Text 7.84

अथार्थ-दोषान् आह,

athārtha-doṣān āha,

Now he discusses the faults related to a meaning (artha-doṣa):

artho’puṣṭaḥ kaṣṭo vyāhata-punar-ukta-duṣkrama-grāmyāḥ ||7.55cd||
sandigdho nirhetuḥ prasiddhi-vidyā-viruddhaś ca |
anavī-kṛtaḥ saniyamā-niyama-viśeṣāviśeṣa-parivṛttāḥ ||7.56||
sākāṅkṣo’padam uktaḥ^[1] sahacara-bhinnaḥ prakāśita-viruddhaḥ |
vidhy-anuvādāyuktas tyakta-punaḥ-svīkṛto’ślīlaḥ ||7.57||

These are the twenty-three kinds of faulty meanings: (1) apuṣṭa (irrelevant), (2) kaṣṭa (difficult to understand), (3) vyāhata (inconsistent), (4) punar-ukta (redundant), (5) duṣkrama (bad sequence), (6) grāmya (vulgar, colloquial), (7) sandigdha (ambiguous) (also called sandeha), (8) nirhetu (lacking an explanation), (9) prasiddhi-viruddha (contrary to what is well-known), (10) vidyā-viruddha (contrary to book knowledge), (11) anavī-kṛta (not made new), (12) saniyama-parivṛtta (not restrictive enough) (the word “only” should have been used) (also called sa-niyame aniyama), (13) aniyama-parivṛtta (too restrictive) (the word “only” should not have been used) (also called aniyame sa-niyama), (14) viśeṣa-parivṛtta (too general) (also called viśeṣe sāmānya), (15) aviśeṣa-parivṛtta (too particular) (also called sāmānye sa-viśeṣa), (16) sākāṅkṣa (missing words), (17) apadam ukta (said out of place) (also called apada-yukta), (18) sahacara-bhinna (mismatched) (or sahacara-bheda), (19) prakāśita-viruddha (contradicted by an implied sense) (vyaṅgya-viruddha), (20) vidhi-ayukta (adulterated predicate), (21) anuvāda ayukta (improperly described substantive), (22) tyakta-punaḥ-svīkṛta (ended, and taken again), and (23) aślīla (unpleasant).

trayo-viṃśati-vidho’rtho duṣṭa iti sambandhaḥ. krameṇodāharaṇāni.

Examples are shown in order.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

sākāṅkṣo’pada-yuktaḥ (Kāvya-prakāśa 7.57). However, Vāsudeva Śāstrī says another reading is sākāṅkṣo’padam uktaḥ (Vāsudeva Śāstrī Abhyaṅkar, Kāvya-prakāśaḥ, Caukhamba Vidyābhavana, Vārāṇasī, India, 1994 (second edition), p. 325). Govinda Ṭhakkura refers to both readings (Kāvya-pradīpa on Kāvya-prakāśa verse 278). The interpretation of the fault is the same in both readings.