Abhidha

Author(s): Tapasvi Nandi, Jitendra B Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 11

[2]
same way that meaning also is apprehended first in comparison with all other meanings apprehended. So, 'that which is like 'mukha' or 'face' is termed 'mukhya' i.e. principal, which is formed with the help of Pāṇini sūtra 5/3/103, viz. “śākhādibhyo yah", which recommends 'ya' suffix which is in the sense of comparison and seen in words such as 'śäkhā' etc. The illustration is, "gaur anubandhyah” i. e. 'the cow / ox may be fixed for a sacrifice.' Here, 'go' is a word, and due to its employment gotva-jāti is apprehended as instrument for performing a sacrifice. So, the mukhyatā or principality will be fixed with reference to 'go-jāti'. From this illustration, it is understood that the meaning viz. 'gotva-ādi-rūpa' which is derived by the function of the word 'gauḥ' is mukhya i.e. principal meaning.
But, observes Mukula, that is called 'lāksanika' or secondary whose apprehension follows the examination of a meaning derived through sabdavyāpāra "yasya tu sabda-vyāpāra-avagamyārtha-paryālocanayā avagatis tasya lākṣanikatvam yathā pūrvasmin eva udāharane vyakteh.” — Mukula thus holds that the meaning of go-vyati or individual cow follows the first apprehension of go-jāti, and therefore the go-vyati-jñāna is lāksanika for him. Mukula holds that -- (pp. 2, 3, ibid) : "sā hi na śabda-vyāpārād avasiyate, 'višesyam nābhidhā gacched ksīna-śaktir viśesane' iti nyāyāt sabdasya jātimātra-paryavasitatvāt. jātis tu vyaktim antarena yāga-sadhana-bhāvam na pratipadyate iti śabda-pratyāyita-jāti-sāmarthyād atra jāter aśraya-bhūtā vyaktir aksipyate. tena asau lāksanikī. evam ayam mukhya-lāksanikāt visayopa-varnana-dvāreņa sabdasya abhidhā-vyāpāro dvividhaḥ pratipădito, nirantarātha-nistaḥ, sāntarārtha-nisthaś ca.”
Mukula holds that go-vyakti is not understood through the function of a word, because there is an all accepted dictum that, "abhidhā can express only one of the two, viz. višesana or viśesya. If it conveys visesana then it cannot express višesya, for the whole of its capacity is exhausted in apprehending višesana alone. Following this principle, in the said illustration, the word 'go' has a capacity to convey only 'gotva-jāti'. When the apprehender thinks that jāti' by itself, cannot be instrumental in the act of sacrifice, without its reference to the 'go-vyati, so then this 'go-vyakti' is covered by āksepa i. e.