Sahrdayaloka Part 02

SR No.: 006909
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Tapasvi Nandi
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2005
Total Pages: 642
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 15 MB

Page 203

758
SAHRDAYĀLOKA there is apprehension of vibhāvā"dis. In a sentence charged with rasa, we know that the sentence-sense rests at the apprehension of the vibhāva i.e. determinants etc. only. Thus vibhāvas etc being only the instrument to bring home rasaapprehension, they necessarily have to be the fore-runners of rasa-apprehension. In the second stage there can never be rasa-pratīti, along with the apprehension of the determinants etc. As such, it is said,
"a-pratistam a-viếrāntam svárthe, yat-paratām idam, vākyam vigāhate tatra nyāyyā tatparatā’sya sā.” yatra tu svártha-viśrāntam pratisthām tāvad āgatam, tat-prasarpati tatra syāt
sarvatra dhvaninā sthitih." Dhanika quotes these two kārikās on behlaf of the vyañjanāvādin objector who refuses to include vyañjanā-dhvani in tātparya. The meaning is as follows -
When a sentence is not stable (a-pratisthita) and when it does not rest (aviśrānta) in its own sense, it is said to be 'tat-paraka' i.e. 'that-sense-oriented', in which (yat-paratā) it indulges. This is the nyāyyā or right position.
But when a sentence is resting in its own sense (i.e. svártha-viśrānta), and has attained stability, i.e. when the sentence-sense is fully apprehended, the further sense is called 'dhvani'.
So, with reference to these two karikās, it is clear that with the sentence-sense in form of the meaning of determinants etc. (= vibhāvā”di), having attained full rest (= viśrānta), the rasa-apprehension which follows has to be taken as a suggested sense and not as a sentence-sense. In case of idea (i.e. vastu), and a figure of speech (i.e. alamkāra), the story is different as they can be, at places suggested, or at other places even directly expressed through abhidha. But rasa is necessarily only suggested. In the case of suggested idea and figure, dhvani will be there only if they are principally suggested; for in other case of there being either equal status, or the vācyártha being comparatively more prominant, it will be a case of the gunībhūtavyangya-type of poetry. For, the Dhvanikāra himself has said, “yatrárthaḥ śabdo vā..." etc. (Dhanika here quotes the Dhv. I. 13). Dhanika further explains that