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 384

358
SAHRDAYĀLOKA Jayadeva, at X. 3 cites illustrations of all these six varieties of abhidhā, such as -
"gaur nīlaḥ pācako dandi ditthah kamsa iti kramất, kam samhinasti kamsárir
naram ca kam samāśritam.” Here 'dandi' gives meaning by danda-sambandha i.e. vastu-yoga. In the illustration, viz. 'kamsam hinasti', etc., the term “kamsa' is nirdeśa-vācaka. There is a question asked viz. "Who was killed by Krsna ? The answer is, "A person who was associated with 'ka’kāra." This means krsna killed 'naraka' and also 'sa' associated with 'kam', i.e. íkamsa'. As only letters are mentioned, this is a case of 'nirdeśa', and not samjñā or yadrcchā. When 'kamsa' is referred to by such letters it is ‘nirdeśa'. When he is referred directly as, "krsna killed kamsa" - it is samjñā and not nirdeśa. Jayadeva (X. 4) suggests that :
“na yogā"der āyatanam na samketa-niketanam, vịttyā nirdeśa-śabdo'yam
mukhyayā svábhidheyayā.” Jāti' etc. are negated in the nirdesa-pada. This sort of an expression i.e. nirdeśa, is neither capable of 'vyutpatti' nor is there any sanketa in it. Only letters are apprehended through abhidhā. It makes only for 'sva-rūpa' - "ato’yam nirdese svarūpe śabdo nirdeśa-śabdah kamsā"dih. svam varna-dvayam eva abhidheyam yasyām sā tayā.” Paurņamāsī; pp. 303, ibid. In the Mahābhāsya we have a four-fold scheme of words : "catustayi śabdānām pravrttih iti uktam. Here, for Jayadeva, abhidhā is, six-fold - 'atra tu sā sadvidhā iti visesah. (pp. 303, ibid)
Vidyādhara (Ekāvalī II. 2) follows Mammata and holds that meaning of a word which conveys 'sāksāt samketa' - i.e. convention directly is 'mukhya' or primary and the power which directly conveys this 'samketita artha' - is 'abhidha' and is also ‘mukhya' i.e. primary.
Vidyānātha, the author of Pratāpa-rudra-yaśo-bhāṣaṇa, holds that tātparyártha or purport is covered up by vyañjanā only and supports only three powers of a word viz. abhidhā, laksanā and vyañjanā. He does not accept, as is done by Hemacandra, 'gauņi' as an independent power over and above laksanā. He incorporates 'gauņī in laksaņā and thus, like the kashmir school opts for the