________________
1722
SAHRDAYĀLOKA
The DR. cites the passage from the Ratnävali (Act. III) where Kāñcanamālā refers to the Vidūsaka's secret plot according to which Sāgarikā, disguised as Vāsavadattā is to meet the king. The ND. refers to the clever ruse used by the Vidūşaka (in the Mālavikā.) in securing the signet-ring from the queen.
(2) Mārga - is speaking out the exact truth - a pointing out of one's real purpose. A.bh. illustrates it by a passage in the Ratnāvali (Act II) where the queen refuses to believe with Kāñcanamālā that it may be by accident that the figure drawn by the king resembles Sāgarikā and says that Kāñcanamālā does not understand Vidūsaka's prevarications. The Avaloka illustrates it by a passage in the Ratnāvali (Act III), where the Vidūsaka tells the king of his plot of bringing about his union with Sāgarikā about whose success he was quite certain.
The ND. interprets this limb thus : "paramárthasya vacanam sāmānyenocyamānam prakstā’rthena yat sambadhyate tan mārgaḥ.” and illustrates it by Mudrārākşasa III. 4-5.
(3) Rūpa : is a statement embodying doubts regarding the true nature of something, e.g. in the Kętyārāvana, Rāma not recognising Jatāyu's body, doubts whether it was the mountain with its wings chopped of by Indra, or Garuda smashed down by the Lord of the Asuras or it was Jatāyu who was lying dead. This is how the ND. defines and illustrates rūpa following the NS. and the A.bh. and with this definition rūpa does not differ in any way from the sa-sandeha alamkāra. The Abh. illustrates it by a passage in the Ratnāvalī (Act II. 20) which the Avaloka cites as an example of Paryupāsanā.
The DR. defines it as a remark embodying some hypothesis (vitarka). The Avaloka illustrates it by a passage in the Ratnāvali (Act. III. 9 etc.) where the king expresses his hope of being united to Sāgarikā, but finds that Vidūsaka was carrying doubts : "can it be that the queen has come to know the whole plot ?" : The NLRK. defines it as a logical argument or hypothesis having a striking sense and illustrates it by Ratnāvali III. 2: The mind is, by its very nature, fickle, and thus it should be a difficult mark to hit. How does it happen then that god of love has pierced it with all his arrows at once ?” The SD., too, cites this stanza as an example.
The ND. following the A.bh. distinguishes between Yukti, a sub-division of Mukha and this “rūpa”, as follows : "rūpam iva rūpam. a-niyato hyākāro rūpam ucyate. ... yukteh krtya-vicāra-rūpatvena, niyatā”kārāyā asya bhedah.” (p. 83)
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
