________________
432
SAHRDAYĀLOKA
To this Dhanika says yes'. He says that ordinarily we speak two types of sentences such as one in which a verb is directly mentioned and the other one in which a verb is not mentioned. The instance of the first is, “gām abhyāja”. i.e. drive away the cow. The verb is clearly mentioned in this. In the other instance, viz. "dvāram dvāram”, meaning "door... door”, the speaker wants to convey that the listener may please shut the door. Thus through context alone, the action of closing the door, which is at the mental level, is conveyed - “yathā laukika-vākyesu śrūyamānakriyeșu, 'gām abhyāja' ityādişu, a-śrūyamanakriyeșu ca dvāram dvaram' ityādişu, sva-sabdopādānāt, prakaranā"divaśāt buddhi-sannivesini kriyaiva kārakopacitā vākyárthah...” The case of rasa-realization is akin to this. Mostly in poetry 'rasa' is not directly expressed and rasa is arrived at through vibhāvas etc. which have an invariable concomittance with rasa-experience. But at times, even in poetry there is mentioning of rasa through its name also e.g. in “prītyā navodhā priyā”.
All sentences such as 'gām abhyāja' or 'dvāram dvāram', terminate in some activity. Similarly all poetic expressions end in a 'kriya' called 'svādodbhūti' or rasa/ taste-experience, i.e. the manifestation of relish which is the sthāyin nourished to that extent. Towards this end, i.e. ralish, all poetry is addressed. Thus vibhāvā"dis form the word-units i.e. padárthas leading to the sentence-unit or vākyártha, the sthāyin. This sthāyin is enjoyed by the bhāvaka. This is ābhidhāniki-ratyādi-pratītih. Now Dhanika holds that if this apprehension does not clear the issue, then the understanding of the sthāyin from the vibhāvas etc. may be held as arriving through laksaņā, i.e. lākṣaṇika-ratyādi-pratītiḥ, i.e. apprehension or rati etc. through secondary usage. This could resemble Kumārila's position which takes 'ākhyātártha' as 'laksya'. Dhanika, in order to make the process less prosaic, calls it bhāvyabhāvaka-sambandha like Bhatta Nāyaka. He quotes Bharata “bhāvayanti rasan yasmāt tasmad bhāvāh", (N.S. VII. 4) in his support.
He says : "ato na rasā"dīnām kāvyena saha vyangya-vyañjaka-bhāvaḥ kim tarhi ? bhāvya-bhāvaka-sambandhaḥ. kāvyam hi bhāvakam, bhāvyāḥ rasā”dayaḥ.
We know that for obvious difficulties in accepting this broder concept of tātparya, it could not hold good before vyañjanāvāda. The fourfold division of word powers into abhidhā, tātparya, laksaņā and vyañjanā by Abhinavagupta was so logical that Dhananjaya/Dhanika's onslaught could not stand. Actually if tātparya is inclusive of vyangya, over and above the sum-total of word-senses in a sentence, then it is another name of vyañjanā. We will go to see how Viśvanātha removes all air from the sail of tātparya later.
We will now turn to Bhoja.
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
