काव्यप्रकाश (आचार्य मम्मट - सम्पूर्ण १० उल्लास सटीक)

20 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
नाभिधा गच्छेत् क्षीणशक्तिर्विशेषणे" इति न्यायादित्युपादान-
लक्षणा तु नोदाहर्तव्या । न ह्यत्र प्रयोजनमस्ति न वा रूढि-
रियम् । व्यक्त्यविनाभावित्वात्तु जात्या व्यक्तिराक्षिप्यते ।
यथा क्रियतामित्यत्र कर्ता । कुर्वित्यत्र कर्म । प्रविश पिण्डी-
मित्यादौ गृहं भक्षयेत्यादि च ।
case, is the community), is unable to proceed to the qualified
(which is the Individual).'
This however is not a right example of 'inclusive'
indication ; because in this case, there is neither any
'purpose' (served by the indirect implication, which
could not be got by direct denotation), nor any 'usage'
(and these alone have been declared to be the basis for
indirect implication). What really happens in the case
cited is that the individual is implied by the community
by reason of their invariable concomitance ; just as there
is in the case of the imperative passive form 'kriyatām',
where the agent is implied by reason of his being invariably
concomitant with an action,—or in that of the imperative
word 'kuru', the object is implied by reason of its being
inseparable from every transitive verb,—or in the case of
the word 'praviśa,' 'enter,' which implies the 'house'
to be entered, as what is entered is inseparable from the
act of entering,—or in the case of the word 'piṇḍīm'
'cake' (in the accusative), some such verb as 'eat'
is implied, as without some such transitive verb, there
could be no object.
The expression 'fat Devadatta eats not during the
day' as implying his nocturnal feeding has been regarded
by some people as an example of 'Indication'; but in
this case the nocturnal feeding is not 'indicated' by the words

CHAPTER II 21
‘पीनो देवदत्तो दिवा न भुङ्क्ते’ इत्यत्र च रात्रिभोजनं न
लक्ष्यते श्रुतार्थापत्तेरर्थापत्तेर्वा तस्य विषयत्वात् ।
‘गङ्गायां घोषः’ इत्यत्र तटस्य घोषाधिकरणत्वसिद्धये
गङ्गाशब्दः स्वार्थमर्पयति इत्येवमादौ लक्षणैनैषा लक्षणा ।
उभयरूपा चेयं शुद्धा । उपचारेणामिश्रितत्वात् ।
at all ; it is simply cognised either through ‘Verbal Pre-
sumption’ (of the expression ‘he eats at night’ as held
by the Bhāṭṭa), or through pure presumption (of the fact
of the nocturnal feeding, as held by the Prābhākara).
(b) An example of the ‘Indicative’ Indication we have
in the expression ‘gaṅgāyāṁ ghoṣaḥ’ (‘the ranch in the
Gaṅgā’); here, for the purpose of obtaining for the Bank
(which is the secondary meaning indicated by the term
‘Gaṅgāyām’) the character of being the location of the
ranch, the term ‘Gaṅgāyām’ ‘surrenders its primary mean-
ing’ (i. e. the river); and in this case the process of Indi-
cation is called ‘Indicative.’
Both of these kinds here exemplified (a and b) belong
to the category of ‘pure’ Indication,—so called because
they do not involve or require any auxiliary agency (in the
shape of some sort of similitude between the Primary and
Secondary meanings).
It is not true (as some people have asserted) that in
cases of ‘pure’ Indication—like those just cited—there
is a clear ‘difference’ manifested between the indicated
(secondary) and the indicative (primary) meanings,—this
‘difference’ being technically called ‘tāṭasthya’ ‘aloofness’
—[while in cases of Indication other than the ‘pure,’ there
is ‘non-difference’ manifested between the two mean-
ings.]—This, we say, is not true ; because as a matter of

22 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
अनयोर्लक्ष्यस्य लक्षकस्य च न भेदरूपं तटस्थ्यम् ।
तटादीनां गङ्गादिशब्दैः प्रतिपादने तत्वप्रतिपत्तौ हि प्रतिपिपाद-
यिषितप्रयोजनसंप्रत्ययः । गङ्गासंबन्धमात्रप्रतीतौ तु गङ्गातटे
घोष इति मुख्यशब्दाभिधानाल्लक्षणायाः को भेदः ॥१०॥
सारोपान्या तु यत्रोक्तौ विषयी विषयस्तथा ।
आरोप्यमाणः आरोपविषयश्च यत्रानपह्रुतभेदौ सामाना-
धिकरण्येन निर्दिश्येते सा लक्षणा सारोपा ॥
fact, in a case where the Bank is spoken of by means of
the word 'Gaṅgā,' it is done clearly for the purpose of
expressing some definite notion (such as that of 'sanctity'
in the present case); and this purpose can be accomplished
only when the two (the indicated 'bank' and the indica-
tive 'river') are comprehended as absolutely identical
i. e., the sanctity of the 'bank' is recognised only when the
'bank' is identified with the 'river' whose sanctity is
already well-known. If this were not so, and if all that
was intended to be expressed was some sort of connection
with the 'river,' then as this could be done equally well
by the ordinary expression 'gaṅgātaṭe ghoṣaḥ' ('the ranch
on the banks of the river Gaṅgā'),—what difference would
there be between the expression of that idea by this direct
assertion and the indirect 'indication' of the same (by
the indirect expression 'gaṅgāyāṁ ghoṣaḥ') ? 10.
There is however another (kind of Indication) called the
'Super-imponent', wherein the 'imposed' as well as 'that
imposed upon' are both distinctly expressed.
That Indication is called 'Super-imponent' in which
what is 'imposed' and what is 'imposed upon' are both
mentioned as correlated and as clearly distinct from
one another.

CHAPTER II 23
विषय्यन्तःकृतेऽन्यस्मिन् सा स्यात्साध्यवसानिका ॥ ११ ॥
विषयिणारोप्यमाणेनान्तःकृते निगीर्णे अन्यस्मिन्नारोपविषये
सति साध्यवसाना स्यात् ॥ ११ ॥
भेदाविमौ च सादृश्यात्सम्बन्धान्तरतस्तथा ।
गौणौ शुद्धौ च विज्ञेयौ
इमावारोपाध्यवसानरूपौ सादृश्यहेतू भेदौ ‘गौर्वाहीकः’
इत्यत्र ‘गौरयम्’ इत्यत्र च ।
अत्र हि स्वार्थसहचारिणो गुणा जाड्यमान्द्यादयो लक्ष्य-
माणा अपि गोशब्दस्य परार्थाभिधाने प्रवृत्तिनिमित्तत्वमुपयान्ति
That same (Indication) would be called ‘Introsusceptive’
when what is ‘imposed’ swallows the other (that is ‘imposed
upon’).—(11)
Where the ‘viṣayin’, what is ‘imposed’ ‘swallows’—
i. e., takes within itself—‘the other’—i. e., that which
is ‘imposed upon’,—it is a case of ‘Introsusceptive’
Indication. 11.
These two kinds of Indication (a) when based upon
similitude, are known as ‘qualitative’; and (b) as ‘pure’ when
they are based upon other kinds of relationship.
(A) As examples respectively of the ‘Superimponent’
and ‘Introsusceptive’ Indication, based upon similitude
(and hence ‘qualitative’), we have the two expressions
(a) ‘gaurvāhīkaḥ’ ) (‘the ploughman is an ox’), and (b)
‘gaurayam’ (‘he is the ox itself’).
[In (a) the character of the ‘ox’ is what is ‘imposed’, and the
‘ploughman’ is the one ‘imposed upon’, and both these being mentioned
as distinct from one another, it is a case of ‘superimponent’ Indication;
while in (b) the character imposed, i. e. the ‘ox’, ‘swallows’ up the
man upon whom it is imposed, the man loses his distinct individuality
and becomes merged, as it were, in the ‘ox’, hence this becomes
a case of the ‘introsusceptive’ Indication.]

24 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
इति केचित् । स्वार्थसहचारिगुणाभेदेन पदार्थगता गुणा एव
लक्ष्यन्ते न परार्थोऽभिधीयते इत्यन्ये । साधारणगुणाश्रयत्वेन
परार्थ एव लक्ष्यते इत्यपरे ।
उक्तं चान्यत्र “अभिधेयाविनाभूतप्रतीतिर्लक्षणोच्यते ।
लक्ष्यमाणगुणैर्योगाद्वृत्तेरिष्टा तु गौणता” इति ।
अविनाभावोत्र संबन्धमात्रं न तु नान्तरीयकत्वम् । तत्त्वे हि
‘मञ्चाः क्रोशन्ति’ इत्यादौ न लक्षणा स्यात् । अविनाभावे
चाक्षेपेणैव सिद्धेर्लक्षणाया नोपयोग इत्युक्तम् ।
The exact process of Indication in these cases is thus
explained by some people :—When the ‘ploughman’ is
spoken of as the ‘ox’, this latter word indicates the qualities
of stupidity, dullness and the like which belong to the
animal denoted by that word, and through these qualities
(thus indirectly indicated) the word ‘ox’ comes to denote
the man (and it is thus that the co-ordination between the
man and the ox is secured).—According to others, how-
ever, what happens is, not that the word ‘ox’ directly ex-
presses the man (through its qualities of stupidity and dull-
ness), but that it indirectly indicates similar qualities in the
man.—But according to others again (men of our way of
thinking), the word ‘ox’ indicates the man himself, as
being the substratum of those same qualities that belong
to the ox also.
This has been declared elsewhere also (in the
Ślokavārttika)—‘Indication is the name given to the
cognition of what is invariably concomitant with what is
directly expressed by the word ; and this process is called
‘qualitative’ on account of the indication being based
upon the presence of certain qualities.’

CHAPTER II 25
‘आयुर्घृतम्’ ‘आयुरेवेदम्’ इत्यादौ च सादृश्यादन्यत्
कार्यकारणभावादि संबन्धान्तरम् । एवमादौ च कार्यकारण-
भावादिलक्षणपूर्वे आरोपाध्यवसाने ।
अत्र गौणभेदयोर्भेदोपि ताद्रूप्यप्रतीति. सर्वथैवाभेदावगमश्च
प्रयोजनम् । शुद्धभेदयोस्त्वन्यवैलक्षण्येनाव्यभिचारेण च कार्य-
कारित्वादि ।
In this passage what is meant by ‘invariable con-
comitance’ is only relationship, and not actual (inseparable)
concomitance, for if the latter were meant, there could
be no indication in the case of such expressions as ‘mañchāḥ
krośanti’ (‘the platforms are shouting’).
[As there is no inseparable concomitance between the platform
and the men on the platform.]
In fact it has been rightly observed that in cases where
there is actual invariable concomitance (between the indicated
and the indicator), one naturally implies the other, and
there is no need for the indicative process at all.
(b) Examples of the ‘superimponent’ and ‘intro-
susuceptive’ Indication, based upon factors other than
‘similitude,’ (and hence ‘pure’) we have in the two ex-
pressions ‘Āyurghṛtam’ (‘clarified butter is longevity’)
and ‘Āyurevedam’ (‘It is longevity itself’) ; —where the
factor upon which the indication is based is some such
relationship as that between cause and effect, and the like
and in all such cases the two kinds of Indication—‘superim-
ponent’ and ‘introsusceptive’—are such as are actually
preceded (and brought about) by the said relationships
of ‘cause and effect’ and the like.

26 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
क्वचित् तादर्थ्यादुपचारः । यथा इन्द्रार्था स्थूणा इन्द्रः ।
क्वचित् स्वस्वामिभावात् । यथा राजकीयः पुरुषो राजा । क्वचित्
अवयवावयविभावात् । यथा अग्रहस्त इत्यत्राग्रमात्रेवयवे हस्तः ।
क्वचित् तात्कर्म्यात् । यथा अतक्षा तक्षा ॥
Now here, in the case of the two kinds of 'qualita-
tive' Indication, the purpose served [(a) in the case of
the 'superimponent' variety, e. g., 'the ploughman is an
ox'] is the bringing about of the cognition of similarity
between the two things recognised as different from one
another,—and [(b) in the case of the 'introsusceptive'
variety, e. g., 'he is verily an ox'] it is the bringing about
of the notion of absolute identity between the two things.
In the case of the two kinds of 'pure' Indication [e g.,
(I) 'Butter is longevity' and (b) 'It is longevity itself'],
on the other hand, the purpose served is the bringing about
of the notion that the thing spoken of is one that accom-
plishes a certain object in a way better than anything else
[in the case of (a)] or infallibly [in the case of (b)] .
In some cases the Indication is based upon the rela-
tion of 'subserviency;' e.g., the pillar that subserves the
purpose of (the worship of) Indra is called 'indra';—
sometimes it is based upon the relationship of 'master
and servant'; e. g. when the king's servant is spoken as
the 'king';—in some cases it is based upon the relation-
ship of 'whole and part'; e. g. in the expression 'agra-
hastaḥ' ('foremost hand') as applied to any and every
foremost limb, this latter is indicated by the word 'hand';—
in other cases again it is based upon the relationship of
'doing the same work'; e. g., when one who is not a
carpenter is spoken of as 'carpenter' (on account of his
doing the carpenter's work).

CHAPTER II 27
लक्षणा तेन षड्विधा ॥ १२ ॥
आद्यभेदाभ्या सह ॥ १२ ॥
सा च
व्यङ्ग्येन रहिता रूढौ सहिता तु प्रयोजने ।
प्रयोजनं हि व्यञ्जनव्यापारगम्यमेव ॥
तच्च गूढमगूढं वा
तच्चेति व्यङ्ग्यम् । गूढं यथा
मुखं विकसितस्मितं वशितवक्रिम प्रेक्षितं
समुच्छलितविभ्रमा गतिरपास्तसंस्था मतिः ।
Thus Indication is of six kinds.—(12).
That is, (the four kinds mentioned in 11 and 12)
along with the first two kinds (described in 10) 12.
This (Indication)—
When based upon usage, is without any ‘suggested’ meaning;
but when it is based upon some purpose, it is accompanied by
a ‘suggested’ meaning.
In fact the recognition of the purpose (in the case of
Indication) is obtained only through the process of
‘suggestion’.
And it may be either abstruse or explicit.
‘It’—the suggested meaning.
It is ‘abstruse’ in the following passage—
‘Oh ! The first tide of youth is exuberant in the
body of the moon-faced one : her face is blooming with
smiles, her glances have acquired the graceful arch, her
gait evinces a rising gracefulness, her thoughts have re-
linquished steadiness, the bosom shows the budding
breasts, and her thighs are plump and efficient.’
[Here we have the primary meaning of the following words barred
by incompatibility with the context—(a) the word ‘is exuberant’
(as applied to tide of youth, which is inanimate),—(b) ‘blooming’
(applied to smile, though it is really applicable to flowers),—(c) ‘acqui-

28 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
उरो मुकुलितस्तनं जघनमंसबन्धोधुरं
बतेन्दुवदनात नौ तरुणिमोद्गमो मोदते ॥ ९ ॥
अगूढं यथा
श्रीपरिचयाज्जडा अपि भवन्त्यभिज्ञा विदग्धचरितानाम् ।
उपदिशति कामिनीनां यौवनमद एव ललितानि ॥ १० ॥
अत्रोपदिशतीति ॥
ling' (as applied to the glances, which are inanimate),—(d) 'rising'
(as applied to gracefulness, which is not a material substance and hence
cannot do any rising),—e) 'relinquishing steadiness' (as applied to
thoughts which are not sentient),—(f) 'budding' (as applied to breasts,
though really applicable to flowers,)—and (g) 'efficient' (as applied
to the thighs which are inanimate), and hence they are taken as indicating
the (figurative) meaning in which the words are understood in the
passage, e g (a) 'exuberance' indicates excellence and what is suggested
is 'desirability',—(b) 'blooming' indicates unrestrained manifestation,
and what is suggested is 'sweet odour' and so forth,—(c) 'acquiring'
indicates mastery and it suggests the 'appearance of the loved person',—
(d) 'rising' indicates profuseness, which suggests 'heart-ravishing cha-
racter';—e) 'relinquishing steadiness' indicates impatience, which
suggests 'the increasing influence of love',—(f) 'budding' indicates
unflabbiness, which suggests 'fitness for embrace',—(g) 'efficiency'
indicates capacity for spirited intercourse, which suggests 'loveliness.'—
And all this, not capable of being comprehended by ordinary men, is
very 'abstruse'।
As an example of the 'explicit' suggested meaning,
we have the following—
'Coming into contact with prosperity' even dull
persons become conversant with the functions of the
clever : the intoxication of youth itself teaches the graces
to lovely women.'
Here the work 'teaches' (having its direct meaning
barred, in relation to the 'intoxication of youth,' which
is inanimate), indicates 'manifestation', which suggests
'spontaneous attainment of the graces'; and this sug-
gestion is quite explicit).

CHAPTER II 29
तदेषा कथिता त्रिधा ॥ १३ ॥
अव्यङ्ग्या गूढव्यङ्ग्या अगूढव्यङ्ग्या च ॥ १३ ॥
तद्भूलाक्षणिकः
शब्द इति संबध्यते । तद्भूस्तदाश्रयः ॥
तत्र व्यापारो व्यञ्जनात्मकः ।
In this way Indication has been declared to be of three
kinds.—(13).
That is, (1) that in which there is no suggested meaning,
(2) that in which the suggested meaning is abstruse,
and (3) that in which the suggested meaning is explicit.
That which contains the said (indication) is the 'Indicative'—
'Word', 'śabdah', has to be construed here (from
Text 6).
'Tadbhūh'—That which contains, is the substratum
of, the Indication.
[Having described the 'expressive word' (in the Text 7) and the
'indicative word' (in the foregoing Text), the author now turns to
the description of the 'suggestive word' As in the other two cases,
however, so here also, before describing the 'suggestive word,' it is
necessary to explain the process of 'suggestion.' This suggestion is
of two kinds—'Verbal', based upon the word, and 'Ideal', based
upon the meaning, as the present context is dealing with words, the
author takes up Verbal suggestion here, the other kind being dealt
with in Chapter III. The Verbal suggestion also is of two kinds,
that based upon the directly expressed meaning of the word,
'denotative', and that based upon the indicated meaning of the word,
'indicative'. And as he has been just dealing with Indication, he
takes up the 'Indicative' suggestion first ]—13
Of the Indicative Word, that function (which brings about
the cognition of the 'purpose' of the indication) is of the nature
of 'Suggestion'.
"Why so?"

30 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
कुत इत्याह
यस्य ऽप्रतीतिमाधातुं लक्षणा समुपास्यते ॥ १४ ॥
फले शब्दैकगम्येऽत्र व्यञ्जनान्नापरा क्रिया ।
प्रयोजनप्रतिपिपादयिषया यत्र लक्षणया शब्दप्रयोगस्तत्र
नान्यतस्तत्प्रतीतिरपि तु तस्मादेव शब्दात् । न चात्र व्यञ्जना-
दृतेऽन्यो व्यापारः ॥
तथाहि
नाभिधा समयाभावात्
[Answer.]
In regard to that intended idea for bringing about the
cognition whereof one has recourse to Indication, (14) and which is
cognisable through the word only,—the function (of the word)
can be none other than 'Suggestion.'
A word is used indicatively only when it is intend-
ed to convey the notion of the 'purpose' (which
could not be cognised through the direct denotation of
the word);—and yet the said notion is obtained from that
same word, and not from anything else ; and in this func-
tion the word is none other than Suggestion ;—because
(a) it cannot be direct denotation, as there is no usage to
that effect ;—
In the case of the expression 'the ranch in the
Gaṅgā', the 'sancity' and such other qualities are re-
cognised as belonging to the bank ; and yet there is no
usage of the word 'Gaṅgā in that sense :—
(b) nor can it be Indication because the necessary conditions
are wanting.—(15).

CHAPTER, II 31
गङ्गायां घोष इत्यादौ ये पावनत्वादयो धर्मास्तटादौ प्रतीयन्ते
न तत्र गङ्गादिशब्दाः संकेतिताः ॥
हेत्वभावान्न लक्षणा ॥ १५ ॥
मुख्यार्थबाधादित्रयं हेतुः ॥ १५ ॥
तथा च
लक्ष्यं न मुख्यं नाप्यत्र बाधो योगः फलेन नो ।
न प्रयोजनमेतस्मिन् न च शब्दः स्खलद्गतिः ॥ १६ ॥
That is the three conditions described above—the
primary meaning being barred and so forth (see Text
9). For instance—
What is 'indictated' is not the primary meaning ; nor is
that meaning incompatible ; nor has it any connection with the
intended idea ; nor again is there any purpose served by it (i. e.,
by making the intended idea an object of further Indication) ,
nor lastly is the word itself wanting in the requisite force. (16).
In the expression 'the ranch in the Gaṅgā', the
word 'Gaṅgā' is taken as indicating the 'bank', because
its primary meaning of 'river' is found incompa-
tible;—if, in the same manner, the sense of the 'bank'
also were incompatible, then alone could it be taken as
indicating the intended idea (of 'sanctity' and so forth) ;—
as a matter of fact however, in the first place, the bank
does not form the primary meaning of the word 'Gaṅgā',
nor is it incompatible, [so that the first condition of Indi-
cation is not fulfilled],—secondly there is no affinity
between the 'bank' as indicated by the word 'Gaṅgā'
with 'sanctity' and the other qualities that would be
indicated (by the bank) [so that the second condition of
Indication is not fulfilled];—thirdly, there is no further
purpose served by making the intended idea of 'sanctity'
and the rest the object of a further indication ;—nor lastly,
is the word 'Gaṅgā' incapable (without the intervention

32 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
यथा गङ्गाशब्द स्रोतसि सबाध इति तटं लक्षयति तद्वत्
यदि तटेऽपि सबाध स्यात् तत प्रयोजनं लक्षयेत । न च तटं
मुख्योर्थ. । नाप्यत्र बाधः । न च गङ्गाशब्दार्थस्य तटस्य पावन-
त्वादैर्लक्षणीये संबन्ध.। नापि प्रयोजने लक्ष्ये किचित् प्रयोजनम् ।
नापि गङ्गाशब्दस्तटमिव प्रयोजनं प्रतिपादयितुमसमर्थः ॥१६॥
एवमप्यनवस्था स्याद् या मूलक्षयकारिणी ।
of the indicative process) of bringing about the notion
of ‘sanctity’ and the rest, as it is of denoting the bank.
[The word ‘Gaṅgā’ is incapable of denoting the bank, hence for
the purpose of bringing about the notion of the bank, it has to seek
the help of Indication, but as regards ‘sanctity’ and the rest, the idea
of these can be brought about by the word ‘Gaṅgā’ itself, through
‘suggestion’]—16
Further, in this manner, there would be an infinite regress,
which would strike at the very root (of the intended com-
prehension).
If the purpose for which the original Indication has
been adopted were itself the object of a further Indica-
tion,—then for the second Indication there would be
another purpose; and in connection with the Indication
of this latter, there would be yet another purpose; and
so on and on, there would be an infinite regress, and the
result of this would be that the desired comprehension
would not be got at.
An objection is raised:—‘‘What the word ‘Gaṅgā’
indicates may be the bank as possessed of the qualities of
sanctity and the rest; and the purpose served by this indi-
cation is the bringing about of a notion that could not be
got at by the expression ‘the ranch on the bank of the
Gaṅgā’; and thus as Indication itself would provide the
comprehension of the bank along with the qualities, where
would be the need for having any ‘suggestion’ at all?’’

CHAPTER II 33
एवमपि प्रयोजनं चेल्लक्ष्यते तत् प्रयोजनान्तरेणेति तदपि
प्रयोजनान्तरेणेति प्रकृताप्रतीतिकृत् अनवस्था भवेत् ॥
ननु पावनत्वादिधर्मयुक्तमेव तटं लक्ष्यते । 'गङ्गायास्तटे
घोषः' इत्यतोधिकस्यार्थस्य प्रतीतिश्च प्रयोजनमिति विशिष्टे
लक्षणा तत्किं व्यञ्जनयेत्याह--
प्रयोजनेन सहितं लक्षणीयं न युज्यते ॥ १७ ॥
कुत इत्याह--
ज्ञानस्य विषयो ह्यन्यः फलमन्यदुदाहृतम् ।
प्रत्यक्षादेर्नीलादिर्विषयः फलं तु प्रकटता संवित्तिर्वा ॥
[The answer to this is given by the following Text.]
It is not right to make the 'indicated' meaning include the
intended idea (for the sake of which Indication is admitted.—(17)
"Why not?"
Because the object of a cognition is one thing, and its
resultant is said to be another.
For instance, the 'object' of the perceptional cognition
is the blue thing, while the 'resultant' of that cognition
is the 'apprehendedness' of that thing (as held by the
Mīmāṁsaka), or the 'representative cognition' ('I perceive
the blue thing,'—this is according to the Naiyāyika).
[Similarly the object of the cognition obtained by Indication is the
'bank', and the idea of 'sanctity' and the rest is only its resultant,
which, therefore, being different from the 'object', cannot be
coupled with the former.—There is no doubt that such is the mean-
ing of the text, and the commentators have had recourse to a subtle
and laboured explanation only on account of their being unable to re-
concile the clear meaning of the text with their own conceptions ] 17
Thus Indication cannot apply to the thing along with its
qualities.
This has been already explained.
3

34 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
विशिष्टे लक्षणा नैवम्
व्याख्यातम् ॥
विशेषाः स्युस्तु लक्षिते ॥ १८ ॥
तटादौ ये विशेषाः पावनत्वादयस्ते चाभिधातात्पर्यलक्षणा-
भ्यो व्यापारान्तरेण गम्याः । तच्च व्यञ्जनध्वननद्योतनादि-
शब्दवाच्यमवश्यमेषितव्यम् ॥ १८ ॥
It is only after something has been indicated that special
qualities come (to be recognised) as belonging to it.—(18).
Thus after the bank has been indicated (by the word
‘Gaṅgā), the special qualities of ‘sanctity’ and the
rest come to be recognised as belonging to it ; and
the recognition of these qualities can be brought about
by the word through a function that is different from
Denotation and Indication ; and this function must
necessarily be held to be that which is spoken of by such
names as ‘vyañjana’ (suggestion), ‘dhvanana’ (echo),
‘dyotana’ (illumination) and so forth. 18.
Suggestion based upon Indication has been described ;
the author now proceeds to describe that based upon
Denotation—
When a word having several primary meanings
has the range of its denotation restricted by ‘connection’
and such other conditions,—if there appears the cogni-
tion of a meaning other than the denoted (or directly
expressed) one, that function which brings about this
cognition is ‘Suggestion.’—(19).
[Says the Vākyapadīya] (a) ‘Connection, (b) Dis-
junction, (c) Association, (d) Enmity, (e) Purpose,
(f) Context, (g) Peculiarity, (h) Proximity of another

CHAPTER II 35

word, (i) Capacity, (j) Compatibility, (k) Place, (l) Time,
(m) Gender, (n) Accent and so forth,—these are the con-
ditions that serve to bring about the idea of a particular
meaning of a word, when there is an uncertainty as to its
actual meaning in a particular context';—and it is in
accordance with this that one particular meaning, out
of a number of meanings, of a word is understood to be
intended, in each of the following expressions respec-
tively :—
(a) In the expression ‘Hari with conch and discus’
the exact meaning of the word ‘hari’, which has many
meanings, is restricted to Visnu, through ‘connection’,
[as of all the things denoted by the word ‘hari’, it is
Viṣṇu alone who has any connection with ‘the conch and
the discus’];—(b) similarly in the expression ‘Hari
without the conch and the discus’, [as it is only one who
has had ‘connection’ with a thing that can be ‘disjoined’
from it, this ‘disjunction’ restricts the meaning of ‘hari’
to Viṣṇu];—(c) in the expression ‘Rāmalakṣmaṇau,’ the
meaning of the word ‘Rāma’, is restricted to that Rāma
who was the son of Daśaratha [and this on account of the
‘association’ of Lakṣmaṇa]; (d) while in the expression
‘the behaviour of these two combatants is like that of
Rāma and Arjuna’, the meaning of ‘Rāma’ is restricted
to Paraśurāma, and that of ‘Arjuna’ to the son of Kṛtavīrya
[and this through the well-known ‘enmity’ between
these two persons]; —(e) in the expression ‘worship
Sthāṇu for the purpose of removing the shackles of the
world’, the meaning of the word ‘Sthāṇu’ is restricted to
Śiva [as the ‘purpose’ mentioned can be fulfilled by the
worship of that God only];—(f) in the expression ‘Deva
knows everything’, the meaning of the word ‘deva’ is
restricted to ‘you’ [and this is done through the ‘context’,

36 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
एवं लक्षणामूलं व्यञ्जकत्वमुक्तम् ।। अभिधामूलं त्वाह—
the words being addressed to the king]; (g) in the expression
‘Makaradhvaja is angry’, the meaning of the word
‘Makaradhvaja’ is restricted to the Love-God [as the
‘peculiarity’ mentioned, being angry, can apply to that
God alone, and not to the ocean, which is also called
‘Makaradhvaja’];—(h) in ‘devasya purārāteḥ’, the meaning
of the word, ‘deva’ is restricted to Śiva [through the
‘proximity of the word’ ‘purārāti’, which can apply to
Śiva, and to no other God];—(i) in ‘the kokila bird is
intoxicated by Madhu’. the meaning of the word ‘Madhu’
is restricted to the Spring [as that alone, and not honey
or wine, has the ‘capacity’ to intoxicate the bird];
(j)—in ‘pātu vo dayitāmukham,’ the meaning of the word
‘pātu’ (which can mean drink and protect also) is restricted
to confrontation [as this alone is ‘compatible’ with the
‘beloved’s face’];—(k) in ‘Parameśvara shines here’,
the meaning of the word ‘Parameśvaraḥ’ is restricted to
the king, through the ‘place’ referred to being the King’s
capital;—(l) in ‘Chitrabhānu is shining,’ the meaning of
the word ‘Chitrabhānu’ is restricted to the Sun, if the
words are uttered during the day, and to fire, if they are
uttered at night, and this is done through ‘time’;—(m)
in the expression ‘Mitra shines’, if the word ‘Mitra’ is
used in the neuter ‘gender’, its meaning becomes res-
tricted to the friend, but if in the masculine ‘gender’, then
to the Sun;—(n) in the expression ‘Indraśatru,’ the
meaning becomes restricted by the ‘accent’ [if the accent
is put on the first word of the compound, it has to be
taken as Bahuvrīhi, and then its meaning is he ‘whose
killer is Indra,’ but if the accent is put on the second word
it has to be taken as Tatpuruṣa, which means ‘the killer

CHAPTER II 37
अनेकार्थस्य शब्दस्य वाचकत्वे नियन्त्रिते ।
संयोगाद्यैरवाच्यार्थधीकृद्व्यापृतिरञ्जनम् ॥ १९ ॥
“संयोगो विप्रयोगश्च साहचर्यं विरोधिता ।
अर्थः प्रकरणं लिङ्गं शब्दस्यान्यस्य संनिधिः ॥
सामर्थ्यमौचिती देशः कालो व्यक्तिः स्वरादयः ।
शब्दार्थस्यानवच्छेदे विशेषस्मृतिहेतवः ॥”
इत्युक्तदिशा
सशङ्खचक्रो हरिः अशङ्खचक्रो हरिरित्युच्यते । रामलक्ष्मणाविति
दाशरथौ । रामार्जुनगतिस्तयोरिति भार्गवकार्तवीर्ययोः ।
स्थाणुं भज भवच्छिदे, इति हरे । सर्वं जानाति देव इति
युष्मदर्थे । कुपितो मकरध्वज इति कामे । देवस्य पुरारातेरिति
शंभौ । मधुना मत्तः कोकिल इति वसन्ते । पातु वो दयितामुख-
मिति सांमुख्ये । भात्यत्र परमेश्वर इति राजधानीरूपात् देशाद्रा-
जनि । चित्रभानुर्विभातीति दिने रवौ रात्रौ वह्नौ । मित्रं भातीति
सुहृदि मित्रो भातीति रवौ । इन्द्रशत्रुरित्यादौ वेदे एव न काव्ये
स्वरो विशेषप्रतीतिकृत् ।
of Indra ']. But it is only in the case of Vedic expressions
that accent serves the purpose of restricting the denotation
of words.—The verse quoted from the Vākyapadīya con-
tains at the end the term ‘ ādi ’, ‘ and so forth ’; this is
meant to include (o) Gesture, which serves to restrict the
meaning in such passages as—‘ During all these days her
breasts have been reduced to this (marked by a gesture)
size, her eyes have shrunk to this, and her condition has
become like this.’
Now, in some cases, it is found that though the signi-
fication of the word has been restricted in the manner
described above, and the other significations are pre-

आदिग्रहणात्
एद्दहमेत्तत्थणिआ एद्दहमेत्तेहि अच्छिवत्तेहि ।
एद्दहमेत्तावस्था एद्दहमेत्तेहिँ दिअएहिँ ॥ ११ ॥
इत्यादावभिनयादयः ।
इत्थं संयोगादिभिरर्थान्तराभिधायकत्वे निवारितेप्यने-
कार्थस्य शब्दस्य यत् क्वचिदर्थान्तरप्रतिपादनं तत्र नाभिधा निय-
मनात्तस्याः । न च लक्षणा मुख्यार्थबाधाद्यभावात् । अपि
त्वञ्जनं व्यञ्जनमेव व्यापारः । यथा
भद्रात्मनो दुरधिरोहतनोर्विशाल
वंशोन्नतेःकृतशिलीमुखविग्रहस्य ।
यस्यानुपप्लुतगतेः परवारणस्य
दानाम्बुसेकसुभगः सततं करोभूत् ॥ १२ ॥ १९ ॥

CHAPTER II 39
तद्युक्तो व्यञ्जकः शब्दः
तद्युक्तो व्यञ्जनयुक्तः
यत्सोऽर्थान्तरयुक् तथा ।
अर्थोऽपि व्यञ्जकस्तत्र सहकारितया मतः ॥ २० ॥
तथेति व्यञ्जकः ॥ २० ॥
इति काव्यप्रकाशे शब्दार्थस्वरूपनिर्णयो नाम द्वितीय उल्लासः ॥ २ ॥
can be mounted with difficulty), the nobility of whose
race is high (who is as tall as a bamboo), who has become
an expert in the use of arrows (who has a host of bees
hovering round him), whose insight is undimmed (whose
gait is steady),—was always beautified by the water poured
in the formal making of gifts (by the ichor flowing from
his temples)].
[Here we find that the words are so skilfully chosen that they are
applicable to the king as also to the elephant; the fact however that
it is addressed to the king restricts the meaning of the words to him
alone; and yet the idea of the ‘elephant’ also is cognisable throughout;
and this idea is the result of Suggestion.] 19.
The word endowed with that (i. e. the said function of
suggestion) is the ‘suggestive word.’
‘Endowed with that,’ i. e. endowed with the function
of suggestion.
Inasmuch as the word is ‘suggestive’ only when it has other
meanings, the meaning also is held to be so (i. e. ‘suggestive’ by
virtue of its helping the process. (20).
‘So’—i. e. suggestive. 20.