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

SIXTH ADHYĀYA 167
therefore, it does not matter if the Arthavāda contained some
untrue statements also.
ll. 23-24. This verse is quoted by Patañjali in his Mahā-
bhāṣya (Paspaśānhika) to show the utility of studying
grammar. The commentator Kaiyaṭa, however, attributes the
authorship of this verse to Kātyāyana. cf. कात्यायनोपनिबद्धभ्राजाख्यश्लोक-
मध्यपतितस्य तस्य श्रुतिरनुग्राहिकाऽस्ति । 'एकः शब्दः सम्यग् ज्ञातः सुु प्रयुक्तः स्वर्गे लोके
कामधुग्भवति' इति ।
*[ pp. 25-26. l. 16. From महाभाष्य पस्पशा. ]
Page. 26.
ll. 1-16. All these lines are quoted here from the Mahābhāṣya
of Patañjali, under the name Gonardīya. Here, it is said that
one who speaks in words, which are grammatically correct, enjoys
success in the next world, while the other whose speech is un-
grammatical is contaminated or polluted. The sentence विषम
उपन्यासः which is found in the Mahābhāṣya after the words अज्ञानं
तस्य शरणम्, is omitted here. In the verse यदुदुम्बरवर्णानां, etc. a question
is asked: If ordinarily wine cannot bring heaven to those who
drink it, how can it do so when drunk in Sautrāmaṇīyāga? This
is one of the arguments advanced by atheists to challenge the
testimony of the orthodox. Read प्रमत्तगीत एषः । तत्रभवतो.
ll. 17-18. *[ गुणानुराग. also in सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण. ] Also quoted in
S'rṅgāraprakāśa.
l. 19. On moral grounds also the Kāvya is injurious and
should be discarded.
l. 20. Read डिभांस्तरुणिमनि. This verse is attributed to Vijjākā
in the Saduktikarṇāmṛta, and it is also recorded in the Subhāṣita-
bhāṇḍāgāra under the heading of असतीचरित. The reading in the 3rd
पाद also is found there as अनेनैकपतिना which is better fitted than the
reading अमार्गेण किमिदम् found in the text.
l. 25. A similar explanation is given by Vātsyāyana while
concluding the chapter on पारदारिकाधिकरण of the Kāmasūtra where
immoral practices are described.
cf. संदृश्य शास्त्रतो योगान् पारदारिकलक्षितान् ।
न याति छलनां कश्चित् स्वदारान् प्रति शास्त्रवित् ॥ ५० ॥

168 EXPLANATORY NOTES
पाक्षिकत्वात्प्रयोगाणामपायानाञ्च दर्शनात् ।
धर्मार्थयोश्च वैलोम्यान्नाचरेत्पारदारिकम् ॥ ५१ ॥
तदेतद्दारगुप्त्यर्थमारब्धं श्रेयसे नृणाम् ।
प्रजानां दूषणायैव न विधेयो ह्ययं विधिः ॥ ५२ ॥
Kāmasūtra, 5. 6. 2.
Page. 27.
*[ काव्यमध्येयो. No. 171 of शार्ङ्गधरपद्धति । ख्याता. No. 161 of सुभाषितावलि,
attributed to भट्टगोविन्दस्वामी ।
cf. महीपतेः सन्ति न यस्य पार्श्वे कवीश्वरास्तस्य कुतो यशांसि ।
भूपाः कियन्तो न बभूवुरुर्व्यां नामापि जानाति न कोपि तेषाम् ॥
विक्रमाङ्कचरित्र 1–26]
ll. 3–4. In addition to this, the statements of Daṇḍin
( Kāvyādarśa 1-5 ) Bhāmaha ( 1, 6–8 ) and Rudraṭa ( 1, 4–13 )
may be noted.
l. 19. प्रग्रीवः=window.
ll. 27–28. Yāyāvarīya holds that if this kind of description is
a taboo in the Kāvyas, the objection will hold good even in the
case of the Vedas and the S'āstras the study of which in conse-
quence should be abandoned.
Page. 28.
*[ l. 2. उपोप मे परा॑मृश॒ मा मे॑ द॑भ्राणि॑ मन्यथाः ।
सर्वा॒हम॑स्मि रोम॒शा ग॒न्धारी॑णामिवावि॒का ॥
ऋग्वेद, २. १. ११. ७.
निरुक्त ३. ४. ३. ]
l. 4. S'ṛṅgāraprakāśa of Bhoja reads प्रकामधवलं यस्याः instead of
यस्याः प्रसङ्गधवलम् ।
Adhyāya VII.
l. 10. पाठप्रतिष्ठा or settling the reading is taken up after the
पदवाक्यविवेक according to the list of subjects given in the first
chapter. This order seems logical inasmuch as instructions on
the reading of sentences are given after indicating their nature in
previous chapters.

SEVENTH ADHYĀYA 169
ll. 11–17. Sentences are again classified here according to the
sect to which the speaker belongs, such as the ब्राह्म or शैव or वैष्णव.
This classification should be known by the reader as it is a part
of his education. Rājaśekhara, in writing this chapter, seems
to have drawn his information mainly from the Vāyupurāṇa.
Bāṇa, in his Harṣacarita and Kādambarī mentions this Purāṇa,
and the Sārasvateya cult which is inculcated in the Harṣacarita
and the Kāvyamīmāṁsā, is chiefly derived from the same Purāṇa.
Rājaśekhara in his description of the five kinds of speech also
seems to be indebted to the Vāyu and other Purāṇas. This group
is named as Brāhma and is divided into five classes: स्वायंभुव, ऐश्वर,
आर्ष, आर्षिक and आर्षिपुत्रक. This classification actually appears in the
Vāyupurāṇa (chapter 59), though the definitions and illustrations
of these five kinds of speech are not found in it. Through this
classification, Rājaśekhara seeks to trace the origin and develop-
ment of human speech.
ll. 19–23. Here two kinds of speech स्वायंभुव and ऐश्वर are differ-
entiated. The first is स्वायंभुव or the primitive speech in which
neither the ideas follow in their logical sequence, nor the language
appears to be refined, though it is able to express all objects, and
even go so far as to describe the methods leading to salvation.
Svayambhū is supposed to be the originator of two kinds of
speech, one in the form of the Vedas is the earlier, while the other
known as स्वायम्भुव or the primitive speech is the later. The ऐश्वर
speech is more refined than the स्वायंभुव and in it both the logical
sequence and skill in composition are noticeable.
Page 29.
l. 1. The next stage of development is represented by the
speech attributed to the Ṛṣis. In this speech sentences have more
nouns and case-terminations than those previously described, and
their import finds a ready expression. But this speech is invaria-
bly connected with some Mantras.
l. 3. The next stage in linguistic development is represented
by the speech of the Ṛṣikas in which there is a great volume of
short sentences full of Nipātas without any case-terminations.
But in this speech there is frequent use of words found only in
the Vedas.
l. 5 The fifth or the last stage is represented by the speech
२२

170 EXPLANATORY NOTES
attributed to the Ṛṣiputras. This is difficult inasmuch as there
are words which cannot be definitely separated, and therefore,
the import of the sentences becomes doubtful, thus making their
meanings obscure. In this speech, there may be frequent use of
Yamaka, Anuprāsa and other S'abdacitras, S'leṣa, etc.
ll. 8–15. After explaining the different stages of human
speech, Rājaśekhara proceeds to characterise the various grades of
development in divine speech which seem to be purely imaginary
and fanciful. The creator in the beginning of creation taught
a language to his 64 disciples Brahmā and others, and this speech
was known as the Pārameśvara or Divya. This speech was
adopted by the different grades of divine beings and practised
according to their capabilities. The Piśācas and Apsarasas are
represented to be using the Divya language in their lands, but
they are nevertheless allowed in the Sanskrit drama the use of two
other languages namely, the भूतभाषा and the प्राकृतभाषा respectively.
l. 16. The original language दिव्य or पारमेश्वर which is spoken
by divine beings is divided into four different classes, representing
the four styles of writing: वैध्रुव, etc. Yoginīs are probably the
female attendants of S'iva or Durgā and their language is here
represented by the word योगिनीगत. The female magicians, such
as Kāmandakī, Kapālakuṇḍalā etc. described, for instance, in the
Mālatīmādhava may also be represented by the word Yoginī. It
is, however, noteworthy that these four speeches generally resemble
the four Rītis वैदर्भी, गौडीया, पाञ्चाली and लाटीया respectively.
*[ l. 20. यच्चन्द्र. found in सदुक्तिकर्णामृत and सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण. ]
Page. 30.
l. 15. योगीन्द्रदर्पण=mirror of saints. Best saints also obtain the
knowledge of their own self in His presence.
Page. 31.
ll. 1–4. The main headings under which language is divided,
are three: Brāhma, S'aiva and Vaiṣṇava. Under Brāhma speech
are included the dialects of the Ṛṣis and their followers, while
under S'aiva are mentioned the dialects known as Pārameśvara
or Divya. Now, the dialect coming under the Vaiṣṇava or the
Mānuṣa form of speech is dealt with. This form of speech
is chiefly needed for poets of classical literature. Though Rāja-

śekhara is primarily concerned only with this third variety of speech,
he mentions nevertheless the first two kinds of speech, namely,
the dialects of the primitive sages and divine beings, because he
wanted to show the different stages of linguistic development and
also because these are employed by dramatists in their dramas.
*[ ll. 5-25. वैदर्भी गौडीया cf. सा त्रेधा-वैदर्भी गौडी पाञ्चाली चेति। वामन. 1.2.17.
काकुर्वक्रोक्ति. etc. cf.
विस्पष्टक्रियमाणादक्लिष्टा स्वरविशेषतो भवति ।
अर्थान्तरप्रतीतिर्यत्रासौ काकुवक्रोक्तिः ॥
रुद्रट-काव्यालङ्कार. 2-16.
cf. also काकुर्वक्रोक्तिःस्व्वलङ्कारत्वेन न वाच्या । पाठधर्मत्वात् । तथा चाभिप्रायवान्
पाठधर्मः काकुः । स कथमलङ्कारी स्यादिति यायावरीयः । गुणीभूतव्यङ्ग्यप्रभेद एव चायम् ।
शब्दस्पृष्टत्वेनार्थान्तरप्रतीतिहेतुत्वात् ।
यदाह ध्वनिकारः—
अर्थान्तरगतिः काका या चैषा परिदृश्यते ।
सा व्यङ्ग्यस्य गुणीभावे प्रकारमिममाश्रिता ॥
सा च काकुर्द्विधा—साकाङ्क्षा निराकाङ्क्षा च । वाक्यस्य साकाङ्क्षनिराकाङ्क्षत्वात् । यस्माद्वाक्यात्
यादृशः सङ्केतबलेनार्थः प्रतीयते न तादृश एव, किन्तु न्यूनाधिकः प्रमाणबलेन निर्णययोग्यस्तद्वाक्यं
साकाङ्क्षम् । तद्विपरीतं निराकाङ्क्षम् । वक्तृगता ह्याकाङ्क्षा वाक्ये उपचर्यते । सा च प्रकरणबलान्नि-
र्णीयते । विशिष्टविषयत्वं च तस्यास्तत एवावसीयते ॥ हेमचन्द्रकाव्यानुशासन V.
साकाङ्क्षा and निराकाङ्क्षा cf. द्विविधा काकुः । साकाङ्क्षा निराकाङ्क्षेति । वाक्यस्य
साकाङ्क्षेति । नाट्यशास्त्र chapt. 17; also सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण 2-56. नवजलधरः.
विक्रमोर्वशीय IV. I. ]
ll. 5-8. Vāmana mentioned three Rītis. But Rudraṭa who
flourished later added a fourth and called it Lāṭīyā. After him
came Rājaśekhara who, though conversant with Rudraṭa's view,
did not accept the Lāṭīyā Rīti, but followed Vāmana in
this respect. The reason why Rājaśekhara ignored the view of
Rudraṭa seems to be that he did not see any necessity of acknow-
ledging a separate Rīti beyond Pāñcālī, probably because the
definition of Rudraṭa which is given below, did not convince him
of the necessity.
द्वित्रिपदा पाञ्चाली लाटीया पञ्च सप्त वा यावत् ।
( K. A. 2-5. )
The three Rītis and the different Kākus form parts of instruc-

172 EXPLANATORY NOTES
tion on reading. The reader should observe these Rītis with
proper intonations on the Kākus while reading poetry, so that the
meaning may be readily understood by the listener.
l. 10. Kākuvakrokti is one of the Śabdālaṅkāras according
to Rudraṭa. Yāyāvarīya disagrees with him, but follows the
definition of Ānandavardhana who seems to think that Kāku is a
variety of intonation which serves to bring out only that sense of a
passage, intended by the authors to convey, and no other.
(For further information, see pp. 212–213 of Dhvanyāloka and
Locana).
l. 15. Again, a sentence may be used with two varieties of
Kāku, namely साकाङ्क्ष and निराकाङ्क्ष. In such cases the question
raised by the first Kāku will be answered by the second. The
verse यदि मे वल्लभा etc. is an example of this kind. Here, a Nāyikā
replies to her friend who had put a question as to whether her
lover could be made sympathetic towards her by the Dūtī whom
she had sent. The reply of the Nāyikā is with आक्षेपगर्भकाकु and,
therefore, is साकाङ्क्ष. आक्षेप is denoted by the काकु which bears an
express censure on the Dūtī who had become faithless to her.
The same verse may also denote विधि and, therefore, become
निराकाङ्क्ष. Vidhi is indicated in the sense that in case the Dūtī
faithfully carries out her wishes the Nāyaka will certainly be
drawn towards her (Nāyikā).
l. 18. प्रश्नगर्भा । The verse गत: स कालो etc. is found in the Bāla-
rāmāyaṇa of Rājaśekhara (3. 2). This verse may be interpreted
with two kinds of Kāku, namely, प्रश्न and उत्तर thus making it both
साकाङ्क्ष and निराकाङ्क्ष. In this verse an eagle tells his wife that
those days when Rāvaṇa was everywhere successful are gone,
and that evil days have dawned on him so that his enemies are
crowned with success. Here two different intonations on the part
of the speaker on the words गत: and वर्तन्ते will indicate both a
question and its answer.
l. 21. वितर्क etc.—The third and last variety of Kāku is
illustrated in the verse नवजलधर, etc. Each pāda of this verse will
be read differently with two Kākus denoting doubt and decision,
and thus make the sentence both साकाङ्क्ष and निराकाङ्क्ष ।
l. 26. These three Kākus each with two varieties are invariably

connected with one another. There are, besides, other varieties of
Kāku but they may occur without any definite relation amongst
themselves.
Page. 32.
*[ l. 1. युष्मच्छासन. वेणीसंहार 1--12 ].
ll. 1-4. The first three lines in this verse have the Kāku
denoting अभ्युपगम while the last line indicates अनुनय. It may be
noted here that the two ideas expressed by the two Kākus are
not interdependent.
*[ l. 5. मथ्नामि. वेणीसंहार 1-15 ].
ll. 5-8. Here first three lines have the उपहास Kāku by which
the real intention of the speaker is revealed, though it is quite
contrary to the sense expressed by the lines. The Kāku denoting
अभ्यनुज्ञा is found in the last line, and here also in reality, the speaker
does not intend to have सन्धि as he says.
ll. 10-13. This is a verse with three kinds of Kāku. Here
each line contains three Kākus, nemely, अवधारण, अपह्नव and अनुशो-
चन. The words सेयं have the Kāku of अवधारण; नो कुरङ्गक etc. have
the अपह्नव Kāku, while the whole line must be read in a way so as
to show अनुशोचन of the speaker.
*[ l. 14. उच्च्यतां (किरात. 9-39). ]
ll. 14-17. In this verse four kinds of Kāku are expressed.
They are quite different from one another and have intonations
on four small sentences contained in this verse. By these
four Kākus रौक्ष्य, प्रतिबोधन, औत्सुक्य and निर्वेद are expressed in the four
sentences, one following the other in sequence.
ll. 18-19. For the continuation and context of the verse
उच्च्यतां etc. see Kirātārjunīya 9-40.
किं गतेन न हि युक्तमुपैतुं कः प्रिये सुभगमानिनि मानः ।
योषितामिति कथासु समेताः कामिभिर्बहुविधा धृतिरुहे ॥
The different varieties of Kāku with the same illustrations are
also found in the Śṛṅgāraprakāśa of Bhojadeva (Prakāśa VII)
and in the Bhāvaprakāśana of Śāradātanaya (GOS. ed. p. 146.).
both of whom seem to have drawn their information on Kākus
from the present work.

174 EXPLANATORY NOTES
l. 20. The further portion of this chapter shows the impor-
tance of the knowledge of Kāku for a clever reader.
l. 21. सत्त्वाङ्गाभिनय=histrionics of Sāttvika and Āṅgika.
l. 23. The accents in Vedic Mantras, and changed accents in
compound words for the purpose of obtaining different connotations
from the same words, according to the rules of grammar, may be
called the Kākus of the S'āstras.
l. 25. The Kāku not only reveals a different sense from the
ordinary meaning of the words, but also trains the reader in
histrionics in order to enable him to express the different senses
conveyed by the words.
ll. 26-27. Here Rājaśekhara praises the poet or the reader
who is able to use appropriate Kākus either in his poetry
or in reading. But Ānandavardhana is, however, inclined to
characterize such Kāvya as inferior or गुणीभूतव्यङ्ग्य because in this
Kāvya the suggested ideas are expressed by the Kāku. (see
Dhvani pp. 212-213). The substance of Dhvani is held by
Ānandavardhana as the best form of poetry; but this theory of
Dhvani is not recognized by Rājaśekhara in spite of the fact that
the theory was well-known in the field of literary criticism even
before the 9th century A. D.
Page. 33.
*[ For the काकु and पाठगुण cf. भरतनाट्यशास्त्र chap. 17. काकुस्वरविधान; ]
ll. 1-2. Here it is said that mastery in the art of reading
Kāvya can be obtained only by those persons who are highly
cultured. The author even goes further and states that the art
of composing poetry appears to be quite easy when compared to its
reading.
ll. 3.-4. Like the art of singing, the art of correct reading is
not obtained in one birth, but it is the result of experience in
many previous births.
ll. 7-8. Here is given an account of the different intonations
for reading different types of poetry.
प्रसन्न । The portion of poetry where the Guṇa प्रसाद is found.
Daṇḍin defines प्रसन्न as प्रसिद्धार्थम्.

SEVENTH ADHYĀYA 175
तद्विरोधिनी। ओजस् is the Guṇa opposed to the प्रसाद, and it is
defined by Daṇḍin as समासभूयस्त्वम्. While reading this kind of
poetry the intonation should be of the तार variety.
ll. 9–12. In these two verses an account has been given of
good and bad forms of reading.
*[l. 15. यथा व्याघ्री हरेत् found in Pāṇini's and Yājñavalkya's
S'ikṣās;]
ll. 25–28. From here onwards Rājaśekhara gives the different
methods employed for reading the Kāvya by men belonging
to different countries of India. The people who reside in the
countries east of Benares, read Sanskrit well but their reading of
Prākṛta is very bad.
*[l. 27. ब्रह्मन् विज्ञापयामि quoted in सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण 2-14. ब्रह्मन्नित्यादिना
निन्दार्थानुवादेन गौडेषु प्राकृतानौचित्यं राजशेखरेण व्यञ्जितम् ॥ रत्नेश्वर । ]
Page. 34.
ll. 1–2. Here also the reading of the Gauḍas meets with
unfavourable criticism as it does not conform to any of the rules of
reading. The reading पाठ: is suggested here instead of पाठी owing
to the nature of the adjectives नातिस्पष्ट: etc.; the word बाडब is
to be taken here to mean something belonging to a Brāhmaṇa.
ll. 3–4. Karṇāṭas are criticized here as they are always fond
of using the letter ‘ṭa’ everywhere without paying any attention to
the Rasa or Rīti or Guṇa in the poetry they read.
ll. 5–6. काव्यमना:=knowing that it is poetry.
The reading of the Drāviḍas is said to be always accompanied
with music whether they read poetry or prose or Campū.
*[l. 7. पठन्ति लटभं cf.
शृण्वन्ति लटभं लाटाः प्राकृतं संस्कृतद्विषः ।
अपभ्रंशेन तुष्यन्ति स्वेन नान्येन गुर्जराः ॥ सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण. II. 13.
cf. यद्योनिः किल संस्कृतस्य सुदृशां जिह्वासु यन्मोदते
यत्र श्रोत्रपथावतारिणि कटुर्भाषाक्षराणां रसः ।
गद्यं चूर्णपदं रतिपतेस्तत्प्राकृतं यद्वच-
स्तौल्लांतौल्लिलिताङ्गि पश्य नुदती दृष्टेर्निमेषव्रतम् ॥ Ibid. II. 16.
गौडाद्याः संस्कृतस्थाः परिचितरुचयः प्राकृते लाटदेश्याः
सापभ्रंशप्रयोगाः सकलमरुभुवष्टक्कभादानकाश्च ।

176 EXPLANATORY NOTES
आवन्त्याः पारियात्राः सह दशपुरजैर्भूतभाषां भजन्ते
यो मध्येमध्यदेशं निवसति स कविः सर्वभाषानिषण्णः ॥ काव्यमीमांसा p. 51.
and also गिरः श्रव्या दिव्याः प्रकृतिमधुराः प्राकृतधुराः
शुभव्योऽपभ्रंशः सरसरचनं भूतवचनम् ।
विदग्धामिष्टे मगधमधुरावासिभणिति-
र्निबद्धा यस्तेषां स इह कविराजो विजयते ॥ बालरामायण. 1-11.]
ll. 7-10. In these two verses, the methods of reading
employed by the people belonging to the countries लाट, सुराष्ट्र and त्रवण
are stated. All these countries are situated in the western part of
India. For त्रवण country see page 94-4 of the Kāvyamīmāṁsā.
Rājaśekhara is inclined to believe that the people of the Lāṭa
country hated Sanskrit as they were great lovers of Prākṛta. This
is borne out by the quotations above cited, and is probably one of
the reasons which led him to disregard the existence of a separate
Rīti described as Lāṭīyā by Rudraṭa (see p. 31-6 of the
Kāvyamīmāṁsā).
According to Rājaśekhara the people of Saurāṣṭra and Travaṇa
were lovers of the अपभ्रंश language, and while reading Sanskrit they
adopted the same method as employed in reading their own dialect.
ll. 11-14. Here the Kashmirian poets are praised for their
excellence in the art of reading. It is also said that some poets in
the eastern side of Kashmir employ a nasal tone while reading.
ll. 15-18. In this verse the reading of the Pāñcāla poets is
characterized as the best, because their tone is best suited to
different Rītis in poetry and possesses all the Guṇas required for
reading. In their reading all letters are clearly pronounced and
properly punctuated.
ll. 19-20. Translate:—
Only Viṭas and Śakāras are allowed to use the letters ल and र
frequently in their speeches, but not the good readers of poetry.
Adhyāya VIII.
Page. 35.
*[काव्यार्थयोनयः
cf. लोको विद्या प्रकीर्णं च काव्याङ्गानि । लोकवृत्तं लोकः । वामन 1-3. et. seq.
शब्दः छन्दोऽभिधानार्था इतिहासाश्रयाः कथाः ।
लोको युक्तिः कलाश्चेति मन्तव्याः काव्ययोनयः ॥ भामह 1-9.

EIGHTH ADHYĀYA 177
Most of this chapter is quoted in Hemacandra's Kāvyânuśā-
sana-viveka and Vāgbhaṭa's Kāvyānuśāsana. Not quite of this but
of a similar type, are the various Paricayas in the fifth Sandhi of
the Kavikaṇṭhābharaṇa. Vinayacandra in his काव्यशिक्षा mentions
तर्कपरिचय, व्याकरणपरिचय, चाणक्यपरिचय, धनुर्वेदीय (the quotation is the same
as one in the Kāvyamīmāṁsā, स दक्षिणापाङ्ग०) उत्पाद्यसंयोग (quotation is
the same as in the Kāvyamīmāṁsā, उभौ यदि व्योम्नि). भारतपरिचय, रामायण-
परिचय, मोक्षोपायपरिचय, आत्मज्ञानपरिचय, धातुवादपरिचय, पुरुषलक्षणपरिचय, द्यूतपरिचय,
चित्रपरिचय, वृक्षपरिचय, वनेचरपरिचय, भक्तिपरिचय, विवेकपरिचय, प्रशमपरिचय, हस्तिपरिचय,
वैद्यकपरिचय, शास्त्रपरिचय, धनुर्वेदपरिचय, गजलक्षणपरिचय, तुरगलक्षणपरिचय.]
ll. 1-5. काव्यार्थयोनयः ।
The sources of the theme of poetry are detailed in this chapter
according to the classification scheme given by the author in the
first chapter. The faculty of discovering an appropriate theme
for poetry after examining these sources is called Vyutpatti, and
this has already been dealt with in the fifth chapter. The early
writers on poetics mentioned these sources as काव्याङ्ग or limbs of
poetry, and they advise the poets to be sufficiently conversant
with them. But this list of 12 or 16 sources adopted by Rājaśe-
khara is not found in any of the earlier works. Among the lists
given in the early treatises, the list of Vāmana seems to be fairly
exhaustive and to the point (see 1, 3, 1-20). Rudraṭa's list is
almost similar to that of Bhāmaha (1-9) and is given below :-
छन्दोव्याकरणकलालोकस्थितिपदपदार्थविज्ञानात् ।
युक्तायुक्तविवेको व्युत्पत्तिरियं समासेन ॥
(K. A. 1-18.)
Rudraṭa holds that there is nothing in the world of words or
things which cannot be made use of in poetry, and, therefore,
the poet must be conversant with all varieties of subjects.
Rudraṭa says:-
विस्तरतस्तु किमन्यत्तत इह वाच्यं न वाचकं लोके ।
न भवति यत्काव्याङ्गं सर्वज्ञत्वं ततोऽन्यैषा ॥
(K. A. 1-19.)
On this point compare Bhāmaha :-
न स शब्दो न तद्वाच्यं न स न्यायो न सा कला ।
जायते यन्न काव्याङ्गमहो भारो महान् कवेः ॥
(K. A. 5-4.)

178 EXPLANATORY NOTES
Also Bharata's Nāṭyaśāstra:
न तत् ज्ञानं न तत् शिल्पं न सा विद्या न सा कला ।
न स योगो न तत् कर्म नाट्येऽस्मिन् यन्न दृश्यते ॥ 1-117.
But Daṇḍin in his Kāvyādarśa condensed the same idea in a
remarkably short sentence: श्रुतं च बहु निर्मलम् । 1-103.
Later writers on poetics, such as Abhinavagupta, Mammaṭa
and others followed the same list and illustrated each point in the
same way as Rājaśekhara did. (See commentary of Abhinava-
gupta on the above verse of Bharata (G.O.S. ed. p. 42) and the
Kāvyaprakāśa 1-3).
*[l. 6. उर्वशी. (शतपथ. 5-1-2)
l. 11. यदेतन्मण्डलं Cf. महानारायणोपनिषत् XII. 2 ;
l. 15. एतद्यत्. सूर्यशतक. 89.]
ll. 17. Construe and translate:—अयं वेदवेदी समग्रः वर्गः यं वेदत्रितयमयं
वेद=this entire group of people who profess to know the Vedas
acknowledge him who is the embodiment of the three Vedas: सः
सूर्यः वः श्रियेऽस्तु ।
*[l. 24. हंस प्रयच्छ ( विक्रमोर्वशीय. IV. 17. ) (Cf. वाक्यघटना । यथा-हंस
etc. इयं पूर्वशास्त्रनिबद्धस्योत्तरार्धस्य तदर्थाननुयायिनाऽपि प्रस्तुतार्थविरुद्धेनैकवाक्यतयैव घटित-
त्वाद्वाक्यघटना । सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण. II. ]
ll. 22-25. In this verse quoted from the Vikramorvaśīya,
the king Purūravas requests a swan to return his beloved उर्वशी as
it had misappropriated her graceful gait of walking. To accuse
the swan with a charge of the theft of his beloved, Kālidāsa quotes
Nārada where it is said that a person can be charged with the theft
of the whole property when a portion of the stolen property is
actually found in his possession.
Cf. यथाऽऽह नारदः—अनेकार्थाभियुक्तेन सर्वद्रव्यापलापिना ।
विभावितैकदेशेन देयं यदभियुज्यते ॥
(Jīmūtavāhana's Vyavahāramātṛkā: Memoirs of A.S.B. p. 311.)
निह्नुते लिखितं नैकमेकदेशविभावितः ।
दाप्यः सर्वं नृपेणार्थं न ग्राह्यस्त्वनिवेदितः ॥
(Yājñavalkya.—Vyavahārakāṇḍa 20.)
एकदेशविभावितो नृपेण सर्वं दाप्यः ॥ Gautamasmṛti.

EIGHTH ADHYĀYA 179
Page. 36.
*[l. 1. न स संकुचितः (रामायण- किष्किन्धाकाण्ड. 34-18).
l. 3. मदं. (जानकीहरण. XII. 36. The first half reads as :
पदं नवैश्वर्यबलेन लम्भितं विसृज्य पूर्वं समयो विमृश्यताम् ॥
l. 7. हिरण्य. from अग्निपुराण ।]
l. 7. Cf. Vāyupurāṇa. chapter. 67. :—
हिरण्यकशिपुर्दैत्यः श्लोकैर्गीतः पुरातनैः ।
“राजा हिरण्यकशिपुर्यां यामाशां निषेवते ।
तस्मै तस्यै दिशे देवा नमश्चकुर्महर्षिभिः ॥”
[l. 9. स सधरिष्णुः (माघ. 1-46.)
l. 21. सामान्यवाचि quoted anonymously in कवीन्द्रवचनसमुच्चय
(No. 270).]
ll. 19-24. प्रमाणविद्या includes, according to Rājaśekhara, not
only the three Vedic schools of philosophy but also the other
heterodox schools, such as the Bauddha, Ārhata and Lokāyata
which are taken as पूर्वपक्षतर्क on p. 4. l. 17 of this work. The Mīmāṁsā
has been separated from Tarkas on the ground that this school
does not adduce any argument against the injunctions of the
Vedas, while the Tarkas attribute greater importance to rational
arguments than to Vedic injunctions. The word Mīmāṁsā also
means पूजितविचार, or in other words, discussions conducted on the
assumption that the Vedas are of superior authority while
decisions arrived at by mere arguments are called Tarkas. Hence
मीमांसा and तर्क are classified as different Pramāṇas. Mīmāṁsakas
believe that a word at first means an entity in general and the
particular thing meant by the speaker is understood only when
it is connected with the meanings of other words in the same
sentence. See Jaimini's Sūtra आकृतिस्तु क्रियार्थत्वात् । 1-3-33. Here
आकृति is taken as सामान्य or जाति which each noun signifies. See,
Kumārila’s definition of आकृति.
जातिमेवाकृतिं प्राहुर्व्यक्तिराक्रियते यया ।
सामान्यं तच्च पिण्डानामेकबुद्धिनिबन्धनम् ॥ ३ ॥
तन्निमित्तं च यत्किञ्चित्सामान्यं शब्दगोचरम् ।
सर्वं एवेच्छतीत्येवमविरोधोऽत्र वादिनाम् ॥ ४ ॥
Ślokavārttika—Ākṛtivāda.
see also—
कक्षान्तरितसामान्यविशेषेषु हि दुर्बलः ।
सामान्यवचनः शब्दो जायते लक्षणाबलात् ॥ २७-२८
Ibid. Sambandhākṣepavāda.

180 EXPLANATORY NOTES
Among the Mīmāṁsakas, the followers of Kumārila are called
अभिहितान्वयवादिन् because they hold that a word in a sentence is
capable only of expressing its meaning, while its connection with
the meaning of other words is decided on seeing the nature of other
words in the same sentence. But the Prābhākara school of
Mīmāṁsā believes in अन्विताभिधानवाद and holds that the meaning of
each word is अन्वित or connected with others. According to
this school also अन्वितसामान्य is the expressed meaning of the word,
while अन्वितविशेष is the meaning derived by its connection with
other words.
Page. 37.
*[l. 1. नासतो (गीता 2–16.)
ll. 1–6. The Sāṅkhyas are called Satkāryavādins while the
Naiyāyikas call themselves as Asatkāryavādins, and the two
schools are, therefore, opposed to each other. The theory of
सत्कार्यवाद is that the effect produced by a cause is not entirely
different from the cause, and that the effect also always exists in
the cause. Similarly, the cause of an effect does not entirely
disappear after the production of the effect, but it exists in the form
of that effect. This may be illustrated by the instance of gold and
golden ornaments.
नासतो विद्यते भावः=a thing that does not exist cannot be produced.
नाभावो विद्यते सतः=the existing one (cause) does not perish
(after producing the effect).
In the verse य एते etc. the same theory is illustrated on the
analogy of the earth and earthen vessels, thus showing that the
effects are not different from the cause which in this case is earth.
*[l. 9. किमीहः किं कायः (महिम्नः स्तोत्र 5).]
ll. 7–12. For Rājaśekhara's conception of the existence of
Īśvara and his creation of the world, see Nyāyasūtra of Gautama
4. 1. 19–21, Nyāyavārttika of Uddyotakara on these sūtras,
Nyāyamañjarī of Jayantabhaṭṭa pp. 190–204 and the Praśasta-
pādabhāṣya on Kaṇādasūtra pp. 48–49. Regarding the ऐश्वर्य of
Īśvara, the following verse is quoted by Udayanācārya in his
Kusumāñjali fifth stabaka:—
सर्वज्ञता तृप्तिरनादिबोधः स्वतन्त्रता नित्यमलुप्तशक्तिः।
अनन्तशक्तिश्च विभोर्विधिज्ञाः षडाहुरङ्गानि महेश्वरस्य ॥

EIGHTH ADHYĀYA 181
ll. 13-18. The Vijñānavādins among the Bauddhas do not
believe in the existence of the objective world except the Vijñāna.
According to them, therefore, words cannot denote any outward
object, but produce a momentary effect and transmit the idea of
the speaker to the minds of his hearers. The view of the Vijñāna-
vādins has been clearly explained by Śāntarakṣita and Kamalaśīla
in their works Tattvasaṅgraha and its Pañjikā (GOS. Nos. 30-31).
cf. विवक्षानुमितिश्लिष्टमाकारं बाह्यभावतः ।
व्यवस्यतः प्रवृत्तिश्चेत्तदेवास्मन्मतं पुनः ॥
Tattvasaṅgraha. p. 290.
Kamalaśīla quotes a line from an earlier work in support of
this view.
अन्ये त्वाहुः—'अर्थविवक्षां शब्दोऽनुमापयति ।'
यथोक्तं—“अनुमानं विवक्षायाः शब्दादन्यन्न विद्यते ॥”
Tattvasaṅgraha. p. 289.
This view is illustrated by the verse भवतु etc., in which the
same words such as न न न मममा etc., spoken by a lady at one time
convey निषेध or denial, while at another her acceptance, according
to circumstances.
ll. 19-23. Lokāyatikas or the atheists do not recognise the soul
or Ātman who may enjoy the fruits of his action either in heaven or
in hell after death. They also hold that the Vijñāna or consci-
ousness found in living beings arises out of a combination of the
five elements, in the same way as a few ingredients produce wine.
This theory of the atheists also is quoted and refuted by Śāntarak-
ṣita in the Tattvasaṅgraha.
cf. तस्माद्भूतविशेषेभ्यो यथा शुक्त्सुरादिकम् ।
तेभ्य एव तथा ज्ञानं जायते व्यज्यतेऽथवा ॥ p. 520.
साक्षिचिन्तका =those who meditate on the Supreme Being.
ll. 24-25. The soul, according to the Jains, is the doer and
enjoyer of all actions and is of the same size as the body. They
also consider the futility of the body or Ātman in case the size of
the soul is acknowledged as either smaller or larger than that of
the body. This is what is shown by an example in this verse.

182 EXPLANATORY NOTES
Page. 38.
l. 3. सर्वपार्षदत्वात्='because it is fit for all kinds of cultured
associations.' The word Pārṣada may refer to the Vedic Sūtra
literature belonging to several pariṣads as well. The Prātiśākhya
works are included in the Pārṣada literature. The word generally
means grammatical works affiliated to the Vedas. See Nirukta

1. 17 and the Prātiśākhya section of the History of Ancient
   Sanskrit Literature by Max Muller, (p. 68-70)
   ll. 7-9. समयविद्या='religious doctrines'.
   The terms घोर, घोरतर, ब्रह्म, विद्या, कला, and परापरपद refer to the diffe-
   rent tenets of the doctrine of the S'aivites.
   ll. 10-13. That the Pāñcarātra doctrines are based solely
   on the theory of the four Vyūhas of प्रद्युम्न, अनिरुद्ध, सङ्कर्षण and वासुदेव,
   is explained here in detail.
   सर्वज्वर=the sufferings both mental and physical.
   ll. 14-17. The Mahāyāna School of Buddhism enjoins that
   the Bodhisattva should have great compassion for the suffering
   humanity and should not receive emancipation, though fully entitled
   to it, until the whole creation is delivered. Further, the Bodhisa-
   ttva is required to work continuously for the emancipation of living
   beings by sacrificing his own merits, and taking the consequence
   of all bad actions done by others on himself. This theory of the
   Mahāyānists and the description of the सुखावती heaven, which is
   above the ten Bhūmis are the subject-matter of this verse कलिकलुष,
   etc. Kumārilabhaṭṭa quotes the same verse in his Tantravārttika
   and attributes its origin to Buddha (Tantravārttika 1-3. 2.).
   The Hīnayānists, on the other hand, possess no such compassion
   for the suffering humanity as Mahāyāuists do, and they desire
   emancipation only for themselves. In this verse the methods of a
   Mahāyānist Bodhisattva are described. For further information on
   the two Yānas of the Buddhists compare Tattvasaṅgraha: (p. 872.)
   ये तावज्जात्यादिदुःखोत्पीडितमानसाः संसारादुद्व्रस्तमनसः तदुपशममात्मनः प्रार्थयन्ते तेषां
   श्रावकादिबोधिनियतानां संसाराद्भयमेव नैरात्म्यभावनाथित्वनिमित्तम् ।
   ये तु गोत्रविशेषात्प्रकृत्यैव परहितकरणैकाभिरामाः संस्कारादिदुःखत्रितयपीडितं जगदवेक्ष्य
   कृपापरतन्त्रतया तद्दुःखदुखिनः स्वात्मनि व्यपेक्षामपास्य सकलानेव संसारिणः आत्मत्वेनाभ्युपगताः
   तत्परित्राणाय प्रणिदधते तेषां करुणैव भावना प्रवृत्तिनिमित्तम् ॥

EIGHTH ADHYĀYA 183
l. 18. राजसिद्धान्तत्रयी=The three S'āstras of Artha, Nāṭya and
Kāma are mentioned here as of interest only to the royal personages,
because it is only the kings who are able to practice, follow and
appreciate the doctrines inculcated in these S'āstras.
*[ l. 19. शमव्यायामाभ्यां ( बालरामायण 1-24 ). ]
ll. 19–22. This verse of Rājaśekhara has also been quoted by
Abhinavagupta in his अभिनवभारती while commenting on the verse
of Bharata न तज्ज्ञानं, etc. see Abhinavabhāratī (G.O.S. No. 36. p. 42.)
For an explanation of this verse, compare the शमव्यायामिक
chapter of the Arthaśāstra of Kauṭilya.
शमव्यायामौ योगक्षेमयोर्योनिः ।
कर्मारम्भाणां योगाराधनो व्यायामः ।
कर्मफलोपभोगानां क्षेमाराधनः शमः ।
शमव्यायामयोर्योनिः षाड्गुण्यम् ॥ etc.
आवापः=‘intention of declaring a war’. In this verse Rāja-
śekhara exhibits his special acquaintance with the Arthaśāstra
of Kauṭilya.
ll. 23–26. This verse shows that the author was fully conver-
sant with the contents of the Nāṭyaśāstra; for, he describes
not only the dancing postures, but also explains such technical
terms as लंबितलय etc. which pertain to the science of music. Cf.
Nāṭyaśāstra :
अङ्गभूता हि तालस्य यतिपाणिलयाः स्मृताः ।
त्रयो लयास्तु विज्ञेयाः द्रुतमध्यविलम्बिताः ॥
31. 331.
Page. 39.
*[ l. 2. असौ मन्दरतस्त्वं cf. कामसूत्र 2.1.3, 9 and 13. ]
l. 2. मन्दरतः=‘from the Mandara mountain’ or ‘one with dissimilar
conjugal affinity.’
समरतः=‘from the war’ or ‘one with similar conjugal affinity’.
ll. 3–9. Poets are here advised to mix freely with common
folk in order to be acquainted with their mode of life and expres-
sion. The mode of life is generally recognized as of two varieties :

184 EXPLANATORY NOTES
the cultured and the uncultured. How the uucultured folks behave
and how they express themselves are treated in these two verses.
स्फुटितपिठरी=cracked pan.
Here an uncultured woman talks to her lover regarding the
changed treatment she was getting from him of late. The following
may be cited in this connection as a contrast to illustrate a refined
address on the same subject.
पुराऽभूदस्माकं प्रथममविभिन्ना तनुरियं
ततो नु त्वं प्रेयानहमपि हताशा प्रियतमा ।
इदानीं नाथस्त्वं वयमपि कलत्रं किमपरं
मयाऽऽप्तं प्राणानां कुलिशकठिनानां फलमिदम् ॥
In the second verse इक्षुदण्डस्य etc. a popular mode of expression,
is illustrated while describing the days of the Phālguna month
in which things such as इक्षुदण्ड, etc. are very commonly
enjoyed by the country folk. See the description of Hemanta
and S'iśira on pp. 102-104 of this work. For the correctness
of the word सैष see notes on p. 2. l. 6.
ll. 10–19. समस्तजनजन्यः='pertaining to several groups of people'.
कतिपयजनजन्यः-'pertaining only to a limited circle'.
The verse पिबन्ति etc. exhibits the knowledge of the poet
concerning the topography of South India where मरिच, ताम्बूल and मधु
are common products of the land.
In the second verse the feelings of women of the Kuntala
country in amorous sports are described, while the third gives an
idea of the geographical peculiarities of the Nepal country.
ग्रन्थिपर्णकपाली='an avenue made up of a kind of fragrant trees'.
*[ l. 18. आर्द्रणमदमण्डनाः=कस्तूरीपङ्कमण्डनाः । ]
ll. 20–23. In this verse are described the actions of a Nāyikā
who wanted to put a stop to the conversation of her lover
with her friends, in order to secure privacy; as also the action of
her lady-friends who knew the Nāyikā's intention and left the
place on the plea that they were called by somebody outside.
Page. 40.
l. 7. The reading नाथकथा is adopted here as it is found in
two Mss B and C. and सर्गे is changed into सर्गः as it is required to

be construed with the word यस्य. The first half of the verse should,
therefore, be construed as: यस्य कथासर्गः न नीचैः, अथ न प्रतिभाक्षयः
स कविग्रामणीः ।
According to the reading available in Ms A, however, the
construction will be as follows:—
यस्य ( कवेः ) अर्थकथासर्गे ( गीं ) न नीचैः, ( यस्य ) न प्रतिभाक्षयः स कविग्रामणीः ।
This construction also gives a good sense inasmuch as the
अर्थ and कथा developed by a poet through his power of imagination
and described in the last two verses, are the subject-matter
of this Śloka. The only defect in this reading is that the two
words नीचैः and प्रतिभाक्षयः do not sound well. An emendation may be
suggested giving a better sense as:—नवीनार्थकथासर्गे यस्य न प्रतिभाक्षयः ।
स कविग्रामणीः । but this emendation is not supported by any of the
Mss available.
ll. 9–13. A knowledge of different sciences and common
practices is considered necessary for poets by later writers such as
Kṣemendra, Hemacandra, Vāgbhaṭa and Vinayacandra who have
included several varieties under the heading of Prakīrṇaka. But
Rājaśekhara illustrates only four kinds of them and suggests several
more worthy of being known by poets, saying : एवं प्रकीर्णकान्तरमपि ।
On Hastiśikṣā, for instance, the verse मेघानां etc. is quoted here
as an illustration. Here the well-known habit of elephants while
bathing in the river is correctly observed in the description of
Irāvaṇa’s throwing up water.
*[ l. 18. स दक्षिणापाङ्ग ( कुमारसंभव. III. 70. ) ]
Page. 41.
*[ l. 2. पाण्ड्योऽयमंसार्पित. ( रघुवंश VI. 60 )
ll. 1–5. These last four additional sources for the theme of
poetry, introduced by Rājaśekhara for the first time, are not
referred to by any of the later writers, though the other twelve
sources are quoted sometimes with the same illustrations as given
by our author. It is not, however, easy to surmise how these
four principles उचितसंयोग etc. are considered as काव्यार्थयोनि by
Rājaśekhara. But it is clear that Rājaśekhara has shown by
these four illustrations the four methods of description. उचितसंयोग
is ‘the appropriate connection ( of things )’.
ll. 6–9. युक्तसंयोगः=the connection of a thing already descri-
२४

186 EXPLANATORY NOTES
bed as connected with others. In this verse the dust raised up
by the march of an army is described as already connected with
other things such as सुरदन्तिदानोदक and चक्षुःसहस्र of Indra. This dust
is said to have been mixed up with the water of the celestial
Ganges where the divine ladies are accustomed to take their bath.
*[l. 10. उभौ यदि व्योम्नि (माघ. III. 8.)]
ll. 14–19. संयोगविकारः=change due to connection. Imaginary
and natural changes are described in these two verses one after
the other.
पीयन्ते. This verb is derived from the root पीङ् पाने of
श्यन्विकरणि.
Adhyāya IX.
Page. 42.
*[Pages 42–44. l. 10. are quoted by Hemacandra in his
काव्यानुशासनविवेक. pp. 122–123.]
ll. 1–4. सः stands for काव्यार्थ or the theme of poetry. Drau-
hiṇi's view is cited here for the second time. For the other
reference see notes on p. 2. l. 24 of the present work. दिव्य means
the activities of divine beings.
ll. 5–8. The first half may be construed thus: निजवारवासगतया
रम्भया नलकूबरस्य विरहात् (तं) स्मृत्वा उत्कण्ठुलं तुम्बुरोः वीणासमं यत् उद्गीतम् ।
Kāvyānuśāsanaviveka reads उत्कण्ठसंरम्भया instead of उत्कण्ठुलं रम्भया ।
*[l. 13. श्रियः पतिः (माघ. 1. 1.)]
Page. 43.
ll. 20–23. If the reading कोटिकुण्ठः is adopted, प्रणमति should
be connected with तक्षके. The words कपिल, कुलिक, स्वस्तिक, पद्म, कम्बल,
शङ्खपाल etc. are the names of different serpents in the nether world.
Many of the names are found in the Mahābhārata (Ādiparva
Adhyāya 35.) शङ्खपाल seems to be the same as the father of S'aṅ-
khacūḍa, the serpent who was given protection by Jīmūtavāhana,
the hero of the drama, Nāgānanda. The subject matter of this
verse also seems to be connected with the story recorded in the
Nāgānanda.
ll. 24–27. This verse describes the conversation between