________________
Śabdavṛttis, the nature of : Abhidhā
289
We may observe that these words are taken up fully by Mammata. So, Mukula not only serves as a shaping influence for Bhoja but also for Mammața to some extent because he, i.e. Mukula follows the lead of the grammarians such as Patanjali and Bhartṛhari.
-
Now, Mukula considers a pūrva-pakṣa. It goes like this - Is it not possible that words connoting 'guna', 'kriya' or 'yadṛccha' - all can be taken as jāti-śabda ? For example take the word śukla. Now the whiteness in milk, conch, balākā (= name of a bird), etc. is really different but a common word 'śukla' is used for a variety of white colour. Thus 'jāti-nibandhanatva' of 'guṇa-vācī' words is seen. This can be said of kriya sabdas also. The kriya of cooking in case of molasses, sesamum, rice etc. is different yet it is conveyed by the same word viz., 'pacati'. The yadṛccha words such as 'dittha' etc. as spoken by humans, parrots etc. are really different and yet because of jāti i.e. 'ḍittha-sabdatva' they are taken to be one. So, as a result the 'catuṣṭayi pravṛtti' of words does not hold good: "ataś ca gunakriya yadṛcchā-śabdānām api jāti-śabdatvāt caṭuṣṭayī śabdānām pravṛttir na upapadyate." (pp. 9, ibid)
The siddhantin's answer follows: It is not 'jāti' or 'class' which results in cognition of identity in case of guna-sabdas or kriyāśabdas. But it is 'samjn?' i.e. the individual who makes for this sense of identity. The difference seen among individuals is the result of their difference in attributes, i.e. the āśraya or substratum. For example, take a face, which when reflected in oil, sword, water or mirror, which are responsible only for the knowledge of the reflections, make for difference seen in the figures seen in them. In the same way, the individual quality such as whiteness etc., owing to difference with reference to time, place, and context, and thus due to difference in medium, 'kāraṇabheda' - appear differt when vested in a conch, and the like. The colour looks, as though different. But thereby 'śuklatva' - 'jāti' is not proved to have existence. For 'jāti' is that one 'dharma' which resides in many. But the substratum of the imagined śuklatva jāti, viz. śulkla-vyakti is basically one and identical. Same is the case with such words as 'pacati', 'dittha', etc. Thus the 'vyakti' in form of paka-kriya is one and the same, and so also the individual-samjñī-named 'dittha'. The illusory manifoldness nānātva-seen in different stages of paka-kriyā, or in an individual at different years such as of a child, young boy, young man, etc. etc. - makes for this wrong perception of jāti in such cases. This is not real. Says Mukula (pp. 10, ibid) - "atra api ekasyā eva pākā"di-kriya-vyakteḥ, ditthā"di-śabda-vyakteḥ, ditthā"deś ca samjñino yathākramam abhivyañjakānām pākā"dīnām tathā dhvanīnām vayóvasthā-viśeṣāṇām
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
-
www.jainelibrary.org
