Studies In Sanskrit Sahitya Shastra

Author(s): V M Kulkarni
Publisher: B L Institute of Indology

Page 78

66
Studies in
From this prattka and the explanation that follows it would seem that the Kārikā : संसर्गादिया शास्त्र एकत्वात् फलयोगतः । वाक्यार्थस्तद्वदेवात्र शृङ्गारादी रसो मतः ॥
formed part of the text of the A.Bh. and stood just before the Karika Samvedanakhya (khyaya) etc. (as found on p. 277) bhidyasamyojana etc. ( Gnoli's text p. II). This inference is based on the fact that the KLV takes up immediately after the Pratika Samsargādib, tadvitayab iti as the next Prarika for explanation and this latter pranka forms part of the A. Bh. line अनुभवेन च तद्रिश्य इति मन्यम् which is a comment of Abhinavagupta on the word anubhava occuring in the Karika Bhavasamyojana, etc. 14 धिगनागमित्वम् इति ।
–KLV p. 308, 11. 4-5
The text of the A.Bh. (p. 278 1. 3), however, reads (a) dhigarågamitvam. The verse as it stands is highly obscure. Gnoli's translation (p. 51 ) of this verse is hardly satisfactory. Masson and Patawardhan frankly concede: "The first verse is corrupt. and we cannot derive any satisfactory sense from it." Elsewhere they suggest that it is impossible to interpret it when they say: "We give the verse for anybody who wishes to attempt an interpretation." The following passage from the KLV throws. fresh light on the text and the interpretation of this verse:
न त्वेवम् (? नन्वेवम्) इति । न त्वेको ( नन्वेको ) ऽन्यथा व्याचष्टेऽपरोऽन्यतरश्चान्यथेत्येवं रसतत्त्वमलब्वप्रतिष्ठ कथमास्तामिति निर्विण्णप्रायस्य जिज्ञासोः प्रश्नः । किं कुर्मः इति । निराम्नाये ना ( निराम्नायम् (आ) द्यागन रहस्य न कश्चितीति सजुगुप्तमाचार्य स्योक्तिः धिगनागमित्वम् इति । तथा ह्यनागमज्ञो लोलयप्रभृतिः स्थाय्येव विभावानुभावादिभिरुपचितो रस इत्यादिना प्रकारेण किं न दूषयति । सर्वमप्यसङ्गतार्थं प्ररूपयतीत्यर्थः ।
The reading 'dhiganagamitvam, found in the KLV, is highly superior and eminently suits the context. The reading (a)dhigatagamitvam hardly goes well with annayasiddhe in the first påda. With this reading the verse may tentatively be translated as follows :
The true nature of rasa (rasa-tattva) being well-established or being well-known through (Bharata's) tradition what is there new about it ? In the upward march of knowledge the disregard of (Bharata's) tradition deserves to be condemned. Do not people like Lolata vitiate this doctrine of rasa going against the evident and precious hetu (viz. tradition)? Certainly they do."
Abhinavagupta is fond of using this expression 'kimapurvametat'. In the Locana (p. 188 1.5) he says kimetadapūrvam. The statement of Abhinavagupta, which follows immediately after the introductory verses, supports this interpretation (what is new about it ?) :
उक्तमेव मुनिना न खपूर्व किञ्चित् । प्रतिपत्ति इति वाक्यार्थप्रतिपत्तिमात्रात् । 15 इतिवृत्त इति । इतिवृत्तम् इतिकर्तव्यतेत्यर्थः ।
KLV p. 308, 124