2023-03-29 18:10:59 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
280
GLOSSARY
to us (in the sense, at least, that the writers never tell us when they
are innovating), but here is an example of a notion refuted before
it is stated. The issue is not major, for it reduces to a decision
as to which of the two figures (drstânta, vyatireka) here com-
bined is primary, and that seems to depend on the intention of
the speaker. In the example from Saul Bellow, the distinction seems
more important than the illustration (he is not looking around for
un mot juste at any rate).
nimittadṛṣţi, "whose cause is evident': (1) a type of vyatireka in which a
cause explains the pre-eminence of the subject. (2) U 2.6. (3)
padman ca nisi niḥśrīkam divā candram ca nişprabham । sphuraccha-
yena satatam mukhenâdhaḥ prakurvatīm [Umām] (Udbhata; Uma's
face surpasses both the lotus and the moon because it is beautiful
both by day and by night: "Umă, conquering with her ever-
radiant face the lotus, at night unlovely, and the moon, dull by
day").
(4) "Return sweet Evening / Not sumptuously adorned, nor
needing aid, / Like homely featured Night, of clustering gems; /
A star or two, just twinkling on thy brow, / Suffices thee" (William
Cowper).
nimittâdṛṣţi, 'whose cause is not evident': (1) a type of vyatireka in which
the cause of the subject's pre-eminence is only hinted at. (2) U 2.6.
(3) să gaurī śikharam gatvā dadarśômām tapaḥkṛśām । rāhupītapra-
bhasyêndor jayantīm dūratas tanum (Udbhața; the explanation-the
eclipse is not given: Rāhu is unable to obscure the moon for long,
whereas Uma's pale and intense tapas is constant; "Gauri, gone to
the mountain peak, saw Umā, frail through penance but conquering
from afar the beauty of the pale, eclipsing moon"). (4) "I think
that I shall never see / A billboard lovely as a tree. / Perhaps unless
the billboards fall, / I'll never see a tree at all" (Ogden Nash; why
trees are preferable to billboards is left to our imagination). (5)
Udbhata subdivides vyatireka only in this way (cf. nimittadrsti);
now, any distinctive qualification can be taken as a cause of dis-
similitude or pre-eminence, but it seems that we should take Udbhaṭa
more literally than that, and see his cause to be an effective and not
merely formal cause. Eka and ubhaya vyatireka concern distinctive
qualifications only as forms. In hetu vyatireka, the discrimination is
itself given the form of a cause; in the present case, the cause is
taken to mean the explanation of that discrimination.
pratiyamāna, 'being understood, implicit': (1) a type of vyatireka in
GLOSSARY
to us (in the sense, at least, that the writers never tell us when they
are innovating), but here is an example of a notion refuted before
it is stated. The issue is not major, for it reduces to a decision
as to which of the two figures (drstânta, vyatireka) here com-
bined is primary, and that seems to depend on the intention of
the speaker. In the example from Saul Bellow, the distinction seems
more important than the illustration (he is not looking around for
un mot juste at any rate).
nimittadṛṣţi, "whose cause is evident': (1) a type of vyatireka in which a
cause explains the pre-eminence of the subject. (2) U 2.6. (3)
padman ca nisi niḥśrīkam divā candram ca nişprabham । sphuraccha-
yena satatam mukhenâdhaḥ prakurvatīm [Umām] (Udbhata; Uma's
face surpasses both the lotus and the moon because it is beautiful
both by day and by night: "Umă, conquering with her ever-
radiant face the lotus, at night unlovely, and the moon, dull by
day").
(4) "Return sweet Evening / Not sumptuously adorned, nor
needing aid, / Like homely featured Night, of clustering gems; /
A star or two, just twinkling on thy brow, / Suffices thee" (William
Cowper).
nimittâdṛṣţi, 'whose cause is not evident': (1) a type of vyatireka in which
the cause of the subject's pre-eminence is only hinted at. (2) U 2.6.
(3) să gaurī śikharam gatvā dadarśômām tapaḥkṛśām । rāhupītapra-
bhasyêndor jayantīm dūratas tanum (Udbhața; the explanation-the
eclipse is not given: Rāhu is unable to obscure the moon for long,
whereas Uma's pale and intense tapas is constant; "Gauri, gone to
the mountain peak, saw Umā, frail through penance but conquering
from afar the beauty of the pale, eclipsing moon"). (4) "I think
that I shall never see / A billboard lovely as a tree. / Perhaps unless
the billboards fall, / I'll never see a tree at all" (Ogden Nash; why
trees are preferable to billboards is left to our imagination). (5)
Udbhata subdivides vyatireka only in this way (cf. nimittadrsti);
now, any distinctive qualification can be taken as a cause of dis-
similitude or pre-eminence, but it seems that we should take Udbhaṭa
more literally than that, and see his cause to be an effective and not
merely formal cause. Eka and ubhaya vyatireka concern distinctive
qualifications only as forms. In hetu vyatireka, the discrimination is
itself given the form of a cause; in the present case, the cause is
taken to mean the explanation of that discrimination.
pratiyamāna, 'being understood, implicit': (1) a type of vyatireka in