Sahrdayaloka Part 02

SR No.: 006909
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Tapasvi Nandi
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2005
Total Pages: 642
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 15 MB

Page 168

Vyañjanā-virodha or, opposition to suggestive power
723
nimittabhāvam gacchanti iti nūnam mīmamsakasya prapautram prati naimittikam abhimatam." (pp. 30, Edn. Dr. Nandi, ibid)
Abhinavagupta further elaborates as follows. He observes that the objector can contend this much here, that samketa-grahana or convention was formed earlier. After that on listening to a sentence, we apprehend the sentence-sense. Thus nimitta-naimittika-bhāva takes shape between word-sense (i.e. the expressed sense), and the suggested sense. But in this case, argues the Locanakāra, which process will the objector resort to in apprehending the suggested sense ? There is no convention formed with reference to the suggested sense, so how can the objector say that the suggested sense is apprehended through abhidhā or the power of expression ? Again, the next point is that in the opinion of the objector himself, the samketa-grahana with reference to an individual word-sense is itself not possible because you, the anvitábhidhānavādins, hold expressive power only with reference to the ‘anvita' or correlated sense. If the objector says that yes, convention is of course formed with reference to the correlated sense alone, but by avāpaudvāpa i.e. removal and substitution, this fixing of convention - samketa-grahana is with reference to a word only, then Abhinavagupta's submission is that even in this case a meaning related to the particular - i.e. višesa-artha-will necessarily be cognized still later (because the mīmāmsakas believe in jāti-visayaka Thus, the anvitábhidhānavādins also will have to resort to the tātparya-vrtti or purport, and thus your principle will be negated.
To this, the objector may submit that, whether nimitta-naimittika bhāva is established between padártha and vyangyártha, but one thing is certain that the moment a sentence is spoken, import i.e. 'tātparyártha' is apprehended, and how can anyone reject this ? To this, Abhinavagupta says that we do not negate this fact that vyangyártha in form of the intention of the speaker is immediately apprehended : atra ucyate - drstaiva jhațiti tātparyártha-pratipattih. kim atra kurmaḥ, iti. tad idam vayam api na năngīkurmaḥ.” (pp. 30, ibid). He quotes from Anandavardhana Kārikā (Dhv.) I. 12 - viz. "tadvat sacetasām." etc. “So also that suggested meaning flashes suddenly across the truth-perceiving minds of perceptive critics, when they turn away from literal meaning." (Trans. K.Kris. pp. 19, ibid).
But the Locanakāra adds that this does not mean that in the truth-perceiving minds of the perceptive critics, the suggested sense flashes forth even without the apprehension of the primary sense. There is always this possibility of a sequence of first the dawning of the literal sense and then the flashing of the suggested sense.
Jain Education Interational