काव्यप्रकाश (आचार्य मम्मट - सम्पूर्ण १० उल्लास सटीक)

CHAPTER, VII 181 'इत्यत्र । न त्वमुक्ततानुवादेनान्यदत्र किंचिद्विहितम् । यथा जुगोपात्मानमत्रस्तो भेजे धर्ममनातुरः । अगृध्नूराददे सोर्थानसक्तः सुखमन्वभूत् ।।१६४।। इत्यत्र अत्रस्तत्वाद्यनुवादेनात्मनो गोपनादि ।। (१६) 'विरुद्धमतिकृत्' यथा सुधाकरकराकारविशारदविचेष्टितः । अकार्यमित्रमेकोऽसौ तस्य किं वर्णयामहे ।।१६५।। this is the celestial bow, not the bow of that demon ; this is the downpour of rain ; not the flight of arrows ; this is the lightning bright like the hue of gold on a touch-stone, and not my beloved Urvashī ;—while, in the passage quoted before we have the negative particle appearing as the subordinate factor in the compound 'amuktā', which would have been justified only if there were something else predicated in reference to the 'non-abandoning', as is found to be the case with the following—'jugopātmā- namatrasto ; bheje dharmamanāturaḥ ; agṛdhnurādade sorthān ; asaktaḥ sukhamanvabhūt ;—' Though unterrified, he guarded himself ; though untroubled, he had recourse to righteous- ness ; though not greedy, he received wealth ; and though unattached, he enjoyed pleasures;' [where the self-guarding is predicated with reference to the fact of the king being unterrified and so forth, which justifies the compounding of the negative particle.] (16) The following is an example of 'repugnant sugges- tion',— 'sudhā.................. akāryamitra.................varṇayāmahe' 'What shall I say of him who is a disinterested friend, his conduct being as pure as the rays of the moon.'

182 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA अत्र ‘कार्यं विना मित्रम्’ इति विवक्षितम् ‘अकार्ये मित्रम् इति’ तु प्रतीतिः । यथा वा चिरकालपरिप्राप्तलोचनानन्ददायिनः । कान्ता कान्तस्य सहसा विदधाति गलग्रहम् ।। १६६।। अत्र ‘कण्ठग्रहम्’ इति वाच्यम् । यथा वा न त्रस्तं यदि नाम भूतकरुणासंतानशान्तात्मनः तेन व्यारुजता धनुर्भगवतो देवादभवानीपतेः । तत्पुत्रस्तु मदान्धतारकवधाद्विश्वस्य दत्तोत्सवः स्कन्दः स्कन्द इव प्रियोहमथ वा शिष्यः कथं विस्मृतः ।। १६७।। Here the sense meant to be conveyed by the word ‘akāryamitram’ is that he is friendly without any selfish motive—a disinterested friend ; whereas the word has also the other (repugnant) signification—that ‘he is a mitra, a companion, an associate, in akārya, evil deeds.’ Another example— ‘Chirakāla.............. ..................galagraham’ ‘Meeting after a long time her lover rejoicing her eyes, the loving girl suddenly offers him her embrace.’ Here the right word to use would have been ‘Kaṇṭha- graham’, ‘falling on his neck’. [The word that is used, however, ‘galagraham’, is better known as the name of a particular disease of the neck, and as such it has a most repugnant implication in the present context.] Another example— ‘Na trastam........ ....................bhavānīpateḥ ........................vismṛtaḥ.’ ‘When Rāma broke the bow of the husband of Bha- vānī, he did not fear that God himself, because his heart

CHAPTER VII 183 अत्र भवानीपतिशब्दो भवान्याः पत्यन्तरे प्रतीतिं करोति । यथा वा गोरपि यद्वाहनतां प्राप्तवतः सोपि गिरिसुतासिंहः । सविधे निरहंकारः पायाद्वः सोम्बिकारमणः ॥१६८॥ अत्राम्बिकारमण इति विरुद्धां धियमुत्पादयति ॥ ‘श्रुतिकटु’ समासगतं यथा is quiescent through his mercy on all living creatures ; the son of that God, Skanda, also, was the source of joy to the universe by reason of his having killed the haughty demon Tāraka (and hence he also could not be feared) ; but how is it that he did not think of myself, the disciple of the God Śiva, and as dear to him as his son Skanda ?’ Here the word ‘bhavānīpati’, literally meaning ‘the husband of Bhava’s wife’ (‘bhavānī’ meaning the ‘wife of Bhava’ another name for Shiva,) has the repugnant signification that the Goddess had a husband other than Shiva, the God spoken of. Another example— ‘Gorapi.......................ambikāramaṇaḥ’ ‘May Ambikā’s husband protect you,—he near whom even Gaurī’s lion becomes freed from all ill-feeling towards the bull that is used as a conveyance by that God.’ Here the word ‘ambikāramaṇaḥ’ has a repugnant signification (its literal meaning ‘one who enjoys the company of ‘Ambikā’, Mother). [Having dealt with the defects found in compounds only, the author proceeds to deal with the other defects described before, the ‘disagreeable to the ear’ and the rest which are held to occur in single words as also in compounds.] But he gives an example of only one of them, the ‘disagreeable to the ear,’ as occurring in a compound—

184 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA सा दूरे च सुधासान्द्रतरङ्गितविलोचना । बर्हिनिह्रादिनार्होयं कालश्च समुपागतः ॥१६९॥ एवमन्यदपि ज्ञेयम् ।। अपास्य च्युतसंस्कारमसमर्थं निरर्थकम् । वाक्येपि दोषाः सन्त्येते पदस्यांशेपि केचन ।। ५२ ।। केचन न पुनः सर्वे । क्रमेणोदाहरणम् सोध्यैष्ट वेदांस्त्रिदशानयष्ट पितॄनताप्सीत्सममंस्त बन्धून् । व्यजेष्ट षड्वर्गमरंस्त नीतौ समूलघातं न्यवधीदरींश्च ।।१७०।। ‘ Sā dūre.................................. Barhinirhrādanārhoyaṁ.....gataḥ ’ ‘ Far away is she of the lovely and graceful glances, and here has arrived the season resounding with the cry of the peacocks !’ [Here the compound in the second line is harsh-sound- ing]. The other defects (as occurring in compounds) may be similarly exemplified. 51. Excepting (a) ‘ lack of correctness’, (b) ‘ incapability of giving sense ’ and (c) ‘ uselessness ’—these (aforesaid) defects occur in a sentence also; and some of them in parts of words as well. 52. ‘ Some of them ’,—not all. The following are the examples in due order— (1) [The sentence ‘ disagreeable to the ear ’]— ‘ Sodhyaiṣṭa vedāṁstridaśānayaṣṭa ‘ Pitṝnatārpsīt samamaṁsta bandhūn ‘ Vyajeṣṭa ṣaḍvargamaraṁsta nītau ‘ Samūlaghātaṁ nyavadhīdarīṁshcha ’. ‘ He studied the Vedas, offered sacrifices to the Gods and oblations to the Pitṛs, honoured his friends, subjuga- ted the ‘ sixfold group ’ (of Desire, Anger, Avarice, Delu-

CHAPTER VII 185 स रातु वो दुश्च्यवनो भावुकानां परंपराम् । अनेडमूकताद्यैश्च द्यतु दोषैरसंमतान् ॥१७१॥ अत्र दुश्च्यवन इन्द्रः अनेडमूको मूकबधिरः ॥ सायकसहायबाहोर्मकरध्वजनियमितक्षमाधिपतेः । अब्जरुचिभास्वरस्ते भातितरामवनिप श्लोकः ॥१७२॥ sion, Pride and Envy), took delight in statesmanship, and rooted out his enemies’. [Though in most cases cited as exemplifying the defects as occurring in a sentence the defects are actually found to lie in words only,—as here the harshness lies in the words ‘adhyaiṣṭa’, ‘ayaṣṭa’ and so forth,—yet the distinction is justified on the ground that where the defect lies in a single word in the sentence, it is regarded as occurring in the word, while where it occurs in more than one word, it is taken as occurring in the sentence.] (2) [ The ‘unconventional’]— ‘Sa rātu vo dushchyavano bhāvukānāṁ paraṁparām ‘Aneḍamūkatādyaishcha dyatu doṣairasammatān’. ‘May Indra bring you a continuity of prosperity ! May he strike your enemies with deafness, dumbness and other disabilities !’ Here the word ‘dushchyavana’ for Indra, and ‘aneḍa- mūka’ for ‘deaf and dumb’, are such as are not used, are ‘unconventional.’ (3) [ The ‘suppressed meaning’]— ‘Sāyakasahāyabāhormakaradhvajaniyamitakṣamādhipateḥ ‘Abjaruchibhāsvaraste bhātitarāmavanipa shlokaḥ’ ‘You, O King, who are the master of the Ocean- bounded Earth, and have the sword for your companion, have your fame shining resplendent like the moon’. Here the words ‘sāyaka’, ‘makaradhvaja’, ‘kṣamā’, ‘abja’ and ‘shloka’ have been used in the sense, respec-

186 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA अत्र सायकादयः शब्दाः खड्गाब्धिभूचन्द्रयशःपर्यायाः शराद्यर्थतया प्रसिद्धाः ।। कुविन्दस्त्वं तावत्पटयसि गुणग्राममभितो यशो गायन्त्येते दिशि दिशि च नग्नास्तव विभो । शरज्ज्योत्स्नागौरस्फुटविकटसर्वाङ्गसुभगा तथापि त्वत्कीर्तिर्भ्रमति विगताच्छादनमिह ॥१७३॥ अत्र कुविन्दादिशब्दोऽर्थान्तरं प्रतिपादयन्नुपश्लोक्यमानस्य तिरस्कारं व्यनक्तीत्यनुचितार्थः । tively, of sword, ocean, earth, moon, and fame,—while they are better known as having the sense of arrow, love-god, forgiveness, lotus and verse, respectively [and hence the desired signification of all these words is ‘suppressed’]. (4) [‘Improper signification’] Kuvindastvaṁ tāvat paṭayasi guṇagrāmamabhito Yasho gāyantyete dishi dishi cha nagnāstava vibho Sharajjyotsnāgaurasphuṭavikaṭasarvāṅgasubhagā Tathāpi tvatkīrtirbhramati vigatāchchhādanamiha’. ‘As Lord of the Earth, you are spreading on all sides hosts of good qualities ; these bards are singing your fame on all sides ; and yet thy renown, beautiful and resplen- dent as the autumnal moon, wanders about unfurled.’ Here there is an ‘improper signification,’ inasmuch as some of the words—e. g. ‘kuvinda’ [‘paṭayasi’, ‘nagna’, ‘yasha’] have a second meaning which indicates disrespect towards the person described. [‘Kuvinda’ means a weaver, ‘guṇam paṭayasi’ means ‘weave yarn, ‘nagna’ means naked, ‘yashaḥ is capable of being read or construed as ‘ayaśaḥ,’ so that the person addressed comes to be described as a weaver weaving cloth and so forth.]

CHAPTER VII 187 प्राभ्रभ्राड्विष्णुधामाप्य विषमाश्र्वः करोत्ययम् । निद्रां सहस्रपर्णानां पलायनपरायणाम् ।।१७४।। अत्र प्राभ्रभ्राड्विष्णुधामविषमाश्र्वनिद्रापर्णशब्दाः प्रकृष्टजलद- गगनसप्ताश्र्वसंकोचदलानामवाचकाः ।। भूपतेरुपसर्पन्ती कम्पना वामलोचना । तत्तत्प्रहरणोत्साहवती मोहनमादधौ ।।१७५।। अत्रोपसर्पणप्रहरणमोहनशब्दा व्रीडादायित्वादश्लीलाः । तेन्यैर्वान्तं समश्नन्ति परोत्सर्गं च भुञ्जते । इतरार्थग्रहे येषां कवीनां स्यात्प्रवर्तनम् ।।१७६।। (5) [The ‘ Inexpressive ’]— ‘ Prābhrabhrāḍ viṣṇudhāmāpya viṣamāshvaḥ karotyayam Nidrāṁ sahasraparṇānāṁ palāyanaparāyaṇām. ‘ Having reached the beautifully clouded sky, the sun puts to flight the sleep of the lotuses.’ Here the words ‘ prābhrabhrāṭ,’ viṣṇudhāma,’ ‘viṣamāshva ’, ‘ nidrā ’ and ‘ parṇa ’ have been used in the sense, res- pectively, of ‘ beautiful cloud ’, ‘ sky ’ ‘ sun ’, ‘ closing ’ and ‘ petal ’,—while, as a matter of fact they do not ex- press or denote these things. (6) [Indecorous—shameful]— ‘ Bhūpaterupasarpantī kampanā vāmalochanā Tattatpraharaṇotsāhavatī mohanamādadhau ’. ‘The angry army of the king brought about the stupefac- tion (of the enemy) by marching and energetically striking’. Here the words ‘ upasarpantī ’, ‘ praharaṇa ’ and ‘ moha- na ’ give rise to feelings of shame by reason of their second meanings (women in love, embraces and passionate love, respectively), and are ‘ therefore ’ ‘ indecorous ’. [Indecorous—Disgusting]— Tenyairvāntam samashnanti···parotsargaṁcha bhuñjate.

188 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA अत्र वान्तोत्सर्गप्रवर्तनशब्दा जुगुप्सादायिनः । पितृवसतिमहं व्रजामि तां सह परिवारजनेन यत्र मे । भवति सपदि पावकान्वये हृदयमशेषितशोकशल्यकम् ॥१७७॥ अत्र पितृगृहमित्यादौ विवक्षिते श्मशानादिप्रतीतावमङ्गलार्थत्वम् । सुरालयोल्लासपरः प्राप्तपर्याप्तकम्पनः । मार्गणप्रवणो भास्वद्भूतिरेष विलोक्यताम् ॥१७८॥ ‘Those who are prone to making use of the ideas of other poets eat out of other people’s vomitings and slutt- ings.’ Here the words ‘vomiting’, ‘slutting’ and ‘excret- ing’ (which is another meaning of pravartana) are produc- tive of disgust. [Indecorous—Inauspicious]— ‘Pitṛvasatimahaṁ vrajāmi tāṁ saha parivārajanena yatra me ‘Bhavati sapadi pāvakānvaye hṛdayamaśeṣitaśokaśalyakam’. ‘With all my family I shall repair to my father’s house, where in the purifying family, my heart shall have all its darts of grief removed.’ Here the words ‘pitṛvasati’ (and ‘pāvaka’) intended to convey the meaning of ‘father’s house’ (and ‘purify- ing’), signify also the crematorium (and fire), and are for that reason ‘inauspicious.’ (7) [The ‘Ambiguous’]— ‘Surālayollāsaparaḥ prāptaparyāptakampanaḥ Mārgaṇapravaṇo bhāsvadbhūtireṣa vilokyatām.’ It is doubtful whether (a) the words ‘surālaya’, ‘kampana’, ‘mārgaṇa’ and ‘bhūti’ are meant to signify ‘abode of the gods’, ‘army’, ‘arrow’ and ‘glory’ [in which case the passage would mean—‘Look at this king, who is bent upon Heaven, is equipped with sufficient

CHAPTER VII 189 अत्र किं सुरादिशब्दा देवसेनाशरविभूत्यर्थाः किं मदिराद्यर्थाः इति संदेहः ॥ तस्याधिमात्रोपायस्य तीव्रसंवेगताजुषः । दृढभूमिः प्रियप्राप्तौ यत्नः स फलितः सखे ॥१७९॥ अत्राधिमात्रोपायादयः शब्दा योगशास्त्रमात्रप्रयुक्तत्वादप्रतीताः ॥ ताम्बूलभृतगल्लोयं भल्लं जल्पति मानुषः । करोति खादनं पानं सदैव तु यथा तथा ॥१८०॥ army, clever in the use of arrows and of resplendent glory '], or (b) ' wine-shop ', ' trembling ', ' begging ' and ' destruction ' [in which case the meaning would be— ' Look at this man, ever bent upon wine-shops, constantly trembling, efficient in begging and with destruction facing him ']. (8) [The ' Unintelligible ']— ' Tasyādhimātropāyasya Tīvrasaṁvegatajuṣaḥ Dṛḍhabhūmiḥ priyaprāptau Yatnaḥ sa phalitaḥ sakhe '. ' The powerful efforts of the man have succeeded in helping him to attain what he desired,—he having em- ployed the methods (of self-control and the rest) conducive to true wisdom, and practising intense renunciation '. Here the words ' adhimātra ' (' tīvrasaṁvega ' and ' dṛḍhabhūmi ') are used in their technical sense found in Yoga literature only, and as such they are not intelligible '. (9) [' The Vulgar ']— ' Tāmbūlabhṛtagalloyaṁ bhallaṁ jalpati mānuṣaḥ ' ' Karoti khādanaṁ pānaṁ sadaiva tu yathā tathā '. ' Having his cheeks filled with betel-leaves, and eating and drinking always, he goes on talking rapidly'.

190 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA अत्र गल्लादयः शब्दाः ग्राम्याः ॥ वस्त्रवैदूर्यचरणैः क्षतसत्त्वरजःपरा । निष्कम्पा रचिता नेत्रयुद्धं वेदय सांप्रतम् ॥१८४॥ अत्राम्बररत्नपादैः क्षततमा अचला भूः कृता नेत्रद्वन्द्वं बोधयेति नेयार्थता ॥ The words ‘galla’ (and ‘bhalla’) are ‘vulgar’. (10) [‘Whose meaning is to be guessed’] ‘Vastravaiḍūryacharaṇaiḥ Kṣatasattvarajaḥparāḥ Niṣkampā rachitā netra— Yuddhaṁ vedaya sāmpratam’. ‘This unshaking thing (i. e. the earth) has its third besides Harmony and Energy (i. e. Darkness) dispelled by the feet (i. e. rays) of the emerald (i. e. gem) of the vastra (i. e. ‘ambara’, viz : sky) [i. e. the sun] ; so open now the battle (i. e. pair) of your eyes’. The meaning intended to be conveyed here is that ‘the sun having dispelled darkness from the earth, the eyes should be opened’; and this can only be guessed out of the words used. [(a) ‘Vastra’ has another synonym in ‘ambara’, which means the sky,—‘vaidūrya’ denotes the emerald, which is one kind of gem,— ‘charaṇa’ is synonymous with ‘pada’, which also means ‘rays’,— hence the compound ‘vastravaiḍūryacharaṇa’ the rays of the gem of the sky i.e. the sun;—‘Sattva’, Rajas and Tamas are the three cosmic attributes,—so that the third besides Rajas and Sattva is Tamas, which denotes darkness,—so that the compound ‘kṣatasattvarajaḥparāḥ’ means ‘whose darkness has been dispelled;’—‘niṣkampā’ meaning unshaking, is used for the immovable Earth ;—‘yuddha’ is synony- mous with ‘dvandva’, which also means ‘pair’,—hence the compound ‘netrayuddham’ means ‘pair of eyes’.]

CHAPTER VII 191 धम्मिल्लस्य न कस्य प्रेक्ष्य निकामं कुरङ्गशावाक्ष्याः । रज्यत्यपूर्वबन्धव्युत्पत्तेर्मानसं शोभाम् ।।१८२।। अत्र धम्मिल्लस्य शोभां प्रेक्ष्य कस्य मानसं न रज्यतीति संबन्धे क्लिष्टत्वम् ।। न्यक्कारो ह्ययमेव मे यदरयस्तत्राप्यसौ तापसः सोऽप्यत्रैव निहन्ति राक्षसकुलं जीवत्यहो रावणः । धिग्धिकू शक्रजितं प्रबोधितवता किं कुम्भकर्णेन वा स्वर्गग्रामटिकाविलुण्ठनवृथोच्छूनैः किमेभिर्भुजैः ।।१८३।। (11) [The ‘obscure’.]— ‘Dhammillasya na kasya prekṣya nikāmaṁ kuraṅgashāvakṣyāḥ Rajyatyapūrvabandhavyutpattermānasaṁ shobhām’. ‘Whose heart does not become enamoured on seeing the loveliness of the beautifully-braided locks of the fawn- eyed one?’ The syntactical connection intended here— ‘Dhammillasya shobhāṁ prekṣya kasya mānasaṁ na rajyati’,—is difficult to get at, ‘obscure [by reason of the order in which the words are placed]. (12) [‘The predicative factor not discriminated’]— ‘Nyakkārohyayameva me yadarayastatrāpyasau tāpasaḥ ............................................................................ Svargagrāmaṭikāviluṇṭhanavṛthochchhūnaiḥ kimebhirbhujaiḥ’. ‘It is a disgrace that I have enemies; and even that an ascetic, who is slaughtering the host of demons; and that at this very place; and yet Rāvaṇa is living; woe, woe, to Meghanāda! What has come out of Kumbhakarṇa having been awakened. What too has been the use of these my arms that have become uselessly fattened by plundering the tiny hamlet of heaven?’

192 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA अत्र 'अयमेव न्यक्कारः' इति वाच्यम् । उच्छूनत्वमात्रं चानुवाद्यम्, न वृथात्वविशेषितम् । अत्र च शब्दरचना विपरीता कृतेति वाक्यस्यैव दोषो न वाक्यार्थस्य । यथा वा अपाङ्गसंसर्गि तरङ्गितं दृशोर्भ्रुवोररालान्तविलासि वेल्लितम् । विसारि रोमाञ्चनकञ्चुकं तनोस्तनोति यो सौ सुभगे तवागतः॥ ॥१८४॥ What is intended is that 'that I have enemies is itself a disgrace', and the proper order of words would be 'ayameva nyakkāraḥ'; and secondly, what should have been merely referred to, is the mere fattening of the arms, for the purpose of predicating its uselessness, which should not have been made a mere qualifying adjunct in the com- pound. [The meaning intended is that the fattening of my arms has been of no use; being of no use, therefore, being the predicated factor, should have stood by itself, while it has been made a subordinate adjunct by being placed in the middle of a compound.] Inasmuch as the fault here lies in the order of the words being reversed, the defect is attributed to the sen- tence, not to the meaning of the sentence. Another example (of 'non-discrimination of the pre- dicative factor')— 'Apāṅgasaṁsargi taraṅgitaṁ dṛśorbhruvorarālāntavilāsi- vellitam Visāri romāñchanakañchukaṁ tanostanoti yosau subhage . tavāgataḥ' 'Here has come—one who brings a tremor to your eyes, an elegant curvature to your eye-brows and a bodice of thrilling hairs to your body'.

CHAPTER VII 193 अत्र योसाविति पदद्वयमनुवाद्यमात्रप्रतीतिकृत् । तथाहि—प्रक्रान्तप्रसिद्धानुभूतार्थविषयस्तच्छब्दो यच्छब्दो- पादानं नापेक्षते । क्रमेणोदाहरणम् । कातर्यं केवला नीतिः शौर्यं श्वापदचेष्टितम् । अतः सिद्धिं समेताभ्यामुभाभ्यामन्वियेष सः ॥१८५॥ द्वयं गतं संप्रति शोचनीयतां समागमप्रार्थनया कपालिनः । कला च सा कान्तिमती कलावतस्त्वमस्य लोकस्य च नेत्रकौमुदी ॥१८६॥ Here the two pronouns ‘yaḥ and asau’ only serve to point out the person as merely referred to [and the predicative pronoun ‘he’, ‘saḥ’, is wanting]. It is the pronoun ‘tat’, ‘that’, which, standing as it does for (a) what has been spoken of before, or (b) what is well-known, or (c) what has been already seen or heard of, does not require the corresponding pronoun ‘yat’, ‘which’ or ‘what’; as for example— (a) ‘Kātaryaṁ..................saḥ’.—‘Regarding pure statesmanship as a weakness, and sheer valour to be beast- like, he always sought to attain success by both these means’;—[Here the pronoun ‘saḥ’, ‘he’, stands for the king spoken of before, and hence the corresponding ‘who’ is not required] ;— (b) ‘Dvayaṁ......kalā cha sā......kaumudī—‘By seeking to be associated with the God of the Begging Bowl, two things have become objects of concern—that resplendent digit of the moon and thyself, who art like moonlight to the eyes of this world ;’—[Here the pronoun ‘sā’ re- ferring to the well-known digit of the moon on Śiva’s forehead, does not require the corresponding ‘yā’] ;— 13

194 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA उत्कम्पिनी भयपरिस्खलितांशुकान्ता ते लोचने प्रतिदिशं विधुरे क्षिपन्ती । क्रूरेण दारुणतया सहसैव दग्धा धूमान्धितेन दहनेन न वीक्षितासि ॥१८७॥ यच्छब्दस्तूत्तरवाक्यानुगतत्वेनोपात्तः सामर्थ्यात्पूर्ववाक्यानु- गतस्य तच्छब्दस्योपादानं नापेक्षते । यथा साधु चन्द्रमसि पुष्करैः कृतं मीलितं यदभिरामताधिके । उद्यता जयिनि कामिनीमुखे तेन साहसममुष्ठितं पुनः ॥१८८॥ प्रागुपात्तस्तु यच्छब्दस्तच्छब्दोपादानं विना साकाङ्क्षः । (c) ‘Utkampinī……te lochane……..vīkṣitāsi’ ;—‘Tremb- ling and having the clothing gliding off through fear, and casting those timid glances all round, thou wert burnt by the cruel fire blinded by smoke, and wert no longer seen’ ;—[Here the pronoun ‘te’, ‘those’, standing for the glances that the speaker has seen before, does not stand in need of the corresponding ‘ye’]. The pronoun ‘yat’, (who or which) also, when occurring in the latter of two correlated clauses, does not require the corresponding ‘tat’ in the preceding clause, because by reason of its inherent power (it always implies a pre- ceding ‘tat’) ; as we find in the following example— ‘Sādhu…yadabhirāmatādhike…punaḥ ;’—‘On the rising of the lovelier moon the lotuses did well that they closed themselves ; but this moon has behaved most arrogantly when he has risen even on the appearance of the face of the lovely woman, which is far superior to her’. [Here ‘yat mīlitam’ implies the corresponding ‘tat sādhu kṛtam’, and hence the actual presence of this latter pronoun is not necessary in the preceding clause]. But in cases when the pronoun ‘yat’ occurs in the

CHAPTER VII 195 यथा अत्रैव श्लोके आद्यपादयोर्व्यत्यासे । द्वयोरुपादाने तु निरा- काङ्क्षत्वं प्रसिद्धम् । अनुपादानेऽपि सामर्थ्यात्क्वचिद्द्वयमपि गम्यते । यथा ये नाम केचिदिह नः प्रथयन्त्यवज्ञां जानन्ति ते किमपि तान् प्रति नैष यत्नः । उत्पत्स्यतेस्ति मम कोपि समानधर्मा कालो ह्ययं निरवधिर्विपुला च पृथ्वी ॥१८९॥ preceding clause, it is always deficient (wanting in essen- tials), if the corresponding ‘tat’ is not actually present ; as for example in the verse just quoted, if we reverse the order of the two clauses [reading ‘militam yadabhirāmatā- dhike sādhu chandramasi puṣkaraiḥ kṛtam’] we find that it gives no sense. (a) In cases where both the pronouns are used, of course, there is nothing wanting, as every one knows ; and (b) in certain cases, even when neither is present, both are implied by the force of the sentence. e. g. (a) ‘Ye nāma kechidiha naḥ prathayantyavajñāṁ Jānanti te kimapi tān prati naiṣa yatnaḥ ; (b) Utpatsyatesti mama kopi samānadharmā Kālo hyayaṁ niravadhirvipulā cha pṛthvī’. ‘Who would deride me in this attempt, know some- thing perhaps ,—for them this effort of mine is not inten- ded ; some one possessed of qualities similar to mine may yet be born,—or he may even be living now,—time is interminable and the earth immense’. Here in the second half both ‘yat’ and ‘tat’ are under- stood, the meaning intended being ‘the person who will be born, for him is this mark of mine meant ’.

196 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA अत्र य उत्पत्स्यते तं प्रतीति । एवं च तच्छब्दानुपादानेत्र साकाङ्क्षत्वम् । न चासाविति तच्छब्दार्थमाह । असौ मरुच्चुम्बितचारुकेसरः प्रसन्नताराधिपमण्डलाग्रणीः । वियुक्तरामातुरदृष्टिवीक्षितो वसन्तकालो हनुमानिवागतः॥१९०॥ अत्र हि न तच्छब्दार्थप्रतीतिः । [The first half of the verse is an example of this correct use of both ‘yat’ and ‘tat’ and the second half that of the correct suppression of both.] [Having thus discussed the correct use of the relative pronouns ‘yat’ and ‘tat’, the author takes up the thread of his remarks on the verse ‘apāṅgasaṁsargi’ &c.’, see above]. Thus in the above-mentioned verse, the ab- sence of the pronoun ‘tat’ causes a deficiency, and leaves something wanting to complete the sentence.—It cannot be said that the pronoun ‘asau’ has the same sense at ‘tat’; because in such sentences as the following we do not find the word ‘asau’ conveying the sense of ‘tat’— ‘Asau maruchchumbita ......āgataḥ’ ‘Like Hanumān, (a) having his beautiful locks kissed by the Wind-god (his father), (b) the leader of the army of the Lord of Tārā (Sugrīva), and (c) eagerly looked up to by Rāma, separated from his wife,—has this spring- time season arrived, (a) having its flower-pollen wafted by the breeze, (b) beautified by the bright moon, and (c) eagerly looked upon by women separated from their lovers.’ In fact if the pronoun ‘asau’ conveyed the same sense as ‘tat’, then the use of the pronoun ‘sa’ (the masculine

CHAPTER VII 197 प्रतीतौ वा करवालकरालदोः सहायो युधि योऽसौ विजयार्जुनैकमल्लः । यदि भूपतिना स तत्र कार्ये विनियुज्येत ततः कृतं कृतं स्यात् ॥१९१॥ अत्र स इत्यस्यानर्थक्यं स्यात् । अथ योविकल्पमिदमर्थमण्डलं पश्यतीश निखिलं भवद्वपुः । आत्मपक्षपरिपूरिते जगत्यस्य नित्यसुखिनः कुतो भयम् ॥१९२॥ nominative form of ‘tat’) in the following example would be entirely superfluous :— ‘Karabāla......yosau...... ‘Yadi........sa tatra......syāt’ ‘If this person, who is the only equal of Arjuna, atten- ded by his sword, were employed by the King in this work, then would it be perfectly accomplished’. It might be argued that the pronoun ‘asau’ in the passage in question may be taken in the sense of ‘tat’ (even though it may not be quite synonymous with it) ; just as we find, in the following passage the pronoun ‘asya’ (the genitive form of ‘idam’) used in the sense of ‘tat’ (‘that’, though its ordinary meaning is ‘this’]— ‘yovikalpa...........asya.........bhayam’—‘For one who perceives, without any doubt, your body in all this world, where is there any fear in this universe, filled as it is with his own self ?’ Our answer to this is that if in the passage in question the pronoun ‘asau’ were really intended to convey the sense of ‘tat’, (as ‘idam’ is in the passage just quoted), then it would have been used in a clause other than the one in which the pronoun ‘yat’ (‘yaḥ’) occurs,—as in the passage just quoted, ‘asya’ occurs in a separate clause,—

198 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA इतीदंशब्दवददःशब्दस्तच्छब्दार्थमभिधत्ते इति उच्यते। तर्ह्यत्रैव वाक्यान्तरे उपादानमर्हति न तत्रैव। यच्छब्दस्य हि निकटे स्थितः प्रसिद्धिं परामृशति। यथा यत्तदूर्जितमत्युग्रं क्षात्रं तेजोस्य भूपतेः। दीव्यताक्षैस्तदानेन नूनं तदपि हारितम् ॥१९३॥ इत्यत्र तच्छब्दः। ननु कथम् कल्याणानां त्वमसि महसां भाजनं विश्वमूर्ते धुर्यां लक्ष्मीमथ मयि भृशं धेहि देव प्रसीद। यद्यत्पापं प्रतिजहि जगन्नाथ नम्रस्य तन्मे भद्रं भद्रं वितर भगवन् भूयसे मङ्गलाय ॥१९४॥ and not in the same clause (as it does in the passage in question, where we have the two pronouns appearing in juxtaposition, ‘yosau’). In fact when pronouns like ‘tat’ and ‘adas’, appear in close juxtaposition to ‘yat’, they signify the well-known character of the thing spoken of [and they are not used predicatively];—e. g. in the passage—‘yattadūrjita.......hāritam’—‘Even that well- known virile and glorious warlike spirit of the king was lost in the gambling,’—where the pronoun ‘tat’ signifies the well-known character of the ‘spirit.’ It might be argued that, if such be the rule (that the pronoun ‘yat’ in one clause must be followed by a corres- ponding ‘tat’ in a subsequent clause), then how is it that in the following passage, though the preceding clause contains the pronoun ‘yat’ repeated twice—‘yat-yat’— the corresponding ‘tat’ occurs only once in the subse- quent clause—‘Kalyāṇāṁ.....yadyat pāpaṁ......tanme...... maṅgalāya’—‘Oh Thou of form universal! Thou art

CHAPTER VII 199 अत्र यद्यदित्युक्त्वा तन्मे इत्युक्तम्। उच्यते--यद्यदिति येन केनचिद्रूपेण स्थितं सर्वात्मकं वस्वाक्षिप्तं तथाभूतमेव तच्छब्देन परामृश्यते। यथा वा किं लोभेन विलङ्घितः स भरतो येनतदेवं कृतं मात्रा स्त्रीलघुतां गता किमथ वा मातैव मे मध्यमा। मिथ्यैतन्मम चिन्तितं द्वितयमप्यार्यानुजोसौ गुरु- र्माता तातकलत्रमित्यनुचितं मन्ये विधात्रा कृतम् ।।१९५।। the receptacle of the most auspicious effulgence ! Be pleased to ordain for me the highest prosperity ! O Lord of the world ! destroy whatever sin there is in me,—I bow down to thee ! O Blessed Lord ! bestow upon me for my welfare, everything that is good !' Our answer to this is that 'yad—yat' stands for any- thing and everything that exists, that is the entire world regarded as a single entity, and it is this single entity that is referred to in the subsequent clause by the pronoun 'tat' [so that there is perfect co-ordination]. [Finding that the example of the defect cited by him above has given rise to difficulties, the author cites another example of the defect, whereby the predicative factor is not discriminated.] Kiṁ lobhena...āryānujosau......tātakalatram...kṛtam'. ‘ Was Bharata beset with greed that he got this done through his mother ? Or , did my second mother herself succumb to the meanness common among women ?— Both these ideas of mine are wrong ; as he (Bharata) is the younger brother of my noble brother, and she, my revered mother, is my father’s wife. So I think that this improper deed is the work of Providence itself.’ Here stress is meant to be laid upon the terms ‘ ārya ’ and ‘ tāta ’ [the idea being that ‘ it is of my noble brother

200 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA अत्रार्यस्येति तातस्येति च वाच्यम् । न त्वनयोः समासे गुणीभावः कार्यः । एवं समासान्तरेष्वप्युदाहार्यम् ।। विरुद्धमतिकृद्यथा श्रितक्षमा रक्तभुवः शिवालिङ्गितमूर्तयः । विग्रहक्षपणेनाद्य शेरते ते गतासुखाः ।।१९६।। अत्र क्षमादिगुणयुक्ताः सुखमासते इति विवक्षिते हता इति विरुद्धा प्रतीतिः ।। Rāma, that Bharata is the younger brother ;’ and ‘it is of my father that Kaikeyī is the wife,’ and ‘it is not possible for a brother of Rāma or for the wife of my father to do anything wrong’], [and hence these two being the pre- dicative factors] the proper expressions should have been ‘āryasyānujosau’ ‘tātasya kalatram’; and it was not right to make both these the subordinate factors of compounds. Similar examples may be cited of this defect occurring in other compounds. (13) The following is an example of ‘repugnant im- plication.’— ‘Shritakṣamā raktabhuvaḥ ‘Shivāliṅgitamūrtayaḥ ‘Vigrahakṣapaṇenādya ‘Sherate te gatāsukhāḥ’ ‘They, having recourse to forgiveness, with the world attached to them, and their bodies embraced by all that is good, lie down, with all their troubles gone through the removal of all quarrels.’ Here the meaning intended is that ‘persons of forgiving nature remain happy’ (as translated above), but the words chosen have another signification, which is entirely repug- nant to this [‘Lying down on the ground (shṛtakṣamāḥ),