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 508

Dhvani in Kuntaka, Bhoja and others, and Gunībhūta-vyangya and Citra-Kävya. 1063 pp. 54, ibid) - "atra aprastutapraśamsă-laksaņo'lamkāraḥ prādhănyena vākyárthah, pratīyamāna-padārthantaratvena prayuktatvāt, tatra ca vicitra-kavi-śaktisamullikhita - vakra-sabdártho'panibandha-māhātmyāt. prakrama eva pratibhāsamānatvān na cā’rthántara-pratīti-kāritvena padānām śleșa-vyapadeśaḥ śakyate kartum, vācyasya sama-pradhāna-bhāvena anavasthānāt. arthántarapratīti-kāritvam ca padānām pratiyamānártha-sphutatávabhāsanártham upanibadhyamānam ativa-camatkāritām pratipadyate.” “The main purpose of this verse is 'vicarious reference', a figure of speech. The whole passage is designed by the author to convey a suggested meaning, other than the referential one. Further more, as a result of the effective use of artistic words and meanings due to the inventive genius of an accomplished poet, even the suggested meaning is made to appear as if it were the directly denoted meaning. Since it is grasped at the first instance itself, no paronomasia can be said to be involved, merely because the words convey a double meaning; in fact both the meanings retain equal importance. Such a usage of words with double meaning with a view to illuminating a clear, suggested meaning will carry an extremely delightful effect.” (Trans. K.Kris., pp. 340, ibid).
This is nothing else but ‘vyañjanā', not expressly admitted by K., who again equates ‘pratiyamāna', and 'vācya', in ‘aprastuta-praśamsā', which then caeses to be an alamkāra, and is included in the fold of dhvani.
In the same vein, K., without an express mentioning or acceptance of vyañjanavrtti, continues to explain one more illustration, viz. "he heläjita-bodhisattva." etc. (verse, No. 90, pp. 54, ibid). K. holds that, (vrtti, VJ. I. 43, pp. 55 ibid) - "atra atyanta-garhanīya-caritam padárthántaram pratīyamānatayā cetasi nidhāya tathāvidha-vilasitaḥ salila-nidhir vācyatayópakrāntaḥ, tad etāvad eva alamkrter aprastuta-praśamsāyāḥ svarūpam-garhaṇīya-pratīyamāna-padárthá-ntaraparyavasānam api vākyam śrutyupakrama-ramaniyatayā upanibandhyamānam tadvidā”hlādakāritām āyāti. tad etad vyājastuti-prati-rūpaka-prāyam alamkaranántaram aprastuta-prašamsāyā bhūṣaṇatvena upāttam. na cā’tra samkarálankāra-vyavahāro bhavitum arhati, prthag ati-parisphuţatvena avabhāsanāt. na cā’pi samsrsti-sambhavaḥ sama-pradhānabhāvena anavasthiteh. na ca dvayor api vācyálamkāratvam, vibhinna-visayatvāt.”
"Here also, keeping in mind a different meaning altogether, i.e. of a person whose character is most censurable, as his implicit meaning, the poet has explicitly described the ocean whose conduct is similar. This, in essence, is of the nature of the figure of speech, viz. 'Vicarious reference'. (or Indirect narration). Further, the