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 566

540
SAHRDAYĀLOKA
Appayya Dixit has discussed the topic of sabda-vrttis viz. - abhidhā, laksaņā and also vyañjanā in his brilliant work named "Vrtti-vārttika", which unfortunately is available till day only upto the portion containing discussion on abhidhā and laksaņā only. Though Appayya did recognize vyañjanā, the portion containing vyañjanā is not available. We will deal with his concept of lakṣaņā as below :
For Dixit laksaņā is that power of a word wherein, through the relation with the primary sense, the word becomes a conveyer (of meaning): "sā ca mukhyárthasambandhena śabdasya pratipādakatvam” (pp. 50, Edn. Avasthi; Induprakāśana, Delhi, '77). It may be noted that for Dixit also laksanā is exactly the same as that defined by Mammata but the latter's definition is clearer and so also is Viśvanātha's. While Mammata has laid down three causes of the secondary function called laksanā i.e. indication, such as mukhyártha-bādha, tad-yoga, and either rūdhi or prayojana remaining at the base, and all these three connected to one another through the danda-cakrā”di-nyāya i.e. analogy of the rod and the wheel (of a potter), Appayya on the other hand has not taken care to discuss mukhyártha-bādha etc. - the factors being much debated by earlier authors. This means that he starts with the acceptance of these three basic factors which for him are clear to an advanced student.
Appayya Dixit, like Mammața, takes laksaņā to be basically two-fold such as śuddhā and gaunī. He has denounced the opinion of those who hold 'gauni' as an independent sabda-vrtti. He believes that as in both laksanā as well as gaunī, the meaning apprehended is that only which is connected with the primary sense, it is futile to take these two vịttis, i.e. gauņi and laksaņā as separate and independent of each other as is done by Mukula and Hemacandra. He feels that this relation with the primary sense gives rise to a secondary sense in both these vșttis, which therefore do not deserve independent reckoning : “atha laksaņā nirņiyate, să ca mukhyártha-samband hena sabdasya pratipadakatvam. tat-sadrśyena pratipādakatvarūpā gauny api laksaņā-prabheda eva, tat-sadrśepi tannirūpitasādrśyādhi-karanatva-paramparā-sambandha-sattvāt." (pp. 50, ibid)
Mukula, as seen earlier accepts gauņī as an independent power of word, separate from laksanā. He is indebted to some Mimāmsaka thinkers for this approach. Kumārila, as seen earlier, observes :
"abhidhayávinābhūtapratītir laksaņocyate, lakṣyamāņa-guņair yogāt vịtter istā tu gaunatā." (Tantravārttika I. IV. 22)