मालतीमाधवम् (महाकवि भवभूति - शास्त्रीय शृंगार एवं तान्त्रिक प्रकरण नाटक सम्पूर्ण १० अङ्क)

नैः" -> wait, "तरुणकदम्बादि-वनैः"! By writing "कदम्बादि-वनैः", he explains "कदम्ब-जम्बू-वन" as "कदम्बादि-वन"! Because "कदम्ब" and "जम्बू" are two trees, so he glosses them as "कदम्बादि" (Kadamba etc.), and "वन" as "वनैः"! Then "अवबद्ध" is glossed as "दृढीकृता" (or दृढीकृतः)! "अवबद्धो दृढीकृतः" (bound / made dense)! That is so brilliant and totally clarifies the Sanskrit grammar! It is 100% "तरुणकदम्बादि-वनैरवबद्धो" (i.e. तरुणकदम्बादि-वनैः + अवबद्धः = तरुणकदम्बादिचनैरवबद्धो... wait, व, NOT च)! Yes! In Devanagari: "तरुणकदम्बादिचनै" would make no sense, it is "तरुणकदम्बादिचनै"? No, the letter is clearly व! "तरुणकदम्बादिचनै" was just an optical illusion for someone expecting 'च', but it's a 'व'! Wait, look at the end of line 34: "दृढीकृता" or "दृढीकृतो"? Look at the last letter: It is 'त' (ta) with an '