________________
Dhvani in Kuntaka, Bhoja and others, and Gunībhūta-vyangya and Citra-Kavya.
1045
spṛṣṭaḥ...", but it was not 'lakṣitaḥ', i.e. they did not supply a logical definition of dhvani though they, perhaps tumbled upon unknowingly the fringes of dhvani while treating the secondary usage of language. Here, the Locana observes: (Dhv. I. i) "bhaṭṭódbhaṭa-vāmanā”dinā. bhāmahenóktam, 'śabdas' cchandóbhidhānárthāḥ..." ity abhidhānasya sabdad bhedam vyākhyātum bhaṭṭódbhato babhāṣe - "śabdánām abhidhānam abhidha-vyāpāraḥ, mukhyo gunavṛttiś ca" - vāmanópi "sādṛśyāllakṣaṇā vakroktiḥ" - iti. manāk spṛṣṭa iti, tais tāvad dhvani-dig unmīlitā."
We have examined the treatment of pratīyamāna artha in the pūrvā❞cāryas and also their acquaintance with various śabda-vṛttis in greater details in earlier chapters, viz. Ch.s III and IV. So, we will not go further here.
We will look into Kuntaka and Bhoja here, especially with reference to their attitude towards dhvani. Kṣemendra, the protagonist of the so called aucitya-school was a disciple of Abhinavagupta and therefore he is a dhvanivädin to the core.
Actually even Kuntaka is taken as a pracchanna-dhvanivāḍin and therefore ācāryas of the dhvani school, beginning from Abhinavagupta and Mammaţa onwards, spare him the brunt of their attack on dhvani-virodhin. We may choose to call Kuntaka a "mānasaputra" of A., and though perhaps he was a senior contemporary of Abhinavagupta, we do not read much in Abhinavagupta to suggest convincingly that he did know Kuntaka. This we say with the full. knowledge of what our respected senior friend Prof. K. Krishnamoorthy has suggested. One thing for sure is that Kuntaka is spared in their attack on opponents, by dhvanivādins later. So, Kuntaka's vakrokti-vicara has much in common with dhvani theory. We will try to critically examine the theories of vakrokti and dhvani and try to find out the areas of agreement and disagreement. Actually, it is an attempt, so to say, at Kuntaka's reappraisal.
We start with a querry viz. "was Kuntaka a dhvanivādin or not? Was he an opponent of Dhvani? The answer to the first question is both 'yes' and 'no'. The answer to the second question is 'no', pure and simple!
It may be noted that Kuntaka (= K.) refers to 'Dhvanikara' directly and also to his theory of dhvani indirectly at VJ. II. 9 while illustrating 'rūḍhi-vaicitrya-vakratā as in "tālā jāanti guņā." etc., an illustration accepted from A. (It may be noted that all our references to the Vakrokti-jivita i.e. VJ. are to the edn. of Dr. K.Krishnamoorthy, pub. Karnatak Uni. Dharwad, Dec. '77). Here K. observes "yasmāt dhvanikāreņa vyangya-vyañjaka-bhāvo'tra sutarām samarthitas tat kim punaruktyena ?" The reference speaks for itself. This makes him almost a disciple
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
