काव्यमीमांसा (महाकवि राजशेखर - कवि-रहस्य एवं देश-विभाग सटीक)

166 EXPLANATORY NOTES
taught to any one because they contain several untrue statements;
secondly, because they encourage immoral practices; and thirdly,
because they give teachings on indecent practices. In support of
these three arguments they quoted several examples from the
Kāvyas. Rājaśekhara refuted all these hostile views on the
Kāvya and proved that the study of Kāvya is irreproachable in
every way because of its special merits.
Page. 25
ll. 1-4. स्लेमः=moisture. Here the poet has employed the
figure of speech known as अतिशयोक्ति in describing the fame of
a king.
ll. 5-9. Here also अतिशयोक्ति is employed in describing the
army of a king. The word पातालतालु is also used by Vāmana. (See
Kāvyālaṅkārasūtra 1-3-23.)
ll. 10-14. The words वाचाल and तुङ्ग are used here to indicate
the imperfection of वार्ता and पुराण in stating real facts. The word
अव्याहतं should be pronounced with the काकु (intonation) which indicates
interrogation.
l. 15. The reading in this line is defective in all MSS. It
may be emended as:—
नासत्यमस्ति किञ्चन काव्ये स्तुत्यर्थमर्थवादोऽयम् ।
*[l. 17. पुष्पिण्यौ. ऐतरेयब्राह्मण 7-15-2. (33-3) शतपथब्राह्मण. 15-19. ]
l. 17. This ṛk occurs in the शौनःशेपाख्यान where Indra advises
Rohita, the son of Hariścandra to wander again in the jungle, and
this the boy actually did. This ṛk is in eulogy of the wanderer.
शेरे=शेरते । प्रपथे=प्रकृष्टे तीर्थक्षेत्रादिमार्गे ।
Here wandering is praised in order that Rohita may be
tempted to accept this novel career. It is, therefore, called
प्रशंसार्थवाद which may contain untrue statements also.
ll. 19-22. This is also another प्रशंसार्थवाद which praises grammar
as superior even to Vedas. In this connection the Vedic view of
Arthavāda is noteworthy. Vedic scholars are inclined to think
that the chief object of अर्थवाद is only to praise the action prescribed
in the form of विधि or निषेध in order to attract the performer; and,