काव्यप्रकाश (आचार्य मम्मट - सम्पूर्ण १० उल्लास सटीक)

CHAPTER V 141
तत्र निमित्तत्वं कारकत्वं ज्ञापकत्वं वा शब्दस्य। प्रकाशक-
त्वान्न कारकत्वम्। ज्ञापकत्वं तु अज्ञातस्य कथम्। ज्ञातत्वंच
संकेतेनैव स चान्वितमात्रे एवं च निमित्तस्य नियतनिमित्तत्वं
यावन्न निश्चितं तावन्नैमित्तिकस्य प्रतीतिरेव कथम् इति
‘नैमित्तिकानुसारेण निमित्तानि कल्प्यन्ते इत्यविचारिताभि-
धानम्।
regarded to be of the word expressing an idea; and there
is no ground for making any such distinction as that into
‘expression’, ‘indication’ and ‘suggestion’.”
In answer to this we ask—What is meant by the word
being the ‘cause’ here? Does it mean that it produces
the idea? or that it makes it known? It cannot be said
to produce the idea, as what the word does is to give expression
to an idea, it can never produce one. As regards its making
(the idea) known, how can the power to do this belong to
what is itself not known or understood?
[i. e. So long as the meaning of the word itself has not been
understood, it cannot give expression to anything else.]
As a matter of fact, the word itself can be understood
only through convention; and this convention is (as
shown above) only in regard to such words as are correlated
to others. Thus then, so long as the precise extent of
causal potency of the cause has not been ascertained, how
can the cause itself be recognised as such? So that the
assertion that ‘causes are inferred from their effects’ is
extremely ill-conceived.
Others again urge the following argument—“The
action of the word is like that of an arrow, its reach being
prolonged further and further; so that in whatever sense
a word may be used, that is the meaning expressed or de-
noted by it. Thus then (even in the case of the verse ‘the