Studies in the History of Sanskrit Poetics v2.c83.35

v2.c83.35

With regard to the first of these views, viz., the *tadrūpya* or identity of *dhvani* and *bhakti* (by which term *lakṣaṇā* is meant), the Dhvanikāra lays down that Suggestion cannot be identical with Indication, because both have properties peculiar to themselves (i 17). Indication is based upon the consideration of the barring of the expressed sense, and consists merely in *upacāra* (*upacāra-mātram tu bhaktiḥ*, Ānanda p. 51), or, as Abhinavagupta expresses it, in the secondary application of a word (*guṇa-vṛtti*). The suggested sense, on the other hand, though essentially distinct in character, does not yet cancel the expressed sense altogether. The later writers¹⁷ explain further that it is not a mere secondary application of a word through usage or special motive; for if you say that in such a sentence as ‘a herd-station on the Ganges’, the supposed motive, viz., the coolness and purity of the site, is not suggested but indicated, then the notion of ‘the bank’, which is the real indicated sense, would become the primary meaning of the word ‘Ganges’ (for the motive and the secondary sense of ‘bank’ cannot both be indicated), and consequently would be cancelled, since there can be no Indication without the primary sense being cancelled. We must therefore acknowledge another indicated motive for the indication of the first motive (for there can be no indication without the supposition of an indicated motive), and a third motive again to this second indication, and so on *ad infinitum*. In fact, as already noted before, the *prayojana* or special motive is not expressed at all; if it is left unexpressed, how is it then apprehended, unless we suppose that it is suggested? It has also been demonstrated that Suggestion is based on the peculiarity of the speaker, the addressee and various other circumstances, and there is a difference as well in location, the Indication residing in a word only, the Suggestion in a word, its parts, its sense and in the style. Mammaṭa adds that Suggestion cannot be said to be co-extensive with Indication and Denotation combined; for it is seen to come into existence from mere letters without any specific Denotation.