242. ABHINAVAGUPTA'S THEORY OF MEANING 267

ABHINAVAGUPTA'S THEORY OF MEANING 267

imitation is that it lacks the most essential element of the imitated. A life-like wax-figure of a man is acknowledged to be an imitation, because, while externally it is exactly like a man, it lacks the enlivening principle, the soul. Similarly a poetic composition, possessed of poetic qualities and embellishments, is called "Citra" or imitation, because it lacks the soul of poetry, the suggestiveness.

(III) From the point of view of the essential difference between the conventional and the suggested meanings also the non-suggestive poetry is distinguishable from the suggestive, inasmuch as the former, in respect of meaning, consists of only the directly expressible ones, while the latter has both.

(IV) From the point of view of the productive powers also the difference between the two is clear. While the former is a product of mere knowledge and skill in the use of poetic technique, in the production of the latter the poetic genius plays the most important1 part.

THE DISTINCTION OF THE SUGGESTIVE POETRY FROM THE EMBELLISHED

The embellished poetry is of two kinds :--

1. That which stimulates only such ideas as are symbolised by words, which form its body, as for instance, the one having Simile.

2. That which arouses the consciousness of some meanings which are not symbolised in words, but are

3. Dh. L.34

268 CHAPTER IV simply suggested by them, as for instance the one having the following figures :- 1. Samāsokti. 2. Ākșepa. 3. Anuktanimittaviśeşokti. 4. Paryāyokta. 5. Dīpaka. 6. Apahnuti and 7. Sankara etc. The opponents of the theory of the suggestive power of words, therefore, maintain that though the suggestive poetry cannot be brought under the former type of embellished poetry, it can certainly be included in the latter.

To this the exponents reply, as has been stated above, that the conception of the suggestive poetry, as distinct from the embellished, is based upon the suggested element being the principal constituent of the total configuration of meanings. No doubt, in the configuration, presented by the figures of speech, mentioned above, there is a suggested element, but it occupies only a subordinate position, inas- much as it further beautifies that which is directly expressed. But the suggestive poetry (Dhvanikāvya), according to us, is that in which the directly expressed meaning occupies subordinate position to the suggested. Therefore, if we take the two experiences as aroused by the two kinds of poetry into consideration and analyse them, we find them to be quite distinct from each other. Hence we maintain1 the stimuli also to be different.

1. Dh. L., 35,