マッリナータの〈正しい語形成〉論

This paper deals with the question of what the poetic merit (guṇa) called sauśabdya (suśabda +ṢyaÑ) is. The commentator Mallinātha recognizes this poetic merit in the grammatical sections of Bhaṭṭi’s Bhaṭṭikāvya. Commenting on BhK 14.1, Mallinātha quotes Vidyānātha’s definition of sauśabdya (Pratāparudrayaśobhūṣanṇa [328.2]): supāṃ tiṅāṃ ca vyutpattiḥ sauśabdyaṃ parikīrtyate (‘The derivation of items that terminate in nominal or verbal endings is called sauśabdya.’). However, it is difficult to form a clear picture of what sauśabdya consists in merely from this definition. For, if sauśabdya is obtained by the mere use of nominal or verbal forms that are correctly derived, then it will apply to all Sanskrit works indiscriminately.

Śiśupālavadha 1.51 provides a clue in grasping the concept of sauśabdya. The verse runs as follows:
ŚV 1.51: purīm (1)avaskanda (2)lunīhi nandanaṃ
(3)muṣāṇa ratnāni (4)harāmarāṅganāḥ |
vigr*hya (5)cakre namucidviṣā vaśī
ya ittham asvāsthyam ahardivaṃ divaḥ ||
The ruler (Rāvaṇa), competing with the enemy of Namuci (i.e., Indra), attacked his city (Amarāvatī), destroyed the Nandana garden, looted [the city’s] treasures, and abducted the celestial nymphs. In this manner, [Rāvaṇa] ravaged (cakre . . . asvāsthyam) heaven day after day.

Note that Mallinātha accepts two kinds of sauśabdya: one which involves the derivation of items that terminate in nominal endings (sauśabdya 1) and the other which involves the derivation of items that terminate in verbal endings (sauśabdya 2). He acknowledges sauśabdya 2 in ŚV 1.51 on the basis of the manifoldness of verb forms (tiṅvaicitryāt) observed there and cites a definition of sauśabdya (source unknown): supāṃ tiṅāṃ parāvr*ttiḥ sauśabdam (‘sauśabda [=sauśabdya] [consists in] changes of items that terminate in nominal or verbal endings.’). In this connection let us note the following points: Verb forms (1)–(4) are accounted for by A 3.4.3: samuccaye ’nyatarasyām, which provides that the l-affix lOṬ optionally follows verbs if there is the accumulation (samuccaya) of actions denoted by them, and that lOṬ introduced after the verbs is replaced by hi (zero substitutes for hi after the vowel a [A 6.4.105: ato heḥ]); the use of verb form (5) is accounted for by A 3.4.5: samuccaye sāmānyavacanasya providing for the additional use (anuprayoga) of a verb that denotes an action common to accumulated actions (samuccīyamānakriyā). All this shows that sauśabdya 2 is obtained when a series of verb forms that are correctly derived according to grammatical rules is used in a single verse of kāvya. This naturally implies the condition on which sauśabdya 1 is obtained. Vidyānātha’s example (udāharaṇa) of sauśabdya can be interpreted as showing sauśabdya 1.

As is well known, the main purpose of the Bhaṭṭikāvya is to present illustrations of Pāṇini’s rules (pāṇinīyasūtrāṇām udāharaṇam. kāvyaṃ). This work can be said to be a treasury of sauśabdya 1–2. They, as poetic merits, add charm to the work (kāvyaśobhākara). Mallinātha makes the point that, of the three grammatical sections of the Bhaṭṭikāvya, prakīrṇakāṇḍa (on miscellaneous rules) and adhikārakāṇḍa (on rules governed by headings) have sauśabdya 1, and tiṅantakāṇḍa (on finite verb forms) has sauśabdya 2. It is evident that Mallinātha considers sauśabdya as what characterizes the sections. All these things make it clear that he found poetic value in the multifarious usages (prayogavaicitrī) shown in the grammatical sections, which reflect the author’s extensive knowledge of Pāṇinian grammar.