Sambodhi 1972 Vol 01

SR No.: 520751
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Dalsukh Malvania, H C Bhayani
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1972
Total Pages: 416
Language: English, Sanskrit, Prakrit, Gujarati
Classification: Magazine, India_Sambodhi, & India
File Size: 11 MB

Page 363

Gunaratna's Saradipika
fresh remarks, and tries to supply literary illustrations for oxplatea Mimosa terms, though of course, be also furoasbes Wastrations from tho Mimmer in the explanation of salestars (KPI), bc exhibits H'S fondness for the Nyayadarkana, which is also borno oul ia bis cxplanation of Anyathanupapatti (KPV),
कथमित्यत आह-अन्यथाऽनुपपत्त्येति । समानविषयक ज्ञान स्वविषयप्रतिपादकशम्देन विनाऽनुपपन्नं, पर च स्वविषयभिन्नप्रतिपादकशन्देन विनानुफ्पन्न इलयमा. पपल्या । सा चान्यथाऽनुपपत्ति. प्रामाकरमते प्रमाणान्तर, नैयायिकमते मतिरेकानुगतमित्यर्थः ।
At times, he is in the habit of clear diversion from the topica under discussion, as 18 seen under ullasa IV, wherein arter a long diversion be picks up the thread and continues with the words tatrabrigare seniablo udaharah yathetl Prior to this he enters into the definitions and illustration of bhavas and rasas mostly on the basis of the Rasaratrapradiplka.
He also seems to be fond of elaborate explanations, at times, over at the cost of lucidity, but very often remaining absolutely fucld and chose and also original in his writing The fostance of his style being laborud and suffering from the could be gathered from brs discussion on the definition of Kavya under ullasa I कविना काव्य कृतमिति प्रयोगस्तु कथं स्यात् । मर्थस्य स्वत सिद्धत्वादिति चेन्म । कट' कृत इत्यादिवत् काव्य कृतमिति प्रयोगात् । कटांशे व्यक्त्यशे पर न GRYFI, 4540 passo etc., eto
Thon follows the elaborate discussion 10 the fashlog of Virth Under ullasa II, he enters into a long discussion on the nature of spille and thon tadycgas also His discussion on karumand pralaimuda, wtalok bo rojects (K PIV) is also an Instance in the polat His work bere ondo to be purely a commentary on the KP and Glupartea procoada merely la the fashion of an independent cxponent of robo Vlown. He lo altar subtlo discussion on the abhilasaolpralambke to the uno yote. Ho human elaborate discussion on the nature of the foarfold ranas not attempted by Mammata, and also on the nature of wine and moud The Huthor has based his discussion on the rasatoa of karuparan nad baberes on the views oxpressed in the Rosaraina pradipki (VL 58-66). He bu very lucid oxposition when he attempts the explanation of juinaswa wax AAD Minasya phalam poder KP, IL
While explainlng particular Austration givea by Mammata for Yurious purposes, he normally explains the whole verse int. But at time he door