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

FIRST ADHYĀYA 127
poetics, introduced by Rājaśekhara in accordance with the
Kāmasūtra of Vātsyāyana and the Arthaśāstra of Kauṭilya.
Kucamāra is mentioned as the original writer on this subject
both by Rājaśekhara and Vātsyāyana. The object of this chapter
must be the same as that of the औपनिषदिक chapter in the Arthaśa-
stra and the Kāmasūtra. Vātsyāyana describes in this chapter
of औपनिषदिक the ways and means to obtain the expected results
of Kāma through medicinal plants, Mantras and Tāntric practices.
This expediency is recommended by Vātsyāyana for those who fail
to gain the enjoyment of Kāma through ordinary means. Kauṭilya
also in his chapter of औपनिषदिक treats of similar Tantric practices to
be adopted by kings in order to subdue the enemies and protect
the subjects. Similarly, Rājaśekhara also might have dealt with
in this chapter the ways and means to obtain poetical excellence
by those who fail to gain it by ordinary methods. The underlying
motive which led the author to introduce this chapter in the
Kāvyamīmāṁsā, will become apparent if a reference is made to the
statements of Rājaśekhara on p. 11. l. 10, and p. 13. ll. 13, 15.
There it is said that a disciple who is devoid of poetical skill
either by birth or by training, is called दुर्बुद्धि. In order that he
may obtain poetical exellence the ways and means for attaining
it, are treated of in the chapter of औपनिषदिक. In the other place
(p. 12. l. 22) it is said that उपनिषच्छक्ति means मन्त्रतन्त्राद्युपदेशप्रभवा शक्तिः।
*[ll. 14–16. Cf. 'एवं बहुभिराचार्यैः तच्छास्त्रं खण्डशः प्रणीतमुत्सन्नकल्पमभूत् ।
'तत्र...संक्षिप्य सर्वमर्थमल्पेन ग्रन्थेन कामसूत्रमिदं प्रणीतम्॥' (काम. सू. 1. 1. 18 and 19)].
l. 15. प्रयोजका(ना)ङ्गवती। Here the original reading as found
in the MSS does not seem to be quite appropriate because प्रयोजक
is not an अङ्ग. The suggestion as प्रयोजनाङ्गवती seems to be more
suitable because प्रयोजन is considered as an important अङ्ग
for the प्रेक्षावत्प्रवृत्ति. That is to say, there must be some necessity
for composing a work, and this becomes an important factor
for the composition of that work. If there is no need for such a
work, neither the poet should waste his energy in its composition
nor the readers could be interested in a work of that kind. Here
in preparing his Kāvyamīmāṁsā, Rājaśekhara states the necessity
for composing the work by the words: प्रकीर्णत्वात् and उच्छिच्छिदे. In
this respect the author entirely follows Vātsyāyana and Kauṭilya
both in arrangement as also in ideas. Cf. Vātsyāyana:—
तत्रप्रजाचारायणः साधारणमधिकरणं प्रोवाच। सुवर्णनाभः साम्प्रयोगिकम्। घोटकमुखः कन्या-

128 EXPLANATORY NOTES
सम्प्रयुक्तकम् । गोनर्दीयो भार्याधिकारिकम् । गोणिकापुत्रः पारदारिकम् । कुचुमार औपनिषि-
कम् । एवं बहुभिराचार्यैस्तच्छास्त्रं खण्डशः प्रणीतमुत्सन्नकल्पमभूत् । + + + संक्षिप्य
सर्वमर्थमल्पेन ग्रन्थेन कामसूत्रमिदं प्रणीतम् (काम. सू. 1-1-18-19) Also cf. पृथिव्या
लाभे पालने च यावन्त्यर्थशास्त्राणि पूर्वाचार्यैः प्रस्थापितानि प्रायशस्तानि संहृत्यैकमिदमर्थशास्त्रं
कृतम् । तस्यायं प्रकरणाधिकरणसमुद्देशः ( Arthaśāstra 1. 1.)
l. 15. अष्टादशाधिकरणी । This is a compound word by Dvigusamāsa :
अष्टादशानामधिकरणानां समाहारः ।
*[l. 16. तस्या अयं प्रकरणाधिकरणसमुद्देशः । cf. “तस्यायं प्रकरणाधिकरणसमुद्देशः”
( काम. सू. 1-1-19 ) and अर्थशास्त्र ( 1-1.). शास्त्रसंग्रहः. cf. ( काम. सू. 1-1-20 );
also the शास्त्रसंग्रह in Amara's कविकल्पलता. Though the work contains
18 chapters, only 15 headings are here enumerated ].
l. 16. प्रकरणाधिकरणसमुद्देशः । Prakaraṇas are the sub-divisions of each
Adhikarana and they deal with the different topics coming under the
main subject of an Adhikaraṇa. It is to be understood by this remark
that Prakaraṇas of eighteen Adhikaraṇas in the Kāvyamīmāṃsā
are enumerated here. But contrary to this statement and to
the method adopted in the Kāma and the Artha s'āstras, we
find here enumerated only 15 subjects S'āstrasangraha, etc, of
the first Adhikarana Kavirahasya but not the Prakaraṇas of
other 17 Adhikaraṇas of the Kāvyamīmāṃsā. But it is to
be noted here that these 15 subjects cover all the 18 chapters
of the first Adhikarana. This difference in number between
the chapters and the subjects of the first Adhikarana requires
an explanation. It appears that in some places one subject
is treated of in more than one chapter and at others one chapter
deals with more than one subject. In this respect Rājaśekhara
differs from the method of the Kāma and the Arthas'āstras
while enumerating the Prakaraṇādhikaraṇas. In the enumeration
of these 15 subjects also he does not follow the exact order
adopted by him in the first Adhikarana. For example, वाक्यविधयः,
कविविशेषः and काकुप्रकाराः should go after पदवाक्यविवेक, and भुवनकोशः after
देशविभाग according to the order of the text. This deviation of
sequence in the enumeration may be explained by the fact that
probably Rājaśekhara did not anticipate this change when he was
engaged in composing the first chapter of this Adhikarana.
It may also be possible that Vātsyāyana and Kauṭilya did not
commit this mistake because probably they wrote their प्रकरणाधि-
करणसमुद्देश after the completion of their works.

FIRST ADHYĀYA 129
Page. 2.
l. 4. भुवनकोशः। A short description of the Bhuvanakośa is
found in the 17th chapter of this work where a geographical division
of countries is given. Rājaśekhara states on p. 98. l. 9. that for
full information regarding the geography of the world the reader
should refer to another work of his, entitled, the Bhuvanakośa.
It is, however, doubtful as to whether this Bhuvanakośa is entirely
a different work of Rājaśekhara or whether it represents the
subject matter of the 19th chapter of the present work which is
lost. It is, however, highly improbable that this should represent
an independent work composed by him. (For further information
see introduction).
l. 4. इत्यादि। In the corresponding chapters of the Kāmaśāstra
of Vātsyāyana and the Arthaśāstra of Kauṭilya, all Adhikaraṇas
of the complete work are enumerated along with their sub-
divisions. Rājaśekhara who generally follows them ought to have
mentioned in this chapter, all the eighteen Adhikaraṇas of the
Kāvyamīmāṁsā with their Prakaraṇas. But all MSS. of this
work now available omit the other Adhikaraṇas, and this omission
is evident by the word इत्यादि. It cannot also be definitely stated
that the author himself did not care to mention them here as he
was not sure of composing the next 17 Adhikaraṇas because such
statements as औपनिषदिके वक्ष्यामः, रीत्यस्तु पुरस्तात्, अलङ्कारव्याख्यानन्तु पुरस्तात्
etc. in different places of this work clearly show that Rājaśekhara
had a mind to complete this work and that he had already planned
it in eighteen Adhikaraṇas. It is likely therefore that the scribes
who wanted to preserve only the first Adhikaraṇa of Kavirahasya
out of the bulky volume containing the whole, did not mention
the other Adhikaraṇas and Prakaraṇas of the work but only
referred to the omitted portion by the word इत्यादि.

• [ P. 2. l. 5. व्याख्याभाष्यम्-व्याख्यारूपं भाष्यं or व्याख्या and भाष्यम्।
  separately ].
  l. 5. इति सूत्राणि। This remark shows that Rājaśekhara writes
  his work in the same Sūtrabhāṣya style as adopted by Vātsyāyana
  and Kauṭilya.
• [ Read lines 5-8 as—इति सूत्राण्यथैतेषां व्याख्याभाष्यं भविष्यति ।
  समासव्यासविन्यासः सैष शिष्यहिताय नः ॥
  चित्रोदाहरणैर्गुर्वी ग्रन्थेन तु लघीयसी ।
  इयं नः काव्यमीमांसा काव्यव्युत्पत्तिकारणम् ॥
  १७

130 EXPLANATORY NOTES
Cf. संक्षेपमिममुक्त्वाऽस्य विस्तरोऽतः प्रवक्ष्यते ।
इष्टं हि विदुषां लोके समासव्यासभाषणम् ॥ ( काम. सू. 1-87 ) ].
l. 6. सैषः । In ordinary prose writing स एषः is the correct
form. In poetry alone this usage is allowed by Pāṇini ( 6-1-134 )
in accordance with the usages सैष दाशरथी रामः etc.
l. 9. मीमांसा यत्र वाग्भवः । This is the reading found in all
MSS. of the work and this may be construed as follows:—इयं सा
काव्यमीमांसाख्या मीमांसा=विचारः। यत्र=यस्मिन्विचारे। वाग्भवः=मदीयो वाग्भवः एतद्ग्रन्थ-
रूपः ॥ Some scholars, however, suggest here an alternative reading
as मीमांस्यो यत्र वाग्भवः, and this may be construed as: यत्र वाग्भवः=
'poetical compositions' मीमांस्यः।

• [ l. 11. यायावरीयः=यायावरकुलोत्पन्नः । ]
  l. 12. कविभ्यः । This word indicates that all poets are Adhi-
  kārīs or competent to study this science.

Adhyāya II.
l. 15. शास्त्रनिर्देशः। In the first chapter Rājaśekhara gives a list
of subjects to be dealt with in his work and, therefore, he names
it as Śāstrasaṅgraha. The second chapter he calls as Śāstra-
nirdeśa because he states here the names of different Śāstras which
should first be studied by a poet before beginning to compose
anything. Both Kauṭilya and Vātsyāyana have also given similar
instructions in the corresponding chapters of their works.
l. 16. वाङ्मयम्=literature. Literature is of two kinds: Śāstras
and Kāvyas. As the nature of the Kāvyas is to be discussed
in this work from the 3rd chapter onwards, here only the nature
and divisions of the Śāstras are treated.
l. 17. पूर्वम्। Why should the study of the Śāstras be neces-
sary for poets before composing any poem? The answer to this
question has been given thus. None can see in darkness without
the aid of a lamp, even so, no poet can attempt at writing poems
without having efficiency in the Śāstras. Also the Kāvyas follow
the Śāstras in every way (see. p. 4. l. 4-5); therefore, no Kāvya
can be composed without having a good knowledge of the Śāstras.

• [ ll. 18–22. Cf. Sāyaṇa's preface to the Ṛgveda-Bhāṣya,
  Jaimini Sūtra II. 1. 30. etc. and Viramitrodaya Paribhāṣāprakāśa]

SECOND ADHYĀYA 131
ll. 18-22. अपौरुषेयम्। A Śāstra is considered Apauruṣeya
when it cannot be attributed to any author by tradition, and
Pauruṣeya when it can be traditionally attributed to a particular
author. This kind of Apauruṣeyabhāva has been predicated with
reference to the Vedas by the authors of the Pūrvamīmāṁsā but
the Naiyāyikas do not consider the Vedas to be Apauruṣeya. The
authorship of the Vedas is attributed by them to Īśvara who
represents a Puruṣa.
सा च etc. Though there are several definitions of the Vedas,
the one given here as मन्त्रब्राह्मणे—seems to be the earliest. Āpa-
stamba, one of the early Sūtrakāras of the Yajurveda gave the
same definition in a somewhat different wording, as 'मन्त्रब्राह्मणयो-
र्वेदनामधेयम्। (Āpas. śrau. sūtra. 24. 1–31).
विवृत etc. This is a definition of Mantra. The chief function
of the Mantra is to remind the performers of the different
ceremonies to be performed. विवृतं ज्ञापितं क्रियातन्त्रं क्रियाप्रयोगः यैस्ते ।
There are three kinds of Mantras used in Vedic rites, namely,
स्मारक, क्रियमाणानुवादि and अनुमन्त्रणमन्त्राः, and these Mantras remind the
priests of the rites to be performed, already performed and of those
things that are connected with ceremonies they are performing.
Mīmāṁsakas, therefore, define Mantras as प्रयोगसमवेतार्थस्मारका मन्त्राः ।
Jaimini, however, in one of his Sūtras defines the Mantra as तच्चोदकेषु
मन्त्राख्या (II–1–32), meaning that those portions of the Vedas only
are called Mantras which are traditionally known by that name.
Āpastamba's definition of Mantra is ब्राह्मणादन्ये मन्त्राः । Ibid 24–1–84).
मन्त्राणां etc. The Brāhmaṇa portion of the Vedas chiefly
shows the connection of the Mantras with different rites according
to the injunction of the Vedas, and each such injunction is
always accompanied by some explanation either for praising or
denouncing the particular ceremony. These explanations are
called Arthavādas. Āpastamba defines the Brāhmaṇa portion of
the Vedas as कर्मचोदना ब्राह्मणानि. Ibid 24–1–32.
स्तुतिनिन्दाव्याख्यान is the function of the Arthavādas. For the
definition and classification of the Arthavāda cf. ब्राह्मणशेषोऽर्थवादः ।
निन्दा प्रशंसा परकृतिः पुराकल्पश्च । Ibid 24–1–33.
त्रयी। This order of the three Vedas is found generally, in
early Vedic works. Cf. Āpastambaśrautasūtra 24-1-4. But

132 EXPLANATORY NOTES
the order differs in the Arthaśāstra of Kauṭilya where the
Sāmaveda is mentioned first as: सामर्ग्यजुर्वेदास्त्रय्यी. (1-3-1).
अथर्वणवेद is mentioned along with the इतिहासवेद by Kauṭilya
while the present author takes इतिहास amongst the उपवेदs and अथर्वण
as the fourth Veda.
अर्थव्यवस्थित etc. The versified portions of the Vedas are called
Ṛks where each Pāda or one-fourth part is required to convey
a definite sense. In this respect Rājaśekhara follows the definition
of Jaimini. cf. तेषामृग्यत्रार्थवशेन पादव्यवस्था। II-1-35.
ताः सगीतयः। Sāma is represented by Rājaśekhara to be the
same as the Ṛks sung in different tones. But Jaimini defines
Sāma in his Sūtra 'गीतिषु सामाख्या' (II-1-36) as nothing but the Gīti
or song. According to him not Ṛks but Gītis only can be called
Sāmas. Yajus is defined by both Rājaśekhara and Jaimini in
the same manner. According to them Yajus is a portion of the
Vedas having no metre or Gīti. Jaimini defines Yajus as: शेषे यजुः
शब्दः ( II-1-37 ).
l. 23. त इमे etc. The words, ऋचः यजूंषि etc. refer to the Mantras
and not the Brāhmaṇa portion of each Veda according to the
definitions cited above. Here, however, the same words are
used with reference to the whole Veda including both the Mantra
and Brāhmaṇa portions, on the strength of लक्षणावृत्ति ।

• [ l. 24. सार्ववर्णिकः cf. "तस्मात्सृजापरं वेदं पञ्चमं सार्ववर्णिकम्"। नाट्यशास्त्र
  ( 1-12 ). ]
  l. 24. उपवेदाः। गान्धर्व means here the science of music. These
  four Upavedas are attached to the four different Vedas as they
  represent the additional requirements of the four Vedas.
  l. 25. द्रौहिणिः। Music is included by Rājaśekhara amongst
  the Upavedas. He states, however, on the authority of Drauhiṇi
  that the science of music which is both a Upaveda and a part of
  the Sāmaveda, and which is accessible to all castes alike should
  be called the fifth Veda. Nothing whatever is known of this
  Drauhiṇi. He is named after Druhiṇa or Brahman which shows
  that he is the son of Brahman. His views are quoted by Rājaśe-
  khara once again on page 42 with reference to the division of the

SECOND ADHYĀYA 133
themes of poetry or काव्यार्थ. It can only be said here that he must
have been the author of some treatises on Music and Dramaturgy,
as a quotation under his name is also found in the Bhāvaprakāśana
p. 239. 1 which relates to the subject of Dramaturgy.
Page. 3.
* [l. 1. अङ्गानि=अङ्ग्यन्ते ज्ञायन्तेऽमीभिरित्यङ्गानि उपकारकाणि. Rhetorics
also helps in correctly interpreting the Vedic texts; so it is called
the seventh Aṅga. ]
l. 1. सप्तममङ्गम् । cf.
यत् क्षेमं त्रिदिवाय वर्त्म निगमस्याङ्गं च यत्सप्तमं
स्वादिष्ठं च यदैक्षवादपि रसाच्चक्षुश्च यद्वाङ्मयम् ।
तद्यस्मिन् मधुरं प्रसादि रसवत कान्तं च काव्यामृतं
सोयं सुभ्रु पुरो विदर्भविषयः सारस्वतीजन्मभूः ॥
Bālarāmāyaṇa, 10. 74.
Here the whole theme of poetry and not Alaṅkāra alone is
stated by Rājaśekhara as the 7th Aṅga for the Vedas.
* [l. 3. द्वा सुपर्णा ( श्वेताश्वतर 4-6 ). ]
l. 3. द्वा सुपर्णा. etc. ( मुण्डक. 3. 1. 1. ). Śaṅkarācārya's commen-
tary on this Mantra runs as follows :—द्वा=द्वौ । विज्ञानपरमात्मानौ सुपर्णा=सुपर्णौ
शोभनपतनौ शोभनगमनौ सुपर्णा पक्षिसामान्याद्वा सुपर्णौ । सयुजा=सयुजौ सर्वदा संयुक्तौ । सखाया=
सखायौ समानाख्यानौ समानाभिव्यक्तिकारणौ । एवं भूतौ सन्तौ समानं वृक्षं=वृक्षमिवोच्छेदसामा-
न्याद्वृक्षं शरीरं परिषस्वजाते परिष्वक्तवन्तौ । तयोरन्यः=अविद्याकामवासनाश्रयलिङ्गोपाधिः विज्ञानात्मा
पिप्पलं=कर्मफलं । स्वादु=अनेकचित्रवेदनास्वरूपम् । अत्युपभुङ्क्तेऽविवेकतः । अनश्नन्नन्योऽभिचाकशीति ।
नित्यशुद्धबुद्धमुक्तस्वभावः परमेश्वरः सर्वमपि पश्यन्नास्ते इति । ( श्वेताश्वतर. 4-6 ).
Here two figures of speech are combined and these are the
Rūpaka and the Vyatireka. The human body is the repository of
two souls, Jīva and Īśvara; they exist in the body simultaneously.
This idea has been metaphorically expressed in this Mantra
by means of such things as trees, birds etc. In the second
half Vyatireka may be explained in the following manner :
though the two Ātmans are quite similar, one sustains itself
by means of sweet fruits of the tree and the other shines even
without taking anything. By this the superiority of Īśvara is
clearly brought out. In this way the knowledge of Alaṅkāra
helps in correctly interpreting the Vedic texts.

134 EXPLANATORY NOTES

• [ l. 9. शब्दानामन्वाख्यानम् ।
  cf. प्रकृतिप्रत्ययोपाधिनिपातादिविभागशः ।
  पदान्वाख्यानकरणं शास्त्रं व्याकरणं विदुः ॥ ( अभिधानचिन्तामणिटीका ). ]
  l. 11. पुरस्तात् । In the first chapter, Rājaśekhara has already
  intimated that the Alaṅkāras will be treated of in nine Adhika-
  raṇas (4-12) of the Kāvyamīmāṁsā. This word पुरस्तात् now
  indicates that Rājaśekhara had already planned the further Adhī-
  karaṇas of this work.
  l. 15. This śloka is more commonly read as:—
  सर्गश्च प्रतिसर्गश्च वंशो मन्वन्तराणि च ।
  वंशानुचरितं चैव पुराणं पञ्चलक्षणम् ॥
  l. 17. Rājaśekhara's view regarding Itihāsa has already been
  mentioned; he includes it among the Upavedas. ( p. 2. l. 23. ).
  Itihāsa is of two kinds: परक्रिया and पुराकल्प । All MSS. read here
  as परिक्रिया but the correct reading seems to be परक्रिया. The
  Arthavādas of four classes: निन्दा, प्रशंसा, परकृति and पुराकल्प, are known
  as parts of the Vedic injunctions, विधि or निषेध । The last two
  divisions of the Arthavāda are considered as Itihāsa. For the four
  divisions including परकृति and पुराकल्प, see the Āpastambaśrauta-
  sūtra, 24-1-33, Gautama's Nyāyasūtra 2-1-64, Śābarabhāṣya
  on II-1-33, Vāyupurāṇa 59, 136-137, and Jaimini 6-7-26.
  l. 20. These two classes of Itihāsa can be distinguished by
  their names alone as they forcibly bring out the characteristics of
  each. Rājaśekhara seems to have defined the two classes in accor-
  dance with the Vedic illustrations of the two kinds of Arthavāda.
  These are:—इति ह स्माह बद्रुकुवार्णिर्माषान्मे पचत न वा एतेषां हविर्गृह्णन्ति for परकृति,
  and उल्मुकैर्ह स्म पूर्वे समाजग्मुस्तानह असुरा रक्षांसि निर्जघ्नुः for पुराकल्प ।
  l. 22. सहस्रेण । This word should not be taken as literally
  true because the Brahmamīmāṁsā does not consist of a thousand
  Nyāyas; the word may, however, refer to the Dharmamīmāṁsā
  where a thousand Nyāyas are treated of.
  l. 24. The fourteen Vidyāsthānas are enumerated by Yājña-
  valkya in his Smṛti ( 1-3 ) in the following verse :
  पुराणन्यायमीमांसाधर्मशास्त्राङ्गमिश्रिताः ।
  वेदाः स्थानानि विद्यानां धर्मस्य च चतुर्दश ॥

SECOND ADHYĀYA 135
l. 26. भूर्भुवः स्वः । विद्या or knowledge acquired through these
fourteen sources pertain to all things existing in the three worlds,
earth, sky and heaven.
l. 27. In this verse Rājaśekhara expresses his inability to
supply a complete list of works and subjects included in each
Vidyāsthāna as it will be too long and will occupy much space.
Page. 4.

• [ ll. 6-13. Cf. अर्थशास्त्र 1-2. and for ll. 22-24 Cf. Ibid 1-4. ]
  l. 3. After stating the traditional division of the S'āstras,
  the author expresses here the opinion that Kāvya which is the
  second main division of literature should be classed as another
  Vidyāsthāna as it follows the other Vidyāsthānas in many
  respects and that its position should be the 15th in the list of
  the Vidyāsthānas.
  l. 4. गद्यपद्यमयत्वात् etc. These are the three reasons to show how
  poetry follows in the foot-steps of the S'āstras. The reading तद्धि
  शास्त्राणि etc. in C Ms. is preferred to that of A and B, as the same
  idea finds an expression earlier on page 2. l. 17.
  l. 6. All the eighteen sources of Vidyā or knowledge are said
  to be absolutely necessary for every person in his daily observance
  of Dharma, Artha, Kāma and Mokṣa which together constitute
  the Lokayātrā or worldy existence.
  ll. 14-15. Here the method of treatment of Vidyās is
  generally in keeping with the Arthaśāstra of Kauṭilya. According
  to the definition of Vidyā : आभिर्धर्मार्थौ यद्विद्यात्तद्विद्यानां विद्यात्वम्, it is clear
  that only those sciences are considered here as Vidyās through
  which Dharma and Artha can be gained. On the strength of
  this definition of Vidyā, Sāhitya also is included as the fifth Vidyā.
  ll. 16-21. Kauṭilya defines आन्वीक्षिकी thus: बलाबले चैतासां
  (त्रयीवार्तादण्डनीतीनां) हेतुभिरन्वीक्षमाणा आन्वीक्षिकी, and includes the three
  philosophical systems सांख्य, योग and लोकायत under the main
  head of आन्वीक्षिकी. But Vātsyāyana, in his commentary on the
  Nyāyasūtra of Gautama defines it as प्रत्यक्षागमाभ्यामीक्षितस्यान्वीक्षण-
  मन्वीक्षा । तया प्रवर्तत इत्यान्वीक्षिकी न्यायविद्या न्यायशास्त्रम् । (1-1-1). Thus
  the four systems of philosophy are considered as आन्वीक्षिकी.
  Rājaśekhara augments the number of the आन्वीक्षिकीs by adding

136 EXPLANATORY NOTES
two more systems of philosophy and by distributing them into two
groups पूर्वपक्ष and उत्तरपक्ष. The philosophy of the Jains, Buddhists
and Cārvākas is included in the former while that of the Sāṅkhya,
Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika is taken up in the latter. These six schools
are called by the single name of Tarka. Gautama defines Tarka in
his Nyāyasūtra as अविज्ञाततत्त्वेऽर्थे कारणोपपत्तितः तत्त्वज्ञानार्थमूहस्तर्कः । (1-1-40.).
As these six schools of philosophy try to discover the real nature
of the universe, soul, body and other connected objects, they are
collectively known as Tarka. This Tarka is based on three
varieties of arguments in order to decide the truth or otherwise of
a statement. These arguments are commonly known as Kathā
which consists of three members: वाद, जल्प and वितण्डा । (see
Vātsyāyanabhāṣya on Gautama (1. 2. 1-3) for the definitions of
Vāda, etc.)
l. 25. Here the author while generally defining the S'āstras
shows also the correct method of their composition. In the course
of his definition, he mentions that the S'āstras were originally
composed in the form of Sūtras; commentaries and explanations
then followed, and the S'āstras expanded just as the rivers expand
in the course of their progress.
Page. 5.
l. 1. सूत्रणात् । The root sūtra means वेष्टन or that which
encircles. A Sūtra, indeed, encircles or includes many things
within a short space. Similarly, S'āstric Sūtras also are concise
technical sentences which express the maximum idea in the
minimum of space.
l. 2. The well-known and the most popular definition of
Sūtra is given in this verse. Cf. Vāyupurāṇa 59, 142. There
is another definition which also deserves to be cited in this
connection :—
लघूनि सूचितार्थानि स्वल्पाक्षरपदानि च ।
सर्वतः सारभूतानि सूत्राण्याहुर्मनीषिणः ॥
l. 3. अस्तोभम् । The word स्तोभ signifies a letter, or a group of
letters which serves no purpose in making out the sense of a
sentence and is, therefore, considered redundant. Such words
are very common in the Sāmaveda. The letters हुं, फट् etc.
are examples of स्तोभ. In Sūtras all redundant letters should be
eschewed.

SECOND ADHYĀYA 137
l. 4. Vṛtti is the first concise commentary on the Sūtras.
In all Darśanas, or sciences, for instance, the Vṛttis generally
precede the more comprehensive Bhāṣyas.
l. 5. In the Bhāṣyas, the authors spontaneously raise points
of objection in the succeeding portions which seem to militate
against the views expressed in the preceding portions of their own
text. This is what is known as आक्षिप्य भाषणाद्भाष्यम् ।
समीक्षा । This word seems to have been used here in the sense
of परीक्षा. Generally there are three divisions in the Bhāṣyas
i. e. उद्देश, लक्षण and परीक्षा. The Nyāyasūtra and its Bhāṣya deal
with the परीक्षा portion in a more comprehensive manner than the
other philosophical works.
l. 6. A concise commentary on Sūtras or Bhāṣyas is called
a टीका. The टुप्टीका of Kumārilabhaṭṭa may be cited as an instance
where the commentator only touches the very important points of
the Sūtra and the Bhāṣya of the Mīmāṁsāśāstra. Brevity of this
टीका will be apparent when it is compared with the other works of
his, which are designated by him as the Vārttikas, on the Śābara-
bhāṣya.
l. 9. After describing the different divisions of the Śāstras,
the author here relates the function of a poet who endeavours to
compose verses on Śāstric subjects. The Ślokavārttika of Kumā-
rila, the Saṅgraha of Vyāḍi and the Vākyapadīya of Bhartṛhari
may be taken as illustrative of the qualities of a Śāstrakavi.
For further information regarding the Śāstrakavi and his abilities
when compared to those of a Kāvyakavi, see p. 17. ll. 5-17
of this work.
l. 11. The treatises dealt with above follow the methods of
the original Sūtra works and commentaries thereon. But the
Prakaraṇa works which appear to be independent treatises
introduce only the chief subjects of a Śāstra in order to make
the student better fitted for prosecuting higher studies in that
Śāstra.
l. 13. Sāhitya which is the fifth Vidyā in the Rājaśekhara's
scheme of enumeration is defined in this sentence. For the
explanation of the phrase यथावत् सहभाव see Bhoja's definition of
१८

133 EXPLANATORY NOTES
Sāhitya in his S'ṛṅgāraprakāśa ( VII ) where it is explained in the
following words:—
तत्राभिधाविवक्षातात्पर्यप्रविभागव्यपेक्षासामर्थ्यान्वयैकार्थीभावदोषहानगुणोपादानालङ्कारयोगर-
सावियोगरूपाः शब्दार्थयोर्द्वादश संबन्धाः साहित्यमित्युच्यते ॥
Following this statement of Bhoja, S'āradātanaya in his
Bhāvaprakāśana ( p. 145. ll. 6–12 ) defines Sāhitya and gives
several illustrations. The twelve varieties of relation between the
S'abda and its Artha as described in the above quotation from
Bhoja are probably indicated by Rājaśekhara in the phrase,
यथावत्सहभावेन विद्या. It may also be remembered here that Kālidāsa
makes a mention of this Sāhitya of S'abda and Artha in the
beginning of his Raghuvamśa.
* [ l. 14 For the 64 kalās see कामसूत्र 1-3-16 ]
l. 14. 64 Upavidyās are enumerated by Vātsyāyana in his
Kāmasūtra 1-3-16. Another set of 64 Aṅgas of the Pāñcālas
also is mentioned in the above work to complete the सांप्रयोगिकाधिकरण
of the Kāmasūtra. Vātsyāyana himself calls these Upavidyās
by the common name of Kalā in his Kāmasūtra ( 2-2-3. )
आजीवः=livelihood. These Kalās are introduced as a matter
of necessity in the best Kāvyas, and, therefore, it is necessary
that poets should be well conversant with these subjects.
l. 15. The last Adhikaraṇa of the Kāvyamīmāṁsā is called
औपनिषदिक where directions are given for obtaining poetical excellance
through magical practices, such as the practice of Mantras and
Tāntric rites. This statement also indicates that Rājaśekhara
wanted to complete the present work in eighteen Adhikaraṇas.
Adhyāya. III.
l. 20 काव्यपुरुषोत्पत्तिः । In this chapter the author traces
the origin of metrical composition, gives an account of its sub-
sequent developments in a chronological order, and makes
an endeavour to connect them with the customs and manners
prevalent in the different parts of India. And in doing so, he
travels beyond the range of history to mythology and traces
the origin of poetry from an imaginery Kāvyapuruṣa who is
supposed to be the embodiment of the whole classical literature.

THIRD ADHYĀYA 139
He is the son of Sarasvatī, the goddess of learning, and is brought
up in the hermitage of Kavi. The author describes his marriage
with Aumeyī the embodiment of Sāhityavidyā or the science of
poetry. This Kāvyapuruṣa is described in the first chapter as the
earliest teacher of the Kāvyamīmāṁsā and as a divine being from
whom poetry took its origin.
l. 23. गुरुः । Kāvyapuruṣa was the preceptor of Dhiṣaṇa or
Bṛhaspati because he received instructions on the Kāvyamīmāṁsā
from Sārasvateya, and composed a chapter on it dealing with the
Doṣas (see p. 1. l. 12.)
बृहतां पतिः । The word Bṛhaspati is formed according to the
rule of Pāṇini ( 6-1-157 ) and thus it denotes a divine being.
l. 24. पुत्रीयन्ती=being desirous of a son.
तुषारगिरौ=mountain of snow i. e. the Himālayas.
Page. 6.
l. 1. To complete the quotation ‘पुत्रं ते सृजामि’ the word इति
is to be added at the end. But as in many places Rājaśekhara
overlooks this dictum, इति has been added in the present edition
wherever found necessary.
l. 2. छन्दस्वतीं वाचम्=metrical composition. In the mythologi-
cal story related by Rājaśekhara, the reason why Sarasvatī was
desirous of obtaining a son is not clearly explained. Moreover,
Brahmā is here mentioned as the creator of Sārasvateya. But
the story of the birth of Sārasvateya as recorded in such earlier
works as the Vāyupurāṇa, Mahābhārata and Harṣacarita differs
in some important points from the story recorded in the present
work by Rājaśekhara. Bāṇa in his Harṣacarita gives adequate
reasons why Sarasvatī came down to earth, married Dadhīca,
the son of Cyavana, and gave birth to Sārasvateya. These
reasons are not found in any of the Purāṇas. In the Vāyu-
purāṇa also, only the story of the marriage of Sarasvatī
with Dadhīca, son of Cyavana, and of the birth of Sārasvata
who became a master of all sciences through her blessings, is
recorded, mostly on the model of Bāṇa (see Vāyu-Adh. 65).
The fact that in this respect Vāyupurāṇa was followed by
Bāṇa is clearly apparent not only because that a number of

133 EXPLANATORY NOTES
Sāhitya in his S'ṛṅgāraprakāśa ( VII ) where it is explained in the
following words:—
तत्राभिधाविवक्षातात्पर्यप्रविभागव्यपेक्षासामर्थ्यान्वयैकार्थीभावदोषहानगुणोपादानालङ्कारयोगर-
सावियोगरूपाः शब्दार्थयोर्द्वादश संबन्धाः साहित्यमित्युच्यते ॥
Following this statement of Bhoja, S'āradātanaya in his
Bhāvaprakāśana ( p. 145. ll. 6-12) defines Sāhitya and gives
several illustrations. The twelve varieties of relation between the
S'abda and its Artha as described in the above quotation from
Bhoja are probably indicated by Rājaśekhara in the phrase,
यथावत्सहभावेन विद्या. It may also be remembered here that Kālidāsa
makes a mention of this Sāhitya of S'abda and Artha in the
beginning of his Raghuvamśa.

• [ l. 14 For the 64 kalās see कामसूत्र 1-3-16 ]
  l. 14. 64 Upavidyās are enumerated by Vātsyāyana in his
  Kāmasūtra 1-3-16. Another set of 64 Aṅgas of the Pāñcālas
  also is mentioned in the above work to complete the सांप्रयोगिकाधिकरण
  of the Kāmasūtra. Vātsyāyana himself calls these Upavidyās
  by the common name of Kalā in his Kāmasūtra ( 2-2-3. )
  आजीव:=livelihood. These Kalās are introduced as a matter
  of necessity in the best Kāvyas, and, therefore, it is necessary
  that poets should be well conversant with these subjects.
  l. 15. The last Adhikaraṇa of the Kāvyamīmāṁsā is called
  औपनिषदिक where directions are given for obtaining poetical excellance
  through magical practices, such as the practice of Mantras and
  Tāntric rites. This statement also indicates that Rājaśekhara
  wanted to complete the present work in eighteen Adhikaraṇas.
  Adhyāya. III.
  l. 20 काव्यपुरुषोत्पत्तिः । In this chapter the author traces
  the origin of metrical composition, gives an account of its sub-
  sequent developments in a chronological order, and makes
  an endeavour to connect them with the customs and manners
  prevalent in the different parts of India. And in doing so, he
  travels beyond the range of history to mythology and traces
  the origin of poetry from an imaginary Kāvyapuruṣa who is
  supposed to be the embodiment of the whole classical literature.

THIRD ADHYĀYA 139
He is the son of Sarasvatī, the goddess of learning, and is brought
up in the hermitage of Kavi. The author describes his marriage
with Aumeyī the embodiment of Sāhityavidyā or the science of
poetry. This Kāvyapuruṣa is described in the first chapter as the
earliest teacher of the Kāvyamīmāṁsā and as a divine being from
whom poetry took its origin.
l. 23. गुरुः। Kāvyapuruṣa was the preceptor of Dhiṣaṇa or
Bṛhaspati because he received instructions on the Kāvyamīmāṁsā
from Sārasvateya, and composed a chapter on it dealing with the
Doṣas (see p. 1. l. 12.)
बृहतां पतिः। The word Bṛhaspati is formed according to the
rule of Pāṇini (6-1-157) and thus it denotes a divine being.
l. 24. पुत्रीयन्ती=being desirous of a son.
तुषारगिरौ=mountain of snow i. e. the Himālayas.
Page. 6.
l. 1. To complete the quotation 'पुत्रं ते सृजामि' the word इति
is to be added at the end. But as in many places Rājaśekhara
overlooks this dictum, इति has been added in the present edition
wherever found necessary.
l. 2. छन्दस्वतीं वाचम्=metrical composition. In the mythologi-
cal story related by Rājaśekhara, the reason why Sarasvatī was
desirous of obtaining a son is not clearly explained. Moreover,
Brahmā is here mentioned as the creator of Sārasvateya. But
the story of the birth of Sārasvateya as recorded in such earlier
works as the Vāyupurāṇa, Mahābhārata and Harṣacarita differs
in some important points from the story recorded in the present
work by Rājaśekhara. Bāṇa in his Harṣacarita gives adequate
reasons why Sarasvatī came down to earth, married Dadhīca,
the son of Cyavana, and gave birth to Sārasvateya. These
reasons are not found in any of the Purāṇas. In the Vāyu-
purāṇa also, only the story of the marriage of Sarasvatī
with Dadhīca, son of Cyavana, and of the birth of Sārasvata
who became a master of all sciences through her blessings, is
recorded, mostly on the model of Bāṇa (see Vāyu-Adh. 65).
The fact that in this respect Vāyupurāṇa was followed by
Bāṇa is clearly apparent not only because that a number of

140 EXPLANATORY NOTES

quotations from that Purāṇa is to be found in the Harṣacarita,
but also because the name of that Purāṇa is definitely mentioned
by Bāṇa as पवमानप्रोक्तपुराण in the 3rd chapter.
The case of the Mahābhārata is altogether different. Here
various stories are recorded concerning the birth of Sārasvateya, the
son of Sarasvatī. All these authorities, however, are unanimous
in holding that he was vastly learned in the Vedas and that he
transmitted his knowledge to others. (see S'āntiparvan, Adh.
359 and S'alyaparvan Adh. 52. of the Mahābhārata). It is
said in the S'āntiparvan of the Mahābhārata that God created
a Sārasvata through Sarasvatī and asked him to learn the Vedas
himself and transmit his learning to others. This Sārasvata was
also known by the names of Vyāsa and Apāntaratamas, and he in
accordance with the above instruction, spread the knowledge of the
Vedas in the world.
A similar story is also found in the S'alyaparvan where it is
said that the creative energy of the sage Dadhīci was transmitted
to the river Sarasvatī when he was overpowered by passion
on seeing Alambuṣā a divine dancing girl. As a result, the
river Sarasvatī, obtained a son and he was carried by her to
Dadhīci, his father. This Sārasvateya taught the Vedas to the
sages when they forgot them owing to a severe famine which
lasted for 12 years. Aśvaghoṣa, in the first century A. D.
also records the same story regarding Sārasvateya in his Buddha-
carita (1-47.)

1. 3. यदेतत् etc. In the first half of this verse a clear
   exposition of the S'abdabrahmavāda as developed by Bhartṛhari
   in his Vākyapadīya, has been made. According to this school
   of philosophy, the S'abdabrahma or Nāda, which came out
   from God when he desired to create the world, is the cause of
   the universe which is enveloped in Vivarta or the illusory
   form of existence. When this illusion is removed by means of
   Vidyā or true knowledge there remains only the Nāda or
   S'abdabrahma. This Nāda is also called Parāvāk. From this
   Parāvāk, Paśyantī, Madhyamā and Vaikharī, the three other
   kinds of speech, are produced. Here Madhyamāvāk has the
   property of Sphoṭa which reveals the knowledge of Artha from

THIRD ADHYĀYA 141
the S'abda. The things that are known or meant by the words
have also no separate existence from the words, though they
appear to exist separately. In support of this theory, the following
verses appear in Bhartṛhari's Vākyapadīya:—
अनादिनिधनं ब्रह्म शब्दतत्त्वं यदक्षरम् ।
विवर्ततेऽर्थभावेन प्रक्रिया जगतो यतः ॥
यो वाऽर्थो बुद्धिविषयोऽबाह्यवस्तुनिबन्धनः ।
स बाह्यं वस्त्विति ज्ञातः शब्दार्थः सम्यगिष्यते ॥
शब्दोपहितरूपांश्च बुद्धेर्विषयतां गतान् ।
प्रत्यक्षामिव कंसादीन् साधनत्वेन मन्यते ॥
न सोऽस्ति प्रत्ययो लोके यः शब्दानुगमादृते ।
अनुविद्धमिव ज्ञानं सर्वं शब्देन भासते ॥
अत्यन्तासत्यपि ह्यर्थे ज्ञानं शब्दः करोति हि । etc.
For further information regarding the S'abdabrahma and
Vivartavāda a reference may be made to the Laghumañjūṣā of
Nāgeśabhaṭṭa.
विवर्तते । Vivarta is the illusory existence of a thing; for
example, as the illusory existence of a serpent in the rope when
it is mistaken for a snake.
l. 4. अस्मि। This is an indeclinable particle meaning 'I'—or अहम्.
l. 9. त्वदुपज्ञम् । etc. So long Vālmīki was considered to be the
first to write in the classical śloka metre, and the first composition
attributed to him is the verse: मा निषाद, etc. (See Rāmāyaṇa,
1–2.) According to Rājaśekhara, however, this verse of Vālmīki
is much later than the compositions of Kāvyapuruṣa and Uśanas
who were the two earliest inventors of the śloka metre.
l. 12. रस आत्मा । Rasa is the soul of the Kāvya. There are
several standards of literary criticism in the history of Sanskrit
poetics, and amongst them the theory of Rasa as the soul of
poetry may be considered to be the pre-eminent. This theory
was first conceived and developed by Bharata in his Nāṭyaśāstra
for the purpose of dramatic composition. The importance of Rasa,
however, was not fully recognized by later critics such as Bhāmaha,
Daṇḍin, and Vāmana as a standard of literary criticism
with reference to compositions other than the drama. But the
later critics advocated different theories of Alaṅkāra, Guṇa,

142 EXPLANATORY NOTES
Rīti, Dhvani, Vakrokti, Anumiti and Aucitya, and were
of opinion that these principles were the essential factors in the
best form of poetical composition other than the drama. During
this period, the theory of Rasa underwent many changes and
modifications in the hands of those who belonged to the other
schools of literary criticism. In the middle of the 9th century
Ānandavardhana revived the theory of Rasa and held that
Rasa Dhvani is the chief principle in all poetical compositions
including the drama. This theory of Dhvani though well
established by Ānanda did not meet with general approval
amongst a large number of critics during the period from 850
to 950 A. D. as they were content with the original Rasa school
of thought started by Bharata and applied the same principle to
both classes of the literature. Prominent among them were
Rudraṭa, Bhaṭṭanāyaka, Dhanañjaya, and Dhanika. Rājaśekhara
flourished during this period (cir 900 A. D.) and he was
led to adopt the trend of literary criticism as was prevalent in his
days. Thus, he held that the Rasa and not Dhvani is the soul of
the Kāvyapuruṣa. Again, at the end of the 10th century A. D.
the theory of Rasadhvani was revived once more by the great
Kashmirian scholar Abhinavagupta following in the foot-steps
of Ānandavardhana. Rājaśekhara did not even mention Dhvani
as a part of the Kāvyapuruṣa or as the subject-matter of any of his
eighteen chapters because in his time even the existence of
Dhvani in poetry was not recognised by critics. For further
information regarding the history of the Rasa school see the
introduction to the Bhāvaprakāśana (G.O.S. No. 45).
*[ l. 15 च॒त्वारि॒ शृङ्गा॒ त्रयो॑ अस्य॒ पादा॒ द्वे शी॒र्षे स॒प्त हस्ता॑सो अस्य ।
त्रिधा॑ ब॒द्धो वृ॑ष॒भो रो॑रवीति म॒हो दे॒वो मर्त्यां२॒ आव॑िवेश ॥
( ऋग्वेद 3-8-10-3 ).
For the different interpretations of this Ṛk see Sāyaṇa's
Bhāṣya, Yâska's Nirukta 13-18 and Patañjali's Mahābhāṣya पस्पशा.
Both the MSS. of the Kāvyamīmāṁsā read शृङ्गास्त्रयो and मर्त्यमा-
विवेश. cf. सप्त स्वराः, त्रीणि स्थानानि, चत्वारो वर्णाः, द्विविधा काकुः, षडलङ्काराः, षडङ्गानि इति ।
भरतनाट्यशास्त्र chapt. 17 ]
l. 20. उशना परिवृत्ते etc. The fact that Sārasvateya Kāvyapu-
ruṣa was brought up by Uśanas or Kavi, as mentioned by

THIRD ADHYĀYA 143

Rājaśekhara, not only shows that no rule of grammar (Pāṇini
4-1-151), is violated in the derivation of the word Kāvyapuruṣa
(the son of Kavi) but also proves the propriety of using the
famous name of S'ukra as Kavi (see. नामलिङ्गानुशासन. 1-3-25).
*[ll. 23-24. या दुग्धाऽपि न दुग्धेव found in some MSS. of दमयन्तीचम्पू
of त्रिविक्रम as मङ्गलश्लोक].
l. 25. तत्पूर्वकम्=after repeating this verse composed by
Uśanas.
ततः प्रभृति । After this event Uśanas is called Kavi because of his
paternal affection towards the young Kāvyapuruṣa and also
because he himself composed a verse या दुग्धापि न दुग्धेव etc.
l. 26. तदुपचारात् । Due to the secondary capacity of the words
(लक्षणा). Poets are called Kavīs because they are also engaged
in the composition of verses as Uśanas or Kavi did in olden days.

Page. 7.

l. 1. कवृ वर्णे । Pāṇinīyas take the word वर्ण here to represent
colour and derive words such as कर्बुर, कबरी etc. from this root कवृ.
The word Kavi is generally derived by them from the root कुङ् शब्दे;
इकार being added in accordance with the Uṇādi rule अच इः (4-138).
Ujjvaladatta in his Uṇādisūtravṛtti derives the word Kavi from
the roots कु वर्णे or कु शब्दे (sec. 4-138). But the Dhātupāṭha of
Pāṇini reads two roots कुङ् and कु and states शब्द only as their
meaning. Rājaśekhara, however, seems to derive the word Kavi
from the root कवृ वर्णे which is not possible according to the
Uṇādi rule अच इः and seems to take the word वर्ण to mean वर्णन or
description. Following the derivation of Ujjvaladatta on 4-138 of
Uṇādisūtra, the reading कवृ वर्णे may be changed here as कुङ् वर्णे.
l. 2. भक्त्या । भक्ति is the secondary capacity of the word called
the लक्षणा or गौणी. The word Kāvya signifies poetry through the
primary capacity known as शक्ति aud Sārasvateya through the
secondary capacity (लक्षणा) as he is the personification of poetry.
l. 4. वाल्मीकिः । Vālmīki also is brought here by Rājaśekhara
to play his role because the epithet of Kavi applies to
both S'ukra and Vālmīki (कविर्वाल्मीकिशुक्रयोः-मेदिनी) and particularly
to Vālmīki as he is designated by all poets as the आदिकवि.

144 EXPLANATORY NOTES
l. 5. भृगुसूनोः = of Śukra. Bhṛgu is the son of Brahman and
Śukra is Bhṛgu's son. This shows the source Vāyupurāṇa
from which the author conceived the idea underlying the story of
Sārasvateya. The Vāyupurāṇa and the Harṣacarita mention that
Bhṛgu's grandson Dadhīci obtained a son Sārasvateya through his
wife Sarasvatī. Sec. Vāyu. 65, 88-91. and Harṣacarita. I.
l. 7. अनुप्रेक्षितः = blessed by Sarasvatī.
l. 8. निषादनिहतसहचरीकं क्रौञ्चयुवानम्। Here Rājaśekhara states that
the female Krauñca was hit by the Niṣāda and the male
Krauñca was lamenting in the presence of Vālmīki. But this
statement goes against the description of the event recorded in the
Rāmāyaṇa.
Cf. तस्याभ्याशे तु मिथुनं चरन्तमपगायिनम् ।
ददर्श भगवांस्तत्र क्रौञ्चयोश्चारुनिःस्वनम् ॥
तस्मात्तु मिथुनादेकं पुमांसं पापनिश्चयः ।
जघान वैरनिलयो निषादस्तस्य पश्यतः ॥
तं शोणितपरीतांगं वेपमानं महीतले ।
भार्या तु निहतं दृष्ट्वा रुराव करुणां गिरम् ॥
Rāmāyaṇa 1. 2. 9-11.
There is a similar statement made by Ānandavardhana in his
Dhvanyāloka (p. 27) as under : संनिहि(ह)तसहचरीविरहकातरक्रौञ्चाक्रन्दजनितः शोक
एव श्लोकतया परिणतः । which also seems to go against the Rāmāyaṇa of
Vālmīki. Probably this passage of Ānandavardhana may be at the
back of Rājaśekhara's statement because the word संनिहित or संनिहत
construed with the word सहचरी gives a different meaning as
stated by him in the passage निषादनिहतसहचरीकम् । But
Abhinavagupta subsequently in his Locanā got over the dis-
crepancy by mending the passage of the Dhvanyāloka in the
following manner : संनिहतसहचरीविरहकातरक्रौञ्चेन आक्रन्देन च जनितः शोकः ।
In this emendation, the word संनिहत is construed not with
सहचरी but with क्रौञ्च who represents the विभाव, whereas the आक्रन्द of
the female क्रौञ्च is अनुभाव for the शोक of Vālmīki. Cf. Locanā :
संनिहतसहचरीति विभाव उक्तः । आक्रन्दितशब्देनानुभावः । (p. 28. l. 8.)
*[ l. 10. मानिषाद etc. Cf. ध्वन्यालोक 1-5. et. seq. ]