228. ABHINAVAGUPTA'S THEORY OF MEANING 253

ABHINAVAGUPTA'S THEORY OF MEANING 253

according to him, Rasadhvani is invariably concomitant with the embellishment, called Rasavat; and therefore, if there be no Rasavadalaukara in a composition, it shall have to be accepted as unæsthetic. All those compositions, which describe the insentient, will have, therefore, to be admitted by the opponent as devoid of æsthetic element.

EMBELLISHMENTS AND ÆSTHETIC PRESENTATION.

The embellishments are of two kinds1 (i) verbal (sabda) and (ii) ideational (artha). Alliteration etc., are included in the former, and simile etc. in the latter. In the linguistic presentation of the asthetic object frequent laboured intro- duction of the verbal embellishment, alliteration of the same kind, does not tend to suggest the inexpressible. Rather, because of its forcefully drawing the attention of the hearer to itself and exciting his wonder at its frequent appearance, it interferes with the æsthetic experience. It is equally bad for the poet. For, it disturbs his concentration on the delineation of the æsthetic object, because it necessitates conscious search for the necessary words. Hence, though occurrence of an alliteration here and there, without any conscious effort on the part of the poet, lends some external charm to the composition, its frequent laboured introduction has to be avoided.

The case with the ideational embellishments (Arthalan- kara) is different. Because the introduction of only those embellishments has to be avoided in a linguistic æsthetic presentation, which requires a mental effort of such a nature as drives the inspired picture of the æsthetic object out of the poet's mind. The frequent introduction of alliteration, as experience tells us, does necessitate such an effort. But the ideational embellishments come spontaneously to the

1. Dh. L., 85-6.