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

166 EXPLANATORY NOTES taught to any one because they contain several untrue statements; secondly, because they encourage immoral practices; and thirdly, because they give teachings on indecent practices. In support of these three arguments they quoted several examples from the Kāvyas. Rājaśekhara refuted all these hostile views on the Kāvya and proved that the study of Kāvya is irreproachable in every way because of its special merits. Page. 25 ll. 1-4. स्लेमः=moisture. Here the poet has employed the figure of speech known as अतिशयोक्ति in describing the fame of a king. ll. 5-9. Here also अतिशयोक्ति is employed in describing the army of a king. The word पातालतालु is also used by Vāmana. (See Kāvyālaṅkārasūtra 1-3-23.) ll. 10-14. The words वाचाल and तुङ्ग are used here to indicate the imperfection of वार्ता and पुराण in stating real facts. The word अव्याहतं should be pronounced with the काकु (intonation) which indicates interrogation. l. 15. The reading in this line is defective in all MSS. It may be emended as:— नासत्यमस्ति किञ्चन काव्ये स्तुत्यर्थमर्थवादोऽयम् । *[l. 17. पुष्पिण्यौ. ऐतरेयब्राह्मण 7-15-2. (33-3) शतपथब्राह्मण. 15-19. ] l. 17. This ṛk occurs in the शौनःशेपाख्यान where Indra advises Rohita, the son of Hariścandra to wander again in the jungle, and this the boy actually did. This ṛk is in eulogy of the wanderer. शेरे=शेरते । प्रपथे=प्रकृष्टे तीर्थक्षेत्रादिमार्गे । Here wandering is praised in order that Rohita may be tempted to accept this novel career. It is, therefore, called प्रशंसार्थवाद which may contain untrue statements also. ll. 19-22. This is also another प्रशंसार्थवाद which praises grammar as superior even to Vedas. In this connection the Vedic view of Arthavāda is noteworthy. Vedic scholars are inclined to think that the chief object of अर्थवाद is only to praise the action prescribed in the form of विधि or निषेध in order to attract the performer; and,