Abhidha

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

Page 46

[37]
as, "there is sādharmya of this into that object, and between them is sādịśya”. In the usage quoted above, where the praksti of the term 'sādharmya' was taken as ending in daul (dvi-vacanānta), and wherein that of sādņśya as ending in singular (i. e. eka-vacanānta) the opposite can also follow in the present usage.
In different disciplines there is difference with reference to the concepts of 'sādharmya' and 'sādrśya'. The discipline of grammar takes them as different, while the nyāya-darśana takes them as identical and this is acceptable to Mahimā, he being closer to the nyāya discipline.
So, in expressions like 'gaur-vāhīkah', taken as 'gaunī-vstti' and, like 'gangāyām ghosah', taken as laksanā, Mahimā accepts only 'anumāna'. As noted above in the case for the former, Mahimā holds that no sensible person will identify one object with a totally different object without seeing some similarity between the two. The expression 'gaur vāhīkah' cannot be taken literally as it is perceived directly as incongruous, we infer that vāhīka is a bull in some respects. This secondary sense which is not given by the word directly is only inferred. In the same way the fact of a hamlet being situated on the flow of the river Ganges being contradicted by direct perception, we infer the qualities of coolness and purity of the hamlet from the expressed meaning. Mahimā does not accept dhvanivādin's observation that the meaning of the hamlet being situated on the bank of the Ganges is derived through laksanā, and the qualities of coolness and purity of the hamlet are derived through the suggestive power i. e. vyañjanā. For Mahimā both the secondary and suggested senses are arrived at through anumiti kriyā - or inference and so the distinction observed by the Dhvanikāra between bhakti and dhvani is uncalled for.
Mahimā observes (pp. 118)
"tasmād yo'yam vāhīkādau gavādi-sādharmyāvagamaḥ, sa tattvāropaanyathā-anupaptti-parikalpito'numānasya eva vișayah na śabda-vyāpārasya, iti sthitam." .
He further observes (pp. 119, ibid) : “gangāyām ghosa ityādau api gangădayórthāh svātmani-anupapatti-bādhita-ghosādyadhi-karana-bhāvāḥ, tad