Book Title: Prakrit Verses in Sanskrit Works on Poetics Part 02
Author(s): V M Kulkarni
Publisher: B L Institute of Indology

Previous | Next

Page 639
________________ Prakrit Verses in Sanskrit Works on Poetics 575 * 38. This gāthā is already dealt with; vide A 'Ratnakara S.No. (7.437) and KP S.No. (11.420) supra. 39. This gātha is already dealt with; vide VJ S.No. (12.22) supra. Both Kuntaka and Ruyyaka cite this gāthā as an example of the figure Aprastuta-prašamsā. Kuntaka remarks: --- AIG EFt Taft HTATSHEFI facara falar ffyd i (.968); and Ruyyaka observes : 375 46tige fare urge arruiffah i- . 933. * 40. Vimarsinī cites this gātha in the course of his commentary on Vyājastuti and points out that this gātha falls within the sphere of suggestion (dhvani): - "Suit विश्रान्ते वाक्यार्थे वक्तृवाच्यौचित्यपर्यालोचना-बलान्निन्दाया: प्रतीतिरिति ध्वनिविषयत्वमेव युक्तम् । - 9. 987-983. 41. This gātha is an example of Uktaviśaya Aksepa where the vastu-svarūpa, the character of a dūti (a go-between) is denied. The special meaning resulting from this denial is that she tells the truth although she happens to be a dūtī as dūtīs, generally speaking, don't bother about truth. 42. This gāthā is an example of Vaksyamāņavişaya Aksepa. The speaker, who is either a friend or female messenger first declares her intention of speaking something on behalf of the nāyikā. Then she revokes her intention. So here we have Vakşyamaņa-vişaya Akşepa. The special meaning to be conveyed is: it is impossible to describe the great suffering of the näyikā. * 43. This gātha was cited as an example of Ukta-vişaya Aksepa, by Sobhākara in his 'A'Ratnākara (p. 84, S.No. 254). Vimarsinīkāra differs with Sobhākara and opines -"इत्यत्र पुनरुक्तस्यालिगनस्य निषेधो विधौ तात्पर्याभावान्न निषेधाभासतामिया-दित्येतदुदाहरणं 71" Sobhākara cites this gātha as an example of (Acintya-nimitta) Vibhāvanā (A 'Ratnakara, p. 94) which is suddhă (not based on Atiśayokti). It is Ruyyaka who asserts that Atiśayokti is at the root of this figure (Vibhāvanā). Vimarsini defends Ruyyaka and points out that Sobhākara is wrong in holding that the găthă contains Vibhāvanā. The gātha states merely a fact for love is in many cases based on some cause or the other, but in certain cases it springs without any cause and so the question of its containing any alamkāra does not arise.

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768