________________
1622
SAHRDAYĀLOKA
some other place may appear as existing in a different place as in the cause of "sukti-rajata-jñāna" where the Rajatatva is ascribed to 'idamkarāspada,' i.e. sukti, though it (Rajatatva) is really associated with Rajata only, which is in a different place and this is technicaly called Anyathākhyāti of Naiyayikas (Bhāmati, pp. 2930). Thus this theory instead of accepting anirvacanīya-khyāti as in the previous theory, appears to be inclined to accept Anyathākhyāti.
The identification of sahşdaya with Dusyantā"di may be in three different ways with slight difference in višesana-viśesya-bhāva. The first bodha is - "sakuntalāvisayakarati-viśisto’ham dusyantah.” The second bodha is - "sakuntalā-visayakarativisistaḥ dusyantaḥ aham asmi", and the third bodha is - "aham dusyantarvena śakuntalā-visayakaratyä сa visistah.” In all these three bodha-s, the ultimate meaning is the same, though there is difference in the uddesya-vidheya-bhāva. In the first bodha Dusyantatva is ascribed to "Ahamtva". In the second “Ahamtva” is ascribed to “Dusyantarva", whereas in the third bodha, Dusyantatva and rati are ascribed to Aham. In all these three bodhas, rati is visesana. Its cognition is not a śabda-jñāna, because it cannot be expressed by śabda-s. In this theory, vyañjanā is also not accepted, therefore, the cognition of rati, etc., is Anumāna. For, at first, the Sāmājika infers Rati in Dusyanta etc. with the help of the action of the actor. Next the defect in the Sahrdaya, referred to above, removes the sense of difference between himself and Dusyanta which ultimately results in one of the three kinds of cognitions, identifying him with Duşyanta. Now the Rati can be the object of direct cognition (sākṣātkāra) of sahrdaya by “jñāna-rūpa-pratyāsatti”, as was shown above while discussing about Lollata's theory. These two theories are perhaps the amplification of the one that is briefly stated in the Locana (pp. 186, Edn. with Bāla-priya) : "anye tu anukartari yaḥ sthāyyavabhāsah abhinaya-sāmagryādikştah, bhittāv iva haritālā"dinā aśvávabhāsaḥ sa eva lokātītatayā āsvādā'para-samjñayā pratītyā rasyamāno rasa iti nāryād rasāḥ nārya-rasah.”
Here the word “sthāyyavabhāsaḥ” might have given clue to PR. to develop a theory establishing the Rasánubhava to be a kind of Bhrānti-jñāna.
[We have explained this passage differently, taking it as an explanation concerning the citra-turaganyāya of Sri-sankuka. Sthāyyavabhāsaḥ is to be equated with aśvávabhāsa - or the apparent appearance of the aggragate of a horse presented through colours on a canvass. So, we need not correlate this theory with the one held by “pare tu." However, even the "pare" favour inference and do not accept vyañjanā. Hence Sri Ramachandrudu's suggestion is also not un-welcome to us. Actually in a research paper : “The samlaksya-kramatva of rasā”di-dhvani”, we have also tried to correlate the ideas in Locana with some views mentioned by
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
