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 350

SAHṚDAYALOKA lakṣyamāṇa and the
Anandavardhana's observation that the indicated
suggested i.e. the vyajyamāna are also different from each other. For Anandavardhana the secondary function or a-mukhya vyavahara is only an extention of the primary function and it is resorted to when the primary meaning is found to be non-congruent with the context. This secondary sense may not be charming also, and is arrived at only when the primary sense is rejected. This abandonment of the primary sense, in the opinion of Anandavardhana, could be either partial or total. This secondary function is seen only when we use language. The suggestive function, for Anandavardhana, is of wider scope and travels beyond language. When use of language is concerned, then also this suggestive function completely differs from either the primary function of a word in language, i.e. abhidhā, or the secondary function i.e. gunavṛtti or lakṣaṇā or a-mukhya-vyāpāra, both from the point of view of nature and scope i.e. "svarupataḥ viṣayataḥ ca." Suggestivity, as noted above, travels beyond the medium of language and is seen in any other art-form such as drama, music, painting and what not, taking the form of abhinaya or acting, or notes i.e. śuddha svara, or colours etc. as the case may be. Thus for Anandavardhana the suggestivity has to be completely distinguished from lakṣaṇā or secondary function of a word.
324
Not so with Mahimā. He rejects the very basis on which the concept of lakṣaṇā rests. He rejects any other power or function beyond, abhidhā or the direct expressive power in case of a word. Mahima is of the opinion that the fact of 'krama' or sequence in the functioning of powers called abhidhā, lakṣaṇā and vyañjanā goes against them belonging to the same substratum, i.e. word. As seen earlier, he feels that if more than one power belongs to the same thing, these powers should function simultaneously like heat and light emanating from fire. But we had observed earlier that this analogy is not applicable in case of a word, as there is no hard and fast rule that all powers belonging to the same thing should function simultaneously only. Even in day to day life we see agents using their various powers as and when the situation so demands. A brave soldier enjoys life also to the full and also fights against the enemy as and when required. A man may be gifted with a number of special capacity which he chooses to exhibit or utilize only when the situation so demands. But Mahima is satisfied with his own argument and his own illustration of fire oozing light and heat simultaneously, and therefore concludes that word has only one power - abhidhā - that gives the primary