218. 242 CHAPTER IVUDAAMIIGA

242 CHAPTER IVUDAAMIIGA

Naiyayikas and Bhattas, which Abhinava accepts and which we have briefly stated in the preceding pages, the Anvita- bhidhānavādins, Prābhakaras, maintain that there is no necessity of admitting the additional power of words called the Tatparyasakti, admitted by the Naiyayikas and the Bhattas, and Dhvani, as maintained by others. Abhidhāśakti alone serves the purposes of all. They argue as follows :-

Just as the power of an arrow to hit more and more distant objects depends upon the power and the skill of the archer, so the power of words to signify things, not ordi- narily indicated, depends upon the skilful use that the writer or speaker makes of them. Just as in the case of the arrow the assumption of different powers is unnecessary to explain its hitting near and distant objects, so the assumption of more than one power of words is unnecessary to account for their conveying different ideas in different contexts.

CRITICISM OF THE ANVITĀBHIDHĀNAVĀDA.

The conception of difference of one power from another is based upon the difference of functions performed by them. And one function is regarded as different from another, according as its sphere and the means, wherewith it is performed, are different. Now, the question, that the Anvitabhidhanavadins have got to answer, is, whether the far-reaching power of words discharges only one function or many. The former position cannot be maintained, because it extends over different spheres. At one time it gives rise to one meaning at another time to another. This certainly involves difference in the means. If, therefore, it be admitted to perform more than one function, it will have necessarily to be admitted to be of different kinds. And if so, the position of the unity of power becomes indefensible, because, as we have already stated, the conception of