________________
674
SAHRDAYĀLOKA 'Citrabhānu shines' (the word citrabhānu has its meaning restricted) to the Sun during the day and to the fire by night (through 'time', or kālah). (Due to gender, linga, the meaning of) ‘mitra' is restricted to 'suhrd' i.e. friend (in neuter gender) and to sun (in masculine gender of the word). In 'Indra-śatruh' and the like the accent does not produce as it does in the veda, the apprehension of a particular sense in poetry. By the use of ādi (in the phrase 'svarā”dayah'), gestures etc., as illustrated in the verse given below, are included. He observes : "ittham samyogā"dibhir arthántará”-bhidhāyakatve niväritépy anekárthasya śabdasya yat kvacid arthántara-pratipādanam tatra na abhidhā, niyamanāt tasyāḥ, na ca lakṣaṇā mukhyártha-bādhā”dyabhāvāt, api tu añjanam vyañjanam eva vyāpāraḥ. yathā, "bhadrā”tmano." etc. - "When by conjunction etc. the power to signify another sense has been prevented and if still at places a word, having more than one meaning, conveys another sense, there is no denotation on account of its being restricted. There is no indication either owing to the absence of incompatibility of the primary meaning etc. But it is 'añjana' i.e. vyañjana' or suggestion which alone operates.” (Trans. R. C. Dwivedi - pp. 47, ibid).
Mammața also observes that a word possessed of the power of suggestiveness is called the suggestive word - "tad yukto vyañjakaḥ śabdaḥ.” - II. 20. a. At II. 20. bcd Mammața observes :
“yat sórthántarayuk tathā, arthópi vyañjakas tatra sahakāritayā mataḥ.” .
“Since that (word) is so (i.e. suggestive) when connected with another sense (i.e. either expressed or indicated sense) the (other) sense also is considered to be suggestive owing to its co-operation therein.” (Trans. Dwivedi, pp. 47, ibid).
We have seen that Mammața has, so far, dealt with vācaka, lāksaņika and vyañjaka words, vācya, laksya and vyangya senses, and abhidhā, lakṣaņā and śābdi-vyañjanā.
Vyañjanā is divided into śābdī and ārthī. But it may be argued that this division is not reasonable. Sabda and artha are inseparably connected together. So, it is not proper to separate them and make them the basis of two types of vyañjanā viz. śābdi and arthī. The verse, viz. bhadrā"tmano. etc. which illustrates abhidhā-mula vyañjanā, is an example of dhvani-kāvya. Now a kävya is made up of "sabdárthau". If the words in the particular verse, viz. bhadrā”tmano. etc. are regarded as 'vyañjaka' or suggestive, what about the senses therein ? Are they not suggestive ? If so, there is no point in dividing vyañjanā into śābdi and arthi. Again, in 'gangāyām ghoṣaḥ', which is an illustration of laksaņā-mula-vyañjanā, the word
Jain Education Interational
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org