Sahrdayaloka Part 02

Author(s): Tapasvi Nandi
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 30

585
'Vyañjana'
"dyotya" - we have 'dyotya' at Pa. II. i. 10; 19/379; III. i. 7; 2/13 & III. i. 125;
13/88.
The references read as - 'dyotya' - Pā. III. i 10; 19/379 - "ayathājātīyake dyotye". På. III. i. 7; 2/13 "ina yo viseṣa upadhir vópādīyate, dyotye tasmin tena bhavitavyam." Pa. III. i. 125; 13/88 is "ahosvid avaśyate dyotya iti. Then we have vārttika, such as -
·
"avaśyaka upapada iti ced dyotya upasamkhyānam." (i)
The M.bh. reads "avaśyaka upapada iti; ced dyotya upasamkhyānam kartavyam, lātavyam, pāvyam astu tarhi dyotye.
Then we have värttika - 2
-
"dyotya iti cet svara-samāsa'nupapattiḥ" - M.bh. reads 'dyotya' iti cet samāsā'nupapattiḥ." Here the sense is of suggestion.
Again, we have the usage of the word 'rasa' in a very very clear aesthetic sense of the term as in ‘rasika' at Pā. V. ii. 95: 21/394. The sutra reads as - - "rasádibhyaś ca". Rasa in the sense of physical taste such as the salty (i.e. lavana) etc. is of course seen here. But on Varttika - "rasádibhyaḥ punar vacanam anya-nivṛttyartham" (1), the M.bh. has "rasádibhyaḥ punar vacanam kriyate'nyeṣām matvarthīyānām pratisedhártham. matub eva yathā syādyénye matvarthiyāḥ, prapnuvanti te mā bhuvan iti. naitad asti prayojanam. dṛsyante hy anye rasádibhyo matvarthiyāḥ, rasiko naṭaḥ, urvaṣī vai rūpiņī apsarasām, sparsiko vayur iti."
-
'rasa' in 'rasiko natah' has a clear reference to the aesthetic fact, which is collected by vyañjana in poetry.
Thus Panini as explained by Patanjali, and therefore both of them, were aware of vyañjanā as a sabda-vṛtti, though they had no business to discuss it with reference to the śastra of grammar.
We know on the authority of Anandavardhana and his followers, Abhinayagupta and Mammata and the rest, that they have derived ispiration for the Dhvanivāda from the sphotavāda of the grammarians. We will therefore involve ourselves here to examine the concepts of sphota and dhvani as held by the grammarians first, and then as applied to the theory of vyañjana-dhvani-rasa by the ālamkarikas. We will also consider as to how far the writers on poetics are exactly indebted to the Vaiyakaraṇas in upholding their theory of vyañjana and dhvani.
The discussion that follows will take further care of Patanjali and then Bhartṛhari to evolve any further positive observation in this respect. The