________________
450
SAHRDAYĀLOKA dvitiye tu - keyam tātparyākhyā vịttiḥ ? abhihitánvayavādibhir angīkstā tad anyà vā ? ādye dattam eva uttaram.
dvitīye tu-nāmamātre vivādaḥ, tanmate’pi turīya-vrtti-siddheḥ.
nanu astu yugapad eva tātparya-śakryā vibhāvā”di-samsargasya rasā”des ca prakāśanam - iti cet ? na; tayor hetu-phala-bhāvángīkārāt. yad āha munih - 'vibhāvánubhāva-vyabicāri-samyogād rasa-nispattih', iti. sahabhāveca kutah savyetara-vişāņayor iva kārya-kāraṇa-bhāvaḥ ?, paurváparya-virahāt. 'gangāyām ghosah' ity ādau taţā”dy artha-mātra-bodha-viratāyā laksaņāyās' ca kutah śītatvapāvanatvā"di-vyangya-bodhakatā ? tena turīyā vrtcir ūpāsyā eva iti nirvivādam etat.” .
So, any extention of the traditionally accepted connotation of ‘tātparya-vịtti' is not acceptable to Viśvanātha, it being unscientific.
We did not mention Hemacandra after Mammata, because he follows the footsteps of Mammata and observes : (pp. 58, Edn. 2nd '64, Dr. Kulkarni and Prof. Parikh, Bombay, and pp. 28, Edn. Nandi, L. D. Insti. publication, Ahmedabad A.D. 2000) : "abhidhānántaram ca yady api anvaya-pratipatti-nimittam tātparya-śaktir apy asti, tadvisayas tātparya-laksaņo'rtho'pi, tathā’pi tau vākya-visayāv eva iti nā'tra uktau."
In the 'Viveka' he adds only this much- “ 'tāv iti' - sä сa sa ca, tau. atréti saktimadhye arthamadhye ca". This suggests Hemacandra's absolute clerity concerning both the tātparya-sakti and the tātparyártha, which he is not in a mood to discuss because they concern themselves with a sentence only. Tātparya is for Hemacandra, a vākya-sakti and tātparyártha is vākyártha arrived at with the help of a sentence. So, these two - tau i.e. să (= tātparya-sakti) and 'sa' (i.e. tātparyártha) were not to be considered when only word-powers and word-senses were discussed. But even for Hemacandra vyañjană continues to be a turiyā = fourth power, because he accepts 'gauņi' as a separate vrtti over and above laksanā.
Jayadeva and Keśava have nothing to say about tātparya-vrtti.
It will be interesting to end this chapter with a long quotation from : Dr. K. Kunjunni Raja, who in his 'Indian Theories of Meaning" observes (pp. 217, ibid) -
"It is well known that the Bhāțța-Mimāmsakas who followed Kumārilabhatta are staunch supporters of the abhihitánvaya theory of verbal comprehension; as a result of this whenever the term is found, there is a tendency among commentators to associate it exclusively to the Bhātra school, without waiting to inquire whether the theory explained is the same as that adopted by the Bhättas. Some of the commentators, and modern scholars following them, have thus associated 'tātparya-vrtti' with the Bhātta-school of Mimāmsā.
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
