Sambodhi 1993 Vol 18

Author(s): J B Shah, N M Kansara
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 22

Vol. XVIII, '92-'93 The only difference is that in 3.3.87, as in the Dravya-samuddesa, the multifariousness
ne Thing-meant, is closely connected with the expression in words of this one Thing-meant. In Jāti-samuddesa 3.1.33-43, the division of Existence clearly preceded its being expressed in language.
We therefore have to arrive at the remarkable conclusion that the Sambandhasamuddesa is on the whole much more intimately connected with the 'individual substance' view than with the 'universal' view. It may be considered to be a direct continuation of the discussion of the 'substance' view started in the Dravya-samuddesa. 9. The Guna-samuddesa "el
In Helārāja's division, the next chapter is the Guna-samuddesa Hel. It absorbs the three kārikās called 'Bhūyo-dravya-samuddeša' in the manuscripts, the first two of which are as follows. 38 1-2. Some meanings of words, which are in the science (of grammar) abstracted and separated
from the meaning of a sentence, arising from that (sentence meaning) whichis an aggregate and has the character of consciousness, just like the meanings of stem and suffix (arise from and are abstracted and separated from the word), (some of these meanings of words) which are the basis of the correctness of words, will be explained
concisely acording to tradition, their nature being inferred from grammer. The character of these kārikās is quite general. They seem to reintroduce the subject matter of the third Kānda namely the discusion of individual word meanings. The difference with the first general introduction, kārikās 1-2 in the Jāti-samuddesa, is that there it was emphasized that the word meanings are permanent, and that they may be considered as either a universal or a substance. The feasability (as well as the limits of this permanence was demonstrated in various ways in the remainder of the Jātisamuddesa and in the Dravya-samuddeša. But the introduction here seems to clear the way for a more specific discussion of word meanings. And this is what we actually find in the chapters which have been categorized above as the second group of chapters: chapters dealing with more specific word meanings such as 'direction' (dis), 'action' (kriyā), 'time' (kāla), 'person' (puruşa), etc.
It is next, the third, kārikā which deals with dravya 'substance' as the meaning of a word. 39. 3. The thing in reference to which (yatra) a pronoun indicating an object is used, that thing
(so'rthah), intended as something which can be differentiated, is called 'substance'. According to Helārāja, comenting on the first kārikā of the Dravya-samuddesa, it is this kārikā that represents the view of Vyādi, according to whom all words denote dravya 'substance' (VP IIIa:106.8-10). Substance, according to Helārāja, is of two kinds: that belonging to the level of ultimate truth (pāramārthika) and that belonging to the level of (linguistic) practice (sāmvyavahārika). The substance of the ultimate level is discussed in the Dravya-samuddesa, and for the substance of the level of linguistic practice Helārāja cites — as a kārikā from the GunasamuddešaHcl — the kārikā translated here.40