2H?
THE
of
( Paricchedas I, II, X Arthalankaras )
WITH
EXHAUSTIVE NOTES
Mahamahopadhyaya
P. V. KANE, M.A. LL.M..D. Litfc. (All).
ADVOCATE, HIGH COURT, BOMDAy; FELLOW OF THE
BOMBAY ASIATIC SOCIETY AND OF THE LONDON
SCHOOL OF ORIENTAL AND AFRICAN STUDIES ;
AUTHOR OF ‘HINDU CUSTOMS AND MODERN
^T.AW', ‘history OF *dharma£ Astra ’ &C.
Fourth Edition
Ppice Rs. ft*
1050
Digitization, PDF Creation, Bookmarking
and Uploading by Hari Parshad Das (HPD)
on 23 March 2017.
(Some missing pages added from another edition)
This edition is a reprint of the Third Edition of 1951
P. V. Kane
Printed by Laxmibai Narayan Chaudhari,
at the Nirnaya Sagar Press, 26-28, Kolbhat Street, Bombay
and
Published by Pandurang Vaman Kane,
Angre’s Wadi, Bombay 4
II sfr II
i
TO^rrowi: 3npq3jq% —
m ^ t*ft 1
3 tt|^ ^nr: n $ n
3 T^T 3 RTO ^^TI^cT^T ^^Tcifiji^ —
^*r% *t^r s^q- 11 3 ||
TITTll^IIcjffT^T ^
3 % ^ —
I'sreNr ^ig ^ 1 15
'RrfrT #fi jft# =3 W^q»IS?TR^Rj; l|’ |
u+^sfid: ^rn ^irntnrafo’
' « l *nfo« srnmzj 1 *rosn%sn%ihr 1 ^rriftW
J 7 ia?rqqrRt=n^ ^rorrTOr^rara 1 ra{jtra -20
nrffTif TOfrf^^r fftwcPTr ^ito 1 q«?r-
sp?«pdfa!WOT( SffTRiCnrmf^ ^u 1
*5 rffl qfrro gfjfr: 3*3 ij^Tjtig TOR TO:
? ‘m ra’ ?Rf ^-sr-p^tris:.
* iroi!r to:'
I 'fc^l iraf h l ■« te m ^ tenm
xRirnft^^ epm m Eft'll: rcurel^lHfft: m'Jtetil n rara; I
ft * i
ratei teft ftm nn i§£wt i
.5 ;pftte Ttete rar ufa^ra gf&m n’ fra i
‘temrarte «nara£ fra =n i ft^gransft —
‘spirai^mTsi n teftate'+irafft^ift =n i
rrrajjfiraraH ftteiftsn wumra ii’ fra i
^ %gm nm nranra ra^n ftrarat i 'ramfvnte' ^ nfifira^ i
lomftrarai niranttmmra^rar ^iterate — ‘n?tem ftsfraT ^y^i-
<raq i | E te gra nrtft’ fft i gnftram, i ratef — mf temftraten
sfM^IW^Rrafl —
‘rawf urate ft nfmramram rarar:
terrain ftffter fiamfte sfteraf t unu: I
15 ftete+<i*(5ra nrafteraim ft ra
w^cbi^ ’T s ^g^te^: rtefttenp: «’ ^ft i
amt wnrar Trarmftntete 'i £?rara curate n rara; i srapi
sgftft^tenmmmrawtfm i ^mt^rafftte^'Jrtera i ng
giuts^ ^st «t gra rans<frte' terat rarite ten: m^m-
20stete^:, nn raft: h Srmnnraraitefa^ fusrrmrgsracr sn^ra-
wori^te nnraratnra ra ftufa n rate. i n =n iRte.nift nnrara
fqract: gftrrafra tern- - , ft tef ^nraff i rarift
cpiraira^jjrra wra rannte^te ten nteramft m/Tftnn i arrara
ft^in iftraf reraramnft n rate i nfte raft^ra —
25 ‘graprara tent srftrai n =n ft%n: i
raraimra n wn ^ fra f^jfifra: n’ fra i
ft%g=Eite rateptetete fttenn ra rain;, stem ftfintenra
?rarararate i
»ttemte 4 rar: item fft tera'q ‘intent nrsftm nttran,
? ‘3n5Rg<Ft’ ?ft st-n-gra-rare:. h ‘^ft’ sft st-n-gratet-
teifft. 3 ‘am’ fft ^-n-grateitefte. * ‘nratte <tm’ fft ft-
^ ‘tet ’teft’ ft-grawis:.
wr: qfH^v
ntmt: * src* i sft swrt ‘frerqi’ jjfir ira;,
=smr^5fs^^m; 1 ^ rai re g gnt ^Jigtsnftrftfrc'ra; r
* % vim «ns?gjften: f% c^nt^rai*^^
«jr^i*iisft i 3 % =g —
JT3T *T? ||’ |
f% ^ 3r®fT«t4f: ^Jjijkq^s^uRT^qq^ I ^ptRT
T^T^nfw^T W: sp^FfR:’ pn%r n%n%-
^TR^ I =bc=i«Ti 4 'ciTTcT yif^cl s^fcl ijc^, cTSTl’R^rE^ I
cTSTT — Wf: Tfwrt’TT : TTvJPWr TOfcf^T, ?T m I 10-
rafe %!, yuwx'-iHrt *1% i jjoiptt ^5^^ri?n^T5%iTft-
^ra: I 3Tf% ^c, $4 HTtE T^cORR f%5TTcri^ | qiji ^fqi^ T-
^MsTMdQKTcT crff STOTtl#! 3# 3^q;, 1 igjpiT-
f4ra i * i| t^f fra ^tVife^'i t^n f%
%^rr^ra i ^ ‘^mr ^fV ^ifvmr^i ^?t4t 15
^1*4 Ji4t3?Tif4?rfirJtFT ?% ifa;, * 1 »pnf^raR5sr55i«NT3-
^nf4" sEist ^cp4flT5rp^^wn^, * 5 ^sr^qigp-r^^ 1 3 % *
ft — 3 T^t4t 3Tfi?^, T-m^^TcJTT, ?ym: 4Wi%ra, ^Nrr:
wnsuft^ra;, ftcrtissRq^R , arafm:
f^ra;, ^t4 1 <#r ‘sr^pT 5 *: gsTrt’ ^rar crrf^a-
urem; 1 ^ u4: 3 - —
srsfTtf
^TS^T^j c|jM|4hRT I cT^
yi»*i«i®cfi44Wt ^4 s^foraramsiTcr. 1 q^r ‘^frE:
^^jftfirrr^’ qq;Tf%3fTf4crq;RlTE*Tf4 qtrem;
^if cm;—
‘*V ?T ^ ft =nraT <F ^TSTqr-
ra ^NTffecTJTT^dT^W: tl^T:
VI WpflT ^-TlPt cBI
t^Tir^FT tcmfcT^cT^ ^cT: ll” ff% I
^crf%??m; 1 am ft ra*rmtf4?rqrpEW^
^3^ra; 1 q^Fi —
25-
? ‘^HRT-S'W H-^ETTS: . =* ‘37ft’ f|% R-JI^TE qir%.
‘3TW#:’ ?R) R.
‘ 3 TTN I
TmfNq q>fo i^?#tS sfrf^ q T^fra u’
fraTframft <*> m lj m ■h 7 P 3 i^ i mw+iV'jTitv,^ — ‘ qq=q-
^TTcTTr «q{J(:— ’ fra, <TF% q?ra^lp77*TTff^8rr i I iWl
5 spRT^Tfrrr i sra TTnffwnqt qT i qm: i asM'+Tfrararara: i
f^diii^Tri^rra sjjt: i *T5 qff wrfs^qqraT ^qtq: qqm'raTmT, qfi — •
‘STtH ^ TOTTSTf tT?ST 3 Tf f? 3 T^ 3 T < 7 ^Tf I
in qffsr ?f%3r^3T %«nq; atm maRrm' n
f<qi?T ^■?grrra , ?T sq^q^f q»q qjmmrqfi? fra %t , q i
k ar^rrfq mTqraq%qf¥ 5 jq: i srraqi ‘qqrqt am mm’ fra
qT?q d^-l'H) M <u hj'-I 1 d q d 7 ft q>l«qra rai^f I 3Tf?'d Id
qq , q i 7?Tra *pr qqrararsFfqmiq^ i qiirara rarnsra if qm-
^Tfg’qft'rafiqfrci 't^irara^^rai ^qqirndHi TmgqifraT
151^7^ fra ftnraq^gqraiq • ?r*n Rma^prs^^Tim: — ‘qtra-
frraqqrasft 7a qqra ^ftramf’ fra 1 mraira^p^iw^^rpjj; —
‘q ^rerimw qffra q qrarfaftara:’ fra 1
fraiff 1 q^ gfl mraqrar^raqi %qrfqtftmTqr qsnqi qirara q
soraTf^ra %q., q 1 wa^Fa-a^Trafraimw <m^ra mmq-
#qq qq'r Tqqqi^tqmiq; 1 qg «ff 77 rraft ’pirfirrairara'jm'^T-
qrfWwrqTf^rffrcTr^raiqr =t>i«q®qqfi 7 : q 7 mfqmq>i«qq ; qqT-
mtfm qq 1 qg qraqqtTraf— ‘TiFrcimi qirara’ fra, qq i
fra; qfraifqtfqrara, 1 ^qrai^mq^Ttq^qraiq;, strarasr
25 qfearaiq 1 qg rai^^qram.—
‘sr^: TTffa^rra: q>mnmr at sqqfqra: 1
qi^qqd'iqqraraqi qra vififm 7 *jm 11 ’ fra 1
? ‘raT^qTWT:’ TfcT q-q- 3 ra*RT 5 : . * ftq«tfq ST^TC
Rwk wtaq 1 jti qftq Trarara ^rarqTqrqqt^sqF)’ 11 ( qf°i ffc
q 3 jt^ft qtqqq,). 3 ra’ ffq sr-q-
sra^Tfet. v ‘rauqraqqqq *r:’ ?ft ra— ^r— ^ ‘g^*
ftwrqRsa^T’ s, ?ft i^-p-+.TO:.
« ‘ 7 &’ 7 % 31 — q— ^■tel'-h’Hl*:.
1-*
sm: qR'^:
** vgrf?r:— ’ ^ra *gd-dwfa jtal^qT-
qrcnj. i
d <S-H SPTOlft^qffc—
TrorRMm: i to i?totu to to to t aftasnvnro* tot 1 5
^•T ^•n TOT qjRTOmTTOT MWml^d'cllrj; I ‘toR ^Trt TO:’ ^frt
’jiPar 1 to tot tot —
‘3j?q qragt t^tto TOqifsnq (W^to -
ft^roisrgqiTTTO gRtf Rq<ur q ^vTO, 1
R?r^ qft^rsq ^icrss^iTn^tqq
RSTWy^<sO fawn ^FTI TOTT f^R ’iftTOI II*
** f| to: I
tot ff^iq i-sKi>M«t H-<*y iRy (^au^inii^ —
‘toti#to sreqnflfy toRt:, 3% s t ^to * ^ ,
t^rqr ^ttott, to fro^^^r:, q^ Ttrot 1 15
^ ^fitoi:, ?r toi’s:. qrot srorogrt
«iR Rwroiq^irii?^^ to: 11’
TO VKMf^TOl TfrRTk: I
TTTPTOf TOT —
<JT f f^ : ilflTORr qqr frot ^yrw^qv-WH: 1 2 o
J #q ’q Tj*ftRq>ifTO f^roR: 11’
TO TOTOT»2nTOT raqfiqqTOT^ai^Tra: I i i q 4T«Tcj[ |
qtai* S*t : q>i®q « %
<Wrer«w+feu 1
#TT^rgqrTOT?q: ^totto^totto fq TO^airo ^KTO 25
TORpanftTOT^: TOTS^TOTOI^qt §rq STigiTSPFTOTITO-
*?? Whww: q.M'Wiq+qqrr SR-gro^T 1 «^qi R£iql^uiiPi
^SFTO: I
K ‘qMiwr^’ ^ Rr-s^mre:’ ^ ‘i% 3^: qro^’ q-q-
3*ri«hmS:. 3 ‘3)^’ fft 5T-q-3W*MI3:. v ‘qTOTqiqiftqTRT^’ ?fct
^-^-TOWTS:. q ‘SfCiT^q 3r®Tr%fal’ 5T-q -gW4,m 5:.
3
gtrn^r:
3t$ferc: gonsfrcffcra: II 3 II
jpn: fTRn%q;, BTSSfRi: RdqTsqqqH^-JH-
T^tqq^, SR^I^R 1 *! rt^lr EEI^TRH^
.5 ^I^WTR^'RPT I qsrft goiwi Wq#R 5Wlft goiST^sq
^oili^tsq^^R^^t^M^qd I 3RTST ‘’pilfasq^PR: ^RTT TH^Tf-
5 ce^ei:’ r?5% vtqqira srFtqRPH. i qqmft HiiMra.i^Riw q^rm: 11
qiqwra^qTq^KKr-ifdT ■yil^caqq^ ^s^^q-
PtOTt HRT ym: qft^: I
? ‘3'ni:’ ffrt ft-j^ctwns:, r ‘#q’ ft-s’SRi'ns:. 3 ‘g^t-
fipqsRpjRqiqq’^qqq i ®ra^’ fra ^-sra%i rafet.
&
ftrffa: 'Tfcsite! I
?m #ipt: I
’Tt^T q^TO3*si5% STRUTS: I qft^lra?¥n^sft
£ 3%n sira; i stt^|t jRrtfaq*t- 3
I *T =3 ^fi^T^Wr: I H^.T|^T qiqq# ‘4k*tf:
iwr pft’ ^wm i siraf%i^i%^: i g%-
qm<lf
’T^'T Hfl'id:
^ I
?s’q fs^rr ^ ll \ ll
^totri ^ i 3fk xr—
gi^TRI^pn^ $5T: *T^T ^n=7?f ll’ ^TH |
^ w w — ^rerqi-’ i *t?it —
TWT^TT nWlTrR^^nK I
< T2N J ir <ra q^ajonSrera stt? —
pft: m l
w— vz: i switttIft
” v i srofi ?rp
20
I a rq ^ld
i sroqNqq
mi w^m ww fmi m ll r n
"qt wwi? — 25
cn^TtsqisfwTT *TI^ 3$qt swtt mi I
5 W?rcT <$> \\\\\
l '3^ ifr w. ^ ‘qpRq^iqiqq?^’ 1 % ft. 3 ‘qtqw-
sn^’ fra 3T-sr. v ‘^q^raqrrarc;’ ffcr ra-q . ...
3 T arfvrv^n: I
^ SfTrftTsfa I
‘aiam’ ^?g% a
'^WT ai^tsm WI ‘gi^nfe.gRq u^R’tHU ^:’ ffrt 5 PW JTRT-
5 7 ^ I 3 R?cR a ‘TIT STOR, 3 TWTH- 4 ’ ^TTTFTI^Rt^TTI^ri'
’Tt^T^r ‘srerrepTm:’ arMaa^m a ‘anfmroa:’ af-
ffurrw 1 srf%a TO^'T^wfvrsTniniri 1 aaT — aftra-
'bTtotej a^ft ag$?: ftaft’ ^ma I g' P t^l Hhhfo l dL I a'4T —
‘SPWKT^KTT:’ fTTa I a a afftar$ ataa?ail J -tl^¥l
lOsraamTRsaftaT srfrETfaaT am 1
flipt s^s^rf^iTg ^ ll 11
3 nfgrfift«i«i^g atmifePT | ajoTt ft^aiaiatg: ftp?* a*g-
art: • ft <Rii^«i aaidW+a: fJ'JJHMIlIrmt «aRd-
7ftar 1 ^trts^i q^afftaiftm ffi^ftmaftmrga: 1 ftsai:
I5grvamn a^gaat: ai^a: i ^ f| afaaaa-Ta aa a im ifos ai-
lft%5T®TPTR=E^iTi: TRaftsiS^arm: I Ti'fta ft sarfimifag tfifcdl
qsft 1 a s?ttei 1 anasm s a i S wreilM widiq, 1
am 55 $rai —
S^nM ^i€t tRPTts^: jtfjq % 1
20 $t: 5 rtem:rai ^tfqqT ll H ll
‘^T^f: *nf% 7 >:’ ?mr?T ^ria?iaift^ ana-
sgwiamaT TrsaTraai ma^fci^wdWiidiia^M, aaT a ‘a^nai
afcr:’ TRwni^inMaRasnaijftsTwa^T
^<l*ft v Hli^ 4 «|ry^+sil?^pT < 3 ilp 4 ataaR, TTT ^'.tniiwoi mWlft-
25 %an ftang^ftar ar ?rfd,4yai am i *5^ %g, aftrfft-
7a 1 'STt<-^ ‘<ifl-idi ata:’ araai^aT^T^m ^ftamaiaamnaatam
ataamr s a laa^ 1 %g ftarft am +mf^wafmar sssjSrsftswa 1 :
rnift^aafr — ‘^: Malaaigift’ ^fa 1
? ‘sftstftwf^fRra.’ sft ft. * ^tiTR^TT:’ w% ft.
3 ?ft» ft.
%fk:
‘qatfat i ^nmfimw-
^ngratfcr ^qf%^wr: f.jnn^vjwi gqqfs 4 : ir^sw+Rpq^q-
q^ri^q^q^q*RqfNR 3 toh^ qtaqfa i q i
f^tJnf^rrawr gqqi«t«rR: i 3T?qf%;
‘TTSTRr “^r^Iril'tWTl'R'-M^ STffrtwiilTH^ | S^qfrtcsWTR I qR 5
‘m: sr’ fRqrfq ^$ruu rrt i ‘n^tV TTCraRtfTSREpfcr
sfsnrf^rsr qftr^R rrqmrq u
S W^&K T§qt |
^ffli^R^si'Jir wa \ — ‘*irar qiqfct’ i jRt^ w — ‘f,?m:
Rqqrfcr’ 1 sr^qrfl %?r,f%m: q^cnfrrvr^tqqjRqT %qWicR-
S^Rfoqqfc ^t^TT^TO^vmR%lf?g^ 3 TI?Tra?W#qHts^T:
S^riT^arf^FfT 1 1^1 jRRRmi^n^: 1 3 tr^ 3 fRT^r-
••Ww^ iPTterejj; ) 3T5T q g^q^TFffqts ^ i ^h^ i 15
sfgtunqr 3 q^^^aFifa^qw?: 1 11
W W$ qTOR*I%S$ I
SW^qT^fT ^spi^on II vs ||
#&qt3mfc$8joT^on qqj — st?rr;:’, ‘n^m sta:’
=5 1 snrmit 3 ^qqzqRRq$s?qq% 5 ^ t jp^rerrererR-
JTq?R: I
q 5 -TT m —
‘sqf q srf qq Rig^ra 5^R?rr irf&rr vrqm q?q; 1
%^t^q s# §%cmRsr ?rer: srtt stcrj; u’
STqiqqTO^RT qtqqp4S?qqp?:§q sqfR^q: strt 3TTRHJT3-25
q#q 1 arqqsTftu’i q^gqqjRireqf^qrRP^Rrrqqrqr qqfiq^nq:
^ f, q: qwRmrcifasrq: 1 gqftq u
snftTT^q^i^r^ mw< qr sift fg^rr i
cJT: ^IrETa-^^^oif: I
II C II 30
20
? ‘ftfr wrftra’ q-q. * ‘qq^sqqtniq’ ffir R.
•^Ip^I ^STOTT RTJlqT 44 ] — ‘SW parin' I 3T5T T£
^rrjpicnq’gts w^ui ** t-M : ^m^ra3?pren3F^*r nniarn t
untenr 44\ — ‘R? f??n: afesrfci’ i ara ?mrai f?crenft-
5 i strctar nair-‘ai;fow :
^ft’ I *44 S^T'Tfes ^^!TTgT3jqq¥ng[ : | Mqteft
q’STT — ‘an^f^’ I ST-Il^'^R'JWN ?!WraiW=T^-
iranra i ar^Wa^n ( arsqfiran>r ) ang-
’ERa# I
10 44] an — TR#^ 5^ Tpa^fa ‘TT^TOT n^jfcf’ rfn i ®ra
^wfJwTW^H: SRSR'n: I 44] 4] — 3TJmra$aHfe ‘^jtsanj;’ I
srarmanarnf^^i^^Ji: w^^v- i snimsfn ‘narrat’ i am arr^-
wNrapr: i ‘anfr ^:’ i 44 an?^^rui:
sgrsRg: i qnTRnanft i Fnft'n^r ^mn^Fnm^anratf^f'tRT-
15 i ar^nea-^ *% n
wm' *ra^r m ll ^ u
m *\mm ftm *rferc: l
cTT*. sts^ti srajon: i srnj#j?R*srren: ^i^i^Rian-
<?q: i <44 3J’S.mi ’jjn^nimFafa i ^T^ntTR^^mr RRim
20 nmr 44i — ‘qnrin tterin gorin’ i ^
Rmifrg atnn i irntan 441 —
^srfnrcg 4 ‘<# ^RfrrRr n^f*ct’ 1 ^if-
qr?FP5a*Wf sm-qaRTRT n t oft qxTT-^IM %R?n ?pnnt’ I JTqRRt
44J — Rmfqrcr n^for’ 1 ^ft assw^ami RiTtqr ^Wt 441 —
25 ‘CTStt STtanfct’ I Sfqrnn 44] — ‘niaflftap:’ 1 ^fr
asarwarju qVcr 44\ — Rmr STTOqfcr’ i
qqRH 441 — ‘niireqfaj’ I
? ‘ftqfrjiT arRift^ m^rer a&r ni: nra^swtra^cHrcr'n i sqnq'
^RFTSfR^ 4t4\ l’ m44 ‘53T’ feTOTTasn^ H~3^% S3 3 #. R ‘*J=T’
sriar nrfe. 3 ‘amqnm’ ?ra h. v ‘^ajwq^r:’ ?rat w.
H ‘SrifPTTSfo’ ^H.
aa %f^if : — jpn ar§a+TR?n 7 k sssfa^ 1 If a
aHlcsr-i ai£l*fmftak Piw-nf.fl^f?cr | d-i^Tt^ | Tft^TS^^TPJ-
€fd?ri;d ai^F^af^isam&akc ^a^&riaafaRi^ 1 afir-
■SIM &RF<ai 3 - r^diaTST g?T^TT^P 7 IWT^ I
sr^f a $fRTRT#T Stl^raT ail%ftad[ I 3
^wwi^d aiCtaarniai jprr »*a sssprI 1 a i
aarfl — aa ’Tta« 5 i 5 fi 0 'M*r: mnaa, a ai 1 aitrsf¥ afa ^ a
ai 1 5 r%n^t gara^araia^RT 1 aa a asm: 1 aT#q>ksWifTlr-
aaia; 1 a f^ffc: 1 afamaia^saanma an^sKk a^n-
awqaia; 1 snsft manfi ?ir^aa a$lr 1 a f|ak: i aR %
aiar^T^taam a M<ii*id, rt-iK^ aissta^i®^*^ a awiaifacotua-
sri3 1
amiaa jtivTstt g<?aar fan ai^ssT^an H^r^m^wn-
^sa^%nmania*aii[T?tans| ^SFafn 1 ai ^aFiig a ivM i da ra-
araa aaTaan; 1 fa a faamilFm^aa 1 ^'t fjraRifiraaT-
'^s.i I TqaRr Tf amraRa knqi&a^l : Riiy-nIfl^T««*tI^'SU
•^TadlldWRT^TflRR, I nai — ‘afjmiaaqjaT:’ I gmzafcf RiaRa
%jRfrfR: 1 amnaroifc’J SRa ^sror 1
T>mqw> ll ^ II
sank ai srs^fi war ?r%Rrai: aataawa^qar
aar sa£ f^'-aT ^rf ar^T^TF: i jr ^[kfranNdiqft-
n^ifsknaninaa: 1 asrr — ‘aq^ar af an’ — ffa 1 nsja:,
afa?$3anT n#aann?T: 1 am —
saf^TR sRifknar afaan? fa ^rrfth i’
an kqf^ifa’ faaa ‘arifa^rfa’ rfa ssapk i anacqroTa-
arasnfasraaafa: natal 1
^%FT*r^Ft Ttmm srft wi\ I
? ‘agaaaia.’ k. = < 3 ?aT i RffaTqia’ fft fa. 3 ‘aft’
i^raaife ia-ya%. v ‘sriffark?’ ?n fa. h <<jq|’ ffr fa.
$. ‘satat’ sftt a-a. vs ‘a’ ?fct aifer n-a-gar-w:. <£ ‘agn-
$k’ ffiF a-a. ^ iaaffa% M-g^ra. > o ‘aaafaa-’
H. r ( > ‘qmr 4 -’ sfo fa.
5
10
15
20
25
n
UTTT 3R *ifr*<i : qt'^r5r?i ssasror: q wia-^R
^ Mwt> f^n *JRT I
idsyi^ ?T<1 ] —
5 ^RT: ifl+KVl: q^g^ WRg^ i: sRjJT: |
*R3 35 qsifff^Tt TmbfR Rf
^Tft % tfti ^T IT tfm ^ II’
ar^l^fr^naJTTfcap^ fiifr ^4f5i 3 * 5 =^ I
‘TT^WT ^t^:’ FR5T Tw’jH, I
10 rfcj WIIW^IT%^T ft: II H II
^RST flT^Tf^R R«TIH^5§TOTT¥r^T: I
=3 —
*r^% <n 3 tn flr^TT i
cTT 3T^ctfrfFi^RiR5T??T: i ?ra <T7JRRqlr rsti — ‘ nwiRf
15^:’ i srrc«m?rc^ m \ — ‘sqft qf ^r’ sh i q^w^trainpiTf
s^roi n
31 «T oZf^7\]
W^T sfcq% W* II II
m ^K^pnf^r ^ i
20 ‘3T^ff%^raT RRR ^lqRTflR:’ fR R^lfttWajraRT-
*r=TR-*ng RT=rg ffrag r rr*t sfaf^uqaqmiTj ^rtr^s^t
5Ttel% RT STS^RTOR K$fcT5RRn?aj ff^^R^RTORRTR-
^rfi[^rq%^rm^n ^t^tt i
cT^T —
>5 STf^WTIfST W'W ^TT II W II
srfirarq^mT5 —
3ra$r m ww i
*ttrwtt ii ?v ii
? ‘MM3 r$3’ m ra-*r. r ‘wra^’ sftt r. ? ‘qiWRc¥
?.% r. v ‘^rfrfi:’ r.
VI V
4 iV^<v
Trfc —
‘Rrmr fespqfrra si^-d4 fenfarn i
3t 4: M+Wl few *ifefsi: II
gTT: 'bkJt ®rfei: ??RigT: I 5
TTSgiSRTIJR*^ fetlTOjfe^ra: II’ ffe I
‘SKTf^Et 5 ft:’ ffe TTj|"d*4l4d ffeiRgt I
‘^Iff-wl fft:’ ^fe ?rfel I ‘tftalljdY ^fe sr^sr:
’Tl4: I ffe T^T: ^rp: | ‘^ng ^ ^n^:
fe^: 1 ‘a4 th# *Rng i rtrstti:’ 10
ffe «<4x«q*i: <pw: I ‘p: ijnft:’ ffe gflft: feg: 1 ‘jt^jti TRf:
%f:’ ffe JTgfeFT: | ‘Tig TT gl4dl^<d< gfa 5 ^ I
‘fevnfe TFFT =q^T:’ 1TFT =5Fg: 5nft I ‘H% fe^Tig:’ ffe fep-
'<Trg4% i ‘vrtfe ?snwg.’ ?«# 1 *g**g |g
fe^rurtfri^r tjt^t ?rt t%tt 4tgi^^ 1 15
ft ^ %'Ty^HF srif: — ‘^rftsfe T^rig^q: ^15^ feiTT-
STTtfe^T I TgPHIig^qtsft 5T: TOtrE%n 3JWRI%g , fetiT'-
iH fg TT TgnRGnjfe?ri|T’ f FT | | ■ Tg qi:
^ITT^T: Til-dig-ii TT STfT^T^T fe^TT aRR#3, T ^
T^4feRfe^l4qT®^T»P4feTlPn^T TTJTTJ^ | fe ^ | ?nt TR 20
*fti^=t>i«i5riiidi TT;?^(f^^iTTTRTiTi^feTflr?r4^<wi44l<g^iiyi-
d^wobst fro? ti’et agr R^nfe'iRT% ^trwi : + i < ny w •* 1 g =g
R«TT I 3RT IRIf : %Tfe^TTtWI% — “-‘TnSTWPT ^Tft g gojfe’
ffa ^ *&” f^5T3ffeTHT JTFTFTT STI^feg T^TSfrfe%'fol I
arrigTTsgig ‘TgrajqrragFfT — ’ gsngt igmg^srfgfiT: sq q i g rei 25
TT^pfera^sftrw ferftfe ti qrsg^rFTi%f%^g: ^rfru:
Riftmg^t st^tt 1
w wr TTmgrci ^in^TggqrvnTifegfTfe>fig5r w^N> ^^-
30
? ‘giteFTig’ ?% ft. ^ ‘R4l<V t-t. 1 ‘mqt 4tgr?g:’
sfe ft. v ‘gFgitgiFTft’ gft ft.
^ *ITo
V-'IV
fospffr iTrtrrf^: I
rfsra^r#5frnt Rvft^ti twt ^ to-
^ Tm rera ^FT ^rfd^i ||’
5 sra IHE?^R7fvr^' W
Eraferci | >jsj+i»-4(r^ i
^pTiw^ w ^ 5pter^ i
w ir^ri^vt m rnmni sspnspn n \\ n
10 ‘*ifr*ri sj^nfr i ^ ^-^1 ^ Iwftt crcra&rN?nv
f^TRT m] ^{W^hh W^KI WW lfe/$P3Rfc *TT
^57 i
^ ^TFTif —
is ««m^w»wrai tmfmwfM ^ n \$ n
m ^w#pw i
‘spi^t JTf: ffar nrf =g gcqv^i #n cj^ffci fuffa: |
20%^MFWT^ ’tfrf: 3KFT {$ ^iftqTRI ||’
8FFT i[3T SIFT sftSl n-cy^c^i^tcq-m St’afaiwlrt WsTf JTFT
^nf^; t
‘ft:tfq^FS^T FPFR ft^S’FTfSVW
25 ^ rT«ft ^Hm I
FT^^FTfTR ^FT ^'FnRFTBTFrfteFT^
^rnff ^rig^at »Frri% ^ M*w rfaFPj, n’
sra ?r?f?cHiiN JtfrrFrtR f^ift^^Fn i ^
MT^I^fAf^SM i^hara i
? ‘arfwn’ ?frr 3i-«r. ^ ‘^rn^rpgrr hsi^R <tss*t’ ffa ^-g.
3 ‘*!3*RP ffo FI. V ‘ftfte’ f% FT. ^ ‘F^,’ #7Tfa% ‘JnmftffT’
«wm5n^ R-3FT7i. s. ‘oWMMfcl4l^’ ffcr ft.
tHk:
55 T—
‘3^r ftra^ror^r firfir#r5fwr sottt I
5* II’
3TW «lwii>i'-<i fif:^«^»i ifiTRI ^5155
5»5: st^jH&ri^fir 5anft sfarts tT^s r ^4> i 5
! firaw^5i| ;
an^wft ^ktari: i qd^Ri&i w —
c g^T9W5l 55 fRT qSTgsmt 5F3K I
^arfir $r% ^rfiifW^sR u’ ia
3T5 'WrT, arft 5lf q igj & ^fit 5535 S5R5 I
% g| 3%£ 55T —
fi>2 5 J|c5i I
^ ggfr l ’T W ft*ft&54< II’
5T5 H?«n ?ra ^fiwfi^rP^ g ^n =s 5i fa$Jta jt 1 is
<£r 3*i<( re i «wwwnaHi ' H^r i
irira; faforr m II ^ li
3T5HT 5|tS 1<$S*5«TJN^5 fa^Vd5l 557 S?Rf3T-
fisfifcn: I ^ gn^TP4^T sq-^pri 3T$IT — c ^I^t JT^:— ’ I
STSfqpfo **jt — — ’ ^STT? I *mwm ^TI — 20
frtw-’ ^Ai\i i 3 i
^*^4 'H^.lRdT II II
55: 5# S55f^S5tn55W^f, sr^STl ST®?*. I 5^7 STST-
4>^V5g4 I 25
3rfwrr^^RtwwT?iR'4t mi I
n 1% n
STfiTOt’Trfil^f 5T55>: I 5§rjrt T Trf55pt 58fT3K | sq^R^Tlft^Pt
S53R5: I
? < Pi c ^ 5 t’ ft. ^ ‘^r sqipn^ 0 ’ fir. 3 ‘sr#w*C ifir fir.
ft; ^ —
^ ^ ^ II ii
art^r^pn ig i+m iy^ro ^tf^i
5cn^- srw ff%: i o^ar <m^w: i ash# ^ arrf*riinsf*r-
fedlfeKHlifrU ggq; II
^r €t(|?i^
5=rw H#n qft#r- u
V-'lv
W.
§WT-
SHTOgRRI^T? —
sn^urWI m*wi sw mti n 12 n 5
«5M'*>ll^ o?rirft:% ^ 3R$t-
-M^rfli-Mi gi+M^-m^, 3R?gf^ %: i
m w *ift *rmFT<d #n^m% ^ I
3#7 q%5T^
ST 3RRT I ST'STTOT^ fst: S K^t& gRft& R R t g 5 R % 1 10
^ii^N$fil4iw i ^qftsr g’STRS i tor i
& 3*: II l\ II
&im «tt ^4^ I
^ m *T II ^ II
^U'51 ^•4RHH*‘a*i)«jTfcg<!r«l|[^^(Vk u ll sfa ®JlrT“ 15
M l^u’itMWMmi)^'i IHS I^^^JTS^-'il sfcg-
RRT I *£R R#l’ R ^R Tgi fr I g5RT-
g*reg gssr g^’ ^rr?Tf^s gR, ‘g»R& g^sr gssg,’
s^h.i^hur rr, ‘3>rs g^t =r g^rg’ ^rogigsRSTfa t^stss-
STteTRigT-FRlRTgR SRR mmhk.M’-iiRI S?S^I% 3TTRT I g=( 20
gss’ ^l%l gSRW RRWgiTf |
i; <if§^ ^
t snrft srsi ^ i g gi ^u i g—
‘stossRNfgsg^sr fwndra rht 'ftRi i
fgs R3 .rm ggR rr wig^ssn rt^ ii’ 25
SS 5R^n f=TTRRT 5RRn i
‘Rg?: gRTRgR*: q^^g^SRI^: RTTOI: I
TT SRgft R 5fSTT: ||’
? ‘^Wl^j^TT’ 31— R.
rtrrtr:’ fit-R.
3. ffa R. 3 ‘3R-
U — -
ara se^jt firf&n arpfi i
’jpn ^ l
■wyn. i
§HT ^ «TT 3j4t» II ^ II
5 OTHT ^TT^R ''fem\ m ft #1^ I
*n ^n i —
sr to Mfcflf 3 ^ ll j£ ll
sr ^famr sjfcr ?TMR'Jiyuif^-Mi^'W ^ i7n^Rr% '^fa:-
ften qzsnFrcr, f% ^ shrt aw^i^n+w i
JO 'g^rftpr^TT, WH: Tg^FT *W: I
srra: &+«i<j<?4l, j^rts^q^ u’
3nTO#rto ftft% ^ i
44w 4 s fe ^ wn 5 ^: n n ll
‘ v-nWrt gsn’ i 3^row* fon-
15 fW: I ^uTldl^tinj—
‘srer ^wfc ?*lg, i#ri^r ^ qi* sr, ?ra ^ wW sfr i
f i4-nif^H^^M^-T i an na gfc wsR'ft %fRr n’
sfra ‘3T^:g{Prw’ ^sri^wn^ww, ‘gqfcrft’
=q ^T: I n^FFTO I
20 55 ^ ^ 1 ft'-d i Hlf*d I ^
n mraq^ r * ^' -iiwtn , i
fafis d ' ^4 i q-m m nm 1 1 l JT3 ^niTRTspftra-
sflfR, n<M«M«yid5t'^ti'^ ^dil^SWUlWWW, s[H «T I
$**wT<iqfa a«n TOW i * ^ ^w4!w«
25 dm't>wi - , =K»s-i<sii( 5 ^^'* )rc '*t, I s^isi'ti*^ dH"*^ RST^tT-
WRR. I ^n ‘WgE[S <R dN^’ ‘U#wfq?f[ RRFT-
=g 4W$3isft q^rri^q^mt: I ^ %&-
^T§: — ‘3RT5F fTOJTOg%RS^, qq^TTTO^^ITOm’ ?%,
? ‘ftWR:’ *f?f Ft, ‘ft'RTfsFR:’ 5ft 51-3; ‘RbuPfW:’ sfa g
jjffcRWsitRd: TO:; see notes. * ‘srfitmwt ^:’ sft
3 ‘^W’ R.
^ *r I * ^ ww WRiwMuft:, arfr g fk^nuw
ffrl i #* ^nro 55m i
SWHI^KM to «W«WW41: I
3t*W u m —
*^TT i+M H Nsi «T 37 I 5 5
I S!3F3[ xf
‘5^ *rar’ ‘g^ *rot’, ‘^r^t’ ^srer ‘drfa’ ^ to
F^ raTOFra^FT: JJ^se 8 q^q^gw ii>S^
Ul'4i«ii«ii ft^TT f^toK'cklql'wi. !
*rto ^ to II II W
**& *£wn*i^: I 5
^vrfrT SkTM^ ^T% I^^IOHl 3^T: l’
‘4|<3^iri’ f^qt I «T
^7i I ‘kH^’ ftr^iT^ I |g
to wm ^ swtorto: i
‘<tot 5^r’ ^nrr fttf ‘5?t%’ tosf ^I^h
f?opj; i
towwwi to q*RiRft<*l « A ii ^ ii
WH- 20
‘Ararat 5^3jsFFFn:’
*ra ‘^RR’ ^ld FF^^-fsfcTOWRT^FTF: I JRtpf-
^iMWI|: I ‘^dl®d’ =3 F F W 1I I
stow 5 grto *rej% to% l
F«fT — 26
«T3 *flfMigv|fiidl?FM*lwld’ fTF Ffo: I
H ^Il'Wdi^WlH 3rfcl^d WIRiy, I FF %%?Tf :-*F^T^t
F? 3&T ?#» FF^Mrgq: F ^M^ld ^ l^ lFT F g ^ i gtfaTftft
«r
$i®3i , 3MMwui^'iito«sJlm’ ^w, ?ra i^k-
I Wsfts^urcw I
*T*IT —
5 ‘WW Jrarfa S?ftd#rfar WPTO: ^ l’
srer ^)<l'i(J|cii5flRfliTKrrft^qA'M sn^n STOFWt: 3IFT
=3 I
ffrm ^ ?xwm II ^ II
*nn —
10 ‘am i’
3tw ijtri =^a?5 ^rfrurfH-
MK'MnyH u N*fiwwwi I
^TtWTT ^t: #flwi: I
’jni ^rt %$f^rirrf^t nlfe^i i
15^3 -d ft w i +fc.jj j^s^n*n*R'ng% fasta afarra^ —
cr^T: fm J HT^nT^Tt ?pit \\^\ II
fq^ri^f^RT^ KWI ^ f^RT I
w ^pv 'rr^: i
fo+sWW&W^ ^TOT —
20 ‘^I^nO&s'MT Rklftr: 3+^^+lilH. I
d+dl* Wdi®aiH: 3 al5,Mi5*Rd ll’
3T3 ‘?Jig%:’ f^T^T fRI i«l«id?MW(^+d^ I 3T«?-
fli^ui fira^ a*n—
f^fadfaa jfteg^ aft sn i
25 Wffira t^llsfl HdHld ll’
3f^% erg 4H r dfd+fo' : TH| Mirnt^+I iq-o»®^*i f^nf% I
^V<il^Hm<d 1 'H+il qMcmi^ II II
^tt m m*m
* *Wl —
V-Va
♦
10
qq^lftq PRif^PT: |
^ ?q qqjqi#: qtfftq II’
stqfcq^T^TCT ^T^RT ^li^M qi^q ^:%fpJIT qisMWI+q
i
^rm mzmi i
^rr^jn^rr il ^ 11
W —
£ ^pt^ ^r t^T^f ^i^r ^rf i
^[••di^rl | f^FT: II 5
*n^w ^e^rr «rf i
*TOT—
‘qiT^itq *TC*fi qT%S|q ftqftfoft I
*TM»l»)q qftqi qifcq *m«i n 5
*ft3.WI*HMqq)$ql*ft q^qqj q^qFT —
‘i^SFjf ^mui qiq sqlfldi qsq I
^T^l: 3>*j3i»ri^ dK<*|: qr^iqil ||’
‘3t?t ^ Jjf wfer ^trt qr fq*jqq: i
3**^ ^qi^niqT ^q ii’
arah^T^jqfq^jrafir: ‘^qf^rqr ^mpnijn f^rq
sn^qscr ?qn%qfqrn i sriq <jj|’ ^q*q ‘srqJr’ ^qmq qfrr-20
^nqriq^^qtqjTi ^qn^qsr q 3#qT: i qq faq3fc?q<q q^p-q
?5 t%i: i
r^R^nr: n ^ \\
15
25
e {l'jfl=llJ)s« <ImO=( |
^ ^i^i'{ini+l»ir4(^5, 1 cc(q , Hq|^diqgqqwTqIlq.qiqt |qf^ : |
‘cnftqftiq qwtqqt,’ ^fq gri e r gqwif^fq-d-Ti faqq: i f% ?q^ft-
qq Snnq; i qf^— 30
{ ‘^Iqr^iqt ?% q. ^ ‘q-<^Hi<C ?fq q— q.
3 r^R 3 x<JW«< ii’ ?ra i
q^S^I^TOWl
^'WM^iU'SfU. I Wlg.l'fMS^ «
5 w —
‘apj^g T|frl 4 f^ft 3 ^T 5 n f^TT t
^ ^ favnfa m *m u’
!H^|«4 cig: sftfWI%re5T *TF*l^f3rfwn*T: I
WU 4 M 4 ia.^i ffo II ^ II
10 *«ct—
^r frorarc ^ras^wn. ii’
‘lift srarci-’ |?n|r ^
*m%n : i <WHft^warea W^TF^rnf^ WJiisfit-
15 fo ->$03 I IwiN *rar —
51 ^ 3 P 7 T *TTT |:WWlft #*T I
ci^i ?rfrsn: ^rss^r# Tm: ii’
sfomfrnfW i
‘^fot-’ iffo i wid i «rft»tw^n% t^j-
JOftwm: I ‘Phm^’
mi ^ II K ii
25 drWfci IWIF^K,^^ II ^ II
ireH mm i
?RT fijESTSTTH^FT W< 9 M 1 *hW w —
‘ 3 TT# I
?frjf^#TT& mzmi ?ra ii’
? ‘fs mftqg ^ T ’ =n<t sr-sr. * ‘rRsrerrl’ ft. 3 ‘^733^:’
fft SPflfarraftSPRT: TO:.
^0-^0
fft ftftFm i flw'iw m\ —
it T^^rRprr4ter: ^himtuTUui: i
5f*f^R^nit^p qq qqpgft ||’
srq qum qq qsrrcig^q:, qarap i Rftq a ^mwq. , 5
ttwj qq qqm ?rj: ^qq i e r if r it ftftq^ 1
srf%ie'4i®^Rsi* , *»n %q?l qqi—
‘qpg ft w qycw i: s nas q iHia^Mm : 1
*ra qftqqsr J*»qq«rftft R«icqj?ft ftftq^ no
irrarpR w —
‘jh^wisw ftprraqq ykq^PM ft^qrqr: 1
*rq nftsift TF3tqrtnTN5ij^'i%i5nq ftrq 1
*^3 ^ ?Tq^j)l<TiHI FT^qifrftft ti'j|4W<Ai<{i«t( 15
ftfaq**.’ ?ft qf^ra 1
3j%^t wm ^T°i ^ 11 \° 11
fT5*
sTRt^m^w ws$t m w w w 20
mi{ iw^iqF^wj. 1 qsn —
‘<i'H | J||'HM^I»Ttwrrl qpPjgR q: |
srftnj^ jrw '^i)yfeqt?q «’
srq ^®jrt iN^qrcft qn ii<£m i4ugq<qi Hiftqn I
m Rh \i ^ 1 25
qprf^TPt'RWJTR I q«n —
‘^iW|m: qwnrRPRn i
c^i+wlTirt^lw+^cp-j+sc i|q tfiqq^ ||’
®ra ^iq*Rrqt JrsqRrqtq: ?r{®^:, g% q?pqftq snft l
? ‘qsfoTCft’ 5ft ft. H ‘TTiRPnd'T:’ ?ft ft. 3 ‘qq q’ 5ft ft.
V ‘qT^qpndft’ ?ft ft. H %T #1%’ fft ft. 5. ‘qgpmfa:’ 5ft
ft. V3 ‘JPsTSl’ ^ R. ^ ‘^^TITPT:’ ft.
•I ft4ite^4Tft4ft'3j4JTt 4% jj<-«<d4i 4ct-
£fcw ^im wm ^ nr-u II ^ H
m
5 44 +li<»i<?'M T*Rfl- 44T —
4i3«rP;r+i ??l4v4?g4ra s i
h’
%4% 441 —
‘71% £4T4% 44|ftf4: JP£HT
10 4KM3K gfc 414 I
4fNro% *j§ 4t 43 *n «rar % ii’
^q% t%t: l
‘ Rk^^.I :’ %4: | 4, fft ^<^ fc 4?M*? ?T ft 4[4 441 —
15 {, 4^: *hwm ft44% 4i44T^i ,, 4 , 44r u’
4414: SFT14T 4^4444*4: 41f[ 4tftW44ft ftftrR. I 441
%74T ^^I ^ K m ^ S^ ^ l ^u' l 4744 . I
^n% uf^Td^i: vm' *n#sft ^ ll ^ II
f^5S 44T TW —
20 IM ft^<4 I
ft+fod^^pil T4fT444TTOT4%% 5 % 34 TU: ll’
«WH*H3ftM4 441—444 ‘ftgTTOt-’ ^11% ‘H^, #?-
<<3 'i g<dft-4 4l 4 %4’ ^T4 TO I 4 =414 I 44 ft
TOTTTf 1<5cMlim>T ft4T 4^4^
25 Pidlfev^l 4444 41^3414*44144^43, I 4ft 4&
‘44t?4T74pfRT:-’ ^4471 TO4%43, 441%: 34IK4I 41^441
44ftT4TI71j3^4f 4^4414-^14 4 41744, I 44T ft— 4I4T3414-
^«44i 41734 4 3 4f>4 T%4%43 I 14f74Fr?4
sSJ^t: 41414444441 ^4f444T4, I ^ 3 jftt44%: 4t4TT74T
{ ‘54441 4%414T4,’ ift ft. R ‘4R414P44SI’ ?ft 4-4; ‘TO4’ ?f%
3 44ffW<fci544: TO:. 3 ‘44F1T’ 4ft ft. V ‘5HW4414’ ?ft ft.
1—W
mwi «n%n g f^aqwR^ i a#?**-
TOTOT^sft s^raf —
‘g^ f^i^t ^r^tftfFT totot i’
TOT —
JTfq&ofriJri ^stot i^fa:’ i 5
a^rl^s'R i tot —
‘W^TORITOTST^T g^l RdTck^igRI fdg<JI-
srtTk^ l^i’JJN^'I -sXl *Hwt ImT'* l^-'^wil I
*ITOlft ^TITOT ^%g*t TOTaaft %TTOT
am 3 tw vrfrrorag^ tot n’ 10
silf %^rf%^H=t>l>JU r + N ^1 4 r =l I ^ 4|1 >3ig; K -H wf
iwr 1 1# m^nTOi^fTTg srterg i
srfawsti^ w* ^ I
a^nf^PT^Ifsrssr^^wj; i tot to —
mi> W -Tlfg i ^ i ^ ^ 7^ * 5T5T'5T; 15
gmm^TOfaTT'Tft'TO %5iW: I
^ TO Ttf%ft?TOf^RTtSr fTO$T
dgwH-'Wi ^(^tT^Tii% gTO?: II’
to a^fgf^iK.aifop ^%2?rg i
f^T^TrWTT^ ^f^imtFTFt tl ^ II 20
Tfarnft f^rr l
^ i<i ■--4-Ht'Ji^ itnnhm i^ci-m 1 aRHiTRiarRirw: 1
tot —
‘fgrTOtam ^crrpw wt to i
TTOtq’frroi^m $at ?j% tottot 11 ’ 25
sTOrot’TTTO'TOT «w«t iVR'JTiTTvri^.iHgjMd 1 sro 1 3 •TTromTOf-
TOgrofc fron%wTTOT 1 kto$t WsaroTO toRt:, fjrfft
TOTRlfaaTOTO II TO% ‘gTO^ ^TRTTOt^TOTJH^r-
? tot’ laraac arfe; see notes.
* ‘to‘ faurom^ ‘wi to’ ssrfoR i ^ 1
See notes. 3 ‘gi^’ ft.
3T° ^
*T g ?^Ni^l^M J -TlTt : I
m^TSRT a# ^ ?i?^^vrmi?i p^i TT: i are ga ^q% amta-
i are g dirre^r i ‘?re $<rretr — ’
«t g ’rft’nw: i ari^iifliowj^wr ai^Jl'^Rsia-
5 ^rmga’dig i * ws iRg^re^r ^n'4Trg^^d i
areaft ^pr?P^Fi^%f% 25 n ^re i a«ri —
‘spraTM aRctFRTRr WM ^EiTO: I
¥Tcrf?cT f^wimdis'ur: gidn^tm: i’
are MilMMWta^K+nMI SJ^I gretaatfare^RJireRT ^PTt-
10 art slWi^dd TpH i^sl %!rd+i. I
3 %: mm WWW
ftwrc'fsti hw^ m T 5 faT i
aw trtw ga aaawH w fj;g;: 1 awr —
‘pfc re^ra?tfta ^awifewr aar a^ft
15 f% ^laaaaRTHaK I
ssiatepfeaaaar ^mata^ai*! Parham:
f% WT^I is HsarafSTWai 5I» IK>J|: ||’
adl^iare W W 3 Ta q=I JT^ M«Ja: H Haiaare: I
aar — /
20 ‘are 77H^: W gen: WFfafta:
IRTTg: f$ Wat: JRT7TrT %Tt aa Haag, I
f^TFcT: g^TTref|aa^TTsgiTaH gg:
3 tt ret ra^are ra^qFUTdvrsT: 11’
are JP$ Ttra^FRtRR^ W^RSTa f g .d iW -iiar^
25 ^R’+T^ig I
aWT^ *RTaTsre W R 3 re: a HesraFa: I aai —
‘f% araFFre a?regad RKr^fe^aaa+i rea agrar: 1
*RTre SHlftra Hfeana ^f^^sNa^rRfrr q*t%: 11’
srjriri^^iPd g ‘rei°jat ggat ai’ aiaa^R: i
K ‘gai^a’ ^ a.
**Mr <tq I
ar% qrcftra *r%: *TP3?t n’
^qiMirqrfqfiq, ^wpraqnr^la^fni^rqwtra; i
ll ^ ll
‘5*qT qqf ft^rar f*¥TRqt q^n: 5-
^1 c ftWil,J;MI ^<»4<4 J.^f'rT ^[?cTf 3Tft I
qr«rft 5 T t<r+i<* i=tiT^ ,, '-< i
HF?r ^jt^t q ^r f^ar ■Rrqsw qf^r »’
srcefcqiftqr ^qqTqrnsf r: i q«n — ‘gft^iqr i
i qqi —
qrm? rar|t q sRFrereqi: i
H# m q«h>r fqgqqqft q;qq %t h’
f^TPJif m i
*t: % 3^4% II ^ II
10'
51.
‘fjpr STH mqq-ffvr: fl^fRT ^ra qq: I
qrcrqui rra vTqjqirqmrit qTfnfvfqq: n’
sflq^snft wNd«g,ui^ii^+^t|# ntcR^r>5#!T ^rrrrt
qqiqWr snitenp?: I qrif: —
‘qqrsf% qqmMf qqisgarf% faqq i 20-
arwwts'^ra ^f^rg^iTOif^Rr: ll’
srq wTqq: ftnq^n^TT qpqqaqr^ jnftFjt^rq q qr<si^qq>*i,
q q snfcmiq;, q Jr? ^q^qiraqrqr%: i q§n
f? — ^qr?i <|qq?tqr:q-
q*nq** i q qqqfq qfqqqjnirqfiT: faqaqtqsqqsftqt 1 25-
faqqnqqqqrq qspt^ qrfrqqjqiq; i — ‘srqw^m
it4fl q i<At Risqifqfcsfqjjqr: i q€rqrf?q q %g<q$qt ftqfiT-
f^aiqiRMq4itwvr^qqqrq ^Tfqqrqffqsftt i q;q^itsft
? q-q. q ‘qq ft’ eft q-q. ? ‘qqqqqitq’ icta^-
‘ww’ ^qnarc q-q-smqt:. v ‘faq^r$qf’ sra ft.
<jo_^V9
q UMMdlkH?^ ft fc s ft rftftq 3%4p^TfvRTI55flT-
srqkq>: i — ‘q#r$rcfrft qrc°nnq:, argj-fef-
tfirft qTft%:’ f^rft^iftqrqktftftTft ftqq: i ff ^ ^qqqqsfi-
?-^tt: i q*gq*3 — ‘anpftq*-’ fRitr ^iftqjt^q^ftq q-
swi;, ^dyiiragriw^Rrq^r smon^ ^,4 =piftspTf ^ <*«^ iq; i
ar^if: qrRftqkrqraTvrrcqsqpjqft sfrqrqfqftfilsn: — ‘srft qr
q re r s ^: qrsr ^sproFnjpiqtita qqlf fft =qq JPTt^y wqsft: krra-
qfti: ST *lk:, 3 =3 %TRqg?:SR:’ 3 qifaq;RT sftq>"5-
raqqrqrara q qqi^<'fqq?ramTq fft i sreft =5 ‘qqlqqfafa
lOgftfa:, qjmrqqqmfq wnfa:’ frarfi qRoimrefRqk: i
‘Tnwftqra sgtrsftr mkraira qqq; i’
1^1 raRqs^^^q ^Ti^^ftqTI^Tqqq^^: qqRl^p: I ®ni ^T ^T -
^7T: I £ jpk%, 21 ^%, srt^ q^T%-’ ^FI-
ftftfft ftqq fft I 3BT ft #q^lf^qtk:qtTl: I
15 5T# JTRT^FWR ^'Tira: I
fq ft^T I ch.Rt^qiqq^F aTTCrq:, sFfq?RTTi^ftsqfq fft I
‘%t swk^nr^fnf^^ srci qq%q*ifi: i
STIR fTffr qtqi SRSTf: fTftqt' gflft: ll’
20 ‘qaf^vrifcr qfqiq^qqfftq ft^ft^^jft^qqftftrftfqj*. I
^• g cnk^Tgr ^5nft qqqn^’q '-k ^qgraz^i^qqKftq ii’
f? JTCT 1
qqq;, ‘ftfraft s^qqg:qqrftraRiqqraq ra kwii’ fqn-
qqk =q S^aft^T qt«q: I
25 ?Ttq^4 sfcfteT ^Nr II 3.6 II
%>1IFW ^^Rr^q-TIRt |
ss^n qqT —
‘qsT% qiRq^inwTRqqf qq m? ^-it^r. i
^F ftsq# qr% qft qft qtft ftfts^: q?qt: ii’
30 arq ‘arqftqqi’ fqrq qft W'K^wi qsnqrqqwpftqr^qqT
l 3r%k qm —
? ‘#kW55fIC’ ft.
fc^a'sufei qi— q— jraqiqt:.
f ‘qrftnRqq^sftl’ ffa ft. f ‘q^ra.’
=ET *T =t»i^iddi ^rr I
3% lift ^HW’Tlid^lfdl ||’
^T W^^P-rariT:, g ¥ft: | ftc Rfoj i
sf^nroftn^nsTM m i Jirt: i
jt^^r $r; u VUI 5
H^nwrsqwfK: i grari^gnd mfl i ^ i
W *m —
‘^ymf ir gfta ^ <p I
f5 *»ft* &*&<( 5 I$Rr 5^1 fife 7 R 5 Rm n’
^T^TT 3J — 10
f^-i<^di$RT 5TF^T ^pT^F^fFT^r
^R^TT^STOTT z&rz ?f m Tir^frT: I
M vm frPTR%d TTf^T
ir?? h ^¥TF?iRf jjsn f %5 wFiftr n’
* ^ ft^TFcf: ?I^:, IBI 15
^ng i sbi g $nro%: ^It^t i f^ ^ ^ ¥nr?T%f^
^ HSJT ’TjftWRJTrvrl]^- | g-}| ^nf^cT-
Tn?R g • *^3 sraiftsrrf^ i * ii^ TT^^r^RnNifoirac i .
Sift 3 ^Tlft^^g%\gfrT I
^rog; TcnrrfT srrirfr =rr ik^'V-t ?i^rafrr ?r«rift-20
I ^ =g ipTSI ^fl^^dlftwiira; I II
^nqira:, u^g^iPt^aig i ^^niJT^fRfkiidftTER^T-
1 ^ i^n%iT i?rfd §jfa%ii it 7H?rftrra 3^r-
tow i 25
3t^tt iRn^^HT m ww fiiw m 11 11
<wr 5 ?t: i
3^301: 3 ^ II «S II
%m ^nmsnFiJTT^: l
? ‘itgw it jpTi qr^rr^’ ?rt st-^. ^ ‘vRTi?Rrqt’ ?fit pi.
3 ‘d*fl 'IFTJTiTrH^IT^T^L’ ?Rl «I— 3T. V ‘i?^’ f^fi]c|i ‘g*VTqid’ 59PJTR7t
\o
^ 3T: II W II
siiGtertorf *to
?ra gtorfcasiRig^R^ f^n^ *r*n —
‘ 3 ^>: ^'r^'T'iawl RTR I
5 RCRRi: 3R37HR I^jRWR: ||’
ani ^pra^rsn^sisp i
‘5jRf RR SWT 5 TtIt RFt ^lyiT^rq^: I
ipn jj» n ^f? ^w^i rjrrt ^ ii’
SRI R5RRR 501: 1
10 ‘nfRR% 3 RHR <R R:'-tU*iw*5H: I
^PTRTR^'i^lTO^RJRR# II*
ara Rratra f^n i
‘^^uto-ilf RTR * 5 ^^ ^TR: I’
3Rj =g;^r irfcdH=j><;q 1 5 =--r-n * 7 : I VudlfaflH I
15 aTORTfiWR *TOT —
5H2 3 RI ?r*nftoT 1
ariiRRritoFRtoifrcajT siurt hr ii’
arara^cnfera ton strr: i '^rrr; i &tor ?pif^n-
q?IT-‘nWFVTO-’ ?RT?T Rldl^S^iMiiw 'TRR^t 3 ^: I
20 ‘atqjRRT-’ fRRJ ajTJRPUR^T RTR^ I I
ihwrR^stt r*it —
{ ^«ispii: 3 *^ ^ n+£i^R3 1
1 |HR 3 UJR ^TR 'T T^WR ^»RT ll’
sra ^st^aRi^RRi^R^RRna^i l *^RR[ I **3 'RRR^>*
25qnraRRS5!fRVJIf s^R RJTTH g'TRfa'R
'B^R^fRT: SRPTfTRRH, I 4 ^ d— *M 3*^ R I ‘Rff^TRlRR— ’
ttoirt ^R^rraanto! 1 3 r^rrrrt strrrt-
ar?r cTR^tR^TR: ^^13 R%g J?«T —
30 m ^n^nf^r: 3 *: I
to z°% to * f& ^TEg ^nt 11 n
ddfo.g en^RdR+IRfcsi ^RTR%g RR % di^dRJRT:
^Rdg r siRn^Ri n«i»ii ^ 5.1^1 iiqitclNi R^R^*
75R: qft^:
\X
%g»T^r i ^sr^frafsFi^
RWRpftfc! ^Trt ^ffi^TF: I 3R ^frfll STT *m
‘SRSI ferqwvr — ’ $frf I ‘HUfM'l pt-» ^qT^t
^IW^uiW: I "K^^T *RT —
RN'JitMiR UfllRf fvRTI FTTWtgTT: I . 5
TaPTCT -^WTC^TggTrt^ Bpr; U*
srappngrarra gjrafra ^ f&n^fafgrag, i %gja$rr m \ —
‘r<tt *re rqf%R?n m STS ?rm i
ait^m srg^i^ «’
sm |;wrt gift Ig^fcafsra: i I 10
3TR3rFqtRTOTT^ fl^TT I
=g^n%Ri^i%g ^rg q& r *?wtrtt: RtesT %p&
F??&^nFifJrwt’Tr7R(Tgqi?T^Tvqt fap-ren ^jqai-
5i^T i m MWTf^i rqr?H *m
f^srrai m$r i srgq^A **n — ^ t-15
to’ ^?ra RSTT^'wt^rNnH^ ^tarer: i tg^fog w^r
wrarr#qT5T?i^j i rtsn f| — ?srer qf^fJNt ^s;-
‘sn^TgRR’ f?Rr ^ gM^fpgqhgq i ^ sR g gfa ^rMr
*ng; I JRn^mpnm; "ftesrg $^g ftwn? —
q#nTRI^T^ JT^r% T dl m'' II V8 II 20
‘etR^n; ^rcg*fcr-’ qrai^ra tg^&ftra: I
wwR ^TOR^ngTiTR h awraf?r i ^Rgqi?(% ftfiraw
^ T# ciy smigH^gTRmRFj; i R *nrfH i
i^qiun^ | *TOT— ‘3RT TRI<R: mfTRPT:’ ?ra I fTi^^JIWI 25
infpRTHt^sn i
^rF^rPTt: sr^rer m* ?tt srft fi^n I
m FJ^STT: I fJtET qsir — £ 3R.: ^^X5t:-’ ^Pt I s^tR *T«n
wr irw^ng — ‘Jtg^j : — %% ft ruth
30
? £ tgn*R^’ fft ft. ^ < 3' I T^WTI:’ fft ft. 3 ‘31##%’ fft ft.
V £ WRR’ fTct ft. H ‘srfctf^T'cf’ fft 3J-3T.
cRfftra gniag^^i^-i «’
^ fed<q ^ 71 tT^ I
T4T 3T — .
5 ‘feiq^fk ?mtsfTH ^rfrar^FT TO: I’
TO TO^t &<TTOf ^T'-Rt-Mt ^rt ^TqirT: I arSfrtqqTOT
to:s*trt: i ^ TOatsirRpreq vnr refora :-
TOtro i %Rrj — t a#'7?npt^rrrf^ to!
wf# sqm =* ftrJrro;, ^ TOtsft q^ftmpg^r’ ?*nf: i
10 sBfFFct^n m ^ n v\ n
to sriqfqt£$ri tot i to —
‘ 3 Tg^ 3 %q ^'TqiW'fTTq^qT^TT : I
3 IMTO TORT# ^q ||’
%q|gqT qqr—
15 ‘3^^r: Rf^foqTOfsOTOq: HT ^ t ^qW i: I
to 3prar% %q: q^giftaTfaqror^Tq t^srpri %g: i srq
‘snsftat’ ^g?&sJiqiqq^ i to^;—
*n% srf ^ m\ I
T: II’
.^iT.rt stot i totor g q^fw*
STOqtqq%: T^*rmRmTq ^Ir $TT I TO %?-
25 q®ft — ‘%grifitqTl^l:-’ ^TO ‘TTOTlft-fi^tmTO ^T TOi gjnFT-
TO^TT: fffe: ^1^:’ ^TT^T =q I ^[f?TO?^fT> ‘51m
§rcrftqi-’ fmrT qg^qi f^nm
qrfR 1 qqmqmTO qqliqq $TOng i ^ g R*TOnnq>gT%-
qroft ijRiiiid i g to^sttot ^tf^r^r qqtfq: i
30 ?? ?WI 5 q^T $tfo I TOTTOTtIt mf^T: 3 -ftdW
qqqqr^sTOro u#r^ i ^ g toto^ ^%ra % 1
? 3T-q. R ‘TTOgMq.’ ffcl 3T-q.
5 Rrifa 5 jfr ^rfitg 5 1
3 vrftsft spn 5 *rfR$r>i u’
raftm^RRT ?¥rit^uf jjfRiR ^r *t%t-
^fR ffrt +ft^Tf:, cRT I REraq^: fWH'sMd-H
I R 3 cRtf^TTR: qRRJ d PqjRt 5 *rrrhr5r 5
?3RTi%: * 3**1 ^ i 3T^r 3 — ‘sr^RH^Ji^rraf^nsR^-
^eTsiPt^s^ firsts* r%h+k:’ ?r g^Pcr r, d^j^ i
i^diR'-TRTRprfl ^jjtrr i <TRr«rnr ^rt
w.idi^#r ^ ^d^dTiRF vrfqj ^tet i srr-
‘q sd =g '^Va w rs <s d rt l w i fstddd
^sr: srpe ^r r frr jtr gsn i
srt jtr R? f<Q<^ i --r; Fd^qrt-
R=q^RJRFtS'^TE^fRT: JRRRRR anRtdR^RnTR 15
RRR’lfqRjTSR I
feqRHR’RnJTRRqfRRqprRSRRTR': I 3RT ^lt3t§JRT PfaPt-
tnfSRfk^RR | 55 3 JRtR^R I
fopTHRai =gRct$TRT f^RRRrqjRRi^Ji | 20
fRilf I *T7If: —
‘^TRT^RTfRS'^TT^sf^ JJR: I
st^ISRorroi rtMr jt^|[ ||’ ^r |
faWfew ^rftrTt: ^ qspjr || ^ \\ 25
dfe'Hdt SfTVR %:, 3RTRJR RJ5R* I RpRTRpE: | SR
*RSJr?T RR JR —
‘q^-Rjqp 'fs^Tr^r: q^rrt r^r ?ir i
?Rt T^R PRTfJJff rRVR IRRTTRR ||’
SIR qqRr%^R^Id4^r-t«* 1 4 1 KpTJRRTR'q*TR: I ggq gj — , 30
‘ft^TT^lf^r | am ^T?RTTiTRHRR!17%rRTTFr gg-
RR ^^sr5r: I TRT^ —
? ‘arpR^tro’ f% 3 T_g. = ‘SKMqPt^tsft’ ssT-g.
3 * ‘i o - vv »
fN: r
SBTN^T Tmr <Alf^*i.> WV- sw, ^TR$r?: I
arat ^ w—
‘ar^^T^I^i^rPTT: I
5 ?nm: TJTWrens^T: II*
*tsjt —
‘arar; sFtf^n JTHPTFrcgg# 3 ^rfcfi^:
Wif^s: ^ g ngw ttrtt g gsqm: 1
^grwn’-THr: qrfr g i^M^^ri^Tt'+ig^r
10 Swig jro^jwt^w? wA 371m gw: 11’
3BT 3<|U | M ' vrimidPw VTO^^S<W^SFq: I
ara*«ro *T 9 T —
‘*ug <«i«-+(' j s^ ^-i-, W'Ti f^-i W 7 ^g 1
d?iq 4 i^ ^ wTwwwg 11’
15 3T5T 3T?TM«(<s4l'il5.riH <7'+d^W I q?W c t>K>J|4l:
f|^n vww 1 qsRorwrsro *n%, gwt:
flW+W^TC W I afifrJi W 41 —
‘jtf^ ^Rwi^ri f%Tniw>wwnf5nj[ 1
20 ?WW>Fet jk flWTFFWT I
Iw t^t w 11’
%% %Brgif: — “%?rqm^ndr ^iwv^sfrRr^ts^i{%^n«T-
1 %^rqRTigRT
1 ?fjt fe ‘awqgg’ ^ra ^tff ‘awq%’
TOs'w^rw^r ^rnw^%tg^s|T^tfqwd 1 ‘nufa ^k«k^tt— ’
arfSJT^sft&ir sr*nT*nforifa qm^tT^riamwFrr 1 ws ^1^1-
ifld^i^M-q r ^ 3 ^ 8 p 1 1
q^mta jr^rto^t 3 T w ^ i
30 ^Rqtffar li vc li
? f gf=F^’ fRt ?rrfet ssr-g-!pwrf:. r ‘ar^n’ ??f q% ‘anwfgiV
fwwrcq< ar-ar-s^fwr:. 3 “-‘ar^npnqqjT’ fsrr^: ^ 3 ^kjt”
?■%*!% 5 T-w- 3 W^qt:. 1 wwraf 3 »dwqigqT^
lo-V,;
<v*W: ^R^ss-v
3R44l4M*5f4Hi' 'TOT gq fo» 4 H?4 : I 4fT|*q4;—
'f.gJTF'JWt: ^44*44: qftg #t7f47: |
sfl^r R^qWnrer
I 5
‘<^•*1 ^ 5|: trt fti% 4 *444 i
3^44 h*
£ fft ft4TC4 4R: 44T444T 441^4: I 10
4^4744 +WI<fcmi<«K4U$<t II’
3R fMltwr 4^444 4R4T^4>gq4Ts|«J H4>l<R»lfk4l-
444R: I
m *st#ri mTi n v% n 15
‘45?I4574Tf'f4Tft 744^41^4% 44 44ftrtftjqT I
M =4 mfq^ptsr ftsnsT sn few 4 )fa 444cft54ft ii’
44 JR34I4T ft^ITT: 4$44k5J4T4iar 454T 4tft4 T^Tf-
‘<|7 441444T4 54 ft jfictMiif*'
f^RTI 4^44474 47 (Rrf l 4T I
TfrTTH Rftft 4W^ 54414-
414114 4TT4 f4T4 4%T4 3T44 ||’
ft 44 I 4445R7 4lRt^I4T 354!4RJ^f*R4RR4R: |
44 4 gqf444Rrit4R[44T44^I44 4^4 4 SS^Rf I
^snft^ftRm 4%lft 4f44t 4*4414 I
srffo^nu m I
^sfq qif: q^r foi%^ yjt% n u
20
25
{ ‘5T%'^ > fft 4. 7 ‘47W’ ft. 3 ‘45^4’ fft ft. V <4f*Rt
-45Rg5Tm’ fft ft. <A ‘qfaqw’ fft 4.
V-V
RRT —
<V ^JT% R^TR ^K^K'H'41 RRRtsft I
*3TR: RR ^ Rfcj+TRT n’
5 rriri ftrefsi i jn^nft r^rr i rrt —
‘I^+i« TRtTR^T^: -iliXl Rf RRTtRR tJR T^ ^R<R: 1
f^T^lft;: f^TW^raff??: «?R f| RiRR: ll’
ftraRTR-
3RT
^ RR I RRRTOi rrt —
10
‘r-wr qR ^wrfc^lR^rCTi i
i^w-otA Rgoji: 11 ’
sriaa^mRRaMsR: i arRuft ?ng?^W*flwit
f|«n 1 5 hH«ifc*i$<um—
‘ariS^agonft Rspr^rrottH: ^5 airfa r^rrr^ i
15 STRfvHM'lftjfcilft f| ^fcl S5T R l ^ dl ' R I cR ll’
‘<Rfo ss f^T^rr: rrr r^rrrt i
RSi-jRRvn^fNri isnfa: fgRRiR: n’
‘R^^+ftsKRTR <Rig RR^ig RR: fat R: 1
T% RfRR: ejR^kf R%TRRra; ||’
20 TO JTO I «ra C *TR: fat R:’ fcRRT ‘^IfRT c|R§TRR| 4 j;’
s[aw RRs^Raaa RRaRTaTariarojiRta i ^ 3 ^i jngRRi-
RRRRT ^^URR R RRR^ta, R fa+V-RRC I ^bl RR } -RRRRRv-
RIWRT: RTm^RT^TW^SRRRRRra: I mHR^RTSSRcnr ^3 R
RRTR *»R: I
^r frjtRi 1
‘'PtsR ^jftfTOR RRRg'Rf RNR^M^rR gff q ^ I
^rflrra '^r srifRTRTRHr? rrtir& rr: 11’
* ‘forcifc’ fa. ‘af^-warn’ sfa ft. 3 ‘m’ ?ft r-r.
X fft 3t-ft.
25
fMta3i33f3f3>3i3T 3*33313 i ftfn^ra-
3'W^3iw3if3W333rang; i sr 3 ^k^n^wh^i qfanfori
^PEnH«r f3*3nfgfiR3gig itro i 3T3*33ffg^3* 3i , 3ffiH T
=33531331335313333313 ff%3l I att=M|+!Ol| 331 —
‘iwMW ^^csM+Hiwi^iwa if%35: 352f£rrgi%: I 5
f353^#smi3333ri: ^ngfgT^ligq; n’
331*333. 3# =P33*3T 3ff=3% 35ZT8#%31313i ^ 33 5 5 331551%-
3i%: §3$3*T13n%5r f3*33T3f3*3¥I13 ^OTH I 331 3T —
‘33ira 33 rara^ g^T Ift^iftesriR i io
TT3lt^rnfrT: 35r'H3T333 fT%3%: ||’
sra
s[TrT
355=33, ^ 3F3*¥13nl lI-tH-TH 3% 3T'33rg I
331 —
‘ft ^rt^TTRf^ ^5nq:gH u ‘ 3 f^fg I 15
3=33133x531
I
33T 31 — 20
‘3*3t 3*«T3T fM ¥r33T3fgfo=ggi I
351 = 3^533 fg^Stgr f*g f%*=rnTira*t3i 11 ’
33 ^3'HOicsIVR y**Ml =3331333 3513*|=533 fxF31ftfini33!3
f%T3 3333I3R I 33R —
‘35 fJ33¥13T 3ft: 35 315313331 313: 1 25
3TflT|^3lf3T 3T3f*f II ’
33 3*3311 fjgtWRgf^ 3333^1^313 3333133; I
f3 3 ^Tq331rT3f3ITi3S533^sf3 33% I 331
‘3Tsg*J3: ff^gigpgi 3$%313f I
331*31% 3 *^1351# ^I^ T K'j, : II’ 30
? ‘33i^3’ ffr 13. = ‘TOq^ra.’ fra %. f
f% h. v ‘w^fNigg.’ ffft 3i-3 ( against the metre ).
*1 ‘cPmR’ fra ft. f. ‘3f:ftRf’ f% H.
31° v
I TOT TO —
‘f%q% ^ i
ra?R% grrt ^ri^riSt H^ra^t ^tt^ctr n’
^ f^TT =n7^TP-JT7^T^H H+i. I 3
«jr=Kii^i ?ro®5rtfi[wsjraf^ra rasrarraraf i ra’ftewrai’rfrt: i ?rer
^Rtsq- #WI2?Tnt-’ fi?n7T ^I^TWraRmRFT. I
'zymv. ^
10 3 =g
■SB 3%s^% |^t 5W4T I
^r#'4tsft wm Itw^irssfa: n ^ n
3J5W f^TS^TT i
5T^% p: II HV II
15 ^q^mnTTnJTTTlf^ TO5^-
SEITOI ^ I 5f#£ TTgTTSR ^Tgrtl fra
: 3gp=|£t S’-M sj,M IT W'-| i) M W( M^<j*i fTo^rt^'11%^11 ijra ^i^l-
jraratsf^ ^gfi^Trasrara^ i ^qrrRi^Rn-
SO^rara^E: I
—
‘sr^f 5 % <rcn ?t ^fT t^tot i’
3T^tq^TOT5^f^rniJm?r ^ ^ffra ig^rra^ira; i *tstt-
^rranram^iw snsgmqrag. i snra ‘n ^raff fra
2,5 'tr srm. i ‘^rara-i sra f^^5ra%r^fi-
Tfrarft •^NflW'iww^l^Kuiigf^: i i
srai —
ra^ra^frr gni: n’
? ‘h ^ ‘37^’ ?{7f ra-;jra%.
■3 ( f ^ li^g^^tTf^'T^! 5 3i— w.
^PT: mk^<:
jpRts^: f^S: I 3R^ P^T: 'i^^$l ; I ^H*f
^j^cjith i «jp& w...
‘afru: afoirsN srcft 35T ^sfara^ff prem. i
frit s*n? qm#n1 ptb 3 u’ ^ 5
i hbip ‘OTPHT^rt^if^^r
feqqif ^T sppn^:’ ^TP ^
^.f%?If:, ^ f^TRP^. I 3srri| — 8raify=b«JP<% <-MTPtB
cr^ ferflw I ST5T =3 ^ftgPTI PWBUS^ *$^3 I 3^3 ^n^t-
qsp^f^si.ki: I 10
‘f^i^swi tptt s^T%rr ^pfsw #rarp?: n’
hr nrafpB ?js% ‘*jjrai?rai’ ?ra i
«t<g% ^ I
sriB^frfR’^^^RPPl'ST sFR^oT^n'T^r^'n ^ • 15
5(T^7I , '^PtHTW7lf^ WTfpfrT^T^-TT ^ I —
‘P^ W^ H Ha t BIBB ^FWlfsfiPT: l’
SRT PPT?
‘PS
pi pppp^I; rai?d«irfte^cn u*
^TFTg^ra^: PS I
20
25’
jtp i srengiPi^raT ^ 5 fw^n I
‘WR&t BPfa^T BT JpBBTST^y^BBT I
arrm^I §<5f^T % strife u’^
%q ^ 5PVPJTH I ‘PI ??nf( •
‘SJSFt’BB PB BB: PPM’
;fr^pn^ ^ I
PTPTf SfRTtPP H BBTH I 33 ^ Wt ^PPPt 33 H^BR
pan’^RTtpp«nprai^T ^^3-«WBTi3Bf*tin3t j ^+*4fts, l Wk-
PTt3tftpR3 dt4WRTO 3t3= I 3BT 33 ; ^PIP^ : 3TftRR3- 30
$3T3 i
? ‘^3’ B-^3. 3 ‘3 BT^ra.’ ^ ^“P.
mi —
‘%TT TFT: |
^TT nt^cnaif TT^^^lf^nq-rT ||
srai^wvnr m —
5 ‘au^TF^n srcrfk q5i?g- sng ffth i
spT crt %n u’
‘rr&p 5t?jt naf Hfe?5n mi * tk gftTrigrarqj^ i
srqftrikkk zzj rara^f q-%^ w n’
sn? 'RPTTra^rf^Fvr^n =auT^pRifrRnT: i ra?n^ir’TftTT?Tilsft
WfantSforowt ftmffkkra; i m gtrf%*ft s?*i®?jkfoiroi%sft
vrWrftf?T «rt«pj; I
’FTWTnfr sr?fe n \\
s? r^TT^^Rt c r: \
kk ^ui sRjassr^^g^rwfn^: i mi —
15 ‘sqTgq q^^JTTf3F^R!TpTT qajFtarrb =PRjf?vrra^ra , »rr^: I
STlfe^# iWWTJFlRl'T^n 1T^TWT?SI^ ||’
q qRHJTTltq: I
%#yi+qH mi —
‘SRmijrf^Tftq^F ^t^Pcn SR rRfk^t: I
20 STTTiq^q ^TTFfFTq sfl »?vqT TT3FF TFt: ||’
srq grqifofTTraui T%Fv^nTk-^n^q;i?!Tqfir: | k^oHirq
5 fwaqr, ^F’^Rikr, afRjqTiwkr =g fln-n i ^ %s?rqr
25
mi tw —
‘ra^FTrrgkf
ft Tqfrsfq T5?T 3?: I
^T 3>^FcR:
%T^T% ^FT STI^TST gf^gk: ||’
vrz p tTHH^i^Rf fjssm i srlq f| kfkffra^’
‘Idimi^rH^’ ^f?T TR H+i^T^T ?WTgtfrFjk i q kq»-
30^ttNS ?w[ i m f| raw'rgctkt
q^Tf^iq+H^spTrk ^Tnk%?n?cr q-
{ fFt ft.
n
mrnfr.m
I nm—
^ 0 F 5 FJ?^ TO iTOJRrcH TT^ 1 ^ 3 ^ I
^reiggt ill *ttot TOg^t K-iti |J ii u’ 5
sra I *f*W ^
sTf^r wi aWvM^fS 1 ^ E ‘
jRft^fjfann OTt^f^srairarai^n^^i^ < 5 ^ : 5^'
ton ^a areren ?§z Hi^fora 1 1
% wmfati&nwfa** *r m iw*«wm-n
g^RdR-^+nro; > WRR' 1 ^ ^
‘^^iTOTr^ctWR#ra^rrt% 5 ft i
3 T 3 R TOTOi^ ^RTTO ^Rt^pft ll’
f^ri^nraf^ttRarai^T^d^n NifepR^RiRn^i ^rt-
^TlftR: SOTRto ^ %* 15
I S^rfe^TT OT-
Wr^TOHfRWTO I TONT'TOi’T^PN ^ —
‘^erervrig^rf^n 1
%TOnsnfoi% g^'Ti f^«°n «’
w g^^^ricsrart ^fraro: g«ir 4 fogTOi*p&£*i *wra ; <20
sfu?^ xt ^aswrors%: sto f^NTOiR^RiRi'TO^'Ji mn-
'ra^wnir^ Kft^^npn TOnsro^rciRnra: > <-m-+«w^ w *\ ,
‘< 5 (toi*ot#i: i^-’ 1 toh^wwis®*-
^ ‘3^1’ INTO ifat TOT TO
f^rm«ra^ 1 ^wwn-cR #R 1 ^■munira: 1 25
^ * M ** ^RTf^f^rf^n RifJ ^ 3n ^‘
?nt: grrratfa: i fibres a*R *& i
q*fc£Nd TOiit toto ^.^Tfe?fN?3TOn#T^^%?n 1 -^-n—
^ 3 : *
imt^rTT R^fTfRl M ^ 5 R »’ ^ 30
w TOT? I
> ^3 ‘sn^mrcjRW 1 *.’ i.^ ^ !T5m
^ ‘i^dTORRTO.’ w. ^ <i rr c f ’ R*
^ R^rcofra^ i mn — ‘^r
^21 me. i & ^n.
'TWJTT?^^ T*KH ^ !T=fT%¥rra^fr% ^j; } q ,
5qsn^%^RM% : , q|:_> ^
T 1 n €rWRf ^^pprr: ^rar%:
ITW: I R57f: —
‘s*nnn?r$sicrT sw «^$rI RaidV-H i
rraTjrir WTratfrfr^p^TtTin ^r n’
10 -5 z^gmwksft mtmft?
irra ^
f g 1 mmtfw,-. i
™I *m^ i a * g^r%% mrm #,%*-
15^^,^^: , «** ^ ,
^ I *TP^ RT
Tg^ J* 2? ' ^ **««*
^ ^ft «ft* ^h
20^^s^T*FT: WTRtq: |
‘rrr^%sr^ ff^l ^ Ts^f^jm^Fnri- sr ? ™ i
^ q: ?fT: *• ^r^r &R%4Nrn ^ ^ gqfo ^ „>
i vm**** immm* ssto ,
^ f^.
J Wl ^ R 3 ^WRtq , *q-
me f * «* r hr*r*, K 3
?J t ^JR^Rf ^7: ,
sr%r^tt%: mwmh <?fast m \\ w \\
so r«r —
‘sTSRra ^rnrer ^fr, *%* ^| ;51TO ^ i’
l ‘miiMk’ st-r. r ‘^jfw’ *% ft. ^ <3^^^.
^^r’ 5% ft. v ‘3%:’ left ft.
v-v
^PT: MK^v
10
15
I
‘wjwriiw*’ w **^s I ‘^’ ITH ^ <
‘Hyyafca^ wi^+uw^w ?ftyi 1H. i
W?WT WWWT iftWf T^T^rirT f^WTW ll’
gra ti^4t ^fi i
gnTFTT^WFT *n fo%^: ll ^ »
WCT II ^ II
^cnt^fnn —
‘qr^ipr w|”ww ^TRnf^wira i
yj^iV-iiWFfsft ^I^y+y^y. *w: u’
wwiwr^Rn ywwft raw^ sr^Bt wwRiwfwTfyn i
WE[ sftf^nwiT V& ^ writ *w w #3 Win. I
fdin^m^ y ^i i^'-iwrar^JWT ii’
\ gt%^Egqi d%^^5TK0TtST^ f^RPlM T^r^IT^Tt S^fed+IRSI-
fcrfa wiwrw ra^qfsfwfert: i ^ ^i^ya4iwi+i^T syi^ -
wrra: i w^nctita wraT5T»W5Wyi m^d I ?? 3
n^wtwra^nirinnw WWT W5TIW: I ^ 20
‘¥$$8 f=n^w ^srftdi tf&n^fiwriira
aw^Hiwtfo te^w# twsmr i
cRcpSW 5E3SWT =3 JR^a
wfai?n: g*3$? ^rT Rifewt w^t: ww^t ^ ll’
gj^ qjvn^cRTTywi ^s, i ^ W 1 3 =R km! ^ • l^+W 1 +w*wt ^Mii^iy- 25
IR3^ C M< U I wW5( I
‘w^wftra fratrjRn nw^n TW’srrastfow
*nsn thww^w to^i wt ^spT i
arei aw w?t 44 faww^i 5 ^ ^wr w^rti-
fim stanswraiftw «’ 30
ara qg mfii^uwreft jRg% ^wwfwftyw; i g^i
fw^ =a f^n mw* Wi^wwraw^i ^ i wwiwH^w-
Ia=iH ,j wg%^ gggrrg f|rgi i ggfa ggj_
?T7M?T gg?ggfagf;gg: |
S3S35^f%: j/TTTFU^TSBH^Tf^: »’
5 M^ildl I
gsmrsft grapgfg sro g ^ i
ftgfiRTtetftg %grft reefed i g^hr^g n’
"f 5W^% AMI iwg h^ w^nii sm
^t^Tcl I gg g»fcftg: gifsjfjpg: tp= f [ ^^ |
10 ^i^rn^nisT ggj —
^raqtd: ^ggj: §jgifggjgf?g I
3T^wi#T5i^r f* |? g?g rag: ^^nr u’
** vnuw^amb'wg'i: inggg i rg g tf#tg*goTrft
amra I
* 5 ^ gg grar: gjfrcmggfTgsg: i
^wm-^V-H^w g ^ ^ ra wi Rgi; u’
am gRrr gmT sr§gg?g ^fg gg?g<g g^g : jrafg^ | gprgm
wwiwmi i gg g*gg ,,
arqgvra ggi —
20 ‘=MiWls*r ggi«j5T3r: gmg: grife^ragh I
arm? grgfomf^g g>ig>??f'i5TTg^T: gg: n’
am ^i^tra^grai^grag sreggtmifrpg ragig*vri% i
ggi —
m^cri^g^rfot ^gtrar grm^i g^gt gff: i
25 3m jg ^jg^g^g gog: n’
^arg^ g^ggr f%gr gmgrgrsrFgfM^nJTT jjgg-
I sraggr g grg#ggg^Tm^ I ggnsj-
mgrairggra sgigm^ i qg smrahft i grgftft gnrarag; i
30 ^ # 5^T g*: |
H^I^Rf^qT gh<ri^T *F*T^[ II ||
? ‘Cftfft’ ffg g-g.
<^0-^0
ftf^qr *mra *3raftra s^t^ti sqiq«3ft: ^rt
PP7PTT q+ J -l^t « J -ii'iNHl frjH: I qiifal ^TSTT—
raft fft^tsft snftq ftsfwrt qrar: 11’
f? m 1
MqH. « m) idn-4 qsTW^iq 3PTa4sl«l ^^HlM I
ratq 3 % TT5%t qfoqHTfl*qqqq% qraftqstfafra II’
T^PTt% W Wf I
^tfrnq—
‘*2OT3T 5T^n: %^S*qWl%qi: I
mK^TRT^T q^ q*T %f?T%: II ’
10
srq fqqftra raft ftftq fra q^ftfa qrar ^irat Iftra-
ftqq; 1 q ra? ^TqW^EraTra^qriRfqsRTra 1 m ^ra^rra^-
qrara, 1 f f 3 q’qqwra qqrarraqqftqqjra ; T ^iqqft qyiraiqra " 15
_ *3^ • "5* * —
‘ST^FT d I ^ R 1 d ^ l H I
qraftqr: ^i^^iw*Twrai^q^%oi ftftr §rcr: 11’
qq qftqftra qftt qra^d * I RURra * irara-* I 4 ^ gsnftq^-
srvrratra^rqqrq^lq q^qrlrara qqrftqftq I 20
‘crjpq^ra q qisqr% tit 35ft ftrar:
fsq qfaq qr ^qrcyftiftsnft ft; gras 1
fft qq^qqiNvrftf gftftraft q$RT-
ftirararaqratra ^qqraqiqtraqrwTqq 11’
qq qqsrraftra w gray qfqqpq: qraiftra ^ra ^ran25
sR 3 q^ 1 ftsftqft qqrafft^ ?ra %f% 3 . 1
qft 3 — ‘qq^^rai^q ftrsft q^qjrqift ftrara ^raqqjq-
q^Tqq’ ?raif : 1
m\rt r 31 *tt ^ II W u
m ^ 1 30
? ‘( fl^ ) ftrft’ ?ft ft. q ‘sraft^ra’ ift ft.
II Vt II
WFS gft^Tqiqft I
q«S*n*qTfqq*ftra q^Tqqi qqmi 11’
5 srq fa'lHi'-Waff &ftq^ftuiiqq qqqjqqq: qiqFqts& »ftq-
qfqq: fqqft i
‘qrq?qq?T qiqftqqr^iq qiqq: I
f^W q^fqiq: q^qq fftqq'rfftq: II ’
‘ifN f^TO qq 3 pTfTt qRqqT
10 cq f cri^t fgqq ^sftqn I
w qflraft fe'ftq't
%q: ERtra ^Pigqqqqqsq^ II’
am spR'Ji'ijgr ^ig^qrasqteRi sift-f^qf^: qq^-:^ 1
iq^ftq q faqiq,-’ ^rrft q>iq q^qrf^qrqT-
I 5 *nq*q Tftij^reJiftq^qqr qiiRTR qq 4 Rj^ 1 ^citpj qiqqfc
s^uilft | qqrq qq I —
‘^smRI^TORtsft ffjsnrq gqqqqq^ I
qqqqqrqpfqq qtw+Kui ^qq: 11’ b
qq qmFq T^frqqr qqqspq, 1 ‘q^qr Tft?sftq-’ ^q q^qr-
20^qi*TnTN<?<N':H^q T^jg; qiq qqqspj^ | uqq-^ I
^fNiWKi^ 1
qq qtqqiqqj qm —
‘qqjftqqqiq^rfsq q%ft qq d^qiq*
ftqRqftq: fqft qq jpqq 5 iqi»jqinq qqft I
25 ftsft R?qqngqrftqqq% qq^qj qqi-
^RTi^qq^trqiqqfq ft %qq q sjrqft 11’
qq q^qqi% qi^qqqiqqqq %qq: I qrpqqi qqi qq—
<=
q q% Rqqj q^r qftqprfqqT R: II’
30 qq f^diqiq qqqTqftqqt % 3 : I qft^Pq? qqi qq-
K ‘q^'Kf’ ffcr FT. * <qrq<^roi’ ^ ft. 3 ‘stt^srR’ q-ft.
V ‘^q’ ?fq ift.
^PT: mk^'v
TT cq si 'I'H i I
faq’-rararra mqq^jirgqft n’
%j%g: q>rsqRi$%r Trarafrar qrahEranvn^sqT-
raff^ra, d^-+;^ I fraifra %gf%rai vrara — ^|M'+T W'-M1^.+:
^TO^^frt I fra ^mtsgJTR^T f^T^:, '-t>i*dK-5*W, 3
^ts ^Wjpr ra^T, fra g«nta «i^^<nwil[s«fFcR5?TO:^ qnrawra; i
qqrg fra qifwraraqq Ftraif^rara^^ I ‘*T??n w^41<j-
fraifi g
^«£JLlL _ f% ,
S^-jW: ^TH! I
10
qrim ^raftrara q T^rar qr^raq u’
ra^fsrt ^rara srffnfoqrai-
wra sran*q<q qftqqfraqBta ^crarra wta q^^rcqrarasqWfrara:
i
ra q% ftwr *wr ^vrRfirai sc i 15
qff<ST f| ?7I «’
fraq ifqrsftqrfFft qff^rarferaq%:grara qgsfrai wwwfrc: i
3 fof^n fR m*m mm^ II II
qqi — 20
‘^jforts^n fif qmqnspn i^rasra: i
^'qjrf'frara: n K^fn ^siwrai (%q^r u’
*T4T 3T —
‘qsr qqraq^rrai tfsraRifn: qqf^ra fra qrcr: i 25
framtftaqRt qrararar g*; ^t rara 11’
sra 5pfq!riitT%qqri%f^3f%: i 3<a$rraraftf$rafraT iratra:, ff g
■rafkfraq^qr^f: i
wa \ ?w — ‘di^qra ffera:-’ f ?ra qqftqraqtg^if^i ^qfcsf* 30
i ^rafimtqraraqHpqg^tsq^rfH: i
\ ‘^raqsiffrai’ q.
% n ^ u
w —
‘j.ftdifa q?T crfN fifam qjfil^cn^ I
smiq apureTimi qjisrt^r ti <mr ii’
5 am =3 fg^ 3 f%ra?i'T«r • ^uita’PTiTsrfT^-
<q|q mim^i
fitararc an% ft g^w qrtrPTt fl^n n $\ ii
?rar Hmpm: fifo:,
10 5^?5Tt=^i%m> fitfo ffij £T ¥pfl | =5 EE R r ^j^. .
q^r fiR - *, qrRrar^qmr^rra ft i ^qrct vttt: i
q^fai *m —
‘^R^iWcn^^T^n qqanm HmT: fH mqft i
%rrm h# fiifqf^mr fife q^im«rei u’
15 sm « mi^r Hmi*m: ^Rrcm q^rmorrl^l fir|g; |
‘?ra ml fRirr# mt^r amrifisqit grtctm; i
im fiETRrftrgiifcrr: r% ssRrfsqqmwT u’
am JTRmfrmTt qhE: i
‘*TOm out ff #t ftaTrfir f% uj ^ an^RT I
HI SR? 5^T ararot ^sf rnium vrflqt »’
am q?gqt firl* i
‘i%?% m am#t qm wi3 t
^iw=(«im 3^% Hiai 3 *T l^m || ’
am qmrotefMm fifths i smiroml nmi am^qvnfl
25 m°ifirfir ft|q: umrl i i <jrfrl
ammqrigm^ i ^3^ 1 q =qpr flf|?rfi:lsr: 1 am
sTFTe^r ww <rct *kt: I
?mfii qqqfliiqukmTiM 1 qsrt —
? 1% fir.
R %$’ qfir ^r-q-fir; ‘ft’
?mr: to:. 3 ‘gar’ f% ar-ar-ft; ‘ato’ f k fr:
TO:. V ‘qi^wq’ ffl H-q.
V
gq; snw tF*nw ^ ^ $rt: i
wnfT si?sr 3%q ^rra^r swig u’
^ifta-srisM-HW ftfa: avq^rr qqqwfir i f^q^-
WTOT?Jnrqftfiq?q^q: adWH I
ffeTFRT ffeTT fe| <TOtW%^T?f II $$ II 6
^I^ThPl^Tl^lfi^ m iMtfoj I
t^tt qsKoigqfiMwrai^Tsft qqqigq: rafe^q^R’HTt^S^q *rf^?j
gw: i ws q w n re fi f|w i q«n —
‘sRiqrapr t?ft i
3r^rim%Tft ^<3*1 ft g»q: u’ io
srq y^MwfiiTj^TfcH. i sraa ‘ag^rrfir ?i*fteqr:’ ?fir
*rft 'mmi f^mfrETO ffeu n ^ ii
qq ^ q a^TtiW i ^Ti^ iq: i d^PiuN i qm —
‘qfintsft fir^n^i gqwtsft a q^n: i 15
JmqtS^nWrTra JI5W^WIlfeq: II ’
3BT afWfcaqilfoN ^ TljjTfeq , I 3t%q qjJsWl^ ‘foqw: sfiq
rra Tis wgw^ i gt ^oMw f^ri^ wgwfilftrwlw % ?ra
i wn —
‘*T srcrfir SPifisr I 20
qg aw srrgw q f# u’
«rer ag^rcift sw i ^ft i q qnqfcnq:
^i^fiHWW^-iii^ fimvan i q^nrvnq: qawr-
^^a?nqg#T i ^ i ^ 4i*nw*:-’ Fwi%w T siqnwrf^w
fiRS EW l fe+rW I 1 ‘q: Imr?-’ ^ng: STRUTS q +|4&^s,iqi 25
’ T ^PTt I =ara *rit* : •
^'sl^i^'j'i 3 Jjrqg I
tor ^ 5^r 3°fer «n f^n II II
TOT <^n$ffe I 30
? ‘usprtV sf% fir. ^ ffir fir.
Wo ^
<Jo-^
V
STTt^#t
?t(?l<3 - ^)sf^ «l v ‘+0«i: I
;jq% |
5 f|[^IWt»ri‘ 'bf&Hl: *4M VRTrT =MI: II*
‘Ztim 53im 3RT HTTfPT I
5rnT^p^r «n*n«$ 37 11’
fon ^K'Ji^g’T: 1
10 < «^R*jTTrcT^ra> jn^raf^nft ^inra^ 1
?i%TSfqrr t^th =g 11’
‘sis#-’ 1 ‘s^w-’ ^gmnr ‘n«if?^i-
I^Tlfaq: 5 ^f¥ 71Z g«ratff?ta: I ^ ‘cTeT m?|-’
f^terr g*?Rr sttort^ 1 1 ara
‘SHRST-’ SF'flSlPUT^fenTI f^tel: I ¥1*1^1:
jrflrawTFRT^t^rg smrsrFra; 1 ‘srgrifa-’ ^nfi ‘^rsft fewr nfi
**!%’ 1 ’ ^Tfehtewi^T^i g surivn^i
<?|fe+|«^(rl I f^WT^TRT 'M< u IWT't^Mi»W fcs i^H«li<'i»iM«ta «ii«4^*i
20Jkfw^ 1 Q^iHf-rhi =5j ^Tqrvrt^r +i*0iiN i p
«d^^wla I
II VK II
—
‘ht «n^f orqriJFT^vnTTOi ht ^rt ^
25 HT ^ i
HT^FFcTT SFFFST^r jparn *1*3 ^
STRTT: HT ll’
?pt1 ftsr \t ?mm wit kg^rWt: I
? ‘*fr’ ^ra i fei fo-pft. ' r sfa ^1% w-pi%; ‘3°w
il^ ll ^fe/Wl ’ 51. 3 ‘^*1^’ fi% ft. V ‘5Rlf?RT: ?ft 5HT.
h sft ft.
^ II V9o ||
$m$u w&n ^ ^ m\ i
^Jfor aw —
‘?w f%ft Tft am i
<3«i<»*(ta>t 5Ri^7Tif ^5Tl^(<^t'*ii+i< l 'l JHjjil ll’
am ^R^IW%^TW: ^T^goiT f| afnarjpTOTWft’ ?%
fe«rlP5<3‘S,t ^$<<413 <W4lr»: I
‘sdw^.Tm^.iWH ^ i
^ fod^mHcU f Slftf ft II’
‘m w^fts wfd ftv-wrl i
^ arewift arTwfrfvn n’
ara ^iHg'aWwftT JTT^, JT^^r I
‘9> ^9 d<4<y^)^-l'Ji 95 O'Dell I
Pm sr fofm i dft *kt sn^srfc* u’
sre aFrforffcaftf^qart: g^n i ^ trti
am m —
‘%ftar Sm^Pm ffftoTT ipRTH am 'Tftfr ajTT&rft i
TTTf^^wm^v.-m 3^: grfejata^mftRan sstt n’
m ^irjj^>| mm srcp: h ^ \\
arm —
‘ j r Rwjj e w ft ai aftg^r ftargTfe sRswPmpft i
|fft ^TRapmtiTJftrR^r 9in: aiam^ sjqrunft^m foi*: ii’
fom #w i
aw —
i
g:ajftam aft ftamTW ll’
ll ^ ii
arismfa^ft aw —
! %Rf^nRT ajftf irifTriH anftfttft*Nr i
anwra "pr ftft w ^ ii’
? ‘99m’ 55-^. * ‘aiwfmt:’ ?Pr H.
snfa?rrf^ —
3Flfi4 4RT sfN>RNTOR I
5RT 4 TO*I fi* M *441 44WFTTOIWI4T g?: II ’
5 ‘5447 sn sftvr^ 44T R*rft 3Tta% i
*5F4T ^twh =5F£«T%rrft TTOftfoft n’
«rT I
wm %ufl^W^wcrt II w n
10 4^1 zr«rr —
wrfier smfia- fa*: wfm ^rr 4 % g^n: ii*
‘4tfR *rfar?ft faffaurft 4 ft* i
q^qwjcpsfrer RiiH> fare: gn ii’ *
15 ‘rrf^ sf%4: sreft fifa: fsprfa'RT 5^ I
*Rprr m 4^ {% 4 ft f<fa; n’
*t 3 ^nft ^3 >
%fTl^ f^S?W3[?W II V9H II
44T — ‘^m 4*4 TRT^H— ’ 1
20 'ElWfaf ^ r -W'W I
RT4T4 ?&4 I
‘^4 c4 RE j[4f[?JTttfar:
SOTFFm 4>F% 4if{'R 4 =414T*R?4T I
ft tg: §¥R ¥R4T lFg*rfofc
25 4 +t£t ylsi J* || ’
3T4 4T44.4 4 1 fa* 14 1 3JTR ^TOFTTWRigRRFR; I 4tfa-
4347 =4 4^j4 *i?jraft <Rtsft ^i^qot i
<rt <rt 5ri% w tpr ll n
? ‘gfero’ sfr fir. * ‘*RJ4T’
Y ‘4N4fr’ *ftt 3T-4; ‘Wlf’
m ‘?fct wr’ r?rM 3t-4-gR*4t:.
31-4. 3 l ^m’ fit.
TO:.
O -vs vs
fTTfasTT TTfTSTlTRt fasR: gffR; |
%Rrer ^^r5?m?r: ii’
^ ^ <F*rwi<{iq$ p: | 5
JT^F^ q^PTlrnTT || V 3 \s ||
*m —
<? ^ Ss'W'iia '^qiqi^r: 5TTT: I
^TTft%TRST qScRT R 5^TT qqn ||’
V W: I 10
$ qft ft%q<q^q qt q^ I
^ ^TR^Sq)^ qr ^rqtqqq^f tlfaT II ^ II
wn^uR;—
M+HidRSTnrTTlqRT W^^R; i
mr mwfai t#h str^tr n’ 15
‘sr n«t4 zr?r zfsrm^ir q q^q T re r ^Rtm^ i
ST ^sq^ts^T ST q: q g%q ^ qsqq. ||>
a^r^^ST^TR f^ROT^ ^rnrq*^ ^ ^ ,
w —
W R^TT %RTT: S^lf;q q^fq , 2Q
'T^T'^wm: ^TTPT TT#tTTTT%S ||’
qqwq^sft i
^Rfa^qi q^q: ^ 3^ i
—
^ ST ST STT'-TR I 25
HI^T ^<T || 9
3%RT q^rq || ^ ||
w —
‘a>4i<$f*-Tr q^isftfl q=rfq ^rwra ^qi^uj
^T3TOsrsmT%r^^ qs?qg;rai: i 30
? ‘qis^RRH;’ ?ra TS^I^aftr ( vsi^vs ).
«|o-^
^Tf^Rr* N<% cT^TT: ^IT^faT TOW ll’
%$*t l
wfa wm ^t %^tt qqk ^ ll <s° ll
5 3^3 33T —
‘f*33l: $r*l 'T^WJ 3rf%3T3Tr: ^gfiWi^WHirrtyuWC I
33TT: ^fen: 33t7> 33tui 3lf3 333T7f3*73: ||’
‘fe3*f>3 T^55T%'^T 33 siH5w<T5r?Tl: I
^q;=f333f%3I3l3 3T353Tft$* II ’
10 ‘T^?g?l3T^3?Tf33T$3: ^3Ti3l3T7^ir3 ^|3>I3; I
lWf3^H3ft:a3Tf %: £3*58^333^ 33T 33: ll’
‘3333*133313* ^33tsf*3Vj33: I
ftsfcRt 33*: r^i: ^333^*3^73: II ’
i£j =3 fjf^pgn*: I 331 —
16 ‘feral: SF3?r ^313*^333: qs'3 , |7T33I3^3 31313 33*31-
^ | ‘i§fttf*3-’ ?313$3PJ3[ f^3: ^d^qiftp 35^n-
I i* 3T333[ I 33 33W3 f%3RI335fRl£ 37: I
^W3I3I3T7Tf^l% : I
20
£3T 3^(8J^3U{ft 331? f ^3 33 I
331 3 f^3 ^31 ^3* 3^333?: ll’
3T3 q$ri*s3 3**3, f^33*S3 ?*[33 I
‘33T 3 3333* 331^3: ^3133: T3OT3 5TT733s'g3T I
33lf333R I
srsri^rsrat ?m ^ ll *\ ll
srratew rf^i i
30 ^oftqiqfUlH. —
‘f% ^J33 ^C733 33T* 3 T3 £fc 3:1331331*3 §£3 3 ^3: I
f$ 3 g?MI3 ?3 f333I 3 **3 313TT3 3>^3^,3T: 373^^3. ll’
33W: TfNte;:
3R sap=T#i| si 'l oj^ 1
‘rssn?i«r hst 5>r s>«r %r: htfth: i
I$t HiRlfNOTj: fife <51?* q?H 11 ’
sm «id^ 'Trrrai^ 1 snurt: srsni#$RH. 1
STSW^*"®! *C'TI — 5
H &H% RHH 5TI% H 34kH>TO I & 1
^FST m H S^fa HR: ST^Rf Tt^TR, 11 ’
‘H^HHHHtWRcR ISTqT HH3H Hf SJSJ^ I
HR H %H3T m^t g^Tflf^ ||’
=srrcr I^RRJRT H«TT— 10
‘Hl^m HHM fitcTHTTR HT^riH Hfr
JJUR^fl:-’ fRlfe I
3rTt Sra#^5tft II & II
H*TT HH — 15
‘sfH%3 * $mT 9SJ! RUft its: I
STqfl'h lie'll HI55T cRl? HHRT: 3>H: ||’
ST^T Hf«RBR HflltRWd SHtSS I
‘^T Qt-IHl TRIT^, HHl ippiri^f I
f“B "Hl^ ?p>RH, <ST®I ||’ 20
SRlRRHlt SIR-MNISWW^-USf ^: I H RJHgHHH. I
hrt #e ri h, • * * <wwjfejR. i
3rR^T 5l¥T I
HfljH fSHlH d^dRdHHyH^fflsk TST H 25
SRRftfrT pRS^RP- T RK^VdlfUMddf^N RRT ^S 'l Hfon I «R
=9 ai&UI l+lful+KSHy 1*1 WI=MM NR ITd-f sbfeiU I*1N*nW* 1-
faRfcN^N ^ ¥T?T I —
ԤRtSH ^f^nrft'irt ^sfrT RHH^ 1 I
SSBRIHRS^H % 3H wI+fKi: ||* 3 q
H HTRiTSt 'sffosp*. I
W fr MI-I HStsft Hits HHH %H ll’
10
s*rn-’ iranar i a i ^miawriaai 3r*q*y^q^wiqig, i
^«n — ffnrim gi +u'i<iPf^JTsg|flla!I q[ I’
ara 1^1 W( a aJHat: "qfKt&M^l^SriuKqiq^, HfrV|(e|*|§-
5m^TT 5P5?RnF^Tf^?tg: I ^ %^T^T%TWR^H: I g*q-
asRa ara- ag if^aauaai i/iuft *aaai qrvrFwaaig, i aig$
ar#a*a7ro#a i qa ‘ajGnjfrf%a?araC raarft i qa ‘garia;
f^at sran&rfla agar ?V 1 ara ^aias^ a i t-raq ; 1
‘araamfia fara aaTa aT ^ ar a aT 1 ’
s[ ^3^*TT^n w I
15
$TW W& II II
3"ft pr qi ^irr^iraf m 311M II
aar aa —
sfastfrc ^=a aaa a a^sapjaT
aifa^a araia* aftaaT at j,ia{NiP<f a: 1
UcM# il&s ft aaTa %^st4f?|4|ftia-
sppatsq fflwn (c+iqpT aaaa asjaa 4>ll4ws! II ’
ana qT? q^^^asFn^jsFaqft aafft aarft ^fstiqpfRi
20t*a?afiungaigHa(. 1 ara ftaaiafa agar 5TraaaiFiam: 1 aaa
agaaTa TMI'fi*K'Hi?TVRTqr atnigaata: I
aaaataf aaT —
‘ataft afoaaiaar aafiafr
aft QaaauVi Tpaaasft *ai$a: 1
25 ag^aroara: aaa^aa: a*wt
gaifaaa: araT aafft SW 5TFRTH ft II ’
— ‘qri^JOjaiqt araaa ’aaarreftaaaarft ag-
aatn:’ ^fa 1 a?ft g ‘ a f ft a ^ft aT araiahaaa q^ aa i fta i
sraftaraariftra a^aata: r aa f? affta>#g ^%a?aag-
K ‘a^araia,’ aft a-a; ‘aaaj’ fra
tftfa’ ffit ift.
': TO: =1 ‘ff-
■'WF*w£y|pfe, ‘JR% HR R5?nfJf’
ffrt RRRwft ^r<yMc^lM*i^Ka , ) ‘^qT^HJW: ^:’ fTR JT^T spT^T-
P^fTRim, SPfcr f^tWTWI 5TtVR^ q qt mfofa I ff =q 5R&
^i^iiii Rtf^TRfrc: i smwf^frc srict htr%
*toj>s' 3 Rfst ^Rn^ta^itoro?i«TntfH £r?: i 5
^ JRRt fr h%t =? Ppt^t jjhr i
g’aJTR# =5 R% Ft RfeFT^I^tFFT?: ||’
snntrs^ jprrt^rm^, f%Fffo feptt: i ^vrIwt# q«n —
^ ■* flifMter F^T JRJCTnq^T qsilir: ||’ 10
£ ptra ^nf§ FrgFf =3 i’
f<*tl<il^*|pM,{U|S>^q z&h I q RiR ftqqtR | tTFT % jpifeqr^-
,,lt ^ wjj'g'HH'bW PpT^Ff '+ M + i<u iq>W H 4 ^ &M -M J -t ^4 1 1 4) r+i^'si I : I
fiq: I
qm-
wft: pr $$ %rr^r^iTTin^ i
15
'JIRWI q%^?n |
sh^kkt fegtr^grftn ^r^nrntrTu \\*
H#PR II II
I 20
?r^%% ftqfN i q«n jw —
FTgjpsn % «eq kH^W-tq I
fRfRRI pRrq^n: f^fwrfjptr fft: II’
II c\3 It
l^talMiPraR «rc 5Rftqf^ff% | 25
3R^n q?n —
‘f^SblWlM+lfar HT%% JTft FTRFftqR^— ’ fF^IT? I
‘FT5?B RT? gff FTT ^Tf^IfP-TT ft % TT RT %f>7Rt-
fTfcj fq^%R%p5Tq ^i g«n I
? ‘qJtF^rcr^rrftFq ftttwrclq’ rft tf=TR% era
jnqrl^Rftq stfitRii^ i itarcr s^iwif^ift. i
~cc
q^r 55^r^g^5^: %vri: ii’
3T3 <*ra iT% ftK 3 ^T^Rt 5Thnra^n%^T ftWwM+t. i
vi'txeu i »' r i *1 ^F^ r '^'d^4 II II
5 I
W
‘ST^ifa 5^: U^I^IHTlWrT 3 TcT JTI ZW I
^5 stfNr VMK3TTH ygtt ^HMI^ U’
5T5T !T^HM \i*\\ ITrT^T^T 3tE: I 3 I ^T^TT —
io <5r^ m&wt ^rr%’ ^rri^ i
iftf^r gfn: II II
arjr wih ^^tji d%rrn?3^ i *rai- —
jTOt jnsrfs* *rrc?n *tm jft^t^mT n’
15 3T5T tor ^nrn Hfai i
‘g^T u7l <?(i ■$« s ^ ^ ^^TT +4 ' , -jw^ Ij u2kuPi |
^[ qiq ^. T^ EBnJpfiaT Jpnft 5TfT ^fn3> •<’
SRFT !(1^IFRKT^T I
20 5TO —
ar fams qr: ^ ^TtN 1 ||’
th^tr**. i f ? <f?r*fap*i7pi-
cPSTT I
25 ggn: » ^° 11
*T4T —
{ 3mi^ i
WJ^'i.y^tgfvr: II’
*0foH cttc^rri^uii^n^^ i ^ 3
303^m w>-'i'T( snfPn=r i
? ‘^’JH’ fft ^ ‘qq^MTf^*!:’ ffit 5T-^. ? ‘^:’ ?$)a?nfla
5T-sj-3^qt:.
w —
‘^f 3T%I ?lto JW |
goflTfc ftoWsft sp?T ^TTT ?T ^HT 1% It’
^STT m — 5
‘nitf+i+g *ng^ ’^^ragvran frara: i
n^rtn m lor fpsrm tort n ra n Norton n’
ilrlt^^^w+M'PiSrW ’pol^TS^T^T^T nra^ST
n f^rsra; i ^TRgrsr^RRworr f^mMiiiMi*) offrajjd fla gon
*•*«■« nnnifOTT: n*#sft n n^Mdl I sraf ra jju ri ir^ui- 10
•r^4 Q ptfi (ri i y i y d i Igi ?i'^l Tti^ : I Wi«-d*l<wT<4+<idra f^qwin |
iSR^ sm&T^rfffa U II II
^rft vm *nr ajtf i
%W- F<J3Snidftntor$gn: I STSTI^RtH n«lT —
‘q*raf^#dl^dM<4rt|p f^ ffSRf qflft ^ I 15
5^ rn^TT sq^rft ^raon fe^T qi^f *sl|j&sri T^to ||’
«ra sraT%f jninin ^rrfk^wiRid wit g^n-
fto^^rarr^ran i ^%nd qsn —
‘*1SS'3't>IWi*1ti R2 sjltttl ^TSOn i
wS«iNai<8a ^t51W Ot4ifed^ ||’ 20
sra feor 5f%r: ^toraranfanrat Tsnftoss-
Hif^di M^PufW^i sraJif^ra: i
II ^ II
nm —
25
‘$1 IdUliW M ftl iVr l^l^l^l^fl 1 -
an: ^ra ^R nH^ftraT^tfera
tran?n:gwnjjrra55n^stsnnT5: %*: n’
^ snwrqgfn: i srai^nVr fornraraftrerao* i f^ftm-
ddiwfl ^rn: i 30
v>
^ <Jt 4si | SFFTt 2T i ts <?H ^) •* I
w *m —
5 fgsm tttr i
ftftqift g: 2T3E: |j’
st^t <r^w ^rrn *rf¥*ra: II <U II
10 *rm —
‘ jjft&j R Tt^RTT fWTOW: I
*\ ^ ^ ^ f\ ^ ^ .
^T TZsW 3T TT^T^^TT II
cTi —
( 3TRft?^ra%% q^rrftr ?r #sft i
15 vnrftwirovrRT m^tr^ ddiawi, n’
^ =SRT WI?H-4t jpi: | ^JcTOTftft: IR?5flRWR% ^Rftrg-
I *T ^l^dT TO: I ft?JR SRTOT %3R13[ I *T ^rR^RTfrJft-
5ffR: i gff^ TO ^WT^, i n ^ snfcRR, i
sr^ra'dldL I * ^ ^TORtfrE: I <TOT ^Tft.<+3^ t^^rifcTOR^R
20 ^sms^Pi ^Fra; i st^t g ^pr: ggr gw< n uM^ ftft#3-
I Rf? ^'RtJ«i: spfe<*y«vi|q\TMd v, -l , w ftfti5%:
TOVRRTfrRt: ^TfT: I
t gPTRPTOt s TO^m ^5R% ftwidiMpR *T#ft f^T: I
sRurms^ *r%t sftera id^H-Rk-u-Md^R ^tsTO^ro <•’
25 sra Jf?romiil^ dURWRWfR: I ^RR^R IRTOR-
JTI0IRR1R r|'1|RR | ^ 5RR3R-
JTrJR^ ?RTRTTOfld VTR5 gr*: I *T«fRlf^ ‘STR^TS^-’ fRRt I
^^TfrtWF^of%iTr5^% II W II
wft srcg^^nw wti ^ i
30
? ‘«R?R’ 3HR. * ‘W’ sft ft. 3 ft.
ht wi f|JTRm; i
^^nftmdic^rt qraiftr: I.#r ii’
‘qifvnrfvra'iTf^RRTr *tot i
WJ ^l^f^dTOTR^: TTfR ^FS^tsBR^If ||’
mxit <Kj'm\ mm jrt mm wv^w B
*fr#r 3;$% swTftsftft w>m^ 11 11
OTrat *nsroraar i tttt TTOftn^ q q frA ' f i fl
— <3T ^ ^ ^TRPTI-’ s[?TITJ I ST5I ^JfH: 'b^UaisHJ, 1
| Sf:sfHRRicijq: | qsjr TO — 10
M^^ift^luicjiiPcTOi^fqTqT STOWTOR ST 5nfcnT*TT: II ’
»rar TOrtri^R: ^rc^rc*T¥rrc*TisF5. i *t ^ ^crtor- i
STR^TJTfRT I TOT —
‘^sf^^RTrPC qfffR ftdfcsR : | 15
5%^r: TTTO, II’
«rar s2firoiHf ti^totttoitottsr; i to TOimratsft i
*wrf|s qftfir: i tot —
{ aTf^sETO15RTO^£f£fa &m $ % f: i
TO IftqiT TT?: TT TO: 5>(fo TO$tSt ST^m; <•’ 20
sra tttrtorr srarat TRftqqTOVTO^n^ i
mm *F<q1 ^ tT^T^U I
'W vnqt^T-VTITOi^'q-flRqrqTOWRts^fHf: | q^aJt-
gRi sKmsft stow %fin: from ??nq; u’
toto-iTi Ti^ Oiq’m.fri ynq RTjj-n i
‘TOTFclflPWTOTOlWi^^jqjl I
^l^d% WWi: qjg 5f: qRrf| j|»
'q^^fkw5T t set srot frrrft
$«!<*♦* a*# qi#r i
m° %
30
RTWTqwifR. I 55 — '7I^RW1!JP3^ ^T^-
gqeRRSBT ir^^fTO: I ?Ri7*Rg cIl’RRTCqJlWIigqqSRt ^ *
rRUWfi'RT 3^n’ 5^ 1 ^ 9 — ‘wi^M+Kfli^^i^f-
rasqq^^rt WTFfk^'tMw-sj isfteiR qq’ 5R i ®R^ ^
qqjRRR'JTi^fTCR 5 ^R» ^I'+h) 3
*rftq’ 5% i arf^^^—
10 wiVi^'tw+iq^RKSK'jitq^Rw^f^q^
^wi% i HHratrRi 3 5n^qjif^« ? R5i ; wi^Rt^^ 1 RRT> *1
d^ ^, {Ud^ 3’ 5ft i »ra ^ ^w+kuTi^—
‘URRtsRRi m t# 3 mv^v 1
spis^r <rferei55fRt Will'd ft JTRi: II *
jg qK ^ ^^n^q=Mwra°n^|; d^r dN'+u^qD <t^ti swift?! 1
qar =q qw ‘OTI7HT*## W^RISfR: | sqpft 3
ft^ft^irtussfR:’ drfq 1
*m m*wv 11 ^ 11
3^1 STOfRl SfRSTCT 1
20 3T2TT
wrefosr# t*-
fo$fts^% 3 T H ^ II
rr^qt ST^RWfKRJR*. I RSTT —
25 ‘5R: MRI^qRRr: I
^TR^RdT^^T5^ : >1*
sra ’TRKMRIKId RR^R, I w*k«Ki di^MW 5% $l^i-
RfT?qt: ftRfo 1 fs^fa qf^ sw, ^ ^qqsfftRRi^fT-
| n^pT*rf: f^RTRRSS^TRWfTCftRfe: I
? ‘ftqre’ ©r.
mm
^ gg: || <^ ||
ai g i f&R i ft rrt —
‘In ffe^RQd ^H^ ^R ft RV^ gR r ^ CT R R S R^ : i
RWT^^^pSfteng TO ftreftg d qp^ „ 5
srar ft+uwsrqf^T trttrfrrt strir ^refft: i *n ^
^*31^ ^RRl^RR^RSR Rg?iRJRr%OTRTRT ^RgRRR Rcflfd
a^Tiw^ i %r«j rttwrot^t ^^^qERm^rasrat#,^ i
8Tft^Rt-,sr g^ , ^ 1Tf .
< I RiR«-R| I di'-qi d ( WRlft^PRRR^R RRRdTRT RRIRT%^^ | JO
RSR RT —
‘ST^RTRRt RWT %SRRgR*R: |
ST^t RRTTRTfkRr dRlft ^ ^^ittR: II’
37^ tfRlftfrET^flRt^^g I TRJ^R^t RRJ —
‘^?RIRlft R*ft fvR^TR R?ctd RR: | j^
^W^RRRRRRTRR R'JR^R^Rg’ II
snr £fc g^RT ^RRTSRRRRT^pftfa:, tJR ^ ftiy
’g^Rtqi^g, STRRf ^TTRft gTRRT g
n f^|^ f; STTftf^J^RnRfR-
^l{ m^, f% RT ^ ftRRRRRl?!^^ J^RR R g RR I^Ri g t fe;:, 20
I RRJRRr +J"3 tmRR fd RrM M ^Jd M RRI, R^j
R-dRtfTRR: $1^: ^fild Rdd-itd'Jl dig#T RRTR j»% qq^ft.
RfRlR^flROTT R%1^ *B%RfR: I
TTRT^RI ‘g<d-dr£ T^Rlft’ ^RTR ft; JJTR ^gRRT, 3R
*J ^ *>% 1 wnanwnijpS^ ^n% r sr: 25
1 RRt— 1 $«*$ 3*Rft’ wm ^ gRreng^ssftigq-
riri; am* 1 3 Rftfssftft T°mst Rra*g i <5*.
RRRRRt’ ^ RRnRTR?ft Vfffi ^T^T RP^ft g# SRRfar-
<%R SRRRRtft RftRNIR?: |
Vl*HKIRU| 575frft^RIRl%^fd ftvr^g’ 3Q
RfftR sn&fR RIR3BRT RS^t RTftdfirfd gSRRT %^HR
? ‘f%TRt’ ?fct 3I-R. ^ *3Rf®’ fft 3f-R.
V ‘RRRRldTRS^’ *ft ft.
3 ‘sarftRfcft’ ?ft ft.
PARICHCHHEDA I
SPTTC 5 ^ &c. (p. 1, 1. 5). All Sanskrit writers generally
introduce their works with a salutation or benediction. This
( Mangala as it is called ) is necessary for the removal of
obstacles and for the safe completion of the work undertaken.
The efficacy of inahga^a is emphasized by so early a writer as
Patanjah, who says sn^ff £Tf?r:
^ i” (p. 7, voi. I of the
ed. by Kielhorn). Compare also the interesting discussion
about the necessity and efficacy of mahgala m the Siddhanta-
muktavali and the Tarkadlpika of Annam-bhatta.
It would have been better if the author had said
instead of snftf^fowflro- But he
is in good company, e. g Abhmavagupta says m his
55t«K$fa«T 4 ‘ T &C. ”
(p. 1); and sifaerg in his comment upon Rudratas Kavya-
lankara says “arf^sr (P- !)• arft&JT snRftacr-
desiring the unobstructed completion of what he
wishes to begin. ( p. 1. 1. 5. )— 3?f ^TOT»
means “ Literature compare ^r4
3%3fa II 1 % HI. 28 cn^r^o means ‘ Because,
She ( Goddess of speech ) is the constituted authority in or has
sway over the province of Literature’, ^Tg^*TN% —
supply — ‘ He (the author) makes the Goddess of speech
favourable ( to his object )\ wrote the Karikas as well
as the Vrtti. But he speaks of himself in the third person
( 37Nvf ), following the practice of such writers as Mammata,
who says “ ” Compare the
words of c s p*T s^q^RT: Wtt Wrefa ’ or of
(on I. 4 ) ‘ ‘^^^TqTDiTS[4‘
^ "
( P* 1. 11. 7-8 ). Construe $r ^
vT^T: ^ %cf{% 3Tf%3T^ m means * well-
* For the derivation of see on the cfjf^K
P&pC on ‘ft foaf *p3Krf^{: J IV. 3. 144.
2
NOTES ON
I. 1
known.’ Dissolve gvrft 5jftftsrr:- Many
writers on Rhetoric appropriately prake the goddess of speech
at the beginning of their works, vide the the cfi^-
SC^T, <&0 *
arsT (p. 1,1. 9). ‘As this work is
ancillary to poetry it can be fruitful by the fruits of
Poetry only.’ No one, not even a fool, does anything without
having some purpose m view. Unless the author tells us
what is to be gained by a study of his work, nobody will care
to learn it.* Therefore the of the study of this work
must be mentioned, This work is auxiliary to poetry in-
asmuch as it helps us to understand thoroughly the elements
of poetry, and consequently helps the reader by giving him a
capacity to appreciate and to compose the best poetry. So the
final aim of it being proper appreciation and creation of
poetry, the aim and purpose of poetry must be the end and
aim of this book also.f
^#^■0 — (p.1,1.10)# Construe srt:
5Tiffr: gsrm; ( *rtRt ) to ( <rcrra;)
means ‘the class of four’ f i. c. the four Treqpjts. >■$,
3TR and (p. 1, 1. 12 ). |^jsqcr: — It is
well-known that the four (mentioned above) arc the fruits of
poetry. and arc to be con-
strued respectively with ^ and i. e. fgr sr$Rr:
compare the words of Mammata «T
^ qroW.... (K. P. 1 Ul.). The fruits
of Poetry are differently given by different writers: — e. g.
^2: in his Kav}alankara (1.4-13) practically says the same
thing as our author. Vamana, on other hand, says that
the fruits of Kfivya are sftffr *( pleasure ) and sfitfc?’ (1.1.5).
Compare the words of Mammata ‘cfifszf
crajcft i a?r: n’ ( K- P. sssra I. )
(p. 1, 11. 15-16 ). This- -tfttse is taken from the
ancient Rhetorioian Bhamaha (1.2). A Transcript in our
possession reads ‘sftft ^ But the
* ft snft i
wrftsw 515ft 11 «terr. 1, 12.
1 5 ?*TT cT^IT
-sti-aiBraii'ar Jpirar 'sasRftjTftr 5 tr:i
I* 2 Sahityadarpana 3.
♦
verse is everywhere quoted as it is in the text. ^q^^joqfqitqqq^
constant application to, or study of, good Poetry ( whether by
way of composing it or reading it). sftfq sf^tfrr causes delight
(to the author as well as to the reader), means
‘ thorough mastery, proficiency. 7
^ (p. 1> 11* 17-20). The author
shows how Poetry severally leads to the attainment of each of
the four goals of men. The word ^pqp^ is to be connected with
each of the four words qjfcnfq:, etc. irq,: H^qT^rq: —
This passage is often quoted as a Yedic one. The readings,,
however, are different in each case. J and B read *qq =q
(in heaven as well as in this world) for *qq ^?j%. Our reading
is supported by the ( p. 228), by ^ (p. 10) and by
the (p. 139 B. I. edition). The adds
Compare for the idea the verse — qj?ff; qiPTgqi spqqq-
grfii 1 ffr 31$ fir 11 1-
— As to the attainment of wealth (by means
of Poetry), we see it with our own senses i. e. we see men
making money by writing poems. ^PTPTfil3Tl%R^ — Poetry
does not directly lead to the attainment of physical comfort,,
but only indirectly i. e. it makes the poet rich and then he cam
enjoy life. Compare I* 49. “qqfeqts%:
'T&Km 1”. ( efipq*pq ) q^fe*
by not regarding (as the goal) or not hankering
after the fruits of merit produced by it (by writing poems).
The idea may be explained as follows: — The composition of
poems leads, as said above, to the attainment of religious
merit and the pleasures of heaven as a consequence of it.
These, although in themselves good enough, are not the highest
goal to be aimed at. They are transitory after all. One should
not rest content with them, because when one’s merit is
exhausted, one will have again to suffer a fall from heaven. One
should therefore aim at Pinal Beatitude ( )• This one can
do only if a man performs his individual duties without hanker-
ing after their proffered reward and thus strives to attain
to correct knowledge, knowledge contained in the Upanishads
&c. Compare gsftf I
u[o Vlii. 1 . 6 ; jprr sffsr jjfrw i
^sfir^^fJfr ajsr ^ II I. 2. 7.
— Tlle passages which are useful
for attaining Moksha are those contained in the Upanishads,.
4
NOTES ON
I. 2
the Bhagavadglta, the HFT^'JTT ,T I and others.
means ‘thorough understanding or comprehension Egc'Tv^iNFt*
— Because it produces a thorough comprehension of.
(P- 1) 11- 20-22 ). In these lines the
author points out the superiority of Poetry over the Vedas &c.
as regards the attainment of the four g^TT^s. The Vedas and
£astras are equally capable of leading to &c. ; but Poetry is
superior to them in three points : — I. V edas &. are dry and
insipid; while Poetry causes the highest pleasure; II. The
Vedas can be learnt with great difficulty; while Poetry is
comparatively very easy; III. It is those of mature intellect
only who can study the Vedas, while Poetry can be learnt
even by those whose intellect is tender ( not developed ).
Compare ( p. 5 ) ‘qqt
I 1 *T fPTT H’.
3TT^: vW ( ’BPPJ )• For igUTR-,
j^x^f &c. compare the words of q^rq ( p. 7. Chandorkar %
HW^jra^tsra-gf^frr^T <wg,nr^^t sr^tf^g^wtrerr-
q-ipl)’. Compare also “spg SRT#T f*Rq% 1
*pr ^ ^n%«T: ll” XII. 1 ; vide q^rfe-
(I. 4. ) ‘qqi^grq^TR: §fUTR^iTt%: I
II’-
^ ’tftiBffefir: ^ ?ira. (p. 1. 1. 23-p. 2, 1, 2)
If an objector were to say ‘Let Poetry be useful to those whose
minds are not manure, but why is Poetry necessary for those
whose intellects are mature, as they can very well grasp the
meaning of the Vedas'?’ We reply: — it is quite true that they
can understand the Vedas and would attain to sf#, but even
to them the study of the V edas would be dry and difficult,
while Poetry will be pleasing and ea.sy, and yet will bring
about the same result. Who would then not prefer the more
pleasing to the one which is dry and troublesome ?
to be cured by bitter drugs. sugar-candy.
Compare for the idea I ST^fT^cf-
^T^^FTTT'Tf^ II ( P- Benares edition).
The last verse is taken from the ( I. 7 ).
* See ^ 3 definition *
STClttf II I. 18 .
I. 2 SXHITYADARPANA 5
i% ^ & c. (p. 2, 1. 3 if.)* In tlie fore ‘
going passage the author has established by reasoning the
excellence of poetry; now he quotes ancient authority in
support of his views. 3if?TgyFI — This Purana is a peculiar one.
It is a sort of an Encyclopedia of Sanskrit literature. It has
chapters on TOTiM, &c * It is
something like <£ Enquire within for everything.” Vide
Introduction, occurs in srfiro 327. 3 and 4 : ( Ananda-
srama ed.). For the printed Puran a has j&rt.
qq g^^rr-to attain to the position of a poet is
very rare there (i. e. even among those who are learned)
and ( real) poetic inspiration is rarer still among them (the
so-called poets ). The Agnipurana makes a distinction between
and 3 jf%. is the same as qfqvq as said by
Vfa‘^TOi^crT’ J !• 16- or is defined by tfr? as
TOrtif^br.*, by t&z as
1 ^ fTOTfirT TOR# II I. I 5 and by
Jagannatha 4 ’ ( P- 8 of R. G.); C 5^TT
srfrPTT *RT’ l’ W- These
words occur in the Agnipurana, adhyaya 338. 7 ( Anan. ed. )
‘ftstftercft TOR: SRRT 1 fWRHTTOT TOT ^ ^ H’-
# 3 4pFR ^fterTO qT^ftf 3TTO 1. 7. 10. ftp# means the
three viz., vq-^ ? and ^jq. ( the science of dramaturgy
or dramatic representation ) is a means of accomplishing the
three. qiRF5TTT3T &c. This occurs in the iroj^FT I. 22. 81
( ed. by Mr. Bhagavat ). There we read t^£ 2TTOF#CFTOI ; ( for
x# fTOTfelT TOTO: of the text).
IsjfTT &c. (p. 2, 1.9) — the word here is the one
occurring in the cjqftaRT ‘ qg#qi^rrfH:, &c, above, IgR for
that reason. By the words ( RTO^ )
the subject of this treatise has been indicated. After
pointing out the reward of reading this book ( i. e. the qqFR
or q^s) the author points out the subject( i. e. fqqq )
of the work. According to ancient Sanskrit writers, every
book has four requisites or srgTOTS as they are called, viz.
fro, and Compare P* 3 «
‘TOTTgTOt TOrPwR l’- Here the author spoke
of qqpsR and now speaks of the fqqq. The is that of
between the qqFrq and fqqq. the 3TfqqTOT is one
that wants to learn the essentials of poetry.
6
NOTES ON
1.2
&c. (p. 3, 1. 10 ff ). The author alluded to
is Mammata, who defines Kavya as quoted by S. D. here.
'Construe WFK ^T^ff ^(i. e. qqsq^)—
poetry is constituted by word and sense which are faultless
and possessed of qualities and which are further rarely with-
out figures of speech. Lit. ‘This should be considered 7
1. e. this is doubtful, improper.
Our author first selects for criticism the word sr^rt in
Mammata’s definition of poetry, qf^;
&c. (p. 2, 1. 12 )— If you accept as poetry that alone which is
free from fault, then the verse ?q^fj &c. would not be a poem
as it has the fault ft^qifq^j.
5P&T &c - (P- 2, 11. 14-18). ^^5% T%WFT
gpfFrnWW « I 3- =sr. That there are
enemies (to me) is itself a humiliation; to add to it, he is an
anchorite and as such kills a number of Rakshasas just here
( under my nose). Oh wonder, then, that Ravana lives yet.
cTTTtftsft 3 jjf^)
l^ftfcT ^RTfrTJR:. <Tfq:— Ha! does Ravana live
( as all this happens, Ravana must not be living, some one
would say; but alas, he is alive), fq^ &c — Fie upon ( my
mighty son ) the conqueror of Indra; what is the use of
Kumbhakarna being awakened (mighty brother and ally though
he be)*? *qq5nq...gq: — The plural is used because Ravana had
twenty arms (contrasted with the two of the ascetic Rama).
^ ^ jprfefiT ( g^JtPT: ) what is the
use of these arms that are fattened or putted up in vain with
•the spoils of the puny hamlet of heaven % What is called
here is the same as the more general name, 3 ?fq^gfq-
i. e. ‘3Tfq3jg: ( ) f^qfqr: qsf qqtT p. 214.
Every sentence is made up of two parts, the subject ( sj^q^)
and the predicate ( fq^q ). It is a general rule that the
subject is placed first and the predicate last. In ordinary
life, we refer to the subject first and then predicate something
about it. If we change this order, then there may be con-
fusion in understanding the exact meaning of the speaker.
What comes at the beginning of a sentence would be called
the subject and it might really have been meant as the
predicate. Let us take an example. In the verse the word
e?q?j’ refers to the existence of enemies and it is the intention
I. 2 Sahityadarpana. 7
of the speaker to convey, what is not known from any other
source, that the existence of enemies is a great humiliation;
therefore the word ?q^ is the predicate. The natural order,
then, of tha words ought to be syqqq ?q^R: and not ?q^rdsqifc,
in accordance with the old maxim ‘one should not utter the
predicate before the subject is expressed’ ?T
«T fjsrsqRqq - II#. The order being
inverted, we understand the meaning intended after an effort.
As, instead of saying gyq^q the speaker says ‘?q^R: srq^q’
( all distinct words ), the fault is said to be qyqqqcf* q (qqqfr
is defined in the Ekavali as 3}gq \ ^fq^qfqnSTfir
fq-q-^q qqy I qqfq rRHT g WiIcT: II p. 159; see also
the^ eifto^Tjor (p. 371 Nir. ). “ c ?q^rd
s^RST fsR%T^ I rpa
I i” and fq^q
are defined as follows: — q=5^*qqyjy; qyqrq T^q RMgJTcTT I q^^qfa
STTvRT ^fV£Rq R fq^RTT II. The subject is that which is connected
iwith the relative pronoun (q<^), which comes first in the
sentence and which is accomplished (or well-known); while the
predicate is connected with the pronoun ‘that’ (q^),it is subse-
quent (to the srjqyq) and it is something to be accomplished
(or not known ). Moreover, in the words fqfc^q:
there is arfqggfqsfaTqr (qqqq) qtq. Here the subject is the fact
of being puffed up ( i. e. s^q^q is the argq'iq ) and what is
predicated is the uselessness of this pride (i. e. ^qqq is the
fq§q). But this fq^q, as it forms part of the compound
becomes subordinate. It is the subject that is sub-
ordinate in a sentence! and hence ejqy, the real fq^q, presents
the appearance of being the subject, which is subordinate and
thus there is srfqggfq^irqqtq. See ^[feqqo (p. 366) ‘ayq gqqq
sqft^T etc. (p. 2, 1. 17). Although the verse c ?q^Rt
^qqq’ is thus tainted with the fault of 3?fqggfq§qjqr, still it
* Ihis is often quoted as from Kumarila, but we do not
find it in the index to the ^facjyf^q;, It is, however, an old
;qjq, as it is quoted even by Hemachandra ( p. 172 of
Nir. Ed. )
f See qqtq ( p. 214 ) ‘qjqpq =q fqfqq<ftfqqt*qqy 1 fly RTgTOMT*
I; a ^ so P* 162 ^ fq§q^ qTRRq
^flcq^f^qq^iqg, syqyqyj-q RTgqT^Tqfg^ l
8
NOTES ON
1.2
has been admitted to be a specimen of the highest type of
Poetry as it contains suggestion. It is Anandavardhana, the
author of the sq?qR?rqi, who looks upon this verse as a
specimen of the highest type of Poetry (see pp. 153-154: of the
Poetry is divided by Anandavardhana and others
like into three varieties, q*c*qq, and 3?qq. That is
qqsq where the 5q*qr ( suggested ) sense far excels the ex-
pressed sense.# It is also called sqfq. In the verse under
discussion, q q^q:, ^q^r ^TTO : , ^ etc *
suggest meanings that are far more charming than the plain
expressed sense, f i 4 e 4 by the word (in the plural ), it is
suggested that they are a mere burden; by the word is
suggested the idea that he must be destitute of prowess. As
Mammata is a great admirer of sqq^qqq and as he defines
SvTq or ^qfqqqsq in the same way as srRs^qqq does, he ( jpqs - )
also must be looked upon as regarding the verse ‘jqqjRt
etc. as an example of q=qq qqsq.
Kavya is defined above as etc.; this verse ( ?q^RV
etc.) is shown to be faulty; therefore it cannot be an example
of Poetry; but it has been implicitly admitted to be the
highest type of Poetry by Mammata. So his definition is too
narrow, as it would exclude the veise in question from the
province of Poetry. qqq^qifq^q^q: (p. 2, 1. 18). Every
definition must be free from three faults, viz. 3T5qjfq ? BTRfcqTfH
and 3 ?q*qq. It must neither be too narrow, nor too wide, nor
quite impossible. Here Mammata’s definition of qqsq is open
* sqft qT^T^fttV qJ%: I qiFqqo I.
fSee tq?qr^fa p. 153 on ?q^R> etc. — *3T5T ft* gqHT
^qqpii%T ^js%q sqSfqir# I qqfqq^q ^
qqsq^r sg^sfq \ qq ft sq*qTq*nftq: qq#-
q^qr q#r q^r^Tqi ftgq qq 3toi sram* i
qqrq'iq^qdftq^qi ; read the remarks of on these words of
the ScjvqT^rqi. See 3T. ft. p. 181 ‘qq 3Rq ift qjqq^q
^T3^ri*T5crit wgfqq - ^Iqfsmrqt ^q% i qft ftsft
q#ft qiqqqiqifr^q qcqqt^qTftsq^ l qqtftqpftq ftwsg-
qTqg^r gq: qrgqiqT ^^q^qFqqiqcqqftr-qrF^ t ^cqFr#hT qft \
g fenfa q i q^T ^qqftqT qTq^gftqi =q s
qq;: i reftfafft ^TsftqOTq; i
iq ^-^q^qicq iqiqrftq sq^ft i g%ftft qfqq^r
qcgq sq^q% sfit i’
I. 2 Sahityadarpana. 9
to the fault of srsiiifff, because, as said above, it excludes such
a verse as &c. which is universally acknowledged to be
the best type of poetry,
^3 (p. 2, 1. 18). An objection is
raised against the criticism of Mammata’s definition &c.
In the verse etc., it is only a part that is faulty, and not
the whole; therefore we may omit what is faulty and regard
the remainder as an example of poetry. To this S. D. replies
m the words ( p. 2, 11, 19 — 28).
The first objection against the above compromise is
contained in the words ^ to That part of
the verse etc. in which there is a fault leads us to call
it non-poetry; while that part of it in which there is Dhvani
*• suggestion, leads us to call it the best poetry. Thus,
being dragged in two opposite directions by these two parts,
the verse would neither be poetry nor non-poetry.
^ &c. (p. 2, 1. 21). In these words S. D.
attacks the idea that one par of a verse may be faulty, while
tae remainder may be good poetry. He says that such
blemishes as etc. (harsh or jarring expression )do not
mar a part of a poem merely, but the ivhole poem if they are
faults at all. The idea is that harshness spoils the charm of
the Rasa and therefore of the whole verse and not only of
those particular words which are harsh. In certain circum-
stances, however, harshness may be an ornament, instead of
being a blemish. Hence, harshness is either a blemish or not
a blemish. If the former, it mars the beauty of the whole
poem. In such a case, then, you cannot say ‘Let a part be
faulty; whole remainder may be good poetry.’ If in etc.
it is admitted that there is then the whole
verse becomes faulty and hence it would not be poetry at all.
0n the efo* remarks (p. 82) 3 T%sr
^qvfr^gT 3 g;qt: qr4t: i \
sRWta; 1”
In (p. 2,11. 22-26 ) S. D. supports what
be has said above i. e. a fault becomes so when it mars the rasa
and thus the whole poem ? * it cannot spoil only a part of the
poem. — to explain. A ^ is defined by Mammata as
* See for the meaning of this K. P. V. 238 ( Va ).
10
NOTES ON
1.2
gw-^r^rat ^s? g^^T«RI§J^: I awtTOtfofl: ^3 :
^ftg:U’ (7th 3 ^) and by S. D. as ^HTT^T ^t:’. A ^
is that which mars the rasa. 45Tsn?tr>JTO — rasa is said
to be the soul of Poetry, e. g. «p 2 t#R II. 7, p. 78‘^q-^-
t g°1T: ^?n: also 4 ,M^[OTr -qHftRT etc. I. 1;
STRrRR says 4iT 5 4¥? , 3TINTT W:’ e ^°- 4f wbat are
called faults do not mar the beauty of the Rasa, the soul of
poetry, then they cease to be faults. This is admitted by all
including Mammata, e. g. harsh words are a fault in the *j^TC‘
^ because they mar the beauty of that rasa , but in or
harshness is not a fault, as it does not mar beauty.
Mammata himself says in the 7th Ul. ( 63rd q;ift3\t) P- 4=45 ( ^ a - )
UIRtTm art^gaft*. S. D. says in the 7th
“SvKfaRi ^ 56tW3% ^ ^3^ j
fnrR> f ^tSsgfcT g°lt II’ P- 403 (Nir.). %qj
gfitgeitfap*. (p. 2, 1. 23) otherwise, i.e. if it were not .
admitted that faults are so only when they mar the and
are not faults when they do not mar the rasa.
It would not be possible to divide faults into and
( as is universally done ). If faultiness did not depend upon
the fact of marring the rasa then this division of 4tT would
be impossible. A fault will always be a fault. But if yon
postulate, as regards the faults, the criterion that whatever
mars the rasa is a fault and that what does not do so is not
a fault, then only can you say that a certain is STRcT ( not
invariably so), e. g. gffog is a ftq in jgfNStf, but not so in
?tfs are generally divided into and 3rfrfi?f. bea
p- 201 (Nia) % ^[4 f§;fr4: fWi'rsftcsrai 1
s^yi eirprtgiRrwt 1 w 1 1
3*nS5igTfilfe: r. may be instanced in the use of JfT*ra
in the sense of ‘requests’ for vuqfcr (which is the correct form
in that sense), is the employment of a word, which,
though authorized, is not used by poets e. g. the word tqcf,
which, the lexicons say, is both masculine and neuter, is used
by poets only in the neuter; if one were to employ in a
poem, it would be srsnj^TtT. «lterr — ®y the autll0r
Dhvani i. e. the work called zqjqf®)*. The author flourished
in the latter half of the 9th century A. D. in^ Kashmir.
Vide Introduction. Construe arff^rr ^ sfs^4t 5T?rcR:. ^ ^
jwft II. See zqvqt^q; PP- 82—34 (Nir).
means ^ ^ 3 ^rTlt^Ptf^Ta ^
SAhityadharpana
II
1 . 2
SEWtf: 37 )— ' when &rfjgara i. e. love is the suggested
sense and is also the principal one. The
tlfdgE etc., are to be avoided only when the prevailing ^
is simply love and not when the prevailing rasa is Raudra
or even love affected by indignation. In the latter case
will not be a fault, or it would not mar the beauty.
( PP- 82-83) says : I ^J^nVcTrifTT-
sr^ftT^ i ^rfr i twtsCrt
!Sf KT^ ^ vrre: I The S. D.
quotes the verse from Dhvanyaloka for the purpose of
supporting what it had said before i . e .
Compare for the idea
3^% ^r^Tr ^T^Ttqt: 1 ^ ^
*<TRf ST^TT^T g qgTqqftqt: ^^qt: I =q *5*1^-
qt^qqsq^^Tgfqqrfn^ i spTrffc q%q starch gqr:, =q
^ T V 5 ^i4qt: i qff f| cnrt: sft*TcHKT sr ^
^ 3T#^5r^q: I 3rfa$rr4i% ^faT: \ qqf
^qq^qfq^i^qf 3^^% ^
1 ”
T% ^...3Tg^qT^— (p. 2,11.27-28). In these words an-
other objection is raised against Mammata’s word sr^tfr* If,
as you say, none but a faultless piece were to be regarded as
Poetry, then Poetry would be a rare thing indeed or would
not exist at all, as it is extremely improbable that a piece
should be free from faults in every respect. The idea is that
there will be some fault, however slight, in every piece; but
according to Mammata’s definition Poetry must be faultless;
therefore all pieces, that are faulty in any respect, will be
excluded and there will remain nothing answering to the
definition of given by This objection against
Mammata’s definition and S. D.’s definition of q;yoq are noticed
bj 5T^T (Nir. p. 13).
In all this criticism, the meaning of the negative particle
In 3T^t<ft was taken to be sTvqq', absence or non-existence.
PTow, a defender of Mammata’s definition comes forward
by saying that the negative particle should be interpreted
in the sense of ‘ a little, slight’, and thus means ‘a
little faulty.’ The meanings of the negative particle, are
.six : — ^qc4 1 ^
12
NOTES ON
1 . 2
jjsfidfcfT: II P- 154; (q-o 55 ° H,° 25, attributes it to
author of ) or I ^
tr^xrT^%: II’ Jtfcfr According to this new interpre-
tation, the definition of Poetry would be ‘ word and sense, a
little faulty etc.’ Against this S. IX brings an objection,
which is as follows. As STsfrft (i- «• fq^tr) forms part of the
definition, in every poem there must be some slight fault. Every
word in a definition must be applicable to all the things
defined. Now, if some very gifted poet wrote a poem free from
every fault, the definition of Kavya as interpreted above would
not apply to it and his composition would not be called a poem,
as it would not possess some slight fault. But to say so would
be quite absurd.
(p. 3, 1. 1 ). gfr %X- An improvement is
suggested in these words in the interpretation of STrtqt as
We do not mean tbat in every poem there must be
some slight fault; what we mean is that Poetry is “word and
sense with a slight fault, if at all ” i. e. there should be no
faults, but if there are faults they should be slight ; if in a
piece there are grave faults, it would not be a poem. S. D.’s
objection against this is contained in the words
H e sa y s that these words i. e. * efcT
fq^tqV should not have been inserted in the definition
of poetry; just as in the definition of such a thing as a
jewel etc. one omits such a circumstance as its being per-
forated by an insect. A is defined by qrcWR as ‘sTcTfq-
vpfr:’ i . e. a property which serves to distinguish the
thing defined from all other things. sa y s I
swt mi b 'nranw'w* >’• From
these it follows that in a definition only the most essential
or peculiar attributes of a thing should find a place. # 2 : 13 ^ is
not an essential or peculiar attribute of a jewel. So it should
have no place in the definition of a jewel, as that circumstance
would not constitute a thing a jewel, though it may not cause
it to cease to be regarded as a jewel. Similarly, poetry may be
free from every fault, or it may have slight faults. But the
fact of having a slight fault, if any, is not one of the essentials
or peculiarities of Poetry and therefore should not find a place
in the definition of poetry. 3 ft etc. Here S. D. fully explains
the illustration of a jewel given by him. Such circumstances
as 4 ^ 3 ^ are not able to deprive a jewel of its character of
Sahityadarpana
13
I. 2
a jewel, but they are able only to make applicable to it degrees
of comparison* ( i . e. that it is excellent, middling or inferior).
The same holds good of such faults as fjRTgg in the case of
poetry i. e . they do not make a composition, in which they
occur, cease to be a poem, but they render applicable to such
a piece the words ‘superior’ ‘middling’ or ‘inferior’. S. D.
supports his remarks by a quotation. “The nature of poetry
is held to reside even in faulty compositions where the ^
etc. are clearly perceived in like manner as the character of
a jewel etc is held to belong to such a thing as a jewel which
is perforated by an insect.”
(P. 3, 1. 7). M - S. D. here begins his
criticism of the second word in ‘fppjqz’s definition of
He says that this qualification of the word qyogfqff is
inappropriate. The reason is contained in the words gqyqf...
On the
wr: I ?piT: II’ ( 2RT. 5T. 8. 1 )
JFiTj’s ff% is STRqq ^ ff qq] qigqfeqt
gqi:, q qqWk- Mammata has declared that the ‘excellences
such as melodiousness are the properties of Easa alone
and not of anything else’ (such as words). But in his
definition he says thereby intimating that the
Gunas (excellences) are the properties of words and senses.
Thus he is inconsistent.
(P. 3, 1. 9). In these words
some one defends expression ggurf strqrcf:
indirectly or by metaphor. The adjective as applied
* We translate cftjngr^g; as ‘perforated by an insect.’ This
is a literal translation. It is not meant that the jewel is really
perforated by an insect. What is meant is that a jewel may
have a scratch on it or may not shoot from a part dazzling
rays, the part being opaque and crossed with lines which
present the appearance of different insects etc. Varahamihira
mentions a number of blemishes in jewels and says that they
lessen Jhe price of the jewel. I
gvrrfa ii qif?r ^ itih>sr-
JnfoPr i ?mi g^qwrisstrt fifJr: n’ ifc?rfhrr 80. 15-16. On
remarks ‘tr%^firer^tf;frffiT:’. In the vernacular
also such defects are called ‘Masi’. — is ascribed to
by ^$7 of jpTIsR ( P. 3 Tri. ed. ).
2
14
NOTES ON
1.2
"to is quite appropriate ; since it is these i. e,
words and senses, that reveal the Pasa or sentiment • the
vjufs, which really are the properties of may be secondarily
regarded as belonging to and 3^4, which manifest the
:S. D. replies that even this would not improve matters. The
definition is still improper. to explain. (P. 3, 11. 10-17)
Here two alternatives
are proposed. Either ^ exists in words and senses or does not
exist. If you accept the latter, then words and senses
cannot possess in that case any excellence, since excellences,
being the properties of ^ (as said by yourself in the 8th
Ul. 1st verse), follow the presence or absence of ^ i. e. if
^ is present, gq is present; if ^ is absent, then gq also is
absent. If then you say that in and 3T^ there is no ^
there follows, as a matter of course, the absence of gq and
therefore the adjective ^qf cannot be applied to If on
the other hand you accept the former alternative i. e. that
does exist in and then why did you not say
instead of ^gqr ? 3^vIT^I3TT^T = 3^^
^^^=^‘ ;: <tt ffir ft^lqq iw°- An
attempt is made in these words to defend qjqz’s words ^qy
^yo^qqf. As excellences are the properties of the word ^gqy
cannot properly be applied to =q©^ys|f. But by <?^qy i. e. Indica-
tion or metaphor, the word gq conveys the idea of to
which it really belongs. Thus the meaning of ^gq* is
indirectly the same as ^qv^ry 3^3^ ( e • the character
of possessing gqs) cannot directly be predicated of
S. D. replies to the above in the words afl*
(P. 3,11.13-15). If by ^jgqy you intend to convey ^^r^TT, then
why not prefer the direct mode of expression
( ) to the round about and metaphorical expression ^ygotf,
which has to be interpreted as meaning By ^qy. 5#
&c.-gives an illustration, ^fy^ is a property of beings, just as
gqs are the properties of qg q^y*fy ^fcT ( P. 3, 11.
15-16). The round-about way of using *ygqy for is now
defended in another way. This round-about method of expres-
sion is preferred to the direct mode-^yqy is resorted to — for a
certain purpose ( syqlqq ) viz. to state this that in Poetry there
are to be employed those words and senses which reveal or
develop the excellences. S. D. rebuts this argument by saying
that, in the case of Poetry, the possession of and sy#
15 >
I. 2 Sahityadarpana
♦
which manifest tjtjj’s, is not of the essence of poetry, but merely
serves to heighten the beauty of Poetry; and here we are not
inquiring as to what heightens Poetry, but as to the essentials
of poetry ; and therefore should not form part of the
definition of
3% ft; ^^f^iftq<3;(p. 3, 11. 17-20). This is given
here for supporting the position above taken about the relation
of and These words summarize the views of
the author of the Dhvanyaloka and others, including
Mammata. gqy: ; see 8th Ul. of K. P. and
8th qfcMN; of (of ) ; see 7th Ul. of
K. P. and 7th of f° r them. style of
composition. Their number is variously given. We shall
refer to them at length later on. Compare for the idea
the words of 3Rlt ^
^RiRT^fRT^ I qpfrfc wV H
I. 10. Compare generally for the whole idea the following: ^
^ ( qtasteEfar ) 4 sri*tst ^ :
3T^fKT: ( in
of p. 20, Nir. ) ; ^ 1
Scq’SfRJ II 7 > Jf TOSTTfipt ^TJ-
I g°TT: II K * 8 - 1 >
# *113(^1 fmft^fRT^s^i^^ur: n K - p - 8 * 2 >
cfiRq^q ft qr*5Flf ^RR^I cf^T ^ W
ftf^RT 3T3fRT: I 011 ^ XII. 2.
(p. 3, 11. 20-23). Here S. D.
attacks the third part of Mainmata’s definition of qiRq
^pfr 3^: Ulft-’ : bimself
explains these words as ’TO#* flRfRT
IRRRESft 3- I K. P. p. 17 ( Va ). These words of
TT^TS - have been variously interpreted; see rr^TT pp. 10-11
(Chan). The best meaning appears to us to be: — Poetry is
constituted by word and sense in which rarely a distinct
figure may be absent i. e. in which there is ( a figure*
may or may not be present) or in which there is a distinct
figure (if the ^ is absent). S. D.’s objection against the
insertion of in the definition is as follows: — Words andi
senses even when possessed of figures serve merely to heighten
a poem. They are not of the essence of Poetry. In defining
Poetry then, only the essentials should be selected and therefore*
16
NOTES ON
1.2
no reference at all ought to have been made to in the
definition of Poetry. If we were to define a child, we should
not refer to the ornaments which children might wear, since
they do not constitute the essentials of a child.
Here ends S. D.’s criticism of jp^’s definition of E^yozj-.
first attacked the word by saying that, if only
faultless pieces were to be called poetry, some of the best
poems will have to be given up and there will be practically no
Poetry, as it is very difficult to keep clear of every blemish.
Nor could it be said that faults mar only those particular
words in which they occur. If they are faults at all, they mar
the whole poem. If were to be taken as meaning
then this word ought not to stand in the definition, as a
faultless piece would otherwise be excluded from the domain
of Poetry. 2ndly, is quite inappropriate; rather, we should
say ; vprs are the] properties of ^ and not of Tfe? and 3T$.
Besides, Tpjs simply heighten and are not of its essence
and therefore should not be referred to in the definition of
3rdly, no reference to figures ought to have been made
in the definition of efc-pq, as they merely heighten the beauty
of cfipq.
As to these objections one cannot help saying that
Visvanatha is here’ over-fastidious and is perhaps actuated by
the desire of making a show of his erudition by pouring ridicule
upon a famous predecessor. This much must be said in favour
of Tpip:, that his definition has the great merit of being simple
and easily understood. His definition is good enough for all
practical purposes. Everyone is familiar with the words
307 and By using them, jRq-j conveys a tolerably clear
and accurate idea of the character of Poetry. Visvanatha, on
the other hand, after a good deal of hair-splitting, offers us a
definition, which doe3 not leave us any the wiser after reading
it. He, in the quest of a scientifically accurate definition,
introduces his readers into the thorny jungle of ^s. After all
this trouble, his definition itself ( has not
satisfied other critics. See for example the criticism of spry.*
* P- 13 - ( Nir - ) I cTsfrsi 5 ^T®fR;5PTr^5
i q %srqf%: i i %
I 2. SshiiyadarRana 17
On criticism of FRfRr’s -word 3Rrtqf, the gqfrf says :* —
The word cffa in the definition is to be understood in the
sense of a ‘tangible fault’ and the tangibility of a fault lies in
being opposed to the apprehension of the Rasa. Thus in the
verse ‘qqpjaf ( I), on account of the apprehension
of the strikingness of the suggested sense, the knowlegde of
the faults in the verse vanishes and hence there arises the
apprehension of the Rasa in the verse. Hence the verse is
entitled to be called poetry and moreover the best poetry. But
as regards him, who does not apprehend the strikingness of the
suggested sense in that verse, the verse is faulty and there is
no contradiction in citing that verse as an illustration of a
fault (as done by Mammata in the 7th sgj**
under on page 339, Va). Just as a piece which
* s STSRTRT ( not understood ) may be called a poem with
reference to him who knows that particular branch of know-
ledge, as to him it is well known and therefore there is no
fault • but with reference to others, the same piece becomes not
poetry ; similarly here. For himself will say later on
‘Even a fault is sometimes an ornament on account of the
appropriateness thereof in the speaker etc/ This is the meaning
%fq i q=q efrRftq ‘^rt fjq’ ssnqt
‘q*TPJ3T S§l’ fRTRT q^c4 jffaW ffcT qq>q%— qtqc4
qrw 3fcr, ‘-q^R’ sstrt ftftispTrqH^ra- I RRT R
R 5f% p?qif»TRT^rT | 3Tcf trq ‘qqqnqiftlRjq-
^T^Trsfq- goj: qqqq tfq q^ i qqr srqqteq r^Rtr:, 3^4 Rfq
3 qtq i ‘stops’— fqrertft ggRqifq ftftrsqfaft-
*crftfq qRT4ftTq i
*P. 15. (Chan.) srsrreBisfrq g qajqqmq *$2c4 3
qRtitqfqRfqqrc; i r# =q ‘rrirrir’ RfOTq^qT3^qqfq--»4M 4twi
qtqfnqfqd'qTqra; #giw Rq|q qq^qc4 qftft?sqfqc4 qRqrcq^q q^i
3 ^qqfq^qq^fqfqFfRt srfq qTqftrcRwqfq^q; > qqfkq
qqsq^qqqRqRT %s4q i qqtSReftq^r qqRsrw
qq^rqrftqt rt 4 srqqsqcq qsq. i q^qfq ft ‘qqRr*RTf%?rqqift; Tt4rsf4 EfiRgq:’
?fq i d&R^kq^i’-qqqq : i qqr RfqRTfcrqr4q qtqfq^f'qrqiq q^T
qj^4sft sqjqqfR^qiJtfq I q^JcRf,
IK I qtqq?3TfRF{tq?qR? gqfcqiqM.
3> srqfRTRftq^q' i m w gi qqsq^^RRfftteqrs: i
18
NOTES ON
I. 2
of the verse cfrr?Tgfq;g; etc: — Just as a jewel does not lose its cha-
racter as a jewel, because all its blemishes are merged away in
the excess of its brilliance, so also, as regards a poem, on acco-
unt of the strikingness of the suggested sense (the faults are
not seen ). Beally speaking, this definition of qpq given be
is the definition of such a poem as does not deserve to be
ridiculed; since it is extremely hard to avoid ridicule, when a
poem possesses faults The general definition of poetry
should not include the word i n it* Hence it is that
such expressions as ‘a faulty poem’ obtain in ordinary life.
qfo BTOflTOlcTO; (p. 3, 11. 23-25 ). extends his
remarks against jpjp: to the views of the The
latter said that V akrokti ( indirect or crooked mode of speech )
is the soul of poetry. S. D. remarks that Vakrokti is merely an
Alankara and, as such, it is not even the body of poetry, much
less the soul. For qq^tfrfisftfqqqiR, vide Introduction, syq^q
on p. 12 of remarkes “qsyfo q*| (qq g<q^"I«h"KTqft
— Dandin does not define but says of it
3 E urrffr srrqt i fvra %<tt n’
K. D. II. 363. ?yyjpr says that qqytf% enters into the composition
of all Alankaras and seems to identify qqyyf%; with 3rfq^qyf^( arfcT^r-
sf%: ): ‘tm I SRT$:
sqqyfqiq II sypy^; II. 75. This verse is quoted as from ^ypTC on P* 208
of sq^qy^q;. K. P. also quotes it ( X on fqqtq). regards it as one
of the five ^j^ y ^ f ^ s and gives two varieties, %qqqyyf% and
‘qq^r *qr^s \ rqq w
\\ 9 II. II. An example of this is pfi qyftm RfcT WT
qg qpf yqy (why, oh Gauri, towards me with anger; am I a
cow 1 ). In the first way qyft is in the V ocative ; in the second
-we read qt* ^qy etc. is defined as fq^l'JITqflgT
■WjWfodl *TqfcT l qiTf^frfi: li’ t&Z II. 16. jpip:
defines briefly, but in the same way as ‘qgrfifFqqr qTqqqvq-
qy^q I qn^r qj %qy tfT q^tfvF^qT U I X * P* 491
( Vi.), qqj: f%rqi fqqid q: II ZVK I. 6. 12])—
dq eans * a change of the tone or voice.’ An example of qqfiq^tfrfi
2 SlHITYADARPANA 19
Stf*TR#sgf II. Here by a change of voice the words fjcqfq ma ^
convey two meanings; in the mouth of the heroine they mean ‘he
■will not come’; in the mouth of her friend, they mean ‘Will he
not comer i. e he will come. The remarks
^®T3JRifRgR R qq=rq')sfa #tW p. 177. For more
examples, see ^ and Hq<q. Vamana deSnes q=£rfo quite diffe-
rently ‘mmrzm ^ IV. 3. 8 ( Vakrokti is
indication based upon resemblance ). The qRtf^ftqq^ says
> (1st 3 ?^). According to him
clever speech is the soul of poetry and that it alone should
engage a poet’s best efforts. Dhvani is included under qq^-
q£f*TT e. q^tfqj based upon metaphor. It is not the suggested
sense (sqiq)thatis the essence of poetry, but striking°speech
His definition of qq;q is ‘^r Ti ff qf c # T
<*RWflT 11 ’. According to him qqqq has
six principal varieties ‘^sqmg^JRTO: ^vrqfvq q^ I Jf#F q 5 qt
fff'sjfb oj Tfirq. II . The six varieties are qt^^vqyi^qq^ff,
'lYjql'iqqiqr, RgHRRq^irr, JRTgjjq 0 , qqvqqo. His views
are briefly summarized by sjo H o p. 8 : ‘ ^qtf^q.
RS r^fTO^Rf q;Rtf%ftq UWRfRFrsqsftfrcrgrfiqi^ I sqtUKR
^ SRsq^r UtM? I 3rfqqTqqq; R j^q r jrq ^ 1Rr; |
JRferRl% ^flTRqwr I aqqirqqvjrf^fir: gq^qt
'RigSTTY: tfTfig: I =Rf^g^fiqf%--q41 fqq q^sq q s qRT# 5 ftfqqiJtf% q^q
sqqf^Rq; |’
(P.3, 11. 25-29). qvr gggjrol ^ On p 17 (Va)
Mammata cites this verse and remarks l m ^ q qsfsjq^;,
W ^ !’• He quotes this verse in illustration of
his words srqg^q) gq: qqft. He says:— in this verse there is no
distinct figure of speech. It cannot also be said that there is
the figure called rgq^ by ^pTC and That figure occurs
only when the ^ is subordinate i. e. when it heightens another
Rasa or the expressed sense. But in this verse qjiffTOT is
the principal one and therefore there is no tp^ 3ra ^ R . This ob-
jection and answer of qrqq are with reference to the views of
RRil’ and ’S-£j. He himself does not admit <gqq^ as an 3T^^ R . q:
TiRrRy: etc.— usjiitqjilfq (qPRl*
grtdrqqfctaT ^rf^qgfijTg^Eqft q^v^^qf
^I'il'H^Yt'TI^qrTi gjRgft y^lflTf — q: qqqigr^; ^ | .qq fc^T^PT
BTf^qriqTqfrq q q ; qy; ^
% Wim u^r ?rf?cr, arfer ^ rraTfa ?Rr
20
NOTES ON
I. 2
^fflt *TT<r4 ^RTT^^'TK^T
^ftfct sr: I ct#IWdtl^W 1 F ^ ^T3 t5F% 1 ^~
sftferTT fl^RfcTT <TT ePTT g^q: I FfeT F3^Tf^T^*Wr
&q: I * TO=% ^^FcTWFF^-
^ I l 3T5T ^Tt: 1 3T^ ^ RT3T f ^ f^f^t^spSR Itf ^f^ft"
1 ^^ITfS^^T f^W: I 1 3T *^^
I ^rW%^^FcTt *T 1 tTClft ^IF-
^T^tsfi- 1 crii^g^ sstfi RH*qq i s^ng^qnr-
^TT 3T 3>§HT^F^raT*T^TT ^ ^ T ^
^FTK^ %cT: H5 ^ u S& 3c§^F ^FTcT * 3- =#• as quoted in qqfa P* 11
( Nir ). In this verse, no figure other than fit^faVRfi and TqvqqqT
is worth pointing out. Those two also are not distinct, as
explained below: — fq^tTrf^i* is the statement that an effect is
absent although the causes of it are present. In this verse, the
fact that ‘the husband and other things have been frequently
enjoyed before’ should be the cause of the effect that ‘the
woman has no longing for the re-enjoyment of them.’ The
absence of this effect i. e. her having a longing for re-enjoy-
ment is here stated ( in %ci: ) even though the cause
i. e. the enjoyment of them in the past, is present. Thus there
is in the verse. But it is not distinctly stated, for the
absence of the effect is stated in the form ‘still the mind has
a longing’ and not in the form ‘still the mind is not without
longing’. The figure would have been distinct only if the
latter mode of expression had been employed, f
fq-VTi^i J is the statement that an effect is produced even
though the causes of the effect are absent. Here the well-known
causes of the effect viz. the woman’s longing for enjoyment of
the husband &c. is the fact of her not having enjoyed them
before. But the absence of this cause i. e. the fact of haviug
* 1 K - P * X
gfit left f^WrfftOTr fiflT i s. D. X
t OTTWFFFFig 1 ^ 3 Tgc 3 F 5 T-
^K'JT :en i scwbtr:
qq q^Tfl ^drh u dTS^Tq^ *
^Jl S qrcKfpg^ ^ 1 9 Nl ‘ r '
t R^sfq- 4J555qf%if^Tr^T l K. P. X.
f^I |g ^T^Tc'T{%%^ 1 S. D. X.
I. 2
Sahittadarpana
21
enjoyed them before, is here stated along with the presence of
the effect i. e. her longing for the enjoyment of them. Thus
there is ffcrmr in the verse. But it is not distinct, for the
absence of the cause is stated in the form ‘although the
usband eta have been frequently enjoyed by me before.’
us - like above fqiTRR also is indistinct here.* The
two fi gures being indistinct the union of these which con-
fute a separate figure called is also indistinct,
vvnere there are no circumstances which enable us to deter-
mine that a verse contains a particular figure to the exclusion
of others which are possible, there is f The S. D.
objects to the abovementioned view of ^ by saying that
o i the figures f^tf% and f^RT are distinct and there-
fore the HfC based upon them is also distinct. His view
appears to be that occurs not only when an effect is
stated to be absent although its causes are present; but also
when the opposite of the effect is stated to exist ; similarly
*Vk e case / f ft ^j; His words are “ff R W&rm:
1 WtPTR:
I • S. D. s remarks appear to be ba based upon the words
of the Alankara-sarvasva of Rajanaka Ruyyaka, where we read
under fylfot ‘^iqTgr?f%a^ I
mrqqiqfRft WTO: Wlf^gt* fi^PTTf^ |’ p. 127 of
; P- 161 of ed. of 1939; on p. 200 ( p. 251 of ed. of 1939 ) he
gives ‘ q: as an instance of ^ an d
remarks WRiRPTlt
p. 11 of 5T#q-.
t tRR r srt 'qmtqmRRffjsjq: i k. p. x. m gRfaW
'H?'
qiw ^ q*q sqqf^q fcfa: mr: | ^
Here in the verse ‘q; > the is as follows—
( f fTOprr: qRrawrwr fqqr earorcror fq^r,
ft qr WIS# cwr: cRqqfitfr Mqtfqfiftfq g%q.’
f^frdsq^i’^Ro p. 15.
t 3T%. g. defines fq^R as 1.’
22
NOTES ON
I. 2
I 3 T. g. ft- ) 33 TOT 3 T ScTfft ^31331 I B =3 ^P TR: ‘3 :
*Wirr:’ tm 3tfg3f3333I%3 Stfwifcr: I 33T =3 ‘3:
‘gg^T’ tfSr ‘ «w ^ (*>*»-
5PKigT3T I 3T- 9- ft- ) StW; 1 ”
(P.4,11.1-3), The verse is T uoted
from the (I. 2.) of gfc. The Benares edition reads
foSpj forsT^mg. S. D. extends his criticism against irjtj’s
words 3T^v4t, gg4t and 33^31 to the definition of Kavya
given by
(P.4,11.3-6). *f?T ‘^WTrfTT
these words are contained in the first verse of the
•^arenwi jH- wraicrgj^^Tflft gRwrggra^ t
forcrcftq* fR^cr^t fcr an: gfwwsfcft aWCT*n-’
The meaning is ‘the soul of poetry is suggestion. S. D.
asks a question:-what does the author mean by the above \
Does he mean suggestion in its threefold aspects-(l) spyg matter,
(2) ara^R embellishment and (3) yg flavour etc.; or does he
mean that the soul of poetry is only yg etc. ( and not the three
SR3, 3T55fR, )? 3*3- 3T®IR; and yg must be clearly explained,
is defined by the s^r^Fi as ‘q3pt: 3T t=l I nit ;
s nrjj; g *fcr:’ « P- 33 (
gqg^ff gofojjft grim s gra'r at^rfcr m«rra. > tnKr
g4i:=ntnT, ^ vtmr. i stag’ )• is divided
into three kinds, cjgyqo, argfigsqo, and W ; tf^ as said in
epqpsta p. 15 «g guff 3 j g3m^ig *H33^#fi-
#^1*3%’ ; I or in the sFT--3igsiW3 of P- 26 ‘g g
( ciprejjvf: ) eftgi% ffcT gjfgi^MPlftfrr gfyfiT^I ®f3 ^
fsp-n I-’ As to qygarffr, ^133 says ‘ 5^331331 3133 SJ
i n: 3T S ?3R33T i
g g 3W**« «’ p. 15. An example of
is ‘ %<gr#r « 3 gw fteiW: fenfnNHngtftsdvw: > mfe ^
^pqyrff jrt 5gfcT H'-til II 3 T3l^»f 3if3fgg5?F 3igff3c3>lM3.
3^331 mvv jnifatiw sfir 3*3 '• A distinct
subject or topic is suggested, viz. that your lip (i. e. a kiss) is to be
gained only by excessive merit. 3T55fr^gf?t is ttiat in which tho
suggested sense would constitute a figure of speech ; the expressed
sense does nat however do so. An example of 3T3^gyffg i s:
gs-p# 3f^TW ^ 1 * ^2* " 5
gtg:g*gftgr 3?g3T ^gsrawtsfa; ffir 5 3333 >•
I. 2
Sahityadarpana
23
, occu , rs , there , wJiere ^T, Bhava etc. are the principal
element and where the words, expressed sense, and the figures
of speech are dependent upon Rasa etc., as said by the
ftfaTOPTTR; I wri^ry spr S II’
aft* i ^ q{ ^
fg^UT ?rpfT sjyay rgf^y II’
f ^ J 2SFR’^r:. Against this threefold division of vwfo * S D
‘^rfddle 11 ° bjection , in the , w ° rds **&*TCnrf?Nlfc. ifc&W means
a riddle or conundrum.’ Even the mentions sy^j
and they are mentioned also by the (3rd ^
Ohap. 16 ). We find a full exposition and illustration of yrifer
in the ^ysryy^y and the H^^jy^oy. jy^j^y is defined by
as ‘ sit^rssiTCT^ =r i’ Ru. v. 25. aa»a
explains as follows r-'^^y f^yy I ,
^ ^ srm m-
BT ff«ITmT l ^SHm^fd^T'ilTTrTI^^Tf^TdctfTIszTIfd: ^l^grRt 3pfr
Wi: er fPRfw I’. An example of the above two binds is
given by xj? in one verse: %yft m m
l WRft rf II’ Ru. V. 29. The first
Halt is an example of TOramf. Construe ^yypyyy^iyy ^y
Wpf Rr4 f-nrarftr- This is the question. The answer is
contained in the same Hne. ^ (ffcffo) ^ ^
(like plantain tree) srrcbrr ( ), ( %qftr ) iff
'T't ( ). The second line is an example of
Zfimmr- means ireyj^. T his applies only to the wind
* A different and more elaborate division of tsyfjy is given
in^the .c^py; (1st and 2nd apjfr ), (4th^yg) and
fUET^rW 7 ! ( 4th tyo ). We give below a brief out-line.
I or syfq^f^yqy,^
II 3
3Tfir'TPJj5 or fesrfW RWN r^b
< a ) 3n4i'7^f%Tr«r
( b ) SRipjfd^^psiy.
< 1 ) 31^1^3^
( O ) ( d ) tp^ZZf-
or ^prsapraj.
( 2 )
( 3 )
^3 ST'SfTC 3?®IR
divides srsTsjcfyjj^q into twelve varieties.
24
NOTES ON
I. 2
and not to a thief etc. Dandin mentions 16 varieties of good
f^js and refers to 14 kinds of bad ones. See Kavyad. III. 106.
We shall quote two interesting examples. giRtrmqT q%-
I 31% ^7T: II Kavyad. III.
114. The town is and the family of the kings is tprq;,
which has 8 letters, K'l'i'l Rd* 1
sqt^f^p^fcT II thl^lciRl HI 120. (f% Tf^TT d^d
f^ KtsHdim re: 3T^q: RRT 'W 3^ : ^11 tW 'IK: TO? 1 !:
fci: I ftimft dfe: 3# etc. ). But even Dandin
and ^a: had a clear perception of the value of these riddles,
says ‘qprtft^gci^ q|ifcfil thK+fVlPi^ ' sr«faoft
u Ru. v. 24 . qft%stfqd% 1
tno?%5^ ^ift trWTT: II HI- 97. ^ They do not
look upon jnlT% as constituting poetry, much less 3?TdK%T>
the author of the w ho says ‘‘f%TddTdT 3 ^FFWR-
feWFt dT%T ^ftsqfdftTP: sRRqqm: I m qftqmdT 3%!
sqm K* d ## f P- 221. He does not recognise
any piece of poetry, in which vg etc. are absent. But the S. D.
objects that, if by you understand the three, viz. sr$j,
a^fjr and vg, then, even would be included under
as in jr|j%^r also, there is some suggested sense other than the
expressed one, just as there is in =Rgs% instanced above.
fl%«KTFTfcr ijjt: If> however, you accept the 2nd alter-
native i. e. the soul of Poetry is suggestion which takes the
shape of Rasa, Bhava and the like then we say ‘ agreed.’
(P. 4, 11. 6-10). R3 % %, An objection is raised
against the 2nd view, mentioned above, viz., the soul of poetry
is suggestion which takes only the form of Rasa and the like
( and not nor SB|:K ). RvIT ’Rd & c -* THi® I s H ie 67th^verse
in the 7th jggf; of the JiPTTCIf%t of fRh gmRF% 'fife led Id
qfvr ( of a woman who introduces herself to her
paramour without the intercession of a go-between ) sfuiRdd. I
5 y*fo. The expressed meaning is ‘Don’t tumble on our bed.’
But the suggested sense is quite the opposite, ‘sir sjjr fqsWHIdi:
qffrmlf5jEqRJT%^ I’ K 0 P- 65 , This is given as an example
* The printed edition of the gj%) reads VrR ^TvTT
tJfSf 3^ Cj-ftifoit gSTfST I qf?R3T TJI d? R3Rf FjqftqftRT II-
The qipgqWR, and others present many various
readings.
I* 2 Sahityadarpana 25
of on p. 20 of the Here another matter
merely is suggested ( viz. the traveller’s doing the opposite of
what is expressed ) and hence, if ’"’ere to be the
soul of Poetry, such a verse cannot be called Poetry.
S. D. replies to the above by saying etc.
We admit that this verse is Poetry, but we do so because in
this verse there is a semblance of Rasa ( of Love here) and not
because mere can constitute the soul of Poetry. S. D.
says further on that under ^ are included vrp^ vrmmra,
■*nwrfcr, urofN', is defined as ‘37^%??-
SfvtRf 37 T‘flrat tRRmt: I’ S. D. IIL 262 . Here the love is
improper and illegitimate and therefore there is TypTRT.
(P. 4 , 1 . 11 ). 3 M«rr=^ 5 ji(| 5 i 9 r 1 yiR°-
If we were to admit that a piece is a poem, even if merely the
matter were suggested, then such a sentence as goes to a
village’ will have to be called Poetry; because here also, there is
something suggested, viz., his being attended by a servant, as
every gentleman usually is. But nobody calls this poetry,
because here there is no connection with rq etc.
(P. 4 , 11 . 12 - 16 ). srftcqfd'- • — If it were said
“Let this sentence goes to a village’ be called a poem,
because there is some suggested sense in it,” we reply:— no'
because it is our position that the name of Poetry is to be
applied to that only which has m . ^ 7 T 7 T_
This is a reply to those who would admit a piece to be poetry
even if it be destitute of Construe =7^7
f^T-those who are to be taught, students.
does not appear to be a good readiDg. Instead of
gsftus the author would have said etc.
I by means of giving a fund of delight in the form
of the relishing of Rasa, jprfyog means ‘an inducement.’ Com-
pare : * Jnfff to $1% 5^ <1%: l jtjr-
tWiRirf — this has occurred above. Compare for the
idea the words of the ancient rhetorician
ftafcr ^ V. 3 ( The
p. 182 quotes this as from vttjt?-, but reads for RiRmft )■
Compare I, p. 20 ‘tr<f R ^ 37577-
gsiSrff^qr 5% ^ cRT
^'HWTRRTfqq JRfP>dW)|: I’.
3
2G
NOTES ON
I. 1
(P. 4,11. 16-20). <T*TT Tbe author cites
the testimony of three ancient authors in support of his position
that the soul of Poetry is suggestion which assumes only the
form of etc - occurs in srffctjo 336. 33
< b. I. ed. ). m=^- qrqt wri qfttq. ^ ( q^q X tbat in
which the chief element is the cleverness of speech ; or we may
dissolve as w (3xW ),’ in Poetry which becomes
first-rate by skill in speech. The Agnipurana says ‘Rasa alone
<and not nor ) is the life of Poetry, in which
the chief element is skill in speech etc. sqf%Tq%q>qiK author
of (which means ‘investigation of the true nature of
su««estion ’ ). His name is Mahimabhatta. "V ide introduction.
He wrote his work to demolish the theory of the and
to establish that what is called suggestion is included under
‘Inference’. ‘ ar;gtnqs ; T*M B#«q 1
fq^'i qipq qftqT TO qm 11 ’ 1st verse, qnsqsncUft
etc. As to the fact that the soul of Poetry, which is always to
be found in it, is yg and the like, there is no difference of opin-
ion. gffffJr-amq^ft I nq°- gf means ‘ attachment or conne-
ction.’ The words occur in the I. p. 22
( Trivandrum ed. 1909 ). The printed edition reads for
^fSf. The position of the sqfyfift%Fqqy is that he does not dis-
pute that yy is the soul of poetry, but the point on which he
lays stress is that the essence of poetry ( viz. ye &c - ) is S ras ‘
ped by stjpni and not by an independent power of words
such as eqfsqt. As regards the thing there is no dis-
pute ; there is a difference only in ypSTT ( m the appellation of the
thing). He calls it by the name of spjfnq, while the
school calls it by the name of eqfff. sq^^w^- . .qftyfe: SoTlfc-
The reads I yfqfT’tKq qf?yfe- The
words of the text mean ‘ By a mere narration on the part of
the poet of what happened, the soul of Poetry is not accom-
plished, because that, viz. the mere narration of events, can
be effected by History ( such as the yCPTRa ) and the like.’ *f?r-
^ means the same thing as qyg or qjqrgiK as said in the vqq-
qqqqr ‘q^g qq. wqqq ; w qifit qqqif^feirfffqq"
II’ (VII. p- 200). We t ke aricqsfW = qiMlWd: w e
may also take to mean qifaqqsw, and then the whole
means ‘ a poet does not attain the position of a poet by confin-
ing himself to the simple narration of events.’ The idea is : —
Sahityadarpana
I. 2
2 7
The poet’s business is to develope ^ etc. and he has, in writing
his work, to look solely to the proper evolution of the senti-
ments etc. If in the narrative on which he bases his pome, he*
finds anything which would be incongruous to the Rasa he is
developing, he should throw the narrative to the winds and
should arrange events so as to suit the Rasa. Because one does
not become a poet by merely narrating events. This is not the
poets function, but that of the historian. In a poet we do not
look for history, but for the development of We prefer
the second meaning of aqcJTRvr: "to the first, as it suits the con-
text better. The reading of the sqpqjRq; means ‘the
poet has nothing to do with the mere narration etc.’ The
words of the preceding the line are ‘qfqqy
crirft# qft
I 5f ft etc. p. 148 of
^RT°-
( P. 4, 11. 19-23 ). qg rfft *TR K3- Rft means ‘If you lay
down that what possesses Rasa is to be called poetry and none
else. Certain verses without ^ ( i. e, merely narrative etc. )
in a composition will not, on the above theory, be poetry ( and
the same difficulty would occur, as said above in qg
55: etc., whether the composition as a whole is poetry or not ).
S. D. re P^s to this objection in ar ffifiK Efr qqT
cTR (;RRRT <RRf)
I. Certain words in a verse may be
without ^ ; still, as the whole verse has a ^ the words may be
said to have a as being included in the verse; similarly
here ^ jfpir The idea is:— The name of poetry
is strictly applicable only to such pieces as have a ^ in them ; the-
application of the term sfqsq to such pieces as are without any
but possess letters which manifest some excellence, which
are without faults and possess figures of speech, is quite second-
dary ( jftur ) and not strict, which application is based on the
resemblance of these latter to such pieces as contain a ^3.
3 u nf^^c|o^^|c||^— 1 The Gunas are three, 3?r^ and
5RTIT. They are the properties of but are said to be revealed
by certain favourable letters, e. g. jjf&r ^ ^
1 HI# ^fT fT^T II K. P. 8. Ul. i.e. is
revealed by the letters from ^ to ^ except the japf, each letter
being preceded by the nasal of the class to which it belongs, by
the letters ^ and (^combined with a short vowel etc.
28
NOTES ON
1 . 2
(P. 4, 1L 23-25) zrg qwto wrote
in five arf^qs. He wrote a comment on his
own sutras. He belongs probably to the latter half of the 8th
century. ftf^RlciTT 'FiT^W — is 'hMlc^Kd?! I- means a
style of composition, as himself defines it as h^c=MI
I. 2. 7. These styles mud be numerous, but writers on
rhetoric generally select a few of the most prevalent onesfor
definition. says ffiU TO4: SSFPte: TOW, 1 ^
II’. I- 40. He then tells us that ten
3 jqs are the essential attributes of $f?T; and 0PP 0sites
them or the absence of them of the jf^rdfcT; SBT3;: ^3^
^TT: 1 W f^: 5Tl4t U’ I - 41 and 42 ‘
vehemently protests against the division of styles into qp^T
and jfl* ‘I^T^T H»F% gfWteA » ^
jffcpr^u Tn^rqFT^^ %5^rwfir fr ' 4 w i J
qg *f%^FTT »’
I. 31-33. mentions three %c^¥f, *Mt and qT^Tcft. ftWPT adds
a* fourth The same are given by the 3?fsrym chap. 339.
^ gives two more, viz. srrqf^FRT and 4t be seen from
the above that each country is credited with a particu lar st yle
of composition. includes them under ( ^RFlft^T,
q^Tj and cfr^T correspond to tfeifff, *Nt, and qraT$t )• The
of w (H. 36, Ch. ed. ) mentions four sffas that were
named after countries.
stands perhaps alone in regarding rifd as the soul of
Poetry. S. D.’s objection is very proper and is as follows :—
is a particular kind of arrangement; and arrangement is
nothing but a particular disposition or posture of parts ; and
what is called soul is different from this. The different parts
of our body assume different positions; but they are distinct
from the soul. Similarly ^ and a?$ are the body of sFpaj-
The various arrangements of the limbs of this body i. e. the
different arrangement of words etc. can never constitute
the soul.
(P. 4, 1. 25-p. 5, 1. 2 ). urn srfJrcrfci etc -
This occurs on p. 12 of the (I. 2) ‘A sense which is-
highly thought of by men of taste, which, it has been settled,
is the soul of Poetry, has two kinds, viz. the expressed or
literal sense, and st#mrc the understood or suggested sense.
Here the declares that 3T4 is the soul of Poetry and that
^ is a variety of rf. Thereby he declares that expressed
1.2
Sshityadarpana
29
sense also is the soul of Poetry. This is opposed to his own
words at the beginning of his work ‘the soul of Poetry is sugge-
tion.’ Thus the srfqqqy is shown to be inconsistent. See, how-
ever, the aTqvr (on pp. 12-13), which reconciles these two appa-
rently conflicting dicta of the The here
speaks of 3T#, the soul of Poetry, as divided into qj^q and
STCfkflH in accordance with ordinary ideas, m is of two kinds;
the real soul of Poetry is sq?q, but there are people who regard
the sr#-W W as not different from qfsf. So what the ^q fiiq ;f ^
says is not that qpjq is the soul of Poetry, but that -qq is of
two kinds, qysq and As to what is the soul of Poetry,
there is difference of opinion.
( P. 5, 11. 4-7 ). WIR* 5fm 3^—
Poetry is a sentence the soul whereof is f^qf^^: —
We shall describe (ia the 3rd ). is explained in
the words ^ ^fTT etc. Rasa alone is the soul ( of Poetry )
i- e. it endows it (^q) with life as being essential. ^ =
f^rfi* It has been established above that, without a piece
cannot be called a poem. ” This has been shown in the words
§3^ 2qpt (p.4,1.11) etc. Under ^ ar e included
(incomplete flavour) and the semblances of ^ and ^
(which will be treated of in the 3rd since the word
is derived from the root ^ £ to taste or relish’ and means
‘what is tasted or relished’, incomplete flavour etc., also
•can be relished and therefore may be included under
See S. D. III. 259-60 rRPTrat WI I 51WT
gisfr ^wrs;yi: ii’
criticizes the definition of given by the
as follws :-— <c qg ^fcT frr^fcT^, ^ I qRPR
^ H i ^ I I
i cm ^ qRfqfMPirrrPr i
i Pr ^ ^ ^ rr^rfqr
3^s r <^qc% %ftfcT I cT^ftcf^T I qt
rTf^T^Rg cTr^^rrer fqrqf^rt i ^
s[fcT fTW £{
I g ^F^Tc^t I p. 13.
30
NOTES ON
1.2
1 I giKWMitta ‘I’Tt TOftT
gg^ I 3^I5T9T f^j 1 R - G - PP- 7 "®‘
is defined as ‘j%gT%qT*JRT^<I Rtfi: ’FRTfttHT cT^TT > ttttifflb
ggjri^: RTRflTq: g%TOHjl’ S. D. III. 1. Love and the like,
which are permanent moods or underlying sentiments in any
■composition, when manifested by f^grq, anc ^ ’Wlft'-flW
^ and not by direct mention thereof ) attain to the condition
of ^ (Flavour) in the man of taste. The gjs are 8 (or 9)
3IWK, IW, W, ftm, (the 9th is ^TFcT )•
The ^nf^-^Tsrs, permanent or underlying sentiment?, corres-
ponding to the 8 rgs are fjg, #K, 5Rt*r, 3c??TC, *T 3 T, jgS'Sh
■f^gpj. ffgrfs are those which are the causes of i- e - on
account of which the ggffjvqqs etc. are manifested, and
those which nourish them ( gg etc. ), when they are produced.
(%vuqs are of two kinds, and Women
etc. are the examples of sg^iqgfqgTq' because they cause the
ggfjpgq ^{5f ; while Rsfoq, TOR e tc. are the 3?TTOf=T'f[W,
because they nourish love. gggTqs ( gggrqt IWU3 RtTORcTOT-
vTO: I 5^:. IV. 3.) are the effects of g% etc. i. e. glance, per-
siration etc. Under arggiq are included the eight grfr^fi'flU 8 ,
ggg, dffTW, RUTW, ^3, or sj rPT^tft-
gy^s are those which help or are accessory in apprehending
or its effects; they are so called because they are not
permanent, but appear and disappear as waves in the ocean.
The cqfggrftgTEjs are 33 viz. fjfo, RTfk, 5JfI, sgjjIT ’ etc - The y
are not main sentiments in a composition; they are found
associated with the main sentiment. giTRtWTq is defined as
(qgg. IV. 32), qsn UT^t*TTU% RIRcTgtPmfff-
tRFR: I
(P.5,11.7-12). cR TOt q^T m-- enggf— occurs
in gggggq; (82). gqisiql 3Tf^TO^FT f U'fcwUU P' °t
TKtq. qtRvjc = gUrgfS^rg;. TOsORT^TTFlrTU of him who was coun-
terfeiting sleep or who was feigning to be asleep. fq-SRq fqTOT
q^T UTviTO Supply q?Jj: before ( cheek ). This verse is
given as an example of gfvfffreiWK- WIT two kinds,
andfqgs^g (that of separated lovers). The former is defined
as ‘sjgfjst qqRqTOT I 3 tFRFTf 5^1"
fgg: II’ qggqqi IV. 63. is defined as ‘gKt* UT
gtgfg I grfro-sfd Rpffte TqURTOUFR^I, or briefly-
grgffr: fqspTO-flTTOf l’ XII. 6. gq giwmt RfofiT*
1.2
S5HITYDARPAANA
81
In this verse, the §rffp; is on both sides. But
that on the part of the qjf^qq is the principal one, as said by
m cfsRRr ^ I p. 88 of ‘ qq W&i
I qiq^qqgqrq: I f
c 13-18 ). *rrqt qqr---R^*n'q:- -qrq is defined by K. P 0
aS cT'4Tf^f: I vtr: sffas: l’ IV. 12-13 c 5?j^'
^RTT&qqT g sqqq ^K:- 5 The meaning
* S: ^ hen the ^TRRnqs such as love have for their objects
God, king, son etc. ( and not lovers ); when the ^f^qjqs, love
etc. are not well nourished so as to reach the condition of rasa
or when the sqfqRiftqTqs such as src^r are manifested as the
principal sentiments in a composition’, there is vqq.
qfTqR^ great minister, according to the <qqq
=q 1’ (under The
pluial is used to show respect. Rf^qTqqf^q; means ‘entrusted
with the affairs of peace and war’ i. e. very much like the mo-
dern minister for foreign affairs. This is a very old office. Com-
pare qr^ta^qqiw vol. II j. p. 175, No. 164 (inscription of
A. D. 571 ) ‘T§>fiqq; Vide. J. B. B. R. A. S.
vol. 9 p. 219 for TTfraif^rf^3Tf|;^ ( Amber nath inscription). q^qftftqq-
etc. In this verse, the ten ajqq^s of Visnu are referred to. The
•verb a^ftqq is to be construed with ten sentences, q^q ^T ^hl ' fe r
( Hc^T^TTR ) — in only the fringe of whose scales the
ocean was -contained, qqq qJFHUs^Rtflqcr refers to ^qTqdTC;
wfr ( 3?^er ) refers to q^IfHd'R; compare qtqqtf^— q^Rt
cT? ^3TT I f^mr’ II-
{ ) 3T$qR — refers to 5jl%frqqrc. Compare ‘qq- q^q^qt
ll ? ^ fast ( heaven
and earth) ( q^qjq;)—- refers to qrfRiqqp;; ^ ^qqui:-refers to
R^R 5 ^ 1° ; RTRV refers to f;sq ( see t^ujjo
V. 9 where q^qq kills with his fist). sqj% fqsfq&qq— -In
whose contemplation as ?p;, the Universe melted into nothing-
ness. 35 taught the doctrine of ^qqyq (annihilation).
3P3T 3RTR3vJ»^ — on whose sword, the race of evil-doers
(will perish when Kalkin will come down). Compare
q;^qf% q^qT^l’. q^fqqR JR: Hail to him whoever
he be; or hail to him who is indescribable. Compare for the idea
%T3^ ^Rfaqi; ^ j 4% i
f ^ q^sq^ fpwi g*4
^q: II’ ^RTqTT^^. In this verse as the sentiment of love has for
32
NOTES ON
I. 2
its object the deity, there is ^(incomplete flavour). The
deity cannot be a fit object of those tendernesses which are
exchanged betweeu man and woman and which belong to the
sentiment of love proper. See 285. 6-7 for ten 3T=r=rK s -
(P. 5, 11. 19-22 ). *TIB: • s - ( IIL
262 ) defines as BTf^rrat when
and ^ proceed with impropriety, there is and
respectively. Then S. D. gives some examples.
=3 I *<TT II
I ^ II HI- 263-264.
There is an impropriety in the Erotic when love resides in a se-
condary hero, and when it is fixed on the wife of a sage or tea-
cher, when it has many heroes for its object and when it does
not exist in both the parties ; when it exists in a rival hero or
low persons or lower animals etc. jpg etc. This occurs in
the III. 36. ^ Tff-
fg^qr: bee(^Fn:). = Waiting upon, coaxing,
^ crf^- iron*: black deer. Here the ^ is
( love * n un i° n ), but as love is here spoken of with
reference to lower animals, there is (semblance of that
flavour), — similarly the rest i . e. vrraisrnH, *TR<TTf^r,
^TTTOf^r,
(P. 5, 11. 24-28 ). ^ = Faults are those
that mar the etc. ^ 5TT°T srTRR-
§:i^t Thr-
l- As blindness (of one eye) and
lameness operate depreciatingly on man through the body
( i , e . indirectly), so harshness, uselessness, and superfluity etc.
operate on the soul of Poetry, i. e. through words and
senses ( i. e. indirectly); so also just as foolishness directly affects
the man, so such faults as the mention of the Vyabhicharibhavas
( accessory sentiments ) by their own names ( i. e. directly and
not suggestively ) mar the rasa directly which is the soul of
Poetry ( and not mediately, like harshness, which first affects
word and sense and then ^ ). Both these classes are called
cfas. has been explained above. arggRR means ‘g^ng-
— what does not help or what is not needed for under-
standing the principal idea ; e . g. 3^ ^
f^. Here the word frcRT serves no purpose as regards the
giving up of wounded pride. RSr^FRRFR.* —
I. 2 Sahityadarpana. 33
To mention or under its own name in a
piece is generally looked upon as a fault. See K. P. VII. 12-14 un-
der p. 433 ( Va) I ... #
II 1. e. WKTfol^T 3 T Wt ^IT-
RrsT 'Tft'^pR' 5 is an example of the mention of sq-Rr^ift-
*TT5f under its own name. Here the Wl’ is directly
mentioned; it would be free from fault if we convey the idea
Of <?53TT by reading ^
?^TT^:-we shall speak of their distinctions and examples ( in
the 7th )•
JFIT^i: SftreTT: ( P. 6, 11. 1-8 ). Excellences,
figures and styles are spoken of as the causes of the heightening
of 3 utt: etc. This we had above ( ^ ^ T *ff text p.
3, 11. 17-20). Here i. e. according to the view of Rhetoricians
like myself. An objector might ask “How do you say that Gunas
heighten ^ through words and senses 'l 3jqs are the proper-
ties of ^ alone and not of therefore having nothing to
do with ^©3; and 3?^, they cannot heighten ^ through and
3T#”. We reply: — The word here is secondarily employed
(i. e. by for words and meanings which develop ex-
cellences. Hence what is meant is this — that words ( and
senses ), which develop excellences, heighten Rasa. This
was said before ( etc. p. 3. 1. 9 ).
— in the 8th ( gqs ), in the 9th and
in the 10th sr^fj^s.
PARICHCHHEDA II
The author defines Poetry as a kind of sentence, the soul
whereof is rasa . A question now arises: — what is a sentence %
The answer is qrqq ^ etc. (p. 7, 1. 2.)- This means:— A sen-
tence is a collection of words possessing Compatibility, Expe-
ctancy, and Juxta-position (or proximity). Some other defi-
nitions of qrqq are: — 1 3?°
<|o ttt o ; qppq i ; qrqq i$fqfqq<ri q^M
g-jjy: i T. Bh. p. 47. qirq^T means the absence of absurdity in
the mutual relation of the things denoted by the words. A
sentence like q^ has qrrzRTT because water has the fit-
ness, owing to its liquidity which is necessary for sprinkling.
But a sentence like qff^q Tester bas no compatibility, since fire
lacks liquidity which only can make 'a thing an instrument in
the act of sprinkling. qqperq^q means qpqqr
If it were held that a mere collocation of words can
make a sentence even in the absence of compatibility, then such
a collection of words as as ‘qffRf would be a sentence; but
no one would say that the above ( qf|?q ) is a proper
sentence. P. L. M. defines qpq?TI as 4
and then says 4 l ^
I 3Tcf T^<ftfcT I q|: ^qq^qqqiRqr
| p. 13 ; see also T. Bh. on qpqqT p. 47. sqqqajT-qrqlfq-
q^TOR fire: ( ) absence of the com-
pletion of the sense. ^ ^ — this refers to of^y:. This absence
of a complete sense consists in the listener’s curiosity ( on hea-
ring a word) to know something which the other words in
the sentence will inform him of. If we say simply w, a
desire ( ) is at once produced in the listener to know-
something about the horse. This desire is satisfied only when
we supply some such word as qqqicr. T. S. defines as
the incapcity of a word
to convey the idea of its connection, which incapacity is due to
the absence of some other word. V. P. says ‘qqprRT q^R-
^ h i v ^w i f^qi^rw sot
i*- qm#— supply
after jqql these words do not constitute
a sentence, because they lack one of the requisites of a sentence.
SlHITYADHARPANA
35
II. 1
viz. btfftsjt; these words have no expectancy as regards one an-
other i. e. when the word jfb is uttered, desire is produced in
the mind to know something about the cow. But this desire
is not satisfied by the word TgrafTf^r-
eTTv'T^W: I ^iro. The
words qfcsn f*ift occur in the of (vol. I p. 1 ).
Juxtaposition is the absence of a break in the apprehension of
what is said; i. e. the presentation of things without the inter-
vention of time or of other unconnected things. The V. P.
defines 3rraf% more clearlyas as p. 265,
the knowledge of the meanings of words resulting from the
words (being heard) without any long pause (between the sever-
al words). P. L. M. also defines it similarly;
T. D. says ^rkf^TfcT: tfftfSr: (the unbro-
ken apprehension of all the things denoted by the words ). A
sentence is made up by the combination of several notions and
it is therefore necesary that the impression made by each
word should remain fresh until this combination is effected.
If we utter the two words jjpi; and at the interval of
some hours, no sense will be apprehended. It is not absolutely
necessary that the words must be uttered together. In a print-
ed book we have no utterance and yet we apprehend the sense
because the words occur in juxtaposition. These three viz.
sn^TSjr, 3>q-n and 3T|gf% or iffJfftj are declared to be the cau-
ses^ Of *rppn%R; T. s. says: ^tt tfftfSrar i
P* ^ sa y® ^ sn%
p- 247; P. L. M. says 5fi^|T-
J p. 12). 37mf^rrq>-4ci4l<iwr4^?lfq; itN'zpt#-
rsig i T : ^Ra(( p. 7, 11. 9-10 ). The words stirtt and art are to be
construed respectivly ^with STpsi^T and q>^ r ; ^
STIcJN^fq- rlf 1 ( i. e.
?Pl)- Although expectancy is a property of the soul and
compatibility is an attribute of things, still both of them are
spoken of in the text as the properties of a collection of
words in a secondary sense. srrarejT, as said in the text, is
a desire to know ( fsr^ngj ). Desire cannot reside in the words,
nor properly speaking, in the senses. Desire is a property of
sentient beings alone. It is therefore that is said to be
in the text. Then how is it that a word is said to be
mfej? We reply that this mode of speech is based on
a is said to be because it conveys a meaning which
is itself a sense is said to be gpRTSf, because it produces
36
NOTES ON
II. 1
in the mind of the listener of the word having that sense, a
desire to know another meaning connected with the first.
(fitness or compatibility) really subsists between the
things signified by words. The thing ‘water’ is a fit objct to
irrigate with. The thing ‘fire’ is not a fit object to irrigate
with. The words are said to possess qfcp=iT, a property of things,
only in a secondary sense, on account of the close connec-
tion between words and things. As explaining the text, read
the following; TO^eWTlft^l STPKTSTT I RT
i|^ |;j dlg/fTf-stil 3R 3 ! 3T?^TT 3$: cfi TOTO7T
TOT: STT^VT: I ^fTCTT 1 ^
1 L - M -P- 12 - Compare
T. Bh. pp. 47-49 TOPflft ^ gpfci$rTf>T Ri mb. wKHWT^TRT
' «t ^ fd^i4dFt srsrf ®rRr HWtjT: >
f^T^R^T %cTfl^^Tct 1 Wj I
^ HTOTT 3^ I TT^R ’RFtfr >
tCTOtf: RFKRTT: I TT^RT 'RRSft '•
The author implies that srrafvT is directly an attribute of words
themselves. When words are uttered or written by a man in
juxtaposition, the meaning is conveyed. T. Bh. says (p. 49)
3 T3T3Rt%^r 3RT I TTW ^
( P. 7, 1. 11. ). ' etc. frwr says in the
words that the collection of sentences which consti-
tutes a great sentence, i. e. a passage, must possess the three
attributes of arpSRTT eto. ^'TOTFFT^raf%3^! RW RCRTPR’Tj-
Two such sentences as »RW W& cannot constitute
a rrfTWT, because there is no expectancy between them,
t:S%t£: (p- 7, 11. 13-17 ). Having given a twofold divi-
sion of =rm, the author supports it with the authority of Kuma-
rilabhatta. ’ spWft etc.— This occurs in TOTlftfti P- 339 - Brama-
dadasa, in his translation, ascribes the verse to the
The crSRTTci^ reads for V - p . ( P- 291 )
follows the printed TO3TTa$- The meaing is:— a syntactial
unity is produced in the case of sentences that have already
effected their purpose by each expressing its own sense, when
they are put together, on account of the sentences being viewd
as standing in the relation of principal and subordinate etc.
The example of is STRPJC etc. which occurs in the
1st p. 5.
2 Sahityadarpana 37
(P. 7, 11. 19-23 ). — Having defined a
sentence as a collection of words, the author now defines a word.
^ | ^ R0 .
"A word means letters so combined as to be suited for use, not
m logical connection, conveying a meaning and only one
meaning.’ sr%Triffer etc. By the expression ‘suited for use’
employed in the definition, a crude form ( snfafa) is excluded
trom being regarded as a word. A snftqftK is the crude
form or base which has not yet been inflected. It is not a
word, because it is not used in a sentence, unless it is inflected.
etc. supply after oircrapfiRt: and also in the
following two clauses. The words ‘not in logical connection’
serve to exclude and irfram. Although a sentence con-
sists of letters which are suited for use, still it is not to be
called a word, because the parts of it are ( srfcpr ) j n logical
connection with one another and not 3 TRffep=r, as in a word (°the
letters constituting which are not logically connected ). ^%frf
«t°-— sras#T =?r rrrfa sritsRTft KlfR fmifa *r. The expression
‘only one’ in the definition serves to exclude many words and
sentences that are inter-dependent (srefa). There may be
certain words and sentences which are suited for use and inter-
dependent, but do not possess or arflfrT- Such a collec-
tion of words or sentences may have to be called letters. The
possibility is excluded by the words ‘only one’. The words or
sentences spoken of above convey not not one but many senses;
while a.t^; must convey only one sense. An example of such
a collection of words would be Here the
created by the utterance of the word is satisfied by the
word gqt ; but there is no sfreRff between the two, as a man
cannot fly. This collection of words is not a sentence. An
objection might be raised that ^ in the definition is superfluous
as would serve the same purpose, i. e. would exclude a
number of words and sentences that are interdependent. We
reply that serves to exclude only those sentences and
great sentences which are properly so called t. e . which possess
’’W®, ’tf’W an< i while ^ serves to exclude a number
of words and sentences, which though possessing arr^TT do
not possess qfajcH or and hence cannot properly be called
a or a JnCftTOh If T?s and are excluded by gcR
in the definition, ffi^sg ones are much more excluded. A
collection of words without 3TT^rf^t or or 3 RRf% is jr^hTtf
and srcfKRr. But as the unconnected words present many
38
■NOTES ON
II. 2
senses th ey are excluded by the word u^R in the definition.
etc.— By this expression employed in the definition
‘conveying a sense,’ the exclusion is effected of such unmeaning
combinations of letters as «r ^ z rf <T ( which are the first letters
of the five classes of consonants), qvft By ‘letters, it
is not intended to speak of a plurality i. e. as the plural qvft:
occurs in the definition, it may be supposed that in a word
there must be at least three letters. But this is not so.
Although most words have three or more letters, still some
words may consist of one letter or two, e. g. jjt ( wealth ). Other
definitions of ^ are: ( quft: ) f^fSPrlT: I *IT- ^ n - 2 - 60 >
^^^,^0 1.4.14. Both these definitions mean ‘a word
is what is inflected’. ^tR T. S. — A word is what has
power or significance.
(P. 7, 1. 24-p. 8, 1. 1.). arm The author
defined a word as ‘ letters conveying a sense etc. ’ It is there-
fore now necessary to know the nature of 3T'4 ( sense ). The
meaning that may belong to a word is held to be threefold
viz. Expressed, Indicated and Suggested. ^rsqtsqTSf^RT
The expressed meaning is what is conveyed by the word’s
power of direct signification (arfiim)- by the power of
indication. sqsRqr by the power of suggestion. cTT :
These three are the powers of a word. It should be noted
that the word generally used to denote a power of a word is
( function ). Compare the titles of certain works such as 3rfa-
TOffrnssr, if etc -5 ST ^ ffaftrar siftaMr ^ < p - L -
M. p. 2; CfR: f • P-
Sometimes the word sqTTR is used in tk e same sense ; hwr
wrote a work called s, fl'TT J J
, k. P. 2nd. TJ1. Our author here uses the word ^frR
f or ^ . w hile many other writers restrict the word ^rfvR to
only one of the ff%s, viz. srf^rr, as for example in the P, L. M.
just quoted.
(P. 8, 1. 2-10) cT?r BffcTrTT 5 ^ etc - rPT means ‘among the
three powers of a word.’ 3T&9- gffrlvP-gf?: fCT:
sref. The primary one is srpfpqr (primary power), since it con-
veys to the understanding the meaning which belongs to the
word by convention. fffrR is definea in T. S. as ‘awrRTIKqWT
fan ttafesr mr- sffc’ *• «• 6akti is the conv€ntion mad ^
by God that such and such a meaning should be understood
II- 4 Sshiiyadarpana 39
from such and such a word. According to this definition
each word in every language is capable of conveying a parti-
cular sense, because God has so willed it. This is the view of
ancient Indian logicians. The moderns say 51%:, there-
by intimating that even the human will can endow words
with meanings, as in the case of proper names like
ftcirt etc. To avoid this controversy T. D. defines as ar4-
5lf%: ‘Power is the relation of a word
and its sense that brings the sense to the mind (whenever the
word is spoken).’ It will be seen from the first definition of
that the cTff^s identified and or The
^KnllsK says qf Sipr p. 9. The
on the other hand hold that irrfxfT is an independent
is said by them to be efcBTiu to be grasped or apprehended
from the convention. When a man ascertains that a particular
word has a convention in respect of a particular sense, then only
does he recognise the power of the w T ord to express that parti-
cular sense. The Grammarians follow the jffrrf^s on this point-
vide gsrrer P ; 39 (Chan.)
l”;
P. L. m. p. 3 ‘to ^ 1 3 ^-
^fvFicr: l’. See also y. P.
pp« 271-273. The Rhetoricians generally follow the Gramma-
rians on this point. Our author seems to do the same,
an old man who gives directions to another middle-
aged man to whom directions are given by his senior, ^rrf^-
b0( ^ P ossessin g a dewlap ete. g l&Rrq&l l 3
II. 9. 63. — Before he grasps the primary meaning of each
word, understands. 8, N 1 \
^jq-o. By the insertion and omission ( of the portions of the
sentence ‘bring the cow' ). ^eniTCrcqicr he ascertains the con-
vention. The idea is: — When a child begins to learn a h&gu-
age, he first understands the meanings of words in a lump and
not of each word separately. When he hears the direction
‘bring a cow’ addressed by one old man to another, and see s
a cow brought by the man, he understands that the direction
meant the bringing of a body with a dewlap etc. He then
has no distinct idea of the meaning of the two words urn and
3TR3T. Afterwards he hears two sentences ‘tie the cow’ and
bring the horse’ and sees the cow fastened and the horse
brought. He finds that in the former of these sentenees, a
t Vide qrfPTl^ of qcrs# (on qj. V. 1. 119) for the proper
names ftcar, srfNg (vol. II. p. 367 ed. by Kielhorn).
40
NOTES ON
II. 4
portion, namely jtH. ( is common to the sentence prqrPP ), but
another portion (aim) « omitted and something else inserted
( As in the case of both the sentences ( irrPTPtr and ip
the same body was dealt with, he naturally associates
the portion prg with the body ( cow )- Thus he ascertains that
the word jff has a convention in respect of cow. The ascerta-
inment of the convention leads him to understand that the
primary meaning of the word if) is cow. Compare T. D.
ijlfgj I PIP t'S.'S. 5 ! l+MPTPTfi'cTC
551 ptw-
Hfst^OTPTpq *if siKT'Tf5f t rT w rr pmRRie
sgpnrinp- 50 - In this case the
gp- is ascertained by the usage of elders ( )• ffer
etc — supply f^^CK is not the only way
of ascertaining the meaning of a word, for sometimes the mea-
ning of a word may be gathered from the utterance of well-
known words along with it, as in the example ;f
etc. ‘In the bosom of the expanded lotus, the honey-maker
drinks honey.’ A person knowing that bees drink the honey
in the lotus understands that the word means a bee: —
-URT PP STT^cTT 31%*
KT«T°- 3J%rat7^n^— sometimes the cenventional
meaning is understood f rom the instruction of one worthy of
confidence, as in tfe example ‘This ( pointing at the animal)
is what is denoted, by the word horse.’ An spa is defined by
T. B. as 3TTHPT by T. S. as 3TtHtg
The following' couplet 'mentions eight ways in which g|?r is
learnt. ^rfrSif sqpRPt'iqTP £t 1 t d 3J 1 WW
StftiiRr: 55 ': II quoted in P. L. M p. 145.
Of these, the text illustrates three opffR, aPHTPR and %S77-
4 oppsrtji-we learn from Grammar the meanings of roots
terminations, derivatives etc; 5 PTPTP a3 when the meaning o
is known by the similarity of a Gayal with the cow; 6 €r^T
as when we know from a dictionary the synonyms srpr, 3fqr,
etc.; 7 (the rest of the passage i. e.) context, as in
the Yedic text apfir: TT^fp, the exact meanin g of TO )
is understood from the context % qpg ( )
q. rft. q^. I. 4. 29); 8 explanation ( ), as in pars: 3TW-
Compare also a#. qf. p. 9 “pr ( ^5= ) ^
qt-gqiftyr: i nR l wqw r * ?T5, •’ ”•
3 I--ITT ^rfvfi: gqqfsrt tfi P )— without the inter-
vention of any other power of the word. That power of a
^ Sahityadarpana. 41
word which conveys to the understanding the conventional
meaning without the intervention of any other power of the
word in called in the text
sfRtt
^ra.- gut wfr g^qfsqqrg =q ‘A convention ( whereby
the expressed meaning of a word is settled) is accepted in
regard to universal, qualities, things and actions.’ Having
defined tffirqr as that power which conveys the conventional
meaning, the author now deals with the question — where is the
convention understood 1 In other words the question is, what
does a word like qx primarily signify 1 Do we understand
^ e reference to the object jar, or the common pro-
perty ( jarness ) or both together! This is a very impor-
tant question, as round it have raged the fiercest controversies.
On this point there are five important theories — I %q g sqfqfj-
qrfrg:, II qifqfqf^gsqfqiqT^q:, III IV %q<55qtfaqifqq:,
v qMtfcflfqq:.
I. When one says ‘bring a jar’ one desires the object (sq{%)
q?, as it is the object that is useful for one’s purpose and not
the property jarness. Therefore by the word ‘jar ’ the object
jai must necessarily be implied somehow or other ; for other-
wise the hearer can never fetch the object. Modern Naiyayi-
kas rely simply upon this fact and say that the word qj- pri-
marily denotes the sqf%. Compare qqx’s qqfq ‘rqftf.qrf^Rcqif: I
sqfq&r qrsqT i i’
p. 17.
II. But there are many objections against this theory. If
the word ‘jar’ denotes a particular oqfo we should require as
many separate words as there are jars in the world and the
gfci would have to be learnt separately in each case, as they
can have no connection with each other. As a matter of fact
there is only one word qx, and when we know its significance
as a we apply it to all objects having that shape,
q? therefore denotes not only the qjsqf%; but also the property
^qtqrfcqTq, and that it is similar to all jars in the world i. e.
when we say qr, we refer to the sqfvq qj, the sqfq qJif and the
peculiarity or srfftfq- qirfqtqif^qqq. jfjqq puts this as ‘sqqRq^fq-
5 nqq?g qqi4:’ 1 N. S. II, 2. 68. This is the view of the ancient
Naiyayikas whom Annambahtta follows; vide the qq^q qq jqyg jgq
<p. 15.) on the words srqjfT q| Irfefjrfi: ‘snfqsqf^qqftqrfvr-
42
NOTES ON
II. 4
q^ptnqjKFii
^3P* *ffT qiST:’; T - D - ’TlfTFI^ft f^sq^fT^B^r^n^Rm
hi*#t snfa&fitgsqqiTlq qrfrK^qBra; i , .
III. The Bauddhas say that the import of all words is
3 fgtf or sr^o^fTT, distinction from all other different objects.
As individuals are innumerable we cannot understand the gjpr
with reference to them. As all things are sjRqi, a ( which
is defined as mW*0 is impossible. Therefore
what the word q* really signifies is that a certain thing possesses
peculiarities which distinguish it from all other things. e
do not exactly know what qz is; we know what it is not; we
know that is not qs or anything else. ‘sFFmg
f^tqi^rq^r ^ 13 W w 14 dt
IY Words, according to the Mlmamsakas, signify the cqTcT
alone primarily. As the sqf^s are many it is not possible to
undersand the with reference to them all; it may be said
that ^Tlf% cannot be the import of a word, because, when we say
qZJflYq, we wish the 5 qf%> to be brought to us; if a word
signified only, the above sentence would mean
The replies by saying that, as sqfrfi inseparably conne-
cted with srrfcT, we understand, from each word by 3?#T
( implication or inference) the sqfrf, although the primary
significance of a word is sqfcf. The TtortfleRS go so far as to say
that even in proper names like there is snfcT- F° r a sum-
mary of their views, vide K. P. 2nd UI. pp. 35-3S( Va ) ; T^b.
says ‘qqjf#5TTqf r^Tmr
qraq’ i; ‘sTTffq^g ftpnfora. >’ 8 - 3 3
‘sffljfcftq jqsqtf sfq msl Wff^ P- 379jsee on
the snffawrftqiBq- ‘w« q
qisjTBrq qrq^t Bcrer^qTfi&q b i qn- /&•; says
(vol. I p. 17 ftritqo ed.) ‘3trf^q
^RrrqrifunBTqqrq i Br =q qrfcr: 1
qq ’rqrqq: qifrwf^qqfa 1 qqtqrqi
qq q fi ga q.q 5t<ftq% I tUT tl I fam «'
q[ cj rj i«q q^n^sft feWlfediT ^TTcf^r^TT
%q *’•
Y. ' The Grammarians hold that the import of words is
either gur, #IT or ^q i . 6. there are four groups of words,
g*r^. or or gfc rare)-^ Their
view is based upon the words of the Mahabhasya =qggqt
(mcfe TT^T^TI^ on the qiPT^FI
* Dr. De was unable to trace this sentence (vide
‘ History of S. Poetics’ vol. I, p. 11 n. ).
II. 4
Sxhityadarpana
43
on the gq ed. by Kielhorn, vol. Ip. 19), says on
this 3T$qq q: qs?: qqtqqfirq^ojq qaj<f% B q-j^-
^TRTtf^T^T^ says on this,
qi^Siqpq;:’ The Rhetoricians generally follow this view.
Our author does the same. Vide E. P. II Ul. pp. 32-35
( Vft );^ STT^Tf?^-; l...q$Jg*ft % 51» <Hj 5Tff%-
qggtf sj^RT qffqftfr qrf^p^ gq*
?t<t: fen^r i qqrt *$qf ^qqr
qffq: 1 370 qp p. 4
(on wftqr 2); qqR: says in his fS^ m
^qrs^: I qq qggift ^3fRr 5Tff% ; 1 3^% 1 if^^p
^nqqqTqqqq^Sft sqq5tqf 5|H^) >ff: qjqjfcij- qrftqfq^q^j^^cj q[?)-
fBfRRfar isg^i/tqf 5qgTftqi2^ferf¥7qi1^5is?:rqf
'•^rqqtqf q i$: w . ^ q^f ^ ^ f|^ ? >
f^ ft<q 5% ^I^RmfFff^T^rqtqq^qqq gq%qr*
^C^SRrfqfrT qqror fqq *q f^qqqqijgqtTq^' qqfTqq g»5-
Rff%fqf^qrfft’ I p. 2, In the qfpTjtq- (vol. I p.l) we read q^-ff
rlf^t'qfqq fsqqftljq RTTIRqgq q ^rsq;: I ^qrq 1 sqfrfrRfa gp, on
which’ qyjfsf says: qiffqqifq: qjqrq q.
( P. 8, 1. 12 ). qrftpjqf^tj = qrqRt^ . By srrffT
( Genus) is meant qRq (nature of a cow) residing in the indi-
vidual cows. It is in virtue of this qrfcr that the thing is a
cow. Hence qrft- is called jqqqq i. e. by its connection with
the thing, it ( sqfq ) makes it a fit object of our thoughts and
speech. gq) fqqfafqjqljj: ete. fttWRti: — flqtft^qt sqqfq
tf<q sqqTq qfq: qtq ^3: — a quality is an accomplished (fqg
or settled ) attribute of a thing, which ( attribute ) is a means of
distinguishing the thing from others of its own class, e. g. the
word Iff serves to distinguish a white cow from other cows
(not white), fgq: — q|q is understood, as said above, on qpjq-,
?jq» ferr and qqx* These are the s 4 jfqs or fqqjqqs of ^qfq*. ^q|fq
is classified as follows: —
sqrfq
I
qq^yiy PHGi^T ( ^fqx or gyq )
i%q
gR(fen)
RFisiq ( qrfff ) f^mqwijg ( gq ).
44
NOTES ON
II. 4
An Upadhi is of two sorts, (attribute inhering in a
thing) and ( an attribute which is imposed
upon a thing by the will of the speaker, such as a proper name ).
is also of two kinds, an attribute that is fully accomplish-
ed and that which is in process of accomplishment. A
again is of two kinds, jfFm that which gives life to a thing
and The former is called snfcT and the latter is
called giT. What is the distinction between srrfq and gojl ^rfcr
is never found dissociatated from the individuals in which it
resdes, while a quality like sp serves to distinguish a thing
from other things belonging to the same ^nfcT- jpi may be disso-
ciated from the thing in which it resides. The of a piece
of cloth may give place to blackness; but the snfcT jtIK wi 'l
al ways be associated with rft. ( an attribute of
a thing in process of accomplishment ) is a ftv4(. When I say
5 ^: qz:, the whiteness of the piece of cloth is an accomplished
fact. But when I say I advert not to one single ac-
co mplished act, but to a series of different movements, some
completed and some in process of completion, all of which
occupy successive portions of time; e. g. the action of cutting
consists of the raising up of the axe, its coming down, its com-
ing in contact with the wood and so on. This is well expressed
by the pqr spfift'raRft-
iq^-fcT 11’. P- L. M explains this as ^qi'lRFTT
gjjff
1’ p. 16. — Differentiate, names
of things i. e. proper names. f%qr tias
been explained above, qg = ^ etc -
(p. 8. 1. 15.) “what is denoted by such a word as ‘cooking’
is the collection of proceedings, from first to last, such as the
putting on ( the. pot with the rice to boil) and ultimately
taking it off (the fire) again.” arfwRT— amK' 7 !’!.;
srqqqct — 'jqWfcjq: occupying successive periods
of time fro m first to last, =q =q
( according to 'K’C I qT° n. 2. 3i )>
s qiMR^ rq:- ft siqt ^ q ( p- 8, li. 16 -17 ).
This has been explained above when dealing with ■JiicHift'uft'fi'
If it ^ere supposed that the convention
is made in respect of individuals (and not in respect of the
four 3 <Tffts — attributes ), then will follow the faults of endless-
II. 4
Sahiiyadarpana
45
ness and violation. To explain— If it be not admitted that a
word imports 3ir%i jjq, etc., we ask what does it import ? You
repiy it imports We ask a further questi on — Is the
convention made in respect of all individuals ( say, cows in
the case of jft ) or in respect of some one only? If you admit
the first alternative, you are liable to the fault of t. e.
if you say that the convention of a word like jft is made on all
the individuals of the species, then, since the individuals are
numberless, it would be impossible to understand the conven-
tional meaning of the word. If, on the other hand, you admit
the second alternative, you will be liable to the fault of
violation (of the rule of invariable association between cause
and effect). To explain -The rule is that a word expresses
that alone in respect of which a convention is understood.
Suppose that a child, on seeing a red bull, is told that it is tfb-
ow, according to the the child understands the
of the word ffh with reference to that individual red bull-
Suppose, a short time afterwards, the child sees a black bull.
The child will call the animal iff:. But the ^ of the word
*Tf: was understood with reference to a red bull. The black
bull was and yet the child applied the word jfh to it.
A qris also equally as the black bull was when the
child understood the in respect of the red bull. There-
fore as the black bull and qr are both it follows
that the child should apply the word 4- to q T , just as it app-
lied the word 4 to a black bull which was But
this is quite absurd. Besides, the child understood the
with reference to the red bull only, and, if it applies the word
to the black bull also in respect of which sfjq was not made,
then the rule is violated. Read the K. P.
Pr. pp. 32-33, ‘j% % ^rffFPJ SftTff (4^3^-
Kn^ mwq .1 5nrr), sp?rr wiftn i srr^r: i (’HTfcareft-
1 *n*r; wr ^ i ) i ,
rfcT q-qjsu*-
?? 477Rsr4fir: sRRKr i pRRq; i
^ ete. (P. 8, 1. 18 ff). Having dealt
with the first power of a word, viz. arfaqr, the author now
tre *l men L? f . th V e ®°“ d ’ viz - 3T-4 s#: 5Rft-
™ 3TRT v^qr 5T%: this is the definition
46
NOTES ON
II. 4
the3C expressions refer to the three conditions
undCT ^ hich alone
Sv posSTand in the absence of any one of which
JTld be impossible. The word * is descriptive. It brings
out the point which distinguishes apr from ^ere
the primarv meaning of a word is incompatible ( with the rest
of the sentence ) this power of Indication is communicated
(to the word), whereby another meaning ( than the expressed
one) connected therewith, becomes apprehended, either
through usage or through some
^ etc. (p.8,1 21). ^ means
3 . The word primarily signifies a country ( Orissa
of the present day). But as rashness is a quality found in
sentient beings only, the primary meaning of is here
inappropriate. Thus there is Hence the word
causes us to think of the men residing in the country, which
meaning is connected with the primary meaning a ‘country.
Thus there is «wln ( to take
another example. HtV a herd-station on the Ganges.
The word Ganges primarily signifies a stream of water; but in
the present example, this meaning is inappropriate, as a herd-
station cannot be built over a mass of water. Thus there is
jr^rpW. This impossibility leads us to think of the bank,
Sh is connected with itself (i.e.the Gonges ) by the re Na-
tion of proximity etc. Thus there fs a** This power of a
word by which we understand ‘men’ from the word and
‘bank’ from the word Ganges, and which is 3 ?pfa, is called
grffcrr is explained as ^ ) or
^,T). These two explanations
of srf^vT refer two views about 3rfiraT, the primary pow r.
Some say that srflwT » that power of a word which is natural.
According to their opinion, sssjUT is a P ower other than the
power which belongs to a word naturally. Others say srfiWT is
the power which is given to a word by God i. e. God willed
that a particular word should mean a particular thing. This
is called gte which is identified by the ^TT^s with arfwT-
Now, according to this view, the snajfas meaning of a word is
nnt ]ri v en to it by God, but by the human will. Hence 553^
is a power not communicated to a word by God, unlike srfiptl-
II. 5
Sahityadarpana
47
etc. (p. 8. 1 . 25 ). In the former example, ‘rash the
the' g hy , th . e J 0rd ^ Primarily signifying a country,’ has
the power of indicating an inhabitant of that region, is Usage
e ' the fact that a11 P eo P le familiarly employ the name o/a
■country to signify an inhabitant of the country, 3*5 e t c
In the latter example, the motive (for using the Lrd Ganges
when werealiy mean ‘bank of the Ganges’) consists in this
/nh h US t0 thlDk ° f the excess of coolness and purity
i e ong to tlie Ganges itself) which cannot be had from
1 1: d sTf (of ?, e r e idea in the form 0f the ew
t ^ 0n hC bank ° f the Ganges -’ and ^
sirnnlv 11 Tt “ the GaDgeS and D0t 011 the bank. If we
P y say we convey no idea of the and inTOr?
m^haWe 11811116 *; t The m ° tiVe that l6ads us tosa 7Wrf
1 LZ t0 C0UVey the fact that the hamlet is
«tuated m a spot which is full of coolness and holiness, the
two characteristics of the Ganges. What we want to convey
7 this mode of expression is that the hamlet is situated on a
very cool and holy part of the bank. This idea could not have
been expressed by the direct m° de of expression
S if ( l tt " 27) ~ In the textitissaidthTtTndtatiS
arises through Usage or Motive, because, if a word were to
indicate apart from these two, anything whatsoever that has
would b!° n ^ primar y waning of the word, then there
world h? an f?r iVe Stretching; *• as everything in the
ing related to everything else in some way or other
however far-fetched it may be, any word may indicate anT’
thmg and then there will be a confusion of all ideas.
Mfl J?; *¥* ( p. 9 , n. 1-7 ) it is ’
Mammata who gives ctffSj as an example of IndicatioD
arising from Usage. The words of are ^ ^
J5l St ^ ^ f#3Ttft-One whe
takes |i5r (sacrificial grass) What Mammata means is:— The
primary meaning of the word viz. ‘gatherer of ** grass’
eing incompatible with the matter in question, viz. ‘business, =
we think of the sense of ‘expert’ which is connected with the
primary sense, ‘gatherer of grass,’ through the relation of a
similarity of character in respect of being a discriminating
person (which the gatherer of m grass must be, else he could
48
NOTES ON
II. 5
-? - r ir.s.tSi z h z
wd in tb. «»se of ‘ expert.’ The * h "V^°”
~ s re here satisfied, viz. g^W, «*I and
3 a meaning other than the primary one is indicated. ^ *
' ^ ,p p 3 ). Others do not like this view of the matter
v • ' , . iM Their idea is as follows: — The
primary ^meanirig of the word is ‘expert’ itself, although
V ii‘«oScS a ^
th 6 e primary meaning. It is the grammarians who find out the
P , { everY W ord that is not a radical and often times
thev^derWe a word in a far-fetched way to suit their own
theories or convenience. The principle that regulates the emp-
loyment of a word in a particular sense is not the etymology,
fanciful or otherwise, that the Grammarians may suggest, but
is the fact that the word is assigned a particular meaning )
convention. etc ‘ Th * reason for the
elymolooy of words is one thing, viz, the theories and conve-
ne of Grammarians; and the reason for the employment of
a word is quite another, viz, the long-standing practice o^ing
the word in a particular sense, * wer
from its etymology, then in the sentence the cow ^
there would be Indication; because, as the word ^ is
£ r rot im ‘to go’ by the addition of the affix
ill it onnot be prim.rily applied to the cow when
' it is lvie* down ; there would be ineomp.tibilih in “5™S ”
^ . ° . clpprtinor 1 The will be and we shall
i, moving « sleeping. IM , bs „ rl view
h „e -**.• “ ” , 00t ^ j*,. **»,
be ? lo. k ed npee „ot«.n en.mpie <d
f j r «iher of srf^TT* Compare the P* ^ A c
auth^now comes to the divisions of equiT. Construe (JWT
ffqr) (^) ^
II. 6
SXhityadarpana
49
'TKTJtra; ( ) ^4 KldS^T' STOStT hinting a
sense other than the primary one. When the primary
meaning hints at something else which is required in
addition for the establishment of a logical connection
among the things in the sentence, there is ( Inclu-
sive Indication ), so called because the primary meaning also
is taken in or included g’sTOTft differ). An example
of based upon usage is ‘the white gallops’ and of
one based upon motive is ‘the lances enter’. 3Rqt: I n these,
two examples. ( p. 9, 11. 12-13) ‘white’
and ‘lances’ being inanimate cannot have by themselves
) a logical connection, as agents, with the actions ‘gallop-
ing’ and ‘entering’. Tgrf?g^-'4 ■s.'H 01 ' * he
purpose of establishing a logical connection among the things
expressed in each sentence. So what we understand in the two
sentences is ‘the white horse gallops’ and ‘the men with lances
enter.’ In as there was no motive for
speaking of the horse as the ‘white,’ the source of the Indica-
tion is usage, because ‘the white horse’ was known among the
neighbours merely as ‘the white’ and the person to whom the
sentence was addressed knew what was meant. In the lances
enter,’ the motive for speaking of ‘lances’ instead of ‘lancers
was to draw attention to the extreme denseness of the lances.
In both the examples of ^e primary meaning also
is included, because the whiteness remained with the horse
when galloping and the men had the lances with them when
they entered. But in ( ‘Exclusive Indication) there
is mere indication of another thing to the exclusion of the
primary sense ; e. g. jRfpri s}fa:. Here the word ‘Ganges’ enti-
rely gives up its primary sense and indicates the bank. This
is the difference between and which are
briefly defined by itoj as TO?t4 : TO*T 1 dMKW
sfcr sr ffctT II’ upon which sr% remarks ‘gpfa Rwta
' gnfoTfoaifo stsfpU’-
55$v[q. 3^Tfcgn*n-3T3T^ S4PTT <W°- is divided by some
into three kinds sfst^WlTi is that
where the primary sense is wholly abandoned and a new one
substituted, as in gisTT: where signifies a child slee-
ping on a cot and not the cot itself. In the wor< t
retains its primary sense and conveys something in addition, as
in x&m) where the word errs signifies not only the
5
50
NOTES ON
II. 6
«row, but all the other ^gqqtqqi oreatures. Compare
II. 314 mm ^r: I sqqm* q^
^ *f ^SjfrT II’* In ^^HWTT a part of the primary
meaning is retained and a part is left out as in p>sq
wor< ^ mea,ns ^qqrT.*, while signifies
and so to establish the identity of the
two we leave out the qualification and oqrqjstff. See
T. D. p. 5 ‘qq qqj jpqj; I qif
qqy sjfg°Tt JT^JcftfcT I qw
^n^rerq 3IC^TC^ qqr qqqytftfcr l’. See V. Sara. pp. 43-47; but
see V. P. pp. 283-285 against the view of V. Sara; in his
commentary on gives the following qjpr^qs ‘^qr^ni)
sc i q%q-jRf^rrq! § i fqpt n ^T%t5[-
qq i qr ^fq^fc^qrqi qrqqt frq i ftR) q qa a a qp ii’
p. 68. ^
3Pt^ ^«?. ; -...3if^riq?3^ I (P- 9, 11. 17-27). Construe
<qqr IWl) =II+Hiq qpuf
55^I55gqr (3^q%). ^ qfrHqpfcr qftsrro:. The abandonment
of the primary sense, with a view to establish the logical conne-
ction of something with the other things in the sentence, is
called ^aT^sgiq ( Exclusive Indication ), since it is the cause of
an indication pure and simple and nothing more. The word
shows why this kind of is called aguia^oR-
ST^jrqqQ. ‘The rash Kalihga’ is an example
of based upon usage. Here, the primary meaning of
qigSjf is entirely given up ( ptr; -qqq^) and the meaning ‘inhabi-
tant of is indicated, because this latter alone can logically
be connected with rashness. The reason why the word is so
used is long-continued usage. An example of based
upon jfqtqq is ‘a hamlet on the Ganges’. Here, the primary
meaning of ‘qffy’ viz. a stream of water, is entirey given up,
and the meaning ‘bank’ is indicated in order that it may be
logically connected with the ‘hamlet.’ The motive why the
word is so used has been explained above.
*rqT qi qffwqq;f\«M+iRtqtfqiftq^ 1 qr^qsqTqrcfNR
p. 4 . ‘qq; yqqr 35 ^ f% qrsyq; | qg^| S q^ K|u , i ^ q
m* I wr qt %# gqqqr qf^rr srqrftftn 1 ... |
wn ( 3 ^) srcqi qqfaf qrq gfer §^5 qqj witm
3?T^r S^sq: I H ^ smqifqqr prrqqtftpyq pfp PTfw: ^
I q«iqT-3qsqqqi^ §^rT jfyqyn I’ go q 0 . The
SAhitydarpana
51
II. 7
primary meaning f the sentence is ‘Oh friend, yon have highly
obliged me, how shall I express the obligation ? You have
shown your good nature etc.’ But the context in which these
words were uttered makes this meaning quite inappropriate.
Exactly the opposite meaning is required. Therefore sqfjq e ^c.
mean their opposites by Indication, himself remarks in
This verse is cited by Mammata in the
4th XJ1. of K. P. as an example where the expressed sense,,
being quite improper, is altogether given up
p- 83 ( Ya ).
In order to establish the logical connection of injuries etc.
( which are what are really meant to be spoken of ) with the
other things in the sentence. — the
words etc. give themselves up and stand ironically for
injuries. The is qTRR, because in the sentence benefit is
ascribed to an injurer. The relation between the primary sense
and the indicated sense is that of contrariety, just as wfr
ironically apply the word to a fool. qi?RqqOTf?T^h’ — The
result of this mode of expression is that excess of injury is
understood. — This we have explained
above under 3RT^Rqi;qT*
3TT^tqr'cqq^T^pRri etc. ( P. 9, 11. 28. ff). So far we have spoken
of four varieties of viz. STT^rq^fqr (based upon and
5FTNR 2 ) and based upon ^(% 3 and srtRr 4 ). -.Now a
further basis of division is introduced. strIt means the expre-
ssing in words of an object and of the thing with which it is
identified ; e. g. the words iqqqqi and 3*f&. It we say arfsffrtqqcfi:
we identify iqqqq; with 3 ?fjf and both of them are expressed
in words. — When an object is swallowed up i . e.
not expresseed in words, by the thing with which it is
identified, there is 3 T«^iT, e. g. when we say with reference to
a boy there is because the boy is not referred
to by name, and he is identified with ‘fire.’ In this example,,
is the f^qq- (an object upon which another is superimpos-
ed) and 3?f?i is the ( an object which is super-imposed
upon another). sr#T says
and ‘ftqfrjq •
^CT€^T% ( P. 9> 1- 30-p. 10, 1. 15 ).
fqq^Rzj &c. not swallowed ( by the i. e . what
52
NOTES ON
II. 7
is superimposed upon another). — 3fl^TcTT^T-
c*TO snftrlr diMfir-which makes one think of the identity
with something else (of an object not swallowed by that
with which it is identified, but expressed along with it).
This is calsed ( Superimponent Indication ). (fqqfourr)
f^TTO ^TrsdTOfd^T ddT* The Indica.
tion is held to be Introsusceptive which makes one think of
the identity with something else of an object swallowed i. e.
not expressed, but recognised as if it were inside of that with
which it is identified. .33; (q^)
An example of ^qT^Rtf^RT ^rdlT based upon is ‘the horse,
the white gallops. 5 ft- because. — 3rf?|pftdf STOT TO
who is not swallowed up i. e. who is expressed by the word
'W is thought of as identical
with the quality i . e. the colour ‘white’, which is in intimate
relation with it (with apq). TO5-
The relation of ^to holds between tjv\ and jjfupj. See T. S.
or T. B. We understand here that the words ‘the horse 5 and
‘the white’ mean just one and the same thing. An example
of wdlT based upon is ‘These-the lances
enter. 5 Here the men carrying lances are denoted by the
pronoun They are also referred to by the word and
thus there is here ^RTqT S^RT- An example of
based upon is ‘The Kalihga— the man— fights. 5 Here
is the fqqq and is the Both are expressed,
therefore there is ^rd'TT- 3 WRT^dTO‘ ; support,
location; 3T$q thing located. An example of
arising from q-qfad is ‘Longevity Ghee.’
(p. 10/ 11. 7-8). q^ig:
cTHR^f. Here ghee, the cause of longevity, is
thought of as indentical with the longevity related to it through
the relation of cause and effect. 3T?q t pg%joi fa etc. — Following
the words of K. P. and Pradipa [
^ ( WfaddJ l K. P; 553^
3 TOPddft*T q^|
Pradipa ], we should read STTg^q STdfadg; Here
only ^rdir based upon gdfad is spoken j of. The
Wfad in this case, as said by q-^-q, is ^rg^dTOd^
STTg^Icd is the in ?^Rr only, which
will be referred to later and therefore the word
should not occur here, also remarks ‘ 3TRTO%pre|'dr 5 q
Sahityadarpana
53
II. 9
etc. — the motive for speaking
of ghee as longevity is the fact, which it is desired to draw
attention to, that it causes longevity differently from anything
else i . e. in a manner superior to anything else — no other
article of our diet being so nutritious, q^ 3T e tc. In the
above we see that for there must be some kind of dircet
relation (^pq-) between the primary and the indicated
sense. In the is that of cause and effect. The
author now points out some other relations which are at
the root of ^ftt. — a man belonging to the
king i . e. in the king’s employ. The in calling a king’s
servant a king is ^Rqq^sq^iPFRcq £. <s. that he is endowed with
so much authority that his orders must be implicitly obayed
like those of the king. etc. ( p. 10, 1. 11,). When
there is meant only the foremost portion of the arm from the
elbow, (the whole arm being, in Sanskrit, called to), one
employs the word to (to denote a part only of what is
really the hand ). Here is due to the relation of the
whole and its parts. This may be said to be based
upon or there may be a jjqFFT — a motive to convey the
idea that the part ( of the hand ) is so skilful or powerful
as to do the work of the whole. Compare the sutra of V amana
on the word
V. 2. 20. that of doing the work of
so and so; to TO$ TO cTTcTO^- When it is even
a brahmana that one is speaking of, one may say ‘he-a
carpenter,’ although it is, strictly speaking, impossible that
a should be a man of the carpenter caste. He is called
*a carpenter’ because he works in wood — which is the peculiar
work of the carpenter caste. The qqfaq here is the conveying
of thorough mastery in the craft, although he is a brahmana.
^sjjriTg etc. (p. 10 1. 13) as regards sacrificial posts
which are useful for Indra (£. e. to which the victims to be
offered to Indra are to be tied), one may say ‘the Indras.’
TO *n*T: TO^— The relation is that
of ‘serving the pupose of.’ Vide TTfTVTO vol. III. p. 32 for
this. The motive here is the fact that the posts deserve to be
honoured as much as Indra himself.
&c. (p. 10, 1. 15). The four examples of gpsqTORT
are in order Sfo) qpjfcT )> I^T:
SW^ll), and
All these are gpsqq^RT* because the fqqq
54
NOTES ON
II. 9
in each case is swallowed up by the fqqfqq^e. g. 3 ^ in the first
is not expressed, in the 2 nd and so on. The relations
( ) which are at the root of ^prq are summarized in
different works differently; e. g. =qo cqjo fao p. 8 ‘q$j
cT q^fqqqTf: 1 qqfaiq; I
I 'TW'-TT JRT ll’- The 3rfq*rrif%J?T33iT ascri-
bes this verse to (qgfft author of ? ) and
quotes it for the same purpose; see q;jlkT 10 ■ the Nyayasutra
gives an exhaustive list of the relations on account of which one
word is used in a secondary sense for another •
crr^-fvr-riR-RtR-gT^T-^-RWfi-aTTfqq^rkt
: ^T-Wr-^2'-3T5f-3^R?I5T^ ttgcRK: I N. S. II. 2. 63.; for
explanation see qr^lRq’s qpq- ; see P. L. M. p. 7 ‘tn^sqrerqg
dl^Iuctn+fl'-qirftq =q I cJcHK^<tiviK«qfv|rqi % fq; It’. The
examples in order of this last Karika are jj§jj ’Tkffk:,
sfa:, *3jyn |fq. This is based on the
words of the jtitrr k$J 1 % JpfiihitTflfFg qqfer tnt^qm 5 «ira;
cT?fii ; 4)'- 4 na > vTv^ri I "=i ( vol. II p. 218). The examples in order
are qa; ^gf%, zjrt qfe;} ??rTf; qfa : ,
etc. (P. 10, 1. 16 ff). The author introdu-
ces a further basis of division, ay: ggjgq:- The eight kinds already
spoken of, viz. gqRHwgojr and sgjaR^qr each of which is first
divided into two varieties and jrqkqcftft, each of these
four being either gjyfar or HTSRRRT-
?tR." tiisvIcR.' t-RT-q".* qRR* All these eight kinds of when
the relation on which they are based is some one other than that
of similarity, are called Pure; but when they arise from like-
ness, they are called Qualitative. Thus the varieties of vr^pJTj
now amount to 16. ^oft-gorf^ II% 4 tk ?f%; or ^ strr
qi D ft'- — The relations other then that of rq^q are
those of q^RRqqrq-, *jRHiP|qR etc. The eight examples of
are the eight examples already given above i. e. %yt spj:
qwf^ etc. ( p. 10.1.2. ff ). An example of jjqyyRg^RT tfWt based
upon is ‘These oils are pleasant in the cold weather.’ Here
the word ffe, taking along with it its primary meaning, which
is the oily matter expressed from sesamum seeds, is applied to
other unctuous liquids also, such as that extracted from mus-
&i seed. Ihus this is SRKHtfo. The word is by usage
applied to all oils ( not only to that extracted from ).
Therefore the is It is qjqt, as the oil of mustard
€ 10 . is so oalled because its qualities are similar in certain
II. 9-10
SXhityadharpana
55
respects to those of the oil of sesamum. The is ^RfaT
because the pronoun is mentioned. An example of
TOSRWHT ^RfaT arising from spifa* is ‘these, the princes, are
going, 5 when this sentence is employed with reference to pri-
nces and persons like them that are going. An example of
3<TT3RT^SFIT arising from usage is ‘oils are
pleasant in the cold weather,’ omitting the pronoun i^TRT. In
the same way, the example under spjRRT would be ‘the princes
go, 5 omitting the pronoun An example of $RtaT
Tfjuft arising from ^ is ‘the king clears away the foe— the chief
of Gauda’. This is because the word ‘thorn’
entirely gives up its primary meaning, and implies ‘a foe from
the likeness of the two. Therefore it is iftoft. The word e
is by common practice used in the sense of ‘foe. 5 Therefore it
is As ( the ( on whom is superimposed)
is mentioned, it is If we omit the word srftlRSC it will be
an example of as done below. An example of tfKfaT
arising from a motive is ‘Vahlka is a bull. If
we omit ( the ) as in ‘the bull prattles,’ there is
is derived in two or three ways. RTR
3^T: q [#fi: an inhabitant of Vahlka (Punjab),
on under ( <TT* !• !• 75) says
R ‘TOFtf ^pRi ^RTf*ETT: 1
ll 5 44r. 7 and then adds 1 sj ^
Another way is srftvNrt «n#fv 3T#& : ^I^HRRT-
53 $:. Panini appears to favour the idea that is
the name of a country, see his sutra cuj|<tiqftvq3r IV. 2 * 117 '
A Vartika on mo IV. 1. 85 says falfl*’ )• Another
says )
3RT etc. (P. 11, 1. 1. ff). The author here expounds
the different views held as to the way in which the afloft
takes effect. = 3"IT The
qualities residing in a bull, such as senselessness and dulness,
are indicated. The idea is:— The word rfr primarily means the
snfer ; the qualities and 3 ^ are only indicated^ as
they are always associated in each individual bull with 3TTR.
We have to explain now how the word ‘bull’ is put in the same
case-relation with ^ * 1)31 — These qualities, thus
indicated, serve as the causes why the word t\ ) is practically
used for the object 3 l$Hl pRTRt =
The idea is — The qualities and *n^T etc. are found in
56
NOTKS ON
II. 9-10
Whoever possesses and rfF3 is to be called aft as
it indicates these. This is the principle which regulates the
practical employment of the word % As 3 ^ and are
found in he is spoken of as aft. These theorists say that
the primary meaning of aft is aftcq, which indicates 3 TT 55 J and .
the possession of these by enables us to employ the word
aft to denote V ahlka i. e. a second power of primary signi-
fication is given to the word aft. Their idea is - a ft ^lif gS?-
W 5BPT cTcf: srfirvrqr sftq:. They do not
say that ‘the man is indicated by the word ‘aft, but that
he is denoted by aft ; what is indicated is the qualities 5 ^
and jrjrg of aft. This view is improper for the following
reasons: — aft^s^f ( P- 11.1.2). Because the word
aft cannot denote , as the theorists say, the object called
in respect of which no convention was made (it being only
through ftjp- that a word can primarily signify anything).
, T) : ?T^TftfTT^^h ; Rra— and because the word aft makes us think
denotatively only of the object (dewlapped and long-tailed)
viz, a bull, since the power of denotation is exhausted (in
denoting the object ‘bull’ ) and there is no revival of that
power when thus exhausted (in making us think of the
primary meaning, ajftq). These theorists say that the word
aft first expresses arfa and secondly also. This is declared
to be impossible, aft means afteq only and as such denotes any
individual bull, after which, its power of denotation is exhausted;
it cannot further denote anything ; it may indicate or suggest.
Compare the sr*tr j])'K*[ThT BfcrmRIST
speaks of another objection against this view
irer ’ft'T^Rmfsrra 1’.
11,11.5-6). The
object cjiglf; is not denoted by the word aft ( as said by the
theorists referred to above ), but only the qualities belonging
to ^T#B are indicated as being cf the same kind as the qualities
belonging to the object which the word ‘bull’ itself denotes.
Their idea is:— in affai^; what is indicated by the word aft is
the qualities and rn*^T belonging to on account of
their being similar to and hence being looked upon as identical
with the properties ‘dullness’ etc. which reside in what is
denoted by aft. The word aft does not denote ( as the
theorists mentiened above say ), nor does it indicate the
II. 9-10 Sahityadarpana. 57
individual What is indicated is the qualities ^1^4 and
belonging to The individual qrgfai 1 9 n °^ indicated
by the word qt, because he is apprehended from the word
cfTffa; itself. The view, although not entirely unobjectionable*
is a great improvement on the first. The differences between
the two are : — I. According to the first view cfT#fi is denoted
by the word according to the second, the individual
is neither denoted by the word qt nor indicated by it. II.
According to the first view, dullness and stupidity co-
existing in a bull are indicated by the word ft \ according
to the 2nd view, what is indicated is the qualities
dullness etc. belonging to ( an( ^ no ^ ^Tt ) which
are similar to and hence looked upon as indentical with those
of qf. The only point in which the two theories coincide
is that both of them regard that the word qj- indicates qualities
and not the individual tKfr 3T^ ( P« 11> 1* 6 ). This second
view also is not approved of by others ( including i^qrq ),
qssqfft to explain. 3?q etc. ( p. 11, 1. 7 ). In the example
under discussion ‘Yahika is a bull’, is the sense of the individual
understood from the word ‘bull’ or not ? If you accept
the former of these alternatives, then, we ask a further
question, is the sense ( of the individual Yahika ) understood
just from the word ‘bull’ by the power of denotation , or
secondly, is it understood from the quality ( sluggishness &c. )
indicated by the word ‘bull’ on account of the fact that
qualities are inseparably associated with the things in which
they reside. qq q qqq: — The first of this second and subordinate
pair of alternatives is improper ; because the convention of the
word ‘bull 5 was not made in respect of the individual
(and therefore -the individual Vahika cannot be denoted by
the worsd ft ). == ft^r^qr. Nor is the 2nd of the subordinate
pair of alternatives proper. The idea of this 2nd view is
The word art indicates the qualities and qpq residing in
because they are similar to and hence identical with
those of 3ft. The individual qrffafi is understood from the word
ft not by Denotation (3rf*rqf) nor by Indication ( ^FTT ) but
by the process of reasoning which enables us to think of the
individual Yahika, because the indicated qualities sqgq and
must have a substratum to reside in. This is
improper. etc: ( P« 11>. H. 9-10) — Be-
cause, the word ft is here placed in apposition to the word
58
NOTES ON
II, 9-10
qiffai and as such does not allow the sense implied by
invariable association ( between a quality and the sub-
stratum in which it resides ) to determine this concordance of
words, gr# — Because the expectancy raised by a word
is fulfilled only by a word and not by a sense which is implied
by the contemplation of inseparable association and which
if expressed would appear not in apposition but in a different
relation e. g . ‘a man of bovine stupidity/ What we under-
stand from is : accord-
ing to the 2nd view. ^ f^^-Nor is the 2nd alternative of
the first pair possible ( the 2nd alternative is that the indivi-
dual c[^|c r is not understood from the word qt ). q-f^
etc. p. 11, 11. 10-12). If the individual Vahika were not
understood from the word tft, then the agreement in case of
this word ( i. e. qt ) and of the word qTlt^, which the example
exhibits, would be improper, it being only words signifying the
s ame thing that agree in case. The word qt indicates qualities
according to this theory and not the individual and Vahika
denotes an individual. The same objection is raised by
against this view "qr 3 Tq% : > ; on this the
JPTT remarks *TR:’-
<TWiqq etc. (P. 11, 1. 33. If ). This is the view of frqqR
himself. Mammata also appears to agree. gWlT fW
etc. The word bull having no logical connection in its primary
signification with Vahika, indicates the individual Vahika
through the relation of community of properties ( between the
bull and the man ) such as ignorance etc. The expression
conveys the identity of the two things denoted by the
two words. But if we take only the primary meaning of qf
and of qTftq> that identity cannot be established. Therefore we
have to take the word qf in a secondary sense, in order that
its meaning maybe logically connected with Vahika. qrffaqq-
* This is a ;qrq often quoted : see comment on 3 rqq’ s
p. 478 ( B. I. edit'on ) ‘qsqft
CRF=R<il'R>r:, q 5 'RlRft I 3Fqqq%5RTq I qRqvqsq
faqr qRcftfT vft: I q
3qqqiq 1 HRITSjr g^q? 5Pj# ffcT RRR. 1 qq
II. 9-10
Sxhityadarpana
59
jre wfifru etc. The motive (from which arises this secondary
use of the word ) is to convey the excessive ignorance etc,
of the man. The three views expounded above are very briefly
put by Mammata as follows : — ‘ 3 ^
TO^TcTT ’FIT <£T d g TO^f^FRT 1
^ ^ <3^T SSTq^ 1 K. P. II.
guwVu^ etc. (P. 11, 1. 15 ). This Indication is called
qualitative because there is in it connection through qualities-
the thing indicated being understood to have the qualities of
that by which it Is indicated. The author here explains the
reason why qroffa^oTT is so called, ‘gnffi: Rl^RTW:
p. 68; gtrfaq * *t° 1° *TT 0 'fiTft^T 1 P- 8.
raf tJ^RT^SRIT^ — The former i. e. the eight varities of
exemplified in qiqf^r etc., is pure, because there is no
admixture of metaphor in it. sqqRt dRT etc. For, metaphor
consists in simply concealing the apprehension of difference
between two things which are altogether distinct, on the
strength of the extreme likeness of the two ; as that of ‘fire’
and a boy called ‘jtt ujqq;’ ( who is so fiery-tempered that we
call him perfect fire ). There is a good deal of fluctuation in
the meaning of the word sq^R. tfus uses the word in two places
in two different senses. I K. P. II. p. 53 ( Va );
here the word is used in a wide sense and means : — ‘calling a
thing by a name which does not properly belong to it or
attributing to an object a property which does not belong
to it,’ which is practically the same thing as s$jPir ; the qvq
explains it as sq^T% S^TqT HFTRlf^RR^T ; 11
^SX \ P. II. p. 46 ( Va )-here the word is used
in the same sense in which it is used by the Sahityadarpana,
as explained by ‘sq^RSJ Rll^llfd^l-
We may reconcile these two mean-
ings given to the same word by the same writer as follows: —
The first meaning is the one which is generally assignsd to
the word OTqR ; the second is a more technical meaning of the
word ^r ; it is qift*nfai, peculiar to the 3^5fR^T. In support
of the first meaning, compare on N. S. II. 2. 63 which
explains sq^R as : i *r*TT
wj qf gq>T«* i’. iu ( P* 51 ) sa, y s
gq gfa& fftf h Mallinatha says in his
60
NOTES ON
II. 9-10
P* 70. These quotations recognize the first meaning
of given above. The says 5 ^
^fcT \ «l
**rfad5<*u$: ^
qif)% sq^fef: I* on eh i ftchi 2. Here the writer
seems to favour the 2nd meaning of ot^R given above. But
further on ( 4-5 ) he speaks of ^ s q ^R and 3 fW OT^R
and gives as an example of ?p; gq^R and
as an example of ffW ^T^R On srffnrM^: the remarks
*Rq% l II
p.345 (Anan ed. ). |pq 7 %g- etc. ( p. 11,11. 17-18). Butin
‘white’ and ‘cloth’ there is no apprehension of any very great
difference between the two. That which is re illy ‘cloth’ is also
that which is ‘white’ and is not simply metaphorically called
‘white’ ; but the ‘boy’ is not really ‘fire’, he is quite distinct
from it, only he is like fire and hence he is metaphorically
called ‘fire’. ^TT^TTl^J — Hence in such cases as sjf : qg-.\
®q^r^r (P. 11, 11. 19-26 ).
cfrjs^TJiT:. Indications arising from a purpose are two-fold on
account of the abstruseness or obviousness of the suggested
sense. Here q^ is used in the same sense as jqqpqq. The eight
varieties of ^qj arising from a motive are further divided
on the ground that the srqfaq which is ( suggested ) is
either abstruse or obvious. 3 ^: d 14 R'4^ C&R SRFTI^Nr
which is to be understood only by the force of an intellect
matured by the study ( or contemplation ) of the sense of
Poetry. Compare the definition of 7j^ given by q-^tq ‘qRRfTRTT-
flfRi: l An example where the qvffaq
is is the verse ‘sqf;# qf’ etc. which occurs above. 3 ^: etc.
The obvious is that which, on account of its extreme clearness,
is to be understood by all ; as in the following ‘It is the
intoxication of youth that teaches women blandishments.’
‘ifWaqtfMI fqvqTSt is a posture of the limbs of
the body so as to convey an idea of the delicacy of it. The first
half of the verse is ‘^ftqft^Twf^T 3 Tft fq^T^fe f RT ^ l’«
Instruction, which consists in the employment of words
favourable to the conveying of knowledge, is possible only in
sentient beings and therefore the word yqf^ifcr is inapplicable
to which is 8 T%;r 5 in its primary sense. Therefore
II. 10 Sahityadarpana 61
the word ^q T ^ rfcT indicates ‘manifests/ vsqcUiwq i s the
attribute of a guru; is not a sentient being like
a guru ahd so it cannot be an in the literal sense.
qffi — and the idea of thorough manifestation is
apprehended as clearly as if it had been stated expressly
(and not indicated by the word sq^frf). The sense,
the. fact that young women learn blandishments easily, all
(whether or not) can understand. ( K. P. II.)
remarks on this verse: 1 =l
I on which says ‘sqf^frq^T
3rf^rq: q;^(P. 11> 1- 27— p. 12, 1. 9).
The arising from a motive was divided into 16 varieties
above. Now a further basis of subdivision is introduced!
whereby the divisions come up to 32 .
Through the fact that the fruit ( i. e. the suggested meaning )
pertains to the thing indicated or to a quality. *TRT
Rgfftq^mr I WTam- etc.— This verse occurs m
•£^n#f5 II. 1 , p. 61 , ctfo 5TO IY. p. 188 (Va), arf^TTf . JR. ( on ^tR^I
7 p. 11 ). 30 says fqtffqi ^TJT^gfvR:. The sNr comments
on this verse as follows : —
frq^TT 3 RRR 1 T ( S 3 TH ) 1
q^FfiT: ) ^5 ^
it^^x | *tct ^ feftsft %'WJ- 1 ^
V3
’JTISlft'nt 3 HT =3 •
?nt 3 fT 3 anwenftc'M 1 ^ ^ S'S
sttw^t (° r as 3° sa y s , r^ t: ^y ^^w-}
%gJTig%T W&v. TT®a: %W l gf 1%^
g:gf WTnrfgr ^ |:giT ?fcT gRT: I
f^g^g: l...fcT c=r jf^fcT fsi^RTm f?WT% 1 5R
gfaqfa gift * 1^1 ?ftr>
i—sreftfir > g ^nf (s° sa y a gfsgftrafo#
gg: gq^ggre^g gftstsgg gg gg gtggt^wftr-
M g|) i gft'g=frft ftpngrgRgg. > ft i ®rg
^ gqg^g ggrr ggsgrsqftc’pftfRfiftn fSPri—g^r^txifidt
f -^ghte gfrgg! gwn? > firtfif 1 ( 3 ° ^ sa y a sci^ftr yft
ftqnt: tgftgif i ) Wffir I ^ (a. *> 1ft *W **
i 3 Tg ^ftftr g’gfagg; i )•
— The clouds, in -which the cranes disport, ^RfT*'
dewy winds, melodious, gf g|; I endure all, (though
it is hard to hear all these suggestive vernal sights and . sounds
6
62
NOTES ON
II. 11
with patience, which heighten the joy of lovers when united ).
etc. Here Rama is indicated by the ex-
pression ^jq)sf9T (which taken literally is insignificant) as
a person extremely patient under afflictions and this
indicated Rama is the vtff ( possessor of the quality of pati-
ence, which is suggested by the employment of the word
Rama ). m . The fruit i. e. the excess
of patience belongs to him i. e. vpj who is indicated. The
remarks upon this 1 5 ^ $
'H^TcT: 5 T# SETT*#, n The idea is:— The word
is a proper name and denotes simply an individual, the son of
here. There is no very great propriety in saying
if we look merely at the primary meaning. But if we take the
indicated meaning ‘who has been the pet of all misfortunes
and sorrows the word is then very appropriate. The
suggested meaning is ‘As I did not break down even when
buffeted by so many misfortunes, I shall surely live on,
though I receive the crowning stroke of misfortune, viz. the
death of Slta.’ Here, then, the suggested sense, viz. the excess
of patience, pertains to the patient Rama who is indicated
by the word 3 * in JTfRT ( p. 12, 1. 9)— In
‘ a herd-station on the Ganges’, where the bank is indicated,
the fruit, i. e. excess, pertains to the properties coolness and
purity and not to the bank, the thing indicated.
( P* 12, 1. 10 ). The varieties of arising
from usage are 8 and we have seen above that those arising
from srqfqq are 32. Thus in all there are 40.
M‘3. c ll c W* • • ^Olcl , Sf=hKJ (P« 12, 11. 13-16), —
according as the power of Indication resides in a word or
sentence. An example of is qfpjrf Here the
word qifr indicated sense. An example of qrem^qr
is Here the does not reside in any particular
word, but in the whole sentence. Thus then the varieties of
amount to 80.
The divisions of $$qj are differently given by different
writers. Mammata’s divisions, according to are as
follows: —
II. 12
Sahityadarpana
♦
63
ssrt
3j3T
1
1
1
1
1
Hrd<n ( ) PRO ( aflWI,)
1 1
l v
pri^RT
[
gpsi 0
1 1
PTRpTT (aTT^tcnr) W^° (3TJ3^>-
( as in ffcfi:
( as in
SW srfc#cT )
R%5Tf^)
The divides ^tu as follows
f ^nrf^rr
’RPT— '
I
SSf I TiS-gKt'Tr, 3RC° and
The pppr^prp divides a9 follows : —
55^1
0t^3T ( as in sr^f,?, RfTtf>75 ) Jrqtim€t
iM ssr
HKfTT . PR^TT pip^i 0
( in ^55P ) ( in ^tepO
sqSRT JTRT (P. 12, 11. 18-23). fopTTJ
ar«rf^3w =? — 3rfwmrg rrt rp: a^: bt ^i 3 ^ swIR+w
g ff%sqa^T ttR — W hen Denotation and other powers cease
after discharging their function, that function of a word or
its sense etc., by which a further meaning is conveyed, is what
is called suggestion. i^:-3Tfii%JTTl^ 5i rf^ft^' : SRlfl^T fppTTT^TfTR:-
3 l 5 jgf g; — In accordance with the maxim that when
a word, a cognition and action cease after a single effort.
64
NOTES ON
II. 12-13
there is no further exertion on their part, The idea is that
a word has a power to express a particular meaning. When
the word expressess that meaning, its power of denotation is
exhausted, it cannot further denote anything else. Compare
ssnft? n 5# ^ T q R ^ f^rq
sqnTRRRqifwRfq” p. 16. This view is diametrically
opposed to that of some followers of who maintain
that, as a single arrow, discharged by a strong man,
destroys in a single movement, called velocity, the armour of
the enemy, pierces his vitals and kills him, so a single word
presents to us, by the single power called Denotation, the sense
of the word, the syntactical connection of the word in a sen-
tence and the suggested sense. They say that the sq^q sense in
such a verse as fq.-^fq^gcfo is brought out by the srfqqr itself,
and not by sqsRy as said by the srRfrft^s. Their view is
vigorously criticised by Mammata in the 5th Ullasa ( pp. 225-
226ff, Va). cqftqTO ‘^Sqfaftftq sqm’ ‘qeiR:
qpsq” ifcf K. P. qqjq- explains the view of these theorists as
follows: — qqj q^qR qfcf ?3^fq qfr%G^<rfr q
RFif ^ ftqW^q% ^q ^%qqilRqRqsq n \X u i qqm^rar qiqqTqrg-
*rq sqRqqtfq q” ftq% i qraqrafspr# sq^q^f^qq-^sj- q rR c q frq i ft
R qq fiTcqq a ifq fqrn^sq
tr^fq- i’. The (P- 11) explains ‘qqq qqfoft
ftvqT cRT qiqwqfaq^q ^Txqoq^ vqq: I 3}l$fqr fe
qN^RT i qi^R^%Rqq
sqRR: >’• srfwqgfl refers to this view, refutes it and approves
of the maxim quoted by our author ‘‘qtRfRRfqqRqiqt ‘q?R:
31®^: s ?f?r ^gtcqr ^qqf+RTRm^q qfq
^tqqtqf sqm^^sRfqfq i fvrwfqqqRTq i qfqqq-
^cqnl^^RRqrqtq ^q grp: i =q qqq Rrr rtttc: qi®q$%3qr-
qnf qqr#fqf^;Rft§;: i ^cq” p. 18 of Vide
also sqfftfq^. I. p. 27. — When
in accordance with the maxim above explained, the three func-
tions, viz. Denotation, Indication and Drift are exhausted,
after having conveyed each its appropriate meaning. 3TprqT an( l
cs^ir have been explained above. But the function called q^
requires a little explanation. When the senses of the words
used in a sentence are connected together on account of Expe-
ctancy, Compatibility and J uxtaposition, a new sense arises,
which is called the Drift or Purport, which is apart from the
II. 12-13 SJhiiyadarpana 65
meanings of the words taken separately. The power by which
this purport is conveyed is called cTMqF?qif%* Mammata
refers to this in many places K. P. 2nd
Ul. p. 25 (Chan.); % ^ ipqi:’.
But it does not appear that Mammata entirely approved of
this view. Otherwise he would not have said but
would have simply declared that is one of the ^functions.
Our author also appears to hold views similar to those of
Mammata. He first emphatically says above (in II. 3) that
there are three powers of a word. He did not mention
there. If he speaks of it here, it is only for the purpose of
referring to the views of others, viz. that school of the
called Their idea of is as
follows : — In a sentence the meanings of certain words are
rcte i. e. accomplished or already known from other sources ;
and the purport of a sentence is to make such meanings
subordinate to the meanings that are to be accomplished
( or ). Let us take an example. The moving about
of priests being known from other sources, in the sentence
the assertion is meant simply to lay
down that the priests should wear red head-dress, and not to
lay down that they should move about. See the remarks of
qqiq(K. P. V.) on p. 176 (Nir). The 3T^fifi:^s gener-
ally do nob accept the as a separate but look
upon it as included under the sqrq sense; e. g. says
‘sugcfTSTOmfai cTTc'riftf'T nnqRTRlt 'KC^Id^’ p. 56.
^ T 31*3^ qpT — That function of a word or sense, or
of an affix etc. ( through which another meaning is conveyed ),
that function which is variously designated as sq^R ( sugges-
tion ), ( hinting ), qqq ( conveying ), SRftqq ( acquainting ),
is what is called the power of suggestion. Compare K. P.
II Ul. p. 63 (Va) ‘to WH PfcWC*
sq^RT-The author of the ’c-qvqr^tqi establishes the existence
of a sq*q sense at great length (pp. 182-197). There are
many who deny the existence of a separate crf% called HqsRj.
They include sq^qj^ under qpqq. Others, like the author of
the Eqfxfifqifo. include it under or under Note
the words of T. D ‘sqtsRrft l qijJJTRT;
f^TFqqTf^T’ I; the qf^lffro^T of says
3 fqqq 3 %
see also P. L. M. p. 9. frog ff%5 — This would be so according
to the sif ^f^jpqqcq i^s; while acc. to the there
would be the two and not three. qifq means-because qqj
qpsqt fosT- qR* sqprrt ^ ‘^fcT 1- 3*gffr lT-
3 = srf^q^^iiT...%T—(p. 12 1. 25 ) sqiSRT is
66
NOTES ON
II. 13
two-fold, (I) that which is based upon a word’s power
of Denotation and ( II ) that which is based upon its power
of Indication.
(P. 12,1. 27-p. 13, 1. 1).
Construe *Hkrtr: ^3T 3$ forfeit ( qi )
3?f*pqT$FziT — That power of suggestion is said to be
based upon Denotation, which causes the apprehension of
something else from a word, which having more possible
meanings than one, has been restricted to a single meaning
by conjunction etc. 5 ^ — By the expression are meant
4 disjunction and others’.
(P. 13, 11. 2-15 ). 3 rfr-It has been said
(byHari or in his qN=Km<{)q ). The two verses quoted
here are from II. 317 and 318. The reading in the
printed text of the Vakyapadiya is for gj zfry f. Almost
everywhere we read the quotation as reads
^■^TT (P* 39 ). We must also notice another
peculiarity about these two verses. They are universally
quoted as embodying the views of Hari. But the commentator
says that they embody the views of others and not
of Hari. Hari’s views are contained in the verse which
precedes these two (i. e. Vakyap. II. 316). jtcrr’s words
are ‘ 3 ^ affair frafWft-
3TTC I 1
^ 11 (sjTWT^q II. 316)...^
companionship; j^tferr hostility or incompatibility of
co-existence; 3 ^ motive 5 context; attribute or
characteristic; juxtaposition of another
word; power; congruity; szjft; gender; ^
accent. — (These) are the causes
of one’s recollecting a special sense of some word, when the
sense of the word is not of itself definitely ascertained.
*fercfer?frT 3 ^ 0 . explains sRcpef^; as
a ^d as ^^fcT:.
1. fft: — This is an example where g-ifa defines
the meaning of a word. Here f ft means ‘Vishnu’ alone and
not ‘a monkey’ or ‘a lion’ (which are also the possible meanings
of the word fft as said by 3^0 I
fft^T because of the conjunction of
II. 14 Sahityadarpana 67
. s .n
conch-shell and discus, which are generally associated with
Vishnu, is defined as a connection between two things
such as is generally known to exist between those two things
only, qqtq defines it as
I ST^TT ) SP^RT:’-.
2. = ^ ( frajN’ )-
supply 3 rf*yq% after The word in this example
denotes Vishnu alone on account of the disjunction of
and There would be no propriety in saying that ‘a
lion’ etc. are without ^ and because they are never
connectd with ^ or Therefore the very fact that
is here spoken of as being without ^ and ^ is the means
of restricting the meaning of the word fft to Vishnu, fqqqtq
is defined by as disappearance of the
connection that is generally known to exist between two
things.
3. In the example ‘Bblma and Arjuna,’ Arjuna is the
son of Prtha (and not who was killed by
) on account of qq i e. because srgyf ( the son of
qqy ) is associated with and not qiTtqtqf^q- is
defined by as ‘irq^R^q The example
of generally given is upon which guqo says
qqtfcT:’- The word ^ is
applied to and An objection is
raised that and sqfqq are not different. The example
of Jflqtq will be an example of also and vice versa.
To this, Jagannatha replies: — What the ancients mean by
regardsng qqpT as different from is: — When any
well-known connection which restricts the denotation of a
word is expressed by a distinct word, that is an example of
^qtq ? as in the example fft: where the connection
between qifqq; and fqsj is because it is expressed by a
distinct word ^ (in ); but when one of the
restricts the sense of the other by forming a Dvandva com
pound with it, there is said to be ; as in where
the word itself restricts the meaning of both form-
ing a gg compound. Thus ^qiu'^TqtS^q: is an example of yqlq
and is an example of
^Ti^Tq: i f ^ ,J ifofrr STNR13F1T3J ^
sf?r tfqtro, P* 120
68
NOTES ON
II. 14
4. In the example ‘Karna and Arjuna,’ Karna is the son
of the Suta ( charioteer ) and not any one else called Karna
‘or the ear,’ because his hostility ( ) to Arjuna is
famous. is defined as An
example of f^rf^TT in the 2nd sense ( not remaining
together) is (shade and light). niay mean
‘lustre’ elsewhere. But here means ‘shade’ as that
meaning is to that of 3TT?PT (light). The usual example
of f^tfaeTT is or as in K. P. This
example is adversely criticised by p. 6.
gives ^rrrrpnr as an example of ftrtmr. The
(pp. 120-121) attacks, as usual, and defends
K. P. Jagannatha says that will be an example of
Vide the ingenious remarks of the
5. — In the example ‘I salute Sthanu’ the word Sthanu
means ‘&iva’ and not ‘a post,’ as there is no purpose served in
saluting a post. 3$ means
6. — In the example ‘my lord knows everything,’
the word means ‘you, sir,’ and not God, the context being
that the words are addressed to a king. is defined as
and fffcrrpfe; p. 6 (being in the mind of
the speaker and hearer). Another example, where
restricts the meaning of a word, is These words,
if uttered when a man is about to take his meal, denote the
bringing of salt. If uttered by a man when going out, they
mean that a horse is to be brought.
7. few — In the example ‘the angry one, on whose banner
is the alligator,’ the God of Love is meant (by the word
and not the ocean which also is called because
the characteristic ‘anger’ is intimately connected with the
God of Love only and with no other meaning of the word
few means ‘a characteristic connected with one of the
things expressed by a word by some relation other than jrr
and separated from everything else denoted by the word.’
fe# ?f^lTfrrftw^T TO^ni^t I 5?#r or ‘fejf
| <|o cpjo , an attribute whichis excludeded from
the other meanings of a word which has been employed and
and is capable of several meanings. Some say that means
‘a peculiar characteristic,’ but if this meaning were taken,
then is not a proper example where %w defines
II. 14
SXHITTADARPANA
69
the meaning of a word, because ^rfT is not a peculiar character-
istic of ( being found in human beings also ) and because
then would be an example under fojf. Therefore
means ‘any property or characteristic which belongs to
one only out of the several meanings of a word by a relation
other than and is not at all found in the other meanings
of that word.’ 30 sgo p. 6 thus distinguishes between g%T
and Jmtf&TpfH, siSi^ft'^RTfMH^SPl sNftTT"
1 i #*tt 3T#^nif%ftf^r >’
8. — In the example ‘the God, the foe
of Pura,’ the word jvjft means Siva, as we gather from the
proximity of the word ‘God,’ for otherwise the word j^ft
might as well stand for ‘the enemy of the city,’ some king.
defines as ^ wmJTTiW'^’ agreement
in case with another word having a fixed sense. This defini-
tion is strongly criticised by the P- 7 as well as by the
^Tfirfrev. defines it as
e^srrfR:’, ‘utterance of a word having a meaning logically
connected with only one meaning of a word which is capable of
many senses.’ The objections which Jagannatha raises against
are “ ‘qfrr VTFT:’
‘ffart ?fcT <
. >?
9. ^zz { — In the example ‘the cuckoo is intoxicated
by the spring,’ the word ‘madhu’ means ‘spring-time’ and not
‘nectar’ or ‘honey,’ because it is the spring-time only that has
‘power’ to intoxicate the cuckoo and not honey etc. is
explained as sf^^.
10. — In the example ‘may the favourableness
of your beloved preserve you’ the word jpg means ‘favour-
ableness or coming face to face,’ because here the word jj^cf
in the sense of face has no propriety with reference to the
act of preserving. The preserving of persons stricken by
love is brought about only by the favourableness of their
sweet hearts, and not by their mere faces, which, if the sweet-
hearts are themselves unfavourable, cannot preserve the
lovers. Hence jpq- is taken to mean “ ‘qTg sj^drg-
ml ft
*prfcr 1 * g g*sPrft°T *
sT^rMtcf P- 124 *
70
NOTES ON
II. 14
11. — In the example “the moon shines in the sky/
we are led to take in the sense of ‘moon/ by the presence
of the place ‘sky’. The word also means ‘camphor’ or
‘gold,’ as said by 3T^o £? or by
^
12. — In the example at night,’ we knovp
that fxpRrg means ‘fire’ here, from the time specified, viz.
‘night.’ £r5r* *rrg also means ‘the sun, 5 if spoken of by day.
13. — In the sentence ‘the wheel glistens, 5 we know
that the word means ‘a wheel 5 and not ‘the chakravaka,
the ruddy goose 5 from its being in the neuter gender,
means when it is masculine. 3 says
and iffcfr says ^ ^
14. (P. 13, 11. 14-15) ^3 ^ As
accent modifies sense in the Yedas alone and not in Poetry,
no example of its occurrence is given here. An example from
the Yedas, where accent modifies the sense is in the
sentence The word may be dissolved in two
ways qrj: or ^ • If it be taken as a fic^T, it
will mean ‘the killer of Indra 5 and the 3^ accent will lie on
the last letter of the whole compound according to the Sutra
of Panini VI. 1. 223 ( 3 ^: ^TtT: ^)- In
this case the word ^33^: will be written in the as
If we dissolve the word as ^ i. e. as a
compound, it will mean ‘whose killer is Indra 5 and the
3 g[TtT accent will be the same as the natural accent of the first
member of the sjjpftfl; compound, viz. according to the
Sutra ‘snpftft <JVT i 5 qr- VI. 2. 1. The word ^| g; in this
latter case will be written in the q^^ as :• Our author
lays down here that accent modifies the sense in the Yedas
alone and not in Poetry. Accents were employed only in the
Yedic Literature and not in classical Sanskrit. Compare
the words of JFqj ^ t?q q ^ *qds$fq5iq5l<ftf?Tf^. >
Our author simply echoes the words of Mammata.
* Compare datapaths Brahmana I. 6. 3. 1. ff 3rq
^5 f H l’; also the t[T%fp#ajT itfl: fsr^Tf
qr Pr«qwgrfit q i h qr'q^’r jpwh
TOTO. II verse 52.
II. 14
Sahityadarpana
71
(P. 13, 11. 16-24) & ^ %s^C*rrcT ^
^ 3 T[j|: some, not enduring this assertion, say. refers to
the words of (and of our author also) quoted above ^
Ucf q feWT gi ve s us here ttie criti ‘
cism of Mammata’s dictum by some commentators ( like
and ) and then rebukes them for criticizing a respe-
ctable writer like Mammata without sufficient reason,
c^T^r^r: Accent also in the shape of change
of voice etc. is, as a matter of fact, the cause of understanding
in a particular sense something that would otherwise be ambi-
guous. The word ^ in the efjyft^y of fit niay mean ‘a Vedic
accent, sfTxT, 3?3fTvT or ’ or it may mean simply ‘change
of voice, or tune. ’ So ^y|>, which is defined by 3T as ‘c^ysf:
ftraf m ’ ( a change of voice which is due
to sorrow, fear, etc.) will be denoted by the word We
have seen above that the same sentence, when uttered with
a different tone will mean different things, e. g. in the verse
^ ^ etc - 1 Act). If this
sentence is read merely as an affirmative one, the meaning
will be ‘I shall not destroy the hundred Kauravas in battle
through wrath.’ This sense is opposed to the vow of Bhima
that he will kill all the Kauravas. So, by a change of voice in
repeating the verse, i. e . repeating it interrogatively, another
meaning is conveyed i. e. ‘ shall I not kill etc. ,i e, ‘I shall indeed
kill’ etc. Here then we see that ^ (in the shape of change
of voice ) does modify the meaning of words in a poem, not —
withstanding Mammata’s words to the contrary,
— According to the way laid down in his
treatise by the holy sage Bharata, accent in the shape of sflrT
(acute) etc. does really convey some particular K as a, as for
example, the Erotic ( when in the absence of the accent, the ^y
would have been doubtful). g^:-The gfa is here the author
of a in 36 or 37 chapters, which he is said to have receiv-
ed from Brahma. We should read tyy^pirfef^^TT for miKtr
1§3IT. says (chap. 19 p. 221 iyysssRyy^T )
<ysy*yy m sro:, ^TRlfa etc.’ The word qys does not yield a good,
sense. But there is no Ms. to support our conjecture, says
(chap. 19. 43 of HI^T^T ) l ^Rt-
^ \\ So we are told that in a dramatic representation the
n
NOTES ON
It 14
speeches should be recited with and letters
respectively in and $t^r. So even such ^r as is cited
by the sage as defining a meaning; and we have seen above
that also modifies the meanings of words. 5Tr C< I J i ~
ffd" — In the case of this also i. e. some exemplifica-
tion is proper, as in the case of the 13 other defining causes.
Here ends the criticism of Mammata’s dictum. The R R ^g ^q
of has a similar note upon the words ^ ff Eftfcif
in ^ zRfft ^ «T *er:
g f^r ; i*- ftsjfar (p< 13, 11. 18-
24). answers these criticisms, ^erj The
^s, whether regarded as changes of voice or the accents
etc., cause one to understand one particular sense in the form
of the suggested sense only ; they do not really acquaint
us with any distinction in the shape of restricting to a
single sense a word which has more possible senses than one,
which (i. e. restricting a word to a particular sense) is the
subject under discussion ( and not anything respecting what
is ©qrq ). The idea is — etc. restrict a word to a parti-
cular meaning out of several possible meanings which are all
primary. As is mentioned along with etc., it also
must restrict a word to a particular meaning out of several
possible and primary meanings. But ^er in the form of cfipj;
does not restrict a word to a particular sense out of many possi-
ble senses, but it suggests some sense other than the one expre-
ssed by the words in a sentence. Yide the words of
‘3RTf^& 3 ^ pfi Similarly ^
in the form of referred to by Bharata-muni does not rest-
rict the meaning of a ivord , but it serves to bring out by its
employment, the sentiment of Love etc. in a recitation. Thus
^cr, as interpreted by the critic, would not be on all fours with
the other defining agencies such as and therefore the
interpretation of the critic is wrong and must not be accepted.
FR, ^ — Moreover, if restriction to a
single sense were laid down by the force of accentuation in
every case where even two meanings of ambiguous words were
left undetermined by the absence of such defining causes as
context etc, then, in such a case, it would follow that we can-
not recognise the figure of speech called ( Paronomasia ).
The idea is If accents such as were admitted as defining
II. 14
SlHITYADARPANA
73
the meanings of words in poetry, then the niust be
given up ; e. g. the expression is We ma y take
it as equal to ttittrrTU’U: or BPW- H accent were admitted
as defining the meanings of words, RIW will mean
only one thing and thus it will not be an example of %?.
q ^ But it is not so ( i. e. it is not seen that %7 is not
recognised ). is vccoc/niscd by all authorities as a figure of
speech. m Hence it is that they say while treat-
ing of “according to the maxim ‘in the province of Poetry,
accent is not regarded.’ ” sn§: — This refers to nwr? himself.
The plural is used to show respect. etc.— -these are
the words of iFire, who sa y s
fJnf Ml a W’ K. P. IX. 7. ^-Enough
of this censorious glancing on the part of these objectors
at the explanations of the venerable ( author of who
is the source of inspiration ( lit. the bestower of livelihood ) to
the critic as well as to me ( i. e. to all ). this refers
to qwrs’s note on the word ^ in the .fnfcfil o£ 5ft-
The words ?? %S^=ICHRT: of the text most probably
refer to ( who is generally identified with the author
of 3W fl <. gf g r, which is the guide of our author). Ruchaka in his
while commenting upon the words of Mammata
f i quft
‘it?; uq ^ q,Tc^ sa y s
qU lxflfe >
quT Jtsrtftr Iiot ^ to
==T g^ FT: l”. We take ^ and as
referring to Mammata and sqpjqrftg as referring to j^re’s
words on the expression occurring in Hari’s Karika.
It is possible that UT?q and refer to Ruchaka and the
words sqr^fT%3 refers to Ruchaka’s remarks upon the words of
Mammata. The above quotation from Ruchaka is due to the
courtesy of Dr. S. K. Belvalkar. The #=H on yr^° sa y s
refers to and
(P. 13, 11. 25-26) 3nfo |* t l fr By the
word srri^; in £s meant, in such an example as ‘a
female with breasts just so big,’ the making one aware by the
gestures of the hand that the breasts etc. resemble the
unexpanded lotus ete. On the word iu Mam-
mat a says
7
aillfe t fTO , I
II’ On this
7k
NOTES ON
II. 14
^ says 5J^ I 3^ ^^=T%T.-.’
The verse quoted above in Prakrit
«IRf|[q'm«rT^. I ’^TTf'JTraT^^tr qqiq^jlrf^: ll ) is an example
of srfirqq (gesticulation). iqfqqq is defined as ‘ftqj^nqjfft-
fW^rPTR:’ f. qp p. 8. srfqqq- is a motion of
the hand etc. conveying to another the idea of the size of
a particular object. The verse qqi q^N ' ttf qqi etc. is commen-
t ed up on as f ollow s “#r^nf^RJTCteTT giIRq<ri-
^ 5 %: i...Rcrrrc7ftJrroft
^i i iw c hiR ,; rftRFtr Hrqr. qw ht | ?q^qi=K | iR.*iiv'i qqR^ tjrn? ? RT%
RqftirFi' tn«trfr%'rRr«rr qqqqar^rrq. 1 qqqsflRtept: 1
RWt 1 cTRr ’RTiqTfr^qf^rrftJTpiT <$qffc JTHrrHrqr-
^rr ^ *rw: ht qq^qrqq; ffe^f qftqm steqr ^<?t rmf^-
q g^iqi H q?g^qg%rT 1 qftfts%fq qrqq. 1 qferq^iq srrqqft 5 rf$sqq-
fkirkc giq. I fcfHftfcT 5fRJ) qr grftqT 1 3TR gf srew tdlffrqifa Htqqft-
qqrqqrtffqqr fa faqftqTqftqft...3?g5qfqrHqiifa^ =q
srqqritqft sffawPRrqnrr
fHqftcRIrfiq: I ” qo %o p. ok.
erq^r, the second defining cause included under 3 ^ in Hroq*P,
is defined by f. q T . as ‘^q%TT 4 « W*lTffaflT fq%:’ (p. 8 .) i. e.
pointing out the person or thing intended in some direct
way, as if it were caught by the horns. An example is «*j r:
N 3v7 : 5TIH«ft^T qqrtfq SJ^’ ( Kumarasam. II. 55 ). Here, in a 3
much as by placing his hand upon his chest, the speaker
designates himself, the word ?q ; is restricted to the speaker
byRq^r- (p. 13, ll. 27-28 ) qqfafqpj. . . «psrq r . When a word
is thus restricted, in respect of its Denotation, to a particular
meaning, that power which is the cause of one’s thinking of
another sense of the word is the power termed suggestion,
founded on Denotation.’
(P. 13, 1. 29-p. 14, 1. 6) qqr qq*Rqtp *npnq and
HTf^rmftq? have been explained above (p. 31 ). qg&pTr n lfar-
tMiPW— ' T he lover of the nymphs in the form of fourteen
6 ' intimately knew fourteen languages.
gqfe%r^iTf: etc. This verse has two applications, one to
the king nrgfa whose glorification is the matter in hand
and the other to Siva. We shall first explain the verse as
applied to the king. ^ 5 !%%^:— jSf;
fqjTf means fight or body. So the compound will mean
‘whose march is not impeded by the fortresses’ ( of his enemy)
or ‘whose body is not screened by fortresses’ i. e. ‘who does not
fight from behind the shelter afforded by forts but who fights
II. 14
SiHITYADARPAIjA
75r
on the open plain.’ who by bis lustre throws
into the back-ground the god of love, — Mted.
traH’Jf srfrT 5 J5T^ who subdues flo urish ing
chiefs. ij^Tuftrn one who has attained greatness. f^fciT
— surrounded on all sides by gay people ( voluptua ries b
sjfsprat
1 ^ 0 — who does not condescend even to cast a look at
the best of ksatrivas. fuftnft 31^1 W3 UR^who bas *be
deepest devotion for Ssiva (f«ift:3^: *1^ )•
Having made the earth his own. fq^jfcnjforag: (f^TT
ftwifo CTg-TT’ sttr:) whose body is de-
corated by prosperity or wealth. — husban d of XJma .
The verse as applied to means: — : yfar 55ff?r:
aTT^: ft**: *£: whose body is embraced by Durga
i. e. Parvatl. irt%^ ^f^w^r-overwhelming by his fire
( from the third eye ) the god of love,
who wears the rising digit of the moon.
^dflfofl -One who has attained vast proportions, ^rtfvrfir:—
^:-by serpents. feF ^ ^ ^
^vt-who looks upon everything by means of the Lord^of the-
Naksatras. fqftjpj nPST ( fbfHi 3?:
who has the deepest affection for the Lord of Mountains.
having mounted on a bull. with bis
body adorned with ashes. 3JTT33VT: husband of 3HT *• «•
Parvatx. m jRRo^...qWf. 3rft^-3?|3»W connect 3rf3^%
with Here by the context the meaning of the word
3Hr=l gra being restricted in respect of Denotation to the king
Bhanudeva, the lord of the great queen Urna, the sense of
the ‘husband of the goddess Gauri’ i. e. the god Siva, is
understood only through suggestion. The suggestion is here
based upon arfwr- The reason is:— Out of several possible
meanings, the word is restricted to a particular one by
context etc. And then another meaning, which could have
been denoted by the same word in another connection, is-
suggested. The result is that the king is suggested to be
similar to 8iva i. e. there is in this verse.
(P. 14, 11. 8-12 ) 55^nRi%...s8}vii^5r *r^r-
ciisrt e^pnrsrar-w # ag. m 41^4 5 w
*mm ^ m-Tbat power, whereby the motive for the
sake of which Indication is resorted to, is caused to be thought
of, is called Suggestion founded on Indication. means
76
NOTES ON
IX. 14
Compare K. P. II. 9-10 ( p . 59 Chan.)
JRftf^mr'-rfn s^tt 1 5 !^r%?r s^-sr^r^rq-^r %rr 11
3L W JrL^ T S T ^fT%: <fSS*T
<TCTT%q *TW*1% q 5 JWFTRRT* !•’
, TWT 3 n’ ^2j !j u<i?5T =q^qr — Pfiqrqf is to be connected
With - 5 Tf*T<mFb When, in such an example as ‘a herd-station
on the Ganges’ the power of denotation ceases after denoting
the meaning ‘a mass of water’, and when the power of
Indication ceases after conveying the meaning of ‘the bank’ etc.,
then that power, by which the excess of coolness and
purity is conveyed, is called suggestion based upon Indication.
The idea is:— In the example qfr : ’ the word qfr
denotes a stream of water; then, as this primary meaning is
unsuitable, we understand afterwards by Indication ‘the bank’.
The motive for making use of such an expression to convey
the meaning is that the speaker wishes to lead us to understand
excess of coolness and purity on the bank (<^q)qisj^
W fra Ctrl' srqRqqJ. In the example qffrqf q)q: we understand
this motive by a special power of words. It cannot be said
that excess of coolness is understood by srfqqr; because the
convention ( of the word q^) was not made in respect of
coolness etc. but in respect of a stream of water. Nor can we
say that the excess of coolness is understood by 55^, because
the conditions of are not satisfied. There must be
and . The primary meaning
of qjfr being inapplicable, we take it to mean ‘bank’ by
Indication. If it be said that the ipitqq also is indicated by
the word q*r, then we reply that the qqfqq would be indi-
cated by ‘the Ganges’ only if the sense of the bank is inappli-
cable. Besides the bank has no direct connection (qq)q =
) with the properties coolness etc.; moreover, if 5^-
be indicated, we ask what the motive is for indicating t^e
from the word m . So none of the conditions of ^
are ^satisfied. Nay, they are not even necessary. The word
has the P° wer to conve y Therefore, the
* s suggested. And as this suggestion comes in only when
f. 19 n e 'j Qplo ^’ ed ina secondary (5q^fqq>) sense, the sqspq
is said to be based upon
(P. 14, 1. 13) gq 3qqftnq. fqqqpq divides sq^qy
into two varieties and aqqj. The ^ again he divides
into qfw^q and In this division he appears to.
11.15 Sxhityadarpana 77
follow Mammata, says % (ozpsRr) ^
xM sn^T g 1;^— srfq^T ^ PP- ^5-46 ( Nirn. ed. ).
Our author and include 3?fqqpj?rr and under 3 il°^b
The reason appears to be that ^uiT and arfwT. are both
powers of a word. The remarks on qp^T
p. 74 (Chan.). The suggestion
is here said to be based upon word because here we cannot
put a synonymous word in place of the one employed. In
the example : • • -SSTR^:’, i* we substitute qrfcft
for ott, it won’t do. The matter in hand is the glorification
of the husbamd of the queen named Uma, So we cannot
employ the word there. Thus in this case of sifvp^PJ^-
the definition of s^TcT applies. But how will it apply
to instanced in iRfpri stT-? There even lf we
substitute qrifRsqj for there is suggestion still. Our
author does not expressly tell us way he includes ^FTFJyS-.
under The reason may be as follows:— It is true
that we can substitute qpfRsft for Jifff; but the
dees not lie in this. We understand from the
expression sffaj ; but if we substitute in its place
the suggested sense vanishes. We may employ another
synonym, But here also, there is ^FTT; what we
cannot do is to substitute a direct expression like ° r
WTRsfieffc for *TWT or Herein consists the
It is not meant that in the 3$ ( meaning ) is not
necessary. What is meant is that in szpsRT, tbe particular
words employed are most important; the circumstances which
constitute srpff sqSRT may or may not be present but it is not
meant that they must not be present. As it is the word that
is most important in this kind of it i s or
in accordance with the WfwT-’
(P. 14, U. 14-16 ) Construct zrr
<sW!T) JTtai^i^WT
^ %ffom. 3 ?^ ^ (****&•
That suggestion is said to arise from the sense of ^oi s
which causes one to think of something else through the
peculiar character of the speaker, or the person addressed, or
the sentence, or the proximity of another person, or the expie-
ssed meaning, or the occasion, or the place, or the time,^ or the
modulation of voice, or gestures etc. Our author copies the
78
NOTES ON
II. 16-17
very words of Mammata II
TOHliii'hi«i^&s«rra: sfrrflTi'TRc. i 5qf%$q
?fl ll’ K. P. Ill 2-3. On sfesq, irfe^ in his qvs remarks
4< %s3rt #f^r%sq: srfrqrat sr m %- 1 jt^rr
ifwrg: I m ‘i^gfrr ^T5. *Pffl’ (<TT° K- =?• 3? ) ?i?R
p. 78. jtrr: ^ has been explained above (p. 71)
3F*t: 3T#:— Rxq^sqf^rf^f;:.
( P. 14, 11. 18-22 ) rn ^•••^TR%. ^ etc. fsr«TCTC Cites his
own verse as an example, where there is some speciality in
respect of the speaker, the sentence, the occasion, the place and
the time, Tig:— etc. %^-exhaustion. ^%:-wind.
-separate this pleasure-garden also. —
3i#R: ( see ^ II. 4. 64 ) % ; ^ : _lovely
with the bowers^of Aiokas. trq- R SR^rt—
'fiRR Rf%TR- SRS^--hi*i=h: — Paramour. The speciality
of the five, viz rpj, err, fej, and j^nq is well brought
out ^ by xro as follows i—^qx: 3>T53iRR, R3R •
ITRRR
( ^* 23 ff). etc. Where the specialty is
in respect of the person addressed the example is etc.
etc. This verse occurs in the printed 3777 ^^ as
No. 105. It is not commented upon by 3T*p^cf ( 1216 A. D. )
but is commented upon by ^rp|q^. A great deal of controversy
has raged about the meaning of this verse. Our author appears
to hold that this verse is an example of based upon
fts is made clear by his remarks
^et us first understand the meaning of the verse as
interpreted by our author, Stf^TT <t spgsqprcrf fjff
1
- — aim: 3717^
^ 1 ^frT ?T 5 3% I TjTjiPcichi^ ^rrqY 57% TRTlRt I
^T^I^Tiifrr^TT^l’ViT^ I 1^7*7 1 | ^q- 51^77 fi^I TOq g f I
3Tfr m ma i srift
1 ^rpi^TTrf 1 \ gr=qr^f
f^'H^dRRR f^qqqi ^ cW tgrf R&T RRq WRRRtrfRM;
on ^ t he propriety of this word remarks (p. 3)
-JL? !T W 3 3<Tt*rrit ^ ^ i
fRTmpR.’ fq4K<HllS^:— sm lower lip. f^paeTFT:- RRTqRRq;:
* ft £J -u=nfcPr JTqr =rf 1 trr 5rtnR.d)bft rtvtct
Rrqq-SRRf JT^X^r 3x ?T q ;
II. 16-17
Sahitydarpana
79
-go =qo. The plain meaning is £ you went hence to bathe in the
well and not, as I had directed you, to the wretch,’ Our
author’s idea appears to be that this plain meaning ( )
is inapplicable under the circumstances and that these words
indicate, by the relation of contrariety ( as in Irony ), that
she went to the wretch ( and not to the well ).
The words etc. apparently denote the effects of bath-
ing. But as the apparent meaning ( ) is incompatible
under the circumstances, the meaning ‘ you went to the wretch’
is indicated by f qqO ' ri ^RT* The words etc. are then
properly construed with this meaning.* This is what the author
says in the words ^ qqf?qq$q TpngtfcT *. *-
the is <Kptfq&q qqmt- ^ From this
indicated sense is understood the suggested sense * your
purpose was dallying with him ’ through the specialty of the
messenger addressed. Therefore the verse is an example of the
specialty of the sfcgsq. The motive, here, in resorting to
as done by our author, is to convey the idea of dallying.
The above view about this verse is entirely opposed to that
of Mammata, his commentators like Pradipakara and Nagega,
and to that of Jagannatha. The words of are ‘3?q
ifr srqqq^q i. e. the sq*q is
Here q*qg says that the sense ‘you went near him only
for dallying with him’ is suggested by the word srqq which
is most prominent ( according to Pradipa ) or the fact that
‘you went only to dally with him,’ which is the most promi-
q-f. In bathing the colour of both the lips would
be washed away, if at all. %qr
WtrfiT 1 S^ : ^ ifrf
\ SRFt 1 —
qr55T^fc% l (the meaning at first
sight) l qpsq: qr 3R g €\^\:
qq srqsrqR^ I & I ft- slender. rig:
1 BTPTTrRT:
q-RTtf: I S^f^rfTsft f%RTtSRq: 1 %3 R S^SkT-
<rg: vrqfq i g r 3%f%
I ft. jft. p. 3.
* As done in the fto ffto quoted above.
80
NOTES ON
II. 16-17
nent, is suggested by the word 3 ?^ (according to s^frd)* jp^’s
idea is that in this verse you cannot resort to ai a
Herein he differs from our author. Moreover, he says that the
whole szpq- sense can be had from the word 3 ^. The words
etc. are common both to and dallying with him.
They are not to be interpreted as being inapplicable to
and specially appropriate to d^ fid ^ P FTd, as is done by the
T%d*ftJTTST- 'Vide the words of jjwre in the 5th Ul. “^TT ’
*nf?r ?rift *fvt-
srf%3TcT3J3T^ ^T^[4^Tt,l41frl
p. 256 ( Va). The explains etc. as applied to the
bathing in the well as follows: — ^dddt frRdd dP>
l
5f<|fTiJI^ 1 ’ pp. 15-16 *
After giving the explanations of ff^q- etc. as applied to
bathing in a well, the y=p\WK remarke that there is no necessity
for resorting to Indication, as the primary sense is not alto-
gether inapplicable, because the words etc. are equally
applicable (to the primary and the suggested sense). After
the primary meaning is understood, we see that the speaker,
the person addressed and the hero have a specialty of their
* The T comments as follows : —
*j<wu5i'Kt 1 ^T^Rfrr 1
1 d^r 1 3t*ft*zt furrow
dT 1 fd:^fd I d?Rdd *dddt: d£ srFd^p
ddT ^rpvT^TT ^gd ^ifed dWd; ddT I d g dTft
’dteddFTTSfa I c|im d^ddgd.gdddd"
3*d ^ =*gd d 8JT&d dT
d^dTd d^idddl d^TddlTR l
d%d dtdTfdddTdl sNirt
l ^gvTMaHl
{^ddddCdmW ^ fdd^j d g fdd. I d g d=dUS: > dg^dddT
dRdspddT^T^ l dRdT d^dd^dl^ > g ddd ^dfd%:, 3vTCt%
dtd d?fid (^pddfd) ddlcdd^ (fdg^FTcddj I . dt ft
dRddRt dd I ^TTddiT% gSRTfR d?RFd^dTdTdTd; I 5TF%
^ dd ) ^«!dfd§:, dUr^TO dldTd^Tdcdd; 1
S’ I Kd dd" dj: d^sft f^TT I 3Td ^ gdT^dT
^^dT^ddT^(^Rjird; g^t ddted: I dim §*d$idT^
d^lggdTld^R^Td: I 3T^FJ^PTcdTU l ^ddldT^d^TTTdTd drftft-
I d 3 gf d* *frT dT I p. 17 (Chan. ).
II. 16-17
SlHITYADARPANA
81
own. The word 3 TW means primarily one who is mean. So
the word at first denotes one who gives pain by doing some
harm. Then ultimately by the power of suggestion, the word
arqrr yields the sense of ‘one who causes pain by dallying with
the maid.’ Wipfe
tftera scftcrr ^rm^r^r
R>TO°TIRT ft fecfl
ft i'«h i^ i7 t ^
i’ p. 16 of This is the reason why the word sr^nr is
the most prominent in the verse, as suggested by Mammata’s
specific mention in the words ‘3 twt^T As for
etc, the other circumstances mentioned in the verse, which are
marks of bathing, they suggest dalliance only when we reflect
that they are also the effects of embraces, kisses etc. which are
subsidiary to dalliance i. e. they first suggest the idea of
embraces etc. and through these and along with these, they
suggest dalliance. Therefore, the words f^r^qxajcT etc. are
subordinate in conveying the sense and the word 3T*m is
prominent. Another reason for rejecting laksarjid and
regarding the word 3 T^tt as pradhana in bringing out the
suggested sense may be suggested. Even supposing for the
sake of argument that there is as said by. our author,
the word 3^ will then niean ‘noble’ and as such will obstruct
the which, as admitted by all, is dallying with the
Hence the presence of the word i n th e verse precludes
and it is thus the most prominent word to
suggest the sense intended, the remainig words being equally
applicable either way. 3R3T 31^1
^FWP=TR u ^cl!i 3R3 Ri M
*iW<iiwrRf
5RT OTflfafar W^fd* I 3TWR:^T 3TW[^1cr
gfiRRfW \ irfefdr \
5 ^H^T^TT f^TORf
STfiKR*T% Sfa cT^reRSTCT dctfl'fe&ite »’
p. 18 ( vide the lucid and interesting remarks of It. G. pp. 12-16.)
(P. 15, 11. 1-6)
( tf*$?ra;) wr \
II- This is the fourth verse of the
of alias flr ddl %«h who is referred to even by Bana,
82
NOTES ON
II. 16-17
Intro. 13 (verse). ‘See, that crane stands unmoved and
undisturbed on the leaf of the lotus, like a conch-shell placed
upon a tray of pure emerald/ ^ qq^qq |
srfcT ^fcT I ftRlrft chM lS«fi rTW: ^ <^1^1 q%fqqtq: I qyt^
ct l i fqftrcfe — f^oteriR t-
Rwst %f?r i ^CRferr ^T^qTffor *
i wfg^rcis; \
fwr ^nr^r ^f%: w 5 ^
1 «T § gW^Rfr: I rrwr I
WURt* 1 ^ i ^f^Pdch^rhrmR: i*
go =qo p. 23. This verse is addressed by a damsel to her
paramour, ma y be taken as one word or as two
words. In the first case, would mean ‘not moving to
another place’ and fq^Tq ‘not moving any part of its body’; in
the latter, fq$yg> would be addressed to the paramour and would
mean ‘lazy, not quick to seize the opportunity’ ( s rq qi^q r
fa$i^iHkf^rl' , T I )* 3T^ Here by the
motionlessness of the crane, its security is suggested and from
the security, the fact that the spot is devoid of people ; hence
it is said ( suggestively of course) by some woman to a
paramour who is by her side that ‘this ( where the crane
stands fearing no intrusion) is the place for a rendezvous/
Here the word fqtq?q suggests the sense of security ( fq*^q ).
This suggested sense suggests another sense, viz, that the
place is a lonely and unfrequented one and hence that it is a.
nice place for their meeting. So here one cq^qsj- gives rise
to another. Therefore this is an example of sqqf sq^rqy. The
last sqjqpi i. e . , is due to the specialty of the fact
of the paramour being near the speaker, i . e . because the
paramour is near, the fact that the place is solitary suggests
the further idea that it is a proper place for their meeting*
Thus this is an example of 3yvqtf(qftl}f%gq. 3 ^ qqt*^—
In these words the author seems to give us an example of 3 qqy
sq^gy due to the tjRrgq of -qqxq. ‘He exemplified the qf^rgq of
spfg, STC3T*r, Sfafr 5T35 a^d qyqq in qg/; that for qr^sq and
SFTOfqfq in fq:q(q etc’ and ‘g3? etc.’ respectively. Further
on he will speak of the qRrgq of efifgr and %gy. So out of the
ten specialties mentioned above, q^qq Rrgq alone remains to be
dealt with. We interpret this line as follows: — In this very
example ‘gsy fufes etc/ the specialty of the suggested sense y
viz. the loneliness of the spot, is what leads to (the appre-
II. 16-17 Sahityadarpana 83
hension of a further suggested sense). Here we must put
a wide interpretation upon the word q-pszy so as to take it to
mean 3^, or So according to this inter-
pretation, the verse is an example of as well as
Pramadadasa does not understand the passage
as an example of as we do. The sqrq - sense in the verse
%3? fvmtf etc. is brought out in two ways by Mammata. One
sense favouring R and the other The first
is the same as that brought out by our author. The second is
ftsqT ^ which is explained by
as 3TT^qr^, l*T Sffit vROTTcT ffcT
ftsqT c# ^TRTdT 3T i fftT
\\ This means: — Some woman made an appointment
with her paramour to meet him at a certain place. He
rebuked her for not coming as appointed, while he himself
came. Thereupon, the woman recites the verse and suggests
by the use of the word that the crane is securely
standing and further none must have come there to disturb it
and hence that the paramour tells a lie in saying that he came
there. his comment upon this verse in the
gives another meaning altogether.
(P. 15, 11. 7-11) fmwx
i This is quoted in srq^s P- 175,
the first half being ? ) 2RT%S*T qfd'^ l’« This
is a definition of cfijgr, which we have explained above. This
definition means ‘that is called by the word emphasis
or modulation of voice, which is an alteration of the sound
in the throat/
— The varieties of should be known
from original works. The word strfk is used for the works on
any 6astra, in which the topics peculiar to a are
authoritatively and completely deilt with; e. g. the
{commentary on the ) applies the word strr to the
JTCPIT'sr of I
^s^fT ^ht p- 11 9 ° n
m o IV. 1. 44; similarly in his
says Ucf f^nTcTffiT 3 tF^.’ is divided into
two varieties and ■pRTO^r in w’ s l^th s?o p.
222 ( of Chowkhamba ed. ). See also the £fiT^.«JS|Rrc of pp.
‘.234-239. ‘g?*R Being dependent on his elders,
84
NOTES ON
II. 16-17
alas, he is about to depart to a far-off land. In the spring
time, deliciously charming on account of its swarms of bees and
its cuckoos, he won't come back, my friend.’ Here she says ‘he
won’t come back’, but by a change of voice when uttering ffe r fr
it is suggested that he will surely come back. So this is an
example of 3TT*fr sqSRT due to Mammata cites this verse
as an example of qqfqqfrfqi ( K. P. under IX. 1 ). There we
have to understand that the heroine said that ‘ he won’t come’
and that her friend interprets it as ‘would he not come T Vide
qqfa ‘ m g ^frT
*m\ In the verse as interpreted by
in the text, the heroine utters the verse with the apparent
meaning that he won’t come, but by a change of voice she
s uggests herself the idea that he would surely come.
(P. 15, 11. 12-15)
f^h&'cTHC- This verse is quoted in the ^ p. 103). It is
cited by Mammata (and by our author also ) as an example of
fez 1 TO I <T I srq ^
f^rr sfarwri stt^t ?nsqf (ft?)
JrrfosqT i 30 ^0 p. 440. ftr
qqt^4:.We may also construe f Efas r i ffimfjT as an adverb or
as an adjective qualifying Perceiving that her lover
was anxious to know the time of their secret meeting, the
quick-witted damsel closed the lotus with which she was play-
ing in such a manner as to convey her import by her laug-
hing eyes. In case we take it as an adverb, dissolve f^TT
tenftci) 3TTfT (mfr) q*TT m Shari Here by
the gesture of closing the lotus, it is suggested by a certain
woman that the twilight is the time of meeting. The petals
of lotuses close in the evening. So by the gesture ( %r ) of
closing the lotus, she suggests the time. Here the sq^q sense
viz, the time of twilight, is due to the of
^ taken separately, taken in combi-
nation.
(P. 15, 1. 17) JTrn- As meanings are
three-fold, the power of suggestion is held to be, in respect
of each of the above-mentioned varieties (in etc.),
three-fold,
(P 15,11. 18-21) 3^*4 Meanings are
three-fold, viz. m=sq, ^ and sq^j. mentioned just
above. An example of the power of suggestion belonging to
an expressed sense is where all the words are to be
II. 17
Sahityadarpana
85
understood literally and then give rise to the suggested sense.
An example of suggestion belonging to an indicated meaning
is etc.’, where the words indicate the reverse of what
is said and suggestion originates in this indicated meaning;
and 3rdly, an example of suggestion belonging to a suggested
meaning is ‘ssr etc.’, where the suggestion of its being a
fit place for meeting arises from the suggested sense of its being
a lonely place. 5^% etc.— But suggestiveness belonging to the
radical part of a word, to an affix etc. will be treated of at
length. The author deals with this topic in the 4th
verse 11 pp. 231 ff. ( Nir. 1922 ), 1
<wwt>fd zm'v w *\ *’• An
example is the verse etc. where the plurals snyf: and
55%:, the affix in etc. suggest other senses.
(P. 15,11. 22-25) ezp&Krf:
The meaning understood from a word suggests, so
also does a word applied in another sense suggest. When the
one suggests, the other is its co-adjutor. The author here
answers an objection that may be raised against his division of
cqsrfft into and arpff. When you say that szjsrj is 3n*ff» do
you mean that in that case is of no account *1 Similarly,
when you say that is do you mean that 3$ is of no
account ? Our author replies that this is by no means the
case. Word and sense are inseparably related together. When
we say that the is 3Raff, we do not mean that it has nothing
to do with What we mean is that it is there primarily
concerned with 3$, and in a subordinate manner with
sicf: — ‘Because a word, when it suggests, has an eye
to another meaning ( without which it would fail of suggesting )
and so too a meaning when it suggests has an eye to the word,
without which the meaning would vanish’; e. g. in the example
of 311*^ (sfpwpj® ) sq-SHT, the word suggests 6iva
only when it denotes another meaning, viz. the husband of
Uma. So here also, sense is required (Hf^rferzfT) as & helper.
TJcj^zf — When one suggests, the co-operation
of the other must needs be admitted. The name or srpff
is employed, as said above, because we look only to what plays
the prominent part in the sqsRj. The idea is
(P. 15, 26-27 ) A word also is
held ( like the meaning ) to be three-fold on account of its being
8
86
NOTES ON
II. 19
distinguished by the three distinguishing elements, viz.
primary power etc. A word is expressive, indicative or
suggestive. Compare the words of Mammata
i ^ K. P. ii.
(P. 16, 11. 2-6 ) fflcTOtetf ff% jrhj;. qiq^qqf
Construe : q^ rTIcq^lt ff% q^q qsfrqqf =q
M I't'H+i ij|* ‘Others say that there is a function called Purport
(<TI?t 4) which function consists in making one apprehend the
connection among the meanings of the words; the sense from
the Purport being the ‘Drift’ and the sentence as a whole being
what conveys that drift by the said function? arftroT
TOR ?TT*r ff%: — As the power of Denotation ceases after con-
veying the meanings of the several words, there is a function
called Purport which leads us to apprehend the connection
among the meanings of the words in the form of the sense of
the whole sentence. The sense arising from the
function called qjqrq is the Drift. qg[tq=R qiqqq; — The sentence
as a whole conveys the q^qq^ through the power called qjqp^.
This is the opinion of the srfafcqre qq l ifers. What is meant is
this: — There is a fourth function called qjq^, in addition to
the three treated of, viz., 3?fqqj } and ^qsrqj. This function
consists in conveying the connected meaning of several words
and is not like and which convey the
meaning of a particular word. As the meaning conveyed by
.^rRT is called c^q, that conveyed by sq^rqy is called sqrq, so the
meaning conveyed by this ffq (q^qq) is called q^qf^. It is
generally the word that conveys the srfqijq or meaning; the
qiqrqpl is conveyed not by a word, but by the whole sentence.
This view is held by that school of the Tjjfrftqfcq, which is called
The opposing school is designated qpqqifqqrq-
c TrR T t; 3 rfaf^Ti*qqe|ff^q: — What they say is this: — Words have a
general meaning. The logical connection of words is not
known from the words, but by the function called q[q[4 based
upon srmfb qfcim and The qjqqf^ that arises is
distinct from the meanings denoted by the words. In the
example q[Jnqq, qt means, 4 ’ generally, the affix
show generally, qj shows motion generally. The
simple word qf by itself does not express the qf meant in the
sentence, viz. the sqqq of the qifcq denoted by qq\ The
connection between the qqp^s is known from qt^qq]-
and and when the connection is known, a special sense
II. 20
SiHITYADARPANA
87
arises, which is called or qjqqrsf. The views of these
are expressed as follows by vrfgtfTTft^ ( from whom the
are called ) in his
q^qftqrc^u qqfer*nfq w
^qi srt^fr qr% ^T^rr q^rf^q^u’ verses
342-343, p. 943. Mammata explains their views as follows : — ■
i ,J i q^pqfar <n?ref*rf
^S^qrsft fa fed r** qqiftqf *kt^’ K - H IT - Hi.
pp. 25-26 ( Chan ). qT^HRftlftsr in bis supports
srfaft d ' Fq qqpr by quoting the authority of and
c< 3rf5rffeTT^T ^ wr ^ ^ L L 25 ) <3 ^
*frt sqrfftl qiWTfeT 1
ft ^ ^roWiwpr f^r^qrcrfa, ^ftrf^rr:
w$t qrni^^Tqqt , qqft^ ? ^nr i” p- 97. The words 3Rjfq q^rf^r €tc -
occur in ^qy’s on %. I. 1. 25 p. 96 ( 3*H^rW e( i). The
reason why they are called ar faftdHqqi 'ft^ 3 i s — ‘^fafedHT
q^T^tiTT 3Tqtfaqift|5TT 3T ffrT ^ ^ STfaftcTM^efift^*
^ftqmftr q T Hq i ft^T '« — These writers say — Words do not ex-
press their meanings generally, but connectedly as parts of a
sentence. In ordinary life, we first understand meanings from
sentences. When a child hears a man say to his servant
be sees the servant move a ^n^fqftqTcq^T^ from one
place to another and infers that the servant understood from
the sentence the bringing of a ^T^ift^Kpq* He then hears
‘ar^JTRFq’ where the word 3TT?rq is the same as before. He then
knows the meanings of the words jjt and 3T^ generally, but
as connected with some such act as bringing. Hence we see
that it is a sentence alone that sets a man in motion or
dissuades him. The is made in respect of a word not as
denoting a general meaning, but rather as connected with
other meanings. Hence words have a power to denote things,,
but as having a connection with some other things. Hence we
need not postulate the special existence of a called tHcq%
from which we are to understand the meaning of a sentence. No
cpf% is necessary to logically connect the meanings of words, as-
said by the 3?faftcTI ^ qq q I but the several meanings them-
selves connectedly denoted by the words constitute the mea-
ning of the sentence. Their views are clearly set forth by
Mammata in the 5th Ul. pp. 265-268 (Va). ‘qrfTOT*
i fo i Rit
srfcTCTt:’ ft%7sTWPn$3t : 3^^
88
NOTES ON
II. 20
TFTOFTTOTF4 STTSOT sgfqgt I tot: % JTPTm,
§3TTT 3TOPTigq, ^KtT ITT TOT,’ f^ftqmsreft cTFT # TOT^HTOTT-
3fH^(^3iTOrf 5Flf%ftff%TOft TOFjftq q^qroqftift TOR-
feTOH^T T<MWtaa: TO^ffTORFf? flf-qt ?% ft%ST TOT qrrqt
q g q-qrqkr tftrero. ' ^Rft TOfTOTOrg^JTRRqft srerfain-
FFFfa TTF^FTf^ TTlfd fqqftqjft ffcT TOT'^X^M'^nfror: TOFT:
q*nft *iRHi=c=aif^ft trqrST srfiTOt^ Bqf S fTO hRi
TOTTOTf TFTFJiTRlftf'T srfRcnfTOqTRqrftR.”. The reason why they
are called arironfRTOTOTf^R: is — sr^ronTO^ TOTTOTrfTWTH
5 rPrqTt<T ?feT ^ qrfcr ^ ^TOrfR'TOm^R: i; see v ng R r Rwful p. 172.
The 3rfipTt?f%TTF3!r ( on qqftqqs 7-8 ) clearly explains the
two views ‘ff TOFTfcT^Ti H^R -R iqHFrfTOTF^ q^|
TOqTqrf^fdfqqTTOrprftw q l qq 1 ^RTgfa^qgcTR cq^ qiilfeKqqiqtq -
I *RT ft ^*rw®r s# _tot:, smspr qisqr t tfMftr qwf
Sqq^RFTl'^ficqfqftth' ffqffqft ^TOTffr^r gdqtg 1 -
tfPRTOTftF^t I TOT TOTO4TOTITrfiF^rgjT#q TO^fftTOT j[5RR I TOTT
cqif:- f^TTOI^TOTTOT'TORFq: I R fS^TOR: 5Fjftrftp|f%-
^q: i snftrftirft r fqftfsptfqi 1 3^fr ft%s totr qrorf tofto^PT: i
titw fqftrer Fq qgiqi q g qgwfaf qftreqg, i tot =r TO<mfNrrRt
J i^td^qH+«*q5STRf
• r p. is.
PARICHCHHEDA X
(P.17,11. 3-4) 3T*r sqrrFTif.
^^ifelKT^S* — The occasion for treating the figures cf
sense having arrived. s rr ^ F ^l^ - • . — those that are based
upon similitude should be defined first, as being the principal
ones. Alahkaras are often classified as those based upon
^tcfirqrc etc. We shall speak of these classifications later
on. — be speaks of simile first, which is at
the root of even those ( flf g ). Compare the words of
as quoted in 3T^o p. 32 ^T 5 Z l"
S-RTT JTTr^fir fl. P; 26
5PRT 1’; cTC^ P* 195 ‘g^
5^ ^ TT, * g# ft 5 ^
I: 5T*PT *’•
(P. 17, 11. 5-7) ^54 ifr:-
construe 31 ^ 3 % (flfa) (sRg^t:) 31^4 *H*4 3TO —
Simile is the resemblance between two things expressed in a
single sentence and unaccompanied with the statement of
difference. ^q^ rf^g f^TT ifc : : — The author now proceeds
to explain the propriety of each of the words used in the
definition. The word serves to distinguish ^rri from
(metaphor). An example of metaphor is g<^ (the face
itself is the moon) ; while an example of simile is g% srq -
(the face is like the moon). In metaphor, when we reflect
upon the fact that the face cannot be identified with the
moon unless there be some points in which the one is like the
other, the similarity of the two objects is suggested; while
in simile (the face is like the moon) the similarity is
directly expressed ( by the word in the example ). ^ —
In (Contrast), points of difference also (between
two objects) are expressly mentioned. In the 3 WT
(the object of comparison) is said to be superior to the
(standard of comparison), which superiority may be due to
the excellence of the Upameya, or to the inferiority of the
Upamana. So in there is not only resemt lance between
* The figure 14 is put after this line in the text, because
there are 13 karikas in the 10th Pari, dealing with ^fs^fj^RS
which have been omitted but are given in Appendix.
90
NOTES ON
X. 14 vm.
two things, but it is also pointed out that one thing excels
another in a certain point (qq^-faf while in similes
resemblance alone is referred to and hence srqqrq^ serves to
exclude An example of sqfq^q; is ‘ 3 ^ 5 ^ g4l ry^qr ^
flgW- 3q%4tWCT ^T^rgrq^— In ^%qrrT, the ^TfR
is compared with the ^qiyq and the ^qifq is compared with the
Upamana i . e. what was Upameya becomes the Upamana and
what was Upamana becomes the Upameya. An example of
is ‘qjEy&q Jrfcr3fc[ft;q y’ (the intellect is like wealth
and wealth is like the intellect). But the above example
contains two sentences. Therefore, by the word qyqqq^,
^wJtqrn', which has two sentences, is excluded.
In 3^rf«-qq ( ‘self-comparison’) the same thing is compared to
itself, the purpose being to show that no second thing
resembling it is known to exist. An example is ‘^TERTqtriqt^
*FRH u i J Hlftq’. In Upama two things are compared and there-
fore the word gr%; serves to exclude the figure sy^qq, in which
there is ^yyrq, but not between two things that are distinct.
Some other definitions of Upama are given below : — 3WT
etc. III. 13;
I 3W qR fq%qy II W yqpfqo 17. 44;
: I ^jq^q^T II
II. 30; q%eftCTft t '
^ 11 L 34 i 3W qq gqt-’ II V. 3.
(P. 17, 11. 8-11) ^y <jrff...3qqy4 q^yfq. Construe *yy
(3WT) ^jyiT (+&%) qft ^FTl^r^: 3?iq*qqrf% (qqq;) sqqq sq^R
^ — The simile is fully expressed, when the common
property, the word implying comparison, the object of com-
parison and the standard of comparison are are all expressed.
The author now comes to the divisions of Upama. Simile is
divided into ijyyy and ^yyy. There is a fully expressed simile
when all the four elements of comparison are expressed. In the
example gqq qi^T^q ; the word g<q is the 3q?tq, 3^*5 is
the Upamana, ^q is the STyqrqqj^ sy*q and the common
property. When all these four are expressed, there is a fully
expressed simile; if any one or more of them be unexpressed,
there is elliptical sq*TT- ^prn^Tiff — The common
property i. e. the quality or action which causes the similarity
of two objects is such as loveliness etc ( in the example
3 * 3*0 ■
X. 15-16 3qrn. Sshityadarpana 91
(P. 17, 11. 12-21). 3*: ?4=^nf-
Is divided into two varieties and syyqf- That (ijrrfy)
again is Direct (^rrqt) in which the notion of comparison
is conveyed by particles, such as qqy, fq, qy, or by the
affix qg when it is equivalent to *q; it is Indirect when the
notion of comparison is conveyed by attributive words such
as etc. or by the affix qg when employed in the sense
of g?q ( equal ). The author tells us that the sqqy is
when the words qqy, fq, qy, etc. are employed to express the
comparison and that it is 3 ?yqy when words like g^q are etn-
ployed. A question arises : — what is the difference between
the words qqy etc. and g?q etc. The difference between the
two classes of words is as follows : — The words ^q, qqy^ qy, etc.
primarily express ^qyjq i. e. relation of two things based upon
their possessing a common property ‘q qy qqy qqqq | syq^
III. 4. 9, I’ ?TRC II. 31. The
words qqy etc. have a peculiar power whereby they denote,
whenever they are used, that two things are related together
as possessing a common property. In the example ‘qsyftq gyqg’
by the very employment of the word ^q, the two things qgq and
g<q are shown to be related together as ^qi^q and ^qqyq on
account of their possessing some property in common. The
words g^q etc. on the other hand, are used in the sense of
‘similar ($£?y). In the example ‘qiyq ipq gyqg’, the word g?q
expresses that gyq is an object similar to another. Here the
word g^q- does not convey the idea of sq^qq directly; it only
expresses that one thing has similarity in it. The word g^q
does not tell us, by its very employment, that two things are
related together by the possession of a common property.
The idea of the possession of a common property comes in
only when we consider that similarity cannot exist unless
there be some property in common. Compare the words
of Mallinatha in his ‘^qyqtqyqcqqyy^^yq^ q ^Tq- g^yy g
cKsrqft i ^Tf^^rori g fj^yy ^qyqxcTO-rt^
srqFt 1’ p. 198. q^qyqq:
qy has two senses ‘sqqyqf qy’-3TJrc;. III. 3. 249. ^qq^TFRIT
etc. — Although they are quite similar to words like g^q
when employed after the sqqyq. The particles ^q, qqy etc.
are used after the sqqyq as in Jpjrg- <pq etc. may be
used with the sqqyq or sqqq or both. When g^q is used
after the sqqpy, it and ^q would be quite similar (as in
92
NOTES ON
X. 16 3*mr.
TO 3*4 5%^)- difference is there between fq and
when so used? The author replies as follows: — gfqTTTqq
— They (qqy etc.) convey the notion of the relation
of similarity between the 3 TOR and gq%T by the very word.
3W — The sq-qj is said to be direct
because words like qqy, employed in it, directly ( g^qy ) convey
the notion of *nf^T- Compare ‘q^TO^^fa m SSn^RPTtffr l*
I. 35 ; ^famqtq^qqt:
srqiqfwqc^ =qpfcqq; l’ qqtq (p. 4 Chan), qq...
■ is so O* e * STO is when the affix qq; is
employed in the sense of qq ; as laid down in the sutra of qyyijyfq
‘qq q^q ? V. I. 116, which means ‘the affix qq; is applied to
a standard of comparison in the locative or genitive case and
takes the place of the case affix and of fq’ ; examples of this
rule are # W:’ and ‘qqq?tr^ m?
(%q^q). gfflqq^g . . .qyqf— The (power of) words like pq
is exhausted in the qq%y in such examples as ‘the face is
similar to the lotus’, in the ^qqyq in such examples as ‘ The lotus
is the equal of the face’, and ( the power is exhausted ) in both
in the example ‘the lotus and the face are alike’; these words
convey comparison only when we reflect upon the sense of these
words, and so the Upama is Indirect, when these words are
employed. The idea is: — the expressive power of such words
as g?q is exhausted in being attributive to the Upamana when
they qualify it etc. They have not the further power of
expressing the notion of qifqq between two things based upon
the possession of some common property. When we reflect
upon the fact that one thing cannot be said to have similarity
unless there be some common property, we understand that the
two things are related by R^qq^pq. Hence the sqqy is said to
be srrqf. qq...cj^qwiqT% — so (the Upama is Arthi) in the case
of the employment of qg ( in the sense of g^q as laid down
in Panini’s rule %q g*q fqjqr %fg:’ V. 1. 115., which means
‘the affix qg is applied to a noun ( which would otherwise
be in the Instrumental) in the sense of g^q, if the
similarity consists in an action (and not guy, quality), e. g.
^TTiFT^ft^ (*T[^Ftq Here the similarity is in
studying. Compare ^TRf ‘qffRTSft I f|*n%-
3^ra*J:<TT% 51:11’. But -we cannot say ‘4br<^
because fj^q is a guy; in this case we must say ‘lyquy g^q: £| 5 [:\
Our author in this passage borrows the words of Mammata
X. 16 to. Sihityadarpana 93
almost verbatim. See K. P. X. “ fT#T ’ 13%^ f^T* * f fairer'
i %r 3?4 31 ^’ atw%
^ ff«rrf%ftfcr 5rr«P^T-
sta^rr g-aaiaatfaftft siy^pnsftgra; 3rr«ff 1
‘fo rn fer %?f^ : ’ iataw gfc %at 1”
(P. 17, 1. 22-p. 18, 1. 2 ) ag- t; etc. | both ( i. e.
and 3Tisff) may be set forth by a nominal affix (afer),
by a compound and by a sentence. ^ etc— g^q- ^
tlie fragrance of the mouth is like that of the lotus,
tfta plump, aa aaar ?aa aaafa aar (aaafa) your face
gladdens the heart as the autumnal moon. In this verse
TO is an example of afsaffi Affixes like ^
etc. are afeas. This is because here ^ is used in the
sense of fa in accordance with the sutra ‘aa a^a 5 (srvwaaaa;
= fa), jvvff fa is an example of qai'H'l Here
the word fa is compounded with in accordance with the
Vartika ‘f^a (faar) f^rasrstr: ( 'jaaaairfatatca ) a’
on Panini II. 4. 71. The words in brackets are not found
in the ftsiTOtj# ( with a^tfM printed by the Nir. Press),
but are found in K. P. In the ( vol. I. p. 417 ) on the
sutra fafaana: we have the words -f=ta favraarata: 'jaaaairfa-
a’’ (but not printed by Kielhorn as a Vartika). The
reading faaRWT^T: appears to be wrong, as this compound is
optional and not (obligatory). The Vartika means ‘the
word ff is compounded with a noun which does not, however,
lose its case-termination’ (as all nouns generally do in a
compound)’. apfg- is an example of
1=1 ^ '-iT.** * *d ^ 1 ■ ^ 7 ^ soft, or delicate. In this verse,
HeigrM:, ‘‘ffepjJT^t^TTwri tlffl are respectively the
examples of rlfiooi STT^ff, HJTTHffi' 3TT*ff and wu srrssff. ijy[p
gg-Thus the fully expressed simile is six-fold, was first
divided into <jVr and ggT. Purna was divided into and
W'li and each of these two was divided into three varieties.
So there are six varieties of tjujf.
(P. 18, 11. 4-5 ) 5gT 'jtfag. Construe —
^ ir 3?3 <hki 1) gnr, trr (pi at)
^ )• It is Elliptical when one, two or three of the
* This example appears to violate the rule of Panini con-
tained in
94
NOTES ON
X. 17-18 »
four (viz. ymiTzpq-#, and 3WT?f ) beginning
■with the common property are omitted. This also like the
former is Direct or Indirect.
(P. 18, 11. 7-11). tjoifostf 3 ^^- crfesT—
( s§htwt ) ’jyrrqR i^rr. The t}%irr has five
varieties, viz. tow and *WRFTT TOT, TOTO, TOI^H and
TTfoRTT 3TT# cffeRIT TOff, when the common property is
omitted, is impossible. The reason is as follows: — the
-§Rft is possible only when the cffef affix is used in the
sense of *;q. Such an affix is q^ only, when it is used
according to the sutra %3T ^T*qq’. When q^ is used it always
requires the express mention of the ground of comparison,
as in %5f6prr=w to: or in §R TOR:, where to - and
5 fj^: are the ground of comparison. We eannot simply say
we must mention the common attribute if we are
to have any complete sense out of the words. But here is
said to be omitted and therefore cffeqqr (which occurs
only when qq^ is employed in the sense of fq) is impossible.
g*qq\ Here ^qqf and . are examples of
qiw 4faft and wn 3TT4f; and are
examples of 3 ^^ and 3qqf respectively. In
none of these five varieties is the common property mentioned.
(P.18, 11. 12-19) 3TPTRI zmK — This
t. e. q$§Hr) is five-fold, being possible in the two sorts of the
affix qqq^ respectively applied in the sense of position and
object, in the case of the affix qq^, and in the case of the
gerundial affix uig^r added in the sense of the agent or object.
( 1 ) The affix qqq^ is applied to a noun in the objective case,
which is expressive of Upamana, in the sense of ‘behaviour’
WtHTTOI^’ TT° HI. 1. 10. %tRTRn^ 3i#n: 3$
I s5[^ l’ ft® ^f®. An example is
g^flqfrT- Here the affix qq=q^ is applied to gq which is an
Upamana in the objective case (jqftq), in the sense of
3TT^R (s^- 3TT^% he behaves towards
his pupil as towards his own son). (2) A Yartika on the
above sutra says ‘3rPlq^yir%% which means that ‘the
affix qqq^is applied to an Upamana in the locative, in the sense
of 3q e. g. 5rT*q^qKt fsqf fa§: the bhiksu behaves in
his hut as if he were in a palace ( ^ 3Tpq?^r fag: )•
(3) ^ qr® hi. l. li. ‘sqjiRTOi: g^Rrra. sroit
X. 19 3TWT.
SjHITYADARPANA.
95
qqf qi I BFTO 5 q^qrqqsr ®tqt qi ^qq; I’ fao qfto. The affix
is applied to a noun in the nominative case and expresses
the sense of ‘behaving like’ e. g. ^ arprofcT )• Here
fT^ is a noun in the nominative case and is an sttttr. The
affix makes the denominative verb Atmanepadr. The
(3T^) affix forms gerunds from verbs when repetition of an
action is to be implied, according to the sutra ‘3Tf4t^ qjps; ^
tn° III. 4. 22, e. g. xmt having again and again re-
membered. (4 and 5) ^ III. 4. 45. \
^cff^TR \ I 3T^^TT^T l ^ qg
I T%o ^|o. The affix is applied to a root compounded
with a noun in the accusative or nominative, which is an
WTH;e. g. in SRcj^r the affix is applied to the root
^ and the gerund is compounded with noun which
is in the nominative case and is an ^xpRT^- qrj : —
Kalapamata is a grammar of the Sanskrit language, the author
of which, is said to have received it from
taught it to king Satavahana, who made his teacher king of
Bharukachcha ( Broach ) out of gratitude. The Grammar
is called q^r^r because it is small as compared with Panini’s
and also from the cf&m (tuft of hair) of the
peacock which is the vehicle of see for the story
ICcqqRStft I- 3 and qqrBfcgTqr I- 6 and 7. . qfq^frr W
fwm qqq H 'fiT ; T%' I T ^1# ^3^11 fSTW 0 I. 3.
48 ; 3Tin^r wiq, srejm. qfftrcrqqq#: i f%it qifcwraiq qfq qq-
gqkqq. ii q^tq i qqrt #q«j5i ^qqtq qqlft-
cPI. II stqiqsflq. ^qt qf *qq qi^ I qqfq'qf^q qTfSfalqfq-
q^qra; ii qgqi qqqq^qiq qr=r^rqq qfqsqfq - i qqrcqqismq qrw
qi^iq-q qUT II qqraft^Tq^; I. 7. 10-13. Vilvanatha says that
in the Katantra Grammar srjfijf and stand for the
qq% qqi and ojjp^ of qnSrfq. qq=q_...qq:— qnw ( B. I. ed. )
WRrniT HI. 2. 7, ‘aw^rer: sqqitsfqq^ qtt qqfq i
T^qfq HFiq^^l’ ffriWi then for qrfq see ‘q^fq: III.
2. 8. and for ap^ ‘op^ R^tqaj’ IV. 6. 5. sj^f: 5^q%...
7% 3Tqr:sftq^- (sT^st qq aq^rcr) is an example of
3qqrcqq=q.- eq 'fit qq §eftq% ( gqpfq srrq?fif ) is an example of
qtfqq^- «ft: qqr q*P>ftq?t’ ( Tqpft qq sqqtfq ) ‘fortune behaves
as a wife towards you’-is an example of qq^. fitqrfk:
aqjqqfqqfr fg: — looked upon by the beloved ladies as the
moon ( whose beams are nectar-like )— is an example of
because is equal to qiqfffqqrq ggj.
96
NOTES ON
X. 19 3TO
In the case of certain roots etc. the same verb, to
which is affixed, must be repeated after the gerund
according to the sutra qqrf^ lgq ' qlq :* V\° HI. 4. 46.
^ ^ ?>• gfa
Thou walkest on the earth like Indra himself. This is an
example of ( i. e. where the qg^ is affixed to a root
which is compounded with a noun in the nominative case,
( ^ ^ qfaqr ). Thus in one verse the five varieties of q%HT
are exemplified, sqq...^: — Here in the word
the common property, viz. the circumstance of being a place
of pleasant sports is omitted and in the word gqt qfif , the
circumstance of being full of affection is omitted, ixqq;q< 3 ;
similarly ( the common property is omitted ) in the remaining
( three expressions ).
(P. 18, 1. 20) ^...qrfer — la these five varieties, i. e.
those due to qqq^ etc., there is no necessity of discussing
whether these ar or sqqj similes, because in them the
words qqj, jpq etc. are absent.
(P. 18, 11. 20-21 ) =q — Some instance these
(five based upon qq=^ etc. ) as the case of the omission of ^q
etc. expressive of comparison. It is Mammata who instances
these^as varieties of qrf^Hl* W ‘frr farwfc 1
c hfl c h'5iiwi^fe J K. P. X. says that in the q^qq=q, or qrqRqqq,
and qjj^;, we have instances of ( omission of words
conveying the simile ) and not of q%nr.
^ This is improper srffrn
ft fencer = ^hrfft Mammata’s view is not right, because
etc. also, being added iu the sense of ^q etc. ( as laid down
in the sutras of Panini ) convey comparison. Therefore qq^
etc. cannot be examples of q r q sK^Hl -
(P« 18, 11. 22-p. 19, 1. 2 ) qg — Nor can you say
that the affixes qq^ etc. do not well convey comparison, because
being affixes they are not independently expressive and
because such words as ^q are not used in these cases. The
words qg ft raise an objection against Visva-
natha s position that qqq etc. convey comparison as ^q etc. do
and that therefore qq^ etc. should not be regarded as cases of
^N^sShi* The objection is based on two grounds j I qq^F is a
termination and not a word like ^q. Some say that a ter-
mination has no indepenent meaning. It has a meaning only
X. 19 3TOT. SAHITYADARPANA 97
when connected with a word. So, as qq^ by itself has no
meaning, it cannot well convey affa^q. II It is generally
acknowledged that words like fq, qq; etc. are 3TOMfdMK«h * qq^
etc. are not so recognised and therefore when qq^- etc. are used,
the comparison is not so well conveyed as when ^q etc. are
used. For these two reasons ^ etc. should be cited as eases
of ( *’• e- q^qigHT) and not of q%q]\ S. D. replies in
the words *^ e same might be urged
against q^q etc.’ ( which are admitted by qrqv- as expressive of
comparison in ‘fqqq^T qqt zfc sftqf^ which is an
example of q%Hj crfeFTT 3 tt4t ). What S. D. means is that q^q
is an affix just like qq^ and not an independent word like ^q.
Therefore, if you say that qq^ cannot well convey comparison,
being an affix, then q^q also being an affix cannot convey
comparison. But you admit it to be expressive of comparison.
So you are inconsistent. You must admit that qq^ is
3 WTsrfd m like e^q. So qq^F etc. should not be cases of
^T^igHTj but of The affix q^q is applied according to
the Sutra, qT° V. 3. 67. The
affixes qqq, and §qftq are added in the sense of ‘a little
less than’; e. g. fq^ q£cq^?:. q q ^^^—‘Nor can
it be argued that q^q etc. as being equivalent to *q etc. are
expressive of comparison, while qq^ etc. are only suggestive of
it. 5 Here the objector brings forward the idea that q^q
though an affix, is used in the sense of fq and is therefore, like
ST, HISTO ^Tq^TSTfcrq^q;; while qq^ etc. are only suggestive of
comparison. S. D. answers this objection by simply denying
what the objector assumes as indisputable. Grammarians say
that fqqxqs (like q etc.) are sjtqq and not qyqqj. ‘qiqqt q
q^ %q^f: I qpqqic^ft q qgsq% V
q[qqq^tq II. 196, on which guq^q says ^ fg; qjqq : %q<*q q
qTW 5T fq is included in the
qrfipT- Therefore S. D. says fqqqt fqsjqrqrqr^ — There is no
certainty as to whether ^q etc. are expressive . qr
qirq^%Rf. ‘Granting that q^q etc. are expressive , there can be
no difference between the affixes of the q^ class and those of
the qqf class, according to either of the two opinions touching
affixes, viz. ( 1 ) the inflected word in its integrity is expressive
and ( 2 ) the base and the affix have each its own significance.
S. D.’s idea is as follows : — He first threw doubt on the theory
that fq etc. are qpqq;. He concedes that qqq ( and therefore ^q
9
NOTES ON
X. 19 3 W.
98
•etc. also) are efpq q;. He says that , even conceding this, his
position is notin the least affected. As q^q is an affix (and
not an independent word), so is qq^; also. So what holds
good of must hold good of qq^[ also. If q^*q * s 3Tqq ( of
sfjqrq ) ? then so is qq^ also. There are two views as to the
meaning of affixes. Some say that an affix by itself has no
meaning. It is the inflected word alone that has a meaning.
Affixes etc. are all of them the contrivances of Grammarians,
who divide a word into two portions, qffq (base) and q?qq
(affix), for the easy comprehension of language. P. L. M.
%5r ^qftqrqrqqcTO
q^rfq 5Tf frTROTWTT^ qft*F5q
mm\: I cT^T
chl?q f q q?: 1 W ^ Wftqf ^=hcc|^felRT ^
» 5^ d N ’w 3 sftfaBr sgqrq-
^ qpfq STT I ^faHf fRT I PP# 1-2. Note the
words of the qrqqqqrq I* 73 ‘q^ ^ qqf q ^ *
■qT e Hk4<Ml , qc z P^ q 3W If* This is the view of those
<the%*n^JTs) who are t^vrqi ftqs* The second view is that the
base and the affix have each its own independent meaning.
The base expresses a meaning which is general ; the affix
denotes its own meaning and then by the combination of
these two meanings, a distinct and limited meaning arises
from the inflected word as a whole, which meaning is
not expressed by anyone singly out of the two, qfrfq an( i 5
e. g. in the word qjqq;, the root q^ simply denotes the action
of boiling and the affix erq; denotes an agent in general. These
two meanings being combined, we get from qjqq; the idea of
*cook’, which is not singly expressed by any one of the two
i. e . q^ and See H« !• 1 an< l dWfifcfi P* 330
(Anan. ed.). This maxim occurs in the qfpqpq on qr. HI.
1. 67 ( vol. II, p. 58 ed. by Kielhorn) and on %. III. 4, 13
refers to it in the words ^TC ^ 5^nqTqfq^ll^L
q^TT q$ %?qqq*q% if. ‘q^jqTq Ifl’: ^ 1 STT'pqT"
^[TqRI qTqqT*rfsqqp© if. cfflo, Compare the following from
the ^qrq^^PTT^i of “srer^q qqqreqqqti"
5T3ITO ^ ^
STjpjqtqt =q W \ l
qqT if^r^H u llcqdi qK ,J rt*W ^
qqreift
fqrcrtq srerqsr qqfqqrq^q 3 qrp^qrfqq% \ ^rrc ^ i ‘q^fcnraqr
q^ i ^^qrf^n^sft snqr^q w qrq ft
q^nt 1 qpfigqs jq: qtff qwt P- 101
\ — ■*' <>9
X. 19 &m. T niaati __ - _..
The above quotations shed much light upon the meanin 0 of
the maxim. We think it clearly established from the a ove
that hot means here also ‘an affix’; the quotation cited by
explains the reason of the maxim. On the ques ion
Ser „ etc. are ^ or ^ the *. G. has the following;
interesting note : —
3 \ w« » ***• 1
k&n aiappro^ ^u'wnisRiM^ 1 P-
Whichever of the above two views about affixes je may
hold TO etc. and ^ etc. are similar. If is arw*-*«n=^
r»'^"o m, f b e so; -d »£.
S ..y that like « «« dw*^ v
employed in the sense of **r, while few etc, are dir eo e
employed in the sense of ‘behaviour’ (as m OT-fiuilt b
What these people mean is as follows :— Pamm lays own a,
a* etc. are to be used in the sense of to ( TO TOW ); therefore
just as to i» so are TO etc. But JJ
are applied in the sense of a^( behaviour ) only. Panini
does not expressly say that they are affixed in the sens
ra . So in his opinion there is a difference between ^ etc. and
3CT etc. The latter, being affixed in the sense of simp e
behaviour, do not denote sfbOT and therefore are fit °“ es o£
a-—™ To this Visvanatha replies as follows:—^ *•••
JT^his view also is wrong; for ** etc. do not simply imply
Saviour, but similar behaviour. Visvanatha says that Panini s
very words suggest the idea that ^ etc. are applied in the
sense of similar behaviour ( ‘OTHTOTT^’ )■ He dirC J S th
^ etc, are to be applied to an to>TO in the sense of behavi-
our’ to form denominative verbs. So the presence 0 e
word Upamana clearly suggests that the behaviour meant is
similar behaviour. Therefore to* etc. are SITOOTTO and
hence, when they are employed, there cannot be OTHT-
When they are employed, the common property similar
behaviour’ is not directly expressed and hence they are cases
100
19 >:
tz-Tr?? ^j2" ,0,d <•’*• m
«n* and sttQt, ?rfemr srtft ( 5 in a n ) and
^TJ, *|« * 5 ^, and
£5’, <rara »ratf ranft SJf^^Srwn^S
' ”*» " «H*rorafWb > tft wn^SftTI,
f^Trr- HPTR^ftsft %rrf 5?%^ I Tnrmfa^Jlvi X^ru
^mrc%ftfa fr* I” pp. 169-170 ^
s^7nl h r nd the Upamana 13 omitted 7^ is WcidfiTa
answering to ih f C ° mp0 . und - Here objects
not expressed theT “ * 7 ® ^ Si “ ply sxl ^sted ( and
expressed) there is omission of the Upamana. • In the
7° r 3 ^ ^ ^ we ha ve in^PTT gtWRgHf and in
^ we have ^ ^ ^ .^_ In thia
verse if we read g^ ^ for g%^ ^ and ^ forced
we shall have jfcft (aroragw) also. Thus and^^
will each have two varieties, ^ and ^ and there
= - w “ r
a ordinary ideas. The word w and ^ when placed
after a noun lead us to understand that the noun is an
Upamana. Compare the words of Mammata ‘aifcnm^
etc. If we say 0 r mk J^Tl
and g* will be looked upon as UpanLST if wfartt 3
anyregard to ordinary modes of speech. Therefore, in the
3WTSHT we cannot employ such words as ^ or w ’ Henoe,
*^ rC . Ca “ n be no in and only two varieties
zzjzt the w ° rds ° f pradi >
^ , *%SP*f ^ fltsffiRT g^w?> P.S.
S. 20 S 5 HITY AD ABfANA 101
(Chan). The example also is not happy. It denies the
existence of any Upamana and does not rest content ■with
merely omitting the Upamana. So the figure will be
(P. 19, 11. 10-15) «TT^...R^n<b sfjqrq , . . fgrqi - — When the
word or affix expressive of comparison is omitted the is
two-fold, being possible m a compound or in the case of the
affix, gw , cr^^i Vf *RtCR^. Here, being omitted,
the example is one of mwil- As the
words, qqr, etc. are omitted, in this variety there
can be no diecussion about or sqqf nor can th'ere be
cTfef*IT; for all ^rf^s like q?^, q^T, being included as affixes
of comparison, are to be omitted. Is or can there be qjqqqr,
because the sentence conveys no connected
sense. So only rhrtt remains. The author adds one more vari-
ety due to the affix, which is added according to the Yartika
f^wr The affix fij^ may be applied option-
ally to all nouns m the sense of 'behaviour’ to form denomina-
tive verbs. The difference between f§^ and ^ is that the
latter leaves some trace of itself in the verb formed by
adding it ( as in 5 but the affix leaves no sign cf itself
(as m qq*#) JT^rfcT tjR —'He acts the as 9 ,
loudly and hoarsely screaming before the great.’ Here, in
the affix expressive of comparison is omitted.
=^... . Rqqnq. — it cannot be said that in this example the
is also omitted; because the is pointed out by
the word (screaming) itself, which is the subject
•of the verb It should be noted that Mammata cited
gHlRl under (where both the common
property and the word expressive of comparison are omitted ).
‘Our author cites under q n ra gar- Our author says
-above that is a case of vr%HT. As is applied m the
sense of sjq^ optionally, and as the affix is omitted
altogether, we should look upon as a case of
according to our author’s own reasoning. So he is inconsistent.
(P. 19, 11. 16-18). fi^rr WWt When both
^ and stRR are omitted, we need not discuss whether is
possible; because ^q etc. are used only with the Upamana; for
the same reason gfepq is excluded. If in the verse jj§?f
•etc. we read in place of we shall have the' two
■examples of qiqqqr and ‘g%?F
102
NOTES ON
X. 21 s-tot;
will be qrwtr- Here onl y tte an< * 2 TH s fi3P 5 T are ex-
pressed; the eqqiiT and common property are omitted. Similarly
m the next.
(P. 19, 11. 19-23) %'^WTcfT...^fnw- f^rfcr 5<=lT^fTOT:
Her lotus-like face shines like the moon aTT^tfrr)- Here
the and *be common property, viz. loveliness,
are both omitted. %f%rT . srrf: — some say that here also, it
is only the affix that* is omitted. These people mean that
this example is similar to the one given above under qT=q=h3HT
{e. i. q^rfcT); and so this is an example of mere and
not of as the author says, is an example of
The compound is formed according to the
*utra ‘aqfoq <TT° H- b 56. Here only the
vflOTH and s qfrq are mentioned and they are compounded.
(P. 19, 1. 24-p. 20, L 2 ) T^r- . The
is possible only in the qq^ affix. sftjfcT.. —
This verse is given by Mammata in the connection m which
our author gives it,
33% 3® W- > f»TFR =tcr^T ^JT: ‘4t7*T:
w- i Sf^rgsffafnr
•qq^l. shT<H14 ^as said to have had 1000 arms and so he could be
^I^T- Vide Jfc^rjTFI chap. 43 and srpqt^q^qq 29 for the story
of is a denominative verb formed from
by the affix qq^ and means ‘he conducts himself like
one who wields a thousand weapons.’ 3?^. — Here the
aqftq, viz. the word arr^n^j is omitted, for the expression
when expanded is equivalent to the sentence ‘he
conducts himself dike one who wields a thousand weapons.
An objection may be raised against this that here the is
directly expressed in the word and therefore this cannot
be an example of v^qg H P The answer is — Althogh the
person denoted by g: is the sqitq, he is the TTpameya, not m
his capacity as the agent, but in his capacity as the object.
If it were said that is the Upameya and that the person
is the Upameya in his capacity as agent { q^i )» then we reply
that in that case the affix 33\ cannot be applied to
to form a denominative verb. The qq^ affix, as said above, is
applied to a noun which is an Upamana and which is an
object TSow here if is the Upameya, ^ng^ftqfcT will
have' to be explained as tWUffi T 53 3TR^- But here
would' be in the nominative case and qq=q^ cannot
be” applied. • So-- must be interpreted as
imwihf %fTR >ftKfc '^hns we see that is the.
X. 22 3’TOT. Sshityadarpana
103
is the STOR and in the objective case. As
S* 1 < ° m f! d It'" 13 Com P are the words of
Pradjpa br ^ ^ ft
lift! rr ^ ^ n 0r ca n it £
sani that there is here the omission of the word expressive of
comparison for reasons already stated above ( when treating of
™^etc. text p 18. 1. 12). He has established that ^ etc
are ^ or ^ like ^ 0 r br ^ ^ .fPsorne’
p ople, m order to get over the objection that the ^ is
word anT T ^ B '" read « as one
wdand interpret it as follows ^ ^
one who is possessed of thousand weapons.' They
e n i ^ P r l y 8 ® X and “terpret as
? IF* behaV6S Hke 0ne who Possesses a thousand
weapons ). en they say that the person who is the subject
of description (^r) not being directly mentioned by any
word, there is omission of Upameya. To this our author
leplies by saying that the view is untenable. The employ-
ment of ^ with the nominal base (r^*) signifying an
agent is opposed to the rules of Panini. P is applied to a
noun in the objective case. It is ^ that is applied to a
noun which is an agent ( ^ ; ^). But the verb formed by
the affix ** takes the Atmanepada. So in the
a X 1 !P\ and the Word is an exa “ple of gqi^ar. Acc.
to the of refers to ^termfugrr,
?rmr: When thy fame
spreads, all the oceans conduct themselves like the ocean of
milk. Fame is, accordiug to the convention of poets, white.
Here, as in ec^igsfcrfcr above, the ‘ariRR^’ is omitted
;1S J e sha11 see when we explain the word as ‘they
conduct themselves like the ocean of milk.’ The common
property ‘whitenese’ also is omitted. So this is an example
of WIWOT-
(P. 20, 11. 8-1 2 ) sbt;. When three out of the four
elements of comparison are omitted, a simile is possible only in
a compound. The word 'is to be explained as
^ ^ <si e whose eyes are as tremulous as those
of a stag.’ Here is the ^ ^ is ^ and
■^s is the common property. All these are omitted and the
^ alone remains. The -jtjjr is and not ^
104
NOTES ON
X. 22 S<WT.
and hence the presence of ^ does not matter. The question
is-— why is the word sfcn dropped from the word ?
The answer is:— according to the Yaxtika 12
on tawami? mo n. 2. 24, a compound
SSTSSLg in itself a word in the locative case or an
TJpamana, enters into a Bahuvrlhi compound with another
word and then the latter part of the first member (which
contained in itself a noun in the locative case or anUpatnana)
of the Bahuvrlhi compound is dropped ; e. g.
TO *: where (a compound word which
contains in itself as its first member arft which 15 in * e locatlVC
case) is compounded with to form a Bahuvrlhi and then
the latter part ( i. e. * ) of the first member <> «.
the Bahuvrlhi is omitted and -we get «imi ar y
where &&& is being a P art “ 'J °
TOOT because the property of the whole may be attributed to
depart or vice versa as said by fcl* ( 2nd *o, p. 120, Benares
ed.) in his glo<s on ‘WW"I
pound word which has an Upamana as its first member
(here, and when it is compounded with the
compound is a Bahuvrlhi and the latter member of the first
compounded word i. e. out of droppe
There are, however, some who say that the word ijjj stands
by Indication for according to this view JjnsttRT
would not be an example of ^ Compare the words
of Pradlpa ‘m ^14^'
TO g S3 ^33 WT ^
I’i W *t i < l l ’ P* 18 ^ Ctian - )
(P. 20, 11. 13-14). ^rwn: tmfai(uM4iRlOTT. Thus
there are 27 sub-divisions of Upama, 6 of the Purna and 21
of the Lupta, viz. 10 of 2 of 2 of g m.sffl,
2 of 2 of nfe5P, 1 of 3WP, 1 of WiAmsHI
and one of ftsfar. O ur author in these sub-division; iollows
♦The Mah&bbashya comments upon it as follows
cfo^t s.'tem: i r ‘ '
p. 423 ( Enelhorn )- - - " •
X. 23 ,Z SShityadarpaka
H05
Mammata with some difference. He borrows some examples
from Mammata and closely copies many others. Mammata
gives in all 25 varieties of Upama, 6 of Purna, which are
the same as our author’s and 19 of Lupta. The latter are as
follows:— 5 of and arisff snWTT and and aipqf
dfedMl); 2 of (fpmr and ?WT5Pn ), 6 of
(ymwrri 3 tt^K'W54ji, 3^(1, and ),
2 of (fl^TI and g^re^TT )> 2 of (twrtHII
and qRqJTr), 1 of ^T^^FJKT (m&n), and 1 of (?TW1T )•
The curious reader may also consult the and ^Tffr=rT-
The grammatical basis of the divisions of Upama appears to
have first originated with Udbhata. Yide his remarks
ii orgs. i st fffcir w
II” 3R5 ( I- p. 16 Nirn. ed. 1915 ).
On the divisions of Upama as given by Mammata and our
author, the author of Chitramlmamsa makes some very approp-
riats remarks. Appaya Dikshita says that the divisions being
based purely upon grammatical principles (thus merely proving
that the authors are familiar with Grammar ) should find no
place in a treatise on Rhetoric; moreover, the divisions of Lupta
are not exhaustive. Yide his remarks c, q^ir4
fT^TT# sgcWcTTCtfiT » * 3TT sJHWFrf ffWT: etc.” {%. iff.
p. 27.
(P. 20, 11. 15-26) The author now expounds
a peculiarity of those varieties of simile in which the common
property is not omitted, Construe BNTWt
3^: *f^^3357T:, Wfa fw, 3 ^)
'fe[T ( The common property is sometimes the
same in both the gnjq-R and sometimes it is distinct.
When the common property is distinct ( being of a different
sort in the Upamana and the Upameya), there is the
relation of ( prototype and copy, or original and
image) or there is merely a verbal difference. What our
author means is as follows : — the may appear under
three aspects; I it may be mentioned only once and is
lOff NOTES ON X. 23-24 3*mr.
connected with both Upamana and s rpfa as in the example
where is mentioned only once and is
directly connected with both the face and nectar; II The
common property may be mentioned twice in two different
words, one connected with the Upamana and the other with the
Upameya; here there are two ways again ; (a) the common pro-
perty, thus twice mentioned in two different words, may really be
non-different in essence i. e. the same property may be mentioned
in two words, as for example, in the verse ‘zn^T
5^ | ’ the two words ^rf^f ( turned ) and
( turned ) mean the same property, but one of the words is
connected with ( neck ) and the other with ( stalk of lotus
etc. ). This aspect is referred to by our author as
fW, which is elsewhere called II (b) The
common property may be expressed by two different words
and the property in the Upameya is distinct from that in
the Upamana; but the two are looked upon as identical on
account of their great resemblance, as for example, in
etc. the heads are compared to honey — combs, the
common property being twice mentioned in and
(teeming with bees); here and are not
essentially the same, but they are so alike that they may be
looked upon as identical. This is called We see
in ordinary life that, although the reflection in the mirror is
different from the face reflected, people identify their
face with the reflection and make use of such expressions
in connection with the reflection ‘This is my face.’
has the following note here ‘ 3 ^ \
1 3TKm ft
^ i’ P- 28 go go f%o. f%*«rsrf?rf%-
— Thf; verse is Raghuvamda IV. 63. ‘He
covered the earth with their (Persians’) bearded heads severed
by the lance, as with honey-combs teeming with bee 3 .’ Here
corresponding to ‘bearded 1 * * * * * 7 , there is the word ‘teeming with
bees’, as in the figure is a figure where the
Upamana, Upameya and the common property are represented
as if reflected i. e. where no are used ; but the meaning
of one sentence is a reflection as it were of another sentence.
We shall treat of this figure later on.
Where the words are different, but the common property is in
X, 23-24 Sahitydarpana
107
reality the same. This is Rwf JTTf?ra;’.
^ expanding, srrfi^— The secret meaning lying
in her heart. Here the same common property is expressed
in two different words in and fforeta) as in
In sr fc T q^M* TT tb e same common property is twice mentioned
in different words in two sentences ( and not in one sentence
as in simile ). The author appears to borrow this treatment
of the three aspects of the common property from the Alan-
karasarvasva of Ruyyaka
icw^t f?f^r: i f^r: i ^
I 5PR*r) JrirR^jCTRg; I
3T I PP- 26-27. The f^pfhrfBT explains
as ‘trsj^hr fs^lTCH ^JrfcR^R:’
( i. e. mentioning the same common property in two different
words on account of its being connected with two different
substrates ) and as ‘^rt
r^T^f p* 18 ( i. e.
mention of two properties, which, though really different, are
looked upon as identical on account of resemblance between
them). The Ekavali gives practically the seme definitions
( p.205 ). For further information on these aspects af the
common property, vide PP* 18-21 and TOTWW PP*
174-177.
< (P* 20, 1. 27-p. 21, 1. 4). m—m
BT 3 ^. en^PF^ (sr) ‘SCRT There is
partial simile when the resemblance is expressed (in one part)
and implied (in another). — This occurs in
TJdbhata’s Alankarasarasangraha (I. p. 18 ), except the third
pada , which is ^ *nf% m in Udbhata. Or our author
appears to have changed the third pcida for his own purpose.
Construe 3?q^: q$: =q^T%: vfc q^
f^'+TTPcf ST — The charms of the lake at every step shone with blue
lotuses as with eyes, with water-lilies as with faces and with
Brahmany ducks as with breasts. Here, resemblance
between blue lotuses and eyes etc. is directly expressed, while
that between the charms and women is implied; i. e. the
word 1 women ’ is not mentioned at all; from the fact
that and are mentioned we infer that *FC:f£R:
must have been compared to women. The word
is significant (i^^f 3§*TI<0*
Jagannatha also speaks of OTRT*
fesiwfefT, ^g^q^qfen,
108
NOTES ON
X. 24 3W.
p. 181. His example of is ‘rpfffjrf^frqf:
I w; II’
p. 183. Here, the sea, the Upmana of the king, is omitted,
while and associated with the sea are Upamanas of
soldiers and poets associated with the king.
^f*im frCFt: (P. 21, 11. 5-9). 'fiPrfTT . . . 3WRIT — construe
SWRcTT m (me) ^rm. If an
object of comparison in one case is turned into an Upamana
at the next step and so on in succession, there is the chain
of similes. If the sq^q - in a simile becomes the in
anotheir simile and is compared with a new which again
is turned into an Upamana and again compared to another
Upameya and so on, there is means ‘girdle worn
by women’ ). =q?3jq^ ftcrq:- The swan, on account of its
pure colour, resembles the moon; the woman, on account of her
charming gait, resembles the swan; the water on account of
its delightful touch resembles the woman; and the sky in its
clearness resembles the water. Here is at first the
then it is turned into an Upamana and qjpqr becomes the
and so on.
( P • 21, 11. 10-22 ).
(gqifcreO *n| sqiTH iqq% (qqi) When we
have several Upamanas in connection with one Upameya,
we have a garland of similes. a lake.
jjq virtue or justice. Here zft is compared to many Upamanas,
viz. •ftqftfqjft and qfqqp Her© the common property
same. Sometimes the common property may be
different with each Upamana, as in ‘ 3 qft%q q - q q ffsq :
I fq?ff^TT II 5 * some-
times both the Upamana and Upameya are connected with
the subject-matter. Generally the Upameya is the matter in
hand and the Upamana has nothiug to do with the subject of
discussion. ^^q:...qrcqFT^. at the advent of Autumn.
Here as the matter in hand is the description of Autumn, both
the moon and swan, the sky and water ets. are ^
...^TI^vrqT s[q. is Indra. q^f^rqr: born of the
celestial tree ( which yielded every desired object ). Here we
have a case of the simile of Implication, since by the word
fq*jqq:, which is the Upameya, are suggested the treasures
X. 26 Sahityadarpana 109
which are the Upamanas and which are qualified as ‘born of
the celestial tree’. In this very example, since the sense of
house is repeated by the word -qq^, this is These
and others have not been defined here, for a thousand such
varieties might be made out; (and so it would be impossible
to define and exemplify them all). Compare the words of
Mammata I •
I’ K. P. X.
2 3TJT*W ( Self-comparison )
(P. 21, 1. 23-p. 22, 1. 2 )
3 R*qq : — When the same object occupies the
position of both Upmana and Upameya i. e. when a thing
is compared to itself, there is 3?q;qq. It follows as a matter
of course that the comparison must be expressed in a single
sentence. — When Autumn began to
manifest itself, the lotus blushed like the lotus etc. — not
slumbering. Here the lotus and others are intentionally
compared to themselves in order to convey the idea that
they have not their like. In 3R?qq one thing is compared to
itself, the purpose being to convey the idea that there is nothing
like it in the world; while in Upama one thing is compared to *
another and there is no intention to intimate the idea that
there is nothing similar. Compare siq^q’s words
P- 30. Vamana de-
fines 3?^;qq similarly ‘i^^^qTTR^S^q:’ IV.
3. 14 and gives the following as an instance ‘jfr *KRi«fili WK»
I II’- ( nl - 45 ) and &&
define in the same words ‘qq ^q I
II’- Udbhata’s example is ‘q*q qpft sqqtftq
*<T =q 11’ VI. 8.
The name sR^qq is significant ( q fqg^ sq^q^q 3T^q:
w Heifer:-
5 qofrqftq...fqqq: — The province of this figure is quite distinct
from that of Latanuprasa, as in the example %sftq|$rq qprfc Pff
where the figure is srq^q, although for ^jsftq we use a
synonym qpJta; while in the same word must
be employed. ^ttTtJPTTB is defined by the Alankarasarvasva as
P- 24. On this the
ff% is ‘tTRH^W'Wj cfo * 3 !’• When
the same words are repeated in the same sense, but with a
different construction, there is which is so called
10
no
NOTES ON
X. 26 9RS3PT.
because it is dear to the people or poets of Lata, the country
tibout Surat. This are r gSTO is treated of at length In Udbhata
•and Mammata. zgz defines it as tp^y-
I 5P*3RT 3T ^#11’ I. 13. Examples of
n <rftrfT
TOfllS. I
II ZgZ I. 18 and 20.
l 5 z^ZR 0 6. Here the words ej^ q%ft
|t*t etc. are repeated in the same sense, but in a different
connection. What then is the difference between
•and 3R^zf? In the former, the poet uses words having
the same appearance and sense, with the difference that
each is construed in a different way. In the poet
uses the same object twice and compares it to itself with
the idea of excluding the possibility of the existence of
.another thing similar to it. It is not absolutely necessary
ior that the same word should be used ; a synonymous
word may do as well, as in but it is better
to employ the same word, as it is more suitable for the
purpose in hand, viz. conveying the idea that the same
-object is compared to itself. In it is absolutely
necessary that the same word be employed twice in the
same sense but with a different construction ; and moreover
-there is no idea of excluding the possibility of another thing
similar to it; i . e. there is while in srjyjqq,
it is not absolutely necessary that the same word should be
used i. e. there is the same word, however, is
generally employed with the purpose of quickly calling attention
to the fact that the poet aims at the exclusion of another object
similar to the one mentioned, f % g . . — “But it is better
to employ the same word, as this is more suitable for leading
us to understand that the zqTTR aud are the same. The
distinguishes the two as follows cTR'TqZR-
l’ p. 113. On this the ^
says ‘zwimwa
— This verse is found in 3 ?£. p. 24. In
5Rrcjq„ sameness of words is accidental because it is., more
X. 26 Sshityadarpana 111
suitable; while in the it is directly essential (to-
constitute the figure itself). On sTrg'-iftPf;*!, f^rrf?Fft says ‘?r;p:
HT^rtg 1 ^^34 uRpTr^rra; >’ and on '
it says %^34 3TP1 P- 2 *-
3 scnfcrt’TOT (Reciprocal Comparison)
f^srrq: (P* 22) 11. 3-8) — S^t: HcT^
( 33441331 33T- That is regarded as
when two things alternately occupy the position of Upamana
and TJpameya. This must of course take place in two sen-
tences. ?tfcr:--»qRT W — This is cited by Mammata as an
example of Here the wealth and intellect etc. of
the king are alternately compared to one another, the object
being to convey that there is no third thing resembling the*
two, and etc. Connect the word ^ith all the
clauses. Our author’s definiton is word for word the same as
Ruyyaka’s §^t: qqiifa P- 31.
The figure is called sqfr qt M Trr, because in it with the-
of the first sentence is compared the of that
sentence, i. e. SWr’ as Mammata says. The purpose
with which this mode of speech is resorted to is to convey the
idea that there is no third thing resembling the two mentioned..
Compare the words of srq^q- ^
3PT q^ tWre tTITT ^ S^WTHl^f^SRl ^
jpft3% m \ ?T4T-‘gf^TT Prefer gf^nfcr cwr
I 3TPT33f4r ^ 33% i’ ^ ^
f^3W 1 ” P- 32. 33+l4t33|-( 333 ) 334^3 -3MH 1*114^4
333RP1-
The word g[4t.' in the definition serves to exclude ^twhmr
where also one thing becomes sqlj-q and ^tpTR in two successive-
sentences as in =q^fq% etc.; but in ^5TiW two
things are not compared to one another. The distinction
between 3^.qq and sq+i zft q qT is* that in the former the same
thing is compared to itself with the object of excluding the
possibility of another thing similar to it; while in ^q^qlWT
two things are compared together alternately with the purpose
of excluding a third thing similar to the two mentioned. In
sqrrjj there is only one sentence setting it forth and there is-
no suggestion of i n two sentences
are required to constitute it and there is such a suggestion*
112
NOTES ON
Other^ exam pies °f are grjfb? rrfartfTTrrSR. I
ainifcriift- c=)<it*JPl=j 'TffSR.II vrRC III. 38; jjrf^uRr 3 r 55 )%
w *3 *T ^3C: 1 fjRP E T TOKrciKHKlft r fWTTf* II
3RT. 3 . p. 32.
4 ^n:on^ ( Reminiscence )
t Ufr 13^313 -*Yl : (P- 22, 11. 9-17). ^^r:
W<«in, _ A recollection of an object arising from the perception
of something like it is termed The Naiyayikas say
that knowledge (ffe or ^r) is of two kinds, and
3 T 3 *R’ > is that knowledge which is produced by im-
pressions alone ; while (apprehension) is all knowledge
other than We apprehend a thing such as a jar.
This apprehension leaves traces on the mind which are
called rpfjpK (^rr^ctj); these impressions when awakened
give rise to remembrance. So mental processes may be
represented as cqjjnq- — ifchK — ?^tcT, each preceding one being
the cause of the following. Compare the words of T. S.
I R ftftNT I twwiwq
^ 1 aft* I’ and also l
^1T I STJIfRFSFqT agcURRlfst: l f -
When, after perceiving a thing similar to one which
was formerly apprehended, one remembers the latter,
there is SRoiRfR-
—Charming with the sporting wagtail bird. Here 'the
perception of the lotus on which the bird was playing
stirs up the latent impressions ( gvqgj; ) which cause the
remembrance of the face with tremulous eyes. There is
similarity between face and lotus. To constitute the figure
W u i, it is necessary that the remebrance must be due to the
perception of a similar object. If remembrance be due to-
anything else such as anxiety, contemplation etc. then there
is no W^iiw^k. In the verse ‘ jrfjj etc. the remembrance
being produced without the apprehension of similarity there
is no SMI|«s;k. The verse in question is YHvanatha’s own
and was cited by him in the 3rd as an example of the
sqfirmfcOTT called The verse is: jjfo
fqsqfsr: ^ ^ srofir erep R q; n ‘Oh how
I recollect the ever-smiling face of the lotus-eyed one, bashfully
held down on seeing her female friend smiling, when I,
X. 27 w*. SAhityadarpana H3
artfully directing my eyes somewhat in some direction, in
some measure caught her eye (which would not consent to
meet my direct glance), that eye of hers the pupil of which
was dilated in a sidelong fashion (as she stole what she fancied
an unobserved look at me !). The great
minister Raghavananda would have the figure ^PRq even where
the recollection arises from dissimilarity (or contrast).
h&s been referred to already in the 1st Pari. He
appears to have been some relative of Visvanatha. We said
above that to constitute the figure ^Rq the remembrance must
be due to the apprehension of a similar object. Raghavananda
says that even when the remembrance is due to the apprehen-
sion of contrast, there is ST^qn^ifR. His instance is
etc. — tender like the £irlsha flower, lakhs
of felicities, is an adverb —
Here by the perception of Slta’s sufferings which are contrast-
ed with (fqf^^l) her pleasures at home, Rama remembers
the latter, H
The definition of *q^q in the text is the same as that of
3 T ®0 g. ( 9ffiTg^T5 ^-rH^fr r: srcyiR.’ P- 32. Ruyyak a rema rks
‘gif^ fsRi g p. 23. 3TOR- defines as gTfRSTffitS-
wyr p- 216. Jagannatha furthe r re -
marks ‘m RSTRRt
jr: I rRTT*TI% sqRRRTT VTR-: I ?TRR«I% 3 =)*g*h^3.’ < P*
Jagannatha criticises the use of the word i n
•definition of Ruyyaka (and our author also). He says that
it is too narrow, as it would exclude a remembrance which is
produced by a s^err which is stirred up by the remembrance
<( and not sjgqq ) of another similar thing. We remember
.a thing not only when we 'perceive another similar thing,
but also when we remember another similar thing. Hence we
should substitute for wor( * a s ^
includes both 3?gqq and
-mwH ^ ^ 1
mms&a srarftq \ «nr?-
.qfojqt ^ w frewT 1 ^W r i
WqfewRl *n^Iifqr I qf^ q ‘^^13**^
NOTES ON
X. 27 sito.
114
221-22.^ A good example of rrit is ‘srfci^rllTTg^RI# f^pR-
g'^+i, • frtft n
s^RXI^RcT V. 4. Mere remembrance, not produced by the
apprehension of similarity, is not W^TSo, as in ‘g rrqfcT qfr^TFT
?iwg*TPi; i 5 Pfr3jj5trtrT#qRra *wrrc fFtT^+tq
VI. 3.
5 ( Metaphor)
^ftTRTTTT fkRTft — Metaphor consists in the re-
presentation of the subject of description, which (subject) is
not concealed, as identified with another ( a well-known
standard ). fippif is an object upon which something is
superimposed, as the face upon which =q;^q is superimposed ;
is the object superimposed upon another, as
011 5fFf' So fqqq and are here equivalent re-
spectively to and ^FT- It
would have been better if the author had said
instead of An example of ^qq; is jpq The
name Rupaka is quite appropriate, as in it the fqtjjft imposes
its form ( ) on the fqqq ; note the words of 3 t#. g. ‘fqTRtqr
p. 35, or of the qqjq(% ^
^qqfcr q^tftr crrr^mfvt>TT?T ^qq^’ p.
212. ffttr — The word ^fqq in the definition
serves to distinguish Rupaka from the figure qftyiR.
We shall discuss this point, when we come to the de-
finition of Parinama. The word ‘fq^’ serves to exclude
3T t r§fcT. In 3rq|fq, an object is denied to be what it really is
•and something else is established in its stead; e. g. ^
In there is no such denial. On account of the
extreme similarity of two things we identify one with the
other and say
cTc<H*wRa f^TT (P. 22, 1. 21). The author divides
Rupaka first into three varieties, ( Consequential ), rufF
( Entire ), fqrf ( Deficient ).
^ fftr (P. 22, 1. 24-p. 23, 1. 16 ). q=r
That is Paramparita when the superimposition,
of something upon another is the cause of another superim-
position and ( 1 ) rests or ( 2 ) does not rest upon Paronomasia;
•each of these again is twofold, as each occurs singly or
.serially. There are thus four varieties of qyrqftq, viz f wwu o
X. 29-30 Sahittadarpana
•X15
. TTRSTf^ETto, 5Tf%2 <ft°, nr®T srffcg qt°- An example of
%^r^qfeT resting upon Paronomasia is t 3Tif^ ? etc.
37BT ^RW^TpJ — 1JWFJ3& may mean ( 1 ) the full orb of * the
moon, or (2) the entire assemblage of kings. ^R-
Here (in the sense of ‘the orb of the moon 7 )
is superimposed upon ( in the sense of ‘assemblage of
kings 7 ). This superimposition is the cause of the superim
postion ( arj^pT ) of Rahu upon the arm of the king. An
example of resting on is ‘q^fe^ etc. Read
for ftarpO^:. qsffcr: is equivalent to qtirai^q: (^ + ^)»
or qfj-pjj: (q^TT + 3^r). qr^TT means ‘Goddess of wealth. 7
^p ilcf may be explained as ( constant motion or as
‘gffiFT Wt cr:* ( the resort of the good ). means ‘ mountain 7 or
* king. 7 ( m.f ) means ‘Thunderbolt. 7 Here we identify
(attainment of fortune) with q^q (the blooming of
lotuses), the point of similarity between the two being the
fact of their being expressed by the same word. This superim-
position of qi^q - on q^j^sf is the cause of identifying the
king with the lord of the day. Similarly, the superimposition
of (constant motion, a characteristic of the wind)
on ( resort of the good ) is the cause of identifying
the king with the wind and the identifiation of ^ 3 ; ( king )
with (mountains, which were cleft by Indra 7 s thunder-
bolt) is the cause of the ascription of the nature of the
thunderbolt to the king. Here there are three superimpositions
(and not one as in ‘ 3 ?^’ etc.) and therefore this is
An example of ifcj<aq< sqfcr not resting upon is ‘qqjg ^etc.
— hardened by the strokes of the string of his
bow (made of horn), — pillars of the dome
in the form of the three words. Here the super-
imposition of qugq upon %^q is the cause of the superim-
position of upon the arms. As there is a single super-
imposition causing another single superimposition, this is
An example of qRl ' qfo , not based upon is ‘qqb
etc. jr3N<j*t*q = qqfa: ( qqq: ) ^ *RT —
white umbrella, sffej (m) means £ sandalwood 7 as
said in the W- y and means
4 the ornamental mark on the forehead )’ as said by
if^IT means ‘direction
or quarter. 7 3TsRT ^g^RT. ^ ^
resembling a lump of camphor. In this verse
116
NOTES ON
X. 29-30
the superimposition of the nature of the king on Madana is the
cause of the ascription of the nature of ‘white umbrella,
( which is a symbol of royalty ) to the moon. The superim-
position of the nature of a woman upon fft^is the cause of the
ascription of the nature of the ( always associated with
a woman ) to the moon ; and so on. In this and the preceding
examples, none of the important words is paronomastic. Thus
the four varieties of q^qfef are exemplified. — It is
the opinion of some that in these (four examples of )
the superimposition of Rahu etc. upon the arm of the king etc.
is the cause of the ascription of the nature of the etc.
to etc. This view is exactly the opposite of Yisva-
natha's. f^qfqq’s view appears to be better, as it is in
accordance with the views of Mammata and other famous
rhetoricians. Moreover, between ( disc of the moon )
and (assemblage of kings), there is something in
common i. e. the fact of being expressed in the same words,
but between Rahu and the king's arm, there is nothing in
common that is well-known.
The name is given to this variety because here
there is a series of Rupakas (q^q^j ^T^TT one of
which is the cause of the other. J ayaratha explains the term
as ‘q ^ q w ^ P- 36 and
as ‘tRTTO *TToT 3T#rfcT’ p. 215. q**qfcr is formed like
errcfito acc. to qj. v. 2. 36 ciT^[lk«r
(P. 23, 1. 17-p. 24,1.2). That is
(entire), where the principal object is metaphorically
represented together with those that are parts of it; and it is
of two kinds, ( 1 ) that which dwells in all the objects, ( 2) or
resides in only a portion. 3TTd c ^rr j lI ? ^- -When all the
things to be superimposed are expressed, it is
means An example of
fqqq) is etc. This verse occurs in Raghuo X. 48.
fa 3TTO5 means ‘drought’,
*TCcT: W fa:- The
cloud-Krshna disappeared, having thus rained down the
nectar of words upon the crops in the form of the deities,
that withered in the drought in the form of Rav&na. Here
is the principal object of description; ^j-qur,
are the subordinate elements associated with him; and
its subordinate elements, such as arqjjf, and are
X. 30— SI Sshityadarpana 117
directly expressed. So this is ^ and as all the angas are
expressly mentioned and are not to be understood, it is
Mammata explains the term as
^ and Jayaratha as ‘OT <riHl<N* T Rl ?*E K
^g* arftraTOT cfrT^T^ P- 36 . When the principal
one (arf^ ), is superimposed upon fjsq (the 3T%^), the
3 %f etc. ( the 3T^s ) are superimposed upon ^ etc. ( which
are also 3Tfs ). zpr frg— It is said to be
( residing in a part ), when someone of the superimposed
things ( ) Is understood ( and not expressed in
words ). An example of is etc.
frg. foam— expanding, blooming. a fa gh ? etc. ^torTT
WKl : fof ttA : — By what cluster of bees in the
form of the eyes of the people. Here, the superimposition
of on ‘beauty’ is directly expressed; while the superimposi-
tion of ‘lotus’ on ‘the face’ is indirect ( i. e. is only suggested)
As ‘honey’ is superimposed on ‘beauty’ and ‘bee’ on ‘eyes’,
so we infer that it is meant that ‘lotus’ should be identified
with ‘face.’ As here one of the constituent Rupakas is not
directly expressed, this is The term is explained
By as 3TKt c r^qr u (m[TT^^; i u i
^ p- 36 ; or By Uddyota as
(3#^) *T — ^ or can y° u sa y that this is
simile ( exemplified in* etc. text p. 21 ),
because the attribute of bloomingness primarily belongs to
the ‘lotus’ alone, which is the thing superimposed ( upon the
face ) and belongs to the face only metaphorically. What is
meant is as follows : — It is sometimes hard to say whether in
a particular expression there is simile or metaphor. In
if we dissolve the compound as g^ there is
Upama, but the word would be prominent in that case and
^7^: would be subordinate. If we dissolve the compound as
g ^ife =373;: it would be a Rupaka and the word =373^ would be
prominent and g^ would be subordinte. From the other
words used in the sentence, we can often judge whether the
one or the other is meant. If I say * g^r re 51 $^, ’ the
compound is Rupaka ( as the word ‘spps’ ( fully
blooming ) primarily agrees with ‘lotus’ alone. The compound,
therefore, must be so dissolvad here as to give prominence
to the word ‘lotus’, which is possible only if we dissolve it as
118
NOTES ON
X. 31
If I say ‘gJcjOT^ f*#,’ there is Upama, because
‘laughing’ can primarily be affirmed of the face alone and only
secondarily of the lotus. The compound must therefore be so
dissolved as to give prominence to the word which is pos-
sible only in Upama ( 533 ). So here, as ( fully
expanded ) can primarily be affirmed of ‘lotus’ only, we must
so interpret the words as to give prominence to lotus, honey
and bees. This is possible only if we understand that there is
Rupaka.
ffRlf sq-^r § (P. 24, 11. 3-12 ). If the principal object
alone is metaphorically represented, there is R^^q^, which is
two-fold, being serial or single. An example of ) is
‘fjRFTW? etc. sr
The very skill of the Creator
in creating. Here the woman (srff^, the principal subject ) is
alone compared; the subordinate elements are not referred to
at all ; hence this is f^ff. An example of is
etc. — This verse is cited by the 3. ( p. 37 ) as an example of
Arjunavarmadeva, in his comment upon the
Amarusataka, ascribes it to king Vakpatiraja alias Munja
( the uncle of Bhoja ) ‘Tit
pTFlfe’ etc.” p. 23 Amaru. Construe frTFTf% (frUTOt) Tit
jbjjtt t nrstfn : sfor; ^ m. ( ) if
<TT ng m «T*IT t- ft 1 grieve.
3VFT: T T5RJ: S5T«lfCi: T ftf ^11 aril: By the points of
those thorns in the form of the hard shoots of my hair that
stand erect ( at the thrilling touch ). The hero says that he
is not distressed by the kick of the heroine; but the thrilling
touch of her foot causes his hair to stand erect and the points
of those may prick her delicate foot. This is what causes
distress to him. Here is identified with ; and
there is no other superimposition.
P. 24, 11. 13-17). Thus eight varieties are
mentioned by the ancients. Bhamaha mentions only two, *r^-
and (II. 22 ). Similarly Udbhata gives four
varieties, and both as and It is Mammata
who gives exactly the same number of divisions as our author.
is divided into 4 varieties, into 2 ( *rro an d
i^3(o ) } into 2 ( and ttm ). The 3^ gives the same
number. Our author does not appear to be satisfied with this
X. 33 S SHIT Y ADARP AN A
119
divison, as the varieties are not mutually exclusive. He says
that a may also be ^§ 3 TfifaT?r. In super-
imposition of one thing on another is the cause of the super-
imposition of something else on another. The two things
do not stand in the relation of principal and subordinate
(srff^ and 3}f); while ( of ™hich is a
variety ), there are no doubt two or more superimpositions,
but the objects stand in the relation of principal and subor-
dinate. This is the view of the ancients. Our author
differs from them and gives ^ as an example
of qTOfawfelfarffr Our author follows here the ^
This line is the last one of a verse cited by 3 ^. flo. The
first three lines are:
^FprC- On this verse the 3#o remarks ‘ 3?5T
p. 38. qpr means ‘the earth’ and is
^1%^, the guard 0Q the king’s harem. 3 ^: 3 ^
m : 1 & II’
II. 8. 8. — That Indra in the form of the king of
Malva. 3??r etc. Here the implied superimposition of the
idea of a queen upon the earth is the cause of the ascription of
the nature of the guard to the sword. As the superimposition of
qffql upon ^T[ is the cause of the superimposition of
upon ^ there is Put as is not directly
expressed, and alone is expressed, this is
sr^T etc. — The reader should search out for himself an
example of where there is a series of super-
impositions.
5 ^% 24, 1. 18-p. 25, 1. 12 ). Even in the
metaphor, we see that the things superimposed
are founded upon ( Paronomasia ). Mammata divided
■flUF into two varieties, anc * ^e did
not say that these two may be founded on Our
author points out that this is possible. An example
of based upon is ‘^g^’ etc. Construe
(iri&r tokO
^ 3T2T ) 3 it ( Wkt )
m g*rrg: (^0 ^ to
Km to ) 5^
Here the word sp,^ is Paronomastic. This is ^^ifqcjln
because here the word ‘woman’ superimposed upon 3rq^|R^
120
NOTES ON
X. 33
is not expressed, while the other constituent elements as
are mentioned. If we read
tor fq^i(cl...g*qig: 7 we shall have
as in this case * the woman 7 superimposed upon ‘ the
direction 1 and ‘the hero 7 upon ‘the moon’ will both be
expressed in words. ^ ( p . 24. 11. 23-25). It
cannot be said that this is fisgq^qftfr ( and not f^g^TW )•
In ^Wt°> e - g- in ‘ etc, without the
superimposition of mountains etc. upon the kings, the
identification of the monarch, who is the object of description,
with the thunderbolt would be altogether absurd, as there
is not the least similarity between the two. But in the
example ‘«fc<g^q 7 etc, the superimposition of upon or
upon gqig, etc., or of woman upon is not
dependent upon the superimposition of anything else. Each
may be superimposed upon the other independently, as
there is great similarity between the various pairs,
An objection is raised against the above reasoning
in these words. If you say that is an
example of q?rqfcr, then how is it that you cite q ^ fc y rp%:
etc as an example of q^far? The king can be identified
with the sun, as there is between the two great similarity
founded upon both being ( glorious ). This superim-
position is independent of the superimposition of q ^aj upon
Hence ‘ 7 should be an example of rip
and not of a«nft fqq%^. The foregoing ob-
jection is answered in these words. It is quite true theat the
resemblance of the king to the sun as possessing glory is
quite manifest ; but it is not intended in the example under
disscusion. It is q^c* ( the identity of the attainmant of
fortune with the bloomiug of lotuses based upon Paronomasia)
that is intended to be the common attribute of the two. And
hence, the superimpositoin of on q q^q is the cause of
the superimposition of the ‘sun’ on the king and ‘q^’ etc.
is an example of q?rq%o. q=qfcq[^q means q ^ R fr fegq^f.
^ 3 ^ f%24^*qfeT^» But here the similarity of the
mountain to the female breast in plumpness and promi-
nence is quite manifest of itself and hence there is no
but
etc. sometime Rupaka
is found without a compound. The author appears
to allude to the words of Barulin, who divides Rupakas
into ( without a compound ), (in a com-
X. 33 Sahityadarpana 121
pound) and (partly compounded and partly not).
1 ^mgc|: II
5TJ^: TO<f^c4 ^T : 5T3f$J-
II (^Tf^ etc.) I
g^fcqfSrftt w^l^ II’ cf^T^f II. 66-86.
etc. — In Rupaka, the Upamana and Upameya are generally
in apposition, as in g^p^C:, ^[^sm ^ But sometimes the
Upamana and Upameya are in different cases, as e. g. ‘The
Creator formed here a line of bees under the shape of a
creeper-like eyebrow.’ Here srssar and frgqSruft are in different
cases. The Nirnaya-sagara edition wrongly omits the words
from to qqrqsft qqp It thus makes etc., an
example under which it is not. Besides the 3T
cites etc. as an example under qqrq; see pp. 38-39.
The printed editions put the words qq’ after the verse
‘^Fqpg’ etc ; this seems to us to be wrong; the verse is
quoted by Ruyyaka, who preceded Visvanatha by at least two
centuries. 5=5^5^— these are in apposition with
%; ^f^TT They, who inspired with foolish hopes,
have served the princes of the Kaliyuga ( Iron Age ).
etc. — qf fa yqfrq 3T*f TO the sandy desert for the water of
courtesy (i. e. as in Marwar there is no water, so there is
no courtesy in princes ). gqfvqo — 3?T^q TO if^rfvT: —
the aerial wall for the pictures of good deeds (i. e. as no
pictures can be painted on the canvas of the sky, so there are
no good deeds in the princes of this age. )
c*^fl — TpTT ^qtc^TT the fourteenth night of the
dark fortnight for the moonlight of merit (i. e. as there is
no moonlight on the fourteenth of the dark fortnight, so there
are no merits in the princes). — ; ER^TT
^T^TT: the very perfection of the
dog’s tail in respect of rectitude (t. e . as the dog’s tail can
never be straight, so there is no staightforwardness in the
prince3 ). — for those ( hard workers ), how
much ability would be required to serve God &iva who is to be
easily attained by faith alone ?
315T ifcqf (P. 25,11. 11-12). Although some of
the Rupakas exemplified above are based upon Paronomasia ( of
words), they are counted as alankdraa of sense, as th ay are
species of Rupaka. is of two kinds, and
11
NOTES ON
122
X. 33
an the former the word itself is important; if we substitute
another in its place, the charm vanishes; e. g.
here fqg^^t means ‘ Lord of Gods
•or lord of learned men’; q^qfal'Jiy means ‘of the families of
enemies’ or ‘of the best mountains’ and so on. Here if we
substitute the word qqr an( l qf^ for qft and fqgq respectively,
the double meaning vanishes and then there will be no %q\
Therefore as the word is here the chief element, this is called
which is an alankara of &abda and not of Artha.
In some of the Paramparita Rupakas founded upon the
particular word employed is very important; as e. g. in
. If we substitute here the word qqq for
then there will be no and this verse would cease to be
an example of f&gq^Mfef. So then, the verse appears to be
an example of Our author remarks that, although
in such verses the particular words employed are important,
still the prominent figure is Rupaka and serves only as a
means to an end. Hence it is that the verses are cited
under figures of sense, — The same is to be under-
stood with respect to alankaras to be spoken of later on.
(P- 25,11. 13-19). Construe (q^) srfa-
3^q^ — That Rupaka in which the ex-
cellence rises to an excessive pitch is termed the same ( i. e.
3Tfqq^q%S^)- ^ An example of
this is & qqq 1 ’ etc. 3 ^: pPTRTO: fq^— the lower
lip, the receptacle of nectar, is a bimba fruit ripened after a
long time. qg: arqqrt; ^T^HT the body
is an ocean of charms exceedingly delightful to him who im-
merses himself in it. In this example, the face is identified
with the moon, but the excellence of the face is carried
to the highest pitch, by saying that the face is spotless,
while the moon has spots; similarly, the fruit is not
the receptacle of nectar ; lotuses do not bloom day
and night (they bloom either by day or in the night);
a, plunge in the sea is not always delightful. To us this verse
appears to be not a distinct variety of ^qq;, but of sqfe bfi. In
the superiority of the sqi^q over the sqqyq is pointed
out. The same is done here. Or if it be said that the superiority
of sqij q is n °f intended, then we say that this is an example
of an ordinary Rupaka. The Upamana and Upameya are
identified because there is great resemblance; still there must be
X. 34
Sahityadarpana
123'
certain properties in the which are not found in the gtpTT?,
Similarly here, the fact that the face is while the
moon is does not constitute this example a separate-
figure. Jagannatha says that the possession by the Upameya
of a property over and above those of the Upamana or the non-
possession by the Upameya of one of the properties of the Upa-
mana does not prevent us from identifying Upamana and
Upameya. “qiwg —
( IV • 3. 23. ) ^rri; ft
i m ft i
PftTPRrft# ft qjf W 3TRt'TtTJJ?5-
i ?3rdft
=k*i^ I 51 I WT fs.’Hlg^O *
ii’ ?ftr ^kwrasft i
ggTifiwe gw CTwft i qrsrr — ‘«nrf ut#^’ ssrrc) >*'
p. 439. R. G.
6 qftarm (Commutation )
fawner qftqR: (P. 25,11,19-21). Construe 3)Rt^
( t. e. i. e. squift ) K^Td^i ( sftf )
q^^TT^t — When what is superimposed serves the purpose
in hand as being identified with the subject of superimposition
(the ^jqqq), it is qftqjq, which is twofold as being apposi-
tional or non-appositional. gsqifqq^q: is the same as ^WHlRT
and ar^qrfqqRui: equivalent to sqfqq^q:. The name
is given to this figure, because the object superimposed is
commuted into the nature of the subject of superimposition.
q^T— (P. 25, 1. 23-p. 26, 1. 3 ). An example is
etc. — construe <£CKI STFfflTCT *W rfqT
# 3TT%q*: — cr^T qq: f^T:— She made a present to
me, who had come from afar, of a smile; and the wager
laid in gambling was an embrace with pressure of the*
breast ( i. e. a close embrace). is a gerund in 3T^
and means sqtfteq. 3 ^^* In other cases i. e . in ordinary
cases. ^q Tqq q n ^ ... ^q^vj ^ ^ ' — In other case9 a present and a wager
assume the form of clothes, ornaments etc. In ordinary
life, a present consists of costly clothes etc. while a wager
is generally laid in the shape of money, ornaments, costly
vessels etc. ^ g ^q^qqqr — supply after
^qqqy. In the present case of welcoming a lover and gaming
124
NOTES ON X. 34-35 Tfrjim.
with him, the present and the wager assume the form of a
smile and and embrace. Here the is ^ qfz frf in the
first case and qrrr in the second, while the fq-qq- ( i. e.
is f%Tcf in the first and 3fl%q in the 2nd. Now here the
QTRt^WiT i- e. is not useful in its own nature for the
matter in hand, which is welcoming a lover ; it will be useful
for the matter in hand by being completely identified with
the f^qq- i . e. A lover must be welcomed by a smile etc;
ordinary presents would not do. Therefore, here the arret ^ FT
vjqFFT in its own sense is not suitable to the purpose in hand;
it becomes suitable only when it is identified with the smile-
Similarly in the case of 3q%q. qqqpf —
In the first half of this verse, the figure is used without
apposition ( of OTqFT and ) i. e. is in the Instrumental
and sq-FH in the Nominative, and in the second half with an
apposition (of ^qqR’ and jjqifcj i . e . qnj: and 3 q%q: are both
in the nom.). ^q% clHicsifa. The author here distinguishes
between ^q-qj and qftcrqq. In Rupaka, as for instance in
‘I see the moon-face’, the superimposed moon only serves to
distinguish the face, but it has nothing to do with the act of
seeing, which is the matter in hand. But in Parinama, the
present (sq^R, the 3Tjffcq-?j|ij| or ^q^R) is completely identi-
fied with the subject of superimposition, viz. the lady’s smile
(the snqtqffR or sq^q); and the present as so identified sub-
serves the purpose in hand, viz. honouring the lover. 3?cT qq
3^ g — Hence is it that in Rupaka, what is super-
imposed ( the sqjqRr ) is construed simply as characterizing or
distinguishing the subject; but in qft?TR, the thing super-
imposed ( sttcN ) is construed as being completely identical.
The word is a technical one, of which the Naiyayikas
are very fond. It means *a determining attribute/ When
we say what the word effects is simply to tell us
that the face is one which possesses most of the qualities of
the moon and is similar to it. It serves to distinguish the
particular face from other faces which do not possess great
similarity to the moon. The distinction between Rupaka
and Parinama when briefly stated is this: — In Rupaka, the
grqjTPT tinges or colours the Upameya simply, but the ^qrrR is
not necessarily of any use for the matter in hand as in
TOlfflT, where the moon subserves no purpose in
the act of seeing. In qftujpq, on the other hand, the sqqqq
X. 33-34 qrffam. SahityadarpAna > 125
is completely identified with the Upameya and subserves the
purpose in hand by being so identified e. g. srIr
*rf^ 3 PTn here th e word 3 t®r ( lotus ) is connected with
the action of seeing as its agent. But a lotas in its own
nature cannot see. It can be the agent of seeing only if it
be thoroughly identified with the eye and when thus identified
with the eye, it will subserve the purpose in hand. In
Rupaka, the is superimposed upon the Upameya,
which is the subject of discussion ; while in Parinama
the scrr passes over entirely into the nature of the
Upameya and subserve the purpose in hand. So it is
that distinguishes this figure from Rupaka. The
word in the definition of Rupaka was said above to
distinguish it from Parinama. It is now clear from the above
that, what is meant is that in ^qq; there is simply a
superimposition of the ( i. e, of what gives its form
to another ). Our author, in distinguishing ^q-c 5 and
appears to borrow the w^ords of Ruyyaka; “3TRi Li J^l u T
I ^r^R^q^r srt qi^TURR^q^r qftwfa t”
p. 40 3 ro on which remarks “ irtr q-^oTTqqtfqcqT-
1 mwwww ft qfcq i” p- 41 ; t
p- * 0 *
Our author is not very clear in his exposition of Pari-
nama. The Chitramlmansa is very explicit on this point
1 ” p. 55. It then explains how this verse is an example
of qftqR; “ 3R 3 I
cfjqqWtR I RRR^qqtqR; I ‘sqM
-qimftftr: R^TRmPt’ ( qT- n. 1. 56 ) cfRqtq- ^qtqftrOTRig
qiraqra: i R %^qqVPrR ^ ^trrt i sr: qf^nRdiq-
q RuiRR ^ R : l” P- 55. The *ft. distinguishes ^qq>
and q ftuiR as ‘^q% qf^qqf^qiq^ RqPr qfun^ g srqfR qfrq^TM^
vrqlcr’ p. 59. Similarly, Jagannatha very clearly defines
Parinama as ‘fqqsft ( i* e. sqJRFR^ ) qq &qqiRcfqq STfE^ qf^TtqqWt
q ( ». ) r qftaiR:’ G: P- 248 « His
•example of qftqpr is a beautiful one. ‘srq^; mi\ ftqRf^qk°qtf<°tr
TR SR5TR I qft^RT^R
OTRTRIRTq Cf^RTsficRqg »’• 'D’po 11 tbis verse he remarks
126
NOTES ON
X. 34-35 tRoiw.
f^f^falrr: l’ R. G. P- 248. In the
above example, the ^FTT^ ( a tree ) cannot on its own account
be said to remove the worry of this life ; it can do so only if it
is identified with the Deity, who is the subject of discussion.
The defines qftqiff quite differently ‘<r
\ qfwfrT II
( i. e. sq^q- ) TfgrRftr
I pp. 220 - 21 . This is directly opposed to the words
of our author (^PRT^) faWRdqT (dqgqiRdd'l )
■etc. and of Jagannatha 4 q?r ftqqiRdqq
( 3q%qTcJTdr% ) 5Tf& etc.’ The Ekaval! means that
where the Upameyct cannot in its own nature serve the
purpose in hand, but can do so only as completely passing
over into the nature of the Upamana, there is qft q irr; while
our author and Jagannatha say that where the Upamana does
not subserve the purpose in hand in its own nature, but does
so only as completely identified with the Upameya, there is
The seems to follow the sr^o go which says ‘
^RlRR^qdfo qft&mfcr’ p. 40. But the 3^50 appears to us
to be self-contradictory. It defines qfgqjq- as ‘s TKfcq.M iqgT
Wfdc^ and says further on ‘qft?TT^ g ^dRTcRT
This is exactly our author’s view; but the
words qftqgfcr’ placed after
are exactly the reverse of what our author says. An
example of qftqR according to the is “g^
RR-' gqft swfq 1 rr
RsfqTRR II 3RrdRR^TRdRg^RRT qftRTRT
5R3d'i^Tt c Rl‘pRq^ l” p. 222 . It should be noted that Mammata
does not recognize the figure Parinama. takes the
same view. Vide its remarks fq'q qiRdqq
^ Rld^^T g ’'Tft'qR: ( this is srtsr’s ) |
sr ^ sq^p# ^q% g Rffaftr ( these
.are the words of R. G. p. 248 ) 1 Rgrr?
1 sr ft i
ffcT erftFTI^n:* I rn I
^ ( P. 26, 11. 3-5 ). In the verse
quoted above (text p. 24), there is Rupaka and not qftuipr. It
may be objected that in the verse ^RfT^TF^ , there is qftqR, as
the 3 Tf(ftq 4 nq which is well-known as the cause of piercing
X. 34-35 qfrwj. Sahityadarpana
127
the foot, is here identified with 3 ^ (sq^q)- cannot
be connected in its own sense with qifJftq, but only when
identified with Thus the verse will be an example of
qftqiFT according to the view of the which says
*qqrdqf¥r^ ( i- ; here ( here
^q ^ 4 , 1 ) ^Td^JTT^T^TrT^T (here q^qncqqqT )
^ q^T^R: l’« To this our author replies that in ‘qT^o’
there is because, the act of piercing the foot, brought
about by the thorn which is the srRtcqqfur, is not the matter
in hand. If qfq^q^T is not the matter in hand there cannot
be qfcuq q, of which the characteristic mark is qt^MqffRq*
In etc., the srfFT is the removal of the sense of wounded
pride. It may be said that although qiq^qq is n ot the matter
in hand, still it helps to being out the qf^r sense ( qqqvrw )
and is thus qf^rtqqTfq- The author replies ^ etc.
qyq^q^. Nor is the piercing of the foot understood to
help towards the bringing out of any of the matters in hand
in that verse.
srqflfq P. 26, 11. 6-10 ). As the author spoke
of so he speaks of 3rfqqq^q%gqqf^
This is Kumar asam. I 10. q^flw^*
qq 3 cSW«* ( la P *• e * interior) RTOr:
— This qualifies aitqqq:. Brq^JJCT: qualifies qqtqy: and
means ‘unfed by oil.’ q^qH 0 !! to the foresters
accompanied by their consorts. In this verse 3?tqqq: ar€
BTT^tqfqqq or sq^q; qqtqT: are the 3 TrcMinq or sqqR. The
5 X^X is the removal of darkness, which is favourable to
dalliance. The lamps subserve the purpose in hand as
identified with the Bffafqs, the Brrctqfqqq, and hence there is
qftqiR* As the lamps are said to be unfed by oil, there
is 3 rfqq;T^I%sq, while ordinary lamps require to be fed by oil.
In our view this is, as remarked by Jagannatha, Rupaka it-
self. In explaining the application of his definition of qftqR
to the verse, the author appears to have broken down
-completely. One may well argue that the lamps (fqq^ft) can
in their own nature very well serve the matter in hand i. e .
removal of darkness. It is 3 ?tqfqs that cannot well serve
the matter in hand and do so only when completely
identified with lamps i, e. here the the ( the lamps ) are
nor f qqqq q q qT qf^TqTqqtfq hut in their own nature. Hence
the definiton of qftqm as given by fq^Riq does not apply to
128
NOTES ON
X. 34-35 irffaw.
this verse. The definition of applies; (i»e.
here afrm: ) ( *• e -
( t. e. sr^r^q^n ) qftwfrT qftoJNT:. The word is to be
kept aside, according to our author, so far as mere qf fo jr R is
concerned ; the addition of that word makes this verse an
example of 3rft^r^ti%gq- qftqR. So the figure qftqr*r is con-
stituted by the words zr ^qf ^cf^jqr ^f^T. In that
case, it is difficult to see how the author's remarks 3 t=f SRTCRT...
%[: apply to the example.
7 ( Doubt )
5Tf%S^T^T srfNtfNfr: ^5iq: e^fr—When an object under
discussion is poetically suspected to be something else, it is
called a Doubt.' It is three-fold, ( containing a
certainty ) and fjrajqprr ( ending in a certainty ). means
vJq^T. t. 6. sq’FR^ . Two things are necessary
to constitute the figure ( I ) the doubt must be due to
and ( II ) the_ doubt must be poetical and not matter
of fact ( i. e. must be ) ; e. g. *TcfT Wi *TcTT g
^ ^TcTT m ' ; here there is a doubt but it is not
due to therefore there is no in
m\ the doubt, though it may be ^rrp^RR, is not poetical ;
therefore there is no $CWlk*T: ( p. 26, 11. 13-17 ).
It is us where it terminates in doubt. —
This verse is ascribed to Bandhu in g y rr fenq fc ( No. 1471 ). It
is cited by 3 t£. p. 43 also. m m - ‘Is she a new sprout,
that from an exuberance of rj ( juice, also feeling ) ha 9 burst
forth from the tree of youthfulness V = ^5Rrf
overflowing the shores,
m$F\: 1 KW ° ) ifepPT Efffftq: ( ) fife
j[ erqi^osi^lff^n^) Ts she the chastising rod of
the Deity of love, eager to expound his doctrines to men
who are deeply agitated ( by fancy ) V gq^fe; gq erfg:
fqsjRT: ^gR: cfR-RT q(S
ffcT Here, no conclusion is arrived at; and
therefore this is an example of fgsjHRcq: —
That is where there is a doubt at the beginning
and another at the end ; but certainty in the middle.
Compare srso go ‘fasjjpprf if: ffT3m«T:
p. 43. ‘3Tjj *n#og- The sun. ^j; =
= 3TfjT : - qq:=3rf5r:. sjfffH2r: foejaen. f^^nfJqrqfcr en-
tertain doubts. This verse is cited by Mammata as well asr
X. 35-36 s%. Sahityadarpana 129.
Rmyyaka. Here at first a doubt is raised that the king is the
sun ; this doubt is dispelled by the fact that the king rides a
single horse. So then there is the certainty that he is not the
sun ( i. e . )• It is not yet certain that he is the
king; for if that were so, no new doubt can arise. So what is
certain is the absence of the first doubt. Then comes the
doubt that he is fire; and so on. So here there is first,
then fqspT ( dispelling of the gqyq ) and then there is another
doubt. qqjqr ( p- 26, 11. 26-28 ). Compare 3 t£.
c q5r p. 43. . .q^ : — This
occurs in {^50 VII. 9. near. ( TORT )
( as defined in ‘firs^sfwcl-
mHlT ffif ) by means of those gestures of loving indiffer-
ence unknown to the lotuses. Here a doubt is raised first
whether it is a lotus or the face of a young woman. At last
by adverting to some property peculiar to the Upameya, a
certainty is arrived at that it is the face. After this certainty
there is no new doubt, qsq qq q-qtqq^or
oppressed by the weight of the breasts. This is an example
of ( Hyperbole ) and not because when the
aq qj d is suspected in place of the sq%q, it is In ‘ipaq
qq’ etc., no ^TfTFT is mentioned ; the doubt is in reference to
the same thing, without suspecting it to be something else.
Our author follows Mammata and Ruyyaka in the three-
fold division of this figure. Ruyyaka, Vamana, the Ekavall
and our author call this figure ; while ^TRTC, 33 ^,
and Jagannatha call it which explains as
S€ faPGFTr 5fcT P- Dandin includes
it undr II. 358.
^THTC’s example is ‘%qq q ftf T ?T
III. 44,
An example of this figure is qsjfcR 3
3 1 qforWr ^ 3
fft: II’ stROT 0 in «
8 ( Error )
fflfe: Klf^cTRRf, ( SF^fR- ) ( ^ ) —
Error is the apprehension, from resemblance, of an object as
being what it is not, if it is suggested by poetical imagination,
g^rr cte. etc. jpqj qgqj*: simple cowherds; qqrqq;
130
NOTES ON
X. 36
place their jars beneath the cows. white lotus ( {%%
I 3 mi I. 10. 37 ). blue lotus. the jujube tree.
WR — The profuse moonlight. In this verse, the profuse
light of the moon is represented as causing error. The jujube
fruit, when the rays of the moon fall upon it so as to make it
shine, is mistaken for a pearl. Here the error is due to simil-
arity. The word ^ in refers to the sqr^ i. e.
and means the or *q^T?*ITftcrT etc. An illu-
sion caused by the nature of things ( and not poetically repre-
sented ) does not come under this figure ; as for example, the
illusion of silver on moth er-o-p earl; or of a snake on a rope.
means here. An illusion not arising from resemblance
is not the subject of the present figure ; as in etc, q-
a c ^ 01 ’ ce between her company and her separa-
tion. ^ Rrct; — In union there is but she alone, but in
separation, the three worlds themselves are nothing but
herself. Here the illusion of looking upon the three worlds
as the woman is not due to *qg^q ( hut to love and constant
thoughts about her ) and there is no sqfc rqq ^
The 3^0 3-0 explains the name srpqqjq as follows —
1 S p. 44. on which
wm remarks Error is a property
of the mind and hence sqpqruq^ would mean *a person who is in
error.’ The is not in error and so cannot be primarily
called $qf?cTTTT^. But the figure is called -^rfcrqp^in a secondary
sense, as in it expression is given to a person’s error. Similarly
sprain remarks “ 3 ^ ^ snf^n^fR: I &mn-
I cPTT =^n: I I e 3Tf%JTTf?if%
II” ’ R. G. p. 266.
Two conditions are essential to constitute this figure;
( I ) The error must be due to similarily ( and not to a stroke
etc. ) and ( II ) the error must be poetical. The verse
1 IS is not an
example of because here the illusion is due to the
heavy blow ( and not to *qfqq ). Although in ‘^jqq
there is similarity and error, there is lo $qf ?cfflr q [ , a s there is no
poetiec beauty in it ( ). Jagannatha defines as
wrf%: 1 m ^ \ t
R. G. p. 266. He finds fault with those who cite a verse
containing many errors as an example of as our author
131
X. 36 snfSmnsj;. Sshityadarpana
does ). He says there must be a single error, or otherwise the
figure gtscf to be defined below will have no province, as it is
nothing but a series of errors in connection with the same thing
made by many perceivers ‘55^0) ^%4HI U IT*
TOffiwM’ R- G- p.
267. His example of ^TTT^nTT^ i s f^f^siqq I
^TCTq^fqqi ST f^T^T : U* P*
What distinguishes Rupaka from that in Rupaka
the knowledge is 3qfi4 while in srrf^tTST^ ^ * s 3?TfT$
means S0R^- Rhpaka, we identify the
(^) with the sqifr; this we do in also. But in
Rupaka, we are conscious that jjrq and are quite distinct
and we identify them because there is great similarity between
them ) in $rrf%inq^ there is no consciousess that the ^ttr and
are separate, the sqqjq is rather mistaken for the sq^q.
9 ( Representation )
s t gfa ntf Jfrrai foranni *tercc.
^5J=t: H The description of one under different
characters arising from a difference of perceivers or from
difference of the objects is termed Representation. Our
author gives two varieties of The first is that where
a certain object is apprehended by different persons in different
ways through different causee e. g. the verse ‘ftq ?%’ etc.
Here the Lord (who is one) is apprehended as fSpT, f%$, 3^,
and by the milkmaids, by elderly men like Nanda,
by other gods, by devotees and by ascetics respectively through
different causes. The milkmaids call him fjft because they love
him, the devotees call him because they desire His grace
and so on. The second variety is that where one and the same
thing is described in different ways on account of the differ-
ence of or arm, although there are not many perceivers.
An example is scwiM*! 1J IT 33^
I id <»
ll? ( quoted, in K. P. VII p. 434
7a. and by spw p. 49 ). In this verse the sight of Parvatl,
which is one, is represented as of differeut sorts (bashful or
jealous etc. ) on account of the varieties of objects (f=PW^r ) on
which it falls. This second variety is alluded to by the
also; f 4 ^ 9 - The
defines this 2nd variety deary as
132
NOTES ON
X. 37 3©^'
\ ll’ p. 69. See R. G. p. 274.
sr^h^lft M<4Wi«hi: — Here the Lord, who is one, being posse-
ssed of many qualities (such as fq^cf etc.) is differently
represented; the reasons for the manifold representations beino*
the love etc. of the mikmaids etc. Compare 3 ^.
^ lS©<sf*' «T ^ 5 qRj-
^ 41 Pi ^ 1 vH i I I ^ ^I^cjc^Lj-u^ qqj%i 5 ^-
^JT: I* P* 47. qrrj: RpR: — The verse is quoted in the 3 ^.
3 . p. 47. wm tells us that it is from the s^rf^r of 3 ^
l’« As they have said ‘the apprehension
of one and the same object, which is produced by a considera-
tion of its various attributes, differs according to the taste, the
purpose and the intelligence of the perceiver. is explained
as 3*3*FT by Mallinatha (Ekavall p. 228) and fqq^q-
by as f^\ and sgcqf% as : by
Mallinatha and BT^qiff^pTT^q^ and f^q q f | <^ qqr respec-
tivly by ‘srg^vqR RJ? ^fRT 2 TT N‘qT^TqT sqTT^tffq
( Trivandrum ed. ); the explains
3R..*rrTfrq^>cqT^(P* 27,11.22-26). The author now proceeds
to distinguish the figure from other figures. The verse ‘fqq ^
etc. is not an example of In instanced above
in etc. we superimpose many things upon one
thing on account of the latter being very similar to many
objects. We are, however, all along conscious that the things
are distinct. But here in ‘fqq ^fq’ there is no mere superim-
position of fsrq (lover), qrcm etc. upon the Lord; here there
is no STRta; but the Lord is, as a matter of fact, fqq to the milk-
maids. Besides, the perceivers are here many. In
the perceiver is one. Nor is this verse an example of
An objector may say that ‘fqq is an example of ^rrPcTRT^,
as here there is Cur author says that it is not
so. In this verse the Lord is looked upon as beloved not
because of any illusion due to similarity, but because he is
really so to them. The f%. jft. says that what distinguishes 3 %^
from is that in the former there is always
while in the latter there is a single fqfqvf; e. g. in ‘fqq etc.
the are srfqcf etc; while in ‘grq T apqfqqT’ etc. the
ftftvT is one i. e. the profuse moonlight. According to
Jagannatha in there is a single error that is charm-
ing; is constituted by many errors, the charm lying in
the number of illusions on the part of many as regards the'
X. 3 7 3%^.
Sahityadarpana
133
same object; ‘ 5 ^ ^ (sifftrufir) U 3 J 3 1 3pq«IT ^SEWIT'
:# t’ R. G.
p. 267. According to Jagannatha’s view the verse
will be an example of 3 %^. Nor is this verse ‘f^zf etc.
an example of srf^r^T^Yf^ consisting in making a distinction
where there is none, srf^zftf^, which will be defined below,
has five varieties. One of these is that where we poetically
make a distinction while there is none as a matter of fact. An
instance is I fTSTT:
5T%f — Here, although beauty is always one and
the same, the poet says that the beauty of a particuar woman
is a strange one, quite distinct from all other beauty. In this
verse the objects, beauty etc., are represented as distinct, q-
tTTfepRTOC — here ( i. e. in ‘fspj lf?r’ ) the character
of being beloved is not poetically ascribed to the Deity by the
milkmaids ; it did really belong to the Lord at the time ( when
they saw him ).
SfTC%r: (P.27, 1. 26-p. 28, 1. 10).
Invariably. 3j#i%KK1 < means ‘charm or
strikingness’; — That which derives
its charm from another figure. Some say that 3 %^ cannot be
found by itself ; it is always associated with some other figure
from which it derives its charm. In the example (fsrq iffr etc.)
there is srf rl^ ' Rfi (Hyperbole) inasmuch as Krsna, though
really one and the same, is represented as distinct (
) with respect to the several beholders, under the
characters of one beloved etc. which are intended to be
exclusive of those of a child etc. f^Tg^TJTTft fawfa-
1 crsrr ^ ^ ^ ^^rdwrrfcr-
^T^tfrfel^TT l. The Lord Krsna is represented as fijzj-; then
it is meant that to them he is not etc. So in Krsna, who
is one and the same } different characters are assumed as in
So there is ) and
we need not define 3 ^ as a separate figure. Our author
replies: — cR^i^sfqr stztr^: — H e admits that is
present in the verse fg-£[ etc., but notwithstanding this, the
peculiar charm consisting in the apprehension of the same
object as different due to a difference of perceivers constit-
utes a separate figure called 3 ^.
* The g. appears to hold the same view ‘^4 ft cR
^ l’ P« 18.
134
NOTES ON
X. 37
sjTtt: — I n the description of the country called ( in
III. para. 10 ff of my edition) the passage (III. 13) ‘it
-was fancied to be an adamantine cage by those who sought
it for refuge, the mine by those who sought treasure’* is an
instances of apart from 3 rfcf^qtf%, it being here associated
with It is the 3 ?^ which says that here is
Associated with
^T%%:’ *9TTCt ST*RI3SR:*ik I 591^1 3?%
^T^>f=(fsr€ts9T ffw i ( *• «■
TwfcrcrftsHmT: ) i” P- 47. (p. 28,
11. 4-5) strictly speaking, in the clause ‘mine’ etc’, they
would have the figure and not Hupaka. Our author
disagrees with the view of the 37^0 ^ 7 ° and says that in
etc. there is srrf^RT*^ and not as admitted by
The super imposition of some-
thing only when preceded by the apprehension of its
distinction from what it is superimposed upon gives rise to
the figure which is founded upon jfpTT^tfTT. In ^qq; } the
and are apprehended as distinct, but the
former is superimposed upon the latter on acconnt of their
possessing certain properties in common. In saying = 3 ^:
the word is used in a secondary sense i. e . there is
which is here jffuft as it is due to
ffcT* The author quotes a venerable writer
in support of his statement that in Rupaka, which is based
upon jfpjft there is apprehension of the difference of
3 -qq-| 7 j and sq^q*. qpwfcTi^ wrote a commentary called vqPRft on
the of 5 [f expounds the Yedantasutras
of Badarayana. The quotation occurs on p. 7 of the Bhamati
(Nirn. edition). 3?fq =et qT^r 5 ^: A word (implying
the 3 cpqT 3 ) is used to signify something else ( i . e. 3 q^q ) on
account of the possession of some attributes which are common to
both. When in such an employment of words, the speaker and
* J. B. and N. read qTf^: , « Pramadadasa
translates ‘the ethereal void by the cha f akas’ (so he read
^Tcf%: )• Our reading is that of the Harsacarita as printed.
The commentator explains as The
3^50 ^-o reads as we do. seems to mean ‘shaft of gold
or diamond mine that had already been worked up in bygone
days.’ Vide our notes on the passage (in p. 90 notes).
X. 37
Sshityadarpana
135
the hearer have the right apprehension ( t. e . the understanding,
of resemblance ), it is qualitative ( i. e. the function is there
qualitative ) ; and it is preceded by an apprehension of differ-
ence between the two objects/ As in rrW, there is apprehen-
sion of difference, so in founded on jfHt ^ftt, there-
must be also apprehension of difference, g ^Tfcr=&HT etc-
But here in the description of the country affairs, the imposi-
tion upon it of the nature of is due to the mistake o£
the vatikas . So, as there is error and not apprehension of
difference, there is no Rupaka, as said by 3#o *70, but there
is snfcrcpf in etc. 37^7 T ' In
same passage, in ‘a sacred grove by the ascetics, the temple
of Love by courtezans’ we have an instance of the association
of 3%^ with the figure nfcmi TT. Here the things superimposed
viz., a nd e&TRTCcR, subserve the purpose in hand viz.
the performance of austerities and carrying on love affairs
therefore there is Parinama. The 3^0 *70 gives these words as
an example of 3fM ( p. 47 ), in which there is no ^73;.
jjir^ftqor sfhr: ( P. 28, 11 . 11 - 14 . ). The author now
comes to the treatment of the 2 nd 3^, viz.
3%^:. Depth. 37773- weightiness. The distinction of
the objects i . e. the qualities of solemnity etc. are the cause of
the manifold representation of the same mac. In the first
variety, the representation is due to the manifold perceivers; in
the 2 nd, it is due to the manifold attributes. Here the figure
is associated with Rupaka. etc. — this is III. 16 -
This is another example of the 2nd sort of 3%<?P In speech
he is Guru (weighty or who is the god of eloquence ).
In chest he is ( vast, or the king son of ^7); in fame he
is 37^p ( white or Ar juna, one of the Pandavas )/ This is a case
in which it has a province apart from Rupaka ( t. e . there is*
no Rupaka here). Here 3^53 is associated with
based upon ( i. e. the words 3^, <jsj, 37^7 are paronomastic )..
* si3pt ’ are cited by the 37^0 730 ( p. 49 ). Compare
V. 20 1
vffar: u’. An example of the first sort as given by the
\f V- 19 .
1 0 amfcr ( Concealment ).
= denying i . e . representing as being-
not what it is, but as something else. 37^7 ( SMRRST
136
NOTES ON
X. 33 STTSfa.
?fcT — Sometimes the attribution of another
character is preceded by the denial of the real nature and
sometimes the denial of the real nature is preceded by the
superimposition of another. ^ ; This is not
the sky, but the ocean, jjqiJwfl': fragments of fresh foam,
tiuf) — 5fq with a coiled tail. Here there is first of
SHipT i. e. denial of the nature of jprfaoi'g and then the
attribution of
kissing the crest of the setting mountain. means ‘foam’.*
IWksr ^ f4w
bearing
the smoke, under the disguise of the clearly seen spot, of
the fire of love kindled during the night, tpj is superimposed
upon the spot in the moon and then by the word the spot
is denied to be what it really is (s^ff ). similarly,
the negation of the real character is to be understood under such
a form as the following ‘the ocean shines in the form of the
heavens and the stars are the foam thereof’. Here the s%r
is not directly negatived, but the negation is to be understood
from the word qj:. The 3T<3fR.ti4st says that the figure srqgRr
presents three aspects; ‘ ^ tpfi q«r g pq |-3rq-§qijfq; sirclq: 1
3TRtTj4%tsqf T: I I
dl+q+lq: I c4=h=( l’ p. 50. On the employment of the
word ;jg ; in the example ‘fcwfcT WTq3: qqtfq:’, compare the
remarks of 3 #. g. ‘iRi%c 3 ^<^q rwq7r4qg:gWT^fa-
p. 52. The word qtj; means ‘body’ and when it is joined
to another word, it conveys the idea that the thing, expressed
by the noun to which it is joined, is something else and thus
conveys the negation of the nature of the thing. vqrnr’s example
of srqffd is ‘44 f4^Rr gw g§: 1 3wtfiwiwi
«rf4: ll’ III. 23. &gz gives q
Self's fqqg, I ftqtw qifc twqfcw iqf ll’ V. 4. The
verse f ‘q f44 f4qfa?ng%*4 faqg^ 1 fqq4qqi%4 cftr *n?p4
3 II’ is not an example of 3rq§Rr, but of ^q-:R. Here
the nature of fqq is not denied and nothing else is established
in its place ; on the contrary ( the wealth of a brahmana)
* ‘fe°4Tdsf*qq,q;: 4^:’ w° III. 9- 105.
f This occurs in 17. 86, where we have
for ^3 HWfcrq.- The (I. 5. 102) reads
STOH f 4 q*Nqi %4 ^ 1 ^ 11.’
137
X. 38 srosfa. Sahitydarpana
is here identified with fqq[ (£• is STRtf^T u po n
and therefore there is if we say RqPk^’>
then there is srqffo. What distinguishes 3rqff^r from ^ is
>o 'S
that in the former there is a poetic denial, expressed or
implied, of the nature of the jq^ ( i. e. sq^q ) and something
else is established in its stead ; while in the latter, there is no
such denial* only the jq^ is identified with the srjqfR’ on
account of their great resemblance.
3TTq?ft4 (P. 28, 1, 25-p. 29, 1. 4).
srtoft ^ to*tt m st 3?ft srq^:—
If, having somehow given expression to something which
ought to be kept a secret, one should construe his words
differently, either by means of Paronomasia or otherwise,
that is spq^. An example of this variety of 3Tq|f?r based
upon is etc. srqtqffi:
q-f^fej: sr 3RfcT: ^TT: *TR: 3Tqf?TRT fiRT- I n tllis season
of clouds it is really impossible to remain without one’s
husband. Oh restless woman ! — Are you agitated
by passion 1 No, no, friend, the way is slippery. The first
half of the verse and the last quarter are the words of
a woman in separation. The words are
uttered by a friend. The woman first gave vent to her inmost
feeling by saying that it was impossible to remain without her
husband. When taken to task by her friend, she gives a
different turn to her words by The word srqf^T may
also mean ‘without falling’ qfcT^T wfcRTT cRT). The first
half would now mean ‘in the season of cloulds it is impossible
to remain without falling ( as the roads become slippery ).’ An
example of this variety not based upon is jd’ etc.
Construe gqr; (qT) (srftcfcr
to: TOT:) TORRffiT “What creeper is this
before me that does not cling to the tree, with its body
agitated by the windT (or ‘what creeper when agitated by the
wind would not cling close to the tree’). This is said by some
woman. Her friend asks her 4 SKf — D° y° u > °b friend >
remember your festive dalliance with your lover ( inasmuch as
you refer to clinging on the part of the creeper) 'l The woman
wishing to conceal her secret, replies etc.’ No; I only
referred to a feature of the rainy season (when creepers should
cling closer to the tree for support, being agitated by the wind ).
138
NOTES ON
X. 38-86 srosEu
etc. The author now proceeds to distinguish this
figure from some others. We have (in the 1st Pari, notes
p. 18) defined Iu crooked speech, a different construe*
tion is put on another's words; in this variety of suffer, a
different construction is put on one's own words. This variety
•°f differs from sqRtfrfj also, is the concealment,
under a pretext, of the nature of an object, though it may
manifest itself. For an instance of see text p. 59 *
^TttRftfTT — ufai fo. In this variety of
the secret is first expressed by the person who afterwards
conceals it, as in 6 ’ etc. ( where the woman herself expresses
the state of her feelings and afterwards tries to conceal it);
while in the secret is not expressed by the person
who conceals it; the secret somehow oozes out and then is
concealed by the interested party.
Most writers say that in the is denied its
nature and the is established in its place i. e. smfft is
based upon Compare the words of
^4-HR sjcti^d^T R <T STRffcT: l\ Our author follows
N9
this definition in his first variety of 3 rq^f. But in the
second variety which he states there is no srfrR.
Something is concealed by represnting it to be something
-else. There is no implied relation of and as for
example in etc. In this second variety of srqffcf our
^author appears to follow writers like Dandin. Dandin de-
fines 37 ^f>r as I ^ W 3 :
t rft’ a TTfitfrT ll’ K. D. II. 304. Dandin says that the denial of
-something and the representing of something else in its place
-constitute srq^frf. There need be no In his example
the q^Kcej of efiw is denied and it is said that he hits with
a thousand arrows. in his takes the same view
1 1 f (Certainty).
(®IWpO ©WR: — Certainty is the emphatic establish-
ing of the real character, having denied the other (i. e. the
fancied character). An example is etc. two
blue lotuses, near the deer-eyed lady. Here on
X, 39 SShityadarpana 139
account of the extreme similarity between and qqq
( the and ^ifq' ), it is possible that the one may be
looked upon as the other. So it is emphatically asserted that
the face is the face and not the lotus. Our author, after
giving his own verse as an example, cites another’s verse.
f«f^5?TT etc/ — This is the utterance of a lover in separation.
This verse occurs in the Tftqqtfqr^. It is also quoted as of
in ( No. 1314), ^ — This is a garland
of lotus stalks on my chest. Lassen reads ‘f^qf. 3pTW'
— The lord of serpents ( which are the ornaments of
6iva ). W It is not ashe3 but the watery
powder of sandal that besmears my body,
— Oh Cupid, do not strike me mistaking me for
£iva ( who is your foe ) ; why do you rush at me with anger 1
Here it is emphatically asserted that it is lotus-stalks etc.
that the man 'wears and not a serpent ( which greatly
resembles the string of lotus stalks ).
( P. 29, 11. 15-17)— It cannot be said
that in these examples the figure is fq^qpq^f, because in
the latter the doubt and certainty successively reside in the
same person ; e. g. in ‘{qj qrq?q^ the man, who has a
doubt whether it is a lotus or the face of a young woman
that he sees, himself decides that it is the face. But in this
figure, the doubt belongs to the bee and the certainty to the
lover, =q flTvjqrq;. The author says that in the verses
( under fqajq ) there is really no doubt at all even in the bees
q^T[: q
when its cognition has not more than
one alternative i . e . when it does not vacillate between two
ideas, but is certain, qqj refers to the words q*rr
( because the bee’s approaching so near would
be impossible ) is the reading of all editions ( except that of
M otilal Banarsidas ). But the context requires the reading
qqT the bee’s approaching so near ( as descri-
bed in the verse ) would be possible only when its cognition is
certain and not vacillating. The bee would surely approach,
when it was certain that it. was a lotus and not when it was
in doubt whether it was a lotus or a face. Pramadadasa
translates as we do. It is noteworthy that paraphrases
as e * he draws the same mea-
ning, as we give above, from the reading We
cannot see how this can be done.
140
NOTES ON
X. 39 ft **r.
rrfjf- objector says: — If the bee is not in
doubt, but is certain of there being a lotus ( in place of the
face), then let the figure be ^ri Pd^n ^ Our author replies —
jjjjt etc. We grant that the bee etc. ( in the two examples
of ffrare ) are under a mistake ; we contend, however, that it is
not the mistake that causes the strikingness in the two verses ;
but it is the peculiar mode ot expression adopted by the lover
( that causes the charm in the verses ). This is felt only by
the man of taste. So our author after appealing to the man
of taste says the figure is ffrajq - and not grPd'JTf^, as it is
the emphatic assertion on the part of the lover etc. that con-
stitutes the charm in these verses, ft ^ ( P- 29,
11. 19-30 ). In these worde, our author takes up the position
that need not necessarily be based upon etc.
It may be said that in the two verses is a t the root
of the figure Even if it be not really meant that the bee
did fly towards the face of the woman or was under a mistake f
such a mode of speech (as ^ may be employed
simply by way of offering a flattering compliment to
the heroine. ‘=35 Our author means : — In
the two verses cited above, it is not necessary to suppose
that the bee was under a delusion and then an emphatic
assertion was made by the lover. Such an assertion may be
made simply as a compliment. Still it will be an instance of
ftsra- ?r ^ arftwira ( p- 29, n. 20 - 21 ). Nor is
this that form of suggested poetry called ( here
)• because the face is not cognised under the
character of the lotus ( which character is, as a matter of
fact, expressly denied ). We have explained above the three
varieties of viz. and is that
where, if the suggested sense were fully expressed, it would
assume the form of a metaphor. An example of is
^ g% 1
5 T Wft ^ Wtft: II’ t-^jo p. 110 .
In this verse, the fact that the sea is found fault with
( : ) for not becoming agitated at sight of
her shining face suggests that the face is identified with
the moon ( at whose sight the sea rises ) and thus there is
In ^ there is no because
there is not only no suggested superimposition of the lotus
on the face, but there is an express denial of the lotus being
X. 39 SAhityadarpana 141
identical with the face. ?y qyq^fq: etc. Nor is this srqf^r;
NS \3
because here the (i. e. sqifa) qqq is not denied to be
what it really is. In 3yqffq we knowingly deny the nature
V»
of the Upameya. But here there is no such denial. So
this is a separate figure, quite distinct from the figures
treated of by ancient rhetoricians. g R fiefi W T
(p. 29, 11. 23-24) — This figure does not exist in such
sentences (which are not striking ? but detail matters of fact )
as ‘This is mother-o’-pearl and not silver/ addressed to a
person bending down over mother-o’-pearl under the notion
of its being silver ; because in these sentences, strikingness
is wanting ( which is the essence of an alahkdra ).
We can only remark that the figure fq^yq has no striking-
ness in it in spite of the author’s vehement efforts to establish
it. In the two examples, the charm lies according to our
ideas in the illusion of the bee etc. and not in the assertion.
Therefore the figure in them is $yrf%rryq\
12 3 TST$j{T ( Poetical Fancy).
qWRT — Poetical fancy is the im
agining of an object under the character of another. The
term s^y is explained by as ‘ 3 ^ ^TT
fyq p. 23 i. e. a prominent apprehension the Upamana
(^I+q + t^r). mjwu = ^rr^n* means
*T^r:. All our notions can be relegated to three
classes: — I we are sure about a thing; II we are in doubt
whether it is one or the other (as in ^yojqf jqqt qy); III
we may be in doubt, but we lean more towards one side
than towards another (as in vrf^cT©q^). In
both the sides are equally prominent. In ^x iy y q q ,
one side (or alternative) is more prominent than the other.
In (Jcsy^fy the mind leans more towards fij-qfqq^ (OTRH) than
towards fiyqq ( i. e . grq^q ) and the f^qq is imagined as being
almost the frqfq;^. In 3 %y$jy the conceiving of an object as
almost another is 3yy^y4 ( volitional ) and not 3 yqy^yq as in
f. all along we are conscious that the and oyqfiq
Are both distinct, but we poetically say that the q^q is almost
identical with the syq^q on account of some cause. We do not
mistake the one for the other as in vrr pq xn ^ , but we simply
represent the one as being the other for poetical purposes.
142
NOTES ON
5. 40-43
SJltsi^Tcn !Hf%(P. 29, 1. 25-p. 30, 1. 2). Our
author closely follows the ar®o go in the subdivisions of
( see sr&o go pp. 57-58 ). is first divided into ^TT
(expressed) and snftjpTRT (implied). The expressed
occurs when particles like etc. are employed and the
Moh'HiJfl when they are not employed. Compare s&o go ‘gj-
^ ^TT I Jt#r*TRrRT l’ p. 57 ; and
c hl«U<V<f gf TOt I 3W5JT
fTTf^r: II’ II. 234. Since in each of these two, the thing
fancied may be either a sfffrr ( genus ), guj ? or they
amount to eight. In each of these eight varieties, the fancy
may be positive or negative. So there are 16 varieties. The
source of the may either be a quality or an action and
thus there are 32 varieties.
(P. 30, 11. 3-20).
etc. °t the woman whose eyes are like those
of a fawn, on which flutters the skirt of
her garment. — triumphal column. Here the thigh
( ) of the woman is figured as if it were the triumphal
column ( ) of Cupid. Here as the word denotes
many objects 3 i. e % is a generic name (and not a proper name)
we have ^ ?TH etc.— This is Raghu. I. 22. ^ =
silence in knowledge ( i. e . he knew so much, still he
kept aloof from all pedantic wrangling ). ^T17t
absence of vaunting in liberality ( i. e, although he was very
generous, he never vaunted of his gifts ). gujy fq- his
virtues, occasioning as they did other virtues, were, as it
were, productive. Here what is fancied is ( i. e.
representing the qualities as having children ), whioh is a
5jv[. ^sTFT is a sanskritized form of the
Arabic word ‘sultan’. ffr.^TR'pRR: — the sound of the drums
beaten at the marching. jt^FR^ 3^
guilty of causing the abortion of the wives of thy
foes. bathes as it were in the Ganges.
Sinners bathe in the waters of the Ganges. Here the coming
in contact with the waters of the Ganges on the part of
the sound is represented as bathing which is an action^
g^^......3T 1i K:‘ Hence the word ‘moon’ signi-
fying, as it does, a single individual, is denotative of a
substance i. e. a concrete object ( i. e. it is not a generic
name ). Here the face is poetically represented as if it were
143
£. 40-43 Sshityabarpana
another moon. If we omit the word. 3?^: here, the figure will
he sqqj- If we omit both and srq^:, the figure will be If
we omit ^ then it will be The above are the ex-,
amples, when the fancy is positive. The following are examples
of the negative fancy. This example occurs in
( III. 7 ) and is cited in the 3^0 $o. Alas, it is a pity,
swr: iw ldqwi Kt <r*nfNt ^
The cheeks of this lady, so fair, are reduced to
this thinness, as if not seeing each other. Here the cheeks,
which have become thin through the lady’s separation fron her
husband, are represented as if growing thin on account of their
not seeing one another. In the word we have the
negation of an action. — The examples, where
the occasion ( or the source ) is a quality or action, are: — in the
example etc. the source of the fancy contained in * as
it were bathes’, is the quality of being a sinner; in
the cause of the fancy is an action, viz. being reduced to
thinness. The author ha9 so far exemplified ( though
only partially ).
rbuui ( P* 30, 11. 2 1-1. 24 ). The author
now comes to affair: ^5fqT ‘The breasts of
the slender lady did not show their face ( or nipples, which
were of a dark colour and therefore concealed as it were )
from shame that they gave no room ( so plump and close they
were ) to the pearl necklace, which is (i. e. ‘ excellent,’ or
also ‘stringed’). Not giving (a gift) causes shame. Here as
words like ^ are absent in connection with ( the real
meaning being ( as if from shame’) there is implied
qg 5ft: (P. 30, 11. 24-28). qg ^WR^—An
objection is raised in these words against the division of
3$^ into and It was said, while treating
0 £ ( suggestion ), that all figures i ; are capable of being
suggested; why is it that you particularly assert that is
implied (and not any other figure ) r l In the 4th the
author speaks of as a variety of] «=rf*. If all
alahkaras can be suggested, why do you say that may
be implied ? Any other figure also may be implied. So RcfrpTHT
need not have been specially mentioned in connection with
3^^. Oar author replies in the words
In such an example of suggested as etc.,
the sentence is logically complete even without the fancy
144
NOTES ON
X. 40-43
( which is that the lady grows thin as if to get room in the
heart of the youth ). The verse occurs in the
4 th qftejy ( p. 219, Nir. ed. ) of the S. D. The whole verse is
f|3Tl? gj 3 ^^^ | 3?lgf >< 7 reu|DU14|«4 fl gjq
*!3* asw II’ II. 82 ^
sm m ar^p# i sr# qvqft cRqft- n ).
™! r . ;T ™ 3^^ i I; gqq, ^qf
ct*r sttow’ntrt bt
qjNr w (ar. 3RHPBHT) itopj^ mr cr^rRr
I m gqq JTTf^WTT ^ q § BT cT^frT
I 3° =q° p. 127. Here the sentence becomes complete
even if we take the plain meaning ( viz, that the woman not
findm a niche m your heart, grows thinner and thinner).
The suggested fancy that she grows thinner as it were to find
an easy entrance in your heart is not recessary to understand
the logical connection of the sentence. But in the verse
‘ 5P ^ : SwTCT’, the breasts cannot possibly feel shame and
hence the sentence becomes logically complete only when we
understand <**nqT as equivalent to <*5^ ^ ( as if through
shame). Supply after Thus there is a
difference between and which is that
m antoj, the sentence is logically complete as regards the
sense even without the suggested fancy, while in
.SLtnmpSS 8 ™ r<1 ' " '"s"* 1 ”“‘ n "' e nnde ‘-
3t5f i§^sr%g: ( P. 30, 1. 29-p. 31, 1. 10 )•
^qrfiR.r ^3 Mi: Of these the expressed sorts again,
with the exception of that of substance, are each threefold, as
pertaining to ( 1 ) nature, ( 2 ) a fruit and ( 3 ) a cause.
^t^T:...q^%53i:. Of the 16 sorts of qyeqt&OT the
eacll Ve th ,,el0 f S l!| 3g ^ t , lnee ’ V1Z ’ 3,T ^’ a nd fq;qr, being
each three-fold as referring to nature or fruit (purpose)
or a cause, we have 36 varieties. As an object denoted by a
proper name can be fancied as regards its nature only, there
are only 4 varieties in connection with it and thus there are
f TI , *“ a11 0f the It is said that an object
( ) denoted by a proper name does not give rise to if
fancied as the fruit or cause of a certain event. Cursor
here appears to follow the wo go but goes a step further.
— ^ ^ m& n: 1’
* The print edqpjjo has ‘frq^qaq etc.’ ‘
X. 43 Sahityadarpatja 145
P* 57, upon which WFW remarks ^
f5nft ^^Is^ftfer »’• An example of SWfosTSJT with
reference to srifer is above, where, the nature
of the thigh ( which is a generic term ) is fancied to be almost
the same as the nature ( ^q- ) of a ( which also is a
generic name); an example of with reference to a
quality is occurring above. A generally
contains a word in the dative or an infinitive. An example is
‘ qsjUKfl ifV etc. ffcR> This is Raghu. XII. 91.
^FTT^T: 1J&] %H: STT^pT: % T ^ ( WT^T“
) fJRR: ) 3# The
arrow shot by Rama entered the ground, because it was
shot with so much force. But the poet here represents it as
entering the earth to communicate the agreeable tidings to
the serpents in Patala. So here it is the fruit ( or purpose),
expressed by the infinitive an action, that has been
fancied in connection with the arrows’s entering the earth.
In a there is generally a noun in the ablative or
instrumental. An instance of is U OTT etc -
...sre^pC* This is Raghu. XIII.’ 23. ^ spot. %qr
<=ri
Here, the anklet, which was not
resounding because it was not worn by anyone, is represented
as being silent through sorrow due to separation from the
lotus-like feet of Slta. Here the cause of the natural silence
of the anklet is represented to be sorrow, which is a gur
( according to the Nyaya-Vaisesika philosophy).
3PPT (P* 31, 11. 11-19). Out of the
above 40 varieties of qpeqj, the 16 varieties of are
subdivided into 32 according as the source ( ftPfa ) of the
is mentioned or not. Thus the varieties of ^IT come
to be 56 (i.e. 32 + 24, after subtracting 16 from 40). An
example where the nwiitta is mentioned is the verse
*TWT*+TT^ etc. in which the occasion of the fancy in ‘bathes as
it were/ viz. ‘being guilty’ is mentioned. In ‘jppWt 0 etc,’ the
cause of the fancy in ‘as if it were another moon,’ viz. excess
of peculiar beauty, is not mentioned. 3T^T
^TTT. In and the ftftvT must invariably be
mentioned. In the is the fruit or consequence
of what is fancied; and in the is the cause of
what is fancied. To explain in ‘tfor holding silence
13
346
NOTES ON
X. 44 sstgrT.
is the fjrffTrr of the fancy ‘as if through sorrow’ ; in
-etc. the fSrfJpg of the fancy ‘as if to tell’ is ‘entering into the
■earth.’ If both these ftfiffis be not mentioned, then the
sentences would be unconnected i. e. if be omitted
there would be no propriety in saying
(P. 31, 11. 19-26). The 16
■varieties of become 32 with reference to jhj and
In ‘r|rq^i: gw^I)n’ e t c - we have a cause fancied in ‘as if
through shame.’ s^rRfcf— In rpftqiTRT also (as in qj^j- with
reference to and ^ ), it is impossible that the occasion
•( fafavi ) should not be mentioned; for if the particles ^ etc.
be not mentioned (as they are not in 5 T#rrt) and if also
the occasion of the fancy be not mentioned, then it would
be impossible for the reader to ascertain that there is a fancy
Our author follows the go 3^TcT
vr^rf ^ SPFTC: I
fafinwr i’ pp. 57-58.
In JfifcpTM, is not possible. 3Tgf[q;=
etc. 3gq: vgff rTKIc+q q^if: *IT ( In
F^TtcTTSJT ) which consists in the identification of one concrete
object with the subject of description.
If fq etc. be not used and an epithet be added to the character
fancied, it is our position that there is Hyperbole as in ‘This
ting is another Indra’. Compare sro go ‘jgqsj m
( STcfcptRPIT ) 3 P- 58 - On 3TfrT^%^5'PFTPI, compare
3T®° “'sro 41'h^iiB'i:’ 55JKT 1 a’OTjff
'■( ) 3 JffrW TH-,~I KR^UcTh I f^T^TTWit
The reason why the figure is 3Tfg^pqtf%; when etc. are
omitted in such a sentence as ‘He is another Indra’, is that
when words like fq, which denote gig^g, are absent the
srsqqgrq becomes fits; and ceases to be gjsq. We shall explain
these terms later on under
^^rg^:...f?TTi: (P. 31, 1. 27-p. 32,1. 9). JR3?TW =
-jc^qgr — the subject of the fancy. It is possible that the
may be omitted or not. ‘qq: etc. is an instance, where
the qqifq ( g;q: ) is mentioned. ‘An instance, where
is omitted, is the following from my drama Prabhavati.’ The
author quotes from a qrfeKT composed by him. qf ;diirq ...'gqqg
(on account of the thick darkness) the- world appears as
X. 45 spSajT.
SjHITYADARPANA
147'
if it is made up of masses of collyrium ; it appears filled, as
it were, with the particles of musk (^qq^); it appears over-
spread, as it were, with Tamala trees (the leaves of which are-
blackish); it appears, as it were covered with dark-blue garments.
Here, the subject ( i. e. sqqq), viz* the being pervaded 1
( c ^i^ej ), is not mentioned in connection with the thing
fancied ( the fqqfqi^or 3cq^q) viz. being made up of collyrium’
etc. The world is pervaded by darkness; this state of being
pervaded by darkness is represented as if the world were
made up of masses of darkness. The author gives another
example in etc. This is from the ( I Act ) .
The last half is qdT l’- The darkness
besmears, as it were, our bodies and the sky rains, as it were,
collyrium. srq cTq;^FTRT : - Here the fipqq is the pervasion
of the world by darkness and its falling all round. The
pervasion is figured as the besmearing of the body and the'
falling of darkness is represented as the showering down of
collyrium. Both, viz. sqyqq and qrr.’OTTq, the fqqqs ( or sM'Jfas ) r
are omitted. 3rqqt: respectively. The
reasons of the fancy in this example are respectively the-
thickness and its coming down in the shape of streams;
as darkness is very thick, so it is represented as besmearing
(^q- also is thick ) and so on. remarks that this explana-
tion is according to the view of those who regard darkness
as a substance. The curious reader may refer to the T. D.
on the words ‘q-q ^oqrfot 1 Icqqqffa ^
T. S. In his remarks upon the words ‘ Darkness besmears 5 etc.
our author follows Mammata who says ‘oqiqqrR"
some say ‘Darkness, which is not
really an agent in besmearing (i. e. darkness can never
as a matter of fact besmear anybody, being 3f%qq), is
figured as being the agent of besmearing, the nimitta
(the reason or occasion) of this fancy being the pervasion
(by darkness of the world). Similarly, the sky ( though it is'
really incapable of showering collyrium) is fancied as the
agent of the act of showering/ The views referred to here are
those of the 30, which says qqj — ‘
fSiPNr q^wqq; 1 ^ 1 ^ ^
feqW qsqqiqc# 3^ 1 1
^TT3 l w p. 63, The views of Mammata and our*
148
NOTES ON
X. 45
author on the one hand and the .Alahkara-sarvasva on the
other as regards the verse may be briefly stated as
follows;— Our author says that here ss^r is the (or
) and is fancied as &r ; while Sarvasva says that is
the R<p (or fRq) and it is fancied as probably identical
with the ^R^f; 2ndly our author says that the (the
reason) of the fancy is the thickness of the darkness, while
Sarvasva says that it is rr (pervasion) which is the
reason; 3rdly, our author cites this verse as an instance of
that variety of scRT, where the (here rr) is not
mentioned, while Sarvasva cites this verse as an instance of
(here 5qpR ? according to 3^0 o ? being the ffjft^f).
The 5?^o 30 criticizes those who regard ©qjR as the R<p ancl
as not mentioned. It says that if s^jr is the r<j^ it must
be mentioned, because it is the subject upon which something
else is to be fancied. If the subject, were swallowed
up by &r we cannot understand %r as poetically
predicated of it. So the Sarvasva argues that it is better to
say that in darkness, which is the *rqf, the attribute of perva-
sion ( sz[[R ) is swallowed up by, and is fancied as identical
with the attribute of being the agent of the action of besmear-
i n g (^Rf^l^rf)* 4thly ? Mammata and our author say
that Utpreksa occurs everywhere by the relation of identity
(^O; e - g- JP ^ where one (i. e. jpj)
is fancied as if identical with another Rflf (i- e. r^); in
etc. they say the Rff (srr) is fancied as if identical
with another q-jff (^tr); the does not admit that
Utpreksa occurs invariably by the identity of two Rffs; it
says that Utpreksa occurs also when an attribute (q§) is
fancied as belonging to a subject (w^). It says that rr,
if it be the Rep, cannot be omitted for reasons given above.
So it is better to admit two kinds of Utpreksa, and
& c - is an instance of where the
(^r) may be fancied as probably belonging to darkness (R[).
Those who uphold Mammata say against the criticism of
Sarvasva that what the poet intends to fancy is the identity
the two actions (^r and sqjR) and since this identity is
directly possible (without having to resort to the idea of
agent etc. ) there is no necessity to fancy the identity of agents
in order that through that identity we may fancy the
identity of actions. Vide rj pp. 381-382 and R. G. 296-304
X. 45
Sahityadarpana
149
‘‘3T5f =R JftwH RT%RWT R3R1 SRRf^RRj; I RR RTRlfiRsRb-gRR
3 ?ift%R ftqfRqt r ^rsrrrr^r ' R«nft-R wRt^RlRf^jRii
‘giR rrtspR’ RTRTCRfRmai^RiT^rf f%R% g% ^ rr i ...rr
l 3Rf gRwwft jfrwgl’ rrrr% (%• vn. 91 )
gfttRsiftRfR Rubift ftq% RRRRftf%m$RTCPi ftRf%%%I^RftRajT >
<p. 296) rr f%RRt% i r R<N%^Rt£f$Ftfaftr ftR% Suffer
RRFRT I 5^3 %%RlfR SIST^RT ^Mllb I Rft 31%^r RtR 8 J°li%%
^%r RtfRR^ i rr^urrhh; : rttr i c^jvifRRbnRi SRRRftaRn^. i ‘f%*R%tR
RHTSRTfR’ -CRTRlft RRsqftg fRR ^3 31%S?I% ?%R 1 l”
R. G. p. 298.
On these manifold sud-divisions of Utpreksa, Jagannatha
makes the very appropriate remark that there is no difference
of strikingness in them. They should not, therefore, be men-
tioned at all. At the most only three varieties of Utpreksa
should be given, viz,, |g\ ^ and ‘?f RRTTRRt ft %RT:
sn^rngd^T^ifftr: i r^3tr$j %rt R^uRRRftfR srjrtct^r 1
RRRhR^SRR RRTqT 5TRRFTT%^f% l’ R- G. p. 295.
3R5fRRrTCtcRT %?mn, (P. 32, 11, 10-18). 3R5fRT'
wT^RT=3l^RRRi;i5f%B%tftr when arising from another figure-
An example of Utpreksa founded upon concealment (srR^ffr)
is ‘3TgxS&R’ etc. §rrtrr^%r R# srfi^ft W vT^TT: g? 3 T:
Rift RRt 35 : 31% RRWRRR srgxjj^Rr fRJRsfcT SR- The flood of beauty
•of that fair-eyed lady, incapable ot being contained in her
body, falls as it -were, under the disguise of tears, as her eyes
are pained by the smoke of the fire kindled by oblations of
ghee. An example of based upon %r is ‘grfTRRR:’ etc.
‘The pearls, we believe, that issued from the narrow womb of
the oyster, have attained this gciq^R ( possession of a fair
quality or being stringed ) from dwelling upon the charming
conch-like neck of this lotus-eyed damsel’. Here the word
gqqtR is paronomastic; and it is the cause ( fJjftrT ) of the frRSTSftr
contained in the words ‘RRpftRifRRRflftR’ ( as if from dwelling
upon the conch-like neck ). The word ‘qRfRnt’ is denotative
of
JR% s^rrkr:. Besides RRfmt, JR%, 3 %, §R, 5TTR:, gRR>
fq etc. are some of the words that are denotative of 375RJT-
We quoted above the words of Dandin on this point.
There are other words also that express rsrirr or 3 ?qgjT, such as
RR>RlRt, *RRlRRTRl, 311%, 33tir, RUR" A question naturally arises;-
How are we to distinguish from rrrt, when fR is
150
NOTES ON
X. 46
employed, as ^ is also; i. e. on what ground is
it that we regard the verse L as an example of
and not of 3 W? The verse can as well be taken as an
Upama (g^: ?qfrr). Our author nowhere
explains this difficulty, ^frqfrT^, the author of the
says on this point ‘q^qgqqRT^t I
^TT^%Nch: II zrt l
^ cj 6 1 *<: II’ ( quoted by p. 24). When
the Upamana is one from ordinary life, there the figure is
Upama and the word ^ is then expressive of similarity.
But when the Upamana ( i. e. the or is not
one from ordinary life, but is simply due to the poet’s fancy,
then the figure is Utpreksa, so that there the word fq- ha s
the sense of spvrR^T ( representing as probably identical ).
When ^ is employed in scir^T, the poet purposely represents
one thing as almost identical with another; in Upama, the
-only object is to give expression to the similarity between two
objects. The f^o *fto remarks: d K I i=i«i) H^t>fq| "
^TUTcf^q^T ^ 1 JR g ^vq ^ijg Tf i i q HT ~
fcgRRfTC: l’ p. 74
{ and then it quotes the words of Appayadlkshita
bases the diffierence upon the existence of adjectives or
attributes that would contribute towards the poetic represen-
tation of the identity of the and If these
exist there is g^fT; but if there is the Upamana purely
without any attributes serving to lead on to ^+TTqff, then there
is Upama and ^ denotes similarity.
(P.32,11. 20-26). zm
^ren.* R Sometimes, an Utpreksa begins with a
simile. ‘qT^...tr^Tw’. This is f^jo III. 70. (f^:)
^ Rf^rr:
% ) cRI$: ( Krsna saw, on the
other side of the sea, series of woods, abounding with
greenish leaves, which looked like moss thrown every moment
upon the shore by thousands of waves. 552 ^ In the
above verse, the word 3 q*q ( in ) denotes comparison
and hence there is a simile at first, but in the end there is
fancy inasmuch as the existence of huge masses of moss
•on the seashore can be imagined as possible. We should
prefer the reading to
Similarly, it is to be understood in the description of the
X. 46
SSHTTYADARPANA
151
emaciation of certain lovelorn ]adies, as in ‘their bracelets
were turned into armlets’ ( and also in ‘the
side glance of her with deer-like eyes acts the part of a
blooming lotus on the ear’ ( sry^fo). In both
the examples, there is at first sqqy, because the affixes
( in %^TT^T*0 and ( in ) are expressive of Upama
but, since it is impossible that a bracelet should be on the
arm and that a glance should exist on the ear, there is only a
poetic fancy. The poet does not here compare the bracelet
with the armlet and the side-glance with the blue lotus, but
rather fancies that they are actually identical as it were.*
ffcT (P. 32, 11. 26-29). The author
now distinguishes Utpreksa from other figures of speech. He
first distinguishes between and g^jy. In -^yf^yqyq^
as instanced in ‘jpqy g^ifqqy’ the cowherds who are under
error have no consciousness of the moonlight, which is the
subject (on which they wrongly superimpose the notion of
milk ); for the description of it ( i. e. of the absence of the
knowledge of the truth ) is given by the poet himself (and not by
the persons). In ^q^y, however, the person who indulges
in the fancy has a consciousness of the subject also. What
distinguishes ^rfcnry^ f rom 3?q$jy is this: — In the former, the
knowledge is while in the latter it is 3yyfy4 ; 2ndly,
in the former, the fqqq is not perceived in its real nature, it
is mistaken for something else (the fqqfq^) ; in s^y both
the fqqq and are cognised distinctly, there is no
mistake, but for poetical purposes it is represented that the
fqqq is almost identical with the fqqfi^.
: ( P. 32, 11. 29-31 ). What distinguishes
from Scsysjyy is that in the former both the alternatives are
equally prominent; but in the latter, one of the alternatives
is more prominent and is poetically represented as probably
identical with the other. 5yfqqyq^y...^q; in Hyperbole, the
unreality of the character fancied ( fqqfif;^) is apprehended
after the sense of the sentence is understood; and here it is
* The BTTOvfcy says that and syfjq mean the same thing
( but the poet seems to have used 3?^ in the
sense of bracelet and in the sense of an ornament for the
upper arm. The lady had grown so emaciated that the bracelet
on her forearm easily moved up to the upper part of the arm.
152
NOTES ON
X. 46 T$8fTT.
apprehended at the very time of the sense being understood.
An example of is 531% q ffifff
>’• Here the face is apprehended and spoken of as
the eyes as and the body as 53r5r?f%5iT- At the time
of using this mode of speech, it is not intended that the
( cpr? 5 ) is understood as distinct. The unreality of the - identity
of fqqq and ftqfqq comes in only when we reflect upon the sense
of the verse. In 3 ^, when use such an expression a s
553 =Ef % we are perfectly conscious of the
( i. e. sqrt ffi ) not being the faqq ( ).
( P. 33, 11. 1-10 )•
This is fqRrargffTq IX. 15. This is a description of intense
darkness. ;rfsrcTT 3...%^:— Has darkness coloured black the
various trees and hills? screened, ftqitg in uneven
portions, gfqr 3 has darkness annihilated the
regions of space ? The printed editions have gfqj: for gf=TT:-
The Sarvasva reads is to be connected with all past
passive participles, some say that the figure
here is inasmuch as the trees pervaded by darkness
are suspected to be coloured and so on. It is the srao go
which cites this verse as an instance of g%, in whi ch the th ings
superimposed have each a separate substratum ( ifiQ|'..i<fcqqi u iHi
fwqqri) I qqt P- 43 ). The Sarvasva remarks
on this verse ^FTTf^ qqf %firaTV-K^ d It) p. 44,
‘tFTTf^ I STlf^ST^rT qrR^FR'JT’Wf
I 3?q fclftt f^W, l’ ggs^’s
comment, q* Our author says that this is
wrong; for the figure consists in the apprehension
of one object under more alternatives than one, all being
equally prominent; whilst, here, the pervasion of the trees,
sky &c. by darkness is not one and the same pervasion,
but is conceived as distinct pervasions distinguished by
the several objects with which it comes in contact. Besides,
pervasion etc. is swallowed up by the idea of ‘colouring’
&c, which alone is prominent. K=t)[=W% = What our
author means is In Sandeha, the same object is ^perceived
under two or more alternatives, as in ‘agj ?Hci u i : fti’ above;
in the present verse, the object is not the same; the pervasion
by darkness of the trees being quite different from the
pervasion of the sky by it; 2ndly, in Sandeha , what the poet
conveys is the equal prominence of two or more alternatives;
but this is not the case here; here the pervasion by darkness
is not mentioned at all in words, it is swallowed up, as it were,
X. 46
Sshittadarpana
153
by ‘colouring’; what the poet intends to do here is to represent
poetically that ‘pervasion’ is probably the same as ‘colouring'.
For these two reasons, the figure in the present verse is
ggftjr. 3p% g ST others say that the present verse
is a distinct sort of the figure though one of the
alternatives is more prominent, because it has the special
charm of determining one thing to be manifold. What these
people mean is: — in this verse, the (^5=f)is no doubt
more prominent; still the figure is not Sc^rr, but another
kind of Here ozprpT ( the ) is determined to be the
same as Wtf, T JT TT T etc. (which are many). Therefore,
as in ordinary one thing is suspected under different
characters, so here also one thing is determined under different
characters ; and therefore there is • This view appears
to be the same as the one mentioned by Sarvasva
P- 44. Our author rejects this view also.
fiT7ftut... ^ qq q r fancy is the apprehension of a thing, the
real nature of which is, as it were, swallowed up, under an
identity with something else. This kind of fancy is clearly
visible here and is conveyed by the word 5. as well as by
Therefore the figure ought to be It is not
necessary to resort to the invention of a distinct species of
Sandeha found nowhere else. The Sarvasva itself mentions
the fact that some look upon the verse 3’ etc. as an
instance of ‘3^ 5
s^frJTJTP^’ p. 44.
(P. 33, 11. 11-16 ). c q5&r ^33’*
This verse is cited by 3? £0 p. 51 as an example of srqfRr
N3
3TRfa : )• ^3^— spreads the charm of
a flake of cloud. srfcT <T*TT to me it does not appear to be
so. 3Tf ^3H; T believe the moon to be marked by the
black scars of the wounds caused by the darting meteor-
glances of the young women distressed by the separation from
thy foemen, their lords.’ Here, in spite of the fact that the
word 1 many e' is employed (it being one of those words that
imply as said above), we have a mere conjecture,
since we do not apprehend here a fancy as defined before.
For this reason there is no sc^TT, founded upon conceal-
ment here. In the first half of the verse, the author began
by denying that the spot on the moon is (i. e. there
is first 3PT$f)- After denying the nature of he ought
154
NOTES ON
X. 46
to have superimposed something else on the But he
speaks of the moon in the next half, and not of at all.
Therefore there is no It may be said that, as there is
>3
sy in the first half and the word ( which is
occurs in the 2nd half, there is Our author
replies that the mere presence of the word is not sufficient.
We must have which does not exist in the verse
under consideration. The author of the also was not
quite satisfied with the instance he himself gave. On °*
etc. he remarks ‘srq
Rjqqq^RT ^qqlRT 5f p. 51 and also u ^Ti:
(seqajTqr:) %qifej^qR%r^sfq i t% g ^m squrfr
q^^qqRT fcdftq qfqqiqqfcT qqiqrfq ^ ssnfc
(on p. SI) 5 ’ p. 64.
What constitutes the essence of is that the
(sq^-) must be represented as probably identical with the
arereip' (sqqR) and that this representation must be charming
must based upon implied resemblance. 39TJ?rr
cannot be an 3c^T, because there is no charm in it.
The fancy must be ( volitional ) and not due to mistake.
‘*FT 1 Rqt qRRdsq STTfcfrT ^T%
%fqfR: II 5 is not an example of because here the peacocks
mistake him to be a cloud and, as a result, dance. They have
no distinct apprehension that he is Kama. The mere presence
of words would not constitute a verse an instance
of g^[T, e. g. the word snq; in the above verse.
Examples of are sown broad-cast in the works
of Kalidasa and Bana ; vide the following ‘gqijj
II’ gr. I.
13
( Hyperbole).
(P. 33, 11. 17-23). When the intro-
susception is complete, it is styled Hyperbole,
3T^f^[q:-These words are quoted verbatim from sr^o ^ o p. 56.
When the (i. e. sqqR or 3T5Rgq) swallows up (oral-
together takes in) the ffqq (the subject on which something
else is superimposed) and there is therefore an apprehen-
sion of identity, it is ( Introsusception ). In
the is incomplete ( or in process of
X. 46 SUfNljftfo. SSHITYADARPANA
155
completion ) as the is expressed there with uncertainty
{ i . e. is there represented as 'probably identical with
the and not with certainty ). But in sTT^qtfrfr, the
is complete because the subject is apprehended with
certainty. The twofold division of sr sqq fl iq is borrowed by
our author from the 3^0 ^o. is brought about in two
ways; (I) the entirely swallows up the f^pj, which is
consequently not expressed in words at all; (II) the f^jfqg
as it were swallows up the f^y, which though expressed in
words and therefore seeming to be different, is yet identified
with the In the first case the is said to be
f^g- and in the latter sy[vq. The srsq^ypi is said to be
because the not being expressed in words and being
swallowad up by the the (which is the 8 T^f^rf,
superimposed) is predominant, is said to be ^psy,
because the fqq^y is in process of being represented as probably
identical with the ( it is not f^ftiTT, but )
and therefore it is this process (which is being accomplished )
that is predominant. Vide on sp? % ( spsqsrarc: )
syyvyy?^ | ^psqt
^ question might be asked what
is the difference between spsqsrapr and 3 TRT C T (as in ^:)?
The reply is: — in sntfa? the f^py is apprehended as the
But here ( in sy^FBTq ), the f^py being entirely swallowed
up by the y^yfq^ and therefore not being expressed, only the
is apprehended; in gyray snsq^py ( ^bic is the province
of ^sjy ), the f^py may or may not be expressed ( while in snffa
it must always be expressed) and, even when it is expressed,
it is in precess of being swallowed up by the fqqfq^(as in
gqiy ). ‘spy U 3 - ^Fy I
<=y5f fqqfeqT I W (s^SJFTFO ^TTWIBI
fqqfqrrT xr^ sy^ftfa: i’ ftiyy^ft p. 55. An objection might be raised
as follows: — sr^BT^T is certain knowledge of the which
swallows up the f^py. It is said above that in 3 ?q^ry there is
.^y spsFBF- In the is generally expressed and
not swallowed up. Besides, s&sjy is constituted by representing
something as probable . There is no certainty in it. Therefore
it is improper to say that in s^y there is spsj sy^ppypy.
The reply is: — sp^y^^y is of two kinds, and 3FT15T-
In the former, the real nature of an object is not known at
156
NOTES ON
S. 46 wfogra t fa .
all, but through mistake the ftqq is identified with the
In the latter ( ), a man, although well knowing that
ftqq is distinct from superimposes the upon the
ftqq for some poetical purpose. s^qq^nq - is the
province of srrferqR^, which the poet speaks of the
mistaken notions of others. ScqRT sjsqqsTq' ( *. )
is the province of 3R*qqyqq is defined as ftMqftmu i,
In although there is no complete swallowing up,
still the fqqq is in process of being swallowed and, therefore
we may say that there is srs q q ^q . Hence there is nothing
wrong in saying that RR*q 3?sqq^ffq is the province of
3^fT- ‘ ^ ^qjj^cqi^-^iqi : q;qq^q$Tqjj<^q^ I
to ft ftqqftrot (*i?) ftqftftsm i q s*qqft i
f^r%TT5:T^Tf%^T^T%Pf I ST^Nq^- I ftyfR^-qq^rq:
\ qq ^r%% fawTOJT ^q qq
ftqqq<nl^©itikt 1 ^Rq 5 fqqqqq^i^ift qqRrrqftq qftwr
ftq% qfqTfrTjjcTC:^ 1 qq ft
fqqq qq qql^TORriqf ftqfqqq^qq*?^ 1 qqftft tqif^q^jftftqq: 1 qq
ft *qRRlq^q TOfqqT sftqf%qqqi^ q 1
qq^jwfqqq: 1 qg- ^sRrftc gyr-
fqqTO ftyftq-K| ,j |^ft q»q^q|Sqq*qq^ft I l ‘ fqq^qRT :f^s;q-
ftTRTT ( ^T- q. H. ) f^fq^qq*qq*q faqftpqT
mq^Rq.qyq asj 1 crw fiw ftTOto faqtwiftq qi *rq<ftfq q
qftjft^tq: 1 fWtfomft ftqqwftrroigqiTO qr Rq<fterfq
q qftrfiqtq: 1 ” f^Tf?RT p- 55. fqqq qq§ft fft (p. 33, 11. 20-23 ).
In the swallowing up of the object takes place only
by reducing it to a subordinate position and so it may be here
also ( i. e. in qfcRTqrfrn ) as in ‘the face is a second moon’.
The author means that for swallowing up as required in Scsftrr
(jqsq 3Rqq^iq ), it is not necessary that the fqqq must not
be mentioned. What is meant by fqq^ur is here simply that
the fqqq should be in quite a subordinate position as regards
the purpose in view (i. e. the charm of the xp:qjq^y). Similarly,
even in 3Tft^qtfrTr, the fqqq ( i. e. jpy here ) need not necessarily
be omitted ( as in ‘ the face is a second moon’ ).
The name given to this figure is significant
^ftq*qq*qy:’ p. 227 ; ‘fqqftqT fqqq^q ftpRqqft^: |
R. G. p. 307.
TO (P. 33, 11, 25-26). Our author, following
the 3 ?Ro ^jo (p. 66), divides 3rftqyqtf% into five varieties. I.
157
X. 47 srfawfa. SAhityadarpana
^sfqf s^: Denial of difference where there is differece in
reality ; II. sdft ( the opposite of the preceding ) statement
of a difference, where there is none in reality; III.
negation of connection where there is a connection;
IV. ( which is the reverse of III ); V.
— "the invertion of the sequence of cause and effect.
Mammata following (11.24-26) gives four varieties, by
omitting III and IV and substituting in their place “sRsrfcfiT
^ ( a supposition under a condition introduced by ‘if’ ).
in his criticizes Mammata and says that
etc.’ is included either under or its reverse ( see
p. 237 ). sorter remarks that ‘q^srNfiT =q J etc. includes
and its reverse by Indication.
An instance of is etc. ^ sf^rpr: How
is it that the peacok’s tail shines above 1 ?nfq5fiTqT 3^fcT.
The digit of the moon on the 8th night of the
fortnight, ^r: next to it. still lower a tender leaf.
Here we have the introsusception of the tresses of a woman
in the peacok’s tail with which they are identified. Here
*TT^, and 3FR are swallowed up respectively
by ^FT, and srfj, although they are
distinct (^sr^t:). Another example of this is ‘fq^nqr^cr’
etc., which was cited above under Utpreksa. The silence
belonging to a sentient creature is one thing and the stillness
pertaining to an inanimate object is another. These two
states, though different, are identified here, the reason being
that the word conveys both the meanings. ‘hOTT- •
is another example of the same. In her youth, her lover is
possessed of raga ( love, also ‘red colour’ ) together with the
soft petal of her under*lip. Here the raga of the lower-lip
is its redness and the raga of the lover is his love. Though
these two are different, they are identified, because they are
expressed by the same word. It must be said that, following
these two examples of our author, the verse etc.
instanced above under (f%g), will be an example of this
kind of 3Tf^rqtf%, so far as the word is concerned.
An example of is £ 3 Fq^q’ etc. the
riches of the fragrance breathed by her. charmingness.
Here though beauty is one and the same, the beauty of a
woman is represented as being quite different from all other
14
158
NOTES ON
X. 47 ^ fa Wife,
beauty. Another example of this variety may be given from
■the 8akuntala ‘^RffaqtT stfarrRf BT % sngftg^JTgf^T
^ ?T«T: I’.
An example of is the verse ‘3^: ^prf%>fir%
•which occurs in the VikramorvaSiya (1st Act ). The same
verse is cited by the 3^0 30 as an example of this variety.
3TSTT: ‘Was it the moon, the source of lovely
radiance, that was the creator in forming her ? ir^t
^ who is solely devoted to the sentiment of love,
spring. ^ : dull, free from emotions, sqj^r
whose admiration ( i. e. mind ) is turned away
from objects of senss. g^rufl - gfa: Brahma. In this verse,
although the Creator is connected with the act of creating
her, he is represented as not being connected with that act*
This verse is cited by Mammata as an instance of ( or
of our author ). remarks ( p. 59 ) that this verse
cannot be an example of as there is no certainty
here. In 3rfcT^tf%, there must be certain knowledge. In the
above verse, the speakar raises doubts as to who created the
woman.
An instance of is etc.’ Here,
a connection, which is unreal, is fancied by means of a
supposition brought in by the force of the word ‘ if \
does not exist in the moon i % e . there is but by the
force of the particle this connection of lotuses with the
moon is brought in. Therefore there is 3 7 *^ 5 .% A
beautifull example of this variety is cited by Yamana ( under
IV. 3. 10) I
II’ f?($ 0 III. 8.
EfiTforcm (P. 34, 11. 15-21). The inversion
of the sequence of causation may occur in two ways : ( I. ) the
•effect may be supposed to precede the cause or ( II. ) it may be
supposed to take place simultaneously with the cause. An
•example of the first is ‘snfcr etc. Supply sncT^ after
and ^TT : after ^if^f^-agitated by fancy.
(^WSiTWtf) ^ Vm: the
beauty of the blooming bakula and the blossoming mango
( manifested itself ). Mangoes put forth blossoms, which
generally are the excitants of love (s^Ff). But here
this sequence is inverted. The heart is said to be agitated
first and then the mangoes blossomed. Another instance of
X. 47 qfagralfe . SSHITYADARPANA
159 -
this variety is JTR5RT: 1 W%eW
#^rf^R RRT vr^tt ll’ ( fgHtoni., verse 96 ). Another
is *5Tf 5WT3^r 3^5 HRR:’ ?TT 0 7. An example of the cause-
and effect taking place at the same time is S tr i fe etc/
This is Raghu. IV. 4. was trodden, was attained.
at the same time. Here the cause, viz, coming to the*
ancestral throne and the effect, viz. conquering the kings, are-
represented as taking place at the same time. The reason why
the relation of cause and effect is inverted is to give expression
to the idea that the cause produces the effect speedily, as said
by Mammata sftsraiftcri etc.
5*8^ ?f?r (P. 34, 11. 22-24). In these-
words our author refers to the view of the 3 &>o ^o. The
question is: — in what is introsuscepted in another V
For fBZ is necessary. When it is said that
two varieties of are and the ques-
tion arises what two things are aqiqqf^q-. According to
the view of the ar^. B- the ordinary excellence belonging,
to the woman’s tresses etc. in the verse ‘qjqjjqft;
is fancied as being extraordinary. It should not be supposed
that tresses etc. are introsuscepted under the character of the-
peacock’s tail. What is 3^^ aqiqq%e is natural beauty
(qTCqq which is here fancied to be identical with the
beauty imagined by the poet ( )• It is not the
that is fancied to be identical ( 3 $^ a ^qR^ ) with the pea-
cock’s tail. If it were intended to be so ( i. e. if it were intend-
ed that the a reqq^ rq in this variety should be between two q-JTT s r
such as and and not between the two q^s (qy^rq-
and then the definition of the figure-
would not include, as it ought to include, such instances as
‘Different is the beauty’ etc. The reason why the instance
‘ar^q^qr^’ etc. would be excluded is — if we say that ^[qyqy an( I
q^qq are 3^rr spsqqf&r, we mean that for ar^qq^Tq, two
are necessary ; two q$s would not do. In etc*
there are no two qrffs, but only two q^s. If two qsffs were
necessary for 3rsqq^yq, this instance cannot be an example of
Therefore, in order to include it, we should say
that it is two q^s that are everywhere are qqR fq. Vide the
words of the ay^. p. 69 “qrj i&tj ^fanfcT^T-
m d*i^i«wsrpr: i*
ISO
NOTBS ON
X. 47 g r fofoftfa s.
ftPMH, I ^ fft
31^*1 I «T 5 'I't'il'^HI c h+i<r»i(^f*i<.+ta|WMtn<I) t
3?ift ift jhf ^5 srs^mr: i fisr ft ‘sTtror agftnnaf f^rrrt
Wfr^R ftPlrJRJjRiftHl'mfyd^ I tjcRsrsrrfq- I”. On
this 3PRST remarks “ ^SJRFtrft’ qft Wim^TT-Hf-
f=pr^ NtTO NUkt F STT^Ttft: I a?NS
^ wfa#n«rraRt q^r: wiftfcTFicqqft: i”
p. 69. The two verses, referred to in this passage, are
*?rfe qwt* ^ <trfa qwqi3ftqraFt,i
n’t (Jftsift:); ‘arwft ^Tliiar aronir ft 3T ^jft q=N0T^Ji3Tr i
?prt Frq^qarrqift tcftar °r iftn (3^ #:^TKnfr^ qqfa qt^-
«®rqi i 5 ftfh ^rrqispntrft ^ *qft n )•
Our author replies to the above reasoning in the words
‘<T=flft etc./ There too, t. e. in
the lady’s beauty, which is generally not different from that
of other women, is fancied as different. So that here also
there is 3^2^^. We nee( t not say that qre ft^«<4 is fancied
to be identical with In ‘3?^^]^’ etc. one thing
viz. the beauty of the woman, is poetically represented as
being another thing, viz. a beauty different from all other
beauty. to explain, to make clear what is meant %
3T^%^...3T^tf^qt If we substitute sr^ri^ for in the
verse ‘3^^=^ etc.’ (in which case it would mean ‘her beauty
is, as it were, quite apart from that of other women’), we
should admit the figure 33^, as there is then jsrsq 3Tsq^flq.
Everybody admits that in 4 3T?qi^f^T^Fb’ there is ggfgp
We have shown above that in Utpreksa there is sp arer
(^psq- of course). So we must admit that in ‘sj v^ T f ’ etc.
also there is 37^^^, which is because the word
that is is absent. In Vpfa ffcwfrlf etc., the
beauty of bakula though coming first is fancied as coming
last i e. there is Here also if we employ the word ^
there is 3c^rr- Similarly in the other two, and
3T^F«P^ t. e. srfit^, who is the creator of the beauty.
is represented as identical with Brahma who does not create
such a beauty; two blue lotuses which are not connected
with the moon are fancied as identical (sr ^j^rf ) with two
lotuses connected with the moon. Hence the opinion of the
3?^. that there is 3?^^ of two v^s ( one and the
other and not of \q-tffs is wrong. srsfOT also finds
'with the “aft. “swsft qrqrTi
t This is cited as a verse of in srsf’q’s gftngrfiTqft
p. 169.
x. 47 srfaraifa. Sjhityadarpana 161
> fro qffriP Kg *rcfai tfr €t ftWt m ' W
•tprfun^f i ^ f3*ii<^W=}*i ^ 'H'H'hIv-^^iIh: iro^Rf
l’ pp. 69-70. As to the remark of our
author that when we read f° r i n 3R ; f^3Tl :i '
W etc. there is ^sjl, vide the remarks of R. G. and
Nagesa thereon ( p. 135.) “jrPI (sM^HsjfTj) '^’7.
%T^irRrgr^!f%: t g)*n?rfa
ftsp^sj; ii’ FTsfJ R i m? ^ ^ J^ 55 '
1R: I z&m %*. I *TTW ^
<i*dl<>i£l(d f*WW ti4ei*idcgra!. ' cgtffl ffl V WVl^l I *d t
fMfcr ^ft^FTTR.’ lf?r cS^W^SJW: ‘WRtllft’ tsro
f^gtRT3WV)TFI. ' flWSJHiijItlWSft RR VTlf^T fnf^^TI^Sw^U
qfiTTRT^TR % rfte ^ infect *W 1 ^^RVIfSTT ’T^^t
n’ gsnf^ 1 RfR ^
fgwvfcppl’ R- G. p. 315.
1 4 g g?4tf rTciT ( Equal Pairing ).
cmwr tofira^r: ( P. 34, 1. 29-p. 35, LB).. When
•objects in hand or others are associated with one and the same
attribute, the figure is g^^lPTdb An attribute is ei ^ er a
quality or an action. So, although our author does not say
so specifically, g^qlPtcTT has four varieties; all the things may
be spgcT or all may be and the common attribute in
each case may be a p or a f^(T. There is another point on
which our author is silent. 332 :, and
many others say that in pq^rfitcTT aSr<W is always implied;
compare 31
5#° r°- This means that betwee “
TOfa or mwtfm things that are connected with the
same attribute, there must be implied resemblance. It is not
suffcient that they are connected with the same attribute.
•Our author, by omitting the words st'FW J F*R^, l ea< ts us to
infer that be did not regard implied resemblance between the
srmfSra or things as necessary to constitute the
figure The reason why the figure is called pq-
4 i R i d I is given by Barest as ‘jpqwvi Rt'VT 3IFT)S?TTfaf?r
.^Rtptcft’ P- 239. i. e. that in which there is a connection
(of zm or arafrT things) with the same attribute.
W&ftW-This is Sisu. IX. 24. Some printed
editions of 6isu, read ^m: for and*
162
NOTKS ON X. 48
for ‘gf%t 5T%sr^f^w;iritfwr' U’. Construe-
^ ^3 Tg%tR Tfir, fgJTrft, ’Tfcig (^rat'TT:) 37 ^j: ;
<\ta=^rr: ( ) gf%t (§f^t qa^
m: SR: m WfW ) srelftw (;qffwfa). Unguents
of sandal, white flowers, fair ones indignant against their
lords and the flames of lamps were by that time ( i. e. by
evening) lighted up so as to awaken Love that had long
fallen asleep. Here, as the description of the evening is the
matter in hand, sandal ointment etc. which are connected with
the evening are also ; they are all connected with the one
action ( ) of epf^ ( being lighted up ).
(P. 35, 11 . 6-13 ). This is Udbhata V.
12 Who, that has perceived the softness of thy body, feels not
that the jasmine, the digit of the moon and the plantain plant
are hard 1 Here the heroine is the subject of description and
JTFStft ete., which are the 3 MHMS are ( generally, of course )
snrcgcf. They are all connected with the single attribute
‘hardness’ (which is a jpi), anf ^— sr ^ (^) ^
etc. ‘charity from affluence, truth from speech, fame and piety
from life, beneficence to others from the body— from unsub-
stantial things, man ought to extract substantial good., Here
?!R, =ErT, #TcP=pft, which are all in the objective case
being all connected with the attribute of substantialness, are
also connected with the action of extracting. Our author
-gives example of jpqqtP'IdT where all the things are con.
nected with the same jjq and the same An example
where all HM=h<p|<t, things are connected with the same rpjj
is fnYft I gfqgiPi cRTWST qqijft
V. 13.
1 5 ( Illuminator ).
^ TO) 5 fSpw&i
hen a thing, which is the subject in hand, and another
w 1 C is not the subject in hand, are connected with the same
attribute, there is Also when the same case ( «« )
is connected with more than one verb.
Some writers like 353 :, 3 pm etc. say that in gjcpj; also
there must be rpq srppq. Our author is silent on this point,
must be noted that if jtr is necessary for then
X. 49 ^5. SiHITYADARPANA 163
the 2nd variety of ^rqq; given by our author, where one case is
connected with many verbs, must be excluded altogether, as
there can be no resemblance in that variety.
The reason why this figure is called is that it is like
a lamp, which, when employed for illuminating one object,
also illumines others. ‘ ?WRt
l’ 3#o g°
P* 72- ‘srirci iTt-i i grqpRt >q#:
^q*reftf?r ^tqq?b r gqq° p. 242 ; ‘qfiRRjqret srgWRJr^fmft'
srqrmfcr gsjytaMfrr cftqq;^ i ^ % ?q <£tw^ i g^f
^ (qr° v. 3. 75) | qt«W I* R. G.
p. 322. s
^rc&TT WRftsrft (P. 35, 11. 17-18)— This is ^u. I.
72. ( %gqi^ ) qssra&qra; (q^qq'ra;) ^
I ) gift ^)fq^ ( graft ggft )
stfrfrT: ( 5qRN: ) R jrhyqvij-Rr. Here unchanging nature
is the subject of description; while, chaste wife is srq^f.
Both of them are connected with one dliarma viz., the one
action of ‘accompanying’. The printed editions of Si^u. read
qtfq^Rflfcr: gfgsj^r ( V. 1. gftfsjgr). The Nirnayasagara edition
of S. D. reads g#r for grft g. But then the figure would be
3-qm- In the above verse, there is afsfjggvqrg also, g-g . .gjvfg
(p.35,11.21-24). This is an instance of the 2nd kind of
called by some qqgq;^tqq;. Here the heroine, who is one, is
connected with many actions, viz, rising, sleeping, going to
the house of the lover and so on.
3T5T P- 35, 1. 26-27)— some say that this figure
has three varieties according as the single vrft, whether jjoj or
%RT, is mentioned in the beginning, middle or end. The
Kavyadarsa, Bhamaha, TJdbhata and many others divide
Dipaka into three varieties according as the single dharma
occurs in in the begininng, middle or end. “srft^qarRrfqiRi fipg
%q;tt|sq% I tgfigrq 5qqggqtf§;fq fspg II srgfg
i fort q-R u” wiri;
II. 17-15; ‘ STlfRq'arpqfqqqT: qr<TT%RqTFH: I 3?RT^^tqHT qgf
■*rsr rf^q^ f%: ll 352 : I. 30. An example of is ^qrqgq-
qri^qrf#t# #J$iq*Rhft: I gqsr gffirKi fin&m laWlfc fft: II,
qqojpo II. 100, where the common property, is
mentioned in the beginning of the verse, ‘gif^ftilpF^r:
f^nqfSS5p% qg: I ^R'JlIJiqa^r: ll’ ( gpr? II. 18)
164
NOTKS ON
X. 49 $m;.
and S H WN P ffhl % I ^
^3*^11’ ( 353-. I. 33 ) are examples of and sr^tw
respectively. Our author remarks upon this that this threefold
division need not be given, because a thousand such varieties
may be found out. There is no special charm in these divisions;
whether the single attribute be mentioned in the bignning or
end it does not matter. The charm of this figure lies in several
and things being connected with the some attribute.
The distinction between Dipaka and g^qt^TcTT may be
stated as follows: — In Dipaka, one or more things and one
or more ajs re gfl things are connected with one attribute; while
in all things must be either or srsRp"; there
cannot be both and arq^P things. Those who regard
affarq- as implied in both the figures make a further distinction.
In Dipaka the Upameya is q^gcf and the ;jqqn (implied, of
course) is arq^pr, while in pwfrrrTr, as all things are either
q^T or are all *qq^, it is left to the volition of the hearer
to regard one as the Upameya and the other as the Upamana
( ) g a h* w*° p- 5L In
Dipaka, the q^T ( sqip ) and the srq^p- ( ) are connected
with the same attribute. A question arises: — how are we to
distinguish ^tqqj from sqqj as in g^r where
is sqrrR (am* therefore arq^pr ) and g?q is ( i • e.
qgp- ) and both are connected with the single attribute
The reply is that in Dipaka the resemblance is only implied,
if at all; there are no words like ^q, expressive of simile ;
while in simile the resemblance is directly expressed.
Tide Jagannatha’s criticism of those who cite as
a separate variety; R. G. pp. 324-326 qq^i^id’^Ft'N'
sq#g 1 gfjraf ^
f^fcr fefer f^fer fafoqfcr fatffaqfcr 1
qqqftqqj ^ II* ( ^F^’s example
^n^Tf vwft * 1 ftwrof 1 ft ^
WrR^PFq sftfTgftfa I * ^
Jagannatha further criticizes those who regard ^tqq{ and
as two distinct figures. He says that they should
X. 49
SlHITYADARPANA
165
not be considered as separate, because the charm in both is
the same, viz. the occurrence of the common attribute only
cnce. What leads to the separate enumeration of figures is
some difference in charm. It cannot be said that, because
in the common dharma is connected with both srfrr and
things and in jpqqtfan either with sif^T things or with
3T^fRT things, there is difference of charm in the two figures ;
because, in also, as defined by you, you will have to
make two figures according as the common dharma is co-
nected with only 5jf;=r things or with arsTfcT things. But you
do not do so. Therefore regard also as a variety of
I 5T I
^ gwlPkiMi rfcr t
35^ratf?[fTr^f wWi ^
l?m%: i ^sfqr Isthttsj i i
^ 1 RFfWliR f
srsTfHMT^, srfrcrrqiCTwi %% i ^ ^ pq41Pt:wf
ffracnuRRt ^n: I” R. G. pp. 326-327.
An example of is
5*?^ qr i crt ^r%rr urat *t?frt sfaj: g^=ri qrqqif: u’
d^r<iw° "V.
16 sri^er^jqjn (Typical Comparison).
^ R^tsfq w: W 61
srfcr^IJJTT — That is srf c r q^ii qr, where in two sentences, resem-
blance between which is implied, the same common attribute is
differently expressed. We have explained above (pp. 106-1 07 )
under Upama the meaning of the word 3T c^fcl<=Hffi rr?« >q^qrf^*
^T^ftRtfcT ( p. 36, 11. 2-3). This is Naisadhiya III. 116.
Ifcfrr — Oh Damayanti ! 35^: noble, ^r: etc. — What greater
praise can be bestowed upon the moonlight than this that it
agitates even the ocean 1 Here one and the same action is
expressed in two different words, viz. ‘attracting’ and ‘agitating’
( in two different sentences ) in order to avoid repetition.
*=raW? ,J I and are really one- and the same in sense.
But if the word had been used in the 2nd sentence^
the fault called ( repetition of the same word in
the same sense) would have been committed. Therefore in
166
NOTES ON
X. 50 nfctq^q^iHU
the same common property is expressed in two
different but synonymous expressions. In the example both
sentences mean the same thing, viz. This figure is
found in a series also, — ( p. 36, 11. 6-7 ).
mountain of $iva i. e . Kailasa, which is white. Compare
Brother of i. e. akin to diva’s laughter. Here the words
‘glorious’, ‘pure’ are the same in their ultimate meaning.
Here is the and in the other sentence there are
and is common to all, though expressed in
different words. This figure also occurs under a negation of
the attribute. =Ep£t4 ( p. 36, 11. 9-10 ). The ver-
se occurs in 3T<5° pp* 74—75 in the same connection, fi fc rre-
etc. ‘none but the fair ones of Avanti are skilled in the
pranks of love. J Other examples of iR T^TtffW T under
are:— c ^rvrfr 1 ^
*Tft*TT^ N*5 ^
»* $ 3 ° p- 54.
The reason why this figure is called is given
by as ‘jjftcpg sfdqmi%q?TT p. 52. Here
the sense of the sentence constitutes the sqrrR or the
says on which remarks
f^rf to® pp- 243 and 254 *
The distinction between Upama and is as
follows: — In Upama, the resemblance may be expressed, while
in it is only implied; 2ndly, in Upama there is
only one sentence, while in there are two sentences;
3rdly, in srfcT^JJFTT words like ^ are always absent, while in
Upama they are generally present.
A beautiful example of this figure occurs is Sak. ( Act I. )
‘fn^qtg ^ 3T ^TT^T I 5PTRT^ ’•
Another is ^ -uftR# *F*nC-* SRlftf I ^T;
qskrt'trcfq- ^ w n 3n° 5 -
17 ^SFcT (Exemplification).
or dmT 5 ^- =
is the reflective representation of a similar
subject. We have explained above under Upama (p. 106)
what is meant by The word serves to
distinguish this figure from srfrl^gw- This fignre also is two-
fold, being founded either on similarity or on contrast,
* Should we not rather expect according to the
utia (qT. V. 4. 124 ) 1
X. 51 sottT. Sahityadarpana 167
...in^ftar^r (P. 36, 11. 14-15). This is taken from the Vasava-
datta, a romance of Subandhu (p. 8, Hall’s edition), srf^r...
— A good poet's song, though its merits have not
been closely examined. although its fragrance
has not been perceived. Now, here, the subject of description
is the song of a good poet, which pours a honeyed stream into
the ear. Corresponding to ‘pouring etc., 5 we have the attribute
‘riveting the eye 5 . These two are not the same, but there is
some similarity between them, as there is between the original
and its reflected image. So also rrrer corresponds to
and to 3rf^cr5p7T* stops,
is gone, ^fir: fgr the assemblage of
water-lilies has been seen to droop, when the moon is not
risen. This is an example based on The fact that
lilies droop when the moon is not risen implies that they
do not droop when it rises; this idea corresponds to the one in
the first line. (p.36,11. 18-19).
t&m fires: ^rre: TO ^ ( TO ) the affections of which are fixed
upon Vasantalekha alone. q^rT&reT-is the name of the ?nf^T
and the verse is to be deemed as spoken by the hero, spra...
Does the bee, extremely fond of the honey of ^ the
blooming jasmine, desire any other plantain this verse the
figure is not ^gRT, but because the two expressions,
viz., ‘how can our mind turn 5 and ‘does the bee desire another
plant 5 , ultimately convey the same sense. In in the
two sentences the attributes are only similar and not the
same (but differently expressed) as in ^...^
— In the present figure, in the example etc. 5 ,
the pouring of a stream of honey and riveting the eye, are
only similar and not identical.
The term ggRf etymologically means that in which the
ascertainment of the matter in hand is observed i. e, made
authoritatively. It is that in which the truth of the matter in
hand is confirmed by the example given in illustration, as said
by Mammata ‘^g: srt: fir^: which Mallinatha explains
as Ffirorepfcnre fir^^re^ren^ P- 24:5 -of
The distinction between and may be stated
as follows:— Although in both similarity is implied, still in
srfiTTOJ^TT the attribute is the same in both the sentences, being
only expressed in different words; while in ^ert, the attribute
in one sentence is only similar to ( and not identical with)
the attribute in the second sentence. In ggRf the two attributes
168
NOTES ON
X. 51 ESFN.
mentioned in the two sentences stand in the relation of the
original and its reflection, wiT$rW
<WT ^ H Rifted:, ft g f&cf: I ST 3 ffft-
l’ R. G. p. 337. draws another distinction. In
srft^JJWT something is stated in order to convey the idea that
it is similar to the matter in hand ; while in fgprT, in order that
the matter in hand should not be indistinctly apprehended,
we give an instance where a similar state of things exists.
ftWT sfa U Ri R *| <9 w 1 ! i&T*ITr!T-
I p. 74. 3pn;4j says further on that similarity
is not absolutely necessary for jgjwr. Vide the severe criticism
of these views of srcpw in R. G. pp. 337-339. arsf »t c&fcT
5^-; ( p. 36, 11. 22-24 ). In araft^Ryzf^t a general proposition is
strengthened by particular instances or a particular instance is
confirmed by a general proposition. In or <[gt^T the
two sentences do not stand in the relation of general and parti-
cular propositions. In them if the first is a particular proposi-
tion, the second also is so. Compare ^p^q-’s words ftBrw
5%: SRTCt: ( of JrftqWJTRr and fgr^r ) ifcJTTf: I
i qcr: i =i't^*n<® r T
I qft
* wra; >’ f^r° p- 75.
Jagannatha is willing to regard srfcTTCJW and fgpw as two
varieties of one figure, ‘qft <J q ffaf TrfifW it
srRrwcjw fst^raj t rtcspr^srrcr ^ aw
R- G. p. 339.
A good example of fgiwr is the following from Raghu.
$PT 3W SfrT I
sqtftsJTtit =W57T^t Wft: II; also wgwf^Rfff^rT: sfttrf:
jrfcrftiW<WJT % I sgv^fFT ff Jjat qRTOl^T ^mfcT ’Tftvrpf
tJPPH HferUIHlI WT° V ; NtTT i m^t^t
ERfwi II WT° V.
18 R^vrffT (Illustration).
‘When a possible or, as is sometimes the case, even an
impossible connection of things implies a relation of type and
prototype, it is
An example of under a possible
connection of things is ‘^ts^ etc. Construe f^T ^
\PRr^' ^dT*S*TT M: ^TTgTTT^
X. 51-52 f^rcr. Sahityadarpana
169
3TTBFK — “‘Who, that vainly torments creatures in
this mundane sphere, enjoys prosperity for a long time’
telling this, the sun, in a day, then reached the western
mountain.” Here the connection of the sun as the agent
in the act of intimating such an idea is quite possible, inas-
much as the attribute of reaching the western mountain, which
( attribute ) belongs to him, is quite capable of conveying
such an idea. is ( qT« H. 3. 6 ) e. g. 3Tfi 3?g-
m 'TfeTTfcrf foMcMiffeq ;- S ^-refers to
This ( possible ) connection conveys the relation
of Type and Prototype (original and reflection ) between the
sun’s setting and the falling into adversity of those who
oppress other e.
The ingredients which constitute are: — there
must be a connection of things, which is, ( A ) either possi-
ble or ( B ) impossible; and moreover, this connection must
lead on to or end in implying the relation of similarity.
An example of A has been given above. There the sun is
represented as telling a moral truth. This connection of the
sun with telling leads us to suppose a similarity between
and fifacqifrr, The second variety of where
an impossible connection of things causes us to suppose the
existence of similarity, is of two kindi, as ( 1 ) occurring in a
single sentence or (2) in more sentences than one. An instance
of B ( 1 ) is etc.’ ( p. 37, 11. 5-6 ). ‘Her sidelong darting
glance bears the loveliness of the blue lotus; her underlip,
the glow of the tender leaf; her face, the charm of the
moon.’ Here the impossibility of the darting glance etc.
bearing the loveliness of the blue lotus garland etc. — for how-
can a thing possess the property of another*? — suggests a loveli-
ness like thereto and implies the relation of similarity between
the wreath of blue lotuses and the darting of a glance. This
is because there is a single sentence is
qR^rfcT-’ ^^rfcT-is to be connected with 3 ^: and
3TFR also. Another example of the same is etc. Here it
is impossible that the feet can give up the gait of the royal
swan, with which they are in no way connected; we are to
understand, therefore, that their ( of the feet ) connection with
it ( gait of a swan ) is only fancied; this fancied connection,
being actually impossible, implies a gait similar to that of the
swan. An example of based upon an impossible connec-
tion of things ( i. e. B. above ) occurring in more sentences than
one is etc’ ( p. 37, 11. 15-1 6 ). . This verse occurs in Sak.
I. Here the connection of identity bewteen the significations
15
170
NOTES ON
X. 52-52
cf the two sentences, respectively marked by the relative pro-
noun and the demonstrative ^ (i. e. q:
=ef^^ sq^rf^-) being impossible, terminates in the relation of
thus :■ — the desire of making such a body fit for
penance is like the desire of cutting the creeper with the
edge of the blue lotus. Or to take another example of the
same. etc.’ (p. 37, 11. 21-22). qn-qq-i q \ ^ rendered
fruitless. ^...f^RT^fT by the desire to enjoy the pleasures of
the world. qjq qy5fcr...qqT I have sold the (invaluable)
Cintamarii ( desire-yielding jewel ) at the price of glass.
Here there is no possible connection between leading a useless
life in the eager pursuit of pleasures and selling Cintamarii
at the price of glass. This impossibility ultimately terminates
in implying a comparison, viz. the wasting of life in the pursuit
of pleasures is like selling Cintamarii at the price of glass.
(P- 37, 11. 25-26 ). This is Raghu. 1. 2. sreqfaqqr
qfq: Intellect of little compass, sgfcr by means of a raft.
Here, the description of the solar race by a narrow intellect
and the crossing of the ocean on a raft are unconnected;
but as they are brought together, they lead us to understand
a comparison thus: — the description of the solar race by the
intellect is like the crossing of the ocean on a raft.
(P. 37, 1. 28-p. 38, 1. 4).
*qqj% — This variety ( srqqrcRg^qrq ) may also be found
where some circumstance belonging to the -jqqq cannot be
found in the Upamana. In the foregoing examples, e. g. in
a property of the (here
of the ) was represented as borne by the Upameya,
q^T^fq^cr:; one thing cannot bear what belongs really to
another alone and so we are led to suppose similarity. Some-
times a property of the Upameya is represented as belonging
to the Upamana and leads to the supposition of similarity.
An example is ‘qtsg^jq: etc.’ in the juice of the
grape. Here the attribute of sweetness belonging to the
lower lip, which is the subject of description ( and hence the
-jq^q), being impossible in the grape-juice (the ^rrt), the
sense terminates in bringing out a comparison, as in the
preceding examples. Our author here closely follows the
srffaTT^rr
gqfcr i gimrft fWswRrwra; i qt
w^r^tnf^JTT i g qrtjmsrggifttjjf n’ m iffrrq”
X. 51-52 r^tt. Sahityadarpana 171
p. 78. footer is found in a series also, as in etc. ( 38 1. 3 ).
a cat - a h y e na ( , 3^0 n. 5. ] ) ;
a tooth. ^FTTqcTT^T %cTT ) thou who settest thy
heart on a series of worldly enjoyments. This verse is addressed
by a man who is ^cT to one who is
f^r (P. 38, 11. 5-7). The
author distinguishes between and 5^. In the
former the sense of the sentence or sentences is not complete,
until the relation of type and prototype ( i. e. of similarity ) is
implied. But in ^strt, the sense of the sentence is complete;
and then through the completed sense we understand the
relation of type and prototype. Briefly put, in
resemblance is supposed in order to account for the bringing
together of two things; while in the sense is quite
complete and then that sense implies resemblance. The
3T^o *T° draws another distinction. In the two sent-
ences are independent and stand in the relation of type and
prototype; while in with the sense of the sentence,
which is the subject of description, another sense is co-
ordinated and the impossibility of the connection thus
brought about is the cause of supposing similarity.
TO. a fgRf: l” p. 77.
Noi con it be said that this figure is the same as 3rq J |qf%
(Natural Inference), because in the example of the latter,
CRtsq’ ( text p. 53 ) the sense does not terminate in a
comparison, as it does in In the example Sf^sq*
etc., one may say that the meaning is “Even the sun,
who torments people, sets ; what of others T Therefore there
is 3T%qf%, which will be explained below. Our author replies
that this is not so. The essence of is that we must
be led on to suppose comparison. This is not so in 3T#rf%.
I n etc. we are led to suppose a comparison and therefore
it is not an example of 3T*riqf%.
Some writers like divide into two
varieties, and qrqqitfftr, which correspond to
and 3T^^|^3T[ of our author. The 3^5- o ^ o gives
I ||’ as an example of
frRT[ffr. R. G. finds fault with it and calls it
( p. 343). Uddyota defends the 3^0 fjo and says that this is
311*^ ^hile % etc. is an example of sryjqj
172
NOTES ON
X. 51-52 fc^rcr.
His reasons are ‘ff 1
^'=hc=M'l, I T=f> ^ cf 5 ? HT^^^PJ^TS^r^Wrr: I fit 3 HdbHMr
i^TjJTmT ^13. 1 ’ P- 47. R. G. is willing to regard
^srcrfer i qpjfdf# ft h: it’
(p. 344 ) as an example of
Some good examples of Ore^RT a re : —
(A) grq- ^gf^ ^ R T— «T% 4t ^4 ^RPTcn^ I grrf
;*RffrrMf?r 4t v T?Rjf^R: ii m srfrr %t-
gfcri 3T*r: qw d &fcr ?fcmt ^Rw^ii ^rmc HI. 34;
3^q%T sfwr w^^'fqirr i fa^raftft^Rr m §3 ^-
jttr 11 K. D. 11. 349.
( B ) 3TH**r?§Rf B«RTftR^RT— ' feRtf^R 1RTT R RRRRft WPTRt t
f4p^Rf4RTfRT RftRft f^Tfvtm^H RJR V. 19 ; gSRd^R-
ft4 RSWmriftRt Rft RRRT 1 fTtfRT: ^ #RRRRRr RRR-
Rifir: 11 RsjrftsRrjiMMd ihh^w f5
gRftRT R§ R=RRR: I RtRlRTT ifr ftRftRRRlfftT WT- R%
n ^rr- VI -
19 s?rfrr^ (Contrast, Dissimilitude).
When the Upameya excels or falls short of the Upamana,
it is The word szffcrfo means ‘difference or excellence’.
The name sqf%^; giren to the figure is therefore quite
appropriate, as in it the excellence of the Upameya over the
Upamana or vice versa is pointed out. ^ f?pTT (p. 38, 1. 11 ).
This is single, when the reason is mentioned and threefold
when the reason is not mentioned. The reason of the
superiority of the Upameya over the Uyamana is some point
of excellence belonging to the Upameya and 'some point of
inferiority belonging to the Upamana. If both of them are
mentioned, there is one kind of ^b©n any one of the
two is mentioned (but not both ) there are two more varieties;
when none of the two is mentioned there i9 one more t
Thus there are in all four varieties.
...... 3TS^nT%fi;*r: The fourfold
becomes twelvefold according as the relation of Upamana and
Upameya is directly expressed by words or indirectly through
the sense or is only implied. 3^^? means ‘implication/
^raf^m^TJTTT^T^rf SpuftWFti These
twelve varieties become twenty-four (three times eight) acco-
rding as there is Paronomasia or not (the words in
the karikd implying the idea of 3T%$sft ). These 21 varieties
occur when the Upameya is superior to the Upamana.
X. 53-54 «rw>s. Sahityadarpana
173
These 24 varieties also occur in the same manner as above,
when the Upameya is inferior to the Upamana. Thus there
are in all 48 varieties.
(P. 38, 1. 22-p. 39, 1. 3 ). In
etc., both the cirumstances, viz, ‘spotlessness’
belonging to the Upameya and ‘the stainedness’ of the moon
(the Upamana) are expressed. If we read ‘q
for ‘q there is indirect comparison. We have
to remember the distinction of and sqqf sqfq based on the
employement of words like qqj, fq or g^q etc. If we read
( triumphs over the spotted moon) for ‘q
we shall have an implied comparison, as words like
5^, g?q are absent. The face cannot defeat anything; so we
are led to infer similarity between the face and the moon.
both and are omitted we shall have
an example of sqfq^q;, where there is no mention of sqfor qt f g ^F,#-
^TCyr^or of In this case the sentence would
stand as ‘gyq q fqgqqy’. Our author’s view is open to the
following criticism. Here it is simply stated that her face is
not like the moon; i. e. there is pure qyf^qfqsfa- and nothing
more. From this sentence standing by itself we cannot
understand that the face is superior or inferior to the moon.
When it is said that A is not like B, there is generally no idea
of expressin the superiority of one over the other. What we
do is to negative similarity. So, those varieties of (viz.
^TT®a, 3TT$ and 3TTf§jH ) which occur when both sqftqq^rt^i#
and OTqiqqqfqq,# are omitted, should really be not counted
at all. Compare the criticism of R . G. ‘‘^=r g- sjfcqq^^qqig-
I %vqrqrgqT^ ft %T: ^ \ ^ ^ ^
^ Vit
qT^qqj *T3T qq*q*q •
fti ll” p. 350.
^Tf^TTftr ( p. 38, 1. 29-p. 39, 1. 3 ). syfq etc. This is
imitated from Mammata’s words ‘srfqqreguTCZTTCr gnu:’
(qRT* 10). gq means ‘fibre’ as well as ‘merit’, qfj^ frail. Here
^ is used in the sense of ( according to the sutra c qq q^q’ ).
Therefore it is Both the superiority of the
Upameya (qyqgqqy) and the inferiority of the qqfqq (^3^)
n3
are mentioned, gq is paronomastic. Other varieties should
be understood as before. Another example of f%goqft^i ( $n4 )
174
NOTES ON X. 53-54
is sfi-qp^qq i q *m&mr
JTFTrf: ll” cfj. q X. Here the word q^j is Paronomastic ( meaning
‘phases 5 or ‘arts’). All these are examples of the cases
where the sq^q excels the Upamana.
m snftsRra; ( p - 39, 11,3-6). ^1-
supply sqqq^q. gftq: 2jHtsfqf...qj# g. This is VII. 90. rqfqqf
Sfit 2TPT g qjqq 3?fqqfq-Youth, when gone, never
comes back again. Here, the sqqyq is the moon and the
Upameya is youth. The moon is pointed out as waxing again
after waning, while (the^qqq) youth never waxes when once
it is lost. So youth is inferior to the moon. This is the
opinion of our auther, who closely follows the which
defines sqfflfo; as qT
p. 79. The 3 T^o *jo following cites etc. as an example
of ^qij-q^^q. It remarks upon ‘$ftq;’ etc. =q qrq^T^T
I fT^rs^FTJT^rq r p. 80. This view is
sharply opposed to that of Mammata, Jagannatha and others,
who say that sqfq^ occurs only when the ^q^q is superior to
or excels the Upamana in some way. They do not hold that
the variety where sqljq is inferior to the Upamana has any
charm in it. They say that ‘gftq: ^q:’ is an example of sqfq^q;
as defined by them; i. e. in it also the ^q%q excels (and is
not inferior to) the Upamana. The views of Mammata and
-others are summed up by our author in ‘srqtq^q
They say that the Upameya and Upamana are not youth and
the moon respectively, but are the instability of youth and
that of the moon. Here the waning of the moon is inferior,
because it is followed by waxing; but the instability of
youth is superior, because it can never return when once
gone. Therefore what the poet here intends to convey
is the superiorty of the instability of youth over that
of the moon. The verse then means: — The moon, though
she wanes, is easily found again; but youth cannot be
regained when once lost; so you should not, cultured as you
are, render it fruitless, by dwelling too much on your
wounded pride. The sense is quite favourable to the object
desired, viz., soothing the heroine’s wounded feeling. But,
if we take the moon as Upamana and youth as the
Upameya and say that here youth is said to be inferior, then
the meaning of the verse would be unfavourable to the object
desired. The meaning would be ‘As youth is inferior, why
.should I give up my pride; let it pass, an inferior thing as it
175
X. 53-54 SShityadarpana
is. ’ Therefore in this verse also, there is of 3q*N over
. Therefore the words ‘fqq^ employed in the definition
of by some ( e. g. ) are useless, can never
occur when the is represented as being inferior to the
Upamana. These are the views of Mammata and others. Our
author does nor agree with them.
era ( P. 39, 11. 8-9 ). By snf*m and
we mean ‘excellence’ and ‘inferiority respectively. In
this verse it is evident that youth is inferior to the moon
in point of stability. Compare the words of ciqyq
Rwiftsft sprtRt ^ g
ePTtSRI I (fft?4ft %fcr ?) gfft=r JftTRi-
I OTJTHT|qirw
ftfasw jrRrqift mftprg. i qfer-
gJRMftlfft I ( 3PR*T replies ) I qft|S5T
qft gg^^iNiRsra sift g^r i
fW FRnratqRTTft^T RJig I wi
gra- Orcraraftg fspH rc
wsftrpqftft ?ra fira jtRt J?;g, ga? iratag’ ??r-
ftrg, fft*m#qftft fft4 sRr ^Iqt'mrq ra^rai^RT
fq^ftprftRr amtfRra Rq iwrag. i r %5rerqgq%ref
fg^grog. i alra grRraqft^ qRpnqcqTg. i sfKn#R3rq*ft ft r#*tt
aft; $i?w- fraiftag'qg%a ar at fafta: i awiggfta
faa^ft Hft gffta^n” p- 80 of faqo
3Rg aT ^ggaiaar ?Rr (P. 39, 11. 9-12). Our author
concedes for argument’s sake, that in ‘^ftq: there is
sqiqqqfqsfqj ( and not sq^T^^jr^TT )• The reason why he concedes
this is probably as follows: — That verse is intended to soothe
a proud woman. It can produce the desired effiect only if it is
impressed upon her mind that by insisting upon nourishing her
wounded feelings, she would be casting aside a rare thing, viz.
youth. So in order to heighten the value of youth, it must be
pointed out that it never returns again when once lost. It would
not do to point out that it is inferior; so, instead of regarding
as the sq*Tq and as being inferior to the moon, it is better
to point out that qfajj is the most unstable thing in the world
( i. e . is the ) and that the most must be made of
it. After conceding that etc. may be an sxample of
BMifaJiaifasrar, our author cites ‘fsjjreqtr:’ etc. as an example,
where there is and says that here the explanation
offered on etc. would not hold good,
176
NOTES ON
X. 53-54
This is the last half of Nai. IX. 123 , the first half being ‘^nrr
WT The printed text of the
reads ^qq-, which appears to be better. Hanumat and
others illumined the messenger’s path by their fame ( which is
white ), while I, by my foemen’s laugh ( which is also repre-
sented as white). Here fJjJTci; and others ( i. e. are
superior, because they carried out the errand on which they
were sent by their masters; the sq^j, Nala ( who is the speaker ),
is inferior, because he failed in effecting the object for which
he was sent by the gods, viz. winning over Damayanti for
them. Our author suggests, by the words ‘cfij that we
cannot anyhow show that the Upameya is superior to the
Upamana here. Therefore it is quite proper that the words
-3BdTS*rqT are inserted in the definition. But the shows
that even here it is sqWFTTTWT and not ^ Wld^ifM that is
intended “37-7
1” p. 70 .
The R. G., after quoting the 37^ . B« and the discussion of
cited by us above, refutes their views as follows: —
B r^uigccj^ I ft ^ m tj$
d rq 54 i^ 3 u i$a ^ 1 r-d^q^s'-^qlsq’
dl^l&lftqfalB Bf^f^B<(uWdd<frT I 3Tsq*TT ‘feftBTST
BBT BRTfltBT^ BT3 BTB Mfcl^dWT STfOTfo ^ g dNx I: I
fiN bb ^ 3 qq-q^nqq;#'Wd , Tft b bb?
4ft u wfd 1 B*TT ‘STft fdBBBT ftdt l 37*} ff% ps 3127 -
%# 3 B: U* ^ fH
qftowft I” R. G. p. 353 .
20 ( Connected Description ).
When a single expression by the force of a term denoting
conjunction, signifies two facts, it is provided hyper-
bole be at the basis of it. When a word conveying, by virtue of
the power of denotation, a meaning connected with one thing,
also conveys a meaning connected with another thing by the
force of some word like etc., it is In
3 %^ BflBB: ftdT, the fathes is connected with the action of
coming as well as the son. But the father, being in the nomi-
native case, is principal, while 2=r, being in the instrumental,
X. 55 a^ ( r K. SlHITYADARPANA 1 77
is indirectly ( and therefore subordinate^ ) connected with the
action of coming. The employment of the word denotes
the idea of between the words, not necessarily
between the objects. It should never be forgotten that striking-
ness is the essence of every figure. also must be striking.
So tp-or sjfPFP ftcTT is not an example of the figure,
is striking only when it is based upon This
may be of two kinds, ( 1 ) based upon ( ‘Intro-
susception of an object into an identity with another ) or ( 2 )
upon the inversion of the sequence of cause and effect. The
former again may rest upon (a) Paronomasia, or (b)
not. The remarks that in the poet intends to
convey the relation of and sq-ifa, but it is not the natural
one ( as that of ^7% and ) but is entirely left to the volition
of the writer. gqsWRTR: I
1 §/fofqr 1
^ S>| I W ^
^r^nwff \ ^ i” p. 81.
etc. Here the word uipTT^I is Paronomastic.
There is between meaning ‘redness’ and tjjj
meaning ‘love’. Therefore this is
S£tf% *• 6 * la), 33RFRT: ‘awake-
ning love along with the assemblage of water-lilies.’
‘closing the heart (in the contemplation of
the beloved one) along with the multitude of lotuses.’ Here
the words are distinct from the difference of the
things they relate to, but not under a Paronomasia, The idea
is: — in ‘^pr’ etc. the two literal senses of the word
( love, redness ) are identified; while here, the word has
one general sense ‘ awakening,’ which in relation to the lotuses
means ‘expanding’ and in relation to love ‘exciting’. These
two, i. e. expanding and exciting are spoken of under one word,
because they are very similar. There is no Paronomasia ( i . e.
it is an example of 1 b ).
An example of based upon the inversion of the
sequence of cause and effect i9 ‘ etc. The
Nirn. edition says that this is taken from the Raghuvamsa.
But this seems to be wrong. There is a similar verse in
Raghu. “qjqr ^Tt^%TT St f*PTcT ; ^t I U3 cRjff&R-
NOTES ON
X. 55 SftfrF.
17'8
^fkll” VIII. 38. 3#JTt^gn%^r whose
conciousness was taken away by a deep swoon. Here, the
falling of the woman is the cause of the swoon of the king.
Both cause and effect are spoken of as occurring at the same
time. Therefore there is based upon ^ | ^ qfa f TM ^
(i. e. 2 above ).
In etc. there is no
because there is no at the basis.
Jagannatha very strongly criticizes those who regard
as a separate figure. He says
that the charm lies simply in the inversion and therefore the
figure is srf^qrfrfl and not Vide his lucid and pointed
remarks in R. G. pp. 361-362.
Other examples of are 1 jfjj- gsrfr
IPR: I qp^rsj nSfalt: II ^
i q?rf% ^ 3m§firteqr1Sf?5r: n’ K. D. II. 352-353.
21 fortfrE (Speech of Absence).
^ 3?% f^TT 3T?irg, qr (m) That
is ffiTtfrft, when a thing in the absence of another is represented
( 1 ) as not disagreeable, or ( 2 ) as disagreeable, means
that it does not become unsightly. Thus, though the meaning
of the words is ultimately the same as i. e.
agreeable, still the reason why the attribute of agreeableness is
expressed through the negative of disagreeableness (i. e.
not positively as but through two negatives as in ?r
3T3ft*R) is to convey the idea that the (apparent)
of some object of description is the fault of the proximity of
another object (and not of the object to be described) and
that the object of description is naturally fair in itself.
fffirsfrrftfcr i ^
^fcT I’ p. 83. ffaj etc. jjar: attained her
unslumbering state ( i . e. shone with all her natural brilliance ).
without the heat of summer, charming.
Here the moon and woods are naturally charming, but become
only in the presence of clouds and summer respectively.
When these latter are absent, they become agreeable i. e . this
verse is an example of that variety, which is
^ By you, who followed thy lord
X. 56'f^Rrirfi. Sshityadarpana 179
who is dead. Here is sr^ft^RT without the sun, i. e. si;
fqRT #«;• farM ?r ( p 40, ll. 7-8 ). This
occurs in 3T^- p- 84 as an example of It is ascribed to
and in the gRTfqRcrf^ (No. 1964 ). means
‘the moon.’ awakened i. e. blooming. The Sarvasva reads
the last pada as ‘ff fST ^TptfRT snptf’* In this verse, there is
a special strikingness, as there is a with reference to
each of the two i. e . is said to be sRjtRfr without
R?jr^R and is said to be brtRr without ftftgRfMRtR-
3T^ r. remarks in the same way on etc.
afiRig^R srJft: i *4 r
R^Rlf^f^ I f p. 84.
etc. Although the very particle is not employ-
ed here, still, the figure is f^Rff^i, since the sense intended to
be conveyed is that of fqRp Similarly m ay occur without
the actual empoyment of
wr rcp^sjt’ i r- p* 83. it
should not be forgotten that here also strikingness is the
essence of the figure.
Bhamaha and Udbhata do not define this figure- A
writer called defines it differently, says
ifrT 5 ” p. 83. An example of this will be
f^RT sprit: #rr I r pjp^T ffor
5rfrT^TT^^- ?? sm fc^^^RccRfg: I m ft tioRf^RT
ftRRR f^RQ P- 83. Jagannatha also
refers to this bt^RRTR^R, quotes his definition and cites
the following as an example : — jju | T tfSRTf^sR *
I snftRr: M R. G.
pp, 365-366.
22 ^T^ftfrfJ (Speech of Brevity).
ar^RJT ( 5Hn*spsr ) sr^ sqwrc-
RiTRtq: RT RRRtfe — ‘When the behaviour of another is ascribed
to the subject of description from a sameness of ( 1 ) action,
( 2 ) sex or gender, or ( 3 ) attribute, the figure is ^JTRTfrfi.
Another means ‘a thing which is not the subject in hand. 7
In the 5T5Tf^T thing is not mentioned in words; on the
5 fc£r[, the behaviour of the is superimposed on account
of a similarity of actions or on account of the gender of the
the word employed or on account of adjectives.
180
NOTES ON
X. 56 *WTHlfrE.
An example of where the behaviour of the
is ascribed to the from a sameness of action, is etc.
(p- 4°> J 1 * 15-16).
(^FPlt:) (^f) sqr^T (fWTSTC),
^ 3?w: 3T^j (^#) w^r (f^) (?r^) ( t; ) WN^ifWf
( ) cfifa qvqw Here it must be understood
that the subject of description is the wind from the Malaya
mountain The action of embracing the woman belongs
both to the wind and the lover. But the lover is not men-
tioned and is 3nT*gcr here. So here from the sameness of action,
there is an ascription of the behaviour of a rough lover to
the wind. It must be noted that, if here it is not the wind
that is the subject of description, but the lover, who does
not succeed in embracing the woman and therefore calls the
wind blessed, implying thereby that he is unfortunate, then
the figure would be and not
Hdittlfrfr from a sameness of sex or gender ( i, e. 2 above )
is exemplified in etc. ^ ( p . 40,11. 19-20).
This is Rajataranginl IY. 441 and is also quoted in
vol. Ip. 305 (which reads gaarf). ‘How can the spirited -
man think of woman, when he has not gratified his desire
of conquest? The sun does not court the Evening, without
having triumphantly passed over the whole world . 5 In this
verse, the behaviour of lover and heroine is ascribed to the
sun and the evening, simply because of the words being
respectively in the masculine and feminine genders. There
is 3T5£rp^y^f also.
Sameness of attributes ( i. e. 3 above ) may occur in three
ways; ( a ) from a Paronomasia; ( b )from community (*prrw)
and (c) as implying resemblance. An example of (3 a) is
etc. ( p. 40, 1J. 24-27 ). This verse is a description of
morning on TOO 5 *: ( 3 ^:) f^^ff
tot hi; fforctt jpr tot: ht)
Oftht arwtioj hto strufrc)
3RTOT ITOTO 3T?snfiTTO 3?T|f?r: 3TI^<TJT TOT: Hr; # TOHft
TOT: HI ), 3R-
(^rrff ) f^T 3RS^e5tiTFifx&|4|: (qg^:
ntqg, qr°f: prcr ^rforTO hO (^§4 TOt to; to*
l^rr 3TT$3 TO* TO TO H) UT%HT lOHr) ffar
( R?l ) ). In this verse the words jpg,
etc. are Paronomastic. Here the moon is the subject of
description; as the morning rays redden the eastern horizon,
the moon approaches the western horizon with faded lustre
X. 56-^57 srcmftfa. SshityAdarpana
181
The Paronomastic adjectives convey the idea that, on seeing
that his beloved (a fickle woman) touched by another’s hand
grows joyous, the lover loses his colour through jealousy.
Here, to the moon is ascribed the behaviour of the lover and
to the eastern quarter that of a fickle lady.
37^ (P. 40, 1. 28-p. 41,1.11).
37%^ la the above example, even if we read
for ‘fTn^TlfTr^ and thus turn a part of the verse
into a metaphor ( would be equal to 37^
sfgi ?m: St), the figure is still and
not f^T:. The author now proceeds
to assign his reasons for saying that there is still
There (i. e . in the figuring of darkness as vesture
would, from their evident resemblance on account of both
being covering things, rest in itself independent of the help of
any other metaphor ( such as that of the East as a woman ) ;
so it ( ) could not preclude our recognizing
WrctRti to be the figure in this whole verse. What the
author means is: — and are both covering things ;
their resemblance is therefore quite evident; they can very
well be superimposed the one on the other on account of
this resemblance. The superimposition of on |%j^; would
be quite independent of any other 3777^7 in the verse and may
stand by itself. It is not necessary for us to suppose a
superimposition in any other part of the verse. Therefore
the figure in the whole verse is ^ 7 71 *flfr f> although in one part
( i. e. fofaugs&H read for there is Rupaka. 27=7
— Where the thing figured and the thing figuring it
do not bear an evident resemblance, there indeed the
metaphor being unintelligible apart from a metaphor in
another part, we have to recognize an implied metaphor in
another part of the description, although it be not expressed
in words. In such a case there is uW'H. The author
says: — in i-r^j we have one metaphor expressed in
words, but the resemblance of the two things is not quite
evident. This leads us to recognise a metaphor in another
part of the description, although it be not expressed. But
in the verse etc. the in is quite
independent of any other Rupaka, as the two things greatly
resemble one another. We need not suppose, to account
for that there is a ^7 of spsft and
although it is not directly expressed. Therefore,
132 notes on X. 56-57 swwtffc.
standing by itself, the figure in the whole verse is and
not An example of is ‘^Rq’ etc.
( p. 40 ,1 1. 4- 5 ). | Jjcjjfq-
’Rrtjpftoifcr ll’. This verse is cited in the K. P.
a * an eMm P’ e of i ^
s£4a: ^kmci: I 551*4 'CcTT^T =4 I 3f rT :J[R=( 1 0 H tl I *i s^ITSiTRT ^ r &hlwi r ^WI^
^ I 55*^ fttg* I TOfpftaffr
^'TOTcJRW^ra 1 * 3. =?. p. 385. Here the resemblance
between battle-field and the 3 ^: 3 * is not quite evident. Here
although there is the superimposition of the character of a
heroine on because the gender of both words is the
same and although the behaviour of the rival heroine ( jjfa.
•snfon) is superimposed upon the hostile army, because
both turn their faces away (the one in running away and
the other through jealousy), still the figure is
(and not where also there is the superimposition
of on a srcp- thing); for these two superimpo-
sitions (of JTrftcfj on HU 3 SRR 5 NT and on ftpp )
are made solely to account for the superimposition of srr
on qr[. 5 i(rcf^i fcTtf'-i — In those cases also where there
is an expressed figuring of many objects bearing evident
resemblance to those with which they are identified, and an
implied figuring in a part, there also there is
The author said above that even if we read (in
^ etc.) the figure will be the
Rupaka in may stand by itself, as the resemblance
between darkness and vesture is evident. Now suppose
that there are several Rupakas, all expressed in words, in a
verse and the things superimposed bear great resemblance to
the things on which they are superimposed; and also that
there is one superimposition which is implied and not expressed.
JSTow the question is:— Is the figure of the whole verse
or ? It may be said that, as in f^fcppr, the
Rupakas, being all of them as regards things between which
there is evident resemblance, may stand by themselves and the
figure will be qfrnptfvN as there is one super imposition which is
implied ( as in qjrr#frR ) and not expressed. The author says
that this should not be so. The figure must be taken to be
Rupaka, as the cognition of metaphor is the pervading one
( on account of there being a number of directly expressed
Rupakas) and as this all-pervading cognition prevails over
18?
X. 56-57 SJmfifa. Ssbittadarpana
the cognition of ( which is possible, in the case supposed
in a solitary part of the whole verse). 53*1%^ = or
^ was said above that the resemblance bet-
ween ^ and 3^:3*; was not quite evident. An objection is
raised against this in these words ‘There is evident resem-
blance between ^ and as in both of them the hero
moves with ease.’ The author replies
It may be conceded that there is a clear resemblance between
and 3^:3? ; but this resemblance is dependent upon ( i. e.
arises only after ) a consideration of the sense of the whole
sentence,- it does not arise independently. Because a battle-
field and an 3^:33; are not, in themselves, places for easy
movement, as a face and the moon are charming in their very
nature; i. e. as jjjjj and are charming independently of
anything else, we may independently superimpose the one
on the other; but and 3^:35; are not in themselves places of
easy movement; they become so only in the case of a
particular king; so their resemblance is perceived not in
itself, but only by considering the sense of the whole passage.
( P. 41, 11. 11-16 ). An example
°f 3 ^ above ^ fart etc. fart...adfaft-sftl mufti (<$>
% wr; fcr pr (wfaft)
far ( TWcRfft ) ( 3Tf=rr )• In this verse, the adjective
‘fart...5T#;ft’ is applicable both to a lotus plant and to a
fair woman (as she also is often represented as having a
fragrant breath); this leads us to recognise the lotu9 under
the character of the heroine, by reason of the attribution
o the action of smiling ( the meaning of $5^ being ‘smiling’ ),
which belongs only to a human being (and not to the plant).
primarily belongs to the woman only; it is then
identified with the of the lotus. So the adjective
is the cause of the superimposition of the behaviour of the
woman on the lotus plant. Unless there be some such
attribute (primarily going with the 3^3^, as here), it
would be impossible to recognise the behaviour of a woman
( in the lotus plant ) merely from a community of epithets..
< n o* fdM I* Compare the words of
VTcjtjiPi i’ p. 86, and vide the adverse-
criticism of B. G. pp. 379-380.
184
NOTES ON X. 56-57
sq<fifrl': (P. 41, 11. 16-25). The circum-
stance of the common qualification implying a resemblance
( i. e. 3 c above) is possible in three ways according as a simile or
a metaphor or a commixture ( of the two figures ) is included.
etc. ^T5nrr fft%uiT“-This occurs in 3T^. *f. p. 86.
Compare the following from ( II. 23 )
i cited as an
example of In this verse the adjective (well
dressed ) applies primarily to the lady. Therefore, the other
adjectives etc. must be interpreted in such a way as
to be applicable to her. f^riT is to be dissolved
as ^isptt: %: f%T- In so dissolving, the word ^sr+n*:
will be prominent and the figure, in the compound, will be
TJpama. Afterwards, the compound ^WTWr^'Tf^TT being
dissolved in another manner ( as which is
a ‘covered with flowers resembling the
brightness of the teeth’) we recognise the fawn-eyed lady
under the charater of a creeper, by the force of the
qualifications ( such as ^rsnrrS^^dT, e tc. ) which
are equally applicable both to the lady and to the creeper ( by
a difference in the way of the dissolution of the compounds ) #
Our author here copies the very words of the 3 #. p. 16 ‘ 3 ?^
ipqFfttfcr =? ft 'T«T**T5r*rai%:
l’. 5TK-
ipqct ( P- 41, 11. 22-23 ). The verse ‘ ^ Ro q qgfV has
been cited above ( text p. 23 ) as an example of
The way in which this verse will be eqHffrfi is as follows : —
^ 5 X^Tj=q and are both delightful; similarly, and
are both therefore there is evident resemblance
between them. These two Rupakas may stand by themselves;
they are independent and do not require the 3flftq of q^r on
The adjective ( expanding ) primarily applies to
q^T and not to Therefore, as in etc., the figure
is The number of Rupakas being only two ( and
not many ), there is no all-pervading idea of Rupakas; and so
the figure may well be It will be seen below
that our author’s view is quite different and that he does
not approve of I n giving this example
he simply follows ancient writers. soffit:
( p. 41, 11. 23-25 ). will be treated of at length below.
It has been briefly explained in the notes ( p. 21 ) on £ ?f:
cKfaitST:’. If we read q%r for in ‘gv^pri’ etc. then
X. 56-57 ssTn<S*fe. Sshittadarpana
18.5
'will be gf 7 Tjvti ( of stot and is an
adjective that may apply to the lady as well as to the
■creeper. There is no criterion for settling whether there is
a simile or a metaphor as in Therefore there
is We may dissolve the compound in one way or
the other. When we have dissolved it in one way, then we
shall recognise the lady under the character of the creeper.
Compare “ 3 ^ ‘q^ ifHsjV
wwr t st gm rawnfem
pp. 86-87<
R 3 =er .. . <gr%cTT (P.41,11. 26-28). Of these three
cases ( viz. and ^jt+t ) there is in the
hrst and third according to the opinion of those who hold
that a simile and cannot be partial. It is who re-
gards that and cannot be Compare
on the words of 3 ^. $ p 87
\ *ris: ^ ^
Rmtcrt ^r. \ 9 37 ^ p* 87.
The aui hor of 37 ^ $ , perhaps simply following TJdbhata, says
that and 33 ^ cannot be but afterwards ( on
p 92 ) he himself says that sqRT must he admitted
rfcR W RRrRrST I
^RTfTiqTw^rr shrift S^T^l”. Jagannatha takes Ruyyaka to
task for this inconsistency; ^
laigqs^qr ^4 »’•
The 2nd (viz ^WT%f7T$Tf% ) is nothing but
In ^rwfrgf^r: etc. there is and not
OTT^frFi ( as the author said following ancient writers ); be-
cause here the charm lies m the Rupaka and not in ^fqy-
besides what is first perceived is the Rupaka. qg
cannot possibly be connected with the face and hence from
the very first we must superimpose q^ on gqq. Compare
irq TOPaTTffr’r sRftfq: 1 f ^
^nq: I 5 xm°- g
tqaqf^ I 3?£. *7- p. 87. qqf^j-q^ .... ^3f%cTT — On careful con-
sideration, however, it will appear that in the first variety
■( viz. ) it is is proper to recognize no other figure
than partial Snnjle.
37=w • (P. 41, 1. 28-32). This
verse occurs in the on qpT?fs q q ^rr^R^of IV. 3. 27, m s^r.
p. 92 and jgvnfq?TT3f&, all of which read ( which is better )>
186
NOTES ON
X. 56-57
instead of swkiRO*. stt^SeRIT^.^ '4g: ?NRT 5K?;
smteprsfl 1 #: 3T«ff^ ST<T ^RTC- TJle autumn bearing
on her pale q<Jt^c ( cloud; breast ) the bow of Indra ( the rain-
bow ) resembling the fresh wound of the nail and delighting the
spotted moon, increased the distrees ( or the heat ) of the sun.
If SWT be not admitted and m its place ^JTysrfrK
be recognised, then in the above verse, how can we recognise
the autumn as behaving like a woman, when it is impossible
that the breast of the woman should bear the ram-bow resem-
bling a fresh wound of the nail ? What the author means is: —
In the above verse every one admits that the sun and the moon
are apprehended as the Nayakas. Now the question is whe-
ther this apprehension is due to Upama, or or whe-
ther the figure in the verse is 3 WT or fliyTflifvFT* The
words convey, by the force of the word
3TR, that the figure is Upama. The only thing that is specially
noteworthy is that all the angas are not mentioned in words.
JTyfifor and ^y^ are not mentioned, but we can understand
that they are the Upamanas here from the fact that 'cf^:
is expressly compared to 37T^R=f^f. So the figure is
sqW* But, it is said by some that the figure is Here
the qualification ( or better SRR ZR ft c making clear
of clouds;’ ‘propitiating’) is common to both and yfjf^y
and therefore here, behaviour of the jflfiyqfyy and of jyyqcjy is
attributed to =ry^ and respectivelv Thus the figure is
^Tyy^tfxy[« Our author brings forward against this the objection
that then the qualification Vy^TOcfPT ^ cannot be
applied to the Nayika. It is applicable only to Autumn. It
-cannot be applied to Nayika, whose breast cannot be said to
bear the rainbow. So in taking ^Tyy^tfrfi to be the figure, one
-qualification would have to be regarded as practically pur-
poseless. This is not good. We must understand the figure
to be that which would explain everything. If we take
Ptofitefr 3WT to be the figure, then we can explain
as compared to ^f^r, to Trrf^y and the moon to a
^yqq; and so on.
^s^yyryqt: (
shows that sn^?y^?y is grrryysy, is ^-zy.
♦The Subha. ascribes the verse to P&nini,
X. 56-57 m mtfa Sshityadarpana 187
s?g 41, 1. 32-p. 42, 1. 3 ). An objec-
tion is raised m these words against the position taken above
that the figure is ^qmr, as m one part, viz,
it is directly expressed. Though here, according
to the letter, the character of Upamana belongs to the nail-
mark, still, if we consider the spirit of the passage, the nature
•of the Upamana must be transferred to the rainbow. What
is meant is; — As the word 3fi*r is used after at first
sight it appears that is the Upamana; but if we refieet
upon the spirit of the passage, which is the apprehension of
the behaviour of ndyikdy we shall find that is the
Upameya and ^ is the Upamana, therefore we should
•construe th words m a different way., viz, zF&Fi
A parallel instance of interpretation is given m the
words mvt fSFcOTC
2 T 4 T ftPr is a Vedic sentence which enjoins something
which is not known from any other source,
Vide notes below on qf^psqp The sentence == 777 ^ ( li'
makes an oblation of curds ) is a fqfSp The question is; —
what is laid down in this sentence, whether is laid
•down or the oblation of curds is laid down. The reply
is; — The Vedic sentence 3 ffJr^ has already enjoined
fcpp So, although in ^ the verb g occurs, stilb
what is enjoined is not which is ( i % e . which
we already know from another source, viz., the Vedic injun-
ction sprtfcr), but as the material with which the
is to be effected. Here the words apparently lay down
but from the spirit of the passage and other circu-
mstances, we say that the object is not to lay down but
to give information about the material to be used. Similarly,
the clause 5PTHT’ will imply
aC*tRT-’ The words from qg JT&ftSrft'zrftr are
‘Copied almost -verbatim from the s^. g. srisrpr
?nq5R: sreM I <T%3f
*rgft RWR°ftfg i irs/tot* w sralfc i q*n ‘cost
fRTpd sftl Frartfr ftft:, H^rftrqg-^TTgmpF 7 ! srn#ftf$=r l’’p. 62; on
W etc. 3 PRST remarks WSRRStRKSKt-vig^
^tfcT— -^RTrf^tT I ft
^ 35#*rPPR’'r«gHii^ii qRKsmr fspgtmr*
sfrr cffa RslT^t l” Compare ‘“gepqs qg-
g^pft wsq^qft^’, sfcT SKRi^pfi: 5PT
188
NOTES ON X. 56-57
nnpfar»
5TT=R3TtN ciWfgyffa^ 2 PTT s KfN?5r^!?t JHMKRlfNlli ‘®tfrrf aj ft l Tr
mfc^.- sr^rcfor’ ??pr ^ftfNhcwrt' ft^PU f*pren«ra: f%t%:
‘sot isrftr’ f<gr#T sot^ot* f^m; i k. p.
5th ui. pp 226-227 (Va) ; “qsrr <i?;farc T 'PTi^ ?w?r s g er*rr
SRrSsrsrrer crT#r 5 T%t rr 3 srra^ft 1 *wr ss^rsr ®P3cr:
f*rft % ‘sat fCrft"’ sppr x% s g sfir ss*r si” asta pp-
176-177; the jfffT says on ?r g 3^4 etc. I t^rtIPK-
oiSIST sift 3T!nt: I spRT^sft ^aifc 5Rf ^TTSST
...»?n*R?TO[ ( P- 42, 11. 3-4 ). Our author replies to the
above ingenious argument m these words. It is better to
admit the existence of q qfeif efaffiift sqm here, rather than
resort; to a far-fetched interpretation like the above, to which
recourse is to be had only when there is no way out of a
difficulty ( 3?fqqi% )
ST^jqre--- Tr^F^rqr^(P. 42,11. 4-8). Granting, however,
that may somehow be recognized in the verse q^.’,
we shall still have to admit sqm in such a verse
as ( cited on X. 24 p 21 of the text above ), as there is
no other alternative The word it. to be connected
with above. The particle srq 1 h
invariably associated with the Upamana, so m etc.
3?qs, q?r and =q=Hqj^ are compared cxpresdy with g^q
and ^gjrf respectively; sjfm* the sqfTR of is not expressed.
We cannot construe with 3^, the Upameya, as sqm
was above taken away from its place and construed with
qg.. The worde g^q etc. ( of which 3 TR is one ) are
construed with the Upamana or Upameya or both; but as
said above ( on p. 91 ) goes with the Upainana alone. So in
is not possible. j% Besides how
can ( which consists in the attribution of the behaviour
of one thing to another) have room in simile on which
( in such examples as qScTsprr e tc. ) depends, and in
which there is no idea of the attribution of the behaviour of
one thing to another? In simile, what is apprehended is that
one thing is similar to another things while in gmmfvfi the
behaviour of one is attributed to another . So the two figures are
quite distinct and to a certain extent antagonistic. It was said
above that ‘qmsmT etc.’ is an example of $m#f% based upon
sqm* Our author says that if you once admit that there is
X. 56-57 ^ T *rri% . SAhittadarpana
189
simile, you cannot in the same breath admit
T4*TcT ^ til Rfei
^t^T^TftTfT^ ^CTC 5 ^ ^ *’ ^°* Compare
i \ n 3T^° ^° P* 93 -
The author supports his position by a quotation ‘sqquft...
^Z\\ Most printed editions read HHNfitlvff: which is
also the reading of Pramadadasa, in a foot-note (p. 400),
asks' us to read Thi 9 latter is better, because
the context is favourable to it. The author is discussing
whether ^n#frf» based upon is possible. I
we read d ' ^flM^^W T ^ t f rfir» the verse will mean that *wr£rf%5
based on ‘ srrt ( i. e. 3TTq«FPTfs5fa u T s ) is not possible. If we
read ^rpRT and also d ^ ffiq ^' as Ndoes, the meaning
will be : — ^ ^ ^ 3TTT *A
^TTfltf^T ( ^T- As to the other reading, construe
z^(mvi) s^qcR: 3?^ 3T^r% cr^ (crernO
( 4|qwpp«! ) OT§H^: *' ( *srfct )• That resemblance
in which the behaviour or the nature of two things is under-
stood (to be similar) is not ^ ^ is evidently partial
simile. An objection against this is that the word * s
needlessly repeated in the second half. supports this
interpretation. B and J read flr=r There the meaning
would be ‘since in 3 x^ 7 , neither the identical action nor the
nature ( of the ) i 9 understood ( to be attributed to the
Upameya), there is no such thing as (in which this
is done) based upon simile but it is evidently
3 'qTft.’ To us this appears better, as it agrees well with the
words above ‘j^ =4twri etc «’ Some say that
in the nature ( ) of one is apprehended as identical
with that of another. It is, however, generally said that the
behaviour of one is represented to be identical with that
( ) of another. In Upama one thing is simply understood
to be similar to another.
?TFW fqqq ^frT ( P. 42, 11. 10-11 ). Thus the possi-
bility of a partial simile and partial metaphor being admitted,
it follows logically that *wiy|frfi is not possible in a ( com-
mixture ) founded upon the two ( Upama and Rupaka ). So
in fact, does not admit of being sustained by^ epithets
implying comparison. The author said above that
is possible in three ways, The
last he divided into three, amd
190
Nona ON x. 56-57 sm roifou
He established above that the first and second of
these latter are respectively ^ an d
He shows here that the third also is not ggjgtfg- but
P urel y gfC- So, furore as based upon is im-
possible. So that variety should not be recognised at all*
The author, following ancient writers, first said so; but now
finally withdraws his words.
WfsrsRTa gHWlfo: (P.42, 11. 12-18). The
author now tells us finally that the 3rd variety of HWetfrfi
( viz. MqviHt^r, the other two being q-^gi^ and f^gpjj ) is
only twofold (and not three-fold as said above), as resting
upon Paronomastie or common epithets. gt n tflRfi is due to
or flqhjrngp^j; the last is of two kinds.
T T°T 0 or gretrcrfqsrrno. Thus gqBtfrf; has four varieties. In all
these four varieties, the essence is the attribution of the
behaviour of one thing to another. Compare ‘g^ ^ sq^n;-
OTKfa ^ ^TfW’bl’ 3T^° go p. 89. $ ^ ?f?r ggqr— g: means
^CKegiTlT.'. This attribution of the behaviour of one thing
to another is again fourfold :— ( 1 ) The behaviour of a thing
belonging to ordinary life is attributed to another thing of
ordinary life; (2) The behaviour of a thing pertaining to some
branch of science is attributed to another thing pertainin'*
to science; ( 3 ) The behaviour of a is ascribed to a
(4) The behaviour of a is attributed to a
These four are mentioned by sr^o go p. 89 and by
R. G. p. 384. <?| 1%^ . . . ST^mq;. The things belonging to
ordinary life may be divided into many classes from the
difference of rasas etc. which they are capable of developing.
f^rr^ (P. 42, 11. 19-24). In the verse
‘szmjV .etc. occurring above (text p. 40, 1. 15) we have an
example of ( 1 ) the behaviour of a rude lover, a being of
ordinary life, being attributed to the Malaya wind another
thing of ordinary life.
' This verse is cited in the 3Rb> go p. 90, with
the remark arm
means ift- ^Here fajr is addreesed. srfijpgg ( gqfg ) srft ff%j
( ff%3, as said in j%. q? r .
TW iftW I 'Ttmff+rsTH ff%:’ ) 3rsqg (srfqgtfiftg;
ffflrfi: f^T^f according to Panini’s
191
X. 56-57 Sxhityadarpana
sutra I. 4. 194— g%#T ^T: I %• &) sfa: fcT: h
rTW 5?^i IPT JT^- ‘They, I think, have surely definitely
understood Thee, who (they), seeing Thee as the one
unchangeable in all phenomena, the imperishable and evolving
manifold forms, have lost all notions of difference ( quality )
in Thee who art the highest,’ This is the meaning of the verse
as understood with reference to God. We understand the
also viz. f^ricr ( a particle like ^ etc. ), through the
force of the qualifications etc., although the word
pwrffi- is not mentioned. The grammatical meaning would be
‘they, I think, have defined thee (properly), (Oh nipata\
who, seeing thee same in all connections, called an 37 ^,
used without reference to number, omit the application of
terminations after thee. 5 ’ Compare Panini’s sutras ‘snsftwfe-
I. 4. 56; ‘=n^S^’ I. 4. 57 f^TTcf^TT:
* 3 : 1 ffc. eft.)* ‘qr^r:’ I. 4. 58. (sr^sfi: STRTOWT 1 %• on
37 ^:, the remarks i&ipteqrfSw In the above
verse, the properties of a thing ( f^ws ) known from the science
of Grammar are ascribed to the Being (God) known from the
V edas. Many V edic passages say that the truth about God
can be known only from the V edas ; compare
etc. ^ 77527 = 7 . The author has given examples of two
varieties only, viz. ^ an< *
For til€ examples of the other
two, see 37^0 ^ \o pp. 90-91 and R, G. pp. 384-5. An example
of ( 4 above ) is TOfeff-
wm, 1 wnrorerRr:
^f?r swf % ^ ^tsfir u m
(otkWO 1 a* ft ‘sw ^ ifir 7% stti*’
37 ^^^Tfqr ^m\ R- G-. p. 384. An example of
(3 above) is 5T^r^
\ 3?FpTTr47iqf^?vrrftr %3FfOTSwt: n ^ G. P* 385.
The reason why this figure is called Is given by
Mammata as ‘^* 77 %* 37%^^^’, because
{ one and the same word ) briefly conveys two things.
^FTigtfvFr: f
p. 254.
Mammata definess differently f %%:
There are two points in which Mammata appears to
192
NOTES ON • ... X. 56-57 ?WTHmE.
differ from our author. ( 1 ) According to Mammata, Parono-
mastic adjectives are necessary to constitute w hile
according to our author Paronomastic. adjectives are not
necessary. (2) Mammata simply says ‘q^j he
does not intimate that in the behaviour of the snigger
is attributed to the while our author distinctly says so.
(P. 42, 11. 24-28). The author now proceeds
to distinguish from other figures of speech.
fSTIf : — I n «.H«h ( particularly ) a thing, which is not
the matter in hand, by superimposing its own nature, covers
over the nature of the thing, which is the subject in hand; while
n tw itilfth Ibe by the attribution of its own condition
{ to the st^t=t ) distinguishes the gfrr from its original condition,
without covering its nature. It is therefore that they say that
here(i. e. in twifilRh) there is simply the attribution of the
behaviour of the 3Tgf;^ to the and not the superimposition
of the nature of the on the jjf^. The author here
appears to refer to the words of the ares. g.
^'WTRT'T: 1 vmyil't.'-lr-ld I
p. 85. remarks ‘cr#
t’. In Rupaka, as instanced in
very nature of the moon (^tf) is superimposed upon the
face, without any regard to the mention of common qualifica-
tions. There is not merely the attribution of the behaviour
of the moon to the face ; but rather the face is looked upon as
the moon i. e. the face is covered over, as it were, by the mcon.
In WBlfrfi, as instanced in the nature
of the i «• JfFPK is not superimposed upon but the
behaviour of the Nayaka is attributed to the moon. This
attribution of behaviour only results in heightening the beauty
of the ch m vj'i ( it results in the distinguishing of the 3Tg5^[cf
from its former condition i. e. if it be plainly stated ). The
behaviour of one object cannot properly belong to another.
Therefore the attribution of the behaviour of one to another
suggests by the invariable concomitance of and its 3? T ?m,
that in which the behaviour rests. The which is thus
suggested only distinguishes the srcpr( but does not cover it),
as a crow sitting on a house-top serves to distinguish the
house but does not cover it.
X. 56-57 swraifa. Sshittadarpana
193
• R UHRtl> RRRRR'j'JIlRHRt t SRqqRTRp -
irKPURRiRwrera. i m RqtRwr^RRRTRTSRRRfRtsRR r r^rr^
felRR lfr R I M^ R Rflfo? sRg^ ^ _
rG 3R% ?I SRRsqjRRf l’ ffRo p. 85; ‘hr =R RRRifcfil ETfiRSRRfl^S" .
RfRSRRfRRtR: I RR% I RfftSRfRnFRRt'T: >’ RRRfa P- 43 5
VRIlfi'^RRRRRRftRT SRftRrSHiRRTRRFS: ^133^ RT^T^RrfSW •
?Tr jraaRRRpf ^T=wd ihirrrr^r^ts^rtr-
feig% \...m RptfKn^R
q^Isf^HRRTj ^J2%=T >’ H. G. p. 371; ‘RHlRfRil % RfRfRT'RtSHiTR"
fRTRH*&R f^R ffrT RRtfRRR.’ R - G - P* 483 -
ffRUTRi^R — In the suggestion of simile and in 3rsT%R) there
is sameness of the fRsH (the thing qualified) also; while
in RRTRlfR;, there is sameness of the attributes alone. 3W^
occurs when the sentence as a whole suggests a comparison
as the principal meaning, as remarked by R. G. ‘HRR =R RRf
rh^r rtr^r jirtt^r £ ^r% RRT RR4di<riSRRrRT >’
p. 185. An example of ^qiRSRfR 33 < 3?ftJ?^5f^RR^rRlRRi v fRTRRl^’3i*
RTTRRR: I RRRjnRfCR^fHRfRRRt RTR'^RfSRR^ H’ on which Nagoji-
bhatta comments ‘sir jjstt RIRrIr: RR^^^R: I RRpR’RRSI >•...
^yml i jGiaulfci jfcfr r - g - p- 185 - Here *R
in the first line means ‘gift’ or ‘the fluid issuing from an
elephant’s temples’. Here the word RifRiR: means a sovereign
and the of that name. A comparison between the two
is suggested. The ‘rt<NW is the same ( and not only
the fttfq’Jis ‘srf^R’ etc.), 3?4 %r will be treated of below.
The com. f^fERT says we should read rw ; Rr( ^°T
R. G., after defining RHTRtfRi as ‘rR JRsJuRRffit s RRfR:
^qiHRf^HRRRrtHRITf’iRTHR3ERi(^ t i' oi * ^?RR^d RTR^ RT RRIRTT^i »
says about the insertion of ttr after fttrRR ‘ ‘jR^f^^RRRR-
trrrq RTRRt l RR (as exemplified in Rf^R etc. above) RjslRRift
f%gRRT R^RR^t^HRSKT R - G -
p. 367. SfR^p- ifR:— RHRJRRW wil1 be defined below; in
that figure, it is the iRgqthat is implied 'from the mention
of the srERgq, while in gRTRtTRI, it is the 3TRRJR that is implied.
Compare ‘rtr^r Ep^RfRsJHRRJRERIRrfRRR' * STSTCsJrnRB 3 RRTRffRv
{qqq: l’ 3R5. g. pp. 84*85.
Some examples of RRTRtfRi are ‘RqiRRRR fq^teRK^ 3*11 333
^%rt fR^npi^i rrt rrrt rrt 5^ 3RT5%3 ll ’
quoted in the SR 5 RFRt'f> I, p. 35; *3R?W RR Rif RTR RIR HRtSiRt!g(R31. I
R ifoR T f fc swrw rrr rrtc f%m RrfRRil n’ R. g. p. 377 (rr
felRR?ftT3TRn*ftR RRR: RfRfRFR: )•
17
194
NOTES ON
X. 57 trN*.
23 (Insinuator, the significant).
A speech with a number of significant epithets is the
-figure called The plural in the definition implies
that there must be many significant epithets to constitute the
figure. The example is etc. It occurs in the Venl-
samhara ((III). These words were addressed by Asvatthaman
to Karna (who had ridiculed Drona and also his son) when
was about to be killed by Bhima. Each word is signi-
ficant; “You are a king; you must be able to protect the
whole country; let me see whether you can save your own
brother” etc. W ^
l’ f p. 95. In this figure the
adjectives are i. e. suggest a sense which is
striking and serve to bring the expressed meaning into
prominence. The suggested sense is not the prominent one;
it is subordinate to the expressed sense. Therefore this figure
is properly so called, because in it the suggested sense is
dependent on the expressed sense. Srftnrrqc? SRnW-
^r4i3iK: i m K? i r# ^ M#wHk rgr
.qn^rg^-dfi^ cfcT rd^T r 3#. p. 84. ( tp^r-
dftdKdt: U ariRo III. 3. 165).
There is a difference of opinion among rhetoricians in
connection with this figure. Mammata, Sarvasva, the Vima-
rsinl, Ekavall, our author hold that to constitute this figure
there must be many significant epithets; one would not suffice.
On the other hand Pradipa, Uddyota and Jagannatha
hold that even one significant epithet would constitute
this figure. Compare for the former view the following: —
f?T:,
*rftfcr:’ ffrT in K. P.;
i 3T^55TT Pff
I 4t
I p. 94. They mean;— -Epithets that do not
nourish the meaning are said to be 3 Tjg; zrgp is a fault.
An example of it is f^t suffer ftg ^
here the word does not serve to nourish the sense of the
passage, which is the removal of wounded pride. From this it
naturally follows that the epithet employed must be significant
and thus the employment of significant epithets is not an
X. 57 Sahittadarpana
195-
alanhara , but only the absence of a fault. Mammata replies
to this argument that, although this is so, the fact that many
epithets qualifying one noun are used gives rise to a special
charm, which is called So, according to Mammata and
others of the same school, the charm lies in the number of sig-
nificant epithets. Those who hold the other view say: — the
presence of even a single significant epithet would constitute
this figure, that freedom from the fault called 111 a y
be brought about by not employing epithets at all, that there"
fore is not the same as the absence of and that
a distinct charm is perceived from a single significant epithet.
frgvrffferra; i’ sr4ft; ‘ftg
snj: -
5 i’ ?fcr i flfef i ft
*H*T I 5T 5 cTftft ^T=f4 IWf. *
‘4tf%5jrf^iftRTft^’* iftr 5TT3^ ftftxTO wfiifermr
i Vfft rfi=|uj)^R w * r 4fa???RraT:.i fx&
Rtft ft; ft u’
i” R. g. p. 387 • “jjiTt fftraiwiW'
fifcfr wiftrfraitftr, 5 *tt
5?rf? fft *rre: i ft; =x
Ԥ^SP#4fti?reiT4 ^ ssrrcf ^ sxigfftxrHxt iftr
fqft^TTRftsft- sr*r*f ft^tor'gq
^ sjfnsre 4t«pj; i” sfsfar p- 108.
Some writers, like fqsjrprc ( author of ) and Appaya-
dikshita speak of a figure called which occurs when
the fqqteq is significant and not the f^qtrrs. An example is
sxwfaT arrcTT 4 xsj§jft: >’• Here the fiiK =i35£sr ( fifj ),
is significant as it suggests the power of God to give the four
objects of human life ( with his four hands as it were ). Most
writers on the are^ req i re r, however, do not speak of
Uddyota remarks that the word fqqtW i Q the definition of
is to be taken as comprehending fq^q also and therefore
qftqRTg * is not a separate figure, “srq fqqtq^lfegq^nt l
* ^ ctn fvr^r^rr *r^m-
sqi^iq^t^R: I!’- This is the latter half of a verse quoted in
R. G. p. 386 under
196
NOTES ON
X. 57 trfoR - .
?rrfwn^ i q*n ‘^nf’ *$pt i m sfir
3^4^P^m5tR«q!fvr5Tm4’i. i
^r i i ^ ‘??rfiT5n^
fasrtefR;’ i?iqrerq.i” 33 ^ p- 108.
A good example of T^r is gJTTf^sfa
irstf 55s«r r 1 f^tf fi^rrft % w if
ni.
24 ( Paronomasia ).
The expression of more than one meaning by words natu-
rally bearing one signification is callea %q. The words
‘naturally bearing one signification’ serve to distinguish this
figure ( 3pJ%q- ) f rom and the word ‘expression’ serves
to distinguish this figure from ( suggestive Poetry ).
W e shall explain this below. An example of 3 ?g%^ is
etc/ ( p. 43, 11. 4-5 ). the sun, or a king so called.
%^rr: occasioning the performance of good actions
(the sun and the king both do this). dispelling
the gloom of the quarters (the sun by lustre, and the king by
his spotless fame ). brilliant with excessive
glory ( both the sun and the king are brilliant ). In this verse
as there is no such determining element as ( context )
etc. both the king and the sun are expressly meant. We have
seen above II. text p. 13 ) that etc. determine
the sense of a word capable of many significations. Here
there is no such determining element • therefore the word
is used to express both the king and the sun; both of
them are the subject of description We cannot say
that one is and the other qqejpr. Both are intended to
be expressed. The words fi^qr: WZBT 3JH:
are applicable both to the king and the sun and even if we
substitute such words as ^qriTcTi, for f%qq:, and
respectively, the figure will still be the same. It must be
remarked that in the word there is and not 3^4-
as, if we substitute another word for such as sorFftf;,
it will not apply to the king. So in this example both
and 3?4%q- are combined; it is not an example of pure 3T'4%q.
5i*^r ^pt
geasi»w; i’
It was said above that this figure is to be distinguished
from is of two kinds, and 3r4%q*
is, according to our author, of three kinds,
X. 58
SSHITYADARRANA
1.97.
and m ( i- e - b ' oth and ^ ^ ^ lde JW 1 "-
An example of all the three varieties of 19 •
TOI5: *3* ^ *PnTO: ^
u q. i Q the .( P* 95 ) and ^ p *
this verse, both Vishnu (w) and Siva (jCTIW ) are
addressed. <stqq comments on this :— ' snllir
the word OTY^tisto be split
up into sq^pr sr: sr*fol ) ^f?RT qT<i3TRl -sprfrT ~~.
^ 1 e ^.
(the word ends with gqffT,. nom. singular of
w w f%’ rcg%: > w ** J
# ( i. «• have H SUPP °i e h ~ i IVI
an arqjpr after q<?qt ) I q*q q ^TH *gjaSW ^1' 1 ^ ^
jjdrfffir for (i- e. we get meaning Uf: ) ^
JjqfafRK: > S fri RI^: ^ ^hftfrT ^ T^ 3 - Yf^r
^IMTSf (a clan of the Yadavas) ^Rt *T
Closer: I TO 4fefr dtaifttSnrt ^ ^ ^ A f ’ ? tZ
the meaning when Vishnu is meant to he ad dr esse .
second meaning, when for is meant to be addressed, is given
by <sfoT ( pp. 95-96 ) as follows :— iR (
^rr qfcfor: ftnft: *m: sti sr^tp; < sm
gqqqfT gqf T ^ fK^tr^ W 1 *Hff ^ *nsqTC33. I 'W ^
qrqq; ( we have smti:; ^qq appears to read qTR$q: for qRTR W )
fiR! m- 1 R =* ^ 1 9 Tn
f5RF?r^>TCr *37 ti4«fiT^ 3*RT ^ *
the above verse, in qwl#i etc. there is RW, because me
expressions have to be differently split up in each conne c io n
( once as vq^R, sr: ansfol, and then as sqR: tRt^: ^ ^ ''
If we substitute for qqfor the word R5R, the second sense will
vanish altogether- sqRqqiR will not yield the secon
yielded by «rePRt*for ( cr^sr: etc. ). So here the particu-
lar word employed is the most important thing. In qrqq^fa'ht:
there is -qvrfwq, as the expression is not split up differently,
but in the same way ( sr;qq; + sjq ); the only thing note-wor y
being that here also the particular word employed is the
most prominent thing. We cannot substitute another word
for -qrqq; or gjq. If we do so, we shall get only one sense.
As both gqff%q and 3Rff%q are exemplified in the same verse,
it is also an example of sMqiwq&q- A11 tbese tbree varietl ® s
are called ^q%q, because here everything depends upon the
particular word employed. The determining element in calling
198
NOTES ON
X, 56 wr.
a figure as
_ belonging to ^ or 3 # is ariqtpRfctH If an
mankara occurs only when a particular word is present, and
•disappears when that word is not employed, (but a synonymous
•word is employed ) it is an alank&ra of In all the three
TZr menti0ned Variet f S oi the particular word em-
ployed was necessary f or the figure, which would disappear
1 ot er words were used ( as shown above ). But in
wnrH« ta #!^ ed ^ etc -’ even if substitute synonymous
o ds for feu, Rfesq etc., the figure will still persist i. e.
this figure does not depend upon the particular words
, b . n . t . U P°\ }t e f nse - Hence is 11 that the words
distinguish this figure from
^ thiS P ° int there is a great divergence of opinion among
the different writers on Rhetoric. (I) Udbhata speaks of %q
( he calls it feg ) as an only. He then divides it into two
SSl S "' hi A ch corres P° nd respectively to our author’s
a nd An example of the two is ‘rqq ^ tr^PTm^-
| ^ jy 26 («*%#
I JRTTT^% I I q^lduft
fl I!L fwf%r 1 wm
l ^TlTOft ffT ffiTT 5T^Tj: cTTTsff ftjOSRq: cfq ^
I 3. pp. 351-52. (p. 53) explains differ-
ently n %# m gqr mx W %q5PKT*f?r =4^:’.
Jntl^lZTu^T V**? (f.e. our author)
Th! h 6 * h ? lf nT nd (*•«• ?WW%q)iB the 2nd. (II)
The views of Mammata and our author coincide. They say
that what is called ^ by Udbhata is really and
jthat there is contradiction in saying (as Udbhata does ) that
is an 3Tin^|qr and yet dividing it into two varieties called
JT^and sw ‘jg ((«■
S fsmptrRfu =? ^RT
wWtSRin«fr<JT^ q^qffiqts-qftTt R: I 4^4% I srf ftqgvq-
f*2° n ' 5rer»KR»T ??: BTiq^f^vqritq I
. 3 ^? I *WT * wiura’ tft ***,
3WTTO ^ ST?T 5'flf:, qfq jrqfq SRfcft ^%q-
ctiiHlgR, IT cqTWRtr4%qrqjp I 3?$%^ g g ^
mm ^ II” K. p. IX. Ul. pp. 516-520 ( Va );
JKVX (*m 9&v) tit #s4
r*l po-nirr ’ • x ^1, P* 527. In this passage Mammata
•clearly enunciates the difference between and <*$%?.
X. 58 ^p?. Saeityadarpana 199
The former is (i. e. incapable of eniuriig a
change of words), while the latter is (capable of
enduring a change of wores), (III) The treats of
among the 3T*jfel£Rs just as Udbhata does. He then divides
it into three varieties (and not two as does ), viz.
and The former occurs when the same ex-
pression, being differently split up, yields two meanings.
Here the words are really different, as would be indicated
by the difference of the accent in them such as etc,
and the effort that would be required in pronouncing them.
They present the appearance of being one as lacquered
wood appears to be one single thing, though really lac is put
upon wooden parts. occurs where the expression is the
same and has the same accent etc., but has two meanings,
just as two fruits hang down from a single stem ( as in
above). is that where both these varieties
occur, “ixq- ^ I rf^RTTft-
Rife 1 3Tcf SR RR ?r I i”
R. p. 96. All these three views are very clearly and
concisely put forward by R. G. “^s A %*:
1 ( r ) 1 qRfTRHfRKRq-
I l 1
ffa *FR2R|i: 1 ( ^ ) ft IgR-RTRl qi 5TfcT \
R RT2RRTRRR: ( This is an attack on Mammata ) ! $ g
SRRT^R^TRfeR: I ft ^iTBKflafa
Rd<fWSR5|%[ ^T^fTCcRR-
» ” R. G. pp. 401-402.
qpRR R sqft : — W e have now to distinguish between
%R and ^p^fer^Rfe In both the fqftw and the
are f%g ( Paronomastic). In ) also,
they are f$g (as exemplified in gRfeffcrftjTf: in the 2nd
Pari.). But the difference between them is: — In %q } the
are both or 9T5 TTO^r; while in Scffc, only
one topic is sn=h<ftV=h, the expressive power of the words being
limited by the context etc. ; but another srsRgcf meaning is
suggested, after the meaning is understood, by the
force of the double-meaning expressions. In ft;qr:
( example of 3T^%q ), there is nothing to tell us that only the
king or the sun is the subject of description. Both may be
RIR or both may be But in ‘grosftRftJlff etc., from
200
NOTES ON
X. 58
the context we know that the jRjpr is the king, who was the
husband of queen Uma; while by the power of suggestion,
another meaning, viz. the description of Siva ( who is srcregcT )
is conveyed. An example of given by Ananda-
vardhana is #5 *
II? (35RT: OTcTW; fR:
Here the subject of description is the breast. The
words also suggest the description of a cloud. But this has
nothing to do with the subject of description. So the ultimate
meaning that is conveyed is the idea that the breast is similar
to the cloud, puts the difference between and
as ‘‘jpftoqfei^Tq- s m: 1 m srcjftnftsrr 3
er I” p. 56 ( Nir. ); ‘f^rf^<PTOT#T 3^
iftflRwPJwgstfcr ^ w i”
p. 26i ; “jpr 3 f%eq%RR* g 3
||’ ? R. G. p. 396. The difference between and
is as follows : — in the former, both the f^qais and
f^qsarefeg; while in fljrTRtfrfi only the f^qqs may be f%g.
Besides, in the two objects are either both or both
STSTftf’; while in one is SfcT and the otlier
3T^. p. 95 ; 5Tr4 OTTOtRp:, eft srfcT I
^ l” P- 259;
“m g si ^TTfqr ^
: ^ ^ ^RTRtfffi: l’ gsrfcr P- 72.
There is another point in connection with on which
also a fierce controversy has been carried on. We have seen
above that is at the root of many figures e. g .
etc. The question arises whether should be regarded as
stronger than any of these (and thus dispelling the notion of
these figures), or ( 2 ) as being equally powerful and therefore
entering into combination with other figures, or ( 3 ) as being
weaker and therefore not prominent where other figures occur
“3k =5TT55£rc: ^
l” R. G. p. 393, Considera-
tions of space and utility prevent us from discussing at
length these three views. The curious reader is referred to the
K. P. IX. Ul. pp. 516-527 ( Va), the Alahkarasarvasva p. 97 ff,
X. 58
Sahittabarpana
201
R; G. 393-396. The first view mentioned above is that of
who says that is more powerful than any other figure,
that when it is present, there is merely the appearance of
another figure ( like ) and that the real figure in such
verses ( where sipp etc. and %q- appear to be combined ) is %q-
and not the former. His words are
% 3r^fui?ct?nm nfcWT
i f|;f%?rr45T5Tr{%Rf^r?T2 BsrataBra; ii” a®? iv. 24 - 25 .
The second is the view of Mammata, Sarvasva, Jagannatha
and almost all writers on Rhetoric. The 3?ss. briefly
. puts all the three views ^ qTSTPlg
^rmi^r BBrfirBtcqfatgftGr 1 ( 2 ) %
hc bib 1 ( 3 )
( ? ) 1 ” p. 97. bisto
B 3TTB*B% B BBT BIBB!:’ rfr ^RBR^WTUTtS-
BIRFB* BP# I B =B1BT ftfarR: Brf£T?fe fBB% BB BlBBiTSTt BT#
BT% I ‘b#BT BIT? ftVBBBTT BBTBf BBT* BBITBT BTBTBtBf srfrrBTBRrB'
B 3 B1BTBT ftrfrr: I • • fc#g: %B BB B it ?# B B B^f l B
I ( 2 ) B ^B#: I %BBJ BmrcnBT B^tef 3 BTT3 I
( 3 ) 3T®fRTBRtT^RTi?TT f&B: %B: BPTIlt ?B
BpBWTB BB-fBfT§:” R. G. pp. 393-396.
About Jagannatha says that it enters into combination
with many figures and produces ever fresh charms in poetry.
‘a?B #qitB BBT^tsfq BB BB BB^fKTgBrfBTBBf f%TB: B^BTT
BB BB BI'BBBBTTfvtraTf^g BI#TBBrB#B BTB I’ R. G. p. 402.
Similarly, Dandin says 5<fq: sjqfg BTBt B#TtJ> 3 f*RB I
favf f?TI BrBTTlfBit^lf^^TcT BT^BBB(’ II K. D. II. 363.
25 STsi^mren (Indirect Description).
When ( 1 ) a particular from a general, ( 2 ) a general
from a particular, or ( 3 ) a cause from an effect, or ( 4 ) an
effect from a cause, or ( 5 ) a thing similar from what resem-
bles it, is understood, each of the former being in question and
the latter not so, it is which is thus five-fold.
The word in 59 (latter half) is to be connected
with five words viz. f^q:, ^mp4, fafovr, 3qq and sq and
srsregcTT^ is to be connected with the five words in the ablative
viz. HRPBTB;, f^tTcr:, wife;, t#:, bhtb-
SR^orr^BJiB.. • •BWMB&feBU. (P.43,11.11-14). tt?itb...
BB: — This is 3isu. 11.46. qg; (bb:) TTBTIB ( BB.) BcBTB iJBTBR-
fBBtfft b^ bb: aBwr^sfq Brara; ( bs-ttb ) (bbtb) ^
Here, the topic in question is that even the dust is better than
ourselves; i. e . it is a particular one, as referring to the
speaker; but the general expression, ‘man’ is used here,
instead of the particular one ‘ourselves’. This verse is
addresed by to gp-q.
202
rotes on S. 58-60 wrepra&snv
ffopfte frs gqT — This is Raghu. VIII. 46. This
is part of Aja’s lamentation on the death of his queen caused
by the fall of a garland. Here what is intended to be expressed
is the general proposition that a thing which is ordinarily
hurtful may work good and a thing which is ordinarily
beneficial may do evil. This general proposition being 5 ^ the
author speaks of only a particular example, viz. poison and
nectar. Thus, there is the figure called founded
on a general proposition is sup-
ported by a particular instance or particular instances are
supported by genaral propositions. In the above verse, Aja
at first asks the question why the garland which killed his
beloved does not kill him. He himself answers the question
by a general proposition that a thing ordinarily beneficial
may be sometimes hurtful ( as the garland proved to be in
the case of his wife ). Therefore there is But
instead of laying down the general proposition, which was
he cites a particular case. Therefore there is
It might be said against this that the figure is fSPcT, since re-
acting rarely as nectar or nectar as poison is exactly paralled
to the garland, which is generally beneficial,
killing the queen. Our author declares that this is not
because in a well-known object alone is taken as the
type ( srfcrf^r )> as instanced in srf^^qTfqr e ^ c * a ^ ove - But ^
this verse is not possible, because the fact of poison and
nectar turning into nectar and poison respectively is not
well-known. ^ in 1. 20 refers to
(P- 43 , 11. 21-26 ).
This occurs in p. 105 in the same connection. For
we read there and for ^ we have
— These words are to be construed with every
clause. In the presence of Sfta, the moon is, as it were,
besmeared with lamp-black. motionless.
'fKt — The redness of the leaf-like
coral appears to fade. The reading ( I think ) would
be better. 3^34 — It appears, as it were^
that harshness has begun to manifest itself to a cer-
tain extent (^qr) in the throats of female cuckoos,
— The long tails display as it were . their defects ( on
account of the absence of blueness and delicacy ). Here what
is SRgd is the extreme beauty of the face etc. of Sita. This?
203
X. 58-60 sTJregctsRtm Sihityadarpana
beauty is the cause of the fancy of the moon being besmeared
•with lamp-black as it were. So instead of speaking of the
•cause, viz. which is grp', the effects, viz., the fancy
of the moon as besmeared etc., are spoken of. Therefore
there is srsRgqqqRT. “sR 1 WV&
TOWT: 5Rp: 1
i” 3# 0 a- p- 105 -
(P. 43, 11. 27-31 ). These words
are addressed to his friend by a person who postponed his
intention of going abroad, — is to be connected with
3*mfacr:. ISrotf TO?qT heaving a swelling sigh. qctftq =
*rf% 3T fq?^. with a sad smile. Here what is sRp is
the prevention of departure. Instead of speaking of it, the
cause of the prevention ( viz. the lady’s intimation that she
would die if her lover went away ) is mentioned.
sRp: (P* 43, 1. 31-p. 44, 1. 13). That
variety (5th) of STSRpSRrai in which one thing being in
question, another thing, which is sreRp though similar to it,
is described, is two-fold, as being founded on Paronomasia ( 1 )
or ( 2 ) on simple resemblance. That sub-variety which is
is again two-fold, (a) according as there is Paronomasia in
the epithets alone as in or ( b ) as there is Parono-
masia in the also as in Compare K. P. X. u g^
gqqifqq# qq: R=FTRT«, %q: pqTgvq^
|g*”; on wbich Hddyota remarks { 3rq#t
p. 53. qcftfcf: — qfqjR: sw:
(HTr ^TR^: HR# HHT; TO 3TTTO: q^ ) qrosfPWPw
(qrofro HHpqq:, (Hgro^T
qtffcrqsr a PP lies to ) sftTO. sforcn^)
(TO-rif# totth: qfWfrr- s# : 3T Tf^ :
spjgRT anfif te raT qT^Tf^q#qmr sfljs:)- Here the lover, the
subject of description, is understood by the Paronomastic epi-
thets alone from the description of a mango tree, which is
smw sw 5Rftq%- This verse occurs in
,{ verse 79 ). It is quoted in the K. P. X. also. . The com-
ments as follows : — ‘‘ qNq jsqTO q i qT^fajq i
or: w# q i to# TOT i qqq^
Rq# q qN'TOtfi.FTT TO&PTO I
■fqTO^^r fqq%TOT%q i toc- i s^qtvrq: twr-*
\ n p. 53. takes Purushottama to be. the name of
a king. Here the fqqt^q (as well as the qualifications
201
notes on X. 58-60 arsresrRrersn.
etc. ) is Paronomastic, as it is in %q. —
‘Though he may give up the state of a male, as Vishnu did
when he assumed the form of a damsel ( JTTTf^ft ) to tempt
the demons into destruction’ ; as applied to the person
it means ‘although he may lose one of the cherished
objects of man (Tj^qyst).’ spqtsftr qyqyg although he may
go down to the infernal regions, as Vishnu did to raise
up the earth submerged under water ( in TOfT^TR); with refe-
rence to the person “although he may be reduced to a low
condition.” 3 ?^- qqfq% — Here from the f^^sq JWTtTTT
which is Paronomastic is first understood Vishnu because the
word Purusottama is generally used in that sense.
But as fqeuj is BTSRp-, some person intended to be
described is understood from the word It
might be said that in this verse the figure is as both
the fq^quys and the are and not s^pr^j.
Both the senses, viz. fqsig and some person, may be looked
upon as intended to be expressed (sregq). To this we
reply: — this is not but 3T5Rg^Rj^T; because what we
first understand is Vishnu, as that is the conventional mean-
ing of the word gsqTvW and then we understand the etymolo-
gical meaning ‘best of men’; i . e. both meanings are not at
once expressed; therefore there is no Besides, here the
poet intends to give information of the matter in hand viz.
the person to be described, by describing Vishnu who is not
the matter in hand. %q is subordinate as it simply helps to
bring out this intention. Therefore the principal figure is
SlfWW SRffat- The sky (the
atmospheric region) affords no shelter (corner), ^Ruy
fq^: Divine Grace is the only refuge. Here, from the
description of the pigeon, which is 3T5Rgcf, is understood some
person, the subject of description, whom many enemies are
pursuing. Here there is mere similarity between ^qtq(the
3T5T*§cO an( * the person (the 5 Rgq).
54^ 5Rgcf: (p. 44,11. 13-17). The figure also
occurs under a contrast. The 3^0 *y. says that the fifth
variety of viz., ^y^yq^y, is of two kinds, as based
upon *yyq*q and qq *4 and gives ‘q;qy: ^ as an instance of
‘rRTTft If^qq; '? 3. p. 104.
cooled by contact with lotuses, ^yqo tells us
that these are the words of qyy^q. Here the spgq is and
X. 58-60 soregasRrerr. Sahityadarpana 205
is understood under a contrast, viz. ‘the winds are blessed,
while I am unfortunate.’ “stst qmT ^ 3TJT^grTK^|;3T^
ifr Iwi l” 37^. $. p, 108.
(P. 44, 11. 17-27). The figure again
is three-fold, according as the expressed sense ( which is srsregcF )
is possible, impossible or both. Of these three cases, that of
possibility is illustrated by the above examples. ^F^RT'
i 5FRRT. l’ 3?^. P* 104. An example of
impossibility is f etc. 3 ^ 73$
^ I l sfiS.’ vm I. 7. 2 )— Those who know soft
melody. Here the srqqgcT is the dialogue between a crow and
a cuckoo; but this is impossible m the nature of things, unless
we superimpose upon them the character of two persons whose
exteriors are alike, but whose qualities vastly differ,
f^TT ^t€I^FF 4-
%t*4T: i il’
of Bhoja, qfto II. 57^r...5jurj:--This is the 23rd
verse of ^ and is cited in 37^. *f. p 108. ft^yfut f^rPr
^rif% sifcFTpT, mV
^rrf% ^ W ‘+TsRI 57T WFg RF )* The expressed sense
is the splitting of the lotus stalk. This meaning is 3TspgFr and
the possession of holes ( in the case of lotus stalks ) is no cause
of their splitting up, but the possession of thorns is a cause,
because they may rend the stalks. Therefore, without superim-
posing the notion of some person who is qqgq on the
the possession of holes cannot possibly be the cause of making
the fibres fragile. So this is an example where both possibility
and impossibility are found “37-r qr^sq 1 tgcq
fNJStfTJTT 1 ciwfa
l” 37^r. g. p. 108.
-3TRI3? sprfcft (P. 44, 11. 27-29). The author
now proceeds to distinguish this figure from the other figures.
This figure, when founded upon %q, differs from suggestion of
matter ( q*§t*qfff ) founded upon the power of words, because like
this figure has as its very essence the ascription of the
behaviour of one to another. We have above given a division of
in the 1st Pari. An example of is “fasrm-
3*a**n: *TC i V5 RM^iRRT3PT:
srw ^^rr: u” ( ^Fndfts
1 srdmi s^mra; WlMwia, Mm: ^ ri r s faim <n§sn:
irra%t > cr*rr
206
NOTES ON X. 58-60
gsr frmm: 5PS5U: ftfaRTT I sfitfgi: fHRSfrr: I
ktkt srg^r srefo > 8pt fftwfcrat fore:
Wspjjfi: I ST=T SRPTRC ^TRTTT., ^fTOnfflcr’JJPT, ^jf^rr:,
?ra 8mjf3I#& W«Hra^Rr*rr 3"T‘ I ^ ^ P 302 ). In this verse
the plain sfcnse is “ may the sons of *£cKT^r, who have made the
•world contented and -who have brought all quarrels to an end
rest m ease. ” But by the force of the double-meaning words
etc, another sense is suggested, viz. ‘may
'the Kauravas-, who have besmeared the earth with blood,
whose bodies are hacked into pieces, attain to Heaven
means ‘remaining in heaven’, etc.’
3T^. ).’ This second sense is suggested purely by the force
of the* words, ^^1 is based purely on double-
meaning words; while 375f^^fgr is not necessarily so based.
Even when the latter is based upon words with two meanings
it differs from 3] In the the expressed
senseis complete in itself and then suggests another matter;
but there is no attribution of the behaviour of one to another ;
while in the expressed sense is srspEgT and is
identified with the suggested sense, which is , as e. g, m
ST^crffecrfa etc., the behaviour of is identified with that
of a person who has many enemies In ^nrrarf-vF? also, the
behaviour of one is supeiimposed upon another. Then what
is the difference between ^rrp§tf% and 7 It is as
follows: — In ^THratfxfr, the grp is described and suggests the
3T!**p> while m 37>FgfJ7rin, what is is expressed and
‘suggests the srep i. e. sTSKpsp^ is exactly the opposite of
SRTStfe OTnaMrR^iT 37^T atq$^mpR^p-
i* 3. p. 102;
fife I
5f% p. 50 (Chan.), An example of
has been given above and explained under In
the 375RgcT is only suggested, while in srsr^pq^THT,
the 3T$r^r is expressed and the 5f?p is suggested. ^ flRTfltrfif —
similarly in ( the 3Brep is implied and not expressed
as in The printed editions do not put a stop
^fter - but we think it is necessary. The author himself
said, , a bove * under ^FTT^tffe c «T5RpTROTf' sr^cT^r ^ §
• fe. J , %%sfir ^TcSfy^— In both the things
* may .also be written- as according to the
W&tika'’ fferStft jr&c on ^0 ■ VIII. 3. 36.
X. 58-60 srafgimsT. Sshityadarpana
207
denoted by the word are expressed, because there is no deter-
mining element such as y^oT etc. to tell us that a particular
sense is 5^33- and the other srs^gfr. In acregdyOT.. the arygpr
is expressed, while the yvjpT is implied. Even, when Parono-
mastic words are employed in the first .meaning
that strikes us is .connected with, the .3ry?$p- .•
1 1’ ; 3 j^>
e- P- 104. - • . ; : “•
The word sp^RIT in 3Tg^gcTsrggr does not mean ‘ praise ’ but
simply ‘mention, description’ ( cfisqviqj.
•wgRwnfq- sfcr <M*rosi^rcr
RrfeJTr^rpfrfrr wra#^sffoT I ; <^TJr?grer 5! ^ Tr
wh gjrrgqTTfgfo
ipFT- p.293; ‘tr# ^ 55^R5f0igt: J^rarar®?: ^gf^^TI^qTWJigPIK'JT-
3$rwni5r4<t zm: i’ p. 79; ‘y^r ^ yomrag;, 3
R. G. p. 402.
The student is advised to read the R. G. for some very
beautiful examples of the 5th variety of arsRgfly^raT-X viz. 35%
353TTf^PTR3.); some of them are :— fdcRT wt fit
nr fjsrr: 1 wr. g®rar^nsgMi
1 £tsft eg®*
erfcT II pp. 403-404.
26 sqRT^grer; (Artful Praise).
When from blame and praise, that are expressed, are
understood praise and blame respectively, it is termed
f^qr 5 q r «reg ffc When praise is understood from Apparent
blame , the figure is properly called ©qi^gfcT, because it etymo-
logically means e. praise by an
artifice or disguise. But when blame is understood . from
apparent praise, how can the figure be called ^
should rather be called, it might be said, oijpsTf^T)? The
author says that in this second case, the word ssfR^frT- .is to be
explained in another manner, i. e. as meaning ‘false praise/
Compare the words of qrqz ; “m ^fcT~
^fkflRISft T^rfcT cf^^l^qT^TT
m&n \ srf^wRT. ^3;
^Tf^r^w ^gfcr: st fester
^t” i h- p- 1 12 ; .
§;%ft *
208
NOTES ON
X. 60 sqrircgft.
(P. 45, 11. 3-4). The reading in the test
makes the metre of the verse faulty. It we read
there are 1 6 matras , whereas there should be only 15
in the last padct of an Arya. It is therefore that the
Nirnava-sagara edition proposes But for this there
is no warrant, fid W cTT: Ut, ^cT^rai 5%
i#?t 3 tw*tj 3; jjrar’T. m.-) ^ 2 ^: skt^t: szrrarr: srff^.-
§;C^f?OT: qrar cTT: ( ?ST, ^fe=rr: ),
ffiftsft HTf?lT ( :RT% ?? ) Hwi: ftf^cTT
(<?§•, few: ‘fewrfe^fe 3WC. II. 6. 11 ) sjrttj. The women
formerly wore pearl necklaces etc.; now also they are ^rg;q
etc. (i. e. in running away, when their lords were killed, for
fear of capture, they had no time even to look to their gar-
ments ). Formerly they felt secure (f^-^TOT:); now also they
are ( widowed ). Herein this verse, at first sight it
appears that the king is blamed for causing trouble to women
.( whose delicate bodies were pierced by thorns when fleeing
for life into a forest etc. ), but ultimately we perceive that
praise is meant, because he utterly routes his enemies.
(P. 45, 11. 6-7). ^ wm:
^ ), & ( | ) ( ifq ) jt^TT cR
sferT ^tFJT I ( I ^T, 3 ^ cR
^ ter ( fwftitcrRT ^rt %cft
^TtT ) “This is, Oh cloud,
but a false encomium I have bestowed on thee ‘thy waters
are the life of the world’. But this indeed is a great praise to
thee, that thou renderest assistance to the Lord of Justice
( Yama, the God of death) by killing the wayfarers ( who are
separated from their beloved).” Here at first sight it seems
that the cloud is praised for rendering assistance to
himself; but ultimately we perceive that censure is meant,
because the cloud kills poor wayfarers.
In cijr^gpr, the sense that is at first expressed by the
words, whether praise or blame, is given up and is understood,
on account of the context or the specialty of the speaker etc.
as conveying blame or praise respectively. A question naturally
arises: — what is the distinction between and that
ScrffT in which a sense, exactly opposed to that which is express-
ed, is suggested ? The reply is in s-ffa, the expressed sense
can stand by itself; it is not improper or improbable in itself ;
another sense is suggested when we reflect upon the speaker.
X. 60 Sahityadarpana
209
the context etc; while in RTSRgft the expressed sense, whether
praise or blame, being impossible because opposed to what we
understand from the context, the specialty of the speaker etc.,
gives itself up and indicates something else, either blame or
praise respectively. “sr tRTRT 1 ft 3FRR
l jp: SRFlRRTSlf^T: ^RTmT$ :
ftsTT^b \ ” ftRo p. 112; “( 3Rg^sr?ft:rrRT
RRRgft: ) M^awranr
^RTft^c^rftra'ft 1 3R sr rrt i *^Rt ft
i JT l” R. G. p. 416. RR*gft must
be distinguished from I n both, something else
i9 suggested by the expressed sense. From srsr^ScTT ftRT or
*gft we understand ip^rfT ^jfcT or ff^cg. But in 375Kg<m^l,
we understand a cause from an effect or vice versa , a general
from a particular or vice versa , or a thing similar from another
like it; but in sq p R gft, there is no such thing. Besides, in
sqr^RgfrT, the charm lies in understanding blame or praise
from praise or blame. ^TRi^Mtgd"
ife: 1 3ri. p. 112; on which remarks ‘cR ft
p- H3; 1
w v ^ P* 89 -
It should be remembered that ssrpjrcgft occurs only when
the blame or praise is understood with reference to that object
alone with reference to which the praise or censure was
expressed, ^ ^gfcffaR
<r *N rr vr^rfcf 1 g «? srRPRfR-
^WSRf^RT rr: l’ R. G. p. 419. Where from the praise or
blame of one, we understand the praise or blame of another,
there is no but it is an example of s^RRTR-
“ft? fvfTR: TCJC*m: ft? 3 RC Rig 5Tfiftg^d
1 ftqftg <rcrr qR^MrgR^ swft
H”. This is cited as an example of RRRgft
by The 37^. 73. and ( p. 113) say that it is
not a proper example ( ^757 snfiTRTSft ftRT CR
qftmftft vwm 57 srdft Rfftft 1 s- )•
Jagannatha defends the Lochana and says that it is an example
of RRRgfa (R. G. p. 418) SvRt:— s^ftR ftRTR
I Another
210
NOTES ON
X. 60 san a^ irf.
example of sqj^gfl is ‘ 3 ?% frrftRqRR fijTOigci
*tg*ftsf?r 1 nwr hfrw Jrfgwr fTRifw:
W# N%c^^T^rqnT^f m r n’ (e%: Ni*fdstftffr
W ; ^3?n ^w^M'hi JT^q^qr^; ^Tftsiri^ n!
q|T ^ ^INtfrT RRT sq*^ I f f o p. 92 ).
27 q^r^Tf^ ( Periphrasis ).
‘Periphrasis occurs when the fact to be intimated is
expressed by a turn of speech.’ vrff means qqR ‘ mode’ ( of
speech). When what is to be conveyed is expressed, there is
qzfPTtxk It may be asked, 4 how can that which is jRq be at the
same time qjxq’ i. e. the same thing cannot be T\rq and qjxq at
the same time. The reply is; — the jpq is expressed through its
effect, i. e. the effect is expressed and as there is invariable
association between cause and effect, the express mention of the
effect suggests the cause ( which is ). This is what is meant
by ^ e - Our author
closely follows the 3 ?£. 3 . in defining this figure, ‘hpqgflfq
^Rcf^TT^R ^ I ( ff% ) ^
^ ft ^ *F*rqfcr i 3^r: ^r%^-
’ 3#- & p. 111 .
An example of qqfqfaj is “^ST:’ etc. (P. 45,
11 . 10 - 11 ). The verse is cited by 3?^. r. p. 112 as an
example of q^rR- W (fqsfcrer) (sR^tqqft)
^T^f: Cf^PWTt). qj^TR^m^l^cTT: ( %^TT«Tt *jqunq ^rf^R:
RWtfctT:-) qrfcsrTcTCT RT# ^ST:- The word
( with contempt ) implies that they were not afraid of Indra
at all. Hence . it is clearly implied that the heavens were
conquered by Hayagrlva. Here what is 5 Rg?r and is to be
intimated is the fact of the conquest of Heaven by Hayagrlva,
which fact is the cause, and is expressed through the effect,
viz. the scornful touching of the flowers of Pdrijata by the
soldiers. The reason why the cause is expressed through the
effect is that the description should be specially charming.
sRgcR; (P.45, 11. 14-16). It cannot be said
that the figure is of that sort where a cause is
understood from an effect. In srq^rsr^r, the description
of the effect is srsRgcT as in f etc. above. While
here (in etc. ) the effect equally with the cause is sRgcf, as
conveying greatness of the power of the person who is the
X. 61
SlHITYADARPANA
211
subject of description. = fqrffast
)• The reason why the effect is described and the cause
is left to be understood is that, as the effect is more striking
than the cause, its description lends a special charm to the
verse; “rf m wIvfOT m sRlt %ft Jlfcf: l
ftft i R5T ft ^pnfcr^r^r
i m 32 :
jftrar I W ??TT?T l ^ ft i
vRsrfvpE^^ijn^fT 5??n^t^T sn#«; i
: «F^ JRT^T IRgtf Fp5TftJTd tr^S H^TRCR^Tft ?ft s^fST^fT-
srerar ' ^ *nr m^rtsssftssifoq greqfra ^'T^rc^qrijjqftr
5rer T^ W t ^ q i *ra gq: qnrnrqfcriJregqsrra; ^gsqqFcft irftr
qqTqftr ?rqT5T^?PRrq% ft'W’ sr®. q. pp. 106-107.
^ ^...qvnft^fftq- (P. 45, 11. 16-20). 3T^...frq: — Th-is is
Raghu. YI. 28. 5T% ^TT sftfifciq- The printed
editions of the Raghuvamsa read 3 ;gxq for 3TT^r^q. The
reading in the text is supported by ;qqo. It must be said
that the reading is better, as it agrees very well with
s^NcTT: (returned or restored). *cT%3 grfiFTiS-
rflW ( WWT mm ) ( 3Ttf?n% )
3ff&T^Fr ( ) ftvpf f^p ^qfqqp ‘ He restored to the fair
ladies of his foemen their necklaces without the binding
thread, as he caused tears to trickle down their breasts in
drops large like pearls.’ Here the effect — the tears shed by
the wfeeping wives of the slaughtered enemies — is as much
as the cause, which is merely ipq (suggested) viz. the
killing of the enemies, as it ( the description of the tears )
conveys the great prowess of the king who is the subject of
description. Therefore the figure is no other than
(P. 45,11. 21-28). These words
are addressed by some person to a king, who was preparing
to march out against his enemies.
srent: if%: isma; gg>: ftrert ftrwiq ( tm&O
jrfcr fmnTT'# i i i i f^r mf^rFrr:
1 fHTOlftfr: shrift ERTfr:
( trrr <Tf3Rfw^ ^pranft ) i 3 . p. 397. ^sg: gftr grhraqi
fjwff ffepp: Here, the cause of the state of things
described is in question, viz, ‘the enemies have suddenly fled
away, hearing that Your Majesty was ready to march. 5 With
respect to this verse, some say that the effect too, viz, the talk
of the parrot is q^g=r, as being fit to be described in connection
with the cause, which is and therefore the figure in this
212
NOTES ON
X. 61
verse is Others says that the figure is none but
inasmuch as the indescribably great power of the king
in question is understood from the account of the royal
parrot, which is (not connected with the subject).
It is Mammata who cites as an example
oi 'm ^ct *f?r
K. P. X. The STRfRR#r, on the other
hand, says that the verse in an example of qqtqtrfi as defined
by it. ‘W^Rqr TRiqlrrjirq \
3 liftoff cTT cqpSTZT: ^RTT ff?T SRgrRqTR
^4^TtSqfeR5cT ^ 5R3cTT§ Sift ^R?TR
1S T cpJTqfRr” I 3^. r. p. 107. There is
a great difference in the definitions of qqRrtrfi given by
Mammata and Ruyyaka. We shall speak of it later on.
As regards the present verse, the whole dispute lies round
the question whether the talk of the parrot is SRgcf or
The 3 #. g. takes it to be SRjp’ and according to its definition
of qqRftrfi the figure must be Mammata, on the
other hand, regards prwi as 3?jRg<T and therefore naturally
says that the figure is To us the opinion of
Mammata appears to be more reasonable. If which
is one of the many effects of the running away of the enemies,
is to be looked upon as sreger, then any other effect, however
remote, will have to be regarded as qfg-f. It will be then hard
to say what effects are jRgcf and what are srsRjpT. So it is
better to regard effects like as srq^p. Visvanatha
does not positively declare what side he takes. But from the
fact that he de defines as the 3 #. does, and cites the
opinion of 3 t£. 3 . on this verse first, we may infer that he
leans to the view of the 3 ^. r. ( and regards <HHRTg cfT as an
example of rather than to that of Mammata.
There is a great difference in the views held by different
writers as regards this figure. Bhamaha and Udbhata define it
inthe same manner. Wratrfi JPKftnifasfiqt I WW
ffvT^qT VI. 12. Where the meaning
is conveyed in another manner, viz. by suggestion, which is
apart from the primary power, there is qq^ffai. According to
them, what is expressed is the same as that which is suggested;
only the words employed express the sense in a different manner
and are more picturesque than they would otherwise have been
X. 61
SiHITYADARPANA
213
Bhamaha and Udbhata do not seem to have recognised
as the best and a separate variety of They
included all suggestive poetry under q’qtqtrff. The meaning
of as defined by them is given by as follows : —
3?cr ^ q4f4q WTTncJT^rr
sfcT q^rxfiftfcr
cS^TT^, 3T^fefR?# ^FTI^^T^T %fcT fs# l” p. 39. Mammata
following defines q^f 4 trfi as ‘qq^Tfc fqr^TT
^ : i ff% \ 3T<«»wH^iqT^T sTfcrqrc^,
^ (qqi^q ^RT^q qRqR) qqNN=^-’ According to him also,
the expressed sense and the implied one are practically the
same, but they present different aspects. The mode of
expression is more striking than the suggested sense. The
only difference between the view of Mammata and that of
TJdbhata is that the former recognizes When the
suggested sense is most prominent, there istqfjf; but in
the suggested sense is not most prominent; besides, the
charm lies in the method of expression which is striking.
The word qqfqtrfi is to be explained as ‘qqfifa 3 ^
BTf^rftcf 5^4 qq’’ R. G. p. 410. 3 t£. the Ekavall and our
author define qqRfxfi in a different manner. When the sug-
gested sense is expressed in a different manner there is qqisfjrFi.
The same- thing cannot both be suggested and expressed at the
same time. Therefore, expressing the suggested sense in
another manner is to express it through its effect, which is also
So, according to these writers, qqfqfai occurs only when the
5RP cause is suggested through the description of the effect,
which also is It must be said that this unnecessarily
limits the scope of the figure and is opposed to the views of
very respectable writers like Udbhata, Mammata 5 Jagannatha.
J agannatha points out that this figure has a very wide
province. It may occur, (a) when the description of the
cause suggests the effect which is sf^jrT, or ( b ) when the gvrp-
cause is suggested through the description of the effect which
also is , or ( c ) when one thing which is sr^-p- is suggest-
ed by the description of another, without any causal relation
between the two: ‘3 t 4 qTtffR: q*qc 4
%fq
II’ R. G. 415. An example of (a) is
Wll: ' qFfjqg II- Here, the
description of the sowing of seeds, which is a cause, suggests
214
NOTES ON
X. 61
the effect which is viz. destruction of the whole family.
An example of ( b) is I
||. Here the description of the effect, viz*
on the part of the enemies, suggests the cause which
is viz. their death. An example of(c)is q*q
WTflt ^qq: ^TcqfsRcT qi% ||. Here is
suggested to be qqqRcp; ( one whose garment is the sky, naked )
by the description of him as one whose garment is dyed by
the rays of the sun and the moon; he is also suggested to be
smeared with ashes by the description of him as one whose
toilet is furnished by fire. Between the suggested sense
qq^T^cq and the description ^qq'^q^qqrqq^Jcq there is no
causal relation; and yet there is qqfqfqj. Therefore the views
of 3T^5\ ^f. and its followers that occurs only when there
is a causal relation is, in our opinion, wrong, Jagannatha
points out that the modes of expressing an idea are number-
less. I 3 q-q'T5?fair fqq^Sq-
i qqr— % ^fwT^sqqj 1 ifq
‘3r4 ^5ftS55f^o3j:’ ffq, •qfqsftqitsq:’ ?fcr, ‘g^^irr cRf,
‘sraRT#P’ ?fcr, ?fcT, ‘cTJTff% frT^ofcnft >
fft, ‘aTSRPRqt: g^rrqt ifcr, qruftq:’ l”
R. G. p. 416.
Some examples of qqfqtg; are:— ^ gsq^q;: g r ^ ; q^qR^q-
^R : vrcrq^qt JRT^q'fyNT: II IV. 13; =qqqfvrqRrsra+{l?f%
quoted by the sqsqi^rq; ( p. 89. ); f;=ft g^T ^q'ffrqt l
•q«-stlwl4i-
28 arqfcrcKtren (Corroboration).
When a general proposition is strengthened by a particu-
lar or a particular by a general one and when an effect is
justified by a cause or vice versa , either under a similarity or
a contrast, there is which is thus eight-fold.
IC^TCre: qqiw (P. 46, 11. 3-4). This is £isu. II.
10 °- IfcHCTC: (fC^T: qfjqr *TfTqT: q*q )
differ (^T% 3T?q) q=£^fq (ejqq *Trqqqtfq qiqq;) l ^WTT
( rstt ^wjq ( mf^qr ) 3R^tfq ( *qqt )
Here the general proposition laid down in the first
half of the verse is confirmed by a particular illustration
contained in the 2nd half.
215
X; 61—62' SiHITYADARPANA
(P. 46, 11. 7-8). This is Sisu,
II. 13. 31^+rtY: t
qgrfgr) m 3 n5R(’3^T
(poj:) fifjTTR' I (RfvTCT 5RT: ) STfR^TT
(^f%). ^TWI having discoursed in words that
exactly conveyed the sense required to be expressed. The
Nir. edition of S. D. reads and is supported by
rj 4 Our reading is supported by Mallinatha.
will mean “jnqfgr 8f«nM ( (f»T, according to the
sutra l vr#rsq^?iiiqKgt|%’ t TT° IV. 4. 92) qsjft that
in which all the words are significant. Here the particular
proposition, viz. that Krsna stopped after speaking in words
that exactly conveyed the sense intended, is supported by the
general proposition that all great persons ( Madhava being
one ) are naturally measured in their speech.
-jflq ffaRt 3 tt^^ ( P. 16, 11. 9-12 ). This is cited by
the s#. g. p. HO. This occurs in the I. 27 (a ms.
in the library of the Bom. Branch of the Royal Asiatic
Society). These are the words of Laksmana when Rama
was about to make the bow of 6iva strung, ■jflq f&g g?
be firm, Oh earth ( or otherwise by the formidable pressure
it might totter), g*ifJT ) WT; c# &
fgy^ ( ^ ( VKm ) ; ^
f%rf^ . ’jssqi ^ ) •psT 5
f^ilw ( 3TRRfr ^ qfer^<ra;) splfr-
For . the idea that the great Tortoise, the serpent and the
elephants of the quarters support the earth, compare ‘ 3 ^ 33 ^-
^fcT qg&pC Here we und€r_
stand that the firmness etc. are the effects, as they are the
things which are enjoined upon the earth; the earth is
naturally firm ; so what is to be conveyed by the injunction is
that it should be specially firm. The special firmness required
is justified by the cause or occasion, viz, the stringing of
diva’s bow.
? WW ( P-.46, 11. 14-15 ).
ThiS iS: H.30. ^ e£EeCtj VlZ * P 1?0S P €rit y ?S
choosing the prudent man, justifies the cause, viz. the reverse
of rash dealing i . e, prudence. JEtere, as the reverse, of rash
dealing is enjoined- upon^all (in the • potential mood )«
216
NOTES ON X. 61-62 3T*ThlT*mT.
we understand that it i9 the means to an end. Unless that
end is mentioned, it cannot properly be the means, therefore
is put in ( as the effect ) to justify the cause, viz. g^gj-
f^n^TRlq- The above four verses are examples { four ) resting
upon gp^.
^ ( p - 46 , 11 . 16 - 20 ). * 4 %.
This is Kumara. II, 40. This is spoken by Brhaspati with
reference to the demon Taraka. Here a general proposition
supports the particular proposition (in the first half) under
gfgr TT3^ftn etc. Here, the reverse of rash behaviour
that is enjoined is justified by the effect ( which is produced
by rash behaviour i. e. the opposite of gfgrfVwgr? ) viz. causing
adversity. Out of the four varieties of arqfg^spg
under our author exemplifies only two, viz.,
and ro;ureT Examples of the
other two,jiz., ( 3 ) gigpe^ f^T gg^ , and ( 4 ) ^
are: (3 ) Jpirfilik ^ I
II ( gq: gft
I srgsntri^ui: ^r: m I q: sggftk gq 3 d l? nddE r
g JMir: i p. 82 ) ; ( 4 ) g^ %vftcT etc..— Here the effeot of
( which is the opposite of HfgrfqqigrvrFr ) viz. 3 q<gg=^j-
is justified by the cause ( ) which is ■ the same as
mentioned in the 2nd half ).
The name is significant. ‘ 3 ^ fPr
p. 266; 3 ^; 3 T^: cRfF^Rf;. Compare
the following definitions m JR3W FRd I
^^"dd+l4« II’ K. D. II. 169; krvijgggvggf
'TT^gTlRnij^ l %?r: ks^RTTHTTg: ’J^Nfjpnrt gsg ||’ qjgf II. 71.
Our author, in the treatment of spqfggykg, slavishly
follows the 3 T®. g. Although this figure is of the most frequent
occurrence, next to 3TOT, and scsir^T, he borrows some of
the examples also from 3 t£.
W ^
1 m
cRr 51 \ ?rm grj
§xi 1 rm ^ i
^RRifwwr^n- ^ ^
cr^RT | I | ?
3 ^* SP P* 109. sr^cK^itf, the proposition to be supported is
generally placed first and the proposition that supports is placed
X. 61-62 gra Ww n g . Sahityadarpana
217
last. But this order may be reversed. Similarly, the relation
of spqzq and wfo m ay be directly expressed by such words
as qqr, ft etc. or it may be left to be understood.
3Tit: 1 *T 5 Igl^^Tq
53V$ 33 I ft ^ MfdTMr^W^ \
B. G. p. 472. Compare ^ q§^tS^^T 3 i
3 \ qT II %q: SURftfOTfclW, l
5^THT^T U’ H. 7 “ 8 -
The 3?^. has been severely criticized for saying that
occurs also when an effect is justified by a cause
or vice versa . The 3T^. and our author perhaps stand alone
in holding this view. Even Jayaratha, the commentator of
says qjsqf^W?q £Rqi?^q qqqqlfq
\* f^T5T° P- 109 - Jagannatha
says that when the cause is justified by the effect or the
effect by the cause, the figure is qqsqf^f ( which is admitted
by the m. $. and our author also ) “q^T ‘qrcftq qA
qr wA^C ssrf*
asc i q*q q^qfewfqqqcqi^;, sr^m
i mm writer qR^^TqtRflRqrat-
^Ti;^ uicf i q% : l” B. G. p. 474. The verse referred to in the
quotation from B. G. is JRT gyft
3 mq: 3 qnf 5TOqi^ l ^RT^gqi:
qfeqTO^qqfl ll” This is cited as an example of q^faf
by Mammata and many other rhetoricians. Here the effect,
viz., 3JTOWPb, is j us t ified by the two causes, ju qifqqfq 3
3?>rsfft sTqfcRT^- This would be an example of
according to the 3 #. and our author. But that
would be going against all weighty authority. So 3TqrqR^TO
should be so defined as not to trench upon the province of
qiRqf^W- This can be effected by saying that 3T5qf^«nH
occurs when a particular is supported by a general proposition
and a general by a particular; while in qiRqfts^ the effect is
justified by the cause or vice versa . Compare ‘qjRtffa
q^q qqquj qT BW$$ ^fcT I *W«q-
^q^qqt- ^T^^^^Tq^Fq^sq, qftcTRffq^ qr^qfew Pi c^h * i qnrac. i*
p. 82. It should not be forgotten that this distinction is not
approved of by our author and that he tries to show that
even when arqiRR^qrg is defined as done by him, qqsq&ff will
have a province quite distinct, from qqf^^vqRj. We shall
see this later on under qtfsqfsf .
19
218
notes ON X. 61-62
3T*rtP;pRT must be disitnguished from fgjp. I n the former,
a particular proposition is supported by a general one and vice
versa- while in the latter, a general is illustrated by a general
and a particular by a particular. Compare ‘ajgppppqr
^ 1 ^ §
fl^rt f^il ifcT Pf ibr: l’ pjfcr p. 81. We "must
also distinguish between an and where
from the description of an 3Tpp- or pnp, the uppiPTlP
•° r b-ist'i is implied. In both the general and particular
propositions are expressly mentioned. • while in the
Mr or PTRt is expressly mentioned and the general or
particular ( which is sj^p ) is left to be implied.
Jagannatha speaks of an called pj^ which
occurs when, in order to understand a general proposition laid
■down, a particular case of that proposition is mentioned and
the relation of the two as 3pp and pqfc is expressed by such
wds as p, p* fp#R etc.
PTfP^l’ R. G. p. 213. Ex-
amples are 3iiiRrg°7tsft pirn fiifpt -pfo 1
pWtJm ^ ^ \\ f# fpp : ^ hptjt I
^ TIPTS^ p: II’. What distinguishes this
figure, according to Jagannatha, from is that
m some word, such as p, pj, fpjfa, which conveys
the relation of pp and 3?pf% is present, while in
it is not present; and that in the predicate of the
particular case is the same as that of the general proposition
first laid down, as p% in ‘ 3 #^^ etc. “armpp^s-
p>i:
I” R. G. p. 215; also pp. 472-473. On
-this some say that the figure in etc. is nothing but
^*TRT*>3T*I, for means nothing but Others say
that the^ figure is Upama. Very few writers recognise this
figure, “snsreg pfp PTfPTRSfRt ) 1
l * * JPTPMph
^ fp
fptwr sRftpRetift
qfiyiw p f^TF%:’ 1 ” R. G. PP .
^ ^ item
fPfTPi; l” ^ p. 82. The Chand-
raloka and the Kuvalayananda speak of another figure called
219
X. 61-62 ara fe r rera . Sahityadarpana
where first a particular proposition is supported by
a general one and then a particular case is mentioned,
fcf^PTTHrf^: H I B H Wt-cft WJ
^ ll”. The cites the following as an example: —
wA 3 5FRR I <^t ft
II* I. 2. This, however, does not
deserve to be a separate figure. There is ^f^fs of two*
s or of and rTST
^pjrcr mAd
i 3?^^qrft5iitei?n^5r^^r srft^s^rcr-
i ‘%q rj 4 sr^g: firftrat ^ i’
^rr^TT^II^T^RviM'tfWrW l” R. G. p. 475.
STjqr^f^^^ occurs very frequently. The Patakas of
Bhartrhari exhibit many charming examples. Kalidasa also
is very fond of this figure. Compare
ftR#^ <$$Ai <ratft i
&tPr ft «ii^«iin, il ’ <]T- I;
srt: i 3?g^cfT: ^cjw: Rlftfa: SERFf ^
^KlW^n^l’ ^FT° V. In both these verses, there are other
figures also.
29 (Poetical Cause).
When a reason is implied in ( 1 ) a sentence or ( 2 ) a word,
it is termed cfir«rf%f- l/fT^WTTT^ = ^S-
fr?T ^mr%r ’TtwgspJ^fa (P. 46, 1. 22-p. 47, 1. 2).
3t#3T ^«1%- ^3 in his gfgfit3*K ( p. 47 ) ascribes this
verse to (probably the same as the patron of
and qi3FTf^y=r, about 700 A. D. ); the verse is cited as an
example of ^fs?rf®W in the sw. g. ( p. 144 ). Some person who
is gone on a long journey and whose mind becomes excited at
the approach of the rainy season says this ( according to ^iro ).
( ^%5[[«ri HRRI ^
*rara[.; 5^9? sjrai <r?ft ftl: w^rfer:
(Rtdflcr:); (f^Jrarggiftoft nfcr: ^ri>
^ Jierr: (jn^ad^fcr %?:); rjcerfsq-ftffteirmft (<r?
fa f%%:, ffafe W ffate*rm;) ^ tfa g In this
stanza, the fourth line asserts that 4 Fate does not allow me to
derive even that consolation which things resembling you
would give/ The first three lines imply the three reasons for
this assertion. Here the reason is implied in a sentence
220 NOTES ON X. 63
(^^faT=BjT%T)- The second variety, viz. q^pfof, may
occur, 'when the is implied in a single word or in many
words (not forming a sentence), ?*:—
( 3T^Rq|: ) ffpfjf sqg; q%5R(. ( ) JTsfi ^ftvrRfiRt
( %q: ) ftR;^r q%. In this verse, the first half which is
a single word (being a compound), implies the reason of
the assertion made in the 2nd. ^ ( ^),
W^nr^Tf ( 5T^r|:
ftwn ( iRfr ; f^rfir: kz JTm^^tfrr ) sipjqfa ( zm %qr,
‘^JT: 3^0 $ftqra:’ mt- 1.1.32, cT^r^T%) Jjtqqffr. Here, for
the assertion that the Ganges hides herself on the head
of Siva, the implied reason is contained in the words
The reason is not contained in
one word, but in many ; but there is not a complete sentence.
It should be carefully remembered that to constitute the
figure the ihj must be implied and not expressed by
the instrumental or ablative case. Therefore the verse ‘‘srtrt
f^R^r^TWlT^T^ « B fqRTT II* (l%o
1.24) is not an example of as the |g is directly
mentioned by the ablative cases. Compare
^l^f^^TVgqJFTT^ l” H. G. p. 466.
The word means ‘a sign, reason’. The reason why the
figure is called ^Risqfof is given by ^ o (p. 127) as “sqrft^T-
[52Uf&q^r%T?] Vide “q$j-
2r‘4T tfrqt
ftqq^Ttqft^qqi^r ^ cr^rr i
Bm: qqT%ftrg?RT I 3 r: cfn-sq^fftfcT
i ^ Rg- carafe#, fife rrff qqsqir^tiT
STfcTOT^ l” on 3%? VI. 16.
%fqq; warfsin^ ( p - 47 » 11. 3-6).
2J5%. Some writers do not admit those cases of
which are based upon the relation of causation, because they
suppose that they fall under residing in a sentence.
The writers here referred to are Mammata and others. We
have already dwelt upon this difference of view in our notes
on fffr etc. Our author declares
that this view is quite wrong. The reason is as follows : — A
c^use is here i . e. in the province of poetry, three-fold, viz.
Indicative lit. Informative), Productive, Justificative
5. 63 SAhityadarpana 221
( or confirmatory ). The is the province of the figure
called Inference, the ffpsqj^ that of and the that
Thus founded upon the relation
of causation is quite distinct from What the author
means by the three words ^rq^ 5 and is as
follows: — When we see smoke on a mountain, we infer fire.
Here smoke is the §;g of the inference of fire. Smoke simply
indicates that there is fire ( i. e. the f g is f[jq^);it does not
produce fire ( i . e. it is not f^sqj^ ). Or to take another
example; it is a general rule in Grammar that in a Dvandva
compound, a word with a smaller number of syllables should
be placed before another with a larger number of syllables.
But Panini himself gives such sutras as reRTO: 5 ( where
the word containing three syllables is placed before %g
containing only two ) and thereby indicates that the rule
above referred to is not rigid ( i, e . the sutra is a ^rqq; ).
Sometimes a actually produces a thing or a state of things.
For example, in the verse q^q^feq etc, the fact of seeing
another river with numberless mouths would actually produce
the result, viz., the Ganges concealing herself out of shame
( because it has only three streams ). Here the actually
produces or would produce a result, and does not merely
indicate the existence of another thing ( as smoke does ). By
a as exemplified in the author means: —
A special degree of firmness is demanded of the Earth, which
is already firm; this special demand is justified by the viz,
Rama’s stringing the bow of Siva. It must be remarked upon
these views of our author that he is perhaps alone in this
three-fold classification of |gs. The line drawn between f^eqT^sR
and ^$3* appears to us, to say the least, very thin. There is
no reason why what is called cannot be as well.
Rama’s stringing the bow of 6iva would actually give rise to
a demand for more firmness on the part of the earth, i. e. the
fg is just as the water of gifts flowing in numberless
streams gives rise to the Ganges’ concealing itself. Moreover,
the author goes against all authority in giving this three-fold
division. Dandin speaks of only two kinds of |gs ( apart from
*r*TT II’ K. D. II. 235.
An example of $ 1^3 is *S|T 1
ll’. Here the advent of the breeze
from jRRj charged with the fragrance of sandalwood is what
222
NOTES ON
X. 63
actually would cause the death of the love-lorn travellers, i. e.
tjj is *KR3i- An example of 5 [tr#g is ‘imtesw#
TOR qfsjii: l si#? n’ K. D. II. 244-. Here
the setting of the sun and the like indicate that it is time to
perform the Sandhya adoration. The 3rf5tgo ( B. I. edition )
defines irg as ‘rerswftmr-W ^3‘^fcT to: l StfC# ?rm fPf ft??T
\\ y sjo 343. 29-30 (irg I s ^at "which is a means to
accomplish or prove what is desired to be accomplished or
proved). The strictly following the dogma of the
grammarians, says ‘f^^rr: I 3Tvrrwf^-
=^Tlt*r #*{% II’ HI. 12. The is defined as ‘zy: 5 ^f% ^
^ ^ fqk. m. 5^# ii’
HI* 13 (That which, whether itself acting or not,
causes motion, cessation or continuity is termed c^y^). About
a it is said ‘fg^yfaT ^ ^Rfteyy ^ ^ » feTW
ftg*TP^S ^FT q: ll’. A ^ryijcfi has no sqyqft of its own and it
serves as a characteristic of another thing. A does not
produce an object, but it only indicates its existence; it may
itself be the effect and may lead us to infer its cause, as the
sight of a flood of water leads us to the inference of heavy
rains as the source of a river. The ( B. I. ed ) observes
‘sr^ STT^ 'T«n?*T%iTOT: II ’J#’? ?f?T I
'ifersfsr i’
3To 343. 30-32. The and itgs °£ our author are
both included under qF;y^; for we have shown above that no
clear line of division can be drawn between them.
(P. 47, 11. 7-14). The author now
shows, by referring to the examples, how is different
from as based upon the relation of causation,
ii^r ^1T<U 3^31 means, ‘in the absence of the three
.sentences which are the reasons’. In the verse etc., the
sentence in the fourth line, being incomplete in its significa-
tion in the absence of the first three sentences and therefore
absurd, indispensably requires the three sentences forming the
first three lines for the purpose of completing its sense. What
the author means is that the meaning of the 4th line cannot
be understood by itself; the line is it requires the
presence of those circumstances whieh gave rise to the state
mentioned in it. ‘gfsi
Construe with sijjfg:. qqqjif viqq: — is parenthetical and
means ‘I tell you the truth.’ The prohibition of heedless
X. 63 cMo-Mfef . Sahityadarpana
223
■dealing contained in etc. is fully intelligible in
itself ( even without the mention of the reason ) on account of
the sense being complete, as being a piece of advice similar to
that contained in etc.’ is the subject of
the object being fltorrftPfiSfa goes with
The mention of the fact that prosperity
chooses only the discreet merely confirms the prohibition ( of
rash dealing); but is not required for the completion of the
sense of etc.’ What the author means is— We
often give advice in the form of cut and dried propositions
without stating the reasons for the advice. Similarly, in
etc, people are warned against acting rashly; that
advice is intelligible in itself ; it is If the reason is
at all mentioned, it is only to justify the advice given. That
is to say, in based upon one proposition
is quite independent of the other ; while in one
proposition depends upon another ( i. e. is ) and would
be unintelligible without it. f f^r For this
reason is quite distinct from based upon
If may be remarked here that the author has
not succeeded in convincing us. The only distinction that he
has been able to point out does not lie so much in the differ-
ence of the irgs, as in the fact that in one proposi-
tion is independent of the other, while in one is
dependent on the other. But this also is not a sure guide.
In etc. which is an example of 3^^;^ according
to our author, it cannot be said that the sentences f%Rr
etc. are independent and complete in sense in themselves.
The earth is already firm and it would be nonsense to ask it
to be what it already is. Therefore c ^ does stand
in need of the sense contained in the last line in order to
complete its own sense ; i. e. the sentence f%RT is ^ 1 ^,
just as \d{ ^ etc.’ is; it may, hence, be said that
‘gfsq is an example of If should also be
noticed that the 3^. ^ . which appears to have been the guide
of our author surrenders the position taken up by it, viz.
that based upon causation is different from
and says that in holding that view it simply followed
It says that the legitimate province of is the relation
of and fqqfa; and that wherever the sense of a sentence
constitutes the there is It also says that a
224
NOTES ON
X. 63
^I=h4 cannot be said to be independent, ‘‘qq g qjqqpqj ^rg^qq’
tsTSTftHK'hHTtVl ( C$Jcmt7° ? ) cT2^T^-
I >?? =^reri
i ^rtfsjrira; ^r^sqrfrRrec 1 «rw w*n^-
few i ^WR^pra#! wl-
'W'liiWi> clf^JTOS^WJRtrfeRT I cTfeW^T ^oiRT^ft^t^rfffel-
(a?®, e- P- 148. o^ufeRWg.?)- 3^e defines
as ‘gd*H ■Hi^t.gvrTO' sfi i ^grff srf^qtrcr 11’
VI. 16. His examples is ‘gfe4 W f'KW'flfe: ferf%^»j53W I fe^RR^T'
jfefe ITT^U’ VI. 18. This is an example of %qf:
q^T^cfT* Since Udbhata does not give an example of irqj: qyqqRjqjj
it follows that he included %qt: qpFqf^qj under srqRcT^qT^*
His definition also is favourable to this construction.
?T^%...3T^Rccj|^ (P.47, 11. 15-18). In ?f q%...qf|^ T ft
^[, there is no qfiioqfa^, because the reason is clearly and
directly mentioned by the use of the particle ft, as if we were
to employ the formal expression (iy: *<jftqRftrqr q^f
ftR^TT W I etc. ). It has been said above that only
a 7 T T2 r^ ( and not an expressed one ) constitutes the figure
sRTsqf^. There is no charm in the formal expression yf f ;
and it is strikingness alone that constitutes a figure.
c^-oqf^ must be distinguished from qftqy. In the latter
the epithets are significant and the sense suggested from the
words contributes to make the expressed meaning striking;
while in the sense of the sentence or word itself
becomes the reason of another assertion. For example, in
3TW^R, etc. ( which was cited above as an instance
<Tft3R ) the words suggest a sense which makes the express-
ed meaning more charming; while in ‘q^q’ etc. the sense of
the first three lines constitutes the reason of the assertion con-
tained in the 4th line, ‘qg
^qf^ff^T sft ftq: l 3=Eq^ |
^TcT: 1 3 ^T^T^TqT^ fgqiq -qqq:|’ grqo
p. 129. Some say that in one sentence is indepen-
dent and is confirmed by another; while in ^ sqfe f f one sen-
tence is not complete in itself and requires the help of another.
t3c4 l” o p. 300, on
which ^ observes f
3 BTqt^r^yqRi I.’ It would be better to say that when two
sentences stand in the relation of qjqRq and fq^jq and one
X. 63
Sahityadarpana
225
of them confirms the other, there is ; and when two
sentences stand to each other in some other relation and
one justifies the other there is ^
f^W rfcf 5T fsr^o t% 3 h*tt^-
5 ^^OTT^(T l”
p. 132-133. Or to put it in another way, in we
understand from the sense a while in
another proposition is put down for the purpose of a thorough
understanding of what is already said. ‘‘cTSTT^
3T ^ i I
\" snrr p- 425.
Ancient writers like Dandin and Bhamaha do not speak
of at all. Some say that is not a % ure at a ^,
because in it there is no special charm that is striking. A
striking charm is due to the poet’s imagination. But in
cfflojffcff there is no scope for a poetic flight, as it deals with
the relation of cause and effect which belongs to ordinary life
and is not due to the poet’s fancy. If it be said that there is
a charm in when combined with the reply is that
then the charm being due to alone, the figure will be
and not Therefore, they say that what is called
is simply the absence of the fault called Rirg^*.
ifarrac i ^ w ^cfiRrcft \
K5 l q*TT 3Tf& 1 *3 ffTt
3^3 i fti i ct^tt^
ssrft i” R* g. p. 470.
30 Inference ).
ftf^=RT *TR 3 ? 5 RR^— Anumana is the
knowledge of the sadhya , expressed in a striking manner,
* On this remarks ‘f^gR^RTt
‘3j#r ^t#: sprmsrerPi? ^ ^ \
scT5ft-w5f g wGi.'flt# sjrer c^rwf^ w
ll’—api 1” p- 280.
226
NOTES ON
X. 63
from the sadhana. The words gp;q and are well-known
to the student of Nyaya. gpR is that which goes to prove the
existence of one thing on another, as in ‘#f T
where vgrr is the gpR, which, being known to be invariably
associated with fire, proves the existence of fire on the moun-
tain. gp;jj is that the existence of which on a particular thing
is to be proved by means of the *n>R. The word serves
to distinguish a poetic 3?grrH from one which is purely logical.
The inference must be a charming one; it must be due to the
poet’s fancy; and must not be purely matter of fact. There,
fore q^cTT etc. is not an example of the figure called
srgrTPT' Besides, in a poetical the five members of a
complete logical syllogism are not mentioned; only the gpaj
and gpR ( and of course qs; ) are mentioned. ^ qn%"
R - G. p. 475; “jjsr
FTPRiluta*) glsg^MI^K: i
fltM%f^«iT3rr^wfkr: I 3--7;rgjTi?!n% sr. g.
p. 146; ‘ sr gr®raPR3>!RJTt^Tf5r4T*T g
3TRW“dgg'-n7R ql^grqftfRiq i” p. 302.
gRsiwufsjg^r (P. 47, 11. 21-22 ). ggri: graruRT:
( Ww'iqgPTi:) ffit ( fjr*tgr rpt: ) 3rt:
(?pr ) ( rpforc: ) tral: sgrcfoRrl: (^r wf?cr: ggsiftr: frgrr:
^TR:) 3TW3) srpiF^dl (^H ffcT ) 3{%q% ( srf^ cr-
gfgR ) f (#!)•
The paleness of the limb3 and the closing ( literally
means ‘being a bud ” ) of the eyes are really due to separation
but the poet fancies them to be due to the rays of the moon.
The moon’s rays are pale and therefore the body appears pale,
and as lotuses close their petals in the moonlight, the lotus-like
eyes are represented as closing. As there can be no moonlight
without the moon, the poet infers that the moon shines in her
heart. Here the gpsq- is the moon shining. The gppj is the
paleness of the body and the closing of the eyes caused by the
bursting rays of the moon. The qaj is the heart of the woman.
The argument may be put in a syllogism as follows— a^jf:
i- e. the
srf^iTT is ‘her heart ( tp>j ) has a moon in the form of her lover’s
face shining in it’ ( gp:R ); the reason ( frg or gpR ) is ‘because
there is paleness of limbs in her and closing of lotuses ( eyes )
caused by the moon’s rays’, sr Ttfr-R
X. 63 argnH. Sahityadarpana 227
sr I n the foregoing verse the strikingness
was based upon the figure ^qqp The here is helped
by the superimposition of on q^ and qfj on 3rf$j. In the
same way sfJJTFT may be based on other figures.
^ Rd ^ (P.47, 11. 25-26). (q^r:) Zft
?fg: qrrfcf^ f^ftr^TT: 3RT: ^ (^TT^) RTOftcT^R:
dfarn 3RT : 5hr) SR: ( Hqq: ) sTOHi SR: wfcT
( ifcT ) JT*^. Here the ^psq is Cupid’s running in front of the
women with a strung bow; the Rqvf is the falling of arrows
in the form of the glances of the women; and the qgj is women.
The argument may be put as follows; — 3T^rp gforr q =^f q -
Rtfqd^Kr^fqrf^TglRhT^r:, ; i. e. the qf^rr
is these women ( q$j ) have Cupid running before them with
a bow etc. ( the gp-q- ) ; the reason is ‘because they shoot
glances which are sharp arrows etc.’ sr qtfq ftff g ftri —
Here the charm rests simply upon the imaginative description
of the poet ( and not upon ^;qqj or any other figure as in the
first example ). The second example is closely similar to the
example of 3rgqR cited by Mammata ( and by 3^. 3. also )
viz. yimr ^ ■§<
rn^ri: i ^^fcr^rrirf^Rsrfc^:: *rra?nRr ^
3TRRRK-* 9R: ll’- ^ fqM T ^trh^lld; — This word is employed
in^the qnfcFT it 27 ) I
SRffsft flfqqt %% $m: 11 ). An example of qifqsrr^-
is g*3Tqfq «T qjqgqqfq I
SRI^II; Vide wt^R p. 106 for
^explanation. Wfofe ^gffT STHSIcf^: qfe 1
It should be noted that in the first example, the was
first mentioned and then the while in the second
example the *jpr is mentioned first and the gp-q last. In the
formal syllogism, the $psq is stated first ( in the y ) and
then the Rq-q. In the poetical 3 T*j*TR, this order need not be
strictly adhered to.
It should be remembered that the word 375^ R is loosely
employed in Rhetoric. The technical meaning of is
‘srgftfhFCT’- According to the Naiyayikas, the q^vf of qjfafcT
( i. e. the aqjrrc ) is ( otherwise called );
others say that or 5qrf?r5TR is the q^uy of sfgfafiy. The
rhetoricians define ^jjqyq as the knowledge of the y from
the i. c. they apply the word aygqyq to the resulting
judgment ( the 3rgftfq ) and not to the q^oy of that judgment.
The word in the strict sense, is to be explained as
ajSfcr ^fcT 373?TR^ ( q^ot ^5 ). while the word 3ygqR as
employed by the rhetoricians is to be explained as sr«pftq^ ?{qr
). 1
^RFTR^HT vrr^s^frT 1 ” H. o. p. 476.
228
NOTES ON
x. 63 «rg?TH.
ScS^m (P.47,11.27-28). In the example
of 3 T 3 JIR the words 3 i%) 3 % and were used. It has been
said above (text p. 32 ) that in Utpreksa such words as
51 %, g^C. are employed. A question arises:— what is the
distinction between 337337 and 373373? The answer is; — In
37^377, the knowledge is not certain; while here it is attended
with certainty. We have seen above that in 3^7 one thing
is represented as probably idential with another; there is
: ; while in 373:773, there is no trace of doubt.
3737773 must be clearly distinguished from 3,753^. The author
has already told us that a ^7733^5 is the province of 373373;
while a 73 ^ 1^5 is that of In the cause is an
efficient one (3^) i. e. it actually produces something else ;
while in 3733FT, the 33 is only indicatory, as smoke. It cannot
be said that smoke is the cause of fire; smoke only indicates
the existence of fire. In c 5 STl% 5 li% (text p. 46 , 1 . 28 ) that pre-
sence of mud would be a cause of not bearing the Ganges on
the head. Some distinguish between 3,(077 and 3733( 3 i n
another way. The subject of the figure 373373 is that reason
[ feff ] which the poet wishes the reader to know as employed
by him ( by the poet) to arrive at the inference; while in
the inference is not drawn by the poet, but is left to
be drawn by the reader. In other words, in 373373 the poet
composes his verse in such a manner that his intention is
that the reader should know that the inference has been
drawn by the^poet^ himself and put in the mouth of a personi
while in the poet intends to leave the inference
to the reader. ‘‘TTWlcWcqw^r 37 33
I 3Tfffi4f^5733T3 33T3KRr3g3 I
lg't>333<J3HFf?l3 “33737 li3T 1 37331% 3 57733;-
f 33 - 3 re : 1 sh-wiR:^ ?Rr 1 ^3 33
f^TT rraigupnaiR R? 1” snrr p. 425 ;
feffoRl TTfrfMft: 1 ” R. G. p. 469.
■MTide the remark of R. G. “ ?c 3=7 feyfeftqh 333 33 3^
51% 37%% 37% 53T|l^7<tl3IH;jii|Ri«l m 3 91£5 3H%MI3Tlffi g73-
1 5 c^qi^OT 5 farai% 37^33^3733^1
55 ^ 33 ; 1 ” p. 476.
X. 63 srgrn’T*
Sjhityadarpana
229
Examples of the figure 3Tgin f f are: — ^3 f^tsf^r 31R
^ i stct E3 ft'fciitejd gfsft^r 11 ;
Rfe?nf3mraf5n«R>^: 3 ^ fJRrpsfof^rffrcit 1 ^ ^3^
q$m: wqftr ( from R - 6< ?• 475)5 m &***&*
*3P SfffjJ fovil^ ^fl I 3Ps' J M<st*i*ll§.d§ cf?irS3cTJlf%
II 5Tt° VI -
31 tg: (Cause).
(W) tfC wfc* 3,f^ %3 : When a cause is _
expressed as identical with the effect, there is the figure %g.
An example is ?TB: > ''Ttr a T*
g^rsrcwst >”• This verse 18 the aut ^ 01 ’ 3
own and is cited by him in the 3rd Parichcheda. Here, from
the context, we understand that it is the heroine that is being
describd. Here, the heroine, who is the cause of the subjuga-
tion of the minds of youths, is described as the sikljugation
itself of the minds of young men.
3 ^43 913 h a3 been explained above in the notes on esSfiTT
(p. 51) and ( p. 155). The author says that the
figure Ifjj occurs by itself in the 4th pada viz. in
while in fifSfH: and ^MoqgwTTt flff:, the figure
is based upon apaRgrij. It cannot be said that the woman
is the cause of cTPjuqf^ig or of gwtsfff; while the woman
is really the cause of So in ftsTOSj
the charm lies in the woman’s being swallowed up as it were
byfasiB, as is the case in the first kind of 3T%^[tfxT;. In
3#F^, the charm lies in the woman’s (the cause )
being identified with the subjugation (the effect). ^
^ = There is a ^good deal of difference about the figure fg.
Dandin speaks of %g as an sr^f.R %aj ^ ^TgvR-
K. D. II. 235. But from his treatment of the figure
and the illustrations it appears that under he included both
(^R^taof Dandin) and srgJTH (jrmif3)- Bhamaha
positively declares that is not an Alankdra ,
II. 86 (This appears to be a reflection upon
Dandin’ s words quoted above). Udbhata does not speak of
^ at all ; be treats of cfiTsqf^. It is Rudrata who first define s
as our author does “$^d[ *
#SSfKt *TT^: ***& II” ^ VII 82. Mammata cri-
ticizes this definition of Hetu> he says that fg does not
deserve to be a figure, because it has no strikingness in it; and
20
230
NOTES ON
X. 64
that if the identification of the cause with the effect were to
constitute the figure the words ‘arrjgtfR,’ ( an example of
Hrcm«53Pir) will have to be called an example of ( which is
absurd ) ; tsPffiT HC fjj:* — g(% ^
•v5%t: i sTTgicrPten-f^fr Ipt h i
'7'rfen^: I ^qtsgirfa tfsrffr
H’ ( ^5? VII. 83 ) f^=j #JT5ST35rrflJTitf[g
?WMTCf3# 5 tc^fT^RSTfl^frr 'J^ra fg: l” K. P. X.
. under p. 706 (Va). The ( as well as )
gives two varieties of %rj • one is the same as our author’s
ts! ^JcSRSjt l flgR TO$jr ^fssrgt: n’;
the 2nd variety Js defined as follows:— ‘frftfgqgr HR ftfft
I 3RT^r §STgR |l’ .
It has been seen above that |g is regarded by Mammata
and others as nothing else but In certain cases what
is called |g by our author will be the first kind of
( ) according to the Uddyota “gg fsJ3K52TtI?l : 3"PRg-
tll^bl (sTfrRrTrfrR:) I gR — ‘fl^RR gRHI ' -MRNl gq
^trirr ; 1 SlcRrafc ^;q
^ J 1 ’^ gssipapisRT i gin ‘i^tfgWr
Irg^frdsg i” p. 58.
32 ( Favourable).
The figure is called when unfavourableness turns
out favourable. An example is (%) ^ ^
3 # fr^T (^a^r) fJRR^ cRoj g^qr^nwri (^gggj^ir
vTPRT ) WR- 3RT refers to the Rgg; for some fault of whom
the heroine is angry with him. Ramacharana says that
these words are addressed to a heroine by her friend.
Wounding and binding a man are generally unfavourable;
but in the particular case taken, wounding the hero with the
nails and locking him up in the arms (as punishment meted
in anger) would be something most desirable to him.
R RPRg (p. 48, 11. 5-6) — As the peculiar
strikingness in the verse cited is apprehended as altogether
different from all other figures, it is but proper that it should
be counted as a distinct ornament.
* Pradipa ( p. 437 ) seems to be wrong in ascribing this
definition of gjj to Udbhata, who does not speak of Iletu
at all. The definition is found almost verbatim in Rudrata
and the example which Mammata cites is also from Rudrata.
The Alahkaracandrika (Kuval. p. 168) falls into the
same error.
X. 65 snpFS. Sahityadarpana
231
It should be noted that this is a figure defined by Visva-
natha alone. No well-known writer on Rhetoric mentions it*
We think that 3^33555 is somewhat like to be defined below.
If from a slight difference of strikingness a separate figure
were to be reckoned, there would be a very large number of
figures. There must be certain broad lines of demarcation
between one figure and another. Compare the instructive-
words of Dandin “ Sr<T?sr^ I I
ii Pft g 'remit: i nls •
II” K. D. II. 1-2.
33 3TT$rr ( Paralepsis).
fttwiie: ®r#i: ^^iqiTfiqr
( eififtqsr: ) fire?. When there is an
apparent denial of something, which was intended to be said,,
for the purpose of conveying some special meaning, the figure is
termed 3 ?t^, which is two fold as pertaining to what is about
to be said and what has been said.
In 3TT^T, there is a verbal denial or suppression of what i&
intended to be said; but this denial is not really meant to be so.
The purpose for which this is resorted to is to convey
something special about the matter in hand. So the not
being intended to be so, becomes only an apparent one
Vide 3T^. Fr^if^W
*f>3 i sr ^fcr
B. 114. The elements that constitute are therefore
four; there must be something intended to be said, there must
be an express denial of it, this denial or suppression being really
inapplicable under the circumstances must be only apparent,,
and lastly there must be the conveyance of some special meaning.
what is really enjoined is or where what was said ia
merely negatived and this negation is real and not apparent,
there is no 3?i%. For example,
wr k i tsrr n
^ ^TlRcT 1
rfir u” I. H-12.
In the first verse poets are called upon to guard their poetic,
treasures. But in the second verse, this advice is negatived
232
NOTES ON
X. 65 STT^T,
and they are called upon to allow others to take their treasures.
Here as the negation is really meant to be conveyed and not
apparent, there is no ‘‘fo w 3
fjmft i i” e- p. 117.
sifVfrat *rqf<T 3TT%W) TWW I WW g fttW ?TT*r
?fcr i” ^ p. 274.
The thing intended to be said may have been actually said
( 1 ), or it may be yet to be said ( II ). The first again is two-
fold; the very nature of the thing said ( ) may be
denied ( a ) or what is negatived may be the mentioning
of what is spoken (b). As regards the f^^q- of that which is
yet to be said ( ), we can only negative the cfisqq, because
the being yet not mentioned, we cannot nagative its nature
As regards the of of the there
are two varieties* the whole of what is to be said and what was
generally suggested may be negatived ( c ), or a part being
expressed, another part ( not expressed ) may be negatived ( d ).
Thus 3 tt^T is fourfold. In this division of our author
closely follows the ^
£\ 1 3 1 era
l” p. 115. It should be well remembered that the
( to be conveyed by the apparent ) is never
expressed in words, but is left to be understood
9TCW (P.48,11. 13-14). Helpless.
SFTfirC stay here for a moment. is addressed to
the husband of the heroine by the latter’s friend. This verse
is an example of II c., i . e. ^I^T, where the whole
is negatived. Here by the expression ‘^qn^’ the pangs of
separation felt by the friend of the speaker are suggested
in general. But the words ‘j% negative into the
mentioning of what was about to be said and convey a special
meaning ( by so negativing ) with reference to what was to
be said ( fjpN - : )• What that special meaning is
we shall know later on.
aw fTOi (P- 48, 11. 16-17). W5RTT^RT—
Jasmine. — blooming, expanded. — certainly. This
is an example of II d, i. e . of 3TT^T, where a part
being expressed, another part is suppressed. Here
is a part of what is intended to be said, but the part ‘qf fe q ft T*
X. 65 Sahityadarpana 233
is not uttered. The special meaning that results from this
expression is that it is impossible for the speaker to give
expression to the idea of the death of the friend.
crc^ 3 T 'qrpRt (P. 48, 11. 19-20 ). This verse is cited in
the in the same connection. t
i 3T a-^rmr ^ wart n’* ?wt:—
It is not my business to say that thou art loved by her.
Thine will be the disgrace, Righteous words.
These words were said by the friend of a love-lorn woman,
who first declared herself to be a go-between. This verse is
an example of I. a. i . e, of 3TT^T, w ^ ere the
itself is denied. In this verse, the character of a go-between
which was already announced is denied. The special meaning
that results from this denial is that she tells the truth
although she is a ( while generally are not very
particular about truth ).
fiftt %^(P. 48,11.22-23). whose
purpose is cruel. Here, in the first half, the friend of the
heroine intimates to her lover that he should stay with her
and should not go away as he intends to do. After saying
it, she negatives what she had said. This is an example of
I b above, i . e. of snifa where is negatived.
The particular meaning that results from this mode of speech
is the excess of the sorrow felt by the speaker.
WTteTf^T g:^Tf^r:- In the first example, the
particular meaning conveyed is ‘my friend is sure to die/
The particular meanings in connection with the other examples
have been already explained.
=qi4 3TT*TT^rT^( P. 48, 11. 26-27 ). It cannot be said
that in all these examples the negation of what is said or is
about to be said is really intended and constitutes the essence of
the figure. The negation, not being really intended, is merely
apparently so and what constitutes the charm of the figure
3 jy^cf is the fact that the is purely apparent. We have
shewn above that if negation of what is said be really intended
there is no 3Tf%q\
(P. 48, 1. 28 ). Another figure, also called
3u^q-, is held to be the apparent permission or enjoining of
something, which is really not desired. The word means
‘for the purpose of appi ehending some particular meaning* as
234
NOTES ON
X. 66 3TT$»T.
in the first 5?r%q described above. In this second there
are four constituent elements; there must be something sjfqg
{ not desired); there must be a permission or enjoining of that
thing ; this permission must bs only apparent and not
really intended and lastly some special meaning must be
conveyed by this mode of speech. These two kinds of snit'T
differ as follows: — In the first, there is something which is
desired and there is an apparent negation of it; while in the
second, there is something which is not desired and there is
an apparent permitting of it.
No one will enjoin what is not wished by him. So
ihe verbal permission, being inapplicable, terminates in indi-
cating the of what is not wished. Vide 3#.
qqqftgsrift i
wwl 1 tmsi ffa fqfwTsq
■'fq^qrsHgfqtT'TqqHPff i” p. 120.
An example of this second is etc. This is
K. D. II, 141, This verse is cited by the p. 120 and by
the gvrrfWcTrrf^ No. 1040. Here the departure of the lover is
srfqsj it is permitted in the words etc; this permission
is only verbal, what is really meant is that he should not go.
The last line means ‘if you go away I shall die; I only wish
that I may be born again in that place where you are going.’
3R Here, as the departure of the husband is not
desired,, the permission ( contained in the words etc. )
is inpplicable literally and terminates in prohibition and the
special meaning conveyd is that the husband must entirely
abstain from going . Dandin remarks upon this verse as follows
qqrqftqfcqcfrrr i qT^qrqr frfq-
a# ||” K. D. II 142. Vide 3?®. g. “3^ -^rrf^cqr^ J^INTOT-
1 q =qm 1 srftKqiq 1
pp. 120-121.
The figure has been differently defined by different
writers. Vamana defines it as follows 5 ff% c T:’ ^T 52 TT*
IV. 3. 27. The «|f% on this is ‘sirrst 3^: ^rqPRT^fT^T: I
V This is nothing but the of
later writers. According to another interpretation of the
sutra t what Vamana calls would be OTRtfrfi.
X. 66 stt^t.
S5HITYADARPANA
235
q?f: Hfn'qf^teqft l’. Dandin’s definition of srr^T is very
■wide. ‘stfcl^tftKT%q^MI^Pir fq^FF I R^FFT 3 ^l|N%F^ 9 JT-
qvRcTFTF ll’ K. D. II. 120. According to him. the qfqijq need
not be of q^qfTF 13 ! or but may be of anything. Thus the
following he regards as examples of sq^fq: — qq qsqfff W»qq
qqfor JTFq.ii 127; 35 fsFqqjq:
#q-flT»TFTt i q gqr ^tt% n” 133.
Bhamaha, TJdbhata and Mammata define in the same way.
Their definition is practically the same as our author’s definition
of the first sn^q. ‘jrfq^r sfr flfqifqfeFm > 3 tf%t ?fq cr qqf
qrafer qqq: frf it ^^FRrnirFif^’w: e ^ ^ 1 fq^iq qsqqF
fq^q^I =q sftfqq: II’ II. 2-3. The Alankarasarvasva, our
author and Ekavall speak of theater as defined by TJdbhata
and add a second kind of it, viz. the apparent permission of
what is not wished for. Vide R. G. pp. 421-426.
It should be noticed that in suffer there is suggested
sense (fqqfq). But this auggested sense is not prominent; it is
subordinate to the expressed sense. The inode of speech itself
is charming. Therefore, although there is a suggested sense,
this is not sqfq, but goft^jpq^rsq. Vide ‘sTTSftsfa
5WM E TF%ft l ’Tt 4T«F#Fq qrScqq, * 5TW% ^mYA aq^qtf^qssqf^
5Tiq% i ft5F ^r^tTF^s^qt q e qq
sqfFfq^qjflf^qsjpsq qF^qFKRJF. I % qF^F®4*qqt:
SFT^Mfqr^ l” pp- 36-37.
Examples of 57i%q are;— cWftT *F fF4 c4 qfigqt
FJflW I f?FFf?ffl : g«ri cFl^F f^iWfTvFtoT II
3rTttW° HI.; arc cFT qfq ;)%q ^PW^clW cFFF: 1
f% 3 %iqffsF^t § II RFJT 3 II. 69.; ^ ^ qq qftef f^TR^T fqfq*q
qsRitir i wsjrqqF qTTiw^cTqF qqqrfq ^ cqqF it R- G - p- 123.
34 finTT^HT (Peculiar Causation).
When an effect is said to arise without a cause, it is f^rR^TT,
which is two-fold according as the reason is mentioned or not.
As an effect is bound by the rule of presence and absence with
a cause, it is impossible that an effect can come into existence
without its cause. But if, under some striking mode of speech,
it is stated that the effect does come into existence in the
absence of its well-known cause there is f^riqTU, The effect in
such a cause is due to some other cause which is not well-known
(arcrf^:)- qJFyrtvqqsqfq^FlfqqTRIcwV qWW-fl^lF^W I
3p-q*FF filter ^qftix: 5FF3, qfc 3 qiqifq^RF qqiVTTq FFTT
236
NOTES ON
X. 66-67 f^rcr.
f W ^T7o%^fK: fa%KFqT I ST ^ sffft%S^ST-
l 3mi<T $TC°T q^TTtSsftfrT l” 3*5- S' p. I 24 -
^ this distinct cause (which is not well-known)
is sometimes mentioned and sometimes not.
3STTTO fflF: (P- 49,11. 9-10). slender
without toil ( the waist of a man becomes slender by exercise
through the decrease of fat). 3RTfcT#— ’ Tremulous without
fright ( when a person is frightened his eyes become tremulous).
In youth. Here the effects viz. are
rspresented as happening even in the absence of the well*known
causes, viz. srprpj, ^T, and ^pq respectively. But there is an
that produces these effects. It is youth; and as
it is mentioned in the verse, this is an example of ^rrfffftTTT*
If we read cfgqftcr for it will be an example
of
The name ftqppfl- is significant. f^TPRT etymologically
means ‘that in which some cause (other than the well-known
one) is to be suggested’. ^T^TTnTt
p. 98. We may also explain the term in another manner.
fcRTR^iT is that in which the effect is reprsented in a peculiar
manner i. e . as not produced by its well-known cause, as said
by 3 P 5 . ‘fqf^PTT T or by Ekavall ‘faf^PTT arprf
3T^[fWRT fWFRT >’ P- 279.
It should be noticed that in a conscious identifica-
tion is at the bottom. For example, the due to youth is
not the same as the ^ j ^ due to exercise, but they are spoken
of as identical. It is therefore that the 3j$. says that
srfrfgqtfrfj is at the root of this figure. ( ^fcT^iqtfvR: ) ^ 3P3T-
5T cTSO^^TTW srRf 3 c^RT^TcR^ f P- 12 ^
Jagannatha demurs to this statement and says that 3rfcT^[qtRfi
is not everywhere at the root of this figure ; it is
that is at the root everywhere. 4 qj gr
*«pnftro i i m
5fl%5tfcT 5T : l’ Eu G-. p. 433.
Dandin’s defintion of is every clear
i zra ^prrf^ct 3T st f^rmr u’ D.
II. 199.
Examples of feqpffir are;— qfnrFT: TOT ^
^s^mwqfistsfq- ^^rpft i i srapfitf
237
X. 66-67 Sahityadarpana
|cTWTW II 3IT° V ; \
^ dtf Tfatf T^T^TPTl I 3 teRTt^ir II. 21;
I II.
35 ( Peculiar Allegation ).
Where, in spite of the existence of a cause, the effect is
absent, there is which is likewise two-fold. It is well
known that when all the causes are present they invariably
produce the effect. When it is represented that the effect
does not follow, although all the causes are present, there is
which is resorted to to manifest some specialty. The
contradiction involved in saying that the effect does not follow
though the causes are present is to be removed by the fact that
there is some reason which prevents the production of the
effect. ^rsqnfut f^T I 3T?q*lT
f 3T3T. p. 126.
An example of is etc. They, being truly
great, are free from haughtiness though rich, are not fickle
though young, and, though possessed of power, are not heedless
in the exercise of it. Wealth generally makes a man haughty
and youth makes one fickle. Here, they are represented as not
being haughty &c. though they are rich etc. The reason, viz.
being truly great, is mentioned. If we read ‘j%^ ;
we shall have an example of srgrfiftffffir
( P. 49, 11. 18-22 ). It is Mammata
who gives three divisions of viz.
and Almost all writers, including Udbhata,
give two. Our author following the says that what is
called (the reason of which is inconceivable ) is
really The reason that is not mentioned may be
easily conceivable or not conceivable. It is to be understood
that by is meant that it is inconceivable to ordinary
intellects ( and not to all ). Otherwise the contradiction
involved in saying that the effect does not follow though the
cause is present cannot be removed. I
^ \* 3T^- p. 127. An example of
srf^^rfaTTT cited by Mammata is % etc. This is given by
Bhamaha ( III. 24 ) as an example of Here it is said
that his body was destroyed, yet his strength is not destroyed.
238
NOTES ON
X. 67 Mf'ilte.
Destruction of body is a cause of the destruction of strength.
Here the reason why the effect does not follow the cause is not
mentioned and besides it is inconceivable ( i. e. not to be
understood by men of ordinary intellect).
The name is significant. The ex plains
as ^pr%: t V- 101 « Ttie OTtcT
explains as ’statement of something in order to intimate
something in particular’; t P* 78.
Similarly, ^ o ^ ( OTflPWi )
p. 281.
*1* R (P* 49, 11.22-24). In the
present figure, an effect is also intimated to be absent by means
of representing something as present which is opposed to it.
So also in fqpqRR, a cause is intimated as being absent by means
of representing something, which is opposd to it, as present.
What our author means is as follows: — was defined as
‘the absence of the effect even though the cause is present.’
Our author declares that occurs, not only when the
effect is stated to be absent , but also when something, opposed
to the effect, is stated to be present; i. e . it occurs, not only
when the sjvrR of the ^ is stated, but also when the
of what is opposed to the q^> is stated. Similarly, f%^r^TT
occurs, not only when the cause is stated to be absent though
the effect is present, but also when something opposed to the
cause is stated to be present ; i. e t it occurs not only when the
of the is stated, but also when the vtr of what is
opposed to the is stated. Vide g.
ir =et 2i: Bfi: (P. 49, 11. 24-26 ). q: sfifarcf*:— Vide our
notes on this verse in the first Parichchheda. Here the cause
of longing is the absence of the lover etc. The opposite of this
is the presence of the lover etc. The figure is f^TR^jr because
the opposite of the cause ( absence of the lover) is stated to be
present. The statement that we expect in accordance with the
definition of r^TR^TT as strictly construed is ‘the heart has a
longing (^), though the cause, absence of the lover etc. is
absent ( sfi R TO In the verse, the 3 T^r- of the
is not stated in so many words ( i . e . we ought to havs m
X. 67 Sshityadarpana 239
=fiWRf sr: g g sjfft g ); what is stated is the ^ ( the presence )
of what is opposed to the cause. Similarly, the presence of the
lover etc. is a cause, which should produce the effect, viz,
absence of longing. The opposite of absence of longing is
longing. This is stated in the verse. Therefore there is
The statement, strictly in accordance with the defini-
tion of should have been ‘though the lover etc. are
present (^fct^dt), there is an absence of 3 ig fih P <5j (the ^ )\
In the verse the srqjq of the effect is not directly stated ( i. e .
we ought to have *T )• What is stated
is the of what is opposed to the effect ( i . e. is stated
to exist). Compare “ggFPSpqT: I g?T
ftgRRT 1 qiRggr qimacqror gggqj
1 ggtft ^WR^qgfqgfgqT^ gq^r ^i4gr ggcfra-
^TgngTf 5f?r 127.^ ^ we have
explained in the notes ( p. 21 ) on the verse how there is
Jagannatha says that and are
(express), when the absence of the cause or of the effect is
directly expressed, otherwise they are srjsJ (indirect or
implied). It was with reference to this distinction that
Mammata remarked on the verse ‘q: etc, that there
was no distinct figure in it. Mammata appears to hold that
is distinct only when it is stated in accordance with
the definition of it, i . e. when the effect is stated, though the
causes are absent. fqvqqqr, according to him, is not distinct,
when the existence of the opposite of the cause is stated.
Similarly in the case of Fie ? e It. G. p. 439
i m ir
i gfeqsft i cf^rr \
1 *Tt 3 Mig^Ril^I
\ 3?gSfa *Frc*ii:
% ivRKw^- ^zt ^ l ”
Vatnana defines quite differently. His definition
is 30 IV. 3. 23. The
confirmation of similarity resulting from the representation
of the absence of only one quality ( in one of the things ) is called
fq^fg;. His examples are: ‘vrqfrg qsfiw^f
240
NOTES ON
X. 67 faftqtfrK.
gW5T#n'-’ Kumara. I. 10; ^ srffejNq ^qq^l’
•‘j-'WifS'h IT* The vr&. ^f. says that this is nothing but Rupaka.
Jagannatha and Nagoji call it “qrg
^rraf fq^tfrE:’ fftr fq^Tf^%rr ^f?r q
tjqrqpEqy l” 3T^* P* 128. Jagannatha remarks ‘‘qqy
^mrJTfq- q%q (ssKtwwtq) i m ‘wf qg^gfo qiM j V
fcqRTt > ^ NT*qqi3q fqtqwi.’ ?fq
Mn^tt i’ R. G. p. 439.
Examples of are:— =^^1 qi&€I qarfir q *4
*q; qqftf&tf qrqkqnq^qT i qp%g ^=r^cf qlsft
5^tRi«HT qq qij; ■tUtfit tH^lsPt =qR)d^u^ft qrqq^ n qiT° VI. ;
=?q q^qtsft ^frOTPTt Wt Wt l q^sqqqi4#lfa q& TOR%q^ II; 3TTfqtsft
yc$M?gqtqr fagq.Pi^sft i qqjqqr srft qfSrq: ^q ttrfqsqfq ii
(quoted in eq-qi^tq; p. 38 as an example of stqq
remarks ‘qftqfiqt JcRqTfcrqq ftptqftftir v^3f:)’.
36 (Contradiction).
qrfcT^gfSf qqnfrfcr: (P.49,11.28-30). When there is
an apparent incongruity between a genus and any of the four
beginning with genus (srrfcT, gq,!^ - and ^©q), between a quality
and any of the three beginning with quality, between an action
and another action or substance, or between two substances,
there is f^bT, which has thus ten varieties (lit. forms). We
have seen in the 2nd Parichchheda (pp. 42-43) that the
attributes of an individual are four, viz, qyfq, gq, f^qy an( l 5^.
jsjjfcr may be apparently incongruous with four, gq may be so
with three, fqyqy with two and ^©q with another ^©q only; so
there are ten varieties. It may be asked ‘why should we not
regard the of gq with qyf^r as a separate variety ? The
reply is — the fq^br of gq with is the same as the fq^fa of
srrfct with gq, which has been reckoned in the first four
varieties, where ^ 1 % is opposed to qyfq or gq or fqyqy or ^©q.
The same remark holds good in the case of the fq^bq- of fqjqy
with snffr or gar and the of g=q with sqfq, gq or fifrq.
Compare “5n%#to m fqd^ sq; ‘fq^sj^qqrqq^’ f^rr ^qq
3n?rr hc fqdq: i ^ ^ gw anftqf- qq) Srqr:i”
fqqo p. 122.
qq fqq gqtfir q it (P. 50,11. 2-11). qrittqqtsft
flbflTJi: ‘the beams of the moon are impregnated with heat.’
3Tfeqqqft §qq fil*% — Even the hum of bees breaks the heart.
In ‘qq fq^l etc.’ the f^rhq of qffit With srrf^T, jpi, fq;qT and £oq
241
X. 68-69 Sahityadarpana
is exemplified in the four pdclas of the verse. qqyq
— This verse is cited by Mammata. We read there
which is perhaps better. Here there is a con-
tradiction in saying that the rough palms, are soft, qfjqcq and
are both qualities. This contradiction is removed by
the fact that the palms were hard at one time and became soft
at another time ( when the munificent king began to rule ).
sRRzr — This is Raghu. . X. 24. — though devoid
of desires. qiqysq reality. This is addressed to the Deity.
Here there is contradiction between the^q syqyq (being unborn)
and the action ‘being born’. This contradiction is only
apparent; it is removed by the fact that God’s greatness is
transcendental. q^cW 3WRi;. tefoTCT)
(v%w) tot: tot:
ftqrr; \q r^’
1. 4. 8.; qrqr q^ s jdrrop;
‘tow <tt° 5. 4. 134 sriq^enq snraO- m^T^r-
gi^l'Sqq^. Here there is a contradiction between
( which being a single thing is 3oq and not a ;qjfq) and
5qMJ*5cq (which is a «jq). This contradiction is removed
by the fact that to one in separation the moon may appear
to be full of heat, qqq^qr =q ^ 3 T§xrsr^
(or 3Ti%qq^ also; IRqhsRTt TO l’ 3rqt°
III. I. 53 ). qRR3?Wfr Difficult to be found even in
imagination. qqqfq gladdens. Here there is a contradiction
between two actions qqqfq and This can be removed
by the fact that in separation both of them are possible.
— This verse occurs above ( text p. 46 ) under
Here there is a contradiction between %qy and ^q
i. e . between ‘not bearing on the head’ and Hara ( who being
one is ^q and not ). The explanation lies in the fact that
here there is a hyperbolical and picturesque description given
by the poet. If we read in the verse qypftRJW e tc., the words
( the mid-day sun ), then the verse will be an
example of the fq^tq of ^q with another ^sq. The moon
cannot be the sun. This is explained by the state of separation.
To constitute f^ThT, the following is essential. There must
be an opposition or contradiction between two things; bqt
this contradiction must be explicable, i . e. apparent merely.
If the f^jq cannot be explained and is final, it is a fault (qfa);
but if the opposition can be reconciled in some way and
21
242
NOTES ON
X. 68-69 fefar.
thus shewn to be merely apparent, there is the figure called
•fqfhq-. Because the is merely apparent, the figure
is also named by some. Jagannatha defines
as l<
I VZJ I RWq H:
he Jthen remarks “g =q 1 srdf$j ‘
dNM^rcte i. awrt qtasr rqqq: i 3 rt ^
i ifit errors: i Rowtfr^ra%R i
3flW SR 5T#P!Rt sfif i”
R. G. p. 427.
3T5f ‘qq ^TS^rq^ (P. 50, 11. 13-19 ). In such ex-
amples as ‘qq f^r’ etc., the wind etc., which as denoting many
individuals, are generic terms seem, at first sight, to be opposed
to ‘conflagration/ ‘heat/ ‘piercing the heart’ and ‘the sun,’
which are a genus, quality, action and substance respectively.
This apparent contradiction is removed by the fact that the
state of things was caused by separation. 3jq 5?^I
This has been explained in connection with each
•of the verses above.
T^qrq^TqT 5fe: (P. 50, 11. 19-21 ). The author now pro-
ceeds to distinguish between fq^q, frqiqvrr and What
is common to all these figures is apparent contradiction, r^ftq
is the widest of the three and corresponds to ( general
rule ); while f^qrqqr anc ^ are narrow and correspond to
srq-^f^r ( exception ). The contradiction involved in both fq*nqqx
and is the violation of the law of causation. The
•contradiction in fqfto has nothing to do with the relation of
causation. The general rule is ‘ejqqftfiwrR'sfal SCOT*?
So where there is apparent contradiction involved in
stating that though the causes are absent the effect is present
or that though the causes are present the effect is absent, there
is fq^qqqr and respectively and not Our author
draws another distinction. In i^qTqqT, as the poet starts with
the statement of the absence of the cause, it is the effect only
{ represented as happening even in the absence of its cause )
that is seemingly incongruous i . e. the q;RiirpTR is qrqq; and qjjq
is qj^-q, because the absence of the cause is a matter of fact
while the q^q is only poetically fancied. What is
merely fancied is opposed by the real, but what is real cannot
be opposed by what is fancied, is the converse of
n#r^)-
X. 68-69 Mta.
SlHITYADARPANA
243
In jqqHrtf%> the non-production of the effect, though causes
exist, which is represented by the poet is more powerful than
the cause and therefore the cause is apprehended as seemingly
incongruous; i. e. in fqsfqtfrfr, qqqRR is 3P=!'K a °d 'FR cr Rtq i®
But in ftrfq, both the objects are equally powerful and
are both qp:q and qm, as3 e. g. =F,<%R?q and gjRRR in ‘bRtT-
etc. - Compare “qRiTTBTtR ^^fT^rS^JT
sr^^RT, * 3 (sri^i) wyirvtR
snfftaTfsKftTSfRTftq: < qq Rtrq>qf qTqiBitq ^rcrorarar qq qT®i-
qRcqg%qq. i %q RTsft iqdqrfeqT bir 3 t^ h- p- 124. The
following cKjft^r ( quoted by p. 124 and Jagannatha in
R. G. p, 4 32) clearly explains the difference between ft-qRRr
and ‘q.IRRT qT«RR: q^tqq: I ftwqRqRRlfcr
f^qtsRlRqmq. ii 3mt frfqJtrtsBr; i%d§q ®qqf&q: R. G.
p. 432 “qq (frqrsRrqf) q SRhr: ^y'lrRlWTftdf^Rt fpRTr
g qrqq«tqr i srrt^f^i qrfvqqRRqiKqpTrqBr q i ^q qq
qqqf^jt qqqqifq i ®rq qq q B*t i ■ <* Rdfq^qftqrfiqfaTBiptT*
qBt l”.
It should be noted that our author says above that in
fttulftfi, sRiqRTq is qrqq; and SRRumrq is qi«r- This is opposed
to the view of Jayaratha (who says that the words quoted
by us above from Sarvasva as regards jqftTrfqi are spurious
and supports his remark by a quotation from fiRq; whom
Sarvasva generally follows ) and of JaganDatha. They say that
in the cRRi^R is really spar and ^Ror^T is qr*R-
To us the view of J ayaratha and J agannatha appears to be
sounder. <l 3R ( ft%q)xT;t ) WTOiRiW k
^ i qlg^fx i ^ qTfgRgfit qpRr i ‘e qq#fft qqfq
g^TTgsr: i sRrfa qg qp? qpgqr q §q qqq ’ h qi^qqRRKrfRig
^otynqqR^T JRl u lRUtrifa qT , 'qqTqtqtq. I
-«RRBt qifq.qqqRTB : fR B 5TR ?^q JRR:,.
3 g ^frfiqqsq): bbt: qw ^brt l” R. G. p. 438; ‘§RR—
qftqqsnqqqqrs 1 ( ‘qq ^%Ttq>r q>rqi+n^q qqtRBqiqr qq qpqqRcq-
gtPRj ) i but ft — ‘q^qrsft erg qui’ ?enqr ERRqftq q,rqWt%u
qjpyoR'T qjyft g qi«q|, qft jj BBift qgiX D TR^ BR^f W B q&
qRTBRBrq qrRe^q jrftft: i qqrra; ‘qq qiKBBqqr
qRiBTq^-q qivqqRcqgqqq.’ iftr to! ura; i qq§q BBR^ra^qr*
cggig — ‘qrRqRRsqftc qrqq.fqqq qiqTg?rf%?3 ifq i
riRfw ( BqRqrt: ) sRBRraTgq^q i qjqJBBRRTqlsRifh; qrsV
qvf^rvf: i’ ftqrfrqt p- 124.
244
NOTES ON
X. 68-69 fetter.
A question arises as regards certain cases of j^pf. What
difference is there between Rupaka and fprjp ( of with
snfcT^or of psq with psp ) as exemplified in pg-qp^ qqjp^,
P«rfe;pf^Ptfqp: ? These last appear to be quite
on a par with the stock example of Rupak&, gpr q;p : . As in
Bupaka the identity of two objects is- predicated, so in the above
examples of fq^TP also there is 3 feq. Hence the above two exam-
ples should be regarded as cases of Rupaka, or otherwise all
examples of ltupaka will fail under fqrjq and Rupaka will have
no province of its own. To this objection the following reply is
given. Although in the above two examples, the non-difference
of the two objects is intended in order to give rise to the con-
tradiction ( involved in saying that the wind is fire, or the
moon is the sun ), still the charm in the two verses does
not lie in the non-difference, which is subordinate as being
subservient to something else. In the two verses what is intend*
ed to be conveyed is the extraordinary condition of a woman
in separation. It is contradiction itself that is striking here
as being favourable to this purpose, although it is not directly
expressed, but is implied; and therefore it is the contradiction
that constitutes the figure here. On the other hand, in such
examples of Rupaka as ‘the face is the moon,’ the strikingness
lies in the non-difference ( of the face and the moon ) in order
that it may be understood that all the qualities such as
‘being delightful’ etc. residing in the moon are to be found
in the face also. Although there is some contradiction in
saying that the face is the moon, it, not being favourable to
the sense intended, is not charming. Therefore there is Rupaka
and not Virodha. So the difference between fq^jp and Rupaka
briefly stated is : — In j^fpq, the strikingness lies in the con-
tradiction and not in non-difference; while in Rupaka, the
charm lies in the non-difference and not in the contradiction.
Vide ‘3T*r PT#poqqtpj fqd^fFJ p piqgFts’ on p. 429 of R. G.
of which the following quotation from the Uddyota is a
summary ,, p%pqrdP 3 < 3 ' qqqpq p fpfpT: I 3Fpqr ppr
fraF Ffrf^rd i fp fqfmifPTTPrpp^pr fqqfedcpsft
gTrefeprpFrfTfteqrP. i fTOtvqqFqqrq^^FqFqq qrqfq , rrqf^fqqc|p
cT^^qrFrpfpmsR-PT ( trrRpf ? ) fetter" pp ‘PP^rftpPT
p#RFPSFcq[<t I jdr fes; 3 P^fpgr^rPP.cPF^gpi^prpf 3 %
FFt'mp FscrPT pffrft p 3 Fpfq fetter:, fefeTqrqfpggPFrra.,
^ F’FfFte p 3 1 pip 3 ferffteppppiPT stftp^cp p
X. 68-69
SShityadarpana
245
if Jpflfrcr:, ft § vRT»r ^l#[l
qft ^t jprcftSl q (^ptis , ai^r#Ri^i ^ ‘m ^knt jpi
^■’ scf^Rf ?rgj ^ fed*r i” pp- 83-84.
Jagannatha remarks that the division into ten varieties
is not charming one. should be divided into two
varieties: — ( I ) pure, ( II ) based upon paronomasia. V? 3 ?rt
fgf^r I 2 !: >’ R* * G - P- 428.
The works of Bana abound in example of Yirodha based
upon Paronomasia.
37 (Disconnection).
When a cause and its effect are represented as having
different locations, there is It is a general rule that we
see the effect as following in that very region where the cause
exists. We see smoke in the kitchen, where fire is kindled;
but fire lighted in the kitchen does not produce smoke on the
mountain. Where, however, two things, related as cause and
effect and therefore naturally expected to be in the same place,
are represented as occupyiang different places on account of
some specialty (of the cause), there is SR^fcT. 35 R° t
i Ejf|: ^ 1 ^
^TS^IRI i’ 3T^. R p. 129.
ST (P. 50, 11. 24-27). This verse occurs
in the Amarusataka (No. 34) and is cited by the ar^. as
an example of The words are addressed to a friend
by one disappointed in his love, or they are uttered in a
soliloquy by one who is deeply in love, comments
upon it as follows: cfRurf^g^: *
3 T I 3T l
JPTT, ^ ^ awnOTWfl: 1 m ^ ^
^4 I ^4 =5T fff RRT 5T5T*pr
^fcT l 3T5qr ^ ^%5T ^<4 ^ ^fcT I ST #T
4W?r^ ^4(44 PmfS, ^4 ^ ^srf^TOna^r: 1
w =5r w s ^ s#?t 5^1% i st
T4 cTT ffc5TRVTRe?l^l^llft4T SRRft
S $TCT: I 3T*T ^ ^ WT ^Tl^lI^Rdt S ^ ^ t
*C4 Stef SIxTT l”- The
S- reads qqpR*rt, which is noticed by also* The 37 ^.
reads QTSRf^ef^: for 3 ?^+tr?ri: and ^TR^RFTTfsRf:
246
NOTES ON
X. 69 srsi#.
wfafr: ) for 5t^s=q3wi«t|t: ( ztim: ^TP*.).
TOSiWiT^: Our minds lack maturity of judg-
ment i . e. the mind being disappointed does not know what
to do. In childhood, one has not maturity of understanding.
Here the woman is young, and therefore the want of maturity
of understanding should belong to her; but is represented
.here as belonging to the lover. Women are timid; therefore
timidity should belong to her ; but here timidity ( of course,
due to love ) belongs to the lover. We are oppre-
ssed or worried. Here the causes, etc., belong to
the woman, but the effects WTRf etc. are represented
as belonging to the hero. Thus and exist in diffe-
rent places ( i . e . there is qqfqq^uq of qjrqq^uj ) aud therefore
the figure is differ-
It should be noticed here that the due to
childhood is different from that due to love; similarly, the
natural timidity of women is different from the fluttering of
the heart due to love. But both of them are here regarded
as non-different ( i. e. there is between due
to womanhood and due to love ). It is therefore that
the 3?<s. remarks srcftftxRr
I P- 130. The ftq ff fTft remarks
upon this that, according to the views of 3 j^. is
always at the root of this figure, I
I 3RWT ft felNt ^ I” Pro
p. 130. Jagannatha says that the figure 3?fcrq|qtfrfi is not
everywhere at the root of this figure; what is necessary
■everywhere is the as regards the effect ( as that of
explained above) ft 3 1 #KZT«J-
I ^
I ‘f I 3^=% qwRI^iqTT ftf%qr
%^rdt qftr: n’ -qfaqRRRTwq^ i * ft
^RTc^:’ ra* \ f% g %qfaf%qRfti-
WRj” R. G. pp. 440-141.
The name significant,
absence of the natural co-existence
said by Mammata qqf:
because in it there is
of cause and effect, as
3TCTWI (P. 50, 1. 28 ). In there is
apparent contradiction in saying that the cause remains in one
247
X. 69 srosj-w. Sahityadarpana
place and that the effect is produced in another. So it may be
thought that is nothing but The author therefore
proceeds to distinguish between and As said
above with reference to and 3T^f% corresponds
to an srqqfq, while is something like a rule (^naj).
An amtf is always more powerful than a rule. So where the
conditions of suffer are satisfied, there can be no ff^q.
occurs when two things, well known to reside in different
places, are represented as residing in the same substratum,
e - S- and ggiFTR^f, which reside in different objects, but are
represented as residing in the same object, viz, the palm;
3 T’3Wf?T ) on the other hand, occurs when two objects, related as
eause and effect and generally known to reside in the same
place, are represented as residing in different substrata.
Compare K. P. X. q q f^q ; ,
i i”; “sqfW°t#T gfasqt:
tfqffimtqctqTqfqq*^ I BJTRiiwyi^T
I’ R. G. p. 441. In fqqrqjq, the effect is
represented as following even in the absence of the well-known
cause; in suffer both the cause and effect exist, but in different
places i. e. in frqrqqr the charm lies in qqqfafq even without
the well-known cause, while in the charm lies in the
qqfqqoq of ^TT^T and qspnq. Similarly, fqqfqfftf; should be
distinguished from 3i^ffq. Jagannatha remarks that in
3T6WfcT it is not necessary that the two objects should be
related as cause and effect. What is necessary to constitute
the figure, according to Jagannatha, is that two objects, known
as generally existing together, should be represented as
residing in different places. “jn3^raffcP?§Ft Igqpfcftftfq q
fa ‘fa fqrfa ^
ft^qcq^cqfacqrqqqrq^q^q;qR;fa}fa ?JS£WRlfqqRqcfa Iffa-
i qqrgt § bt q srra; i” R. G. p. 441.
The following are some examples of srqjffq. fat 05^
1 331% n’; rfqqjfa
^Tl qq% I qyqfa q;ifa qv:q r ^q^jr ||>
( quoted in K. P. X. )
38 rereun (Incongruity).
( I ) When the qualities ( a ) or the actions ( b ) of a cause
and its effect are opposed to each other, ( II ) When an effort
248
NOTES ON
X. 70-71
fails and some evil result follows; or ( III ) when there is an-
association ( bringing together or connection ) between two
things that are incongruous, there is
It is a general maxim that the qualities of a cause produce
in the effect similar qualities, ft
Vide H. I. 24. Where the
poet represents the qualities of the cause as opposed to those
of the effect, there is (I a above ). If, however, the
qualities of the cause are different from those of the effect
in the nature of things there is no e. g. in
II” there is no fqqir, as grapes do
naturally grow on the hills. Therefore, the production of
qualities different from those of the cause must be due to the
poet’s imagination.
(P- 51, 11. 4-5). This occurs in Padma-
gupta’s Navasahasankacarita (I. 62 ). It is cited by
Mammata and Sarvasva as an example of fqqrr.
^ I P- 443 « Here >
we have pure (lit. white) fame arising from the cause, viz,
the dark sword, in opposition to the general rule that the
qualities of the cause produce in the effect qualities similar to
themselves. The quality ‘darkness’ of the cause, the
sword, is opposed to the quality ‘whiteness’ residing in the
effect, viz. fame.
3TH ^R ^ This is Rudrata IX. 47. not
small, i. e. very great. This is an example of I b. Here the
cause, the heroine, has the action, viz, ‘giving delight’
expressed by the words ^ the effect, viz.
separation, caused by the heroine, has the action ‘burning’
expressed by verb Therefore the actions of
the cause and its effect are opposed.
3t 4 51,11.11-12). This is an example
of II. wfrftr: (W srRfiC 1
(*Tftcr:) I *R Here not
only was the object ( viz. attainment of wealth ) not obtained,
but, on the contrary, the mouth was filled with salt water
( 3T^fci )•
X. 70-71 ftrv. Sahityadarpana
249
95 §5**95^. (P- 51, 11. 14-15).
^5=F ^9TIR 0 II. 4. 12, ^jqoj
^ 95, (^I'ipKTT) ^ 1 fa* (g<f) m (sj*
'ft ^ qH: ^) Mirfa=fFfa vn$j: (fa:) ^ftcf (%fM) §5:5^.
Here we have an association of woods and royal glory (in
the person of Rama), which are incongruous. The commentator
Ramacarana says that this is not a proper example of the
third variety, because Rama, when he went to the woods, was
not a king; that, therefore, the verse is an example of the
second variety, as not only was Da^aratha’s attempt to crown
Rama as frustrated, but an evil result, viz. Rama’s exile
followed. We may say against this that though Rama was
not king de facto , he was a king de jure and therefore the
verse is a proper example.
faS&T—Krr ( P« 51, 11. 18-19 ). The author cites another
example of the third variety ( s f ;r* T ). The verse is
Sisu. XIII. 40 and is cited in K. P. also, *j* r
f^rs^r ftfau qflft dtfrrf% i
3^: faj: («ftfW:) I I ifa
fqstRl *ivrf sr ^y=h«i araw^n*( =* ('fa^rqifaqT 3*3*11-
qrffaTptf:) rrsmjrfJIT ^ I tft=r wfcr^-
p. 444. Here in Vishnu, there is the association
of two incongruous things, viz., a part of V ishnu is represen-
ted as swallowing all the worlds; but Vishnu himself (the
ST^Jjqt ) is spoken of as drunk by a woman with a single eye.
Our author give no general definition of fa*. He only
mentions three varieties of fa*. In this he follows Mammata
and Ruyyaka. Jagannatha defines fa* aa fa**’
( an incongruous relation ). It should be noticed 'that the
treatment of fa* given in the text is not exhaustive.
Jagannatha remarks that in the second variety, we shall have
to speak of a number of sub-varieties; e. g. (a) There may be
the frustration of desired object and also the befalling of
some evil, (b) there may be simply the non-attainment of the
desired object, (c) there may be simply the befalling of some
evil. He then shows that the desired object may be four-fold
and that arfa may be threefold. Vide R. G. pp. 444-447.
In the third variety (fafat: e^arfa also there are many
subdivisions. We do not refer to them, as for our purpose it
is not necessary to do so. r
250
NOTES ON
X. 71-72 far.
We should clearly distinguish between 3RJWf?T an( *
(variety I). It may be said that the verse
etc. is an example of fqRte, because there is an apparent
contradiction between the two actions ^IRt and
cTmft^RR- But tbis is not so * Here tbe ckarm does Dot
lie in the apparent contradiction of the two actions by
themselves; but it lies in the fact that the cause, the
woman, and the effect, separation, have each of them an
action opposed to that of the other. In fi^PT what is charming
is the residence in one place of two things that are known to
reside in different places; in 3?^% the charm lies in the fact
that cause and effect are represented as residing in different
places, although naturally they should reside in the same
place; but in fqqqr the charm lies in this that qualities or
actions pertaining to the effect are opposed to the qualities or
actions belonging to the cause. RRTpffiT:
' 3 ^rfr m 3
P* 123.
The Kuvalayananda and R. G. speak of a figure called
which is defined by the latter as
Where one makes no effort to obtain what is desired
but only desires it and something exactly the opposite
happens, there is fqqRvr. An example is
^ ^ sifat m ottto We thiDk that this should be
regarded as for there will be no end of figures if we go
on with this hair-splitting.
Examples of are: — (I) 1 1^ :
> qi'kkk *r# ^ ^ H IX - 46 > ( n> )
zft fs sawi ^W- 1 a ^ ^
ffcT. ^ II (quoted by Jayaratha ) ; (III ) ir
nftr: i 13- 1- 2 ! $ ^ ^
I kTT- II-
36 (Equal).
grr is the commendation of an object as worthy of
another on account of the fitness of both for one another.
31T3 ^%err refers to the reason why praise is bestowed.
An example of gif is ^iURgqirfci etc. (P. 51, 11. 22-23 ).
This is Raghu. VI. 85.
«rg^t 3t?5RT% (»twt) “fir
*
X. 71 arr.
Sahityadarpana
251
?pft qqt: qqt: qffiq qtftrqqrq) 'fni: S^FTT UF55 qqqTqq qq
T^qq: ( qqtw^ri': )• Here there is a commendation of the union
of Aja and Indumat!, which commendation is due to their
fitness for one another.
Mammata speaks of two varieties of ^ ; ( I) when the two
things are both good and ( II ) when both of them are bad. The
first is illustrated by the verse in the text. An example of
the second is: Rr ^ spJ ^TRit
^Ttfr^NTflT T^JRTT I qftRRT q%q^0: q^y-
q^^yfa: II ( quoted by . q\ X p. 719 ).
SW is the converse of the third variety of ftqq (
)• a question may be asked; — ‘why should we not
regard the converse of the other two varieties of fqqq as ^ V
The reply is that the converse of those varieties is not charm-
ing. To say that the qualities or actions of the cause are
reproduced in the effect, or that one who was striving to attain
his object has attained it is not very striking,
(in the definition of ^ given by
3 t£. b. ift: I
I l” &T&- p. 132.
Jagannatha, however, condemns this remark of the 3 ^. ^
and says that ^ also has the same three varieties as
The examples of the first two varieties are : ^
ra? Rm; 1 mi\\\ j^f
RT q&m I fim W&fh T ffRqfr ^
II. In the last example, there is a pun on the
word Mq^(RcRf Rq-q ^: ). Jagannatha says that in
these examples, there is a charm, which consists in describing
a cause and its effect as suitable to one another, although
they are really not so, by representing them by means of
etc. as possessing the same qualities, or in describing the
attainment of what is desired, although it (the object attained)
is really srfite, by the same process ( by etc).
m up) , q^?frsHE*z?ift
h tii & 1 ft q up ^
i” R. G. p. 452.
Examples of grr are:— SftmK: ^cT^
^ I RftR qRT ^ *Tcf: ST^rnf^*: II
3ir° V; i^q r i *rs;r Rt ftqq-
•awrpici^n 3FT 0 VII.
252
NOTES ON
X. 72
40 ( Strange ).
When, for the attainment of the desired object, one does
something contrary to it, there is An example is 5rq^-
^ etc. ( p. 51, 11. 26-27). This occurs in the Hitopadesa II.
‘‘For the purpose of being elevated, he bows down; for the sake
of his life, he parts with it altogether ; for the sake of happiness
he subjects himself to misery; who is there a greater fool than
a servant ?” One who wants (elevation, here used both
literally and metaphorically ) should go up ; but the servant,
wishing for goes down on his knees before his master.
The servant takes service with the object of leading a comfor-
table life; but he has often to lose his life in the service of his
master. He thinks that by service he will obtain happiness,
but what he really gets is worry and toil. So for obtaining
what is desired, viz., oftRcT and jpr he employs means,
viz. stutfT, an( * which are exactly the reverse
of what he wants.
Jayaratha informs us that the figure was first
defined by *T. f p. 134.
“TO (5FT$) TO ^ (*r3)
p. 133. ordinarily means ‘wonderful’. The figure is
called because it causes wonder ( in that one tries to
obtain by means of a particular act a result which is exactly
the opposite of what generally follows from that act. )
A question may be asked: — “What difference is there
between and that where an effect opposed to the
cause in its qualities is produced ? The reply is: — In fife,
when we say ‘he bows down to become elevated’ what we first
understand is that bowing down cannot be the cause of be-
coming elevated ( i. e. there is first ) and then we under-
stand that elevation cannot be the effect of bowing down, being
opposed to it ( i. e. there is ^T^q"<icWft^ )i while in fsfq-jr ( in
which an effect opposed to the cause is already produced)
there is first and then there is When we say
‘Although the sword is black, it produces bright fame, ’
what we first apprehend is that brightness is an effect
opposed to the cause ( i. e. there is first) and
then we apprehend that the blue sword cannot be the cause of
bright fame (i. e. there is ). This difference is set
X. 72 S&flHYADARPANA 253
forth very concisely by the 3. as follows:—' :, q ^ r^
I (^qf^^5%?r) tqftqqqft: I r^m-
3Tt^T 5 ) fqqq: I qqr
I 5f <q?qqT qqtjcf: l” p 133. Another
difference is pointed out by Jayaratha and Jagannatha. In
fqqq, an opposite effect results of its own accord; while in
fqfqq, an effort is made by some person to produce an opposite
effect. ^ ‘qsjfr fqqR fq**qST =q ^
^?[S c qqqr.* ^BTqrfq SRTfitrr fq^faqft^iqiqq g^Rt%=FFF% VTcCteq-
grfi: I” fqqo pp 133-34; “q q q^qHg^r ^FTRT^tf^r fqqq^TSq
^i^q: i fqqR
R. G. p. 453.
It should be noticed that Dandm, Bhamaha, Udbhata,
Mammata and others do not regard as a distinct figure.
Uddyota regards f^fqq as not different fiom fqqq, ‘‘qqftgRt-
fqmmfosfqq^qqwrq^qfr fifqqqq I qqj ‘qqf% BFrI*
^ Bg^i^g. i’ %i^qpqq€&: i qq
s«rftmrcra i” p- 124.
Examples of fqfqq are — 35$- qqfq qg q l t fe rg f rT
^ s ^q^'HidBifcr ^^TBrqTftfqmqnqT 1 ^ fgsrrfcr
*TFN$qT ff# 3^ ll quoted in 3F*. q pp.134;
qf^qf^g ftq^rfrT STqfnT ^q 1 fqqr^ q^| ftqrq
SRTTqtsft I!
41 a?T^^( Exceeding).
When, of the container and the contained, one is repre-
sented as vaster than the other, there is sqqq;. = srrqqBT
STT^qt 3T sqfqqq 57fqq:qqr An example where
the aqqq is vaster than the 3?T f«rq, is etc. (p. 51,
11. 30-31). strict Sq not known (by all the animals in the sea,
because Han lies in only a part of the sea). The greatness
of Hari is apprehended from the fact that all the worlds are
contained m Har’s side. The excessive greatness of the sea
(the 3*T$rq of fft) is understood from the fact that the great
Hari covers only a part of the sea. An example of erfq^,
where the sqfqq (the thing contained) is represented as
being vaster than the sqgq is ‘gqrwro’ ( p. 52, 11. 2-3 ).
This is f^ngo I. 23, and is cited by qsqj as an example of
3 rfq=H* H is a description of the great pleasure which
Krsna felt at the approach of the sage Istarada.
srfcrsfeff: 3 ^i srq^rt ^ cr?r %£qfg^: q^rf qqr
NOTES ON
X. 72
254
(sjerf) gTOrfa stot sqTrof% % ere
tot to FrqfaTO ?iuto toftc: arpR^ tofw. toto. gi-
sftTO^T *rg: TOT^T^T SITJJ. t 1 ’ ^JRtcT p. 125 . Here the body of
Kmia, m which all the worlds he without jostling one
another , and which is therefore the 3773727, is intended to be
great. The pleasure due to Narada’s arrival, which most be
smaller than the body, is heie spoken ot as not contained in
the body (3773727) and therefore there is the figure called sjfqq;.
goftq- remarks ‘aranfcpjyrpn gd *# 7 ^T
It should be well borne m mind that the figure occurs
only when the of the 3773727 or 377377^ is not true in the
nature of thmgs, but is due solely to the poet’s fancy
Ww^fynt: unr * 1 %st 1’
f^R° p. 134 ; ‘sspt sRjTTlfacqsft
A rRT srrfcTOW-* ? G. p- 454 . For this reason the
following verse, though it is cited by the 33 77 as an example
of 37^, is not a proper example of it. tfiWsnfacIT qfteTcr
TO TOTOTTORT^Id#^ I ?ftTO0RT^ TO:
T? rj]JR Sl Here 4 he
vast ness of nabltas and the limited extent of the Heaven etc.,
that are described, are well-known . Compare ‘5747*7)- srqgeftai
raMNksjrar 43^ rafters ^ i’ fan" i» 135 .
It may be said that 3 ifSft is nothing but the third kind of
fqqq- (fq^qqr: since m the former also there is as-
sociation of two incongruous things ( 1, e. the 3773727 is vast,
while 3T7$rf$tr^ is very small or vice versa ). But this is not
proper. In two things that are independent (1. e. not
related as 377*777; and 37 i^q ) and are incongruous with each
other are brought together, while in 37(^277 two things are
related as 3773727 and 3 Treri%^ and one of them is vast while the
other is limited. The charm lies not in the incongruity of the
two things, but rather 111 the fact that the 3773727 or 37737®^ is
vaster than the 37737$^ or 3773727 respectively. c trq ^ qft-
1 fan*! ^ ^wgwft:
1 ’ fan" P 134.
Other examples of arfasp; are; — srft faRTfa* I
’Trier ’ns’m^rstfr ehi K. P. X; farewfakit
fawrare %cttt: 1 botsrrt m fa*rr?rnl 5 ft; n R - G. p. 453 ;
«rcf 53 T& ff^TO sMtstf^rgr# stcpw eraii 'ratswrcfckf® 3
iratsrwrr: n ^ ix. 29.
X. 73 arsqtKr. Sshityadarpaya 255
42 37?^?^ (Reciprocal ).
( qr^rt ) ^°t (%0 ( cpst >
When two things do the same act to each otheiy
there is occurs when two things are represented
as causing a specialty in each other. The essentials of 3 ??qt?q:
are two: — I. Two things must acton each other; II. the effect,
produced in each other must be the same. ‘[%f:
STTH'cfflT frT is not an example of 3??qt;q, because there is-
no reciprocal action; we are told that the lion killed but
we are not told what did to the lion.
ftPqqxTq: I 3 ll’ is not an example
of 3??qt?zf. Here and ^ act on each other; but the
action is not the same.
An example of 3}?qt;q is ^qj ^fT° ( P. 52, 11. 5-6 ). Here*,
the night and the moon conduce to each other’s beauty.
It is not necessary that the two things should produce
the same action in each other ; it is sufficient if they produce
the same quality (rpj). An example is ‘qqnqr:
I ST^qiq II’.
Examples of 3pqt^q are : — ^¥1 cWT:
=3 I WK' C°Tt II
3 * 42 ; sft: I spqfcq^ 3TT<qM
II K - X - P- 708; q^^qffsqTcrai^rffcl^aT
i gtsft crerr: h R. O. p 455.
43 ( Extraordinary ).
( I ) When something which is dependent on another?
(as its support) is represented as existing without it; (II)
when one object is spoken of as being present in many places
(simultaneously); (III) when somebody, in bringing about
one result, unexpectedly accomplishes something else also y
which is impossible; there is which is thus threefold.
We construe the last two lines of the definition as
3T 5Tf%: 3Tqm*q qqTcq^T*k We think that ^
.connects the third kind of fq%q with the other two.
Pramadadasa connectss qj with and takes as equal
to ( i. e . srqrqq^r qrqq^ qT qqfe )• ^FT°
also does the same. We think that both are wrong for
two reasons: — I. All weighty authority is in favour of our
interpretation ( i. e. in taking as 3 pq^q qqq;*q ) and
256
NOTES ON
X. 7 3-74
against that of ' Pramadadasa. No one speaks of the
effecting of a cfiisf. Carefully note the following words
‘3T*qcS?$ifcr: ‘ ^°T %fcT Fl^ferf^r: ^T: H”
K. P. X.; S ^ft^T l*
ST^- p. 136. II. Our author, supposing ^jrr ° to be right,
does not cite any example of another ^33^4 being produced
at the same time. Pramadadasa translates as ‘unconne-
cted with the subject.’ This appears to be wrong, as will be
clear from the word used by the 3?^ above.
It should be noted that no definition common to the
three varieties is given. There are really speaking three
figures all of which are called ^ ^ 1
P- 1 36.
An example of the 1st variety is ( p. 52^
11.11-12). This is Rudrata IX. 6; the verse is cited by
Mammata and the 3 h- also,
SfaT (sftffai) 3T^3nFT'Jn: ( 3T^: 3?eg: 3WT:
^ Here
the is speech, the well-known support ( which
is man. The poets are spoken of as dead and yet their
speech is represented as gladdening the world even in the
absence of poets ( the well-known of speech ). Therefore
this is an example of the 1st ^ pp; 3Ti^qT*. 1
3T*T ^ fa^TTSft \’
Although the author does not say so specifically, we must
understand that in the 2nd variety one thing simultaneously
resides in many abodes, as said by 3?sr. TftfinT
Mt: \ J p. 136. An example
is efira^r etc. ( p. 52, 11. 13-14 ). 3^^fn&=^0RR; i Here, the
king is represented as seen in many places at the same time.
It is not really possible that one man can be in many places
at the same time. The king is represented to be in many
places, because to his enemies, in whose hearts he has struck
terror, he is everywhere. TSlfjRII cT^RT^-
An example of the 3rd variety is 3j%ofr etc. ( P. 52> 11.15-16).
This is Raghu. VIII. 66, and is cited by K. P. A ja, bewailing
the loss of his wife, sums it in this fine verse.
Here Death is represented as depriving Aja of everything such
as a minister, friend, disciple etc. in depriving him of
*m sptt-
X. 73-74
Sshityadarpana
257
Examples of are: — I. g an% cRlf^THT
i § f^r squmn^t f^r^iMarr ^fcr m £rrcr: u R - G - P - 457 >
II. =srgft ^ rRT &dfa«M%:n 3?# > WI5J f?W'RT5FT
gf=T qRMfi^T II IX. 8.; III. TTT^: 1
?MTW.: sqfntcf II quoted by spRiT
the remark ‘ 3 ^ ^ JTRt:^ ftl^'IRRt'j ^KR qm^^T 52 ! ft 'filled
44 sm'sncT ( Frustration ).
3fa q«IT ^ SRI ( S^ux ) f^Pf.
gq^-q 3?sj: ^sq*IT ( a^S^RTT ) ( ATT ) Eisner:- I f a
certain thing, which is done by one man by a certain means,
is undone by another by the same means, there is An
example is %rq 3T-* l
U- This verse occurs in Rajasekhara’s Yiddhasa-
labhajnika (I Act). Our author cites it as an example of
also.
^ ^ ctt: (^wt
f%Tv^ra; ftt^O 5i^Ti^ f ^ : ) ^rwt^T :
g^ Cupid was burnt by Siva with the fire
from his eye; but here, women are represented as revivifying
Cupid by that very means i. e. by the eye ). Therefore there
is szyyTO- ‘3}5T STW f^T *
ll’ 3T^. p. 138. It should be noted that the poet
represents the eye of Siva and the eye of the women as non-
difierent; while in reality the two are different.
The following are the essentials of szyyqjty: ~I- Something
must have been accomplished by a certain person with
certain means; II. What has been accomplished must be
frustrated by another with the same means • III. The repre-
sentation must be poetical and not mere matter of fact. When
the same cause produces two opposed effects, in connection
with different substrata, there is no sqT^TcT; 9-
gf^mfer: sjfrT^nfiMT wTar srffirgw
*trt auftfir*?} *Rt w a®npn : n”. Here there
is no sqjqjrf, because the state of things can be explained by
the fact that great men are quite different from ordinary men t
The figure is called sqrTO, because it is the cause of the
frustration of a thing already accomplished, as said by Mam-
mata %
258
NOTES ON
X. 76 s*TTWTcT.
When the contrary of a certain act
is justified by the same reason with facility, that is also sq ^ .
The essentials of this sqjqiq- are— I. Some person must repre-
sent a certain cause as probably producing a certain effect; II.
Another person must represent that very cause as capable of
producing exactly an opposite effect and with greater ease
than the first. This second variety also is called eq^,
ecause in it there is a frustration of the effect that was
represented as probable. sfircyi-
I cKT WTOffj
*^133°^ I’ 3t5T. H. p. 139.
An example of this sqprrtT is ^ etc. (P. 52, 11. 22-25 ).
he first half of the verse is spoken by the husband and the
second by the wife. ^ ( w ^ art
rut: jpf ( ( Nom. Sing, of ^fTPT^ m - )> )
?? 3TRf «T ^ 3TTqT€B5Trr *itg JT SpTT) I g*PT (g^;) % (qq)
^recTT ( ) »F3 3 ?fqsR qq;(qq : ) (3^) ^ (gft)
m fticor f?f) 3TBJNJ; (313*) sqq^ 5:# q Here
the husband mentions the delicate state of the heroine as a
reason against her accompanying him ( on a journey ); but
the heroine on the other hand represents it (^) with still
greater force as a reason for accompanying him.
The difference between the first and the second kind of
«qjETRf is as follows: — In the first a certain thing is already
accomplished by some person with a certain means and another
person with the same means frustrates it; while in the second,
a certain thing is put forward by a person as probably
producing some effect ( i. e . the effect is not already produced
as in the first ) while another represents that very thing as
more easily capable of producing exactly the opposite effect.
If ^ 1 fl; qtjqp
l’ fqqo p. 139.
It may be said that in the example ^hfo the husband
not only failed to persuade his wife to stay at home
but the wife represented the excuse brought forward
by him as a stronger reason for her accompanying him ( i. e .
there is 3^5}^ ^p-qq : ) ; and therefore the 2nd variety of sq-p^-
is nothing but the second variety of fqqq. To this objection
-X. 76 s^nsnRT.
Sahityadarpana
259
we reply;— In fa*r, the desired effect does nob follow and
moreover there is some evil resulting; while in o^ff, it
cannot be said that what is first put forward as a probable
effect is not an effect at all. It is an effect; but another
person represents that an effect opposed to the first can more
easily be brought about by the same means.
, 3?ffaff3irfffgcq : fft 3RifaTff5ri£*n%
^ faff: l p. 296.
It will have been noticed by the careful reader that in
£3 J T etc., there is as made clear by the words
5?fan:, and f^ry^*. Jayaratha says that s^fflff
is not possible without The representation that one
person frustrates what has been accomplished by another
with a certain means by that very means cannot be explained
otherwise than by supposing that the one excels the other.
‘#Sfr- ( 5 qTffTff:) I ( the
reading of *{<fa) ^ sqfff^I^fa W I sqfff^tfa: l’
3^-. s. p. 138 ; sqfffH ^ snftfir ^ff^ \
ff*TTft-^ff ff^R^TT^^T ff^T ff^ ffffl’S^ff^TT-
r far ° p. 138.
Ancient writers like Dandin and Bhamaha do not define
o^qrff ^ all. Mammata speaks of the first variety only. Our
author follows the 3^. g. Jagannatha says that in £^jj ^rq-
etc. the figure is nothing but sqf^^. Vide his remarks
in It. G. p. 460.
Examples of sjjisucT are:— I.
^cri^ 1 R- G. p. 450:,n.
%WTH qft faq lri irf^ Hf ITT TTWW^TRftrTf: 1
m 5T^»'4^ft?rfe®iftf^iTW^[iTra 3TT5 gsRog^cj^t n R.
G. p. 460; ‘qfc ^5% §5K|iPTft?T[3%ftT I T$(ijfcr 5% gqgqq'SKilq
CJWTRiC f^M^T VI. para 10 ( our edition ) quoted in the
3T^. g. with the remark “qq ^TT^pft-
qce^rtfor smiqir^Kai^ gq^qqr
grnqqMt 5qMTTTlfqt®fR: I P- 139.
45 sKreomraT ( Garland of Causes ).
"When each preceding object is spoken of as the cause of
each succeeding one, there is qn< u HTT3I. An example is gtf
etc. ( p. 53, 11. 3-4 ). gqi^- knowledge of the ^astras ( ‘gg
OTT^V III. 3. 77.). of learned men.
260
NOTES ON
X. 76-77
Here the company of learned men is the cause of knowledge
which again is spoken of as the cause of modesty, which is
the cause of the affection of the people.
The name cj^uiJn^T given to the figure is significant,
because here a number of causes are spoken of as connected
with one another in a peculiar manner; e. g, gcT which is
the effect of becomes the cause of and so on.
The charm here lies in the peculiar sequence of causes and
effects. l’ Sf- P- 140 -
Jayaratha and Jagannatha say that this figure occurs
also when each succeeding object is the cause of each preceding
one ( and not merely when each preceding object is the cause
of each succeeding one as said in the text ). ‘^r ijf ijq
nt \ G - p* 461 * An
example of this is ^ ^ l
Jagannatha remarks that the repetition of the same word
in the same sense is not a fault in this figure. If another
word were employed in the same sense it would obstruct the
recognition of the object and the intended meaning would not
flash at once on the mind; therefore the employment of two
different words in the same sense would constitute a fault in
this figure “sisf =5 EfifackR# R cfa: I JRgcT ERTRTt'n cRJIRteikft
fkcTk Jra^isrfrl <1 foflrq Rlfl-
1 ’ R- G. p. 462.
Jagannatha further observes that in this figure we should
preserve symmetry, if strikingness is to be produced. If we
begin with the express mention of something as a cause then
we must speak of the cause of that thing and so on; or we must
speak of the effect of that thing as the cause of something else
and so on. Or if we begin with the express mention of some-
thing as an effect , we must speak of the effect of that and so
on or we must speak of that effect as due to something else
and so on. =¥ JRfRT ERROjtfgfo JkcJERt fRI rlklft
EfiR'nfitfrT, rkft Eft EfiR°WRri iJEfiT I ¥2T 5
¥T¥ff%iW 3k ¥lf cTkrfq ERrfftfrr, ckft
3T 3W t ¥: 51^: 33%R'33kkm 3?F3T a 3 ^: R R¥ 1
5K^JT I 3T^t¥I 3 kRSRk kT 3 . I ¥¥T
RRfoTfrf fa^qk ¥R°i jrwwT 1
31 % 3H|g4.|Jf5T*kT Tf RkT: II’ 3T¥ ftkfk ¥tkf
X. 76-77 tznmv&i. Sahityadarpana
261
fit l ft p RTOTft ft ^R^ftfcT, m 3iR*lfrfr 3T I
gfNsrra; OTTjpftreh i...^4 ^ few ^R^ftsn^isjrer
fe^m^T^ *fcT ^Tffe Wft ^
wterf^t?*#r *” R * G - p- 462 -
46 wigi ^ K^ (Serial Illuminator X
When several objects are, in succession, connected with
the same attribute, there is TTRsfefa^- Our author’s definition
is not quite clear. According to Mammata and Ruyyaka the
essentials of TTR5T^K are;— I. Many objects are connected with
the same attribute; II. Each preceding object serves as a
qualification of each succeeding one; 3 U I Flffe
1* 3T<S. 141 ; %sr«ft s ^R3 a TT^CT! K - X -
An example of rrT^t'Ffi is cqfe etc. (H 53,11. 8-9).
orftf %*: (ansnftnO, fa (a?ftfeR^) ^ («n«iftsn )> w (jft)
^ (airaifer:^ wrr *RT: (3TRnffa*0- Here, the bow, the
arrows, the head of the enemy, the earth etc. are all con-
nected with the single action 3TRTT3*T ( obtaining or reaching ) ?
as in th the figure where some and some things
are connected with the same Moreover, each preceding
object serves as a qualification of each succeeding one ; the bow
serves as a qualification of the arrows by making them reach
the head of the enemy, the arrows oblige the head by enabling
it to reach the earth, and so on. Vide Uddyota u 3TRnfeifefe
( in the text arraign: ) ^ 1 ^
?ttW^r: srTTOfT ^rt feR^Tsfe
cqi awrqgr *jjrofa ^ ^rf^Rn^TT ^fe-*
ijjpjjfci: l” p. 67.
The reason why the figure is called is: — As in
so here also many objects are connected with one and the
same attribute, just as many objects are illumined by a single
lamp. Besides, here many objects are linked together, each
preceding one qualifying each succeeding one.
Mammata defines after ^tq^, intimating thereby
that it is a kind of ^jqq^ or very similar to it. Our author,
following the sRs. defines it after ^rufttst an< l before
because here the charm really lies in the linking
together, as it were, of certain objects. The 3?^. says that
it is not proper to define it after ^ q^. Jayaratha says that
the word jjrsj is not used in the same sense in which it is used
262
NOTES ON
X. 77 fTMiiiWJ,
in the word ( where many stprRS are mentioned one
after another in connection with a single sq^r). In *TT5?faJTIV
JTIW means a simple collection of things (which are, as it were,
huddled up together without one being linked with the other);
while in means ‘a chain’, because here each
preceding object qualifies each succeeding one and there-
fore the objects are linked together so as to form a chain.
cannot be a variety of cftqefj, as in it there is no 3rtqrzj
intended between and ^ etc; in is admitted
by all to be implied. The reason why writers like Mammata
define JTT^T^tqq; after ^q-^ is that there is illuminntion
( of many objects by a single attribute ) here also, as in ^rqcfi.
^n>4Rt?r t’ 3is. b-
p. 141 ; ‘lTT<5RI%im I TOT TTl'RiTRTO; I B ^ TOtT-
TOTORF 5 ?! %q: I TJTOftftTO ^'WT^'IITOTOTO I 3RT
1 ^>^RT^IT TOl%SFira. I m B t
ft ?ra; i srr^t: i’
ftno p. 142.
The difference between seruRRI an 'I PTRTTtT-TI is as follows: —
In ihRW*! an d in RRjqfaq; also, each preceding thing is
connected with each succeeding one 1 but in the former, each
preceding object is the cause of each succeeding one, while in
the latter, each preceding object only qualifies each succee-
ding one.
Examples of are:— %nf%Tt T8T: W3TO
W I ii T TITO TPTTSft ggf, T5grof»W II K. D. II. 107; q^T ^
Twrgft s 3 ^ 0 ^ sttt:
=rog^T5T *TT j i'fit 'ftRrr ^ m bpkt; bto fprgmft-
=r TOugqr ^ 5rfdwim RRrarftdq, i Orairttr
p. 23. Jiv., p. 41 of Hall’s ed. ).
47 ( Necklace ).
If each succeeding thing is affirmed or denied as an
attribute of each preceding thing, there is Rq^qQ?T, which is
thus twofold. An example of the first variety where each
succeeding thing is affirmed as an attribute of each preceding
one is etc. ( P. 53, 11. 14-15). qq et: ( fw»T%-
TO 3R-qfatfq qfsrrft qfwg,), 3T*qN ( vr|: VI PR: SfcPf,
3^*0. W ; BBlftflT: (RW%T Bf T§PfR[: ) Bsfrf ( SITO
grafq: 3sR : %«T Bftd'R.)- does not simply mean ‘adjective’
263
X. 78 Sahityadarpana
in Sanskrit. is anything ( whether a noun or an adjective )
which serves to' distinguish one thing with which it is
connected from other things or which gives a special chara-
cter to a thing known in a general way
cTfift'T 1 !’! >’ f^° P- 14:1 -
In the above example, 3rr^3i is a firmed as a qualification
of the lake, bees are introduced as a qualification of lotuses,
singiDg is mentioned as a qualification of the bees and the
excitement of love as a qualification of the humming. So
here each succeeding thing is affirmed as a qualification of
each preceding one.
An example of the second variety is ^
etc. (p. 53, 11. 16-17). This is Bhatti. II. 19. It
is a description of autumn. ^ gweS — There was no
water that was not graced with fair lotuses. ( ) g cTft. ^
(sntffcO ^ aifNrhraTft 'TfsnfSf qftra;).
»r gg; qf3f gg 3t#qq5qgg_ ( g sftgr: E T?'Ri: W ^
g: sr& ( ggt ) g ijgpir, *T tig. gf^ci gg *1 «ifP> Here
stands as a qualification of water in a negative
form, fq^fqq^qg; appears negatively as a qualification of the
lotus, sR^sgfsrg is put forward as a qualification of the bees.
Therefore there is a negation of each succeeding thing as an
attribute of each preceding thing.
txcftfq# is a kind of fR, having only one string of pearls.
‘arqfHt RSRTq^RqflsRT I fig qsjqrTT^g Wcgctf%fETRtf%i%: H*
3 PT^o II. 6. 106. The remarks ‘gggg 1 gqg =qi^f
g t’. The figure is called uqirgst, because here the pre-
ceding thing and succeeding thing present one connected
chain ( as two pearls in a chain do).
( P- 53, 11. 18-22 ). Sometimes
each preceding fqqttq is affirmed or negatived as a qualification
with reference to each succeeding thing. An example is qpqf
etc. Here in the first sentence the fqqtqnr is fqggsT: and the
fq%sq is qpai:, this fqfpg is affirmed as a qualification ( fq%qg )
of in the next sentence; the. 'lotuses’ is affirmed
as a qualification of the bees and so on. The same holds good
in the case of negativing the gfqjsq in one sentence as a iq% q |J 1
in the next. ^qo gives as an example the following:— ‘guq%3-
g g 1 grfsi%3 h g w «”•
It should be remembered that Mammata and Ruyyaka spea
264
NOTES ON
X. 78
of only that qqqq^t, where each succeeding thing is affirmed
or negatived as a of each preceding thing. Jagannatha’s
treatmeat is the same as our author’s.
The distinction between jq^qq; and irqqq^ft ( 0 f the first
sort) is:— In the former, each preceding thing lends some
charm to each succeeding thing, as in wq r etc.’,
while in the latter, each succeeding thing enhances the charm
of each preceding one, as in ^ fqq^qpq^ etc.
15 1# sift I i5^r 5 ^Kt-
^ ft* P- 14 1. The difference between qRqqlqq; and
( of ^ ie 2nd sort, where each preceding fqqpq i s affirmed
or denied as a ftqfani of each succeeding thing) is that in the
former all the things are connected with one and the same
attribute, while in the latter they are not necessarily so. The
distinction between Jurist and qqqq^ft i s that in the former
the relation between the two things is that of qqqq^orqjq.
while in the latter it is f^qfqcif^qqjq.
Jagannatha remarks that irrMtafi does not deserve to be
a separate figure, but should be regarded as a sub-variety of
the second „ kind of qqqq^?r ( where each preceding
is affirmed or negatived as a fqq|sq of each succeeding thing).
The only condition is that the obligation conferred on each
succeeding thing by each preceding ft^q should be the same
( )• He further observes that rrT^r^tqqi cannot be a variety
of for reasons which we have already mentioned in our
notes ‘q*gq?g qqg ) qtqq^q q qyqq q^q,
\ g RSRTq^q^q fRl qt^qq |’ R. G. p. 322.
NHOI ffeqq *q 5WTT fittl Hf|q | ^iq r ^ m
*’ ^ T? 17 ! l^r ^rsqq%qg--
2 ^*^ I qqqqqqr rm Vq 15^:
WffiT°ir wmqrqqq qrsr^qq^rs^q 5qqf|q^ jjpftq: |...
^ ^ jwiRW 5 ! ^iTii;%qrfqtqtsqftffr qqwiH’i I
llqi^qrq^-
1 K. Or. p. 464.
are: ~^ :
11 qmRT^. iv. 137
X. 79 ST*. SiHITYADARPANA
48 *rrc ( Climax).
265
When the things to be described gradually rise in excelle-
nce, there is An example is §5^ nit etc., ( p. 53, 11. 25-26 ),
ffhi’s is Rudrata VII. 97. ^ tIS ^ ^ 1$
§ 15.1 ?fcT (I. 16 ) §HTW 3 ^ Bit
( m, ‘erct # ftrcflt 5 ^ fag* wk° nT - 3. 171)
(cRjj) ^§^t, 3 t (Bit 3*3), st §1^5
§>*Tt^sgrreftfcr), §i% <rei (its^X ^ b% ^ 33 )
TOf^TT (WTBT B3*3VTI ) (*W)- H ere ea °h
succeeding thing is better than each preceding one, and the
highest pitch of excellence is reached in the beautiful woman
beyond whom the description cannot proceed.
Jagannatha remarks that this figure occurs not only when
the excellence gradually rises ( so that the thing last mentioned
is the best of all ), but also when each succeeding object is
represented as worse than each preceding one ( so that the
last is the worst of all). An example of this giy (which
corresponds here to 5 Anti-climax’ ) is ^
1 qriggr sn^i^fcr n” pr° p- H 9 *
The figure is properly called §rr, because in it we have
excellence rising by steps. The 3pj. §. calls it str.
Jagannatha says that this figure occurs not only when
many things are mentioned as rising in excellence one after
another, but also when the same thing, on account of difference
of condition, rises in excellence. An example is
$t55?fa 1 f=3T I ^
R* G. P- 466.
The four figures, and gp; are
based upon ( chain ). A question is raised by J ayaratha
and Jagannatha whether the four should be separately defined
or whether we should have only one figure called ^Jfsr with
the above four figures as its varieties. They both come to the
conclusion that the four figures must be separately defined;
for otherwise, we shall have to define only and tfawr by
a parity of reasoning, and need not define fq^rTTBT) fq^tTRh,
etc. or etc. Vide the sjw. §. fq- P- 140 and R. G.
p. 461 and p. 466.
23
266
NOTKS ON
X. 79 HR.
Examples of HR are:— ^ qfcqr: Hit St ^ hurt
%^^r: i qqifq ?Rqr 5iq% q^rt H3r§53Hr Hrcgii (tcRffen
73. 1.); HHlt Hig^T Hit JTTg«q%^ qffcr qfq^
=qifa nqqtqg.ii qF*Ri<s<> iv. 127.
49 ?totcN 7^( Relative Order).
qgs%HT (qqrqRi) q>^q aigiftr: (qfqfqqqr:) (^) qqRqqg.
’When a reference is made to objects in the same order in
■which they have been already mentioned, there is qqigqEq.
An example is snftgfJq etc. ( p. 53, 1. 29-p. 54, 1. 2 ).
( i%q;nfnr, q^gtsi sfq q*q^ ) qjtgqift; ( sRqmqg),
•qffcr (qrfq, qfq nqfcqq) sjTqiw^q arng (^qjntq 3ig%q
^ng, qnq qfqFiifqgg), ^mqiTqqqTfq^f^ (ffqrai: ?fq qrsqg)
q^qiir%: (q^qrqf ffrcit: ) ( $§qrorg) ng?rinq (tftfqgrfiig
•fq). qtq gqq tqtftqfqti tren: H^Tqf ftq: (3R%q ) q^^f^-
5 : 3T#r:, jffqro: ) HTffqifcoqT^rtf: (qqrer).
These words are addressed by some woman to a person who is
away from bis beloved respecting the latter’s condition. Here
arf^u||p[55 and ar e connected as agents with
qffq, snfasrffq respectively and as objects with
eqfoj, and ng?fRiq respectively.
The 3T«. H- defines and explains as follows: — 3fc£RfRqRT
q^ugt 5 ^ qqRtqqq; i fqREi: sf^sr: i qsqfqqsn'sgjqr; i h =q
’nqfg srqifqHTq: n^wq nrqsqjq (qiqqqqf#qqq?5ra;) q<ftqt i
sisf fqREHRqT*ri q^iftKetq: HRRt qqrnijqiiffq' qrqqri - 1
p. 148-149.
Some writers like Yamana call this figure qq^Rq
is one of those figures that occur even in the most ancient
■writers on rhetoric. Dandin says ‘qftgRf qqRiqg I
qqwqqftfq srtrfi HqqR sfiq qnrft ll’ K. D. II. 273. Bhamaha tells
us that g-jjqRt was the name given to this figure by the
rhetorician (^0 “qqiHqqqqt^^IR^fT^q % I HqqRfrfq
efifqg ll’ II. 88 ( should we read jRx=ft ?).
Jayaratha and Jagannatha question the propriety of
■calling qqitfqq a figure of speech. What is called qq^pjq is
merely the absence of the fault called iqqqjq. The fault ^^q-
occurs when a number of things mentioned in a particular
order are not again referred to in the same order, such order
being necessary for some reason or other, e. g. in rqTsRI& fqSTpift
X. 79 ureter.
Sahityadarpana
267
q ; !§iva being mentioned first should naturally
be connected with ysixir (the wheel); but it is not §iva who
bears the 'wheel. Therefore there is 3Tij5fiqr^fa. The mere
absence of a fault does not constitute a figure. To constitute
a figure there must be some charm due to the poet’s imagination,
“si gxFH I I sftsift
I ?R[ft I
3*TT l’ ^
TO ^ftrrftRTRqiftftBfaft^qft^tTF.RlS; l” 3T3. H- ft' PP- 149-150..
Vide R. G. p. 478. The Uddyota, while admitting the force-
of the above remarks, says that was looked upon as a»
figure, because there is a certain strikingness in referring,
in the same verse to many things again in the same order-
in which they have been once mentioned, ‘qsjft
3?^rro ^rirr^i fr*nft
SRJTT^ft l’ p. 80.
Examples of are: — ajiftfaRSTOft
xfftPb ' ftefroftfftrr spift ii; ^jresft^fc^jft*
II 3tTC*T*T 0 111 ')
gcMrll T ^^b' eft 3FRf1«R5rftsPf, I ftfTO sftt fift^ft eft eftcIT
II (In the last there is also.); q^-g^fUpTW*
i ftRn: il hrc II. S0>
( quoted in the
50 qqfa: (Sequence).
(I) When the same thing is ( a ) or is made to be(b)in
many places in succession or (II) when many objects are
(c) or are made to be(d)in the same place in succession,,
it is termed qqfq.
An example of I a is to^t: SR e t c - (P. 54, 11. 6-7). This
is Kumara-sam. Y. 24. The verse is spoken of with reference
to Parvati, who was practising austerities in order to secure'
6iva as her husband, tot: ( qrftqr: ) TSRg (sifijftRg) SJ°T
fftR:, (qaR) mftcTPTn: (sifter: 3RR:*f:), ( 3TTOt ) ftitoft-
(qqt^Rht: fftncr:
^T^rm: *tr: ), (qsira;) (s^aig) Rftiftr:
Rift ( armr: )- Here, one object, viz. first
rain-drops, is represented as occupying in succession, Parvati’s
eyelashes, lower lip, breasls, the dimples on the abdomen skin
and the navel.
268
NOTES ON
X. 80
An example of II c is etc. (P. 54, 11. 8-9). m
sfrfStwTsgr: (facwfcn sr^er: awwwT:)
Wf^f. Here in one and the same place, viz.,
the enemy’s city, many objects, viz. gay women, and wolves,
crows and female jackals, exist in succession.
An example of I b, where one thing is made to be
in many places is etc. ( p. 54, 11. 10-11 ). It is Kumara.
sam. Y. 11. It speaks of the change that came over Parvati as
regards her occupations when she began to practise penance.
) fiRjKmra: ( ^ft: w ) forf&r :
^Rrs?*mT^ (^RqtfiffcnSr h)
STRICT ^ft^RTT: ^rg^T: W ( ^T^FTT?F3T: fN*)
fcf:. Here, the same object, viz. the hand, is made to be in
different places in succession, i. e. before the austerities the
hand was employed in dying the lower lip and in playing with
a ball, while after the austerities were begun, it was employed
in cutting kuza grass and in telling the beads of the rosary.
An example of II d is etc. (P. 54, 11. 12-13 ).
(^R%:) ffKT ( ^ ffR: 53PTC:
III. 3. 166, fR: stldftff: cRff:
Here in one and the same object, viz. the
breasts, many objects are made to be in succession, viz.
necklaces when the husbands of the women were living, large
drops of tears when they were dead.
The name qqfq given to this figure is quite significant.
The word qzjFT, according to the sutra of Panini ‘TO^gqTcSFT
(qr o III. 3. 38; 3T*rfcfaRT2 sigTOq: | ^ qqfa: |
I \ 3rfrrq[cT: \ ftr. ^.), means
sequence ( ^q ), as the affix is applied to the root ^ with
qft only when sequence is to be conveyed. In the figure, there
is a sequence ( qqfq ) i. e. the figure is qqiqq^ and hence the
figure itself is called qqfa. Compare ‘ 3 ^ irq ^qi^oqcqqfq
T 3?^. p. 150;
(BESNftOTt? ) f cR^ p. 305.
It was said above that one thing is (vrqfcf) or is made te
be (1%*^) in many places or many things are or are made to
be in one place. What; is meant by vrqfrf is not ‘natural
existence’ and by what is meant is not ‘artificial
existence.’ These words simply indicate that in one no causal
X. 80 q^W. SlHITYADARPANA 269
agency is mentioned, while in the other it is mentioned; e. g.
in f^KTT: ^rr no one is mentioned as making the drops of
rain exist in many places, while in the hand is
made to be in many places by an agent who is expressly
mentioned ( in the word ). Compare
i * g i*.
^5^ (P.54, 11. 14-17). In these varieties
(i2T| ), the place ( 3TPTr^ ) is either a collection (hence looked
upon as one ) or not ( i. e. there are several distinct places ).
means For example, in the verse ‘f^TT: goTo*
the rain drops successively exist in the eyelashes etc., which
are several distinct things (and not a collection or aggregate).
In the example the several objects that are to be
placed somewhere ( ), viz. wolves and others ( 3 ttR[
includes also ) exist in succession in the enemy’s city,
which is an aggregate ( )• sn^Frfa-understand
In the verse etc. the
( viz. and ) are because they cannot
form an aggregate, belonging, as they do, respectively to
the past and the present. In the verse the hand
successively exists in many places, which form an aggregate
( i . e. 3^ and ^5^; form one group and and 3?^^
form another ). Our author here borrows the words of the
a#, s. firfw * crw t^WNKi^mPrfcr
l’ p. 151.
=et (P. 54, 11. 17-18). The distinction
between ( 2nd variety, where one thing exists in many
places ) and ijzfo ( of the first sort viz. where one thing exists
in many places ) is that in the former one thing exists in
many places simultaneously , while in the latter one the thing
exists in many places in succession . For example, in
the is seen in many places at the same time,
while in c f^TcTT: the drops of rain exist in many places in
succession and not at one and the same time. We shall deal
with the distinction between qqfa aud i n our notes on
the latter figure.
It must be well borne in mind that the representation
that one thing resides in many places in succession or that
many things successivley reside in the same place must be
poetical in order to constitute the figure qqfa. Where one
270
NOTES ON
X. 80 'rrW.
thing naturally resides in many places in succession or many
reside in one place as a matter of fact, there is no alahkdra .
i m g
?f rRf -T.fsKsfiK: i’ R. G. p. 481. If this were not so,
the words ijf qz:’ would constitute an example
of wNt- Similarly, ‘ 5 ^ ^ jf^^Rgrfr cPT gfcrPi.’ is not an
•example of this figure.
Examples of Tqfa are :— jpsjT?{qf%Tf?rft4 cT^T Z %qkr^K-
1 srFPfcrsr t^wtssr srgfe 3 *:
WHin. II ( 4 ) ; fJrgxg V)N?tr*<!J^tFii ?:
^ktop *, 1 ‘^gil iffrqrf^: e srr# w*r: ftmftr: 11 ( ^°XVI.
12 ); pjr f^wi g^s?gigpii ^ 1 gsrfa %
: 1 FF 5 R'IP!% gWT II R. G.
5 1 <rftf fcn ( Barter ).
The exchange of a thing for what is ( 1 ) equal, ( 2 ) lesser
or ( 3 ) greater is qftfftr- means ‘ of equal value.’
<^T ... ( P. 54, 11 . 21-22 ). snui^ft
W f ^4 ^TTf- Here in the first half , the woman gives a
glance to her lover and takes away his heart. There is an
^exchange here and that exchange is of two things of the
same value ( 1 ). In the latter half, the lover gives his heart
^nd receives the fever of love. He exchanges the heart for
fever, which being dangerous, is ( a thing of less value
than what he gave ) ( 2 ). ^ 4 te^TT
cT^? ^ ( P. 54, 11. 24-25 ). This verse is cited as
an example of qixff% by the 3 ^ 5 . ^ srcrafl: ( f^r ) srrrgq:
( ^4 *RTST ) 3?spr frfrq ^ T%R*fter4: ),
% sfcrkit 3RTt cT¥T sq^T, #TT f^TT
as gs; sttwt: ) q^r :
Here J atayus gave up a thing of small value, viz. his shattered
body, and received in return spotless fame, a thing of great
value ( 3 ).
is defined as fqf^rizr by our author. In ordinary
life, there must be two persons for an exchange of two things*
A must give to B something ( say a maund of rice ) and receive
from B something ( say a maund of wheat ) or A must receive,
from B something and then give something in return to B.
This mutual giving and taking must exist in the figure also.
Xet us see whether it is so in the examples given by our author.
In the first verse, there are two persons. The woman gives a
X 81
SAhityadarpana
271
glance to her lover and receives from him in return his heart ;
the lover gives his heart to his beloved and receives fever of
love from her ( i . e . caused by her ). But in the second ex-
ample, Jatayus gives up his body, but there is no one to whom
he gives it; he receives, in return for the body, pure fame
but there is no one to give it ; so that in this verse there is a
single person. The essentials of a real barter are not satisfied
in this verse. The question naturally arises:— what meaning
is attached to by our author 1 Does he use it in the
same sense in which it is used in ordinary life, or does he mean
by it simply this much that a man should abandon something
and receive something else 'l The reply is: — Our author seems
to have purposely left the word undefined. We have
shown above that in the first verse the strict meaning of
is taken, but not in the second. There is a sharp conflict
of opinion as regards the essentials of among writers
on Rhetoric. There are two schools, one represented by
Mammata and Jagannatha and the other by the Alankara-
sarvasva and Vatnana. Our author, without following any
particular school, seems to have made a compromise by acce-
pting the views of both schools.
According to Mammata, one must give to another a thing
belonging to one’s self and receive from that person another
thing belonging to that person, says 1 fqrf^FRt ft
on which the Uddyots remarks
pp. 91-92. According to this view, the verse
etc. cited by our author, would not be an example of
The 3T^r. h- on the other hand says that in on€ must
abandon something belonging to oneself ( it need not be given
to another) and take something else (not necessarily belon-
ging to another ). It appears that such a ease cannot be dist-
inguished from that variety of Paryaya where many things are
successively referred to as occupying one place. That is, accor-
ding to the there need not be two persons in
One of the examples cited by 3^r. ^ . is
11 W Here there is a single person, viz. Parvati,
who abandoned her ornaments (but did not give them to some
one and receive from him something in return for the
ornaments) and began to wear a bark garment. This verse
272:
NOTES ON
X. 81 ’Tft ffr T.
would not be an example of barter according to Mam mat a,
as there is no real barter in it. Jagannatha sides with
Mammata Vide his remarks £< 3 ^ q^
5rqi^-^ i ^ ^r^Rr
qr=^i ^ws 5 ^ > ^ fsRt
‘faRW^tSsf ZIWT
l” R. G. p. 482.
It should be remembered that the barter spoken of must
be due to the poet’s imagination merely, and must not be one
of ordinary life. For example, the words
m 3M:’ are not an example of qftf f% ;
^ ^ ^ 5 qrerq-: I ^TT^igTC: I
R. G. p. 482 #
The distinction between qqqq- and qftffrT is as follows: —
In the former there is no barter, while in the latter there is.
To explain: — when, in qqjq, one thing resides in many places
in succession, that place from which the thing goes away to
another place, receives nothing in return ; e. g . in ‘%cTC: ^of
the eyelashes, form which the drops travel on to the lip,
receive nothing in return for the drops ; similarly, in the other
examples of qqjq, there is no barter intended or expressed. In
on the other hand, whether we follow the view of
Mammata or of Ruyyaka, there is giving up and taking.
J atayus gave up his body in return for fame. It is for this
reason that the following verse is an example of qqfq and not
although the word occurs in it: —
i-h (3,414 r cTST^mf qrRR n’ ^mKcr
p. 7. Here iff , - T ft-7R is said to have given up but is not
said to have received something else in its place and hence the
poet does not wish to fix our attention on the change of
the state of a thing, but rather on the change of the place i. e.
he intends qjfjq- and not
Examples of qftffa are: — ^ Rqr e&aT: I
R cTT gV.ftT RTt VII. 78;
3i[^[RWK7fT: STfTCT^ I
II (quoted by K. P. X. p. 675 );^
7v7l*Kl7|VTf %r 3^7 I ft^7T^T7T%3 2RT: gpfe 3Rf«fqT II 35? V. 32.
273
X. 81-82 q fote m. Sahityadarpana
52 qR^TT ( Special Mention ).
srsrra. qr ^ (^)
3FW szrqtf: 3TT^:
3TT^: <Tc[T qftsft^rr. When, with or without a query, there
is, owing to the very mention of a thing, the exclusion of
something else similar to it, whether that exclusion be expressed
or implied, there is qft'y^T*
qf^ftoqr is one of three technical terms often met with in
writings on the tjjfrftqfaT and The three terms are fqrf^r,
and They are concisely defined in the following
qrf^% \ ^ sra qfafarr
II q. by f=Ri%?fr of P- 155 - ^ is that which
enjoins something which is not at all known from any other
source ; e. g. the vedic sentence WrqiTRt sqtfcTEt^T is a
because it enjoins something, viz. q-pT, as a means of going
to heaven, which is not known from any other source. A
■pTqjj is an injunction which restricts something to one out of
two or more possible alternatives and hence excludes the other
alternatives. An example is ^ ^ Sacrifice is laid
down as a duty. It cannot be performed without a plot of
ground and hence we know indirectly that a plot is necessary
for a sacrifice. A plot may be even or uneven; so it may
follow that a sacrifice may be performed either on a level spot
or on an uneven one ( i . e. there is qrRj^rqTfH )• The injunction
^ restricts the performance of sacrifice to a level
piece of land only, to the exclusion of an uneven piece of land.
It may be asked — what is the difference between and
In fqf^r their is merely an injunction as to something not
known from any other source; in fffzpr, one of two alternatives
being possible, we are restricted to one to the exclusion of the
other or others. In fcffq- there is pure injunction of something
otherwise unknown and nothing more ; in faqJT, we are ordered
to follow a special course in doing a thing known from another
source, fq-fq performs a single function ; performs two,
it restricts us to one out of two possible alternatives and also
excludes the other. Another example of f^T is
3 T^f%. We can separate the chafi from the grains of rice at
least in two ways, either by peeling off with our nails, or by
pounding with a pestle and morter. The sentence
restricts us to the mortar and pestle, to the exclusion
of separating the chaff with the nails. It lays down that
( freeing from the chaff ) must be brought about by
274
NOTES ON
X. 81-82 qR^Vm.
3 ?^^ and forbids the use of nails. Vide q r gf^ ; »
T: ^ *£.• IV - 2 - 24 g 5 gg^ i jt^t
^•'1 ^ *RT Rw:, *RT fwr: g <T3T gg: g gq gq: tTTTWTJITH^ I qqr q
SITS: g <T 8 jt firfs sr!^ STgf f qqq & Mqiq ft mt I ) and
=q cTcSPTNNqra;’ Y n - *ft- %. IV. 2. 26. A qfte^qr i3 that which
restricts us to one of the many things which may be possible
simultaneously and all of which accrue independently cfthe
injunction and hence it merely serves to exclude the others.
The import of qftggqr is therefore not injunctive at all but
merely prohibitive. An example of qftg-^n is qg* qg^ *r^rr:.
Hunger can be allayed by eating the flesh of hares or dogs or
of any other animal ( i. e. there is g^Slfs)- The sentence,
therefore, restricting as it appears to do the permission of
eating only to the five five-nailed animals, serves merely to
exclude other five-nailed animals ( such as a dog ). The
distinction between f^fq and is: — A fjffq* enjoins upon
us something otherwise unknown as in 3 ^:
If we do not obey this injunction we shall incur sin. In
'rfwreqT we are forbidden a thing ( out of two, which are both
possible at the same time ). If we have to eat flesh at all, we
must restrict ourselves to five five-nailed animals. The above
sRSbem does not lay down just in the manner of
a ftfu, for if that were so, he who does not eat the flesh of the
five animals would incur sin. Therefore what that text does
is to permit the eatiDg of the flesh of the five and to forbid
the eating of the flesh of other animals. In fqft the purpose
is 3ToT;TTT5IIKl^i|iH'JletW, "while in the purpose is purely
• The distinction between fjfjjq and is:
In the former, there is the enjoining of something and also-
the of something else; in the latter there is merely the
fq^r of something else. For example, in gij- ^ 2 ,%, the
sacrificer is ordered to perform the sacrifice on a level piece
of ground and is forbidden an uneven piece of ground. If he
performs the sacrifice on an uneven piece of ground he will
incur sin. In qg q^qqri +T$qr: we are not ordered to eat the flesh
of five five-nailed animals,* what the sentence really means is to
prohibit the eating of other animals. Vide for futher infor-
mation the ftcTT^r on I. 81, the fqqfSjjf} p. 155, P. L.
M. p. 28 and R. G. p. 483. “aigRTTinHsrPF'f fqfq; | qqrfjrftq tgfqra;,
3TSW q^TT srRr I JriH6?IFTH>^rRN?flT J t Rtcf: qqf gif & I...
X. 81-82 Sahityadarpana
275
cr^i%cji~r qftsiw \ <r*rr
^ WT 5TTR 3^: W^3 *%?m
ftqfqRt »’ “fc f^^rqTTcr^r ftfir: f^wfr
q^qf^R^Tsfaft qq^ft rRT faqqftft: ( fW: I ? ) 3^f WqTPR-
R^T^f^cr vrqfq i fcr ■Prq^
ifa l 5[?Rl^;ft ^Tfa W SRq^l ST^ncIT-
?nt f^qfc{sq%: i fqfo fow°its*h^-
qq qqq^ra* sr qteteqr i fa W qw^nqr *rqqr:’ *c*r<[<M-
q^TO^qfqfaqiqqT^qfa i q ^r^cqwq^q^q^ °qqrsft i qqi^
wrI qr ^ srou” ffa
p. 155.
It will have been noticed from the foregoing remarks
on fjppr and qfttf^T that they have one thing in common, viz.,
srqq^cRfqfa, «. g . in ^ qfa’ there is the exclusion of an
uneven piece of ground ( over and above the command that a
sacrifice is to be performed on a level plot ); and in q^Jflgf
v^qj; the words are really intended to forbid the eatiog of
other five-nailed animals ( and are not intended to lay down
anything ). It is for this reason that Grammarians include
VMt&T under fq*R, as said by P. L. M. q w
fqqq^fa *0^ sqqfcTcqig I ftqqqfa
qforeqTSfa sq^ft ^ m ti§r. l” p. 28. The says *^q-
(fafai?WFTsrf&^ *i«i% \ q^ ?m\ ^cg% ^er ^qts^s^r.'
T (ed. Kielhorn, vol. 1. p. 8.). For the same reason
Rhetoricians include ftqq under qftgw as remarked by the
b?^. ‘sf^r ^ qre^Tqfqfcr ^rqqpr
ffaqtf qfe frc^r ( in the definition ‘qa^nfa*
srraifaiq ffafa qftsreqi’) * ^ ^ qT%qqft qrfRq ttfq
^qq^VTPRT snffa^l’ P* 155 - We shall see later on bow ftq*r
and qft flVi r (strictly so called ) are both included under
qfaaw by the 3?R>f rftqs.
When a thing which is known from other sources (sjiTTO-
^R^nn) is ye* 5 made the subject of an express assertion, it
terminates in the exclusion of another thing similar to it, for
there is no other purpose which such an express mention can
serve. The mention of such a thing is the figure The
special mention of a thing may be preceded by a question ( 1 )
or not ( II. ). In each of these two cases the thing to be ex-
cluded may be expressly mentioned ( a ), or it may be implied
( b ). Compare <4 3Tr3>f Tftqq srft qftSR^ISfTCSpf^ RH#r
sRgp: gq: qfcRT^T i WffacT”
P. L. M. p. 27; ‘r spg<jfeT ^fcT srfa f^TT » stffa =q
^IR^T^cqRqf t%qftfcT qg:q%qT t P- 153.
276
NOTES ON
X. 81-82
An example of I a is ft *jquf etc. (P. 54, 11. 31-32 ). This
occurs in K. P. X. p. 704 and Subha. (No. 2537). gfft
( ^ ^:=g*PTRrft:S
3r$fi*6cf ( ); fWTT ffi:. Here a question is first asked
and then a special assertion is made; we know from the
Itihasas, Puranas etc. that the real ornament of man is fame.
The express mention of it here serves the purpose of ex-
cluding the idea that jewels etc. are the ornaments of man.
A jewel is expressly mentioned ( ); therefore this verse
in an example of I a.
An example of I b, where the special mention of a thing
is preceded by a question and the thing to be excluded is
not mentioned expressly, is etc. ^^JT:--^criTrRTJT: the
company of the good, q-^q- Here the things to be
excluded, viz. qjq, *RTf^ respectively, are
not mentioned, but left to be understood.
An example of II a is vfavft etc. (P. 55, 11. 6-7 ).
*1 sRKTj ^
( ( 3rrerr ) qqmt ^ qjfi- ( qpfft ).
Here there is no questison. We know from ancient writings
that we should devote ourselves to the worship of God and not
to that of Mammon. The express assertion serves to
exclude the worship of lucre, which is expressly mentioned
( qrre )•
An example of II b is etc. ( P. 55, 11. 8-9 ). This is
Raghu. VIII. 31.
5T g ), f^T
m ^ fqqKR ) cT^r ( Z&Km ) fq^: ( spri: ) ^ %q^ qg ( qit )
srqRR qdq^tfit (g) guiq^rr (3 <wt-
qdqqWtf^ q^gqj-
qqtsfa q<lwqiRliT: l ). Here there is no question and
the things to be excluded are not mentioned.
It should be noticed that in some of the above examples
there is what is strictly called f^q. We have seen that, in
f^RFT any one of two things is possible ( qyq ) but not both at
the same time; and that a text restricts us to one of the two
things to the exclusion of the other. It follows that a sacrifice
may be performed on or fqrqq ground, but not on and fqqq
ground at the same time; we are restricted by the text
to level ground alone to the exclusion of fqqq ground.
Similarly* in juq, any one of the two things
X. 81-82 Sahityadarpana
277
( or mqfem ) is possible; but it is not possible to have
both of them at the same time. We are restricted to
'to the exclusion of qqq^qr* For these reasons there is
strictly so called in this verse.
The reason why this figure is called is: — The two
prepositions srq- and qft have the sense of ‘giving up, excluding’
according to the sutra <TT- 1- 4. 88. gqsqr uaeans
gfe or f^xrpr, 3T?T^o. Therefore the word
means ‘(the mention of one thing with) the idea
of excluding another.’ Compare ‘^^fqcqR^^f
TFR qtef^^TT \ } 3T3>. 153; ‘qft^ \ \
spfosfefflct 3T^5qt ^tt’ I 5rvrr p. 435.
There is a special charm when this figure is based upon
Paronomasia. An example is *RRo’. This is taken
from the Kadambarl (para 2) of Ban a. There was mixture
of quts ( colours ) in painting ( there was no mixture of #s,
castes, in the community ), there was ^ ( cutting ) of gqs
( strings ) in bows ( but there was no lack of ^ujs, merits,
among the people ).
It need not be said that to constitute the figure
there must be some poetic charm ( ^[cjH ); or e l se j
even such expressions as +(^r:, W^ITg'kiraC.
be examples of the figure qfcew- *t?r fcR-
i 2t*rr— ;w^Prwir
p. 112.
Examples of are; — E ?R3V r IF : R3^3 IPrBi
JRRzMsftf II ^ 7 H. 81 ; pf;
Pr Ftsrr i fr ^urt g^rhrl ftsw mra; n
VII. 80; jpr qig: q* =3R : ' SflFfSJ
II BfRiRTvS 0 IV . 143.
53 Reply ).
qp* jpsrjj: 3W3, ( 3vPTd wftsftf ) RcSf'I ( 37FtI‘9.) H3T
3THM ( I ) When a question is inferred
from an answer, or ( II ) when there being many questions,
there are also many answers, which do not ordinarily occur to
one, there is 3vR> An example of ( I ) is sftfajg ( p. 55, 11. 1 6-17 ).
5 ftf§jg ^ ^ is not able to see ( i. e. is blind ). means ‘hus-
band’. We understand here from these words of the woman
a question on the part of the traveller in some such form as
the following ‘will you give me a lodging for the night’ 1
24
278
NOTES ON
X. 82-83 3tTT.
An example of (II) is qgp ftgjg etc. There are many
•difierent readings. Most editions of K. P. and the 3 ^. g.
*ead ft while the and Uddyota have ft
Similarly many read ft pt t for ‘ 1 % '^wr:'
’pnsrrfi 1 ft grgq ft pfai jq®t ®ft: 11 ’. What
is most hard 1— the fiat of destiny (the decrees of Fate).
What should be obtained!— a man appreciating merit.
What is bliss?— a good wife. What is very difficult to win?-
wicked people. Here there are a number of questions and a
number of answers, which are all ggugsq ( i. e. not ordinarily
occurring to men ).
In the first kind of 3vK, the charm lies in the inferring
of a question from an answer. It is sufficient if there is an
answer and a question is inferred from it. In the second
■kind of 3 vTC the charm lies in the number of questions and
answers ( both being expressed ). A single question and
answer are not sufficient to constitute the charm,
-Tiffprw 3 5PsT)Tfgfr<gf^T^ srrw: i’ R. G.
p. 520.
3*50 qfoMrtTT ( p. 55, 11. 21 ). This figure must
be distinguished from qfapjqp In the express
mention of a thing, which is ( smHRRJriH ) well-known from
some source, serves to exclude another thing like it; while in
there is no idea of excluding another thing , but there is
simple assertion of a thing, which is not well-known. ‘gg ^
ir^Rei^icft i qq itr i-q -
^ 1 3 qpsq qq fficq4fc*rm: l’ 3T^r; f %q
qRti'tsqT 1 ’ g®. g. 172.
* P- 55, 11. 21-22 ). It may be said that
the first kind of is nothing but sigp-g, because a question
is inferred from a reply. Our author replies that this is not
so. There is a difference between stjjth, and 3 ^ (of the
first kind). In sigJTR, both the gpsq- ( thing to be inferred)
and the gpR (the ground of inference) are expressly
mentioned; in 3xR, the ^ and 3 ^ are not both mentioned .
°nly the answer is mentioned, ‘grffcgggrc* ,
' K. P. X; ‘g
3jg. g. p. 172. ^ ^
* ^ W.cdiq,(P. 53, 11. 22-23 ). 3 xR: must be distin-
guished from qqsqfts. In , a word, clause or sentence
X. 82-83 3tTT.
Sahityadarpana
279>
is the reason of an assertion. Here the answer does not produce
the question ( % . e. the answer is not a of the question);,
it at the most suggests the question. In Hfipsr&f, a word or
sentence contains the of an assertion. 1
svfot 1 ^ % to sforw Is-* r K. P. x.
Jagannatha remarks that when either the 5i$T or SxTC or
both the question and answer are significant, it is not necessary
that there should be a number of them. cTNcT^
R- P* 522 - An exaU3 P le is
^TTSrcr F& cFT {m
^xi^uf ^rif^r^czr ©q 7 ^)- The TJddyota remarks that the'
figure occurs also when the question is one and the answers-
many, as in ‘f% *FT *\\$t \
II ? ; also when the question and answer are-
expressed in the same words (owing to %q) as in
JTWTl^ *rqR ^ (ZKVW
^rr: % to:,
Examples of v 3 xft are:—
*rat i ^ fife qreftq ^3 * 1 ? ^ ^
VII. 41 (quoted in 3 ?^. ^. ); ‘qifiWfi <f*TtSSTTS£~
I 3 I ?qT H* ( quoted mthe-
K. P. X.).
54 3?sii<irp (Presumption or Necessary
Conclusion).
When according to the maxim of the stick and the cake-
a fact is concluded from another, there is sprprfxr- ^r^PTFFP
" z&m atfsr strut: 3Trqctf w- The 1S
explained as follows: — When it is said that the stick (on
which cakes were placed) has been eaten by a mouse, it
naturally follows that the cakes connected with the stick have
also been eaten. The stick, being very hard, can be eaten with'
great difficulty ; if it has been eaten, there can be no question
as to the eating of the cakes (that are very soft as compared to
the stick ) which are placed on the stick. The is*-
therefore, one, by which, in accordance with the above example^
on the strength of one fact that is given or admitted, another
fact comes in ( i. e, has to be admitted or presumed ) on
account of the applicability to the latter of the same circum-
stances which are ascertained with certainty in the former*.
?80
NOTES ON
X. 83 sraWfo.
explains ‘fim^r^rcrac.’ as
gSq^Rsqrg’. Pramadadasa translates ‘through a necessary
connection'/ What is meant by is: — if one
fact being admitted, another follows, because the latter resem-
bles the former ( about the circumstances of which there is
certainty ) in its circumstances, there is 3rqTqf%. The deriva-
tion of the word must now be explained, sm is a
cake or a preparation of flour and ghee 4 t JTTS , JT: ftgq;
II- 9. 48. 3?>jqq ^[^qt (gy^). The affix gq is
applied to this Dvandva compound according to the sutra
qr° V. 1. 133 ( fr^r^R^r, i m°)-
The affix causes but it does not do so here. The mean-
ing will be Or we may explain the word in
another manner, qusr<jqr TOt qrqr HT qw: The
possessive affix is applied to the word in accor-
dance with the sutra ^ ifoRf’ qT o Y. 2. 115. Or quspjftqiT
may be derived from qtf^ftjq by the addition of the affix
according to the sutra 5TTcT^icft ? TT- Y. 3. 96 (3^53
3?^: ). The meaning then would be fq q-ftfifiT:
( an image resembling and ). Compare the following
from the 3^'. (which is here very badly printed): —
vnn^a i ( m ) «fit 3^ '
i qqr ^ g
? )” i 3jq^
q^nrtqRT (qft^dnqfq ?) cj;q qi^qfvq | p. 156. Yide the very
lucid and valuable remarks of Jayaratha on this passage for
further information. Jayaratha says that the first explanation
of the word qusr<jftqq is to be preferred. For ^jfqifrq quiy
q^r^fqqjr,^ compare 3?^. “srq ft qcHf ^[oq-
1 qq Riqr i qqaj w ^^rk-
qflfq w^rqfvr: i” p. 156.
There are two varieties: — (I) From a fact which is Rq^fqqi
there comes in one that is arsrraid&lsR ; of ( II ) from a fact that is
wqtffqqi, there comes in one that is qpRpiqi- An example of
the first is fRlsq (p. 55, 11. 29-30). %fpr: —
When this is the condition of even those who are gqq: (pearls,
free from birth and death), what of us, the slaves of Love?
Here the muktas are the subject of description. Those who
are muktas can never be seen embracing women. If even
281
X. 83 aro'i'rft. Sahityadarpana
they are seen yielding to the influence of love, then nothing
-need be said about ordinary men. The similarity ( ^JTRrqrq )
between muhtas and the speakers consists in the fact that
both are men.
An example of the second variety is ( P* 55,
11. 31-32 ). This is Raghu. VIII. 43. Even
iron, when strongly heated, becomess soft, what of men ( who
have ne iron-like bodies ) \ Here the description of iron is
The may be explained as follows: — If
even such a hard substance as iron melts when heated,
then it follows with greater force that men, whose bodies
are very soft as compared to iron, melt under afflictions.
( P 55, 1. 33 ). When the existence of similar
circumstances is due to Paronomasia, there is a special charm
as in the verse ‘fRfcf instanced above ( where the word
2TfiRR is Paronomastic ).
q (P- 56, 1. 1 ). This figure is not
Anumana because the existence of similar circumstances is
not of the ri&ture of an ( invariable ) relation ( which is
required in srjjqR ). In ergiTR, there is an invariable
concomitance between one thing and anosther ( between sqrcq
and sqyqq; 1 so that where the first exists, the second is invari-
ably found. In there is no invariable concomitance
between two things. A certain thing being admitted, another
follows, because the latter has a similarity ( of circumstances )
with the former. But it is possible that the latter will not
necessarily follow. For example, although it is proper to
conclude that the apupas have been eaten, still the conclusion ^
is not certain, because it is possible that the cakes may not
have been eaten, although the stick is eaten, for the mouse
may have so entered as to come in contact with the stick only
or because the cakes may have been placed in a peculiar
manner ( so as not to be reached by the mouse ). J agannatha
further points out that in 3 }gqR, the and reside in
the same thing; but this is not possible in 3RTqf%;
that follows from another does not reside in the same place
as the latter. Compare 3^r. fl. “q %3R3*TR*I 1 (^ ? ) ^7
i i” p- 1 75 ;
282
NOTES ON
X. 83 sdWfrt
*ireRsrr<4fwwMW: >” k*r° p- 157 ; ‘kra-pn^ ( srakfaft-
) i suTErdrs ( wqcrdts ? ) ^rcr^.reffl^-i3R°T#T ^Fwrg-
>4#c^f3:m^siTi3; i” R. G. p. 486.
It should be well borne in mind that the figure is
not the same as the 3T*nTf% of the Mimansaksa. 3rqTTftr is
•defined by them as ( 3T*n7f% is
the surmise of a thing to account for something else, which
surmise is based upon the knowledge of something which has
to be accounted for ). For example, when we see or learn
from another that Devadatta who is fat does not eat by day ?
we surmise that he must be eating at night in order to
account for his fatness. Here the fatness of Devadatta is
the vJqTpsr ( the thing which has tp be accounted for ) and
is the ( the thing that accounts for fatness ).
The word 3 ?qrqf% is applied both to the and the ^ ( the
resulting knowledge ). Here, the is sqqR^R ( *. 6. the
knowledge of fatness ). as it leads on to the surmise. The
^ is the sqqKWR (the surmisal of ). Vide
vol. I, p. 38 ( Anan. ed. ) 3rqrrfvRft £2: fpfr srrqTsRT
•TtmrT I W
the 4faiflRf3i ( 1st verse ) ^T^IT R-
3Tf £ ll\ The word 3rqtqf%, when
used to denote the has to be explained as a com-
pound ( that from which follows another thing
when used to denote the resulting knowledge it is to be
explasined as a 3TTqf%: the resulting of a thing ).
It should be observed that the Naiyayikas do not regard
•3RRf% as a separate i^frrq but include it under
Compare T^fT ^
n#r g% forsg«Ric% ^
T. D. The question may be asked: — What is the
point of similarity between the of the rhetoricians
and the 3rqrtqf% of the Mimansakas ? The answer is: — in
the sr^rqfxT of the former, from one fact that is admitted,
another comes in through the applicability to the latter
•Of a similar reasoning; e. g. from the fact that even iron ?
when heated, melts it naturally follows that othar things
when heated ( i. e. afflicted ) should melt. In the
3W?f% of the jftrrigf; also, when the truth or existence
X. 83 srsfcrfo.
Sahityadarpana
283
of one thing is admitted, we have to admit the existence of
another in order to account for the former. For example, we
admit in order to account for the fatness of who
takes no food by day. The difference between the 3TqT4Rf of
the Alankarikas and that of the MJmahsakas is as follows: Tn
the 3T*rrqf% of the latter the thing that is known or admitted
cannot be explained without the surmise of another thing; but
this is not so in the of the Alankarikas. The of
taking no food by day cannot be explained without
supposing ^rPrvrRH on his P ar t ; but the melting of iron does
not require the melting of ( the hearts of ) men to explain
itself. q^Tf Wiglet I ^rqr^^ntqf^cR^
i’ R. P- 486 -
Dandin, Bhamaha, other ancient writers and Mammata
do not admit 3 pqqqf% as a separate figure. Uddyota says that
it is included under srqfTRT or sfpr^rqrPfi*
Examples of srqrq'Pr are: — q^pp^pq
VI. 95; ^r^flrf^Tqicq-frHTgqtg i 3iT°
V ; 31&W- foMft ^ ^ ^ 1
wmA ^TRfqr qqqPr ^frcgdrqqr qwer ^ % 5^R*ft \\
( quoted in the sr^r. H* with the remark 3T5T ‘{^ v qt ff?T
The word is the loc. sing, of fqfq ‘fate’ or f4g’ moon’ ).
55 ^^(Alternative).
When there is an ingenious or striking opposition of two
things of equal force, there is f^qv^T* An exampls is iTTRRg' etc,
( p. 56, 1. 3 ). This is borrowed from the 3T^. p. 151. ‘Let
them. (. i. e. the enemies ) bend their heads or their bows; let
them make ( our ) commands or their bow-strings their
ear-ornaments’.
^ (p- 56, 11. 4-6 ). As the bending of
the heads and that of the bows are respectively the marks of
peace and war, there is an opposition between them, because it
is impossibe to resort to both peace and war at the same time
(for the same enemy). This opposition (h:) terminates in
leading one to resort to one of the alternatives (
2(57). fttdvWFT and a re here oi e 1 ual foroe »
because they are represented ( by the speaker ) as alike through
a pride of his own excellence, ^pqo explains
284
NOTES ON
X. 84 f%^T.
as ‘^rj: and we translate above
accordingly. We think it is possible to put another construc-
tion upon the words, g^qq®^ qrvfrsqrnqqtq — The bending
of the head and that of the bow are of equal force, because both
of them are represented as if rivalling one another.
^Tgq ^ thrift (P. 56, 11. 6-7 ). The ingenuity of the
speech consists in its implying a comparison, seems to
have read the definition as r^yfqsjiqqT'fo:- He notices two
other readings qq ; ’ and ftytqqjrgff qq.\ The esse-
ntials of fqq^q are therefore the following: — I There must
be two things of equal force: II the two cannot be resorted to
at the same time by the same person; III the two being thus
opposed, we must be able to resort to anyone of the two
alternatives at our will; and IV there must be implied resemb-
lance between these two things. Ihe text ‘qtqflff^rql
lays down an option; but it is not an example of the figure, for
there is no sqpT^q implied in it. In the above example of the
figure jqq^q- there is resemblance between the two, based upon
the property qqq ( which is common both to the head and
the bow ), and a special charm in the rapresentation that
both alternatives are equally acceptable. Similarly, in
jfrfrrfJrjrriT qR qi gqiftsig qr qftgq. 1 3?qq qr
JRarqtg qr qfqqqfqr qq q q^T: ||’ there is no
iqqsq, as there is no implied resemblance. Vide the 3 ?<j. q.
gwsmfr ftqscq^q qlqqgreF^
I slrqrqq-flfqrarq ^T^qqiqqr ‘qqvg Rrrrfit |
NfdtTtqqiTq qq^ f^RqT qgqf q g^qqJTFiqf^SEcqq^ I qjq
^ s^qqqial i srfqtTsiRqq^q ^qaqqr g;%fr ^qpqqiqtqra: i it %rr
qq>3qrrqfl% STONST* ( fiT^fq qf%
MlWSflSf sraiTT 0 ? ) ^TcqqiRrqnvnqp^qqcqi?!; qqsj jqrqSTTHt
ftqwq: I” qq. q. p. 158-
^ to* ( p - 56, 11. 7-8 ) gon* qgqr f*:-This is
the last pada of a verse cited by the aqj. $. f the first three
padas jDeing sfrqfarqqqfqrft ^qiqjqjqqqj
5WTfqpRqqft fcqqiH^ I qRnqtq ^qqf
3^1^ agqr may the eyes of Visnu effect the cure of
your worldly distresses, or may the body of Visnu do so It
should be noted that here the verb giqqp^ is 3rd per. dual of g;
( Parasmaipada, when agreeing with %!f) aud also the 3rd person
sing.( itmanepada, when agreeing with q^:). The adjectives
X. 84
Sahityadarpana
♦
285
STjrfzffit, cT^ft are capable of two constructions; they
are neuter duals ( spqfqjfT of qurfq-;^ etc. ) or feminine singulars.
Therefore there is of and We have to explain
how there is As the eyes form part of the body, they
should not be separately mentioned. But as they are separately
mentioned, it conveys the idea of their rivalry with the body,
there being otherwise no purpose which the separate mention
can serve. When they are looked upon as rivals, there is
opposition between the eyes and the body. The properties
etc - are common to both 2ft and ^3 and
therefore there is implied resemblance. All the conditions of
beino; satisfied, the figure is fq^T.
The figure {cj^q was first defined by the author of the
3 ra\ * 7 . as he himself and Jayaratha inform us.
3 T<[cT P* 159, 011 which remarks
Uddyota remarks that this
does not deserve to be a figure at all, as it does not enhance
the charm of the subject of description, and as the general
definition of a figure given by Mammata as
STTff^rg; I >’ is not applicable
to it. Vide P- 29 *
56 (Conjunction).
(I) When, notwithstanding the existence of one cause
sufficient to bring about an effect, there are others producing
the same effect according to the maxim of the threshing-floor
and the pigeons ; ( II ) or when two qualities ( a ), or two
actions (b) or a quality and an action (c) are simultaneously
produced, there is
The ivqiq is as follows: — many pigeons, whether
young or old, alight on the threshing-floor at the same time
and rival one another in picking the grains of corn lying there.
The maxim is, therefore, used to illustrate the production of
an effect by the operation of many causes at the same time.
The word Tq&sfiqtfifaT ma y explained as follows: —
in an Aluk compound according to the sutra
<TT° VI. 3. 9 ( f 1
f^o qqo ). The word is formed from by the
affix sfi^in accordance with the sutra qi° V. 3. 96
^^TTfcT^Tq:- ( on %. XI. 1. 16) says: ‘aWT
286
NOTES ON
X. 84-85 ggsw.
An example of (I) is fff etc. (P. 56, 11. 15-18). These
words are uttered by someone who is separated from his be-
loved. |
tr^^ra; ) ( ) <ct%°4
( «Pifrr 3vrt 5rs^ ), ( crt ) #cRrcmftfvr: ^qfqr
( ) %3. 3 (w) JT?Tf y^r<KWllil^ ( srwt^Rvqq-
) ?€ ( crfc) m JTtT: flfsRITNRj;: ( 3}RJTr ?[« )
^r%55: RR q§qt ( %vft 'ARR# qqr )■ JRffts4 ^ti%55: What
shall be said by me to this black cuckoo, wild and intoxicated
as he is 1 When the wind, which comes from the Malaya
mountain, which is pre-eminently ^f%uj (southern, gentle)
and which is intimately associated with the holy and cool
waters of the Godavari, causes burning, what of the cuckoo
who is to, and (it need not be said that the
2Rti%55 will cause ^ ) ? qf^RiRR: fRORr<%fs5Rq»rpq: sr^er: arfeR-
To a lover in separation, the southern wind,
sandalwood etc. appear hot; to all others they are delightful.
^ (P- 56, 11. 20-21 ). Here, although there axists
a cause, viz. the circumstance of being produced from the
Malaya mountain, for the purpose of producing, the effect, viz.
burning (in the case of the lover), other causes, such as coming
from the south, are mentioned. 3 ^ (p. 56*
11. 21-22 ). All these causes being good (as they are generally
the source of delight to all), we have in the above example a
combination of good things. In the fourth line of the above
stanza, where many bad things such as being to, and
are combined, we have a combination of bad things. It
should be noted that many divide the first kind of into
three varieties, ^t:, 37 ^ 7 : and see p. 161.
In the verse etc. our author exemplifies the first two of
the three sub-varieties. In that verse, there is 3 Tqfcrf% also.
An example of is ^j^IV etc. This occurs in the
-Tucr^ia^ of #TOT TO- ^r;=^ ; . Each
one of the above is capable of causing great pain to the mind,
this being so, many others are mentioned as producing the*
same effect. Therefore the figure is ^Fp^q\ The word
may be explained in two ways:— I ^ Vft:
a combination of good things with other things that are bad'
or n CRW ^ ^trr: a combination of things
that are both good and bad (i. e. that are good in one way
and bad in another ).
X. 84-85 sg^r.
Sahityadarpana
287
w %fo-y§ ( P. 56, 11. 27-28 ). The first explan-
ation of is resorted to by some who say that in etc*’
the moon and others are good and the wicked man is bad and
thus there is a combination of good and bad things. There
are three objections against this view. I. There is no charm
in the combination of the moon etc. with the II. The
concluding words of the stanza are against the above construc-
tion. All the seven objects are declared to be ^y*qs; so the
moon etc. cannot be said to be ^ytqq. III. If we take this in-
terpretation of the word B ^Bs f ftT, we shall commit the fault of
BfBtfBvTBT- A combination of good things with bad things,
instead of being an ornament, is a fault An example of
given by jt*jt Z is ‘sj^B gfeBB^B B^B Blft
BT^B TBBBT I *1*1 ffctt BBlftffT B%B
B^BTll’ K. P. VII p. 401 (Va). In this verse, excellent
things such as are combined with things quite dissimilar,
viz., szibb ( vice ) etc.
3 ?;% g ( P. 56, 1. 28-p. 57, 1.3). Others
again take the second explanation of BTBBfB ( i- e. combination
of things which are both good and bad ). The moon etc. are
good in themselves, but the dimness etc. with which they are
associated are bad. So the six objects ^y^ft, ^rft"Bt, B^T> gBRi,
syg: and are g°°d in themselves, but become bad as they
are associated with *JBR^T, Bf&BBTBBBT etc. We may say the
same about sjqiffBBB: & wicked man is bad in himself,
but gqjWB is good. But as there is BTBlfff^T, this last may
not be taken and the figure may be constituted by the
first six only. The special strikingness
consisting in pointing out that such states as dimness etc*
are extremely improper when they befall such objects as
the moon etc. is what constitutes the charm of the verse
( and not the combination of some good things with a bad
thing as said by those who entertain the first view ). Besides,
the conclusion is that all the seven are afflictions as said in the
words ‘BBTCt Bff etc*’. This furnishes a reply to those who hold
the first view. The clause bears a fault, on
account of its violating the uniformity of description.
Everywhere, the object qualified ( such as Ty^ft, sRpTBI etc. ) is
good in itself ( the qualification, such as feqB^BB, being bad ),
while here the f^sq, is bad and the is good. Thus
288
NOTES ON
X. 84-85
there is the fault called Therefore according to
this second view the proper example of is furnished by
the first six instances, the seventh g q Tf Rnqd -* should be left
out of account, as it is marred by a fault. Our author seems
to hold the second view, which appears to us the beter of
the two. Vide 3?^.^. p. 162.
^ rfcT 5fe: ( P. 57, 11. 4-5 ). The figure occurs
when, though a cause capable of producing the effect exists,
another cause begins to operate by chance and makes the
production of the effect very easy. We must distinguish
clearly between and In the former all the
causes operate jointly and simultaneously to produce the
same effect, like pigeons alighting upon the threshing-floor
to pick up grains of corn. In notwithstanding the
existence of a cause capable of producing the effect, another
more powerful ( cause ) begins to operate by chance and
facilitates the effect. The differece may be put thus:— I.
In all the causes begin to operate at once, just as the
pigeons all alight at the same time; while in when one
cause has begun to operate, another comes in by chance and
not at the same time as the first; II. In <qg^q, although
there are many causes operating to produce the same effect,
there is no specialty as regards the effect; while in the
operation of another cause by chance facilitates the production
of the ^effect, ft
^ WtdT CTTOPfofll =5T
^tS^fcr^R: g: f 9 R. Cr. p. 400. The requires a
little explanation. A crow alighted on a Palmyra tree.
At that very moment a fruit of the tree fell on its head and
is a fault and means ‘a breach of the unifor-
mity or regularity of expression’. w ^ : ^ ^
p. 1 68-
>3^ nieans ‘mention or statement of a word, affix, pre-
position, tense etc. for the first time’ and is the
repetition of these for some purpose. An example is
^TTi^r i
feRri mm : q?q& fqsipt ^
wsg: n ^T. II. Here qrf^ri and 3?«rcrg are in the Active
voice, but is in the Passive. Therefore there is
289
X. 84-85 Sshittadarpana
killed it. The maxim is therefore used to illustrate anything
that occurs purely by chance . This maxim is a very old one,
as it is explained even by Patanjali. Vide iff. p. 22 for
a lucid grammatical explanation of the word. The jfb
quotes the MahabhaSya and gloss on it.
\ ftfcf I^R ‘cR^WR ^WR^mR^
( in the sentence qft: *wpm:, ct^hr: fcT:
I tTRqcR l g ^
^faFTRfafcT I” f%- *ft> P- 22. TOe JTfT^T on qr° V. 3.
106 ( vol. II, p. 429 Kielhorn ).
<>m =et fer (P.57, 11.6-8). These words are
addressed by a friend to the heroine.
(aTR^R)«n% wRTfiH, fsnw ^ cr 5TRg
st^T sr^ (I'Rr) sqfar:. In the first half there
is the simultaneity of two qualities ( viz. and Trf^Rcg)
and in the second that of two actions ( viz. bending down
and blazing forth ). The meaning of the verse is: — When
her eyes become red (through anger ), the lover loses his
colour ( because he despairs of winning her ); when she hangs
down her head (through love and bashful n ess ), the fire of
love blazes forth in him. This verse is an example of II a
and II b.
An example of II c, where there is a simultaneity of a
quality and of an action, is ( p. 57, 11. 9-10 ). ^ =rg:
<ni^?T)f%crT^fRtef«T srfcfa
(=srfa =5r i far ^ qffar^.
Here there is 4Wm of the quality ( ) and the action
viz. falling. The meaning is: — No sooner do the eyes of
the king grow red through anger than his enamies incur
misfortunes.
ptfa VZ& ( p -57, 11. 11 -12). It will have been
noticed that the qualities and actions that occur simultaneously
are generally found in different places. For example, the
eye of the woman or of the king becomes red and the
face of the lover becomes gloomy or the enemies meet with
misfortunes. So it may be thought that * in the second kind
of gqs } %qT s or must be seen simultaneously in
different places ; but this is not so. Although the figure
occurs more frequently when there is tqftqRoq, still the
25
290
NOTES ON
X. 84-85
4 tiT'T«r qualities or actions is possible even in the same
substratum, as in the example ‘he waves his sword and spreads
his glory \ Here there is sfpm of two actions and
trgpO in the same person (viz. the king). These words
are directed against Rudrata, who says that this variety of
^Tgwq ( (i- e- the of gqf^qT: ) occurs only when a number
of things occur in different places. qy qiwgqfqiij -
^rrvT^frs^t II ? Rudrata Vir. 27.
*T gsc^TFr: (P.57, 11.12-14). It may
be said that in some examples of eg^q there is really ;
as for example in ggtfcr etc. where two actions are connected
with one agent (thus there is qiT^Tqq;). Our author
replies: — All these examples of ggsfq- due to the simultaneity
of qualities and actions are invariably founded upon
consisting in the inversion of the sequence of cause and effect;
while is not founded upon srfcr^tf^. Iu the verse
it is represented that calamities befall the enemies the
moment the king’s eye grows red. Here the cause (qj^qjq)
and the effect (arpjNff^) are spoken of as taking place at the
same time, against the general rule that an effect follows its
cause. Similarly in gifffcr etc.
We must distinguish between and qqfq. In
there is while in qqpq many things reside in one place
in succession ( and not at the same time ). ^g^q must also
be distinguished from In the former, there is a combina-
tion of causes ( whether good or bad), while in two things
not represented as the causes of anything, are spoken of as
being quite suitable to one another, ‘gg^ gflkflcffa f qnwft:
p. 120 .
Examples of are:— I. gRI TfcTT qiSfaR 5 %
RRR. > RG ftp?: II $rrr° VI. 82; gg?qf% :
i iiiTWT?: c r?rw«^rBtTO: i sqrgf: qffor-
^RftRaRRft^ Wlfc^RTf RRTlft RTcT: II R. G. p. 491.
II. 131% cRwfSJR&R Rvf: I RPTfS'K#
1 %??: <no§:ll R. G. p. 490; STqij^ m %4V*T: fsTRRT
Sf : Rft I R IV.
57 (Facilitation).
When what is to be accomplished becomes easy through
the accidental operation of another thing, there is gqqfq.
X. 86 srmfa. Sihityadarpana 29 1
An example is jtfwsit: etc. ( P. 57, 11. 17-18 ). This is
K. D. IT. 299. srerr: ( ) FFf
lfcT«r^t ^ Efflftn, ^gtTT (¥H%t) (ssRRf.)-
Here the is the removal of the wounded pride of a woman.
This is accomplished more easily by the sudden thundering of
clouds (which frightens the woman and makes her cling to
her lover ).
The name ^infSr given to the figure is significant,
is equivalent to ('flTFFJ ^Ropf,) ‘accomplishing a thing
well.’ cfc
3STT*nft*rRi: Rirrf^WRrAvfR: i’ cfrto p. 315.
gfnfSf has been above distinguished from ( p. 288 ).
-rRt defines graft differently %:l
R fir-FT qft'TSSRt ll’ R^#fTORR:'n 4. 32 ; Dandin
speaks of giqft as a gq sMfarsdfW I fRWsft#
R ROlft: W 11 $g?Tft ftifteftr sFUTSRgf^fwT ^ ll’
I- 93-94.
58 sreinfta;j^( Rivalry ).
fftt: 3151%;^ offtor
SR^R:) ft?REfiR: cTWF ( ftqtft ) SrTtfgm: (fe%) tRI
When somebody unable to avenge himself on bis enemy is
represented as doing harm to somebody else connected with
the enemy, which simply results in proving the enemy’s
superiority, there is
An example of is etc.’ ( P. 57, 11. 22-23),.
agtmn- ) ( ft ^ a«f ?frr ( l;at: ) sr} fft:
( Rtf: ) 3RR: fRJJRRmr ( iRfFORfRl' ) ( FiftgFOT ) ftRtf%-
Here the heroine is a rival of the lion, whom she throws
into the background by her slender waist. The lion, not being
able to do any harm to his rival, the woman, breaks the
protuberant temples of the elephant. The temples of the
elephant are connected with the woman (filter) indirectly,
because they are connected with the breasts ( by the relation
of similarity) which are themselves connected with the
woman by This representation of the lion’s
breaking the temples of the elephant results in establishing
the superiority of the woman ( as regards slenderness of waist )
over the lion.
292
NOTES ON
X. 86-87 sprite.
The name TOTOfi may be explained as follows— 3 ttoj>
means an army, qczpfft means a representative or deputy of
an army. J ust as one unable to do harm to a powerful army
tries to do harm to an ally of that army, so here also some
powerful person, not being able to make any impression on his
antagonist, harms another, who is weak, connected with the
antagonist. So the word jRzpflefi is applied by to the
figure. The qqtro is the conveying of the superiority of the
antagonist. TO I
siwftafofir zydmvm i TOr TOrfcrftfH-
qftfiTO-
l TO R sr^mq$: TOfaTO \* TOtf 0 p. 316.
The connection between the enemy and his ally, whom
another, unable to do harm to the enemy, punishes, may be
either direct or indirect. An example of indirect connection
has been given by the author. An example where the connec-
tion ^is direct is ‘c# W R
TOTOc^qTfTO to: ll’. Here Cupid, unable
to conquer the hero, assails the heroine with his arrows. The
heroine is directly related to the hero as his beloved.
Jagannatha points out that is the same as |cJ^T.
In the verse etc. the fact that the lion breaks the
temples of elephants is poetically represented as due to the
fact that the woman (whose breasts are similar to the temples
of the elephants ) surpasses the lion. So there is here.
Uddyota replies to this by saying that, although there is
it is not the principal figure, because there is a special charm
in the representation that somebody being unable to avenge
himself on his enemy harms another connected with the enemy.
Vide R. G. pp. 494-495 and Uddyota p. 126.
Examples of srepffa? are: — ^ ^ jrqt TO JTqtTO^TT^TOr
TOTOTTOTTO^ 1 *TT ftMTTORl TORcTT TO TOTOfcT
n R. G. p. 494; to *
TOr^TO^nro fdt ii ftrgo XI v. 78.
59 srrfT<7^( The Converse ).
TOlTO TOTTOT TOTOTO fTOSTOTfTOH
TOtqftfrT ( I ) When things that are well-known to be
standards of comparison are themselves turned into objects of
comparison, or ( II ) when things which are standards of com-
parison are declared to be useless, it is termed
X. 87-88 5Rfar.
SXhityadarpana
293
An example of ( I ) is ‘q^%5r’ etc., which was cited above
(text p. 46) as an example of (blue lotus) is well-
known as an of the eyes of women, as in %%
But here is made an by being compared to the eyes
in the words ‘^IrWiT^^TfnT OTFTT
The reason why this is done is to convey that the Upameya is
superior to the Upamana and that the speaker has a low
opinion of the things that is well-known as an ^PTR* H a
general rule that the is superior in excellence, while the
is inferior. But sometimes a well-known is turned
into an to convey 'the idea that it is really inferior to
what is generally regarded as the sqifcr ( anc ^ therefore as
inferior ). Similarly in C 2 ^% 5 T etc.,’ the moon and ( we ^“
known Upamanas) are turned into Upameyas, by being
respectively compared to the face and the woman in order to
convey the superiority of the latter over the former. Compare
waft, rTgwsti
An example of ( II) is etc. (P* 57, 1. 28-p. 58, 1. 2 ).
This is II* 17. ( 3T%*T :
sflfaT, 3T*RT 3TTWT: ) sfett ( WTTH HST ), ST ^ ^
gsoft:, smi uteftfcr m ^ i*rr ( ^ ^
SfeKfa:) rT^...^-When there is that face, all
talk about the moon is stopped (closed), The
lotuses are gone, or (if we take as one word) ‘the lotuses
are lost’, explains the last line as wfam
ffcT^T^ft We think that has misse( * the spirit
of the verse and that we need not take as understood.
The last line must be regarded as ironical. etc. 1° t e h
the truth, Brahma’s method of creation is such that it avoids
superfluities. Here it is represented that the face etc. (the
^ifcjs ) are capable of serving all the purposes served by the
moon etc. (the well-known Upamanas) and therefore the
latter are condemned as being superfluous. If we do not
take the last line as ironical, there would be no force in
saying that the moon etc. are superfluous and yet asserting
that Brahma’s creation avoids superfluities. Compares#.
I f%TT<> ) STT^f^i f^t% srffa 5 !, I p. 1
294
NOTES ON
X . 87-88 mtv.
It should be noticed that both these varieties of qqft are
based upon resemblance. If something is condemned as
superfluous on account of the existence of another, and there
is no resemblance batween the two things, there is no qqyq.
It may be asked: — what is the difference between sq-qy and
JRTfa? The reply is: — in both there is no doubt resemblance;
but in qqft there is either the condemnation of the sq-qyq as
superfluous or the fact of the Upamana being turned into
the Upameya (in order to convey the superiority of the latter
and the inferiority of the former ); neither of these exists in
i i ^ ft
^(sqJTRy) cRtSJRt: gRRq ^ 5ft: i
( RcfiT+ftl ) ^ I ? ftqo p. 165.
The reason why the figure is called Rcftq is as follows; —
irfft means ‘against’. It literally means ‘against the current.’
The word is formed according to the sutra
qT° IV. 3. 97. The name qqft is given to this figure because
in it the sqift becomes opposed to i. e . is an antagonist ( a
rival) of the Upamana. l’
p. 165.
This figure must be distinguished from In qqft
as well as in sqfq^ 5 the is seen to be superior; but in
the former the superiority of the sqift is due to the fact
that it is turned into the Upamana and no dissimilarity
between the Upamana and Upameya is expressed or implied;
while in sqfq^ the sqqq is not turned into the ^qqyq or
vice versa and the charm lies in the conveying of the super-
iority of the over the Upamana by the mention
of the possession of certain qualities by the Upameya, which
&ve not possessed by the Upamaoa ( i . e. also is intended
in while in srqtq- only ^F#). gcq-
^ JaRt&fib q 1pF%q : | $yq*qiqq q^yqyq; j
i” R. G. p. 347.
(P. 58, 11. 4-5). After declaring the
pre-eminence of an object greatly excelling in some quality,
if another is compared to it (if the former is made an sqjyyfr of
another ), it also is termed by some qqft. This is a reference
to the views of Mammata and Ruyyaka. When an object ?
X. 88-89 5r#r. Sahityadarpana
295
which did not before experience the state of being an
Upainana on account of the possession of such pre-eminent
qualities that nothing approaches it, is yet made to assume
the state of an Upmana, there is qqftq. Compare
3 r q^ir^qm^rq^ ^ ^qwfcr
K. P. x.,*
( *nTOFFj^ ? ) srit#T l” p- 167 » on which spRsq
remarks ‘qqft STSKgStftonJfa *Tl 5 4 =#tq^fa 1 rT^^ft^nT^S-
An example of this is ‘srf^q’ etc. ^ficT ( ^fcT ^q^q^TTwO
CT^Tf^, 3Tfifa I^ITO w- ( FT 9* S^: ( ^TT *T? fPTi: );
^3 ( q<T: *F<^q ) arf^gcft >jq: ( 3^: ) vrqjf (vrq^f^Tfa )
2 ^Rf qqwift* Here is well-known to be such a
deadly thing that there is nothing to compare to it; but
here the words of the wicked are compared to it ( i. e .
fT^HT^ is. turned into an (jqqpq ). The result is that,
although the words of wicked men are not equal to fi^T^ in
their deadliness, they approach fRTf3>, which has been
generally regarded as incomparable. In this verse, in the
first line, the pre-eminence of the object is expressly declared
( in the words 3 ^: )• If the pre-eminence be not
declared, then there is no q<ftq but only sqTTT as in *r§rq-o ( qqy
5T§TT ^ qqfcT cT«IT WOt qqfcT )•
Vide the interesting remarks of Jagannatha on this
figure, B. G. pp. 496-497.
Examples of sr&T are— ^fsjjgjqqfgt ^ffiT i%
gt^igr qt ? #T qB; =q ^ Pfi qrq qt^q%: i 8 > qr fqg^tf
g^q qqiq^ it Rwfsq’jqf si: u’ (This bears a
close resemblance to the verse fi'grqq etc. ). This is quoted by
siqgq ); qfqgqTufoq stqggn&q qcra jq; i ggffeiiH
gg-g gg iftegfeqfq II ^ VIII. 78.
60 ( Lost).
%q£ra; ( ggq ^ f^qt q#: qgr ) ( g^ggi ) q^gg:
3 jf£t: ( When something is concealed (covered
up) by another possessing a similar characteristic, there is
The thing having a common characteristic ( or rather
the characteristic itself, the f%f^q ) may be inherent ( a ),
or adventitious (b).
Ac example of (a) is (P.58,11.13-14).
^fr^tcq^iw ( ) ^rraT ( ) sref ( frtdfttf )
296
NOTES ON
X. 89
*r#?r ^4t cf%: ^ f%f )
( ^t ^p*rr: sprsit ) «t 3^5% ( ^ f^fw^). jr^
etc.-lost as it was in the lustre ( of Yisnu’s body ) that shone
*like the dark-blue lotus. Here the dark-blue lustre of the God
Yisnu is inherent in him. Musk (sjpqjft) is dark and the
"spot, left on the chest of Yisnu when he embraced LaksmI
whose breasts were smeared with musk, was not observed
because it was concealed by another thing ( which is charmingly
darker ), viz. the lustre of Yisnu’s body.
An example of (b) is ‘gjfo etc. (P. 58, 11. 16-17). zRzrf
< ( #jt: ^ ^
jfP^5 cTC?T ) 3Tqoft^qjf^
( ^ikttr ) ^fofriri 3?ft ( 3?ft ) jpqrfq
3TfT ( *r4 ) frqg: ( ). Here the redness of the
ruby ear-ring is adventitious in the face. The glow spreading
over the face of women through anger is concealed by the
redness ( which is more powerful ) of the ruby in the ear-ring;
the redness of the ruby that spreads over the face is not
natural to it, but is borrowed or adventitious.
What constitutes is as follows:— There are two
things, one of which is more prominent, while the other is less
prominent; II. they both possess the same characteristic; III.
on account of the possession of the same characteristic, the
thing that is less prominent is concealed by the one that is
more prominent. In the examples in the text, the mark made
by the musk and the glow of wrath are not observed, because
they are concealed by the more prominent lustre (ofVisnu’s
body ) and the redness of the ruby respectively.
This figure is appropriately called as in it one thing
is concealed by another. The root ( 1st conj. P. ) means
‘to shut, contract.’ Compare 3 ?^. =q
This figure must be distinguished from In $rrf%-
on seeing one thing, another resembling it, is remembered
and mistaken for it e. g. in grqfqqT’ P- 27 above,
the moon’s rays cause the milkmen to remember milk, which
is not present then, and to mistake them for milk. While in
both the things are per sent) one is not •perceived because
it is overshadowed by another; moreover there is no mistake.
X. 89
S 5HITTADARPAN A
297
Examples of jfrf&r are f^TT
irffrdk W?n' l l^Tfgt #5RtT
cT?5T ^ ?=mfsft ^Sf^ll (quoted by K. P. X.); rn^j-
IT5!:*l^!T55qiqts5fT5S^^%3 SR%5 I #ft *f;#FfRT ^ 55^ ^TRtfa: JW^I*
^ VII. 108.
61 ^iTJTF^n^ (Sameness).
( J(5f ) gftrs^T: ^i^Raig'nqtrrra; irf^ ar^i^q
(3T^f( ampta cTRO^i ^Tc*4) (fT5f) eWRRI;
When something in question is spoken of as having become
undistinguishable from something else on account of similar
qualities, there is *fpTIR.
An example is etc.’ (P. 58, 11. 21-22 ). *I%3iTfircT-
qfam: (*Tft^T3*r: 3TT^fcrr: Sfacfl: ^ri: ^THT ) ^PR^i-
R%fi: (3TcT 3#^TRT: (^RT:
soffit ^^Zffa^TO 3if^BTf^T: (‘^Mg ^rfct mf*W
^fcT 3W;° II- 6 10) ^ errPcf. Here the subject of descrip-
tion (q^p-)is women going out* to meet their lovers at an
appointed place. Women are represented as not distingui-
shable from the moonlight, which is an^p, on account of the
possession by both (women who had white Mallika flowers in
their tresses and were anointed with white sandal, and the
moonlight ) of a common property, viz. whiteness.
The reason why this figure is called i s that here
there is connection of two things with the same property
(which renders them undistinguishable). Compare
or 3?^. *f.
p. 169.
What constitutes rrr is : — I. There are two things
both of which are seen; II. Both the things possess one
property in common; III. The two objects are within sight
but are not distinguished from each other on account of
the possession by both of the same property.
vftRf: (P.58, 11. 23-24). The author now
proceeds to distinguish between and HRTR- l n the
former, an object possessing a quality in an inferior degree is
eclipsed by another possessing the same quality in a superior
degree and the object that is is not perceived • while in
grTIpq both the objects are perceived , but they are apprehended
298
NOTES ON
X. 90 ^upr.
as undistinguishable on account of both the objects possessing
like properties, Compare 3?#. g. %. ^TrgsqqgR:
'W'MT T^tffRRR^'TRRPTJTt tflferfafcT l’ p. 168;
^f?Rn#qirc d^f^jrc°V grrriRg i
0 ftgpRRRR3 JT l” R. G. p. 516. This figure must also
be distinguished from 3Tq|frr. As there is do denial of anything
and as nothing else is asserted in the place of the former, this
is not 3FTff% ‘Jlwrffcr: I l’
p. 320. Similarly this is not srrfrmrg In the latter, we
mistake one thing for another and both the things are not
perceived (one is perceived and the other is remembered);
while in gpnR both the things are directly perceived. % ^
srrfewriT sir: i era ^mwRt'terTggjmRrRfr fNtTig. i’ 355ft-
p. 134.
Examples of gTftR are:— ft^cR R fT PkHWia ^isjlqRRft
5RT# 1 3 T SWIW(i f^SST IRft) g?,r§ RfR?: II ; ircRRRRff-
3>is^— *Tfflr §f% ’mtsgprgfi^: 1 <Rg
^rft: %hirj^ct er fwi^RggiriSTfr 1; gmr ggsR: 11
K, P. X.
62 cf^jor: (Borrower).
^S^RfiTRI Rg 11 !."- When an object is re-
presented as giving up its own quality and assuming the
quality of another excellent thing (that is near ), there is
ggvj. An example is etc.’ ( p. 58 11. 27-28 ). This is
Sisu. IL 21. qqqqSPT^RT'nfcft: (sRg^q q-gj qjjft gjfft
Rig) rftftf: (sprcig) ^JT^RigpT: (35?nf3i:)3«^W-
'■grptr: ) (^Rfi) qqg (sRTlftg) 3PTR (5RR5:). Here, the
bees, which are blue, are represented as giving up their
blueness and assuming the whiteness of the shining teeth
of Baladeva.
The reason why this figure is called ffguj is that in this
the object of description (q^-) assumes the properties of
that e. of a thing not in question or of a thing that
possesses same quality in an eminent degree. Compare. K. P. X.
‘<rsr g°Tterreflf?r’ or 3ft. g. ‘ergmisgTO gqr
|KRT i’ p- 170.
The essentials of ggv[ are: — I. One object ( the has
another object near it; II. the thing that is 5^3- gives up
its own qualities and assumes the quality of the thing that
Sahityadarpana
299
X, 90 cT^pr.
is near. It should be, however, noticed that our author does
not speak anything about or His example also is
noteworthy. The bees are not sif^r, but rather
According to our author, tTgq occurs when one object ( whether
or sTSTfirT ) assumes the qualities of another. In giving
the essentials of tTgq above we follow the authority of
Mammata.
m Jfc: (P.58,11. 29-30). An objection may
be raised: — in ^Tgq, the quality of one thing is concealed by
another and so there is no difference between ^gur and
Our author replies to this as follows: — In the thing itself
is concealed by another, so that the former is not perceived at
all ; while in ^gq, both the things are perceived ( and not only
one, as in ), but the qualities of one are transferred to
another; besides in the thing that is covered up ( or
over-shadowed ) does not give up its own qualities and assume
another’s ( as in flgq ), but is only over-shadowed by another
possessing the same quality in an eminent degree; while in
^guj, the thing loses its own quality and assumes a different
one. Compare : q I crq ft STfKff 3R3 sTT^Tftff'
1 S- P* 17 °* must be distinguished from
also. In the latter, one thing does not give up its
qualities, but appears undistinguishable from another on
account of the possession by both of similar properties • while
in qgq, both the things are seen distinctly , but one gives up
its quality and assumes the quality of another which is
dissimilar ). In one thing is really seen and mistaken
to be another, which is remembered ; while here both are seen
and there is no mistake. Vide the following lucid remarks
of the Uddyota crqraf:,
^OTFR^fcT ifc: * 1 5> PP‘ 137-138.
An objection may be raised as follows: — What is common
to the three figures ^FTT^ an d the non-perception
of difference ( whether, of qualities or things ). So instead of
defining them separately, let there be one Alankara, with
these three varieties. If a slight difference were sufficient to
constitute a distinct figure, then will have to be defined
as a figure distinct from Tjqjqqp Jagnnatha replies to this
300
NOTES ON
X. 90
that this is not proper. He says that following the above
reasoning, ^q-=R, qftqpT, etc. cannot be separately
defined and will form varieties of one figure called 3^.
Besides, in each of the three figures there is a distinct charm,
as in trftgrg etc. ( which have been separately defined by
all Alankarikas ). Vide R. G. pp. 516-517.
Examples of gguj are: — flfggggt g5^ig%g gjygr ^Eqy: tyfig:
1 ^rv=fT ggggrgr^: II f%sj. IV. 14;
^ J TT^r: I TPt a TT«IW^r II
R. G. p. 513.
63 3Tclgar; ( Non=borrower ).
IcTf tic 4 ! ft ( l^gj ggjftf ) fTSgTgjJfTC: (g^qgj
aiJTfvf qy ) jj 3?^fgq;. When one
thing does not assume the quality of another, though there is
a reason for it, there is syggiij. This definition is word for
word the same as that of the atf. g. ‘gfc iTgnngsfRtsggoy: i>.
It should be noticed that the figure sgygay would occur in
two ways: — I when something not in question ( ) t which
is s^h^ui, does not assume the quality of the thing in question,
which is ScfEgor ( although it comes in contact with the latter V
there is syggoy; II when the thing in question ( q^g ) does not
assume the quality of another which is not in question ( sijffjg ),
although the syqfyg is quite near the q^g, there is 3ygguy. The
preferred to in the definition means here ‘ the . presence of a
thing possessing excellent qualities’.
(P. 59, 11 3-4 ). jjqgjg ( tj$| ; qyy; qqg ), gygyij|
(sf% ( ijqsft ) qq fqguqtsfq
( fefrf ^RT»if7 ) ( m ) fgf wri gyq q gsgRl (gqyt qgfg, aygy^gr
)• The worda g-ifa and gsqfg are Paronomastic. Here
the gfig object is the hero, who is called ‘white with qualities’
( *• e - famed ). Although the hero ( who is ) is enshrined
in the heart of the heroine, which is gyg ( red or glowing with
ardent love ), he does not himself assume ygy^g ( redness or
love for the heroine ).
*nir*PS (P. 59,11. 6-7). griFb (gw m: ^
f % gi# gWRWPw ) 3?^ ( 3T* ) ( Jjgg; ), gTgg 3?jg ( qggygy;
^ ) qfwrgpT ( gj«ragf ), g^r^g, gqgiy qqsyg: gg ^jggy gy qg ( q%g,
), g ( gwr3i55gig^g g syftgy gqfg ) g g-
X. 91
Sahityadarpana
301
( qf&qj q qqfq). This verse is an example of
the second variety of ^gq. Here (sfffr) does not
assume the qualities of the Ganges or the Jumna (the vfspgft)
although they are in contact with him ( gffr 3?fq).
TjfoT qwr (P.59, 11. 8-10). Tjjfor fawro*;. This
has been explained above. qiRq^3?fq- although it is proper
that it should follow, q q^qqj. It may be contended
that in ‘qnftpg etc ' the figure is arsregqsrqHT ( 4th variety
g^Tfqqrqq;); the description of is not really the
matter in hand; the subject of description is a good man, who
remains the same (in character ) in prosperity or adversity.
Our author concedes this contention and says that, although
absolutely speaking the swan is still in comparison to
the Ganges and the Jumna, the swan is a subject in question,
as the Ganges and Jumna are still more removed from the
real subject of description, viz. a good person. As the swan,
who is thus relatively does not assume the qualities of
the rivers, though in contact with them, there is sjqgq.
(P. 59, 11. 10-11). It may be conte-
nded that in the above examples of 3 rqgq, there is
because, though the hero is placed in the heart which is full of
m ( »• «• flcqft), he does not become ^ ( i. e. there is qrarqrq)
and though the swan plunges in the bright and dark waters
of the Ganges and the Jumna, it does not heighten or lessen
its whiteness. Therefore qq-gq should not be separately
defined. Our author replies that 3Tqgq deserves to be a
distinct figure because there is a distinct charm in it, viz. the
peculiar striking circumstance of the non-assumption of the
quality of one thing by another. In the charm consists
in the representation that the effect does not follow, although
its well-known causes are present ; while in ;qqgq, the charm
lies in the non-assumption of the quality of one by another.
Even if there be a causal relation, the poet does not iutend
(in 3?cfgq) to emphasize it; what he (poet) insists upon as
charming is gqpqfq. We are informed by Jayaratha that
3rqgur was included under by the author of mwmm
(p. 171offqq T %tf).
q^Wdcq frqqTS; (P.59, 1. 11). 3?qgq must be dis-
tinguished from the first variety of fqqq, where the properties
or actions of an effect are opposed to those of the cause. In
( example of ftqq on text p. 51 ) the sword which
26
302
NOTES ON
X. 91
is darkish produces fame ( which is white ) i. e. a dark thing
produces an effect possessing a quality which is opposed to
that of the cause. But in srqgq, a distinct ( and opposed)
colour is not produced ; e. g. in £ *r?q ; 3 T ;: ^ ,T T , e ^ c - ^he
heart in which the hero is enshrined does not produce another
.( and an opposed ) colour in the hero. The only thing that
happens is that the hero remains ^^5 as before and does not
assume
The reason why this figure is called sqrgq is • ^
^ q spfgq:, sWfKTCT ^jqT 3
q ^cftfcT srqgq:. Compare Mammata’s words ^
smfcT =3
Examples of s?qgq are: — f^T 3^
T^rarq i fq PTft^T &T RMI ( quoted in
K. P. ) ; gr qRqRIofts flfsrqrf&n^lflr ^ q cTW W& PT3RT-
^ 5 ^ 1 ^nfiww&rfSr f^RR\ ^ 3R3? f^RR*3-
f^mtii R ' G - p- 5U *
64 ( Subtle ).
qq 3?r^q (srqqq^qqfcjqr^q) (% 2 IR^ U T) 3T
•^tt: 3?'4: (^qfJTcffa^r 3 t 4: ) ^qrsfq (qq^q^ftq ) 33 ^
fT3 — When a delicate circumstance gathered from
some feature of the limbs ( a ) or from gesture ( b ) is intimated
to another by means of a clever hint, it is It should be
observed that Amara gives sq^R and qffq as synonyms
'^T^RRrqW ffiRRC HI* 2. I 5 1 in another place, he says £ 3q^KT-
III. 3. 162. The commentator Bhanuji explains
^ffcf %ST l >’• Mammata and our author
seem to have taken sqqnr in the sense of sqgtfq ( posture or
appearance ) and in the sense of %T ( gesture ). q^qfri',
author of the says sq^frRqf^^T^Sr
^TftffT: 1 vmv 3q^RTR!r ll ^TRJJHIsq^K^RTfqfW^
fqj: 1 3TT^RT: VTRT 3q^r ||’ ( quoted in the
p. 465).
means ‘not to be apprehended by men of dull under
standing.’ An example of ( a ) is ‘qqq 1 ’ ( p. 59, 11. 15-16 ). qqft
m (m\) (qrffeq:) ^
5RR%: (rViI: Rf^f^T^T) f^T ( fg?TT ^ ) gf*T
f |T f&rqT cR 5 ^ 3^3 f^RTcR^) sqsrqRft (^33^
qfqY (ff 152 !!* fRf)
X. 91-92
Sahityadarpana
303
Here, the masculine action of a woman, concluded from the
mixing up of the drops of perspiration with the saffron on the
two sides of the throat, is intimated to her by another by
means of drawing on her hand the figure of a sword which is
the characteristic mark of man. Here the ( appearance )
is on the throat, which leads to the guessing of
( the *j§q 3 R ). This delicate circumstance is indicated in a
clever manner by the drawing of the figure of a sword on the
hand of the woman. How on throat leads to the
inference of is explained by commentators as follows:
An example of ( b ) is fligaqTOTW ( P. 59, U. 19-20 ). This
occurs on p. 15 of the text and has been explained above. Here
the curiosity of the lover to know the time of meeting, which
(curiosity) was guessed from the movements of his eyebrows
and the like and is intimated to him by the closing of a lotu&
which ( closing ) takes place at the approach of night. Here
the ^gq 3 ?^ is the desire of the lover to know the time of
meeting. This is guessed by viz. the movements
of the eyebrows. The fact that the woman understands the
meaning of the look of the lover is conveyed in a clever
manner (vpqj) by the closing of a lotus.
It should be observed that in ^$q, there exists srgftfcT
also. But the figure is not sqjqjq, because it is subordinate.
The charm lies not in the inference of a delicate circumstance
from appearance or gesture, but in devising a clever mark
which would easily intimate to another that the. delicate
circumstance has been discovered ‘3R fqqqRqfqr q^qTq t
gsppte' >’ p- H6.
An example of is : — ^ ^ gfJTT qWWf’I V
sfiRTOST #K5nW It K. D. II. 216 (on this
Dandin remarks 1
ii )•
65 ( Dissembler).
(jpSRT ^13. ( sWTT, >
’Tt'W The artful concealment of a thing, though it
has become clear, is sqpqtfqi.
304
NOTES ON
X. 29 s*rratfrf>.
An example is ( P. 58, 11. 25-28 ). f%r^;
3T^n^ ( ) i i t&^ui sr^crm-RT^T ftfcsir
'TTtrft aw: f«T: fW 3'T’I? 3?T%T: ( tR: ) 3e5Hf^ : qrftwf?;:
dfrrarl^fJr: b wht
ftarcSTf^: (%r:) 3?r: ?fir 'ftmra; i (cTNsr )
gft^rww ( ffaraaw ) 5Rat: w: i ( (luissra )
3T^a:3t ( (siiSWt: ‘stlfiaMl Jim?:’ 3m?° I- 1-
35) wit: (war: ftr^T^W^T- ) at: afwa is: (f?R: ?gg). ‘wSff:
sqm?;:’ . %%?£•.. WTJ^: who was perturbed by the appearance of
tremor and horripilation due to the thrilling touch of Parvati
and was troubled by the fear of the irregular performance of
the ceremonies of marriage ( because his mind was distracted ).
Here, the love for Parvati that was hidden is manifested
( ) by the indications of love ( 373 ^ of 7 ^, viz.
etc. ); it is then concealed under the pretence ( )
that these indications, viz. and ifag, are due to cold (as
cold also causes tremor and makes the hair stand erect ).
Compare jpftq- ‘|ps#qgwrf HTfWRPW JpR#<n ’JST cT%:
i’; ‘sur tfcrvrR:
fTWrlfa^refircT: 1 ’ 3?^. q. p. 174.
What constitutes is : — I* something is at first hid-
den; II. then it is manifested somehow ( involuntarily )j III
but it is then represented as not being due to what really
causes it, but to something else.
The reason why this figure is called 5qr^H%? is that here
there is a putting forward (^rf%>) of a pretext (sqpq), viz.
representing a thing as due to something else. Compare
r 3#. p. 174.
$(A ^Tcf: ( P. 59, 11. 29-30 ). Udbhata and his follo-
wers do not define sqr^tfxfi separately, but include it under srqffrT.
Our author distinguishes between the two figures, is
not the first kind of 37<7fRT, because in the former, the
V3
( the subject on which something else is superimposed ) is not
expressly mentioned by the person who conceals ( the real state
of things ) In etc., the is the love of 3iva for
Parvatl. It is not directly expressed, but left to be under-
stood from the sense of the verse. In the first kind of 37q§fcr
S3 '
the giifo is denied and somthing else is established in its
stead. But both of them are directly expressed , as in
305
X. 92 sqraHrE. Sahityadarpana
♦
etc. ; while in sqy^f^, only one is expressed and the other
(thefqqq-, which is concealed under a pretext) is only sug-
gested. Mammata draws another distinction between
and In suffer, there is resemblance between and
^TRficT ( the ;jqiqq and the sqrq^ ) ; but this is not possible in
gqj^ t f rh . There is really no charming resemblance between
^jcRiq and ff^q. Besides in srqffq-, the sq^q is denied and
the t s established in its stead; but in sq^f^i nothing
is denied, but something is represented as due to a cause other
than that to which it is really due. ‘q %qTSqifcT: Sfiffrefi"
>a
l’ K. P. X; ‘cR (3rq|m)
q 7 «T^ l’ ssjtrT P- 108. The difference between sqi^qtfrfi and the
2nd kind of 3?q^fa has been explained in our notes on the
latter ( p. 138).
66 (Natural Description).
Dissolve ^ ftareA, #r (^r^)
^ ^ ^ 3q^rar (jj^T
^^5itfcffvr?#ir)! 374^\*rr^ frqt: ^'fcr’T,- The description of such
actions and characteristics of an object as are peculiar to it
and are not easily perceived by all is ^TTqTfrfr- means
‘to be apprehended by the poet alone’. 3$ means ‘a child and
the like’, means ‘of such as belong solely to that object’
(tf <^T arm: qqt:)-
An example is etc. ( P. 60, 11. 4-7 ).
Os Os
(f^frtasfofrT %?q»0, ^ ^ ) 3^#^
(•nf^JT, 3TfrT^ ; ^t 3?$;), m ( TOR ) IRR ( 3TRfgfrf^2TT )
I# ?fcT sfa: W ), 3Tfe5T^
5#M ctt: ^ttrrfws: ( srrfts: ) 3RRHf*m§: ( am
=5T w) efts: (w^O SlfoPT 5rf%S-'-^
cRg: the hyena, with red and swollen eyes. 3TTR^qTq<£fq
shrinking into himself for a moment. ^frT...q^q^= Scraping
the ground again and again with his front feet. Here there
is a description of the actions and characteristics of a hyena
that are peculiar to it.
It should be borne in mind that a matter of fact descrip-
tion of an object does not constitute *q?rrqtf%i. Otherwise, ever
306
NOTES ON
X, 93 swratfa.
such a sentence as ‘c^ 3 [twirl g^i’ will be an example
°f What constitutes is; — The description
must be charming; II The description must be in reference to
the Tlpn and t^'T of an object, such as a child, lower animals
etc. ‘3Tifcrr p. 88; ill.
The actions and characteristics described must be peculiar to
the object described and must not be such as to be common to
it and others; IV the description must be faithful and not
hyperbolical.
The figure ^vrr^rfrfi was also called srjfs* by ancient
'writers; e. g. ^Z and +TR- See K. D. II. 8-18. Rudrata
defines as qsTCT qffJT wTrf I #T% f^STTCPs:
srrfcr: ii %gg 5 ^3 ; rR'7irc[i%^5r^r' : Tff^7T5Tr'inv i sr
q«it£RT%rg n’ vii. 30-31.
Examples of ^rerqtfrf; are: — ^of gtff |
smrl^rftq gqrte ii ill. 9 ; qr*qf&-
l^qfrqrfvq^&gqr: i fag^qraffora: qfefR firwrr: ll ^z
VII. 32.
67 (Vision).
3TicreT q^pfcnjjra 3?q (^t) vrfirRq: (q^nfcq) q^rqqr'q^q
(vfciTfqt'mra: s^q?srfcr*rr5WRcrT) ^ vrrfq^g, When a
wonderful object, whether past or future, is so represented as
to strike the mind as if it were present, it is termed wfqqv
An example is gfajo ( P. 60, 11. 11-12 ). This is cited
in the sqRRtq; p. 239, as an example where the description of
a thing which is favourable to the development of some rasa
produces great charm, although a figure of speech may be
absent, ‘su 13 q ^Higs g T[^fqqlTlqfiiq?qw t T g f R r «vft.( q<i. s lil =n5T*rr-
fvrqmtfr 55 ^ fqq% i qqr — gftsfqfqro i 3 r ^$^13301^55%
nc^rqt^qq^ffi' sJRTfq^q geoirfa i crq qRHfJpqRrqft
q^sq^qi i gooj f~- ^
*TO*nft vrqfrr i’ «r- p. 239. j*vRRq; m) rivut
«[g:)_ gfa: (srrreq:) qprfcT, rfr ( wfqqf^I )
i^4i' qc^^tjqr (qRf$4r fqwfaqcntr) qq^g% %i\. ccq^g% gg|
saw in the hollow of one of his hands the fish and the tortoise
( the two incarnations of V isnu ), when he ( Agastya, ) drank
♦^Compare qpq’s verse 4i TO^T^TT:
I ^sKId-qt HCRTSIS^qsfiJSWvfftq’ II qqrrqvt-
X. 93-94
307
fSjHITrADARPANA
♦
up the ocean in one handful of water. Here the wonderful
thing is the seeing of the divine Fish and Tortoise in a hand-
ful of water (the sea). This wonderful thing appears as if it
were present to the reader’s eye on account of the vividness
and strikingness of the description.
Another example is ‘sfldtfSR etc.’
^TR: ( thy form ) with the profusion of
ornaments that is to adorn it hereafter. Here in the first half,
a past object ( ), viz. collyrium and in the second half, the
future object, viz. profusion of ornaments, are represented as
if they were present before the eyes.
In the above treatment of the figure Bhavika, acc. to the
words of we widely differ from the interpretation of
Ramacarana. ^[Ro takes to be of two sorts : — I
RfPfcr %&qX3W3&*{ and II vrf^rr: He
instance etc. as an example of the first and srrtftfSTR
etc. as an example of the 2nd. We, on the other hand, think
that 5CRo is wrong, that there are no such two varieties acc.
to and that the two verses are examples of one and the
same thing, viz. qscpfar ( Aether or 3&®3~
Our reasons are; — I If Ramacarana’ s interpretation be
accepted, then we shall be obliged to suppose that our author
sets at naught all ancient and respectable authority. Bham-
aha, Udbhata and Ruyyaka all define Bhavika as the repre-
sentation of something past or future as if it were present.
None of them speaks of as a distinct variety
NO
of On the other hand, Bhamaha, Udbhata and
Ruyyaka in the clearest terms say that is one of the
conditions (or causes) of the figure Bhavika. Note carefully
the following, srr§: 3^ 1 53 153$
RRTR? II I
%fcTffST ft 33&U’ RRf HI. 52-53; 53 153$
^r^rf^r: lara^ai: Rifaroji’ VI. 12;*^-
3?^. p. 178.11. Ramacarana’ s interpretation is
opposed to the words of the author himself. If there were
two varieties of vnf^, we expect some such particle as ^ and
some reference to the two-fold division ( as ) in the
definition of There is nothing of the sort. Moreover,
our author introduces the second example ( etc.) with
the words ‘qf, which clearly show that the second example
308
NOTES ON
X. 93-94
illustrates the same thing as the first, and preclude the idea
that there are two varieties. Compare the definition of
immediately below where 37 occurs in the definition itself.
We therefore think that Ramacarana should not be followed,
even though Pramadadasa follows him in his translation, and
that so far as f^Ry^’s words go our interpretation is the only
proper one.
What constitutes mfmfi acc. to the ^yffczy^ny is : — I There
is a description of something past or future; II The descri-
ption is of something which is strikingly wonderful or
extraordinary or 3Fg^); III The description is putin
words that are perspicuous and the best adapted to the sense ;
IV The description of the past or future object must be such
as to vividly present the object to the reflective mind of the
reader. Vide the interesting remarks of the pp,
178-180. It should be borne in mind that the figure
is spoken of as sRrvrfifapr ( having the whole work for its
province, and not a verse) by Dandin and Bhamaha. Bhatti,
in his Bhatti-kavya (canto 12), follows the same view,
acc. to commentators. According to them, the figure per-
meates the whole composition and not a single verse.
It is for this reason that Dandin and Bhamaha do not give
an example of vrrfqr^. See K. D. II. 364-366.
The reason why this figure is called is : ^ means
Hhe intention of the poet’ ( or syj^syyey: ) and the
figure is called because in it the meaning of the poet
is so well conveyed that it is as it were reflected in the reader
{i. e. the reader vividly feels the same emotion which inspired
the poet ) ; or ^ means ‘revolving in the mind’, and the figure
is called because in it there is this revolving in the mind
of the readers. Compare K. P. X.
3?r^r: malt mam
mgm stssrreftfcr’ s. p. 178; *rn:
sgcq%ftsr$: I $y<$q.
5T 3°I : (P. 60, 11. 16-17 ). It was
said above in dealing with the essentials of that the words
must be well adapted to the sense so as to vividly present the
meaning of the poet to the reader’s mind. It may be contended
that this is not possible unless the words are perspicuous and
hence that is nothing but the guinea 37^7^. It was said in
the first pari, that rasa is the soul of poetry and that, just
as bravery etc. ( guys ) are possessed by the soul, there are
certain properties of the soul of Poetry which are manifested
X. 93-94 *TTtN>. Sahityadarpana 309
by words. The number of these ^uys is given differently by
different writers. Mammata and our author speak of only
three Gunas, 3*1^ and See K. P. YIII. and S. D.
YIII. ( Lucidity, Perspicuity ) is defined by K. P. as
i fefrofafer: n*
and again ‘gfrom ^ I TOJTT01T S
TORt JFTr TO: ll’ K. P. YIII. p. 476 and p. 486; ^pTf H. 3
WK<id^ Prasada is a Guna which is common
to all Rasas, by which the moment the words are uttered,
the meaning is apprehended and which pervades the mind at
once ( i . e. which is instrumental in evolving at once the
Rasas in the mind), in the case of efc or ^ like fire per
vading dry fuel and in the case of or like water
permeating a clean sheet of cloth. An example of sp^guy is
IL Our author replies that sp^yp*- is not the same as 1
vrrfsr^, because the former is not a ( necessary ) cause of a past
or future thing appearing as if it were present. Our author
means that spyy^; ( Perspicuity ) is not absolutely necessary for
the appearance of a past or future object as if it were present.
This latter may be brought about by other things, such as
attendant circumstances, the powerful feeling of the poet or
reader etc.
^ (P. 60, 1. 17). The past or future
thing must be in vyyf^jy. So it may be said that ^yyf^sjy is
not a figure at all, but merely spg^y. The Rasas are 8 or 9.
‘SWRIRTOTOT d*4kTOM=hi: l tot: *tot : ll’
TOr’s JTISI5IM VI. 15 ( the 9th is rrr-cT )• fem is the
of spgcR^J, the fquyq-s are seeieg something that is extraordi-
nary, accomplishment of what is desired, etc. The
3Tg*nRS ( indications ) are ?wfTOp;, etc. The terms
^yftvrR etc. have been explained in the notes on the 1st
The ^yptay^r f^yzy, in conjunction with the appropriate fq-^rqs,
3pjvyy^s and cqf^yto'R 8 evolves in the mind of the spectator
or reader the 3?^^. An example of is ^y^^ I^Tf^^T
sa vs
TO=T TO I TOTOTOTwM TO%TOT ll’; SRlf^gJTTOt
TOrfarar i m i 3 ri%^-
TO«f[TOTO3‘<tT^»r s i fff%roc4 %;t dTOa^'KR'Jitfc: ^ig^ro: 1
^TTHTTOf l’ R. G. p. 42. Our author replies that
is not because the former is what causes f^QR ( the
310
NOTES ON
X. 93-94 vtchN?.
^TTft*rrq of 3T^rT^ ). What the author means seems to us to
be as follows: — the ^qrf^qqq fqsrq ? in conjunction with the
fq*qqs and 3rgvrrqs etc. causes the development of
while in ^nf%qpj there is no fqq^ but only what would cause
fq^rq ; e * 9 • in e tc, there is no reference to the senti-
ment of wonder in the speaker or reader i. e. the speaker or
reader is not represented as engrossed in relishing but
S3
rather as perceiving as it were what is past or future. This
state of his may cause fq^q to others. But as regards him ,
there is no fq^Tq and hence no 3?^q^. Pramadadasa asks us
V3
to read for %3cqT3> But then it would be hard to
explain the words, as he himself remarks “It indeed seems
odd to speak of the representation of a wonderful object
causing no wonder.” The ms. G reads f^q qfq qgq f g ^q ^ ,
which seems to have been due to the copyist transcribing
again the words in the preceding line ‘ qreJTtgcqT^’. The fq^fqqr
explains ‘q*q fq^q qfq fg^l^q * g fc^q^qiT^i: l’
^ ^rfcT VTTqi^ ( P. 60, 11. 17-18 ). *rrfqq; is not 3Tfrr^qtfrFi,
because there in no introsusception in the former ( while it
exists in the latter ). In srfcrqiqtRq. one thing is completely
swallowed up by another and is spoken of in terms of the latter.
In vrifqqi also, a thing which is past or future is spoken of as
being present; and so there is ^q^qq^yq. This objection our
author meets with a flat denial. In ^rfqq; there is no
q^yq at all. Even when the past or future object vividly
presents itself to the mind as if it were present, there is a deep
seated but certain knowledge that the object is past or future 7
Compare 3 t£. fl. I 3^TOI^^^qqHR!^[qT^ I-
p. 179. It should be observed that the Uddyota says that
*nfqq; is the same as that 3Tfqqrqtf% in which there is 3 f^rq;%
SPapq:- ^q^qqfq^qtqqq qqrqfqq; I JTcq^T^q^Sf^
q^p=q?qqutqT^ » ^rf^cq^pq;%ft qc^wfal^fq \ 9 ssftq p. 93.
q ^ mrfSTCra: (P. 60,11. 18-19). Our author copies
the very words of the 3 ?^. In ^qf^qqr^, one thing is mis-
taken for another similar to it. Here there is no mistake;
for what is past or future is mentioned as past or future, as
in sqqtqsrq etc.
*cftfq (P.60, 11.19-21). It was said
above that in vrrfqq; there is a description of an extraordinarily
striking object (whether past or future). In ^TlTif% also
X. 93-94 *nfaq;. Sshittadarpana
311
there is a description of an object with regard to its or
What difference is there between the two *2 The reply is: — In
there is a faithful description of the nice ( )
charat eristics of an object of everyday experience; while in
there is the peculiarly striking circumstance, viz. an
object ( really past or future ) appearing as present. Clearly put
the difference is as follows: — I. in there is a description
of the peculiar vq^s of a such as a child, a beast, a
frightened person etc. ; in ?rrf%cfi there is a description of an
as in II in the description is
admitted by all to be faithful, but there is no appearance of a
past or future object as if it were present; in a past or
future object does appear as if it were present.
qqqiqq'fara; ^vrrfrf%>: i q^i *gqqgsqq4q>ffa f?q-
3qiqs*qqra;, ^qqr (s^gqqqqqr) qiaq#r
q##r (%:?)’ g. p. 181.
^^r.* If, in a rare case, in the description of the
nature of an object, the above peculiarity occurs, then there
is a commixture of the two figures ( and )• If
while describing the peculiar of a it so happens
that the thing, past or future, vividly appears before the
mind as if it were present, then there is of and
An example of such a ^ is given by spERsq.
q<qgt: qofqqfa gq^sfaqfqr fafqRqtd^q#*
gifaqTq. 1 foftg5555gcST5f qqfalftqjftq
ggr q-qq 11 ’ m fTflRf *wrqtfrfi:, qgi^Tqqt-
<ji#t wfaqfaqRqt: 1 ” a*. fa. p. 18 l-
sgrrq (P. 60, 11. 23-27). sRrqqq: (sifasmrq
srrgqq t?q qgr ) 3rq faqjqqq: ( flt#qrqcq?j.q%: ) gqq: qq
s«r srq 1 qq ; srqTqdsfo ( «tq?wR qwt qgr ) qrsft afa g<q
fa^raqr^sqafag ( fq^igr qq qRsqqq qwc ?R fasieg^q qresqsfaq
qr, ‘qrq^r qmt qR ; -qqq (fag^qg.’ sfa vw - ) ; qqrqds'^q
e tc: — who is he that, without a chdmara , is ever fanned with a
graceful chdmara or a with chdmara of graceful movemnts?
may also mean ‘some wonderful or indescribrble person’.
Here some great man is spoken of. He appears to the speaker
as covered with white umbrellas (perhaps on account of his
majestic mien or his fame), although he be without any.
Somebody may say that there also the figure is vnftcfi. Our,
author replies that there is no in the verse, because the
312
NOTES ON
X. 93-94 snflnu,
subject of description is what is actually apprehended ( and
not what is past or future ) The person spoken of is present
before the speaker and besides the description of the umbrella
and chamara as being present is due to a sort of reasoning
( viz. as he is possessed of kingly lustre, he must be surrounded
by umbrella ). And because this figure has
for its essence the circumstance of appearing as present solely
through the force of the description. Compare ey^.
afVfrfc rei i
srnfr snf ( ) i q*n— ' fcsrfc...
.TOTOfR: l” pp. 182-83.
where something, though not actually present
appears as if present on account of the description, there this
figure occurs as i^ayydfcsR’ etc.
An example of a future is Rl ft-
ll” f^. p. 182. Jayaratha
gives the following as an example of *rr%Fi: ^T
^ fSRTT I ^ fon Weft
cicch^Tfwft n’ 33° n. ( gift
sy^f^y Reftfft: i’ )• Those who are interested in the different
stages through which the conception of passed may read
Dr. Raghavan’s paper in ‘Some concepts of Alankarasastra’
pp. 117-130.
68 ^Trrn(The Exalted).
<£Ulfa*l4tl«lf%4<faT (®fcfirf%3!RTT PtJjfe <TW: )
3 T 3 ?ftr near srcjprer ( 3#^: ) 31#
?yi^. The description of prosperity exceeding all ordinary
experience is ( I ); so alos it is s^TtT when the actions of
the great become ( are represented as ) subordinate or collateral
to the subject in hand ( II ).
An example of ( I ) is etc. (P. 61, 11. 1-2 ). q^T
( q^tw^T %•* )
^d^rrf^TTcn^ ^ ) ^reiratq^ffiJTHi (
‘^fprtswr ftro (*&:)
( ) ife ( 31s ) ( ^tqRtfrr> 31^ ^r^eft^nfc )•
3Tq:fcTF^qTq^Rt 2^Rrf...JTRI^ °t the roofs of the moonstone,
which ( roofs ) leave the sphere of the clouds far beneath them
i % e. which are built so high. Here what is to be conveyed is
the extreme prosperity of the citizens. For this purpose a
hyperbolical description is given to the effect that pleasure-
gardens were fed by the water oozing from roofs of moon-
stone etc.
X. 94-95 g^lrT.
Sahityadarpana
313
An example of (II) is jnf*r etc. (P.61,11.3-4). This
occurs in 750 XIII. 6.
spgw qiqr ( ^naT» ) sr^r:,
^I^RtcT^PTHS;: ( g»TR% «%TT ) JW: ( TRTRT
fqraj: ) Rf?f ( fq®q RiRiT ) 37g ( ggS ) srfq^. Here the
subject of description is the ocean and it is therefore the
principal topic (srftf^). The actions of the lord Visnu are
here subordinate or collateral ( 3^ ) to the description of the
sea. The great Lord, who is used to the slumber of Yoga at
the end of a mundane period and who destroys the worlds, is
here spoken of as resting on the ocean. This suggests the
greatness of the latter.
The two varieties of are really two distinct figures
but they have been treated together because the same name is
given to both. The first is called because there is a des-
cription of the possession of enormous prosperity; the second
variety is called because in it the subject of description
is connected with the actions of a truly noble personage.
Compare 3ST%^q%Trj?Rl: JTTJJxfi:, m
i Tt i”
rRsr p. 331. 4tf| called this figure and speaks of it
as 3 ?cRr.
What distinguishes 33^ from and ^TrqrRfi is that in
the two latter, things are described as they are, while in 337^
(1st variety) the poet gives an imaginative description of an
object as possessed of prosperity beyond the experience of
man. ^ qqTqgRgq&m I
WNeroMxrg, i’ are- R- pp- i 83-184.
Examples of are: sqR ^ tr: I
ii i ftidPre-
ft5<smftHsTC iPTHR*W;ll I v - 19 and 20; gpnwl JRfigqqTSF?-
*wr i ^ qqgt n ?rmc III. 13; II.
( variety ) qfcqTRaq I
n*?: u w? vin - 104 -
69, 70, 71, 72, 5T^, 3^%, STOTffrD^.
(Impassioned, Devoted, Impetuous and
Allayment).
• (1) When or (2) or (3) the semblance of ^ and sry?,
or ( 4 ) the quelling of a ( sentiment ), are reduced to a
27
314
NOTES ON
X. 95-96
subordinate condition, they become ornaments and are
respectively termed rjcr;, jfa;, and spnftr r .
Rasas are Love etc. which are particular states of the mind
of the spectator or reader, and are evolved by appropriate
and All these terms have been ex-
plained in the notes on the 1st Pari. (pp. 30-32). It some-
times so happens that the principal Rasa is one, while another
Rasa helps on its development and is therefore subordinate
to it. When this is the case, the figure is which
is so called because there is in it association of a Rasa.
Compare “sRRm to tot l
Rqfcr I to r^sit ft w u” quoted
by Jayaratha, p. 186; ‘qfeRfipft 5PTOTOTS?4teiT
^Tf^rr ^ rto ?ft tot^r: q^ ; i sRqwfa;
p. 7 1. An example of *r=t<- is ‘sr *r RRtmT ifaH R i tofr : 1
II* *TCr*TTO> s?o 24 . 19. This verse
was cited by Visvanatha in the 4th Pari. These are the
words of the wives of Bhurisravas, who fell in battle, at
the sight of his hand. ‘ 3 R I gcTOW*
» ITO TO%c^<ftft I TOT
^ ^ tor %tor ^sftrft 1 (‘rW torr rtr!
TOR**’ RTR*TOT ) R^TOi: f ft I W
RTRgjW fel^WsrrfHftft I R* p. 159. This
verse forms part of the lamentations of the women. The
principal Rasa is q^q ( Pathos ). In the 'present verse the
Rasa is -gfiy ( Love ). The description of the amorous move-
ments of the hand, that are remembered by the women,
heightens the main Rasa ( viz. ^q ) ? because the recollection
•of those movements is an excitant ( R^tqRfRRTR ) of q^q ( the
loss of the women appears the greater when it is seen what the
hand had been to them ). Thus love being not the principal
Rasa intended, but only subordinate ( as heightening the
main Rasa, Karuna) the figure is TOTOTOTft-Similarly
in the case of other Rasas. An example of where q^q
is an stw is ‘ft fr«R R if TORTR* 3 ^: %4 fR^q
%RTftf 1 *TOF%f^ft & TOf^TO TOSTOTOrWRft
Cftft ll’ p. 72 ( cfiSTOTST W"
Another example, where is
an 3^ of otr is 4 ^r R r mi tot ft
RT F rr i FTT i %ft5^ i TOSTOgror 4ft to*
£kg<3PfTOT TO^t TOcTT ft^rfiTOT ll’ %Ro p* 188 ; 3}q Rqqfqrgq:
X. 95-96 Sahityadarpana
♦
315
TO: — The figure is so called, because of its being a favourite
of the best ( of critics ) , or because of its causing great pleasure
( sjfSRr fro cro *tr:, or Pr ctr ^r:
cTSTT^)- The figure sr: occurs when what is called
( incomplete ^ ) becomes subordinate to something else.
is defined by Mammata as *TTfsR: \
^TqT: sftxfi:’, which is explained by j^q- as follows
i i *ht>
TOTF^T RftfcfT RfTOFft
P* 106 ( Nir ). qR occurs when (I)
( the Rif^qR ) Love has for its object God, a sage etc. ( not
the husband or wife ), or when ( II ) Love, even though its.
object be the husband or wife, is not well nourished or when
( III ) the other RjfqqRs, such as ^ etc. are so described as
not to reach the condition of Rasa, or when ( IV ) a Vyabhi-
cari-bhava is developed as the principal sentiment. An
example of qR, where a (this term has been
explained already ) is developed as the principal sentiment is
TO: I fll f§ %'rf§Rtefir ^ ^
sfits4 frfa: I! 1 3R ff Rfl^feqsqfsr-
3TORrf^R: I P- 65. An example of
TO: is etc. ( p. 61, 11. 11-12).
3T3*f2RT ART f^fcT%
TOT:) arf 3RT: ( m^),
sngsro tott: (cfra^),
5Rg^3R5ftS5f5r: 3Tlfet
TO?T: <T1R, (3?^r) 3?^r; (str.^ut) ^flTO
?T ^fcT. 3Tnft&cTT sjt — With eyes half closed, in which the
eyeballs were languidly moved. Here the first three lines
describe the characteristics of ( Love in union )
which is subordinate to the mood called
( Reminiscence ). The sqfrorftqR itself is subordinate to
( Love in separation ), because the topic of descri-
ption is the state of the separated lover who remembers his
past experiences of love. Another example of sr: is “Rg ffiflffi T-
TT^5«forr?fT %zm 9> w-A j?t: qptqt: i
«Wf -w frfg^i tfqfa
wr: II 3T^r sqfSrqiftwr: ( fcq-^nsWRWff’O” ^ tf.
p. 189. Both vriRf and quote the same verse as an
example of ; ilqt^rncf fiWRRT^fljd 2T*rr I 3RT qr qq ifrf^sr
316
NOTES ON
X. 95-96 sto:
sncTT Jlfplt > ^T^fWT ^crftf^t^NTfMTrSrf: II 'flNTf HI. 5 ; the
same is II. 276, on which gygt says
5jRT: I flf^RqyRKT«l: 5pftcT5} d<Tt fft: ll’- But the jr:
of ^TPTiT an( f i g n °f such a complicated affair as that of
later writers.
— When and become subordinate to
something else, there is g^ fer- We have explained in our notes
on the 1st Pari, the meaning of ^r^TTS’- When ^ and are
described in connection with improper ( or unworthy ) objects,
there occur respectively and Vl^r^Ri^W
5rfr2TTS^Tf%^^ I* 3T^. p. 1 85. The figure is called gr^rfW,
because in it there is * urjas,’ i. e. impetuosity or force, in so
far as there is improper procedure. An example of
(due to ^tptth) is ^ etc/ ( p. 61, 11. 15-16 ).
( ^^ftcTTf^r§ ) 3f^T : ( f%U<TT : ) ^
(rRT 2TT BVBJ ifk g#. Here
the principal sentiment is that of love having for its object
the king ( ^fcT is a and not ^ according to the
definition quoted above etc/ ). This sentiment
is helped by the description of the love of the savages for the
royal ladies. This is (and not ), because there
is impropriety ( ) in the love as it is adulterous. As
SflWS is here subordinate to something else, the figure is
The same holds good in the case of g^fW based upon
TTrsmrra- An example of it is £C f|qf ^T^qHqi*TJftg<?T fcrfMfaf
fggT**5p£ I ^ (cW ) ? 11”
( quoted by Jayaratha, p. 190 ). Here the ( ) ^§3*1
( eagerness ) of the Sabaras, having for its object the wives
of others, is a This is subordinate to the
main sentiment of Love for the king.
naeans ‘giving up or quelling’ ( of a senti-
ment ), The figure ^qr%T occurs when ( or *rrq3jrf% )
becomes subordinate to something else. An example is
etc. This is quoted by Mammata ( K. P. V. Va, p. 18 ).
wrt
=r ) 5§: (tor) m tf^r (t4 : )
51% (fg:) fTf #81% ^PTia. e JR-’- Here the quelling of
the sentiment of pride in the enemies is subordinate to the
sentiment of love for the king ( which is principal ). Another
example of prefer is : : qfor:
* Vide Calcutta Oriental Journal vol. II. pp. 237-247
where Prof. Sivaprasad Bhattacharya traces at great length
how the idea of PHWra changed from time to time, citing
iv on gr#f^ ( 3T^f^?mT5rrjrf o ), srfSR^Trceft voi. i pp. 29 - 0 - 297 ,.
( pp. 101-103 ), «fpR, "qo^TRT, and 3mr*T-
317
X. 95-96 Sahityadarpana
arrjfft f%qfr g ^rtt% g«i gg: i 3?isjqoj gggjr: srenft
^HRTert gfscrt: n m
^sgjTR) gfr'Rgr arsn^r^g. i’ f^rffi^fr p. 190. The
^Writer of ¥r(rf?r and Tuifi is nearly the same as the figure gjflfqr
of %qqpr.
73, 74, 75 *TPTl^T:, VT iq^H# :.
( Excitement of a mood, Conjunction of
moods, and Commixture of moods).
When there is an excitement of a mood, when there is a
conjunction of moods, and when there is a commixture
of moods, all of them being subordinate to something
else, there are *rTcpfeq, *n-q^ff?q and *TTcf 5 jq 3 ? respectively. Our
author does not expressly say that etc. must be subordi-
nate in order to constitute the figure etc. But that qua-
lification necessarily follows from the treatment of the four
figures etc.
What is meant by vrrqRq i s ; — The word ;*jrq has been
already explained. s^q means ‘the condition of being in
process of evolution’. occurs when a +uq is described
as occurring or as being in process of evolution, and not
when the ^q is completely evolved. The latter is the province
of the figure qqw When ^qqrqq becomes subordinate to some-
thing else the figure is ^^q-. An example is qg* etc. ( p. 61>
11. 25-26 ). ft ( ) tftir: ( sj3r: ) ^ { Rgqr-
*TRT iTfTtT: ) firTfSft frw ^TT Here the
principal sentiment is love for the king. The sentiment of
terror that is described as arising is subordinate to this
main sentiment.
occurs when two vnqs ( that are opposed
to each other ) are described as competing with each other*
explains it as ‘experience of two equally strong senti-
ments at the same time ’ ( 3^3J%TS=TR;: I p.
110 or ‘Hf^rjqtfq^qt; W. *f. p. 191). Rq^q-
(the figure) occurs when qrqHf^qr is subordinate to something
else. An example is etc. ( p. 61, 11. 28-29 ).
* This bears a very close resemblance to the example of
given by Ffif
^ StfjT I ajrqifqqjfo qq qR fq«T g#t %FT[ft qsf ||”
p. 191.
318
NOTES ON
X. 97 wsrafasr.
( 3331 ) ^wftw 3f^9%3 flgfg^FT tfi?3f: arfnl%
=g g<5wr 7133) 3RT 3: 7ff • Here the sentiment of love
having for its object a divinity, viz. Parvatl, is principal.
The conjunction of the two bhavas, Longing and Bashfulness
( which, occurring together, compete with each other ) is
subordinate to this main sentiment. Another example of
?TfTOf^r is 3TO 313 (43<jJ fsj%: 3(4: I sffifTO"
snftwg tt er 4 gft^Ji ^ §3gf4(4 t r3qt Wit?*r-
*rrg4t: 7T33ft3 TOTOft^trc^i” (4*r° P 192 -
— When many bhavas are represented as succes-
sively taking the place of each preceding one, there is '■ni c i^i < H<n
'will ( arorc: ) >’ r#tp- no
(Nir.)or ‘^t^t 3 3^31 'jgf'WTJT ft3=3:’ sf3. 3- P- l 91 - The
figure vrT33T3® occurs when *ri^«|s5 is represented as subor-
dinate. An example of the figure wgro? 5 is etc. This
is found in K. P. V. ( Va. p. 200). ^FifajOL cR^g; ( 3fT3T smuci-
4^), 3735 ( 33TO3I3 ), to ( gx377R ), 4 3ff ?37T ( R;3447 ),
3ft f ffRT ( c33T Nf 3efiTi4;-31 33 33J grffl- ), ( f 7777 ) %R
(^f t), ff?T sgfiSIfT: (7ffi 5l4 3 3337 : T4TO3T3R:, 7TC $3l(l
ml 3n3TO*4 f ) 31 : =>mr ( fi ) 3i(4, 3?T ‘sf(%’ ?<4
wre,’TO7 (iTOT: 3'flt ), 'TO3I%:
( STtyif ff%gt3 TO TO ) ■wfgflTT: ( TO3: 5T3t:) Tl^TT TSR'yw'Hl ft
3TRTOT ( 337 ) ®rf33%- f 3 TO 0, we may be
seen together. Go away, thou fickle man. Why this haste 1
I am a maiden. f^grTO sgefil: ‘Give me the support of thy
hand. Alas ! Alas ! what a transgression of maidenly
conduct.’ Here the principal sentiment is the love for the
king. Many bhavas, which rise one after another, are subordi-
nate to this main sentiment. The bhavas are Apprehension
( ^33 in ‘ q^ cT i fajg.’ ), Resentment ( 3 T 33 T in ‘TO 3 TO 4’ ), Equani-
mity ( *jfer in ‘eftf cTO’ ), Recollection ( ~rpr in ‘art |w’ ), W eariness
( m in ‘tofTO (437’ ). Wretchedness (|sr in 'wm’ ), Awaken-
ing (frqfa in ‘og^jtT:’), Longing ( 3f?g33 in ‘<£3% 3Tf%’ )•
Another example of TO3ITO is 731371 ^7 §3t 7gfi& Tlftr TOVrt
3TOF3wTO 7fft37T f4ro% 8JTO W3f: I 3T3Tftf3TO34f4 133 77(4:
TO33 4 53TpTO53l f73T JTfjcTTl HTTOt Sffi: 413313, II 3T3 33lRG3'HI' J li
^^3m?4t7f3TO3i 3T3TO3. <’ (43 0 P< 192.
ff % ^ 3 T § : 333 ffo (P. 62, 11. 4-6 ). Some say : — orna-
ments are those alone which heighten the Rasa etc. by embel-
319
X. 97 &C. SSaiTFADARPANA
lisbing the form of words ( 37^ ) and senses ( ). But
Rasa etc,, being such as to be helped ( ) by words and
senses ( and not ), should not properly be called orna-
ments. What is meant is: — It was said in the first Pari, that
Basa is the soul of Poetry, words and senses are the body and
Alahkaras ( figures ) are ornaments which heighten the soul of
Poetry through the body (viz. word and sense). Hence it
follows that Rasa is always ( to be helped or embellished )
and not ( helping or embellishing others ) and that
whatever is called an ornament must heighten Rasa, the soul
of Poetry, through word and sense, the body. It is laid down
above that ^ etc. when they are subordinate to something
else, become the figures , sfa: etc. These persons assert
that in this there is a contradiction. If they are ^ etc. they
cannot be Alahkaras, because Rasa and Alahkara are by their
very nature distinct ( as Rasa is being the soul aud
Alahkara is s^R^i being merely an ornament ). If you say
they are Alahkaras, you cannot call them Rasa. Thus these
objectors are not ready to admit etc. as ornaments. It
should be observed that Mammata also does not regard
etc. as Alahkaras ; he includes them under the 2nd variety of
cfiiszr, viz. (see K. P. V. p 201 Va. ) ^
The also denies that
are ^fR s 9 - qlqMspftctft: I
57 lT ( 3rd 3^17 ). Its position is that these are not
RS but
3r4 5 H5T ( P. 62, 11. 6-7 ). Others again say: — The
designation of ornament given to etc. merely because they
help ( the development of ) Rasa etc. is purely secondary ( )
and must be accepted in compliance with the practice of the
ancients. What these people mean is : — Alahkaras are those
which heighten the body of Poetry. We have seen above
that in etc. vrrq - etc. are subordinate to ( i. e. heighten )
another Rasa etc. There is a difference between Alahkaras
and etc. The former heighten Rasa etc. indirectly
through the body of poetry, viz. word and sense, i. e. words and
senses ( the body ) are adorned by ornaments and then the soul
is set off to greater advantage by the embellished words and
senses ; while in etc., ^ etc, directly enhance another
Rasa etc. In spite of this difference, there is one thing in
320
NOTES ON
X. 97 *TT^T &c.
common between Alankaras properly so called and etc.
viz. that both of them heighten the Rasa ( directly or indirect-
ly ) by being subservient to it. On account of this similarity
between the two, the word Alankara which is properly applic-
able only to such figures as Upama is applied to ^q<^ etc. by
laksaria . We have seen above ( p. 54 ) that is one of the
circumstances which are at the root of lahsavd. ^qqr. etc.
do not properly speaking deserve to be called Alankaras.
The application of the word Alahkara to them is secondary
and has the sanction of ancient and respectable authority,
before which we must bow. is derived from the word
and means the same thing as The Locana,
while commenting upon the words has the follo-
wing note on the word sNft 5n%^T
^fer t ^ i q^Tf:
‘3Tf^-?T I
iffiTT ll’ ffcf* I cRT ^TT^ht *TT<%*if
i i ^fi ^^Tcr^F^rr^T •sngrfcrqrq.* i qi h)
m sTTJrrr vrixfi srfq rffart i g^qvr m *ri?t
vrqfer i” p. 9.
Vide on VII. 3.34 ( p. 1536 Anan. ed. ) fc vrq^j
*rfq*qfq TOT ^r^TJTT^TT q gjr ffcT l’- The ancient authority alluded
to is that of Bhatnaha, Udbhata, and others who define
etc. as figures of speech. Compare Udbhata ‘sqqt ^q^qf^q-
TORTtR 1 TOT fqg: n’ IV. 1. It must
be remarked that ancient authority is not unanimous in
defining these figures. The of Dandin is quite
different from that of Udbhata; moreover vuqtro, ^TTTOf^
and ?n-qqyq?j are not defined by Udbhata and Bhamaha and
qsq-q; is the first great writer to define these three. Still,
etc. have generally been defined in the same way by
many.
?qi^T (P. 62, 11. 7-9). Others say: —
Strictly speaking, an ornament becomes so merely by subserv-
ing Rasa etc. ( qqiR^miFSfRcf ) ; the circumstance
that such figures as Rupaka etc. embellish the sense etc. ( which
is the body of Poetry ) is analogous to the nipple attached to
the neck of a she-goat ( which nipple serves no purpose ). What
* The 3?f^r^Tff%JTTg^r on qqftqqs 9-10 and the
( p. 17 ed. ) read this verse as l 3 rf^fa
and ascribe it to an ancient jftqfgq;;
mentioned by the of qr4gRfSr and g^fcrftsr’s qqfW,
on verse 10. It is said that mac *e
X. 97 vrraf^qr &c. Sshityadarpana
321
these people mean is : — Alankara is that which heightens Rasa, ;
as stated in cRpapr. "V III. 2 T I fRTft-
c f i T^TT^T ; * II In etc. as in Rupaka etc. Rasa,
the soul of poetry, is embellished. Therefore the application,
of the designation of Alankara to Rasavad etc. is not secondary
( R\rf\, as said by those who hold the second view propounded
in the text ) but is rather strictly correct. The only difference
between Rupaka etc. and Rasavad etc. is that the former
embellish Rasa through word and sense and that the latter
directly do so. But this difference is of no importance. The
circumstance that in Rupaka etc. the senses ( and words ) also
are embellished is purely accidental and serves no purpose,
just as the nipple on the neck of a she-goat serves no purpose
(it cannot yield milk). These persons hold the view that
Rasavad etc. are properly called Alankaras. The view is opposed
to those who hold that the application of the word Alankara
to etc. is We have explained as qr^TRT'
in accordance with Ramcharana’s explanation. The
word vjqq r R , however, generally means ‘ a pillow.’ Taking this
meaning of the word, we may translate ^q-^r^T as
“The circumstance that in Rupaka etc. the figures rest upon
the sense etc. is ( of no importance ), being analogous to the
nipple attached to the neck of a she-goat.”
- . . t frr =
But those who have deeply considered the matter
say: — Rasa etc. which have become subordinate ( to something
else ) and which are themselves helped ( ) by words and
senses that manifest them, quite properly obtain the deno-
mination of ornament, because they help ( other ) Rasa etc,
which are principal, by embellishing the words and senses
that suggest the latter. In it is merely the behaviour
of the Nayika etc. (that is imposed upon the behaviour of
another ) that constitutes the ornament and not the relish
that is derivable from the representation; because, (the
behaviour being itself the ultimate thing ) it wants the
said condition of assisting a principal Rasa through orna-
menting the words and senses suggestive thereof. What is
meant by this view ( which is the one held by our author )
is : — Alankaras are those which assist the principal Rasa*,,
through words and senses that manifest it. In ^B^\ etc v
certain words and senses manifest a particular Rasa or
Bhava; this latter again is subordinate to another Rasa and
322
NOTES ON
X. 97 &C.
assists it through words and senses which manifest the
principal Rasa. It is therefore quite proper that etc. are
called Alankaras. In ^JTrertfrfi, the ascription of the behaviour
of one to another constitutes the Alankara. But Samasok t
does not possess the characteristics of Rasavad etc. There
is no ( Aesthetic enjoyment or flavour ) of one Rasa
which assists another through words and senses, as in
What is charming is simply the which is not Rasa etc.
So, although there is a difference between etc. and
fl sr r qt f rft etc. ( because in the former there is while in
the latter there is none ), still both of them are very properly
called Alankaras, because to both of them the definition of
Alankara ( viz. what heightens the Rasa through words and
senses is a figure ) is applicable. The of a subordinate
Rasa etc. in Rasavad etc. heightens the principal Rasa through
word and sense; the a ^ so heightens the Rasa through
word and sense. The words are an
answer to the objection contained in the first view propounded
in the text ccq.’ According to the siddhanta
( the view of our author ) ^ etc. are not always ( to be
helped ), they can also be as in Rasavad.
stcT teq ( P* 62, 11. 12-14 ). Our author supports
his position by quoting the words of a highly respectable
authority ( perhaps the highest authority ) on such matters.
Construe sr^qq ( qq
3T# ^ Rirfr: sf^fR: ffrT if qfcT:- The
verse is explained by Locana as follows : — “qf&^qn^ %
\ fr^r.^T 5 ^ ^
%W*£T:, JT ffcT qiqq l” P- 71. The meaning is :-In that
piece of poerty, where Rasa etc. are subordinate to the main,
purport of the passage ( where another Rasa or a sense
that is principal ), the former ( Rasa etc. ) constitute in my
opinion the province of an ornament.
qf^ q (P.62,1.15). This is an answer to
those who hold the 3rd view mentioned in the text. If it be
said that the mere oircumstance of assisting a Rasa etc.
constitutes an Alankare, then it would follow that words etc.
also are Alankaras because they also assist Rasa etc. It was
said above by those who hold the third view that the circum-
stance of embellishing qjxq etc. is of no importance, being like
X. 97 &c. Sahityadarpana
323
and that mere RttgRR constitutes an Alankara.
If that were so, words themselves, which together with senses
constitute the body of Poetry, will have to be called Alankaras
(because they also are RTTgRRefi inasmuch as they manifest
Rasa ) ; but this is absurd.
=5T RR<TR ( P. 62, 11. 16-17 ) Similarly the dictum
of some that the figures Rasavad etc. occur when Rasa etc.
are principal and that when the latter are subordinate, the
figure is Udatta (of the 2nd sort, ) is
wrong. Some writers on Rhetoric denied the existence of
( suggested sense ) in Poetry. They said that wherever
Rf etc. are principal, there is ; where ^ etc. are
subordinate there is the 2nd variety of Udatta. These views
are wrong, for the simple reason that words also will then
have to be called Udatta -Alankara, because they also are
subordinate to the principal Rasa (just as Udatta is said to
be constituted by Rasa etc. being subordinate). Moreover
there are other grave objections against this theory. If
Rasa, even when principal, is to be called Alankara, then
what is the soul of Poetry ? This theory is alluded to by the
3T^. R.
%5T ^ I fro )
I?) p. 186.
76 (Conjunction).
^ ^ ( ifrT )
^ If any of the ornaments that are treated of here
are combined together, then there arise two distinct figures,
and
( P. 62, 1. 20 ). As the ornaments ( worn
on the body ) in ordinary life produce a distinct beauty
when they are combined together and are hence counted as
distinct ornaments. Compare ‘qsjy 4r^(l^Kl u li
t* g. p. 193.
toft ^ (P. 62, 1 . 23). iRhTT ( ) for: (<trr*0
) f&fir: ^tefg: 3 ^ The existence of
these independently of each other is This mixture
324
NOTES ON
X. 97-98
ot: figures is like the mixture of sesame and rice. There may
be a mixture of only ( I ), or of srefefpcs only ( II ), or
( III ) of a K and an spqfofTC-
An example is etc. ( P. 62, 11. 25-26).
( Sfkft S3 ( mK: KS
cw ^ ife: (‘tf^r^RTT ni 3.
223) (3m s*n)^ (ww) 3 m - ( mm.
(^g). Here we have a qqq; (Rhyme) in qiqr^trRTg; and
3Tg5n^ (Alliteration) in • Thus there is
a of two Alahkaras of sa&da ( I). There is an Upama
in and a Rupaka in
( Krsna is identified with the sun and samsdra with
darkness). Therefore there is a of two figures of sense
( II ) . As both these conjunctions reside in the same verse,
there is a of ^[T<SfK and ( III ). ^ and srgsro
deserve a passing notice. argsttfl is defined as
The repetition of the same letters (consonants) constitutes
It is possible in various ways;— e. g. ( I ) the same
consonant may be repeated twice; (II ) many consonants (sqsr-
^ 1 *) maybe repeated only once and in the same order ; or
( III) the same consonant may be repeated a number of times.
Examples of the three sorts ( the second called a ^d
the first and third fx^srTS ) are I
ll’; xfc qq;
sFrcigj qw n’; ^rw
ggf efeT q%T :
»’• (Rhyme) is defined as
or ‘snfffir ftj:’ K. D. I. 61. When more
syllables than one are repeated in the same order in which
they first occurred, but in a different sense, there is qqqq
Examples are : ‘^Rsrtsg^RTIB RCKRf R # f%W: I*
^ : IX. 1. ; ‘jft m tRjrfcr SRTjTR^ 1 fTR? rr^T^%5
SI 5TFT% 11 ( ^ q^r cf% 3^ jftfr: )•
There are other kinds of srgsrTCi called g^TgJTra, RT2T3TR etc.
The verse sf; etc. is an example of gufg, where the two
a^l^s of sense, fqqq and HTry^TT, are combined.
77 (Commixture).
(I) When two or more ornaments stand in the relation of
principal and subordinate, ( II ) when they reside in the
X. 57 Sahityadarpana 325
same place, or ( III ) when there is a doubt about them, there
is ef?:, which is thus threefold. It is said that the mixture
of figures in ^ is like the mixture of milk and water.
An example of (I) is srr^fg etc. ( P. 63, 11. 4-5). This occurs
in 37 ^. p. 93. 27^7 3T^r^: ( 177 ^ (
III. 3. 89 ) ( JTwr )
( § 3 T.* $7^27^ 27:
^I§% : ^TFT¥7 ^f^7 37 f^7T3r 3^: ( ^ ), qf ?q ( 4 qf ;
^ «P7%’ ) )
^13 ( ^P^7.) f%^ 37^grf- Long did Mandakin! cling to
his feet ( in kneading them ) under the disguise of that
bandage of the ( white ) slough, that had slipped, through the
force of pulling, from the body of Vasuki (employed as the
string ), as if to remove the worry the ocean had suffered
in the churning. When the ocean was churned with Vasuki
as the string, the slough slipped from the serpent’s body ( the
poet says ) and encireled the ocean. The poet says it was not
the slough that encircled the ocean, but it was the Ganges that
had assumed that form and came there quickly out of love for
her lord ( the ocean ). The Ganges remained at his 177 ^^, to
shampoo her lord’s feet in order to remove the great fatigue
that he must have felt when he was churned by the Gods.
37^...^i7T^7:f^ ( P. 63, 11. 6-10 ). Here Mandakin!
is superimposed upon the slough, the real nature of which is
denied; so we have the figure 37 qf£t ( 57 ^#
srqifcf: )• srqffcf is subordinate to %q, inasmuch as it gives rise
S3 v3 ~
to Paronomasia, because the actual qTT^^g ?7 ( clinging to a
portion of the sea ) of the Ganges ( under the disguise of the
slough ) is the same as ( clinging to the feet ), as
the word 177 ^ is capable of two senses. %q is subordinate to
37%^[qtf%i, because 37 ^ 3 ? in one sense is identified ( ^s^;: )
with qrr^ in another sense. 37 ^^ 277 ^ is subordinate to 3^7
contained in The natural qr^?^g;q of the
Ganges ( disguised as slough ) being identified with qT^^ilgq
( clinging to the feet ), ‘qjq- is fancied as the of
qr^Jy3%E^ ( clinging to the feet in order to knead them ). 337 $^
is subordinate to inasmuch as it conveys the idea of
1 See I. 9. 75-76 ‘grtffa HTfR I
R^TR JRCt fjRT ^ |RRI 3 l’.
28
326
NOTES ON
X. 99 gf?.
the ocean and the Mandakini behaving like a husband and his
lovin- wife ( who tries to remove her husband’s fatigue and
pain by kneading his feet etc. )
Wfm- (P- 63, 11. 12-13). This verse is
cited in the «f° p. 37. We read there
( 3rg?pT: 1% gn trlvfil ) ( ' rerr:
it fw ( swfiifi ),
1 WIT ( it ^Igegwisi )• Here the meaning of
the words as they stand is “The Evening glows with srg^R
( redness ) and the day is ever present before her; yet how
■wonderful is the working of Destiny— they are never united
( when there is day, there is no tfsqr, when the *parr comes,
there is no day )”. The words and on account of
their gender, and the words stgqmiR and ficgltSI (which
are Paronomastic ) suggest the behaviour of a lover and his
sweet-heart. The meaning then is: — ( The sweet-heart ) is full
of affection and (the lover ) is ever ready to do her bidding;
but alas, wonderful is the working of Fate— there is no union
of the two ( this being due to the fact that one or both of
them are prevented by the elders from meeting each other ).
Thus there is ggra!f%- This OT[gtf%i is subordinate to
Although the causes of grfFTI, v ' z STg^PT ( i n ldle woman ) and
(in the lover) are present, the fruit of them does
not follow. Therefore there is
An example of (HI) is eto - ( P,63 >
2.5-16 ) The verse can be construed in many ways.
may be construed with ^ R-^gor separately ( as referring
to face etc. ). ggfcT ( ) cW: ( 1% 3T WT*i }
fus’-R ( ftpgtg ) 3Wv4 JNRFffi
^ em) Here doubts arise as to
the figure as follows:— It may be srfenjritfo if we suppose
that the face is swallowed up as it were by the moon and
spoken of in the terms of the moon, as in sfRgqft tpifR:
( p_ 33 ) above, the figure may be RQpaka consisting in the
superimposition of the moon upon a face pointed out by the
pronoun ‘this’ ( as if we were to say ** g3 the
figure may be (defined as ‘iTllfar etc -)>
if° we suppose that a face ( pointed out by the pronoun ‘this’ )
and the lunar orb are both subjects of discussion ( If3 ) and
are connected with the same attribute of destroying darkness
( whether internal or external does not matter ) ; the figure
X. 99 SfT.
Sahityadarpana
327
may be
if we suppose
that the moon is not ( and that the face is ^ ).
the figure may be if we suppose that the face is
(and the moon in ‘f 4 is sr^) and that it
is suggested by the sameness of attributes ( viz. f^;f 4 and
3OT^WI*K$t) ; it may be (5th variety ^ $Rg^
3Tpr^R^), the face being in question and under-
stood through the description of the moon which is not
is question (on account of the similarity between them); or
it may be q^RtTfi, the time that excites love (viz. night)
being meant to be described through the description of the
moon, the rise of which is the effect of night. Thus there
being a doubt on account of the possibility of many alankdras ,
there is
^T- ••*?%: (P. 63, 11. 24-25 ). In the sentence ‘g^^
it is doubtful whether the figure is as the com-
pound may mean ‘the moon-like face’ (g^f fq - ) or whether
it is Rupaka, as the compound may mean ‘the moon in the
form of the face’ (g*^ = 5 r^:). There is nothing hereto
determine the figure with certainty.
wimmi—wn mm (P. 63, 1. 25-p. 64, 1. 6). m*—
When there is some circumstance favourable to one
alankara and some other circumstance unfavourable to another,
or when even one of these exists, then there is no doubt ( and no
^ffp;). For example, in ‘He kisses the the circumstance
that kissing is consistent with the face and inconsistent in the
case of the moon is a reason for regarding the figure to be a
simile and is a reason against regarding it as Rupaka. If we
dissolve the compound g^r^: as g(q g^ becomes pro-
minent and can be well construed with the action of kissing .
but if we dissolve it as g^q ^ 3 ; becomes more prominent
and cannot be well construed with the action of kissing.
Therefore the figure is Upama and not Rupaka. Here there
exist both and circumstances. g^ z qv^: , ’'^q‘Frr=rT^:*
In this example, the attribute of shiningness is a circumstance
favourable to the recognition of Rupaka ( because it is
construable with the moon in its primary sense ) and is not
unfavourable to simile because it can be construed with the
face in a secondary sense. It is a general rule of interpretation
that where the primary meaning is applicable, a secondary
328
NOTES ON
X. 99 sf*.
meaning should not be resorted to. So in there
is ^cfcR only. Here there is a circumstance but nothing
(i. e. nothing that forbids the recognition of
^ -Here, the circumstance of a woman embracing
one like her lord being improper, the embrace of the king
as such on the part of Laksmi is impossible and so the
recognition of Upama is forbidden (if we dissolve as
jfrcrquT n^TT becomes prominent and is likened to Visnu);
but the embrace of Narayana by Laksmi being possible, there
is a (i. e . we must dissolve the compound as ^ ^TRFFTb
where becomes prominent and the king is identified with
Narayana). Thus here there is a of simile and therefore
the figure is ^qcfi. I n lotus-face of the
fawn-eyed lady shines with tremulous eyes’ the eye being
possible only in the face, the recognition of Upama is favoured
( i. e. we must dissolve as where
becomes prominent and is well construed with
and as the eye is impossible in lotus, the recognition of
Rupaka is prevented ( we cannot dissolve as
because then will be prominent and cannot
be well construed with ). ^ H*
such a sentence as where the common property
(§^^) i 3 mentioned, the compound cannot be so
dissolved as to bring out an Upama, according to the sutra of
Panini (II. 1. 56) ‘sqftcf (an object of
comparison, is compounded with etc. the Upamanas,
when the common attribute is not mentioned ) and therefore
the recognition of a simile is debarred. The compound here
must be taken to be ^q^ and as belonging to the class which
begins with qT° H. 1. 72 ipjyt
l ^T° )•
(P- 64, 11. 7-14). An example of
the residence of figures in the same place (the 2nd variety of
sjf C ) is cf£T%ur etc. qfc f ^
cf5T tfrec: (srO ( ftffccTT: SF£TT: srf^r:
f^RT: ifa) ziwv (f^) ^fd,
(WBTW) (*TCtaT#T
3^*3^ ^[^cTT ^rfcPTT^r cTT^i
srera tot
*rmr (*rfqsqf?r). whicl1 slluts out
the consciousness of all external objects. 3?^ srgsr^T*'*
X. 99 saf*.
Sahittadarpana
329
Here the contained in and the
consisting in the occurrence of the compound letter
twice in < 3 i^^ 3 ^ l fh?^I 3 ^Tft , and once in (377^3 have the same
position. We explained above ( p. 324 ) what is meant by 37557777.
occurs when a number of consonants are repeated
again in the same order. Here o^and q^are repeated again in
the same order in ‘35357 fV on (I) explains
" i ‘ Tri^fiTTcng^rfor
ifcT I 3 %^f^^iTTqr^TiTT^[^^T 35 TT^R
1 t^rgsn^ ^fcr i 3 ?^t
I fNirgsriT^r ! fr ^ g Ml TT occurs when a single
consonant is repeated once or many times, or when many
consonants occur once again but not in the same order, or when
many consonants occur more than once and in the same order
The letter ^ occurs thrice in ‘35^7^... {3773(3’ and there is
therefore 33 3 ^f£R 3 T:« So also there is 335373357-
357^7 of 373577*3 and 373 hf%. If at the mere glance of the
woman, all consciousness of external objects is lost ( as in
3 IHRF 3 ) then what would happen at the time of embracing
her ? This is 37313 %. The same words which cause this figure
also present 3735371 and therefore there is 125353^3357557^.
*WT ( P. 64 , 11 . 14-16 ). In
which is part of a verse quoted above (on p. 62 ), there is ^7;
by 333F33iT33%3r of ^ 7 I 3 i and 3755377. ‘777777 ^77:’ is a single
( compound ) word. ^7^7 and 7773775 are identified. The letters
^ are repeated; therefore there is *7157 of 375 5377 and
^7^. Another example of the of two figures ( here, of
word ) is 5773357 ^335771337 35;’ which is the last pada of Baghu.
IX. 29 , the first three being <73%
I Flgfefi ^ 73 ^T^T%^TK^T:’- Here there is a of two
occurring in the same place; 753377 and 73357 from one
3^ and 3357 and 3357 from another. We have explained
Yamaka above. It may be said that 753357 and 753357 do not
forma 3335, because in 73357 these is 3 and 111753357 there is 3.
Against this the following reply is given. It is the general,
convention of poets to regard 3 and 3, ^ and 55 as non-different
* n %3 and such (333^73 as 573373 etc. ‘333%3f333
fug. 1 ^ f%gvifrzr eipfr i’ I. 20.
’W ^...sifaeftfcr (P. 64 , 11 . 17 - 21 ). tPt-
^riRr/^3 I STtarr JTOlfcTift^FTr gc 4 ll’. This is
330
NOTES ON
X. 99 tff*.
IV. 59. The readiDg in the printed edition of that
work are for ‘arftqspiqt^R^, ‘OT^TOlftd 0 ’ for
TOTft^ 0 ’, ^RTf^j’ for The read-
ings adopted in the text are sanctioned by the high’ authority
of the and (see p. 230 of ). appears to
have read for sfh#. ‘‘srfsR# qq^RT %qpTT ( ^TRcT )
^5 1 srfd ^iRTft&s *
qk R qf^T^Tf S^RTfe* I 3Tt‘^ TOifor^Rr
;JvR”i P- 230. The expression fc qf^3T^TrqrTf
may stand for qf$rqRRTR%3 as well as for The
meaning of qfqqiRRf^g is <rf^ T trq Rqrf^r: ( ^TURR: ) ^ ( the
spectators in the form of travellers). The verse means ‘charming
is the dance of the peacocks, whose necks are out-stretched,
in these days, noisy with the fresh ( or charming ) rumbling
of clouds and appearing to the travellers gloomy as the night
(because they are separated from their wives); compare
‘^r^T% 5fe^TS^qqTlT% %: qjU5T%qsrqfqR sft Wi )♦
If we read ‘qfeFRRTR^’, the meaning will be ‘charming is
the dance of the peacocks etc. in these days with travellers
as spectators’; The readings of the printed also
yield a good meaning. *3?f¥Rqin^f^5 ¥TRffo%3 ( or
^[RTf^3 ) I ^ Charming
is the dance of the peacocks whose necks are stretched out
through joy ( or quickly ) i n these days, with
the first roars of the rainy season and appearing dark as night
( or in these days that are spectators). sr RRSftfrT-
Here in the same place, viz the Prakrit expression ‘qTpRRT
there is a simile in qfqq^qRTfq^j and a rupaka in
qf^TORlf^J. The word ^qRifqrf is the past passive participle
of a denominative verb which is explained as
3TRRf%- Therefore in ^qRifter, there is sqtry (q%Hi according
to our author). In qfacjRRif ^%3 ( ^ ^rr^nf^r^TT: ) there is
^jl. Therefore there is Hf* of 3W and by
srfcT iRRT fcRERRtfo ^tft<RT ftKSf I
l’ p. 230. ^tro justly contends that
this is not a proper example of by but that
it is an example of as q^JTfo’ is* The Prakrit
expression qffirBTflRTfS'g does not simultaneously admit two
figures, as in etc. but alternately and therefore there
is a doubt.
X. 99 HfT. Saaitvadarpana 331
The difference between and by
is that in the former we are in doubt as to what the figure is,,
there being no determining circumstance, while in the latter
we are certain about the figures, which occur in the same
phrase or expression.
Mammata appears to have held that ^ bj T^mr^sr^r
cccurs only when one figure of word and another of sense
reside together in the same place (
^ K. P. X. ). Our author, following the ^., hold&
that by occurs not only when one figure of
word and another of sense reside together, but also when two
figures of word as in etc. or two figures of sense reside
in the same place. The also says
1
Appendix A.
Index of verses and half-verses cited as illustrations.
Verse
Page
m
3 <5
3T5WT *1^
^0
3?f5t*TT3
C3
sror
V
ararsm
BTirnrra
v<z>
3fg^Fc9T
Vo
y
ST^T qqfa
v^
sr^rjfrqT^
u
3HlRs$sUpT
VV
3*^^TS
3*
sr4 *Ttt®g:
3?4 *3 R?e
RR
•3Ki[cife>*Fi
wf =3 rrePt
^V9
3?i%^55
ejgxs^t
n
3W*HH
Vo
*m Rirt
RK
sr^fr: e^rftgl
3*
3T?*fa g^:
*AC
■3#J13T
$V
3*iffe^r
3N*fliSctl55
«
STreffcSR
3Hf% 5TC
RR
^*mKro
V*
«
Verse
Page
15 ft55|°2(M
^V9
%i w
SfSP*
?tfc# rag
33T
3**ft55f%
sgfra
aql^sira
n
iftif
^0
W
srai|*TTRl RFOTP35S
^g3 :
V^
2R5TSMfa^
wgqft
&
^'Tt55CR55^I
lo
RR
RV
q^qid
q;§q ^
^V9
sft
^R
q>r& qrft
RC
*rg:
qiT f^HT
Va
FFi dWcd<Rj
R$
Ffi dT5 u q
R$
Si ^5°T
<AV
T^rRqi
SwrcN
'A<A
VC
^tS3f
vv
f^SP
a
V erse Page
W: Rv
3 °
I TT^*T*3 HH
*H
HR
3R
Rt
stnK H<
simrRrfm 5 t
^%r 5 ; «rai 30
5T5fl R^5%
srnfmts^n
Jftfl 3°
tTS^fg ^ H«
cr^wn: ^ 3°
?Tg T^RIi *15521 Ho
5Pf Rt| ffaTT$t V<5
=5 sm# H*
^I g%*r n
c^fFrrf^ 3 ^
*5
oti eT #*# hr
C^f 5 S 3 $.
5«p: H3
5cgT3^T$, HV
5 *<tjptt v?
5TC 3H
5T% fRTUITCt RV
fcre*gR HR
V erse Page
HR
JRfefgR *V
% t . hrirh rh
rto hr
MlHlR RR
RRtRtSft VH
R«nf% Irtr 3R
RTOT: RTS R% vv
gRtra r# h®
«T ^
R R%%TO ws
*pt^ 3 t tt ^o
RTfHRfRTtT^ R>
IRR^ RTO HR vo
RRfTOfifo® RV
1R:%R *v
RH^rgRRt v>
%r RHtH®Rs
r?
r
TOJtRR R3
TOW v\s
«ww ws
TO^fsWS R?
RTRTfR V3
TO 5 ! Rt R3
RlWi
STOTTOft w
?fro fron vr
RTORcg H*
RRFt HR
sTOtRR.fTOn: v?
RFlH fftTO RV
fRH ?fH RVS
RHRT§ HH
RTOR&RT ‘ RH
HTH3? °Ifi Vi
IfcHCtR: vR
HfHi^ R HH
Sahityadarpana
♦
V erse Page
RmiRRf: Ro
R3 ftbfi: H
rjjrtr rr
Rg*:: 3RT ?«
hsr hr rvs
R^H H3 Ho
RntoTCIH ^3
Rft5R>iRiH Hi
HTRRTOT t^vs
3^RfcTO!: Rr
iWl^RRr u
pf^ft Ro
5<a TOT RH
JJTOT JTOfw Ro
SR^fd Ro
h: 4rk r
rtr%?t vr
hr rhrr vo
TOR TOTRTOH& Rv
H^WSW RR
HHtRrd' 'iv
RR1R* RHUH =0
HTOI<ftRH H
RPTORTOf vR
S^TPcT^T^ ^
^Ri^R VR
^sggjr: ro
Rf^ten g RR
wiw rr
Wisp v'^
u*fc?PH
RTO^ Hft HR
RIRTORfft R R
rthtor rr
oSRTOJfa HR RR
558?fr#3T Hi
TO#RTfR So
HTRTOHgfTO
&TO#f RR
333
V erse Page
HR
HRHftR H RR
^^TPg^T ^V
^sfw ^
^KT°lf ^
3s3*Tt?flW ^O
3T% *rffrr ^
Vo
fN»rR)cfl«?l ^
R*il 'sTsScC vo
%T^- ^
%| cR Vd
TTOSTRt 5%T ^c
^T%3 ?T §FTT
5 ^PPgra^R vh
^pft T^Pt
1^:
fff ^
B ^WtFT V^
^l?f^ Va, ^
hc
5W: TO^W H»
HTOHSHTO Ho
HR^R R^Tf^R n
HH^R HRlRilTO ^V
ndi^R ^
334 APPENDIX A
Terse
Page
YY
V*
=efN^
3*, ^
^o
Verse
Page
^V9
^3n
Y^
f%rcTT: SjPT
<V*
f^WFRS
^jsrar
Y^
srcsrc
Y£
Verse
Page
#rt
RO
srf*t4 ^
S?cT 3T%I
fKtS*T
ifc f§ra^?rr
fHS^
**
td Nix
General Index to the Notes
( The pages refer to the Notes )
Abhidha, definition of 38
Abhidha-vrtti-matrka
54, 59, 60, 61, 88, 320
Abhihitanvaya-vadin 65, 86
explanation of the term 87
summary of the views of 86
Abhinavagupta 1, 59
Action definition of 44
Adhika 253-254
distinguished from Visama
254
Adhyavsaya, distinguished
from Aropa 155
divisions of 155
Affix, whether it has a
meaning 98
Agnipurana 5, 26, 222
Aharya 131
Aiahat-svartha, definition of
49, 50
Akanksa 34
Akara, meaning of 83
Aksepa 231-235
Alarikaras, classificttion of 89
Alahkarabhasyakara 179
Alahkara-candrika
230, 236, 238
Alankara-dhvani, definition
of 22, 140
Alahkarasarvasva 19, 21, 73,
89, 107, 109, 126, 157 ff
copied by Yisvanatha
187, 216, 209, 310
-vimarsin! 83, 106, 155
-sanjlvinl 150, 302
Alankarasarasahgraha 105,
107
Alankarasekhara
15, 40, 89
Amarusataka
30, 78, 118,
245
Anandavardhana
8, 24
Anantya, explanation of 45
Ananvaya
106, 111
Annambhatta
41
Anubandhas, four
5
Anubhava
30
Anukula
230-31
Anumana
225-22£
distinguished from Kav^a-
linga 228
Ut-
preksa 228
Anuprasa
324
Anvitabhidhana-vadin, expl a
nation of the term 88
summary of the
views of 87
Anyonya
255
Apahnuti
135-138
distinguished from Rupaka
137
» ff
Yakrokti
138
>>
Vyajokti
138
Appayadlksita
68, 105, 150
Aprastuta-prasamsa 201-207
distinguished from
„ „ Samasokti
206
distinguished from
,, ,, £?le&a
207
„ „ Upama-
dhvani 206
336
INDEX
„ Vast »-
dhvani 205
Aprayukta, a closa 10
Apta 40
Arjunavarmadeva 71, 118, 245
Aropa, meaning of 51
Artha ( purpose) 68
Artha, division of 38
Arthantaranyasa 214-219
distinguished from Aprastu-
tapragamsa 218
5 , from Drstanta
218
Arthapatti 279-283
distinguished from
anumana 281
explanation of the term 282
Asatti 35
Asahgati
245-247
distinguished from V irodha
247
,, from Vibhavana
247
„ from Visesokti
247
Atadguna 300-2
Atisayokti 154-161
divisions of 157
AucitI 59
Avimrsta-vidheyamsa 6
Bala-bharata 27 2
Bala-ramayana 293
Bana 81, 277, 306
Baudhayanadharmasutra 136
Bhagavata-purana 32
Bhagna-prakramatva,
a fault 288
Bhakta, meaning of 320
Bhamaha 2, 18, 19, 25, 28,
90, 92
Bhamatl 134
Bharat a 71, 83
Bbartrhari 215, 219, 286
Bhatta-cintamani 12, 88
Bhattikavya 263, 313
Bhava, definition of 31
Bhava-sabala 318
Bhava sandhi 317-318
Bhavodaya 317
Bhavika 306-312
distinguished from Adbhu*
tarasa 309
„ from Atisayokti 310
„ from Bhrantiman 310
„ from Prasada-guna
309
„ from Svabbavokti
310-11
Bhrantiman 129-131
distinguished from Rupaka
131
Bilhana 179, 231
Bi mba-pratibimba-bhava
106, 107
Bhoja 28, 205, 291
Brhatkatha-maujari 95
Brhatsamhita 13, 216
Cakravartin 150, 302
Candraloka 90, 135, 214, 218
Chekanuprasa 329
Citramlmamsa 78, 79, 105^
102, 125, 150, 289 ff
Cyutasamskrti 10
Damodaragupta 159
Dandapupika-nyaya 279
Dandin 18, 138, 201, 221
Dasarupaka 30
Desa 70
Dhvani, definition of 22
divisions of 22, 23
Dhvanyaloka 8, 9, 15, 22,
61, 84, 235ff
TO THE NOTES
337
Dlpaka 162-165
distinguished from Tulyayo-
gita 164
„ from Upama 1 64
divisions of 163
Dosa, definition of 9, 10
divisions of 10
Drift 64
Drstanta 164-168
distinguished from Prativa-
stupama 167, 168
explanation of the term 167
Durgasimha 95
Ekavall ( a work ) 7, 50, 65,
107, 110, 126
Ekavali ( figure of speach )
262-264
distinguished from Mala-
dlpaka 264
Etymology, relation of, to
primary power of words 48
Eruits of poetry 2
Gatha-saptasat! 24, 81, 144
Gauni, views about 55 ff
Genus, distinguished from
quality 44
Gita-govinda 31, 139
Guna, ( quality ), distinguished
from kriya 43, 44
Gunas (of Kavya ) definition
of 27-28
enumeration of 27, 28, 309
Hal a 24, 81
Hanuman-nataka 215
Harsacarita 134, 259
Hemacandra 7, 11, 22
48, 66
Hetu ( reason ), definition of
222
220-221
Hetu (figure of speeh) 229-30
Import, of a word,
41
theories about
41-43
Incarnations, of Vsnu 31, 32
Indication
46
Itivrtta-defined
26
Jacob, Col.
98
Jagannatha 5, 29, 69, 107
113 ff
Jahat-svartha
49
J ati ( genus ), distinguished
from Guna
44
explanation of
43
J ayaratha 83,
, 106, 109,
139, 243 ff
J iiapaka-hetu
221, 222
Kadambarl 23, 277, 306
K aiy ata
3, 41, 104
K akatallya-nyaya
Kaku, modulation of
288
voice,
71, 83
Kala
Kalapa, a system of
71
Grammar
95
Kamandaka
3
Karaka-dipaka
Karaka-hetu, defined
164
and explained
321-22
Karanamala
259-261
Katantra
95
Kathasaritsagara
95
Kavyadarsa 3, 23,
28, 121 ff
K avyalankarasutra
109
Kavyalankara-kamadhenu 4
Kavyalinga 219-225
distinguished from
Arthantaranyasa 225
distinguished from
Parikara 224
divisions of
29
338
INDEX
Kavyaprakasa-sanketa 41, 64,
320
Kavyanusasana of Hema-
candra
11, 48
Kavyapraksa
2, 15, 17 ff
Khalekapotika, a nyaya 245
Eiratarjuniya
152, 215
Kriya, definition of 44
Ksemendra
219
Kulluka
1
Kumarasambhava 32, 7 4,
114, 127, 196,
216, 219, 240
Kumarilabhatta
36, 87
Kuttanlmata
159
Kuvalayananda
164, 207,
210, 218, 224
Laksana definition of 8, 12
Laksana, definition of 46
divisions of
49 ff, 63
principles at the root of 54
Latanuprasa, definition of, 109
distinguished
from Anan-
vaya 110
Linga
68, 220
Locana 11, 22, 61, 64 ff
Lollata
64
Madhurya
27
Mahabhasya
1, 42, 54, 104
Mahabharata
314
Mahimabhatta date of 26
views of
26
Maladipaka
261-262
distinguished from Karana-
mala 262
Mallinatha
50, 59, 61, 157
Malopama
108
Mammata
1, 2, 5, 17, 43,
49, 51, 59, 73 ff
criticism of the views of 6,
17, 47, 96, 175, 220
Mahgala 1
Medhatithi 1
Medini 12, 31
Mllita 295-297
distinguishsed from Bhanti-
man 296
Mfmansakas, on the import of
word 39, 42
Mitaksara 27 4
Moksa 3
Mundakopanisad 3
Mrchhakatika 147, 240
Nagesa or Nagojibhatta 43
55**138,193
Naisadhlya-carita 165, 176
Namisadhu 15, 23
Natyasastra 71, 90
Navasahasanka-carita 248
Negative particle, meanings of
11
N j darsana 168-172
distinguished from Artha-
patti 171
„ from Drstanta
171
divisions of 171
Nipata, views about 97
Nirukta 90
Niscaya 138-141
distinguished from
Apahnuti 141
„ from Sandeha 139
Nitigataka 286
Niyama, defined 273
distinguished from Vidhi
1 273
Nyayabhasya 54
Nyayaratnamala 87, 98
Nyayasutra 41, 54
Nyayavartika 59
TO THE NOTES 339
Pada, definition of 37
Padmagupta 248
104, 186
Paramalaghu-maffjusa 34, 36
40, 54, 65, 98, 275
Paramparita H6
Parikara 194-196
Parikarankura 195
Parisamkhya 273, 277
distinguished from Niyarna
274
„ from Vidhi 274
Parinama 123-128
distinguished from Rupaka
125
Parivrtti 270-272
distinguished from Paryaya
272
views about 271
Parthasarathimisra 87, 98
Paryaya 267-270
distinguished from Vise§a
269
Paryayokta 210-214
distinguished from Apra-
stuta-prasamsa 2 1 0-2 1 1
divergence opinion about
212 ff
Patafijali 1
Poet, function of 26
Poetry, divisions of 8
fruits of 2, 25
soul of 15
superior to the Vedas 4
Powers, of a word 38
Prabha 16, 31, 56, 59,
148, 228
Pradipa 4, 6, 7, 31, 42, 67, 104
Prahelika, definition of 23
illustrations of 23
Prakarana
68
Prasada, a guya
309
Prataparudriya
4
Pratibha
5
Pratiharenduraja
220
Pratlpa
292-295
distinguished from Upama
294
„ from Vyatireka 294
Pratipadika, explained 37
Prativastupama 165-166
distinguished from Upama
166
explanation of the term 166
Pratyabhi jna ( a work ) 132
Pratyanika 291-292
Predicate, definition of 7
Preyas
315-316
Punyaraja
66, 67, 97
Purport
65, 86
Purva-mimansa-sutra 42, 87.
98, 274
Raghavananda
113
Raghuvamsa 1,
106, 116 fE
Rajasekhara
89, 257
Raja-tarangini
180
Ramacarana, criticized 139,
255, 293, 307
quoted
40, 49, 78,
183, 185
Rasa, definition of
30
divisions of 30
Rasabhasa
32
Rasadhvani, defini-
tion of
23
examples of
23
Rasagahgadhara
63-67.
148 S
Rasanopama
108
Rasavad
19, 313-14
Ratnakantha
72
340
INDEX
Ratnapana 302
Ratnavali 309
Rltis ( styles of composi-
tion), definition of 15, 28
divisions of 15, 28
Rucidatta 58
Rudrata 1, 2. 4, 5, 15,
18, 23, 30, 174, 229 ff
Rupaka 114-123
distinguished from
Apahnuti 114
„ from Parinama 114, 125
divisions of 114 ff
explanation of the term 114
Ruyyaka 73, 107
Sahara 87, 274,
282, 320
„ „ Rupaka 192
„ „ Upama 188
divisions of 179-180
Samuccaya 285-290
distinguished from
Samadhi 288
„ from Dipaka 290
„ from Paryaya 290
„ from Sama 290
Samyoga 07
Sandeha 128, 129
Sankara 324-331
Sankaracarya 134
Sanketa 38
Samsrsti 323-24
Sara 265-266
Sarasamuccaya 72
Sabda-vyapara-vicara 43, 50,
54
Sadhyavasana, laksana 51
gfahacarabhinnata, a
fault 287
Sahacharya 66, 67
Sahokti 176-178
Sakti 5, 38
Sakuntala 152, 159, 166,
168, 178, 219, 229 ff
Sama 250-251
Samadhi 290-291
as guria 29 1
Samahita 316-317
Samanya 297-298
distinguished from
.Apahnuti 298
„ from Bhrantiman 298
,, from Mflita 207
Samarthya 69
Samasokti 179-193
distinguished from
Aprastuta- prasamsa 193
Sarasvatlkanthabharana 22, 23,
205, 225, 291
Saropa, Laksana 50-51
Sarvadarsanasangraha 3, 48
Sarvavarman 95
Satapatha-brahmana 70
Sastradipika 42
Sauddhodani 10
Sentence, definitions of 34
Sisupalavadha 129, 150
158,161, 163, 215, 249 ff
Slesa, distinguished from
Dhvani 199
„ from Samasokti
200
divisions of 121-122, 196
views about 198-199
Sloka-vartika 87, 282
Smarana 112-114
Srngara, definition and kinds
of 30
^ruti-dusta, a dosa
Sthayibhava 30
TO THE NOTES
341
Subhasitavali 128, 139,
179, 185
Subject, defined 7
Suggestion 75
Suksma 302-303
distinguished from Anu-
mana 303
Suvritta-tilaka 219
Svabhavokti 305-306
S vara, V edic accent 70
Tadguna 298-300
distinguished from Bhranti-
man 299
„ from Milita 299
,, from Sam any a 299
Tantravartika 3, 36, 42, 60>
98, 273
Tarala 59, 89, 91, 110 , 157
Tarkabhasa 34 , 36 40
Tarkadipika 1 , 12 , 31, 39 , 50,
65, 282
Tarkasangraha 34, 40, 147
Tatparya 65, 86
Tatvabodhini 83
Tauta 5
Til aka 243
Tulyayogita 161-162
U daharana-a figure 2 1 8
Udabarana-candrika 20, 24,
30, 50, 74, 206 ff
Udatta 312 , 313
Udayana 58
Udbhata 19, 90, 92, 105,
107, 109, 110 ff
Uddyota 17, 39, 56, 80 ff
Ullekha 131-135
distinguished from Bhranti-
man 132
„ from Malarupaka 123
Upacara, meanings of 59
Upadananlaksana 49
Upama 89-109
distinguished from Anan-
vaya 20
„ from Rupaka 89
„ from Upameyopama
90
„ from Yyatireka 90
divisions of 90, 105
Upama-dbvani 193
distinguished from Sarna-
sokti 193
Upameyopama 110-1 11
distinguished from Anan-
vaya 1 10
„ from Rasanopama
110
„ from Upama 110
explanation of the term 110
Upnisads 3
Urjasvi 316
Utpala 132
Utprek§a 141-154
distinguished from Atisa-
yokti 151-152
„ from Bhrantiman
141, 151
„ from Sandeha 157
„ from Upama 150
divisions of 142,144
explanation of she term 141
Uttara 277, 279
distinguished from Anu-
mana 278
„ from Kavyalinga 27 9
„ from Parisankhya
278
Uttararamacarita 110 , 114,
165, 235, 267 ff
Y acaspatimisra 134
342
INDEX
Vagbhatalankara 264, 266, 277
Vahlka, derivation of 55
Vakovakya, defined 205
Vakpatiraja 118
Yakrokti 18
Vakrokti-jlvitakara, date of 4
views of 18-19, 319
Vakyapadiya 50, 66, 97, 98
Vamana 2, 19, 28, 53, 109,
148, 234, 239, 266
Varahamihira 13
Vasavadatta 167
Vasisthadharmasutra 136
V astudhvani, definition of 22
example of 23
V astuprativastubhava 106, 107
Vatsyayana-bhasya 54
Vedantaparibha^a 34, 50
Vedantasara 50
Venisamhara 194, 205
Vibhava 30
Yibhavana 20, 235-237
Vicitra 252-253
distinguished from
Y isama 252-253
Vidhi * 187, 273
V iddhagalabhaujika 257
Vikalpa 283-285
Vikasvara, a figure of
speech 219
V ikrainanka-devacarita 231
Vikiamorvasiya 158 3 290
Vinokti 178-179
Yiprayoga 67
Virodha 240-245
distinguished from
Rupaka 244
„ „ Vibhavana 242
„ „ Visesokti 243
Virodhita 68
Yi^esa 255-257
ViSesokti 237-240
Yisama 247-250
distinguished from
Yibhavana 250
„ „ Virodha 250
„ „ Vi^esokti 250
Yisadana, a figure of
speech 250
V isaya, explained 114
Visnupurapa 31
Yisvanatha, criticizd, 100 r
122, 125, 141,213,216,
233, 24a
Vrttyanuprasa 28, 329
Vyabhicara, explanation
of the term 45
Vyabhicari-bhava 30
Yyaghata 257-259
two kinds of and their
differences 2 58
distinguished from
Yisama 259
Vyajastuti 207-110
distinguished from Apra-
stutaprasamsa 209
„ from Dhvani 200
Vyajokti 303-305
distinguished from Apa-
hnuti 304
V yakti ( gender ) 70
Vyaktivivekara 25, 26, 64
Vyanjana 15
Arthi 77, 78
based upon Abhidha 66 ff
„ „ Laksana 75, 76
Sabdi 76-77
theories about 65-66
Yyatireka 172-176
difference of views as to 175
divisions of 172-173
Word, powers of 38
Yamaka 324
Yasovarman 219
Yathasahkhya 266-267
Yogyata 35
A List of the Principal Abbreviations employed
in the Notes.
B.— The Sahityadarpana, published in the B. I. Series.
B. I.— Bibliotheca Indica Series.
B. S. S. — Bombay Sanskrit series.
edM “ 01 lhe (i.
E. I. — Epigraphia Indica.
H. S. L.— History of Sanskrit Literature.
I. O. Cat — India Office Mss. catalogue.
I* A. Indian Antiquary volumes.
™ hC ®* hit y adar P a ^- Published by Jivananda Vidyasagar.
JASB. — Journal, Asiatic Society, Bengal.
2^ AS r J ° Urnal B ° mbay Branch > Asiatic Society.
JR AS. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Great Britain
Cat. — Catalogue.
K. D. or Kavyad.— The Kavyadars'a of Dandin with the com-
mentary of Premchandra TarkavagMa. °° m
K. M. — Kavyamala series.
K. P.— Kavyaprakas'a of Mammata.
K. P. Pr.— The Kavyaprakas'a-pradipa, a comment on the
Kavyaprakas'a by Govinda Thakkura ( K. M series )
Ku, “ l *•
Laukika N.— The Laukika-nyayafijali of Colonel Jacob
N.-The Sahityadarpana published by the Nirnaya-sagar press.
Nai.— The Naisadhiyacarita of Srlharsa. F
Nir. or Nirnaya The Nirnaya-sagar edition ( of a work).
®. — The Nyaya-sutra of Gautama.
P. L. M.— The Paramalaghumanjusa of Nagesabhatta.
R - G -— T be Rasagahgadhara of Jagannatha ( K. M. series ).
R aghu. — R agh u vam sa.
Ru. Rudrata’s Kavyalahkara ( K. M. series ).
^> a k. The Abhijnana-^akuntala.
S. D. — The Sahityadarpana.
Subha. — Subhasitavali.
T. Bh. The Tarkabhasa (Mr. Paranjape’s edition of 1909).
Tarkadfpika of Annambhatta.
T. S. — The Tarkasangraha of Annambhatta.
HI. — Ulaa
344
ABBREVIATIONS
Va Vamanacarya’s edition of the Kavyaprakasa (1921).
Vakyap. — Vakyapadlya of Bhartrhari ( Benares edition ).
Y, 0. J. — Vienna Oriental Journal.
y. p. — The V edantapanbhasa. (Bombay).
V. Sara. — The Vedantasara ( edited by Col. Jacob).
srf^TTo, 37. *{[•
37- ft-
3T^- or 3T$.
37* e* fir- or b* fir*
TO®
^jo 570 , or cfipRj 57 .
or ^T°^°
W3*
fi*. ift.
cTC^-
*rrqT°
^]0 $0
Sfo
qqre°
vq°, sqsqTO
3T«n^
SifitSCF 1 ! ( ®. !• edition ).
3TfwRlf%JTT<I*T ( frftq. ed. of 1916 ).
3R5fR^PTf&lf^K (comment of
on his own <Kpqigqngq )•
STss&K&ifC °f series ).
a^Kgf^ of qzqq; ( series ).
sresfrcg^fqqfSpft of ( qu^Hicil
series ).
aqTf^nqf^qqq ( as contained in the edi-
tion of the qqsqq#q in the qqsqqM )•
3tRXmftcT of nqijfq.
qa^qqqiRfq^t'flqqlcr of ( contained
in Prof. Chandorkar’s edition of
the E&JoqsrqiRr ).
of ^ witb tbe of
Jl^tcfcf^rsr ( Nir - edition )•
^4 of fqsfW ( Bombay Sanskrit
Series ).
q^qqW of qwT?-
qn^q^ffrai of <M$k-K ( Gaik wad Orien-
tal series ).
qjsqre^T of qfs®^.
4»1° q i ^f,K ^q of qwq ( qipqtnsr series ).
of wq^RT ( Nir. edition ).
fUR^'^q-
f%q*ftqrar °f srq^q^f^RT ( qqsqqiai )•
qqiiq^tq^s of qf^qrq ( printed in
edition of the qqqq^t b y Mr.
Trivedi ).
qrqiya?!^ of ( Nir ).
jji^q-^qfqq^-
( printed by Jivananda ),
qqrfjmqfor-
with srq^tq;.
t-q;qr^ of )
the
ABBREVIATIONS
345
ZfRZJo
JrfO
qo &o tfo
qjo
juqo
«r
ff^STTo
*RcRl«Jo
T*PT°
TPT°
ffcr*,
•J^JO
^frfio
g-o sq-fo f^o
3rr°
^rr°
3it#°
«fa3T°
or ?R^ko
^r°
f#0
( the ftokffpn; edition ),
of fhrur.
of
3 rsr«n*fr of tjrMft.
the commentator of the
^qjpRRTJr^qr of TTtf^TJjr ( ERTsqJTTSI )
Commentary on the of
Blffc^q ( B. I. edition ).
fimmssfr of
^l«<Rii<?( of ( Nir. )
*!%•
of 3tTRf[q ( Nir. )
WJT^oi, the commentator of the
flrffc*T?k.
of 3rf?rqqjjH.
K ( series ).
of ^q.
f^'35*T°T ( Bombay edition ).
^(vhf^i ( Trivandrum ed. of 1909 ).
5I»^TTW:ff^K of ijwtj ( Nir. edition ).
3 tfwnRTl3RT5r of sfirf^jrj.
of 'n4BTCf*rft«l'.
SfTCfcteq;.
%J7R5^r of j^q.
of .
of ( Nir. ed. )
RlST-T^g# (Nir.)
§*n%rafo.
a. of commentary on the qqs q M4l ^ f
( Ms. in the Bhau Daji collection
in Bombay Asiatic Society ).
of qjuj.
Open Library
