________________
परिशिष्ट yfirat not sufficient to convey zire WETET ceases to operate as soon as it has expressed the symbolical meaning, therefore, it is not capable of conveying any further meaning, e. g. TE, art or at. Take for instance T which is said to be suggested through Farura, gara eto. Now neither feata (e. g. राम, सीता ) :10: अनुभाव ( e. g. कंप) stand as symlbol for any रस. रस and विभाव etc. are not identical. They are not one and the same thing. Moreover, if one says, "this is the TH", the sentence does not suggest any h at all. On the contrary, mention of the name of my is a q (FREE). All this shows that are is not cornveyed by अभिधा. It has already been stated that there are two schools of Minansaks—HETT7a49cts, admitting artist, and faaliarets denying it. Both agree in rejecting i as fourth वृत्ति. अभिहितान्वयवादी assents that Af is so elastic as to include within its range of operation any meaning, however remote and distant. The assertion violates the principle Tegl HQ force AIHE:. If one does not recognize the principle it may
