298. 330 CHAPTER V

330 CHAPTER V

poetic composition in the second chapter of his work. The incongruity in general consists in unfitness of either word or meaning. It is of two types: (I) internal and (II) external. The internal incongruity consits in the presen- tation of the situation, mimetic changes and transient emotions such as are not in perfect harmony with the basic mental state. It has been exhaustively dealt with by Ananda Vardhana. Mahima Bhatța, therefore, does not discuss it. He confines himself to the treatment of the latter. The external incongruities, according to him, are many1. He begins with broadly dividing them into five types: (I) Vidheyāvimarśa (II) Prakramabheda (III) Krama- bheda (IV) Paunaruktya and (V) Vacyāvacana. Subse- quently he points out their subdivisions.

Ruyyaka points out that these defects are not the origi- nal discoveries of Mahima Bhatta and that they had been noticed by earlier thinkers such as Pāņini, Kātyāyana and Patañjali2 etc. To support his view Ruyyaka quotes from these authorities at every step.

(I) Vidheyāvimarśa consists in reducing to a subordinate position that which is intended to be presented as the principal. Mahima Bhatta cites as an illustration of this defect a verse, which is from the pen of Kuntaka and which Kuntaka wrote to illustrate how words, befitting the context, give rise to the æsthetic experience (Cetanacam- atkāra). He points out three main defects in it3 : (1) Nega- tive compound in 'Asamrabdhavan', (2) The use of the words 'Yosau' without the use of the corresponding 'Tat', (3) Genitive compound in 'Ambikākeśarī.

(II) Prakramabheda is a type of Sabdānaucitya. It consists in the break or want of symmetry in the use of 1. V. V. 150. 2. V. V. V. 151. 3. V. V. 154,