________________
1382
SAHRDAYĀLOKA In a sentence we understand, with the help of context and kārakas, a particular ativity as vākyártha, either directly stated as above or as implied through context alone. Thus ‘kriya' either directly stated or otherwise is the sentence-sense. In the same way, through vibhāvādi-s, sthāyin emerges as vākyārtha' i.e. tātparyártha or purport in poetry, i.e. in a poetic statement. Sthāyī, like implied kriyā i.e. buddhisthā kriyā, is arrived at through context i.e. prakaraṇā"di.
Dhanika establishes the supremacy of tātparya-vịtti and denounces vyañjanā in his Avaloka on DR. IV. 37.
The DR. IV. 38-47 discuss the topic of rasa in greater detail. DR. IV. 38-39 (pp. 217) read as -
“rasaḥ sa eva svādyatvād rasikasyaiva vartanāt na-anukāryasya vịttatvāt kāvyasya a-tatparatvatah.” (IV. 38) drastuḥ pratītir vrīdérsyā. . rāga-dveșa-prasangataḥ, S . laukikasya sya-ramaņi
samyuktasyaiva darśanāt.” - (IV. 39). Rasa is so called because of its being relished and because it is located only in the connoisseur or rasika who is present. Rasa is not said to be present in the 'anukārya' i.e. original character such as Rāma, Sitā, etc., that are imitated reason is that the 'anukārya' is a matter of past i.e. history. Again poetry is not written to please these historical characters. If rasa were accepted with reference to the anukārya, then as in drama, so also in actual life if a seer sees somebody making love, he should experience rasa. But on the contrary such a sight promotes, with reference to the individual culture of an onlooker, a response of aversion, shame, jealousy, attachment, displeasure etc. as the case may be.
Dhanika (pp. 217, ibid) observes in Avaloka : "kāvyárthópaplāvito rasikavarti ratyā"diḥ sthāyī bhāvaḥ sa iti nirdiśyate. sa ca svādyatām nirbharā”nandasamvidātmatām-äpädyamāno rasah. rasikavarti vartamānarvāt; na anukāryarāmā"di-vartī, vịttatvāt tasya.
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
