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

220 EXPLANATORY NOTES
Cf. तदित्थं स्थिते—
प्रतायन्तां वाचो निमितविविधार्थामृतरसा
न वादः कर्तव्यः कविभिरनवद्ये स्वविषये ।
परस्वादानेच्छाविरतमनसो वस्तु सुकवेः
सरस्वत्यैवैषा घटयति यथेष्टं भगवती ॥
Dhvani. 4. 17.
Page. 63.
**[ ll. 2-5. The portion dealing with प्रतिबिम्बकल्प, आलेख्यप्रख्य, तुल्य-
देहितुल्य and परपुरप्रवेशसदृश is borrowed by Hemacandra. cf. also अर्थो
द्विविधोऽयोनिरन्यच्छायायोनिश्च । (वामन. III. 2-7.) अयोनिर अकारणः अवधानमात्र-
कारण इत्यर्थः । अन्यस्य काव्यस्य च्छाया अन्यच्छाया तयोनिः । Read एकादृश । ]
ll. 2-5. Rājaśekhara approves of all the above mentioned
views as correct. Vāmana seems to have analyzed अर्थ in poetry
for the first time, and discovered that there are three distinct
divisions of it.
Cf. अर्थो द्विविधोऽयोनिरन्यच्छायायोनिश्च ।
व्यक्तः सूक्ष्मश्च । सूक्ष्मो भाव्यो वासनीयश्च ।
Kāvyālaṅkārasūtra III. 2, 7-9.
Ānandavardhana, further developed this idea of three divisions
of Artha and, therefore, his is a definite improvement on the older
theory. This is found in the Dhvanyāloka 4-12.
Cf. संवादा ह्यन्यसादृश्यं तत्पुनः प्रतिबिम्बवत् ।
आलेख्यप्रख्यवत्तुल्यदेहिवच्च शरीरिणाम् ॥
Taking advantage of the already existing theories, Rājaśekhara
develops upon them, puts the whole on a more scientific basis, and
illustrates his points by a number of verses in these two chapters.
The word अध्यगीष्महि also shows that Rājaśekhara here alludes to
the views of some earlier writers on this subject. The examples
of निन्हुतयोनि and परपुरप्रवेशसदृश are an improvement on Vāmana
and Ānandavardhana.
The word एकादृश may be read as एकादृत् as अयोनिर is used by only
one author. Hemacandra incorporated all these four divisions as
recorded by Rājaśekhara along with their definitions and illustra-
tions in his Kāvyānuśāsanaviveka. p. 8.
ll. 7-14. प्रतिबिम्बकल्पार्थ is defined by Ānandavardhana as अनन्य्यात्म
and explained by him as तात्त्विकशरीरशून्यम् । see. Dhvani 4-13. The