काव्यप्रकाश (आचार्य मम्मट - सम्पूर्ण १० उल्लास सटीक)

CHAPTER X 361 धर्मोपमानयोर्लोपे वृत्तौ वाक्ये च दृश्यते । तुण्टुण्णन्तो मरिहिसि कण्टअकलिआइँ केअइवणाईं । मालइकुसुमसरिच्छं भमर भमन्तो ण पाविहिसि ॥४०७॥ कुसुमेण सममिति पाठे वाक्यगा । क्यचि वाद्युपमेयासे । आसे निरासे । अरातिविक्रमालोकविकस्वरविलोचनः । कृपाणोदग्रदोर्दण्डः स सहस्रायुधीयति ॥४०८॥ ‘ The chief of kings shines resplendent in battle, being unapproachable, as he is, by even the dreaming desires of his enemies. ’ [Here the said Simile lies in the compound “rā̃jakuñjaraḥ.] 89. (16)—(17)— On the omission of the common property and the object compared to, it is found in a compound and in a sentence. (16) ‘ Ṭuṇṭuṇṇanto marihisi kaṇṭaakaliāiṁ keaivaṇāiṁ Mālaikusumasarichchhaṁ bhamara bhamanto ṇa pāvihisi’ ‘ O black bee ! thou shalt perish, wandering among Ketakī-bowers ; but however much thou mayst wander, thou shalt never find anything like the Mālatī-flower. ’ [The Simile lies in the compound ‘ mālai-kusuma—sarichchhaṁ ].’ (17) If we read ‘ kusumeṇa samaṁ ’ (in place of ‘ kusuma- sarichchhaṁ ’), the same verse becomes an example of the same kind of compound as occurring in a sentence. (18)—On the omission of the term expressive of simi- litude and the object compared, it occurs in the affix ‘ Kyach ’. ‘ Āsā ’ means “ nirāsā ’, ‘ on the omission.’ (18)— [Example]— ‘ Arātivikramālokavikasvaravilocanaḥ Kṛpāṇodagradordaṇḍaḥ sa sahasrāyudhīyati ’

362 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA अत्रात्मा उपमेयः । त्रिलोपे च समासगा ॥ ९० ॥ त्रयाणां वादिधर्मोपमानानाम् । उदाहरणम्— तरुणिमनि कृतावलोकना ललितविलासवितीर्णविग्रहा । स्मरशरविसराचितन्तरा मृगनयना हरते मुनेर्मनः ॥४०९॥ अत्र सप्तम्युपमानेत्यादिना यदा समासलोपौ भवतः । तदेदमुदा- हरणम् ॥ ‘ Having his eyes widely opened by the sight of his enemy’s prowess, and arms terrible through his sword, he disports himself like the thousand-armed king Kārtta- vīrya.’ [Here the king’s own self is the object compared ; the Simile, occurring in the affix ‘ Kyach ’ in the word ‘ Sahasrāyudhīyati ’, means ‘ disports himself like the thousand-armed king ’.] (19)—On the omission of the three, it occurs in a compound. 90. ‘ Three ’—the term expressing similitude, the common property and the object compared to. Example— ‘ Taruṇimani kṛtāvalokanā lalitavilāsavitīrṇavigrahā Smarasharavisarāchitāntarā mṛganayanā harate munermanaḥ.’ ‘ Just peeping into youthfulness, surrendering her body to graceful dalliance, and having her heart pierced by a flight of Cupid’s arrows, the fawn-eyed one captivates the heart of even the ascetic.’ This verse forms an apposite example only when the compound ‘ mṛganayanā ’ is expounded in accordance with the Vārtika on Pāṇini 2.2.24 (as mṛganayanā iva nayane yasyāḥ), involving the elision [(1) of the former ‘ nayane ’, which is the ‘ object compared to ’, and (2) of the term

CHAPTER X 363 क्रूरस्याचारस्यायःशूलतयाध्यवसायाद् अयःशूलेनान्विच्छति ‘आयःशूलिकः’ इत्यतिशयोक्तिर्न तु क्रूराचारोपमेयतैक्ष्ण्यधर्मवा- दीनां लोपे त्रिलोपेयमुपमा । एवमेकोनविंशतिर्लुप्ताः पूर्णाभिः सह पञ्चविंशतिः ॥ अनयेनेव राज्यश्रीर्दैन्येनेव मनस्विता । मम्लौ साथ विषादेन पद्मिनीव हिमाम्भसा ॥४१०॥ इत्यभिन्ने साधारण धर्मे ॥ ज्योत्स्नेव नयनानन्दः सुरेव मदकारणम् । प्रभुतेव समाकृष्टसर्वलोका नितम्बिनी ॥४११॥ इति भिन्ने च तस्मिन् एकस्यैव बहूपमानोपादाने मालोपमा । ‘iva’ expressive of similitude ; in addition to these there is the omission (3) also of the common property of ‘fickle- ness.’] The term ayaḥshūlikaḥ, ‘one who behaves like a spear’, has been taken by some people to be an example of that kind of Simile which omits the three factors of (1) the object compared—the cruel person, (2) the common pro- perty—cruelty and (3) the term expressive of similitude— ‘vā’ and the rest. But this is not right ; as what the term means is ‘ayaḥshūlena anvichchhati’ ‘who behaves like the spear,’ and what is done here is that ‘cruel behaviour’ is spoken of as the ‘spear’, and this involves the figure of Atishayokti, Hyperbole,—and not that of Simile with three factors omitted. These nineteen kinds of Elliptical Simile, along with the six kinds of the Complete Simile, make up the twenty- five varieties of Simile. As regards other varieties of Simile that have been described by others, we find—(a) the Mālopamā, String- simile, where a single object is compared to several, with its two varieties—one in which the same common property II-5

364 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA यथोत्तरमुपमेयस्योपमानत्वे पूर्ववदभिन्नधर्मत्वे अनवरतकनकवितरणजललवभृतकरतरङ्गिताथिततेः । भणितिरिव मतिर्मतिरिव चेष्टा चेष्टेव कीर्तिरतिविमला ॥४१२॥ मतिरिव मूर्तिमधुरा मूर्तिरिव सभा प्रभावचिता । तस्य सभेव जयश्रीः शक्या जेतुं नृपस्य न परेषाम् ॥४१३॥ · इत्यादिका रशनोपमा च न लक्षिता एवंविधवैचित्र्य- सहस्रसंभवात् उक्तभेदानतिक्रमाच्च ॥९०॥ of prowithering appears throughout the ‘string’—as in the verse.—‘ Like royal splendour, through injustice and corrup- tion,—like prowess through poverty,—like the lotus through frost,—she has withered through sorrow ;’ —and the other in which diverse common properties are involved,—e. g., in the verse—‘ Like light, she is a joy to the eyes ; like wine, she is maddening; and like sove- reignty, she attracts to herself all the world ;’—and (b) the Rashanopamā, the ‘Girdle-simile’, where the object compared in the preceding Simile becomes the object com- pared to in the succeeding one, with its two varieties, as before; with the same or diverse common properties ; e.g., (A) “ When the King brings together hosts of suppli- cants like waves on his hand which is full of water used, in his continuous gifts of gold, his heart is like his words, like his heart his actions, and his fame pure like his ac- tions ’;—and (B) ‘ Of the King, the body is sweet like his heart, his court powerful as his body, and his victory irrepressible by enemies, like his court.’ But we have not described these, because in the first place there are thousands of such possible varieties, and secondly, they are not such as cannot be included under the varieties already described above. 90.

CHAPTER X 365 उपमानोपमेयत्वे एकस्यैवैकवाक्यगे । अनन्वयः ॥ उपमानान्तरसंबन्धाभावोऽनन्वयः । उदाहरणम्— न केवलं भाति नितान्तकान्तिर्नितम्बिनी सैव नितम्बिनीव । यावद्विलासायुधलास्यवासास्ते तद्विलासा इव तद्विलासाः ॥४१४॥ विपर्यास उपमेयोपमा तयोः ॥ ९१ ॥ तयोः उपमानोपमेययोः । परिवृत्तिः अर्थात् वाक्यद्वये । इतरोपमानव्यवच्छेदपरा उपमेयेनोपमा इति उपमेयोपमा । II—Ananvaya—Comparison Absolute When one and the same thing appears in a single sentence as both the ‘object compared’, and the ‘object compared to’ it is ‘Comparison Absolute’. ‘Comparison Absolute’ means that there is no other thing to which the thing described could bear comparison. Example— ‘It is not only that possessed of exquisite loveliness, that woman shines as that woman herself ; in fact, her graces also, which are the abode of the Cupid’s blandish- ments, are like her own graces.’ III—Upameyopamā—Reciprocal Comparison When there is alternation of these two, it is Reciprocal Comparison. 91. ‘Of these two’ i. e., of the object compared and the object compared to ;—there is ‘alternation’, interchange, in two separate sentences,—this means that there is no third thing with which either of them could bear comparison, we have ‘Upameyopamā—i. e., a figure, where there is ‘Upamā’—(comparison, of the object compared to) with the ‘Upameya’ (object compared) itself.

366 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA उदाहरणम्-- कमलेव मतिर्मतिरिव कमला तनुरिव विभा विभेव तनुः । धरणीव धृतिर्धृतिरिव धरणी सततं विभाति बत यस्य ।।४१५।।९१॥ संभावनमथोत्प्रेक्षा प्रकृतस्य समेन यत् । समेन उपमानेन । उदाहरणम्- उन्मेषं यो मम न सहते जातिवैरी निशायाम् इन्दोरिन्दीवरदलदृशा तस्य सौन्दर्यदर्पः । नीतः शान्तिं प्रसभमनया वक्त्रकान्त्येति हर्षात् लग्ना मन्ये ललिततनु ते पादयोः पद्मलक्ष्मीः ।।४१६।। Example— ‘His heart is like Lakṣmī,—Lakṣmī is like his heart; his splendour is like his body, and his body is like his splendour; his fortitude is like the earth, and the earth is like his fortitude.’ 91. IV—Utprekṣā—Poetic Fancy. Poetic Fancy consists in the imagining of the thing described as (identical) with a similar thing. ‘Similar thing’—i.e., that to which it is meant to be compared. Example— ‘O beautiful one! I think that the beauty of the lotus attaches itself to your feet, on being happy at the idea that her born enemy the Moon, who brooks not her blossoming during the night, has had the pride of his beauty quickly suppressed by the splendour of the face of this lotus-eyed girl. [Here the object compared is the beauty of the girl’s feet, and this has been imagined to be the beauty of the lotus fallen on her feet, which, in reality, is the object to which the former is meant to be compared.]

CHAPTER X 367 लिम्पतीव तमोऽङ्गानि वर्षतीवाञ्जनं नभः । असत्पुरुषसेवेव दृष्टिविफलतां गता ॥४१७॥ इत्यादौ व्यापनादि लेपनादिरूपतया संभावितम् ॥ ससंदेहस्तु भेदोक्तौ तदनुक्तौ च संशयः ॥ ९२ ॥ भेदोक्तौ यथा अयं मार्तण्डः किं स खलु तुरगैः सप्तभिरितः कृशानुः किं सर्वाः प्रसरति दिशो नैष नियतम् । कृतान्तः किं साक्षान्महिषवहनोसाविति चिरं समालोक्याजौ त्वां विदधति विकल्पान् प्रतिभटाः ॥४१८॥ In the following verse— ‘Limpatīva tamoṅgāni varṣatīvāñjanaṁ nabhaḥ Asatpuruṣaseveva dṛṣṭirviphalatāṁ gatā’ ‘Darkness besmears the limbs as it were ; the sky is, as it were, showering soot ; and vision has become as useless as the service of a wicked master’ ;—what is done is that the pervading (of darkness) has been imagined to be besmearing. [And the spreading of darkness has been imagined to be the showering of soot : so that this is an instance of Poetical Fancy, and not Simile, as some people have taken it to be, having been misled to this view by the presence of the particle ‘iva’] V—Sasandeha—Doubtful. The statement of a doubt constitutes the Doubtful,—the distinction being asserted or not asserted. 92. For example, we have the ‘difference stated’, in the following verse— ‘Is this the sun ?—But the sun is carried by seven horses. Is he the Fire ?—Surely, Fire never flames on all sides. Is he the Death-god ?—But the Death-god has the buffalo for his conveyance. Thus, O King, on

368 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA भेदोक्तावित्यनेन न केवलमयं निश्चयगर्भो यावन्निश्चयान्तोपि संदेहः स्वीकृतः । यथा इन्दुः किं क्व कलङ्कः सरसिजमेतत् किमम्बु कुत्र गतम् । ललितसविलासपचनैर्मुखमिति हरिणाक्षि निश्चितं परतः ॥४१९॥ किं तु निश्चयगर्भ इव नात्र निश्चयः प्रतीयमान इति उपे- क्षितो भट्टोद्भटेन । तदनुक्तौ यथा अस्याः सर्गविधौ प्रजापतिरभूच्चन्द्रो नु कान्तिप्रदः शृङ्गारैकरसः स्वयं नु मदनो मासो नु पुष्पाकरः । वेदाभ्यासजडः कथं नु विषयव्यावृत्तकौतूहलो निर्मातुं प्रभवेन्मनोहरमिदं रूपं पुराणो मुनिः ॥४२०॥१९२॥ seeing you in battle, do your enemies entertain various doubts.’ Inasmuch as the definition speaks of the difference being stated, it follows that we have this Figure, not only when the certainty is left concealed (implied), but also when the cogitation leads on to certainty. e.g.— ‘ Is this the moon ?—But where is the dark stigma ? Is this the lotus ?—But where is the water gone to ? O Fawn-eyed one ! that what was seen was the face ascertained later on through the presence of sweet and elegant speech.’ But this variety of the Doubtful has been omitted by Rudraṭa, on the ground that in this case the certainty is not merely suggested, as it is in that variety where the cer- tainty is left concealed [and hence it loses its effectiveness.] The following is an example of the case where the difference is not stated—‘ In the creating of this woman, was the position of the creator occupied by the Moon,

CHAPTER X 369 तद्रूपकमभेदो य उपमानोपमेययोः । अतिसाम्याद् अनपह्नुतभेदयोः अभेदः । समस्तवस्तुविषयं श्रौता आरोपिता यदा ॥ ९३ ॥ आरोपविषया इव आरोप्यमाणाः यदा शब्दोपात्ताः तदा समस्तानि वस्तूनि विषयोस्येति समस्तवस्तुविषयम् । आरोपिता इति बहुवचनमविवक्षितम् । यथा ज्योत्स्नाभस्मच्छुरणधवला बिभ्रती तारकास्थी- न्यन्तर्धानव्यसनरसिका रात्रिकापालिकीयम् । द्वीपाद् द्वीपं भ्रमति दधती चन्द्रमुद्राकपाले न्यस्तं सिद्धाञ्जनपरिमलं लाञ्छनस्यच्छलेन ॥३२१॥ the source of effulgence ? or was it the Love-god him- self abounding in the erotic passion ? Or was it the season of spring ?—How else could the ancient sage, whose sensibility had been deadened by Vedic study and whose interest had been withdrawn from all objects, be able to create such a heart-ravishing body ?' 92. VI—Rūpaka—Metaphor. Where there is non-difference between the 'object compared to' and the 'object compared', it is Metaphor. What is meant by 'non-difference' is that idea of non-difference which is based upon extreme likeness between two objects, whose difference is not entirely concealed. (1) In cases where what is imposed is directly expressed, it is Metaphor Universal. 93. In cases where, as the objects imposed upon, so the objects imposed also, are directly mentioned by words, it is that Metaphor which is called 'Universal',—in the sense that the whole (samasta) of what is imposed (nyasta) is its expressed objective (viṣaya).

अत्र पादत्रये, अन्तर्धानव्यसनरसिकत्वमारोपितधर्म एवेति रूपकपरिग्रहे साधकमस्तीति तत्संकराशङ्का न कार्या ॥९३॥ श्रौता आर्थाश्च ते यस्मिन्नेकदेशविवर्ति तत् ॥ केचिदारोप्यमाणाः शब्दोपात्ताः केचिदर्थसामर्थ्यादवसेयाः इत्येकदेशविवर्तनात् एकदेशविवर्ति । यथा

CHAPTER X 371 जस्स रणंतेउरए करे कुणंतस्स मण्डलग्गलअं । रससंमुही वि सहसा परंमुही होइ रिउसेणा ॥४२२॥ अत्र रणस्यान्तःपुरत्वमारोप्यमाणं शब्दोपात्तम् मण्डलाग्र- लतायाः नायिकात्वम् रिपुसेनायाश्च प्रतिनायिकात्वम् अर्थ- सामर्थ्यादवसीयते इति एकदेशे विशेषेण वर्तनादेकदेशविवर्ति । साङ्गमेतत् ॥ उक्तद्विभेदं सावयवम् ॥ Where some of the imposed factors are directly expressed by words, while some are cognised only through the force of the meanings of the words,— it is 'partial', ekadeshavivarti',—so called, because of its functioning directly (vivartana) in one part (ekadesha). 'Jassa raṇaṁteurae kare kuṇaṁtassa maṇḍalaggalaaṁ Rasasaṁmuhī vi sahasā paraṁmuhī hoi riuseṇā'. 'When, in the harem of the battle-field, he takes in his arms the sword-blade (his beloved wife). the oppo- sing army (her rival), even though passionate, turns away from him'. Here the character of 'harem' as imposed upon the 'battlefield' is directly expressed by the words, while the fact of the 'sword-blade' being the 'beloved wife', as also that of the 'opposite army' being her 'rival', is comprehended only through the force of the meaning of the words employed ; and thus the Metaphor, being particularly, explicit in only a part of it, is called 'partial'. This is complex, with all its constituents. The two kinds of Metaphor just described are equipped with all constituents. [i. e. in these what is imposed is not only the object compared to, by itself alone, but along with all its accessories.]

372 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA निरङ्गं तु शुद्धम् ॥ यथा कुरङ्गीवाङ्गानि स्तिमितयति गीतध्वनिषु यत् सखीं कान्तोदन्तं श्रुतमपि पुनः प्रश्नयति यत् । अनिद्रं यच्चान्तः स्वपिति तदहो वेद्म्यभिनवां प्रवृत्तोस्याः सेक्तुं हृदि मनसिजः प्रेमलतिकाम् ॥४२३॥ माला तु पूर्ववत् ॥ ९४ ॥ मालोपमायामिवैकस्मिन् बहव आरोपिताः । यथा सौन्दर्यस्य तरङ्गिणी तरुणिमोत्कर्षस्य हर्षोद्गमः कान्तेः कार्मणकर्म नर्मरहसामुल्लासनावासभूः । (3) That which is devoid of constituents is the Pure Metaphor. [When the object alone by itself is imposed.] Example—‘While listening to songs, she keeps her limbs unmoved, like the doe ; asks her friend the news about her lover, even though she has already heard it ; she lies down within, without sleep ; from all this I gather that the Love-god has begun to water the fresh sprout of affection in her heart’. [Here, all that is imposed upon the affection is the character of the sprout ; and nothing is said regarding any detailed properties of the latter.] The ‘String’ is like the foregoing. 94. Just as in the ‘String Simile’ so in the ‘String Metaphor’ also, the character of several objects is imposed upon a single object. Example—‘That beloved one is the stream of beauty, the joyous effusion of youthful exuberance, the touch- stone of resplendence, the abode of loving confidences,

CHAPTER X 373 विद्या वक्रगिरां विधेरनवाधिप्रावीण्यसाक्षात्क्रिया बाणाः पञ्चशिलीमुखस्य ललनाचूडामणिः सा प्रिया ॥४२४॥९४॥ नियतारोपणोपायः स्यादारोपः परस्य यः । तत्परंपरितं श्लिष्टे वाचके भेदभाजि वा ॥ ९५ ॥ यथा विद्वन्मानसहंस वैरिकमलासंकोचदीप्तद्युते दुर्गामार्गणनीललोहित समित्स्वीकारवैश्वानर । सत्यप्रीतिविधानदक्ष विजयप्राग्भावभीम प्रभो साम्राज्यं वरवीर वत्सरशतं वैरिञ्चमुच्चैः क्रियाः ॥४२५॥ the tutoress of clever conversation, the direct evidence of the illimitable efficiency of the Creator, the arrows of the Love-god and the crest-jewel of lovely women’. 94. (4). Where as a means of the desired imposition, there is imposition of something else, it is the Consequential Metaphor ; —where the expressive word is either ‘ coalescent ’ (in Pun) or ‘ distinct ’. 95. Example ‘ Vidvanmānasahaṁsa vairikamalāsaṁkochadīptadyute Durgāmārgaṇanīlalohita samitsvīkāravaishvānara Satyaprītividhānadakṣa vijayaprāgbhāvabhīma prabho Sāmrājyaṁ varavīra vatsarashataṁ vairiñchamuchchaiḥkriyāḥ ‘ O thou, who art like the swan in the mind of the learned [which is like the Mānasa-lake] ; like the sun in the shri- velling of the prosperity of your enemies [which is like the blossoming of the lotus] ; like Shiva is not seeking the shelter of forts [which is like the longing for Durgā] ; like Fire in accepting battle [which is like the consuming of fuel]; like Dakṣa in attachment to truth [which is like displeasure with Satī] ; like Bhīma in the exuberance of victory [which like being the elder brother of Arjuna] ;—bravest of the

374 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA अत्र मानसमेव मानसम् कमलायाः संकोच एव कमलानाम- संकोचः दुर्गाणाममार्गणमेव दुर्गायाः मार्गणम् समितां स्वीकार एव समिधां स्वीकारः सत्ये प्रीतिरेव सत्यामप्रीतिः विजयः परपराभव एव विजयोर्जुनः एवमारोपणनिमित्तो हंसादेरारोपः। यद्यपि शब्दार्थालंकारोयमित्युक्तं वक्ष्यते च तथापि प्रसिद्धचनुरोधादत्रोक्तः। एकदेशविवर्ति हीदमन्यैरभिधीयते ।। brave ! Mayst thou continue to sway your empire for a hundred years of Brahma ! Here (1) the character of the ‘swan’ is imposed upon the ‘king’, only as a means of imposing (through Pun) upon the ‘mind’ the character of the ‘Mānasa lake’;— (2) the character of the ‘Sun’ is imposed upon the ‘king’, only as a means of imposing (through Pun) the character of ‘the blossoming of lotuses’ upon ‘the shrivelling of the enemy’s prosperity’;—(3) the character of ‘Shiva’ is imposed upon the ‘king’, only as a means of imposing (through Pun) the character of ‘longing for Durgā’ upon ‘the not seeking of the shelter of forts’;—(4) the character of ‘fire’ is imposed upon the ‘king’, only as a means of imposing (through Pun) the character of ‘consuming fuel’ upon ‘the accepting of battle’;—(5) the character of ‘Dakṣa’ is imposed upon the ‘king’ only as a means of imposing (through Pun) of the character of ‘displeasure with Satī’ upon the ‘attachment to truth’;—(6) the character of ‘Bhīma’ is imposed upon the ‘king’ as a means of imposing (through Pun) the character of ‘being he elder brother of Arjuna’ upon the ‘exuberance of victory’. Though (by reason of the Puns being such as do not admit of the replacing of the words used by their synonyms)

भेदभाजि यथा आलानं जयकुञ्जरस्य दृषदां सेतुर्विपद्वारिधेः पूर्वाद्रिः करवालचण्डमहसो लीलोपधानं श्रियः । संग्रामामृतसागरप्रमथनब्रीडाविधौ मन्दरो राजन् राजति वीरवैरिवनितावैधव्यदस्ते भुजः ॥४२६॥ अत्र जयादेर्भिन्नशब्दवाच्यस्य कुञ्जरत्वाद्यारोपे भुजस्य आलानत्वाद्यारोपो युज्यते ।

376 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA अलौकिकमहालोकप्रकाशितजगत्त्रयः । स्तूयते देव सद्वंशमुक्तारत्नं न कैर्भवान् ॥४२७॥ निरवधि च निराश्रयं च यस्य स्थितमनिवर्तितकौतुकप्रपञ्चम् । प्रथम इह भवान् स कूर्ममूर्तिर्जयति चतुर्दशलोकवल्लिकन्दः॥४२८॥ इति च अमालारूपकमपि परंपरितं द्रष्टव्यम् ।। किसलयकरैर्लतानां करकमलैः कामिनां मनो जयति । नलिनीनां कमलमुखैः मुखेन्दुभिर्योषितां मदनः ॥४२९॥ इत्यादि रशनारूपकं न वैचित्र्यवदिति न लक्षितम् ।।९५।। [The following is an example of the Punning Consequential ' Metaphor]. ‘ Alaukikamahālokaprakāshitajagattrayaḥ Stūyate deva sadvaṁshamuktāratnaṁ na kairbhavān. ‘O King ! brightening the three worlds with your superhuman resplendence, and being a pearl in the bamboo of a noble race, by whom are you not eulogised ?’ [Here the imposition of the character of ‘pearl’ upon the king is made possible by the imposition of the character of the ‘bamboo’ upon the ‘noble race,’ both of these latter being expressed by the punning word ‘sadvaṁsha’], [The following is an example of the non-punning Consequential Metaphor]— ‘Ever glorious are you, the primeval Tortoise-shaped God ! the root of the creeper of the fourteen regions, whose existence, infinite (in time) and unsupported. is never bereft of extraordinary phenomenon.’ [Here the imposition of the character of the ‘root’ upon the God is rendered possible by the imposition of the character of ‘creeper’ upon the ‘fourteen regions,’ both of these latter being expressed by distinct words.] In both these cases we have the Consequential Meta- phor, not in the form of a ‘string.’

CHAPTER X 377 प्रकृतं यन्निषिध्यान्यत् साध्यते सा त्वपह्नुतिः । उपमेयम् असत्यं कृत्वोपमानं सत्यतया यत् स्थाप्यते सा तु अपह्नुतिः उदाहरणम्-- अवाप्तः प्रागल्भ्यं परिणतरुचः शैलतनये कलङ्को नैवायं विलसति शशाङ्कस्य वपुषि । अमुष्येयं मन्ये विगलदमृतस्यन्दशिशिरे रतिश्रान्ता शेते रजनिरमणी गाढमुरसि ॥४३०॥ इत्थं वा बत सखि कियदेतत् पश्य वैरं स्मरस्य प्रियविरहकृशेस्मिन् रागिलोके तथा हि । There is ‘Girdle-Metaphor’ also, in such verses as— “The Love-god captivates the hearts of amorous men, by means (1) of the hand-like leaves of creepers, (2) of the lotus-like hands and moon-like faces of women, and (3) of the lotus-like faces of the lotus-pond.’ This, however, has not been described here as there is not much charm in it. 95. VII—Apahnuti—Concealment. When the object to be described is negatived and another is affirmed, it is Concealment. Where the ‘object compared’ is ‘negatived’—declared to be unreal,—and the ‘object compared to’ is ‘affirmed’ declared to be real, it is the Figure of Concealment. Example— ‘O Pārvatī! This that you see is not the fully de- veloped stigma in the disc of the moon shining with full lustre; I think it is his beloved, Night, fatigued by dalli- ance, sleeping soundly on his chest, rendered cool by the drops of nectar.’

378 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA उपवनसहकारोद्भासिभृङ्गच्छलेन प्रतिविशिखमनेनोद्दङ्कितं कालकूटम् ॥४३१॥ अत्र हि न सभृङ्गाणि सहकाराणि अपि तु सकालकूटाः शरा इति प्रतीतिः । एवं वा अमुष्मिंल्लावण्यामृतसरसि नूनं मृगदृशः स्मरः शर्वप्लुष्टः पृथुजघनभागे निपतितः । यदङ्गाङ्गाराणां प्रथमपिशुना नाभिकुहरे शिखा धूमस्येयं परिणमति रोमावलिवपुः ॥४३२॥ अत्र न रोमावलिः धूमशिखेयमिति प्रतिपत्तिः ॥ एवमियं भङ्ग्यन्तरैरप्यूह्या ॥ Or again— ‘ O friend ! Just see the ill-will borne by the Love- god towards lovers already emaciated by separation from their beloved : Under the pretext of black bees hovering over the mango-trees in the garden, he has applied poison to each one of his arrows ’. Here the idea meant to be conveyed is that ‘ what are seen are not mango-trees with black bees hovering about them, but so many arrows dipped in poison ’. Yet another example— ‘ Verily, the Love-god, scorched by Shiva, has fallen upon the plump thighs of the Fawn-eyed one,—which are like the tank of the nectar of loveliness ; as from the hole of her naval there is proceeding a line of smoke, in the form of the line of hair, which is the first sign of the extin- guishing of the fire-embers of his body.’ The idea conveyed here is that ‘ what we see is not the line of hair, but the line of smoke.’

CHAPTER X 379 श्लेषः स वाक्य एकस्मिन् यत्रानेकार्थता भवेत् ॥ ९६ ॥ एकार्थप्रतिपादकानामेव शब्दानां यत्रानेकोऽर्थः स श्लेषः । उदाहरणम्-- उदयमयते दिङ्मालिन्यं निराकुरुतेतरां नयति निधनं निद्रामुद्रां प्रवर्तयति क्रियाः । रचयतितरां स्वैराचारप्रवर्तनकर्तनं बत बत लसत्तेजःपुञ्जो विभाति विभाकरः ॥४३३॥ अत्राभिधाया अनियन्त्रणात् द्वावप्यर्कभूपौ वाच्यौ ॥९६॥ Thus may other ways of expressing this Figure be deduced. VIII—Shleṣa—Paronomasia. When in a single sentence, there are several meanings, it is Paronomasia. 96. Where a set of words, expressive of one meaning, is found to have several meanings, it is Paronomasia. Example— ‘Udayamayate diṅmālinyaṁ nirākurutetarāṁ Nayati nidhanaṁ nidrāmudrāṁ pravartayati kriyāḥ. Rachayatitarāṁ svairāchārapravartanakartanaṁ Vata vata lasattejaḥpuñjo vibhāti vibhākaraḥ’ ‘(a) The Sun, [(b) the king named Vibhākara], (a) the receptacle of effulgent light [(b) possessing exuberant energy],—who attains (a) the Rising Mount [(b) pros- perity], sets aside (a) the darkness of the quarters [(b) the poverty-stricken appearance of the people], destroys (a) sleepiness [(b) depression], sets going (a) business- operations [(b) the performance of religious rites], puts a stop to all (a) free love-making [(b) unrestrained acti- vity],—is shining’. II-6

380 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA परोक्तिर्भेदकैः श्लिष्टैः समासोक्तिः ॥ प्रकृतार्थप्रतिपादकवाक्येन श्लिष्टविशेषणमाहात्म्यात् न तु विशेष्यस्य सामर्थ्यादपि यत् अप्रकृतस्यार्थस्याभिधानम् सा समासेन संक्षेपेणार्थद्वयकथनात् समासोक्तिः । उदाहरणम्-- लहिऊण तुज्झ बाहुप्फंसं जीए स को वि उल्लासो । जअलच्छी तुह विरहे ण हुज्जला दुब्बला णं सा ॥४३४॥ अत्र जयलक्ष्मीशब्दस्य केवलं कान्तावाचकत्वं नास्ति ॥ As there is nothing in the shape of Context and the rest to restrict the denotation of the words-used, both, the Sun as well as the King, are equally capable of being accepted as the object described. 96. IX—Samāsokti—Modal Metaphor. Where the other object is implied by means of paronomatic differentiating adjuncts, it is Modal Metaphor. When a sentence descriptive of the object meant to be described serves to imply something else not meant to be described, through the force of adjectives used punningly—and not through any force of the object it- self,—it is Modal Metaphor, 'Samāsokti',—so called be- cause it consists in a 'statement' (ukti) of two meanings, 'in brief' (samāsena). Example— 'Lahiūṇa tujjha bāhupphaṁsaṁ Jīe sa ko vi ullāso. Jaa-lachchhī tuha virahe ṇa hujjalā dubbalā ṇaṁ sā'. 'Jayalakṣmī (the Glory of Victory) who felt a peculiar exhilaration on attaining the touch of your arms, is no longer bright, on being separated from you ; in fact she is emaciated.'