti bāhyārthopacāraḥ."Thus far, Bhartṛhari gives basis for abhidhā, gauņi and lakṣaṇā, almost on the lines of the Mbh.
Over and above this, Bhartṛhari discusses the problem of determination of the sense of a given word which has convention with reference to more than one sense, i.e. a word having multiple sense. Thus, he takes up the problem of a word having multiple senses, all of which are mukhyārthas. In his view, the particular meaning out of several possible, is determined by factors such as context, time, place etc. In this connection, he cites V. P. II. 316 and 317, 318.
-V. P. II. 316-318;
vākyāt prakaraṇād arthād
aucityād deṣa-kālataḥ
śabdarthāḥ pravibhajyante
na rūpād eva kevalāt."—V. P. II. 316
samyogo viprayogaś ca sahacaryam virodhitā
arthaḥ prakaranam lingam sabdasya'nyasya sannidhiḥ, sāmarthyam auciti deṣaḥ kālo vyaktiḥ svaradayaḥ
śabdarthasya anavacchede viseṣa-smṛtihetavaḥ" (V. P. II.317-18)
Here, we may ask as to what is it that fixes the particular meaning of a given word and debars other multiple sense which it has by convention and usage ? To Bhartṛhari, this question does not seem to have occurred. For him, samsarga or conjunction and the like limit the word to one mukhyārtha or primary sense. But to later thinkers on this subject, it appears necessary to postulate an additional sabda-vṛtti, over and above abhidhā, gauņī and lakṣaṇā. In this, we may see the inspiration for the recognition of a separate and independent vyañjana-vṛtti. This is supported by the fact that later writers on alamkāra such as Mammata, Viśvanatha and others mention these very verses (i. e. V. P. II. 317-318) as authority for their theory of 'abhidhāmūlā vyañjanā.' For Punyarāja these verses contain the views of others and not Bhartṛhari. Jagannatha also does not read abhidhāmūla vyañjanā here.
Among later grammarians Nāgeśa (cir. 18th Cen. A. D.) was the first to recommend the case of vyañjanā. He apparently follows the lead of the ālamkarikas in this respect and repeats the same arguments.