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 246

Śabdavsttis in Bhāmaha, Daņdin, etc.
221 makes for the charm : "tasyām artha-guna-sampat asvadyā bhavati." Now this totality of artha-guņas by themselves, as it resides in the vaidarbhī, is itself known by the name of 'vaidarbhí. I ii. 22 - he says : “sā'pi vaidarbhī tātsthyāt.” Vāmana then adds : śāpi iyam artha-guna-sampat vaidarbhi iti ucyate. tātstyāt, iti upacaratah vyavahāram darśayati." Thus, we come across a clear reference to the secondary usage of language.
At V. i. 12, Vāmana considers the blemish called 'neyártha'. He observes that when some meaning which is not heard of in a particular sentence is inferred, it makes for the blemish called 'neyártha'. The term viz. 'pankti-vihamgamanāma-bhrt', used for Daśaratha is an instance in point. By 'pańkti' is meant 'ten', by 'vihamgama-nāma' is meant 'cakravāka'. 'Ratha' i.e. chariot is one that bears the name of cakra-vāka on itself. Thus 'pankti' and vihamgama-nāmabhrt mean 'Dasa-ratha'. This makes for the blemish called neyartha. Then it is argued that if you find neyártha-dosa in such illustrations then the word ‘rathánganāma’ for cakravāka used by all poets also will be an illustration of neyártha-dosa. To this, Vāmana says : na teşām, “nirūdha-lakṣaṇatvāt.” Such words as rathánga-náma for cakravāka are instances of nirudhā laksaņā and are therefore free from any blemish. Thus Vāmana seems to be conversant with what later alamkārikas term as 'rūdhi-mūlā laksana', i.e. secondary usage based on convention.
At II. i. 14 Vāmana says that whatever has an obscene sense as another sense is 'aślīla' which is a dosa or a blemish : "a-sabhyā'rthā’ntaram asabhya-smrtihetuś ca aślīlam.” But he adds at II. i. 15 (KSV.) that, secondary usages do not fall under this, He reads - "na gupta-lakṣita-samāvstāni.” - "apavādártham idam. guptam, lakṣitam, samvitam ca nā'ślilam." Thus, secondary usage of language is clearly referred to by Vāmana and is recommended also in poetry. At II. i. 17 he defines 'laksita' as : läksanika - asabhyabhyām laksitam." i.e. if the obscene sense is gathered secondarily, it is called 'lakṣita' and it does not give rise to the blemish of vulgarity. The illustration cited is 'janma-bhūmih'. Vāmana says - "tad eva asabhyā'rthā'ntaram lākṣanikena asabhyena arthena anvitam padam lakṣitam, yathā janma-bhūmih iti.” Vāmana adds that here, this word viz. 'janmabhūmih' means the female organ - i.e. 'yonih', only secondarily and not by the power of expression - "tad hi laksanayā guhyártham, na sva-śaktyā iti." Here 'sva-sakti' of a word is ‘abhidhā' or the power of direct expression and 'laksana' is secondary power - both of which are clearly known to Vāmana and clearly referred to here by him also.