________________
Śabdavșttis, the nature of : Abhidhā
325 sense alone and whatever added sense follows, - call it laksyártha, tātparyártha or vyangyártha - call it by any name, it follows from the primary sense alone as an inferred sense, and the word has nothing to do with it. The other meaning follows from the primary sense due to the relation of linga-lingi-bhāva only. Mahimā observes : (pp. 121, ibid) : "kiñca upacāravrttau śabdasya mā bhūd atiprasanga iti avaśyam kim api nimittam anusartavyam. anyathā anyatra prasiddha-sambandhah katham asamitam (= sanketa-virahita) eva arthántaram pratyāyayet ? yat ca tannimittam tad eva asmābhir iha lingam iti ākhyātam. yuktam ca etat, śabdasya tatra vyāpārā'bhāvāt. vyāpārábhāvas' ca sambandhábhāvāt. lingăt ca linginaḥ pratitir anumānam eva, na guņa-víttau arthántara-pratītiḥ śābdi iti tasyāḥ vācakās'rayatvam asiddham eva." Mahimā (pp. 122) further observes in Samgraha verses :
“yaḥ satattva-samāropaḥ tat-sambandha-nibandhanaḥ, mukhyártha-bādhe sópy artham sambandham anumāpayet.” (46)
and,
stat-sāmya-tat-sambandhau hi tattvā”ropaika-kāraṇam, guņavstter dvirūpāyāḥ
tat-pratītir ato'numā.” (47) i.e. 'tat-sāmya' and 'tat-sambandha' - these two are the causes of 'tattvā”ropa' i.e. superimposition of one object over the other. So, in two types of guņavrtti (or laksanā) the apprehension of the cause - i.e. prayojana - is through inference only.
Thus, Mahimā accepts two types of gunavrtti : (i) based on 'tat-sāmya', as in 'gaur vāhikah' and (ii) based on 'tat-sambandha' as in 'mañcāḥ kros'anti'.
He further observes that abandoning of mukhya-vrtti is not possible in case of a word. So, only a meaning superimposed on a (primary) meaning causes inference of similarity.
“mukhya-vrtti-parityāgah na sabdasya upapadyate, vihito'rthántare hy arthaḥ sva-sāmyam anumāpayet.” - (48)
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
