________________
Dhvani in Kuntaka, Bhoja and others, and Gunībhūta-vyangya and Citra-Kavya. 1109 The former is a case of abhidhă/laksaņā-vyañjanā, the latter is the field of abhidhā / laksaņā -> vyañjanā -> vyañjanā; a three tier system. Actually Bhojas love for three and the multiple of three at all stages must have prompted him to this threefold tātparya.
Again, when Dr. Raghavan suggests that perhaps the distinction between vastudhvani / Alamkāra-dhvani on one side and rasa-bhāvā”di-dhvani on the other side can explain Pratīyamāna / dhvanyamāna-tātparya, he is only echoing Abhinavaguptaś views in Locana where he declares that-“vastvalamkāradhvani rasa-dhvanim prati paryavastete," and this shows that Bhoja had seen Abhinavaguptaś works and was also indebted to the same. But Dr. Raghavans suggestion of vaidagdhya' as anubhāvadhvani is not convincing, for Anandavardhana or Abhinavagupta or Mammata or any dhvani-vādin worth his name never mentions "anubhāva-dhvani", for virtually it is 'vastu-dhvani' itself, and even Dr. Raghavan admits this to be so. Hence, only two reasons, which we feel are convincing, as suggested by us project themselves before us and they are- (i) Bhojas penchant for the number three and its multiple and (ii) attraction for singling out 'vyangya based on vyangya' as of special charm, could have driven him to offer abhidhīyamāna-pratīyamāna-and dhvanirūpathree-fold tātparya. For our close reference we will quote from Bhoja, who begins with an explanation of tātparya, perhaps in the fashion of Dhanañjaya / Dhanika, or in the fashion of a dirgha-dirghatara-abhidhāvādin as one pūrvapaksa projected by Mammața, seems to hold. Bhoja observes : (pp. 246, Ch. VII. Śr. Pra. ibid) :
"yatparah-sabdah sa sabdárthaḥ iti tātparyam. tac ca vākya eva upapadyate. padamātrena abhiprāyasya prakāśayitum aśakyatvāt. tac ca vākya-pratipadyam vastu tri-rūpam bhavati. abhidhīyamānam, pratīyamānam, dhvanirūpam ca.”
Before continuing with this quotation we have to take note of an interesting fact that Bhoja talks of tri-rūpa abhiprāya derived from sentence-sense only and rejects out right the possilility of an 'abhiprāya'/ tātparya to be had from a single word i.e. pada. This assertion on Bhojas part rules out pada-dhvani and thereby dhvani derived from padāmía. Theoretically thus the scope of dhvani is restricted to vākya only. We continue with Bhojaś words :
"yatra yad upātta-śabdeșu mukhyā-gauņi-laksaņābhiḥ śabda-śaktibhiḥ svam artham abhidhāya uparata-vyāpāreșu ākānkṣā-sannidhi-yogyatā”dibhir vākyárthamātram eva abhidhīyate tad abhidhīyamānam. yathā gaur gacchati iti vākyárthávagateh uttarakālam vākyárthaḥ upapadyamānó nupapadyamāno vā
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
