काव्यप्रकाश (आचार्य मम्मट - सम्पूर्ण १० उल्लास सटीक)

CHAPTER, VII 209 अत्र हि विकटवर्णत्वं दीर्घसमासत्वं चोचितम् । यथा प्रागप्राप्तनिशुम्भशांभवधनुर्द्वेधाविधाविर्भवत्- क्रोधप्रेरितभीमभार्गवभुजस्तम्भापविद्धः क्षणात् । उज्जवालः परशुर्भवत्वशिथिलस्त्वत्कण्ठपीठातिथि- र्येनानेन जगत्सु खण्डपरशुर्देवो हरः ख्याप्यते ॥२०९॥ यत्र तु न क्रोधस्तत्र चतुर्थपादाभिधाने तथैव शब्दप्रयोगः ॥ Droṇa is going to do precisely what was done by Paraśu- rāma '.— What would have been in consonance with the senti- ment depicted would be [not the soft letters and simple words used, but] harsh sounding letters and long com- pounds ; as in the following— ‘ Prāgaprāptaniśumbhaśāmbhava- dhanurdvedhāvidhāvirbhavat- Krodhapreritabhīmabhārgavabhuja- stambhāpaviddhaḥ kṣaṇāt Ujjvālaḥ parashurbhavatvashithilas- tvatkaṇṭhapīṭhātithir- Yenānena jagatsu khaṇḍaparashur- devo haraḥ khyāpyate ’. ‘ May this blazing and powerful axe of mine, by reason whereof the god Shiva is known as ‘the god of the broken axe,’ (He having bestowed a part of his axe to me), be the guest of the back of your neck,—being wielded by my pillar-like terrific arms urged into action by the wrath excited by the breaking of the ever unbent bow of Śiva ’;— [We find long compounds and harsh-sounding words] ; but in the last quarter of the verse, where no anger is expressed (but only a deferential reference to the God Shiva), we have words suited to the sentiment.

210 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA (२) उपहत उत्त्वं प्राप्तो (३) लुप्तो वा विसर्गो यत्र तत् । यथा धीरो विनीतो निपुणो वराकारो नृपोत्र सः । यस्य भृत्या बलोत्सिक्ता भक्ता बुद्धिप्रभावितः ॥२१०॥ (४) विसंधि संधेर्वैरूप्यम् विश्लेषोश्लीलत्वं कष्टत्वं च । तत्राद्यं यथा राजन्विभान्ति भवतश्चरितानि तानि इन्दोर्द्युतिं दधति यानि रसातलेन्तः । धीदोर्बले अतितते उचितानुवृत्ती आतन्वती विजयसंपदमेत्य भातः ॥२११॥ (2) and (3) The following is an example of the ‘visarga blunted’,—i. e., transformed into ‘o’,—as also of the ‘visarga deleted’— ‘Dhīro vinīto nipuṇo varākāro nṛpotra saḥ—(2) Yasya bhṛtyā balotsiktā bhaktā buddhiprabhāvitāḥ’—(3) ‘This king is dignified, modest, efficient and of hand- some presence ; his dependants are strong in intelligence, devoted to their master and proud of their strength.’ [In the first half the visarga is transformed into ‘o’ no less than five times; and in the second half it is deleted thrice.] (4) The ‘Cacophonous’ is that which involves a dis- cordant euphony,—this discordance manifesting itself in three ways : (a) in disjunction, (b) in indecorousness and (c) in harshness. (a) The following is an example of the euphony of discordant disjunction— ‘Rājan...tāni indor......dhīdorbale atitate uchitānuvṛttī ātanvatī.........bhātaḥ’...

CHAPTER VII 211 यथा वा तत उदित उदारहारहारिद्युतिरुच्चैरुदयाचलादिवेन्दुः ।। निजवंश उदात्तकान्तकान्तिर्बत मुक्तामणिवच्चकास्त्यनर्घः ।।२१२।। ‘ O King ! thy deeds shine resplendent even in the nethermost regions, resembling the sheen of the moon ; and the power of thy intellect and arms, functioning in the right manner, brings about thy victory and glory and shines in the world ’. [Here the disjunction between ‘tāni’ and ‘indoḥ’, between ‘bale’ and ‘atitate’ and ‘uchitānuvṛtti’ and ‘ātanvati’ even though gramma- tically correct, is highly discordant’.] Or in the following— ‘ Tata udita udārahāra......nijavaṁsha- .........udātta...........narghaḥ’. ‘ That great man of the exquisitely fascinating splen- dour rises resplendent in his family, resembling the pearl (appearing from the bamboo) ; and having his resplendence enhanced by the beautiful pearl-necklace, he resembles the moon (whose sheen is like that of the flawless pearl) ’. [Here the visarga is deleted twice after ‘tataḥ’ and ‘uditaḥ.] In this connection it has to be borne in mind that there are two conditions under which the disjunction in euphony is grammatically permissible,—in the first place, there is the very wide rule which makes all euphonious combination purely optional, and secondly in the case of the preceding word being a noun with a dual termination ending in the vowel ‘ī’ or ‘ū’, where according to ‘Pāṇini (1.1.11 and 6.1.125), no conjunction takes place. Now if the disjunc- tion in euphony is of the former kind, then even a single instance makes the sentence defective ; while if it belongs

212 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA संहितां न करोमीति स्वच्छया सकृदपि दोषः प्रगृह्यादिहेतुकत्वे त्वसकृत् ॥ वेगादुड्डीय गगने चलण्डामरचेष्टितः । अयमुत्तपते पत्री ततोत्रैव रुचिङ्कुरु ॥२१३॥ अत्र संधावश्लीलता ॥ उर्व्यसावत्र तर्वाली मर्वन्ते चार्ववस्थितिः । नात्रर्जु युज्यते गन्तुं शिरो नमय तन्मनाक् ॥२१४॥ (५) हतं लक्षणानुसरणेप्यश्रव्यम् । अप्राप्तगुरुभावान्तलघु रसान- नुगुणं च वृत्तं यत्र तत् हतवृत्तम् । क्रमेणोदाहरणम्-- to the latter class, then it renders the sentence defective if it occurs more than once. (b) ‘Vegā......chalaṇḍāmara.........ruchiṅkuru’ ‘This bird of unrestrained activity, flying in the sky with great force, finds it extremely hot ; so take your rest here.’ Here the euphonious combination (involved in the expressions ‘chalaṇḍāmara’ and ‘ruchiṅkuru’) lead to in- decorousness (in this that they give rise to sounds mani- festing the terms ‘laṇḍa’ and ‘chiṅku’ respectively, both of which are the names of certain private parts of the human body). (c) ‘Urvyasāvatra tarvālī marvante charvavasthitiḥ nātrārju............manāk’. ‘Hence on the outskirts of a sandy desert the ground is covered by a line of trees affording a nice resting place ; it is not right to go through it standing ; so just lower your head a little.’ [Here the euphonious combination becomes harsh.] (5) The ‘marred metre’ is of three kinds—(a) Though technically satisfying the formal conditions, it may be

CHAPTER VII 213 अमृतममृतं कः संदेहो मधून्यपि नान्यथा मधुरमधिकं चूतस्यापि प्रसन्नरसं फलम् । सकृदपि पुनर्मध्यस्थः सन् रसान्तरविज्जनो वदतु यदिहान्यत्स्वादु स्यात्प्रियादशनच्छदात् ॥२१५॥ अत्र ‘यदिहान्यत्स्वादु स्यात्’ इत्यश्रव्यम् । यथा वा जं परिहरिउं तीरइ मणअंपि ण सुन्दरत्तणगुणेण । अह णवरँ जस्स दोसो पडिपक्खेहिं पि पडिवण्णो ॥२१६॥ अत्र द्वितीयतृतीयगणौ सकारभकारौ । unpleasant to the ear, unmelodious,—(b) it may not have the last syllable of the foot elongated,—and (c) it may not be in harmony with the sentiment depicted. The following are the examples of each of these three. (a) ‘Amṛtam........vadatu yadihānyat svādu......chhadāt.’ What doubt is that nectar is really nectar; honey also is not otherwise ; the fruit of the mango also is very sweet and of pleasing flavour ; yet let any disinterested person, who is capable of appreciating the various kinds of flavours; say if anything in this world is sweeter than the lips of one’s beloved !’ In the fourth line the portion ‘yadihānyat svādu syāt’ (though formally correct) is not pleasant to the ear. Or again in the following— ‘Jaṁ pari........paḍivaṇṇo’. ‘That by reason of their very fascinating character affairs of love cannot be avoided is their one defect, which has been admitted even by their opponents’. Here the close proximity of the group of three letters ‘ha-ri-uṁ’—which is technically named ‘sa’ (i. e. the group of three in which, the first two letters are short and the third long),—to the next group, ‘tī—ra-i’—which is technically called ‘bha’ (i. e. one long letter followed by

214 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA विकसितसहकारतारहारिपरिमलगुञ्जितपुञ्जितद्विरेफः । नवकिसलयचारुचामरश्रीहरति मुनेरपि मानसं वसन्तः ॥२१७॥ अत्र हारिशब्दः । हारिप्रमुदितसौरभेति पाठो युक्तः । यथा वा अन्यास्ता गुणरत्नरोहणभुवो धन्या मृदन्यैव सा संभाराः खलु तेन्य एव विधिना यैरेष सृष्टो युवा । श्रीमत्कान्तिजुषां द्विषां करतलात् स्त्रीणां नितम्बस्थलात् दृष्टे यत्र पतन्ति मूढमनसामस्त्राणि वस्त्राणि च ॥२१८॥ two short ones),—is unmelodious [as has been recognised by standard writers on metrics also]. (b) ‘Vikasitasahakāratārahāriparimala........................ ..............................................vasantaḥ’. ‘The spring bearing the fascinating fragrance of the blossoming mangoes, having swarms of black bees humm- ing about, and beautified by chowries in the shape of the fresh leaves of trees—captivates the heart of even the ascetic’. Here the metre is halting at ‘hāri’ [where the last vowel is not elongated]. The right reading would be ‘hāri—pramudita etc. etc.’ Or, as in the following— ‘Anyāstā............................vastrāṇi cha’. ‘Wonderful must have been the mines that produced these jewels of qualities ! wonderful too that blessed clay, as also the accessories, wherewith this young man has been created by God ! Since at his appearance, the weapons fall off from the hands of his rich and elegant enemies, and clothes slur away from the waists of beautiful women,— both of these having their hearts benumbed (the former through fear and the latter through love)’.

CHAPTER VII 215 अत्र ‘वस्त्राण्यपि’ इति पाठे लघुरपि गुरुतां भजते ॥ हा नृप हा बुध हा कविबन्धो विप्रसहस्रसमाश्रय देव । मुग्धविदग्धसभान्तररत्न क्वासि गतः क्व वयं च तवैते ॥२१९॥ हास्यरसव्यञ्जकमेतद्वृत्तम् (६) न्यूनपदं यथा तथाभूतां दृष्ट्वा नृपसदसि पाञ्चालतन्‍यां वने व्याधैः सार्धं सुचिरमुषितं वल्कलधरैः । विराटस्यावासे स्थितमनुचितारम्भनिभृतं गुरुः खेदं खिन्ने मयि भजति नाद्यापि कुरुषु ॥२२०॥ [Here the short syllable ‘cha’ at the end is such as cannot take the long accent]. If the reading were ‘nyapi’ (instead of ‘ṇi cha’), the ‘pi’, even though short, could have taken the long accent (by virtue of its being preceded by the conjunct consonant “nya”). (c) ‘Hā nrpa.........tavaite’. ‘O king ! O wise one ! O patron of poets, the patron of hundreds of Brāhmaṇas ! O godlike one, jewel of the assembly of the learned and the wise ! Whereto have you gone ?—and where are we, your very own ?’ The metre adopted here is suited to the delineation of the Comic (and not of the Pathetic, to which it is employed here). (6) The following is an example of the ‘deficient in words’— ‘Tathābhūtāṁ dṛṣṭvā nṛpasadasi pāñchālatanayāṁ Vane vyādhaiḥ sārdhaṁ suchiramuṣitaṁ valkaladharaiḥ Virāṭasyāvāse sthitamanuchitārambhanibhṛtaṁ Guruḥ khedaṁ khinne mayi bhajati nādyāpi kuruṣu. (See translation above in Chapter III,)

216 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA अत्रास्माभिरिति “खिन्न” इत्यस्मात्पूर्वमित्थमिति च ।। (७) अधिकं यथा स्फटिकाकृतिनिर्मलः प्रकामं प्रतिसंक्रान्तनिशातशास्त्रतत्त्वः । अविरुद्धसमन्वितोक्तियुक्तिः प्रतिमल्लास्तमयोदयः स कोपि ॥ ॥२२१॥ अत्र आकृतिशब्दः । यथा वा इदमनुचितमक्रमश्च पुंसां यदिह जरास्वपि मान्मथा विकाराः । यदपि च न कृतं नितम्बिनीनां स्तनपतनावधि जीवितं रतं वा ॥२२२॥ Here, in the first sentence the word ‘asmābhiḥ’ is wanting (without which the sentence is left without a nominative) ; similarly before ‘khinne’, the adverb ‘ittham’ ‘in this manner’ is wanting [the intended meaning being ‘he bears anger towards me, who have suffered in the manner described’]. (7) The following in an example of the ‘Redundant word’— ‘Sphaṭikākṛti......sa kopi’ ‘Truly marvellous is this King !—clean like the form of the rock-crystal, all the most abstruse principles of the sciences fully reflected in himself, his statements consistent and closely reasoned, and the source of the destruction of his adversaries.’ Here the term ‘ākṛti’ (‘form’) is entirely superfluous. Another example— ‘Idamanuchitam......... Yadapi cha na kṛtaṁ......rataṁ vā’. ‘It is improper and unnatural that men should evince sexual desires even in old age ; as also that of women, either life itself or sexual enjoyment was not made to end with the fall of their breasts’.

CHAPTER VII 217 अत्र कृतमिति । कृतं प्रत्युत प्रक्रमभङ्गमावहति । तथा च 'यदपि' च न कुरङ्गलोचनानाम्' इति पाठे निराकाङ्क्षैव प्रतीतिः ॥ (८) कथितपदं यथा अधिकरतलतल्पं कल्पितस्वापलीला- परिमिलननिमीलत्पाण्डिमा गण्डपाली । सुतनु कथय कस्य व्यञ्जयत्यञ्जसैव स्मरनरपतिलीलायौवराज्याभिषेकम् ॥२२३॥ अत्र लीलेति ॥ (९) पतत्प्रकर्षं यथा कः कः कुत्र न घुर्घुरारियतघुरीघोरो घुरेत्सूकरः कः कः कं कमलाकरं विकमलं कर्तुं करी नोद्यतः । Here the term 'kṛtam' is superfluous ; in fact its insertion breaks the uniformity (of the two statements). If the reading were 'yadapi cha na kuraṅgalochanānām', the intended sense would be quite complete. (8) The following is an example of the 'Repeated Word'— 'Adhikara......līlā— Smaranarapatilīlā......ṣēkam' 'The paleness of your cheek is waning on account of the pressure of your arms upon which it rested during sleep ; tell me, O beautiful one ! of what young man does this (cheek) indicate the coronation as the Prince of the sportings of King Cupid.' Here the word 'līlā' is needlessly repeated. (9) The following is the example of 'Receding Ex- cellence'— 'Kaḥ kaḥ kutra na ghurghurāyitaghurīghoro ghuret sūkaraḥ Kaḥ kaḥ kaṁ kamalākaraṁ vikamalaṁ kartuṁ karī nodyataḥ

218 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA के के कानि वनान्यरण्यमहिषा नोन्मूलयेयुर्यतः सिंहीस्नेहविलासबद्धवसतिः पञ्चाननो वर्तते ॥२२४॥ (१०) समाप्तपुनरात्तं यथा क्रेङ्कारः स्मरकार्मुकस्य सुरतक्रीडापिकीनां रवः झङ्कारो रतिमञ्जरीमधुलिहां लीलाचकोरीध्वनिः । तन्व्याः कञ्चुलिकापसारणभुजाक्षेपस्खलत्कङ्कण- क्वाणः प्रेम तनोतु वो नववयोलास्याय वेणुस्वनः ॥२२५॥ Ke ke kāni vanānyaraṇyamahiṣā nonmūlayeyuryataḥ Siṁhīsnehavilāsabaddhavasatiḥ pañchānano vartate ’ ‘ What boar and where would not make the terrible ghur ghur sound ?—What elephant would not deprive the lotus-ponds of its lotuses ?—What wild buffalo would not uproot the forests ?—Now that the lion lies capti- vated by the love of the lioness !’ [Here the climax is not maintained to the end; it breaks off after the third line. The destructiveness of one animal is described in the first foot, greater destructiveness is described in the second foot, and still greater destructiveness is described in the third foot; this climax would have been rightly maintained, if the lion were described, in the last foot, as bringing greater destruction than that wrought by all the aforesaid animals. What is done on the other hand is that the fierce destructiveness of animals is toned down towards the end to the quiescent lying down of the lion under the captivating influence of feminine charms.] (10) The following is the example of ‘ Resuming the Concluded ’— ‘ Kreṅkāraḥ.........veṇusvanaḥ ’. ‘ Like unto the twang of Cupid’s bow, the sweet singing of the cuckoo of dalliance, the humming of bees in the blossom of love, the sound of the partridge of graceful sportiveness,—may the jingling of the slender

CHAPTER VII 219 (११) द्वितीयार्धगतैकवाचकशेषप्रथमाधं यथा मसृणचरणपातं गम्यतां भूः सदर्भा विरचय सिचयान्तं मूर्ध्नि घर्मः कठोरः । तदिति जनकपुत्री लोचनैरश्रुपूर्णैः पथि पथिकवधूर्भीरीक्षिता शिक्षिता च ॥२२६॥ (१२) अभवन् मतः (इष्टः) योगः (संबन्धः) यत्र तत् । यथा girl's bangles dropped in the shaking of her arms at the time of the attempt to remove her bodice, expand your love !—the jingling resembling the ring of the flute, played to the dancing of youthfulness !' [The last qualification is thrown in, after the sentence has been completed, without materially adding to the beauty of the descrip- tion.] (11) The following is an example of the 'Isolation, in the second part of a word required by the first half'— ' Masṛṇa............bhūḥ sadarbhā ................................................................ Taditi........................... ...................śikṣitā cha'. ' The ground is covered with grass-shoots, therefore, weak with soft foot-steps ; the sun is strong overhead, therefore place a piece of cloth on your head ;—thus was Jānakī on her way exhorted and looked upon with tearful eyes by the wives of fellow-travellers'. [The construction here is 'bhūḥ sadarbhā—'(the ground is covered with shoots) tat (therfore) gamyatām (walk with soft tread etc. etc.); and the term 'tat' which is required in the first half of the verse has been placed in the second half, with which it has no syntactical connection.] (12) The following is an example of what is 'devoid of intended connection', i.e. where the desired connection is wanting—

220 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA येषां तास्त्रिदशेभदानसरितः पीताः प्रतापोष्मभि- र्लीलापानभुवश्च नन्दनवनच्छायासु यैः कल्पिताः । येषां हुंकृतयः कृतामरपतिक्षोभाः क्षपाचारिणां किं तैस्त्वत्परितोषकारि विहितं किंचित्प्रवादोचितम् ॥२२७॥ अत्र “गुणानां च परार्थत्वादसंबन्धः समत्वात्स्यात्” इत्युक्तनयेन यच्छब्दनिर्द्देश्यानामर्थानां परस्परमसन्वयेन यैरि- त्यत्र विशेषस्याप्रतीतिरिति । 'क्षपाचारिभिः' इति पाठे युज्यते समन्वयः । (a) ‘Yeṣāṁ tāstridashebhadānasaritaḥ pītāḥ pratāpoṣmabhiḥ Līlāpānabhuvashcha nandanavana- (b) chchhāyāsu yaiḥ kalpitāḥ (c) Yeṣāṁ huṁkṛtayaḥ kṛtāmarapati- kṣobhāḥ kṣapāchāriṇāṁ Kiṁ taistvatparitoṣakāri vihitaṁ kiñchit pravādochitam’. ‘By the fire of whose glory was dried the ichor-flow of the celestial elephants,—by whom were established drink- ing booths in the shady groves of the Nandana garden,— of which demons the slightest sound of displeasure brought up perturbation in the mind of the king of the gods,—what satisfactory act has been done by them which could be spoken of ?’ Here it is not comprehensible what is the antecedent (qualified and referred to) of the pronoun ‘yaiḥ’ (there being no noun with the instrumental ending),—it being not possible to co-ordinate it with ‘yeṣām’ and thus corre- late it with the ‘demons’ (kṣapāchāriṇāṁ’ with the

CHAPTER VII 221 यथा वा त्वमेवंसौन्दर्या स च रुचिरतायाः परिचितः कलानां सीमानं परमिह युवामेव भजथः । अपि द्वन्द्वं दिष्ट्या तदिति सुभगे संवदति वाम् अतः शेषं यत्स्याज्जितमिह तदानीं गुणितया ॥२२८॥ अत्र यदित्यत्र तदिति तदानीमित्यत्र यदेति वचनं नास्ति । genitive ending, which is the antecedent of the pronoun ‘yeṣām’), because, according to the dictum of Jaimini (Mīmā. Sū. 3.1.22), when there are several subordinate factors (in the present case, the pronouns ‘yeṣām’, in the first line, ‘yaiḥ’ in the second line and ‘yeṣām’ in the third line), they are all equally subservient to something else, and as such cannot be mutually correlated. The necessary co-ordination (and antecedent) would be got at, if we read ‘kṣapāchāribhiḥ’, (with the instrumental ending, in place of ‘kṣapāchāriṇām’. Another example of the same defect we have in the following— ‘Tvamevaṁ saundaryāḥ sa cha ruchiratāyāḥ parichitaḥ Kalānāṁ sīmānaṁ paramiha yuvāmeva bhajathaḥ Api dvandvaṁ diṣṭyā taditi subhage saṁvadati vām Ataḥ śeṣaṁ yat syāj jitamiha tadānīṁ guṇitayā’. ‘You are endowed with such beauty, and he is not unfamiliar with handsomeness; both of you possess the highest proficiency in the finer arts; thus fortunately the pair of you two is quite compatible; if the subsequent issue were what it should be, then indeed would the en- dowment of qualities become duly glorified.’ Here the relative pronoun ‘yat’ (in the fourth line) requires a corresponding ‘tat’, and the term ‘tadānīm’

222 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA ‘चेत्स्यात्’ इति युक्तः पाठः। यथा वा संग्रामाङ्गणमागतेन भवता चापे समारोपिते देवाकर्णय येन येन सहसा यद्यत्स्रभासादितम् । कोदण्डेन शराः शरैररिशिरस्तेनापि भूमण्डलं तेन त्वं भवता च कीर्तिरतुला कीर्त्या च लोकत्रयम् ॥२२९॥ अत्राकर्णनक्रियाकर्मत्वे कोदण्डं शरानित्यादि वाक्यार्थस्य कर्मत्वे कोदण्डः शरा इति प्राप्तम् । न च यच्छब्दार्थस्तद्विशेषणं वा कोदण्डादि । न च केन केनेत्यादि प्रश्नः। requires a corresponding ‘yadānīm’; but both these are absent [and hence the desired connection becomes im- possible]. The right reading would be ‘chet syāt’ (for ‘yat syāt’). Another example of the same. ‘Saṅgrāmāṅgaṇamāgatena bhavatā chāpe samāropite ‘Devākarṇaya yena yena sahasā yad yat samāsāditam Kodaṇḍena sharāḥ sharairarishirastenāpi bhūmaṇḍalaṁ Tena tvaṁ bhavatā cha kīrtiratulā kīrtyā cha lokatrayam’. ‘O king ! listen to what was attained by what, when you came to the field of battle and stringed your bow : The bow obtained the arrows,—the arrows, the enemy's head,—this head, the earth,—the earth, yourself (for its master),—you, unrivalled fame,—and the fame, all the three worlds.’ As objectives of the verb ‘listen’, all the nouns men- tioned should have the accusative ending—‘Kodaṇḍam sharān’ and so forth. If the whole of the subsequent sentence were to be treated as the objective of the said verb, then the form would be ‘Kodaṇḍaḥ sharāḥ’ [as what

CHAPTER VII 223 यथा वा “चापाचार्यस्त्रिपुरविजयी कार्तिकेयो विजेयः शस्त्रव्यस्तः सदनमुदधिर्भूरियं हन्तकारः । अस्त्येवैतत् किमु कृतवता रेणुकाकण्ठबाधां बद्धस्पर्द्धस्तव परशुना लज्जते चन्द्रहासः” ॥२३०॥ इत्यादौ भार्गवस्य निन्दायां तात्पर्यम् । कृतवतेति परशौ सा प्रतीयते । ‘कृतवतः’ इति तु पाठे मतयोगो भवति । are meant to be ‘listened’ to are (1) the thing that attains, and (2) the thing attained; and in any enumeration of these, both of them should be spoken of by means of nouns with the nominative ending].—Nor is it possible for the ‘Bow’ and other things to be regarded either as included in the denotation of the pronoun ‘yat’ (in the first line, which is the objective of the verb to listen), or as a qualification of that denotation. Nor lastly is there any such question as—‘what was attained by what?’— ‘kena kena kim kim’—(which would have established the intended connection between the two sets of sentences). Another example of the same defect— ‘Chāpāchāryastripuravijayī kārtikeyo vijeyaḥ Shastravyastaḥ sadanamudadhirbhūriyaṁ hantakāraḥ Astyevaitat kimu kṛtavatā reṇukā-kaṇṭhabādhāṁ Baddhaspardhastava parashunā lajjate chandrahāsaḥ’ (For translation see above, stanza No. 201) What is intended here is the deprecation of Parashu- rāma himself (for having killed his mother); while the term ‘kṛtavatā’ qualifying the axe, makes the said de- precation appliable to this latter. The reading ‘kṛtavataḥ’ (which would qualify ‘tava’) would afford the intended connection.

224 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA यथा वा चत्वारो वयमृत्विजः स भगवान् कर्मोपदेष्टा हरिः संग्रामाध्वरदीक्षितो नरपतिः पत्नी गृहीतव्रता । कौरव्याः पशवः प्रियापरिभवक्लेशोपशान्तिः फलं राजन्योपनिमन्त्रणाय रसति स्फीतं हतो दुन्दुभिः ॥२३१॥ अत्राध्वरशब्दः समासे गुणीभूत इति न तदर्थः सर्वैः संयुज्यते । यथा वा जङ्घाकाण्डोरुनालो नखकिरणलसत्केसरालीकरालः प्रत्यग्रालक्तकाभाप्रसरकिसलयो मञ्जुमञ्जीरभृङ्गः । Another example— Chatvāro vayamṛtvijaḥ sa bhagavān karmopadeṣṭā hariḥ Saṁgrāmādhvaradīkṣito narapatiḥ patnī gṛhītavratā Kauravyāḥ pashavaḥ priyāparibhavakleshopashāntiḥ phalaṁ Rājanyopanimantraṇāya rasati sphītaṁ hato dundubhiḥ.’ ‘ We four are the sacrificial priests; the blessed Hari is the spiritual adviser; the king has been initiated for the battle-ritual; and his wife is keeping the vows; the Kurus are the animals (to be sacrificed); the result aimed at is the allayment of the pain caused by the molestation of our beloved wife; the battle-drum is being sounded for the purpose of inviting the Kṣattriyas (to the sacrifice)’. Here the term ‘adhvara’, ‘sacrifice’, has been made a subordinate member of the compound, and hence what is denoted by it fails to be connected with all the sacrificial details mentioned. The following is yet another example;— ‘Jaṅghākāṇḍorunālo nakhakiraṇalasatkesarālīkarālaḥ Pratyagrālaktakābhāprasarakisalayo mañjumañjīrabhṛṅgaḥ

CHAPTER VII 225 भर्तुर्नृत्तानुकार जयति निजतनूस्वच्छलावण्यवापी- संभूताम्भोजशोभां विदधदभिनवो दण्डपादो भवान्याः ॥२३२॥ अत्र दण्डपादगता निजतनूः प्रतीयते भवान्याः संबन्धिनी तु विवक्षिता ॥ (१३) अवश्यवक्तव्यमनुक्तं यत्र । यथा अप्राकृतस्य चरितातिशयैश्च दृष्टै- रत्यद्भुतैरपहृतस्य तथापि नास्था । कोप्येष वीरशिशुकाकृतिरप्रमेय- सौन्दर्यसारसमुदायमयः पदार्थः ॥२३३॥ अत्र ‘अपहृतोस्मि’ इत्यपहृतत्वस्य विधिर्वाच्यः तथापीत्यस्य द्वितीयवाक्यगतत्वेनैवोपपत्तेः । यथा वा Bharturnṛttānukāre jayati nijatanusvachchalāvaṇyavāpī- Sambhūtāmbhojaśobhāṁ vidadhadabhinavo daṇḍapādo bhavānyāḥ. (Translated above as stanza No. 150) Here the expression ‘nijatanu’, appearing in the com- pound, is understood as refering to the Daṇḍapāda, while it is intended to refer to Bhavānī. (13) In the following we have an example of the ‘Omission of a necessary Statement’.— ‘Aprākṛtasya charitātishayaishcha dṛṣṭair Atyadbhutairapahṛtasya tathāpi nāsthā Kopyeṣa vīrashishukākṛtiraprameya- Saundaryasārasamudāyamayaḥ padārthaḥ’. ‘Though I am captivated by the apparently excellent and marvellous deeds of this extraordinary person, yet I have no faith (in the fact that the bow has been broken by him); for this is an indescribable entity constituted by the very essence of illimitable beauty, appearing in the shape of a heroic boy.’ Here what should have been expressly stated was the 15

226 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA एषोहमद्रितनयामुखपद्मजन्मा प्राप्तः सुरासुरमनोरथदूरवर्ती । स्वप्नेनिरुद्धघटनाधिगताभिरूप- लक्ष्मीफलामसुरराजसुतां विधाय ॥२३४॥ अत्र मनोरथानामपि दूरवर्तीत्यप्यर्थो वाच्यः । यथा वा त्वयि निबद्धरतेः प्रियवादिनः प्रणयभङ्गपराङ्मुखचेतसः । कमपराधलवं मम पश्यसि त्यजसि मानिनि दासजनं यतः ॥२३५॥ direct affirmation of his having ‘ become captivated ’,— the right reading being ‘ apahṛtosmi ’ (for ‘ apahṛtasya ’); specially as the use of the expression ‘ tathāpi ’ could be justified only as occurring in a totally different sentence [hence it is essential that there should be a finite verb in the preceding sentence, without which there would not be two distinct sentences.] Another example of the same :— ‘ Eṣohamadritanayāmukhapadmajanmā Prāptaḥ surāsuramanorathadūravartī Svapneniruddhaghaṭanādhigatābhirūpa- Lakṣmīphalāmasurarājasutāṁ vidhāya ’. ‘ I, born of the lotus-face of Pārvatī, who am beyond the reach of the longings of gods and demons, have come here, after having made the daughter of the demon-king such as has her exquisite beauty rendered fruitful through association, in a dream, with Aniruddha.’ [Here the sense intended to be conveyed is that ‘ I am beyond even the longings of the gods and demons ;’ [and this idea the words used fail to convey ]. Similarly in the following verse also— Tvayi nibaddharateḥ priyavādinaḥ Praṇayabhaṅgaparāṅmukhacetasaḥ Kamaparādhalavaṁ mama paśyasi Tyajasi mānini dāsajanaṁ yataḥ.

CHAPTER VII 227 अत्र 'अपराधस्य लवमपि' इति वाच्यम् ॥ (१४) अस्थानस्थपदं यथा प्रियेण संग्रथ्य विपक्षसंनिधा- वुपाहितां वक्षसि पीवरस्तने । स्रजं न काचिद्विजहौ जलाविलां वसन्ति हि प्रेम्णि गुणा न वस्तुषु ॥२३६॥ अत्र 'काचिन्न विजहौ' इति वाच्यम् । यथा वा 'O proud one ! what trace of fault do you find in me, which makes you abandon me, your servant ?—I, whose love is centered in you, who always talk to you affec- tionately and whose mind is ever averse to any breach of endearment.' Here also what is meant to be expressed is 'even the slightest trace of a fault.' (14) The following is an example of the 'Misplaced Word'— 'Priyeṇa saṅgrathya vipakṣasannidhā- Vupāhitāṁ vakṣasi pīvarastane Srajaṁ na kāchid vijahau jalāvilāṁ Vasanti hi premṇi guṇā na vastuṣu.' 'The lover had carefully knitted a garland and placed it over her chest covered with her high breasts, in the presence of her rivals ; and though this garland had become sullied with water, yet not a certain girl did remove it ; the value lies, not in the presented object, but in the love that prompts it.' What is intended to be expressed is that 'a certain woman did not remove the garland ;' and to this end the 'na' should have come before 'vijahau'.

228 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA लग्नः केलिकचग्रहश्लथजटालम्बेन निद्रान्तरे मुद्राङ्कः शितिकन्धरेन्दुशकलेनान्तःकपोलस्थलम् । पार्वत्या नखलक्ष्मशङ्कितसखीनर्मस्मितह्रीतया प्रोन्मृष्टः करपल्लवेन कुटिलाताम्रच्छविः पातु वः ॥२३७॥ अत्र नखलक्ष्मनेत्यतः पूर्वं ‘कुटिलाताम्र०’ इति वाच्यम् ॥ (१५) अस्थानस्थसमासं यथा अद्यापि स्तनशैलदुर्गविषमे सीमन्तिनीनां हृदि स्थातुं वाञ्छति मान एष धिगिति क्रोधादिवालोहितः । [As it stands, the expression means 'not some one,—but all— removed the garland.'] Another example of the same— Lagnaḥ kelikachagrahashlathajaṭālambena nidrāntare Mudrāṅkaḥ śitikandharenduśakalenāntaḥkapolasthalam Pārvatyā nakhalakṣmaśaṅkitasakhīnarmasmitahrītayā Pronmṛṣṭaḥ karapallavena kuṭilātāmrachchhaviḥ pātu vaḥ. ‘May the curved red mark made on Pārvatī’s cheek by Shiva’s moon-digit, while she slept on his matted locks, tired during dalliance, protect you !—the marks wiped off by her tender hands, when she was abashed by the smiles of her companion who suspected the mark to be of nails.’ The epithet ‘kuṭilātāmrachchhaviḥ’ (‘red and curved’) should have been placed before the term ‘nakhalakṣma etc.’ [As it is the ‘curvature and redness’ that supply the grounds for the companion’s suspicion.] (15) The following is an example of the ‘Misplaced Compound’— ‘Adyāpi stanashailadurgaviṣame sīmantinīnāṁ hṛdi Sthātuṁ vāñchhati māna eṣa dhigiti krodhādivālohitaḥ