Sambodhi 1998 Vol 22

SR No.: 520772
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Jitendra B Shah, N M Kansara
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1998
Total Pages: 279
Language: English, Sanskrit, Prakrit, Gujarati
Classification: Magazine, India_Sambodhi, & India
File Size: 8 MB

Page 53

SWERA PRAJAPATI
SAMBODHI
42
said to be complete if it fulfils the expectancy If a piece of poetry or a verse does not give a coherent and complete meaning what is expected from the point of view of the listener, then expectancy arises Either for the expectancy or for the purpose of some other cause of an addition is made which does not fit into the structure of the verse after the formal completion usually denoted by the verb The poetic blemish samāptapunarātta, is rooted in the idea of logical completion of the sentence Poeticians have developed this concept on the logical foundation of the Nyāyaśästra
It is interesting to see here that Rāmarudra argues against Mahadeva Bhattācarya on the issue of whether the given piece of poetry is defective or not ? As I understand in the above given versecüdāmanıkrtavidhu, the term līlātändavapandita is added with a definite purpose It is a substantive, of bhaya It explains the nature of him and also explains why he has made moon his cüdāmanı and why Väsuki as his valaya The given clause therefore fulfils the desired expectancy Taking into consideration this point the argument of Mahādeva seems to be convincing But, as apparently clear the construction of verse is little awkward which perhaps urges Råmarudra to find a fault with it However, his argument is not clear and convincing He shows excessive logical concern and argues that the word is given after the completion of the sentence and it does not add anything new to the content of meaning, But Mahadeva nghtly argues and shows how the given Mangalasloka is free from the defect of Samāptapunarätta
REFERENCES 1 Nyāyapaficānana Viśvanātha, Karkāvali-Muktavali, with Dinakari and Rāmarudri,
edited by Shukla Hariram, Pub by Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series, Benaras 1959 2 क्रियाऽन्वयेन शान्ताऽऽकाक्षस्य भवो भव्याय भवत्वित्येतावताऽन्वयबोधेनैव भवपदस्य शान्ताऽऽकाक्षतयोतरत्र
विद्यमानस्य "लीलाताण्डवपण्डित" इति विशेषणस्याऽन्वयार्थ स भवः पुन. कीदृश ? इत्याकाङ्क्षासम्पादनाय
भवपदेन भवस्मरणस्यावश्यकतया भवति समाप्तपुनरात्तत्व दोष इति भावः । Ramarudri, P 1-2 3 wafa gefastoa, : THYRICA ea. Dinakarī, P 1 4 विधोः किमिति चूडामणीकरणम् ? किमर्थ वा वासुकेर्वलयीकरणम् ? इत्याकाक्षाया निराकाङ्क्षप्रतिपत्तिर्न
Hafa istifafarerga faratas 991065444 ara: Dinakari, P 2 5 उत्थाप्याऽऽकाक्षया विशेषणाऽन्वय एव तन्प्रसरादिनि । लीलया ताण्डव नृत्य, तत्र पण्डितोऽभिज्ञ इत्यर्थः ।
Dinakari, P 2 6 Parekh Nagindas, Mammata no Kavyavicāra, Gujarati Sahitya Parishad, Ahmedabad, P
275