काव्यप्रकाश (आचार्य मम्मट - सम्पूर्ण १० उल्लास सटीक)

146 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA किं च 'कुरु रुचिम्' इति पदयोर्वैपरीत्ये काव्यान्तर्वर्तिनि कथं दुष्टत्वम् । न ह्यत्रासभ्योऽर्थः पदार्थान्तरैरन्वितः इत्यनभिधेय एवेति एवमादि अपरित्याज्यं स्यात् । यदि च वाच्यवाचकत्वव्यतिरेकेण व्यङ्ग्यव्यञ्जकभावो नाभ्युपेयते तदासाधुत्वादीनां नित्यदोषत्वं कष्टत्वादीनामनित्य- verse ‘ The sandal paint......thou hast not gone to the wretched man ’) must be regarded as the object of sugges- tion.’ Further, in the case of the expression ‘ kuru ruchim ’ (‘ have the pleasure ’), it has been held that if in a poem, the order of the two words is inverted, and we have the form ‘ ruchinkuru ’, it becomes defective [by reason of the unseemly suggestion by the word ‘ chinku,’ which would be heard in the middle of the said expression, and which is the name of a private part of the female body] ;—now why should the said expression be defective ? [Even though a particular sound-combination may have an unseemly significance, yet] the unseemly meaning is not correlated to any other words of the expression ; and not being so correlated, it would be as good as not denoted (according to the view that there is no other verbal signification ex- cept ‘ denotation ’ and the denotation of a word must always be correlated to the denotation of other words) ; and thus there would be no ground for avoiding the use of such expressions as the one noted above (which are to be avoided only on account of the unseemly meaning suggested by the particular sound-combination). Then again, if the suggestive process be not accepted as distinct from the denotative process, it would be im-