काव्यप्रकाश (आचार्य मम्मट - सम्पूर्ण १० उल्लास सटीक)

480 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA लिङ्गवचनभेदोपि उपमानोपमेययोः साधारणं चेत् धर्ममन्यरूपं कुर्यात् । तदा एकतरस्यैव तद्धर्मसमन्वयावगतेः सविशेषणस्यैव तस्योपमानत्वमुपमेयत्वं वा प्रतीयमानेन धर्मेण प्रतीयते इति प्रक्रान्तस्यार्थस्य स्फुटमनिर्वाहादस्य भग्नप्रक्रम- रूपत्वम् । यथा-- चिन्तारत्नमिव च्युतोसि करतो धिङ्मन्दभाग्यस्य मे ॥५९०॥ of any mention of the conch and other things in connec- tion with the object compared (Kṛṣṇa), the mention of the moon is superfluous ; and this involves the defect of 'Redundancy' (already described under chapter VII). Further, the diversity in gender and number, of the object compared and that compared to (which has been des- cribed as a defect of Simile),—if it bring about some di- versity in the form of the word mentioning the common property, it is only the defect which has been described as 'Broken Uniformity;' because in such a case the said property belonging to only one of the two objects, the objects could be regarded either as 'the object compared' or 'the object compared a to' on the basis of that property only in a qualified (and not original) form ; and this would mean that the idea started with could not be sustained. For example, in the following instances— (a) 'Chintāratnamiva chyutosi karato dhiṅ mandabhāgyasya me' 'You are fallen from my hands, like the Chintāmaṇi,— unlucky that I am!' [where the past-participle 'chyutaḥ' being in the masculine gender, can be construed only with the man described, and not with 'ratnam', which is in the neuter gender, [ ;-and also in the passage—(b) 'Saktavo