Abhidha

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

Page 57

[48] result (phala, i. e. another sense) which follows through inference from a given linga or mark i. e. cause ?
"ittham arthāntare sabda
vịtter anupapattitah, phale lingaika-gamye syāt
kutaḥ śabdaḥ skhalad-gatiḥ.” (50) (pp. 122, ibid) Thus, observes Mahimā, that whatever factors are considered in favour of gaunī vịtti, are taken by us as promoting anumāna -
“guna-víttau girām yāvat
sāmagrī-īstā nibandhanam, saiva lingatayā’smābhir
isyate arthāntaram prati."-(55) (pp. 123, ibid) "na hi tat samayābhāvāt
vācyam śabdasya kalpyate pratīyamānatāyām ca
vyaktasya anumeyatā.” (56) "tasmāt svārthā'tirikteņa
gatir na arthāntare girām, vācakatvās'rayenā'to
gunavrtter asambhavah.” (57) Mahimā suggests that when we resort to metaphorical expression or guna-vịtti, the secret underlying this activity is that it is the natural linguistic habit of people that they identify similar or mutually connected objects. When we see a person with long neck and ugly figure we call him “karabha' or a youngone of a camel. Again on seeing children crying in a cradle, we describe the cradle as crying : (pp. 121, ibid) : “loko hi tat-sadrśam tatsambaddham ca tattvena vyavaharan drśyate, tad yathā dirgha-grīvam vikata-kāyam ca kamcit paśyan 'karabha' iti vyapadiśati, mañca-sambaddhān ca kāmścit krośato mañcāḥ krośanti iti.” On hearing such sentences which