________________
257
Sabdavrttis, the nature of : Abhidhā power of these two parts i.e. the root and the suffix, we get the senses of 'to cook' and 'the agent (of cooking)'. The combination of these senses renders the sense of 'a cook’. Now beyond this total of two senses there is no extra meaning of the word 'pacaka', 'pāthaka' etc. Thus these words do not have a samudāya-sakti over and above their avayava-sakti's. The third variety is illustrated by words such as ‘pankaja'. One part of this word is the root Vjan meaning 'to be born'. Prior to that there is one part viz. 'panka' meaning ‘mud', which is ‘upa-pada’. Now when the upapada is in locative 'da' suffix is attached to the root vjan, according to pānini sūtra (3/2/97) - "saptamyam janerdah”. This da (= a) is attached in the sense of agent, and it forms the third portion of the word. Through the three powers of these three individual parts, viz. ‘mud, to be born, and agent, coming together by the conditions of akānksā, i.e. expectancy, 'yogyatā' or compatibility, and 'āsatti' i.e. proximity we derive the meaning viz. 'that which is born of mud.' But after that total sense is derived by combination of three senses of three parts, there is a special sense of lotus, 'padmatvayukta padma' - which is derived further. Here it is stated as ‘padmatva-viśista-padma', because out of mud even moss is generated and it is not called 'pankaja'. For this added sense of 'lotus', we have to imagine a special 'samudāya-śakti' in the word 'pankaja'. Thus there is 'samkara' or mixing up of 'avayava-śákti' and 'samudāya-sakti'. These three varieties are also respectively named as rüdhi-sakti, yoga-sakti and yoga-rūdhi-sakti also as noted above.
Appaya Dixit has cited in his Vrttivārtika the definitions of these three varieties as : "akhanda-śakti-mātrena ekártha-pratipadakatvam rūdhih", "avayava-śaktisāpekşam padasya ekártha-pratipādakatvam yogaḥ”, and “ubhaya-śakti-sāpeksam ekártha-pratipādaktvam yoga-rūdhiḥ” - respectively. Jagannātha observes that these definitions are not acceptable because the blemishes pointed out in Appayya's original definition of abhidhā continue here also. Thus, in the definition of the first variety viz. to convey a single meaning by akhanda-śakti, involves the blemish called 'a-samgati' because here also the sense, viz. 'that which is conveyed by sakti is śakti', continues. Jagannātha's argument is that here also, whether you call it Śakti or rūdhi-sakti the meaning is the same. So, when these two are of identical nature, there is a 'ātmā”śraya-dosa'. Again the difficulty pointed out earlier, - viz. that the knowledge of the 'pratipādakatva' of 'artha' does not render 'arthajñāna', - also continues. After thus refuting Appayya, Jagannātha concentrates on a different topic, of
concerning abhidhā. He mentions words such as, "ašvagandhä", "aśvakarņa”, “mandapa”, “niśānta”, and “kuvalaya”, etc. Which variety of abhidhā is
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
