1. Sahitya Darpana Visvanatha Pandurang Vaman Kane

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY

CENTRAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL LIBRARY

CLASS

CALL No. Sa4A Vis'-Kan

D.G.A. 79.

THE

SAHITYADARPANA

OF

VIS'VANĀTHA

(Parichchhedas I-X)

WITH NOTES

ON

Parichchhedas I, II, X 8327 AND

HISTORY OF ALAŃKĀRA LITERATURE

BY

P. V. KANE, M. A., LL. M.,

MEMBER OF THE SENATE, BOMBAY UNIVERSITY; ZALA VEDANY

PRIZEMAN V. N. MANDLIK GOLD MEDALLIST;

VAKIL, HIGH COURT, BOMBAY.

Second Lanti2n uesignated Viskan 1923.

(All Righta reserved by the Author).

Price Rupeet

:.... Fa, XXM Kać

1

CENTRAL ARCHAEOLOGIGAN LIBRARY, NEW VE!HI. Ion No. 19. 3.67. SaLA Vừs'/Kau

First Edition, 1910;

Printed by Retrokandra Yesu Birdge, at the ' Nirnaya-sagar ' Preccy 23, Krjbbattane, Bombay. Pablished by Pandurang Vaman Kanc, Angre's Wadi, Front Crawi, Girgaon Back Rond, Bombay.

Preface to the Second Edition.

In this edition two important additions have been made. The History of Alankara Literature has been treated of in the Introduction at considerable length. I have been interested in this subject for over twenty years and contributed to the Indian Antiquary some articles on it several years ago. So far as I know there is no work in English dealing with the History of Alarkara Literature in a comprehensive manner. In the present essay I received material help from the writings of Buhler, Peterson, Aufrecht, Col. Jacob, Dr. Jacobi, Prof. Pathak, Mr. Trivedi and a host of other scholars. It has been my endeavour to arrive at my own conclusions after considering the views of my distinguished predecessors. I hope that I have been able to make my own humble contributions to . this field of reseafch. At the repeated requests of many friends I have included in thi edition the whole of the text of the Sahityadarpana (as appendix E, which contains Parichchhedas III-IX ). I have conated three mas. In settling the text of mhe w tyadarpana .* I have been able to trace a few more quotations than the editors of the Kavyamala were able to do. I hope that these additions will render the book more. acceptable to University students and to the general public and that they will extend to it a cordial welcome.

P. V. KANE.

• The three mss. are respectively designated 4, ta, t. They are No. 598 of 1887-91, No. 712 of 1891-95 and No. 380 of 1895-1898 of the Deccan college collection. The ms. a is incomplete and breaks off in the 3rd yfto after kārika 39. contains several gaps, viz. a portion of the 2nd and 3rd qfto and almost the whole of the 6th yftesa are wanting. It has numerous marginal notes and gives the chhaya of Prakrit verses occurring in the text. « is complete and looks rather old. All the mss, are at least 200 years old.

Table of Contents.

Pages Introduction: History of Alankara Literature ... I-CLXXX

Text of Parichchhedas I, II, X arthalankāras 1-64 ...

Notes on Parichchhedas I, II, X ... ... 1-333 ...

Appendix A, containing the various readings in Parichchhedas I, II, X ... 334-338

Appendix B, containing the karikas of Parichchhe- das I, II, X arthalankāras 339-341 ...

Appendix C, containing the index of illustrations in the aboro 342-344 ...

Appendix D, containing the general index to tho notes ... .. 1 ... ...

Appondix E, containing the text of Parichchhedas III-IX ... 1-142

To

the memory of

my younger brother

BALKRISHNA VAMAN KANE, B, A.

whose affection and keen interest en- couraged me in my first labours

on the history of Alankāra

Literature.

タ ン タ ー ー ト ー !

Introduction.

The History of Alankara Literature. The History of Alankara Literature can naturally be divided into two parts. The first part should give an account of the important works on the Alarikaras'astra, a brief analysis of the contents and the chronology of writers on the Alankaras'astra and other kindred matters. More space will be devoted to early writers. The second part would comprise a review of the subjects that fall to be treated under the Alan- karas'astra, attempt to show how from very small beginnings various theories about Poetics and literary criticism were evolved, dilate upon the different aspects of an elaborate theory of Poetics and trace the history of literary theories in India.

Part I. 1 As in many other branches of Sanskrit Literature, so in the Alankaras'astra also, we come across many writers whose works have not come down to us and who are no more than mere names to us. राजशेखर, for example, in his काव्यमीमांसा (p.1) tells us how the science of Poetics could claim to have been proclaimed by S'iva to Brahma, from whom it was handed down to others and how it came to be divided into eighteen sections ( arfaarus ), each of which taught in this world by a particular teacher 'तत्र कविरहस्यं सहस्राक्ष: समाम्रासीत, औक्तिकमुक्तिगर्भः, रीतिनिर्णयं सुवर्णनाभः, आनुप्रासिकं प्रचेतायन:, यमकानि चित्रं चित्राङ्दः, शब्दरेषं शेषः, वास्तवं पुलस्त्यः, औपम्यमौपकायनः, अतिशयं पाराशरः, अर्थक्षेषमुतथ्य:, उभयालक्कारिकं कुबेरः, वैनोदिकं कामदेव:, रूपकनिरूपणीयं भरतः, रसाधिकारिकं नन्दिकेश्वरः, दोषाधिकारिकं धिषणः, गुणौपादानिकमुपमन्युः, औपनिषदिकं कुचुमार:, sfa.' It is doubtful how far this list is authentic or whether most of the writers named are mythical. It is however to be noted that सुवर्णनाभ and कुचुमार appear as teachers of the सांप्रयोगिक and औपनिषदिक sections of Erotics in the कामसूत्र (I. 1.13 and17), while Bharata's work dealing with Rupakas ( plays ) has come down to modern times. The &457T a commentary on the काव्यादर्श informs us that काश्यप and वररुचि had composed works on Poetics before the काव्यादर्श 'पूर्वेषां काश्यपवररुचिप्रभृतीनामाचार्याणां लक्षणशास्त्राणि संहृत्य पर्यालोच्य' (on I. 2) and 'पूर्वसूरिभि: काश्यपवररुचिप्रय' तिभि: (on II. 7.). The com. शुतानुपालिनी on the काव्या. mentions काश्यप, जह्मदत्त and नन्दिस्वामी as the predecessors of Dadin. The

II SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 1

Simhalese siya-bas-lakara, a work on rhetoric, after paying homage to ब्रह्मा, शक and बृहस्पति, refers to a sage काश्यप (J.R.A. S. 1905 p. 841 ). All these works are no longer available.

The question naturally arises :- what is the most ancient ex- tant work on the Alankaras'astra? Some comparatively modern writers on Alankara have put forward the Agnipurana as the original source of all later teachings on this s'astra. Therefore the claims of the अग्निपुराण must be examined.1

2 The Agnipurana. महेश्वर in his काव्यप्रकाशादर्श says 'सुकु- मारान्राजकुमारान् स्वादुकाव्यप्रवृत्तिद्वारा गहने शास्त्रान्तरे प्रवर्तयितुमभ्निपुराणादुद्धत्य काव्यरसास्वादकारणमलङ्कारशास्त्रं कारिकाभि: संक्षिप्य भरतमुनिः प्रणीतवान्'. Simi- larly the कृष्णानन्दिनी, a commentary on the साहित्यकौमुदी of विद्याभूषण, says 'काव्यरसास्वादनाय वह्निपुराणादिदृष्टां साहित्यप्रक्रियां भरतः संक्षिप्ताभिः कारिकाभिर्निबबन्ध.'

The अग्निंपुराण has been frequently printed in India (in the B. I. series, Anandas'rama series and at the Venkates'vara Press in Bombay). Chapters 336-346 (of the B. I. edition) deal with subjects falling within the province of Poetics. Chapter 336 defines a kavya, classifies kavyas into संस्कृत and प्राकृत ( of three sorts ), into गद्य, पद्य and मिश्र; subdivides these and defines in particular कथा, आख्यायिका, महाकाव्य. Chapter 337 deals with topics of dramaturgy (such as the kinds of dramas, प्रस्तावना, the five अर्थप्रकृतिs, the five सन्धि). Chapter 338 speaks of the rasas togther with the स्थायिमावs, अनुभावs, व्यभिचारिभावs, the आलम्बनविभाव and उद्दीपनविभाव, the various kinds of heroes and their companions and the heroines (नायिका). Chapter 339 speaks of the four riis, पाञ्चाली, गौडी, वैदर्मी and लाटी and the four •वृत्तिs, भारती, सात्त्वती, कौशिकी (कैशिकी?) and आरभटी. Chapter 340 comains a description of the various natural movements of the principal limbs ( head, hands, feet &c. ) and other parts of the body ( eyebrows &c. ) in dancing. Chapter 341 dilates upon the four kinds of अभिनय (acting), सात्त्विक, वाचिक, आद्िक and आहार्य. Chapter 342 defines and divides शब्दालङ्वारs viz. अनुप्रास, यमक (of ten kinds), चित्र (seven varieties ) &c. Chap. 343 deals with अर्थालङ्कारs (such as उपमा, रूपक, सहोक्ति. &c,). Chap. 344 is spoken of as dealing with शब्दार्थालङ्कारs, but therein are

1 For detailed discussion of this question vide my paper (in I. A. vol 46 1917 ) pp. 173 ff.

I. 2 अगनिपुराण. INTRODUCTION.

included such figures as आक्षेप, समासोक्ति, पर्यायोक्त Chapters 345 and 346 dwell respeotively upon the गुणs and दोषs of काव्य. There are in all 362 verses in these chapters.

It is not possible to give even a brief analysis of the con- tents of the 11000 verses of the Agnipurana. It is an ency- clopaedia dealing with all sorts of subjects in which mediaeval India was interested. Chapter 382 ( the last one ) contains ( verses 52-63 ) a brief enumeration of the topics treated of in it. It contains summaries of various branches of Sanskrit Literature.

The evidence for determining the date of the Agnipurana ( and particularly of the sahitya portion ) and examining whether it can be regarded as the oldest extant work on Poetics is as follows :-

(a) The अगिपुराण refers to the seven kandas of the रामायण, to the हरिवंश, to पिङ्गल (327.1.), पालकाप्य, शालिहोत्र, धन्वन्तरि and सुश्रुत. It contains ( chap. 380) a short summary of the भगवद्गीता by combining half verses of the latter. Chapters 359-366 con- tain lexical matter almost the whole of which is identical with the verses and portions of verses of the arHataT. It can- not be sapposed that all these works ( the गीता, अमरकोश &c.) borrowed from the arfergIUT. It must be supposed that the afagro in its desire to give summaries of every branch of literature drew upon the lexicon that was most popular when the purana was compiled. Various dates have been assigned to अमरसिंह. Prof. Macdonell (HSL p.433) thinks it not improbable that he flourished about 500 A. C. Max Muller says that the अमरकोश was translated into Chinese in the 6th century ( India; what can it teach us? 1st. ed. p. 232 ). Dr. Hoernle ( JRAS 1906 p. 940) places the अमरकोश between 625 and 940 A. C. rather on shadowy grounds. Mr. Qak places it in the 4th century A. C. Taking even this early date, the अग्निपुराण, if it borrowed from the अमरकोश, cannot be earlier than the 6th or 7th century A. C, as a good deal of time must have elapsed before the arHTEtRT could attain a pre-eminent position as a lexicon. (b) The अग्निपुराण says that the riti Bharati was so called because it was promulgated by भरत (भरतेन प्रणीतखाद्दारती रीतिरुच्यते। chap. 339. 6 ). aa says that he promulgated the four Vrittis by order of Brahma and that the aratafa was so called after

SÅHITYADARPAŅA. I. 2 अभिपुराण.

the Bharatas (मया काव्यक्रियाहेतोः प्रक्षिप्ता द्रुहिणाज्चया॥ ... सवनामघेयैः भरतैः प्रयुक्ता सा भारती नाम भवेत्त वृत्ति:। नाव्य. 20. 23 and 25). This shows that the अग्निपुराण had before it the नाट्यशास्त्र of भरत (or at least the portion dealing with वृत्तिs). Though the नाय्यशासत्र knows works of the purana class (अन्येपि देशा एभ्यो ये पुराणे संप्रकीर्तिताः। नाज्य. 13.35), yet it nowhere alludes to the अगनिपुराण. (c) There are numerous verses in the अग्निपुराण that are identical with verses of the नाट्यशासत्र. Compare नाट्य. 6. 36 and भभ्ि. 338. 12; नाय्य. 6. 39 and अभनि. 338. 7-8; नाट्य. 20. 28-29 and अभि. 337. 11-12; नाट्य. 16. 60-62 and अभि. 342. 15-16. Taking the character of the two works into consideration it will have to be conceded that it is the अग्निपुराण that borrows. (d) The definitions of रूपक, उत्प्रेक्षा, विशेषोक्ति, विभावना, अपहुति and समाधि given by the अग्निपुराण ( 348, 23, 24-25, 26-27, 27-28; 344. 18, 13 respectively ) are almost the same as those of the काव्यादर्श (II. 66, 221, 323, 199, 304, I. 93 respectively ). Besides these there are many phrases and half verses that occur in both works e. g. पद्यं चतुष्पदी तच्च वृत्तं जातिरिति त्रिषा (अभनि. 336. 21 and काव्या. I. 11); सा विद्या नौस्तितीर्षू्णां गम्भीरं काव्यसागरम् (अभनि. 336. 23 and काव्या. I.12); अधि. 336. 29 and काव्या. I. 16; अभि. 336. 25 and काव्या. I. 15. It has not been possible to point out (except in two instances, viz काव्या. II. 226 the well known लिम्पतीव &c. and II. 276 अद्य या मम dc ) that Dandin borrows his definitions or examples from others. Dandin belongs, as will be shown later on, to the 6th or 7th century. So the अग्निपुराण, if it borrows from the काव्यादर्श, must be later than this date. (e) The definitions of रूपक, आक्षेप, अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, पर्यायोक्त and समासोक्ति are almost identical in भामइ (II. 21, 68, III. 28,8, II. 79) and the अभिपुराण (343. 22; 344. 15; 344. 16; 344. 18; 344. 17). arHz distinctly states that he composed his own examples and also himself settled the definitions of figures (स्वयंकृतैरेव निदर्शनैरियं मया प्रक्कपा खलु वागलक्कतिः। भामह II. 96; गिरामलक्कारविधि: सविस्तरः स्वयं विनिश्चित्य घिया मयोदितः । III. 57). भामइ, as shown below, belongs to the 6th or 7th century A. C. (f) It appears that the अग्निपुराण was aware of the theory of dhvani promulgated in the Dhvanikārikas and elaborately set forth in the Dhvanyaloka. It says that ध्वनि will be included in some one out of पर्यायोक्त, अपह्दति, समासोक्ति, अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, आक्षेप (स आक्षेपो ध्वनिः स्वाच्च ध्वनिना व्यज्यते यतः and एषामेकतमस्येव (स्यैव?) समाख्या ध्वनिरित्यतः । अभि. 344. 14 and 18). This shows that though the

I. 2 अगिपुराण. INTRODUCTION.

अग्निपुराण knew the theory of ध्वनि it was not willing to subscribe to it. This view of the अग्निपुराण is similar to the view of भामह and उद्भट as said by the अलक्कारसर्वस्व 'इदं हि तावद्भ्रामद्यो- दद्टप्रभृतयश्च्चिरन्तनालङ्गारकारा: प्रतीयमानमर्थ वाच्योपस्कार कतयाल द्क्कार पक्षनिक्षिपं मन्यन्ते। तथाहि-पर्यायोक्ताप्रस्तुतप्रशंसास मासोक्त्याक्षेपव्या जस्तुत्युपमेयोपमानन्वयादौ वस्तुमात्रं गम्यमायं वाच्योपस्कारत्वेन स्वसिद्धये पराक्षेपः परार्थ स्वसमर्पणमिति यथायोगं द्विविधया भङ्गया प्रतिपादितं तैः' (p. 3). Vide also स्व० 'पर्यायोक्तेऽपि यदि प्राधान्येन व्यंग्यत्वं तद्द्रवतु नाम तस्य ध्वनावन्तर्भावः । न तु ध्वनेस्तन्नान्तर्भावः।' ( p. 39 ff ). It therefore may be argued that the portion on Poetics in the अग्निपुराण is not much later than the ध्वन्यालोक. The latter work, it will be seen, was composed in the latter half of the 9th century. It is further to be noted that two verses (अपारे काव्यसंसारे dc. and शृङ्गारी चेत्कविः occur in the अग्निपुराण (338. 10-11) and in the ध्वन्यालोक (p. 222). In the latter these verses are introduced with the words तथा चैदमुच्यते and so it is possible to argue that the ध्वन्यालोक is merely quoting from another work. But these verses are followed by a brief discussion which winds up with the werds ध्वनिरेव प्राधान्येन काव्यमिति स्थितमेतत् (p. 223). So it is not unlikely that the अग्नि- पुराण knowing as it does the theory of ध्वनि borrows the verses from the ध्वन्यालोक. The foregoing discussion goes to establish that the अग्रिपुराण is later than the 7th century at least and that the section on Poetics was probably complied about or a little afrer 900 A. C. It is significant that no early writer on Poetics quotes from or refers to the Agnipurana. मम्मट quotes from the विष्णुपुराण but nowhere rafers to the अझ्निपुराण. The first Alaukara writer of note who distinctly mentions the अग्निपुराण as an authority on Poetics is विश्वनाथ (14th century), who quotes अभ्नि. 336. 3-4 and 337. 7 (त्रिवर्गसाधनं नाट्यं), although works on धर्मशास्त्र such as अपरार्कटीका and the अद्भतसागर of बल्लालसेन (begun in 1268 A. C. ) refers to the Agnipurana as an authority. But "a's नाट्यशास is quoted with reverence by the ध्वन्यालोक, the लोचन and other early writers. Even भामह and दण्डी appears to refer to him as an authority as well be shown later on. Therefore the अगिनपुराण is later than भरत, भामह, दण्डी and probably the ध्वन्यालोक and has no claim to be regarded as the original work on the अलक्कारशास्त्र. Modern writers, guided by their reverence for Puranas in general because they were ascribed to the mythical Vyasa, naturally looked upon the अग्निपुराण as the most ancient work on the अलङ्कारशाखत्र.

VI SAHITYADARPANA. I. 3 नाव्यसास्त्न

3 The Nâtyas'âstra of Bharata. For several reasons the. Natyas'astra must be regarded as the oldest extant work on the theory of Poetics. That work contains the first exposition of the rasa theory ( for which see part II ) and also contains considerable information upon many topics pertaining to the Alankāras'āstra.

The Natyas'astra has been published in the Kāvyamala series. The work as published is full of corrupt passages and lacuna ; a scholarly edition of the text is a great desideratum. The work contains 37 chapters and about 5000 verses, most- ly in the aaer metre. Here and there, particularly in chap. 6, 7, 27 there are prose passages. There are a few verses in the Arya and other metres; sometimes the Arya verses are preceded by the words अत्र सूत्रानुबद्धे आर्ये भवतः (chap. VI p. 64) or अत्रानुवंश्ये आयें भवतः (chap. VI. p. 65 and p. 68, chap VII. p. 73 ). The first expression seems to mean that Arya verses closely following some sutras had been composed and were cited. Whether the sutras are those of Bharata himself or another is doubtful. It appears probable that the word refers to the words of the author of the Natyas'astra himself and that the Aryas also were his own composition. The words may also mean 'composed in a laconic style like sūtras'. Some- times we have the words अत्रानुवंश्यौ श्रोको (chap. VI. p. 62) or simply अत्र श्रोक: or अत्र आर्या. What the word आनुवंश्य means it is difficult. to say. Literally taken the word means 'handed down in the an' ( i. e. handed down from teacher to pupil ). So the words mean that the verses in question were traditionally handed down by spiritual descent to the author of the Natya- s'astra or they were the heir-looms of his family. The words may possibly mean 'connected with the same topic or springing from the 'same topic and adding to it'. It is not possible to give even a brief analysis of the contents of the HRTa. The following is a mere outline : chap. I instruction in ene here called the fifth Veda was imparted to wta by Brahma; 2 con- struction of the theatre ( नाट्यमण्डप); 3 worship of the deities presiding over the theatre; 4 Tandava dance and its technique; 5 Purvaranga, Nandī ( benediction ), prologue; 6 Rasas, their Vibhāvas (generating and accessory moods ), Sthāyibhāvas ( permanent moods ); 7 the Bhavas, Sthayi, Sattvika and Vyabhichari; 8 Abhinaya of four kinds ( आङ्गिक, वाच्िक, आहार्य,

I. 3 नाव्यशास्त्र. INTRODUCTION. VII

HTfaa ); 9 the various movements and positions of the hands, chest, waist &c; 10-11 instructions about exercises in various gaits and postures ( n ) and rapid movements on the stage; 12 various manners of carrying the body in the case of divine characters, kings, lower characters and the seats appropriate to them; 13 the four pravrittis ( combinations or modes of dramatic representation, dress, dialect, usages ) viz. anra-dit, दाक्षिणात्या, पाञ्चाली and ओड्मागधी; 14-15 metres with examples; 16 the lakshanas of kavya, their definitions, the alankāras, उपमा, रूपक, दीपक and यमक, ten blemishes of kavya and ten gunas; 17 Prakrit dialects, modes of address and the appropriate accent and pitch of the dialogues in a drama; 18 the ten kinds of rūpakas ( plays ); 19 the plot, the five sandhis and their constituents; 20 the four vrittis, भारती, सात्वती, कैशिकी and आरभटी; 21 the dress and ornaments of actors; 22 the representation of Bhavas, Havas appropriate to males and females, the ten stages of love, the eight kinds of Nayikas; 23 the various ways and means for succeeding in one's pursuit of love, go-between; 24 various kinds of Nāyaka and Nayika, attendants of the king and his harem, the accomplishments of tha सूत्रधार, विदूषक and other characters; 25 special directions about acting; 26 assignment of parts to the members of a dramatic company according to their sex, age, ability &c; 27 What makes for success in a dramatic representation, qualifications of dramatic critics and spectators; 28 musical instruments, the seven स्वरs, the ग्रामs, मूर्च्छनs &c; 29-34 various aspects of vocal and instrumental music; 35 qualifications of the various members on the staff of a dramatic company and the artisans required by it; 36-37 how dramaturgy descended to the earth. It will be seen from the foregoing statement of the topics of the Natys'astra that the most important chapters of it forthe purposes of Poetics are the 6th, 7th, 16th, 18th, 20th, and 22nd. The reputed author of the Natyas'astra, Bharata, is a mythical character, supposed to have access to the world of gods as well as to the mundane world. Whether actors were called bharatas because they studied the work of Bharata on drama- turgy or whether the Bharatas were originally a clan of people proficient in the mimetic art and Bharata is only an imaginary person, a sort of legendary eponymous hero of the dramatic art, is a disputable point. Whatever may be the true theory, it is clear that the extant Natyas'astra is not the work

VIII SAȘITYADARPANA., I. 3 नाव्यशासर.

of Bharata, but of some one else who had traditionally learnt the doctrines and practice of the art and made a compilation. The words आनुवंश्यौ श्रोकौ (or आये) point in the same direction. The Natyas'astra says in a prophetic strain that कोलाइल (or s?) will spread Naty doctrines in the world (37.18) and that कोहेल (कोहल?), वत्स, शाण्डिल्य and घूर्तित (ल?) wrote on the Natyas'astra (37.24). The name of कोहल as a writer on नृत्यशास्त्र occurs in the कुट्टनीमत (verse 81) of दामोदरगुप्त (latter half of 8th A. C. ) along with ma. A work on Tala attributed to कोहलाचार्य exists in the India Offico Library. हेमचन्द्र (in the काव्यानुशासन p. 325) speaks of कोलाहल as writer on drama- turgy. In the बालरामायण of राजशेखर there is a नाट्याचार्य कोहल addressing राधण परमेष्ठिनो मानसभुन्नः प्रथमपुत्रस्य नाट्ययोनेर्मर- ताचार्यस्य कृतिरभिनवं सीतास्वयंवर इति नाटकं प्रयोक्तव्यम्' (before Act III. 12). The रसार्णवसुधाकर of शिक्षभूपाल mentions भरत, शाण्डिल्य, कोइल दत्तिल and मतङ् as authors of works on Natya (1st विलास verses 50-52 ). The कुट्टनीमत in two consecutive verses 122- 123) mentions दत्तक (along with कामशास्त्र writers like वात्स्यायन) and दन्तिल (along with भरत and विशाखिल). Therefore it is doubtful whether they are identical. It is also a question whether दन्तिल and घूर्तिल are identical. Besides कोहल, शाण्डिल्य, वत्स and धूर्तिल, the नाट्यशास often refers to the views of others in the words अन्ये, अन्यैस्तु etc. (e. g. p. 48, p.109). The date of the Natyas'astra. Various estimates of the age of the Natyas'astra have been offered by scholars. Prof. Macdonell assins him to the 6th century A. C. M. M. Haraprasada S'astri assigns it to 2nd century before Christ (J. A. S. B. 1913 p. 307). Prof. Levi In a brilliant artical ( translated I. A. vol, 33 p. 163) relying upon the use of such words as स्वामी in the नाव्यशासत्र (17.75) as terms of address tried to prove that the नाट्यशास्त्र was composed about the time of the Indo-Scythian Kshatrapas some of whom like Chashtana are styled svami in the inscriptions. In spite of the brilliant manner in which the argumetns are advanced, and the vigour and confidence with which they are set forth, the theory that the Sanskrit theatre came into existence at the court of the Kshatrapas and that the supplanting of the Prakrits by classical Sanskrit was led by the foreign Ksatrapas appears, to say the least, to be an imposing structure built upon very slender founda- tions. An obvious reply is that the inscription was composed

I.3 नाव्यशाखत्र. INTRODUCTION. IX

by one who was thoroughly imbued with the dramatic termi- nology contained in the Natys'astra. The upper limit of the Natyas'astra cannot be fixed with certainty. The Fao men- tions the Pas'upatas ( 12. 76 ), the S'akyas and Nigranthas ( 12.78 ), the S'abaras and Abhiras ( 17. 49), the S'akas (17.53), numerous Prakrit dialects such as शौरसेनी, मागधी, अर्धमागधी, आवन्ती, दाक्षिणात्या and their peculiarities, the names of numerous countries ( in the 13th chapter ). But all these details cannot lead to any certain result as to the age of tpe Natyas'astra. They, however, make it highly probable that the नाट्यशास्त्र is not much older than the beginning of the Christian era. The lower limit can be settled with more certainty and to some extent depends upon the date of Kalidāsa. The question of the date of the नाट्यशासत has been discussed by me in I. A. Vol. 46 (1917) PP. 171-183. A brief resume with some additions is given below. (b) दामोदरगुप्त in his कुट्टनीमत (v. 75) says that the नास्यशास्त्र was promulgated by Brahma (बह्मोक्तनाय्यशास्त्रे). So also the दशरूपक (composed about 1000 A.C.) says 'उद्धत्योद्धत्य सारं यमखिल- निगमान्रास्यवेदं विरिञ्जिश्चक्रे यस्य प्रयोगं मुनिरपि भरतस्ताण्डवं नीलकण्ठः ।' (I. 4). This shows that even in the 8th century the नाट्यशारत contained statements as in the extant work ( 1. 1-4 and 11-16) that it was received by भरत from Brahma.

(b) आनन्दवर्धन in the ध्वन्यालोक says 'यदि वा वृत्तीनां भरत- प्रसिद्धानां कैशिक्यादीनां' ( KM. ed. p. 163) and 'यथा वेणीसंहारे विलासाख्यस्य प्रतिमुखसन्ध्यङ्गस्य प्रकृतरसनिबन्धनाननुगुणमपि भरतमतानुसर- णमात्रेच्छया घटनं' (P150); so also 'अत एव च भरते प्रबन्धप्रख्यात- वस्तुविषयत्वं प्रख्यातोदात्तनायकत्वं च नाटकस्यावश्यकर्तव्यतयोपन्यस्तम्' (p.146) and 'एतच रसादितात्पर्येण काव्यनिबन्धनं भरतादावपि सुप्रसिद्धमेव' (p.181). The vrittis called Kais'iki and others are described in the नाट्यशार्त्र ( chap. 20) and the arga named विलास is defined in chap. 19 (p. 71). आनन्दवर्धन flourished in the latter half of the 9th century. The वेणीसंहार had been composed before him and the author of that drama regarded Bharata as a paramount authority. Therefore centuries bofore आनन्दवर्धन the नाव्यशास्त्र contained a treatment of rasas, heroes, afas and such minute particulars as the anga called विलास. (c) The काव्यप्रकाश quotes from Bharata that sutra 'विभावा- नुभावव्यभिचारिसंयोगाद्रसनिष्पत्तिः' (which occurs in the 6th chap. p. 62 ) and gives the interpretation of that sūtra by four

X SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 3 नाव्यशासत्र.

scholars, भटलोलट, शङ्कक, भट्टनायक and अभिनवगुप्त. It will be seen that अभिनवगुम's literary aotivity lay between 990-1020 A.C. and that भट्टनायक flourished between 900 and 925 A. C. शङकुक has probably to be identified with the poet शङ्कक, author of भुवनाभ्युदय, mentioned in the राजतरङिणी (IV. 705) 'कविर्वुधमन:सिन्धुशशाङ्कः शङ्ककाभिधः। यमुद्दिश्याकरोत्काव्यं भुवनाभ्युदयाभिधम्।।2 This would assign him to about 840 A.D. सोमेश्वर in his com- mentary on the काव्यप्रकाश quotes a few verses of शङ्कक on the above sutra of Bharata and the criticism of Bhatta Tauta thereon. The exact date of Lollata cannot be determined. But as शुङ्कक, नायक and अभिनवगुप्त are mentioned in chronological order, it is not unlikely that लोलट preceded all the three. He was a मीमांसक and his name is associated by Alankara writers with the view that words have a single pervasive power called अभिधा (and not three) like an arrow (सोयमिषोरिव दीर्घदीर्घतरो व्यापार:). This view is ascribed to the प्राभाकर school in tha लोचन (p. 188 ) and the व्यक्तिविवेक (p. 27) also criticizes it. The काव्यप्रकाशसङ्केत (1159 A.C.) of माणिक्यचन्द्र (Mysore ed. 82) says that लोइट wrote रसविवरण and सोमेश्वर quotes from लोलट (folio 105 b) 'यमकानुलोमतदितरचक्रादिभिदा हि रसविरोघिन्यः अभिधानमा- त्रमेतद्गद्द (डु?)रिकादिप्रवाहो वा ॥'. This verse is quoted by नमिसाधु also (on रुद्रट III. 59) without the author's name. Therefore लोलट flourished after प्रभाकर and before शङ्कक i. e. between 700- 800. The conclusion is that the 6th chapter of the नाय्यशास्त्र dealing with rasas had been the subject of interpretation before the 8th century A. C.

(d) अभिनवगुप्त says that ancient sages like भरत regard Yamaka and Upama as alankūras of word and sense respe- ctively ( लोचन p. 5). These are two of the four figures treated of in the 16th chapter of the नाट्यशास्त्र. The लोचन does not quote भामह, उद्ट or दण्डी with the opithet चिरन्तन. Therefore according to it the नाट्यशास्र long preceded these writers.

(0) भवभूति (about 700-740 A. D) looks upon Bharata as the author of तौयत्रिकसूत्र (i. e. नाट्यसूत्र) and as a contemporary of Valmiki, the author of the रामायण (vide उत्तररामचरित IV). (f) Bana in his कादम्बरी (para 71 of my edition) mentions the नृचशासत् composed by भरत as one of the branches of know- ledge in which चन्द्रापीड became proficient. In the हर्षचरित also ( III. para 5 ) he speaks of music which followed the path laid

I. 3 नाव्यंशास्त्र: INTRODUÓTION.

down by Bharata (भरतमार्गभजनगुरु गीतं). In another place (हर्ष० II 4.) he speaks of actors in the आरभटीवृत्ति (रैणवावर्तमण्डलीरेचकरासर- सरभसारब्धनर्तनारम्भारभटीनटा:) रेचक is defined in नाट्यशास्त्र (22. 10) and आरभटी (in chap. 20. 54 ff).

(g) कालिदास in the विक्रमोर्वशीय (1st Act) tells us that the sage Bharata was the नाट्याचार्य of the gods, that the business of a drama is to evolve eight rasas and that Apsarases helped him to bring his play on the stage (मुनिना भरतेन यः प्रयोगो भवतीष्व- ष्टरसाश्रय: प्रयुक्त । ललिताभिनयं तमद्य भर्ता मरुतां द्रष्टमना: सलोकपालः) All the three characteristics are found in the extant नाट्यशास्त्र. Vide anra chap. 6. 15 for the eight rasas and 37. 19 for the Apsarases. No scholar of note will now place कालिदास later than about 450 A. C., whatever the earlier limit may be. He knew wra and looked upon him as a semi-divine person. Therefore the work of wra must have preceded him by some centuries.

(h) All ancient writers on alankara, Bhatti ( between 500-650. A. C.), Bhamaha, दण्डी, उद्धट, define more than thirty figures of speech. wa defines only four, which are the simple- st viz. उपमा, दीपक, रूपक and यमक. भरत gives a long disquisi- tion on metres and on the Prakrits and would not have scrupled to define more figures of speech if he had known them. Therefore he preceded these writers by some centuries at least. The foregoing discussion has made it clear that the नाट्यशास cannot be assigned to a later date than about 300 A. C. This does not mean that the extant नाट्यशास्त्र has come down to us intact from that date. It may be admitted that there may be a few interpolations here and there. But that before 300 A. C. there existed a work going under the name of Bharata containing the rasa theory and dealing with dramaturgy cannot be disputed. As there is no othor extant work on the theory of Poetics and allied topics as old as 300 A. C. the नाट्यशास must be regarded in the present state of our knowledge as the oldest work on the अलङ्गारशास्त्र. fs in his commentary on the Das'arupa (III. 57-60) quotes a verse from भरत "एतच्च 'इदं त्रिपुरदाहे तु लक्षणं ब्रह्मणोदितम्। ततस्त्रिपुरदाइश्च डिमसंज्ञः प्रयोजितः ॥I'इति भरतमुनिना स्वयमेव त्रिपुरदाहेतिवृत्तस्य तुल्यत्वं दर्शितम्". In the नाट्यशास्त् only the latter, half is found (IV.9). The commentator on the सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण (II. p. 254 Benares ed. ) says that, as regards मुरजबन्ध, भरत mentions the

XII SÂHITYADARPANA. J.3 नाव्यशास.

letters to be employed 'पाठाक्षराणि मुरजे लडकारौ तथदधाच्छमौ रेफः । नणकखगवळाश्चेत्यं षोडश भरतादिकथितानि ॥'. There is nothing in the नाट्यशासत्र on this point. अभिनवगुम्त wrote a commentary upon the नाट्यशासत्र. राघवभट् in his commentary called अर्थद्योतनिका on the S'akuntala quotes very frequently the chapters and verses of Bharata's Natyas'astra and Abhinavagupta's comment thereon. He gives अभिनवभारती as the name of Abhinava- gupta's commentary. For example ( on p. 6 of the Nirnaya. ed. of 1922). 'इदं पद्यं ('सूत्रधारः पठेन्नादी' नाट्य V. 98) अभिनवगुप्ताचार्यैर्मैर- तटीकायामभिनवभारत्यां व्याख्यातम्'; on p. 20 राघवभट्ट quotes a long passage from the 16th chap. of the नाट्यशाम and remarks 'अभिनवभारत्यां भरतटीकायामभिनवगुप्ताचार्यर्मेहता प्रबन्धेन मिन्नतया स्थापितानि.' Portions of अभिनवगुम's commentary have been recovered in the Madras Presidency, the commentary baing therein called नाव्यवेदविवृति ( Vide Bhandarkar commemoration vol. p. 368 ). सोमेश्वर in his commentary on the काव्यप्रकाश quotes from भरत a passage about ojas ( which is not found in the नाय्यशास्त्र) and the explanation of मङ्गल thereon 'तत्रावगीतस् हीनस्य वा वस्तुन: शब्दार्थसम्पदा यदुदाचत्वं निषिश्रन्ति कवयस्तदोज इति भरतः।अवगीतस्य हीनस्य वा वस्तुन: शब्दार्थयोरर्थसम्पदा पदमुदात्तत्वं (१) निषिश्चन्ति कवयः तर्हि तदनोज: स्यादिति मङ्गल:' The काव्यप्रकाशसङ्केत of माणिक्यचन्द्र also quotes the views of मङ्गल 'दण्ड्यक्ततं समासदैध्यमोज इत्यपि न रीतित्रयेप्योजसः साधारण- त्वाद्रौडीयानिर्देशो न युक्तिमानिति वामनमङ्गलौ' (p.292 Mysore ed.). हेमचन्द्र (विवेक p. 195) quotes the same two passages from मनल. The काव्यमी. of राजशेखर quotes मडल as a writer on Poetics (pp.11, 14, 16, 20 ). Therefore it is not unlikely that Mangala wrote a comment. on the Natyas'astra. The लोचन tells us that a verse in the Natyas'astra ( VIII. 112 बहूनां समवेतानां रूपं यस्य भवेद्दु। स मन्तव्यो रस: स्थायी शेषा: सव्जारिणो मता:॥) was variously interpreted and refers to the opinion of भागुरि on the point (p.175) 'तथा च भागुरिरपि

shows ( unless the passage is corrupt ) that argft explained the rules of भरत. Whether he wrote a commentary on the नाय्यशास is doubtful. Many authors, when explaining the theory of Poetics, quote Bharata's rules and discuss them, but do not write regular commentaries on the Natys'astra. लोलट, शङ्डक and भट्टनायक were probably not commentators of the नाट्यशासत्र, but in discussing the theory of rasa in their works on Poetics they explained, the sutra quoted above. The नाय्यप्रदीप compoS- ed in 1613 A. C. by सुन्दरमिश्र quotes the definition of नान्दी from गरत (नाख्य. V. 25 and 28) and then remarks मस्य व्याख्याने

I. 3 माट्यशाखत्र. INTRODUCTION. XIII

मातृगुप्ताचार्य: षोडशाङ्घ्रिपदापीयमुदाहता' (I. O. Cat. p. 348 No. 1199). This leads one to surmise that मातृगुप्ताचार्य had something to do with the नाट्यशास्त्र. राघवभट्ट in his अर्थद्योतनिका (p. 15) quotes a passage on आरम्भ and बीज from भरत and then says "अत्र विशेषो मातृगुप्ताचार्येरुक्तः 'कचित्कारणमात्रं तु क्वचिच्च फलदर्शनम्। etc.' He quotes numerous passages in verse from मातृगुप्ताचार्य on सूत्रधार (p. 5), on नान्दी (p.4), on नाटकलक्षण (p. 9), on भूषण the first of the 36 ornaments of kavyas ( 16th chap.), on यवनी (p. 27). Some of these quotations are cited by other commentators also. It may be therefore conjectured that मातृगुप्ताचार्य was somewhat of वार्तिककार (उक्तानुक्तदुरुक्तचिन्ताकरं वार्तिक) to the Natyas'astra. Whether this मातृगुप्ताचार्य is to be identified with the poet मातृगुप्त, who was made king of Kashmir by हर्ष विक्रमादित्य of उज्जयिनी according to the राजतरङ्गिणी (III. 129-189), is very doubtful.

4 Medhavin. wg twice mentions a writer on Alankara named Medhavin who enumerated seven faults in Upama (a एत उपमादोषा: सप्त मेधाविनोदिता:। II. 40). In another place he says 'यथासंख्यमथोत्प्रेक्षामलङ्कारद्वयं विदुः। संख्यानमिति मेधाविनोत्प्रेक्षाभिहिता कचित् ॥'. The latter half as printed means ' Utpreksha has been in some places designated संख्यान by Medhavin'. But this meaning seems to be doubtful. संख्यान, we are told by Dandin, is the name given to यथासंख्य by other writers (यथासंख्यमिति प्रोक्तं संख्ैयानं क्रम इत्यपि' काव्यादर्श II. 273). Therefore the passage in Bhamaha's work seems to be corrupt. If we read 'मेधावी नोत्प्रेक्षा ete'. then there is correspondence with Dandin's words the meaning being 'Medhavin ( calls यथासंख्य) by the name संख्यान and in some places (in works on alankara) उत्प्रेक्षा has not been spoken of as an Alankara.' नमिसाधु in commenting upon Rudrata's काव्यालद्कार (I. 2) says 'ननु दण्डिमेधाविरुद्रभामहादिकृतानि सन्त्येवालक्कारशास्त्राणि'. The question is whether मेधाविरुद्र is one name or whether there were two writers on Alankaras'astra named Medhavin and Rudra. No work on Alailkara com- posed by Rudra has been referred to by another writer. The शङ्गारतिलक of रुद्रभद्ट as its contents show cannot be called a work on the अलङ्कारशासत्र. Therefore it is probable that the full name is मेषाविरुद्र. धर्मकीर्ति and भर्तृहरि are often cited as कीर्ति and हरि; so there is no wonder if मेधाविरुद् be cited as मेघाविन् (vide my article in J. R. A. S. 1908 at p. 545 ). शाso quotes a verse of मालवरुद्र (1091) and of कपिलरुद्र (No 3787) and सुभा० of a कपिलरुद्रक (1666). This shows that there were many Rudras. On रुद्रट (XI. 24 ) नमिसायु again quotes मेषाविन about the seven दोषs of

XIV SÂHITYADARPANA. I. 4 मेधाविन्.

simile and the manner in which he deals with this topic sug- gests that the examples he gives are taken from Medhavin's work अत्र च स्वरूपोपादाने सत्यपि चत्वार इति ग्रहणाद्यन्मेधाविप्रभृतिमिरुक्तं यथा लिङ्गव- चनमेदौ हीनताधिक्यमसम्भवो विपर्ययोऽसाटृश्यमिति सप्तोपमादोषा :... तदेतन्निरस्तम्.' On p. 9 (on रुद्रट II.2) नमिसाधु tells us that मेधाविरुद् and others gave only four divisions of शब्द 'एत एव चत्वारः शब्दविधा इति येषां सम्यड मतं तत्र तेषु नामादिषु मध्ये मेधाविरुद्रप्रभृतिभि: कर्मप्रवचनीया नोक्ता भवेयुः The त्रिकाण्डशेष gives मेघारूद्र and कालिदास as synonyms. The काव्यमी० tells us that मेधाविरुद् was a poet blind from birth (p. 12) and quotes कालिदास as a writer on Poetics (p.14). The work of मेघाविन has not come down to modern times. 5 Dharmakirti. A passage in the वासवदत्ता of Subandhu (Hall's ed.p.235) 'बौद्धसङ्गतिमिवालङ्गारभूषिताम्' led many scholars like Aufrecht, Hall and Peterson ( Preface to garo p. 47 and JBBRAS vol. 16 p. 173 ) to regard ygaria as one of the oldest writers on Alankara, following the explanation of faTy that अलङ्कार was a work of धर्मकीर्ति. But the S'rirangam edition reads (p. 303) 'सत्कविकाव्यरचनामिवालङ्कारप्रसाधिताम्.' Moreover there is no- thing besides this passage to show that धर्मकीर्ति wrote a work on Poetics. Alankära is a very common word ocourring in the names of works and a Sutralankara written by As'vaghosha is known from a Chinese translation. That the Buddhist Dharmakirti was a poet appears to follow from quotations con- tained in the anthologies where he is often cited as भदन्तधर्मकीर्ति (शाई० No 947-सुभा० 657; सुभा० 737, 1587, 1617, 2246, 3232), The ध्वन्यालोक (p.216) quotes the verse 'लावण्यद्रविणव्ययो न गणितः क्केशो महानर्जितः स्वच्छन्दं चरतो जनस्य हृदये चिन्ताज्वरो निर्मितः। एषापि स्वयमेव तुल्यरमणामावाद्वराकी हता कोडर्थश्रेतसि वेधसा विनिहितस्तन्व्यास्तनुं तन्वता ॥' and says that some explained this verse as an example of व्याजस्तुति while it is really an example of अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा. Then it remarks 'तथा चायं धर्मकीतेः श्रोक इति प्रसिद्धि: सम्भाव्यते च तस्यैव'. The reason assigned is that the verse quoted has underlying it a current of ideas similar to another verse which certainly was compos- od by धर्मकीर्ति. The verse is then quoted (ध्व. p.217). क्षेमेन्द्र (in औचित्यवि०), सुभाषितावलि and other anthologies follow the धवन्याo in ascribing the verse लावण्यद्रविण to धर्मकीर्ति. So the Buddhist philosopher धर्मकीर्ति who commented upon दिङनाग's अंमाणसमुच्चय may have been a poet, but there is nothing to sub- stantiate the claim to regard him as a writer on Alankara. : 6 Bhatti. The Bhattikavya in' 22 cantos was composed mainly for illustrating the rules of Sanskrit grammar" It is

I.6 भदि INTRODUCTION. . XY

divided into four sections, called प्रकीर्णकाण्ड ( sargas I-V. ), अधिकारकाण्ड (VI-IX), प्रसन्नकाण्ड (X-XIII) and तिङन्तकाण्ड (XIV- XXII). In the प्रसन्नकाण्ड, Bhatti illustrates matters that fall to be treated in works on Poetics. In the tenth sarga he gives illustrations of 38 Alankaras ( including the two शब्दालङ्गारS अनुप्रास and यमक). The I1th illustrates माधुर्यगुण (in 47 verses); the 12th illustrates the figure भाविक (which is said to be प्रबन्ध- विषय by भामह III. 52 and दण्डी II. 364) in 87 verses and the 13th elucidates yrargH in 50 verses ( where the same verse may be regarded as composed in Sanskrit as well as in Prakrit ). On account of these four sargas Bhatti deserves a passing notice in the History of Alankara Literature. It will be seen from the comparative table in section 12 that Bhatti illustrates almost the same figures that are defined by भामह and दण्डी. He generally follows the order in which wrHg defines the figures, though he in a few cases deviates from mHe. For example, भामह defines रूपक first and then दीपक, and आक्षेप before अर्थान्तर- न्यास; while भटि illustrates दीपक and अर्थान्तरन्यास before रूपक and आक्षेप respectively; भामह defines तुल्ययोगिता immediately after विरोध, while भटि illustrates तुल्ययोगिता ater उपमारूपक and before विरोध. भट्ि does not define अप्रस्तुतप्र शंसा, which is defined by भामह; while भटि illustrates the figures हेतु and वार्ता to which भामह denies the status of alarkaras. भटि illustrates the figure निपुण which is found in neither भामह nor Dandin. भट्टि does not illustrate लेश and सूक्ष्म which are said to be ex- cellent ornaments of speech by Dandin (along with a); while भामह denies to all three the position of Alankaras. भट्टि devotes about 20 verses to the illustration of यमक and herein is similar to the treatment of यमक in the काव्यादर्श, while भामह is very brief, on this point. From this it is clear that Bhatti does not follow either Bhamaha or Dandin, but bases his ex- amples on some other work or works that were prior to both of them.

As to the age of Bhatti, Mr. Trivedi's Introduction to the भट्टिकाव्य (p. XVIII ff, B.S.series) may be consulted. भट्ि says that he wrote in Valabhi under king Dharasena ( काव्यमिदं विहितं मया वलभ्यां श्रीधरसेननरेन्द्रपालितायाम् । last verse). There were four kings named धरसेन that ruled at Valabhi ( modern Vala in Kathiawar ). When the first धरसेन began to rule is not olear. The earliest grant of धरसेन II. is dated संवत् 252 (of the

XVI SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I.6 भट्टि.

Valabhi era i. e. about 571 A. C. and the latest grant of rad IV is diaa 332 ( of the Valabhi era i. e. about 651 A. C. ). The first धरसेन must have come to the throne some years before Hiaa 183 ( i. e. 502 A. C. ) which is the date mentioned under द्रोणसिंह the successor of धरसेन I. Therefore भदि must have flourished sometime between about 500 and 650 A, C.

Bhatti's name is often given in the mss. as wgtareft and भर्तृस्वामी and his father's name is given as श्रीस्वामी (by जयमङ्गला) or श्रीधरस्वामी ( by the commentator विद्याविनोद). Some scholars identify the author of the भट्टिकाव्य with the donee भट्टिभट, son of बप्प, in a grant of ध्रुवसेन III ( who was son of घरसेन IV ) dated ( वलभी) संवत् 344 (653 A. C. ). Dr. Hultzsch objects to this identification ( E. I. vol. 1 p. 92 ). Mr. B. C. Mazumdar ( J. R. A. S. 1904 pp. 395-397 ) identifies the author of the Bhattikavya with the aanrf of the Mandasor Sun Temple Inscription (Fleet's Gupta Inscriptions No. 18) dated 473 A. C. on the ground of similarity between the verses of the inscription and the description of autumn in the भट्टिकाव्य (sarga II ). This would lead to the result that af flourished under धरसेन I. Prof. A. B. Keith (J.R.A.S.1909 p.435) calls this identification a 'most unfortunate suggestion' and Mr. Mazumdar ( J. R. A. S. 1909 p. 759 ) replies that it is not so. Both Prof. Keith and Mr. Mazumdar agree that Bhatti flou- rished before Bharavi and Dandin and that the Bhattikavya is not the work of भर्तृहरि, author of the वाक्यपदीय.

There are numerous commentaries on the afaetor for which Aufrecht's catalogue may be consulted.

7 Bhamaha's Kâvyalankara. For a long time the Kavyalankara of Bhamaha was known only from quotations (vide Col. Jacob in J. R. A. S. 1897 p. 285 ). But recently mss. of the work have been found and Mr. Trivedi has published the work as an appendix to his edition of the प्रतापसद्रयशोभूषण (B. S. series ).

The work is divided into six परिच्छेदs and contains about 400 verses ( exactly 396 excluding the two verses at the end which roughly give the number of verses on each of five topics षष्टया शरीरं निर्णीतं शतषष्ट्या त्वलक्कतिः। पञ्चाशता दोषदृष्टिः सप्तत्या न्यायनिर्णयः॥ षष्टया शब्दस्य शुद्धिः स्यादित्येवं वस्तुपञ्चकम्। उक्तं षडभि: परिच्छेदैमांमहेन क्रमेण a: u) The verses are in the S'loka metre, except a few at

I. 7 भामह. INTRODUCTION. XVII

the end of each uftea and a few in the body of the work. In the first परिच्छेद after saluting Sarva, he states the purposes of poetry, the qualifications of a poet, the definition of arar and divisions of काव्य from different points of view into गद्य and पद्य, संस्कृत, प्राकृत and अपभ्रंश; he divides काव्य into वृत्तदेवादिचरितशंसि, उत्पाद्यवस्तु, कलाश्रय and शास्त्राश्रय and again into five सर्गबन्ध, अभिनेयार्थ, आख्यायिका, कथा, अनिबद्ध. He then defines सर्गबन्ध, omits the treat- ment of अमिनेयार्थ (dramas) because it has been treated of by others, distinguishes between कथा and आख्यायिका, refers to the वैदर्भ and गौड styles and remarks that the distinctions drawn between the two styles by some are meaningless; and then speaks of some faults such as नेयार्थ, क्विष्ट etc. In the 2nd परिच्छेद he speaks of three gunas, माधुर्य, प्रसाद and ओज: and begins the treatment of Alankaras which ends with the third qfto. The अलंकारs defined by him are (in order) अनुप्रास (refers to आम्यानुप्रास and लाटीयानुप्रास of others), यमक (five varieties), रूपक, दीपक, उपमा (with its seven दोषs), प्रतिवस्तूपमा ( as a variety of उपमा), आक्षेप, अर्थान्तरन्यास, व्यतिरेक, विभावना, समासोकि, अतिशयोक्ति, यथासंख्य, उत्प्रेक्षा, स्वभावोक्ति (according to some), प्रेयस्, रसवत्, ऊजस्वि, पर्यायोक्त, समाहित, उदात्त (of two sorts), ्रिष्ट, अपह्ृति, विशेषोक्ति, विरोध, तुल्ययोगिता, अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, व्याजस्तुति, निदर्शना, उपमारूपक, उपमेयोपमा, सहोक्ति, परिवृत्ति, ससन्देह, अनन्वय, उत्प्रेक्षावयव, संसृष्टि, भाविक, आशीः (according to some ). He denies the status of अलंकारs to हेतु, सूक्षम, लेश ad aTai( which must have been defined before him as figures by some writer on Poetics), as there is no aaifif in them. In the 4th qfedz he dilates upon eleven kinds of doshas in kavya, defines and illustrates the first ten of them. In the fifth qfe he defines and illustrates the eleventh dosha which arises from a faulty प्रतिज्ञा, हेतु or दृष्टात, the treatment being based upon a discussion of such Nyaya-Vais'eshika topics as the number and definitions of pramanas, definitions of yas and its varieties, of हेतु and its varieties, of दृष्टान्त etc. In the 6th परि९ he gives some practical hints to poets for securing सौशब्ध (gramma- tical purity ) in poetry and in this respect resembles Vamana who in the fifth अधिकरण of his काव्यालङ्कारसूत treats the same subject more elaborately. Bhamaha is the oldest extant exponent of the Alankara school of Poetics. Of his personal history we know next to nothing. In the last verse he tells us that he was the son of Rakrilagomin 'अवलोक्य मतानि सत्कवीनामवगम्य स्वधिया च काव्यलक्ष्म। सुजनावगमाय भामहेन ग्रथितं रक्रिलगोमिसुनुनेदम्॥।'. This name रक्रिलमोमिन्

XVIII SÅHITYADARPAŅA. I. 7 भामह.

has given rise to a heated discussion whether Bhamaha was a a Bauddha. Prof. M. T. Narasimhiengar ( J. R. A. S. 1905 pp. 535-545) thinks that भामह was a Bauddha, as रक्रिल (his father's name ) resembles some distinctly Buddhistic names such as Rahula, Potala and Gomin is a name of one of Buddha's disciples. Vide J. R. A. S. for 1908 p. 543 against this view. Prof. Pathak (I.A. 1912 p. 235 ) says that गोमिन is not a contraction of गोस्वामिन्, but means 'venerable' (पूज्य) and that Rakrila was a Buddhist. He relies on a sutra in the 51-z- व्याकरण 'गोमिन् पूज्ये' (IV. 2. 144 गोमान् अन्यः ।). After all there is not much in a name. When Buddhists and followers of Bra- hmanism had lived together for a thousand years, there is no wonder even if distinctively Buddhist names were appro- priated by Brahmanic people, since Buddha himself came to be recognised as an avatara of Vishnu certainly before the 11th century. The same phenomenon is seen in modern India when Hindus adopt distinctively Mahomedan names and titles and vice versa. An author's religion must be judged from the contents of his books and not from his name. In the whole of the Kavyalankara there is nothing that is peculiarly Baddhistic, nor is there any reference to the incidents of Buddha's life and purely Buddhistic legends. The first verse salutes सार्व सर्वज्ञ. सर्वज्ञ is an appellation of शिव as well as of बुद्ध, while सार्व simply means 'सर्वस्मै हित' and is not given by अमर as an appellation of Buddha. भामह teaches the forms सार्व and सर्वीय in VI. 53 'हितप्रकरणे णं च सर्वशब्दात् प्रयुञ्जते। ततशछमिष्टया च यथा सार्व: सर्वीय इत्यपि ।।' (Compare 'सर्वपुरुषाभ्यां णढजौ' पाणिनि V. 1.10). भामह negatives the अपोहवाद of the Bauddhas as regards the expressive power of words (VI. 16-17 'अन्यापोहेन शब्दोर्धमाहेत्यन्ये प्रचक्षते। ... यदि गौरित्ययं शब्द: कृतार्थोऽन्यनिराकृतौ। जनको गवि गोबुद्धेरमृग्यतामपरो ध्वनि: ॥). Kings that drank soma are highly spoken of at IV. 49. Most of his examples refer to Brahmanical gods and he- roes. He frequently alludes to the characters and incidents of the रामायण and महाभारत. For example, III. 7 (कर्ण, पार्थ, शल्य), III. 11 (उदात्तं शक्तिमान् रामो गुरुवाक्यानुरोधकः। विह्यायोपवनं राज्यं यथावनमुपा- गमत्'Il), III. 5 ('अद्य या मम गोविन्द' &c. to be quoted below), II. 41 (यदुप्रवीर and शार्ङ्ग), II. 55 (युगादौ भगवान् ब्रह्मा विनिर्मित्सुरिव प्रजाः), III. 23 (शम्भु and कुसुमायुध ), III. 31 (राम: सप्तामिनत् तालान् गिरि कौञ्ं भृगूत्तम:), IV. 21 (रथाङ्गशूले बिभ्राणौ पातां वः शम्भुशार्ङ्िणौ), V. 39 (भीम and रुधिरपान), V. 41-43 (प्रतिज्ञाs of दुर्योधन, युधिष्ठिर and भीष्म), V. 44 ( meeting of परशुराम and राम), V. 37 (इनूमान् and सीता).

I. 7 भामह. INTRODUGTION. XIX

Bhamaha was a modest man. At the end of the 4th qfto after pointing out the faults to be avoided in poetry he says ' gUT- यायमुदाहतो विधिन चाभिमानेन किमु प्रतीयते। कृतात्मनां तत्त्वदृशां च मादृशो जनोभिसन्धि क इवावभोत्स्यते।।' (IV. 57). He derived help from his predecessors, one of whom, Medhavin, he names. He briefly summarises the sum of literary criticism that existed before him and says that in enumerating the figures of speech he saw various works of others and thought over the matter himself. 'समासेनोदितमिदं धीखेदायैव विस्तरः । असङ्गहीतमप्यन्यदभ्यूह्यमनया दिशा॥' (II. 95) and 'इति निगदितास्तास्ता वाचामलङ्कृतयो मया बहुविधकृतीर्दृद्वान्येषां स्वयं परितर्क्य च'। (V. 69). At the end of the 2nd परि० occurs a verse which has been made much of by some scholars 'स्वयंकृतै- रेव निदर्शनैरियं मया प्रकुपता खलु वागलङ्कतिः।' (96). What is the mean- ing of इयं वागलक्कतिः? If these words refer to the whole of the work called काव्यालङ्कार, then the statement (said to be very emphatic on account of the occurrence of the word qa) must be qualified. There are several examples in the work that are obviously borrowed e. g. IV. 8 'दाडिमानि दशापूपाः षडित्यादि यथोदितम्' (for which see below); I., 41 हिमापहामित्रधरैव्यांप्तं व्योमेत्यवाचकम्- Therefore it cannot be asserted that every example in the book is Bbamaha's own. If the words refer only to the examples of figures of speech, the verse should have occurred at the end of the third परिच्छेद. Besides even in the second परिच्छेद he quotes many verses from other writers. It is true that he gives the sources from which those quotations are taken. But there is no qualifying clause in the verse (स्वयंकृतैरेव etc.) making an exception in favour of such borrowed verses. It is not un- likely that the names of the authors have been lost ( if they occurred in the criginal ) in the lapse of centuries. The number of the mss. of Bhamaha's work is not so large as to make one feel confident about the accuracy of the text of Bhamaha. For example the लोचन (p. 71) says भामहेन हि गुरुदेवनृपतिपुत्रविषयप्री- तिवर्णनं प्रेयोलद्कार इत्युक्तम्, but भामह nowhere defines प्रेय: and only cites an example which refers to देव (III. 4-5). No com- mentary on the work has been found. The only one that is known to have been composed, the भामहविवरण of उद्धट, has not been yet recovered. Therefore too much emphasis cannot be laid on the words 'स्वयंकृतैरेव etc.'

Among the authors and works mentioned by name are the following :- अच्युतोत्तर of रामझर्मा (II. 19 and 58), अश्मकबंश

XX SÂHITYADARPAŅA, I. 7 भामह.

(I.33), कणभक्ष (V. 17), न्यास (VI. 36), पाणिनि (ealled also सालातुरीय, VI. 62-63), मेघावि, रल्ाहरण (III. 8), राजमित्र ( a work, II. 45, III. 10), शाखवर्धन (II. 47). Of these only five viz. अच्युतोत्तर, अश्मकवंश, रत्नाहरण, राजमित्र and शाखवर्धन are names that are not known from other sources. From the अश्मकवंश no quotation is taken by भामह. It is doubtful whether रव्ाहरण is really the title of a work ( उवाच रत्नाहरणे चैद्यं शार्ङ्धनुर्यथा। गृहेष्व- ध्वसु वा नाननं भुअमहे यदधीतिनः । न भुअते द्विजास्तच्च रसदाननिवृत्तये॥). The examples cited from शाखवर्धन and रामशर्मा are cited for only illustrating faults and they are quoted by नमिसाधु (On रुद्रट XI. 24) and in the काव्यप्रकाश ( without name ). Because these are authors and works not referred to elsewhere, therefore it has been urged by some that arHg is very ancient. There is no- thing of the sort. A few years ago even भामह's work was not found. We do not know what the future may discover to us and should be loth to dogmatise on the scanty data at present available. Among the authors and works referred to but not named are भरत (. 24 'उक्त तदभिनेयार्थमुक्तोऽन्यैस्तस्य विस्तरः' and II.4), महाभाष्य of पतञ्जलि ( VI. 21). As regards other writers and works supposed to be quoted or referred to, vide below on the age of Bhamaha. भामह refers to the story of वत्सेश (IV. 40) and of नरवाहनदत्त (IV. 50) both of whom are the principal characters in the बृहत्कथा. He very often cites the views of other rhetoricians under the words अपरे, अन्ये, केषांचित, (II. 6, 8, 87; III. 12, 54 ) and refers to other writers ( on grammar and other S'astras ) also ( IV. 6; V. 6, 11, 60 ). He thought very higbly of Panini's system 'श्रद्धेयं जगति मतं हि पाणिनीयं' (IV. 63); at the beginning of the 6th परिo there is a fine रूपक on grammar सूत्राम्भसं पदावर्त पारायणरसातलम्। धातूणा दिगणग्राहं ध्यानग्रहबृदृतप्रवम्। नापा- रयित्वा दुर्गाधममुं व्याकरणार्णवम्। शब्दरलं स्वयंगममलङ्कर्तुमयं जन: ।'. He refers to दण्डनीति (IV. 39) and to स्फोटवाद (VI.12 'शपथैरपि चादेयं वचो न स्फोटवादिनाम् । नभःकुसुममस्तीति श्रद्दध्यात्कः सचेतनः). His verses are generally smooth and polished and have been largely quoted by the लोचन and other later writers.

The कामधेनु (वाणी विलास ed.) quotes many verses from भामह about definitions of सूत्र, वृत्ति and topics of Poetics which are not found in the काव्यालक्गार. नारायण in his com. on the वृत्तरलाकर quotes long passages from भामह (pp. 5-6) which indicate that भामह wrote on metrics also. Whether the भामह who wrote the टीका on वररुचि's grammar is identical with our author is doubtful.

I. 7 भामह- INTRODUCTION. XXI

Before discussing the question of the age of Bhamaha, it would be better, in order to clear the ground, to say a few words about the काव्यादर्श 8 The Kâvyâdars'a of Dandin. The Kāvyādars'a has been often printed in India (at Calcutta in 1863 with the com. of प्रेमचन्द्रतर्कवागीश, in 1910 at Madras by Prof. Rangacharya with two commentaries, in Poona by Dr. Belvalkar and Shastri Rangacharya Raddi ). The work is divided into three परिच्छेद's; in Prof. Rangacharya's edition there are four परिच्छेदs, the third qfto of the other editions being split up into two. The fourth परिच्छेद in the Madras edition begins with the treat- ment of alys. There are in all 660 verses (in the Calcutta edition ), while in the Madras edition there are 663 verses ( the famous verse लिम्पतीव ... गता being omitted in the 2nd परि०, 2 added at the end of its 3rd qfte, one added at the beginning of its 4th yfto and one more in the middle, viz the verse 'आधिव्याधिपरीताय अद्य श्वो वा विनाशिने। को हि नाम शरीराय धर्मापेतं समाचरेत्।।' after III. 160 of the Calcutta edition). It is the Calcutta edition from which citations are made here.

The first uftda defines kavya, divides the latter into गद्य, पद्य and मिश्र; defines सर्गबन्ध; refers to two varieties of गद्य viz. आख्यायिका and कथा and remarks that there is really no distinction between the two; divides literature into iraa, प्राकृत, अपभ्रंश and मिश्र; speaks of the two styles वैदर्भ and गौड and of the ten gunas; defines and illustrates अनुप्रास; mentions the three essentials that contribute to the making of a poet, viz. प्रतिभा (imagination), श्रुत (culture ) and अभियोग ( constant practice ). The second परिच्छेद defines the word अलङ्गार, enumerates 35 alankaras and illustrates them. The JOEKS treated of are (in order) स्वभावोक्ति, उपमा, रूपक, दीपक, आवृत्ति, आक्षेप, अर्थान्तरन्यास, व्यतिरेक, विभावना, समासोक्ति, अतिशयोक्ति, उत्प्रेक्षा, हेतु, सूक्ष्म, लेश (or लव), यथासंख्य (or क्रम), प्रेयः, रसवत्, ऊर्जस्वि, पर्यायोक्त, समाहित, उदात्त, अपह्वृति, श्रेष, विशेषोक्ति, तुल्ययोगिता, विरोध, अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, व्याजोक्ति, निदर्शना, सहोक्ति, परिवृत्ति, आशीः, सङ्कीर्ण and भाविक. The third परिच्छेद gives an elaborate treatment of यमक, defines and illustrates such चित्रबन्धS aS गोमूत्रिका, अर्धभ्रम, सर्वतोभद्र, स्वरस्थान- वर्णनियम; gives 16 varieties of प्रहेलिकाs; ten kinds of दोषs. Dandin's Kāvyādars'a is to some extent an exponent of the Riti school of Poetics and partly of the Alankāra sshool. Of his personal history we know next to nothing.

XXII SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I.8 काव्यादर्श.

He appears to have belonged to the Deccan or to some part south of the Narmada. In the illustrations the following figure most prominently; मलयानिल (II. 174; III. 165), कावेरी ( III. 166), arait ( III. 114 not actually named but suggested ), चोल (III. 166), कलिङ्ग (165), अवन्ती (II. 280 in Prof. Ranga- charya's edition, the name of वासवदत्ता). The occurrence of the word पशय in I. 5. (आदिराजयशोबिम्बमादर्श प्राप्य वाडायम्। तेषामसन्निधा नेडपि न स्वयं पश्य नश्यति ॥) and in II. 172 (भगवन्तौ जगन्नेत्रे सूर्या चन्द्र- मसावपि। पश्य गच्छत एवास्तं नियतिः केन लड्ड्यते ॥ ) has led to the tradi- tion that Dandin wrote the work for some easy-going prince. But the word is probably a rhetorical device and used for the sake of the अनुप्रास in (पश्य नश्यति). The list of अलङ्गारs (II. 4-7) is suspected to be an interpolation by scholars like Dr. Belvalkar on the grounds of the use of the wrong from दीपकावृती (for वृत्ती, which would mar the metre), the word लव for लेश and the somewhat strange अप्रस्तुतस्तोत्र and विशेष for अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा and विशे- affih. Though these blemishes are somewhat suspicious, still to regard the verses as interpolations on these grounds is going too far. Such lists of alankaras always precede the treatment of them in ancient works. Bhamaha, Udbhata, and Rudrata have them ( though not of all figures in one place). To use synonyms for the names of figures of speech is not an unknown proceeding. उद्गट (VI.1) says 'काव्यदृष्टान्तहेतू चेत्यलक्कारान्परे विदुः' This shows that the figures are to be called काव्यहेतु and काव्यदृष्टान्त but when he comes to the definitions of these he uses the well- known terms काव्यलिङ् and not काव्यहेतु and दृष्टान्त (and not काव्यदृष्टान्त). This would explain the use of लव for लेश and •स्तोत्र for प्रशंसा and also of विशेष for विशेषोक्ति. The Kavyadars'a is throughout written in a flowing, mellifluous style. As compared with Bhamaha, the palm of superiority in the sphere of poetic excellence must be given to Dandin, . though as regards precision, logical acumen and clearness of perception Bhamaha stands higher than Dandin. Dandin's examples bear the stamp of originality and, except in two or three cases which will be discussed below, it has not been possible to point out that he borrows his examples from others. The काव्याद्श mentions the following works by name छन्दोविचिति (I.12), बृहत्कथा (I. 38 भूतभाषामयीं प्राङ्ुरद्भतार्था बृदत्कथाम्), सेतुबन्ध (I. 39) 'महाराष्ट्राश्रयां भाषां प्रकृष्ट प्राकृतं विदुः। सागरः सूक्तिरलानां सेतुबन्धादि यन्मयम् ॥). He refers to a कलापरिच्छेद, which he contemplated writing, probably as a part of his aaet or

I.8 काव्यादर्श. INTRODUCTION. XXIII

as an independent work 'इत्थं कलाचतुष्षष्टिविरोधः साघु नीयताम्। तस्या: कलापरिच्छेदे रूपमाविर्भवष्यति ।' (III. 171). At one time eminent scholars thought that छन्दोविचिति was Dandin's own work. छन्दोविचिति is, however, as shown by me in I. A. for 1911 p. 177, a name for the science of metrics and particularly for the Vedanga on metrics attri- buted to पिङ्गलनाग who is quoted even in the S'abarabhashya (vol. I. p. 16). The word छन्दोविचिति occurs even in कौटिल्य's अर्थशास्त्र (I. 3.1). The following are among the authors and works not quoted by name. पतअ्जलि's महाभाष्य is quoted as आप्तभाषित 'नोपमानं तिडन्तेनेत्यतिकम्याप्तभाषितम्' (काव्या. II. 227); भरत's नाट्यशास्त्र seems to be referred to as another school (आगमान्तर) 'यच्च सन्ध्यङ्गवृत्त्यङ्गलक्षणाद्यागमान्तरे। व्यावर्णितमिदं चेष्टमलक्कारतयैव नः ॥' (II. 367): For सन्ध्यङ्ग, वृत्त्यङ्ग and लक्षण see chapters 19, 20, 16 of the नाट्यशाखत्र. In another place दण्डी says almost in the same way as भामह (I. 24 quoted above) 'मिश्राणि नाटकादीनि तेषामन्यत्र विस्तरः (I. 31). He refers in general terms to former Acharyas or learned men; 'पूर्वशास्त्राणि संहृत्य' ( I. 2 .; this is a common statement with writers; compare 'समाहृत्यान्यतब्राणि' अमर०); मूरयः occurs at I. 9-10 (former sages explained the body of poetry and its orna- ments); II. 7 (इति वाचामलङ्गारा दर्शिता: पूर्वसूरिभिः); किं तु बीजं विकल्पानां पूर्वाचार्ये: प्रदर्शितम्' II. 2; 'एषाः षोडश निर्दिष्टाः पूर्वाचार्येः प्रहेलिकाः' III. 106. He refere to the opinions of other writers on Poetics as केषांचित् or कैश्चित् (II. 227; I. 79) and एके (II. 268 about the de- finition of लेश). He quotes a half verse लिम्पतीव तमोङ्गानि वर्षतीवाञ्ञनं aN: ( (II. 226) and holds an elaborate discussion on it, point- ing out that some writers were misled into regarding that verse (well known even in Dandin's day) as an example of sqmr ( as the word ga occurs in it thrice ), but that the verse is an example of उत्प्रेक्षा (in the first half where two इवs occur). This discussion is pointedly referred to by प्रतीहारेन्दुराज on उन्भ्रट (P. 26 ). The verse occurs in the मृच्छकटिक and also in two of the dramas discovered and ascribed to Bhasa by Mr. Gana- patis'astri, viz. चारुदत्त I. 19 and बालचरित I. 15. दण्डी refers to कापिलs (III. 175 ) and सुगत (III. 174) and to न्याय which is ealled हेतुविद्या by him (III. 173). : In the शार्ङ्गघरपद्धंति (No 174) a verse of राजशेखर is quoted which makes दण्डी the author of three works 'त्रयोऽम्नयस्त्रयो वेदा- स्त्नयो देवास्त्रयो गुणाः। त्रयो दण्डिप्रबन्धाश्च त्रिषु लोकेषु विश्रुताः ॥'. Various scholars have taxed their ingenuity to find out these three works. Pischel made the desperate conjecture on account of

XXIV SAHITYADARPAŅA. I. 8 काव्यादर्स.

not correctly understanding the discussion about the Prudta verse that the मृच्छकटिक was a work of दण्डी and along with the काव्यादर्श and the दशकुमारचरित made up the required number. But now we have two more works in which that verse occurs and they too will have Dandin fathered on them if Pischel's reasoning is to be followed. Others like Peterson ( Intro. TO p. 5) and Dr. Jacobi hit upon the छन्दोविचिति as the third work. But this also has been shown to be wrong. Some took the कलापरिच्छेद as the third work. Whether दण्डी ever wrote a कलापरिच्छेद ( which was only contemplated when he wrote the काव्यादर्श), whether it was an independent work and whether राजशेखर knew of any such work as a कलापरिच्छेद by Dandin are points that require to be established before the कलापरिच्छेद can be fastened upon as Dandin's third work. To add to the confusion there are scholars who seriously question the view that the दशकुमारचरित is a work by the same author that wrote the काव्यादर्श. Mr. Trivedi (Intro. to प्रतापरुद्र० XXXI ), Mr. Agashe ( in I. A. for 1915 p. 67 and more re- cently in his introduction to the दशकुमार० pp. XXV ff ). argue that the author of the काव्यादर्श cannot be the author of the दश- aHT. also. This is not the place to examine their arguments in detail. But a brief reference must be made to some of them. Mr. Agashe's first argument is that the author of the काव्यादर्श was a fastidious critic, who warned all poets to eschew even the slightest blemishes (तदल्पमषि नोपेक्ष्यं काव्ये दुषट कथंचन। स्याद्रपु: सुन्दरमपि श्वित्रेणैकेन दुर्भगम्॥। I. 7. ) and condemned as ग्राम्य even such apparently harmless words as 'कन्ये कामयमानं मां न त्वं कामयसे कथम्। इति ग्राम्योयमर्थात्मा वैरस्याय प्रकल्पते ॥I' I. 63, while in the दश० there are numerous faults in the matter of good taste and grammar and direct references to sexual intercourse. Here two things have to be noted. There is always a great gulf between precept and practice, which has been admitted by all literary critics e.g. the व्याक्तिविवेक says about his method of finding fault with the greatest poets 'स्वकृतिष्वयत्रितः कथमनुशिष्यादन्यमयमिति न वाच्यम्। वारयति भिषगपथ्यादितरान् स्वयमाचरन्नपि तत् ॥' (p. 37); similarly क्षेमेन्द्र in his औचित्य० finds fault with his own com- positions ( under kārikas 20 and 21 ). Besides the To may have been composed while auet was comparatively young and inexperieneed; while the काव्यादर्श is a product of mature years. Moreover what quet means when he styles the verse कन्ये &c. as ग्राम्य has not been clearly grasped. He condemns

I- 8 काव्यादर्श. INTRODUCTION. XXV

the downright, rough and outspoken mode of conveying one's meaning and prefers the suggestive method. This is illustra- ted by avet himself in the next verse which conveys the same sense but in a different manner 'कामं कन्दर्पचाण्डालो मयि वामाक्षि निर्दयः। त्वयि निर्मत्सरो दिष्टथत्यग्राम्योथों रसावहः ॥' (I. 64). The second point emphasized by Mr. Agashe is that there is great differ- ence between the chaste and smooth diction of the काव्यादर्श and the somewhat slipshod style and the long-drawn compounds of the To. Here again there is a misapprehension. The ar-reei being in verse did not allow much scope for long compounds; yet it approves of a compound extending over a half verse (I. 84 पयोधरतटोत्सङ्गलग्नसन्ध्यातपांशुका। कस्य कामा- तुरं चेतो वारुणी न करिष्यति ।) while the दशo being in prose exhibits long compounds and therein accords with the teaching of the काव्यादर्श which condemns long compounds only in पद्य (ओज: समासभूयस्त्वमेतद्रदयस्य जीवितम् । प्ेऽप्यदाक्षिणात्यानामिदमेकं परायणम्।। I 80. ). Subandhu's introductory verses to वासवदत्ता offer a great contrast to his prose. And so do the few verses in the &RT0. Sufficient reasons have not yet been advanced for rejecting Dandin's authorship of the दशo. The first verse of the दश० (ब्रह्माण्डच्छत्र- दण्ड: etc.) is quoted by the सरस्वती० (p.248), which profusely quotes from the कान्यादर्श also. What the three works of Dandin are is still as unsettled as before.

The following are the passages that are common to both दण्डी and भामह word for word. (a) सर्गबन्धो महाकाव्यम्' काव्या. I 14, ऑ. I. 19; (b) मत्रिदूतप्रयाणाजिनायकाभ्युदयैरपि' काव्या. I. 17, भा. I. 20 (मश्रदूत ... दयैश्च यत्); (c) कन्याहरणसंग्रामविप्रलम्भोदयादयः' काव्या. I. 29, भा. I. 27 ( ०दयान्विता); (d ) 'अद्य या मम गोविन्द जाता त्वयि गृहा- गते। कालेनैषा भवेत्प्रीतिस्तवैवागमनात्पुनः॥' काव्या. II. 276, भा. III. 5 (both give it as an example of प्रेयः); (e) तद्भाविकमिति प्राडुः प्रबन्धविषयं गुणम्' काव्या. II.364, भा. III. 52 (भाविकत्वमिति etc.); (6) अपार्थ व्यर्थमेकार्थ .. विरोधि च ।' काव्या. III. 125 ff, भा. IV. 1-2; (g) समुदायार्थशून्यं यत्तदपार्थकमिष्यते' काव्या. III. 128, भा. IV. 8; (hi) 'गतोस्तम्को भातीन्दुर्यान्ति वासाय पक्षिणः ।' काव्या. II. 244, भा. II. 87; (i) 'आक्षेपोर्थान्तरन्यासो व्यतिरेको विभावना' काव्या. II. 4, भा. II. 66; (j) प्रेयो रसवदूर्जस्वि पर्यायोकतं समाहितम्' काव्या. II 5, भा. III. 1. 9 The relative position of Bhâmaha and Dandin. There prevails a sharp conflict of views on this point and on the allied question of भामह and the न्यास and keen controversies C

XXVI SAHITYADARPANA. I. 9 भामह and दण्डी-

have been going on for several years and it cannot be said that the question is definitively settled now one way or the other. Mr. Trivedi (Intro. to yarqea XXIII ff and I. A. vol. 42, 1913 pp. 258-274 and Bhandarkar Com. vol. p. 40), Dr. Jacobi (Z D M G 64 p. 134 and 139), Prof. Rangacharya ( Intro. to edition of काव्यादर्श), Mr. Ganapati S'astri (Intro. to स्वप्र० XXV), Prof. Pathak (Intro. to कविराजमार्ग p. 16) place मामह before avst. Prof. M. T. Narasimhiengar (JRAS 1905 pp. 535 ff ) places avet before ang and Prof. Pathak also seems to have changed his earlier view (JBBRAS vol. 23 p. 19 and I. A. for 1912 p. 236 ff ). I shall try to summarise the views of both sides and make remarks thereon as I proceed and make my own humble contribution to this subject.

Before proceeding further two points must be made clear and emphasized. One is that both wrag and aust expressly say that they had before them the works of older teachers on Poetics and ामह actually names one of them viz. मेधाविन्. This should warn us against jumping to the conclusion that one necessarily borrows from the other when they have identical verses or one criticises the other when their views conflict. This fact and our ignorance of what went before HIH< and avet should make us reluctant to dogmatise and should dis- pose us to regard the hypothesis that both are quoting from or criticizing older works now lost as very probable. The second point is that both are comparatively very early writers. As GR who flourished about 800 A. C. wrote a commentary on wrHe's work, the latter cannot be placed later than about 750 A. C. avet also cannot certainly be placed later than that date for the following reasons. The ta (composed about 1000 A. C.) names avet and his definition of arq (at p. 141) as it quotes भामह and उद्ट. So does प्रतीहारेन्दुराज (about 950 A. C.) quote him (p. 26). The Canarese work कविराजमार्ग (ed. by Prof. Pathak in 1898) composed by yugs, the maw king aaas, looked upon Dandin as an authority (as clearly proved by Prof. Pathak ) and most of the verses in that work (in the 3rd qfto ) are either translations or adaptations of Dandin's verses. The कविराजमार्ग must have been composed between S'ake 737-797 ( 815-865 A. C.). Dr. Barnett shows ( JRAS 1905 p. 841 ) that a Simhalese work siya-bas-lakara ( OSR) on Rhetoric is based upon the aaned of Dandin whom it mentions

J. 9 भामह and दुण्डी. INTRODUCTION. XXVII

by name. Its author king Sena I reigned according to the Mabavams'a A. C. 846-866. If one compares aaz's scientifie treatment of Alankaras ( particularly of उपमा and रूपक ) with that of Dandin and bears in mind the new Alankaras that he defines ( such as काव्यलिङ्ग, दृष्ान्त, पुनरुक्तवदाभास, छेकानुप्रास), the distinction he makes between wufg and Hat and if one compares Vamana's treatment of the ten gunas with Dandin's and the former's disquisition on doshas with the latter's, it will appear that Dandin must have preceded both Udbhata and Vamana by & considerable period. So Dandin also cannot be placed later than 750 A. C.

I shall now set out the grounds some or all of which are relied upon by those who place wHa prior to Dandin.

(a) Mr. Trivedi and Prof. Rangacharya say that wre is referred to as चिरन्तन by the अलङ्कारसर्वस्व (p.3), his work is styled आकर by राघवभट्ट (शाकुन्तल p. 14) and that he is styled 'ancient' in the प्रतापरुद्र० ('पूर्वेभ्यो भामहादिभ्यः,' 'प्राचा भामहेन' p. 11). The only place where according to Mr. Trivedi avet is mentioned before भामह is नमिसाधु on रुद्रट (I. 2) quoted above. I fail to see how this proves or even suggests the priority of e to दण्डी. भामद is an ancient writer and so there is nothing special in calling him ud. Do these scholars mean that whenever reterence is to be made to older writers all ancient names must be trotted forth ? Further afrenry is older than all the authors mentioned by Mr. Trivedi and therefore even a single positive reference where aust is placed by a writer before मेघावी who preceded भामह is sufficient to knock out all argument based upon mere silence. Besides too much cannot be made of the views of authors belonging to the 14th century about the relative chronology of authors that flourished seven or eight hundred years earlier. If we followed such later writers in chronological details, there would be a hopeless mess. The अलङ्कारसर्वस्व speaks of उद्भट also as चिरन्तन. Does Mr. Trivedi think that auet is therefore later then EFe? Mr. Trivedi forgets that जयरथ commenting upon the passage of the सर्वस्व specially includes avet among the ancients. Therefore this point is worth very little.

(b) Dandin's elaborate treatment of Yamaka and S'abda- lankāras in a separate chapter and his numerons subdivisions

XXVIII SAHITYADARPANA. I. 9 भामह and दण्डी.

of Upama stamp him as a later writer; while anne's divisions are not minute. I am of opinion that this puts the matter exactly the opposite way. भरत gives ten varieties of यमक (16. 59-63), while भामह gives only five (II. 9). No one has made bold to place भामह before the नाट्यशास्त्र. यमक was highly thought of even by कालिदास (vide रघु. 9th sarga). It occurs even so early as in aaaraa's inscription of A. D. 150. It is precisely later writers that look down upon यमक. उद्भट ignores it altogether though he defines अनुप्रास at some length, and qrHz is very brief. The same remarks apply to rTrs. Even Subandhu and Bana knew ga-a, various puzzles like अक्षरच्युतक, प्रहेलिका etc. Dandin's treatment of उपमा is un- scientific but follows that of भरत; while भामह is the first of those who place the divisions of sqqr on a grammatical basis, as done later by ERe and qrHe. From these very facts I would argue that Dandin is earlier than wTHE. Both arguments are at least equally plausible. It is possible that दण्डी and भामह follow different traditions, the former having more affinity to भरत's school, while भामह follows a school that relies more upon mere Alankāras.

(c) The commentator तरुणवाचस्पति distinctly says that in some places Dandin criticizes Bhamaha (e. g. on aost I. 23, 29; II 235, 358 and III. 127). तरुणवाचस्पति is comparatively a late writer. He quotes from the दशरूपक (on दण्डी II. 281) and probably refers to the सरस्वती in the sixfold division of ritis. Therefore he is at least later than the 11th century. He found two conflicting views and thinks that avet criticizes HE. A similar example will illustrate how unsafe it is to rely upon later commentators in the matter of chronology. चक्रवर्तिभट्टाचार्य in his commentary on the काव्यप्रकाश thinks that मम्मट criticizes the view of the अलङ्गारसर्वस्व on the verse राजति तटीय etc. (10th उ.) and so says Nagoji also; while जयरथ (who wrote about 1200 and was near to both मम्मट and the सर्वस्व) thinks that the सर्वस्व criticizes the काव्यप्रकाश (p. 199 of सर्वस्व). Therefore तरुणवाचस्पति's remarks should carry hardly any weight with us in the absence of other cogent evidence.

(d) भामह distinguishes between कथा and आख्यायिका, while avet says that the two are but different names for the same elass of composition ('तत्कथाख्यायिकेत्येका जातिः संज्ञाद्वयाङ्किता' I. 28). It is supposed that दण्डी criticizes भामह. भामह makes the follow-

1.9 भामह and दण्डी. INTRODUCTION. XXIX

ing points of distinction between the two; (1) सोच्छासाख्यायिका मता ॥ (2) वृत्तमाख्यायते तस्यां नायकेन स्वचेष्टितम्। (3) वक्त्रं चापरवक्त्रं च काले भाव्यर्थशंसि च । (4) कवेरमिप्रायकृतैः कथा (थ१) नैः कैश्विदक्किता।', (5) कन्याहरणसंग्रामविप्रलम्भोदयान्विता (I take these two lines as part of the description of आख्यायिका); but a कथा is न वक्त्रापरवक्त्राभ्यां युक्ता ( this is against No 3 above), नोच्छासवत्यपि (No. 1) । अन्यैः स्वचरितं तंस्यां नायकेन तु नोच्यते (No 2 above). As भामह is silent about the points 4 and 5 in describing UT, he means that they are to be absent in a कथा. दण्डी attacks all these points ex- cept one. According to दण्डी, some say that in an आख्यायिका the narrator is the hero himself while in a qur the narrator may be the hero or someone else. This is not the distinction that भामह draws between कथा and आख्यायिका. 'तयोराख्यायिका किल ॥ नायकेनैव वाच्यान्या नायकेनेतरेण वा। ... अपि त्वनियमो दृष्टस्तत्राप्यन्यैरुदीरणात्। अन्यो वक्ता स्वयं वेति कीटृग्वा मेदलक्षणम् ।I' काव्या. I. 23-25. दण्डी remarks that even in आख्यायिकाs, the narrators in some cases are others than the hero. On points 1 and 3 above he remarks 'वक्त्रं चापरवकत्रं च सोच्छासत्वं च भेदकम्॥ चिह्नमाख्यायिका याश्चेतप्रसङ्गेन कथास्वपि॥ आर्यादिवत्प्रवेशः किं न वक्त्रापरवक्त्रयोः । भेदश्व दृष्टो सम्भादिरुच्छासो वास्तु किं ततः ॥।' I. 26-27. He says as आर्याs are used in कथाs, so there is no reason why वक्त्र and अपरवक्त verses cannot be employed in them. Similarly the sections of कथाs are called lambhas ( lambakas in the बृहत्कथा ); what difference does it make if they are called उच्छासs as in the case of आख्यायिकाs ? On points 4 and 5 दण्डी says that the topics कम्वाहरण etc. occur in सर्गबन्ध also and are not peculiar to आख्यायिकाs and that the use of some catchword (as the word श्री in the verses at the end of each sarga by माघ and अनुराग in the सेतुबन्ध) would not be a blemish in a कथा. 'कन्याहरणसंग्रामविप्रलम्भोद यादय: । सर्गबन्धसमा एव नैते वैशेषिका गुणाः ॥ कविभावकृतं चिह्मन्यत्रापि न दुष्यति' काव्या. I. 29-30. It will be shown later on (Part II ) that the two classes of works, कथा and आख्यायिका, were known to पतज्ञलि who named several of them, that long before the 6th century A. C. (as attested by सुबन्धु and बाण) आख्यायिकाs exhibited the special features on which भामह dwells. Therefore it is not necessary to suppose that दण्डी criticizes the dicta of भामइ, particulary because one point of attack ( about the narrator ) in the काव्यादर्श is not the opinion held by भामह.

(०) दण्डी (in II. 51 न लिङ्गवचने भिन्ने न हीनाधिकतापि वा। उपमादूष- णायालं यत्रोद्वेगो न धीमताम् ।।) refers to लिङ्गमेद, वचनमेद, हीनता and अधि- कता between उपमान and उपमेय as blemishes in some cases but

XXX SAHITYADARPANA. L 9 भामह and दण्डी.

not in all; while भामह speaks of seven blemishes in उपमा. But this cannot be made an argument for the priority of भामइ. भामह himself says that मेधाविन् enumerated seven उपमादोषs (vide above p. XIII). So this was an ancient topic. One may rather use this as an argument for Dandin's priority. Dandin refers to only four उपमादोषs; while मेधावी knows seven and भामह follows the latter. So दण्डी was the pioneer. वामन speaks of six उपमादोष (का. सूत्र. IV.2.8.)

(f) दण्डी says that even the words 'गतोस्तम्कों भातीन्दुर्यान्ति वासा- य पक्षिणः are certainly good (poetry) in certain circumstances ('गतो ... पक्षिणः। इतीदमपि साध्वेव कालावस्थानिवेदने' II. 244); while भामह says about those words 'are such words poetry? (Some ) designate them afar.' His words may also mean 'such words are bad samples of poetry' (गतोःपक्षिणः। इत्येवमादि कि काव्यं वार्तामेनां प्रचक्षते। II 87 ). Prof. Rangacharya and Mr. Trivedi rely on this as proving Bhamaha's priority. But the words इत्ये .... चक्षते show that भामह is quoting these words as an example of वार्ता given by others and these words are not his own composition compare the use of the words इतीदमपि of दण्डी in connect- ion with लिम्पतीव). Now वार्ता is a figure of speoch illustrated by af (X. 45). Dandin seems to allude to it in the words 'तच् वार्ताभिधानेषु वर्णनास्वपि दृश्यते' (I. 85). But Dandin does not define the figure arai. Ha probably disapproved of it and included some examples of it under सवमानोक्ति. He takes the example naltaus: cited by some old writer and says that even that example may be good poetry if the snggested sense be taken (but if the plain meaning is the only one intend- ed it is not काव्य). Vide काव्यप्रकाश (5th उल्ास p. 240 Va.) for the various meanings that these words may suggest. These words गतोस्तमर्क: are well-known examples (मूर्धामिषिक) like the famous दशदाडिमादिवाक्य (which occurs in भामह at IV. 8) that is cited in the शाबरभाष्य (vol. I p. 13 and 497).

(g) The verse अद्य या मम गोविन्द is given by both as an ex- ample of dy :. The argument of Mr. Trivedi is that Bhamaha cites his authority if he is quoting from another while aust does not do so as in the case of the verse लिम्पतीव. This argument does injustice to दण्डी. दण्डी does clearly indicate that he is citing another's verse as a well-known example by using the words इतीद्मपि. As remarked above भामह's text is not so immacul- ate as to inspire complete confidence. So the first part of

I.9 भामह and दुण्डी. INTRODUCTION. XXXI

the argument really begs the whole question. There are other considerations also, भामह does not even define प्रेय: and ऊर्जस्वि and cites one example of each; while quet defines both and gives two examples of प्रेय: The obvious conclusion is that भामह found both figures defined by some predecessor and was con- tent simply to cite an example or probably he disapproved of these as figures of speech and following older authorities simply cited examples. Therefore it is going too far to say that दण्डी takes the example from भामह. One may as plausibly argue that भामह borrows from दण्डी one of the latter's two examples. The verse अद्य या मम is similar in purport to the महाभारत 'या प्रीतिः पुण्डरीकाक्ष तवागमनकारणात । सा किमाख्यायते तुभ्य. मन्तरात्मासि देहिनाम् ॥' (उद्योग. 89.24).

(h) भामह defines उपमारूपक (III. 34), ससन्देह (III. 42), अनन्वय (III. 44 ) and उत्प्रेक्षावयव (III. 46) as separate figures of speech; while avet does not regard them as separate figures, but includes उपमारूपक under रूपक, ससन्देह and अनन्वय under उपमा and उत्प्रेक्षावयव under उत्प्रेक्षा (अनन्वयससन्देहावुपमास्वेव दर्शिती। उपमारूपकं चापि रूपकेष्जरेव दर्शितम्।। उत्प्रेक्षामेद एवासावुत्प्रेक्षावयवोपि च। II. 358-359). This has been used as an argument for amHe's priority. All these figures are separately illustrated by uf. There is no compelling reason why auef must be regarded as referring to ag and not to those Alankarikas who preceded wf. There is one more reason which throws doubt on the theory advanced. उपमेयोपमा is separately defined by भामह (III. 36), while दण्डी does not define it but his अन्योन्योपमा (II.18) is उपमेयोपमा. If दण्डी had the work of भामह before him, he would have said as he said in the other four cases that उपमेयोपमा was included under उपमा.

(i) Bhamaha after enumerating ten doshas ( which are identical with Dandin's ) adds an eleventh dosha in the words 'प्रतिज्ञाहेतुदृष्टान्तहीनं दुष्ट च नेष्यते' and devotes one whole परि० to the discussion of this dosha. Dandin says the discus- sion whether प्रतिज्ञाहेतुदृष्टान्तहानि is a dosha or not is dry and abstruse and no purpose is served by entering upon it (प्रतिज्ञाहेतुदृष्टानहा निदोंषो नवाप्यस। विचार: कर्कशः प्रायस्तेनालीढेन f go4 l III. 127). It is not to be supposed that discus- sions about logical matters in the province of Poetics were first started by भामह. Even the नाट्यशारत्र enumerates ten do- shas of karya one of which is न्यायादपेत and defined as 'न्यायादपेतं विन्रेयं

XXXII SAHITYADARPANA. I. 9 AIAE and ai.

प्रमाणपरिवर्जितम्' (नाम्य. 16.89). The प्रमाणs are the special province of lagic. The काव्यादर्श, therefore, alludes if at all to the नाट्यशाल् or some alankārika who worked up the simple statement of the नाट्यशास्त्र into greater detail. It is more than doubtful whether, if दण्डी had the whole of the 5th परिo of भामइ before him and was in a fighting mood, he would have let off wrag with such a mild and suave remark 'तेनालीढेन कि फलम्'. The ton दोषड of the नाट्यशास्त्र (16. 84) are अर्थहीन, एकार्थ, गूढार्थ, अर्थान्तर, विसन्धि, शब्दच्युत (or शंब्दहीन as in 16. 90), विषम, भिन्नार्थ, अभिपुतार्थ and न्याया. दपेत. The first seven correspond more or less with अपार्थ, एकार्थ, ससंशय, अपक्रम, विसन्धि, शब्दहीन, मिन्नवृत्त (of भामह and दण्डी). The भिन्नर्थ of the नास्य is the same as असम्य and ग्राम्य and अभिपुतार्थ is defined as 'यत्पादेन (यत्पादे न?) समस्यते'. The यतिभ्रष्टदोष (of भामद) was probably included in the विषम (of the नाट्यशास्त्र) and व्यर्थ under the अर्धहीन (of भरत). The Alankara writers probably draw upon the aee also for some of the names of the doshas; compare न्यायसूत्र V.2.1. 'प्रतिज्ञाहानि: प्रतिभान्तरं प्रतिज्ञाविरोषः प्रतिज्ञा- संन्यास: हेत्वन्तरमर्थान्तरं निरर्थकमविज्ञातार्थमपार्थकमप्राप्तकालं न्यूनमघिक पुनरुक- मननुभाषणञ्चानमप्रतिभा ... निग्रहस्थानानि.' I shall now mention the points relied upon for placing भामह after Dandin. (i) भामह says 'हिमापहामित्रच रैर्व्याप्तं व्योमेत्यवाचकम्,while दण्डी gives the whole verse of which this is a part as as example of a kind of प्रहेलिका 'विजितात्म (न्र V.1.) भवद्वेषिगुरुपादहतो जनः । हिमापहामित्रधरै्व्यांसं न्योमाभिनन्दति I'(III.120). शाङ० ascribes it to दण्डी and explains it. This is a somewhat formidable argument and the only way of escaping from it is to assert that avet is simply quoting from some older writer, whom arng also quotes. Bat there are a few considerations even against this. auet has not been shewn to quote any verse excopt लिम्पतीव from another author. The other verses suggested to be quotations are matters of controversy. It would be a gratuitous assumption to predicate of any verse in the araTo as another's simply because otherwise it leads to inconvenient results. The words 'दोषानपरिसंख्येयान्मन्यमाना वयं पुनः। साध्वीरेवाभिधास्यामस्ता दुष्टा यास्त्वलक्षणाः II' (काव्य० III. 107) appear to suggest that Dandin gives his own examples of प्रहेलिकाS. (k ) Dandin's treatment of Upama is unscientific as com- pared with भामह' s; s0 also दण्डी treats of अनुप्रास very concisely and dilates upon Yamaka at great length. But this is not such a strong point after all. The Agnipurana which borrows from

J. 9 भामह and दण्डी, INTRODUCTION. XXXIII

भामह has a treatment of उपमा similar to Dandin's and even comparatively early writers like Rudrata have treated of Yamaka at great length. .

(1) There are many passages in Bhamaha's work where he either refers to the views of other authors on Poetics or ridicules them. In most of these cases the views animadverted upon are found in Dandin. arHa criticizes those who distinguish the two styles वैदर्भ and गौड and prefer the former to the latter and ironically calls them सुधिय: 'वैदर्भमन्यदस्तीति मन्यन्ते सुधियोऽपरे। तदेव च किल ज्याय: सदर्थमपि नापरम्॥ गौडीयमिदमेतत्त वैदर्भमिति किं पृथक्। गतानुगति- कन्यायान्नानाख्येयममेघसाम् ।' (I. 31-32). The काव्यादर्श makes this distinction and shows its preference for वैदर्भमार्ग. 'अस्त्यनेको गिरां - मार्ग: सूक्ष्ममेद: परस्परम्। तत्र वैदर्भंगौडीयौ वर्ण्येते प्रस्फुटान्तरौ। इति वैदर्भमार्गस्य प्राणा दश गुणाः स्मृताः । एषां विपर्ययः प्रायो दृश्यते गौडवर्त्मनि ॥' (I. 40 and 42). But these words (अनेको मार्ग:) of Dandin show that before him many styles had been recognised and as long as we do not possess all the ancient works that preceded Dandin (a thing which is never likely to happen ) we cannot assert with an air of assurance that aHa criticizes Dandin alone and no one else. It will be noticed that aro also credits the Gauda style with pomposity 'गौडेष्वक्षरडम्बरः' ( हर्षचरित Intro. verse 7). (m) Dandin names ten gunas and the names are the same as those in the नाट्यशास्त्र (16. 92). भामह has almost nothing to say on the gunas. But he seems to be the first of those who like ध्वनिकारिका II. 8. 10, 11 andमम्मट reduced the gunas to three and ridicules those who look upon ओज: as a profusion of compounds 'माधुर्यमभिवान्छन्तः प्रसाद च सुमेधसः । समासवन्ति भूयांसि न पदानि प्रयुअ्ते॥ केचिदोजोभिधित्सन्तः समस्यन्ति बहून्यपि । श्रव्यं नातिसमस्तार्थ काव्यं मधुरमिष्यते। अविद्वदङ्गनाबाल- अतीतार्थ प्रसादवत्॥' (II. 1-3). This shows, according to some, a distinctly later tendeney, while Dandin follows the' ancient view of Bharata. But when the tendeney to reduce the gunas began, no one knows. And the ten gunas are enumerated by Vamana who is certainly later than Bhamaha. Besides Dandin does not distinctly say that माघुर्य and प्रसाद would not allow the use of long compounds, though he distinctly says 'airs: समासभूयस्त्वं' (I.80). It may plausibly be urged that very likely भामह is referring to another writer. (n) Bhamaha says यदुक्तं त्रिप्रकारत्वं तस्या: कैश्चिन्महात्मभिः।निन्दा- प्शंसाचिख्यासामेदादत्रा भिधीयते॥ सामान्यगुणनिर्देशात् त्रयमध्युदितं ननु। मालोप-

XXXIV SAHITYADARPANA. L 9 भांमह and दण्डी.

मादि: सर्वोपि न ज्यायान् विस्तरो मुषा ॥।'II. 37-38. He refers to the threefold division of उपमा into निन्दोपमा, प्रशंसोपमा and आचिख्या- सोपमा. These three varieties of उपमा ocour in the same order in काव्या. (II. 30-32). The नाट्य speaks of प्रशंसोपमा and निन्दोपमा (16. 49-50) but not of आचिख्यासोपमा. On the other hand it is urged that aHa's words, strictly interpreted, mean that उपमा was divided only into three varieties, while दण्डी gives over 30 including these three. If he meant to refer to these three as a few out of many yarrs he would have said प्रकाराख्रय एतेपि तस्या उक्ता etc.' There is some force in this latter argument. But it has to be noted that in the same breath (with these three ) he speaks of मालोपमा and other varieties of Upama as a mere superfluity. मालोपमा does occur in the काव्या. II. 42.

(o) The काव्यादर्श says 'हेतुश्र सूक्ष्मलेशौ च वाचामुत्तमभूषणम् (II. 235 ), while भामह says 'हेतुश्च सूक्ष्मो लेशोथ नालक्कारतया मतः' ( II. 86). He puts his emphatic denial on the ground that they do not contain वक्रोक्ति. It may be argued that because भामह said that they were not even alunkaras, auet equally vehemently asserts that they are the best ornaments of speech.

(p) 'स्वभावोक्तिरलङ्कार इति केचित्प्रचक्षते। अर्थस्य तदवस्थत्वं स्वभावोभिहितो यथा ।' भामह II. 93; दण्डी speaks of स्वभावोक्ति as the first of alarkaras and calls it जाति also 'नानावस्थं पदार्थानां रूपं साक्षाद्विवृण्वती। स्वभावोक्तिश्च जातिश्चेत्याद्या (II 8.). It is true that भामह's defini- tion has a very close verbal resemblance to Dandin's; but Fn- वोक्ति is a very ancient अलङ्गार. बाण speaks of it as जाति. Sa this is not decisive.

(q) 'एतदेवापरेन्येन व्याख्यानेनान्यथा विदुः। नानारत्नादियुक्तं यव तत किलोदात्तमुच्यते॥।' भा. III. 12. दण्डी says 'आशयस्य विभूतेर्वा यन्महत्त्त्वम- नुत्तमम्। उदात्त ... ।। रतभित्तिषु संक्रान्तैः प्रतिबिम्बशतैर्वृतः। ज्ञातो लङ्केश्वरः कृच्छ्रादा- जनेयेन तत्त्वतः॥ पूर्वत्राशयमाहात्म्यमत्राभ्युदयगौरवम्। सुव्यञ्जितमिति प्रोक्तमुदात्तद्वय- मप्यदः ॥' काव्या. II. 300, 302-3. It will be noticed that Dandin's. example begins with the word Ta. But as against the theory that भामह refers to दण्डी it must be pointed out that उदात्त is an ancient figure. uf gives two examples corresponding to the two varieties of the figure.

(r) भामह says 'आशीरपि च केषाज्निदलङ्कारतया मतः' (III 54) and gives two examples. दण्डी says 'आशीर्नामाभिलषिते वस्तुन्याशंसनं यथा।

I.9 भामह and दण्डी. INTRODUCTION. XXXV

पातु वः परमं ज्योतिरवाङ्मनसगोचरम् ॥।' II. 357. भामह may or may not be referring to दण्डी. आशी: is a figure illustrated by भट्ि and आाशी: is one of the 36 लक्षणs defined by भरत (16. 29). (+) 'पुनरुक्तमिदं प्राडुरन्ये शब्दार्थमेदतः। ... अत्रार्थपुनरुक्तं यत्तदेवैकार्थमिष्यते। ... तामुत्कमनसं नूनं करोति ध्वनिरम्भसाम्। सौधेषु धनमुक्तानां प्रणालीमुखपातिनाम्॥।' मा. IV. 12,15-16. दण्डी says 'अविशेषेण पूर्वोक्तं यदि भूयोपि कीर्त्यते। अर्थतः शब्दुतो वापि तदेकार्थ मतं यथा ॥ उत्कामुन्मनयन्त्येते बालां तदलकत्विष:। अम्भोधरास्तडित्वन्तो गम्भीरा: स्तनयिलवः॥' III. 135-136. It will be noticed that anwa's example also is very similar to Dandin's. (u) As quoted above नमिसाधु (रुद्रट I. 2) refers to the अलक्कारशास्त्रs composed by 'दण्डिमेधाविरुद्रभामहादिकृतानि'. It is argued that, as मेधाविन् certainly preceded भामह, नमिसाधु has purposely arranged the authors in chronological order and therefore दण्डी preceded even मेघावी. There is some force in the argument. But underlying it there is an assumption that m- arg intends to arrange them chronologically. There is no proof of such an intention. His only purpose is to assert that some authors wrote on अलङ्गार before रुद्रट. We shall have to attribute to him a double assertion (i, e. to use the language of the sftwitns there would be वाक्यमेद). The upshot of the above discussion is that the reasons usually advanced by the partisans of Bhamaha's priority fall very far short of what is required and are easily explicable without the hypothesis of Bhamaha's priority and that the grounds urged for placing Dandin before Bhamaha, though of some force, are not so strong as to produce conviction in every unbiassed mind. It seems probable that भामह and दण्डी follow independent traditions, the former having more affinity with the agr school and the latter with wra's school. Whoever may be ear- lier, both are very near each other and are to be placed between 500-630 A. C., If however it be said that from the materials collected above one must be held to be borrowing from or criticizing the other and that the third alternative suggested above is not admissible, then I would declare myself in favour of Dandin's priority over Bhamaha. There is no use in repetition. I hold that the reasons assigned for Dandin's prio- rity are more weighty ( though not decisive ) than those as- signed for Bhamaha's priority A few words must be said concerning the heated contro- versy about ang and the -TH. The two great protagonists here

XXXVI SAHITY ADARPANA. I. 9 भामह and दण्डी.

are Prof. Pathak and Mr. Trivedi. भामह says 'शिष्टप्रयोगमात्रेण न्यासकारमतेन वा। तृचा समस्तषष्ठीकं न कथंचिदुदाहरेत्। सूत्रज्ञापकमात्रेण वृत्रहन्ता यथोदितः । अकेन च न कुर्वीत वृतति तद्गमको यथा ॥' (VI 36-37). This means that a poet should not employ in his work a compound in which a word ending in the aq affix is joined with another word in the genitive ( in dissolving that compound ), following merely the usage of fargs or the opinion of ths THR, as the word वृत्रहन्ता was taught (spoken of, by the न्यासकार) by merely relying upon the indication furnished from Panini's sutra, nor should ( a poet ) employ tho compound of a word ending in are ( with another in the genitive ) as in the example तद्गमक. This indicates that भामह'S न्यासकार allowed the compound of a तृच with another word and that in his work वृत्रहन्ता was cited as an example ( also तद्गमक). Prof. Pathak thinks that in the commentary of जिनेन्द्रबुद्धि on the काशिका which is styled न्यास (and also काशिकाविवरणपज्ञिका) such a procedure is per- mitted and that therefore भामह is later than the न्यास which is later than the काशिका. Now the Chinese traveller It-sing makes some rather confused statements about the grammatical works of Panini's system. If they be followed as is usually done, the Kas'ika was composed about 660 A. C. So the TH will have to be placed not earlier than about 700 A. C. and ane will have to be assigned to about 750 A. C. Mr. Trivedi on the other hand contends that the काशिकान्यास pas- sages quoted by Prof. Pathak do not contain the view attributed to the न्यास by भामह, that they do not contain the word वृत्रहन्ता so pointedly referred to by भामह and that therefore भामह is not referring to the काशिकान्यास. When such eminent scholars disagree on a purely grammatical issue, it would be hazardous to take sides. But in my humble opinion Mr. Trivedi seems to be right in his contention. Vide for Prof. Pathak's view I. A. 1912 p. 235 and JBBRAS vol. 23 p. 18 and for Mr. Trivedi's views I. A. 1913 p. 258. It has to be re membered that Bana in his हर्षचरित (प्रसन्नवृत्तयो गृहीतवाक्याः कृतगुरुपद- न्यासा ... लोक ... इव व्याकरणेपि' III. para 5 of my edition) refers to a वृत्ति and न्यास. The न्यास of वाण cannot be the काशिकान्यास, as बाण flourished in the first half of the 7th century. So it is likely that भामह refers to the न्यास mentioned by बाण. Attempts are made to fix the age of both भामह and दण्डी by reference to para'lel passages from early writers and it is argued that they are later than those poets. Unless the very

I. 9 भामह and दण्डी. INTRODUCTION, XXXVII

words are quoted I am not at all disposed to attach the slightest weight to parallelism of thought. There is no monopoly in the realm of thought as was observed by the ध्वनिकारिका (IV. 11 'संवादास्तु भवन्त्येव बाडुल्येन सुमेघसाम्।'). It is said that दण्डी's 'इन्दोरिन्दीवरदुति। लक्ष्म लक्ष्मीं तनोतीति प्रतीतिसुभगं वचः ॥' is taken from the शाकुन्तल I. Similarly 'प्रभामान्रं हि तरलं दृश्यते न तदाश्रयः' (काव्या. II. 129) may be said to be a reminiscence of न अभातरलं ज्योतिरुदेति वसुधातलात' (शाकुन्तल I). So also काव्या. II. 286 is similar to verses in the कुमारo and रघु०; and the words 'अरल्ालोकसंहार्यमवार्य सूर्यरश्मिभिः । दृष्टिरोधकरं यूनां यौवनप्रभवं तमः ।' (काव्या. II. 197) are supposed to have been suggested by बाण's words 'केवलं च निसर्गत एवाभानुमेद्यमरलालोकोच्छेद्यमप्रदीपप्रभापनेयमतिगहनं तमो यौवनप्रभवम्' (कादम्बरी para 103 of my edition). Prof. Pathak thinks that Dandin's disquisition on the three kinds of कर्म (निर्वर्त्य, विकार्य and प्राप्य, काव्या. II. 240-241) is borrowed from the वाक्यपदीय (about 650 A. C. according to Prof. Pathak; I. A. for 1912 p. 235 ff). Unless it be shown that the वाक्यपदीय was the first to make this distinction, this argu- ment is worthless. In the words 'नासिक्यमध्या परितश्चतुर्वर्णविभूषिता। अस्ति काच्वित्पुरी यस्यामष्टवर्णाह्या नृपाः' (काव्या. III. 114) the com. तरुणवाचस्पति sees a reference to aTait and to the Pallavas. In another place Dandin refers to a king राजवर्म (रातवर्म according to some commentators), who had a vision of the Deity ( II. 279). Prof. R. Narasimha- char (I. A. 1912 p. 90) and Prof. Belvalkar (notes on the afaro) regard राजवर्मा to be a पल्लव putting the two verses together and identify him with नरसिंह वर्म II or राजसिंहवर्म (690-715 A. C.) and thus place avet at the end of the 7th century. But this is a futile effort. Whether राजवर्मा or रातवर्मा was a पल्लव we do not know. On the contrary the commentary शुतानुपालिनी says that he was a king of केरल. राजवर्मा is a very general name. It may have been borne by a dozen kings of ancient India. Similarly in नासिक्यमध्या (which is a प्रहेलिका) it is purely guess- work. The town may be aait near Cochin.

Some think that the verses of भामह [I. 42-44 अयुक्तिमद्यथा दूता जलभृन्मात्रकेङ च (१मारुतेन्दवः) । तथा भ्रमरहारीतचक्र्वाकशुकादयः॥। अवाचो व्यक्तवाचश्च दूरदेशविचारिणः । कथं दूत्यं प्रपद्येरन्निति युक्त्या न युज्यते॥ यदि चोत्कण्ठया यत्तदुन्मत्त इव भाषते। तथा भवतु भूम्रेदं सुमेधीभि: प्रयुज्यते ॥] contain a covert attack on or reference to the मेघदूत. Mr. T. Ganapati S'astri, who has his own axe to grind as will be seen d

XXXVIH SAHITYADARPANA. I. 9 भामह and दण्डी.

a little later on, vehemently protests against this theory (Intro. to स्वप्र० 1916 p. 7) and says that कालिदास in his fine verse (धूमज्योतिःसलिलमरुता) condescends to administer a gentle rebuke to the extreme theorist wrag. In another part of his work wTHE refers to the story of चत्सेश (उदयन) and delivers a spirited attack against some poet or poets who so narrated Udayana's story as to run counter to the dictates of S'astra and worldly experience. 'अन्तर्योषशताकीण सालक्कायननेत्रकम्। तथाविरधं गजच्छद्म नाजञासीत् स स्वभूगतम्। यदि वोपेक्षितं तस सचिवैः स्वार्थसिद्धये। अहो नु मन्दिमा तेषां भक्तिवा नास्ति भर्तरि। शरा दृढधनुर्मुक्ता मन्युमद्भिररातिभिः । मर्माणि परिहृत्यास्य पतिष्यन्तीति कानुमा ॥ हतोनेन मम आ्रांता मम पुत्र: पिता मम। मातुलो भागिनेयश्च रुषा संरब्धचेतसः ॥ अस्यन्तों विविधान्याजावायुधान्यपराधिनम् । एकाकिनमरण्यान्यां न हन्युर्बहवः कथम्॥ नमोस्तु तेभ्यो विद्वव्यो येऽभिप्रायं कवेरिमम्। शास्त्रलोकावपास्यैवं नयन्ति नयवेदिनः ॥ सचेतसो वनेभस्य चर्मणा निर्मितस्य च। अन्तरं वेद बालोपि कष्टं किं नु कथं नु तद।।' IV. 41-47). Mr. Ganapati S'astri thinks that this is an attack against the प्रतिज्ञायौगन्धरायण of भास. His theory is that भामह preceded कालिदास and followed भास and he relies upon the fact that in the speech of eua (I Act p. 13) the words 'अणेण मम भादा हदो अणेण मम पिदा अणेण मम सुदो मम चअस्सत्ति अण्णहा भट्टिणो वण्णअन्ता etc' are almost the same as the words 'हतोनेन मम आ्राता &c' (from भामह). This looks a plausible theory at first sight; but on closer examination it will be found that it is based on a very weak foundation. Several points in the passage from aug have escaped the learned S'astri's vigilance. For want of space, all the points cannot be set out here. But the most important thing to note is that in the sfasro उदयन is accompanied by twenty foot-soldiers who are all killed in the ambush except हंसक; while भामह uses the words एकाकिनं. Besides the cries of the attacking party are not identical in both. In the प्रतिज्ञा० there is no reference to मातुल and भागिनेय which occur in भामह's work. It appears to me that the words of भामह 'नमोस्तु तेभ्यो &' amount to this that some poet first narrated the story of उदयन and then others ( referred to as विद्वङ्धयः ) adapted (नयन्ति) the story for their own purposes (in a mahakavya or drama ), wherein they made the king unable to distinguish between a real elephant and a sham one and made him start on an adventure single-handed. Therefore it seems

I. 9 भामह and दण्डी. INTRODUCTION. XXXIX

that the original story is probably that of the er (referred to as कनेः ) and भामह is criticizing some drama- or poem based thereon. In the बृहत्कथामअ्री (II. 2) where this adventure of उद्यन is narrated we are told that उदयन started alone with his वीणा (गजेन्द्रबन्धकुशलो विवेशको महद्वनम् । verse 34 ) and the author क्षेमेन्द्र makes the sage reflection 'प्रायेण व्यसनासक्तिमोहाय महतामपि.' This is the real purport of the story to which probably ang refers in the words. (कवेरभिप्रायमिमम्). The कथासरित्सागर gives more details. But there alse we have these statements that scya's detectives reported to him the discovery of a wonderful elephant ( taking it to be real ), that he entered the forest without his army (चारमात्रसहायस्तु ... विवेश महाटवीम् II. 4, 15) and that be approached the elephant alone (एकाकी वादयन्वीणां verse 17). Both the बृहत्कथामअ्ञरी and the कथा profess to ba based upon the बृहत्कथा of गुणाढ्य. Therefore there is no force in saying that भामह refers to प्रतिज्ञा, when besides the बृह्- iAT, there were about a dozen dramas and poems on the उदयन saga and when there are important discrepancies. Mr. Trivedi relies upon the close resemblance between भट्टि 22. 34 (व्याख्यागम्यमिदं काव्यमुत्सवः सुधियामलम्। हता दुर्मेघसश्चास्मिन् विद्वत्प्रियतया मया ॥) with भामह II. 20 (काव्यान्यपि यदीमानि ... इन्त दुर्मेधसो हता: ll) for the latter's priority. Though there is re- semblance in the words, the purport is different. Besides the two verses standing by themselves would rather suggest that भामह criticizes भट्टि. There are two points in connection with Bhamaha's date which so far as I am aware have not yet been relied upon by any scholar. In the ध्वन्यालोक (4th उद्द्योत) it is asserted that the same idea, though already expressed by one poet, appears new and charming when put in a suggestive garb by another poet and among several instances ( p. 236 ) occurs the following "तथा विव क्षितान्यपरवाच्यस्यैव शब्दशक्त्युद्धवानुरणनरूपव्यड्प्रकारसमाश्रयेण नवत्वम्। यथा 'धरणीधारणायाधुना त्वं श्ञेषः' (हर्षचरित VI. para 15 of my edition) इत्यादौ 'शेषो हिमगिरिस्त्वं च महान्तो गुरवः स्थिराः । यदलङ्गितमर्यादाश्चलन्तीं बिभ्रते भुवम्।।' (भामह IIT. 27) इत्यादिषु सत्स्वपि तस्यैवार्थशक्त्युद्भवानुरणनरूपव्यङ्गयस माश्रयेण नवत्वम्". This makes it elear that according to आनन्दवर्धन (latter half of 9th century) भामह's verse existed before बाण penned his eulogy. Therefore भामह flourished before बाण i. e. before 600 A. C. UWO

SAHITYADABPANA. I. 9 भामह and दण्डी.

भामह says 'प्रत्यक्षं कल्पनापोढं ततोऽर्यादिति केचन। करपना नाम- ात्यादियोजनां प्रतिजानते I।' V. 6. We know from वाचस्पतिमिश्र' स्यायकणिका that दिदूनाग and धर्मकीर्ति defined प्रत्यक्ष in these terms "न खल 'प्रत्यक्षं कल्पनापोढमन्यनिर्दिष्टलक्षणम्' इति प्रणयतो दिङ्नागस्यैव कल्पनापोढ त्वमात्रं प्रत्यक्षलक्षणम्, अपि तु तदेव भ्रान्तत्वसहितं प्रत्यक्षे लक्षणमिति मन्यते स क्रीर्तिः। यथाह 'प्रत्यक्षं कल्पनापोढमभ्रान्त'मिति ॥" (JRAS for 1905 p.361- 362). In the न्यायबिन्दु this definition of प्रत्यक्ष is found. भांमह therefore quotes the definition of प्रत्यक्ष given by दिड्नाग or धर्मकीर्ति. The treatment of प्रत्यक्ष and अनुमान in भामह's work (V परिच्छेद) shows great resemblance with and presupposes an acquain- tance with the न्यायबिन्दु. Compare भामह V.5 'सत्त्वादयः प्रमाणाभ्यां अत्यक्षमनुमा च ते । असाधारणसामान्यविषयत्वं तयोः किल ॥' with न्यायबिन्दु 'द्विविधं सम्यग्ज्ञानं प्रत्यक्षमनुमानं च। ... तस्य विषयः स्वलक्षणं.अन्यत्सामान्यलक्षण ोनुमानस्य विषय:' Compare also भामह V.11 'त्रिरूपालिङ्गतो ज्ञानमनुमानं च केचन' with न्यायविन्दु 'अनुमानं द्विधा स्वार्थ परार्थ च, तत्र स्वार्थ त्रिरूपालिड्गा चदनुमेये ज्ञानं तदनुमानम्'. Therefore भामह seems to have lived after दिड्नाग and probably after धर्मकीर्ति. दिड्नाग flourished ac- cording to Dr. Satischandra Vidyabhushana about 500 A. C. (Bhandarkar Com. vol. p. 163 ) and Dr. Takakusu tells us that It sing (671-695 A. C.) refers to दिडूनाग as having flourished 'in late years' (JRAS 1905 p. 33 at p. 40). Therefore NTHE flourished after about 500 A. C. and if he is later than धर्मकीर्ति, then after 600. The date of Dandin also can be arrived at in another manner. ae (No. 180 ) and other anthologies quote a verse of a poetess विज्जका 'नीलोत्पलदलश्यामां विज्जकां मामजानता। वृथव दण्डिना प्रोक्तं सर्वशुक्का सरस्वती I'. She quotes the last pada of the first verse of the काव्यादर्श. धनददेव is quoted in the शाङ० (No. 163) as enumerating विज्जा among poetesses. Numerous verses are ascribed to this विज्जका in the anthologies, two of which दृष्टि हे पतिवेशिनि (No. 500 कवीन्द्र०) and धन्यासि या कथयसि (298 कवीन्द्र०) are very frequently quoted in alankara works. Both of them are quoted in मम्मट's शब्दव्यापारविचार and the second in the क्ाव्यप्रकाश. The verse दृष्टिं हे प्रतिवेशिनि occurs in the दशरूपावलोक (II. 21) and in मुकुलभट्ट's अभिधावृत्तिमातृका (p.12). मुकुल as will be shown later on wrote about 925 A. C. So विज्जका could not have flourished later than 850 A. C. and Dandin is earlier still. राजशेखर, as quoted in the सूक्तिमुक्तावलि of अहण, speaks of a Canarese poetess 'सरस्वतीव कार्णाटी विजयाक्का जयत्यसौ। या विदर्भगिरां वास: कालिदासादनन्तरम् ।।' (vide शाई० 184). The words Sरजयाङ्का सरस्वतीव mean 'she was like सरस्वती named विजया'. The

J.9. भामेह and दुण्डी. INTRODUCTION.

words may also mean that in her compositions she used the word विजय as a catch-word. The first meaning is supported by verses like the following 'वयासगिरां निर्यासं सारं विश्वस्य भारतं वन्दे। भूषणतयैव संज्ञां यदक्कितां भारती वहति ॥'. विज्जका also seems to be southern poetess and probably identical with कार्णाटी विजयाङ्का If the latter is the same as the famous विजयभट्टारिका, queen of चन्द्रादित्य, the eldest son of Pulikesin II, she lived about 660 A. C. Vide the Nerur plates and Kochrem plates of this queen in I. A. vol. VII p. 163 and I.A. Vol. VIII. p. 45. This identifica- tion would place Dandin before about 600 A. C. The 6th century has been accepted by many scholars as the date of Dandin. Vide Max Muller ( India; what can it teach us, 1st edition p. 332), Weber (H. S. L. p. 232 n); Prof. Macdonell ( H. S. L. p. 434 ) and Col. Jacob (JRAS 1897 p. 284). Among the commentaries on the काव्यादर्श are (1) the व्याख्या of तरुणवाचर्पति (edited by Prof. Rangacharya), (2) the com: हृदयङ्गमा by an anonymous author (edited by Prof. Ranga- charya) on the first two परिच्छेदs only ; (3) a टीका called मार्जन by महामहोपाध्याय हरिनाथ, son of विश्वधर and younger brother of केशव (Peterson, 6th report p. 30, ms. copied in संवत् 1746); (4) काव्यतत्त्वविवेचककामुदी, by कृष्णकिङ्कर तर्कवागीश of गोपालपुर in Bengal (I.O. cat. p. 221); (5) the शुतानुपालिनी of वादिघङ्गल ; 6 वैमल्यविधायिनी by मछिनाथ son of जगन्नाथ and a few more mentioned by Aufrecht.

10 The अलङ्गारसारसङ््ग्रह of उन्ट. This work was trans- literated by Col. Jacob in JRAS 1897 pp. 829-847. It has been now issued by the Nirnayasagara Press ( 1915 ) with the commentary (called लघुवृत्ति) of प्रतीहारेन्दुराज. The work of aRr is divided into six chapters ( called vargas ) and contains about 79 kārikas defining 41 alankaras and about a hundred illustrations. The illustrations are taken, as we are told by the commentator प्रतीहारेन्दुराज, from the author's own work styled कुमारसम्भव 'अनेन ग्रन्थकृता स्वोपरच्वितकुमारसम्भवैकदेशोत्रोदाह- रणत्वेनोपन्यस्तः। तत्र पूर्वे दीपकस्योदाहरणानि। तदनुसन्धानाविच्छेदायात्र उद्देशकमः yRcIm: l (p. 15). The alankaras defined and illustrated are the following (in order); I (वर्ग), पुनरुक्तवदाभास, छेकानुप्रास, अनुप्रास (of 3 kinds परुषावृत्ति, उपनागरिका, ग्राम्या or कोमला), लाटानुप्रास, रूपक, उपमा, दीपक (आदि, मध्य, अन्त), प्रतिवस्तूपमा; II. आक्षेप, अर्थान्तर- न्यास, व्यतिरेक, विभावना, समासोक्ति, अतिशयोक्ति; III यथासंख्य उत्पेक्षा, स्वभावोक्ति; IV प्रेय, रसवत्, ऊर्जस्वि, पर्यायोक्त, समाहित, उदात्त (of two

XLII SÂHITYADARPAŅA, I.10 उद्धट,

kinds), छ्िष्ट; V अपह्वति, विशेषोक्ति, विरोध, तुल्ययोगिता, अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, न्भाजस्तुति, विदर्शना, उपमेयोपमा, सहोक्ति, सङ्कर (of four kinds), परिवृत्ति, अनन्वय, ससन्देह, संसृष्टि, भाविक, काव्यलिङ्ग, दृष्टान्त. It will be noted that the alankaras are enumerated almost in the same order as that of भामह. उद्भट omits a few अलद्कारs which भामह defined such as यमक, उपमारूपक, उत्प्रेक्षावयव; while he adds a few अलद्गारS to those that were either defined or alluded to by भामह, vizi पुमरुक्तवदाभास, सङ्कर, काव्यलिङ्ग and दृष्टान्त. It is noteworthy that उन्भट employs the term विदर्शना for निदर्शना (unless it is due to copyist's mistake ) and illustrates only one of the two varieties of that figure and his commentator had to cite an illustration of the second variety from भामह "यत्र तु पदार्थसमन्वय उपमानोपमेयभा- वकल्पनया स्वात्मानमुपपादयति तस्य विदर्शनाभेदस्योदाहरणमुद्भटपुस्तके न दृश्यते तस्य तु भामहोदितमिदमुदाहरणम् (भामह III. 33) 'अयं मन्दधुतिर्भास्वानस्तं प्रति यियासति। उदयः पतनायेति श्रीमतो बोधयन्नरान् ॥' इति" (p.62).

On comparing उद्ध's definitions with भामह's it will be seen that the definitions of आक्षेप, विभावना, अतिशयोक्ति, यथासंख्य, पयायोक्त, अपह्वति, विरोध, अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, सदोक्ति, ससन्देह, अनन्वय are word for word the same in both and the definitions of several other figures such as अनुप्रास, उत्प्रेक्षा, रसवत्, भाविक contain closely similar phraseology. This is probably due to the fact that उद्दट wrote a commentary called भामहविवरण on the काव्यालद्वार of भामह प्रतीहारेन्दुराज says (p.13) "एकदेशवृत्तीत्यत्र हि एकदा अन्यदा ईशः अभविष्णुयों वाक्यार्थस्तद्वत्तित्वं रूपकस्याभिमतम् । विशेषोक्तिलक्षणे च भामह विवरणे भट्टोद्भटेन एकदेशशब्द एवं व्याख्यातो यथेहास्मामिर्निरूपितः। तत्र विशेषोक्तिलक्षणं ' कदेशस्य विगमे या गुणान्तरसंस्तुतिः । विशेषप्रथना- यासो विशेषोक्तिर्मता यथा ।। (भामह III. 22)." The work भामह. विवरण seems to have been an elaborate one and it appears that the अलङ्कारसारसंग्रह was only a summary of that work, as its very pame indicates. Later writers very frequently refer to the भामहविवरण of उद्भट; e. g. the लोचन (ध्. p. 10) says "भामहोक्तं 'शब्दशछन्दोमिधानार्थ' (भामह I. 9.) इत्यभिधानस्य शब्दान्वेदं व्याख्यातुं भट्टो्टो बभाषे शब्दानामभिधानमभिधाव्यापारो मुख्यो गुणवृत्तश्च इति"; लोचन P. 40 'यत्त विवरणकृद् दीपकस्य सर्वत्रोपमान्वयोस्तीति बडुनोदा- हरणप्रपञ्नचेन विचारितवांस्तदनुपयोगि नितरां सप्रतिक्षेपं च'; on the verse 'आहू- तोपि सहायैरेमीत्युक्त्वा विमुक्तनिद्रोपि। गन्तुमना अपि पथिक: सङ्कोचं नैव शिथिलय ति' (quoted in :वo p. 38 as an example of अनुक्तनिमित्ता विशञेषोक्ति) the लोचन remarks 'शीतकृता खल्वार्तिरत्र निमित्तमिति भट्टोड्ड्रट:' So also on p.159 the word अन्यत्र occurring in the व्वनालोक is explained by लोचन as 'भामहविवरणे.' प्रतीहारेन्दुराज (p. 49) seems to be quoting from the

I. 10 उन्द्ट. INTRODUCTION. XLIIE

भामह्विवरण when be says "एषां च शृंद्गारादीनां नव्रानां रसानां स्वश- न्दादिभि: पञ्चभिरवगतिर्भवति। यदुक्तं भट्टो्टटेन 'पञ्चरूपा रसाः'इति। तत्र स्वशब्दाः शङ्गारादेवांचका: शुङ्गारादय: शब्दाः।" (this last sentence is प्रतीहारेन्दु- राज's comment on the words 'स्वशब्दस्थायिसञ्चारिविभावाभिनयास्पदम् of the अलक्कारसारसंग्रह); हेमचन्द्र (in विवेक p.110) says "एतेन 'रसवद्द- शितस्पष्टशङ्गारादिरसोदयम्। स्वशब्द ... सपदम् ।।' इत्येतद्व्याख्यानावसरे यद्भट्टोन्भटेन 'यञ्चरूपा रसाः' इत्युपक्रम्य 'स्वशब्दाः शृङ्गारादेर्वांचकाः शृङ्गारादयः शब्दाः' इत्युक्तं तत्प्रतिक्षिप्तम्"). It appears from this that हेमचन्द्र simply quotes the words of प्रतीहारेन्दुराज, had not the भामहविवरण before him and confounds the verse रसव ... स्पदं, which is really उद्ध's own definition, with भामह's definition of रसवत्, which is simply रसवद्दर्शितस्पष्ट शृङ्गारादिरसं यथा.6); the काव्यप्रकाशसङ्केत of माणिक्यचन्द्र ( p. 269 Mysore ed. ) falls into the same confusion and says 'एतेन शृद्गाराद्याः शब्दाः शङ्गारादेवांचका इत्युद्भटोक्तं निरस्तम्; s0 also सोमेश्वर (folio 75 a ) says 'रसवद् ... स्पदमित्यस्य व्याख्यायां पञ्चरूपा रसा इत्युपक्रम्य तत्र स्वशब्दा: शङ्गारादेवांचका इति भट्टोद्गटोक्तं निरस्तम्'; हेमचन्द्र (विवेक p. 17) "एतावता 'शौर्यादिसदृशा गुणाः केयूरादितुल्या अलङ्कारा इति विवेकमुक्त्वा संयोगसमवायाभ्यां शौर्यादीनामस्ति भेद:, इह तूभयेषां समवायेन स्थितिरित्यभिधाय 'तस्माद्गडडुरिकाप्रवाहेण गुणालङ्कारमेद:' इति भामहविवरणे यद्धट्वोन्भटोड्यधाव् तन्निरस्तम्;" माणिक्यचन्द्र (सङ्केत p. 289 Mysore) says the same 'शब्दार्थालक्काराणां गुणवत्समवायेन स्थितिरिति भामहवृत्तौ भट्टोन्भटेन भणनमसत्'and so does सोमेश्वर (folio 88 a); समुद्रबन्ध (on the सर्वस्व p. 89) says उद्भटेन च काव्यालङ्कारविवृतौ सत्कवित्वविरहिताया विदग्धताया अस्थैर्यस्याशोभनसम च प्रतिपादनाय निदर्शनद्वयमिति वदता का श्रीरित्यस्य श्रीरस्थिरेत्यर्थोमिहितः'.

ERz exercised a profound influence over the Alankāra- s'astra. He eclipsed भामह and it is probably owing to his great fame that wna's work remained in the back-ground and was rarely to be had up till a few years ago. He is always quoted with respect by his successors, even when they differ from him. He is the foremost representative of the Alankāra school and his name is associated with several doctrines in the Alankaras'astra. In several important points he differs from भामह For example प्रतीहारेन्दुराज says (p. 1) भामहो हि ग्राम्योपनागरिकावृत्तिमेदेन द्विप्रकारमेवानुप्रासं व्याख्यातवान्। तथा रूपकस्य ये चत्वारो भेदा वक्ष्यन्ते तन्मध्यादाद्यमेव मेदद्वितयं प्रादर्शयत् ।'; "भामहो हि 'तत्सहोक्त्युपमाहेतुनिर्देशात्रिविधं यथा' (भामह 3.17) इति शिष्टस्य त्रैविध्य- माह" (प्रतीहारेन्दु. p. 47, while उद्भट divides शष into two vari- eties); the लोचन says 'भामहेन हि गुरुदेवनृपतिपुत्रविषयप्रीतिवर्णनं प्रेयो- लक्कार इत्युक्त उद्टमते हि भावालङ्कार एव प्रेय इत्युक्त:' (p. 71-72); मामह does not speak of परुषा, ग्राम्या and उपनागरिका वृत्तिश

XLİV SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 1.10 म्दरढ

while उद्धट does (vide लोचन p. 6). For respect shown to स्दूट, vide ध्व. p.108 (तन्नभवद्धिरुद्भ्रठादिभिः); अलङ्कारसर्वस्व p. 3 (इइ तावद्गामहोन्द्रटप्रभृतयश्चिरन्तनालक्कारकारा:); व्यक्तिविवेकटीका (p. 3) 'इह दि त्विरन्तनैरलक्कारत्रप्रजापतिभिर्भटोन्टप्रभृतिभि: शब्दार्थधर्मा एवालङ्कारा प्रतिः घादिता नाभिधाधमाः It is not necessary to refer to the numerous passages where aaz is quoted or referred to by later writers.

Some of the doctrines that are peculiar to agz are: (I) 'अर्थमेदेन तावच्छव्दा भिद्यन्ते इति भट्टोन्भटस्य सिद्धान्तः' प्रतीहारे० (p.55); II र्ेष is of two kinds, शब्दश्रेष and अर्थश्लेष and both are अर्था- लद्कारक. This view is severely criticized by मम्मट (9th उल्लास) शब्दश्रेष इति चोच्यते अर्थालक्कारमध्ये च लक्ष्यते इति कोयं नयः' (p. 527 Va.)- III y is stronger than other figures and that whereever other figures are combined with it, dy is the principal fig- pre and the apprehension of other figures is slight and dispelled by श्रेष, 'अलक्कारान्तरगतां प्रतिभां जनयत्पदैः' as उद्ट says. The ध्व. (p 96) refers to this view. मम्मट criticizes this view also. IV The काव्यमीमांसा (of राज०) says 'तस्य (वाक्यस्य) च त्रिधा; भिधाव्यापार इंति औन्धंटाः' V अर्थ is of two kinds 'किन्तु द्विरूप एवासौ विचारितसुस्थोऽविचारितरमणीयः । तयोः पूर्वमाश्रितानि शास्त्राणि तदुत्तरं काव्यानी त्यौद्धटा:' (काव्यमीमांसा p. 44); a somewhat similar view is attri- buted to उद्द्ट in the व्यक्तिविवेकटीका (p.4) 'शास्त्रेतिहासवैलक्षण्यं तु काव्यस्य शब्दार्थवैशिष्टयादेव नाभिधावैशिष्टयादिति भट्टोन्भटादीनां सिद्धान्तः' VI 'सङ्गटनाया धर्मो गुणा इति भट्टोद्भटादयः' लोचन p. 134. VII The later divisions of Upama based upon grammatical considerations as in the काव्यप्रकाश seem to have been elaborated by उद्भट. Col. Jacob (JRAS, 1897 p. 847 ) thought that the verse 'रसाद्यधिष्ठितं काव्यं जीवद्रूपतया यतः । कथ्यते तद्रसादीनां काव्यात्मत्वं व्यव- fera I' was Udbhata's and that therefore Udbhata sub- scribed to the view that rasa was the soul of poetry. But several circumstances militate against this view. The verse in question is introduced by प्रतीहारेन्दुराज with the words aarg: ( p. 77 )and therefore it is merely a quotation from some other writer that preceded प्रतीहारेन्दुराज. Besides that verse would break the usual order followed by Udbhata. That verse occurs in the comment on काव्यलिङ्ग. After defining काव्यलङ we naturally expect an illustration of it, which is the verse 'छायेयं तव शेषाङ्गकान्तेः किञ्निदनुज्ज्वला। विभूषाघटनादेशान्दर्शयन्ती दुनोति माम् ॥', while if Col. Jacob be followed, the verse रसाद्यधिष्ठितं काव्यं would be abruptly thrust between the definition of काव्यलिङ्ग

J.10 उद्धट INTRODUCTION. XLV

and its example. Moreover the view that aaz approved of rasa as the soul of poetry would be opposed to his own definition of रसवद् and the opinion of the अलङ्कारसर्वस्व (p. 5) 'उद्भ्रटादिभिस्तु गुणालङ्गाराणां प्रायशः साम्यमेव सूचितम् ।. तदेवमलङ्गारा एव क्राव्ये प्रधानमिति प्राच्यानां मतम्'. The printed edition (on p. 42 ) puts the verse तद्विगुणं त्रिगुणं वा in bold type, as if it were a कारिका of उद्ट; but it is really a verse of रुद्रट's (VII.35). The कुमारसम्भव of उद्धट from which the examples of Alankāras are cited seems to have been a poem resembling the famous mahakavya of कालिदास. There is a close correspon- dence between the two works not only in phrases and ideas, but even in incidents. For example compare 'प्रच्छन्ना शस्यते वृत्ति: स्त्रीणां भावपरीक्षणे। प्रतस्थे धूर्जटिरतस्तनुं स्वीकृत्य बाटवीम् ।' उद्भ्ट II. 10 with कुमार V. 30 'विवेश कश्चिज्जटिलस्तपोवनं etc .; 'अपश्यच्चातिकष्टानि तप्यमाना तपांस्युमाम्। असम्भाव्यपतीच्छानां कन्यानां का परा गतिः ॥' उद्धट II. 12 with कुमार V.2 'इयेष ... पतिश्च तादृशः'; 'शीर्णपर्णाम्ुवाताशकष्टेपि तपसि स्थिताम्' उङ्भट II. 17 with कुमार. V.28 'सवयं विशीर्णद्रुमपर्णवृत्तिता' etc.' The date of Udbhata does not present much difficulty. He was the सभापति of king Jayapida of Kashmir (779-813 A. C.), as the राजतरङ्गिणी says 'विद्वान्दीनारलक्षेण प्रत्यहं कृतवेतनः। भट्टोभूदुद्भट- स्वस्य भूमिभर्तुः सभापतिः॥' (IV. 495). Therefore he flourished about 800 A. C. This date is further corroborated by the fact that the ध्वन्यालोक (latter half of ninth century) frequently refars to him. The commentary of प्रतीहारेन्दुराज is among the oldest com- mentaries on Alankara works. He tells us that he was the pupil of Mukula (विद्वद ययान्मुकुलकादधिगम्य विविच्यते। प्रतीहारेन्दुराजेन काव्यालङ्गारसंग्रह:॥ Intro. 3rd verse). The last verse of the commentary bestows high praise upon aess, who is said to have been deeply versed in मीमांसा, व्याकरण, तर्क and, साहित्य प्रतीहारेन्दुराज in that verse speaks of himself only as श्रीन्दुराज and as a कौङूण (an inhabitant of Konkan). The commentary of प्रतीहारेन्दुराज is concise, lucid and learned. He namesअमरुक उन्द्रट, कात्यायन, चूर्णिकार (पतज्लि), दण्डी, भामह, भामहविवरण, वामन and quotes frequently from the नाट्यशास्त्र, रुद्रट's काव्यालङ्कार and from he ध्वन्यालोक. As मुकुल flourished about 925 A. C.his pupil पतीहारेन्दुराज must have flourished about 950 A. C. or a little later. Whether he is identical with the इन्दुराज whose disciple was the great अभिनवगुम्त will be discussed later on. It appears

XLVI SAHITYADARPAŅA. I. 10 उद्दक

from the विमर्शिनी of जयरथ that राजानकतिलक wrote a work called उद्भटविवेक or-विचार and that the अलङ्कारसर्वसव generally followed the views of तिलक (विमर्शिनी pp. 115, 124, 205). 11 The काव्यालङ्गारसूत्र of वामन. This work has been edited several times, the best edition being that of the Vanivilas Press ( 1909). The work is divided into three parts, the sutras, the author's own vritti thereon and the examples. वामन himself says 'प्रणम्य परमं ज्योतिर्वामनेन कविप्रिया। का- व्यालद्वारसूत्राणां स्वेषां वृत्तिर्विधीयते।'. This is further corroborated by the fact that so early a writer as प्रतीहारेन्दुराज ascribes not only the sūtras ( e. g. arqa III. 1. 1-2 on p. 17 and IV 3. 8 on p. 81 ) but also passage from the वृत्ति to वामन (e. g. the two verses युवतेरिव रूपमङ्ग काव्यं and यदि भवति which are cited by वामन under III. 2. 2 are ascribed to वामन on p. 76 and the words 'लक्षणायां हि झगित्यर्थप्रतिपत्तिक्षमत्वं रहस्यमाचक्षते' which occur in the वृत्ति on IV. 3.8 are ascribed to वामन on p. 84 by प्रतीहारेन्दुराज). Similarly the लोचन (p. 37) cites वामन's definition of आक्षेप and quotes the two instances given in the वृत्ति. Most of the examples cited in the वृत्ति are taken from standard works as वामन himself says 'एभिर्निद- र्शनैः स्वीयैः परकीयैश्च पुष्कलैः । शब्दवैचचित्र्यगर्भेयमुपमैव प्रपञ्चिता II' (on IV. 3. 33 ). As वामन is comparatively a very early writer, his work, which is full of quotations, is of capital importance for settling the chronology of many Sanskrit writers. Vamana writes in the sutra style and also borrows the terminology of sutra writers in dividing his work into five अधिकरणS. Each अधिकरण is divided into two or three अध्यायड. There are in all 12 अध्याय (the Ist and 4th अधिकरणs having three ao and the rest two each ) and 319 sutras. It will be noticed that he reverses the relation of अध्यायs and अधिकरणऊ 4 Ancient सूत्रकारs divide their works into अध्यायs, each compris- ing several अधिकरण. The first अधि० (called शारीरा०) speaks of the प्रयोजनs of काव्य, those who are properly qualified to receive instruction in Poetics, declares that riti is the soul of poetry, speaks of three रीतिs वैद्भी, गौडी and पाञ्चाली, dilates upon the subsidiary aids to poetry and the divisions of poetry. The 2nd अधि० (called दोषदर्शन) speaks of the दोषs of पद, वाक्य and वाक्यारथ; the third अधि०ं (called गुणविवेचन ) distinguishes between गुणड and aarrs and defines and illustrates the ten gunas (such as ओज:) of words and of sense; the 4th अधि० (called आलङ्कारिक)

I. 11 वामन. INTRODUCTI ON. XLVII

treats of यमक and अनुप्रास, of उपमा and the six doshas of उपमा, and of other अलद्कारs based more or less upon उपमा; the fifth अधि० (called प्रायोगिक) speaks of certain conventions observed by poets, such as not employing the same word twice, observance of rules of af, non-employment of words like g at the beginning of a qre and points out how grammati- cal purity may be secured, examines and tries to explain away some apparent irregularities in the works of poets of old. The last अध्याय (on शब्दशुद्धि ) closely resembles the 6th परिच्छेद of भामह's work. The अलद्कारs defined and illustrated ( besides अनुप्रास, यमक and उपमा) are (in order) प्रतिवस्तूपमा समासोकति, अप्रस्तुत०, अपह्वति, रूपक, श्रेष, वक्रोक्ति, उत्प्रेक्षा, अतिशयोक्ति, सन्देह, विरोध, विभावना अनन्वय, उपमेयोपमा, परिवृत्ति, क्रम, दीपक, निदर्शन, अर्थान्तर०, व्यतिरेक, विशेषोक्ति, व्याजस्तुति, व्याजोक्ति, तुल्ययोगिता, आक्षेप, सहोक्ति, समाहित, संसृष्टि, उपमारूपक, उत्प्रेक्षावयव (i. e. 33 in all). It will be noticed that वामन does not define such figures as पर्यायोकत, प्रेय:, रसवत्, ऊर्जस्वि, उदात्त, भाविक, सूक्ष्म

Among the authors and works that are expressly named are कविराज (as a great poet, IV.1.10), कामन्दकीनीति (IV. 1. 2.), कामशास्त्र, छन्दोविचिति, नाममाला (a lexicon, I. 3. 5), विशाखिल (a writer on कलाशास्त्र, I. 3. 7), शूद्धक (for works exhibiting शषगुण, III. 2, 4), हरिप्रबोध (for यमक8, IV, 1.2). On III. 2.2. वामन says 'साभिप्रायत्वं यथा-सोयं संप्रति चन्द्रगुप्ततनयश्चन्द्रप्रकाशो युवा जातो भूपतिराश्रयः कृतधियां दिष्टया कृतार्थश्रमः ॥ आश्रयः कृतधियामित्यस्य वसुबन्धुसाचिव्योपक्षेपपरत्वात साभिप्रायत्वम्'. Round this a great controversy has raged as to what king is referred to as aara and whether the proper reading is वसुबन्धुसाचिव्यो० or whether it is च सुबन्धुसाच्चिव्यो०. Vide I. A. vol 40 ( 1911) p. 170 ff ( Prof. Pathak ), p. 264 ( Dr. Hoernle ) and I. A. vol. 41 (1912 ) p. 1 (Prof D. R. Bhandar- kar ) in favour of aga y and I. A. 1911 p. 312 ( Prof. Nara- simhachar ) and I. A. 1912 p. 15 ( M. M. Haraprasāda S'āstri ) in favour of gay. Among the works quoted from, though not. actully named, are the अमरुशतक, उत्तरराम० (इयं गेहे लक्ष्मीः), कादम्बरी, किरातार्जुनीय, कुमारसम्भव, मालतीमाधव, मृच्छकटिक (दयतं हि नाम पुरुषस्यासिंहासनं राज्यम् on IV.3. 23), मेघदूत, रघुवंश, विक्रमोर्वशीय, वेणीसंहार, शाकुन्तल, शिशुपालवध, हर्षचरित. The verse यासां बलि: (on V. 1. 3) occurs in the मृच्छकटिक (I. 9) as well as in the चारुदत्त (I.2) ascribed to भास. The words 'यो भर्तृपिण्ड़स्य कृते न युध्येद्' ( cited as an ungrammatical प्रयोग on V. 2, 13) occur in कौटिल्य's अर्थशास and in the प्रतिज्ञायौगन्धरायण (IV.3). The verse

XLVIII SAHITYADARPANA. I. 11 वांमन

'सरच्छशाङ्कगौरेण वाताविद्ेन भामिनि। काशपुष्पलवेनेदं साश्रुपातं मुखं कृतम् ।।'cited as an example of व्याजोक्ि (V. 3.25) occurs with slight varia- tions in the सवप्नवासवदत्ता (IV. 8) ascribed to भास. The words मातजं मानभङ्गुर on V. 2. 38 seem to be taken from भामह 'मदो जनयति प्रीति सानङं मानभङ्गरम्' II. 27. He refers to the views of other writers on अलङ्गार. 'उत्प्रेक्षवातिशयोक्तिरिति केचिव' (IV. 3. 10); 'अर्थान्तरन्यासस्य हेतुरूपत्वाद्वेतोश्चान्वयव्यतिरेकात्मकत्वान्न ततः: पृथगू व्यतिरेक इति केत्वित्' IV. 3. 21; उपमानाधिक्यात्तदपोह इत्येके' IV. 2. 18; 'अनयोदोषयोर्विपर्ययाख्यस्य दोषस्यान्तर्भावान्न पृथगुपादानम्। अत एवास्माकं मते षडू दोषा इति' on IV. 2. 11. (this seems to refer to मेवाविन् or to भामह II. 39). He often says श्लोकाश्चात्र भवन्ति (which are probably quotations ); vide III. 1. 25 and III, 2. 14 Vamana is the protagonist of the riti school. It was he who boldly asserted that rui was the soul of poetry (रीतिरात्मा काव्यस्य । विशिष्टा पदरचना रीतिः । विशेषो गुणात्मा । I. 2. 6-8). Some of 1 the other doctrines peculiarly associated with his name are-I the distinction between गुणs and अलक्कारS (काव्यशोभायाः कतारो धर्मा गुणाः । तदतिशयहेतवस्त्वलङ्काराः । III. 2. 1-2). This view is strongly criticized by the काव्यप्रकाश( VIII p. 471 Va); II three styles वैदभी, गौडी and पाञ्चाली; III the inclusion of वक्रोक्ति as an अर्थालक्कार and its definition as 'सादृश्याल्लक्षणा' (IV. 3.8 'उन्मिमील कमलं सर- सीनां कैरवं च निमिमील मुहूर्ताद। अत्र नेत्रधर्मावुन्मीलननिमीलने सादृश्याद्विकास- सक्कोचौ लक्षयत: ); IV the peculiar definition of विशेषोक्ति as 'एकगुण- हानिकल्पनायां साम्यदार्ढ्य विशेषोक्तिः' (IV.3. 123), which according to जगन्नाथ and others is रूपक (दृढारोप); V the two meanings given to the figure आक्षेप (उपमानस्य आक्षेप: प्रतिषेध: तुल्यकार्यार्थस् नैरर्थक्यविवक्षायामाक्षेप:, उपमानस्याक्षेपतः प्रतिपत्तिरित्यपि सूत्रार्थः), which respectively correspond to the प्रतीप and समासोक्ति of मम्मट and others. The commentator सहदेव on the काव्यालङ्गारसूत tells us that वामन's work went cut of vogue and भटमुकुल restored its tradition after obtaining a copy of it. 'वेदिता सर्वशास्त्राणां भट्टोभून्मुकुलाभिघः। लब्धा कुतश्चिदादर्शै भ्रष्टाम्नायं समुद्धतम् ॥ काव्यालङ्कारशास्त्रं यत्तेनैतद्वामनोदितम्। असूया सन्न कर्तव्या विशेषालोकिभि: क्वचित् ॥' ( notes p. 5 to the काव्यमीमांसा of राजशेखर). राजशेखर (काव्यमी. p. 14) quotes the view 'ते च द्विाडरो- चकिन: सतृणाभ्यवहारिणश्च' इति मङ्गलः । 'कवयोपि भवन्ति' इति वामनीयाः (com- pare काव्यालङ्कारसूत्र 'अरोचकिन: सतृणाभ्यवहारिणश्च कवयः' I. 2. 1.). So according to राज०, वामन followed the phraseology of मङ्गल's work. The date of Vamana can be settled within very narrow limits. Vide my article in JBBRAS vol, 23 (1909 p. 91 ff. )

I. 11 वामन. INTRODUCTION. XLIX

राजशेखर in his काव्यमीमांसा quotes (pp. 14 and 20) the वामनीय school. राजशेखर flourished in the first quarter of the tenth century. प्रतीहारेन्दुराज, as shown above, quotes वामन frequently and so does the लोचन (pp.8, 10, 180). Therefore वामन flourish- ed before 900 A. C. On the verse ( अनुरागवती सन्ध्या दिवसस्तत्पुर :- सरः । अहो दैवगतिः कीदृक्तथापि न समागम: ॥) cited in the ध्व० (p. 37) the लोचन remarks 'वामनाभिप्रायेणायमाक्षेपः, भामहाभिप्रायेण तु समासोक्ति- रित्यमुमाशयं हृदये गृहीत्वा समासोक्त्याक्षेपयोरिदमेकमेवोदाहरणं व्यतरद् ग्रन्थकृत.' So according to the लोचन, वामन preceded the स्व० (which was composed in the latter half of the 9th century ) and must have flourished before 850 A. C. The ध्वनिकारिका (III. 52 अस्फुट- स्फुरितं काव्यतत्त्वमेतद्यथोदितम् । अशक्नुवद्धिर्व्याकर्तु रीतयः संप्रवर्तिता:) probably refers to वामन. वामन quotes the verse इयं गेहे लक्ष्मीः(उत्तरराम० 1 I ) under रूपक (IV. 3.6 ) and the word 'पक्ष्मालीपिङ्गलिम्नः' (on V. 2. 18 ) from the मालतीमाधव. भवभूति flourished at some time between 700 and 740 A. C. ( vide Dr. Bhandarkar's preface to the मालतीमाधव pp. XIII-XVII ed. of 1905 and Smith in JRAS 1908 p. 793). Therefore वामन is later than 750 A.C. The राजतरङ्गिणी says that a वामन was a minister of जयापीड 'मनोरथः शङ्दत्तश्रटकः सन्धिमास्तथा। बभूवुः कवयस्तस्य वानाद्याश्च मत्रिणः ॥' (IV. 497). Bulher (Kashmir report p. 65) is inclined to give credence to the tradition of the Kashmirian pandits that the minister Vamana whom जयापीड employed was the author of the काव्यालद्कारसूत्र. If this were accepted it must lead to the result that Vamana flourished about 800 A. C. and was a contemporary and probably a rival of 3Rz. It is re- markable that neither of them refers to the other. There is another way of arriving at the date of वामन. He quotes some verses from माघ, viz. उभौ यदि (शिशु. III. 8 on IV 3.10), सितं सितिम्रा (शिशु. I. 25 on V. 2.8) and refers to खलूक्त्वा खलु वाचिकम् (शिशु. II. 70) in the sutra 'न पादादौ खल्वादयः' (V. 1. 5). माघ refers to न्यास, वृत्ति and महाभाष्य in 'अनुत्सूत्रपदन्यासा सद्वत्तिः सन्निबन्धना' ( fary. II. 112). From the way in which the works are arranged it seems that the न्यास here referred to was a com- mentary on the afa. According to the somewhat vague and confused statements of It-sing (India;'what can it teach us? Pp. 343-350) the काशिका was composed about 660 A. C. There- fore the न्यास cannot be placed earlier than about 700 A. C. and माघ must be placed about 750 A. C. Whatever the date of माघ may be वामन the author of the काव्या० सू० cannot be identi- fied with the वामन who had a hand in the काशिका, if the latter e

L SÂHITYADARPAŅA, I. 11 वामन.

was composed about 660 A. C. It is worthy of note that वामन holds the same views as the काशिका on certain grammatical points. For example, on the सूत्र 'ब्रह्मादिषु हन्तेर्नियमादरिहाद्य- सिद्धिः' (काव्या० सू० V.2. 35) वामन says 'ब्रह्मादिष्वेव, हन्तेरेव, कविबेव, भूतकाल पवेति चतुर्विधश्चात्र नियम:'; the काशिका on 'ब्रह्मभ्रणवृत्रेषु किपू' (पा. III. 2.87) says the same thing, while the महाभाष्य holds that there is a twofold नियम only. On सुदत्यादयः प्रतिविधेयाः (काव्या० सू० V. 2. 67) वामन mentions two ways of explaining away words like सुदती, the second of which seems to be the opinion of the काशिका (on 'स्त्रियां संज्ञायाम्' पा. V. 4. 143). The commentary of गोपेन्द्रतिप्पभूपाल has been published several times. He belongs to the 15th century or is even a little later. He quotes the काव्यप्रकाश, विद्याधर, विद्यानाथ, विदग्धमुखमण्डन and other later writers. He quotes a verse in praise of तिप्पभूपाल (on V. 1. 3. ). The com. is called कामधेनु. He quotes a भट्टगोपाल who seems to have been wommentator on the काव्यालङ्कारसूत्र (on I. 3. 16). The other commentaries are those of महेश्वर (styled साहित्यसर्वस्व I. O. cat. p.321) and of सहदेव. 12 An alphabetical list of alankāras defined or re- ferred to by भट्टि, भामह, दण्डी, उद्भट and वामन. अतिशयोक्ति found in all. अनन्वय defined by all except दण्डी who calls it असाधारणोपमा. अनुप्रास found in all. अपहुति "

अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा found in all except भट्टि अर्थान्तरन्यास found in all. आवृत्ति treated by दण्डी alone. आशी: found in भट्टि, दण्डी and भामह (केषाञ्चिदलङ्कारतया मतः). आक्षेप found in all. But वामन's आक्षेप is either समासोकि or प्रतीप of later writers. उत्प्रेक्षा treated by all. उत्प्रेक्षावयव found in भट्टि, भामह and वामन (who.treats it as a variety of संसृष्टि). दण्डी includes under उत्प्रेक्षा. उदाच found in all (भटि called it उदार according to जयमङ्गला).

I. 12 list of अलद्वारs. INTRODUCTION. LI

उपमा found in all. उपमारूपक found in भट्टि, भामह, वामन (who treats it as a variety of संसृष्टि). दण्डी includes under रूपक. उपमेयोपमा found in all except दण्डी (who calls it अन्योन्योपमा). ऊर्जस्वि found in all except वामन. काव्यलिङ्ग defined by उद्रट alone. छेकानुप्रास " तुल्ययोगिता found in all, but दण्डी adds that it must be स्तुतिनिन्दार्थ. दीपक defined by all. दृष्टान्त defined by उन्भट alone. निदर्शन or निदर्शना found in all, उन्ट calling it विदर्शना. निपुण found in भटि alone (may be included under उदात्त according to जय०, while the same verse is प्रेय: accordng to मल्ि०). परिवृत्ति found in all, but भामह and भटि require it to be भर्थान्तरन्यासवती. पर्यायोक्त found in all except वामन. प्रतिवस्तूषमा found in all except भट्टि; भामह and दण्डी regard it as a variety of उपमा. प्रेय: found in all except वामन. भाविक ,9 यथासंख्य found in all, वामन calling it क्रम and दण्डी saying that it is styled संख्यान and क्रम also. यमक found in all except उन्ट, रसवत found in all except वामन. रूपक found in all. लाटानुप्रास defined by उन्दट alone and referred to by भामह. ळेश defined by दण्डी alone. It is the व्याजोक्ति of मम्मट. दण्डी also says some defined it so as to make it the same as व्याजस्तुति. भामह denies that it is an अलं० वक्रोक्ति defined as a figure by वामन alone; referred to by मामह (II. 25) and दण्डी (II. 220 and 363) as underlying all figures.

LII SAHITYADARPANA. I. 12 list of अलद्कारs वार्ता found in भद्टि alone. भामह (II. 87) alludes to it and so does दण्डी (I. 85-86). विभावना found in all. विरोध found in all. विशेषोक्ति found in all, but वामन' वि० is defined differently and is equal to रूपक. व्यतिरेक found in all. व्याजस्तुति found in all. व्याजोक्ति defined by वामन alone, which was called मायोक्ति by. others, as he says. शष्ट found in all, वामन using the word क्ेष. संसृष्टि found in all; दण्डी calls it सङ्कीर्ण and includes संसृष्टि and संङ्गर in it; वामन gives it a restricted scope recognis- ing only two varieties उपमारूपक and उत्प्रेक्षावयव; उन्गट distinguishes it from सङ्कर. सङ्कर defined by उन्ट alone ( with four varieties). समासोक्ति found in all. समाहित found in all, but the समाहित of दण्डी is different from उन्ट's and is the समाधि of later writers; वामन's समाहित is quite different from both. The verse in भदि that is समाहित according to जय० is स्वभावोक्ति according to महि०. ससन्देह found in all except दण्डी who includes it under उपमा calling it संशयोपमा ; वामन uses the form सन्देह. सहोक्ति found in all. सूक्ष्म defined by दण्डी alone; भामह denies that it is an अलं०. स्वभावोक्ति defined by दण्डी, उन्भट and भामह alone, the latter admitting it according to others; दण्डी calls it जाति also. भट्टि's वार्ता included स्वभावोक्ति. हेतु found in भट्टि and दण्डी; भामह denies it the position of अलं०. उद्रट would bring it under काव्यलिङ्ग. 13 The काव्यालङ्कार of रुद्रट. This work has been edited in the KM series with the commentary of नमिसाधु. The काव्यालद्गार is an extensive work divided into 16 अध्यायs and reviews the whole field of Poetics. It is composed mostly in the Arya metre, with a few exceptions here and

I. 13 रुद्रट. INTRODUCTION. LIII

there, particularly at the end of chapters. All the examples are Rudrata's own. There are in all 734 verses, besides which 14 verses in the 12th अध्याय dealing with the eight kinds of नायिका and their sub-varieties are declared to be interpolations. The contents of the 16 chapters are :- 1, the purposes and objects of काव्य, the essential requisites of a poet and definitions of these; 2, the five अलङ्कारड of शब्द, viz. वक्रोक्ति, अनुप्रास, दमक, श्रेष and चित्र are enumerated, the four रीतिs वैदर्भी, पाञ्चाली, लाटी and गौडी are briefly defined, six भाषाS (प्राकृत, संस्कृत, मागध, पैशाची, शूरसेनी and अपभ्रंश ) in which काव्यs are composed are mentioned, then वक्रोक्ति and अनुप्रास are defined, divided and illustrated and five वृत्तिs (मधुरा, ललिता, प्रौढा, परुषा and भद्रा) of अनुप्रास are defined; 3, elaborate treatment of यमक in 58 verses; 4, श्ेष and its eight varieties (वर्ण, पद, लिङ्ग, भाषा, प्रकृति, प्रत्यय, विभक्ति and वचन ); 5, treatment of चित्र, viz. such combinations and tricks of words as चक्रबन्ध, मुरजबन्ध, अर्धभ्रम, सर्वतो- भद्र, मात्राच्युतक, प्रहेलिका etc; 6, the doshas of पद and वाक्य; 7, the four bases of the figures of अर्थ, viz. वास्तव, औपम्य, अतिशय and श्रेष and definitions of 23 figures based upon वास्तव; 8, 21 figures based on औपम्य; 9, 12 figures based upon अतिशय; 10, ten varieties of शुद्धक्षेष and two kinds of सङ्कर; 11, the doshas of अर्थ and four doshas of उपमा; 12, ten rasas, definition of शृद्गार and its two varieties सम्भोग and विप्रलम्भ, qualities of नायक and his companions and varieties of नायक and नायिका; 13, सम्भोगशृद्गार and characteristic actions of heroines at particular times and places; 14, characteristics of विप्रलम्भशृङ्गार, the ten दशाs of चिप्रलम्भ, the six उपायs for winning over an offended lady, viz. साम, दान, मेद, प्रणति, उपेक्षा, प्रसङ्गभ्रंश; 15, characteristics of वीर and the other rasas; 16, various kinds of poetic compositions, such as कथा, आख्यायिका and their plots and other characteristics.

z was the first to attempt a scientific classification of figures as based upon certain definite principles, such as anq औपम्य, अतिशय and श्रेष. The result of rigorously following this classification has been this that the same figure oceurs as an अलङ्कार based upon two or more from among the four bases of division. For example the figures सहोक्ति and समुच्चय are spoken of as having two varieties based upon वास्तव and औपम्य and the figure उत्प्रेक्षा as having two varieties based upon औपम्य and अतिशय. Some of the figures separately defined by writers like भामह and उ्ट are not separately defined by रुद्रट, e. g. उपमेयोपमा and अनन्वय are

LIV SÂRITYADARPAŅA. I. 13 रुद्रट.

regarded as mere varieties of उपमा (called उभयोपमा and अनन्व- TyHT, 7. 9 and 11). A few figures defined by both earlier and later writers appear in Rudrata under other names. For example, the figure called व्याजश्ेष (10. 11) is the same as the व्याजस्तुति of भामह and मम्मट, अवसर (7. 103) is the same as the 2nd kind of the उदात्त of उद्धट and मम्मट, the जाति of रुद्रट (7. 30 ) is the same as the स्वभावोक्ति of दण्डी and मम्मट, the पूर्व of रुट्रट (9. 3) is the same as the 4th variety of अतिशयोक्ति (कार्यकारण- योर्यश्च पौर्वापर्यविपर्ययः). Some of the figures defined by रुद्रट are not admitted as अलङ्कारs by other writers. हेतु (defined as 'हेतुमता सह हेतोरभिधानममेदकृद्भवेद्यन्' 7. 82) is said by मम्मट to be no अलक्कार at all. रुद्रट defines an अलङ्कार called भाव ( with two well-known varieties, 7. 38 and 40) and gives two instances 'ग्रामतरुणं तरुण्या नववञ्ञलमअ्जरीसनाथकरम्। पश्यन्त्या भवति मुद्दर्नितरां मलिना मुखच्छाया ॥'; 'एकाकिनी यदबला तरुणी तथाहमस्मिन्गृहे गृदपतिश्च गतो विदेशम्। कि याचसे तदिह वासमियं वराकी श्वश्ूर्ममान्धबधिरा ननु मूढ पान्थ II'. The first is cited by मम्मट (I) and the second by the लोचन (p. 45). In both there is व्यङ् sense which is sub- ordinated to the वाच्य sense. Similarly the figures मत, साम्य, पिहित are not defined by other early writers.

About Rudrata we know very little. He seems to have been a Kashmirian as his name suggests. At the beginning of his work he performs an obeisance to Ganesa and Gauri and at the end he praises भवानी, मुरारि and गजानन. While commenting upon V. 12-14 नमिसाधु says 'अन्र च चक्रे खवनामाङ्कभूतोयं श्लोक: कविनान्तर्भावितो यथा-शतानन्दापराख्येन भट्टवामुकसूनुना। साधितं रुद्रटेनेदं सामाजा धीमता हितम् I'. This shows that रुद्रट was also called सतानन्द, that his father's name was वामुक and that he was a student of the सामवेद. रुद्रट does not mention any author by name. But he seems to refer to भरत'S नाय्यशासत्र by the word आचायैं: (in 12. 4), to मयूर (I. 9 नुत्वा तथाहि दुर्गा केच्वित्तीर्णां दुरुत्तरां विपदम्। अपरे रोगविमुक्ति वरमन्ये लेमिरेडभिमतम् II). He refers to the opinions of others, as in II. 2.

रुद्रट must be regarded as a representative of the अलद्धार school. Although he knows the rasa theory propounded by Bharata and although he says that kavya must be endowed with रस (तसात्तत्कर्तव्यं यतेन महीयसा रसैर्युक्तम् । chap. 12.2), still he looked upon alankāras as very important. It is a noticeable feature that he does not attach much importance to the ritis, though he casually refers to them (II. 4-6, XIV. 37, XV. 20)

I. 13 रुद्रट. INTRODUCTION. LV

and the gunas are not defined and illustrated by him. The साहि त्यदर्पण (IX. 2) quotes from रुद्रट an Arya about वैदभी which is not founa in the काव्यालङ्कार.

The date of Rudrata can be settled with a good deal of certainty. He defines more figures than भामह, दण्डी and उद्धट and his treatment is precise and scientific. He is therefore somewhat later than these writers. He is quoted by numerous writers from the tenth century downwards. राजशेखर in his काव्यमीमांसा (p. 31) mentions him by name 'काकुवक्रोक्तिर्नाम शब्दालङ्कारोयमिति रुद्रटः' and quotes (on p. 57) the verse चक्नं दहतारं चक्रन्द हतारं (रुद्रट III. 4). प्रतीहारेन्दुराज frequently quotes the verses of az without actually naming him ( vide pp. 11, 31, 34, 42, 43, 49, where az 8. 40, 8. 89, 8. 95, 7. 35, 7.36 and 12.4 are respectively quoted ). In the दशरूपकटीका by धनिक (on IV. 35), रुद्रट (XII. 4) is quoted. The लोचन (p. 45) quotes रुद्रट's definition of भाव and his example. ne quotes him by name ( IX p. 521 Va) and criticizes his views about हेतु, समुच्चय and व्यतिरेक (क्षीणः क्षीणोपि शशी etc.). Therefore ar is not later than about 900 A. C. He is quite unaware of the ध्वनि theory and has great affinity with भामह and aR2. He was probably a contemporary of or a little older than the author of the व्वनिकारिका and flourished between 800 and 850 A. C.

The commentator नमिसाधु deserves more than a passing notice. He was a शेताम्बर जैन and pupil of शालिभद्र. He com- posed his commentary in the year 1125 of the AH era (i. e. 1068-69 A. C.). One old ms. gives the date as 1176 (i. e. 1119-20 A. C. ). नमिसाघु is an early writer. He followed older commentators as he himself says 'पूर्वमहामतिविर्वितवृत्त्यनु- सारेण किमपि रचयामि' and refers to other explanations of रुद्रट' words (on II. 1. and V. 23). His commentary, though generally concise and to the point, contains many quotations. Among the authors and works either named or quoted from are the following :- अर्जुनचरित (16. 4), उद्ट (6.33), कादम्बरी, किरातार्जुनीय, जयदेव (1. 18, as a writer on metrics), तिलकमअ्जरी (16.3), दण्डी, नाममाला, पातालविजयमहाकाव्य of पाणिनि (2.8.), पिङ्गल, बृहत्कथा (2.10 peculiarities of पैशाची noted), भरत, भर्तृहरि, भामह (8.84), माघकाव्य, मालवीमाधव (7. 33), मृच्छकटिक (8.1), मेधाविरुद्र, मेघदूत, रलावली (7. 33), वामन, (1.20, 8.10), वेणीसंहार (7.73), शिशुपालवध, हरि (on 2.19, a writer in Prakrit on Poetics), हर्षचरित. There is a com-

LVI SÂHITYADARPAŅA, I. 13 रुद्रट.

mentary on रुद्रट's work composed by आशाघर (1236 A. C.) and another commentary called वनतरङ्गिणी

There is a work called शृद्गारतिलक composed by रुद्रभट्ट. A keen controversy has raged for several years as to whether रुद्रभट्ट and रुद्रट are identical. Weber, Aufrecht and Pischel (in his Intro. to शृङ्गारतिलक p. 5 ff and ZDMG. 42, 1888 p. 296) held the view that they were identical, while Pandit Durgaprasad and Dr. Jacobi ( VOJ 1888 vol. II p. 151-156 and ZDMG 42 pp 425-435 ) think that they are distinct persons. This question must be briefly discussed here. The शृङ्गारतिलक has been published in the K. M. series. It is divided into three qftdas. The work opens with a benediction in honour of Pas'upati (S'iva). The first qfto deals with the nine rasas, the bhavas, the various kinds of Nayaka and Nayika. The second speaks of विप्रलम्भशृङ्गार, the ten stages of love in separa- tion, the six upayas for winning over one's offended beloved. The third treats of the other rasas and the four orittis afarnt, सात्त्वती, आरभटी and भारती. रुद्रभद्द says that he treats of rasas in their relation to kavya, while Bharata spoke of them with reference to नाय्य. 'प्रायो नाट्यं प्रति प्रोक्ता भरतादै रसस्थितिः। यथामति मयाप्येषा काव्यं प्रति निगदते॥' I. 5. The last verses are 'कान्या काव्यकथा कीदृग्वैदग्धी को रसागमः। किं गोष्ठीमण्डनं हन्त शृङ्गारतिलकं विना॥ त्रिपुरवधादेव गतामुल्लासमुमां समस्तदेवनताम् । शृङ्गारतिलकविधिना पुनरपि रुद्र: प्रसादयति॥'. The last verse is not found in some mss. That verse has been interpreted as meaning that ug composed another work called fagray. There is no doubt that there is a pun on the words त्रिपुरवध, शृङ्गारतिलक and रुद्र (god S'iva and the author ). It may be suggested as an alternative ex- planation that in fayray the author is not referring to his own work, but to a play called fayrara said to have been performed by भरत before S'iva and his attendants ( vide नास्य. 4.9 and धनिक's quotation above p. XI).

The Mss. of the शृद्गारतिलक sometimes give the name of the author as Rz (vide I O cat. p. 321 No. 1131 and Madras Government Mss cat. 1918 p. 8697 No. 12955). The anthologies also make confusion and quote the verses of the काव्यालद्वार as रुद्रट's and also as रुद्र's or रुद्रभट्ट's. For example शाङ० No. 3773 ('एकाकिनी यदबला' रुद्रट VII. 41) and No. 3788 ('मलयानिल०' रुद्रट II. 30) are ascribed respectively to रुद्र and भट्टरूद्र; Nos. 575 and 3473 correctly ascribe .them to

I. 13 रुद्रट. INTRODUCTION. LVII

रुद्रट. शार्ङ्ग० Nos. 3567-68, 3579, 3670, 3675, 3754 are correctly ascribed to रुद्र (the author of शृङ्गारतिलक). The examples con tained in the शुङ्गारतिलक appear to be the author's own and may be used for chronological purposes. It is a remarkable fact that, while verses from Rudrata's काव्यालङ्वार are quoted by writers from the beginning of the 10th century, the verses from the शृद्गारतिलक are not quoted by these early writers. The earliest authors who quote them are हेमचन्द्र (who quotes, for example, the verses यत्पाणिन निवारितो० p. 304 and गाढालिङ्गन० p. 305 from the शुद्गारo ) and विश्वनाथ. Therefore the पङ्गारतिलक must have been composed before 1100 A. C.

On an examination of all that may be urged for and against the identity of the two authors, it must be conceded that there are very weighty grounds for holding that the two are distinct authors. The reasons may be briefly stated. Chapters XII-XIV of रुद्रट cover almost the same ground as the sTTfacsa and very often in the same words. It does not seem very likely that the same author would write two works in this manner, the only important addition in the srT- तिलक being that of the illustrative verses. The शङ्गारतिलक in a few cases gives more details, such as the treatment of the four vrittis, the definitions of the ten stages of love, the subdivi- sions of Nayika and their definitions. But there are some points where रुद्रट gives more information e.g. रुद्रट 14. 22-24. There are some doctrines on which the views of the काव्यालक्कार and of the शुङ्गारतिलक conflict. It is not likely that the same author will impart conflicting directions on vital points. The शुङ्गारतिलक says that there are nine rasas in काव्य; while रुद्रट says there are ten (12.3). शद्गा० speaks of four वृत्तिs (कैशिकी ete, which are transferred from the realm of the drama to that of kavya in general ), while रुद्रट speaks of five वृत्तिs (called मधुरा, प्रौढा etc. II. 19) and is silent about the कैशिकी and other vrittis. रुद्रट first classifies नायिका into स्वीया, परकीया and वेश्या and then says that all the three may be अभिसारिका or खण्डिता and sub- divides सवीया into स्वाधीनपतिका and प्रोषितपतिका; while the एङ्गार० speaks of eight kinds of नायिका in one place (I. 72-73, KM ed.). az (12. 39-40) has not one good word to say about courtes- ans, but the शुङ्गारतिलक, while admitting the justice of the strictures passed by some against them, puts in a defence on their behalf. Compare रुद्रट (12.39 'सर्वाङ्गना तु वेश्या सम्यगसौ लिप्सबे

LVIII SÂHITYADARPANA. I. 13 रुद्रट.

धन कामात्। निरगुणगुणिनोस्तस्या न द्वेष्यो न प्रिय: कश्चित्॥।' with शद्गार० 'सामान्यवनिता वेश्या सा वित्तं परमिच्छति। निरगुंणेपि न विद्वेषो न रागोस्या गुणिन्यपि । तत्स्वरूपमिदं प्रोक्त कैश्रिदू जरूमो वयं पुनः।'. The शृङ्गार० winds up by saying about courtesans 'सर्वस्वमेतास्तदहो स्मरस्य.' The word afaa in the ISTTo is suspicious. It seems clearly to refer to are's words. There is a slight difference between the words of रुद्रट 'साक्षाच्चित्रे रवपे स्यादर्शनमेवमिन्द्रजाले वा। देशे काले भख्या साधु तदाक- णैनं च स्यात् ।।' (12.31) and those of the शुद्धार० 'साक्षाचित्रे तथा खभे तस्य स्यादर्शनं त्रिधा। देशे काले च भख्ां च श्रवण चास्य तद्यथा॥' (I. 51). Barring such points of difference there is a remarkable coincidence of thought and phraseology between the two works, which cannot be explained by the fact that the subject treated of is the same. The only alternative is to suppose that one of the two works is based on the other. Taking all the above circumstances together I think that Fx is later than रुद्रट, bases his ृङ्गारतिलक on the काव्यालद्वार and flourished between 900-1100 A. C.

धनिक in his comment on दशरूपक (IV. 60) says 'उत्सप्रायितो यथा रदस्य-निर्मग्रेन मयाम्भसि etc'; this is found in neither of the two works. The प्रतापरुद्रयशोभूषण cites two quotations from रुद्रभट्ट ( p. 11 and p. 335), which are found in neither of the two works. It cannot be ascertained whether the who is mentioned as author of the त्रैलोक्यसुन्दरीकथा in the तिलक्रमअरी ( verse 35 ) is the same as the author of the srro. 14 The ध्वन्यालोक. This work has been published in the KM series with the commentary, called लोचन, of अभिनवगुप्त on the first three उद्द्योत. The ध्वन्यालोक is an opoch-making work in the History of Alankara Literature. It occupies the same position in the Alankarasastra as Panini's sūtras in grammar and the Vedantasutras in Vedanta. The work shows great erudition and critical insight. It is written in a luoid and forcible style and bears the stamp of originality on every page. As the रसगङ्गाघर remarks (p. 425 ध्वनिकृतामालक्कारिकसरणिन्य- वस्थापकत्वात्) the ध्वन्यालोक settled the principles to be followed in Poetios. The ध्वन्यालोक is divided into three parts; first come the arfers, which are 129 in the printed edition, then comes the afa in prose explaining ( often at great length ) the karikas and the examples, most of which are taken from previous poets. The work is divided into four seenlas.

I. 14 ध्वन्यालोक. INTRODUCTION. LIX

At the outset one is confronted by the question whether all the three parts of the work are by the same author. That the afa and the citation of the examples proceed from the same author admits of no doubt. The real difficulty is about the authorship of the कारिकाs and the वृत्ति. The लोचन which was composed about 150 years after the ध्वन्यालोक is very frequently at great pains to distinguish between the author of the कारिकाs and the author of the वृत्ति. The following quotations will make this clear. 'अत एव मूलकारिका साक्षात्तत्नि- राकरणार्था न श्रूयते। वृत्तिकृत्त निराकृतमपि प्रमेयसंख्यापूरणाय कण्ठेन तत्पक्षमनूद्य निराकरोति येपीत्यादिना । ...... तेनात्र प्रथमोद्योते ध्वनेः सामान्यलक्षणमेव कारि- काकारेण कृतम्। द्वितीयोद्द्योते कारिकाकारोऽवान्तरविभागं विशेषलक्षणं च विदधदनुवादमुखेन मूलविभागं द्विविधं सूचितवान्। तदाशयानुसारेण वृत्तिकृदत्रैवो- द्द्योते मूलविभागमवोचत् etc.' (लोचन. p. 59); 'न चैतन्मयोक्तम्, अपि तु कारिकाकाराभिप्रायेणेत्याह तत्रेति । ... भवति मूलतो द्विमेदत्वं कारिकाकारस्यापि संमतमेवेति भावः।' (p. 60); 'उक्तमेव ध्वनिस्वरूपं तदाभासविवेकहेतुतया कारिकाकारोनुवदतीत्यभिप्रायेण वृत्तिकृदुपस्कारं ददाति' (p.122); 'एतत्तावत्रिमेदत्वं न कारिकाकारेण कृतं वृत्तिकारेण तु दर्शितं न चेदानीं वृत्तिकारो मेदप्रकटनं करोति। ततश्चेदं कृतमिदं क्रियते इति कर्तृभेदे का सङ्गतिः।' (p. 123); 'कारिकाकारेण पूर्व व्यतिरेक उक्तः । न च सर्वथा न कर्तव्योऽपि तु बीभत्सादौ कर्तव्य एवेति पश्चादन्वयः । वृत्तिकारेण तु अन्वयपूर्वको व्यतिरेक इति शैलीमनुसर्तुमन्वय: पूर्वुपात्तः' (pp. 130-131 ); on the words प्रतिपादितमेवैषामालम्बनम् in the ध्व. (p. 135) the लोचन says 'अस्मन्मूलग्रन्थकृतेत्यर्थः; on the words in the ध्व० (p. 138) 'दर्शितमेवाग्रे' the लोचन remarks दर्शितमेवेति कारिकाकारेणेति भूतप्रत्ययः' The last remark means this-if the कारिका and afa had been the work of the same author, he would have used the future tense in place of the past in the word दर्शितं, when referring to what was to be discussed later on; but as the कारिकाs were the work of a predeces- sor and were already before the वृत्तिकार when he wrote this passage, he employs the words (दर्शितमग्रे कारिकाकारेण). For other places where the word वृत्तिकार occurs in the लोचन, though not expressly in such direct opposition to the कारिकाकार as in the above passages, vide लोचन pp. 48, 71, 85, 104, 108, 115. It has further to be noted that the लोचन generally applies the epithet गन्थकृत to the author of the वृत्ति and the examples and the word मूलग्रन्थकृत or-कार to the author of the कारिकाड (as in the passage quoted above from p. 135). On the words 'तथा चान्येन कृत पवात्र श्रोक:' (ध्व. p.8) the लोचन say 'ग्रन्थकृत्समानकालभाविना मनोरथनाम्ना कविना;' on the words 'सहृदयानामानन्दः' (व्व. p.11) the लोचन says 'आनन्द इति च ग्रन्थकृतो नाम तेन स एवानन्दवर्नाचार्य एतच्छास्त्रद्वारेण ete.' p. 12 ;

LX SÂHITYADARPAŅA, I. 14 ध्वन्यालोक.

'समासोक्त्याक्षेपयोरेकमेवोदाहरणं व्यतरद् ग्रन्थकृत्' (लोचन p. 37); 'एवमभिप्राय- द्रयमपि साधारणोक्त्या ग्रन्थकृन्नयरूपयत्' (p. 39); on the verse आहूलेपि सहायैः 'अत एव ग्रन्थकारः सामान्येन' etc, (लोचन p. 58). The above quotations show that the लोचन regarded आनन्दवर्धन as the author of the वृत्ति and that he was distinct from the author of the कारिका. We have to see how far this accords with the view of other early writers and what the name of the author of the कारिकाड was, supposing he was not identical with आनन्दवर्धन.

Before proceeding further a few remarks have to be made about the name of the work. In the colophons of the work, it is often called सहृदयालोक and also काव्यालोक. The third introductory verse of the लोचन (यत्किञ्चिदप्यनुरणन् स्फुटयामि काव्यालोक सुलोचननियोजनया जनस्य) seems to suggest that the author of the लोचन knew the work as काव्यालोक. The penultimate verse at the end of the 4th उद्द्योत (काव्याख्येऽखिलसौख्यधाम्नि विबुधोद्याने ध्वनिदर्शितः) leads one to infer that काव्य formed part of the name of the original work (or was itself its name) on which आनन्दवर्धन commented (probably it was called काव्यध्वनि or simply काव्य or ध्वनि). ध्वनिकारिका III. 53 speaks of the कारिकाड as काव्यलक्षण. It is therefore proper that the वृत्ति is called काव्यालोक or ध्वन्यालोक. But it is not so easy to say why the work should have been styled सहृदयालोक. Prof. Sovani (JRAS 1910 pp. 164- 167) made the plausible conjecture that सहृदय was the name of the author of the कारिकाड He relies upon the name सहृदयालोक and on the words of the लोचन in the 2nd introductory stanza (सरस्वत्यास्तत्वं कविसहृदयाख्यं विज- यतात्). It may ultimately turn out that Prof. Sovani is right, but the reasons assigned by him are quite meagre and more substantial evidence ought to be adduced for the purpose. If आलोक is the name of a work (as प्रदीप, प्रकाश) it seems natural to suppose that सहृदय is the name of a work and not of an author. So सहृदयालोक cannot be made to yield सह्दय as the name of the author of the कारिकाs. The words 'सरस्व ... विजयतात' may, for aught we know, contain a veiled allusion to सहृदय as the name of the author of the कारिकाs. But the words. clearly mean that the real essence of सरस्वती is poets (कवि) and men of taste (सहृदय, literary critics). The last verse of the ध्वन्यालोक would seem to suggest that आनन्दवर्धन claimed for himself the position of the first expounder of the real

I.14 ध्वन्यालाक. INTRODUCTION. LXI

essence of poetry which lay dormant in mature minds (rerar. तत्त्वविषयं स्फुरितप्रसुप्तकल्पं मनःस्ु परिपक्कधियां यदासीत। तद्व्याकरोत्सहृदयोदयळा- भहेतोरानन्दवर्धन इति प्रथिताभिधानः॥).

The evidence so far advanced for holding that सहृदय Was the author of the karikas is quite inadequate. But there is more evidence, which as far as my knowledge goes, has not been relied upon by scholars. The अभिधावृत्तिमातृका, which was composed at least two generations earlier than the लोचन, distinctly says that ध्वनि, which had been propounded as a new doctrine by the respected सहृदय, does fall within the sphere of लक्षणा 'लक्षणामार्गावगाहित्वं तु ध्वनेः सहृद्यैर्नूतनतयोपवर्णितस्य विद्यत इति दिशमुन्मीलयितुमिदमत्रोक्तम्' p. 21. So also on p. 19 मुकुल says 'तथाहि तत्र विवक्षितान्यपरता सहृद्यैः काव्यवर्त्मनि निरूपिता.' 1 This clearly shows that when मुकुल wrote (about 925-940 A. C.) व्वनि was a new doctrine and that सहृदय propounded it. Similarly प्रतीहारेन्दुराज, the pupil of मुकुल, says 'ननु यत्र काव्ये सहृदयहृदयाह्वादिनः प्रधानभूतस्य स्वशब्दव्यापारास्पृष्टत्वेन प्रतीयमानैकरूपस्यार्थस्य सभ्नावस्तत्र तथाविधार्थाभिव्यक्तिहेतु: काव्यजीवितभूतः कैश्चित्सहृद्यैर्ध्वनिर्नाम व्यञ- कत्वभेदात्मा काव्यधमोंऽभिहितः' (p. 75). These passages establish that सहृदय was the name of the author who propounded the theory of ध्वनि or (more probably) was the title given to him by his admirers.

As to the identity of the author of the kārikas with आनन्दवर्धन, a perplexing difficulty arises. राजशेखर in his काव्यमी० (p. 15 ) says 'प्रतिभाव्युत्पत्त्योः प्रतिभा शेयसी इत्यानन्दः। सा हि कवेरव्यु- त्पत्तिकृतं दोषमशेषमाच्छादयति। तत्राह-अव्युत्पत्तिकृतो दोष: शक्त्या संत्रियते कबेः। यस्त्वशक्तिकृतस्तस्य झगित्येवावभासते।' (p. 16). The verse quoted as आनन्द's is a परिकरश्रोक in स्वo (p.137); so by 900 A. C. it *was well-known that आनन्दवर्धन was the author of the वृत्ति in the to. A verse ascribed to राजशेखर in जह्ण's सूक्तिमुक्तावलि (JBBRAS vol. 17 p. 57) speaks of आनन्दवर्धन as the promul- gator of ध्वनि 'ध्वनिनातिगभीरेण काव्यतत्त्वनिवेशिना। आनन्दवर्धनः कस्य नासीदानन्दवर्षन: ॥'. प्रतीहारेन्दुराज, after the passage quoted above about सहृदय, gives it as his opinion that ध्वनि is included among the alankaras and proceeds to examine the threefold division of ध्वनि into वस्तु, अलङ्गार and रस and tries to show that the examples of these given in the tao are merely oxamples of अलद्घारs (pp. 79-85). In these pages occur passages which show that he attributed the वृत्ति to सहृदय; for example, (1) 'तथाहि प्रतीयमानरूपस्य वस्तुन्ैविध्यं तैरुकं (तैः= f

LXnI SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 14 ध्वन्यालोक.

सहृदय:) वस्तुमात्रालक्काररसादिमेदेन तत्र वस्तुमात्रं तावत्प्रतीयते यथा चक्राभिघात- प्रसमाश्यव; vide स्व. p. 89 for this illustration; (2) "वाच्यश- क्त्याश्रयं (व्यञ्जकत्वं) तु रसादिवस्तुमात्रालक्काराभिव्यक्तिहेतुत्वात्रिविधम्।तत्र यत्तावद्वाचकशक्त्याश्रयं व्यञ्ञ्भूतालङ्कारैकनियतं शब्दशक्तिमूलानुरणनरूपव्यञ्ञयतया सहृद्यैर्व्यञ्जकत्वमुक्तं 'सवैकशरणमक्षयम्' इत्यादौ, तत्र शब्दशक्त्या ये प्रतीयन्ते विरोधादयोलक्कारास्तत्संस्कृतस्वभावं वाच्यमवगम्यते । अतस्तत्र वाच्यस्य विवक्षय (p. 83 ); on this passage it is to be noted that the verse सवैंक० is cited as his own by आनन्दवर्धन (p. 101), which is attributed to सहृदय by प्रतीहारेन्दुराज; (3) अत एव च सहृद्यैयेत्र 4 वाच्यस्य विवक्षितत्वं तत्रैव वस्त्वलक्कारयोः प्रतीयमानयोर्वाच्येन सइ क्रमव्यवहार: प्वर्तितोऽर्थशक्तिमूलानुरणनरूपव्यञ्चयो ध्वनिरित्युक्तं न तु वाच्यविवक्षायामपि (?'घाच्या०)। यत्र च वाच्यस्याविवक्षा पूर्वमुक्ता रामोस्मीति सुवर्णपुष्पामिति च तत्र वयमधिकारापेतप्रस्तु तार्थानुबन्धिवस्तूपनिबन्धादप्रस्तुतप्रशंसाभेदत्वमेव न्याय्यं मन्यामहे' (p. 84 ) Both the verses रामोस्ि and सुवर्णपुष्पा are cited as examples of अविवक्षितवाच्यध्वनि (p. 61 and p. 49 respectively of the स्व.). The वक्रोक्तिजीवित cites ताला जाअन्ति गुणा ... कमलाइँ (ध्व. p. 62) as an example of रूढिशब्दवकता (it is आनन्दo's own verse) and remarks ध्वनिकारेण व्यङ्ञव्यअ्ञकभावोऽन सुतरां समर्थितः कि पौनरुक्त्येन.' So the वक्रोक्तिजीवित speaks of आनन्द० as ध्वनिकार

Coming to महिमभट्ट, a writer who was almost a con- temporary of the author of the लोचन, we find that he makes no distinction between the author of the कारिकाs and the वृत्ति. On p. 1 he quotes the कारिका 'यत्रार्थः शब्दो वा' etc. (न्व. p. 33) as छनिकार's, while on p.l1 he quotes several passages from the वृच्ि as ध्वनिकार's (viz, the passage "तथा चाह ध्वनिकारः 'साररूपो ह्यर्थः' is from p. 239 of the tवo; the passage पुनः स एवाह नहि व्यंग्ये प्रतीयमाने वाच्यबुद्धिर्दूरीभवति occurs on p. 190 of the स्वo; again 'नहि विभावानुभावव्यभिचारिण एव etc.' occurs on p. 183 of ध्व). On p. 16 of the व्यक्तिविवेक we read 'अथार्थशब्देनोभयमपि सङ्गहीतं तस्योभयार्थविषयत्वेनेष्ट लवात्। यदाह-अर्थः सहृदयश्राध्यः ... स्मृतौ ( ध्वनिकारिका I. 2) इति। सत्यम् । किन्तु तमर्थमिति तच्छब्देनानन्तर्यात् प्रतीयमानस्यार्थस्य परामशे सति पारिशेष्यादर्थो वाच्यविशेष इति स्वयं विवृतत्वाच्चार्थशब्दो वाच्यविषय एव विज्ञायते'. It will be noticed that the व्यक्तिविवेक clearly states that the वृत्ति 'यत्रारथों वाच्यविशेष: etc.' on the karika 'यत्रार्थः शब्दो वा' etc., (र. p. 33) belongs to the author of the कारिकाs. So also pp. 29 and 34 of the व्यक्तिवेवेक will show that he designated the author of the धवनिकारिकाs and of the वृत्ति also as ध्वनिकार. The औचित्यविचारचर्चा of क्षेमेन्द्र (on कारिका 18) quotes the कारिका (च. III. 24) 'विरोवी वाविरोधी वा रसोङगिनि रसान्तरे । ... विरोधिता ।।' as आनन्दवर्धन's. हेमचन्द्र (विेक p. 26) ascribes the कारिका

I. 14 ध्वन्यालोक. INTRODUCTION. LXIII

'प्रतीयमानं पुनरन्यदेव &c.' (व्व. I. 4) to आनन्दवर्धन, while on pp. 113 and 235 (काव्यानुशासन) be ascribes the कारिकाड III. 30 and 39 to ध्वनिकार. The साहित्यदर्पण quotes the first कारिका and II. 12 as from ध्वनिकार or ध्वनिकृत and also as- cribes the वृत्ति (viz. the words नहि कवेरितिवृत्तमात्रनि्वाहेण &c, on p. 148 of व्व०) to ध्वनिकार. No useful purpose will be served by referring to later writers, when comparatively early writers who were not separated from the ध्वन्यालोक by more than a century or two hold conflicting opinions as to the identity of the कारिकाकार and the वृत्तिकार.

It is difficult to give a decisive opinion in the midst of the conflict of views between the लोचन on the 1 one hand and प्रतीहारेन्दुराज, महिमभट्ट and क्षेमेन्द्र on the other. The चन्द्रिका ( which as we shall see later on was a commentary on the ध्वन्यालोक written before the लोचन ) and the हृदयदर्पण of भट्टनायक (which strongly criticized्व. ) would in all probability throw some light on this question; but unfortunately these works have not yet been discovered. But a passage of the लोचन (on p.123) quoted above (p. LIX), if rightly interpreted, seems to show that the चन्द्रिका also regarded the कारिकाकार and वृत्तिकार as distinct. At present I feel inclined to hold ( though with hesitation ) that the लोचन is right and that प्रतीहारेन्दुराज, महिमभट्ट, क्षेमेन्द्र and others had not the correct tradition before them. It seems that सहृदय was either the name or title of the कारिकाकार and that आनन्दवर्धन was his pupil and was very closely associated with him. This would serve to explain the confusion of authorship that arose within a short time. Faint indications of this relationship may be traced in the ध्वन्यालोक. The word सहृदयमनःप्रीतये in the first कारिका is explained in the वृत्ति a9 'रामायणमहाभारतप्रभृतिनि लक्ष्ये सर्वत्र प्रसिद्धन्यवहारं लक्षयतां सहृद्यानामानन्दो मनसि लभतां प्रतिष्ठामिति प्रकाश्यते.' It will be noticed that the word प्रीति is purposely rendered by the double-meaning word आनन्द (pleasure and the author anasao). The whole sentence may have two meanings 'may pleasure find room in the heart of the men of taste &c.' and 'may आनन्द (the author) secure regard in the heart of the (respected ) Haca who defined (the nature of ध्वनि) to be found in the रामायण&' Similarly the words सहृदयोदयलाभहेतोः in the last verse of

LXIV SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 14 धवन्यालोक.

the afd may be explained as 'for the sake of the benefit viz. the appearance of men of correct literary taste' or 'for the sake of securing the rise (of the fame ) of सहृदय' ( tho author ). The word सहृदय (as well as its syno- nym सचेतसू) occurs scores of times in the कारिका, वृत्ति and लोचन. For example vide कारिकाs I. 1 and 2, II. 14, III, 40; व्व. pp. 3, 7, 8, 10, 15, 34,59,80,84,131,159, 160, 182, 233 etc; लोचन pp, 3, 7, 11, 12, 22, 24, 45, 57, 105, 211, etc, The ध्वन्यालोक (p. 160) holds a discussion about the meaning of सहृदयत्व and the लोचन defines सहृदय as 'येषां काव्यानुशीलनाभ्यासवशाद्विशदीभूते मनोमुकुरे वर्णनीयतन्मयीभवनयोग्यता ते हृद- यसंवादभाज: सहृदयाः' (p. 11) and again (at p. 57) 'हृदयसंवादापरपर्या- यसहृदयत्वपरवशीकृततया etc.' It is to be noted that the लोचन speaks of आनन्दवर्धन as 'सहृदयचक्रवर्ती खत्वयं ग्रन्थकृदिति भावः' (p.12). One may hazard the conjecture that it was due to the profuse use of the word सहृदय in the ध्वन्यालोक and to making the सहृदय the final court of appeal in all matters of taste that the founder of the व्वनि theory earned the opithet सहृदय (par ex- callence).

An additional argument for asserting that the theory of ध्वनि in poetry had been propounded before आनन्दवर्धन is this that आनन्दo quotes (on p. 9) a verse which the लोचन ascribes to मनोरथ, a contemporary of आनन्दo, in which the theory) of ध्वनि० is ridiculed 'काव्यं तद्ध्वनिना समन्वितमिति प्रीत्या प्रशंस अडो नो विझोमिदधाति किं सुमतिना पृष्टः स्वरूपं ध्वनेः॥'. Vide राजतर० (IV. 497) for मनोरथ and others and IV. 671 मानी मनोरथो मन्री परं परिजद्दार तम्. The सुभा० (51, 58, 440) quotes verses of a मनोरथ. If this मनोरथ is identical with the मनोरथ who flourished in the reign of जयापीड (which does not look likely) the ध्वनिकारिकाड were composed between 800-815. Perhaps the लोचन is somewhat wrong in making आनन्द० a contemporary of मनोरथ.

The लोचन while commenting on the words 'परम्परया समाम्नात:' in the ध्वन्यालोक says that before the ध्वन्यालोक there ex- isted no work dealing with the theory of ध्वनि 'विनापि विशिष्टपुस्तकेषु विवेचनादित्यभिप्रायः' (p.10). The ध्वन्यालोक makes it clear that the theory of ध्वनि and its nomenclature was suggested by the स्फोट theory of the grammarians 'प्रथमो हि विद्वांसो वैयाकरणाः । व्याकरणमूलत्वात्सर्वविद्यानाम् । ते च श्रूयमाणेषु वर्णेषु ध्वनिरिति व्यवहरन्ति। तथेवान्यैस्तन्मतानुसारिभि: सूरिभिः काव्यतत्त्वार्थंदर्शिभिर्वाच्यवाचकसंमिश्रः शब्दात्मा काव्यमिति व्यपदेश्यो व्यअ्कत्वसाम्यादू ध्वनिरित्युक्त: ।' (घ्वopp. 47-48) and

I. 14 ध्वन्यालोक. INTRODUCTIOX. LXY

again on p. 199 'परिनिश्चितनिरपअ्रंशशब्दब्रह्मणां विपश्चितां मतमाश्रित्यैव प्रवृत्तोयं ध्वनिव्यवद्ार इति तैः सह कि विरोधाविरोधौ चिन्तेते।'. The स्कोट theory is probably older than qrfona who mentions a predeces sor स्फोटायन 'अवड् स्फोटायनस्य' पा. VI. 1. 123. The वावयपदीय at great length propounds the doctrine of lz (I. 44 ff). The ध्वन्यालोक says that the object of writing the book is not merely to establish by polemics that eaf exists, but it is to show that the true function and purpose of poetry is sr which may take the form of T# etc. and to show that if the poet regards mere narration of events as his principal function, he is liable to commit serious breaches of good taste 'अत एव

तानि भवन्तीति रसादिरूपव्यङ्गयतात्पर्यमेवैषां युक्तमिति यत्नोऽस्माभिरार्धो न ध्वनिप 1

तिपादनमात्राभिनिवेशेन' (p.163).

It is impossible to convey an adequate idea of the contents of the धवन्यालोक in a few lines. The following is a bare out- line. In the first उद्द्योत, the author refers to the different views about ध्वनि, some holding that it does not exist, some saying that it is included under लक्षणा, others holding that ध्वनि cannot be defined and is beyond the province of words but can at the most be relished by the man of taste; there are two senses in poetry expressed (ar) and implied (प्रतीयमान); the वाच्य sense in the form of figures of speech is well-known; the प्रतीयमान is like personal charm in the case of beautiful ladies ( which is distinct from the body and the limbs); प्रतीयमान is of three kinds, वस्तु, अलद्कार and रस and there are many subdivisions of these three; this पतीयमान sense is not understood by those who merely know grammer and lexicons, but only by those who know the essence of poetry; the प्रतीयमान sense is the principal thing in poetry; when the aj sense is the most prominent, it is ध्वनिकाव्य; in figures like समासोक्ति, आक्षेप, पर्यायोकत and others, though there is a प्रतीय- मान sense, the वाच्य sense is the most prominent and hence they are not ध्वनि; ध्वनि is of two kinds अविवक्षितवाच्य ( in which the expressed sense is not intended to be conveyed or taken literally) and विवक्षितान्यपरवाच्य (where the arar sense is intended to be conveyed and also suggests another sense ). ध्वनि is not identical with भक्ति (लक्षणा); nor is ध्वनि incapable of being defined and

LXVI SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 14 ध्वन्यालोक.

illustrated. In the 2nd उदूदयोत he subdivides अविधक्षितवाच्य into अर्थान्तरसंक्रमित and अत्यन्ततिरस्कृतवाच्य and cites instances 4 of each; the instances of the two respectively are 'aer जायन्ते गुणा यदा ते सहृदयैगृद्यन्ते। रविकिरणानुगृहीतानि भवन्ति कमलानि कमलानि। (here the 2nd कमलानि is अर्थान्तरसं० ) and 'रविसंक्रान्त- सौभाग्यस्तुषारावृतमण्डलः । निःश्वासान्व इवादर्शश्चन्द्रमा न प्रकाशते।' (here the word अन्ध is अत्यन्ततिरस्कृतवाच्य); he divides विवक्षितान्यप- रवाच्य into असंलक्ष्यतमव्यङ्गय and संलक्ष्यक्रमव्यज्ञ्य; असंल० is constituted by रस, भाव, रसाभास, भावाभास and भावप्रशम; when these occupy the principal position; where रस, भाव and others are subordinate and the principal purport of the passage is different, there occur the figures रसवद् &c; difference between gunas and alankaras; remarks on the three gunas माधुर्य, ओजसू and प्रसाद; अनुप्रास .and यमक not very desirable in शङ्गार; illutration of such figures as रूपक, पर्यायोक्त as subsidiary and favourable to the evolution of शङ्गाररस; subdivision of संलक्ष्यक्म into शब्दशक्तिमूल and अर्थ- शक्तिमूल; the former occurs where by the power of words an अलक्कार is suggested (and not expressed ), while in ay two meanings are directly conveyed by the words themselves; examples of श्ेष and शब्दशक्तिमूलध्वनि; definition and elucidation of अर्थशक्तिमूल (an example is 'एवं बादिनि देवषों पार्श्रे पितुरधोमुखी। लीलाकमलपत्राणि गणयामास पार्वती ।।' where the व्यभिचारिभाव-लज्जा is suggested ); difference between अर्थशक्तिमूल and असंलक्ष्यक्रमव्यङ्गय (the latter occurs where रस is relished by the express mention of विभावs, अनुभावs and व्यभिचारिभावs); subdivision of अर्धशक्तिमूल into वस्तु and अलङ्कार, the former being प्रौढोक्तिनिष्पन्र and स्वतःसम्भवी; examples of अलङ्कारध्वनि. III. In the second उद्द्योत the subdivi- sions of ध्वनि were based upon व्यङ्गय, in the third subdivi- sions are made from the point of view of the व्यञ्ञक; अविवक्षि- तवाच्य (in its two varieties) is पदप्रकाश्य (an example is कः सन्नद्धे विरदृविधुरां त्वय्युपेक्षेत जायां) or वाक्यप्रकाश्य (as in या निशा सर्वभूतानां तस्यां जागर्ति संयमी); the same two varieties occur in the संलक्ष्य- क्रमव्यङ्ञय division of विवक्षितान्यपरवाच्य; मसंलक्ष्यकम is helped by वर्ण, पद, वाक्य, सङ्गटना and प्रबन्ध; three kinds of सङ्घटना (असमासा, मध्यमसमासा and दीर्घसमासा); the relation of सङ्गटना to गुणs; सङ्गटना depends upon its appropriateness to speaker, the sense, the subject, the rasa; how rasa is manifested, how it is to be sustained, the figures favourable to the various rasas; the plot and its relation to rasa; illustration of the fact that

I. 14 ध्वन्यालोक. INTRODUCTION. LXVII

असंलक्ष्यकम is conveyed even by particular declensions, conjuga- tions, कृत and तद्धित affixes, compounds etc; what things are opposed (विरोधिन:) to the proper evolution of rasa; one रस should be the principal one in a composition and others should be ancillary to it; discussion of the difference between a and गम्य sense; difference between गुणवृत्ति and व्यंग्य; व्यंग्यव्यअ्जकभाव is not the same as अनुमान; a second variety of काव्य called गुणीभूतव्यंग्य (where, though there is a व्यंग्य sense, the expressed sense is charming ); examples of गुणीभूतव्यंग्य; the third variety of काव्य is चित्र, which is of two kinds, शब्दचित्र (such as यमक) and वाच्यचित्र (such as the figures उत्पेक्षा etc.); the third variety of aaT occurs when the poet has no intention to convey a suggested sense or to evolve rasa etc; by the combination of these three varieties of aray numerous subvarieties arise; the rutis and orittis (कैशिकी etc. and उपनागरिका etc). IV The पतिभा of poets presents ever fresh aspects in the domain of ध्वनि and गुणीभूतव्यङ्गयकाव्य; the same thought, when made to glow by the poets' imagination, appears new; the poet should concentrate upon one rasa as the main purport of his work; in the रामायणकरुण is the main rasa and in the महाभारत, which is both शास्त्र and काव्य, शान्त rasa is the principal one intended by the poet; the province of poetry is unlimited, in spite of the fact that hundreds of poets have composed works for centuries; the thoughts of inspired poets may bear a certain correspondence; the semblance between the works of two poets may be like that of बिम्ब and प्रतिबिम्ब, or between a thing and its picture, or between two human beings; the first two kinds of semblance should be avoided, but the third is charming.

Besides the रामायण and the महाभारत (the अनुक्रमणी, गीता, गृधगोमायुसंवाद of which are quoted ) the following are among the authors and works mentioned by name :- अर्जुनचरित (a महा- काव्य by आनन्द० pp. 148, 176), अमरुक, उद्ट (96, 108), कादम्बरी, कालिदास, तापसवत्सराज (a drama, 151), धर्मकीर्ति, नागा- नन्द (176), भट्टबाण (100), भरत (146, 163, 181), भामह (39, 207), मधुमथनविजय (152), रलावली (150), रामाभ्युदय (133), विषमबाणलीला (a work by आनन्द० in Prakrit, 62, 152, 241), वेणीसंहार, सर्वसेन (author of हरिविजय in Prakrit, 148), सातवाहन (as having gone to नागलोक, 145), सेतुकाव्य (87 ), इरिविजय (127, 148), हरिवंश (as composed by कृष्णद्वेपायन

LXVII SABITYADABPAŅA. I. 14 धवन्यालोक.

and plaoed at the end of the महाभारत, 239)2 हर्षचरित (99, 100, 101, 127 ); quotations are taken from the गाथासप्तशवी, मनोरथ, the शाकुन्तल and other works of कालिदास, शिशुपालव, सूर्यशतक; he frequently quotes his own verses (in Sanskrit and Prakrit ) as illustrations ( 96, 101, 110, 218, 227, 243 ), he gives here and there a few verses, called परिकरश्लोक (pp. 34, 129, 137, 147, 163,); this expression is explained by लोचन (p.34) 'परिकरार्थ कारिकार्थस्याधिकावापं कर्तु श्रोकः परिकरफ्रोकः' i. e. a verse that explained and expanded the sonse of a कारिका (discussed in the वृत्ति). For the meaning of परिकर compare 'व्याकरणस्य शरीरं परिनिष्ठितशास्त्रकार्यमेतावत्। शिष्टः परिकर- बन्धः क्रियतेस्य ग्रन्थकारेण ।I' (Peterson on ms of काशिका JBBRAS vol. 16 extra No. p. 29). On p. 221 he introduces two verses with the words 'तदिदमुक्त' on which the लोचन remarks 'मयैवेत्यर्थः' On p. 233 he quotes a verse with the words तदिदमुक्त on which the लोचन says 'उक्तमिति संग्रहार्थ मयैवेत्यर्थः' (and therefore the KM edition is wrong in printing the verse as a कारिका). On p. 222 we have two well-known verses 'अपारे काव्यसंसारे' etc. and 'शद्गारी चेत्कविः' introduced by the words तथा चेदमुच्यते on which the लोचन does not say as it does in other cases that they are his own. On p. 223 he gives two verses that summa- rise the preceding discussion with the words तदयमत्र संग्रह:

The date of आनन्दवर्धन can be settled with great precision. The राज० says 'मुक्ताकण: शिवस्वामी कविरानन्दवर्धनः। प्रथां रलाकरश्चागा- त्साम्राज्येवन्तिवर्मणः II'(V. 34). This shows that आनन्दवर्धन attained fame in the reigo of अवन्तिवर्मन of Kashmir (855-883 A. C. ). This date agrees well with what we know from other sources. He quotes उद्धट and so is later than 800 A. C; while he is quoted by राजशेखर (about 900 A. C.). Therefore the period of his literary activity would lie between 840-870 A. C. रल्नाकर is the author of the महाकाव्य हरविजय, which was composed by him, as he says, in the reign of बालबृहस्पति. Numerous verses are quoted by the TT. from a poet called शिवस्वामी. We are told by the लोचन that मनोरथ was one of the contemporaries of आनन्द Besides the अर्जुनचरित, the ध्वन्यालोक and the विषमबाणलीला, आनन्द० wrote after the ध्वन्यालोक a work on the धर्मोत्तमा, a commentary on the (प्रमाण)विनिश्चय (of धर्मकीर्ति). 'यत्त्वनिर्देश्यत्वं सर्वलक्षणविषये बौद्धानां प्रसिद्धं तत्तन्मतपरीक्षायां ग्रन्थान्तरे निरूपयिष्यामः' on which the लोचन remarks 'विनिश्चयटीकार्या धर्मोत्तमायां या विवृतिरमुना ग्रन्थकृता कृता तत्रैव तद्व्याख्यातम्' मानन्द०

I.14 ध्वन्यालोक. INTRODUCTION. LXIX

also composed the देवीशतक which is full of यमक, भाषाश्रेष, गोमूत्रिका and other चित्रबनधs. From verse 101 it appears that he was the son of नोण and wrote the work after the विषमबाण- लीला and the अर्जुनचरित 'येनानन्दकथायां त्रिदशानन्दे घ लालिता वागी। तेन सुदुष्करमेतत्स्तोत्रं देव्या: कृतं भक्त्या ॥'. The देवीशतक was commented upon by कय्यट, son of चन्द्रादित्य and grandson of वल्भदेव, in 4078 गतकलि (i, e. 978 A. C.) in the reign of king भीमगुप्त .* . The commentary of अभिनवगुप्त is variously designated in the mss. as सहृदयालोकलोचन or ध्वन्यालोकलोचन or काव्यालोकलोचन; the name of the cammentary is लोचन and not आलोचन as some suppose. At the end of the first and the third उद्दोत we have the verse 'कि लोचनं विनालोंको भाति चन्द्रिकया- पि हि। तेनाभिनवगुप्तोन्र लोचनोन्मीलनं व्यधात् II'; later writers like 1 विश्वनाथ cite him as लोचनकार. The commentary of अभिनवगुप्त ocoupies in the Alankara literature a position analogous to that of पतञ्ञलि's महाभाष्य in grammar or S'ankaracharya's bhashya on the Vedantasutras. अभिनवगुप्त was a profound philosopher, an acute critic and a great poet. His commentary is sometimes more erudite and difficult than the text. Here and there he discusses various readings in the कारिकाs and the वृत्ति also ( vide p. 23, and कारिका İII. 51). Among the authors and works quoted by him (besides those in the ध्वन्यालोक) in the लोचन are :- इन्दुराज ( frequently quoted ), उत्पल (30), कादम्बरीकथासार of भट्टजयन्तक (142), काव्यकौतुक (178) of भट्टतौत, कुमारिलभट्ट (188), चन्द्रि- कांकार (178), तत्रालोक (19), तापसवत्सराज (an analysis of its six acts, 151 ), भट्टतात (29), दण्डी (141), प्रभाकरदर्शन (188), भर्तृहरि (author of वाक्यपदीय, p. 47), भागुरि (175), मनोरथ, विवरणकृत् (40), यशोवर्म (author of रामाभ्युदय, 148), वत्सरानचरित (162 ), वामन (8, 10, 180), स्वप्नवासवदत्ता ( a drama, 152), हृदयदर्पण (27, 28, 63). He frequently quotes his own verses

• The Journal ( No IX ) of the Department of letters, Calcutta University, that came to my hands while these pages were passing through the press, contains the comment of अभिनवगुप्त on the 4th उदूद्योत edited by Dr. Sushil Kumar De from two mss at Madras. From this it appears that आनन्द wrote a work called तत्त्वालोक in which he discussed the relation of शास्त्रनय and कार्व्यनय and that the verse cited on p 243 ( qo ) as his was composed in the सैन्धवभाषा.

LXX SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 14 ध्वन्यालोक.

( 36, 40, 43, 75, 94, 117, 119 ). Some of these verses are said to be from his own स्तोत्र (75, 179). He tells us that he wrote a commentary (विवरण) on the काव्यकौतुक of his teacher तौत (p. 178). He wrote the लोचन after the तन्नालोक (p.19).

अभिनवगुप्त was a very prolific writer. Over twenty works of his are known. He wrote on Kashmir S'aivism. From his परात्रिशिकाविवरण (Bubler's Kashmir report p. CLVII ) we learn that his grandfather was वराइगुम्त and father चुखल; मनोरथगुप्त was his younger brother (प्रत्यभिज्ञाविमर्शिनी बृददती- वृत्ति). It appears that he had several teachers. In the introduction to the लोचन he refers to भट्टेन्दुराज as his teacher and quotes very frequently the verses of भट्टेन्दुराज as illustrations ( 25, 43, 116, 160 207, 223 ). The last is & Prakrit गाथा. That भट्टेन्दुराज was not only a poet but also a critic follows from the words of the लोचन (p.160) 'यथा वास्मदुपाध्यायस्य वि्द्वत्कविसहृदयचक्रवर्तिनो भट्टेन्दुराजस्य' where he highly eulogises इन्दुराज as supreme amongst learned men, poets and men of taste. In his commentary on the भगवद्गीता (Buhler's K. report CXVIII ) he tells us that his guru भट्टेन्दुराज belonged to the कात्यायनगोत्र, that his grandfather was सौचुक and father भूतिराज- In several places the लोचन quotes the views of his guru or उपाध्याय on the words of the ध्वन्यालोक or examples cited therein. On the introductory verse स्वेच्छाकेसरिण: of the ध्वन्यालोक, the लोचन (p. 2) says 'एवं वस्त्वलक्काररसमेदेन त्रिधा ध्वनिरत्र श्रोकेसमद्ुरुमिर्व्यां ख्यातः'; 'सर्वथालङ्कारादिषु व्यङ्गयं वाच्ये गुणीभवतीति नः साध्यमित्यत्राशयोत्र अन्थेऽसमद्गुरुमिर्निरूपितः'(p. 37); 'प्रीत्यात्मा च रसस्तदेव नाट्यं नाट्य एव च वेद इत्यस्मदुपाध्यायः' (p. 149); 'अस्मद्रुरवस्त्वाङ्ड :- अत्रोच्यत इत्यनेनेदमुच्यते etc.' (p.183); 'अस्मदुपाध्यायास्तु हृद्यतमानि पुष्पाणि अमुके गृद्दाण गृहाणे- त्युच्चैस्तारस्वरेणादरातिशयार्थ प्रयच्छता' (p. 214, on the verse 'प्रयच्छतोचचैः कुसुमानि मानिनी, where the explanation of लोचन is different). These quotations show that his teacher had explained either orally to अभिनवगुप्त or in some commentary the ध्वन्यालोक. The question arises whether भट्टेन्दुराज is identical with पवीहारेन्दुराज, commentator of ERc. We do not know the parentage of the latter. But we know this that the latter did not approve of the theory of ध्वनि and included ध्वनिकान्य under alarikaras; while भट्टेन्दुराज seems to have approved of it and explained the व्वन्यालोक to अभिनवगुप्त. प्रतीहारेन्दुराज was a कौङ्कण and had come to काश्मीर for study. The word प्रतीहार is somewhat suspicious.

I. 14 ध्वन्यालोक. INTRODUCTION. LXXI

It was applied to a clan of the non-Aryan Gurjaras ( I. A. 1919 p. 132). Therefore, though भट्टेन्दुराज and प्रतीहारेन्दुराज were both of them well versed in Alankaras'astra and flourished almost about the same time, they must be regarded as distinct. It is, however, noteworthy that समुद्रबन्ध on the अलक्गारसर्वस्व (p. 130 Trivandrum ed.) seems to identify the two by calling प्रतीहारेन्दुराज by the name भट्टेन्दुराज 'भट्टेन्दुराजेन प्रीणितप्रणयीत्यादि अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसोदाहरणे ... भटटोन्द्टअ्रन्थे ... व्याख्यातम्' (vide p. 34 of the मलक्कारसारसंग्रहलघुवृत्ति for the verse प्रीणितप्रणयि which is भामह III. 29). भट्टतौत was another teacher of अभिनवगुप्त (लोचन p. 29, 178) and wrote the work called काव्यकौतुक. The लोचन refers to उत्पल as the परमगुरु of अभिनवगुप्त (p.30), who wrote on the प्रत्यभिज्ञाशास्त्र. His teacher in S'aiva philosophy seems to have been लक्ष्मणगुप्त (Buhlers' K. report CLIX).

अभिनवगुप्त's literary activity falls between 990 A. C. and 1020 A.C. His प्रत्यभिज्ञाविमर्शिनी (बृहतीवृत्ति ) was composed in the 90th year of the लौकिक era and in गतकलि 4115 (i. e. 1015 A.C.) 'इति नवतिनमेस्मिन् वत्सरेन्त्ये युगांशे तिथिशशिजलधिस्थे मार्गशीर्षावसाने' (Buhler's K. report CLIX); while his भरवस्तोत्र was composed in 68 लौकिककाल (i. e. 993 A. C). Vide Buhler's report CLXII.

Before the लोचन, there existed a commentary on the ध्वन्यालोक called चन्द्रिका, which was composed by some one who belonged to the same family to which अभिनवगुप्त belonged. The लोचन cites it in many places and strongly condemns it 'चन्द्रिकाकारस्तु पठितमनुपठतीति न्यायेन गजनिमीलिकया व्याचचक्षे तस्य तस्य शब्दस्य फलं तद्वा फलं वाच्यव्यञ्ञप्रतीत्यात्मकं तस्य घटना निष्पादना यतोऽनन्यसाध्या शब्दव्यापारैकजन्येति। न चात्रार्थसतत्त्त्वं व्याख्यानेन किन्रिदुत्पश्याम इत्यलं पूर्ववंश्यैः सह विवादेन बडुना' (लोचन p. 185); 'आधि- कारिकत्वेन तु शान्तो रसोनिबद्धव्य इति चन्द्रिकाकारः । तच्चेहास्माभिर्न पर्यालो- च्चितम्। प्रसङ्गान्तरात्' (लो० p. 178). This view is quoted by the काव्यप्रकाशसङ्केत of माणिक्य० (p. 101 Mysore ed. ) and by सोमेश्वर. The verse 'कि लोचनं विनालोको भाति चन्द्रिकयापि हि' (at the end of the 1st and 3rd उद्दयोत) contains a pun on the three words आलोक, चन्द्रिका (moonlight and the com. on the ध्वन्या- लोक) and लोचन. The लोचन in several other places quotes the explanation of the धवन्यालोक by a previous commentator and adds words to the effect 'इत्यलं पूर्ववंश्यैः सह विक्ादेन.' For example, p. 123 'यस्तु व्याचष्टे ... त्यलं निजपूर्वजसगोत्रैः साकं विवादेन; p.174 "अन्यस्तु व्याचष्टे-एतच्चापेक्षिकमित्यादिग्रन्थो ... इत्यलं पूर्ववंश्यैः सह बट्ुना संलापेन;

LXXII SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 14 ध्वन्यांलौक.

P 215 यत्त (यस्तु?) त्रिष्वपि क्रोकेषु प्रतीयमानस्यैव रसाङ्गत्वं व्याचष्टे स स देवं विक्रीय तघात्रोत्सवमकाषीत्। ... इत्यलं पूर्ववंश्यैः सह विवादेन. The चन्द्रिका is referred to in the व्यक्तिविवेक also (5th intro. verse) In several other places the लोचन refers ( in the words अन्यः, afaa &c ) to the explanations and comments of the passages of the ध्वन्यालोक or the illustrations cited therein, but does not name the author, nor does it add the words er पूर्ववंश्यः सह विवादेन. The views quoted are likely to be those of the चन्द्रिका in some cases and of भट्टनायक in others; vide Pp. 7, 9. 20 ( यस्तु ध्वनिव्याख्यानोद्यतस्तात्पर्यशक्तिमेव -.. स नास्माकं हृदयमा- वर्जयति), 22, 36 (यस्तु व्याचष्टे ... स प्रकृतार्थमेव ग्रन्थार्थमत्यजत्), 124, 136, 140, 143, 157, 173, 201, 205, 207, which are cases where probably the चन्द्रिका is referred to, while p. 57 (यत्त वाक्यमेद: स्यादिति केनचिदुक्तं तदसव), 131, 208, 212 seem to refer to the views of independent writers like भट्टनायक.

15 The काव्यमीमांसा of राजशेखर. This work has been pub- lished in the Gaikwad Oriental Series. This is a unique work, but it does not directly concern itself with the exposition of rasas, gunas, or alankaras, and it is rather in the nature of a practical handbook for poets. It is divided into 18 chap- ters. The following is a brief analysis of the contents. I, शास्त्रसंग्रह; narrates how instruction in काव्यमीमांसा was impar- ted by S'iva to Brahma and others and how from Brahma through a succession of teachers and pupils, the 18 sections of the काव्यमीमांसा were dealt with by 18 different writers, how राजशेखर of the यायावरीय family summarised the views of sages. :- II शास्त्रनिर्देश :- वाङाय is of two kinds शास्त्र and काव्य; शास्त्र is अपौरुषेय and पौरुषेय; the four Vedas, 4 उपवेदs, six angas; यायावरीय thinks that अलद्वार is the seventh anga; पौरुष शास्त is con- stituted by the पुराणs, आन्वीक्षिकी, the two मीमांसाs, 18 स्मृतिs; the number of विद्यास्थानs; 14 or 18 is the number of विद्याs according to various authorities; यायावरीय calls साहित्यविद्या the fifth विद्या; meaning of such words as सूत्र, भाष्य, वृत्ति, टीका, पञ्चिका, कारिका ete. III. काव्यपुरुषोत्पत्ति; a mythical account of the birth of काव्यपुरुष from सरस्वती, who is described as 'शब्दार्थों ते शरीरं, संस्कृतं मुखं, प्राकृतं बाङु:, जघनमपभ्रंश, पैशाचं पादौ, उरो मिश्रम्। समः प्रसन्नो मधुर उदार ओजस्वी चासि। उक्तिचणं च ते वचो, रस आत्मा, रोमाणि च्छन्दांसि, प्रश्नोत्तरप्रवह्धिकादिकं च वाक्केलि:, अनुप्रासोपमादयश्च त्वामलडकुर्वन्ति।' (p. 6); marriage of काव्यपुरुष with साहित्यविद्यावधू at the city of वत्सगुल्म (probably modern Basim in Berar); IV पदवाक्यविवेक :- what are the essential

I. 15 राजशेखर. INTRODUCTION. LXXII

requisites to become a poet! यायावरीय said शक्ति was the only काव्यहेतु and gave rise to प्रतिभा and व्युत्पत्ति; while others said that the aid of समाधि (concentration) and अभ्यास was required; various classifications of poets; V काव्यपाककल्प :- meaning of न्युत्पत्ति; शास्त्रकवि, काव्यकवि and उभयकवि and their subdivisions; the ten stages( aaeI ) of a poet, the various meanings of the term पाक; VI पदवाक्यविवेक :- the five वृत्तिs of शब्द, सुबू, समास, तद्धित, कृत and तिड; definition of वाक्य; its threefold expressive power वैभक्त, शक्त, शक्तिविभक्तिमय; ten kinds of वाक्य; definition of काव्य as 'गुणवदलङ्गतं च वाक्यमेव काव्यम्; VII पाठप्र- तिषा :- the appropriate language and style for gods, Apsarases, पिशाचs &c; the three रीतिs वैदर्भी, गौडीया and पाञ्चाली; a of two kinds and their subdivisions with illustrations; the intonation of various peoples in India and the different languages they empoly; VIII काव्यार्थयोनय :- the sources of the subjeot-matter of काव्य are 12, श्रुति, स्मृति, इतिहास, पुराण, प्रमाण- विद्या, समयविद्या, राजसिद्धान्तत्रयी (अर्थशास्त्र, नाट्यशास्त्र, कामशास्त्र), लोक, विरचना (कविमनीषानिर्मितं कथातत्रमर्थमात्रं वा विरचना) and प्रकीर्णक; यायावरीय adds four more; IX अर्थव्याप्ति-the subject of description may be दिव्य, दिव्यमानुष, मानुष, पातालीय, मर्त्यपातालीय, दिव्यपातालीय and दिव्यमर्त्यपातालीय; whatever the location may be the subject must be रसवत् (रसवत एव निबन्धो युक्तो न नीरसस्येति आपराजितिः । आमिति यायावरीयः ); the subject of description may be in an isolated verse or in a ga-q, each of which is of five kinds; X कविचर्या and राजचर्या-काव्यविद्याS (नामधातुपारायण, अभिधान- कोश, छन्दोविचिति and अलङ्गार); 64 कलाs are the उपविद्याS; काव्यमातर: (देशवार्ता, विदग्धवाद, लोकयात्रा, विद्वद्गोष्ठी etc); purity of body, speech and thought necessary for a poet; the house of a poet, his attendants and writing materials; how a poet should divide the whole day into eight parts and the duties appropriate to each of the 8 parts; women may compose poetry; assembly hall to be erected by kings for examining poets; in large towns assemblies to be formed for testing those learned in the TreTS and काव्य; XI-XIII-how far a poet can appropriate a predecessor's words and thoughts; XIV-XVI about कविसमय (conventions) with reference to countries, trees, plants, flowers, etc .; about intangible things (as a smile which is said to be white); XVII देशविभाग :- the various countries, rivers, mountains in the four' quarters of India and the products peculiar to each; the colour of the complexion of various peoples; XVIII TofarT :- the seasons, g

LXXIY SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 15 राजशेखर.

the winds, flowers, birds and actions appropriate to various. seasons. It will be seen that this work is a mine of information on numerous matters. It appears that the printed काव्यमीमांसा is only a fragment of what the author contepmlated (e. g. on p. 11 तमौपनिषदिके वक्ष्याम:). The अलक्कारशेखर at the end of the 11th मरीचि quotes two verses from राजशेखर which are not found in the काव्यमी, one of which is 'अलङ्कारशिरोरलं सर्वस्वं काव्यसम्पदाम्। उपमा कविवंशस्य मातैवेति मतिर्मम ॥'. The work is written somewhat after the अर्थशास्त्र of कौटिल्य and the style is vigorous, though sometimes ponderous. He quotes numerous verses from ancient authors. Among the works drawn upon are those of कालिदास, अमरुशतक, किरातार्जुनीय, कादम्बरी, मालतीमाधव, वेणीसंहार, शिशुपालवध, सूर्यशतक, हयग्रीववध, his own works. He quotes the opinions of numerous writers on Alankara, some of whom are known from his work alone, viz. अवन्तिसुन्दरी, आनन्द, आपराजिति, उद्भट, कालिदास, द्रौहिणि, भरत, मङ्गल, रुट्रट, वाक्पतिराज, वामन, श्यामदेव, सुरानन्द. He frequently cites certain views as those of the Acharyas. It is not possible to say who are meant. He quotes his own views as those of यायावरीय. The काव्यमीमांसा has not been frequently quoted in later works on साहित्य हेमचन्द्र and वाग्भट borrowed from him very largely, particularly chapters 17-18. The काव्यप्रकाशसङ्केत of माणिक्य० (p. 308 Mysore ed.) quotes the words 'अमिप्रायवान्पाठधर्मः काकु: स नालक्कारी स्यादिति यायावरीयः' (which occur in the काव्यमी. p. 31). हेमचन्द्र (p. 235 काव्यानु) and सोमेश्रर also quote these words. He gives some striking historical and literary information. He tells us that मेधाविरुद्र and कुमारदास were poets that were blind from birth (p.12), that certain kings such as शिशुनाग in मगध, कुविन्द in शूरसेन, सातवाहन in कुन्तल and साहसाङ in उज्जयिनी respectively made rules that in their palaces eight letters that were difficult to utter were not to be employed, that harsh conjunct con- sonants were to ba avoided, that only Prakrit was to be em- ployed or only Sanskrit (p.50); that वासुदेव, सातवाहन, शूदक and साहसाङ were great patrons of learning and that in उज्जयिनी the poets कालिदास, मेण्ठ, अमर, रूपसूर (१), भारवि, हरिचन्द्र, चन्द्रगुप्त were examined and in पाटलिपुत्र उपवर्ष, वर्ष, पाणिनि, पिङ्गल, व्याडि, वररुचि and पतजञलि were tested (p. 55). He is very fond of the Prakrits (pp .. 34, 51 ) and speaks of the languages in different countries (p. 51 where पैशाची is said to prevail in अवन्ती, पारियात्र and दशपुर). :

I. 15 राजशेखर. INTRODUCTION, LXXV

For the personal history of राजशेखर Dr. Konow's introduction to the कर्पूरमज्जरी and Mr. Dalal's to the काव्यमी० may be consulted. He seems to have belonged to महाराष्ट्र He says in his बालरामायण that he was fourth in descent from अकालजलद whom he describes as महाराष्ट्रचूडामणि. He was the son of दुर्दुक and शीलवती. He was very confident of his powers and speaks of himself as वाल्मीकि in another birth (बालरामायण I. 16). He is described as महामत्रिपुत्र and as the उपाध्याय or guru of king निर्भय or महेन्द्रपाल (बाल. I. 5 and 18, कर्पूर० I. 5. and 9) of the Raghu family. His wife अवन्तिसुन्दरी belonged to the Chahuana (Chavan ) family and it was at her desire that the कर्पूरमअरी (I. 11) was brought on the stage. So it seems that he married an accomplished क्षत्रिय lady. The views of अवन्तिसुन्दरी are quoted in the काव्यमी० (pp. 20, 46, 57). राजशेखर is styled बालकवि and कविराज in the कर्पूर० (I. 9). He speaks of the king महीपाल- देव, son of निर्भयनरेन्द्र in the प्रचण्डपाण्डव (alias बालभारत). He or his family seems to have migrated to Kanoj. The ars- भारत was performed at महोदय (कान्यकुब्ज). In the काव्यमी. (p. 94 तत्रापि महोदयं मूलमवधीकृत्येति यायावरीयः) he lays down that directions are to be measured from Kanoj. The works he composed are the four dramas विद्धशालभज्जिका, कर्पूरमज्जरी, बाल- रामायण, बालभारत (or प्रचण्डपाण्डव), the काव्यमीमांसा and हरविलास (a महाकाव्य). The बालरा० (I. 12) says that he composed six प्रबन्धs. हेमचन्द्र (विवेक p. 335) ascribes the हरविलास to him. The काव्यमी. (p. 98) refers to a geographical work of his called भुवनकोश. The verses appreciative of poets that are quoted in the anthologies as राजशेखर's probably belong to this राज०.

He flourished in the first quarter of the 10th century. Vide L. A. vol 16 pp. 175-178, I.A. Vol 34 p. 177 and E. I. I. 162 ff, which show that the dates of महेन्द्रपाल or निर्भय- नरेन्द्र are 902 and 907 A.C. and the date of his son मही- पाल is 917 A. C. As he quotes उद्धट and आनन्दवर्धन and is referred to or quoted by यशस्तिलक ( written in 959-60 A. C. ), by the तिलकमजरी (about 1000 A.C. 'समाधिगुणशालिन्यः प्रसन्नपरिप- क्त्रिमाः। यायावरकवेवांचो मुनीनामिव वृत्तयः ॥ verse 33) and by महि- मभट्, this date is amply corroborated.

16 The अमिधावृत्तिमातका of मुकुलभट्ट (published by the Nir- naya-sagar Press, 1916). This work deserves a passing notice.

LXXVI SÂHITYADARPANA. I. 16 मुकुलभट्ट.

This is a work containing 15 karikas with वृत्ति thereon by the author himself. It deals with the two senses of words viz. मुख्य and लाक्षणिक and gives a detailed treatment of लक्षणा (its subdivisions and examples). Later works like the काव्यप्रकाश base their teatment of लक्षणा on this work. He quotes or rofers to उद्भट, कुमारिलभट्ट, ध्वन्यालोक, भर्तृमित्र, महाभाष्य, विज्जका, वाक्यपदीय, शबरस्वामी. He was the son of भट्टकलट and the teacher of प्रवीहारेन्दुराज. भट्टकलट flourished in the reign of अवन्तिवर्मन् (855-883 A.C.) 'अनुग्रहाय लोकानां भट्टाः श्रीकलटादयः । अवन्तिवर्मण: काले सिद्धा भुवमवातरन् ॥'राजतर० V. 66. Therofore मुकुल flourished in the first quarter of the tenth century. He is frequently quoted in the काव्यप्रकाशसक्केत of माणिक्यचन्द्र 17 The काव्यकौतुक of भट्टतौत. We know that भट्टतौत was the guru of अभिनवगुप्त (लोचन p. 29) and that he wrote a work called काव्यकौतुक on which अभिनवगुप्त wrote a विवरण (लोचन p.178). One of his docrines was that शान्तरस was at the head of all rasas as it led on to मोक्ष. Another doctrine that he held was that the poet, the hero (of a poem ) and the ( sympathetic ) reader pass through the same experiences 'नायकस्य कवेः श्रोतुः समानोनुभवस्ततः' (लोचन p. 29). The औचित्य० of क्षेमेन्द्र (on कारिका 35) attributes to him the definition of प्रतिभा 'प्रज्ञा नवनवोन्मेषशालिनी प्रतिभा मता' हेमचन्द्र (काव्यानु. p.316) quotes three verses from भट्टतौत 'नानृषिः कविरित्युक्तमृषिश्च किल दर्शनाव। विचित्रभावधर्माशतत्त्वप्रख्या च दर्शनम् ॥ स तत्त्वदर्शनादेव शास्त्रेषु पठितः कविः। दर्शनाद्वर्णनाच्चाथ रूढा लोके कविश्रुतिः ॥ तथाहि दर्शने स्वच्छे नित्येप्यादिकवेर्मुनि: (नेः१)। नोदिता कविता लोके यावज्जाता न वर्णना ॥'. सोमेश्वर (in his टीका on काव्यप्र. I) quotes these verses. The काव्यप्रकाशसङ्केत (of माणिक्य०) ascribes the following to काव्यकौतुक 'प्रज्ञाप्रतिभा मता। तदनुप्राणनाजीवद्वर्णनानिपुणः कविः। तस्य कर्म स्मृतं काव्यं' (p.7 Mysore ed.). This is quoted by हेमचन्द्र (काव्यानु. P.3) also without name; the व्यक्तिविवेकव्याख्या (p.13) also says "अनेन कवेः कर्म काव्यमिति काव्यकौतुकविहितां काव्यस्य शब्दव्युत्पत्ति कविमूलकाव्यत्वप्र तिपादिकां दर्शयति। तत्र ह्यक्त 'तस्य कर्म स्मृतं काव्यम्' इति ॥". हेमचन्द्र (विवेक p. 59) tells us that भट्टतौत was against the view of शङ्कक 'अनुकरणरूपो रसः.' So also माणिक्यचन्द्र (p. 69) and सोमेश्वर say the same. भट्टतौत flourished about 960-990 A. C. and had exercised great influence over अमिनवगुप्त. His work, if recovered, would be very valuable.

18 The हृदयदर्पण of भट्टनायक. भट्टनायक is one of the four writers whose interpretations of the sutra of Bharata 'विभावानुभावव्यभिचारिसंयोगाद्रसनिष्पत्तिः' are quoted in the काव्यप्रकाश

I, 18 भट्टनायक. INTRODUCTION. LXXV.II

( IV. p. 90 Va. ). His view of रस is 'न ताटस्थ्येन नात्मगतत्वेन रसः प्रतीयते नोत्पदते नाभिव्यज्यते अपि तु काव्ये नास्य चाभिधातो द्विवीयेन विभावादिसाधारणीकरणात्मना भावकत्वव्यापारेण भाव्यमान: स्थायी सत्त्वोद्रेकप्रकाशा नन्दमयसंविद्विश्रान्तिसतत्त्वेन भोगेन भुज्यत इति भट्टनायक:'. Vide लोचन pp. 67-68 for a more detailed statement of the views of az- नायक about रस. According to him, there are three functions of the words of a poem or drama, अभिधा, भावना, भोगीकृति (or रसचर्वणा or भोग). The first is common to शास्त्र also. By the second function (भावना), the विभावs (like सीता &c.) are presented to the reader or spectator stripped of their individual existence and only in a general way ( as chaste and charming womanhood &c. ). The third function leads to the ultimate experience of the reader or spectator ( which, like ब्रह्मानन्द, is स्वसंवेद and not capable of being defined in words ); that experience for the moment makes the सहृदय reader or spectator forget all else and makes him one with the subject presented. हेमचन्द्र (विवेक p. 61) and जयरथ (अलं. स. वि. p. 9) quote the following verses from him on this point 'अभिधा भावना चान्या तन्भ्ोगीकृतिरेव च। अभिधाधामतां याते शब्दार्थालङ्गती ततः ॥ भावनाभाव्य एषोपि शङ्गारादिगणो मतः । तद्गोगीकृतिरूपेण व्याप्यते सिद्धिमान्नरः ॥l'. That he was the author of the हृदयदर्पण fol- lows from several circumstances. The लोचन quotes certain verses of भटटनायक in which he distinguishes between शास्त्र and आ. ख्यान on the one hand and काव्य on the other 'शब्दप्राधान्य- माश्रित्य तत्र शास्त्रं पृथग्विदुः। अर्थतत्त्वेन युक्तं तु वदन्त्याख्यानमेतयोः। द्वयोर्गुणत्वे व्यापारप्राधान्ये काव्यधीर्भवेत्।' (p. 27). These verses are quoted from the हृदयदर्पण by हेमचन्द्र (काव्यानु p.3). The अलङ्कारसर्वखव (p.9) summarises the views of भट्टनायक 'भट्टनायकेन तु व्यङ्गय- व्यापारस्य प्रौढोक्त्याभ्युपगतस्य काव्यांशत्वं जवता न्यग्भावितशब्दार्थस्वरूपस्य व्या- पारस्यैव प्राधान्यमुक्तम्। तत्राप्यभिधाभावकत्वलक्षणव्यापारद्वयोत्तीणों रसचर्वणात्मा भो- गापरपर्यायो व्यापार: प्राधान्येन विश्रान्तिस्थानतयाङ्गीकृतः' With reference to this view, जयरथ speaks of भट्टनायक as हृदयदर्पणकार (p.12). महिमभट्ट says that he composed the व्यक्तिविवेक to secure fame (of demolishing the स्वन्यालोक) without looking at the दर्पण (the हृदयदर्पण) 'सहसा यशोभिसर्तुं समुद्यतादृष्टदर्पणा मम घीः। स्वालक्कारवि- कल्पप्रकल्पने वेत्ति कथमिवावद्यम्।।' (p.1, अभिसर्तु means to approach as an अभिसारिका and दर्पण also means 'mirror'). The com- mentary on this explains 'दर्पणो हृदयदर्पणाख्यो ध्वनिध्वंसग्रन्थोपि'. It follows that भट्टनायक wrote the हृदयदर्पण for demolishing the theory of ध्वनि. The लोचन (p. 19) refers te the adverse criticism of भट्टनायक on the illustration भम धम्मिम (प्व. p. 16)

EXXVIII SAHITYADARPAŅA. I. 18 भट्टनायक.

and then twits him by saying 'कि च वस्तुध्व्नि दूषयता रसष्वनि- खद्रनुग्ाइक: समर्थ्यत इति सुष्ठतरां ध्वनिध्वंसोयम्' (लोचन p. 20). The principal point on which he differs from the ध्वन्यालोक is that he regards ध्वनि as transcending definition and as purely स्वसंवेद. So he was a follower of those of whom the ध्वनिकारिका says 'केच्विद्वार्चा स्थितमविषये तत्त्वमूचुस्तदीयम्' or as the ध्वo says केचित्पुनर्लक्षणकरणशालीनबुद्धयो ध्वनेस्तत्त्वं गिरामगोचरं सहृदयहृदयसंवेदमेव समाख्यातवन्तः' (p.10). According to him रसचर्वणा is the soul of poetry and he is not prepared to admit ध्वनि as the soul of poetry. 'ध्वनिनामापरो योपि व्यापारो व्यज्ञनात्मकः। तस्य सिद्धेपि मेदे स्थात्काव्याङ्गत्वं न रूपिता।।' (लोचन pp. 11 and 15; जयरथ p. 9). The लोचन rofers to the views of भट्टनायक and हृदयदर्पण very frequently and generally for condemnation. Besides the references given above vide लोचन pp. 12('काव्ये रसयिता सवों न बोद्धा न नियोगभाक्'), p. 21 (on the verse 'अत्ता एत्थ' in ध्व. p. 20), p. 27 (एतदेवोक्ततं हृदयदर्पणे 'यावतपूणों न त्वेतेन तावन्नैवम्' इति), 28 (आत्मसन्गावेपि कच्विदेव जीवव्यवहार इत्युक्तं प्रागेव। तेनैतन्निरवकाशं यदुक्तं हृदयदर्पणे-'सर्वत्र त्हि काव्यव्यवहारः स्यात' इति), 29 (यदाह भट्टनायक :- वाग्धेनुर्दुग्ध एकं हि रसं यल्लाभतृष्णया। तेन नास्य सम: स स्याद् दुह्यते योगिमिर्हि यः), 33 (तेन यद्भट्टनायकेन द्विवचनं दूषितं तदजनिमीलिकयैव ); the reference here is to the form व्यङ्क: in ध्वनिकारिका . 13 and this passage of the लोचन has been critici- zed in the व्यक्तिविवेक (p.19); 63 (भट्टनायकेन तु यदुक्ततं-इवशब्दयोगा· द्रौणताप्यत्र न काचित्-तच्छोकार्थमपरामृश्य on निश्वासान्ध इवादर्श:); p. 63 यतु हृदयदर्पणे उक्तम्-हह्दा हेति संरम्भाथोयं चमत्कार इति (on the verse खििग्धश्यामल . 61). From these quotations it will be clear that the हृदयदर्पण was a work in verse and prose composed for establish- ing a theory of Poeties and for controverting the position of the ध्वन्यालोक. माणिक्यचन्द्र (सङ्केत p. 147) gives two verses characterising लोलट, शङ्कक and नायक 'न वेत्ति यस्य गाम्भीये गिरितुद्गोपि लोलट: 1 तत्तस्य रसपाथोधेः कथं जानातु शङ्कुकः॥ भोगे रत्यादिभावानां भोगं स्वस्योचितं ब्रुवन्। सर्वथा रससर्वस्वमभांक्षीद्भट्टनायकः ॥'. The व्यक्तिविवेकटीका (p. 13 ) quotes हृदयदर्पण "हृदयदर्पणे च 'तत्कर्ता च कविः प्रोक्तो मेदेपि हि तदस्ति यत्' इति काव्यमूलं कवित्वं प्रतिपादितम्"

भट्टनायक flourished after the ध्वन्यालोक and before the लोचन i. e. between 900 and 1000 A. C. From the somewhat bitter and personal attacks that the लोचन makes it appears likely that he was nearer to the times of the लोचन than to those of the ध्वन्या- लोक. If he was a contemporary of अभिनवगुप्त or only slightly old- er, then भट्टनायक, the author of the हृदयदर्पण, cannot be identified with the भट्टनायक mentioned in the राजतरङ्गिणी 'द्विजस्तयोर्नायकाख्यो

I. 18 भट्टनायक. INTRODUCTION. LXXIX

गौरीशसुरसझ्नोः। चातुविद्यः कृतस्तेन वाग्देवीकुलमन्दिरम् ॥' (V.59). This refers to the time ofaFRaH (883-902 A. C.). It is difficult to decide positively one way or the other.

19 The वक्रोक्तिजीवित of कुन्तक. This work has been known only through quotations and references in other Alankara works, such as the अलं. स०, साहित्यदर्पण. &c. Through the kindness of Dr. Belvalkar I was able to secure a transcript of a ms. of the work recently discovered in Madras. The transcript is full of lacunae and is incomplete. But there is sufficient material to give a tolerably correct idea of the work.

The work consists of three parts, कारिकाS, वृत्ति, and examples, almost all of which are taken from previous authors. It is divided into four aqqs. The transcript breaks off in the fourth, but it seems that the work did not extend much beyond where the transcript breaks off. That 3ra- 4 is the author of the whole of the work and that the entire work containing कारिकाS, वृत्ति and examples was called वक्रोक्तिजीवित follows from several considerations. The व्यक्ति- विवेक (p. 28 ) quotes the verse 'शब्दार्थौ सहितौ ... कारिणि' (which occurs in the transcript of the वकरोक्ति०), says that certain people assert that anifi is the soul of poetry and then ( on p. 37 ) quotes the verse सरम्भ: करिकीट (which is quoted in the वक्रोक्तिजीवित as an example of an excellent ) and finds several faults in that verse and winds up by saying (p. 58) 'काव्य काञ्चनकषाशममानिना कुन्तकेन निजकाव्यलक्ष्म- णि। यस्य सर्वनिरवद्यतोदिता श्रोक एष स निदर्शितो मया ॥'. This shows that the definitions ( 3En ) and the citation of examples are कुन्तक's according to महिमभट्ट (who was not far removed in time from the वक्रोक्ति०). The टीका on the व्यक्ति० (p. 16) says 'अयं क्रोको वक्रोक्तिजीविते वितत्य व्याख्यात इति तत एवावधार्यः' So according to the टीका also, the वृत्ति and the examples formed part of the वक्रोक्तिजीवित. The एकावली (p.51) says 'एतेन यत्र कुन्तकेन भक्तावन्तर्भावितो ध्वनिस्तदपि प्रत्याख्यातम्'. सोमेश्वर in his commentary on the काव्यप्र० (61 b and 67 a) quotes two verses of कुत्तक (१कुन्त- क) which are found in the transcript. The कान्यप्रकाशसङ्केत of माणिक्य० says on the verse 'तरन्तीवाङ्गानि स्खलदमललावण्यजलघौ' इत्यत्र सादृश्योपचारमूचे यथा चोपचारस्तथा वक्रोक्तिजीवितग्रन्थाज्ज्ञेयः' (P. 40-41 ). This verse is cited as an example of उपचारवक्रता in the वक्रोक्ति० with the remark 'अन्र चेतनपदार्थसम्भविसादृश्योपचा-

LXXX SAHITYADARPANA. I. 19 कुन्तक.

राव तारुण्यतरलतरुणीगात्राणां तरणमुत्लेक्षितम् "'. The colophons at the end of the first and second उन्मेषड are respectively 'इति राजा- नककुन्तल ( क?) विरच्िते वक्रोक्तिजीविते काव्यालक्कारे प्रथमोन्मेष:' and 'इति श्रीकुन्तलविरचिते वक्रोक्तिजीविते द्वितीय उन्मेष:' As the work has been so far not known to scholars, a somewhat detailed analysis is given below.

The first उन्मेष bogins 'वन्दे कवीन्द्रववत्रेन्दुलास्यमन्दिरनर्तकीम्। देवीं सूक्तिपरिस्पन्दसुन्दराभिनयोज्ज्वलाम्॥ वाचो विषयनैयत्यमुत्पादयितुमुच्यते। आदिवा- क्येभिधानादि निर्मिंतेमानसूत्रवत् ॥ लोकोत्तरचमत्कारकारिवैत्चित्र्यसिद्धये। काव्यस्या यमलङ्कारः कोप्यपूर्वो विधीयते॥ धर्मादिसाधनोपायः सुकुमारक्रमोदितः । काव्यब- न्धोभिजातानां हृदयाह्लादकारकः ॥ ( after two more verses) कटुकौषधव- च्छास्त्रमविद्याव्याधिनाशनम् । आह्लाद्यमृतवत्काव्यमविवेकगदापहम्॥ आयत्यां च तदा- त्वे च रसनिष्यन्दसुन्दरम्। येन सम्पद्यते काव्यं तदिदानीं विचार्यते॥ अलङ्कतिरलट्ठार- मुपोद्धत्य (र उपो?) विवेच्यते। तदुपायतया तत्त्वं सालक्कारस्य काव्यता I'. It will be noticed that he gives the प्रयोजन of काव्य like भामह I. 2. (धर्मार्थ ... काव्यनिबन्धनम्) and calls his work काव्यालक्वार. The वृत्ति -begins 'जगत्रितयवैचित्र्यचित्रकर्मविधायिनम्। शिवं शक्तिपरिस्पन्दमात्रोपकरणं नुमः। साहित्यार्थसुधासिन्धोः सारमुन्मीलयाम्यहम्॥ येन द्वितयमप्येतत्तत्वनिर्मितिलक्षणम्। तद्विदामद्भतामोदं चमत्कारं विधास्यति॥'. Following भामह (I. 16 शब्दारथौं सहितौ काव्यं) he defines काव्य as 'शब्दार्थौं सहितौ वक्रकविव्यापारशालिनि। ब्रन्धे व्यवस्थितौ काव्यं तद्विदाह्ादकारिणि॥' (quoted in व्यक्ति० p.28 and by समुद्रबन्ध p.8). His position is that सालक्कत s'abda and artha constitute काव्य and it is not proper to say that अलक्कारs belong to काव्य (as this mode of speech suggests that काव्य may exist without them ). He gives as an example of a1oq the verse ततोरुणपरिस्पन्दमन्दीकृतवपुः शशी। दभे कामपरिक्षामकामिनीगण्डपाण्डु- ताम् ॥l ( quoted in the काव्यप्र. IX). Then he comes to the part वक्रोक्ति plays 'शब्दो विवक्षितार्थैकवाचकोन्येषु सत्स्वपि। अर्थः सहृदयाह्लादकारी स्वस्पन्दसुन्दरः ॥ उभावेतावलङ्गायौं तयो: पुनरलक्कतिः। वक्रोक्तिरेव वैदग्ध्यभङ्गीभ- जितिरुच्यते ।I' ( last quoted by जयरथ p.8. ). वक्रोक्ति is a striking mode of speech differing from and transcending the ordinary everyday mode of speaking about a thing ( and hence called वक्रोक्ति); it is speech that charms by the skill of the poet. The वृत्ति explains 'वक्रोक्ति: प्रसिद्धा भिधानव्यतिरेकिणी विचित्रवाभिधा वैदग्ध्यं कविकौ- शलं तस्य भङ्गी विच्छित्तिः' He cites तामभ्यगच्छत् (रघु. 14.70) and सद: पुरीपरिसरे ( बालरा. 6. 34.) respectively as examples of poetry that is सहृदयाह्ादकारि and not so. He ridicules those who regard स्वभावोक्ति as an अलक्कार and says that when in a so-called स्वभावोक्ति other figures occur, there will always bo सङ्कर or संसृष्टि 'मलङ्कारकृतां येषां स्वभावोक्तिरलङ्कतिः । अलक्कार्यतया तेषां किमन्यदवतिष्ठते॥ ... स्पष्टे

.J. 19 कुन्तक. INTRODUCTION. LXXXI

सर्वत्र संसृष्टिरस्पष्टे सक्करस्ततः ।'. The साहित्य of शब्द and अर्थ is ex- plained in the वृत्ति as 'तत्र वाचकस्य वाचकान्तरेण वाच्यस्य वाच्यान्तरेण साहित्यमभिप्रेतम्' and negatives the साहित्य of वाचक with वाच्यान्तर and of वाच्य with वाचकान्तर. 'शब्दार्थौं सहितावेव प्रतीतौ स्फुरतः सदा। साहित्यमनयोः शोभाशालितां प्रति काप्यसौ । अन्यूनातिरिक्तत्वमनोहारिण्यवस्थितिः॥ मागानुगुण्यसुभगो माधुर्यादिगुणोदयः । अलङ्गरणविन्यासो वक्रतातिशयान्वितः ॥ वृत्त्यौन्चित्यमनीहारि रसानां परिपोषणम्। स्पर्धया विद्यते यत्र यथास्वमुभयोरपि॥ सा काप्यवस्थितिस्तद्विदाह्लादैकनिबन्धना। पदादिवाक्परिस्पन्दसार: साहित्यमुच्यते॥'. वक्रता is explained as 'वकरत्वं प्रसिद्धप्रस्थानव्यतिरेकिवैचित्यम्'. Then he enumer- ates six varities of कविव्यापारवऋत्व, viz. वर्णविन्यासवतत्व, पदपूर्वाधव०, प्रत्ययव, वाक्यव०, प्रकरणव०, प्रबन्धव 'वर्णविन्यासवऋत्वं पदपूर्वार्धवक्रता। वक्रतायाः परोप्यस्ति प्रकार: प्रत्ययाश्रयः ॥ वाक्यस्य वक्रभावोन्यो विद्यते यः सहस्रधा। यत्रालक्कारवगोंसौ सर्वोप्यन्तर्भविष्यति (this verse is quoted by समुद्रबन्ध P. 9)। वक्रभावः प्रकरणे प्रबन्धेप्यस्ति यादशः । उच्यते सहजाह्ार्यसौकुमार्यमनोहर: ॥'. पदपूर्वार्ध means पदस्य सुबन्ततिङन्तरूपस्य पूर्वार्ध प्रातिपदिकं धातुर्वा. He briefly mentions the varieties of these and cites examples. His position is that वक्रोक्ति is the soul of poetry (i.e. it is वक्रोक्त that breathes life into poetry, makes it poetry, without it काव्य cannot exist), but वक्रोकत itself is not possible unless the poet possesses the necessary fancy and imagination ( there- fore कविव्यापार is प्रधान in काव्य). About वैचित्य he says 'विचित्रो यत्र वक्रोक्तिवैचित्यं जीवितायते। परिस्फुरति यस्यान्तः सा काप्यतिशयाभिषा॥'. He then speaks of certain गुणs of विचित्र, viz. माधुर्य, प्रसाद (rare use of compounds and well-connected sentences), ओज:, लावण्य, आभिजात्य. लावण्य and आभिजात्य are defined as अत्रालुप्तविसर्गान्तैः पदैः प्रोतैः परस्परम्। हस्वैः संयोगपूर्वैश्च लावण्यमतिरिच्यते (quoted by सोमेश्वर)। यन्नातिकोमलच्छायं नातिकाठिन्यमुद्दहत्। आभिजात्यं मनोद्ारि तदत्र प्रौढिनिर्मितम्।।' Examples of all these are cited. किं तारुण्यतरो: (साहित्यद० X ex- ample of सन्देह) illustrates माधुर्य as causing वैचित्य. An example of लावण्य is 'वासोत्कम्पतरङ्गिणीस्तनतटे धौताअनश्यामलाः कीर्यन्ते कणशः कृशाङ्गि किममी बाष्पाम्भसां बिन्दवः। किं चाकु्रितकण्ठरोधकुटिला: कर्णामृतस्यन्दिनो हुक्काराः कलपञ्चमप्रणयिनर्युट्यन्ति निर्यान्ति च ॥।'. He speaks of three मार्गs, वैचित्र्य- मार्ग, सुकुमारमार्ग and सौकुमार्यवैचित्र्यसंवलितमार्ग. The last is called मध्यम- मार्ग 'मागोंसौ मध्यमो नाम नानारुचिमनोहरः।स्पर्धया यत्र वर्धन्ते मार्गद्वितयसम्पदः।', The 2nd उन्मेष starts with the explanation and elucidation of वर्णविन्यासवक्रत्व. He defines it as 'एको द्वौ बहवो वर्णा बध्यमानाः पुनः पुनः । स्वल्पान्तरा त्रिधा सोकता वर्णविन्यासवक्रता। वर्णान्तयोगिन: स्पर्शा दविरु- कास्तलनादयः । रेफादिभिश्च संयुक्ताः प्रस्तुतौचित्यशोभिन: ॥'. It will be notic- ed that वर्णविन्यासवक्रता is the same as the अनुप्रास of the ancient आ- लक्कारिकs. An example (of एकस्य द्वयोरबहूनां च) is भगनैलावल्रीकास्तरलि-

LXXXII SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 19 कुन्तक.

तकदलीस्तम्बताम्बूलजम्बूजम्बीरास्तालतालीतरलतरलतालासका यस्य जन्दः। वेलत्कलो लहेलाबिसकलनजडाः कूलकच्छेषु सिन्धोः सेनासीमन्तिनीनामनवरतरताभ्यांस तन्तीं (?) समीराः।' The verse प्रथममरुणच्छायस्तावत्ततः कनकप्रभः (cited in the काव्यप्र. VI. p. 260 Va.) is an example of वर्णविन्यासव० He does not like, however, that too many Alankaras should be heaped up in one verse 'अलङ्कारस्य कवयो यत्रालङ्करणान्तरम्। असन्तुष्टा निबध्न्ति हारादेर्मणिबन्धवत्। नातिनिर्बन्धविहिता नाप्यपेशलभूषिता। पूर्वावृत्तपरित्या- गनूतनावर्तनोज्ज्वला ।।' (first verse is quoted in व्यक्तिविवेकटीका Pp. 43-44 as from वक्रोक्तिजी०). He says that the उपनागरिका and other वृत्तिs of the ancients (vide उद्दट I ) are the same as वर्णविन्यासवक्रता 'वर्णच्छायानुसारेण गुणमार्गानुवर्तिनी । वृत्तिवैचित्र्ययुक्तेति सैव प्रोक्ता चिरन्वनैः॥.' यमक also is a kind of वर्णविन्यासव० 'यमकं नाम कोप्यस्याः प्रकार: परिदृश्यते। स तु शोभान्तराभावादिह नातिप्रतन्यते॥'. Then he comes to the several varieties of पदपूर्वार्धवक्रता, viz. रूढिवै- चित्र्यवक्रता (रूढि means रूढिप्रधाना: शब्दा:) 'यत्र रूढेरसम्भाव्यधर्माध्यारोप- गर्भता। सद्धर्मातिशयारोपगर्भत्वं वा प्रतीयते॥ लोकोत्तरतिरस्कारश्राध्योत्कर्षाभिधि- तसया । वाच्यस्य सोच्यते कापि रूढिवैचित्र्यवक्रता II'. There are two varieties of रूढिवैo, as the first verse shows. Examples (of the first variety ) are the word कमलाइँ in ताला जाअन्ति quoted above (from ध्व. p. 62) and राम: in स्न्रिग्ध० (स्व. 61). Examples of 2nd variety of रूढिवै० (विद्यमानधर्मातिशयवाच्याध्यारोपगर्भत्व) are ततः प्रह- स्याह पुनः पुरन्दर: (रघु. III. 51, the word रघुं) and रामोसौ भुवनेषु ( quoted in the काव्यप्र. IV p. 182). Another variety of पदपूर्वाष० is पर्यायवक्रता (पर्यायप्रधानः शब्द: पर्यायः) 'अभिधेयान्तरतमस्त- स्यातिशयपोषकः । रम्यच्छायान्तरस्पर्शात्तदलङ्गर्तुमी ... नः ॥स्वयं विशेषणेनापि स्वच्छा- योत्कर्षपेशलः । पर्यायस्तेन वैचित्र्यं परा पर्यायवक्रता I'. An example is नानु- योक्तमनृतत्वमिष्यसे कस्तपस्त्रिविशिखेषु चादरः । सन्ति भूभृति हि नः शराः परे ये परा- क्रमवसूनि वज्रिणः ॥ (here the word इन्द्रस्य for वज्रिण: would not convey the same force and charm ). Another and a very important variety of पदपूर्वाध० is उपचारवक्रता 'यत्र दूरान्तरेन्यस्मात् सामान्यसुपचर्यते। लेशेनापि भवत्कांचिद् (?) वक्तुमुद्रिक्तवृत्तिताम्॥ यन्मूला सरसोलेखा रूपकादिरलक्कतिः। उपचारप्रधानासौ वक्रता काचिदुच्यते ।' (both quoted by जयरथ p.8). Examples of उपचारवक्रता are 'लिग्ध- श्यामल०', 'गच्छन्तीनां रमणवसति' (पूर्वमेध 38) and 'गभणं च मत्तमेहं' ( the first and last being cited in the ta. as examples of अर्थान्तरसंक्रमितवाच्य and अत्यन्ततिरस्कृतवाच्य respectively). therefore that the अलं. स. ( p.8) in summarising the view of It is

the वक्रोक्तिजीवितकार says 'उपचारवक्रतादिमिः समस्तो ध्वनिप्रपञ्चः स्वीकृक:' and जयरथ after saying that the verse गअणं च मत्तमेहँ is cited as an example by the वक्रोक्तिजीवितकार remarks 'अत्र मदनिरहङ्कारतवे मपचारिके इति उपचारवक्रतादीनामपि ग्रहणम्.' Two other varieties

I. 19 कुन्तक. INTRODUCTION. LXX&III.

are विशेषणवक्रता and संवृतिवक्रता 'विशेषणस्य माहात्म्यात् क्रियायाः कारकस्य वा। यत्रोलसति लावण्यं सा विशेषणवक्रता । यत्त संत्रियते वस्तु वैचित्यस्य विव- क्षया। सर्वनामादिभिः कैश्चित्सोक्ता संवृतिवक्रता ॥'. Examples of the two are ( respectively) शुचिशीतलचन्द्रिकापुताश्चिरनिःशब्दमनोहरा दिशः । प्रशमस्य मनोभवस्य वा हृदि तस्याप्यथ हेतुतां ययुः ॥ and निवार्यतामालि किम- ्ययं बटुः(कुमार० V. 83). Then he speaks of various other varieties of पदपूर्वार्धव such as वृत्तिवैचित्र्यवक्रता (वृत्ति is fivefold कृत, तद्धित, समास, एकशेष, सन्नन्त), भाववैचित्यव०, लिङ्गवैचित्र्यव०, कर्त्रन्तरविचित्रता, क्रियावैचित्यव०, कालवै०, कारकवै०, संख्या०, पुरुष०, उपग्रह०. An example of लिङ्ग० is 'त्वं रक्षसा भीरू यतोपनीता तं मार्गमेता: कृपया लता मे' &c.' (रघु. 13.24 where लताः for वृक्षा: is very charming); of संख्या- वकरता is 'वयं तत्वान्त्रेषान्मधुकर &c' शाकुन्तल I; उपग्रह is explained as 'धातूनां लक्षणानुसारेण नियतपदाश्रयः प्रयोग: पूर्वांचार्याणामुपग्रहशब्दाभि- धेयतया प्रसिद्धः' and an example of उपग्रहवक्रता is 'तस्यापरेष्वपि मृगेषु शरान्मुमुक्षोः कर्णान्तमेत्य बिभिदे निबिडोपि मुष्टिः ।(रघु. 9.58, अत्र विभिदे भिद्यते स्म स्वयमेवेति कर्मकर्तृकत्व आत्मनेपदमतिचमत्कारकारि).

In the third उन्मेष the author comes to the discussion of वाक्यवैचित्र्यवक्रता. In connection with this he speaks of वस्तु- वक्रता. The वस्तु may be सहज or आहार्य (कविशक्तिव्युत्पत्तिपरिपाक- प्रौढ). In this उन्मेष and the next it is very difficult to construet the original कारिकाs from the वृत्ति (in which they are imbedded and are not given in full). 'उदारस्वपरिस्पन्दसुन्दरत्वेन वर्तनम्। वस्तुनो वक्र- शब्दकगोचरत्वेन वक्रता ॥।'. The verse अस्या: सर्गविधौ (विक्रमोर्वशीय I.10) is cited as an example in which सहज and आहार्य are both skil- fully combined. He gives directions here as to how sentient and other objects can be used in a poem to yield charming results and how to lend charm to poetry by nourishing appro- priate रसs, भावs etc. The verse तिष्ठेत्कोपवशात् (विक्र. IV. 9) is cited as an excellent example of fayan and the lamentations of वत्सराज (in तापसवत्सराज 2nd Act) as examples of करुण. 'चूताङ्करा स्वाद' etc.' (कुमार० III. 32) and 'इदमसुलभवस्तु' (विक्रमो० II. 6) are examples where चेतनस्वरूपं रसोद्दीपनसामर्थ्यबन्धुरं and अचेतनानां स्वरूपं रसोद्दीपनसामर्थ्यबन्धुरम्. Incidentally he launches upon a dis- cussion as to whether रसवदू, प्रेयः, ऊर्जस्वि, समाहित, उदास are Alati- karas and decides that they are not Alankaras but अलक्कार्य. 'अलङ्गारो न रसवद् ... । स्वरूपादतिरिकस्यापरस्याप्रतिभासनात ॥ ... ऊर्जस्व्युदात्ताभि- धयोः पौर्वापर्यप्रणीतयोः । अलक्करणयोस्तद्वदङ्भषणत्वं न विद्यते ॥'. He criticizes. the various definitions of रसवत् such as 'रसवद्दर्शतसपष्टश्यङ्गारादिरसं यथा' (भामह III. 6), 'रसवद्रससंश्रयात,' 'रसवद्रसपेशलम्' (काव्या II. 275). His words are 'दर्शिता: स्पष्टाः अस्पष्टाश्र शङ्गारादयो यत्रेति व्याख्याने काव्यव्यतिरिक्तो

LXXXIV SAHITYADARPAŅA. I. 19 कुन्तक

न कश्चिदन्य: समासार्थभूतः स लक्ष्यते योसावलक्कारः। ... यदपि रसवद्रससंश्रयात् इति कैश्चिलक्षणमकारि तदपि न सम्यक् समाचीयतामतितिष्ठति। तथाहि रसः संश्रयो यस्यासौ रससंश्रयः तस्मात्कारणादयं रसवदलङ्कारः सम्पद्यते। तथापि वक्तव्यमेव कोसौ रसव्यतिरेकवृत्तिरन्यः पदार्थः । काव्यमेवेति चेत्तदापि पूर्वमेव प्रत्युक्तम्। तस्य स्वात्मेति क्रियाविरोधादलङ्कारत्वानुपपत्तेः । रसपेशलमिति पाठे न किश्चिदत्राति- रिच्यते।. He criticizes the definitions and example of ऊर्जस्वि given by उङ्ट, भामह and दण्डी. According to him proper ex- amples of रसवदलक्गार (in a different sense, रसेन वर्तते तुल्यं) would be 'उपोढरागेण विलोलतारकं' (cited in ध् p. 35), चलापाङ्ां दृष्टि (शाकुन्तल I. 21), ऐन्द्रं धनु:' (cited in साहित्य० X). He finds fault with the threefold division of दीपक given by भामह and after citing भामह's examples approves of the addition (अन्तर्गतोपमाधर्माः) in the definition of दीपक made by उद्भट (whom he designates अभियुक्ततरै:). His own example of a proper दीपक is 'असारं संसारं .. विधातुं व्यवसितः' (मालतीमाधव V. अत्र विधातुं व्यवसितः कर्ता संसारादीनाम- सारत्वप्रभृतीन्धर्मानुद्द्योतयन् दीपकालङ्कारमवाप्वान्). He goes on examin- ing many other figures and elucidates them in his own way, such as रूपक, अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा पर्यायोक्त, व्याजस्तुति, उत्प्रेक्षा, अतिशयोक्ति and about 20 more figures .. He quotes the लिम्पतीव verse as an example of उत्प्रेक्षा and remarks 'अत्र दण्डिना विहितमिति न पुनर्विधीयते'. On परिवृत्ति he cites the example शस्त्रप्रहारं ददता भुजेन तव भूभुजाम् ! चिरार्जितं हृतं तेषां यशः कुमुदपाण्डुरम्॥' (काव्या. II. 356) with the words 'तथा च लक्षणकारेणात्रैवोदाहरणं दर्शितम्'. He remarks at the beginning of the 4th उन्मेष 'एवं सकलसाहित्यसर्वस्वकत्पवाक्यवक्रता- प्रकार प्रकाशनान्तरमवसरप्राप्तां' etc.'

In the 4th उन्मेष he gives the treatment of प्रकरणवक्रता and प्रबन्धवकता. As examples of प्रकरणवक्रता he cites several verses from रघुवंश (5th sarga, such as कि वस्तु विद्वन् गुरवे प्रदेयं, यावचते साधयितुं तवार्थ) with the remark 'कुबेरं प्रति सामन्तसम्भावनया जयाध्य- वसाय: कामपि सहृदयहृदयाह्लादकारितां प्रतिपद्यते'. Similarly the intro- duction of the curse of Durvasas in the शाकुन्तल is a charm- ing example of प्रकरणवक्रता. Another example is the मृगयाप्रकरण in the रघुवंश on which he remarks 'दशरथेन राज्षा स्थविरान्धतपस्वि- बालवधो व्यधीयतेति एकवाक्यशक्यप्रतिपादन: पुनरयमप्यर्थः परमार्थसरससरस्वती- सर्वस्वायमानप्रतिभाविधानकलेशेन तादृश्या प्रकरणविच्छित्या विस्फारितश्चेतन- चमत्कारकरणतामधितिष्ठति.' 'प्रधानवस्तुनिष्पत्त्यै वस्त्वन्तरविचित्रता। यत्रोल्लसति सोलेखा सापराप्यस्य वक्रता ।।' (अस्य प्रकरणस्य). The episode introduced with the words ततः प्रविशति रज्जुहस्तः पुरुष: (6th Act of मुद्राराकस) is an instance of प्रकरणवक्रता. प्रबन्धवक्रता is defined as 'इतिवृचान्यथावृत्तरस- सम्पदपेक्षया। रसान्तरेण रम्येण यत्र निर्वहणं भवेत् ॥I ... कथामूर्तेरामूलोन्मीलित श्रियः।

उ. 19 वक्रोक्तिजीवित. INTRODUCTION. LXXXY

विनेयानन्दनिष्पत्त्ये सा प्रबन्धस्य वक्रता I'. The रामायण and the महाभारत are examples 'रामायणमहाभारतयोश्च शान्ताद्वित्वं पूर्वसूरिमिरेव निरूपितम् ।' probably a reference to ध्वन्यालोक pp. 237-238). Anather variety of प्रबन्धवकता is 'त्रैलोक्याभिनवोललेखनायकोत्कर्षपोषिणा। इतिहास कदेशेन प्रबन्धस्य समापनम् ।। तदुत्तरकथावर्तिविरसत्वजिहासया। कुर्वीत यत्र सकविः सा विचित्रास्य वकता ॥'. An example is the किरातार्जुनीय. He says that great poets show their imagination in the very names with which they christen their works (आस्तां वस्तुषु वैदग्ध्यं काव्ये कामपि वक्ताम्। प्रधानसंविधानाङ्कनाम्नापि कुरुते कविः॥) and instances अभिज्ञानशाकुन्तल, मुद्राराक्षस, प्रतिमानिरुद्ध, मायापुष्पक, कृत्यारावण etc. as instances. It is genuis that makes all the difference, though the plot may be the same 'कथोन्मेषे समानेपि वपुषीव च निर्गुणैः (१णे) पवन्धा: प्राणिन इव भासन्ते हि पृथक् पृथक् ।'

The वक्रोक्तिजीवित denies the independent existenee of व्वनि or an as the soul of poetry and tries to include it under its all-pervading antfe. It therefore makes the soul of poetry to consist of something that is striking by its being dif- ferent from and above what is ordinary. It therefore holds the same view as those who regarded ध्वनि to be भाक्त.

The वक्रोक्तिजीवित is a work of great value and deserves to be rescued from the oblivion into which it has fallen. Whatever one may think of his central theory that anifmr is the soul of poetry and of the somewhat quaint nomenclature adopted by the author, the work shows great literary acumen and is full of charming ideas. His choice of examples is very judicious and he casts his net over a wide area. In the analysis given above I have referred to well-known examples for saving space; but no reader should entertain the impression that he very largely quotes Kalidasa only. The work contains over five hundred examples. The kārikas are composed in a smooth, limpid style and the afa generally shows very high qualities of a grand literary style, which is rhythmic and melodious. He very profusely quotes HrHE and avei and to a lesser extent azz. He does not slavishly follow anyone of these and criticizes them all. For example he finds fault with भामह's three kinds of दीपक and with his way of dealing with the figure ऊर्जस्वि 'कैश्चिदुदाहरणमेव व्यक्तत्वालक्षणं मन्यमानैस्तदेव प्रदर्शितम्। यथा ऊर्जस्वि कर्णेन यथा पार्थाय पुनरागतः।' et0. (भामह III. 7). He finds fault with those who regard आशी: AS अलक्कार (दण्डी does so.). About रुद्रट's well-known verses 'भण h

LXXXVI SAHITYADARPANA. I. 19 वक्रोकिजीवित.

तरुणि रमणमन्दिर० and 'अनणुरणन्मणिमेखलं' (रुद्रट II. 22-23) he remarks 'प्रतिभादारिददैन्यादतिस्वल्पसुभाषितेन कविना वर्णसावर्ण्यरम्यतामात्रमत्रो- दितं न पुनर्वाच्यवैचित्र्यकणिका काचिदस्तीति' and says that the verses are ग्राम्य. He quotes the first verse 'स्वेच्छाकेसरिण :... नखाः' of आनन्दवर्धन's वृत्ति as a fine example of क्रियावैचित्र्य He names a very large number of works. Among the authors and works quoted are :- उत्तररामचरित, उदात्तराघव (in which लक्ष्मण is re- presented as pursuing मारीचमृग), उन्भट, कालिदास (as composing kavyas which possess सहजसौकुमार्य), किरातार्जुनीय, कुमारसम्भव, कृत्यारावण, छलितराम, तापसवत्सराज (a drama in which करुण is more charming in each succeeding Act), दण्डी, ध्वनिकार, नागानन्द, पाण्डवा- भ्युदय, पुष्पदूषितक, प्रतिमानिरुद्ध, बालरामायण, भट्टबाण, भरत, भवभूति, भामह, मजीर (as a poet of the मध्यममार्ग), महाभारत, मातृगुप्त (as a poet of the मध्यममार्ग), मायापुष्पक, मालती०, मुद्रारा०, मेघ०, रघु०, राजशेखर, रामचरित, रामानन्द, रामाभ्युदय, रामायण, रुद्रट, विकरमो०, वीरचरित, वेणीसंहार, शाकुन्तल, शिशुपालवध, सर्वसेन (as a poet of the सुकुमारमार्ग), सेतुप्रबन्ध (a drama), हृयग्रीववध, हर्षचरित (in which there are numerous charm- ing descriptions of moonrise ). The transcript in various places points out that there are large gaps (अत्र गन्थपातः). Here and there certain karikas occur which are styled अन्तरश्रोक (in some cases अनन्त), which expression occurs in the व्यक्तिविवेक also (pp. 46, 54, 55 etc.) and is explained by हेमचन्द्र (विवेक p. 392) as अन्तरे मध्ये वक्तव्यशेषाभिधायको श्रोकौ अन्तरक्रोकौ' As the वक्रोक्तिजीवित quotes the ध्वनिकार, रुद्रट and the बालरामायण of राजशेखर it is later than the first quarter of the 10th century. Therefore जयरथ is right when he says 'यद्यपि वक्रोक्तिजीवित- हृदयदर्पणकारावपि ध्वनिकारानन्तरभाविनावेव तथापि तौ चिरन्तनमतानुयायिनावेवेति तन्मतं eto. अलं. स, वि. (p.12). The वक्रोक्तिजीवित is quoted and criticized by महिमभट्ट in his व्यक्तिविवेक (pp. 28, 37, 58) and its views are summarised by the अलङ्कारसर्वस्व. महिमभद्ट's manner of referring to the वक्रोक्तिजीवित (P. 28 सहृदयमानिनः केचिदाचक्षते) implies that कुन्तक was his contemporary or only slightly older. He refers to the लोचनकार in a similar strain (व्यक्तिविवेक p. 19 अत्र केचिद्विद्वन्मानिन:यदाहु:) It is further noteworthy that the लोचन contains no reference to the वकरोक्तिजीवित S0 he was probably a contemporary of the लोचनकार also. Hence कुन्तक flourished between 925 and 1025 A. C., probably nearer the latter limit than the former. 20 The दशरूप of धनअय. This work with the com- mentary called अवलोक by धनिक has been published several times. The references here are to the Nirnay. edition. It deserves

I. 20 दशरूप. INTRODUCTION. LXXXVIF

to be referred to here because it contains a treatment of the rasa theory. Otherwise it is a work dealing with dramaturgy alone. The work contains about 300 karikas and is divided into four yTRTs. The first speaks of the ten kinds of rupakas, the five sandhis and their angas, definition of विष्कम्भ, चूलिका, अङ्कास्य, अङ्कावतार, प्रवेशक etc. The 2nd speaks of several kinds of heroes and heroines, their characteristics; friends, the four vrittis and their angas. The third gives practical directions as to how to begin a play, about the pro- logue, about the various requisites that constitute the ten kinds of rupakas. The fourth deals with the rasa theory in all its details. The commentary of धनिक is a learned one and is full of quotations. Over 300 verses from other works are quoted and ufa quotes about twenty verses of his own, some of which are in Prakrit. We learn from yfa's comment (on IV. 37) that he wrote a work called काव्यनिर्णय from which he quotes several verses. He seems to have held views somewhat similar to those of भट्टनायक, when he says (on IV. 37) 'न रसादीनां काव्येन सह व्यञ््यव्यअकभावः किं तहि भाव्यभावकसम्बन्धः । काव्यं हि भावकम् । भाव्या रसादयः' ।. The दशरूप says that for the plot the poet should turn to the ar and the वृहत्कथा. For want of space all the works quoted by धनिक are not set out here. Of special interest are his quotations from araufa- राजदेव alias मुअ (the verse प्रणयकुपिता being attributed once to वाक्पति० and again to मुख on IV.58 and 60), पद्मगुप्त (under II. 40 'चित्रवर्तिन्यपि नृपे' नवसाहसाड़ VI 42), the विद्धशालभजिका (on IV. 53).

धनअय, the author of the कारिकाs, was son of विष्णु and a member of the sabha of king Munja; while धनिक also was the son of fasu and therefore seems to have been the brother of धनजय. The कारिकाs were composed in the time of Munja, whose dates are 974-5, 979 and 991-94 A. C. ( vide E. I. vol, I p. 235, E.I. vol. II p. 180, I. A. VI p.51 (a gift to वसन्ताचार्य son of धनिक- पण्डित), I. A.XIV p. 159, the सुभाषितरलसन्दोह of अमितगति composed in विक्रम 1050 (when मुख् was alive). धनिक appears to have composed the commentary later on as he quotes yaw who composed the नवसाइसाङ्कचरित in the time of सिन्धुराज, the brother and successor of मुअ. धनञ्ञय is quoted by अर्जुनवर्मदेव (1216 A.C.) in his टीका on the अमरुशतक and the साहित्यदर्पण (VI. 64) ascribes the कारिका (न चातिरसतो वस्तु दूरं विच्छिन्नतां नयेत III. 32) t0 धनिक (when it should have ascribed it to धनअय).

LXXXVIHI SAHITYADARPANA, I. 21 व़क्तिविवेक.

21 The व्यक्तिविवेक of राजानकमहिमभट्ट This work has been published in the Trivandrum Series (1909) with a commentary that breaks off in the middle of the 2nd विमर्श. He wrote the work for demolishing the theory of dhvani propounded by the ध्वन्यालोक. He controverts the position of the व्वन्यालोक that there is a third function called व्यअ्ञना (besides अभिधा and लक्षणा ) and that the suggested sense is conveyed by this process. His own position is that words have a single power (अभिधा), that the suggested sense (प्रतीयमान) is conveyed by the expressed sense throuh the process of inference (अनुमान) and that word and sense are not arsr. He does not dispute that the soul of poetry is rasa etc. (as the ध्वन्यालोक would say) "वाच्यस्तदनुमितो वा यत्राथोर्थान्तरं प्रकाशयति। सम्बन्धतः कुतश्चित्सा काव्यानुमिति- रित्युक्ता। इति । एतच्चानुमानस्यैव लक्षणं नान्यस्य। यदुक्तं 'त्रिरूपलिङ्गाख्यानं परार्था- सुमानम्' इति केवलं संज्ञामेद:। काव्यस्यात्मनि संजञिनि रसादिरूपे न कस्यच्विद्विमतिः । संज्ञार्यां सा केवलमेषापि व्यक्त्ययोगतोस्य कुतः ॥" (व्यक्ति० p. 22); the last verse पणभूता ध््व्रनेर्व्यक्तिरिति सव विवेच्चिता। यत्त्वन्यत्तत्र श्रिमति: प्रायो नास्तीत्युपेक्षितम् ।'. It is not to be supposed that महिमभट्ट was the first to advance this theory. The धवन्यालोक anticipates the theory and tries to meet it ( vide pp. 201-204) 'अस्त्यमिस- स्थानावसरे व्यञ्जकत्वं शब्दानां गमकत्वं तच्च लिङ्गत्वमतश्च व्यञ्ञयप्रतीतिर्लिङ्गप्रतीतिरेवेति लिङ्गलिव्रिभाव एव तेषां व्यञ्ञव्यअकभावो नापर: कश्चित्। ... न पुनरयं परमार्थो यद व्यअ्कत्वं लिङ्गत्वमेव सर्वत्र व्यञ्चयप्रतीतिश्च लिङ्गप्रतीतिरेवेति। ... तस्माल्विङ्गिप्रतीतिरेव सर्वत्र व्यञ्चप्रतीतिरिति न शक्यते वक्तम्. The व्यक्तिविवेक elaborates the arguments of those who relied upon भक्ति (गुणवृत्ति i.e. उपचार and लक्षणा) and regarded व्यअकत्व as identical with it (vide tao pp. 51, 55, 191-197 ). The व्यक्तिविवेक is divided into three विमर्शs. महिम० states his प्रतिज्ञा in the first verse 'अनुमानान्तर्भावं सर्वस्यैव ध्वनेः प्रकाशयि- खुम्। व्यक्तिविवेकं कुरुते प्रणम्य महिमा परां वाचम् ॥'. In the first विमर्श he starts by quoting the definition of ध्वनि ('यत्रार्थः शब्दो वा' श्वनिकारिका I. 13), finds several faults with it and says that the definition, if properly considered, applies to अनुमान. The first objection is that the qualification उफसर्जनीकृतात्मत्व should not have been mentioned in connection with the word ara. The second objection is that the word a should not ocour in the लक्षण, as a शब्द has no व्यापार except अभिधा. Then he finds fault with the word ar. He quarrels with the word विशेष in काव्यविशेष, as aceording to ध्वनिकार himseli all कान्य must have रस as its soul (ध्व. p.26). He says सूरिभि: in the definition is unnecessary. In all he finds ten faults 'अरथस्य विशिष्टत्वं शब्द:

I. 21 व्यक्तिविवेक. · INTRODUCTION. LXXXIX

सविशेषणस्तद: पुंस्त्वम्। द्विवचनवाशब्दौ च व्यक्तिर्ध्वनिनाम काव्यवैशिष्ट्यम्।। वचनं च कथनकर्तु: कथिता ध्वनिलक्ष्मणीति दश दोषाः ।' (p. 21). His own position is 'सर्व एव हि शाब्दो व्यवहारः साध्यसाधनभावगर्भतया प्राये- णानुमानरूपोऽभ्युपगन्तव्यः, तस्य परप्रवृत्तिनिवृत्तिनिबन्धनत्वात् तयोश्च सम्प्रत्यया सम्प्रत्ययात्मनारन्यथाकर्तुमशक्यत्वतः।' (p.3) and 'अर्थोपि द्विविधो वाच्योनुमेय- श् । तत्र शब्दव्यापारविषयो वाच्यः । स एव मुख्य उच्यते । ... तत एव तद- सुमिताद्वा लिङ्गभूताद्यदर्थान्तरमनुमीयते सोनुमेयः । स च त्रिविधः, वस्तुमात्र- मलङ्कारा रसादयश्चेति। तत्राद्यौ वाच्यावपि सम्भवतः । अन्यस्त्वनुमेय एवेति वक्ष्यते' (p. 7). So it will be noticed that, according to his view, To has only two senses वाच्य and अनुमेय; the लक्षणा of other writers will be included under अनुमान. He says that in such verses as 'सुवर्णपुष्पां पृथिवीं चिन्वन्ति पुरुषास्त्रयः' (example of अविवक्षितवाच्यध्वनि in घ्व0 p. 49), 'पत्युः शिरश्चन्द्रकलामनेन' (ध्व. p. 213), 'एवं वादिनि देवषों' (सo p. 102), the suggested sense is really inferred 'अत्र हि सर्वत्र सुलभा विभूतयः शूरादीनामित्ययमर्थोऽनुमीयत इत्येतद्वितनिष्यते' (व्यक्ति० p. 9). As वाच्य sense and प्रतीयमान sense stand in the relation of लिङ्ग and लिङ्गिन, the process is अनुमान 'वाच्यप्रतीयमानयोर्वक्ष्यमाणक्रमेण लिङ्गलिङ्चिभावस्य समर्थनात सर्वस्यैव ध्वनेरनुमानान्तर्भावः समन्वितो भवति तस्य च तदपेक्षया महाविषयत्वात्' (व्यक्ति० p.12) and he relies upon ध्वनिकार's own words that the principal sense intended appears more charming when it is suggested (i. e. is left to be gathered from the words) 'साररूपो ह्यर्थः स्वशब्दानभिधेयत्वेन प्रकाशितः सुतरा शोभामावइति' (्व० p. 239). He says that in many of the instances of ध्वनि cited in the ध्वन्यालोक the ultimate व्यज् sense is not suggested by the expressed sense, but between the two one or more inferences intervene ( as in 'वाणिअम इत्थिदन्ता' स्व० p. 128). In गौर्वाहीक:, the ultimate sense is arrived at by अनुमान; as the two cannot in reality be identical one comes to the conclusion that they possess similar qualities 'तस्मादयोयं वाहीकादौ गवादिसाधर्म्यावगमः स तत्त्वारोपान्यथानुपपत्तिपरिकल्पितोऽनुमा- नस्यैव विषयः, न शब्दव्यापारस्येति स्थितम्' (p. 24). The same reasoning applies to गङ्गायां घोष: He asserts, by using व्वनिकारिकाड them- selves with a slight turn of expression, that eafa is identical with भक्ति 'भक्त्या बिभर्ति चैकत्वं रूपामेदादयं ध्वनिः। न च नाव्याप्त्यतिव्याह्योर भावालक्ष्यते तया ॥ सुवर्णपुष्पामित्यादी न चाव्याप्तिः प्रसज्यते। यतः पदार्थवाक्यार्थमे दादू भक्तिर्द्विधोदिता॥। अतरिगस्तत्समारोपो भक्तेर्लक्षणमिष्यते। अर्थान्तरप्रवीत्यर्थः प्रकार: सोपि शस्यते II' (व्यक्ति. p. 26; compare ध्वनिका • I. 17). He opposes the views of those who, like भट्टलोलट, think that there is a single pervasive power of words which conveys what is called the ara sense and the implied sense and who rely upon the instance of an arrow. He controverts the position

xc SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 21 व्यक्तिविवेक.

of the वक्रोक्तिजीवित and says that if what is conveyed by the striking mode of speech adopted by the poet is different from the plain expressed sense, then वक्रोक्ति also is included like ध्वनि under अनुमान (p.28). He denies that words have any other power than अभिधा 'नापि शब्दस्याभिधाव्यतिरेकेण व्यापारान्तर- सुपपद्यते येनार्थान्तरं प्रत्याययेत, व्यक्तेरनुपपत्तेः सम्बन्धान्तरस्य चासिद्धेः' (p. 29). He ridicules the ध्वनिकार for not giving a definition of kavya in general and for dilating upon the two varieties of it, ध्वनि and गुणीतभूतव्यसय in the absence of a general definition 'कि च काव्यस्य स्वरूपं व्युत्पादयितुकामेन मतिमता तलक्षणमेव सामान्येनाख्यातव्यम् ... यत्त तदनाख्यायैव तयोः प्रधानेतरभावकल्पनेन प्रकारद्वयमुक्तं तदप्रयोजकमेव ।' (p. 32). He finds fault with the two terms अविवक्षितवाच्य and विवक्षितान्यपरवाच्य, says that the ex- amples of the former are like the examples of भक्ति (अगनिर्माणवक:) and that the term विवक्षितान्य contains a contradiction (if a thing is विवक्षित i. 6. प्रधान, it cannot be अन्यपर). In the second विमर्श, he considers अनौचित्य (impropriety or incongruity ). It is of two kinds, अर्थविषय and शब्दविषय. The अन्तरङ्ग औचित्य consists in the improper employment of विभावs, अनुभावs and व्यभिचारिभावs in the manifestation of रस and has been explained by former writers. The बहिरङ् ( formal) impropriety falls under five faults, विधेयाविमर्श, प्रक्रममेद, क्रमभेद, पौनरुक्त्य and वाच्यावचन. The whole of the second fan (pp. 37-112 ) is concerned with the explanation and ex- emplification of these five faults amidst several digressions; the first विधेयाविमर्श is treated of in pp. 37-58. He takes the verse संरम्भ: करिकीटमेघशकलोद्देशेन सिंहस्य यः सर्वस्यैव सजातिमात्रनियतो हेवाकलेश: किल। इत्याशाद्विरदक्षयाम्बुदघटाबन्घेप्यसंरब्धवान् योसौ कुत्र चमत्कृतेर- तिशयं यात्वम्बिकाकेसरी' cited in tle वक्रोक्तिजीवित as a faultless piece of poetry and shows that it contains three cases of विधेयाविमर्श. The first is that the compound (नञ्समास) असंरब्धवान is improper, the second is that the relative pro- noun in योसौ has no corresponding demonstrative pronoun (स.) in the verse, and the third is that the compound अम्बिकाकेसरी is improper; as the word अम्बिका is a member of a compound, it is subordinate and the sense also is therefore subordinate and not at once perceived as principal ( while Ambika is really the principal object of adoration to the poet ). He snggests ( on p. 57 ) how the verse should be read to avoid these faults. His position on this point of विधेयाविमर्श is briefly put in these words 'तदिदमत्र तात्पर्यें यत् कथंचविदपि प्रधानत-

I. 21 व्यक्तिविवेक. INTRODUCTION. XCI

या चिवक्षितं न तन्नियमेनेतरेण सह समासमदतीति। इतरच्च विशेष्यमन्यद्वास्तु न तत्र नियम: ।' (p. 52). He gives numerous examples where this rule is followed or violated by the greatest poets and in cases of violation of the rule suggests how the verses should be com- posed. Examples where the rule is followed are 'सूर्याचन्द्रमसौ यस्य मातामहपितामहौ।' (विक्रमो. IV. 38); उपपन्नं ननु शिवं सप्तस्वञ्ञेषु यस्य मे। दैवीनां मानुषीणां च &c. (रघु. I. 60); 'अङ्गराज, सेनापते, द्रोणोपहासिन् etc' (वेणी० III); 'रामस्य पाणिरसि दुर्वहगर्भखिन्न०' (उत्तरराम. II.). Opposite examples are 'आसमुद्रक्षितीशानाम्' (रघु. I. which should be आ समुद्रात्); 'पृथ्वि स्थिरा भव ... देव: करोति हरकार्मुकमाततज्यम्' (बालरामा. I, 48 cited in साहित्यद० under अर्थान्तर०), where the reading 'देवो धनुः पुररिपोर्विदधात्यघिज्यम्' would be better ( as the most important point is that it is Hara's bow). प्रक्रमभेद is dealt with on pp. 58-66. 'प्रक्रममेदोपि शब्दानौ- च्वित्यमेव। स हि यथाप्रक्रममेकरसप्रवृत्ताया:प्रतिपत्तिप्रतीतेरुत्खात इव परिस्खलनखेददायी रसभङ्गाय पर्यवस्यति। ... स चायमनन्तप्रकार: सम्भवति प्रकृतिप्रत्ययपर्यायादीनां तद्विषयभावाभिमतानामानन्त्यात् (p. 58) and 'यथोद्देशं हि प्रतिनिर्देशोस्य विषयः (p. 59). Examples of the fault are 'ते हिमा .. सिद्धं चास्मै निवेद्यार्थ तद्विसष्टाः खमुद्ययुः॥' (कुमार० 6, 94, असै requires a similar pronoun in place of तत्); 'उदन्वच्छिन्ना भूः स च निघिरपा योजन- शतं' भर्तृहरि (मिता भू: पत्यापां स च पतिरपां &c. would be better); 'गाहन्तां महिषा' (शाकुन्तल II. 6, the active forms गाहन्तां, अभ्यस्यतु and लभता require the same form in the third पाद and therofore 'कुर्वन्त्वस्तभि- यो वराहततयो मुस्ता0' is better). Yet कर्तप्रक्रममेद (i. e. the use of the third person for the second or first ) is not a fault, but a गुण e. g, 'अयं जनः प्रष्टमनास्तपोधने' (for अहं in कुमार V.). क्रममेद is treated of in pp. 66-69. An example is 'कला च सा कान्तिमती कलावतस्त्वमस्य लोकस्य च नेत्रकौमुदी' (कुमार० V. 71, where the second च should be after त्वम्) पौनरुक्त्य is dealt with on pp. 69-84. शब्दपुनरुत is not a fault if the senses of the words are different (as in हसति हसति स्वामिन्युच्चै रुदत्यपि रोदिति) where हसति is 3rd per. present as also loc. sing. of pr. p. ) and even if the sense of the repeated word be the same, there is no fault ( but it is an ornament called लाटानुप्रास) if the purport is differont (e. g. 'वस्नायन्ते नदीनां सितकुसुमधराः शक्रसक्काशकाशा, काशाभा भान्ति तासां नवपुलिनगता: श्रीनदीहंस हंसा:।' quoted in वामनीयवृत्ि IV. 1. 10). Examples of ( आर्थ) पौनरुक्त्य are 'बिसकिसलयच्छेदपाथे- यवन्तः' (मेघ०), 'लवगुत्तरासङ्गवतीमचीतिनीम्' (कुमार० V. 16), where the affx a is superfluous as the same sense can be had by means of a बहुव्रीहि; 'सहसा विदधीत न क्रियां' (किराता० II. 30) is वाक्यार्थ- विषयपौनरुक्त्य, as the second half contains the same proposition as 'अविवेक: परमापदां पद्रं'); 'यदा यदा हि धर्मस्य' (गीता 4.7) also exemplifies

XCII SAHITYADARPANA. I. 21 व्यक्तिविवेक

पुनरुक, as अभ्युत्थानमधर्मस्य is the same as धर्मस्य ग्लानि: His position on the point of पुनरुक्त is 'न च सामर्थ्यसिद्धेर्ये शब्दप्रयोग- माद्रियन्ते सत्कवयः' (p. 77) and 'सा (प्रवीतिः) च यावद्िरुपजायते तावतामेव प्रयोगो युक्तो नातिरिक्तानाम्' on which the commentary justly observes that poetry is not व्याकरणसूत्र (न हीदं वाक्यं लक्षणशासत्रं येन मात्रालाघवं चिन्त्यते' p. 44). Where there is a special sense intended there is no पौनरुक्त्य as in 'कुर्यां हरस्यापि पिनाकपाणेः' (कुमार० III. 10). The fifth fault वाच्यावचन is treated of in pp. 84-109. An example is 'कमलमनम्भसि कमले कुवलये ete' (here the 2nd word कमल should have been expressed by a सर्वनाम 'तमिमिंश्च कुवलये'). He says यत्रान्यस्यालङ्कारस्य विषयेऽलङ्गारान्तरनिबन्धः सोपि वाच्यावचनं दोष:' (p. 86) and instances 'भैरवाचार्यस्तु दूरादेव दृष्टा राजानं शशिनमिव जलनिषिश्चचाळ' (हर्षचरित III. para 20, here राजानं would also mean शशिनं and this is a proper subject for शेष and not उपमा as the poet has done). His position about शेष is 'तस्मादर्थान्तर- व्यक्तिहेतौ कसिमिंश्च नासति। यः श्रेषबन्धनिर्बन्धः क्वेशायैव कवेरसौ।।' (p. 89) and that the piling up of ays for their own sake and for no other purpose is वाच्यावचन. He finds this fault in the verse सर्वैकशरणमक्षयमधी शमीशं which is आनन्दवर्धन's own (and cited in . p. 101). He finds this fault in many of the instances of शब्दशक्तिमूलध्वनि cited by the ध्वन्यालोक. He winds up by saying that even great poets did not perceive these faults and instances उमावृषाङ्कौ शरजन्मना यथा (रघु. 3. 23 as vitiated by पौनरुक्त्य, प्रक्रममेद and अवाच्यवचन ) and काव्यस्यात्मा ध्वनिरिति (the first ध्वनिकारिका). In the last there is प्रक्रममेद as इति should be placed after आत्मा; there is also पौनरुक्त्य, as बुधे: and पूर्व need not have been mentioned (समास्नात itself expresses past tense). Several more faults are found and then he proposes to read the कारिका differently ( p. 112) to avoid these faults. In the third विमर्श he takes about forty examples cited by the ध्वन्यालोक and shows that they are really cases of अनु- मान. For example, the verse भम धम्मिअ (व्.p.16) contains nothing but अनुमान 'केवलं योसौ भ्रमणविधौ हेतुभावेन दृप्तपञ्जाननव्यापारस त्रोपात्तः स एव विमृश्यमान: परम्परया धार्मिकस्य तन्निषेधे पर्यवस्यति तयोबाध्यवाधक भावेनावस्थानाव्' (p.113). As. regards rasas he says that their apprehension also comes under अनुमान 'यापि विभावादिभ्यो रसादीनां प्रतीति: सानुमान एवान्तर्भावमईति। विभावानुभावव्यभिचारिप्रतीविर्हि स्सादिप्रवीते: साधनमिष्यते' (p. 119) and concludes by saying 'तदेवं सर्वस्यैव ध्वनेरनुमानान्तर्भावाभ्युप्गमः श्रेयानिति ।' (p. 137 ). महिमभट्ट was a Kashmirian as the title राजानक indicates. His father was शषय and he was the pupil of श्यामल

I. 21 व्यक्तिविर्वेक. INTRODUCTION.

a great poet. क्षेमेन्द्र in his सुवृत्ततिलक and औचित्य quotes verses from a श्यामल महिमभद्ट wrote the work for his grandsons, who were the sons of fty. The latter was probably his son. 'आधातुं व्युत्पत्ति नप्तणां क्षेमयोगभाजानाम्। सत्सु प्रथित- नयानां भीमस्यामितगुणस्य तनयानाम्॥'. The word क्षेमयोगभाजानाम् is probabaly double-meaning and क्षेम, योग and भाज (?) were probably the names of the grandsons. He wrote another work called तत्त्वोक्तिकोश on Poeties 'इत्यादि प्रतिभातत्त्वमस्मामिरुपपादि- तम्। शास्त्रे तत्त्वोक्तिकोशाख्ये इति नेह प्रपञ्चितम् ।'(p. 118). His work is one of the masterpieces of the Alankāra Literature and deserves to be saved from the unmerited oblivion in which it has fallen. His work contains brilliant argument, and exhibits great erudition, logical acumen, fastidions eriticism and deep insight. Among later Alankara writers he found no follower and being pitted against the famous आनन्दवर्धन, he does not receive his due. Though he tries to disarm all criticism against his boldness in finding fault with great poets by saying 'स्वकृतिष्वयत्रितः कथमनुशि- ष्यादन्यमयमिति न वाच्यम्। वारयति भिषगपथ्यादितरान् स्वयमाचरन्नपि (p.37), yet he seems to have been proud and self-confident, e.g. p. 97 'अत्रोदाहरणप्रत्युदाहरणप्रतीत्योर्यदन्तरं तन्मतिमतामेवावभासते, अन्येषां तु शपथप्रत्ये- यमेव'; p. 109 'ता मता दोषजातयो महाकवीनामपि दुर्लक्षा इत्यवसीयन्ते'. He seems to have followed arga in regarding even rasa as inferred. His views are quoted at length and severely criticized in the साहित्यदर्पण (under V, 4). Vide also एकावली p. 32. He very often quotes the views of urforfa as those of the आचार्य ( p. 55), he enters upon a learned discussion about पर्युदास and प्रसज्यप्रतिषेध (on pp. 38-39), very often quotes others' views with the words तदुक्तं, यदाहु: (pp. 6, 7, 82). Often he gives verses styled संग्रहश्लोक or संग्रहार्या, which summarise the discussion that precedes them; vide ( pp 6, 14, 18, 22-23, 26, 32, 34-35, 56 etc). Some of these contain the पूर्वपक्ष and the उत्तरपक् on a topic (e. g. pp. 124-125). All these संग्रहश्ठोकs seem to be his own. In other cases he gives verses that are called अन्तरश्रोक or अन्तरार्या (pp. 97, 109 110, 136). The संग्रदश्रोक summarise a preceding discussion, while अन्तरश्रोकs seem to be verses that add to the discussion. In one case ( on p. 97 ) the अन्तरश्रोकs seem to be not his own ( viz. the two verses 'अनुवाद्यमनुक्तव न विधेयमुदीरयेत' 'विधेयोद्देश्यभावोयं'). He cites कारिकाड dealing with Alankara topics which are styled neither संह्शोक nor अन्तरक्रोक (pp. 74, 76,77, 108). They may be his

XCIV SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 21 व्यक्तिविवेक.

own composition. He profusely quotes from the works of कालिदास, from भरत, भारवि, the ध्वन्यालोक. He also quotes उत्तरराम०1 उन्भट, चन्द्रिका, बालरामायण, भल्लट, भामह, माघ, रत्नावलि, लोचन, वक्ोक्तिजीवित, वामन, वेणीसंहार, विद्धशालभजिका, हर्षचरित and refers to हृदयदर्पण. A& the views of the व्यक्तिविवेक are summarised by the अलक्कार- सर्वस्व he is earlier than about 1100 A. C. and as he quotes the बालरामायण and oriticizes the वक्रोक्तिजीवित and the लोचन ( p. 19, where a passage from लोचन p. 33 is quoted ) he is later than 1000 A. C. It is supposed by सरस्वतीतीर्थ and other commentators of the काव्यप्रकाश that मम्मट in the 5th उल्लास combats the view of the वयक्तिविवेक though he does not name the latter. The passage of the काव्यप्रकाश (V p. 252 beginning with ननु वाच्यादसम्बद्धं तावन्न प्रतीयते closely resembles the व्यक्तिविवेक (p.15 and p. 111). Further in the 7th उल्लास the काव्यप्रकाश seems to follow the व्यक्तिविवेक very closely in pointing out doshas. If this is the case as appears very likely, then महिमभट्ट flourished between 1020 and 1060 A. C.

The commentary as published is unfortunately incom- plete. The author's name is not given. But he appears to have been the same as the author of the वृत्ति in the अलङ्गारसर्वस्व. On p.44 the commentator says that he wrote हर्षचरितवार्तिक and on p. 32 that he wrote साहित्यमीमांसा and नाटकमीमांसा, while the अलङ्कारसर्वस्व (p. 61) refers to them as the author's work. जयरथ (p. 13) ascribes a commentary on the व्यक्तिविवेक to the author of the अलङ्कारसर्वस्व (वृत्ति) 'व्यक्तिविवेकविचारे हि मयैवैतद्वितत्य नि्णींतमिति भाव:'. The commentary is a very learned one, but his stand-point being different from that of the व्यक्तिविवेक (as he is a staunch follower of the ध्वन्यालोक) he frequently takes महिमभट्ट to task. On the third introductory verse (ध्वनिकारस्य वचोविवेचनं नः) he remarks 'यथास्थितपाठे तु ध्वनिकारस्येति वच:शब्दान्वितमिष्यमाणं प्राधान्याद्विवेचनशब्दान्वितं प्रतीयते। एतच्वास्य साहित्यविचारदुर्निरूपकस्य प्रमुख एव सखलितमिति महान् प्रमाद: The commentator pulls him up very frequently for his pride e. g.p. 41 'तदेतदस्य विश्वमगणनीयं मन्यमानस स्वात्मनः सर्वोत्कर्षशालिताख्यापनमिति'; vide p. 44 also. But the com- mentator is prepared to give the author his due; vide pp. 15 and 16 (where he calls him महामति). The commentator gives संग्रहश्लोकs of his own (on p. 3, which contains a reply to a verse of the text and p. 12 which contains a reply to a verse on p. 14 of the text). Older commentators seem to be referred to in the word afaa ( on p. 32). On p. 20 he quotes the well-known verse 'हेम्नो भारशतानि' about हर्ष and बाण and another

J. 21 व्यक्तिविवेक. INTRODUCTION. XCV

verse about भर्तृमेण्ठ. He refers to a work called बृहती (p. 45, 'which he contemplated writing). He quotes अक्षपाद, दण्डी (दाण्डो अन्थ: p. 47), a वार्तिक of धर्मकीर्ति (p. 34), उन्भट, वक्रोक्तिजीवित, घामन, परिमल (p. 53), सौगता: (in Sanskrit p. 41). He discusses readings of the text (pp. 33, 35, 51 about an interpolation). As he is identical with the author of the वृत्ति in the अलं. स. he flourished about 1150 A. C.

22 The सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण of भोज. This work has been published several times ( by Mr. Borooah, at Benares in 1887 and in the KM series, the latter being incomple- te ). In these pages reference is made to the Benares edition. The सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण is a voluminous work, but it is more or less a compilation. It is divided into five परिच्छेदs. The first speaks of 16 doshas of pada 16 of वाक्य and 16 of वाक्यार्थ, the 24 गुणs of शब्द and the same number in वाक्यार्थ; in the sccond परि० the author treats of 24 शब्दालक्कारs; in the third he defines and illustrates 24 अर्थालक्कारs, जाति, विभावना, हेतु, अहेतु, सूक्ष्म, उत्तर, विरोध, सम्भव, अन्योन्य, परिवृत्ति, निदर्शन, मेद, समाहित, भ्रान्ति, वितर्क, मीलित, स्मृति, भाव, प्रत्यक्ष, अनुमान, उपमान, आगम, अर्थापत्ति and अभाव; in the fourth परि० he dwells upon 24 figures of both शब्द and अर्थ viz उपमा, रूपक, साम्य, संशय, अपहुति, समाधि, समासोक्ति, उतेक्षा, अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, तुल्ययोगिता, लेश, सहोक्ति, समुच्चय, आक्षेप, अर्थान्तरन्यास, विशेषोक्ति, परिकर, दीपक, क्रम, पर्याय, अतिशयोक्ति, ऋ्रेष, भाविक, संसृष्टि; in the fifth he treats of rasas, bhavas, heroes and heroines and their subdivisions and characteristics, the five sandhis मुख, प्रतिमुख etc, of the four orittis भारती etc. The सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण quotes profusely from Dandin's Kavya- dars'a, about two hundred verses being borrowed from the latter. The सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण quotes ever 1500 examples from former poets and therefore is valuable for the chronology of Sanskrit literature. But as much earlier works like the काव्यालक्कारसूत्र of वामन, the ध्वन्यालोक and लोचन have now become available to all, its importance is now much less than in the days of Aufrecht. It draws upon कालिदास and भवभूति at every step. Besides the above he quotes अभिधानमाला, कादम्बरी, कामशास्त्र, छलितराम, जैमिनि, तापसवत्सराज, the ध्वन्यालोक, बाण, भट्टि, भरत, भामइ, भारवि, महाभारत, रलावली, राजशेखर, रामायण, रुद्रट, विक्रान्तशूद्रक (a drama), वेणीसंदार, शिशुपालवध. In several respects his views are peculiar. There is a certain symmetrical arrangement in everything he treats as in the

XOVI SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 22 भोज.

sixteen doshas and 24 figures of शब्द, अर्थ and उभय, the six varieties of रीति, वृत्ति, मुद्रा etc. He stands almost alone in regard- ing उपमा, आक्षेप, समासोक्ति, अपहृति and several others as figures of hoth s'abda and artha. In this he seems to follow the Agnipurana ( vide chap. 344 ). He looks upon riti as a शब्दालक्वार and enumerates six riis वैदर्भी, पाञ्चाली, गौडीया, आवन्तिका, लाटीया, Hrrat. He raised all the six pramanas of Jaimini to figures of speech. Although, following old writers, he speaks of eight rasas, from the way in which he treats of them, it seems that he looked upon S'ringara as the only rasa. This accords well with what we are told by the Ekavali (p. 98) that in the शुद्गारप्रकाश composed by 'the king' a single rasa alone has been admitted (राजा तु शङ्गारमे- कमेव शङ्गारप्रकाशे रसमुररीचकार, on which the तरल says 'भोजराजमतमाड राजा त्विति'. In the रतापण also (p. 221) कुमारस्वामी quotes the same view from the शङ्गारप्रकाश 'शृङ्गार एक एव रस इति शङ्गारप्रकाश- कार:'. The मन्दारमरन्दचम्पू (9th बिन्दु p. 107) says 'अथ भोजनृपादीनां मतमत्र प्रकाश्यवे । रसो वै स इति श्रुत्या रस एकः प्रकीर्तितः । अतो रसः स्याच्छ- ज्ार एक एवेतरे तुन । धर्मार्थकाममोक्षाख्यमेदेन स चतुर्विध: II'. Another very peculiar view is that he looks upon even gunas and rasa as alankaras. He quotes the words of दण्डी 'काव्यशोभाकरान् धर्मान्' (काव्यादर्श II. 1-2) and then remarks 'तत्र काव्यशोभाकरानित्यनेन क्रेषोपमावहुणरसभावतदाभासप्रशमादीनप्यनुगृज्जाति' ( 5th qfto p. 182 ). Some of these peculiar views have been referred to by comparatively early writers, The aT. y. सङ्केत of माणिक्य० frequently refers to भोज and कण्ठाभरण (e.g. p. 300, 332, 338, 339 ). On p. 469 it says 'श्रीभोजेन जैमिन्युक्तष- ट्प्रमाणानि सम्भवश्चालङ्कारतयोक्तानि' हेमचन्द्र (io काव्यानुशासनविवेक p. 295) says 'जातिगतिरीतिवृत्तिछाया ... शय्यापीति वाक्ये ... सम्भवप्रत्यक्षागमोपमानार्थापस्य- भावलक्षणाश्चार्थालद्कारा ये भोजराजेन प्रतिपादिता:' eto. जयरथ (p.195) says that भोज treats of only संसृष्टि (and not सङ्कर).

Numerous works are ascribed to मोज. He seems to have written on धर्मशास्त्र and is quoted by the मिताक्षरा (generally as धारेश्वर) and the दायभाग. In the राजमार्तण्ड (a commentary an the योगसूत्र) we read 'शब्दानामनुशासनं विदधता पातज्जले कुर्वता वृत्ति राजमृगाङ्कसंज्ञकमपि व्यातन्वता वैद्यके। वाक्चेतोवपुर्षा मलः फणभृतां भर्त्रेव येनोद्धतस्तस्य श्रीरणरङ्गमल्लनृपतेर्वाचो जयन्त्युज्वला:।।' (verse 4 Intro. ). His astronomical work the करण called राजमृगाक्क was probably composed in 1042-43. A. C. as it takes for its initial date the S'ake Year 964. Dr. Bhandarkar (Early

I. 22 भोज. INTRODUCTION. XCVII

History of the Deccan p. 60 ) came to the conclusion that nr flourished in the first half of the 11th century. Dr. Buhler (Intro. to विक्रमाङ्कदेवचरित pp. 19-25) holds that भोज flourished somewhat later than that date. His reasons were principally two. The राजतर (VII. 259 ) says 'स च भोजनरेन्द्र- श्र दानोत्कर्षेण विश्रुतौ । सूरी तस्मिन्क्षणे तुल्या द्वावास्तां कविबान्धवौ II'. This passage according to Dr. Buhler refers to the period after 1062 A. C. when HOT had been crowned king of Kashmir. The second reason is that the सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण quotes a verse from the चौरपञ्चाशिका which, according to Buhler, is the work of Bilhana. Bulher laid too much emphasis on the words तस्मिन् क्षणे in the राज०. Moreover a gloss refers the word सः to अनन्त. Further the authorship of the चौरपञ्चाशिका is not beyond the pale of discussion. According to the e- y, Bhoja reigned for 55 years. Bhoja's uncle Munja was slain by Tailapa between 994 and 997 A.C. and Munja was succeeded by his brother सिन्धुराज or सिन्धुल also styled नवसाइसाङ. An inseription of जयसिंह the successor of भोज dated diaa 1112 ( 1055-56 A. C. ) settles this dispute about the date of ( vide E. I. vol. III pp. 46-50 ). It shows that भोज could not have been living beyond 1054 A. C. Bhoja had a very long reign. Another certain date is that of his grant, संवत् 1078 (1021 A. C. ). Vide I. A. vol. VI p. 53. Therefore भोज came to the throne about 1005 A. C. and died before 1054 A.C. and the सरस्वतीकण्ठा- au must have been composed between this period, probably towards the close of Bhoja's career i. e. between 1030-1050 A.C. The सरस्वती contains a verse in praise of मुञ् 'सौजन्याम्बु- निघे ... श्रीमन्मुञ्ज किमित्यमुं जनमुपस्प्रष्टं दृशा नाईसि॥' (1st परि० p. 61). The Dhar प्रशस्ति speaks of अर्जुनवर्म ( whose dates are 1211, 1213, and 1215 A. C. ) as the avatara of ara ( E I vol VIII. p. 96). The commentary is called रलदर्पण and was composed by महामहोपाध्याय रलनेश्वर at the instance of king रामसिंहदेव (of Tirhut ). He seems to have flourished in the 14th century. The commentary on the first three परिच्छेदs only has been published. The commentary is a learned one and quotes आनन्दवर्धन, the काव्यप्रकाश, चन्द्रगोमिन्, राजशेखर, रुद्रट, लोचनकार, शृङ्गारप्रकाश. He tells us that he wrote a commentary on the काव्यप्रकाश. On the verse 'हा तो जोज्जलदेउ नैव मदनः साक्षादयं भूतले' (1st परि० p. 106) the commentator remarks 'हातो' are Marathi words meaning 'अयं सः'

XCVII SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 23 क्षेमेन्द्र.

23 औचित्यविचारचर्चा and कविकण्ठाभरण of क्षेमेन्द्र. क्षेमेन्द्र, a Kashmirian, was a voluminous writer and wrote on a variety of subjects. He wrote the भारतमअरी, the बृहत्कथामअरी and about forty other works. The IsaT. (I. 13 ) refers to his नृपावलि (राजावलि) which has not been yet found. His con- tribution to Poetics was meagre and did not exert any appreciable influence over the Alankaras'astra. In his se- त्ततिलक (divided into three विन्यासs) he makes very interesting remarks upon metres, gives directions as to their employment and points out in what metre certain poets excelled e. g. अभिनन्द in अनुष्टप्, पाणिनि in उपजाति, भारवि in वंशस्थ, कालिदास in मन्दाक्रान्ता, रल्नाकर in वसन्ततिलक, भवभूति in शिखरिणी, राजशेखर in शार्दूलविक्रीडित. His औच्चित्यविचारचर्चा contains karikas with his own vritti and illustrations taken from numerous authors and works (including his own ). His position is that औच्वित्य (appro- priateness ) is the essence of rasa 'औच्चित्यस्य चमत्कारकारिणश्चा रुचर्वणे । रसजीवितभूतस्य विचारं कुरुतेधुना' (कारिका 3) and defines औच्ित्य as 'उचितं प्राहुराचार्याः सदृशं किल यस्य यत्। उच्चितस्य च यो भावस्तदौ- चित्यं प्रचक्षते II' (7). Then he illustrates औचित्य in connec- tion with पद, वाक्य, प्रबन्धार्थ, गुण (such as ओज:), अलक्कार, रस, क्रिया, कारक, लिङ्ग, वचन, उपसर्ग, काल, देश and several other matters. His method is to give an appropriate example on each topic and also to cite an inappropriate one. In the मौच्वित्य० he simply develops what the ध्वन्यालोक had laid down (in pp. 134-145) and which the sao had summarised in the verse 'अनाचित्यादृते नान्यद्रसभङ्गस्य कारणम्। प्रसिद्धान्वित्यबन्धस्तु रसस्योपनिषत्परा।।' (p. 145). For want of space the numerous authors and works quoted by him are not given here. He quotes परिमल, the कुन्तेश्वरदौत्य of कालिदास ( not hitherto known from his works), गौडकुम्भकार, भट्टभल्लट, भट्टतौत and his own gur भट्टगङ्गक. In the औचित्य० he refers to a work of his own called कविकर्ण्णिकाकाव्यालक्कार. Whether this is a different work from the कविकण्ठाभरण is doubtful. His कविकण्ठाभरण is divided into five sandhis and 55 karikas the subjects of which are respectively 'अत्राकवेः कवित्वाप्तिः, शिक्षा प्राप्तगिर: कवेः। चमत्कृतिश्च शिक्षाप्ती, गुणदोषोद्गतिस्ततः॥ पश्चात्परि- चयप्राप्तिरित्येते पञ्च सन्धयः।' (I. 3-4). He divides pupils into three kinds and poets into छायोपजीवी, पदकोपजीवी, पादोपजीवी, सकलोपजीवी, भुवनोपजीव्य, and gives certain directions to poets about the us and doshas of काव्य and the study of व्याकरण, तर्क, . His own works referred to in the two books are अवसरसार, अमृततरङ्ग (काव्य), कनकजानकी, कविकर्णिका, चतुर्वर्गसंग्रह, चित्र-

I. 23 क्षेमेन्द्र INTRODUCTION. XCIX

भारतनाटक, देशोपदेश, नीतिलता, पद्यकादम्बरी, बौद्धावदानकल्पलता, मुक्तावली- काव्य, मुनिमतमीमांसा, ललितरतमाला, लावण्यवती (काव्य), वात्स्यायनसूत्रसार, विनयवल्ली, शशिवंश. In the सुवृत्ततिलक he quotes a verse of कलश and in the कविकण्ठा० the ललिताभिधान महाकाव्य of his pupil भट्टोदयसिंह and quotes a verse of his pupil राजपुत्रलक्ष्मणादित्य. क्षेमेन्द्र was the son of प्रकाशेन्द्र and grandson of सिन्धु. He wrote many of his works at the instance of one रामयशस्. In the बृहत्कथामअ्री he tells us that he learnt साहित्य at the feet of अभिनवगुप्त 'श्रुत्वाभिनवगुप्ताख्यात् साहित्यं बोधवारिधेः।' He was originally a शैव but was converted to the वैष्णव faith in later life by सोमाचार्य. He calls himself व्यासदास in almost all works. He wrote his समयमातृका in 25th लौकिककाल i. e. 1050 A. C. and the दशावतारचरित in 41 लौकिक when कलश was ruling. The औचित्य० and the कवि० were composed by him in the time of king अनन्त ('तस्य श्रीमदनन्तराजनृपतेः काले किलायं कृतः' औचित्य० and 'राज्ये श्रीमदनन्तराजनृपतेः काव्योदयोयं कृतः' कवि०). King Ananta ruled in Kashmir from 1028 to 1063 A. C. and erowned his son कलश in 1063. अनन्त died in 1081 A. D. at the age of 61. The words of क्षेमेन्द्र lead one to suppose that the two works were written while ara was actually reigning. Therefore क्षेमेन्द्र wrote the two works before 1063 A. C. and his literary activity lay in the 2nd and 3rd quarters of the 11th century. For further information about his works vide Buhler's Kashmir report ( pp. 45-48), JBBRAS vol. 16 (extra No. pp. 5-9) and vol. 16 pp. 167-179 (Peterson on the औचित्य०). 24 The काव्यप्रकाश of मम्मट. This far-famed work has been published several times. In the alankāra literature the काव्यप्रकाश occupies a unique position. It sums up in itself all the activities that had been going on for cen- turies in the field of Poetics; while it becomes itself a fountain-head from which fresh streams of doctrines issue forth. Like the शारीरकभाष्य in Vedanta or the महाभाष्य in grammar, the काव्यप्रकाश becomes a starting point for fut- ure exegesis and expansion. The great merit of the work is that it combines fulness of treatment with conciseness. In 142 kārikās (often called sūtras ) the whole field of Poetics is traversed. The work is divided into ten ullas- as and comprises as usual three parts, the कारिकाs, the वृत्ति and the examples all of which are taken from other works (ex- cept probably a few simple examples under उपमा, व्यतिरेक). The contents of the work are :- I, the purpose of काव्य, काव्यहेतु,

C SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 24 काव्यप्रकाश.

the definition of काव्य, its subdivisions into उत्तम (where the suggested sense far excels the वाच्य sense), मध्यम and अधम; II, word is वाचक, लाक्षणिक and व्यज्ञक and sense also is वाच्य, लक्ष्य and व्यड्य; some maintain a fourth sense called तात्पर्यार्थ; explanation of these terms and the sub- divisions of लक्षणा and व्यञ्ञना; III. how all kinds of senses may be व्यक्षक and how the function in such cases is व्यञ्ञना; IV the two varieties of ध्वनि viz. अविवक्षितवाच्य and विवक्षितान्यपरवाच्य and their subdivisions, the nature of rasa, of स्थायिभावs, of विभावs and व्यभिचारिभावs; various theories about rasa; V. the second variety of काव्य viz. गुणीभूतव्यङ्ञ and its eight subdivisions; VI. third kind of काव्य called चित्र (or अधम) and its two varieties, शब्दचवित्र and अर्थचित्र; VII. the doshas of पद, वाक्य, अर्थ and of rasa and how in some cases what is generally a dosha may lend charm; VIII, distinction between gunas and alankāras and the position that there are only three gunas माधुर्य, ओजस् and gata; definitions of these; other gunas are included under these or are really the absence of doshas; the combinations of certain letters is conducive to these gunas; IX the figures of s'abda, viz. वक्रोक्ि (two varieties करेष and काकु), अनुप्रास (छेकानु० and वृत्त्यनु०) and the three वृत्तिs (उपनागरिका, परुषा and कोमला which were designated वैदभी, गौडी and पाञ्चाली ritis by Vamana and others), लाटानुप्रास, यमक ( with its numerous varieties), श्रेष, चित्र (its varieties such as खङ्गबन्ध, मुरजबन्ध etc.), पुनरुक्तवदाभास; X.61 अलकारs of sense; the doshas of अलद्वारs are included under the- doshas treated in the 7th उललास.

It will have been noticed how aaa deals with all topics of Poetics except dramaturgy. He casts his net over a wide area. He quotes over 600 verses from other authors to illustrate his teachings. For want of space it is not possible to set out in detail all the authors and works from which quotations are taken. The following are mentioned by name :- आचार्याभिनवगुप्त, कालिदास, कामशास्त्र, उद्ट, ध्वनिकार or ध्वनिकृत, बाण, भट्टनायक, भरत, मयूर, लोल्लट, शङ्कक, श्रीहर्ष. Among those which are not named are the following :- the works of कालिदास and भवभूति, अमरुशतक, कर्पूरमअ्जरी, कुट्टनीमत, चण्डीशतक, नवसाहसाङ्गचरित, नागानन्द, बालरामायण, भट्टि, भर्तृहरि, भल्लट, भामह, भास, माघ, रलावली, राघवानन्द, विज्जका, विद्धशालभज्जिका, वेणीसंहार, हयग्रीववध, हरविजय. Though much of az's treatment is based upon the works of his pre- decessors, such as the ध्वन्यालोक, उन्दट, भामह, रुद्रट, चामन, अभिनवगुप्त, yet he is a man of independent views and his respect for these

I. 24 काव्यप्रकाश. INTRODUCTION. CI

ancient authorities does not preclude him from criticizing them, when occasion demands. For example, he strongly criticizes (in 9th उल्लास) भट्टोन्द्रट for the latter's view about श्रेष. He finds fault ( towards the end of the 7th उल्लास) with the remarks of the ध्वन्यालोक on the verse सत्यं मनोरमा रामा: सत्यं रम्या विभूतयः । कि तु मत्ताङ्नापाङ्गभङ्गलोलं हि जीवितम् ॥ (ध्व० p. 180 says that the first half begins with the विभावs of शृद्गार and the latter half culminates in शान्त and yet there is no विरोध, as this mode of treatment is adopted for inducing the instructed to be ready to receive instruction and for lending charm to the verse). Though मम्मट borrows several verses from रुद्रट, he differs from the latter on several occasions. For example, मम्मट's remarks on समुच्य (धुनोति चासि तनुते च कीर्तिमित्यादेः, कृपाणपाणिश्च भवानरणक्षितौ। ससाधुवादाश्च सुरा: सुरालये इत्यादेश्च दर्शनात, 'व्यधिकरणे' इति, 'एकस्मिन् देशे' इति च न वाच्यम्) are directed to रुद्रट's words 'व्यधिकरणे वा यस्मिन्गुण- क्रिये' & (VII. 27); similarly his words on कारणमाला ('हेतुमता सह हेतोरभिधानमभेदतो हेतुः' इति हेत्वलङ्गारो न लक्षित:'अविरलकमलविकास :... काल:' इत्यत्र काव्यरूपतां कोमलानुप्रासमहिम्ैव समाम्नासिषुर्न पुनर्हेत्वलद्कारकल्पनया) refer to रुद्रट's definition of हेतु and his example thereof (VII. 82-83). So also the dictum under अनुमान 'साध्यसाधनयोः पौर्वापर्य- विकल्पे न किञ्निद्वैच्चित्र्यमिति न तथा दर्शितम्' has in view रुद्रट VII. 56. He criticizes (in the Sth उललास) वामन's distinction between gunas and alankaras (काव्यशोभायाः कतारो धर्मा गुणाः। तदतिशयहेत- वस्त्वलङ्गाराः । काव्या. सू. III. I. 1-2). Similarly he finds fault with वामन's explanation of ओज: as प्रौढि 'पदार्थे वाक्यरचनं वाक्यार्थे च पदाभिधा। प्रौढिर्व्याससमासौ च साभिप्रायत्वमस्य च।। इति या प्रौढिरोज इत्युक्त्तं तद्वैचित्र्यमात्रं न गुणः, तदभावेपि काव्यव्यवहारप्रवृत्तेः' (VIII उललास). वामन says 'अर्थस्य प्रौढिरोज:' (काव्या. सू. III. 2.2) and quotes the verse in the वृत्ति. Though he quotes three verses from भामह (I.13- 15 ) in the sixth उल्लास and the famous verse of भामह (II.85 सैषा सवैंव वक्ोक्तिरनयार्थो विभाव्यते। ... कोलङ्कारोनया विना ॥) in the 10th उल्लास (under विशेष), yet he appears to find fault with भामह (श्रव्यं नातिसमस्तार्थ काव्यं मघुरमिष्यते II. 3) when he says (8th उलास) 'आह्लादकत्वं माधुर्ये शृङ्गारे द्रुतिकारणम् । श्रव्यत्वं पुनरोजः प्रसादयोरपि'. मम्मट does not scruple to find fault with the greatest of poets, e. g. he says that in मृदुपवनविभिन्नो (विक्रमो० 4. 22) there is the fault अमङ्गलाश्चील, in दिवाकराद्रक्षति (कुमार० I. 12) there is अनुचितार्थता, in अतिथि नाम (रघु 17. 1) there is भग्नप्रक्रम, in गाहन्ता महिषा (शाकुन्तल II. 6) there is also भग्नप्रक्रम, in वपुर्विरूपाक्षमलक्ष्यजन्मता (कुमार० V. 72) there is अविमृष्टविधेयांशदोष.

CİI SAHITYADARPAŅA. I. 24 काव्यप्रकाश.

Several later commentators affirm that the kārikas are the work of भरत and that मम्मट only commented on them (i. e. he is only a वृत्तिकार). The साहित्यकौमुदी of विद्याभूषण say 'सूत्राणां भरतमुनीशवर्णितानां वृत्तीनां मितवपुषां कृतौ ममास्याम्।' and at the end we have 'मम्मटादयक्तिमाश्रित्य मितां साहित्य कौमुदीम्। वृत्ति भरतसूत्राणां श्रीविद्याभूषणो व्यधात् ।।'. Similarly महेश्वर (Jivanand's edition p. 3) says that भरत is the author of the कारिकाs in the काव्यप्रकाश Vide p. II above. जयराम in his तिलक first puts forward the view that भरत is the author of the कारिकाs and then comes to the conclusion that the author of the arfars and the वृत्ति is the same. The main grounds on which this theory is based are three; (I) some of the कारिकाs are identical with verses of the नाट्यशासत्र e.g. the कारिका शृङ्गारहास्य .. स्मृ- ताः' 'रतिर्हासश्च', 'निर्वेदग्लानि ... नामतः' (in the 4th उल्लास ) are नाट्य- शास्त्र VI. 15, 17-21; (II) the वृत्ति on the first कारिका is 'अ्रन्था- रम्मे विभ्नविधाताय समुचितेष्टदेवतां ग्रन्थकृत्परामृशति. This use of the third person shows that the कारिकाकार is a different person from the author of the afa. ( III ) There is a dif- ference of opinion between the कारिका 'समस्तवस्तुविषयं श्रीता आरोपिता यदा' (10th उल्लास) and the वृत्ति thereon 'बहुवचनमवि- वक्षितम्'. If the कारिकाs had been the work of the वृत्तिकार, it is argued, the कारिकाकार would have said 'श्रीतावारोपितौ यदि' All these arguments will be found on examination to be ex- tremely weak. Only a few out of the 142 कारिकाs are found in the नाट्यशास्त्र. मम्मट probably incorporated the कारिकाs on rasas etc. because he could not convey the ideas more concisely and because by his time ara's work had attained the premier place in matters of rasa. It will be found that there are other karikas which are adapted almost verba- tim from other works e. g. the कारिका 'कर्णावतंसादिपदे कर्णादिध्वनि निर्मितिः। संनिधानादिबोधार्थम्' (VII उल्लास p. 406 Va.) is an adaptation of वामन's sutra 'कर्णावतंसश्रवणकुण्डलशिर:शेखरेषु कर्णादिनिर्देश:, सन्निधेः' (II. 2.14); कारिका 'ये रसस्याङिनो धर्माः' etc. and 'उपकुर्वन्ति तं सन्तं येङद्ा- रेण जातुचित्' (8th उल्लास) closely follow ध्वनिकारिका (II. 7) 'तमर्थमवलम्बन्ते येङ्विनं ते गुणाः स्मृताः । अङ्गाश्रितास्त्वलङ्कारा मन्तव्याः कटकादि- वस् I'. As regards the use of the third person परामृशति, the truth lies exactly the other way. Ancient writers regarded it as too dogmatie to express their opinions in the first person. Vide notes to the साहित्यदर्पण on आधत्ते (p.1), where मेघातिथि and a are quoted. There is really no divergence between

I. 24 काव्यप्रकाश. INTRODUCTION.

the कारिका 'समस्त ... यदा' and the वृत्ति. The point of the वृत्ति has been missed altogether. In the kārika the plural is employed to lay down a general proposition. In a समस्तव- सुविषयरूपक, there will generally be many आरोष्यमाणs; and hence the plural आरोपिता: has been used. The वृत्ति also begins the explanation in the same way 'आरोप्यविषया इवा- रोप्यमाणा यदा &c'. In the words बहु ... क्षितम् the वृत्ति cally attention to a special case, which may perhaps be overlooked. Even if the आरोप्यमाणs be two, there may be समस्तवस्तुविषयरू- q. This case is not clearly referred to by the kārika ( which uses the plural) and is therefore brought out in the वृत्ति. There are positive grounds for asserting that the कारिकाड and वृत्ति are both the work of मम्मट. (I) मम्मट nowhere con- veys in an unmistakable manner that he is commenting on another's work. There is no soparate मङ्गल in the वृत्ति. If the वृत्ति had been composed by one person and the कारिकाs by another, naturally there should have been a separate मङ्गल in the वृत्ति. (II) Upon the कारिका 'कारणान्यथ कार्याणि' &c. (in the 4th उल्लास) the वृत्ति says 'तदुक्तं भरतेन विभावानुभाव०'. If भरत had been the author of the कारिकाड in the काव्यप्रकाश, the वृत्तिकार would more naturally have said 'तदुक्तमनेनवान्यत्र' or 'तदुक्तं ग्रन्थकृतान्यत्र etc.' (I1I) We have the कारिका 'साङ्गमेतन्निरङं तु शुद्धं माला तु पूर्ववत्'. Here the कारिका refers to मालारूपक and adds that it is similar to the former (i.e. मालोपमा). But मालोपमा has been spoken of only in the वृत्ति. Therefore this clearly indicates that the कारिकाs and the वृत्ति are the compositions of the same hand. IV None of the early commentators such as माणिक्यचन्द्र, जयन्त, सरस्वतीतीर्थ, सोमेश्वर makes any distinction between the author of the कारिकाs and of the वृत्ति. On the other hand, there are both early and later writers who distinctly ascribe the कारिकाs and वृत्ति to the same author. हेमचन्द्र says (in com. on काव्यानुशासन p.4) 'एवमानन्दयश- श्रतुर्वगोंपायव्युत्पत्तीनां काव्यप्रयोननतामसाधारणी प्रतिपाद यत्कैश्चित श्रीहर्षांदेर्धा- वकादीनामिव धनं नर्थनिवारणं प्रयोजनत्रयमुपन्यस्तम्'. It will be noticed that this passage ascribes the कारिका 'काव्यं यशसे etc' and the वृत्ति thereon to the same person. Similarly हेमचन्द्र (com. on काव्यानुशासन p. 109) says 'यथाह मम्मटः अगूढमपरस्याङं etc (which is उल्लास V.1-2). Here हेमचन्द्र distinctly ascribes the कारिकाS to मम्मट. जयरथ applies the term काव्यप्रकाशकृत without distinc- tion to the author of the कारिकाs and of the वृत्ति (vide pp. 102,

cIV SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 24 कांव्यप्रकाश.

107, 150, 199). The प्रतापरुद्रीय speaks of the कारिकाs as काव्यप्रकाश (vide pp. 6, 90, 225, 336 ). The च्ित्रमीमांसा (p.80) ascribes a कारिका (definition of उत्रेक्षा) and an example thereon to काव्यप्रका- शिकाकार. The रसगङ्गाधर (p.30) ascribes the कारिकाs to मम्मटभट्ट Therefore wrqz must be held to be the author of the kārikas. also. We find at the end of the काव्यप्रकाश a verse which has been interpreted in two ways even by the earliest com- mentators 'इत्येष मार्गो विदुषां विभिन्नोप्यभिन्नरूपः प्रतिभासते यद्। न वद्विच्चित्रं यदमुत्र सम्यग्विनिर्मिता सङ्गटनैव हेतुः ।।'. The earliest known commentator माणिक्य चन्द्र remarks 'अथ चायं अ्न्थोऽन्येनारब्धोऽपरेण च समर्थित इति द्विखण्डोपि सङ्गटनावशादखण्डायते'. The काव्यप्रकाशसक्केत (Peter- son's 2nd report p. 13 'एतेन महामतीनां प्रसरणहेतुरेष ग्रन्थो ग्रन्थकृतानेन कथ- मप्यसमाप्तत्वादपरेण च पूरितावशेषत्वात् द्विखण्डोपि etc.' The काव्यप्रकाशनिदर्शन of राजानकानन्द (written in 1665 A. C.) tells us that मम्मट com- posed the work up to परिकर and the rest was completed by अलक 'यदुक्तंकृतः श्रीमम्मटाचार्यवर्येंः परिकरावधिः। प्रबन्धः पूरितः शेषो विधायालक- सूरिणा ॥ अन्येनाप्युक्तम्-काव्यप्रकाशदशकोपि निबन्धकृन्यां द्वाभ्यां कृतोपि कृतिनां रसतत्त्वलाभ: । etc' (vide JBBRAS vol. 16 extra No. p. 23). The colophons at the end of the first and 10th chap. of the are- प्रकाशसङ्केत are 'इति श्रीमद्राजानकामलमम्मटरुचकविरच्चिते निजग्रन्थकाव्यप्रकाश- सङ्केते प्रथम उल्लास:' and 'कृती राजानकमम्मटालकरुचकानाम्' (vide Peter- son's 2nd report p. 14). A ms. of the काव्यप्रकाश dated संवत् 1215 (i. e. 1158 A. C.) described by Prof. S. R. Bhandarkar (report on tour for 1904-6 p. 79) has the colophon 'कृती राजानक- मम्मटालकयोः' This joint authorship of the काव्यप्रकाश is referred to by अर्जुनवर्मदेव in his commentary on the अमरुशतक. He says (on verse भवतु विदितं p. 29 'यथोदाहृतं दोषनिर्णये मम्मटालकाभ्यां-प्रसादे वर्तस्व etc.' (vide काव्यप्र. p. 438 Va.). In another place (on the verse लीलातामरसाहतो p. 55) he remarks 'अत्र केचिद्वायुपदेन जुगुप्साश्रीलमिति दोषमाचक्षते -.. तदा वाग्देवतादेश इति व्यवसितन्य एवासौ। कि तु ह्ादैकमयीवरलब्धप्रसादौ काव्यप्रकाशकारो प्रायेण दोषदृष्टी etc.' For the verse लीलाताम० vide काव्यप्रकाश (P.278 Va). अर्जुनवर्मदेव was 13th in succession from भोज of धारा and his inscriptions range from 1211 to 1216 A. C. Therefore in about a hundred years rz eame to be regarded as an avatara of सरस्वती. It further follows from the words of अर्जुनo that अलक had a hand not only in the 10th but also in the 7th उल्लास. It is probable that having known by tradition that अलक was associated with the काव्यप्रकाश, अर्जुन ascribes to him the authorship of the whole work. Most mss, read the name as अलक, but Dr. Stein

I. 24 काव्यप्रकाश. INTRODUCTION. CV

says ' In order to complete the case for asz as the name of the continuator of the Kavyaprakas'a, it suffices for me to point out that this form of the name is the only one known to the tradition of the Kashmirian pandits, to whom the double authorship of the Kavyaprakas'a is otherwise perfectly familiar (vide cat. of Jammu mss. p. XXIII). Col. Jacob there- fore.thinks that अलट is the correct form and not अलक (JRAS p. 282). I would attach more importance to ancient mss. than to the traditions of modern pandits (one of the ms. which gives the name as अलक is so old as 1158 A. C.). अलक would be as good a Kashmirian name as aaz. We have such well-known names as कुन्तक, शङ्कक, लङ्कक, मङ्गक that end in क, to match with रुद्रट, मम्मट, कलट, भलट etc. Vide my note in I. A. for 1911 p. 208 on the subject.

Whetber the अलकदत्त (styled सान्धिविग्रहिक by जोनराज) who imparted instruction in Poetics to कल्याण ( probably कल्हण, the author of the राजतर०), as said in the श्रीकण्ठच- रित of मङ् (25. 78-80) isidentical with this अलक, it is difficult to say.

About the personal history of qanz we know practically nothing. मीमसेन in his सुधासागर ( Peterson's first report p.94) says that he was the elder brother of both $yz ( author of महाभाष्यप्रदीप) and उवट (author of भाष्य on ऋक्प्रातिशाख्य), that he was the son of dyz and though born in Kashmir, studied at Benares and taught his brothers. But this account furnished by an author who wrote six centuries after RHz ( 1723 A. C. ) seems to be more or less fanciful and based probably on the similarity of sounds in the three names. We know from उवट's भाष्य on the ऋक्प्रातिशाख्य that he was a son of वज्रट (and not of जैयट) and a native of आन- न्दपुर, उवट wrote his वाजसनेयसंहिताभाष्य while भोज was reigning (भोजे राज्यं प्रशासति). There is therefore nothing improbable in मम्मट being a brother of उवट, but he cannot then be the brother of कैयट, whose father was जैयट. The Kashmirian pandits says that मम्मट was the maternal uncle of श्रीहर्ष, the author of the नैषधीय (Bulher's K. report p. 68). मम्मट was a man of great erudition and vast reading. He seems to have been a profound student of grammar also. He quotes th महाभाष्य and the वाक्यपदीय, places the divisions of उपमा on a grammatical basis, takes क्रिया in the sense of हेतु

CVI SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 24 काव्यप्रकाश.

(in the definition of विभावना), follows the views of gram- marians about the सङ्केत of words (जात्यादि:), speaks of the grammarians as learned men par excellence. He wrote another work called शब्दव्यापारविचार (published by the Nirnaya-sagar Press). In that work he discusses in greater detail the subject of his 2nd उल्लास (viz. अभिधा and लक्षणा). He was styled राजानक, which is a title borne by Kashmirian Brahmanas even now. It means 'almost a king'. Vide राजतर० (VI. 261) 'राज्ञी कृतप्ञभावेन सापि मत्रिसभान्तरे। तमाजुहाव निद्रोंहं स्वयं राजानकाख्यया।'. मम्मट became the most popular writer on Poetics throughout India, as the large number of commentaries (about 70 yet discovered ) testifies.

मम्मट quotes अभिनवगुप्त (who was still living in 1015 A.C.) and नवसाहसाङ्चरित (composed about 1010 A. C.). He also refers to the liberality of भोज to learned men (यद्विद्वन्भ्रवनेषु भोज- नृपतेस्तत्त्यागलीलायितं on उदात्त ). Even if this verse was composed during ma's life-time, it must have been composed towards the latter part of his life, as it would take some years before his fame spread abroad. It was shown above that भोज could not have ruled beyond 1055 A. C. So the काव्यप्रकाश is not most probably earlier than 1050 A. C. The काव्यप्रकाश was commented upon by माणिक्यचन्द्र in his सङ्गेत in संवत् 1216 (i. e, 1159-1160) and a ms.of the work is dated iaa 1215 ( i. e. 1158-59). It has been established above that the अलक्कारसर्वस्व refers to the काव्यप्रकाश. Therefore the काव्यप्रकाश was com- posed at all events before 1150 A. C. So the date of the काव्यप्रकाश lies between 1050 and 1150 A. C. and is most v probably about 1100 A. C. Among the numerous commentaries, those of माणिक्य चन्द्र, सोमेश्वर, सरस्वतीतीर्थ and जयन्त deserve special mention as being amongst the earliest ones. The com. ( called प्रदीप) of गोविन्दठक्कुर is a very learned one. He flourished probably in the 15th century.

25 The अलङ्कारसर्वस्व of रुय्यक. This is a standard work on figures of speech. The author is a staunch advocate of the dhoani school and briefly summarises the views of Bhamaha, Udbhata, Rudrata, Vamana, the वक्रोक्तिजीवित, व्यक्तिविवेक, and ध्वनिकार on the essence of Poetry. He then deals with पुनरुक्वदाभास, छेकानुप्रास, वृत्त्यनुप्रास, यमक, लाटानुप्रास, चित्र and 75 figures of अर्थ beginning with उपमा. He defines more figures

I. 25. रुख क. INTRODUCTION. CVIT

than an and his treatment is generelly more elaborate than that of the latter. He adds a few figures such as परिणाम, रसवत, प्रेयः, ऊर्जस्वि, समाहित, भावोदय, भावसन्धि and भावशबल to those defined by मम्मट and gives two altogether new figures, viz. विकल्प (p.159 as he himself says पूर्वैरकृतविवेकोत्र दर्शित इत्यवगन्तव्यम्') and विचित्र (p. 133-134, about which जयरथ says 'पतद्धि ग्रन्थकृतैवाभिनवत्वेनोक्त्तम)- My notes to the साहित्यदर्पण will show how विश्वनाथ was indebted to the अलक्कारसर्वसव and received inspiration from it. The same may be said of the एकावली, कुवलयानन्द and other works. The work is divided into three parts. First come the sūtras ( in prose ) defining the figures, then the vritti and the examples, all of which are cited from previous works. Among the authors and works quoted or referred to the following deserve attention :- अलङ्कारमअ्जरी (p.15), उद्भ्ट, बिल्हण'S विक्रमा- क्ूदेवचरित (p. 118, two verses I. 11-12), भामह (183), वामन (p. 128 ), श्रीकण्ठस्तव (p. 19 four verses quoted ), श्रीकण्ठचरित of मङ, हरिश्चन्द्रचरित (p.102). He frequently cites the views of उ्ट ( p. 123, 125, 126, 174, 183,204) and जयरथ (p.124) tells us that the author of the सर्वस्व generally follows the views of राजानकतिलक who wrote a work called उद्भटविवेक or विचार (pp. 115, 205). In one place (p. 119) he differs from the ध्वन्यालोक (p. lll ) in not regarding the verse 'स वक्तम- खिलाञूशक्तो इयग्रीवाश्रितान्गुणान्। योम्बुकुम्भैः परिच्छेदं कर्तु शक्तो महोदघेः। as an example of आक्षेपध्वनि. He finds fault with the लोचन (44) for citing 'किं वृत्तान्तैः परगृहगतैः' &c. as an example of व्यजस्तुति (p.113). The अलं. स. quotes the काव्यप्रकाश in several places and also criticizes the latter. For example, the सर्वस्व (p. 107) cites the verse 'राजन्राजसुता न पाठयति मां देव्योपि तूष्णी स्थिता :- चित्रस्थानवलोक्य ून्यवलभावेककमाभाषते' as an example of पर्यायोक्त and remarks 'अन्ये तु दण्डयात्रोद्यतं त्वां बुद्धा त्वदरयः पलाय्य गता इति कारणरूपस्यैवार्थस्य प्रस्तुतत्वात्कार्यरूपोर्थोSप्रस्तुत एव राजशुकवृत्तान्तस्याप्रस्तुतत्वात्प्रस्तुतार्थे प्रति स्वात्मा नं समर्पयतीति अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसैवात्र न्याय्येति वर्णयन्ति'. The काव्यप्रकाश cites the verse as an instance of अप्रस्तुत प्रशंसा and makes the same remarks as in 'अन्ये तु etc'. The सर्वस्व ( p. 102) quotes the verse 'अलक्कारोऽथ वस्त्वेव शब्दाद्यत्रावभासते। प्रधानत्वेन स ज्ञेयः शब्दशक्त्युद्धवो दविा ॥' as a न्याय. This is a कारिका of the काव्यप्र. (4th उल्लास). On p. 183 the सर्वस्व says "अत एव 'प्रत्यक्षा एव (इव in समुद्रबन्ध) यत्रार्थाः क्रियन्ते भूतभाविनः । तद्भाविकम्' इत्येवमन्यैर्भाविकलक्षणमकारि"; this is the definition of भाविक in the काव्यप्रo. On p. 199 the सर्वस्व says 'शब्दालङ्का- रसङ्करस्तु कैश्चिदुदाहृतो यथा-राजति तटीयमभिहृत ... सारा वनदा। अत्र यमकानु लोमप्रतिलोमयोः शब्दालङ्कारयोः परस्परापेक्षत्वेनाङ्गाङगिसङ्कर इति। एतत्तु न सम्यगा-

CVIII SAHITYADARPAŅA. I. 25 रुय्यक:

वर्जकम्। शब्दालङ्कारयोः शब्दवदुपकार्योंपकारकत्वाभावेनाङ्गाङ्विभावाभावाद। शब्दा- लक्कारसंसृष्टिस्तवत्र श्रयसी'. The काव्यप्र. cites the verse राजति तटी &c. as an example of शब्दालङ्गारसक्कर (with the words 'अत्र यमकमनुलोम- प्रतिलोमश्च चित्रमेद: पाददवयगते परस्परापेक्षे'). On p. 204 the सर्वस्व remarks 'अत एव व्यवस्थितत्वमन्यानुभाषितमप्रयोजनकम्'; this clearly refers to the words of the कारिका 'स्फुटमेकत्र विषये शब्दार्थालङ्कतिद्वयम् । व्यवस्थितं च' (काव्यप्र. X.) On p. 205 the सर्वस्व asserts that आश्रया- श्रयिभाव is the determining principle as to whether a particular अलद्कार is शब्दालद्कार or अथालङ्कार (लोकवदाश्रयाश्रयिभावश्च तत्तदलक्कारनि- बन्धनम्। अन्वयव्यतिरेकौ तु तत्कार्यत्वे प्रयोजकी) and not अन्वयव्यतिरेकौ; while qn takes the opposite view; similarly on p. 3 the सर्वस्व quotes 'स्वसिद्धये पराक्षेप: ete.' which occurs in the काव्यप्र. (II ). It may he conceded that the quotation by 34e of कारिकाs that occur in the काव्यप्रकाश is not conclusive as to the priority of the काव्यप्र. over रुय्यक; for some of the कारिकाs in the काव्यप्र. are borrowed from others. Still there are other passages from the वृत्ति in the काव्यप्र. quoted above, which are conclusive on this point. Vide also विमर्रशनी ( pp 150, 163 ). It is further to be noted that the definitions of several अलङ्कारs are the same in both काव्यप्र. and अलं. स. 0. g. चित्र, काव्यलिङ्ग, व्याजोक्ति, उत्तर, मीलित, समाधि and that about 56 illustrations are the same in the 10th उल्लास of मम्मट and in the अल. स.

About the authorship of the वृत्ति in the अलक्कारसर्वस्व a very perplexing question arises. In the K M edition the first verse reads 'निजालङ्कारसूत्राणां वृत्त्या तात्पर्यमुच्यते ।।'. जयरथ who flourished within 75 years of रुय्यक commented upon the v.4

words निजालङ्कार &c .; so according to him रुय्यक is the author of the वृत्ति also. Later writers also regard रुचक (or रय्यक ) as the author of the वृत्ति. For example, the रवापण says 'तदुक्तं रुचकेन एषार्थाश्रयापि धर्मविषये क्रिष्टशब्दहेतुका क्वचिद्दृश्यते' (p. 393; this occurs on p. 58 of सर्वस्व); 'न चेदं विषमाद्यभेदेन्तर्भवति। इह हि स्वनिषेधो वैपरीत्यं गमयति विषमे तु व्यत्यय इति मेदस्य रुचकेनोक्तत्वाव्' (P. 425; this is सर्वस्व p. 133); 'काव्यग्रहणं तर्कवैलक्षण्यार्थम्। तेन व्याप्तिप- क्षधर्मतादयो न क्रियन्ते इति रुचक:' (p. 448; this is on p. 144 of सर्वस्व); चित्रमीमांसा (p. 72) 'ये तु उद्धिन्नवस्तुनिगूहनं व्याजोक्ति ... तेषामि- हापि व्याजोक्तिरेव नापहुतिरिति रुचकादयः' (vide अल. स० p. 174). But a ms. described in Burnell's Tanjore cat. ( p. 54) reads the first verse as गुर्वलङ्कारसूत्राणां वृत्त्या etc. The Trivandrum edition of the सर्वस्व with the commentary of समुद्रबन्ध reads

I. 25 रुय्यक. INTRODUCTION.

the first verse similarly and adds at the end of the work the verse 'इति महको वितेने काश्मीरक्षितिपसान्धिविग्रहिकः। सुकविमु- खालकुरणं तदिदमलङ्कारसर्वस्वम् ॥।'. The com. of समुद्रबन्ध ends with the words 'मृङ्कनिबन्धविवृता विहितायामिह समुद्रबन्घेन' and in several other places (p.2 कदाचिन्मङ्ुकोपशं and p.4 'व्यक्तिविवेककाराभिमतस्त्- जुमानपक्ष :- मङुकस्य पूर्वपक्षत्वेनाप्यनभिमत इत्याङः) ascribes the vritti to मङक मङक is an incorrect form of मङ्क. We know from the श्रीकण्ठचरित (25. 26-30) of मङ्द that रूव्यक was the teacher of मह or मङ्गक (II. 63 and 72 for the form मङ्गक and I. 56 for मद्) and the राजतरङ्गिणी says that मङ्गक was made minister for peace and war by king जयसिंह of काश्मीर 'सान्धिविग्रहिको मङ्खकाख्योलक्वार- सोदर: । स मठस्याभवत्ष्ठः श्रीकण्ठस्य प्रतिष्ठया॥' (VIII. 3354). Vide श्रीकण्ठचरित III. 66 also. Therefore it appears that a tradition arose in southern India that मङ्गक had a hand in the अलक्कार- सर्वस्व. For several reasons this tradition must be discarded. Except समुद्रबन्ध, hardly any writer ascribes the वृत्ति to मङ्गक. On the contrary even such south Indian writers as Fur- स्वामी ( vide रक्षापण pp. 393, 396, 425, 448) and जगन्नाथ (pp. 251, 342-43, 352, 482 ) ascribe both the sutras and the vritti to the same author. Besides rR4, who was himself a very learned Kashmirian and flourished in the first quarter of the 13th century, distinctly ascribes the oritti to the author of the sutras. Harera wrote about 1300 A. C. and is much later than जयरथ. It is probable that मङ्गक, who was a pupil of रुय्यक, took great pains to spread the fame of his master's work and in editing it afresh made some additions. It is probably in this way that a few verses from the ftavzafa of Ha ( II. 49 on p. 21, VI. 70 on p. 87 and V. 23, VI. 16 and X. 10 on p. 90) got into the अलं. स. (i.e. the master appears to quote from his pupil's work ). That the afa came to be asoribed to naa is probably due to the fact that quot- ations from the श्रीकण्ठचरित occur in it. That unauthorised additions and alterations were made in the vritti is attested by uTA who frequently complains about the corruptions that crept into the text ( vide pp. 50, 67, 107, 124, 126 ).

• But the following passage from the चित्रमीमांसा (p.10) is noteworthy 'किं तु श्रेषस्यालक्कारान्तरविविक्तविषयाभावेन निरवकाशतया बलवत्त्वेन ... श्रेष एव नोपमेति मङ्गकादिभिरभ्युपेयते'. Vide p. 97 of सर्वस्व for this view.

CX SÂHITYADARPAŅA, I. 25 रय्यक.

According to the colophon of a ms. of the सहृदयलीला, रुचक is another name of रुय्यक, who was the son of राजानकतिलक (vide Pischel's Intro. to पद्गारतिलक pp. 28-29). जयरय is positive (p. 102) that the काव्यप्रकाशसक्केत (ascribed to रुचक) was the work of the author of the अलक्कारसर्वस्व. This statement coming from a Kashmirian writer who flourished within a century of the सर्वस्व is very valuable and must be accepted. The काव्यप्रकाशसक्केत itself says that the author learnt Poetics under तिलक (2nd intro. verse). Later writers frequently use the form रुचक (vide रलापण pp. 393, 396 ). Instead of the name अलङ्कारसर्वस्व, many writers use the shorter form सर्वस्व (रलापण pp. 424, 449, 452, रसगङ्गाघर pp. 220, 227, 355, चित्रमीमांसा p. 98). The sutras as well as the vritti are often referred to as अलक्कारसर्वस्व or सर्वस्व; vide एकावलीतरल ( pp. 136, 186, 237 ), प्रतापरुद्र० p. 291, रलापण ( pp. 341, 452).

Besides the अलङ्कारसर्वस्व, रुय्यक wrote the following works :- 1, अलङ्कारानुसारिणी; 2, काव्यप्रकाशसङ्केत (Peterson's 2nd report p. 13 and p. 102 of विमर्शिनी); 3, नाटकमीमांसा; 4, व्यक्तिविवेकविचार; 5, श्रीकण्ठस्तव (vide अलं. स. p.19 'उदाहरणं मदीये श्रीकण्ठस्तवे'); 6, सहृदय- कीला; 7, साहित्यमीमांसा; 8, हर्षचरितवार्तिक. About the last two the अलं.स. says (p.61) 'एषा च समस्तोपमाप्रतिपादकविषयेपि हर्षचरितवार्तिके साहित्यमीमांसायां च तेषु तेषु प्रदेशेषूदाहता। इह तु ग्रन्थविस्तरभयान्न प्रपब्निता'. नयरथ (p. 13) distinctly ascribes the com. on the व्यक्तिविवेक to रुय्यक 'वाच्यस्य प्रतीयमानेन तादात्म्यतदुत्पत्त्यभावादि नेह प्रतन्यत इति व्यक्तिविवेक- विचारे हि मयैवैतद्वितत्य निणींतमिति भाव:'. The com. on the व्यक्तिविवेक (Trivandrum ed. p. 44 ) claims the हर्षचरितवार्तिक as a work of the author 'एतदस्माभिर्र्षचरितवार्तिके विस्तृत्य प्रतिपादितं'. Vide p. 50 also. In the same work (p. 33 ) the नाटकमीमांसा and साहित्य- भीमांसा are said to be the author's works. जयरथ says in several places (pp. 36, 57, 58, 60) that रुय्यक wrote a work called मलङ्कारानुसारिणी. Aufrecht (C.C.p.32 b) says that this work is a commentary on the सोमपालविलास of जहण, relying upon the remarks of रत्कण्ठ (1681 A. C.) on स्तुतिकुसुमाअ्जलि (VIII. 19 'तथाहि किवरजह्रणकृते सोमपालविलासे ... अस्यार्थः श्रीराजानकरुचकविरचितायाम- लङ्कारानुसारिण्या etc.'). But the remarks of जयरथ show that the अलक्कारानुसारिणी was an independent work on अलद्कार, containing a dissertation on the 48 varieties of प्रतीयमानोेक्षा, on मालारूपक etc. A mere commentary on another work is hardly likely to contain such dissertations. The व्यक्तिविवेकविचार (p. 45) shows that the author contemplated writing a work called बृहती. This last, if actually completed, would be his tenth work. The सहृदयलीला (published in K M series) is a brief work

I. 25 रुय्यक. INTRODUCTION. CXI

divided into four उल्लेखs called गुण, अलक्कार, जीवित and परिकर. The first उललेख describes the ten gunas रूप, वर्ण, प्रभा etc. of charming ladies; the 2nd speaks of the various kinds of ornaments ( of gold, pearl, stones ) etc, unguents, fiowers worn by women; the third speaks of youth, that is the very essence of charm; and the last briefly refers to the paraphernalia that sets off beauty to advantage.

The date of रुय्यक can be easily determined. He quotes from the विक्रमाङ्कदेवचरित (composed about 1085 according to Buhler) and criticizes the व्यक्तिविवेक and the काव्यप्रकाश. Therefore the सर्वस्व is later than 1100 A. C. He was teacher of मङ्गक, who was the सान्धिविग्रहिक of जयसिंह of Kashmir (1128- 1149 A. C). मङ्ग's श्रीकण्ठचरित was composed according to Buhler (K. report p. 50) between 1135-1145 A. C. There- fore, if the quotations from the श्रीकण्ठचरित were originally part of the वृत्ति, the सर्वस्व was composed about 1150 A. C. Besides, the सर्वस्व cites (p. 93) the verse असमाप्तजिगीषस्य, which occurs in the राजतरo (IV. 441). If that verse is कह्ण's own (as is probable ) and not a mere quotation, then the सर्वस्व was composed after 1150 A. C. The काव्यप्रकाशसङ्केत of माणिक्यचन्द्र ( composed in 1159-60) refers to the अलं. स. several times (pp. 321, 355 Mysore ed. ). Therefore the अलं. स. was composed sometime between 1135-1155 A. C, Vide ZDMG 62 p. 289.

A few words must be said about the commentators. जयरथ's commentary, designated विमर्िनी, is a learned one and and is very frequently quoted and criticized by TTaTa ( pp. 325, 337, 352, 380, 387, 414, 418 ). Among the authors and works quoted by him are अनङ्गलेखा, अलङ्कारभाष्यकार, अलङ्कारवार्तिक (p. 71), अलङ्कारसार (Pp, 88, 97, 171), अलङ्कारानुसारिणी, उद्धटविवेक or-विचार (115, 205 ), काव्यप्रकाश (pp. 3, 10, 26, 55, 142, 150), काव्यप्रकाशसङ्केत (p. 102), तिलक, पृथ्वीराजविजय (p. 64), प्रत्यभिज्ञा (p. 47), भोजदेव (pp. 121, 195 ), मम्मट (63, 102, 77), राजतर० (p. 194), रुद्रट, लोचनकार (p. 113), वक्रोक्तिजीवितकार (p. 150). He frequently discusses readings (pp. 21, 37, 49, 126, 172 etc.). He criticizes रुय्यक also (pp. 70, 109). He refers to previous commentators of the सर्वस्व aS अन्यैः (pp. 4, 5). He wrote another work called तत्रालोकविवेक at the end of which he gives his pedigree at great length ( vide Buhler's Kashmir report p. 68 and CXLVIII-CXLX ). His great-grand-father's brother was a minister of king (1101-1111 A. C.) and his father ऋृद्गार was a minister of राजराज

CXII SÅHITYADARPANA. I. 25 रुख्यक.

or राजदेव (1203-1226 A.C.). जयरथ's younger brother जयद्रय wrote the हरचरितच्विन्तामणि (in 32 cantos published in KM series). Therefore he flourished in the first quarter of the 13th century. This is corroborated by the fact that he mentions पृथ्वीराजविजय which speaks of the exploits of the great Chohan prince पृथ्वीराज (captured in 1193 A. C.). The com. of समुद्रबन्ध is not so learned and so copious as that of a74. It was composed at the court of रविवर्म king of कोलम्ब in केरल (Malabar). This king is said to have been born in 1265 A. C. The com. quotes verses in honour of faa ( pp. 12, 13, 19 &c ), discusses various readings ( p. 57 ) and complains of the loss of illustrations from aya's work ( p. 127 ) and refers to the explanations of other conmentators of the सर्वस्व (pp. 55, 96, 145, 209 ). A third commentary called सजीविनी composed by चक्रवर्तिन् is quoted by मल्िनाथ in his तरल (pp. 31, 221), in the रलापण (Pp. 54, 319, 377, 387 &c.) and in चित्रमीमांसा (pp. 7, 74). That commentary contained verses summarising the distinc- tions between figures (e. g. between रूपक and परिणाम). 26 The वाग्भटालद्कार of वाग्भट. This work with the com- mentary of सिंहदेवगणि has been published in the KM series. The work is not an elaborate treatise. It is divided into five परिच्छेदs which contain 260 verses. Most of the verses are in the Anushtubh metre, a few, particularly at the end of each ufr, being composed in other metres. There is a single passage in prose (III. 14). The first परिच्छेद defines काव्य, gives प्रतिभा as the source of काव्य and defines प्रतिभा, व्युत्पत्ति and areH, speaks of the favourable circumstances for the ont-turn of poetry and the conventions to be observed by poets. The second ufto says that kavya may be composed in four languages संस्कृत, प्राकृत, अपभ्रंश and भूतभाषा, divides काव्य into metrical (छन्दोनिबद) and non-metrical, into पद्य, गद्य and मिश्र and then defines and illustrates eight doshas of pada and of vakya and the doshas of artha. The third qfto defines and illustrates the ten gunas. The fourth qfto treats of four alanikuras of s'abda viz चित्र, वक्रोक्ति, अनुप्रास and यमक and their varieties and 35 alankaras of sense and the two styles. वैदर्भी and गौडीया. The fifth परिo is concerned with the treat- ment of nine rasas, the different kinds of नायक and नायिका and kindred topics, The author was a Jaina. His name occurs as iee ( in Prakrit ) and he seems to have been the son of al and #

I. 26 वाग्भट. INTRODUCTION. cXII

minister. On the verse बंभण्डसुत्तिसंपुड-मुत्तिअमणिणो पहासमूह व्व । सिरिबाहडत्ति तणओ आसि बुहो तस्स सोमस्स (IV. 148 p. 60), the com. remarks 'इदानी ग्रन्थकार इदमलक्कारकर्तृत्वख्यापनाय वाग्भटाभिधस्य महाकवेम हामात्यस्य तन्नाम गाथयैकया निदर्शयति' All the examples cited in the work appear to be the author's own. A few examples are in Prakrit. He cites ( as pointed out by Col. Jacob, JRAS 1897 p. 309) six verses which ocour in the नेमिनिर्वाणमहाकाव्य, the author of which is a वाग्भट. On the verse ककाकुकङ्ककेकाङ्ककेकिकोकैककु: ककः। अकुकौकः काककाक ऋकाकुकुककाक्ककु: ॥ (IV. 12), the com. remarks 'ककाकु इत्येष श्रोक एकव्यञ्जनो नेमिनिर्वाणमहाकाव्ये राजीमतीपरित्यागा- धिकारे समुद्रवर्णनरूपो व्वेय:'. But this verse is not found in the printed नेमिनिर्वाण. It appears that the same वाग्भट was the author of both works. In the verses cited as illustrations king जयसिंह (चालुक्य) of Anhilvad, son of कर्ण, figures very frequently. For example, 'इन्द्रेण कि यदि स कर्णनरेन्द्रसनुरैरावणेन किमहो यदि तद्विपेन्द्रः। दम्भोलिनाप्यलमलं यदि तत्रतापः स्वर्गोप्ययं ननु सुधा यदि सत्पुरी सा।।' (IV. 76); जगदात्मकीर्तिशुभ्रं जनयन्ुद्दामधामदोःपरिघः।जयति प्रतापपूषा जयसिंह: क्ष्माभृदधिनाथः (IV. 45); अणहिल्लपाटकं पुरमवनिपतिः कर्णदेवनृपसूनुः ।श्रीकलशनामघेयः करी च रल्नानि जगतीह॥' (IV. 132). Vide also IV.81,85, the former of which ( आः स्यन्दनव्वजधृतोद्धुर- ताम्रचूड: श्रीकर्णदेवनृपसूनुरयं रणाये) shows that the Anhilvad Chalukyas had the figure of a cock on their banner. sfere reigned from 1093 A. C. to 1143 A. C. Vide I. A. vol. 6 p. 180 ( at p. 213 for pedigree of the चालुक्यs of Anhilwad ) and E. I. I. p. 293 for the Vadnagar प्रशस्ति. The editors of the KM. series show from the प्रभावकचरित्र of प्रभाचन्द्र that वाग्भट Was living in samvat 1179 and 1213 ( i. e. 1123 and 1156 A. C. ). Therefore arne flourished in the first half of the 12th century. 27 The काव्यानुशासन of हेमचन्द्र. This work, together with the author's own commentary, has been published in the KM series. The work is divided as usual into three parts, sutras (in prose), explanation and examples. It appears that the sutras constitute the काव्यानुशासन and the वृत्ति explain- ing the sutras is styled अलङ्कारचूडामणि and the commentary, ' which in some places is extremely meagre and explains the वृत्ति and adds some examples, is styled विवेक, as the intro- ductory verse shows (विवरीतुं कचिदब्धं नवं सन्दर्भितुं कचित्। काव्यानुशा सनस्यायं विवेक: प्रवितन्यते॥). The work is divided into eight अध्यायs. The first deals with the purposes of काव्य, the hetu (cause ) of kavya ( viz. प्रतिभा), the aids to प्रतिभा, viz. व्युत्पत्ति,

CXIV SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 27 हेमचन्द्र.

अभ्यास; definition of काव्य; the nature of शब्द and अर्थ, meanings of मुख्यार्थ, गौणार्थ, लक्ष्यार्थ and व्यंग्यार्थ. The second chapter deals with rasas, sthayibhavas, व्यभिचारिभाव, सात्तविकभावs. The third treats of doshas of word, sentence, artha and rasas. The fourth is concerned with gunas which are three माधुर्य, ओजस and प्रसाद and the letters that help on these. The fifth speaks of six figures of s'abda, अनुप्रास, यमक, चित्र, श्रेष, वक्रोक्ति पुनरुक्ताभास The 6th discourses upon 29 figures of sense. He includes संसृष्टि under सङ्कर, so defines दीपक as to include तुल्ययोगिता in it, defines a figure परावृत्ति which contains the पर्याय and परिवृत्ति (of qe), omits all those figures that have a touch of rasa, bhava &c. in them ( viz. रसवत्, प्रेयः, ऊर्जस्वि, समाहित) and passes over अनन्वय, उपमेयोपमा (as varieties of उपमा), includes under निदर्शन the figures प्रतिवस्तूपमा, दृष्टान्त and निदर्शना (of others). He uses the names जाति and अन्योक्ति for स्वभावोक्ति and अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा. On pp. 292-294 he explains why he does not define some of the above figures. The 7th chap. treats of the characteristics and kinds of नायक and नायिका. The 8th gives the divisions of काव्य into प्रेक्ष्य and श्रव्य and their subdivisions and their characteristics.

The काव्यानुशासन is a mere compilation and exhibits hardly any originality. It borrows wholesale from the काव्यमीमांसा of राजशेखर, the काव्यप्रकाश, the ध्वन्यालोक and the लोचन. For ex- ample, compare pp. 8-10 of हेमचन्द्र with काव्यमीमांसा p.56, pp. 11-16 of हेमचन्द्र with pp. 42-44 of the काव्यमीमांसा and pp. 122-123 of हेम with pp. 42-44 of the काव्यमी. He expressly states that he bases his views upon those of अमिनवगुप्त and भरत 'साधारणीभावना च विभावादिभिरिति श्रीमानभिनवगुप्ता- चार्यः । एतन्मतमेव वास्माभिरुपजीवितं वेदितव्यम्' (p. 66 of विवेक); 'तेडस्मामिर्भरतमतानुसारिमिरुपेक्षिताः' (p. 316 of काव्यानु०). The one merit of his work is that in the afd and the commentary he cites about 1500 examples from various authors. He however exercised very little influence over later rhetoricians and is scarcely ever quoted (except in the Terqur pp. 46, 75, 224, 233, 259, 279, 299). He wrote the काव्यानुशासन after his great grammatical work (शब्दानुशासन), सिद्धहेमचन्द्र. Among the authors and works (too numerous to be set out at length ) referred to by him the following deserve to be noted :- अवन्तिसुन्दरी, उषाहरण, भट्टतोत, भट्टनायक, पञ्चशिखशूद्रककथा, भामहविवरण, भोजराज, मम्मट, मङ्गल, मायुराज, यायावरीय, रावणविजय, शाक्याचार्यराडुल (p.316), हरविलास of राजशेखर, हरिप्रबोध, हृदयदर्पण.

I. 27 हेमचन्द्र. INTRODUCTION. Cx

हेमचन्द्र is the brightest star in the galaxy of Jain writers. He was a voluminous writer and wrote on numerous branches of study. He was born in 1088 A. C. at Dhandhuka and died in 1172 A. C. He wrote his great grammar at the request of the चालुक्य king जयसिंह सिद्धराज (1093-1143 A. C.) and कुमारपाल (1143-1172), the successor of जयसिंह, was his pupil. From the fact that he names मम्मट and wrote the काव्यानुशासन after the शब्दानुशासन, it appears that he composed the काव्यानुशासन after 1150 A. C. Materials for हेमचन्द्र's life are supplied by the प्रबन्धचिन्तामणि of मेरुतुङ्ग, the प्रबन्धकोष of राजशेखर, the प्रभावकचरित of प्रभाचन्द्र, the हेमकुमारचरित्र of सोमप्रभ (written in 1184 A. C.) and other Jain works and epigraphic records. Dr. Buhler wrote a monograph ( in German) on हेमचन्द्र in which he brings together all available data. 28 The चन्द्रालोक of जयदेव. This has been printed several times in India. Jivananda's edition has been used for the purposes of this note. The चन्द्रालोक is an elementary treatise on Poetics written in the Anushtubh metre. The author gives his own examples as do भामह and दण्डी. The work is divided into ten nergs and contains about 350 verses. The style is lucid and easy, the language is flowing and sonorous, and the work is admirably adapted to the needs of beginners. The contents are :- I. the definition of काव्य, the hetu of काव्य (viz. प्रतिभा aided by अ्रुत and अभ्यास), the threefold division of words into रूढ, यौगिक and योगरूढ; II doshas of शब्द, अर्थ, वाक्य etc .; III. some devices which poets adopt to heighten the charm of their works, such as निर्वचन (exemplified in ईदृशैश्चरितैर्जाने सत्यं दोषाकरो भवान् ); IV ton gunas; V figures of शब्द, अनुप्रास (ळेका०, वृत्त्यनु०, लाटानु०), पुनरुक्ताभास, यमक, चित्र and one hundred figures of sense; in the midst of the 5th nra, at the beginning of अर्थालक्कारs there is a fresh मङ्गल; VI rasas, bhavas, the three ritis गौडी, लाटी and पाञ्चाली and the five वृत्तिs (मधुरा, प्रौढ़ा, परुषा, ललिता and भद्रा); VII व्यञ्ञना and divisions of ध्वनि (as in the ध्वन्यालोक); VIII the divisions of गुणीभूतव्यड्न्य; IX लक्षणा; X अभिधा. The author was also styled पीयूषवर्ष (shower of nectar) as the work itself shows 'चन्द्रालोकममुं स्वयं वितनुते पीयूषवर्षः कृती' (I.2), 'अनेनासावाद्यः सुकविजयदेवेन रचिते चिरं चन्द्रालोके सुखयतु मयूखः सुमनसः॥' (I. 16). The राकागम, com. on the चन्द्रालोक, by गागाभट्ट expressly says 'जयदेवस्यैव पीयूषवर्ष इति नामान्तरम्' (Madras Govt. Mss. cat, 1918 p. 8653 No. 12877). नयदेव was the son of महादेव and सुमित्रा

CXVI SAHITYADARPAŅA, I. 28 चन्द्रालोक.

(महादेव: संत्रप्रमुखमखविल्नैकचतुरः सुमित्रा तन्द्रक्तिप्रणिहितमतिर्यस्य पितरौ। I 16). जयदेव, the author of the drama प्रसन्नराघव, was also the son of महादेव and सुमित्रा (vide प्रसन्न० I. 14 and 15). From the प्रसन्नराधव it appears that he was a great logician also (ननु अयं प्रमाणप्रवीणोपि श्रूयते। सूत्रधार :- येषां कोमलकाव्यकौशलकलालीलावती भारती तेषां कर्कशतर्केवक्रवचनोद्गारेपि कि हीयते ।। I. 18). This जयदेव is different from the जयदेव that was the author of the गीतगोविन्द, as the latter was the son of भोजदेव and रामादेवी and was an inhabitant of किन्दुबिल्व in the Birbhum district of Bengal (while जयदेव पीयूषवर्ष seems not to have been.a native of Bengal ). The author of the चन्द्रालोक is probably to be identified with जयदेव named पक्षधर, author of the मान्यालोक (a work on logic). The date of the चन्द्रालोक cannot be fixed with certainty. The चन्द्रालोक mentions noauthor by name. But in the verse 'अङ्गीकरोति यः काव्यं शब्दार्थावनलङ्गती। असौ न मन्यते कस्मादनुष्णमनलं कृती॥ (1.8), there is clearly a reference to the काव्यप्रकाशकारिका (तददोषौ शब्दार्थों सगुणावनलङ्गती पुनः क्वापि). We saw above (p. CVII ) that the अलङ्कारसर्वस्व was the first to define the two figures विचित्र and विकल्प. The चन्द्रालोक defines both these figures and almost in the same words as the सर्वस्व ('तुल्यबलविरोधो विकल्पः' अलं. स. P.158; विरोधे तुल्यबलयोर्विकल्पालङ्कतिर्मता' चन्द्रालोक V.112; 'स्वविपरीतफल- निष्पत्तये प्रयल्नो विचित्रम्' अलं. स. p.133, 'विच्ित्रं तत्प्रयत्नश्चेद्विपरीतः फलेच्छया' चन्द्रालोक V.62). The चन्द्रालोक expressly says that it considered the views of ancient and modern alarikarikas 'इत्थं शतमलद्कारा लक्षयित्वा निदर्शिताः। प्राचामाधुनिकानां च मतान्यालोच्य सर्वतः।।' V. 173. This shows that the author is one of the later writers on alankāra. The number of alarikāras defined (viz. 100) is in favour of a late date. aE defines only about 60 figures of sense, the सर्वस्व about 75. Hence the चन्द्रालोक is much later than the अलं. स. and cannot be much earlier than about 1200 A.C. A verse of the प्रसन्नराघव (कदली कदली &c. I. 37) is quoted in the साहित्यदर्पण (under IV. 3.). A few verses of the प्रसन्नराघव are quoted in the शार्ङ्गवरपद्धति (dated 1363 A. C. ) viz Nos 164 (प्रसन्न० I. 9 ), 3520 (I. 33), 3557 (II.22),3626(7.59), 3631 (7.60). Therefore जयदेव must have flourished before about 1300 A. C. So the चन्द्रालोक is to be placed between 1200 and 1300 A.C. The अलङ्कारशेखर of केशवमिश्र (p. 17) speaks of a poet जयदेवपण्डित who vanquished by his logical subtlety the pandits at the court of the king of उत्कल. This probably refers to the author of the चन्द्रालोक. The कुलयानन्द has a verse at

1. 28 चन्द्रालोक. INTRODUCTION. OXVII

the end 'चन्द्रालोको विजयतां शरदागमसम्भवः। हृद्यः कुवलयानन्दो यत्प्सादादभूदयम् ॥'. वैदनाथ explains that शरदागम is the original work on whioh the चन्द्रालोक is based. But this is wrong. शरदागम is the name of a com. on the चन्द्रालोक by प्रद्योतनभट्टाचार्य patronized by वीरभद्र, a Bundella prince (vide Madras Govt. Mss. cat. 1918, p. 8655 No 12878). This प्रद्योतन wrote a commentary on the कामसूत्र in 1577 A. C. 29 The रसतरदिणी and the रसमअ्जरी of भानुदत्त. The first has been published by the Venkates'vara Press, Bombay and by P. Regnaud ( Paris 1184 ) and the second with two com- mentaries in the Benares Sanskrit series. The रसतरद्गिणी is divided into eight तरङs; I, definition of भाव, subdivisions thereof, स्थायिभाव; II definition and divisions of विभाव; III. अनुभाव (such as कटाक्ष); IV the eight सात्त्विकभाव (स्तम्भ etc.); V व्यभिचारिमावs; VI rasas and detailed treatment of शद्वार; VII हास्य and other rasas; VIII स्थायिभावजा and रसजा दृष्टिः The रसमअरी is a somewhat smaller treatise than the रसतरङ्गिणी ( though their topics are different ) and deals with नायिकाड and their varieties ( about two-thirds of the work is occupied with this topic ), the सखी of the नायिका, दूती, नायक (in शद्गार) and their varieties, the friends of the नायक (viz. पीठमर्द, चिट, चेट, and विदूषक), the eight सात्तविक gunas (सम्भ ete), two varieties of शद्गार and the ten stages of विप्रलम्भ. In both works all the examples ( except in a few cases where he indicates to the contrary ) are the author's own, as he says 'अवगादस्व वाग्देवि दिव्या रसतरङ्गिणीम् । अस्मत्पद्येन पद्मेन रचय श्रुतिभूषणम् ।।' (रसतर० VIII. 29) and 'पद्मेन स्वकृतेन तेन कविना श्रीभानुना योजिता' (last verse of रसमअरी). In the रसतर० he quotes भरत very frequently and a few verses of his father. He seems to have the दशरूपक also in mind, though he does not name it. In both works he quotes from the अमरुशतक (एकत्रासनसंस्थिति: in रसत० V and प्रस्थानं बलयै: कृतं in रसमअरी p. 183). In both works he refers to ancient writings in general (in the words प्राचीनसंमति or प्राचीनलेखन and पूर्वाचार्या:). In the रसतरङ्गिणी he mentions by name the रसरस- दीपिका (p.20) and the इद्धारतिलक (p. 68). He composed the रसमअरी before the रसतरङ्गिणी (p. 130). He quotes the verse 'अनौत्वित्यादृते नान्यद्रसभङ्गस्य कारणम् । प्रसिद्धीचित्यवद्रस्तु रसहर्षाय जायते' as प्राचीनग्रन्थ (in रसत० p. 177). This is similar to a verse in the घ्व० (p. 145) and व्यक्तिविवेक (p.31). In the रसमअ्जरी he tells us that his father was गणेम्वर and his country was विदेह on the banks of the Ganges 'तातो यस

CXVIII SAHITYADARPAŅA. I. 29 भानुदत्त.

गणेश्वरः कविकुलालङ्कारचूडामणिर्देशों यस्य विदेहभ: सुरसरित्कलोलकिमीरिता। (last verse). Some mss. read 'विदर्भभू:' which would not agree with the word 'सुर ... रिता'. In Burnell's Tanjore cat. भानुदत्त is distinctly styled मैथिल. As गणेश्वर was a मैथिल he may very likely be the गणेश्वरमन्नी, brother of वीरेश्वर, whose son चण्डेश्वर composed the विवादरलाकर and weighed himself against gold in 1315 A. C. This agrees well with the date of भानुदत arrived at in other ways. As he mentions the शुद्गारतिलक and रसरत- दीपिका and had the दशरूपक before him, he is later than the 11th century. A commentary on the रसमज्जरी by गोपाल was com- posed in 1437 A. C. Therefore भानुदत्त flourished probably towards the end of the 13th and the beginning of the 14th century. 30 The एकावली of विद्याघर. This work with the commen- tary, तरल of मल्िनाथ, has been edited by Mr. Trivedi in the BS series. The work contains three parts, the kārikas, the oritti and the examples. The peculiarity of this work is that all the examples are composed by विद्याधर himself and contain panegyrices of his patron, king नरसिंह of उत्कल or Orissa. He himself says 'एष विद्याधरस्तेषु कान्तासंमितलक्षणम्। करोमि नरसिंहस्य चाङुश्लोकानुदाहरन् I'. In this respect it resembles the प्रतापरुद्रयशो- भूषण, the नअ्राजयशोभूषण, the रघुनाथभूपालीय and the अलङ्कारमअ्ञषा The work is divided into eight उन्मेषs, the subjects of which are :- I the hetu of काव्य (प्रतिभा, बहुशास्त्रदर्शिता and अभ्यास), definition of काव्य, discussion of the views of भामह, महिमभद्द and others; II. word is वाचक, लाक्षणिक and व्यअ्ञक and discussion of the three powers अभिधा, लक्षणा and व्यअ्ना; III. subdivisions of ध्वनि; IV. treatment of गुणीभूतव्यक्ञ; V. gunas (three) and rītis; VI. doshas; VII alankāras of s'abda; VIII alankāras of sense. In the first उन्मेष, विद्याधर is a thorough-going follower of the धवन्यालोक. His work is based on the काव्यप्रकाश and the अलङ्कारसर्वस्व. In the treatment of alankaras he prefers the सर्वस्व to the काव्यप्रकाश e. g. he defines the figures परिणाम, उल्लेख, विचित्र and विकल्प almost in the same words as the सर्वस्व, which do not occur in the काव्यप्रकाश at all. Among others he names the following :- अभिनवगुप्त, अलक्कारसर्वस्व, काव्यप्रकाश, बिह्ण, भोज, महिमभट्ट, वामन, श्रीहर्ष, हम्मीर, हरिहर and quotes from the दशरूप, नैषधीय, राजभेखर. He wrote another work केलिरहस्य on Erotics. Mr. Trivedi ( in his Introduction ) collects all the data for arriving at the age in which विद्याधर flourished and comes to the conclusion ( p. XXIII ) that he was patronised either

I.30 एकावली. INTRODUCTION. CXIX

by केसरिनरसिंह (1282-1307) or प्रतापनरसिंह (1307-1327 A. C. ). The रसार्णवसुधाकर of शिङ्षभूपाल (about 1350 A.C.) refers to the एकावली 'उत्कलाधिपतेः शङ्गाररसाभिमानिनो नरसिंहदेवस्य चित्तमनुवर्वमानेन विद्याधरेण कविना वाढमभ्यन्तरीकृतोसि। एवं खलु समर्थितमेकावल्यामनेन' (p.306 of Trivandrum ed. ). The ars is a model commentary. It is from the pen of the famous commentator of the mahakavyas. afgo flourished probably in the 15th century. 31 The प्रतापरुद्रयशोभूषण of विद्यानाथ. An excellent edition of this work, with the commentary called रत्ापण by कुमारस्वामिन्, son of मल्िनाथ, has been brought out by Mr. Trivedi in the B. S. series. This work is very popular in Southern India. The work contains three parts, karikas, vritti and illustrations. All the examples are composed in honour of the काकतीय king of Telangana, प्रतापरुद्रदेव (also called वीररुद्र or रुद्र), whose capital was एकशिला ( Orangal or Warangal) 'प्रतापरुद्रदेवस्य गुणानात्रित्य निर्मितः । अलक्कारप्रबन्धोयं सन्तः कर्णोत्सवोस्तु व: ॥' I. 9. In this respect it resembles the एकावली. The work has 9 प्रकरणs on नायक, काव्य, नाटक, रस, दोष, गुण, शब्दालक्कार, अर्थालङ्कार, मिश्रालङ्कार. Among others the following are named :- अलङ्कारसर्वस्व, उद्भट, काव्यप्रकाश, दण्डिन्, दशरूपक, बालरामायण, भरत, भामह, भोज, रुद्रभट्ट, शङ्गारतिलक, साहित्यमीमांसा. In the third प्रकरण, while illustrating the requirements of a नाटक, he exhibits a model drama called प्रतापरुद्रकल्याण (p.139). He follows in goneral the काव्यप्रकाश but prefers the अलक्कारसर्वस to wwe in the matter of figures. He defines the figures परिणाम, उल्लेख, विचित्र and विकल्प which are passed over by मम्मट and his definition of विकल्प (विरोधस्तुल्यबलयोर्विकल्पालङ्कतिर्मता p. 456) is almost the same as that of the चन्द्रालोक (विरोधे तुल्य०). प्रतापरुद्रदेव was the son of महादेव and मुम्मुडि or मुम्मुडम्बा, who was the daughter of रुद्राम्बा. This रुद्राम्बा was known as रुद्र and ruled at एकशिला after her father गणपति. प्रतापरुद्रदेव is said to have routed सेवण of the यादव family (i. e. रामदेव of देवगिरि, 1271-1309 A. C.). From this fact and the information supplied by epigraphic records, it follows that प्रतापरुद्रदेव ruled in the last quarter of the 13th and the first quarter of the 14th century and was captured in 1323 A. C. by Mahammad Taghlakh's armies. Therefore the प्रतापरुद्रयशोभूषण was composed in the first quarter of the 14th century. The रत्नापण of कुमारस्वामिन् is a good commentary, though inferior to the तरल of मलिनाथ. He quotes a host of writers,

exx SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 31 विदानाथ.

among whom the following deserve to be noted :- अलक्कारचूडामणि, एकावली, एकावलीवरल, कविकल्पद्रुम, गोपाल, चक्रवर्तिन् (author of अलक्कारस- वैस्वसजीविनी), दशरूपक, नरहरि, नाटकप्रकाश, पञ्चपादिका, पदमअ्री, भट्टमल, भावप्रकाश, भोजराज, महिमभट्ट, मानसोल्लास, रसनिरूपण, रसमज्जरी, रसार्णव, रुचक, वसन्तराजीय, विदग्धमुखमण्डन, विद्याधर, शारदातनय, शिङ्रभूपाल, शद्गारप्रकाश, सजजीविनी, साहित्यच्चिन्तामणि, साहित्यदर्पण, हेमचन्द्र. Another com. रलशाण is incomplete and refers to Taryor. 32 The काव्यानुशासन of वाग्भट. This work has been publi- shed in the KM series together with the commentary agn- faor composed by the author himself. The work is divided into five arearys. The main part is in the form of sutras in prose and the explanation and all illustrations occur in the commentary. The first अध्याय dwells upon the प्रयोजनs of काव्य, the hetu of kavya (viz. प्रतिभा aided by व्युत्पत्ति and अभ्यास) and the definitions of these; conventions of poets; defintion of kavya and its divisions गद्य, पद्य and मिश्र; definitions of महाकाव्य, आख्यायिका, कथा, चम्पू, मिश्रकाव्य (the ten रूपक). The second chapter deals with the 16 doshas of पद and fourteen of वाक्य, 14 doshas of sense, speaks of the ten gunas according to Dandin and Vamana, but gives as its opinion that the gunas are really three, माधुर्य, ओजसू and प्रसाद; and mentions the ruis, वैदभी, गौडीया and पाञ्चाली. The third chap. defines 63 alanikaras of sense, of which the following deserve mention as being somewhat rare अन्य, अपर, पूर्व, लेश, पिहित, मत, उभयन्यास, भाव and आशीः. The fourth chap. treats of six alankaras of s'abda चित्र, शेष, अनु- प्रास, वक्रोक्ि, यमक, पुनरुकवदाभास and their varieties. The fifth chap. dilates upon the nine rasas, the विभावs, अनुभावs, व्यभिचा रिमावs, the varieties of नायक and नायिका, the ten stages of love and the doshas of rasas. The author was a Jain. He mentions the country of मेदपाट (Mewad ) and the towns of राइडपुर and नलोटकपुर. He was the son of नेमिकुमार and is to be distinguished from the वाग्भट who was the author of वाग्भ- टालद्ार, as he himself mentions the latter 'दण्डिवामनवाग्भटादि प्रणीता दश काव्यगुणाः। वयं तु माधुयौजनप्रसादलक्षणांस्त्रीनेव गुणान्मन्यामहे' (का- व्यानुशासन p. 31). In his commentary (pp. 3-5) he gives long lists of countries, rivers, plants and products peculiar to each. He seems to have written a महाकाव्य named ऋषभदेवचरित (p. 15 ) and a work on metrics styled छन्दोनुशासन (p.20). A verse ( on p. 58 ) addressed to वाग्भट (i. e. probably the author himself ) is quoted in the com, and another in which af- कुमार is addressed oocurs on p.32 (गायन्ति रासकविधाविह मेदपाटना-

I. 82 वाग्भट. INTRODUCTION. CXXI

मोंधुनापि तब नेमिकुमार कीर्तिम् ॥). Among the authors and works quoted by him are अब्धिमथन (अपभ्रंशनिबद्ध p.15), आनन्दवर्धन, काव्यप्र- काश (p. 29), चन्द्रप्रभकाव्य, त्रिविक्रम (p. 20), दमयन्ती (p.19), नेमि- निर्वाण (p. 16), बालरामायण (p. 67), भीमकाव्य (in ग्राम्यभाषा p.15), राजीमतीपरित्याग, लीलावती (पद्यमयीकथा p. 18), वासवदत्ता (चम्पू p. 19), विष्णुविजय, शीता (a poetess p.20), रुनरतिलक (p. 61 and 63 the verses अस्माकं सखि and गाढालिङ्गन). There is no originality in the work. He largely borrows from the काव्यमीमांसा of राजशेखर, the काव्यप्रकाश and other works. A ms. of the काध्यानुशासन ( Eggeling's cat. No. 1157) is dated संवत् 1515 (1458-59 A. C.). He mentions the काव्यप्रकाश and arn. Therefore he is later than 1150 A. C. So he probably flourished in the 14th century. 33 The साहित्यदर्पण of विश्वनाथ. Beyond a few scraps of information gathered from his own works, we know very little about the personal history of Vis'vanatha. He came of a Brahmana family that had distinguished itself by learning. His great-great-grand-father was Narayana, who appears to have been a learned man and to have written & work on Rhetoric. * His father was Chandras'ekhara, who was a poot and scholar. His verses are often quoted by Vis'vanatha (p. 11, 15, 36, 38 &c. of appendix E). Vis'vanatha mentions by name two works of his fathar, viz. the Pushpa-mala ( on VI. 25 ) and Bhasharnava which dealt with the characteristics of Sanskrit, S'auraseni, Maharashtri and other Prakrit dialects. As Vis'vanatha explains certain Sanskrit expressions by Uriya equivalents in his commentary on the Kāvyaprakās'a, he appears to have been an inhabitant of Orissa. + The * 'तत्प्राणत्वं चास्मदूवृद्धप्रपितामहसहृदयगोष्ठीगरिष्ठकविपण्डितमुख्य श्रीमन्नारायण- qhr P S. D. III. 2-3; but in his Kavyaprakās'adarpaņa, Vis'vanatha says that Narayans was his grandfather "a4: श्रीकलिङ्गभूमण्डलाखण्डलमहाराजाधिराजश्रीनरसिंहदेवसभायां धर्मदत्तं स्यगयन्त ...... अस्मत्पितामइश्रीमन्नारायणदासपादाः" Intro. to K. P. p. 25 (Va.). Two explanations are possible; I Narayana was really the great-great-grand-father and is referred to as the grand-father for the sake of brevity; II The two Narayanas were distinct, one being the grand-son of the other. In India, a grandson often bears the name of his grand-father. + See Vamanacharya's Introduction to K. P. p. 25 'aude रुचि कुर्विति पाठः, अत्र चिक्कपदं काश्मीरादिभाषायामश्लीलार्थबोगकम्, उत्कलादि- मानायां पृतवांडकदव इत्यादि ।' k

CXXH SAHITYADARPANA. I. 33 साहित्यदर्पण.

father of Vis'vanatha and Vis'vanatha himself appear to have held some important office at the court of a king, probably of Kalinga. Both of them are styled Sandhivigrahika-Mahapatra. Vis'vanatha was & Vaishnava as is made clear by the colophon * at the end of the first Parichchheda and the last verse of the Sahityadarpana. i He was a poet and quotes his own verses in Sanskrit and Prakrit at every step, when illustrating the canons of Rhetoric. He composed a number of works, besides the Sahityadarpana, of which the following are men- tioned in the latter :- I. a mahakavya in Sanskrit, called Raghava-vilāsa ( under III. 222-225 ); II. Kuvalayās'vacha- rita, a kāvya in Prakrit ( III. 148); III. Prabhāvatī, a Nāțikā ( III 58); IV Chandra-kalā, another Nātikā (III. 96); V Pras'astiratnāvalī, a Karambhaka in sixteen languages ( VI. 337 ). After composing the Sahityadarpana, he wrote two other works, a kavya called Narasimha-vijaya and a comme- ntary on the Kavyaprakas'a called Kavyaprakas'a-darpana ( see Intro. to K. P. p. 25, Vā.). Chandīdāsa, who wrote a com- mentary on the Kavyaprakas'a, was the younger brother of Vis'vanatha's grand-father. t The question of Vis'vanatha's date does not present much difficulty. There are certain data, which, fortunately for us, fix within very narrow limits his chronological position. A ms. of the Sahityadarpana deposited at Jammu § is dated in the Vikrama year 1440, i. e. approximately 1384 A. C. From this it may be safely concluded that the Sahityadarpana was composed at some time earlier than 1384 A. C. Vis'va- natha quotes a verse which speaks of a Mahomedan king named Allauddin. $ We saw above that Vis'vanatha came from Orissa. The king referred to in the verse is certainly * 'श्रीमन्नारायणचरणारविन्दमधुव्रत etc.' Note the words 'काव्याद्धर्म- प्राप्तिर्भंगवन्नारायणचरणारविन्दस्तवादिना' p.1. 1 'यावत्प्रसन्नेन्दुनिभानना श्रीर्नारायणस्याङ्गमलङ्करोति।' 1 'अस्मत्पितामद्दानुजकविपण्डितमुख्यश्रीचण्डीदासपादानां तु खण्डरसनाम्ना' VII. 31. § See Dr. Stein's Catalogue of mss. at Jammu under the heading Alankāras'āstra p. 64. $ सन्धौ सर्वस्वहरणं विग्रहे प्राणनिग्रह्ः। अलावदीननृपतौ न सन्धिर्न च विग्रहः ॥ IV. 14, Appendix E, p.55.

I. 33 साहित्यदर्पण INTRODUCTION. CXXIII

Sultan * Allauddin Khilji, whose favourite general Malik Kafur invaded the Deccan, seized Warangal and carried his viotorious arms as far as Cape Comorin. Allauddin, it is said, was poisoned in 1316 A. C. Supposing that the verse in which Allauddin is mentioned by name was written in his life-time, the Sahityadarpana cannot be said to have been composed at a date earlier than 1300 A. C. From these two circumstances it follows that the Sahityadarpana was com- posed at some time between 1300 A. C. and 1384 A. C. There is a good deal of evidence, both internal and ex- ternal, that confirms this conclusion.

I The internal evidence is as follows :- ( a ) Vis'vanātha quotes a verse from the Gitagovinda of Jayadeva. + Tradition makes Jayadeva, along with Govardhana, S'arana, Umāpati and Kavirāja, a protege of Lakshmana-sena whose inscription at Gaya is dated in Samvat 1173 or 1116 A. C. t. Jayadeva himself mentions Govardhana etc. as his con- temporaries.§ We may say that Jayadeva flourished in the first half of the 12th century. (b) विश्वनाथ quotes a verse (कदली कदली etc. under IV. 3) from the प्रसन्नराघव (I. 37) of जयदेव who flourished between 1200 and 1300 A. C. We have pointed out in the notes that Vis'vanatha often quotes $ verbatim from the Alankā- rasarvasva of Ruyyaka and in some places even criticizes it T. We know that Ruyyaka was the teacher s of Mankha,

• The word Sultan, it should be noted, occurs under the Sanskritized form सुरत्राण in the साहित्यदर्पण. 'गङ्गाम्भसि सुरत्राण तव निःशाननिस्वन: ।' p. 30 of our text (under उत्प्रेक्षा). 'हृदि बिसलताहारो नायं' etc. p.29 of our text (under निश्चय). This verse is ascribed to Jayadeva in the Subhashitavali also. t See Buhler's Kashmir report p. 64. 9 वाच: पल्लवयत्युमापतिधरः सन्दर्भशुद्धि गिरां जानीते जयदेव एव शरण: श्राध्यो दुरूहद्रुते। शङ्गारोत्तरसत्प्रमेयवचनैराचार्यगोवर्धनः स्पर्धी कोऽपि न विश्रुतः श्रुतिपरो घोयी कविक्ष्मापतिः॥ 4th verse of the Gitagovinda. $ See e. g. pp. 41, 42, 60, of the text and the notes thereon. See pp. 147, 152, 153-54, 159-60. तं श्रीरुय्यकमालोक्य स प्रियं गुरुमग्रहीद। सौहार्दप्रश्रयरसस्रोतःसम्मेदमज्जनम्॥ श्रीकण्ठ XXV.30.

CXXIV SÂHITYADARPAŅA. I. 33 साहित्यदर्पण

suthor of S'rikanthacharita. In the 25th sarga of the S'rl- kanthacharita Mankha tells us that he showed his work to an assembly of learned men in the house of his elder brother Alankara,* who was ministert of King Jayasimha of Kashmir (1129-1150 A. C). The S'rikanthacharita was composed about 1140 A. C. Ruyyaka wrote his work later than 1150 A. C. at an advanced age. A good deal of time must have elapsed before Ruyyaka's work attained such popularity as to be the guide of a writer from Orissa.

(c ) Vis'vanātha quotes some verses from the Naishadhiya- charita of S'riharsha. t The date of S'riharsha has been for a long time a subject of discussion among scholars. S'ri- harsha tell us that he was patronized by a king of Kan- yakubja. § Rajas'ekhara in his Prabandhakosha written in Samivat 1405 informs us that S'riharsha was the son of Hira, who was a minister of Jayantachandra of Kas'i. It is probable that this Jayantachandra is the same as the Jayachandra that was a king of Kanauj. One of the earliest inscriptions of Jayachandra is dated in Samvat 1223. $ Buhler referred the composition of the Naishadhiya to some date between 1167 A. C. and 1174 A. C. Gadadhara, a commentator of the Naishadhiya, makes S'riharsha a protege of Govindachandra of Varaņasī f. Mankha informs us that a king of Kanyakubja, named Govindachandra, sent an ambassador to Jayasimiha,

• मदग्रजन्मनः श्रीमल्लङ्ककस्य सभागृह्म्। तेऽथ्यासते च विस्रब्धाः सारसा इव मानसम् । XXV. 15. लकूक must have been another name of HagR. In the third sarga Mankha tells us that he was the last of four brothers, the other three being शुङ्गार, भृद्ग and अलङ्कार ( verses 45, 53, 56). 1 एक श्रीजयसिंहपार्थिवपति काश्मीरमीनव्वजं तस्योपासितसन्धिविग्रद्दमलक्कारं द्विवीयं स्तुमः । श्रीकण्ठ० XXV. 61. 1 इनूमदाघै: etc (p.38), धन्यासि वैदर्भि etc. (p.36) which are respeotively नैषवीय IX. 123 and III. 116. S 'ताम्बूलद्यमासनं च लभते यः कान्यकुब्जेश्वरात' etc., last verse of the Naishadhiya. $ J. B. B. R. A. S. vol. X, p. 31 ff. See Prof. S. R. Bhandarkar's Report on his second tour for 1904-5 pp. 43, 87.

1. 33 साहित्यदर्पण. INTRODUCTION. CXXV

king of Kashmir. * It is not unlikely that this is the same as the king mentioned by Gadadhara. Varānasī and Kānyakubja may have both been the capitals of the king, or the king may have conquered Varanasi after coming to the throne of Kanauj. There is another line of reasoning which leads us approximately to the same date as the above. S'riharsha wrote the Khandana-Khandakhadya, f in which he ridicules Udayana by twisting a verse of the latter. t 3a4a wrote his छक्षणावली in S'ake 906 i. e. 984-5 A.C. 'तर्काम्बराङ्कप्रमितेष्ववीतेषु शकान्ततः । वर्षेषूदयनश्चक्रे सुबोधां लक्षणावलीम्॥.' (d) Chandīdasa, a commentator of the Kāvyaprakās'a, was the younger brother of Vis'vanatha's grand-father. It has been shown (p. CVI) that the काव्यप्रकाश was composed between 1050 and 1150 A. C. Chandidasa is not one of the oldest commentators of the Kāvyaprakas'a and Vis'vanātha is removed by two generations from him. (e) Vis'vanatha quotes the words of a writer called Dharma- datta, § who was a contemporary of Nārayana, the grand- father ( great-great-grandfather! ) of Vis'vanatha and was vanquished by him at the court of king Narasimha of Kalinga. Whether Narayana was the grandfather or great-great-grand- father of Vis'vanatha would not make much difference. Many kings of Kalinga bore the name Narasimha. Besides there is a good deal of confusion about the dates of their accession. $

• अन्यः स सुहलस्तेन ततोऽवन्धत पण्डितः । दूतो गोविन्दचन्द्रस्य कान्यकुब्जस्य भूभुजः ॥ श्रीकण्ठ० XXV.102. f 'षष्ठः खण्डनखण्डतोऽपि सहजात्क्षोदक्षमे तन्महाकाव्येडयं व्यगमन्नळस्य चरिते सर्गों निसरगोब्ज्वल: ll' at the end of the sixth sarga of the Nai. Į See Preface to Nyāyakusumāñjali, p. 15. Udayana's verse is 'शक्का चेदनुमास्त्येव न चेच्छड्का ततस्तराम्। व्याघातावधिराशक्का तर्कः शङ्कावधिमंतः ॥।' 3rd स्तबक, 7th verse p. 381 of न्यायकुसुमाअ्जलि, on which S'riharsha retorts 'तस्मादस्माभिरप्यस्मिन्नये न खलु दुष्पठा। त्वद्राथैवान्यथाका- रमक्षराणि कियन्त्यपि। व्याघातो यदि शक्कासि न चेच्छड्का ततस्तराम्। व्याघाताव- पिराशट्टा तर्क: शभ्टावधि: कुतः॥।' 8 तदाइ धर्मदत्तः खग्रन्ये 'रसे सारश्रमत्कारः सर्वत्राप्यनुभूयते। तथ्चमत्कारसा- रत्वे सर्वत्राप्यभ्वुतो रसः । तसमादङ्भुतमेवाइ कृती नारायणो रसम् ॥' on S. D. III. 2-3. $ See Dr. Bhandarkar's Note on the kings of Kalińga in the Introduction to Mr. Trivedi's edition of the EkAvalf.

CXXVI SAHITYADARPANA. I. 33 साहित्यदर्पण.

As a ms. of the Sahityadarpana is dated in 1384 A. C. Narasimha IV is not certainly the king at whose court Nārayana lived, because Narasimha IV came to the throne at some time between 1373 A. D. and 1411 A. D. Narasimha III also is out of question, as the date of his accession is some- where between 1328 A. C. and 1361 A. C. It is likely that Narasimha II was the king referred to. The date of his ac- cession falls between 1270 A. C. and 1303 A. C .; he is also styled Kavipriya etc. in his inscriptions, which makes it probable that he patronized many learned men. If Narayana was really the great-great-grand-father of Vis'vanatha, then the king may have been Narasimha I, the date of whose accession is some- where near 1253 A. C.

II. The external evidence is as follows :- (f) The Sahi- tyadarpana is twice mentioned by name in the Ratnāpana * of Kumarasvamin, a commentary on the Prataparudrīya. Kumarasvamin is the son of the famous commentator Malli- natha, who is believed by all competent authorities to have flourished in the 15th century. f (h) Govinda Thakkura in his Kavyaprakas'apradīpa quotes the criticisms of Vis'vanatha on Mammata's definition of kavya and Vis'vanatha's definition of kavya without actually naming him. $ Govinda is earlier than 1600 A. D., as he is mentioned by Kamalakarabhatta, who wrote a commentary on the Kavyaprakas'a and finished the Nirnayasindhu in 1612 A. D. § * See pp. 245, 248 of the प्रतापरुद्रयशोभूषण. The quotations are the definitions of the व्यभिचारिभावs मद and मोह, which oceur in the S. D. ( III. 146-47 and 150). t See Dr. Bhandarkar's Preface to the Malatimadhava and Mr. Trivedi's Introduction ( pp. XXIV-XXV ) to the Bhattikāvya. 1 अर्वाचीनास्तु "यथोक्तस्य काव्यलक्षणत्वे काव्यपदं निर्विषयं प्रविरलविषयं वा स्याद। दोषाणां दुर्वारत्वाव। तस्मात 'वाक्यं रसात्मकं काव्यम्' इति तल्लक्षणम्1 तथा च दुछेपि रसान्वये काव्यत्वमस्त्येव। परं त्वपकर्षमात्रम्। तदुक्तम् 'कीटानुवि- दरलादि' इत्ादि। एवं चालक्कारादिसत्त्वे उत्कर्षमात्रम्। नीरसे तु चित्रादी काव्यव्यवहारो गाण:" इत्याङ्डः । प्रदीप p.13 (Nir.) 5 वसुऋत्ुभतुभूमिते गतेब्दे नरपतिविक्रमतोऽय याति रौद्रे। तपसि श्िवतिथौ समापितोऽयं रक्ुपतिपादसरोक्हेऽर्पितश्च।।

I. 33 साहित्यदर्पण. INTRODUCTION. CXXVII

From the foregoing, we see that Vis'vanatha refers to a number of writers who flourished in the 12th century A. C. and is in his turn referred to by writers belonging to the 15th and 16th centuries. The date, above assigned to Vis'vanatha, viz. the 14th century A. C., is thus confirmed by unimpeachable and independent testimony. In the first pari. after the customary marigala, the author speaks of the fruits of poetry, discusses the definition of kavya proposed by different writers and at last gives his own definition and illustrates it. In the second pari. after defining a sentence and a word, the author deals at great length with the three powers of a word. In the third pari. a full dis- quisition on rasas, bhavas and other cognate topics is given. The fourth pari. exhaustively deals with the two divisions of kavya, viz. ध्वनि and गुणीभूतव्यक्ष and their subdivisions. In the fifth, the author establishes the existence of the Vyanjana- vritti and refutes the arguments of those who deny its existence. In the sixth, a full and complete treatment of the science of dramaturgy is given. The 7th deals with the doshas of kavya. The 8th speaks of the three gunas of kavya and shows that the gunas spoken of by others are either included in the three mentioned by Vis'vanatha or are no gunas at all. In the 9th, the author dilates upon the styles of composition, which are four वैदभी, गौडी, पाव्चाली and लाटी. In the 10th, both शब्दालक्कारs and अर्यालक्कारs are dealt with. In the galaxy of Sanskrit rhetoricians Vis'vnatha is & star of the second magnitude only. Beside the brilliance of Anandavardhana, Mammata and Jagannatha his light appears dim. Still the work of Vis'vanatha has some merits of its own. Its greatest merit is that it presents in the compass of & single work, & full and complete treatment of the science of rhetoric in all its branches. Most Sanskrit writers on Sahitya, such as Dandin *. Mammata and Jagannatha leave out the treatment of dramaturgy. The साहित्यदर्पण, how- ever, contains a thorough disquisition on the technicalities of the dramatic art and forms, together with the Natya- s'astra of Bharata and the Dasarupa of 7H7, a triumvi-

• Dandin says 'मिश्राणि नाटकादीनि तेषामन्यत्र विस्तरः ।' K. D. I. 31; Bhamaha says 'नाटकं दविपदी शम्यारासकस्कन्धकादि यत्। उक्त तदभिने- पार्यमुक्तोन्येस्तस्य विस्तरः ।।' I. 24.

EXXVIII SAAITYADARPANA. I. 33 साहित्यदर्पण.

rate in the domain of the Sanskrit drama. Another merit of the work is that it is written in a simple and flowing style. The reader is often hampered in going over the Kavyaprakas'a of Mammata by the author's studied efforts at brevity. Jagannatha frightens the student by his flowery language, his subtle reasoning and his scathing criticisms of his predecessors. Vis'vnatha, although he displays here and there a love for hair-splitting, is generally clear in expression. He is, however, more or less a compiler and not an original writer. In the notes, we have pointed out in detail to what extent he borrows from the es. a .* Sometimes his judgment seems to forsake him and he follows slavishly the Sarvasva. f He does not appear to have bestowed much time and pains upon the selection of examples. Out of about 250 quotations occurring in qf- as I, II and X he borrows no less than 85 from the Dhvanyaloka, the Kavyaprakas'a or the Sarvasva and quotes about 20 verses of his own. He is not happy in the innovations that he introduces t and is sometimes wrong in what he says. § In spite of these blemishes, his work forms an easy and suitable introduction to Sanskrit sāhitya. To judge from the number of commentaries, Vi'svanatha's work seems not to have enjoyed much popularity except per- haps in Bengal. From the various reports on the search for mss. it appears that there exist four commentaries. $ That of Ramacharana was the only one available to me. The comment- ary though useful in its own way, is not so learned or helpful as the Pradipa or the Uddyota. It seldom gives the sources of the verses quoted in illustration or explanations of thom. It very rarely compares the author's definitions with those of other writers. It commits gross mistakes in certain easos. T * See p. 187, 216, 209, 310 etc. t Vide e. g. the treatment of परिणाम, व्यतिरेक and अर्थान्तरन्यास 1 For example, निश्चय (p.138-141) and अनुकूल (p.230-231). § Vido remarks on pp. 100, 125, 213, 243 ** 1 $ Viz. that of anerH, a ms. of which is dated in 1626 A. C; that of ww written in 1700 A. C. and that of मधुरानाथ शुद्ध and the प्रमा of गोपीनाय. I Vide notes on निश्य, विशेष, भाविक.

I. 34 अलद्धारसेखर. INTRODUCTION. CXXIX

34 The अलद्कारशेखर of केशवमिश्र. This work has been published in the KM series. The work is divided into three parts, कारिका8, वृत्ति and examples. The author himself tells us that the कारिकाs are the work of शौद्धोदनि 'अलक्कारविद्यासूत्रकारो भगवाळ्छोड्ोदनिः परमकारुणिक: स्वशास्त्रे प्रवर्तयिष्यन्प्रथमं काव्यस्वरूपमाह (p.2); शुतमेवान्यथाकारमक्षराणि कियन्त्यपि । काव्यालक्कारविद्यायां शौद्धोदनिरसूत्रयत्।।' (p. 83 ). Whether शौद्धोदनि is the name of an author or whether the कारिकाs were composed by some Buddhist writer and were subsequently ascribed to शौद्धोदनि (a name of भगवान् 1 a) cannot be determined. The work very largely draws upon the काव्यादर्श, काव्यमीमांसा, the ध्वन्यालोक, the काव्यप्रकाश, वाग्भ- टाळक्कार and quotes श्रीपाद (an otherwise unknown author on alankara ) very frequently. The work is divided into 8 Ters and 22 मरीच्वि (rays) the subjeots of which are :- 1, definition of काव्य as 'रसादिमद्वाक्य' and its hetu, प्रतिभा etc .; 2, three रीतिश (वैदभी, गौडी and मागधी), उक्ति and मुद्रा with their varieties; 3, the three functions of a word viz. शक्ति, लक्षणा and व्यअ्ना; 4, eight doshas of qa; 5, twelve doshas of at4; 6, eight doshas of अर्थ; 7, the five gunas of शब्द, संक्षिप्तत्व, उदात्तत्व, प्रसाद, उक्ति and समाधि; 8, four gunas of sense भाविकत्व, सुशब्दत्व, पर्यायोकि and gaffiar; 9, in some cases the above doshas become gunas or are not faults; 10, eight अलद्धारs of शब्द, चित्र, वक्रोक्ि, अनु- प्रास, गूढ, क्रेष, प्रहेलिका, प्रश्नोत्तर and यमक; 11, only fourteen alankaras of sense and no more viz. उपमा, रूपक, उत्प्रेक्षा, समासोक्ति, अपहुति, समाहित, स्वभाव, विरोध, सार, दीपक, सहोक्ति, अन्यदेशत्व (i. e. असङ्गति of मम्मट), विशेषोक्ति and विभावना are enumerated and ten varieties of उपमा are illustrated; 12, subdivisions of रूपक; 13, other figures defined and illustrated; the syrs of a damsel and of her complexion, hair, forehead, eyebrows etc .; 14, how poets should describe the physical characteristics of the heroes of their works; 15, words that convey HIER, conventions of poets; 16, the topics to be desoribed such as king, queen, country, town, city, river eto. and the peculiar characteristios of each that should be dwelt upon; 17, the colours of various objeots in nature; 18, words that convey numerals from one to thousand; certain tricks of words such as गतागत, संस्कृत- प्राकृतेक्यता (i. e. भाषासम); 19, समस्यापूरण; 20 the nine rasas, the subdivisions of नायक and नायिका, the different भावs; 21 the doshas of T#; 22 what letters are favourable to each rasa. The कारिकाs of शौद्धोदनि appear to have been composed stter the 12th century. He defines kanya as a sentonco

CXXX SÂHITYADARPANA. I. 34 अलद्कारशेखर.

containing rasas etc ( p. 2 ) and says that rasa is the soul of poetry (p. 6 ). On p. 80 शौद्धोदनि refers to महिमभट्ट the author of the व्यक्तिविवेक and his treatment bears close resem- blance to वाग्भटालद्कार (compare p. 27 with वाग्भटा0 p. 28). The अलक्कारशेखर mentions among others the following works and authors :- कविकल्पलता (p. 48, as following श्रीपाद), गोवर्धन ( frequently quoted, pp. 17, 29, 37, 43, 49, &c), भार्गवसर्वस्व (p. 24), भोजराज (p. 7 ), महिमा (p. 81 the verse अनौचचित्यादृते which occurs in sवo p. 145 is ascribed to महिमा), राजशेखर ( pp. 32, 67), श्रीपाद (frequently quoted pp. 4, 5, 23, 27, 32, 72, 83 &c ), श्रीहर्ष ( p. 41). The author tells us that before the अलद्धारशेखर he composed seven works for the benefit of poets (3rd Intro. verse ). Out of these he mentions two works अलङ्कारसर्वस्व (pp. 9, 38) and काव्यरल (p. 72). The word वाक्यरले (on p. 12) seems to be a mistake for काव्यरले. केशवमिश्र tells us in the Introduction and at the end that he wrote the अलक्कारझेखर at the instance of king माणिक्यचन्द्र son of धर्मचन्द्र. This धर्मचन्द्र was son of रामचन्द्र, a scion of the family of FRTHT, who routed a Kabila ( Afgan ) king of Delhi. According to Cunningham (Arch. Survey of India vol. V. p. 160) माणिक्य चन्द्र king of Kangra succeeded in 1563 A. C. and ruled for about ten years. So the अलक्कारशेखर was composed in the latter half of the 16th century. 35 The works of अप्पय्यदीक्षित. This versatile and prolific writer, who is credited with the authorship of over one hundred works, contributed three works on Poetics. In the वृत्तिवार्तिक, which is divided into two परिच्छेदs as printed, he treats at length of the two functions of words, viz. afre ( of three sorts रूढि, योग and योगरूढि ) and लक्षणा (first divided into शुद्धा and गौणी, each of which is again subdivided into निरूढ and फल and their subdivisions). The कुवलयानन्द is an elementary treatise on aogns. It generally adopts the definitions and examples of the चन्द्रालोक 'येषां चन्द्रालोके दृश्यन्ते लक्ष्यलक्षणश्चोकाः। प्रायस्त एव तेषामितरेषां त्वभिनवा विरच्यन्ते॥l' and he wrote the work by order of king बेड्कूटपति 'अमुं कुवलयानन्दमकरोदप्पदीक्षितः। नियोगाद्वेङ्कटपतेर्निरुपाधिकृपानिघेः॥'. In the कुवलयानन्द he adds his own comments and cites examples from other authors. To the hundred figures of the चन्द्रालोक, he adds 24 separate ones. His third work the Aprfiaier is a more solid performance. His method is to give a kārikā at first and then discuss in prose the views of others and to refute them where necesssry. He first of all briefy treats the

I. 35 अप्पय्यदीक्षित. INTRODUCTION. CXXXE

division of काव्य into ध्वनि, गुणीभूतव्यङ्षय and चित्र, and says that as शब्दचित्र is generally void of charm, he will treat of अर्थच्ित्र alone. He then takes up उपमा and points out how twenty-two figures are based thereon. Unfortunately the printed edi- tion (K. M. series ) breaks off in the midst of अतिशयोक्ति (the figures treated of being उपमा, उपमेयोपमा, अनन्वय, स्मरण, रूपक, परिणाम, ससन्देह, भ्रान्तिमान्, उललेख, अपह्ृति, उत्प्रेक्षा, अतिशयोक्ति ) and & verse at the end says that the च्ित्रमीमांसा, though mutilated, causes delight like the digit of the moon or like Aruna 'अप्यर्धच्वित्र- मीमांसा न मुदे कस्य मांसला। अनूरुरिव धर्माशोरर्षेन्दुरिव धूर्जटेः॥'. The printed च्ित्रमीमांसाखण्डन of जगन्नाथ goes only so far as अपहृति. That he contemplated writing on more figures follows from his words 'अधिकं निदर्शनालक्कारप्रकरणे चिन्तयिष्यते' (चित्र० p. 101); while in the कुवलयानन्द (at end of श्रेष) he says 'एतद्विवेचनं तु चित्रमीमांसायां द्रष्टव्यम्,' on which वैधनाथ remarks 'यद्यप्युत्प्रेक्षाय्न्थानन्तरं चित्रमीमांसा न क्वापि दृश्यते'. This shows that we have now a little more of it than वैद्यनाथ could secure.

The name of the author is written in various ways; अप्पदी- क्षित, अप्पयदी० and अप्पय्यदीक्षित. For the form अप्पय, vide रसगङ्गाघर p. 218. The third Intro. verse in the चित्रमीमांसाखण्डन gives it as अप्पय्य (and the metre requires it to be so 'सूक्ष्मं विभाव्य मयका समुदीरितानामप्पय्यदीक्षितकृताविद्द दूषणानाम् ।') and रसग० (p.120) has that form also. The metre of the verse at the end of the कुवलयानन्द (अमुं ... दीक्षित:) requires the form to be अप्पदीक्षित and रसग० (pp. 209, 226, 249, 254, &c, ) has that form also. अप्पय्य- दीक्षित is very severely criticized by जगन्नाथ and on the devoted head of the दीक्षित he heaps the choicest abuse (suh asदीर्घश्रवसू at रसग. p. 239, द्रविडपुङ्गव p. 420). As अप्पय्यदीक्षित quotes the एकावली, the प्रतापरुद्रयशोभूषण and the अलङ्कारसर्वस्वसजजीविनी, he is later than the 14th century. Dr. Hultzsch ( E. I. Vol. IV p. 269) shows that the वेक्कुटपति mentioned in the कुवलयानन्द was वेङ्कट I of Vijayanagar, one of whose grants is dated 1523 S'ake ( i. e. 1601-2 A. C. ). Therefore acuy flourished in the latter half of the 16th and the first quarter of the 17th century. नीलकण्ठदीक्षित, grandson of आच्चादीक्षित who was the younger brother of अप्पय्यदीक्षित, composed his नीलकण्ठविजय in गतकलि 4738 (i. e.1637-8 A. C.). This also corroborates the above date. Further the .bitter personal remarks that नगन्नाथ makes against him and the #aacour that he displays require that अष्यय्यदीक्षित was alive

CXXXI SAHITYADARPANA. I. 35 अप्पय्यदीक्षित.

during srrara's life (though much older than aT). It will be seen that smara's literary career lies between 1620- 1660 A. C.

36 The रसगङ्गाधर of जगन्ाथ. This work together with the commentary called मर्मप्रकाश by नागेशभट has been edited in the KM series. This is a standard work on poetics, parti- cularly on alankaras. The KrIFrat stands next only to the ध्वन्यालोक and the काव्यप्रकाश in the field of Poetics. Though a modern writer he has a wonderful command over classical Sanskrit. He cites his own examples, as he proudly says 'निर्माय नूतनमुदाहरणानुरूपं काव्यं मयात्र निहितं न परस्य किश्चित। किं सेव्यते सुमनसां मनसापि गन्धः कस्तूरिकाजननशक्तिभृता मृगेण ।I'. His verses are composed in an easy, flowing and graceful style and exhibit great poetic talent. His method is first to define a topic, then to discuss it and elucidate it by citing his own examples and to comment on the views of his predecessors. His prose is characterised by a lucid and vigorous style and displays great critical acumen. He is always independent in his views and boldly criticizes on occasions esteemed ancient writers, e. g. ध्वन्यालोक (for regarding the verse प्राप्तश्रीः as an examples of रूपकध्वनि, p. 247), मम्मट (pp. 5, 229, 334 493), अलक्कारसर्वस्व (pp. 251, 269, 301, 342 &c). His criticism displays great sanity of judgment, maintains a high level of brilliant polemics and acuteness and is generally couched in courteous language ( except when dealing with the views of Appayya). The justice of his criticism has to be acknowledged in most cases.

The work is a very bulky one and it is impossible to convey even a vague idea of its contents by a mere outline. In the first आनन he begins by defining kavya as 'रमणीयार्थप्रतिपादक: शब्द: काव्यम्', examines the definition of काव्य given by others asserts that pratibha alone is the source of kavya, divides atet into four varieties उत्तमोत्तम, उत्तम, मध्यम, अधम; explains rasas, bhavas and kindred topics; speaks of the different views about gunas being three or ten; explains भाव, रसाभास, भावोदय d0 The 2nd आनन treats of the divisions of ध्वनि; of संयोग, विप्रयोग and other determining circumstances; discusses afdrer and agon and their varieties; 3yur and other figures of speech (70 in all). The work breaks off in the midst of the figure sot and the com, of नागेस who flourished only about 50 years after गनाय

I. 36 जगन्नाथ. INTRODUCTION. CXXXIII

extends only up to that figure. It is not to be supposed that Ena passed away in the midst of the task of composing the THISTT, because from the 2nd introductory verse to his चित्रमीमांसाखण्डन it appears that he wrote the latter after the former 'रसगङ्गाधरे त्वित्रमीमांसाया मयोदिताः। ये दोषास्तेत्र संक्षिप्य कथ्यन्ते विदुषां मुदे।।'. In the चित्रमीमांसाखण्डन (p. 12) he says 'विशेषस्तु उदाइरणालक्कारप्रकरणे रसगङ्गाधरादवसेयः' But in the extant रसगङ्गाघर there are no remarks on the figure उदाहरण.

Besides the रसगङ्गाघर and the चित्रमीमांसाखण्डन, जगन्नाथ wrote about a dozen other works. For these and for the question of his date, the edition of the भामिनीविलास by the late Mr.L. R. Vaidya and the introduction in the K. M, edition of the रसगङ्गाधर may be consulted. The गङ्गालहरी and भामिनीविलास are two of his well-known works. He wrote a refutation of the मनोरमा of भट्टोजि and styled it मनोरमाकुचमर्दनम्.

जगन्नाथ was a Tailanga Brahmana. He was the son of पेरुभट्ट (or पेरमभद्टृ) and learnt at the feet of his own father and also of शेषवीरेश्वर. पेरुभट्ट was the pupil of ज्ञानेन्द्रभिक्षु in अद्वैत, of महेन्द्र in logic, of खण्डदेव in पूर्वमीमांसा at Benares, of वीरेश्वर surnamed शेष in grammar. It appears that the title of पण्डितराज was conferred upon aT4 by Emperor Shah Jehan. He bewails over the death of Asaf (in the आसफविलास), probably the favourite Khan Khanan of Shah Jehan who died in 1641 A. C. and praises Dara, the son of Shah Jehan, in his जगदाभरण. Vide the verses सुघेव वाणी (on p. 166 of रस०), युक्तं तु याते (p. 457) for आसफ and the verse भूमीनाथ शहाबुदीन for Shah Jehan (p. 210). A ms. of the चित्रमीमांसाखण्डन is dated Samvat 1709 (i.e.1652-53 A. C.). Therefore both the रसगङ्गाघर and the चित्रमीमांसाखण्डन were composed before 1650 and after 1641 A. C. and they are the products of a mature mind. Therefore the literary activity of maTa lies between 1620 and 1660 A. C.

नागेश is a very learned writer and wrote commentaries on numerous S'astras. He is removed by about two generations from aT4, as the following pedigree will show, and flourished in the first quarter of the 18th century. 15

CXXXIV SÂHITYADARPANA. I. 36 जगन्नाथ

शेष श्रीकृष्ण

शेष वीरेश्वर ( son) नारायण (son)

son पेरुभट्ट (pupil) भट्टोजि (pupil) - शेष हरि. जगन्नाथ (son) भानुजि (son)

(pupil) नागेशभट्ट. For the $y family of Benares vide I. A. for 1912 p. 245 ff. जगन्नाथ is the last great writer on the Alankaras'astra. Therefore it is proper to bring this part of the subject to a close at this stage.

Part II.

The origin and growth of the Alankaras'astra 1 Early poetic efforts. It is extremely difficult to give an accurate definition of poetry and try to distinguish it from other forms of literature. But true poetry ( leaving aside the question whether a work clothed in prose is poetry or not ) is distinguished at least by three things, viz. by a certain peculiar diction, by its subject matter and by the spirit in which it approaches the handling of its themes. Judged from this stand-point, the most ancient monument of the Indo-Aryan languages, viz the Rigveda, contains, though it is mainly a religious book of fervent prayers, a great deal of true poetry. Many of the hymns, particulary those add- ressed to Ushas, exhibit fine specimens of poetry. For example, vide the following: अभ्रातेव पुंस एति प्रतीची गर्तारुगिव सनये धनानाम्। जायेव पत्य उशती सुवासा उषा इस्रेव नि रिणीते अप्सः ॥ ऋ. I. 124. 7. This verse contains four Upamas, the last two of which may occur in the poetry of any country. In 'aT सुपणा सयुजा सखाया समानं वृक्षं परिषस्वजाते। तयोरेक: पिप्पलं स्वाद्वत्त्यनश्नन्नन्यो- मिचाकशीति ॥'(ऋ. I. 164.20) there is a fine idea, which would be regarded as the figure अतिशयोक्ति by Sanskrit alankarikas. In 'द्वादशारं न हि तज्जराय वर्वर्ति चक्रं परि द्यामृतस्य' (ऋ. I. 164.11), it may be said that the figure is व्यतिरेक. One may trace the desire for 2ष in such Vedic passages as 'स्वसुर्जारः शृणोतु नः' ( Rig. VI. 55. 5. ) and in 'यत्रा सुपर्णा अमृतस्य' etc. (क. I. 164.21 explained in fom III. 12 in two ways ). The Upanishads also, though they are devoted to the pursuit of philosophical truth, contain highly poetic passages e. g. 'धनुर्गृहीत्वापनिषदं महास्त्रं शरं हयुपासा निशितं संधयीत । आयम्य तद्भावगतेन चेतसा लक्ष्यं तदेवाक्षरं सोम्य विद्धि I।' मुण्डकोपनि. II. 2.3. Similarly the verse 'आत्मानं रथिनं विद्धि, शरीरं रथमेव तु' (कठोपनिषत् I. 3.3.) contains a good रूपक and the verses 'इन्द्रियेभ्यः परा हर्था अर्थेभ्यश्च परं मनः । ...... तपुरुषः पर:।' contain the figure HTT. In the Rigveda there are several hymns that contain charming dialogues, viz. the dialogue of Sarama and the Panis ( Rig. X. 108 ), of the rivers and the sage विश्वामित्र ( Rig. III. 33) .. These dialogues are the precursors of the Sanskrit drama.

2 Coming to later days, there is ample evidence to show that centuries before the Christian era poetry of a high order

CXXXVI SÂHITYADARPANA. II. 2 Early Poetry.

had been composed. It is accepted almost by all scholars that the Mahabharata in its extant form cannot be placed later than the 2nd century A. C. and that a large portion of it may be at least as old as 500 B. C. Similarly the रामायण has been assigned to the 4th century B. C. by some scholars ( Dr. Keith in JRAS 1915 p. 320 ), while others ( like Dr. Jacobi ) would place it as far back as 600 B. C. These two epios contain highly poetical passages. Many passages are quoted from the महाभारत in the ध्वन्यालोक (p. 125, p. 238) and the काव्यप्रकाश (4th उल्लास, the गृभ्गोमायुसंवाद in शान्तिपर्व 153) and a few from the रामायण (e.g. घ्व0 p.63 रविसंक्रान्त, &c, which is अरण्य० 22. 13). The महाभारत is more of a धर्मशास्त्र than a काव्य, though, as the work itself asserts in no mood of vanity, it has inspired many poets ('इतिहासोत्तमादस्माज्जायन्ते कविबुद्धयः' आदिपर्व II. 385 and 'इदं कविवर: सर्वैराख्यानमुपजीव्यते' आदि. II. 389). The रामायण is truly a kavya in its main purpose, its form and contents. It abounds in elaborate descriptions and flights of fancy. For example, the highly poetical description of the sea (हसन्तमिव फेनौघैर्नत्यन्तमिव चोर्मिभि:) in the युद्धकाण्ड (4.110 f), the imaginative description of the sky in सुन्दरकाण्ड (57.1-4) and the elaborate रूपक in अयोध्याकाण्ड (69. 28 ff) may be referred to in this connection. The TET ( I. 68 ) advises the authors of dramas to draw upon the रामायण and the बृहत्कथा for their plots. The quotation 'अक्ररो ददते मणिम्' in the निरुक ( II. 2) seems to be taken from some secular poetic work. The sutra of Panini (अधिकृत्य कृते IV. 387 ) and the following sutra indicate the existence of secular works before Panini's day which may have been poetic. नमिसाधु on रुद्रट (II. 8) tells us that पाणिनि wrote a . महाकाव्य called पातालविजय and then quotes one verse and a portion of another from that work. राजशेखर attributes the composition of the kavya जम्बवतीजय to the grammarian पाणिनि (Peterson's 4th Report LXXVI ). The सुवृत्ततिलक (III. 30) says that पाणिनि excelled in the composition of the उपजाति metre. Many verses ascribed to पाणिनि in the anthologies (vide Peterson's preface to सुभाषितावलि p. 58 and JRAS 1891 pp. 311-316 ) out of which the verse उपोढरागेण occurs in the व्वo ( p. 35, without name ) and the verse ऐन्द्रं धनुः in काव्या- सू. of वामन (IV.3. 27). Whetber पाणिनि the grammarian and the poet पाणिनि are identical is rather doubtful. A vartika on अधिकृत्य कृते अन्थे (viz. लुबाख्यायिकाभ्यो बहुलम्) shows that the class of composition known as आख्यायिका existed long before पतञ्ञलि. The latter

II. 2 Early Poetry. INTRODUCTION. CXXXVII

speaks of a kavya composed by वररुचि (यत्तेन कृतं न च तेन प्रोक्तं वाररुचं काव्यं' महाभाष्य vol. II. p. 315). पतञ्जलि, while commenting on the वार्तिक 'लुबाख्यायिकाभ्यो बहुलम्' mentions by name three works of the आख्यायिका class, viz. दासवदत्ता, सुमनोत्तरा and भैमरथी (महाभाष्य vol. II. p. 313; see also p. 284 ). He refers to two works dealing with the death of Kamsa and the humiliation of Bali and dramatic representations of these themes ( vol II. 34 and p. 36 'ये तावदेते शोभनिका नामैते प्रत्यक्ष कंसं घातयन्ति प्रत्यक्षं च बलिं बन्धय- ana' ). In another passage he makes a reference to the wives of actors 'नटानां स्त्रियो रङगं गता यो यः पृच्छति कस्य यूयं कस्य यूयमिति तं तं तव तवेत्याहुः' (vol III. p. 7). The महाभाष्य contains many quotations from the works of poets that went before it, some of which possess poetic charm, e. g. 'असिद्वितीयोनुससार पाण्डवम्' and 'संङ्कर्षणद्वितीयस्य बलं कृष्णस्य वर्धताम्' (vol I. p. 426); जघान कंसं किल वासुदेव: (vol II. p. 119); जनार्दनस्त्वात्मचतुर्थ एव (vol. III p.143); प्रियां मयूरः प्रतिनर्नृतीति and यद्वत्त्वं नरवर नर्नृतीषि हृष्टः ( vol III. p. 338); पति जीवन्तमानन्दो नरं वर्षशतादपि (vol I. p.277); वरतनु संप्रवदन्ति कुक्कुटा: ( vol I. p. 238 ). The verse एति etc. occurs in the युद्धकाण्ड (128.2 where it is called लौकिकीगाथा). The preceding brief discussion shows that from at least 500 B. C. to 100 B. C. a great deal of poetical material of a secular character had been accumulated in classical Sanskrit. This must have naturally led to speculations about the functions and objects of poetry, the classifications of different kinds of poetry, the enunciation of rules about the standard form of certain classes of composition, in short, to attempts, more or less crude, to establish a theory of Poetics and literary criticism. From this time forward the two processes, viz composition of poetry and the elaboration of rules, must have proceeded hand in hand. 3 Early beginnings of Poetics. Epigraphic records of the 2nd century A. C. and onwards show that before that period a theory of Poetics had been evolved. Vide on this part of the subject and in general for the development of Poetics my articles in I. A. for 1912 pp 124 ff and p. 204 and on the epigraphic material Buhler's essay 'Die Indische Inschriften etc.' ( translated by Prof. Ghate in I. A. for 1913 pp. 29, 137, 172, 188, 230, 243 ). The Inscription of GTHT at Junagad ( dated 150 A. C.) sheds very great light on the stage Poetics had reached by that time. Vide ASWI vol. II p. 128 and E. I. vol. VIII. p. 36 for the

CXXXVIII SAHITYADARPANA. II. 3 Beginnings of Poetics .. inscription. The preserved portion contains only two verbs, it is written in prose with long compounds, it is full of alliteration and other tricks with words. A brief quotation will convey an idea of the nature of the inscription 'aa- क्षत्राविष्कृतवीरशब्दजातोत्सेकाविधेयानां यौधेयानां प्रसह्योत्सादकेन ... शब्दार्थगान्ध- वन्यायाद्यानां विद्यानां महतीनां पारणधारणविज्ञानप्रयोगावाप्तविपुलकीर्तिना ... स्फुटल घुमधुरचित्रकान्तशब्दसमयोदारालङ्कतगद्यपद्य ... स्वयमधिगतमहाक्षत्रपना- स्ा नरेन्द्र कन्यास्वयंवरानेकमाल्यप्राप्तदान्ना महाक्षत्रपेण रुद्रदाम्ना This shows that in or before the second century arar had been divided into ne and qu, that some of the gunas that figure in later works had been already named (vide स्फुट, मधुर, कान्त, उदार, which correspond to प्रसाद, माधुर्य, कान्ति and उदारता of the काव्यादर्श), both गद्य and पद्य were required to be अलङ्कत (that is 'possessed of figures of speech' ). The composer of this inscription was evidently trying to come up to the standard of a good poet laid down in the works on Poetics of his day and therefore this inscription represents a mediocre attempt at what a kavya was in those days required to be. The Nasik Inscription of Siri Pulumayi, which is somewhat earlier than that of रुद्रदामन, though in Prakrit, exhibits the same traits (Bombay Gazetteer vol. 16 p. 550). It is full of compounds and contains similar efforts at alliteration. An inscription of the 4th century A. C. contains a panegyric of the great Emperor समुद्रगुप्त by हरिषेण ( vide Fleet's Gupta inscriptions, No. 1 p. 8). The prose of this yaTfia rivals the style of Bana. This प्रशस्ति tells us that 'the title कविराज had been applied to agaa on account of the composition of many kavyas that were the source of inspiration to learned men'. A brief quotation will be helpful 'कृपणदीना- नाथातुरजनोद्धरणसमत्रदीक्षाद्युपगतमनसः समिद्धस्य विग्रहवतो लोकानुग्रहस्य धन- दवरुणेन्द्रान्तकसमस्य स्वभुजबलविजितानेकनरपतिविभवप्रत्यर्पणनित्यव्यापृतायुक्तपुरुषस्य निशितविदग्धमतिगान्वर्वललितैव्रीं डितत्रिदशपतिगुरुतुम्बुरुना रदादेर्विद्वजनोपजीव्यानेक काव्यक्रियाभि: प्रतिष्ठितकविराजशब्दुस्य etc.' These inscriptions there- fore show that long before the 2nd or 4th century, Poetics had made a good deal of progress. There are indications of great antiquity that point in the same direction. The faa- vg ( III. 13) collects together several phrases from the Rigveda and calls them उपमाः (such as इदमिव, इदं यथा, तद्त् &c). The fremf, while commenting on this part of the faaug, cites a very scientific definition of उपमा from गार्ग्य a predecessor of यास्त and remarks that in the Rigveda a superior object is sometimes

II. 3 Beginnings of Poetics, INTRODUCTION. CXXXIX

compared with an inferior one ( though the general rule is that the 3HI is superior to or more well-known than the उपमेय) 'अथात उपमा यदतत्तत्सदृशमिति गार्ग्यस्तदासां कर्म ज्वायसा वा गुणेन प्रख्याततमेन वा कनीयांस वाप्रख्यातं वोपमिमीतेथापि कनीयसा ज्यायांसम् (III. 13). The निरुक्त then cites Rig. X.4. 6 (तनूत्यजेव तस्करा वनगू &C, where the arms are compared to desperate thieves ) and Rig. X. 40. 2 (कुह स्विद्दोषा कुह वस्तोरश्विना dc, where the As'vins are compared to the levir having intercourse with his brother's widow ). rt4 foreshadows the later distinction between quft and लुप्ता simile in the words 'लुप्तोपमान्यर्थोपमानीत्याचक्षते' (निरुक्त III. 18). A complete Upama has four constituent elements, 3qHra, उपमेय (or उपमित), the common property (सामान्य) and the word expresive of the relation ( such as इव, तुल्य &c). Long before Panini these technical words had become fixed in the language. The following sutras will make this clear 'उपमानानि सामान्यवचनैः and उपमितं व्याघ्रादिभि: सामान्याप्रयोगे' ( पा. II. 1. 55-56); 'तुल्यार्थेर- तुलोपमाभ्यां तृतीयान्यतरस्याम्' पा. II. 3. 72. Panini refers to the Natasutras composed by S'ilalin and कृशाश्व (पाराशर्यशिलालिभ्यां भिक्षुनटसूत्रयोः' and 'कर्मन्दकृशाश्वादिनिः' IV. 3. 110-111). There is nothing left to show what these contained, but if they were to deserve the high-sounding designation of a sutra, it is not unlikely that they gave ( however crudely ) instruction as to what the business of an actor was, how he could work upon the emotions of the audience ( i. e. in short some theory of rasa ). The Vedāntasūtras name two alankāras viz. 34H and रूपक ('अत एव चोपमा सूर्यकादिवत्' III. 2. 18 and 'आनुमानिकमप्येकेषां शरीररूपकविन्यस्तगृहीतेर्दर्शयति च' I. 4. 1). The बुद्धचरित of अश्वघोष ( not later than 3rd cen., as it was translated into Chinese about 414-421 A. C.) was composed at a time, when some theory of poetics had already been in vogue. Each canto has at the end a verse or verses in a different metre. The author is very much after alliteration ( I. 14, 15; V. 26 ), employs such a frightful jingle as हरितुरगतुरङ्गवत्तरङ्ग: ( V. 87) and is very fond of यथासंख्य ( V.42 and IX. 16). He uses the technical words हाव and भाव (भावज्ञानेन हावेन चातुर्याद्ूपसम्पदा।' IV. 12). Vide नाट्य० 20. 8-10 for भाव and हाद. It was shown above ( p. XI.) that the ना्यशास्त्र must have been composed not later than 300 A. C. It contains a full exposition of the rasa theory, of dramaturgy and of four figures of speech and gunas. Subandhu in his वासवदत्ता alludes in various places to topics of Poetics. He boasts of his skill in weaving a web of puns on

CXL SAHITYADARPANA. IL. 3 Beginnings of Poetics.

each syllable ( प्रत्यक्षरश्ेषमय प्रबन्धविन्यासवैदग्ध्यनिधिर्निबन्धम्), speaks of anlfer, of the soul of poetry, of the composition of an excellent poet in which the expletives a and f do not occur and which is divided into long sections and contains Vaktra metre (अग्रहेणापि काव्यजीवज्ञेन' p.129, 'सत्कविकाव्यबन्ध इवानवबद्धतुहिनिपातः' p.158, 'दीरघों- च्छासरचनाकुल सुश्रेषवक्त्रघटनापट सत्काव्यविरचनमिव' p. 238, S'rirangam ed.). He speeks of शुङ्धलाबन्ध, उत्प्रेक्षा and आक्षेप (p. 146). बाण speaks of such puzzles as अक्षरच्युतक, मात्राच्युतक, बिन्दुमती, प्रहेलिका &c, he knew the difference made between कथा and आख्यायिका (उच्छासान्तेप्यखिन्नास्ते येषां वक्त्रे सरस्वती। कथमाख्यायिकाकारा dc, in हर्षचरित), he speaks of श्रेष, उत्प्रेक्षा, उपमा, दीपक, जाति (हरन्ति कं नोज्ज्वलदीपकोपमै: &c. in कादम्बरी and क्रेषप्रायमुदीच्येषु in the हर्षचरित), he extols a prince as the source or fountain of the ambrosial rasas of kavyas ( 'आगमः काव्यामृतरसानाम्' कादम्बरी 1st para). Thus by 600 A. C., we find that numerous figures had been defined, rules had been laid down for the guidance of poets and various classes of composition such as कथा and आख्यायिका had distinctive forms. Works dealing with Poetics are extant that were composed about the time of Bana (such as those of भामइ and दण्डी). 4 The name of the S'astra. The earlier works on Poetics are generally designated Kāvyālankāra, e. g. the works of भामह, वामन and रुद्रट. These works were so called probably because alankaras played the most prominent part in the treatment of Poetics in them ( following the maxim प्राधान्येन व्यपदेशा भवन्ति). वामन in his काव्या. सू. tells us that the word aETT is used in two senses viz. ( I ) a thing of beauty and (II) a figure of speech (अलड्क्रियते अनेन). According to him it follows that a work on Poeties is called काव्यालद्कार because it points out and explains the things of beauty in a kavya, which make us prize the latter 'काव्यं ग्राह्ममलङ्कारात्। सौन्दर्यमलङ्कारः। काव्या. सू. I. 1. 1-2 (वृत्ति-अलङ्कतिरलङ्गारः । करणव्युत्पत्त्या पुनरलक्कारशब्दोयमुपमा - दिषु वर्तते।). The कामधेनु remarks योयमलक्कारः काव्यग्रहणहेतुत्वेन उपन्यस्यते तद्व्युत्पादकत्वाच्छास्त्रमपि अलङ्गारनाम्ना व्यपदिश्यत इति शास्त्रस्यालङ्कारत्वेन प्रसि- द्विः प्रतिष्ठिता स्यादिति सूचयितुमयं विन्यास: कृतः काव्यं ग्राह्यमलङ्कारादिति. This is more or less scholastic. Even in those early works that are not designated as agTr, figures of speech loom very large as in the काव्यादर्श of Dandin, three fourths of which are taken up by the explanation and elucidation of figures of speech ( of s'abda and artha ). Another name for Poetics is Sahitya. This word seems to have been used

II. 4 Name of शास्त्र. INTRODUCTION. CXLI

in early works in three different but allied senses, though in modern times it is generally employed for Poetics. In the verse साहित्यसक्गीतकलाविहीन: the word साहित्य appears to have been used in the sense of काव्य. In the verse साहित्यपाथो- निधिमन्थनोत्थं कर्णामृतं रक्षत हे कवीन्द्रा: (बिह्नण's विक्रमाङ्कदेवचरित I.11), it will be noticed that साहित्य means 'literature in general' and kavya is said to arise like nectar from the ocean of साहित्य (i. e. काव्य is the quintessence of साहित्य). प्रतीहारेन्दुराज in eulogising his teacher zes and his proficiency in the मीमांसा and other s'astras speaks of him as 'साहित्यश्रीमुरारेः'. Here obviously the word साहित्य stands for साहित्यशास्त्र ( as in the case of मीमांसा, व्याकरण and तर्क that precede the word साहित्य- श्रीमुरारे:). मुकुल in the explanation of the karika (पदवाक्यप्रमाणेषु तदेतत्प्रतिबिम्बितम्। यो योजयति साहित्ये तस्य वाणी प्रसीदति॥' अभिधावृत्तिop. 21) remarks 'व्याकरणमीमांसातर्कसाहित्यात्मकेषु चतुर्षु शास्त्रेषूपयोगात्'. राजशेखर (काव्यमी. p. 4) says 'पञ्चमी साहित्यविद्येति यायावरीयः । सा हि चतसृणा- मपि विद्यानां निष्यन्दः।'. मङ्गक says 'विना न साहित्यविदाऽपरत्र गुणः कथ- श्वित्प्रथते कवीनाम्।' (श्रीकण्ठचरित II. 12). These passages establish that sometime before 900 A. C. (when राजशेखर flourished) the word साहित्य came to be used in the sense of 'the science of Poetics'. How much earlier it was employed in that sense it is difficult to say. The word साहित्य seems to be derived from सहित (meaning 'together'). When poetry came to be defined as 'शब्दाथौं सहिता काव्यं,' the science of poetic criticism that propounded this definition was naturally called साहित्य- राजशेखर gives this etymology 'शब्दार्थयोर्यथावत्सहभावेन विद्या साहित्यविद्या' (काव्यमी p. 5). Similarly the व्यक्तिविवेकटीका (P. 36) remarks 'न च काव्ये शास्त्रादिवदर्थप्रतीत्यर्थ शब्दमात्रं प्रयुज्यते सहितयोः शब्दार्थयोस्तत्र प्रयोगात। साहित्यं तुल्यकक्षत्वेनान्यूनातिरिक्तत्वम् ।'. भामह says 'शब्दार्थों सहितौ काव्यं' (I. 16) and the वक्रोक्तिजीवित (p.LXXX above ) does the same. The शिशुपालवध says 'शब्दार्थो सत्कविरिव द्वयं विद्वानपेक्षते' (II. 86 ).

Therefore the use of the word साहित्य arose probably after the 7th or 8th century.

5 The topics of the अलद्वारशास्त्र. The next question is to consider the problems with which the science of Poetics grapples. In part I when deseribing the contents of several works these topics have been more or less indicated as regards each individual work. Here all these topics will be brought together and their connection with each

CXLII SAHITYADARPANA. IL 5 Topics of arer.

other will be briefly pointed out. The first problem of Poetics is to declare what poetry can do for us and for the poet also (i. e. to enumerate the प्रयोजन of काव्य). Then the s'astra has to consider the essential qualities that consititute the equipment of a poet ( i. e. arauad has to be considered). A definition of kavya is attempted. In defining a kavya, reference is generally made to s'abda aud artha and one has also to say what constitutes the soul or the essence of kavya ( which makes ar what it is ). It is here ( about the soul of poetry) that the greatest divergence of view prevails. As s'abda and artha are necessary for kavya, the various powers of word and its relation to artha have to be discussed. This leads to the topic of the three वृत्तिs, अभिधा, लक्षणा and व्यज्ञना and their subdivisions and the three kinds of artha, arar, 3g and sr. The critic has to give the several divisions of kavya from different stand-points, viz. into na, yy and fa ( according to the external form ), into the best, mediocre and inferior kavyas according to the predominance or other- wise of the most essential things in a kavya, into ay and श्रव्य, into संस्कृत, प्राकृत etc. (according to the language employed) and so on. The division into Ey and gar opens up the vast field of dramaturgy. Certain gunas must always be present. As to their number ( 3, 10, 24 etc. ) great difference of opinion prevails. As allied to this subject of gunas, the various styles (ritis ) have to be considered. A kavya must be free from blemishes and therefore the doshas of pada, vakya, artha, rasa etc. have to be discussed. Lastly certain embellish- ments of kavya ( either of s'abda, artha or both ) are dealt with. Certain works on Poetics go beyond this and lay down practical rules ( as to the conventions to be observed by poets ) and give information of an encyclopaedic character ( e. g. about geography, about flora and fauna etc. ). It is by no means to be supposed that all or even many works on Poetics attempt the treatment of all these topics. The works on Poetics fall into several groups. (I) Some like the साहित्यदर्पण and the प्रतापरुद्रयशोभूषण traverse the whole field of Poetics ( including dramaturgy ). ' ( II ) Most of the well-known works on Poetics confine themselves to the topics indicated above except dramaturgy e. g. the oear, the काव्यालक्कारसूत्र of वामन, काव्यालक्कारs of भामद्द, रुद्रट and वाग्भट, the TT, TT4T etc. In the present essay also works

II. 5 Topics of शास्त्र. INTRODUCTION, CXLIII

on dramaturgy have not generally been considered except in a few cases ( where the rasa theory is concerned ). ( III) Some works treat of only dramaturgy and the theory of rasa, such as the नाट्यशास्त्र, the दशरूपक etc. (IV) Many works are concerned with alankuras alone e. g. अलङ्कारसारसंग्रह, अलङ्का- रसर्वस्व, कुवलयानन्द, च्चित्रमीमांसा etc. (V) A few are concerned with the exposition of some special theory of Poeties, vis. the ध्वन्यालोक on the ध्वनि school, the वक्रोक्तिजीवित, व्यक्तिविवेक. ( VI ) Some works deal only with the powers of word, viz. अभिधा etc. such as the अभिधावृत्तिमातृका, वृत्तिवार्तिक, शब्दव्यापारविचार. ( VII ) A few deal only with the theory of rasa ( without treating of dramaturgy ) such as the the शद्गारतिलक, the रसत- ₹fsuft. ( VIII ) several dilate upon only some special matters such as the रसमश्जरी (where नायिकाs and their subdivisions and other kindred topics are discussed ). 6 The function and purpose of Poetry ( काव्यप्रयोजन). Poetry is an art and its immediate purpose and aim is the giving of delight, of aesthetic pleasure. This has been recognised by Sanskrit critics from very ancient times. The नाट्यशास्त्र says that the dramatic art was promulgated by Bharata as a plea- sure-giving device for all people 'कीडनीयकमिच्छामो दृश्यं श्रव्यं च यद्दवेत्' and 'वेदविद्येति हासानामर्थानां परिकल्पनम्। विनोदकरणं लोके नाट्यमेतन्द्र- विष्यति॥' नाट्य. I. 11 and 86; 'तथापि श्रीतिरेव प्रधानं ... प्राधान्येनानन्द एवोक्त:' लोचन p.12 and 'प्रीत्यात्मा च रसस्तदेव नाट्यं नाट्य एव च वेद इत्यस्मदुपाध्यायः' लोचन p.149; 'सकलप्रयोजनमौलिभूतं समनन्तरमेव रसास्वाद- नसमुद्धू तं विगलितवेद्यान्तरमानन्दं' काव्यप्र. I. Several other purposes that are served by poetry are enumerated by the works on poetics. Some of them are benefits derived by the poet himself, while others are reaped by the reader. They are ( from the reader's point of view ); I solace; II instruction in knowledge of religion, of morality and philosophy ; III. proficiency in the arts and ways of the world. To the poet also poetry brings fame and wealth. The नाट्यशासत् says that to minds that are afflicted by the sorrows and worries of this world, नाट्य would bring relief and solace 'दुःखार्तानां समर्थानां शोकार्तानां तपस्विनाम्। विश्रान्तिजननं काले नाट्यमेतन्मया कृतम्।' (I. 80). भामह says 'धर्मार्थकाम- मोक्षेषु वैचक्षण्यं कलासु च। प्रीति करोति कीति च साधुकाव्यनिबन्धनम् ॥' I. 2; वामन says 'काव्यं सद्दृष्टादृष्टार्थ प्रीतिकीर्तिहेतुत्वात्' I.1.5; 'काव्यं यशसेर्थकृते व्यवहारविदे शिवेतरक्षतये। सद्यः परनिर्वृतये कान्तासंमिततयोपदेशयुजे॥' काव्यप्र. I; vide रुट्रट I. 4,8-13,21 and XII. 1 'ननु काव्येन क्रियते सरसानामवग- मश्चतुर्वगे। लघु मृदु च नीरसेभ्यस्ते हि त्रस्यन्ति शास्त्रेम्यः॥।'. Poetry, however,

CXLIV SÂHITYADARPAŅA. II. 6 काव्यप्रयोजन.

does not ( or should not ) directly teach religion, philosophy or morality, but only indireetly and impliedly as said by मम्मट 'कान्तेव सरसतापादनेनाभिमुखीकृत्य रामादिवद्वर्तितव्यं न रावणादिवदित्यु पदेश ... करोतीति.' Vide my notes on साहित्यद० p.4. Most of the works on Poetics more or less echo the words quoted above. 7 The equipment of the poet ( काव्यहेतु). Most of the writers on Poetics lay down that the things essential to the making of a true poet are three, sidur ( Imagination ), व्युत्पत्ति: (culture ) and अभ्यास ( constant practice). 'नैसर्गिकी च प्रतिभा श्रुतं च बहु निर्मलम्। अमन्दश्चाभियोगोस्याः कारणं काव्यसम्पदः॥।' काव्यादर्श I. 103; 'काव्यं तु जायते जातु कस्यच्वित्प्रतिभावतः । ... शब्दाभिधेये विज्ञाय कृत्वा तद्विदुपासनाम्। विलोक्यान्यनिबन्धांश्च कार्य: काव्यक्रियादरः॥' भामह I. 5 and 10; 'त्रितयमिदं व्याप्रियते शक्तिर्व्युत्पत्तिरभ्यासः ॥' रुद्रट I. 14; 'शकतिर्निपुणता लोकशास्त्रकाव्याद्यवेक्षणात्। काव्यज्ञशिक्षयाभ्यास इति हेतुस्तदुद्दवे ॥' काव्यप्र. I.3; vide also एकावली I. 12; वाग्भटालक्कार I. 3; अलक्कारशेखर (p.4). There were other writers who regarded pratibha as the sole equipment required for the making of a genuine poet. राजशेखर says 'सा (शक्ति:) केवलं काव्ये हेतुरिति यायावरीयः' (p.11); 'प्रतिभैव च कवीनां काव्यकरणकारणम्। व्युत्पत्त्यभ्यासौ तस्या एव संस्कारकारकौ न तु काव्यहेतू' अलक्कारतिलक of वाग्भट (p. 2); 'तस्य च कारणं कविगता केवला प्रतिभा' रसगङ्गाधर p.8. प्रतिभा is that power whereby the poet sees the subjects of his poem as steeped in beauty and gives to his readers in apt language a vivid picture of the beauty he has seen. It is a power whereby the poet not only calls up in his reader's heart the impressions of faded experiences, but whereby he presents ever new, wonderful and charming com- binations and relations of things never before experienced or thought of by the ordinary man. A poet is one who is a seer, a prophet, who sees visions and possesses the additional gift of conveying to others less fortunate through the medium of language the visions he has or the dreams he dreams. The following definitions of प्रतिभा will make this clear. 'प्रज्ञा नवनवोन्मेषशालिनी प्रतिभा मता ...... वर्णनानिपुणः कविः' भट्टतौत in काव्य- कौतुक (vide p.LXXVI above); 'प्रतिभा अपूर्ववस्तुनिर्माणक्षमा प्रज्ञा' and 'शक्तिः प्रतिभानं वर्णनीयवस्तुविषयनूतनोलेखशालित्वम्' लोचन pp. 29 and 137; 'अपारे काव्यसंसारे कविरेव प्रजापतिः। यथास्म रोचते विश्वं तथेदं परिवर्तते॥' (घ्य० p.222); 'प्रसन्नपदनव्यार्थयुकत्युद्वोधविधायिनी। स्फुरन्ती सत्कवेर्बुद्धि: प्रतिभा सर्वतोमुखी ॥।' वाग्मटालक्कार I. 4; vide also वामन's वृत्ति on I. 3. 16; रुद्रट I. 15-16; the prakrit verse 'अतहट्ठिए वि तहसंठिए व्व हिअअम्मि जा णिवेसेइ। अत्थविसेसे सा जअइ विकडकविगोअरा वाणी ॥' quoted in ध्व० P.236; राजशेखर p. 11. भट्टतौत ( p.LXXVI above) refers to this

II. 7 काष्यहतु. INTRODUCTION. OXLV

two-fold gift of the poet, of seeing visions of striking beauty ( विचित्र ... प्रख्या) and of conveying through appropriate language the visions he sees.

व्युत्पत्ति does not present much difficulty. There is theoreti- cally no subject which the poet may not handle and therefore a certain modicum of culture is necessary for him if he is to appeal to the hearts of his contemporaries and to future generations. The नाय्यशास्त्र says 'न तज्ज्ञानं न तच्छिल्पं न सा विद्या न सा कला। न तत्कर्म न वा योगो नाटके यन्न दृश्यते॥' 19. 117; 'छन्दोव्याकरण- कलालोकस्थितिपदपदार्थविज्ञानात्। युक्तायुक्तविवेको व्युत्पत्तिरियं समासेन ॥' रुद्रट I.18; काव्यमी. 5th chap; वाग्भटालङ्कार I. 5. On this subject of 'the making of the Sanskrit poet' vide Dr. Thomas in Bhandarkar commemoration vol. p. 375 ff. 8 The definition of poetry (काव्यलक्षण). Numerous definitions of kavya have been offered by several writers; many of these definitions are affected by the author's view about the soul of poetry. Some of the definitions are no more than mere descriptions. The definitions of a fewr writers, particularly early ones, treat शब्द and अर्थ as equally prominent, while others give more prominence to 4; some give a definition of TT which is more difficult than the thing to be defined ( such as that of विश्वनाथ 'वाक्यं रसात्मकं ar4 ). An attempt will be made to group together some of these definitions. The following lay equal emphasis on शब्द and अर्थ. 'शब्दार्थौ सहितौ काव्यं' (भामइ I. 16; vide also I. 11 and 13 for काव्य being निर्दोष and सालक्कार); 'ननु शब्दार्थौ काव्यं' रुद्रट III. 1; 'शब्दार्थौ सहितौ वक् etc.' वकोकिजीवित (p.LXXX above); 'तददोषौ शब्दार्थौं सगुणावनलक्कती पुनः क्वापि' मम्मट; 'गुणालङ्कारसहितौ शब्दार्थो दोषवर्जितौ। ... काव्यं काव्यविदो विदुः।।' प्रतापरुद्र०; 'शब्दार्थो निर्दोषौ सगुणौ प्रायः सालक्कारौ काव्यम्' काव्यानु० of वाग्भट p. 14; 'अदोषौ सगुणौ सालकारौ च शब्दार्थो काव्यम्' हेमचन्द्र p. 16; vide वामन's वृत्ति on I. 1. 1 Other writers lay more emphasis on शब्द 'तैः शरीरं च काव्यानामलङ्काराश्च दर्िता: 1 शरीर तावदिष्टार्थव्यवच्छिन्ना पदावली ॥' काव्यादर्श I. 10; 'इष्टार्थव्य वच्छिन्ना पदावली। काव्यं स्फुटदलक्कारं गुणवद्दोषवर्जितम् ॥' अगिपुराण; 336. 6-7; 'रमणीयार्थप्रतिपादक: शब्द: काव्यम्' रसगङ्गा० (p.4); vide also चन्द्रालोक ( I. 7 ). These latter definitions emphasize one of the aspects of poetry, viz that, though poetry employs the words of the current language, it differs from the everyday speech of people in the choice of words, in the diction that it employs which is chosen with an eye to beauty. But these definitions are

CXLVI SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 1I, 8. कान्यलक्षण.

very defeotive in one respeot. If, as Dandin says, words are the body of poetry, it may be asked ( to continue that metaphor ) :- what is the soul of Poetry ? To this question various answers have been given by several schools. The रस school of भरत made रस the soul of poetry ( dramatic ), while the school of आनन्दवर्धन (called the ध्वनि school ) extended the conception underlying the rasa theory and laid down that arsr is the soul of poetry. Some of the definitions dominated by the rasa school and cafa school are काव्यं रसादिमद्वाक्यं श्रुतं सुखविशेषकृत्' शौद्धोदनि in अलङ्कारशेखर (p. 2); 'वाक्यं रसात्मकं काव्यं' साहित्यदर्पण; 'निर्दोषं गुणवत्काव्यमलङ्कारैरलङ्कतम् । रसान्वितं कविः कुर्वन्कीर्ति प्रीति च विन्दति ॥' सरस्वती०. On account of the limi- tations of space imposed in this essay it is impossible to refer. to the criticisms passed on these definitions. Vide my notes to साहित्यदर्पण pp. 5-30 for some of them. In order to under- stand the relative positions of रस, ध्वनि, गुण, अलङ्गार, रीति in the theory of Poetics, the different schools must be enumerated and their doctrines briefly stated. The principal schools in chronological order are the rasa school, the alankara school the riti school, the dhvani school, the vakrokti school. Vide ta pp. 4-11 where the author refers to three schools, one totally denying the existence of af, the 2nd saying that what is called ध्वनि is included under भक्ति (i. e. लक्षणा ) and the third asserting that afa is not capable of scientific treatment but can only be experienced by the soul ( सहदयहृद- यसंवेद). In the first class (ध्वन्यभाववादिन:) again three sub- schools are pointed out slightly differing from each other (vide लोचन p.4). समुद्रबन्ध speaks of five schools in a some- what different manner 'इह विशिष्टौ शब्दार्थो काव्यम्। तयोश्च वैशिष्टयं धर्ममुखेन व्यापारमुखेन व्यञ्ञयमुखेन वेति त्रयः पक्षाः । आद्येप्यलङ्कारतो गुणतो वेति द्वैविध्यम्। द्वितीयेपि भणितिवैचित्र्येण भोगकृत्वेन वेति द्वैविध्यम्। इति पञ्नसु पक्षेष्वाद्य उद्भटादिभिरङ्गीकृतः, द्वितीयो वामनेन, तृतीयो वक्रोक्तिजीवितकारेण, चतुथों भट्टनायकेन, पञ्चम आनन्दवर्धनेन ।' ( p. 4). It is to be noted here that समुद्रबन्ध does not mention the rasa theory of भरत; while भट्टनायक is really an adherent of the rasa school, though his method of explaining it is peculiar ( vide p. LXXVII-VIII). He did not follow the afen in his treatment of the functions of words as explained above. Besides these, the view of महिमभट्ट that all ध्वनि is included under अनुमान stands by itself, but as he had no followers, he need not be considered as the founder of a school. Fary in his

II. 8 काव्यलक्षण. INTRODUCTION. CXLYII

famarf quotes two verses (p. 9) in which twelve different theories opposed to the dhvani theory are enumerated 'सात्पर्यशक्तिरमिधा लक्षणानुमिती दविा । अर्थापत्तिः क्चित्तन्रं समासोक्त्ाद्यलक्कतिः॥ रसस्य कार्यता भोगो व्यापारान्तरबाधनम्। द्वादशेत्यं ध्वनेरस्य स्थिता विप्रतिपत्तयः ॥', But he points out that, as said in the ध्वनिकारिका (काव्यस्यात्मा etc.), three theories opposed to that of tafa are pri- ncipal. Vide Prof. Sovani's learned paper in the Bhandarkar com. vol. p. 383 ff on the 'pre-dhvani schools of alankāra'. 9 The rasa school. This school, so for as the extant works go, was fonnded by the author of the erna and has reference to the dramatic art. The central pivot round which the whole rasa system revolves is the sutra 'विभावानुभावव्यभिचारिसंयोगाद्रसनिष्पत्तिः' which literally means 'rasa results from the combination of determinants, the consequents and the secondary or accessary moods ( with the permanent or dominant moods, the Rnfrnas )'. The correct interpretation of this sutra of ma and the detailed treatment of the theory of rasa has engrossed the best portion of numerous works and it is not possible to convey a complete idea in a few lines. Only a bare outline is attempted here. It has to be remembered that Poetry mainly appeals to human feelings and emotions and not to reason. The theory of rasa has a semi-physiological, semi-psychological basis and tries to explain how human feelings and emotions are worked upon by poetry. There are certain permanent or dominant moods of the human mind ( called enfrna ) which generally lie dormant but are roused when appropriate stimuli are applied ( just as reactions are produced in our body by the administration of appropriate drugs ). The stimuli in a dramatic representation are words and gestures ( af) while in a poem they are words alone. Just as a skilful painter produces the illusion of reality by means of a few colours, so the dramatist or the poet by words and gestures so rouses some of the dominant moods that for the moment the spectator or reader forgets himself and has aesthetic enjoyment of a particular kind. The resultant aesthetic enjoyment and pleasure are called rasa. The permanent or dominant moods that the drama or poetry may call forth are said to be eight (or nine ), रति (love), हास (gaiety), शोक, क्रोच, उत्साह ( energy or vigour). भय, जुगुप्सा (repugnance), विस्मय (some add the ninth शम ).

CXLVIIT SAHITYADARPAŅA. II. 9 रस school

Love manifests itself in relation to a man or woman i. e. it depends upon these and when the mood of love is to be roused it is furthered by such exciting causes as moonrise, spring, flowers, bowers &c. These two viz. the fundament- al determining elements of love ( man and woman ) and the exciting elements are called famas ( the former being called आलम्बनवि० and the latter उद्दीपनवि०). Such external manifestations as movements of the eye, glances &c. convey the working of the emotion of love and hence are called agrmq. There are many fleeting or secondary moods that are common to several dominant moods and serve the purpose of completely manifesting the permanent mood, such as निर्वेद (despondencey), ग्लानि (enni or fatigue) These two may help to completely manifest the permanent moods of रति and शोक. These are called व्यमिचारिभावs, The dominant moods रति, हास, शोक, when fully roused by means of appropriate विभावs, अनुभावs, and व्यभिचारिभावs attain to the condition of शुद्गार, हास्य and करुण rasas. It is to be noted that the dramatist does not put down any labels that in a particular composition there is arT or aau. He simply refers to the appropriate fnas (hero and heroine and exciting circumstances ), the ensuants ( such as glances ) and the accessary moods and leaves the spectator or reader to enjoy the aesthetic pleasure resulting from such description. It is therefore that the rasas are said to be only suggested ( and not expressed ). Conversely even if an author expressly said that there was warT or ara rasa in a particular piece, still there would be no aesthetic enjoyment of that rasa in case the appropriate elements were wanting. For a detailed description of the rasa theory in all its parts vide RTR (VI and VII chap), दशरूप (4th prakas'a), साहित्यदर्पण (III) and Rasatarangini. The eight rasas are शुद्गार, हास्य, करुण, रौद्र, वीर, भयानक, बीभत्स and अद्भत (vide नाट्य, VI.15). Some added a ninth rasa ( ana ). But ma and other writers on dramaturgy do not accept it as a rasa in नाट्य, 'शममपि केचिताङ: पुष्टिर्नास्येषु नैतस्य' दशरूप IV. 35. The reason is that the business of a drama is carried on by means of efrrr; the very environment of a dramatic representation is anta- goniatic to the स्थायिभाव शम (tranquility), but a kavya which is to be read in a quiet and secluded place may very fitly develope nT rasa as in the HETHRa. Vide

II. 9 रस school. INTRODUCTION. CXLIX

स्व. pp. 176 and 238. रुद्रट added a tenth rasa called प्रेयान् (XII. 3), while the रसतरङ्विणी (6th तरङ) answers the objection of some that वात्सल्य, लौल्य, भक्ति and कार्पण्य should be regarded as additional rasas by saying that they are included in the others. Similarly the रसरलहार of शिवराम ( on verse 5) says that the rasas भक्ति, वात्सल्य and श्रद्धा put forward by some are included in the nine rasas or the bhavas. Rasa is so called because it is a mental state and is pleasure to be simply aesthetically enjoyed ( 'rH- नाद्रसत्वेमवा' as रुद्रट says in XII. 4 or 'विभावानुभावसात्त्विकव्यभिचा रिभावैरुपनीयमान: परिपूर्णः स्थायिभावो रस्यमानो रसः' रसतरङ्गिणी VI; नाट्य० VI. 34. For विभावs vide नाट्य VII. 4 'वहवोर्था विभाव्यन्ते वागङ्गाभिनयाश्रयाः । अनेन यस्मात्तेनायं विभाव इति संज्ञितः ॥'; 'व्ायमानतया तत्र विभावो भावपोषकृत्। आलम्बनोद्दीपनत्वप्रमेदेन स च दिया॥' दशरूप IV. 2; 'विशेषेण भावयन्त्युत्पादयन्ति ये रसांस्ते विभावाः१' रसतर० II. Why स्थायिभाव is so called is explained as 'यथा नराणां नृपतिः शिष्याणां च यथा गुरुः। एवं हि सर्वभावानां भाव: स्थायी महानिह ॥I' नाय्य. VII. 8; 'विरुद्धैर- विरुद्वैवा भावैर्विच्छिद्यते न यः । आत्मभावं नयत्यन्यान्स स्थायी लवणाकरः ॥' दशरूप IV. 34; 'चरमसमयपर्यन्तस्थायित्वादस्य स्थायित्वव्यपदेशः' रसतर. I. अनुभाव are defined as 'अनुभावो विकारस्तु भावसंसूचनात्मकः ।' दशरूप VII. 3 on which धनिक says 'स्थायिभावाननुभावयतः सामाजिकान् सभ्रविक्षेपकटाक्षादयो रसपोषकारिणोऽनुभावाः' Eight of the अनुभावs are also called सात्त्विकमावS 'पृथग्भावा भवन्त्यन्येऽनुभावत्वेपि सात्त्विकाः। सत्वादेव समुत्पत्तेस्तच्च तन्द्रावभावनम्। स्तम्भप्रलयरोमाञ्चाः स्वेदो वैवर्ण्यवेषथू।। अश्रु वैस्वर्यमित्यष्टौ स्तम्भोसिमन् निष्क्रियाङ्ता । प्रलयो नष्टसंज्ञत्वं शेषा: सुव्यक्तलक्षणाः॥।' दशरूप IV. 4-6. There is a difference of opinion as to why they are called सात्त्विकभावs. According to दशरूप, सत्त्व means 'a sympa- thetic heart' and सात्त्विक means 'सत्त्वेन निर्वृत्त'; vide साहित्यदर्पण 1II. 134 for a similar view; but the रसतर० IV says 'सत्वं जीवशरीरं तस्य धर्माः सात्त्विकाः । इत्थं च शारीरभावाः स्तम्भादयः सात्त्विका भावा इत्यमिचीयन्ते।' There are thirty-three व्यभिचारिभावs, such as निर्वेद, ग्लानि, शङ्का etc. for which see नाय्य VI. 18-21 and साहित्यद० III. 141. They are so called as 'विविधमाभिमुख्येन रसेषु चरन्तीति' नाट्य० p. 72; 'विशेषादाभिमुख्येन चरन्तो व्यभिचारिणः । स्थायिन्युन्मन्ननिर्मझाः कलोला इव बारिधौ ॥' दशरूप IV. 7. The eight स्थायिभावs, the व्यमिचारिभावड and the सात्त्विकमाव constitute 49 भाव 'नानाभिनयसम्बद्धान्भावयन्ति रसानिमान्। यस्मात्तस्मादमी भावा विज्ञेया नाट्ययोक्तृभिः॥ न भावहीनोस्ति रसो न भावो रसवर्जितः । परस्परकृता सिद्धिस्तयोरमिनये भवेत ॥ व्यअ्नौषधिसंयोगो यथान्नं खादुतां नयेत। एवं भावा रसाश्चैव भावयन्ति परस्परम्।।' नाय्य. IV. 35-37. There is divergence of opinion between लोलट, शङ्डक, नायक and अभिनवगुम्त as to the exact mode in which the enjoyment

SAHITYADARPAŅA. IL. 9 ra school.

of rasa is brought about. Most later writers follow अभिनवगुप. Briefly put Lollata's view is as follows. Rasa in the primary sense belongs to the hero, Rama etc. ( i. e. Rāma loves Sītā and the dramatist describes this love in appropriate words ). The spectator ascribes to the actor, on account of the latter's clever acting, the same mental attitude that belonged to Rama and the spectator's apprehension of imputed love in the actor brings to him delight. This is the meaning of the words विभावा ... रसनिष्पत्तिः This view does not treat of rasa as a matter of the spectator's feelings or emotions. ga thinks that rasa is a matter of inference. The actor who has been well trained in the art of gesticulation cleverly simulates the actions of real heroes and the spectator for the moment apprehends the actor as non-different from the real hero and infers love ( of Rama etc.) from the अनुभावs, व्यभिचारिभावड presented by the actor and mentally contemplates such love and relishes it. Here rasa is no doubt spoken of in relation to the spectator; but it is said to be a matter of inference due to clever imitation (अनुकरणरूपो रसः). For the view of भट्टनायक ( vide above LXXVII). भट्टनायक denies that rasa is a matter of inference; nor does he accept the view that rasa is manifested as something relished by the spectator. He looks upon रसास्वाद as in the same category with परब्रह्मसाक्षात्कार As परबह् is आनन्दमय, so is the apprehension of rasa. अभिनवगुप्त holds the view that rasa is अभिव्यक्त (and not कार्य nor ज्ञाप्य). He does not accept the two functions of भटटनायक (other than afrer ). He thinks that love and other moods are dormant in the minds of spectators, are roused by the stimulus of faas øtc. and reach the state of rasa. Vide atSTETRT (IV ) for a detailed statement of these views and लोचन (pp. 24, 56). भरत's view that ta is the soul of poetry was accepted by aaug in the एुद्धारतिलक, by the अग्निपुराण ('वाग्वैदग्ध्यप्रधानेपि रस एवात्र जीवितम्' chap.336.33); काव्यमी० p.6 (रस आत्मा), by शौद्धोदनि (अलङ्कारस्तु शोभायै रस आत्मा परे मनः।' अलङ्कारशेखर p. 6). 10 The alankâra school. The foremost representatives of this school are भामह and उद्ट; दण्डी, रुद्रट and प्रतीहारेन्दुराज belong to this school. It is not to be supposed that they were nnaware of the theory of rasa. For example arg says that a mahakavya should contain the rasas 'युक्तं लोकस्वमानेन रसैश् सकलैः पृथक्' (I.21); 'रसवदशितस्पष्टयद्गारादिरसं यथा' (III.6). Similarly उद्ट defines रसवत् as 'रसवद्दर्शितस्पष्टश द्ारादिरसादयम्। स्वशब्दस्वायिसज्वारि-

II. 10 अलद्वार school INTRODUCTION.

विभावाभिनयास्पदम् II' (IV), in which he refers to the technical terms स्थायिभाव, विभाव, सव्जारि(or व्यमिचारि) भाव and in the next verse names the nine rasas. दण्डी also defines रसवत् and ऊर्जस्वि and says 'मधुरं रसवद्वात्चि वस्तुन्यपि रसस्थितिः ।' (I. 51) and कामं सर्वोप्यलक्कारः रसमर्ये निषिन्चति' (I. 62). He is quite aware of the eight rasas and their स्थायिभाव 'इह त्वष्टरसायत्ता रसवत्ता स्मृता गिराम्' (II.292); 'प्राकू प्रीतिर्दर्शिता सेयं रतिः शङ्गारतां गता' (II. 281); vide also काव्या० II. 283, 285, 287. रुद्रट says 'तस्मात्तत्कर्तव्यं यलेन महीयसा रसैर्युक्तम्' (XII. 2). These writers were well aware of the theory of rasa, but they had not found out how to apply it to kāvya in general. To them alankaras seemed to be the most impor- tant part in kavyas, so much so that they made rasas subordi- nate to alankaras and defined such figures as रसवत् etc. भामह and दण्डी hardly made any distinction between अलक्कारs and gunas. भामह regards the figure भाविक as a guna ('भाविकत्वमिति प्राहुः प्रबन्धविषयं गुणं' III 52); while दण्डी regards the ten गुणs as alankaras (काव्यशोभाकरान् धर्मानलक्कारान् प्रचक्षते। ... काश्चिन्मार्ग- विभागार्थमुक्ता: प्रागप्यलड्कियाः। II. 1 and 3). The अलं. स. (p.3 and p. 7) says 'इह तावन्वामहोन्द्रट प्रभृतय श्चिरन्तनालक्कारकाराः प्रतीयमानमर्थ वाच्योपस्कारकतयालक्कारपक्षनिक्षिप्तं मन्यन्ते। ... उद्भ्टादिभिस्तु गुणालद्काराणां प्रायशः साम्यमेव सूच्चितम्। ... तदेवमलङ्कारा एव काव्ये प्रधानमिति प्राच्यानां मतम्।'. The तरळ says 'अभाव एव ध्वनेरिति भामहप्रभृतयो मन्यन्ते' (p. 24). This may lead one to think that भामह is ध्वन्यभाववादिन्. But tais is not entirely correct. भामह, दण्डी and others were no doubt not aware of the theory that प्रतीयमान sense is the soul of poetry and they do not employ the words ध्वनि, गुणीभूतव्यज्ञ in their works. But they do refer to प्रतीयमान sense. In their definition of अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, समासोक्ति, आक्षेप, they included a good deal of प्रतीयमान sense (i. e. गुणीभूतव्यंम्य of ध्व.) e. g. 'यत्रोक्ते गम्यतेन्योर्थस्तत्समानविशेषणः । सा समासोक्तिः' (भामह II. 79). All the rest of ध्वनि they would have included under the figure पर्यायोक्त. Vide रसगङ्गा pp. 414-415. Though भामह and दण्डी did not speak of ध्वनि (or 45T ) as the pervading element of poetry, they spoke of वक्रोक्ति or अतिशयोक्ति as all important and as lying at the root of all figures; vide भामह II. 85 (सैषा सवैंव quoted above) and 'अलक्कारान्तराणामप्येकमाङ्ड: परायणम्। वागीशमहितामुक्तिमिमा मतिशयाहयाम् ।।' काव्या. II. 220. For भामह's meaning of वक्रोक्ति vide section 12 below. रुद्ट defined a figure भाव (vide p. LIV above), in which there is some वस्तु (matter of fact ) that is व्यज्. He cites an example of implied उत्पेक्षा (IX. 13). Therefore he

CLII SAHITYADARPANA. II. 10 अलद्दार school.

also was not unaware of ar sense. The prominence given to alankaras by avet and ang persisted, though in a lesser degree, even in later times. Even though arge is a thorough- going follower of the eta, his treatment of alankaras is longer than that of any other topic in his work. The number of alankaras separately named by various writers exceeds two hundred. Vide I. A. 1912 p. 206-208 . for further information about alankaras. 11 The Riti school. Vamana is the foremost representa- tive of this school. ausi also devotes considerable space to the ritis and most later writers on alankaras have to say something about them. an in his own way made a distinction between gunas and alankāras ( vide p. XLVIII): Vamana speaks of ten gunas of word and the same ten gunas of sense, viz ओज:, प्रसाद, श्रेष, समता, समाधि, माधुर्य, सौकुमार्य, उदारता, अर्थव्यक्ति, कान्ति. दण्डी mentions ten gunas under the same names, but makes no difference between gunas of word and those of sense. The doctrine of gunas was an ancient one. It was shown above that the inscription of रुद्रदामन् (150 A.C.) refers to some gunas such as माधुर्य, कान्ति, उदारता. The नाव्यशास्त्र (16. 92) enumerates ten gunas of काव्यार्थ 'ऋ्ेषः प्रसादः समता समाधिर्माधुर्यमोज: पदसौकुमार्यम्। अर्थस्य च व्यक्तिरु- दारता च कान्तिश्च काव्यार्थगुणा दशैते II'. It will be noticed that the names are the same as those of दण्डी and वामन. In the HIEFTTa gunas and alankaras occupy a subordinate position ( 16. 104 ). They are described in the 16th chap. along with 26 other ornaments of poetry; while rasa occupies the most prominent place in the नाव्यशास्त्र. दण्डी gives them great prominence ( I. 40-101 ) and the treatment of gunas and alankaras takes up almost the whole of his work. avei's work, however, assigns the most prominent place to alankaras of s'abda and artha and makes no distinction between gunas and alankāras ( vide p. CLI); while arHa differen- tiates between them. aver thinks that the ten gunas are the essence of the vaidarbha style (ar or fa), while the gaudi style generally presents the opposites of the ten gunas (except अर्थव्यक्ति, उदारता and समाधि, which are required by partisans of both styles). 'इति वैदर्भमार्गस्य प्राणा दश गुणाः स्मृताः1 एषां विपर्ययः प्रायो दृश्यते गौडवर्त्मनि॥ (काव्या. I. 42); vide I. 75, 76, 100. He speaks of the guna समाधि (अन्यवर्मस्ततोन्यत्र लोकसीमानुरोधिना। सम्यगाधीयते यत्र स समाधि: स्मृतो यथा॥ कुमुदानि निमीलन्ति

II. 11 रीति school. INTRODUCTION. CLIII

etc. ) as the all-in-all of poetry. But this does not mean that aarfa was the soul of poetry according to him. The words are more or less rhetorical. afua boldly asserts that riti is the soul of poetry, that riti consists in the special arrangement or combination of words and that the specialty lies in the possession of gunas ( रीतिरात्मा काव्यस्य । विशिष्टा पदरचना रीतिः। विशेषो गुणात्मा । काव्या सू. I. 2. 6-8). He speaks of three ritis वैदभी, गौडीया and पाश्ाली and says that the वैदर्भी style is endowed with all the ten gunas while the Gaudiya specially affects ओज: and कान्ति and पाञ्ाली is specially characterised by माघुर्य and सौकुमायं (I. 2.11-13). He cites 'गाहन्तां महिषा' (शाकुन्तल II. 6), 'दौर्दण्डाञ्चित० (महावीरचरित I. 54) and ग्मेऽस्मिन्पथिकाय (अमरु० 131) as respectively the examples of the three styles. He clearly explains why the styles were so named ( 'विदर्भादिषु दृष्टत्वात्तत्समाख्या' काव्या. सू. I.2.10 'विदर्भगौडपाञ्जाळेषु देशेषु तत्रत्यः कविमिर्यथास्वरूपमुपलब्धत्वा- देशसमाख्या। न पुनर्देशैः किञ्चिदुपत्रियते काव्यानाम्' वृत्ति). It must be observed that there is considerable difference between the definitions of the various gunas given by the नाट्यo, दण्डी and arH, though there is agreement in some. For want of space it is not possible to go into details. To take one or two ex- amples: ओज: is defined by the नाट्य (16.99) as 'समासवद्धिर्विविधै- र्विच्चित्रैश्च पदैर्युतम्। सा तु स्वरै (सानुस्वरै?) रुदारैश्च तदोज: परिकीर्त्यते ॥' and by दण्डी as 'ओजः समासभूयस्त्वम्'; while वामन defines as 'गाढबन्धत्वमोजः (III. 1.5) and 'अर्थस्य प्रौढिरोज :. समाधि is defined by the नाट्य० as अभियुक्तर्विशेषस्तु योर्थस्यैवोपलभ्यते। तेन चार्येन सम्पन्नः समाधि: परिकीर्त्यते॥ (16. 97 ), but वामन defines it as 'आरोहावरोहकमः समाधिः (III. 1. 12) and 'अर्थदृष्टिः समाधि:' (III. 2. 6); for दण्डी, vide above. The alankara school looked upon alankaras, which are really of secondary importance and without which kavya can very well exist, as very important. The riti school marks a very real advance over the alankara school. Though it did not reach the real essence of poetry, it approached very near it. Instead of looking upon mere alankaras as the essonce of poetry, it looked upon the gunas as the essence. The riti school was not yet quite aware of that to which the gunas belonged. It is therefore that the अ्वनिकारिका (III. 52) says about the riti school 'अस्फुटस्फुरितं &c' (vide p. XLIX above). वामन included in his वक्रोक्ति (defined as सादृश्यालक्षणा) all अविवक्षितवाच्य ध्वनि and he seems to have found room for rasas in the guna arfa 'दीसरसत्वं कान्तिः' काव्या. सू. III. 2. 14). Gunas really belong to rasa &e, the soul of poetry. The tqo points out that argi is a

CLIV SAHITYADARPAŅA. II. 11 ffar school.

special characteristic of FR, that it reaches the highest pitch in विपळम्भरद्गार and करुण, that ओज: is found specially where रौद्र, वीर and अद्धत prevail and that प्रसाद is a guna common to all r0808 (ध्वनिकारिका II. 8-11). भामह speaks very briefly of gunas and refers to only three of them, माधुर्य, ओजस् and प्रसाद ( II. 1-3 ). Later writers like मम्मट, हेमचन्द्र reduce the gunas to the above three and show that the rest are either included in the three or are really दोषाभाव. The number of ritis varies with different writers. राजशेखर in his काव्यमी. gives the same three ritis as वामन; but in his कर्पूरमअरी he speaks of three ritis as वच्छोमी ( from वत्सगुल्म modern Basim in Berar), माअही (मागची) and पञ्नालिआ. रुद्रट speaks of four (लाटीया is added); vide II. 4-6. वाग्भटालद्कार gives only two like दण्डी. वाग्भट's काव्यानु- शासन names three like वामन; while भोज enumerates six, adding आवन्ती, मागधी and लाटी to वामन's three. 12 The Vakrokti school. The word वकोक्ति has been- used in literature from ancient times and bears several meanings. बाण (कादम्बरी para 44 of my edition) speaks of 'gay men expert in वक्रोक्ति' (वक्रोक्तिनिपुणेन विलासिजनेन). In another place where चन्द्रापीड makes a bantering humerous speech (करीडालाप) about the quarrel of the parrot परिहास and the jealous maina, the parrot addresses him with the words 'qurfr युध्यत पवतावतीर्वकरोकीः । इयमपि जानात्येव परिहासजल्पितानि । ... अभूमिरेषा भुजङभद्गि-भाषितानाम् ।'. Here वक्ोकि is used in the sense of कीडालाप or परिहासजल्पित In the अमरुशतक (29) also the word is used in the same sense 'सा पत्युः प्रथम।पराधसमये सर्योपदेशं विना नो जानाति सविभ्रमाङवलनावक्रोक्तिसंसूचनम्।'. In दण्डी the word is used as opposed to स्वभावोति and he says that केष generally lends charm to वकोकि (II. 363 ऋेषः सर्वांस पुष्णाति प्रायो वक्रोक्तिषु श्रियम्। मिन्नं द्विधा स्वभावोक्तिर्वकोक्तिश्रेति वाष्ययम्।।'). So वक्रोकि is a striking mode of speech, often based on ay and differing from the plain, matter of fact ordinary mode of speech. a uses the word in the same sense, saying that वक्रोक्ति sets off to advantage all figures of speech ( II. 85 ). He required वकोकि to be present in all alankaras. Vide the following from RTE 'वक्ाभिघेयशब्दोक्तिरिष्ट वाचामलङ्गतिः ॥' (I. 36). 'हेतुश्च ...... नालङ्कारतया मतः। समुदायामिधानस वक्रोक्त्नभिधानतः॥' (II. 86); 'वाचा वकार्थशब्दो- किरळद्भाराय कल्पते ।' (V.66); 'वक्रवाचा कवीनां ये प्रयोगं प्रति साधवः। ( VI. 23 ). The लोचन ( p. 208) quotes भामद (I. 36 ) and explains 'शब्दस् हि. वक्रता अमिवेयस् च नकता ोकोच्तीणेन रूपेणावस्वानम्'. This insistence on वकोकि emphasises two

II 12 वंकोकि school. INTRODUCTION. CLV

characteristics of poetry, viz. that, though poetry necessarily takes the words used in common speech its choice ef words is different from that of ordinary speech i. e. its diction is different and that the poet gives expression to striking combinations or relations of things which are beyond the reach of ordinary matter-of-fact men. The वक्रोक्िजीवितकार uses the word बक्रोक्त mainly in this sense, but he goes too far in making aifer the soul of poetry. In this respect he is similar to the alankara school. Vide above part I. 19 for detailed statement of his views. जयरथ says that वक्रोक्ति is due to कविप्रतिभा (p.8 ). कुन्तक's definition of वक्रोक्ति as 'वैदग्ध्यमङ्गीभणितिः' seems to be borrowed from अवन्तिसुन्दरी 'विदग्ध- अणितिभङ्गिनिवेधं वस्तुनो रूपं न नियतस्वभावमिति अवन्तिसुन्दरी' (काव्यमी. p. 46 ). The word विदग्ध has been used from ancient times as opposed to विद्ूत and means 'versed in belle lettres, proficient in poetic or clever speech'. Vide ्व० 'प्रसिद्धिश्च्ेयम- स्त्येव विदुग्धविद्वत्परिषत्सु' etc. (p.239); ध्व. p.201 'विदग्धपरिषत्सु'. In the मालतीमाधव (I) when मकरन्द hears the double-meaning words 'रमणीय एष वः सुमनसां संनिवेश: etc he ejaculates 'अहो वैदग्ध्यम्'. For भद्वि see above quotation from कादम्बरी, ध्व. pp. 169, 241 and लोचन 180. The word भणिति occurs in the वासवदत्ता 'अविदितगुणापि सत्कविभणितिः कर्णेषु वमति मधुधाराम्।; vide ध्व. P. 242 'भणितिकृतं वैचचित्र्यमात्रं' वकोक्त is regarded as an अलङ्कार and given a totally different sense by वामन 'सादृश्यालक्षणा वक्रोक्ति:' (वक्रोक्ति is indication based upon resemblance ) and the instance is 'उन्मिमील कमलं सरसीनां कैरवं च निमिमील मुहूर्तात्' (अत्र नेत्रधर्मावुन्मीलननिमीलने सादृश्याद्विकाससङ्गोचा लक्षयतः ). This would be the समाधिगुण of दण्डी (vide I. 93-94). रुद्रट regards वकोक्ति as s'abdalankara and gives two varieties, काकुवक्रोक्ति and श्ेषवक्रोक्ति He is followed in this by मम्मट, वाग्भटालक्कार, रुय्यक, काव्यानुशासन of वाग्भट, एकावली .and हेमचन्द्र For examples vide साहित्यदर्पण X ( appen- dix E). But रुय्यक regards वक्रोक्ति as an अर्थालद्कार and remarks 'वक्रोक्तिशन्दश्चालक्कारसामान्यवचनोपीद्ालङ्कारविशेषे संश्ञितः' (p.177). It will be thus seen that the वक्रोक्ति of रुद्रट and रुय्यक is much narrower in scope than the वक्रोक्ति of भामह, दण्डी and of the वक्रोक्तिजीवित. * The वकोकि school is really an offshoot of the alankara school and need not be separately recognised. *For two other words that occur very frequently in works on Poetics in a similar sense, विच्छित्ति and वैस्वित्र्य, vide व्व. p. 130, लोचन pp. 5 and 8, व्यक्तिविवेकव्याख्या p. 44, अल. स. p. 46 ( for विच्छित्ति) and ध्व. p. 243 and लोचन p. 5 for वैचिन्य.

CLVI SAHITYADARPAŅA. II. 13 safe school.

13 The Dhvani school. For an analysis of the -os vido LXV above. The dhvani theory is only an extension of the rasa theory. The rasa theory took account only of a complete dramtaic work. The main object of a dramatic work is the evolution of some rasa, s'ringāra, karuna eto. by means of विभावs, अनुभावs etc. This naturally presupposes a composition of some length. But if there be a single charming verse, it cannot be said to evolve a rasa, although it may suggest some one or more of the constituents that bring about the relishing of a complete rasa. Such single pieces would be outside the pale of kavya, if it were said that the soul of kavya is rasa alone. It was shown above that rasa is always suggested and not directly expressed. Hence, applying the same reasoning, the rai said that the best poetry is that which contains a charming व्यङ्ञ sense. 'अयमेव हि महाकवेरमुख्यो व्यापारो यद्रसादीनेव मुख्यतया काव्यार्थीकृत्य तद्व्यक्त्यनुगुणत्वेन शब्दानामर्थानां चोपनिबन्धनम्। एतच्च रसादितात्पर्येण काव्यनिबन्धनं भरतादावपि सुप्रसिद्धमेवेति ... । रसादयो दि द्वयोरपि तयोः (काव्यनास्ययोः) जीवितभूताः' ध्व. p. 181-82); 'सारभूतो ह्यर्थः स्वशब्दानमिधेयत्वेन प्रकाशित: सुतरामेव शोभामावहति। प्रसिद्धिश्चेय- मस्त्येव विदग्धविद्वत्परिषत्सु यदमिमततरं वस्तु व्यज्ञयत्वेन प्रकाश्यते न साक्षाच्छब्दवा- च्यत्वेनैव।' स्व. p. 239. Though it is possible to extract some sort of sasr sense from any sentence or word, still all words or sen- tences are not necessarily kavya but only those words, which have particular qualities and are arranged in a particular manner and contain a charming arr, constitute kāvya. Vide लोचन (p. 28) 'तेन सर्वत्रापि न ध्वननसद्भावेपि तथा व्यवहारः। आत्मसद्धावेपि कचिदेव जीवव्यवहार इत्युक्तं प्रागेव ।'. The ध्व. divides व्यजय sense into three varieties रसादि, अलक्कार and वस्तु. Under the first are included not only the nine rasas, but all the bhavas and their abhasas also etc. What is meant by ageafa is this that a mere fact is suggested by words that express another sense. What is meant by an alankara dhvani is this that what is suggested is an imaginative thing ( not a matter of fact ) which if expressed in so many words would assume the form of a figure of speech. The suggestion of rasa and others does not require explanation here. The eqo seems to hold like Wordsworth that poetry is the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings ( 'कौन्दन्द्ववियोगोत्थः शोक: श्रोकत्वमागतः II'p. 26). When Valmiki was powerfully affected by the spectacle of the death of the loving isa at the hands of the hunter, the sage's imagination was

II. 13 ध्वनि school. INTRODUCTION. CLVII

stirred and he burst forth into an impassioned song. But it is not to be supposed that the sage was himself 3:faa nor is it to be supposed that the reader when he reads the impassioned poem is simply दुखित; for if that were really so, no one would feel delight in reading the poem. Vide लोचन p. 27 'तेन रस एव वस्तुत आत्मा। वस्त्वलङ्कारध्वनी तु सर्वथा रसं प्रति पर्यवस्येते इति वाच्यादुत्कृष्टौ तौ इत्यभिप्रायेण ध्वनिः काव्यस्यात्मेति सामान्येनोक्तम्। ... प्राथमिकानाम भ्यासार्थिनां यदि परं चित्रेण व्यवहारः प्राप्तपरिणतीनां तु ध्वनिरेव प्राधान्येन काव्यमिति स्थितमेतत्।'. The ध्वन्यालोक divided काव्य into three varieties, the best or ध्वनिकाव्य, गुणीभूतव्यङ्ञय and चित्र. In the last it included all alankaras of word and sense. Vide ध्व. II. 4 (p.67 for ध्वनिकाव्य), III. 35 ( p. 205 for गुणीभूतव्यङ्गय), III. 42-43 (p.220, चित्रकाव्य). But the ध्वन्यालोक is careful to point out that a true poet should never waste his powers over composing poems that have no relation to rasa 'एतच्च चित्रं कवीनां विशृह्धलगिरां रसादितात्पर्यमनपेक्ष्यैव काव्यप्रवृत्तिदर्शनादस्माभि: परिकल्पितम्। इदानीं- तनानां तु न्याय्ये काव्यनयव्यवस्थापने क्रियमाणे नास्त्येव ध्वनिव्यतिरिक्तः काव्य- प्रकारः । यतः परिपाकवतां कवीनां रसादितात्पर्यविरहे व्यापार एव न शोभते।' ( p. 221 ). Vide his remarks on अनुप्रास and यमक (II. 15-20 pp. 85-87 ). After having dealt with ध्वनि as the soul of poetry it assigns to gunas and alankaras their proper position ( ta. p. 78) 'तमर्थमवलम्बन्ते &c' (vide p.C II. above) on which the वृत्ति is 'ये तमर्थ रसादिलक्षणमङ्गिनं सन्तमवलम्बन्ते ते गुणाः शौर्यादिवत्। वाच्यवाचक- लक्षणान्यङ्गानि ये पुनराश्रितास्तेऽलक्कारा मन्तव्या: कटकादिवदिति।' About the ritis ( III. 52 p. 231 ) he says that they are explained by the position assigned to the gunas ( as the लोचन remarks रीतिर्हि गुणेष्वेव पर्यवसायिता). He speaks of सङ्घटना as being threefold (असमासा, मध्यमसमासा and दीर्घसमासा) and that each of the three is generally suited to some particular rasa or rasas ( though not as an invariable rule) and that gunas are not of the nature of सङ्घटना, nor are they dependent upon सङ्टना, but that the appropriateness of सङ्टना is determined by the rasa and by the speaker and the subject ( pp. 133-135 ). The afas de- pendent upon words such as उपनागरिका and those dependent upon sense (such as कैशिकी) are on the same level with ritis i. e. like the latter they all depend upon rasa as the soul. Compare व्वo p.182 'तत्र रसानुगुण औचित्यवान् वाच्याश्रयो यो व्यवहारस्ता एता: कैशिक्याद्या वृत्तयः । वाचकाश्रयाश्रोपनागरिकाद्याः। वृत्तयो हि रसादितात्पर्येण संनिवेशिता: कामपि नाट्यस्य काव्यस्य च च्छायामावहन्ति । रसादयो हि द्वयोरपि तयोजींवितभूताः । इतिवृत्तादि तु शरीरभूतमेव ।'; vide also सवo pp. 163 and 231. The three वृत्तिs, उपनागरिका, परुषा and ग्राम्या (called कोमला n

CLVIII SAHITYADARPANA. II. 13 ध्वनि school.

by some ) are spoken of by उन्ट, मम्मट (IX), and other writers. 'शषाभ्यां रेफसंयोगैष्टवर्गेण च योजिता। परुषा नाम वृत्ति: स्ादू हहत्याघैश्च संयुता॥ सरूपसंयोगयुता मूर्झ्नि वर्गान्त्ययोगिभिः । स्पर्शैर्युतां च मन्यन्ते उपनागरिकां बुधाः ॥ शेषैर्वर्णैर्यथायोगं कथिता कोमलाख्यया।' उद्भट I. उपनागरिका is appropriate to गुद्धार, परुषा to वीर and रौद्र and कोमला to हास्य रुद्रट (II. 19) enumerates five वृत्तिs (मधुरा, ललिता, प्रौढ़ा, परुषा and भद्रा). The वृत्तिs peculiar to the नाट्यशास्त्र are four, भारती, कैशिकी, सात्वती and भारभटी. Vide भरत chap. XX. The plot is the body of नाट्य ('इतिवृत्तं हि नाव्यस्य शरीरं परिकीर्तितम्' नाट्य 19. 1 ) and rasa is the soul. About the वृत्ति भरत says 'वृसयो नाव्यमातरः' (20. 62.). Each * वृत्ति is appropriate to some rasa. Vide नास्य. XX. 63-64. राजशेखर distinguishes between प्रवृत्ति, वृत्ति and रीति as follows 'वेषविन्यासक्रमः प्रवृत्तिः, विलासविन्यासक्रमो वृत्ति, वचनविन्यासक्रमो रीतिः' ( p. 9). All these propositions laid down by the ध्वन्यालोक about the several component parts of a complete theory of Poetios are implicitly followed by all later writers on Poetics. It is therefore that the रसगङ्गाधर says 'ध्वनिकृतामा- लक्कारिकसरणिव्यवस्थापकत्वात्' (p. 425). Before the theory of ध्वनि secured general acceptance, it had to pass through an ordeal of fierce criticism at the hands of प्रतीहारेन्दुराज (P. LXI), वक्रोक्तिजीवित (LXXXII), भट्टनायक and महिमभट्ट. 14 The divisions of poetry. As in modern works poetry is divided into epic, lyric, dramatic, so in Sanskit works also it is so divided. Classification of poetry is made from various stand-points. The first division made by दण्डी is into गद्य, पद्य and fa. While most English critics are agreed that versifica- tion is a sine qua non for poetry ( though Prof. Moulton and a few others maintain the opposite view ), all Sanskrit writers on Poetios are unanimous that versification is not a necessary condition of poetry. Not only so but a few like Vamana say 'na कवीनां निकषं वदन्ति (काव्या. सू. on I. 3. 21).' दण्डी then speaks under पद्य of सर्गबन्ध (or महाकाव्य an epic ) and (मुक्तक, a single verse), कुलक (five श्रोकs), कोष and सङ्ात (compilations of unconnected verses ). Under गद्य he refers to कथा, आख्यायिका, चम्पू. The मिश्र kavya is constituted by नाटक and other varieties of plays. दण्डी also divides काव्य into संस्कृत, प्राकृत and अपभ्रंश; while रुद्रट (II. 11) into six, संस्कृत, प्राकृत, मागध, पिशाच, शूरसेन and अपभ्रंश. For भामह's divisions of काव्य vide p.XVII. वामन divides काव्य into गद्य and पद्य; the former into three varieties, वृत्तगन्धि (resembling verse), चूर्ण, and उत्कलिकाप्राय; पद्य is of various sorts, but he gives two divisions of both गद्य and पद into अनिबद्ध (unconnected) and

II. 14 काव्यविभाग. INTRODUCTION. CLIX

निबद्ध (connected i. e. a प्रबन्ध ) and declares that among complete works, the drama is superior ( 'सन्दर्भेंषु दशरूपकं श्रेयः' I. 3. 30). हेमचन्द्र (8th अध्याय ) divides काव्य into प्रेक्ष्य and श्रव्य; and the former into पाष्य and गेय and these into numerous varieties; श्रव्य is divided into महाकाव्य, आख्यायिका, कथा, चम्पू and अनिबद्ध He further speaks of काव्यs composed in संस्कृत, प्राकृत, अपभ्रंश and ग्राम्यापभ्रंश and regards आख्यान, निदर्शन, प्रवह्निका, मतल्लिका, मणिकुल्या, परिकथा, खण्डकथा, सकळकथा, उपकथा as varieties of कथा. Vide ध्व. p. 141 and the लोचन thereon for several varieties of काव्य. 15 Doshas. This is an important topic in all works on Poetics. aa speaks of ten doshas (16. 84). Vide pp. XXXI- XXXII. दण्डी and भामह speak of ten and eleven doshas respect- ively. But they make no scientific distinction between doshas of पद, of वाक्य, of पदार्थ and वाक्यार्थ. This is done by वामन. This distinction of the doshas of पद, वाक्य and अर्ध is accepted by मम्मट and other later writers. The doctrines of the ध्वन्यालोक that, in a composition in which rasa is to be evolved, औचित्य of various kinds has to be looked to ( p. 144, ff ) and that certain items that conflict (विरोधि) with the main rasa should be avoided ( p. 161 ff ), gave rise to the doshas of rasa. Vide मम्मट VII for रसदोषs. मम्मट refers (10th उल्लास) to several doshas of alankaras and shows that they are included in the several doshas discussed by him in the 7th 33T.

Index of authors and works on the Alarikāras'ātra.

In this index works on अभिनय and erotics have been altogether excluded, although in the reports on mss. these works are often included under the heading of argrT. Only a few works on dramaturgy have been included. The index is principally based upon Aufrecht's Catalogus catalogorum . and upon the I. O. catalogue, Burnell's catalogue, Madras Govt, mss. catalogue and a few others. Many difficulties arise in preparing an index. The entries in the catalogues of this kind are often very meagre and misleading. The same work often appears under different names e.g. the अलक्वारशतक of जयदेव listed by Oppert is most probably the same as the चन्द्रालोक of जयदेव. Oftentimes the similarity of names is misleading. The word Ta occurs in the names of works on alankara as well on medicine. The word नाटसूत्र in the विवादरताकर (p. 477 ) is a mistake for लाटसूत्र (i. e. लाट्यायनश्रौतसूत्र I.3.19) as the quotation shows. The names of a few commentators, particularly of the Kāvyaprakas'a, have not been separately indexed. As both authors and their works are separately mentioned, there are numerous double entries. The abbrevia- tions employed are :-

a .= author. acc .= according. ano .= anonymous. C. or com .= com- mentary. c c=commentary on a commentary. m=mentioned. v=vide.

1 अभ्युतराय 19th oen. 837. 8 अभिनवगुप्त, a. of लोचन. 990- 2 भजितसेन देवयतीश्वर minister 1020 A. C. v. 166, 433, of राचमल्ट (Ganga). 10th 457. cen. v. 36, 762. 9 अभिनवभारती, c. on नाट्यशास्त्र. 3 अणुरममण्डन or रस्षमण्डन a. of m.by राघवभट्ट on शाकुन्तल. जरपकल्पलता. 15th cen. 4 अनन्त a. of साहित्यकल्पवलली. 812. 10 अभिसाराधष्टरस of गोपालदास.

5 अनन्तपण्डित. 606. 11 अमरचन्द्र, pupil of जिनदत्तसूरि,

6 अप्प्यदीक्षित a. of कुवलयानन्द. completed काव्यकल्पलता. Mi-

End of 16th cen. 319, 375, ddle of 13th cen.

724. 12 अमृतानन्द vide 73. 7 अमिषावृत्तिमातृका of मुकुल. Ab- 13 अयोध्याप्रसाद. 582. out 925 A. C. 14 अरिसिंह, son of आषाढ, a. of

Index of works. INDEX. CLXI

काव्यकल्पलता. Middle of 13th 36 अलद्ारचिन्तामणि of अजितसेन. cen. 37 C in Government Orie- 15 अर्थालङ्कारमअ्जरी or अलक्कारमज्जरी ntal Library, Madras. of त्रिमल्लभट् of Kas'T. 38 अरक्कारचिन्तामणि of शान्तराज, C मधुधारा of सुधीन्द्रयति, 527. son of पद्मपण्डित. 18th cen. 16 अलक or- completed काव्य- ( This is more probably प्रकाश. a writer of the ms. of 17 अलङ्कारकारिका :. the above. Vide Triennial 18 अलङ्कारकुलप्रदीप of विश्वेश्वर, son cat. Madras 1910-11, 12- of लक्ष्मीधर. 18th cen. 13). 19 अलङ्कारकौमुदी of वल्लभभट्ट 39 अलङ्कारचूडामणि v. 290. 20 C व्याख्या ano. 40 अलङ्गारतिलक of भानुदस, in 21 अलङ्कारकौस्तुभ of विश्वेश्वर, son five परिच्छेदs. of लक्ष्मीधर. quotes रसगङ्गाधर. 41 अलङ्गारतिलक of वाग्भट. V. 289. After 1700 A. C. 42 अलक्कारतिलक of श्रीकरमिश्र. 22 C विवरण by himself. 43 अलङ्कारदर्पण (134 श्रोकs in 23 अलकारकोसतुभ of कल्याणसुब्रह्मण्य प्राकृत). composed about 1800 A.C. 44 अलक्कारनिकर्ष (or निकष) of 24 C by same. सुधीन्द्रयोगिन्, 25 अलक्कारकौस्तुभ of कविकर्णपूर in सुधेन्द्र or follower of मध्व. 10 किरणs. Rules illustrated 45 अलक्कारप्रकाशिका. by verses about कृष्ण and राधा. Born in 1524 A.C. 46 अलक्कारप्रबोध m. in काव्यकल्प- लता. composed by अमरचन्द्र. 26 C किरण by author. 27 C दीधितिप्रकाशिका by वृन्दा- 47 अलङ्कारभाष्यकार, m. by जयरथ

वनचन्द्रतर्का लङ्कार. in विमर्शिनी ( pp. 35, 46, 83,

28 C सारबोधिनी by विश्वनाथ- 138, 173 ). Between 1150- 1200 A. C. चक्रवतिन्. 29 C by लोकनाथ. अलङ्कारमज्जरी vide अर्थालक्कार०.

30 अलद्धारकीस्तुभ of वेङ्कटाचार्य, son 48 अलङ्कारमअ्जरी m. by अलं. स.

of अण्णयार्य and pupil of his ( p. 15 ).

uncle श्रीनिवासार्य. 49 अलङ्कारमश्जरी of सुखलाल.

31 अलक्कारक्रममाला of दामोदर हर्षे. 50 अलक्कारमअ्जरीटीका मधुधारा of

32 अलङ्कारग्रन्थ of काशीलक्ष्मण कवि. सुधीन्द्र

End of 17th cen. Exam- 51 अलक्कारमअ्जषा of पुरोहित देव-

ples in praise of Shāhaji- शङ्कर, son of Nanabhai,

raja of Tanjore. native of Ranera ( Rander

33 भळङारचन्द्रिका of नारायणदेव. near Surat ). Examples

34 अलक्कारचन्द्रिका V. काव्य चन्द्रिका. glorify the Peshwa Madhavrao and his uncle 35 अलक्कारचन्द्रोदय of वेणीदस्तशर्मा, Raghunathrao. Between in 6 उल्लासs 1761-1768 A. C.

CLXII SAHITYADARPANA. Index of works.

52 अलङ्कारमणिदर्पण of प्रधान वेङ्क- शॉंद्धोदनि. Latter half 16th प्पृग्य cen. 53 अलक्कारमणिहार of कृष्ण ब्रह्मतत्न 73 अलक्कारसंग्रह of अमृतानन्दयोगिन्. परकालस्वामी. Written at the instance of 54 अलक्कारमयूख- मन्वभूपति. 55 अळङ्कारमुक्तावलि of रामसुधीवर, 74 अलक्कारसंग्रह ano. (Madras son of नृसिंह Govt San. mss. 1918 p. 56 C रवशोभाकर of कृष्णसूरि 8606). 57 मलक्कारमुक्तावलि of विश्वेश्वर, son 75 अलक्कारसमुद्क of शिवराम. 18th of लक्ष्मीधर. A compendium cen. of the अलद्कारकौस्तुभ, t 76 अलक्कारसर्वस्व of केशवमिश्र. m. which he refers. in his own अलङ्कारशेखर. 58 अलङ्काररलनाकर of शोभाकर in 77 अलक्कारसर्वस्व of रुय्यक, teacher 107 sutras. रसगङ्गाघर says of मङ. About 1150 A.C. (p. 281 ) that कुवलथानन्द 78 C विमर्शिनी by जयरथ. follows अलङ्गाररलाकर. m. in First quarter of 13th वृत्तिवार्तिक (p. 20). cen. 59 C o रल्नोदाहरण by same. 79 C सज्जीविनी by चक्रवती. 60 ० संनिबद्धदेवीस्तोत्र of यशस्कर. m. by मल्लिनाथ in तरल 61 ० स्तोत्रव्याख्या of रत्नकण्ठ. (pp. 31 and 221) and 62 अलक्काररहस्य of प्रभाकर, a. of रसप्रदीप. 1583 A. C. कुमारस्वामी. 80 C by 63 अलक्कारराघव of यज्ञेश्वरदीक्षित. समुद्रबन्ध. Latter half of 13th cen. 64 अलक्कारलक्षणानि of शम्भुनाथ 81 अलक्कारसर्वस्व ano. Author's 65 अलक्कारवादार्थ, discussion on teacher composed anothor साहित्यदर्पण. work in honour of गोपाल- 66 अलङ्कारवार्तिक m. in the विम- देव. रशिनी of जयरथ (p. 71) as a 82 अलक्कारसार m. in विमर्िनी by work by the a. of the अलं. जयरथ (pp. 88, 97, 171). स. 67 अलक्कारशतक of जयदेव. Pro- 83 अलङ्कारसार of बालकृष्ण, who

bably same as चन्द्रालोक. was a follower of वल्भाचार्य school. 68 अलङ्कारशास्त्रसंग्रह of रामसुब्रह्मण्य. 69 अलक्कारशिरोभूषण of कन्दालयार्य, 84 अलक्कारसारसंग्रह of उद्ट्रट. Ab- out 800 A. C. son of रामानुजार्य. 70 अलक्कारशिरोमणि of राजचूडामणि. 85 C लघुवृत्ति of प्रतीहारेन्दुराज.

m.in his own काव्यदर्पण. Middle of 10th cen.

71 अलक्कारशिरोमणि or अलक्कारशेखर 86 C styled उद्भटविवेक by

of जीवनाथ. राजानकतिलक. m. in विमार्शनी (pp. 115, 124 72 अलक्कारशेखर of केशवमिश्र. 205). Before 1150 A. Based on the sūtras of C. as रुय्यक follows it.

Index of works. INDEX. CLXIII

87 अलक्कारसारोद्वार by भीमसेन. 108 आशाधर, a. of कारिकादीपिका 1723 A. C. on the कुवलयानन्द. v. 322. 88 अलङ्कारसुधा of नागेश v. 321. आशाधर v. 300. 88a अलक्कारसुधानिधि m. in the 109 इन्दुराज, teacher of अभिनवगुप्त रलनापण (p. 44) and वृत्तिवार्ति- Probably not identical क ( p. 19). with प्रतीहारेन्दुराज. Latter 89 अलङ्कारसूत्र of शौदधोदनि. half of 10th cen. 90 " m. in the विमर्शिनी इन्दुराज see प्रतीहारेन्दु०. ( p. 150 ). 110 उज्जवलनीलमणि of रूपगोस्वामी- 91 अलक्कारसूर्योदय of यज्ञेश्वरदीक्षित. 16th cen. About 1700. Probably 111 C लोचनरोचनी by सनातन- same as author of 63. गोस्वामी

92 अलङ्कारस्थिति or कुवलयानन्दख 112 C किरण by विश्वनाथ चक्रवर्ती.

ण्डन of भीमसेन दीक्षित. 113 C किरणलेश. 93 अलङ्कारानुक्र्मणिका. 114 C आगमचन्द्रिका and आत्म-

94 अलक्कारानुसारिणी m. by जयरथ प्रबोधिका.

in विमर्िनी (pp. 36, 57, 58, 115 उजज्वलपदा of यशस्विकवि, C on 60 ) as composed by a. of साहित्यकौतूहल. अलं. स. 116 उत्पेक्षामअ्जरी of वरदाचार्य. 95 अलङ्कारेन्दुशेखर by वेङ्गटनृसिंह- 117 उदाहरणदर्पण vide 211.

कवि, who is same as the 118 उदाहरणप्रदीप. v. 212. author of No. 669. 119 उदाहरणविवरण. v. 213. 96 अलङ्कारेश्वर m. by शिवराम on 120 उद्द्योत. v.230. the वासवदत्ता 121 उद्भट v. 84,297. 97 अलङ्गारोदाहरण of जयरथ, son 122 उङ्भटविवेक v. 86.

of शुद्गार. First quarter of 123 उपमासुधानिधि by S'alvapu- 13th cen. Refers to his llaingar.

अलङ्कारविमर््शिनी. 124 ऋजुवृत्ति vide 214.

अलङ्कारोदाहरण of शोभाकर 125 एकषष्टयलङ्कारप्रकाश v. 59. 126 एकावली of महामहेश्वरकवि. 98 अलराज or मलराज v. 614. 99 अवन्तिसुन्दरी m. by राजशेखर 127 एकावली of विद्याधर. End of

100 अवस्थासंग्रह m. by मल्ि०. 13th and beginning of 14th cen. 101 अष्टनायिकादर्पण of भगवत्कवि 128 102 भानन्द a. of काव्यप्रकाशनिदर्शन. C तरल by मल्िनाथ 15th

103 आनन्ददास. 626. cen. 129 104 आनन्दवर्धन a. of ध्वन्यालोक. C प्रकाश by प्रभाकर, son

397,431. of माधवभट्ट and gran-

105 आानन्दशर्मन् 608. dson of रामेश्वरभट्ट

106 आपराजिति m. by क्राव्यमी. born in 1564 A. C.

107 आमोद C. on रसमञ्जरी- 130 औचित्यविचारचर्चा of क्षेमेन्द्र. Latter half of 11th cen.

CLXIY SAHITYADARPAŅA. Index of works.

131 C. सहृदयसन्तोषिणी of श्रीश्रे- mentions काव्यप्रकाश, नअ्जरा- तारण्यनारायण. जयशोभूषण, प्रतापरुद्रीय. 132 कचेश्वरदीक्षित a. of रामचन्द्र- 156 कवीन्द्रकर्णाभरण of विश्वेश्वर. यशोभूषण. First half of 18th cen. 133 कन्दालयार्य v. 69. 157 C by himself. 134 कर्णपूरस्वामी or कविकर्णपूर, &. 158 कान्तिचन्द्र a. of काव्यदीपिका. of अलक्कारकौस्तुभ. v. 25. 159 कारिकार्थप्रकाशिका. C. on काव्य 135 कर्पूररसमज्जरी of बालकवि. प्रकाश of रघुदेव. 136 कलाधर, compiler of काव्य- 160 कालिदास m. by काव्यमी. प्रकाशीय कारिकावलि. 161 काव्यकलाप. 137 कल्याणसुब्रह्मण्य, a. of अलङ्कार- 162 काव्यकल्पलता of अरिसिंह and कौस्तुभ. v. 23. अमरचन्द्र. Middle of 13th 138 कविकण्ठपाश. names पिङ्गल's cen, Also called कविशिक्षा- work as its source. वृत्ति. A ms is dated 1418 139 कविकण्ठहार A. C. v. 11, 14. 140 कविकण्ठाभरण of क्षेमेन्द्र. Latter 163 C मञ्जरी or परिमल of अमर- half of 11th cen. चन्द्र. 141 कविकर्णपाश (?). Same as 164 C वृत्ति मकरन्द of शुभविज- 138 (1) यगणि. 1609-10 A.C. 142 कविकर्पटी or-टिका of शङ्धर. 165 काव्यकौतुक of भट्टतौत. m. in 143 कविकल्पलता of देवेश्वर or देवेन्द्र, the लोचन son of वाग्भट; acc. to अलङ्का- About 950 A. C. रशेखर of केशवमिश्र (p. 48) 166 C विवरण of अभिनत्रगुप्त followed श्रीपाद. 14th cen. 990-1020 A. C. 144 C of बेचाराम सार्वभौम 167 काव्यकौमुदी in 3 परिच्छेदs. 145 C बालबोधिका of सूर्यकवि. 168 काव्यकौमुदी of देवनाथ. C on 146 C विनेक. काव्यप्रकाश. v. 216. 147 कविकल्पलता of राधवचैतन्य. 169 काव्यकौमुदी of रल्नभूषण. 18th 148 कविकौतुक of विष्णुदास, son of cen.

माधव. 170 काव्यकौस्तुभ of विद्याभूषण. 149 कविगजाङ्कश m. in the काव्या- 171 काव्यचन्द्रिका of कविचन्द्र v. 150

लङ्कारकामधेनु. 172 काव्यचन्द्रिका of रामचन्द्र न्याय- 150 कविचन्द्र a. of काव्यचन्द्रिका. वागीश, son of विद्यानिधि. Son of कविकर्णपूर. 16th cen. 173 काव्यतत्त्वविचार of हलधररथ.

151 कवितावतार of पुरुषोत्तम. 174 काव्यतत्त्वविवेचककोमुदी of कृष्म-

152 कविनन्दिका of रामकृष्ण. 215. किङ्कर. C. on the काव्यादर्श.

153 कविशिक्षा of जयमङ्गल. 175 काव्यतिलक of विश्वेश्वर, . of

154 कविशिक्षावृत्ति of अमरचन्द्र. C. अलक्कारकांस्तुभ. 176 काव्यदर्पण of रलपाणि. m.by on काव्यकल्पलता. his son रवि. 155 कविसमयकल्लोल by अनन्तार्य. 177 काव्यदर्पण of राजचूडामणिदीक्षित.

Index of works. INDEX. CLXV

178 काव्यदर्पण of श्रीनिवासदीक्षित. 205 C of शिवनारायण. 179 काव्यदर्पण by मनोधर v. 218. 206 C of सुबुद्धिमिश्र. m. by 180 काव्यदर्पण, by मधुमतिगणेश. चक्रवर्ती. com. on काव्यप्रकाश. 217. 207 C अर्थप्रकाशिका of रघुदेव v. 181 काव्यदीपिका of कान्तिचद्र. v 159. 158. 208 C अवचूरि of राघव. 182 काव्यदीपिका of गोविंद. 209 C आदर्श of महेश्वरन्यायाल- 183 काव्यदीपिका ano.(Mad. Govt. mss. cat 1918 p. 8618 ). द्वार. m. by वैदयनाथ- 210 184 काव्यनिर्णय of धनिक. m. in C उदाहरणचन्द्रिका of वैद्यनाथ 1683 A. C. He wrote दशरूपावलोक. 1000 A. C. 185 काव्यनौका. C. on काव्यप्रकाश the प्रदीपप्रभा also. 211 C उदाहरणदर्पण. 186 काव्यपरिच्छेद 212 187 काव्यपरीक्षा of श्रीवत्सलाळ्छनभ- C उदाहरणप्रदीप of नागेशभट्ट 213 द्टाचार्य. In verse with वृत्ति C उदाहरणविवरण ano.

by author in five उल्लासs. 214 C ऋजुवृत्ति by नरसिंहसूरि

ms. dated 1550 A. C. son of तिम्माजिमत्रिन्· comments on कारिकाड 188 काव्यप्रकाश of मम्मट and अलट only. (क?). About 1100 A. C. 215 C कविनन्दिका of रामकृष्ण 189 C of कमलाकरभट्ट. about v. 152. 1612 A. C. 216 C काव्यकौमुदी of देवनाथ V. 190 C of कृष्णमित्राचार्य. 168. 191 C of गदाधर. 217 C काव्यदर्पण of मधुमतिगणेश 192 C of गुणरल्नगणि. 180. 193 C of गोपालभट्ट. A गोपाल 218 C काव्यदर्पण of मनोधर V. is quoted in the काम- 179. धेनु on वामन. 194 C of जयराम न्यायपञ्चानन. 219 C काव्यादर्श of सोमेश्वरभट्ट,

195 C of तिरुवेक्कट, son of चिन्न- son of भटटदेवक of the

तिम्म. names गोपाल. भरद्वाजगोत्र. 1st half of

196 C of नारायणभट्ट. 13th cen.

197 C of पण्डितराज. 220 C तात्पर्यविवरण of महेशचन्द्र.

198 C of बालदेव. 221 C तिलक of जयराम. m. by 199 C of भवदेव (com. called सारबोधिनी.

लीला). 222 C दर्पण of विश्वनाथ. 14th 200 C of भानुचन्द्र. cen. 201 C of यजेश्वर. 223 C दीपिका of जयन्त. 1294 202 C of रलेश्वर. A. C. under सारङ्गदेव 203 C of राजानन्द. of Guzerat. 204 C of वाचस्पतिमिश्र. m. by 224 C दीपिका of चण्डीदास, gra- चण्डीदास. nduncle of विश्वनाथ.

CLXVI SÂHITYADARPANA. Index of works.

Latter half of 13th of the अलं. स. In the cen. 2nd Intro. verse he 225 C दीपिका of शिवनारायणदास distinctly says that 225a. C निदर्शन of राजानकानन्द he learnt अलक्कार from 1660 A. C. तिलक. 226 C नरासहमनीषा of नृसिंह- 247 C सङ्केत of माणिक्यचन्द्रा ठक्कर. End of 17th cen. 1159-60 A. C.

227 C पदवृत्ति of नागराजकेशव. 248 C सम्प्रदायप्रकाशिनी of विद्य, 228 C प्रदीप of गोविन्दठक्कर. lat- चक्रवर्ती.

ter half of 16th cen. 249 C सार of रामचन्द्र.

229 CC प्रदीपप्रभा of वैदयनाथ. 250 C सारबोधिनी of वत्सवर्मन् or

1684 A. C. वत्सलाल्छन. m.by रतकण्ठ

230 CC प्रदीपोद्द्योत of नागेशभट्ट and जगन्नाथ.

231 C बालचित्तानुरक्षनी of नर- 251 C सारसमुच्चय of रलकण्ठ

इरिसरस्वतीतीर्थ. born in Quotes भास्कर, पण्डित-

1242 A. C. राज, प्रदीप-

232 C भावार्थ of रामकृष्ण. 252 C साहित्यकौमुदी of विद्याभूषण. 233 C भावार्थ्विन्तामणि of महेश्वर. comments on कारिकाड

234 C मधुमती of रवि. m.by only.

क्मलाकर. 253 CC कृष्णानन्दिनी on the

235 C मधुररसा by कृष्ण द्विवेदिन्- above.

236 C रतदर्पण of रक्पाणि. m. 254 C साहित्य चन्द्र on कारिकाड

by रवि in मधुमती only. 255 237 C रसप्रकाश of श्रीकृष्णशर्मन्- C साहित्यचूडामणि of लौहित्य*

238 C रहस्यनिबन्ध of भास्कर. भटटगोपाल. 1750 A.C.

239 C रहस्यप्रकाश of रामनाथ तर्क- 256 C साहित्यदीपिका of भास्कर. m. by गोविन्दठक्कुर. वाचस्पति. About 1660 A. C. 257 C सुधासागर of भीमसेन.

240 C रहस्यप्रकाश of जगदीश तर्क 1723 A. C.

पञ्चानन. 258 C सुबोधिनी of वेक्कटाचलसूरि. 241 C विवेक of श्रीधर. m. by 259 C सुमनोमनोहरा of गोपीनाथ. विश्वनाथ and चण्डीदास. 260 काव्यप्रकाशसार of रामचन्द्र. 249.

242 C विषमपदी of शिवराम. 261 काव्यप्रकाशीयकारिकावलि of कला-

243 C विस्तारिका of परमानन्द घर. v. 136.

चक्रवर्ती. m. by रलकण्ठ. 262 काव्यमजरी. v. 323.

244 C लोकदीपिका of गोविन्दठकर. 263 काव्यमीमांसा of राजशेखर. First quarter of 10th cen. 245 C शोकदीपिका of जनार्दन- 264 काव्यरल of विशवेश्वर, a. of अल- व्यास. 246 C सद्केत of रुचक- Proba- द्वारकौस्तुभ. v. 21. 265 काव्यरल of केशवमिश्र. m. in bly same as the author अलक्कारशेखर (p. 72).

Index of works. INDEX, CLXVII

266 काव्यरसायन- 294 काव्यार्थगुम्फ of हरिप्रसाद 18th 267 काव्यलक्षण ano. (Mad. Govt. cen. ms. cat. 1918 p. 8630 ). 295 काव्यार्थचूडामणि. 268 कान्यविलास of चिरभीवभट्ट in 296 काव्यालद्कार of भामह. 6th or two chapters on रस and 7th cen.

अलक्कार. mentions रसगङ्गाधर. 297 C विवरण of उद्द्ट. About 800 A. C. 269 काव्यशिक्षा of गङ्गादास 298 काव्यालङ्कार of रुद्रट. 800-850 270 काव्यशिक्षा of विनयचन्द्र A. C. 271 काव्यसरणि m. in वृत्तिवार्तिक 299 C टिप्पन by नमिसाधु. 1069 ( p. 20 ). A. C. 272 काव्यसारसंग्रह of श्रीनिवास. 300 C by आश्ञाधर About About 1800 A. C .. 1200 A. C. 273 काव्यसुधा or साहित्य सुधा- 301 C वनतरङ्गिणी 274 काव्यादर्श of दण्डिन्. 6th cen. 302 C by वलभदेव 10th cen. 275 C of तरुणवाचस्पति. 303 काव्यालङ्कारकामधेनु of गोपेन्द्रति- 276 C of त्रिभुवनचन्द्र प्पभूपाल. v. 308 277 C of भगीरथ. 304 काव्यालङ्कारध्वनि (?) 278 C of वादिघङ्कल. 305 काव्यालङ्कारशिशुप्रबोध of पुञ्जराज, 279 C of विजयानन्द. son of जीवनेन्द्र 280 C काव्यतत्त्वविवेचककौमुदी of 306 काव्यालङ्कारसूत्र of वामन· कृष्णकिक्कर. About 800 A. C. 281 C चन्द्रिका of त्रिशरणतटभीम. 307 C by himself. 282 C मार्जन of हरिनाथ महोपा- 308 C कामघेनु by गोपेन्द्रतिप्प- ध्याय. भूपाल. 283 C मुक्तावलि of नरसिंह सूरि· 309 C by सहदेव. 284 C रसिकर ज्जिनी of विश्वनाथ. 310 C साहित्यसर्वस्व of महेश्वरसु- 285 C वैमल्य विधायिनी of मल्िनाथ. बुद्धिमिश्र. 286 C श्रुतानुपालनी. काव्यालोक vide ध्वन्यालोक. 287 C हृदयङ्गमा. 311 काव्यालोक m. in रल्षापण (p. 288 काव्यानुशासन of वाग्भट, son 73) and च्ित्रमीमांसा (pp.27, of नेमिकुमार. About 13th 53). 312 काव्यालोक of इरिप्रसाद, son of cen. 289 C अलङ्कारतिलक by same. गङ्गेश्वर, composed in 1728 290 काव्यानुशासन of हेमचन्द्र 1088- A. C.

1172 A. C. काव्यालोकलोचन vide ध्वन्यालो- 291 C विनेक by हेमचन्द्र. कलोचन. 292 काव्यामृत of श्रीवत्सलाळ्छन. 313 काव्येन्दुप्रकाश by कामराजदी- 293 काव्यामृततरङ्गिणी or काव्यप्रकाश क्षित. खण्डन, criticizes 7th उल्लास 314 काशीलक्ष्मणकवि, v. 32. of काव्यप्रकाश. 315 किरणावली of शशघर

CLXVIII SÂHITYADARPAŅA. Index of works.

316 कुन्तक, a. of वक्रोक्तिजीवित. Be-1 339 केशवमिश्र v. 72, 76, 265. tween 900-1000 A. C. 340 कमदीश्वर m. by प्रेमचन्द्र 317 कुमारंस्वामिन् son of मल्िनाथ, 341 क्षेमहंसगणि. a. of com. रत्नापण. 15th cen. 342 क्षेमेन्द्र a. of औचित्यविचारचर्चा. 318 कुरविराम a. of com. on दशरूप. v. 130, 140. 319 कुवलयानन्द of अप्पय्यदीक्षित, 343 गङ्गादास, a. of काव्यशिक्षा 269. son of रङ्गराज. 16th cen. 344 गङ्गाधर, a. of रसपझाकर. 593 320 C अलङ्कारचन्द्रिका of वैद्यनाथ, 345 गङ्गाधर v. 324. son of रामचन्द्र about 1683 346 गङ्गाराम जडी. 1732 A. C. 321 C अलङ्कारसुधा or षट्पदानन्द 585, 611-12. ्of नागेशभट्ट 347 गणेश, a. of रसोदधि v. 587. 322 C कारिकादीपिका of आशाधर, 348 गदाधरभट्ट, son of गौरीपति, a. son of रामजीभट्ट. v.108. of रसिकजीवन. 323 C काव्यमअ्जरी by न्यायवागी- 349 गागाभट्ट v. 367. शभट्टाचार्य. 350 गुरुचन्द्रिका (?) 324 C रसिकरञ्ञनी of गङ्गाधर, 351 गुरुतरङगिणी (?) grandson of brother 352 गोपाल, a. of रसमअ्जरीविकास of a pupil of अप्पय्य, 605. who acc. to गङ्गाघर com- 353 गोपालदास a. of भाषाविभूषण. posed over 100 works. 354 गोपालदास v. 10. 325 C by मथुरानाथ 355 गोपालभट्ट 604, 758. 326 C लघ्वलङ्कारचन्द्रिका of देवी- 356 गोपीनाथ v. 259. दत्त. 357 गोपेन्द्रतिप्पभूपाल v. 303, 308. 327 कुवलयानन्दखण्डन or अलङ्गारसा- 358 गोवर्धन, m. in अलङ्कारशेखर of रस्थिति of भीमसेनदीक्षित. Ab- केशवमिश्र (pp. 27, 37). out 1723 A. C. 359 गोविन्द, a. of काव्यदीपिका V. 328 कुवलयामोदिनी- 182. 329 कूटसन्दोह by रामानुज. 330 कृष्ण 53. 360 गोविन्दठक्कर. v. 228, 244.

331 कृष्ण a. cf साहित्यतरङ्गिणी. 361 घासीराम a. of रसचन्द्र. 1696

332 कृष्णकिङ्कर a. of काव्यतत्त्वविवेच A. C. v. 578.

ककौमुदी v. 174, 280. 362 चक्रवर्तिन् a. of सजीविनी and 333 कृष्णदीक्षित a. of रघुनाथभूपालीय. com. on काव्यप्रकाश. v. 79. 555. 363 चण्डीदास, a. of com. on 334 कृष्णद्विवेदिन्, a. of मधुररसा, काव्यप्रकाश. v. 224, 430. v. 235. 364 चन्द्रचूड, a of प्रस्तावचिन्तामणि. 335 कृष्णशर्मा 532-33. 336 कृष्णसूरि 56. 365 चन्द्रालोक of जयदेवपीयूषवर्ष 13th cen. 337 कृष्णानन्दिनी C. on साहित्यकौ- 366 मुदी. C शरदागम or चन्द्रालोक़-

338 केशव, a, of रसिकसज्ीविनी. प्रकाश of प्रद्योतनभट्टाचार्य latter half of 16th cen.

Index of works. INDEX. CLXIX

367 C सुधा or राकागम of विश्वे- 391 जयरामन्यायपन्नानन, a. of तिल- श्वरभट्ट alias गागाभट्ट. क. v. 221. latter half of 17th 392 जल्पकल्पलता of रलमण्डन. v. 3. cen. v. 349. 393 जीवगोस्वामिन्, a. of लोचनरो- 368 C शारदशर्वरी by विरूपाक्ष. चनी (?) 111. 369 C रमा or हरिलोचनचन्द्रिका 394 जीवनाथ 71. of वैद्यनाथ पायगुण्ड. 395 जीवराजशर्मन् a. of सेतु. 590. 370 C प्रदीपिका· 396 तत्त्वपरीक्षा of सुबुद्धिमिश्र. m. by 371 C by वाजचन्द्र रलकण्ठ. 372 C बुधरज्जनी by श्रीवेङ्गटसूरि. 397 तत्त्वालोक of आनन्दवर्धन. m. 373 चन्द्रिका, com. on ध्वन्यालोक by लोचन. m. by लोचन and व्यक्तिविवेक. 398 तत्त्वोक्तिकोश of महिमभट्ट. m. 374 चन्द्रिका v. 281. by व्यक्तिविवेक. 375 चित्रमीमांसा of अप्पय्यदीक्षित. 399 तरल v. 128. 376 C गूढार्थप्रकाशिका by बाळ- 400 तरुणवाचस्पति v. 275. कृष्ण पायगुण्ड. ms.dated 401 तिलक vide 86. 1784 A. C. 402 तिलक v. 221, 391. 377 C सुधा by धरानन्द. com- 403 तौत, a. of काव्यकौतुक. v. 165. ments up to अतिशयोक्ति. 404 त्रिभुवनचन्द्र v. 276. 378 C चित्रालोक. 405 त्रिमल्लभट्ट, a. of अलङ्कारमअ्जरी. 379 चित्रमीमांसाखण्डन of जगन्नाथ 15. पण्डितराज. First half of 406 त्रिलोचनादित्य a. of नाट्यलोचन. 17th cen. 407 त्रिशरणतटभीम a. of चन्द्रिका V. 380 चित्रमीमांसादोषधिक्कार of नील- 281. कण्ठ. 408 दण्डिनू, a. of काव्यादर्श. 274. 381 चिन्नअप्पय्यदीक्षित a. of दोषजि- 409 दशरूप of धनअ्य. about 1000 त्कार A. C. 382 चिरजीव, a. of काव्यविलास 410 C अवलोक of धनिक about 268 1000 A. C. 383 चिरञीवभट्टाचार्य a. of शङ्गार- 411 C by देवपाणि. m. by रङ्गनाथ तटिनी. 384 जगदीश तर्कपञ्जानन a. of रहस्य- on विक्रमोर्वशीय 412 C पद्धति by कुरविराम. V. प्रकाश v. 240. 318. 385 जगन्नाथ पण्डितराज 379, 573. 413 C by नृसिंहभट्टः 386 जनार्दन, a. of C श्लोकदीपिका v. 414 दामोदर हषें v. 31. 245. 415 देवदत्त 766. 387 जयदेव 67, 365. 416 देवनाथ a. of रसिकप्रकाश 388 जयन्त, a. of दीपिका on काव्य- 417 देवशङ्कर 51. प्रकास. v. 223. 418 देवीदत्त, a. of लघ्वलङ्गारचन्द्रिका- 389 जयमङल v. 153. 419 देवेन्द्र or देवेश्वर a. of कविकल्प- 390 नयरथ 78, 97. लता. v. 143. 0

CLXX SÂHITYADARPAŅA. Index of works.

420 दोषजित्कार v. 381. 16th cen. refers to साहित्य- 421 धनअ्ञय, a. of दशरूप. 409. दर्पण and रसार्णवसुधाकर. 422 धनिक, v. 184, 410. 447 नाटकदर्पण of रामचन्द्र. 423 धर्मदत्त. m. in the साहित्यदर्पण. 448 नाटकपरिभाषा of शिङ्गधरणीश- 424 धर्मदास. v. 705 About 1350 A. C. 425 धर्मसूरि 832. 449 नाटकप्रकाश m. in रलनापण. 426 धर्मवाचस्पति a. of काव्यादर्शटीका. Same as 275 (?) 450 नाटकमीमांसा by a. of अलक्कार-

427 ध्वनिगाथापजजिका of रलनाकर. सर्वस्व. m. in व्यक्तिविवेकटीका ( p. 32 ). 428 ध्वनिप्रदीप of पुज्जराज. 451 नाटकलक्षण of पुण्डरीक. 429 ध्वनिविवेक. 452 नाट्यदर्पण. 430 ध्वनिसिद्धान्तसंग्रह of चण्डीदास. 453 नाट्यप्रदीप of सुन्दरमिश्र. 1613 m. in 224. A. C. 431 ध्वन्यालोक or सहृदयालोक of 451 नाट्यलोचन of त्रिलोचनादित्य. v. आनन्दवर्धन. latter half of 406. 9th cen. v. 104. 455 C व्याख्याअन by himself. 432 C चन्द्रिका v. 373. 456 ना्यशास्त्र of भरत. Between 433 C लोचन by अभिनवगुप्त. 200 B. C. and 300 A. C.

434 CC लोचनव्याख्याकौमुदी by 457 Cअभिनवभारती or नाट्यवेद- परमेश्वराचार्य. विवृति by अभिनवगुप्त- 435 CC by दाशरथि. 1000 A. C.

436 नञ्जराजयशोभूषण of नरसिंह- 458 नाट्यशास्त्र of वसन्तराज. m. in

कवि alias अभिनवकालिदास रल्नापण.

Illustrations relate to नअ 459a नायक vide भट्टनायक

राज, son of वीरभूप. 459 नायिकादर्पण of रामकवि

437 नमिसाधु, &. of com. on रुद्रट. 460 नायिकावर्णन by रामशर्मन्· v. 299. 461 नारायणदेव 33.

438 नरसिंह v. 283. 462 निर्मलभटटृ a. of अलङ्कारमअ्जरी. 439 नरसिंह 436. Probably same as 405.

440 नरसिंहठक्कुर a. of मनीषा v. 463 नीलकण्ठ 380.

226. 464 नूतनतरि 584.

441 नरहरि सरस्वतीतीर्थ v. 231. 465 नृसिंह केशव a. of पाण्डवराजयशो- भूषण (१). 475. 442 नरहरि a. of रसनिरूपण m. 466 नेमिसाह a. of स्राहित्यसुधा. 589 by रत्ापण (pp. 224, 295). 467 नौका by गङ्गाराम- 585. 443 नवरसरत्हार of शिवराम त्रिपा- 468 नौका by वेङ्गटसूरि. 834. ठिन् . 444 नागराजकेशव a. of पदवृत्ति. V. 470 469 पञ्रसायक of ज्योतिरीश C लक्ष्यवेधन by साहिबाम- 227. 471 पदवृत्ति. 227. 445 नागेश or नागोजिमट्ट v. 88, 212, 230, 321, 574, 601. 472 परमात्मविनोद by गुणनिधि. 473 परमानन्दचक्वर्तिन् vं. 243. 446 नाटकचन्द्रिका of रूपगोस्वामी. 474 परमेश्वराचार्य. 434.

Index of works. INDEX. CLXXI

475 पाण्ड (ण्ड्य?) राजयशोभूषण of | 503 भट्टि, a. of भट्टिकाव्य. 500-600 नृसिंह. Same as 465 (?) A. C. 476 पाल्यकीर्ति m. by काव्यमी. 504 भट्टेन्दुराज vide इन्दुराज. 477 पुअराज v. 305, 428, 752. 505 भरत, a. of नाट्यशास्त्र. 456. 478 पुण्डरीक a. of नाटकलक्षण. 451 506 भरतार्णव of नन्दिकेश्रवर. 479 पुरुषोत्तम m. in साहित्यदर्पण. 507 भानुकर or भानुदत्त 40. v. 151. 508 भानुदत्तमिश्र About 1300. A. 480 पोण्डरीकरामेश्वर. 624. C. 581, 598. 481 प्रतापरुद्रय शोभूषण of विद्यानाथ. 509 भामह, a. of काव्यालङ्कार 296. First quarter of the 14th 510 C भामहविवरण by उद्द्ट. 297. cen. 511 भावतरङ्गिणी. 482 C रलशाण. Later than 512 भावप्रकाश of शारदातनय. m. by रलापण- रसार्णवसुधाकर and रतनापण- 483 C रल्नापण of कुमारस्वामिन् 513 भावप्रदीप. v. 317. 514 भावमिश्र 768. 484 प्रतीहारेन्दुराज. v. 85. 515 भावलवव्याख्या. 485 प्रदयोतनभट्टाचार्य 366. 486 प्रधानवेङ्कप्पय्य 52. 516 भाषाविभूषण by गोपालदास 353. 517 भास्करमिश्र. V. 256. 487 प्रभा, by गोपीनाथ 356, 824. 518 भीमसेन vide 87, 92, 257, 327. 488 प्रमा by वैदनाथ. 229. 519 भीमेश्वरभट्ट, 622. 489 प्रभाकर 62, 129, 595. 1583 520 भूदेवशुक्क- 619. A. C. 521 भोजदेव or भोजराज first half 490 प्रस्तावचिन्तामणि of चन्द्रचूड V. of 11th cen. 760, 794. 364. 522 मङ्ग, pupil of रुय्यक, said to 491 बलदेव, a. of शुङ्गारहार. 773. be a. of वृत्ति in अलं. स. 492 बालकवि a. of कर्पूररसमञ्जरी. v. 1125-1150 A. C.

135. 523 मङ्गल m. by राजशेखर, हेमचन्द्र, 493 बालकृष्ण v. 83. सोमेश्वर. 494 बालकृष्ण पायगुण्ड 376. 524 मङ्गलमयूखमालिका of वरदाचार्य. 495 बिन्दलक्कार (विद्वदल०?) of हरि- 525 मजीरध्वनिकोमल. हर. m. in एकावली ( p. 242). 526 मथुरानाथ v. 325, 827. 496 बुधरजिनी. 527 मधुधारा, com. on अलक्कारमअ्जरी, 497 बेचाराम सार्वभौम v. 144. by सुधीन्द्रयति. 498 भगवत्कवि v. 101. 528 मधुमति गणेश v. 180, 217. 499 भगवद्दट्ट 584. 529 मधुमती 234. 500 भगीरय v. 277. 530 मधुररसा of कृष्णद्विवेदिन्. 235. 501 भटटृगोपाल or लौहित्यभट्टगोपाल a. 531 मनोधर, 179, 218. of साहित्यचूडामणि 255. 532 मन्दारमरन्दचम्पू of कृष्णशर्म and भट्टतात vide तौत. चन्द्रदेवशर्म. mentions भोजराज, 502 भट्टनायक, a. of हृदयदर्पण. 900- आानन्दवीर्थ. Probably 15th 1000 A. C cen. v. 335.

CLXXII SÂHITYADARPAŅA. Index of works.

533 C माघुर्यरञ्ञनी by the same 559 रत्नपाणि, a. of काव्यदर्पण V. ( vide p. 42 ). quotes 176, 236. प्रतापरुद्रीय, रसतरङ्गिणी, 560 रलनभूषण a. of काव्यकौमुदी. v. मेदिनी· 169. 534 मम्मट, a. of काव्यप्रकाश. 188. 561 रत्नमण्डनगणि. 547. 535 मल्िनाथ a. of तरल v. 128. 562 रलमाला of लक्ष्मणभट्ट. 536 मल्िनाथ, son of जगन्नाथ, a. of 563 रखशाण 482. वैमल्यविधायिनी v. 285. 564 रलशोभाकर of कृष्णसूरि 56. 537 महादेव. 588, 602. 565 रत्नाकर a. of ध्वनिगाथापजिका 538 महामहेश्वरकवि a. of एकावली. 427. v. 126. 566 रलाकर same as 58. 539 महिमभट्ट, a. of व्यक्तिविवेक 567 रलनापण v. 317, 483. 1000-1050 A. C. v. 398. 568 रलेश्वर, a. of रतदर्पण 796. 540 महेश्वर (सुबुद्धिमिश्र) v 310. 569 रमा com. on चन्द्रालोक. 369. 541 महेश्वरभट्टाचार्य v. 209. 570 रवि, a. of मधुमती v. 234. 542 मातृगुप्ताचार्य m. by नाट्यप्रदीप 571 रसकलिका m. by वासुदेव on कर्पू- and राघवभट्ट रमञ्जरी. 543 माणिक्यचन्द्र v. 247. 572 रसकौमुदी of घासीरामपण्डित. 544 मानसिंह a. of साहित्यसार. 839. 573 रसगङ्गाधर of जगन्नाथ. 379, 385. 545 मार्जन by हरिनाथ. 282, 797. 574 C मर्मप्रकाश of नागेशभट्ट 546 मुकुलभट्ट 7. First half of 18th cen. 547 मुग्धमेधाकर of रत्नमण्डनगणि. 575 C विषमपदी. 1460 A.C. 576 रसगन्ध 548 मेधावि (रुद्र) m. by भामह and 577 रसगान्धार नमिसाधु- 578 रसचन्द्र of घासीराम 361. 549 यज्ञेश्वरदीक्षित 63, 91. 579 रसचन्द्रिका of विश्वेश्वर, son of 550 यमकरलाकर by श्रीवत्साङ्कमिश्र. लक्ष्मीघर 10th cen. 580 रसतरङ्गिणी. v. 758. 551 यशस्कर. 60. 581 रसतरङ्गिणी of भानुदत्त end of 552 यशस्विकवि a. of साहित्यकौतूहल. 13th cen. v. 115, 814. 582 C by अयोध्याप्रसाद· 553 यायावरीय m. in काव्यमीमांसा, 583 C by दिनकर. हेमचन्द्र, राजशेखर. 584 C नूतनतरि by भगवद्दट्ट- 464 554 रघुदेव. v. 207. 585 C नौका by गङ्गाराम जडी. V. 555 रघुनाथभूपालीय of कृष्णयज्वन्. 346,467. Illustrations in honour of : 586 C रसिकरज्ञिनी by वेणीदत्त. king रघुनाथ. mentions काव्य- 1553 A.C. प्रकाश and विद्यानाथ. v333. 587 556 रलनकण्ठ v. 251. C रसोदघि by गणेश ms.

557 रतदर्पण by रल्नेश्वर 796. dated 1698 A. C v. 347. 558 रल्नपरिणाम. 589 C रसोदधि by महादेव.

Index of works. INDEX, CLXXIII

589 C साहित्यसुधा of नेमिसाइ. 590 C सेतु by जीवराजशर्मा. 395. अलराज or मलराज. m. in the

591 रसदीर्घिका of विद्याराम रसतरङ्गिणी. About 12th cen.

592 रसनिरूपण 442. mentions कविकक्कण v. 98.

593 रसपझ्ाकर of गङ्गाधर v. 344. 615 रसरलहार of शिवराम त्रिपाठिन्

594 रसप्रकाश of कृष्णशर्म. quotes रसमज्जरी and its टीका व्यज्चयार्थकौमुदी ( p.124). 595 रसप्रदीप of प्रभाकर, son of भट्ट- 616 C लक्ष्मीविहार by himself. माधव and grandson of भट्ट- 617 रसरलाकर m. by मल्ि. on रामेश्वर. 1583 A.C. किराता 9.71. 596 रसबिन्दु. 618 रसरलावली of वीरेश्वरपण्डित. ms. •597 रसमअरी of लक्ष्मीधर. dated 1646 A. C. 598 रसमअ्री of भानुदत्त. 508. 619 रसविलास of शुक्कभूदेव. 520. 599 C आमोद by रङ्गशायिन् alias 620 रसविवेक name not known; गुरिजालशायिन्, v. 107. younger brother of सौजन्य- 600 C परिमल by शेषचिन्तामणि, भूषण- son of शेषनृसिंह- 621 रससमुच्चय 601 C प्रकाश by नागेशभट्ट काल, 622 रससर्वस्व of भीमेश्वरभट्ट. 519. son of शिवभट्ट 623 रससागर m. by मल्लिनाथ on 602 C भानुभावप्रकाशिनी by महा- शिशु. 15. 89. देव. 537. 624 रससिन्धु of पौण्डरीकरामेश्वर. 480 603 C रसिकरअ्ञन by ब्रजराज 625 रससुधाकर m. in नाटकचन्द्रिका दीक्षित of रूपगोस्वामी 604 C रसिकरजिनी by गोपालभट्ट, 626 रससुधार्णव of आनन्ददास v. 103 son of हरिवंशभट्ट, son of 627 रसाकर नृसिंह. 628 रसामृतशेष of रूपगोस्वामी 605 C विकास by गोपाल alias 629 रसामृतसिन्धु. वोपदेव, son of नृसिंह. 630 रसार्णव by सिंहमहीपति(Burnell 1437 A. C. v. 352. 57 a ). 18th century (?). 606 C व्यज्ार्थकौमुदी by अनन्तप Same as 632 (?) ण्डित. 1635 A. C. v.5. 631 रसार्णव. m. in the रलापण (p. 607 C व्यड््यार्थकौमुदो or समञ्जसा 226 ). Probably same as by विश्वेश्वर, son of the next. लक्ष्मीधर 632 रसार्णवसुधाकर by शिङ्रभूपाल. 608 C व्यड्गयार्थदीपिका by आनन्द- About 1350 A. C. शर्मन्. v. 105. 633 रसिकजीवन of गदाघरभट्ट. 348. 609 C स्थूलतात्पर्यार्थ. 634 रसिकप्रकाश of देवनाथ 416. 610 C by रमानाथवैद्य. 635 रसिकरजन 603. 611 रसमीमांसा of गङ्गारामजडी 636 रसिकरजिनी com. of गङ्गाधर 324 612 C छाया by himself. 637 " com. of गोपालभट्ट. 613 रसरलकोश 638 रसिकरजिनी com. of विश्वनाथ 614 रसरलदीपिका or रसरलप्रदीप of on काव्यादर्श. 284.

CLXXIV SÂHITYADARPANA. Index of works.

639 रसिकरजिनी com. of वेणीदच quotes कविकण्ठपाश, साहित्य- 586. चन्द्रोदय and साहित्यरलाकर- 640 रसिकसओविनी of केशव, 338. 668 लक्षणमालिका 641 रसिकसर्वस्व. 669 C अलङ्गकारेन्दुशेखर of श्रीशैल 642 रसोदधि by मोहनदास नृसिंहकवि· 643 रसोदधि 587. 670 लक्ष्मणभट्ट. 562. 644 588. 671 लक्ष्मीधर 597 645 राकागम by विश्वेश्वर. 367. 672 लक्ष्मीनाथभट्ट 795. 646 राघवचैतन्य v. 147. 673 लघ्वलङ्गारचन्द्रिका 326. 647 राजचूडामणिदीक्षित 70, 177. 674 लोकनाथ 29. 648 राजशेखर v. 263. 675 लोचन 433. 649 रामकवि 459. 676 C व्याख्याकौमुदी 434. 650 रामचन्द्र. v. 447. 677 लोचनरोचनी. 11. 651 रामचन्द्रदीक्षित a. of शब्दभेद- 678 लोलट m. in काव्यप्रकाश निरूपण. 679 लौहित्यभट्टगोपाल. v.255. 652 रामचन्द्रन्यायवागीश a. of क्ाव्य- 680 वक्रोक्तिजीवित of कुन्तक v. 316 चन्द्रिका. v. 172. 681 वत्सलाञ्छनभट्टाचार्य v. 250. 653 रामचन्द्रयशोभूषण of कच्छपेश्वर- 682 वनतरङ्गिणी com. on रुट्रट V. दीक्षित. Illustrations in ho- 301. nour of बोम्मराज. 132. 654 रामचरण. 826. 683 वरदाचार्य v. 116, 524.

655 रामशर्मन्. 460. 684 वलभदेव v. 302.

656 रामसुधीवर 55. 685 वलभभट्ट a. of अलक्कारकौमुद्दी. 19

657 रामसुब्रह्मण्य 68. 686 वसन्तराज. 458.

658 रामानुज v. 329. 687 वाक्पतिपाद m. by सोमेश्वर

659 रीतिवृत्तिलक्षण by विठ्ठल. 688 वाक्पतिराज m. by काव्यमी.

660 रचक vide रुय्यक. Probably same as above.

661 रुच्विनाथमिश्र m. by 689 वाग्भट v. 288-89. प्रभाकर in रसप्रदीप. 690 वाग्भट, son of सोम, a. of वा-

662 रुद्रट 298. ग्भटालक्कार. 1100-1160 A.C.

663 रुद्रभट्ट, a. of 691 वाग्भटालङ्कार, of वाग्भट, son 900-1100 A. C. शङ्गारतिलक, of सोम. 690.

664 रुय्यक (राजानक) V. 77, 692 C by आदिनाथ- 246, 805, 830. 693 C by जिनवर्धन 1404-1418 665 रूपगोस्वामी v. 110, 446, 628. A. C.

666 लक्षणदीपिका of गौरनार्य- also 694 C समासान्वयटिप्पन by क्षेम-

called पदार्थेदीपिका and प्रबन्ध- हंसगणि v. 341.

दीपिका quotes साहित्यचूडामणि. 695 C विवरण by गणेश ms.

667 लक्षणदीपिका (another work?). copied in 1713 A. C.

by गौरनार्य (Mad. Govt. 696 C by समयसुन्दर 697 C by सिंहदेवगणि mss. cat. 1918 p. 8694 ). 698 C ज्ञानप्रमोदिका by वाचना-

Index of works. INDEX. CLXXV

चार्य प्रमोदगणि 1625| 730 वैदयनाथपायगुण्ड, son of रामचन्द्र, A. C. v. 210, 229, 320, 369. 699 C by राजहंसोपाध्याय 731 व्यक्तिविवेक ्of महिमभट्ट. 539. 700 वादिघङ्गल v. 278. 732 C व्याख्या or विचार by a. 701 वामन v. 306-7. ्of अलङ्कारसर्वस्व 702 विजयानन्द v. 279. 733 व्यङ्ग्यार्थकौमुददी 606. 703 विठ्ठल 659. " or समजसा, by 704 विठ्ठलेश्वर 765. विश्वेश्वर 607. 705 विदग्धमुखमण्डन of धर्मदास. m. 734 व्यञ्ञ्यार्थदीपिका of आनन्दशर्मन् by भानुचन्द्र in कादम्बरीटीका 608. and by रलापण- 735 व्यतिरेकावली. 706 C विद्वन्मनोहरा by ताराचन्द्र 736 ्रजराजदीक्षित. 603. 707 C by आत्माराम 736 a शङकक m. by कान्यप्र. 708 C by जिनप्रभसूरि· 737 शङधर v. 142. 709 C श्रवणभूषण by नरहरिभट्ट. 738 शब्दमेदनिरूपण of रामचन्द्रदीक्षित 710 C सुबोधिनी by त्रिलोचन. and नारायणशास्त्रिन्· 711 विद्याधर v. 127. 739 शब्दव्यापारविचार of मम्मट. 534. 712 विद्यानाथ- v. 481. 740 शब्दार्थचिन्तामणि of चिदम्बरकवि- 713 विद्याभूषण a. of साहित्यकौमुदी 741 शब्दालङ्कारमज्जरी. v. 252. 742 शम्भुनाथ 64. 714 विद्याराम a. of रसदीर्घिका 591. 743 शरच्चन्द्रिका of सुब्रह्मण्यशास्त्रिन्· 715 विनयचन्द्र v. 270. 744 शशघर. v. 315. 716 विरूपाक्ष a. of शारदशर्वरी 368. 745 शान्तराज 38. : 17 विश्वनाथकविराज a. of साहित्य- 746 शारदशर्वरी 368. दर्पण. 14th cen. v. 222, 823 747 शारदागम by प्रघोतनभट्ट 366. 718 विश्वनाथचक्रवती 112. 748 शारदातनय a. of भावप्रकाश 512. 719 विश्वेश्वर alias गागाभट्ट 367. 749 शिङ्गधरणीश or-भूपाल 448,632. 720 विश्वेश्वरपण्डित 21, 57, 156. 750 शिवराम त्रिपाठिन् 75, 443, 615. 175, 579, 607. 751 शिशुप्रबोध काव्यालङ्कार of विष्णु- 721 विष्णुदास v. 148, 751. दास- 722 वीरनारायण 820. 752 शिशुप्रबोधालङ्कार of पुश्जराज 723 वीरेश्वरपण्डित a. of रसरलावलि. 753 शुभविजयगणि v. 164. 618. 754 शृद्गारकौस्तुभ. 724 वृत्तिवार्तिक of अप्पय्यदीक्षित. 755 पृङ्गारतटिनी of चिरजजीवभट्टाचार्य 725 वृन्दावन 27. 383. 726 वेङ्ूटनृसिंहकवि v. 95. 756 शद्ारतरङ्गिणी 727 वेङ्कटसूरि a. of नौका on साहित्य- 757 रद्ारतिलक of रुद्रभट्ट 663. रलाकर. 758 C रसतरङ्गिणी by गोपालभट्ट 728 वेङ्टाचार्य a. of अलङ्कारकौतुम son of इरिवंशभट्ट. 580. 30. 759 शङ्गारदीपिका of भानुदत्त. 729 वेणीदत्तशर्मन् 35, 586. 760 शद्ारप्रकाश of मोजदेव. m. in

CLIXVI SÂHITYADARPAŅA. Index of works

एकावली (p. 9S) and रलापण 791 सनातनगोस्वामी v.111. (p. 221 ). 792 समुद्रबन्ध v. 80 761 शृङ्गारमेदप्रदीप of हरिहर. 793 संप्रदायप्रकाशिनी of विद्याचक्- 762 शृङ्ारमज्जरी of अजितसेन. latter वर्तिन्. 248 half of 10th cen. 794 सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण of भोजदेव. 763 श हारमण्डन. 521. 764 शृङ्गाररलाकर. 795 C दुष्कर चित्र प्रकाशिका by 765 शङ्गाररसमण्डन of विठ्ठलेश्वर. लक्ष्मीनाथभट्ट. 766 शृह्गाररसविलास of देवदत्त v. 796 C रत्नदर्पण by रलनेश्वर on 3 415. परिच्छेदs only. 557. 767 शृङ्गारलता of सुखदेवमिश्र. 797 C मार्जन by हरिनाथ. 768 शृङ्गारसरसी of भावमिश्र. 514. 798 C विवरण by जगद्धर; son of 769 शृङ्गारसार of वेङ्गटनारायणदीक्षित. रल्नधर on four परिच्छेदs 770 शृद्ारसारावलि of वेङ्गटनारायण- 799 Chy इरिकृष्णव्यास दीक्षित. Same as above (?) 800 सरस्वतीतीर्थ (नरहरि before 771 शृङ्गारसारोदधि of सुधाकरपौण्ड- taking संन्यास) v. 231. रीकयाजि 801 सरोजकलिका of काव्यरत. 772 शृङ्गारसारिणी of चित्रधर. 802 सर्वस्वसओ्जीविनी by चक्रवर्तिन्. 79 773 शृङ्गारहार of बलदेव 491. 803 सर्वालङ्कारसंग्रह of अमृतानन्दयो- 774 शृद्गारामृतलहरी of सामराजदीक्षित गिन्, written for king मन्म, 775 शेषचिन्तामणि- 600. son of भक्ति. 12th cen. same 776 शोभाकरमिश्र 58. as 73. 777 शौद्धोदनि 89. S04 सइदेव v. 309. 778 श्यामदेव m. by काव्यमी. 805 सहृदयलीला of राजानकरुय्यक 779 श्रीकरमिश्र 42. About 1150 A. C. 780 श्रीधर v. 241. सहृदयालोक or सहदयहृदयालोक 781 श्रीनिवास v. 272. v. ध्वन्यालोक. 782 श्रीनिवासदीक्षित a. of काव्यदर्पण. 806 सामराजदीक्षित 774. v. 178. 807 सारबोधिनी ofश्रीवत्सला्छन 250. 783 श्रीपाद m. in अलङ्गारश्ेखर (pp. 5, 6, 27, 32 &c). Earlier 808 सारसमुच्चय of रलकण्ठ 251. 809 साहितीसार of सीताराम- than कविकल्पलता acC. to 810 साहित्यकण्टकोद्धार. केशवमिश्र (p. 48). 784 श्रीवत्सलान्छन. v. 187, 292. 811 साहित्यकल्पद्रम.

785 श्रीवत्साङ्कमिश्र. 550. 812 साहित्यकल्पवल्ली of अनन्त.

786 श्रोकदीपिका of गोविन्दठक्कर 244. 813 साहित्यकलोलिनी of भाष्यकारा- चार्य based on काव्यप्रकाश, 787 of जनार्दन 245. 788 चट्पदानन्द of नागेश- 321. रसार्णवसुधाकर.

789 षट्सहस्रीकृत m. by धनिक on 814 साहित्यकौतूहल of यशस्विकवि, son of गोपाल and काशी. v. दशरूप (IV. 2). 115. 790 सदलङ्कारचन्द्रिका 815 C उजज्वलपदा by same.

Index of works. INDEX. CLXXVII

816 साहित्यकौमुदी of विद्याभूषण 252. 843 सिंहभूपाल or शिङ्गभूपाल a. of 817 C कृष्णानन्दिनी v. 253, 337. रसार्णवसुधाकर. 632. 818 साहित्यचन्द्र com. on काव्यप्रका- 844 सीताराम 809. शकारिकाs. 845 सुखदेवमिश्र a. of शृङ्गारलता. 819 साहित्यचन्द्रिका 767. 820 साहित्यचिन्तामणि of वीरनारायण 846 सुखलाल 49. m.in रल्नापण (p.97), कामधेनु 847 सुधा of गागाभट्ट 367. and वृत्तिवार्तिक (p.4). 848 सुधाकर a. of शङ्गारसारोदधि. 821 साहित्यचूडामणि of भट्टगोपाल 849 सुधासागर or सुखोदधि of भीमसेन 255. 257. 822 साहित्यतरङ्गिणी of कृष्ण v. 331. 850 सुधीन्द्रयति 50. 823 साहित्यदर्पण of विश्वनाथकविराज 851 सुधेन्द्र (सुधीन्द्र) 44. 14th cen. 852 सुन्दरमिश्र a. of नाट्यप्रदीप 453. 824 C प्रभा by गोपीनाथ C लोचन by अनन्तदास. ms. 853 सुबुद्धिमिश्र a. of तत्त्वपरीक्षा. 396. 825 854 सुबुद्धिमिश्रमहेश्वर. v. 310. dated 1636 A. C. 855 सुबोधिनी of वेङ्कटाचलसूरि 258. 826 C रामचरण 1700-1 A.C. 856 827 C by मथुरानाथशुक्क. सुब्रह्मण्यशास्त्रिन् a. of शरच्चन्द्रिका 743. 828 साहित्यदीपिका of भास्करमिश्र 256 857 सुमनोमनोहरा of गोपीनाथ 259. 829 साहित्यबोध of सीताराम- 858 सुरानन्द m. by काव्यमी. 830 साहित्यमीमांसा of रुय्यक. m. in 859 सूर्यकवि v. 145. अल. स. (p. 61 ) and व्यक्ति- 860 सोमेश्वर, son of भट्टदेवक विवेकटीका (p.33). v. 219. 831 साहित्यमुक्तावलि. 861 सौभाग्यक्रमदीपिका on nine 832 साहित्यरललाकर of धर्मसूरि, son rasas. of पर्वतनाथ. 425. 862 हरि m. by नमिसाधु on रुद्रट 2. 833 C मन्दर of मल्ादिलक्ष्मणसूरि 19 (as a writer on अलङ्गार 834 C नौका by वेङ्कटसूरि, son of in Prakrit). लक्ष्मणसूरि and disciple 863 हरिश्चन्द्र m. in शङ्गाररलाकर of वेङ्कटार्य. 468. 864 हरिनाथ a. of मार्जन 282, 797. 835 साहित्यसर्वस्व of महेश्वर.310. 865 हरिप्रसाद 294, 312. 836 साहित्यसङ्ग्रह of शम्भुदास. 866 हरिलोचनचन्द्रिका or रमा of 837 साहित्यसार of अच्युतराय मोडक वैद्यनाथ. 369. 1831 A. C. 867 इरिहर a. of शृङ्गारमेदप्रदीप 838 C सरसामोद. v. 761. 839 साहित्यसार of मानसिंह. 544. 868 हर्षमिश्र m. in रसप्रदीप. 840 साहित्यसुधा or काव्यसुधा of नेमिसाह. 589. 869 इलघररथ v.173. 870 हृदयङ्गमा 287. 841 साहित्यसुधासिन्धु of विश्वनाथ. 871 हृदयदर्पण of भट्टनायक. v. 502. 17th cen. 872 हेमचन्द्र a. of काव्यानुशासन. V. 842 साहित्यसूक्ष्मसरणि of श्रीनिवास. 290-91.

A List of some of the Abbreviations employed in the work.

B .- The Sahityadarpana, published in the B. I. Series. B. I .- Bibliotheca Indica Series. B. S. S .- Bombay Sanskrit series. Chan .- Prof. Chandorkar's edition of the Kavyaprakas'a ( I, II and X Ullāsas ). E. I .- Epigraphia Indica. H. S. L .- History of Sanskrit Literature. I. O. Cat .- India Office Mss. catalogue. I. A .- Indian Antiquary volumes. J .- The Sahityadarpana, published by Jivānanda Vidyāsāgara. JASB .- Journal, Asiatic Society, Bengal. JBBRAS .- Journal, Bombay Branch, Royal Asiatic Society. JRAS .- 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 Tarkavagisa. K. M .- Kāvyamālā series. K. P .- The Kavyaprakas'a of Mammata. K. P. Pr .- The Kavyaprakas'a-pradīpa, a comment on the Kav- yaprakās'a by Govinda Thakkura (K. M. series ). Kuval .- The Kuvalayananda of Appayya Dikshita, with the Alankārachandrikā ( Nir ). Lankika N .- The Laukika-nyayaujali of Colonel Jacob. N .- The Sahityadarpana, published by the Nirnaya-sagar press. Nai .- The Naishadhiyacharita of S'riharsha. Nir. or Nirnaya .- The Nirnaya-sagar edition ( of a work ). N. S .- The Nyaya-sūtra of Gautama. P. L. M .- The Paramalaghumañjusha of Nāges'abhatta. R. G .- The Rasagangadhara of Jagannātha (K. M. series ). Raghu .- Raghuvams'a. Ru .- Rudrata's Kāvyālankāra ( K. M. series ). S'ak .- The Abhijaana-S'akuntala. S. D .- The Sahityadarpana. Subha .- Subhāshitāvali. T. B .- The Tarkabhasha ( Mr. Paranjape's edition of 1909 ). T. D .- The Tarkadīpika of Annambhatța. T. S .- The Tarkasangraha of Annambhatta. Ul .- Ullāsa.

ABBREVIATIONS. CLXXIX

Va .- Vamanacharya's 4th edition of the Kavyaprakas'a (1921). Vakyap .- The Vakyapadiya of Bhartrihari ( Benares edition ). V. O. J .- Vienna Oriental Journal. V. P .- The Vedāntaparibhāshā. ( Bombay ). V. Sara .- The Vedantasāra (edited by Col. Jacob ). अ० अध्याय अग्नि०, अग्निपु0 अगनिपुराण (B. I. edition). अभिधा०, अ.वृ. मा. अभिधावृत्तिमातृका (निर्णय. ed. of 1916). अ. वि. अलङ्कारचूडामणिविवेक (comment of हेमचन्द्र on his own काव्यानुशासन). अल.शे. अलङ्कारशेखर of केशवमिश्र (काव्यमाला series). अल. स. or अलं. स. अलङ्कारसर्वस्व of रुय्यक (काव्यमाला series). अ. स. वि. or अलं. स. वि. अलङ्कारसर्वस्वविमर्शिनी of जयरथ (काव्यमाला series ). उ. च. उदाहरणचन्द्रिका ( as containedin the edi- tion of the काव्यप्रदीप in the काव्यमाला). उत्तरराम० उत्तररामचरित of भवभूति. उद्द्योत काव्यप्रकाशप्रदीपोद्योत of नागेशभट्ट (contained in Prof. Chandorkar's edition of the काव्यप्रकाश).

उद्भट अलङ्कारसारसंग्रह of उन्ध्ट with the वृत्ति of प्रतीहारेन्दुराज (Nir. edition). ए०, एका० एकावली of विद्याधर ( Bombay Sanskrit Series ). का० प्र०, or काव्यप्र. काव्यप्रकाश of मम्मट. काव्यमी० काव्यमीमांसा of राजशेखर (Gaikwad Orien- tal series ). काव्या० काव्यादर्श of दण्डिन्. काव्यालङ्कार०or काव्या०सृ० काव्यालङ्गारसूत्र of वामन (काव्यमाला series). कुव० कुवलयानन्द of अप्पय्यदीक्षित (Nir. edition). कुमार० कुमारसम्भव. चि. मी. चित्रमीमांसा of अप्पय्यदीक्षित (काव्यमाला). नरल एकावलीतरल of मल्िनाथ (printed in the edition of the एकावली by Mr. Trivedi ). गाथा0 गाथासप्तशती of हाल ( Nir.). छा० उ० छान्दोग्य उपनिषद्. ज० साहित्यदर्पण (printed by Jivananda). दश० दशकुमारचरित. दशरु० दशरूप with अवलोक. स्व०, ध्वन्या० ध्वन्यालोक of आनन्दवर्धन (काव्यमाला)-

CLXXX SÂHITYADARPANA.

नाट्य० ना्यशाखत्र. नि० साहित्यदर्पण (the निर्णयसागर edition). न्या० सू० न्यायसूत्र of गौतम. प० ल० म० परमलघुमअ्ञषा of नागेशभट्ट. पा० अष्टाध्यायी of पाणिनि. पुण्य० पुण्यराज, the commentator of the वाक्यपदीय. प्दीप काव्यप्रकाशप्रदीप of गोविन्दठक्कर (काव्यमाला) प्रभा Commentary on the प्रदीप of गोविन्दठक्कर. साहित्यदर्पण (B. I. edition) बृहत्कथा० बृहत्कथामञ्जरी of क्षेमेन्द्र. भरतनाट्य नाट्यशास्त्र of भरत ( Nir. ) रघु० रघुवंश. रसगं० रसगङ्गाधर of जगन्नाथ (Nir.) राम० रामचरण, the commentator of the साहित्यदर्पण. लोचन ध्वन्यालोकलोचन of अभिनवगुप्त वाग्भटाल0 वि०, विम०, विमर्शिनी वाग्भटालद्कार (काव्यमाला series). अलङ्कारसर्वस्वविमर्शिनी of जयरथ. विष्णुपु0 विष्णुपुराण ( Bombay edition). व्यक्ति० व्यक्तिविवेक (Trivandrum ed. of 1909). श० व्या० वि० शब्दव्यापारविचार of मम्मट ( Nir. edition). शा० अभिज्ञानशाकुन्तल of कालिदास. शा० दी० शास्त्रदीपिका of पार्थसारथिमिश्र. शार्ङ्ग० शार्ङ्गधरपद्धति. शृङ्गार० शङ्गारतिलक. शिशु० शिशुपाळवध of माघ- शोकवा० श्ोकवार्तिक of कुमारिलभट्ट· सरस्वती० or सरस्वतीक० सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण of भोज (Benares edition). साहित्य०, साहित्यद० साहित्यदर्पण. सि० कौ० सिद्धान्तकौमुदी ( Nir.) सुभा० सोमेश्वर सुभाषितावलि. a. of commentary on the काव्यप्रकाश ( Ms. in the Bhau Daji collection in Bombay Asiatic Society ). हष० हर्षचरित of बाण

।। श्रीः ।। श्रीमद्विश्वनाथकविराजप्रणीतः । साहित्यदर्पणः ।

प्रथम: परिच्छेदः ।

ग्रन्थारम्भे निर्विघ्नेन प्रारिप्सितपरिसमापतिकामो वाडायाधिकृततया 5 वाग्देवताया: सांमुख्यमाधत्ते- शरदिन्दुसुन्दररुचिश्रेतसि सा मे गिरां देवी। अपहृत्य तमः सन्ततमर्थानखिलान्प्रकाशयतु ॥ १॥ अस्य ग्रन्थस्य काव्याङ्तया काव्यफलैरेव फलवत्वमिति काव्यफलान्याह- चतुर्वर्गफलप्राप्तिः सुखादल्पधियामपि। 10 काव्यादेव यतस्तेन तत्स्वरूपं निरुप्यते ॥ २॥ चतुर्वर्गफलप्राप्तिर्हि काव्यतो रामादिवत्प्रवर्तितव्यं न रावणादिवदित्यादि- कृत्याकृत्यप्रवृत्तिनिवृत्त्युप देशद्वारेण सुप्रतीतैव। उक्त च- 'धर्मार्थकाममोक्षेषु वैचक्षण्यं कलासु च। 15 करोति कीति प्रीतिं च साधुकाव्यनिषेवणम् ।।' दति।

शब्द: सुप्रयुक्त: सम्यग्ज्ञातः खवर्गे लोके' कामधुग्भवति' इत्यादिवेदवाक्ये- भ्यश्च सुप्रसिद्धैव । अर्थप्राप्तिश्र प्रत्यक्षसिद्धा। कामप्रापिश्चार्थद्वारैव। मोक्षप्राप्तिश्चतजन्यधर्मफलाननुसन्धानात, मोक्षोपयोगिवाकये व्युत्पत्या-20 धायकत्वाच्च। चतुर्वर्गप्राप्तिर्हि वेदशास्त्रेभ्यो नीरसतया दुःखादेव परिणत- बुद्धीनामेव जायते। परमानन्दसन्दोहजनकतया सुखादेव सुकुमारबुद्धी- नामपि पुनः काव्यादेव। ननु त्हि परिणतबुद्धिभि: सत्सु वेदशास्त्रेषु किमिति काव्ये यस:

१ 'स्वर्गे लोके च' इति ज-ब-पुस्तकपाठः २ 'काव्येषु किमिति यलः' इति ज-व-पुस्तकपाठ:

२ साहित्यदर्पणे १-२

करणीय इत्यपि न वक्तव्यम्। कटुकौषधोपशमनीयस्य रोगस्य सितशर्करो- पशमनीयत्वे कस्य वा रोगिण: सितशर्कराप्रवृत्तिः साधीयसी न स्यात्। किं च । काव्यस्योपादेयत्वमग्निपुराणेऽप्युक्तम्- 'नरत्वं दुर्लभं लोके विद्या तत्र सुदुर्लभा। 5 कवित्वं दुर्लभं तत्र शक्तिस्तत्र सुदुर्लभा ।' इति। 'त्रिवर्गसाधनं नाव्यम्' इति च । विष्णुदठराणेडपि- 'काव्यालापाश्र ये केचिद्ीतकान्यखिलानि च । शब्दमूर्तिधरस्यैते विष्णोरंशा महात्मनः ॥' इति। तेन हेतुना तस्य काव्यस्य स्वरूपं निरूप्यते। एतेनाभिधेयं च प्रदर्शितम्। 10 तत्किंस्वरूपं तावत्काव्यमित्यपेक्षायां कश्चिदाह -'तद्दोषौ शब्दार्थौं सगुणावनलक्कती पुनः क्वापि' इति । एतच्चिन्त्यम् । तथाहि-यदि दोष- रहितस्यैव काव्यत्वाङ्गीकारस्तंदा- 'न्यक्कारो हयमेव मे यदरयस्तन्राप्यसौ तापसः सोऽप्यत्रैव निहन्ति राक्षसकुलं जीवत्यहो रावणः । 15 धिग्धिक्छक्रजितं प्रबोधितवता किं कुम्भकर्णेन वा स्वर्गग्रामटिका विलुण्ठनवृथोच्छूनैः किमेभिरभुजैः ॥' इति। अस्य श्रोकस्य विधेयाविमर्शदोषदुष्टतया काव्यत्वं न स्यात्। प्रत्युत ध्वनित्वेनोत्तमकाव्यतास्याङ्गीकृता। तस्मादव्याप्तिर्लक्षणदोषः । ननु कश्चिदे- वांशोऽत्र दुष्टो न पुनः सर्वोऽपीति' चेत्तर्हि यत्रांशे दोषः सोऽकाव्यत्व- 20 प्रयोजकः यत्र ध्वनिः स उत्तमकाव्यत्वप्रयोजक इत्यशाभ्यामुभयत आकृ- व्यमाणमिदं काव्यमकाव्यं वा किमपि न स्यात्। न च कंचिदेवांशं काव्यस्य दूषयन्तः श्रुतिदुष्टादयो दोषा:, कितर्हि सर्वमेव काव्यम्। तथाहि- काव्यात्मभूतस्य रसस्यानपकर्षकत्वे तेषां दोपत्वमपि नाड्गीक्रियते। अन्यथा नित्यदोषानित्यदोषत्वव्यकस्थापि न स्यात्। यदुक्तं ध्वनिकृता- 25 'श्रुतिदुष्टादयो दोषा अनित्या ये च दर्शिताः। ध्वन्यात्मन्येव शुङ्गारे ते हेया इत्युदाहताः ॥' इति। कि चैवं काव्यं प्रविरलविषयं निर्विषयं वा स्यात्, सर्वथा निर्दोष स्यैका- न्तमसम्भवात्। नन्वीषदर्ये नजः प्रयोग इति चेत्तर्हि 'ईषद्दोषौ शब्दार्थौं काव्यम्' १ 'आाग्गेयपुराणे' इति ज-ब-पुस्तकपाठः. २ 'अपि' इति ज-ब-पुस्तकयो- र्नास्ति. ३ 'आह' इति ज-ब-पुस्तकयोर्नास्ति. ४ 'काव्यत्वं तदा' इति नि-पुस्तकपाठः ५ 'सर्व एवेति' नि-पुस्तकपाठः

१-२ प्रथम: परिच्छेद: ।

इत्युक्ते निर्दोषयो: काव्यत्वं न स्यात्। सति सम्भवे 'इषद्दोषौ' इति चेतू, एतद्पि काव्यलक्षणेऽवाच्यम् । रतादिलक्षणे कीटानुवेधादिपरिहारवत्। न हि कीटानुवेधादयो रत्स्य रतत्वं व्याहन्तुमीशा: कि तूपादेयतारतम्यमेव कर्तुम्, तद्ददत्र श्रुतिदुष्टाद्योऽपि काव्यस्य। उक्ततं च- 'कीटानुविद्धरत्नादिसाधारण्येन काव्यता। 5 दुष्टेष्वपि मता यत्र रसाद्यनुगम: स्फुटः ॥' इति। किं च शब्दार्थयोः सगुणत्वविशेषणमनुपपन्नम् । गुणानां रसैकधर्मत्वस्य 'ये रसस्याद्गिनो धर्माः शौर्यादय इवात्मनः' इत्यादिना तेनैव प्रतिपादित- त्वात्। रसाभिव्यञ्जकत्वेनोपचारत उपपद्यत इति चेतू, तथाप्ययुक्त्तम्। तंथाहि-तयोः काव्यस्वरूपत्वेनाभिमतयो: शब्दार्थयो रसोऽस्ति, न वा। 10 नास्ति चेत्, गुणवत्वमपि नास्ति । गुणानां तदन्वयव्यतिरेकानुविधायि- त्वात्। अस्ति चेत्, कथं नोक्तं रसवन्ताविति विशेषणम्। गुणवत्वान्यथा- जुपपत्यैतल्लभ्यत इति चेत, तर्हि सरसावित्येव वक्तुं युक्तम्, न सगुणा- विति । न हि प्राणिमन्तो देशा इति वक्तव्ये शौर्यादिमन्तो देशा इति केनाप्युच्यते। ननु 'शब्दारथौं सगुणौ' इत्यनेन गुणाभिव्यज्ञकौ शब्दार्थों 15 काव्ये प्रयोज्यावित्यभिन्नाय इति चेत्, न । गुणाभिव्य अकशब्दार्थवत्त्व- स्यापि काव्ये उत्कर्षमात्राधायकत्वम्, न तु स्वरूपाधायकत्वम्। उक्त हि-काव्यस्य शब्दार्थों शरीरम्, रसादिश्चात्मा, गुणाः शौर्यादिवत्, दोषाः काणत्वादिवत्, रीतयोऽवयवसंस्थानविशेषवत्, अलङ्गारा: कटककुण्डला- दिवत्, इति । एतेन 'अनलङ्कती पुनः क्वापि' इति यदुक्तम्, तद्पि 20 परास्तम्। अस्य ह्यर्थ :- सर्वत्र सालङ्गारौ क्वचित्वस्फुटालङ्कारावपि शब्दार्थो काव्यमिति। तत्र सालङ्कारशब्दार्थयोरपि काव्ये उत्कर्षमात्राधायकत्वात्। एतेन 'वक्रोक्ति: काव्यजीवितम्' इति वक्रोक्तिजीवितकारोक्तमपि परासम्। वक्रोक्तेरलङ्कार- रूपत्वात्। यत्तु कचिदस्फुटालङ्ारत्वे उदाहतम्- 25 'यः कौमारहरः स एव हि वरस्ता एव चैत्रक्षपा- स्ते चोन्मीलितमालती सुरभयः प्रौढाः कदम्बानिलाः। सा चैवास्मि तथापि तत्र सुरतव्यापारलीलाविधौ रेवारोधसि वेतसीतरुतले चेतः समुत्कण्ठते ।' इति। एतच्चिन्त्यम्। अत्र हि विभावनाविशेषोक्तिमूलस्य सन्देहसट्टरालङ्कारस 30 स्फुटत्वम्। एतेन- १ 'काव्यस्वरूपेण' इति नि-पुस्तकपाठः. २ 'अपि' इति नि-पुस्तके नास्ति. ३ 'अस्यार्थः' इति नि.

साहित्यदर्पणे १-२

'अदोषं गुणतस्काव्य मलङ्गारेरलङ्गतम्। रसान्वितं कविः कुर्वन्कीर्ति प्रीतिं च विन्दृति ॥' इत्यादीनामपि काव्यलक्षणत्वमपास्तम् । यत्तु ध्वनिकारेणोक्त्तम्-'काव्य- स्यात्मा ध्वनिः-' इति, तत्किं वसत्वलङ्काररसादिलक्षणस्त्रिरूपो ध्वनिः 5 काव्यस्यात्मा। उत रसादिरूपमात्रो वा। नाद्यः। प्रहेलिकादावतिव्याप्ेः। द्वितीयश्चेदोमिति ब्रूमः । ननु यदि रसादिरूपमात्रो ध्वनिः काव्यस्यात्मा, तदा- 'अत्ता एत्थ णिमज्इ एत्थ अहं दिअसअं पलोएहि। मा पहिअ रत्तिअन्धअ सेजाए महँण मज्जहिसि॥ 10 इत्यादौ वस्तुमात्रस्य व्यङ्ञयत्वे कथं काव्यव्यवहार इति चेतू, नै।। अन्रापि रसाभासवत्तैवेति ब्ूमः । अन्यथा 'देवदत्तो ग्रामं याति' इति वाक्ये तद्दृत्यस्य तद्नुसरणरूपव्यङ्यावगतेरपि काव्यत्वं स्यात्। अस्त्वति चेतू, न । रसवत एव काव्यत्वाङ्गीकारात्। काव्यस्य प्रयोजनं हि रसा- स्वाद्मुखपिण्डदानद्वारा वेदशास्त्रविमुखानां सुकुमारमतीनां राजपुत्रादीनां 15 विनेयानां रामादिवत्प्रवर्तितव्यम्, न रावणादिवदित्यादिकृत्याकृत्यप्रवृत्तिनि- वृत्युपदेश इति चिरन्तनरप्युक्तत्वात्। तथा चानेयपुराणेऽप्युक्तम्-'वाग्वै- दुग्ध्यप्रधानेऽपि रस एवात्र जीवितम्' इति। व्यक्तिविवेककारेणाप्युक्तम्- 'काव्यस्यात्मनि सङ्गिनि रसादिरूपे न कस्यचिद्विमतिः' इति । ध्वनिकारेणा- प्युक्तम्-'न हि कवेरितिवृत्तमात्रनिर्वाहेणात्मलाभैः । इतिहासादेरेव तत्सिद्धेः' 20 इत्यादि। ननु तर्हि प्रबन्धान्तर्वर्तिनां केषांचिन्नीरसानां पद्यानां काव्यत्वं न स्यादिति चेत्, न । रसवत्पद्यान्तर्गतनीरसपदानामिव पद्यरसेन प्रबन्धर- सेनैव तेषां रसवत्ताङ्गीकारात्। यत्तु नीरसेष्वपि गुणाभिव्यअकवर्णसद्भा- वाद्दोपाभावाद्लङ्गारसन्भ्रावाच्च काव्यव्यवहार: स रसादिमत्काव्यबन्धसा- म्याद्गोण एव । यत्तु वामनेनोक्तम्-'रीतिरात्मा काव्यस्य' इति, तन्न। 25 रीते: सङ्गटना विशेषत्वात्। सङ्गटनायाश्रावयवसंस्थानरूपत्वात्, आत्मनश्च तद्भिव्नत्वात्। यञ्च ध्वनिकारेणोक्तम्- 'अर्थः सहृदयश्रलाध्यः काव्यात्मा यो व्यवस्थितः। वाच्यप्रतीयमानाख्यौ तस्य भेदावुभौ स्मृतौ ।।' इति। १ 'रसादिमात्ररूपः' इति ज-ब-पुस्तकपाठः. २ 'श्वश्ररत्र निमज्जति अत्राहं दिवसकं प्रलोकय। मा पथिक रात्र्यन्धक शय्यायामावयोर्मडक्ष्यसि' ॥ (महँण इति निपातोऽनेकार्थवृत्तिरत्रावयोरित्य्थे न तु ममेति लोचनम्). ३ 'न' इति ज-ब- पुस्तकयोर्नास्ति. ४ 'रसाभासवत्तयैव न्मः' इति ज-ब-पुस्तकपाठः ५ 'सुख- पिण्डदानद्वारेण' इति ज-ब-पुस्तकपाठः. ६ 'आत्मपदलाभः' इति नि-पुस्तक- पाठ :. ७ 'रसे' इति ज-ब्र-पुस्तकपाठ :.

.

१-३ प्रथम: परिच्छेद: । ५

अत्र वाच्यस्यात्मत्वं 'काव्यस्यात्मा ध्वनिः-' इति स्ववचनविरोधादेवा- पास्तम्। तत्किस्वरूपं काव्यमित्युच्यते- वाक्यं रसात्मकं काव्यं रसस्वरूपं निरूपयिष्यामः । रस एवात्मा साररूपत्रया जीवनाधायको 5 यस्य। तेन विना तस्य काव्यत्वाभावस्य प्रतिपादित्त्वात्। 'रस्ते इति रसः' इति व्युत्पत्तियोगाज्जावतदाभासादयोऽपि गृह्यन्ते। तन्र रसो यथा- 'शून्यं वासगृहं विलोक्य शयनादुत्थाय किंचिच्छनै- निद्राव्याजमुपागतस्य सुचिरं निर्वर्ण्य पत्युर्मुखम्। विश्रब्धं परिचुम्ब्य जातपुलकामालोक्य गण्डस्थली 10 लज्ानम्रमुखी प्रियेण हसता बाला चिरं चुम्बिता ।I' अन्र हि सम्भोगशङ्गाराख्यो रसः। भावो यथा महापात्रराघवानन्दसान्धिविग्रहिकाणाम्- 'यस्यालीयत शल्कसीम्नि जलधिः, पृष्ठे जगन्मण्डलं, दंश्नयां धरणी, नखे दितिसुताधीशः, पदे रोदसी। 15 कोधे क्षत्रगण:, शरे दशमुखः, पाणी प्रलम्बासुरो, ध्याने विश्वमसावधार्मिककुलं कस्मैचिदस्ै नमः ।।' अत्र भगवद्विषया रतिर्भावः । रसाभासो यथा- 'मधु द्विरेफ: कुसुमैकपात्रे पपौ प्रियां स्वामनुवर्तमानः। 20 भृङ्गेण च स्पर्शनिमीलिताक्षीं मृगीमकण्डूयत कृष्णसारः ।' अत्र सम्भोग शङ्गारस्य तिर्यग्विषयत्वाद्रसाभासः। एवमन्यत्। दोषा: पुनः काव्ये किस्वरूपा इत्युच्यन्ते- दोषास्तस्यापकर्षकाः । श्रुतिदुष्टापुष्टार्थत्वाद्य: काणत्वसअ्जत्वादय इव शब्दार्थ्द्वारेण देहद्वा- 25 रेणेव व्यभिचारिभावादे: स्वशब्दवाच्यत्वादयो मूर्खत्वादय हव साक्षात्का- व्यस्यात्मभूतं रसमपकर्षयन्तः काव्यस्यापकर्षका इत्युच्यन्ते। एषां विशेषो- दाहरणानि वक्ष्यामः ।

१ 'वाच्यात्मत्वम्' इति नि-पुस्तकपाठः २ 'कि पुनः काव्यम्' इति ज-ब- पुस्तकपाठ: ३ 'अस्य' इति ज-ब-पुस्तकपाठः ४ 'काव्यत्वानङ्गीकाराव' इति ज-ब-पुस्तकपाठः ५ 'देहद्वारेणेव शब्दार्थद्वारेण' इति ज-ब-पुस्तकपाठ:

साहित्यदर्पणे १-३

गुणादय: किंस्वरूपा इत्युच्यन्ते- उत्कर्षहेतवः प्रोक्ता गुणालङ्काररीतयः ॥ ३॥ गुणा: शौर्यादिवत्, अलङ्गाराः कटककुण्डलादिवत्, रीतयोऽवयव- संस्थानविशेषवत्, देहद्वारेणेव शब्दार्थद्वारेण तमेव काव्यस्यात्मभूतं रस- 5 मुत्कर्षयन्तः काव्यस्योत्कर्षका इत्युच्यन्ते। इह यद्यपि गुणानां रसघर्मत्वं तधापि गुणशब्दोऽत्र गुणाभिव्य अकशब्दार्थयोरुपचर्यंते । अतश्च 'गुणाभि- व्यक्षका: शब्दा रसस्योत्कर्षकाः' इत्युक्तं भवतीति प्रागेवोक्तम्। एषामपि विशेषोदाहरणानि वक्ष्यामः॥

पात्रश्रीविश्वनाथकविराजकृतौ साहित्यदर्पणे काव्यस्वरूप- निरूपणो नाम प्रथम: परिच्छेद्ः।

१ 'गुणाः' इति नि-पुस्तकपाठः. २ 'तस्यैव' इति नि-पुस्तकपाठः. ३ 'गुणा- भिव्यअ्जकशब्दार्थयोरुपचर्यते । अतश्च' इति ज-पुस्तके नास्ति.

2-१ द्वितीयः परिच्छेदः।

द्वितीय: परिच्छेद:। वाक्यस्वरूपमाह- वाक्यं स्याद्योग्यताकाङ्गासत्तियुक्त: पदोच्चयः । योग्यता पदार्थानां परस्परसम्बन्धे बाधाभावः । पदोच्चयस्यैतद्भावेऽपि वाक्यत्वे 'वह्निना सिञ्वति' इत्याद्यपि वाक्यं स्यात्। आकाङ्का प्रतीतिपर्य- चसानविरहः। स च श्रोतुर्जिज्ञासारूपः। निराकाङ्गस्य वाक्यत्वे 'गौरश्वः3 पुरुषो हस्ती' इत्यादीनामपि वाक्यत्वं स्यात्। आसत्तिर्बुद्यविच्छेदः । बुद्धि- विच्छेदेऽपि वाक्यत्वे इदानीमुच्चरितस्य देवदत्तशब्दस्य दिनान्तरोच्चरितेन गच्छतीति पदेन संङ्गतिः स्यात्। अन्राकाङ्कायोग्यतयोरात्मार्थघर्मत्वेऽपि पदोच्चयधर्मत्वमुपचारातू। वाक्योच्चयो महावाक्यम् 10 योग्यताकाङ्कासत्तियुक्त एवं। इत्थं वाक्यं द्विधा मतम् ॥ १॥ इत्थमिति वाक्यत्वेन महावाक्यत्वेन च। उक्तं च- 'सार्थबोधे समाप्ताना मङ्गाङ्गित्वव्यपेक्षया। वाक्यानामेकवाक्यत्वं पुनः संहत्य जायते ।I' इति। 15 तत्र वाक्यं यथा-'शून्यं वासगृहं-' इत्यादि। महावाक्यं यथा- रामायणमहाभारतरघुवंशादि। पदोच्चयो वाक्यमित्युक्तम्, तत्र किं पदलक्षणमित्यत आह- वर्णाः पदं प्रयोगार्हानन्वितैकार्थबोधकाः। यथा-घटः । प्रयोगार्हेति प्रातिपदिकस्य व्यवच्छेदः। अनन्वितेति 20 चाक्यमहावाक्ययोः । एकेति साकाङ्कानेकपदवाक्यानाम्। अर्थबोधका इति कचटतपेत्यादीनामूँ। वर्णा इति बहुवचनमविवक्षितम्। अर्थो वाच्यश्र लक्ष्यथ्र व्यञ्ञ्यश्चेति त्रिधा मतः ॥२॥ एर्षा स्वरूपमाह- वाच्योर्ऽर्थोऽभिधया वोध्यो लक्ष्यो लक्षणया मतः । 25 व्यङ्गो व्यञ्जनया ताः स्युस्तिस्रः शब्दस शक्तयः ॥३॥ १ 'युक्त इत्येव' इति नि. २ 'वाक्यमहावाक्यत्वेन' इति नि. ३ 'बोधसमा- सानाम्' इति ज-ब. ४ 'कचटतपानाम्' इति ज-ब.

साहित्यदर्पणे २-४

सा अमिघाया:। तत्र सङ्केतितार्थस्य बोधनादग्रिमाभिधा॥ उत्तमवृद्वेन मध्यमवृद्धसुद्दिश्य 'गामानय' इत्युक्ते तं गवानयनप्रवृत्तमु- पलम्य बालोऽस्य वाक्यस्य 'सास्नादिमत्पिण्डानयनमर्थः' इति प्रथमं 5 प्रतिपदयते। अनन्तरं च 'गां बधान, अश्वमानय' इत्यादावावापोद्दापाभ्या गोशब्दृस्य 'सास्रादिमानर्थः' आनयनशब्दस्य च 'आहरणमर्थः' इति सङ्के- तमवधारयति। क्वचिच्च प्रसिद्धपद्समभिव्याहारात्। यथा-'इह प्रभिन्न- कमलोदरे मधूनि मधुकरः पिबति' इत्यत्र। क्वचिदापोपदेशात्। यथा- 'अयमश्चशब्दवाच्यः' इत्यत्र। तं च सङ्गेतितमर्थ बोधयन्ती शब्दसय 10 शक्यन्तरानन्तरिता शक्तिरमिधा नाम। सङ्केतो गृह्यते जातौ गुणद्रव्यक्रियासु च ॥।४॥ जातिर्गोपिण्डादिषु गोत्वादिका । गुणो विशेषाधानहेतु: सिद्धो वस्तु- धर्मः । झुककादयो हि गवादिकं सजातीयेभ्यः कृष्णगवादिभ्यो व्यावर्त- यन्ति। द्रव्यशब्दा एकव्यक्तिवाचिनो हरिहरडित्थडवित्थाद्यः। क्रिया: 15 साध्यरूपा वस्तुधर्मा: पाकादयः । एषु हि अधिश्रयणावश्रयणान्तादिपूर्वा- परीभूतव्यापारकलाप: पाकादिशब्दवाच्यः । एष्वेव हि व्यक्तेरुपाविषु सङ्गेतो गृद्यते। न व्यक्ता। आनन्तव्यमिचारदोषापातात्।

अथ लक्षणा- मुख्यार्थबाधे तद्युक्तो ययान्योऽर्थः प्रतीयते। 20 रूढेः प्रयोजनाद्वासौ लक्षणा शक्तिरर्पिता ॥५॥ 'कलिङ्गः साइसिक:' इत्यादौ कलिङ्गादिशब्दो देशविशेषादिरूपे स्वारथेड- सम्भवन्यया शब्दशक्त्या खवसंयुक्तान्पुरुषादीन्प्रत्याययति, बया च 'गङ्गायां घोष:' इत्यादौ गङ्गादिशब्दो जलमयादिरूपार्थवाचकत्वाठ्ककृतेऽसम्भवन्खस सामीप्यादिसम्बन्धसम्बन्धिनं तटादिं बोधयति, सा शब्दस्यार्पिता स्नाभावि- 25 केतरा ईश्वरानुद्धाविता वा शक्तिर्लक्षणा नाम। पूर्वत्र हेतु रूढि: प्रसिद्धि- रेव। उत्तरत्र 'गङ्गातटे घोषः' इति प्रतिपादनादलभ्यस्य शीतत्वपावन- त्वातिशयस्य बोधनरूपं प्रयोजनम्। हेतुं विनापि यस्य कस्यचित्सम्बन्घिनो लक्षणेतिप्रसङ्गः स्वादित्युक्तम्-'रूढेः प्रयोजनाद्वापि' इति।

१ 'प्रसिद्धार्थपदसममिह्ारात' इति नि. २ 'भूतो व्यापारकलापः' इति नि. ३ 'प्रतिपादनालम्यस्य' इति नि.

२-५ द्वितीय: परिच्छेदः।

केचित्तु 'कर्मणि कुशलः' इति रूढावुदाहरन्ति । तेषामयमभिप्रायः- कुशाँल्ातीति व्युत्पत्तिलभ्यः कुशग्राहिरूपो मुख्योऽर्थः प्रकृतेऽसम्भवन्विवे- चकत्वा दिसाधर्म्यसम्बन्धसम्बन्धिनं दक्षरूपमर्थ बोधयति। तदन्ये न मन्यन्ते। कुशग्राहिरूपार्थस्य व्युत्पत्तिलभ्यत्वेऽपि दक्षरूपस्यैव मुख्यार्थत्वात्। अन्यद्धि शब्दानां व्युत्पत्तिनिमित्तमन्यच्च प्रवृत्तिनिमित्तम् । व्युत्पत्तिलभ्यस्य मुख्या-5 र्थत्वे 'गौः शेते' इत्यत्रापि लक्षणा स्ात्। 'गमेर्डो:' इति गमधातोर्डोप्रत्य- येन व्युत्पादितस्य गोशब्दस्य शयनकालेऽपि प्रयोगात्।। तज्जेदानाह- मुख्यार्थस्ेतराक्षेपो वाक्यार्थेऽन्वयसिद्धये। स्यादात्मनोऽप्युपादानादेषोपादानलक्षणा ॥ ६ ॥ 10 रूढावुपादानलक्षणा यथा-'श्वेतो धावति' । प्रयोजने यथा-'कुन्ताः प्रविशन्ति'। अनयोर्हि श्वेतादिमिः कुन्तादिमिश्चाचेतनतया केवलैर्घावन- प्रवेशनक्रिययोः कर्तृतयान्वयमलभमानैरेतत्सिद्धये आत्मसम्बन्धिनोऽश्वादयः पुरुषाद्यश्चाक्षिप्यन्ते। पूर्वत्र प्रयोजनाभावादूढिः । उत्तरत्र तु कुन्तादी नामतिगहनत्वं प्रयोजनम्। अत्र च मुख्यार्थस्यात्मनोऽप्युपादानम्। लक्षण-15 लक्षणायां तु परस्ैवोपलक्षणमित्यनयोर्भेद: । इयमेवाजहत्स्वार्थेत्युच्यते।। अर्पणं सस्य वाक्यार्थे परस्यान्वयसिद्धये। उपलक्षणहेतुत्वादेषा लक्षणलक्षणा।। ७॥ रूढिप्रयोजनयोर्लक्षणलक्षणा यथा-'कलिङ्गः साहसिकः', 'गङ्गायां घोषः' इति च । अनयोर्हि पुरुषतटयोवाक्यार्थेऽन्वयसिद्धये कलिङ्गगङ्गा-20 शब्दावात्मानमर्पयतः। यथा वा- 'उपकृतं बहु तत्र किसुच्यते सुजनता प्रथिता भवता परम्। चिद्धदीदृशमेव सदा सखे सुखितमास्स ततः सरदां शतम् ।' अश्रापकारादीनां वाक्यार्थेऽन्वयसिद्धये उपकृताद्यः शब्दा आत्मानमर्प-25 यन्ति। अपकारिणं प्रत्युपकारादिप्रतिपादनान्मुख्यार्थबाधो वैपरीत्यलक्षणः सम्बन्ध: फलमपकारातिशयः । इयमेव जहत्सवार्थेत्युच्यते।। आरोपाध्यवसानाभ्यां प्रत्येकं ता अपि द्विधा।

30 १ 'कुशं लातीति' ज-ब. २ 'कालेऽप्रयोगात्' इति नि.

१० साहित्यदर्पणे २-९

सारोपा स्यान्निगीर्णस्य मता साध्यवसानिका। रूढावुपादानलक्षणा सारोपा यथा-'अश्वः श्वेतो धावति'। अन्न हि श्वेतगुणवानश्वोऽनिगीर्णस्वरूपः स्वसमवेतश्वेतगुणतादालयेन प्रतीयते। प्रयोजने यथा-'एते कुन्ताः प्रविशन्ति' । अन्र सर्वनाम्ना कुन्तधारि- 5 पुरुषनिर्देशात्सारोपत्वम्। रूढौ लक्षणलक्षणा सारोपा यथा-'कलिङ्ग: पुरुषो युध्यते'। अत्र पुरुषकलिङ्गशब्दयोराधाराधेयभावः सम्बन्धः। प्रयोजने यथा-'आयुर्घृतम्'। अत्रायुष्कारणमपि घृतं कार्यकारणभावसम्बन्ध- सम्बन्ध्यायुस्तादात्म्येन प्रतीयते। अन्यवैलक्षण्येन (अव्यभिचारेण) आयु- एकरत्वं प्रयोजनम्। 10 यथा वा-राजकीये पुरुषे गच्छति 'राजासौ गच्छति' इति। अन्र स्वस्वामिभावलक्षणः सम्बन्धः । यथा वा-अग्रमान्रेऽवयवे 'हस्तोऽयम्'। अन्राचयवावयविभावलक्षणः सम्बन्धः । ब्राह्मेणेऽपि 'तक्षासौ'। अत्र तात्क- म्यलक्षणः । इन्द्रार्थासु स्थूणासु 'अमी इन्द्राः' । अत्र तादर्थ्यलक्षणः सम्बन्धः । एवमन्यत्रापि। निगीर्णस्य पुनर्विषयस्यान्यतादात््यप्रतीतिकृत्सा- 15 ध्यवसाना। अस्याश्चतुर्षु भेदेषु पूर्वोदाहरणान्येव।। सादृश्येतरसम्बन्धाः शुद्धास्ताः सकला अपि ॥ ९ ॥ सादृश्यातु मता गौण्यस्तेन षोडश भेदिताः । ताः पूर्वोक्का अष्टभेदा लक्षणाः। सादृश्येतरसम्बन्धाः कार्यकारणभावा- दयः। अत्र शुद्धानां पूर्वोदाहरणान्येव। रूढावुपादानलक्षणा सारोपा 20 गौणी यथा-'एतानि तैलानि हेमन्ते सुखानि'। अत्र तैलशब्दस्तिलभव. स्नेहरूपं मुख्यार्थमुपादायैव सार्षपादिषु स्रेहेषु वर्तते। प्रयोजने यथा- राजकुमारेषु तत्सदशेषु च गच्छत्सु 'एते राजकुमारा गच्छन्ति'। रूढावु- पादानलक्षणा साध्यवसाना गौणी यथा-'तैलानि हेमन्ते सुखानि'। प्रयोजने यथा-'राजकुमारा गच्छन्ति'। रूढौ लक्षणलक्षणा सारोपा गौणी यथा- 25 'राजा गौडेन्द्रं कण्टकं शोधयति' । प्रयोजने यथा-'गौर्वाहीकः'। रूढौ लक्षणलक्षणा साध्यवसाना गौणी यथा-'राजा कण्टकं शोघयति'। प्रयोजने यथा-'गौर्जल्पति'।

१ 'विषयिणा अनिगीर्णस्य विषयस्य तेनैव सह तादात्म्यप्रतीतिकृत्सारोपा। इयमेव रूपकालङ्कारस्य बीजम्।'इत्येतत् 'रूढौ' इत्यस्मात्प्राक् नि-पुस्तके दृश्यते. २ 'श्वेत' इति नि-पुस्तके नास्ति. ३ 'अवयवभागे' इति नि. ४ 'लक्षणसम्बन्धः' इति नि. ५ 'ब्राह्मणोऽपि' इति नि.

2-१० द्वितीय: परिच्छेदः । ११

अन्न केचिदाहुः-गोसहचारिणो गुणा जाड्यमान्धादयो लक्ष्यन्ते। ते च गोशब्दस्य वाहीकार्थामिधाने निमित्तीभवन्ति। तद्युक्तम्। गोशब्दस्यागृही- तसङ्गेतं वाहीकार्थममिधातुमसामथ्यांत् गोशब्दार्थमात्रबोधनाच्च। अमिधा- या विरतत्वाद् विरतायाश्च पुनरुत्थानाभावाद्। अन्ये च पुनर्गोशब्देन वाहीकार्थो नाभिधीयते। किं तु स्वार्थसहचारि-5 गुणसाजात्येन वाहीकार्थगता गुणा एव लक्ष्यन्ते। तद्प्यन्ये न मन्यन्ते। तथाहि-अत्र गोशब्दाद्वाहीकार्थः प्रतीयते, न वा। आद्येपि गोशब्दादेव वा। लक्षिताद्वा गुणादुविनाभावद्वारा। तत्र न प्रथमः । वाहीकार्थेस्यासङ्के- तितत्वात्। न द्वितीयः । अविनाभावलभ्यस्यार्थस्य शाब्देऽन्वये प्रवेशा सम्भवात्। शाब्दी ह्याकाङ्का शब्देनैव प्रेपूर्यते। न द्वितीयः। यदि हि 10 गोशब्दाद्वाहीकार्थो न प्रतीयेत, तदास्य वाहीकशब्दस्य चे सामानाधिकरण्य- मसङ्गतं स्ात्। तस्मादत्र गोशब्दो सुख्यया वृत्या वाहीकशब्देन सहान्वयमलभमा- नोऽज्ञत्वादिसाधर्म्यसम्बन्धाद्वाहीकार्थ लक्षयति। वाहीकस्याज्ञत्वाद्यतिशय- बोधनं प्रयोजनम्। इयं च गुणयोगाद्गौणीत्युच्यते। पूर्वा तूपचारामिश्रणा-15 च्छुद्दा। उपचारो हि नामात्यन्तं विशकलितयोः सादृश्यातिशयमहित्रा भेदप्रतीतिस्थगनमान्रम् । यथा-'अग्निमाणवक्रयोः' । शुकृपटयोस्तु नातयंन्तं भेदभ्रतीतिः। तस्मादेवमादिषु शुद्धैव लक्षणा। व्यङ्ग्स्य गूढागूढत्वाद्विधा स्युः फललक्षणाः ॥। १० ॥ प्रयोजने या अष्टभेदा लक्षणा दर्शितास्ताः प्रयोजनरूपव्यज्ञयस्य गूढागूढ-20 तया प्रत्येकं द्विधा भूत्वा पोडशभेदाः । तत्र गृढः काव्यार्थभावनापरि- पक्कबुद्धिविभवमात्रवेद्यः । यथा-'उपकृतं बहु तत्र'-इति। अगूढः, अतिस्फुटतया सर्वजनसंवेद्यः । यथा- 'उपदिशति कामिनीनां यौवनमद एव ललितानि।' अत्र 'उपदिशति' इत्यनेन 'आविष्करोति' इति लक्ष्यते। आविष्काराति-25 शयश्राभिधेयचत्स्फुटं प्रतीयते। धर्मिधर्मगतत्वेन फलस्ैता अपि द्विधा। १ 'अशक्यत्वात्' इति नि. २ 'उत्थापनाभावात' इति नि. ३ 'अपि' इत्येतन्नास्ति नि-पुस्तके. ४ 'वाहीकार्थस्य' इति नि. ५ 'पूर्यते' इति नि. ६ 'प्रतीयते' इति ज-ब. ७ 'च' इति नास्ति ज-ब पुस्तकयोः. ८ 'असम- असं' इति ज-ब. ९ 'शब्दयोः' इत्येतदघिकं नि-पुस्तके. १० 'अत्यन्तभेद-' इति नि. ११ 'वाक्यार्थ-' इति नि.

१२ साहित्यदर्पणे २-११

एता अनन्तरोका: षोडशभेदा लक्षणा: फलस्य धर्मिगतत्वेन धर्मगतत्वेन च प्रत्येकं द्विधा भूत्वा द्ात्रिंशद्देदाः। दिब्मात्रं यथा- 'स्त्निग्धश्यामलकान्तिलिप्तवियतो वेल्लद्वलाका घना 5 वाताः शीकरिणः पयोदसुहदामानन्दकेका: कलाः। कामं सन्तु दढं कठोरहृदयो रामोडस्मि सर्व सहे वैदेही तु कथं भविष्यति हहा हा देवि धीरा भव।। अन्नात्यन्तदुःखसहिष्णुरूपे रामे धर्मिणि लक्ष्ये तस्यैवातिशयः फलम्। 'गङ्गायां घोषः' इत्यन्र तेटे शीतत्वपावनत्वरूपधर्मस्यातिशयः फलम्। 10 तदेवं लक्षणाभेदाश्चत्वारिंशन्मता बुधैः ॥११॥ रूढावष्टौ फले द्वात्निंशदिति चत्वारिंशल्लक्षणाभेदाः। किं च- पदवाक्यगतत्वेन प्रत्येकं ता अपि द्विधा। ता अनन्तरोक्ताश्चत्वारिंशज्ेदाः । तत्र पद्गतत्वेन यथा-'गङ्गायां 15 घोषः'। वाक्यगतत्वेने यथा-'उपकृतं बहु तत्र' इति। एवमशीतिप्रकारा लक्षणा II अथ व्यञ्ना विरतास्वभिधाद्यासु ययार्थो बोध्यते परः ॥ १२ ॥ सा वृत्तिर्व्यञ्जना नाम शब्दस्यार्थादिकस्य च। 20 'शब्दबुद्धिकर्मणां विरम्य व्यापाराभावः' इति नयेनाभिघालक्षणाता- त्पर्याख्यासु तिसृषु वृत्तिषु स्वं स्वमर्थ बोधयित्वोपक्षीणासु ययान्योऽर्थों बोध्यते सा शब्दस्यार्थस्य प्रकृतिप्रत्ययादेश्व वृत्तिर्व्यञ्जनध्वननगमनप्रत्याय- नादिव्यपदेशविषया व्यज्जना नाम। तत्र- 25 अभिधालक्षणामूला शब्दस्य व्यञ्जना द्विधा॥ १३॥ अभिधामूलामाह- अनेकार्थस्य शब्दस्य संयोगादयैर्नियत्रिते। एकत्रार्थेऽन्यधीहेतुर्व्यञ्जना सामिधाश्रया॥१४॥ १ 'तटादिषु लक्ष्येषु' इति ज-ब. २ 'पदगतत्वे' इति नि. ३ 'वाक्यगतत्वे' इति नि. ४ 'शक्ति:' इति नि.

२-१४ द्वितीयः परिच्छेद: १३

आद्यशब्दाद्वि प्रयोगादयः । उक्तं हि- 'संयोगो विप्रयोगश्च साहचर्य विरोधिता। अर्थ: प्रकरणं लिङ्गं शब्दस्यान्यस्य संनिधि: ॥ सामर्थ्यमौचिती देशः कालो व्यक्तिः स्वरादयः। 5 शब्दार्थस्यानवच्छेदे विशेषस्मृतिहेतवः ॥' इति। 'सशङ्गचकरो हरिः' इति शङ्गचक्रयोगेन हरिशब्दो विष्णुमेवाभिधत्ते। 'अशङ्गचक्रो हरिः' इति तद्वियोगेन तमेव । 'भीमार्जुनौ' इति भर्जुनः पार्थः । 'कर्णार्जुनौ' इति कर्णः सूतपुत्रः । 'स्थाणुं वन्दे' इति स्थाणु: शिवः । 'सर्वे जानाति देवः' इति देवो भवान् । 'कुपितो मकरध्वजः'10 इति मकरध्वज: कामः । 'देवः पुरारिः' इति पुरारिः शिवः । 'मधुना मत्तः पिकः' इति मधुर्वसन्तः । 'पातु वो दयितामुखम्' इति मुखं सांमुख्यम्। 'विभाति गगने चन्द्रः' इति चन्द्रः शशी। 'निशि चित्रभानुः' इति चित्न- भातुर्वहिः। 'भाति रथाङ्गम्' नपुंसकव्यक्तया रथाङ्गं चक्रम्। स्वरस्तु वेद एव विशेषप्रतीतिकृन्न काव्य इति तस्य विषये नोदाहतम्। 15 इदं च केष्यसहमाना आहु :- 'खरोऽपि काक्कादिरूपः काव्ये विशेष- प्रतीतिकृदेव। उदात्तादिरूपोऽपि मुनेः पाठोककदिशा शङारादिरसविशेष- प्रतीतिकृदेवेत्येतद्विषये उदाहरणमुचितमेव' इति। तन्न। तथाहि-स्वराः काक्कादयः उदात्तादयो वा व्यञ्ञयरूपमेव विशेषं प्रत्याययन्ति, न खल प्रकृतोक्तमनेकार्थशब्दस्यैकार्थनियत्रणरूपं विशेषम्। कि च । यदि यत्र 20

स्वरवशेनैकत्र नियमनं वाच्यं तदा तथाविघस्थले श्रेषानङ्गीकारप्रसङ्ग: । न च तथा। अत एवाहु: श्रेषनिरूपणप्रस्तावे-"'काव्यमार्गे स्वरो न गण्यते' इति च नये" इत्यलमुपजीव्यानां मान्यानां व्याख्यानेषु कटाक्षनिक्षेपेण। आदिशब्दात् 'एतावन्मान्नस्तनी-' इत्यादौ हस्तादिचेष्टादिभिः सनादीनां 25 कमलकोरकाद्याकारत्वम्। एवमेकस्मिव्नर्थेऽभिधया नियन्रिते या शब्दसयान्यार्थबुद्धिहेतु: शक्ति: साभिधामूला व्यजञना। यथा मम तातपादानां महापात्रचतुदेशभाषाविलासिनीभुजङ्गमहाकवी- श्वरश्री चन्द्रशेखरसान्धिविग्रहिकाणाम्- 30

१ 'आदिशब्दात्' इति नि. २ 'वियोगेन' इति ज-ब. ३ 'विषयो नोदाहृतः' इति नि. ४ 'शब्दार्थस्यान्यार्थ' इति नि. २ सा०

१४ साहित्यदर्पणे २-१४

'दुर्गालद्गितविग्रहो मनसिजं संमीलयंस्ेजसा प्रोद्यद्वाजकलो गृहीतगरिमा विष्वग्वृतो भोगिभिः । नक्षत्रेशकृतेक्षणो गिरिगुरौ गाढां रुचिं धारय- न्गामाक्रम्य विभूतिभूषिततनू राजत्युमावल्लभ: ।' 5 अत्र प्रकरणेनामिधेये उमावल्लभशब्दस्योमानाममहादेवीवल्लभभानुदेव- नृपतिरूपेऽर्थे नियत्रिते व्यञ्षनयैव गौरीवल्लभरूपोरऽर्यो बोध्यते। एवमन्यत्। लक्षणामूलामाह- लक्षणोपास्यते यस्य कृते तत्तु प्रयोजनम् । यया प्रत्याय्यते सा स्यान्यञ्जना लक्षणाश्रया ॥१५॥ 10 'गङ्गायां घोषः' इत्यादौ जलमयाद्यर्थबोधनादभिधायां तटाद्यर्थबोधनाच लक्षणायां विरतायां यया शीतत्वपावनत्वाद्यतिशयादिर्बोध्यते सा लक्षणा- मूला व्यजना। एवं शाब्दी व्यअ्ञनामुक्तवार्थीमाह- वक्तृबोद्धव्यवाक्यानामन्यसंनिधिवाच्ययोः । 15 प्रस्तावदेशकालानां काकोश्रेष्टादिकस्य च ॥ १६ ॥ वैशिष्यादन्यमर्थ या बोधयेत्सार्थसम्भवा। व्यञ्जनेति सम्बध्यते। तत्र वक्तवाक्यप्रस्तावदेशकालवैशिष्टये यथा मम- 'कालो मधुः कुपित एष च पुष्पधन्वा धीरा वहन्ति रतिखेदहराः समीराः। 20 केलीवनीयमपि वज्ुलकुजमजुर्दूरे पतिः कथय किं करणीयमद्य।' अत्रैनं देशं प्रति शीघ्रं पच्छन्नकामुकस्त्वया प्रेष्यतामिति सखीं प्रति कयाचिद् द्योतयते। बोद्धव्यवैशिष्टये यथा- 'निःशेषच्युतचन्दनं स्तनतटं निर्मृष्टरागोऽघरो 25 नेत्रे दूरमनञने पुलकिता तन्वी तवेयं तनुः। मिथ्यावादिनि दूति बान्धवजनस्याज्ञातपीडागमे वापीं स्नातुमितो गतासि न पुनस्तस्याधमस्यान्तिकम् ।' अत्र तदुन्तिकमेव गतासीति विपरीतलक्षणया लक्ष्यम्। तसय च रन्तुमिति व्यंग्यं प्रतिपाद्यदूतीवैशिष्याद्वोध्यते। १ 'अभिधया' इति ज-ब. २ 'उमानाम्री महादेवी तद्वल्भ' इति ज-ब. ३ 'व्यज्यते' इति नि. ४ 'निर्मिष्ट' इति नि. ५ 'रन्तुम्' इत्येतदधिकं 'गतासीति' अस्मात्म्राक् नि-पुस्तके. ६ 'व्यङ्गयप्रतिपादं इति' नि.

२-१७ द्वितीय: परिच्छेद: १५

अन्यसन्निविवैशिष्टये यथा- 'उअ णिज्चलणिप्पन्दा मिसिणीपत्तम्मि रेहइ बलाआ। णिम्मलमरगअभाअणपरिट्विआ सङ्गसुत्ति व्व ।।' अत्र बलाकाया निःस्पन्दत्वेन विश्वस्तत्वम्, तेनास्य देशस्य विजनत्वम्, अतः सङ्केतस्थानमेतदिति कयापि सव्निहितं प्रच्छन्नकामुकं प्रत्युच्यते।5 अत्रैव स्थान निर्जनत्वरूपव्यङ्ेयार्थवैशिष्ट्यं प्रयोजकम्। 'भिन्नकण्ठध्व्रनिर्धौरैः काकुरित्यभिधीयते' इत्युक्तप्रकारायाः काकोर्भेदा आकरेभ्यो ज्ञातव्याः। एतद्वैशिष्टये यथा- 'गुरुपरतत्रतया बत दूरतरं देशमुद्यतो गन्तुम्। अलिकुलकोकिलललिते नैप्यति सखि सुरमिसमयेसौ ।' 10 अन्न नैष्यति, अपि तर्हि एष्यत्येवेति काक्का व्यज्यते। चेष्टावैशिष्टये यथा- 'सङ्गेतकालमनसं विटं ज्ञात्वा विदग्धया। हसन्नेत्रार्पिताकूतं लीलापझं निमीलितम् ।' अत्र सन्ध्या सङ्केतकाल इति पद्मनिमीलनादिचेष्टया कयाचित्त्योत्यते। 15 एवं वक्रादीनां व्यस्तसमस्तानां वैशिष्टये बोद्धव्यम्। त्रैविध्यादियमर्थानां प्रत्येकं त्रिविधा मता ॥१७॥ अर्थानां वाच्यलक्ष्यव्यङ्गयत्वेन त्रिरूपतया सर्वा अप्यनन्तरोक्ता व्यअ्ञना स्तिरिविधाः । तत्र वाच्यार्थस्य व्यञ्ञना यथा-'कालो मधुः-' इत्यादि। लक्ष्यार्थस्य यथा-'निःशेषच्युतचन्दनं-' इत्यादि । व्यङ्गयार्थस्य यथा-20 'उभ णिच्चल-' इत्यादि। प्रकृतिप्रत्ययादिव्यञ्जकत्वं तु प्रपञ्जयिष्यते। शब्दबोध्यो व्यनत्त्यर्थः शब्दोऽप्यर्थान्तराश्रयः। एकस्य व्यञ्ञजकत्वे तदन्यस्य सहकारिता ॥ १८ ॥ यतः शब्दो व्यक्षकत्वेऽर्थान्तरमपेक्षते, अर्थोडपि शब्दम्। तदेकस्य व्य अ्ञकत्वेऽन्यस्य सहकारितावश्यमग्गीकतव्या। 25 अभिधादित्रयोपाधिवैशिष्यात्रिविधो मतः । शब्दोऽपि वाचकस्तद्वल्लक्षको व्यञ्जकस्तथा॥ १९॥ अभिधोपाधिको वाचकः । लक्षणोपाधिको लक्षकः । व्यञ्जनोपाधिको व्यजञक: ।

१ 'णिष्फन्दा' इति नि. २ 'रूपं व्यङ्गयार्थ' इति नि. ३ 'प्रयोजनम्' इति नि.

१६ साहित्यदर्पणे २-२०

र्कि च- तात्पर्याख्यां वृत्तिमाहु: पदार्थान्वयबोधने। तात्पर्यार्थ तदर्थ च वाक्यं तद्धोधकं परे ॥ २०॥ अमिधाया एकैकपदार्थबोधनविरमाद्वाक्यार्थरूपस्य पदार्थान्वयस्य 5 बोधिका तारपर्ये नाम वृत्तिः । तदर्थश्च तात्पर्यार्थः । तद्वोधकं च वाक्यमि- अभिहितान्वयवादिनां मतम् ।

इति साहित्यदर्पणे वाक्यस्वरूपनिरूपणो नाम द्वितीय: परिच्छेद्ः॥

१०-१४ दशम: परिच्छेद: १७

दशम: परिच्छेद्: अर्थालङ्काराः अथावसरप्राप्ेष्वर्थालङ्गारेषु प्राधान्यात्सादश्यमूलेषु लक्षितव्येषु तेषा- मप्युपजीव्यतवेन प्रथमसुपमामाह- साम्यं वाच्यमवैधर्म्य वाक्यैक्य उपमा दयोः ॥१४॥ 5 रूपकादिषु साम्यस्य व्यञ्ञ्यत्वम्, व्यतिरेके च वैधर्म्यस्याप्युक्ति:, उपमे- योपमायां वाक्यद्यम्, अनन्वये त्वेकस्यैव साम्योक्िरित्यस्या भेद: । सा पूर्णा यदि सामान्यधर्म औपम्यवाचि च । उपमेयं चोपमानं भवेद्वाच्यम् सा उपमा। साधारणधर्मो दयो: सादृश्यहेतूँ गुणक्रिये मनोज्ञत्वादि । 10 औपम्यवाचकमिवादि। उपभेयं मुखादि। उपमानं चन्द्रादि। इयं पुनः ॥ १५। श्रौती यथेववाशब्दा इवार्थो वा वतिर्यदि। आर्थी तुल्यसमानाद्यास्तुल्यार्थो यत्र वा वतिः ॥ १६॥ यथेववाद्यः शब्दा उपमानानन्तरप्रयुक्ततुल्यादिपदसाधारणा अपि 15 श्रुतिमान्रेणोपमानोपमेयगतसादृश्यलक्षणसम्बन्धं बोधयन्तीति तत्सद्भावे श्रत्युपमा। एवं 'तत्र तस्येव' इत्यनेनेवार्थे विहितस्य वतेरुपादाने। तुल्याद्यस्तु 'कमलेन तुल्यं मुखम्' इत्यादावुपमेय एव, 'कमलं मुखस्य तुस्यम्' इत्यादावुपमान एव, 'कमलं मुखं च तुल्यम्' इत्यादावुभयत्रापि विश्राम्यन्तीत्यर्थानुसन्धानादेव साम्यं प्रतिपाद्यन्तीति तत्सन्दावे आर्थी ।20 एवं 'तेन तुल्यं-' इत्यादिना तुल्यार्थे विहितस्य वतेरुपादाने। द्वे तद्धिते समासेऽथ वाक्ये हे औ्रौती आर्थी च। उदाहरणम्- 'सौरभमम्भोरुहवन्मुखस्य कुम्भाविव स्तनौ पीनौ। हृदयं मद्यति वदनं तव शरदिन्दुर्यथा बाले।' 25 अत्र क्रमेण त्रिविधा श्रीती। 'मधुरः सुधावद्धरः पल्लवतुल्योऽतिपेलवः पाणिः । चकितमृगलोचनाम्यां सदशी चपले च लोचने तस्या: ।।'

१ 'उपमालङ्गारं' इति ज-ब्. २ 'सादृश्यहेतुगुणक्रिये' इति ब. ३ 'उप- मानान्तर' इति नि-ब.

१८ साहित्यदर्पणे १०-१७

अन्न क्रमेण त्रिविधा आर्थी। पूर्णा षडेव तद्। स्पष्टम्। लप्ा सामान्यधर्मादेरेकस्य यदि वा द्वयोः॥१७॥ 5 त्रयाणां वानुपादाने श्रौत्यार्थी सापि पूर्ववत्। सा लुप्ा। तद्वेदमाह- पूर्णावद्धर्मलोपे सा विना श्रौतीं तु तद्धिते ॥ १८ ॥ सा लुपोपमा धर्मस्य साधारणगुणक्रियारूपस्य लोपे पूर्णावदिति पूर्वोक्त- रीत्या षट्प्रकारा, किं त्वत्र तद्धिते श्रौत्या असम्भवात्पञ्च प्रकारा। उदाहरणम्- 10 'मुखमिन्दुर्यथा, पाणिः पल्लवेन समः प्रिये। वाच: सुधा इौष्टस्ते बिम्ततुल्यो, मनोऽशमवत् ।।' आधारकर्मविहिते द्विविधे च क्यचि, क्यडि। कर्मक्त्रोर्णमुलि च, स्यादेवं पश्चधा पुनः ॥ १९॥ 'धर्मलोपे लुप्ा' इत्यनुषज्यते। क्यच्-क्यङ्-णमुलः कलापमते यिन्ना- 15 यिणमः । कमेणोदाहरणम्- अन्तःपुरीयसि रणेषु, सुतीयससि त्वं पौरं जनं, तव सदा रमणीयते श्रीः। दष्टः प्रियाभिरमृतद्युतिदुर्शमिन्द्रसज्चारमत्र भुचि सञ्चरससि क्षितीश ।।' अत्र 'अन्तःपुरीयससि' इत्यत्र सुखविहारास्पदत्वस्य, 'सुतीयसि' इत्यत्र स्रेहनिर्भरत्वस्य च साधारणधर्मस्य लोपः। एवमन्यत्र। 20 इह च यथादितुल्यादिविरहाच्छ्रौत्यादिविशेषचिन्ता नास्ति। इदं च केचिदौपम्य प्रतिपादकस्येवादेलोंपे उदाहरन्ति, तद्युक्तम्। क्यडदेरपि तरदर्थविहितत्वेनौपम्थप्रतिपाद्कत्वात्। ननु क्यडादिषु सम्यगौपम्य प्रतीति- र्नास्ति, प्रत्ययेनास्वतत्रत्वाद् इवादिप्रयोगाभावाच्च, इति न वाच्यम्। कल्पबादावपि तथा प्रसङ्गात्। न च कल्पबादीनामिवादितुल्यतयौपम्यस्य 25 वाचकत्वम्, क्यडादीनां तु द्योतकत्वम्। इवादीनामपि वाचकत्वे निश्चया- भावात्। वाचकत्वे वा 'समुदितं पदं वाचकम्' 'प्रकृतिप्रत्यया स्वस्वार्थ- बोधकौ' इति च मतद्येऽपि वत्यादिक्यडाद्योः साम्यमेवेति। यच्च केचि- दाहु :- 'वत्याद्य इवाद्यर्थेऽनुशिष्यन्ते, क्यडदयस्त्वाचाराद्र्थे' इति, १ 'यिन्नागमः' इति नि, 'यिण्णायिणमः' इति ज-ब; 'यिन्नायिणमः' इति त मुद्रितकातत्रसंमत: पाठ :; see notes. २ 'प्रतिपादकस्य वतेः' इति ज-ब. ३ 'लोपं' इति नि.

90-95 दशम: परिच्छेद: १९

तदुपि न। न सलु क्यडादय आचारमान्नार्थाः, अपि तु सादश्याचारार्थां इति। तदेवं धर्मलोपे दशप्रकारा लुपा। उपमानानुपादाने द्विघा वाक्यसमासयोः । उदाहरणम्- तस्या मुखेन सदशं रम्यं नास्ते न वा नयनतुल्यम्।' 5 अत्र मुखनयनप्रतिनिधिवस्त्वन्तरयोर्गम्यमानत्वादुपमानलोप: । अत्रैव च 'मुखेन सदशं' इत्यत्न 'मुखं यथेदं', 'नयनतुल्यं' इत्यत्र 'दगिव' इति पाठे श्रौत्यपि सम्भवतीत्यनयोर्भेदयो: प्रत्येकं श्रौत्यार्थीत्वभेदेन चतुर्विधत्व- लम्भवेऽपि प्राचीनानां रीत्या द्विप्रकारत्वमेवोक्त्तम्। औपम्यवाचिनो लोपे समासे क्विपि च द्विधा ॥ २०॥ 10 कमेणोदाहरणम्- 'वदनं मृगशावाक्ष्याः सुधाकरमनोहरम्।' 'गर्दभति श्रुतिपरुषं व्यक्तं निनदन्महात्मनां पुरतः।' अन्न 'गर्द्भति' इत्यत्रौपम्यवाचिनः क्विपो लोपः । न चेहोपमेयस्यापि लोपः। 'निनदन्' इत्यनेनैव निर्देशात्। 15 द्विधा समासे वाक्ये च लोपे धर्मोपमानयोः । 'तस्या मुखेन' इत्यादौ 'रम्यं' इति स्थाने 'लोके' इति पाठेऽनयोरुदा- हरणम्। किप्समासगता द्वेधा धर्मेवादिविलोपने ॥ २१ ॥ उदाहरणम्- 20 'विधवति मुखाब्जमस्या:' अत्र 'विधवति' इति मनोहरत्व-क्विप्प्रत्यययोरलोपः। केचित्व्त्रापि प्रत्यय- लोपमाहुः। 'मुखाब्जं' इति च समासगा। उपमेयस्य लोपे तु स्ादेका प्रत्यये क्यचि। यथा- 25

'अरातिविक्रमालोकविकस्वरविलोचनः। कृपाणोदग्रदोर्दण्डः स सहस्रायुधीयति।' अत्र 'सहस्रायुधमिवात्मानमाचरति' इति वाक्ये उपमेयस्यात्मनो लोपः। न चेहौपम्यवाचकलोप उक्कादेव न्यायात्। अत्र केचिदाहुः-'सहस्रायुधेन सह वर्तत इति ससहस्रायुधः स इवाचरतीति वाक्यात्ससहस्त्रायुधीयतीति 30

साहित्यदर्पणे १०-२२

पद्सिड्ौ विशेष्यस्य शब्दानुपात्तत्वादिहोपमेयलोप:' इति वरभ़ विचार- सहम्। कर्तरि क्यचोऽनुसासनविरुदत्वाद्। धर्मोपमेयलोपेऽन्या यथा- 5 'यशसि प्रसरति भवतः क्षीरोदीयन्ति सागराः सर्वे।' अत्र क्षीरोद्मिवारमानमाचरन्तीत्युपमेय आत्मा साधारणधर्मः शुकता च लुसा। त्रिलोपे च समासगा ॥ २२ ॥ यथा- 10 'राजते मृगलोचना।' भत्र मृगस्य लोचने इव चज्जले लोचने यस्या इति समासे उपमाप्रति- पाद्कसाधारणधर्मोपमानानां लोप: । तेनोपमाया भेदा: स्युः सप्विंशतिसंख्यकाः। पूर्णा पङ्डिधा लुसा चैकविंशतिविधेति मिलित्वा सप्षविंशतिप्रकारोपमा। 15 एषु चोपमाभेदेषु मध्येऽलुप्तसाधारणधर्मेषु भेदेषु विशेषः प्रतिपाद्यते- एकरूप: कचित्कापि भिन्नः साधारणो गुणः ।। २३।। िन्ने बिम्बानुबिम्बत्वं शब्दमात्रेण वा भिदा। एकरूपे यथा उदाहतम्-'मधुरः सुधावद्धर :- ' इत्यादि। बिम्बप्रतिबिम्बत्वे यथा- 20 'भल्लापवर्जितैस्तेषां शिरोभि: इमश्रुलैर्महीम्। तस्तार सरघाव्यासैः स क्षौद्रपटलैरिव ।।' अत्र 'उमश्रुलैः' इत्यस 'सरघाव्यापैः' दति दृश्न्तवत्परतिबिम्बनम्। शब्दमात्रेण भिन्नत्वे यथा- 'स्मेरं विधाय नयनं विकासतमिव नीलमुत्पलं मयि सा। 25 कथयामास कृशाङ्गी मनोगतं निखिलमाकृतम्।।' अन्नैके एव सेरत्वविकसतत्वे प्रतिवस्तूपमावच्छ्देन निर्दिष्टे। एकदेशविवर्तिन्युपमा वाच्यत्वगम्यते॥ २४॥ भवेतां यत्र साम्यस्य य था-

१०-२५ दशमः परिच्छेद: २१

'नेत्रैरिवोत्पलै: पन्नैर्मुखैरिव सरःश्रियः । पढ़े पद़े विभान्ति स चक्रवाकैः स्तनैरिव ॥' अन्नोत्पलैदीनां नेत्रादीनां सादृश्यं वाच्यं सरःश्रीणां चाङ्गनासाम्यं गम्यम्। कथिता रसनोपमा। 5 यथोर्ध्वमुपमेयस्य यदि स्यादुपमानता ॥ २५॥ यथा- 'चन्द्रायते शुकरुचापि हंसो हंसायते चारुगतेन कान्ता। कान्तायते स्पर्शसुखेन वारि वारीयते स्वच्छतया विहायः ।' मालोपमा यदेकस्योपमानं बडु दृश्यते। 10 यथा- 'वारिजेनेव सरसी शशिनेव निशीथिनी। यौवनेनेव वनिता नयेन श्रीर्मनोहरा ।।' क्वचिदुपमानोपमेययोर्ई्वयोरपि प्रकृतत्वं दृशयते- 'हंसश्चन्द्र इवाभाति जलं व्योमतलं यथा। 15 िमला: कुमुदानीव तारका: शरदागमे।।' 'अस्य राज्ञो गृहे भान्ति भूपानां ता विभूतयः । पुरन्दरस्य भवने कल्पवृक्षभवा इव ।' अत्रोपमेयभूतविभूतिमिः 'कल्पवृक्षभवा इव' इत्युपमानभूता विभूतय आक्षिप्यन्त इत्याक्षेपोपमा । अत्रैव 'गृहे' इत्यस्य 'भवने' इत्यनेन प्रति-20 निर्देशात्प्रतिनिर्देश्योपमा इत्यादयश्च न लक्षिताः । एवंविधवैचित्र्यस्य सहस्रधा दंर्शनात्। उपमानोपमेयत्वमेकस्यैव त्वनन्वयः ॥ २६॥ अर्थादेकवाक्ये। यथा- 25 'राजीवमिव राजीवं जलं जलमिवाजनि। चन्द्रश्चन्द्र इवातन्द्र: शरत्समुद्योच्यमे।।' अत्र राजीवादीनामनन्यसदशत्वप्रतिपादनार्थमुपमानोपमेयभावो वैव- क्षिकः । 'राजीवमिव पाथोजम्' इति चास्य लाटानुप्रासाद्विविक्तो विषयः । कि त्वत्रोचितत्वादेकशब्दप्रयोग एव श्रेयान्। तदुक्कम्- 30

१. 'नेत्रादीनां उत्पलादिसादृश्यं' इति ब. २ 'सन्दर्शनात्' इति ज-ब.

२२ साहित्यदर्पणे १०-२६

'अनन्वये च शब्दैक्य मौचित्यादानुषङ्गिकम्। अस्मिस्तु लाटानुप्रासे साक्षादेव प्रयोजकम् ॥' इति। पर्यायेण द्वयोरेतदुपमेयोपमा मता। एतदुपमानोपमेयत्वम्। अर्थाद्वाक्यद्दये। 5 यथा- 'कमलेव मतिर्मतिरिव कमला तनुरिव विभा विभेव तनुः। धरणीव धतिर्ष्टतिरिव धरणी सततं विभाति बत यस्य ।।' अत्रास्य राज्ञ: श्रीबुद्ध यादिसदृशं नान्यदुस्तीत्यमिप्रायः। सदृशानुभवाद्वस्तुस्मृतिः सरणमुच्यते॥२७॥ 10 यथा- 'अरविन्दुमिदं वीक्ष्य खेलत्सजञनमजुलम्। सरामि वदनं तस्याश्रारु चञ्चललोचनम्।' 'मयि सकपटं-' इत्यादौ च स्मृतेः सादृश्यानुभवं विनोत्थापितत्वान्ना- यमलङ्कारः । राघवानन्दमहापात्रास्तु वैसादृश्यात्स्मृतिमपि स्रणालङ्कार- 15 मिच्छन्ति। तत्रोदाहरणं तेषामेव यथा- 'शिरीषमृद्धी गिरिषु प्रपेदे यदा यदा दुःखशतानि सीता। तदा तदास्याः सदनेषु सौख्यलक्षाणि दुध्यौ गलद्श्ु रामः ।।' रूपकं रूपितारोपाद्विषये निरपह्रवे। 'रूपित-' इति परिणामाद् व्यवच्छेदः। एतच्च परिणामप्रस्तावे विवेच- 20 यिष्याम:। 'निरपह्लवे' इत्यपह्गुतिव्यवच्छेदार्थम्। तत्परम्परितं साङ्गं निरङ्गमिति च त्रिधा॥२८ ॥ तदूपकम्। तत्र यत्र कस्यचिदारोपः परारोपणकारणम्। 25 तत्परम्परितं श्विष्टाश्लिष्टशब्दनिबन्धनम् ॥२९॥ प्रत्येकं केवलं मालारूपं चेति चतुर्विधम्। तत्र क्रिष्टशब्दनिबन्धनं केवलपरम्परितं यथा- 'आाहवे जगदुइण्डराजमण्डलराहवे। श्रीनृसिंहमहीपाल स्वस्तस्तु तव बाहवे ।। १ 'वृज्यादिसदृशं' इति ज-ब. २ 'तत्प्रस्तावे' इति नि. ३ 'दाइवेपथुकर्त्रेऽरे:' इति सुभाषितावलिसंमत: पाठ :.

१०-३० दशमः परिच्छेद: २३

अत्र राजमण्डलं नृपसमूह एव चन्द्रबिम्बमित्यारोपो राजबाहो राहुत्वा- रोपे निमित्तम्। मालारूपं यथा- 'पद्मोद्यदिनाधीशः सदागतिसमीरणः। भूमृदावलिदम्भोलिरेक एव भवान्भुवि॥ अत्र पद्माया उद्य एव पझमानामुदय:, सतामागतिरेव सदागमनम्, 5 भूमृतो राजान एव पर्वता इत्याद्यारोपो राज्ञ: सूर्यत्वाद्यारोपे निमित्तम्। अश्िष्टशब्दनिबन्धनं केवलं यथा- 'पान्तु वो जलदश्यामाः शार्ङ्गज्याघातकर्कशाः। त्रैलोक्यमण्डपस्तम्भाश्चत्वारो हरिबाहवः ।।' अत्र त्रैलोक्यस्य मण्डपत्वारोपो हरिबाहूनां स्तम्भत्वारोपे निमित्तम्। 10 मालारूपं यथा- 'मनोजराजस्य सितातपत्रं श्रीखण्डचित्रं हरिदुङ्गनायाः। विराजते व्योमसरःसरोजं कर्पूरपूरप्रभमिन्दुबिम्बम् ।।' अन्न मनोजादे राजेत्वाद्यारोपश्चन्द्रबिम्बस्य सितातपत्रत्वाद्यारोपे निमि- त्तम्। 'एषु च राजभुजादीनां राहुत्वाद्यारोपो राजमण्डलादीनां चन्द्रमण्ड- 15 लत्वाद्योरोपे निमित्तम्' इति केचित्। अद्गिनो यदि साङ्गस्य रूपणं साङ्गमेव तत् ॥ ३० ॥ समस्तवस्तुविषयमेकदेशविवर्ति च । तत्र आरोप्याणामशेषाणां शब्दत्वे प्रथमं मतम् ॥ ३१॥। 20 प्रथमं समस्तवस्तुविषयम्। यथा- 'रावणावग्रहक्कान्तमिति वागमृतेन सः । अभिवृष्य मरुत्सस्यं कृष्णमेघस्तिरोदधे॥' अत्र कृष्णस्य मेघत्वारोपे वागादीनाममृतत्वादिकमारोपितम्। यत्र कस्यचिदार्थत्वमेकदेशविवर्ति तत्। 25 कस्य चिदारोप्यमाणस्य। यथा- 'लावण्यमधुमि: पूर्णमास्यमस्या विकस्वरम्। लोकलोचनरोलम्बकदम्बैः कैर्न पीयते॥' अत्र लावण्यादौ मध्वाद्यारोप: शाब्द:, मुँखे पद्मत्वारोप आर्थः। १ 'सूर्यत्वारोपे' इति नि. २ 'राहुत्वाद्यारोपः' इति नि. ३ 'तत्र च' इति नि. ४ 'मण्डलत्वाद्यारोपो' इति नि. ५ 'केन दीयते' इति नि. ६ 'मधुत्वारोपः' इति नि. ७ 'मुखस्य' इति नि. ८ 'पदमत्वाद्यारोपः' इति नि.

२४ साहित्यंदर्पणे १०-३२

न चेयमेकदेशविवर्तिन्युपमा विकस्वरत्वधर्मस्यारोप्यमाणे प्मे सुख्यतयो वर्तमानान्मुखे चोपचरितत्वात्। निरङ्गं केवलस्यैव रूपणं तदपि द्विधा ॥ ३२॥ मालाकेवलरूपत्वात् 5 तत्र मालारूपं निरङ्गं यथा- 'निर्माणकौशलं धातुश्चन्द्रिका लोकचक्षुषाम्। कीडागृहमनङ्गस्य सेयमिन्दीवरेक्षणा ।' केवलं यथा- 'दासे कृतागसि भवेदुचितः प्रभूणां 10 पादप्रहार इति सुन्दरि नात्र दूये। उद्त्कठोरपुल काङ्कुरकण्ट क्ाग्रै- रयंत्खिद्यते मृदु पदं ननु सा व्यथा मे ।।' तेनाष्टौ रूपके भिदाः। 'चिरन्तनैरुक्ताः' इति शेषः । क्चित्परम्परितमप्येकदेशविवर्ति यथा- 15 'खङ्गः क्ष्मासौविदल्लः समिति विजयते मालवाखण्डलस्।।' अन्रार्थ: क्ष्मायां महिषीत्वारोपः खब्गे सौविदल्लत्वारोपे निमित्तम्। अस्य भेदुस्य पूर्ववन्मालारोपत्वेऽप्युदाहरणं सृग्यम्। दृश्यन्ते कचिदारोप्याः श्िष्टाः साङ्गेऽपि रूपके ॥३३॥ तत्रैकदेशविवर्ति छिष्ट यथा मम- 20 'करमुद्यमहीधरस्तनाये गलिततम:पटलांशुके निवेश्य। विकाेतकुमुदेक्षणं विचुम्बत्ययममरेशदिशो मुखं सुधांशुः ।' समख्वस्तुविषयं यथा-अत्रैव 'विचुम्बति-' इत्यादौ 'चुचुम्बे, हरिद- बलामुखमिन्दुनायकेन' इति पाठे। न चात्र छ्िष्टपरम्परितम्। तत्र हि 'भूभृदावलिदम्भोलि :- ' इत्यादौ राजादौ पर्वतत्वाद्यारोपं विना वर्णनीयस्य 25 राजादेर्दम्भोलितादिरूपैणं सर्वथैव सादशयासम्भर्वादसङ्गतम्। तहि कथं 'पद्मोद्यदिनाघीश :- ' इत्यादौ परम्परितम्, राजादेः सूर्यादिना सादृश्यख तेजस्वितादिहेतुकस्य सम्भवात्-इति न वाच्यम्। तथा हि-राजादेखेज- स्वितादिहेतुकं सुव्यकतं सादृश्यं न तु प्रकृते विवक्षितम् । पद्मोदया देरेव दयोः साधारणधर्मतया विवक्षितत्वात् । इह तु महीधरादेः स्तनादिना

१ 'मुखतया वर्वमानान्' इति नि. २ 'मानवाखण्डलस्य' इतिज-ब; 'मालव' इति तु अलक्कारसर्वस्वसंमत: पाठः. ३ 'रूपाणां' इति नि. ४ 'सादृश्याभावात्' इति नि.

१०-३३ दशम: परिच्छेद: २५

सादृश्यं पीनोत्तुङ्त्वादिना सुव्यक्तमेव-इति न ्िष्टपरम्परितम् । क्चित्स- मासाभावेऽपि रूपकं दृश्यते- 'मुखं तव कुरङ्गाक्षि सरोजमिति नान्यथा।' क्चिद्वैयधिकरण्येऽपि यथा- विदेधे मधुपश्रेणीमिह भूलतया विविः। 5

क्वचिद्वैधम्येडपि। यथा- 'सौजन्याम्बुमरुस्थली सुचरितालेख्यधुमित्तिर्गुण- ज्योत्साकृष्णचतुर्दशी सरलतायोगश्चपुच्छच्छटा। थैरेषापि दुराशया कलियुगे राजावली सेविता तेषां शूलिनि भक्तिमात्रसुलभे सेवा कियत्कौशलम्।।' 10 अत्रे केषांचिदरूपकाणां शब्दश्रेषमूलत्वेऽपि रूपकविशेषत्वादर्थालङ्कारमध्ये गणनम्-। एवं वक्ष्यमाणालङ्गारेषु बोध्यम्। अधिकारूढवैशिष्टयं रूपकं यत्तदेव तत्। तदेवाधिकारूढवैशिष्य संज्ञरूपकम्। यथा मम- 'इदं वक्रं साक्षाद्विरहितकलङ्ग: शशधरः 15 सुधाधाराधारश्चिरपरिणतं बिम्बमधरः । इमे नेत्रे रात्रिन्दिवमधिकशोभे कुवलये तनुर्लावण्यानां जलधिरवगाहे सुखतरः ।।' अत्र कलङ्कराहित्यादिनाधिकं वैशिष्ट्यम्। विषयात्मतयारोप्ये प्रकृतार्थोपयोगिनि ॥ ३४॥ 20

परिणामो भवेत्तुल्यातुल्याधिकरणो द्विधा। आरोप्य माणस्यारोपविषयात्मतया परिणमनात्परिणामः । यथा- 'स्मितेनोपायनं दूरादागतस्य कृतं मम। स्तनोपपीडमाश्लेष: कृतो ूते पणस्तया ।' 25

अन्यत्रोपायनपणौ वसनाभरणादिभावेनोपयुज्येते। अत्र तु नायकसम्भा- वनधयूतयोः स्मिताश्लेषरूपतया। प्रथमार्धे वैयधिकरण्येन प्रयोग:, द्वितीये सामानाधिकरण्येन। रूपके 'मुखचन्द्रं पश्यामि' इतयादावारोप्यमाणचन्द्रा-

१ 'विदधे ......... वैधम्येडपि यथा' इत्येतत् नि-पुस्तके नास्ति; see notes. २ 'अत्र' इत्यस्मात्प्राक् 'इदं मम' इत्यधिकं ज-ब-नि-पुस्तकेषु। तच्च अममूळकमेव। see notes. ३ 'संज्ञकम्' इति नि. ३ सा०

२६ साहित्यदर्पणे १०-३५

देरुपरअकतामात्रम्, न तु प्रकृते दर्शनादावुपयोगः । इह तूपायनादेर्विष- येण तादालयं प्रकृते च नायकसम्भावनादावुपयोगः। अत एव रूपके आरोप्यस्यावच्छेदकत्वमात्रेणान्वयः । अत्र तु तादाल्येन । 'दासे कृता- गसि-' इत्यादौ रूपकमेव, न तु परिणामः । आरोप्यमाणकण्टकस्य पादभे- 5 देनकार्यस्याप्रस्तुतत्वात्। न खलु तत्कस्यविद्पि प्रस्तुतकार्यस्य घटनार्थ- मनुसन्धीयते। अयमपि रूपकवद्विकारूढवैशिष्ट्यो दश्यते। यथा- 'वनेचराणां वनितासखानां दरीगृहोत्सङ्गनिषक्तभासः । भवन्ति यत्रौषघयो रजन्यामतैलपूरा: सुरतप्रदीपाः ॥' 10 अत्र प्रदीपानामोषध्यात्मतया प्रकृते सुरतोपयोगिन्यन्धकारनाशे उपयो- गोऽतैलपूरत्वेनाधिका रूढवैशिष्यम्। सन्देहः प्रकृतेऽन्यस्य संशयः प्रतिभोत्थितः ॥ ३५॥ शुद्धो निश्चयगर्भोऽसौ निश्रयान्त इति त्रिधा। यत्र-संशय एव पर्यवसानं स शुद्धः। यथा- 15 'कि तारुण्यतरोरियं रसभरोद्भिन्ना नवा वल्लरी वेलाप्रोच्छलितस्य किं लहरिका लावण्यवारांनिधे: । •उद्गाढोत्कलिकावतां स्वसमयोपन्यासविश्रम्भिण: किं साक्षादुपदेशयष्टिरथवा देवस्य शुङ्गारिणः ।।' यत्रादावन्ते च संशय एव मध्ये निश्चयः स निश्रयमध्यः । 20 यथा- 'अयं मतण्डः कि स खलु तुरगैः सलमिरितः कृशानुः किं सर्वाः प्रसरति दिशो नैष नियतम्। कृतान्तः कि साक्षान्महिषवहनोऽसाविति पुनः समालोक्याजौ तवां विद्धंति विकल्पान्प्रतिभटाः ।' 25 अत्र मध्ये मार्तण्डाय्यभावनिश्रचयो राजनिश्चये द्वितीयसंशयोत्थाना- सम्भवाद्। यत्रादौ संशयोऽन्ते च निश्रयः स निश्चयान्तः। यथा- "कि तावत्सरसि सरोजमेतदारादाहोसिन्मुखमवभासते तरुण्याः। संशय्य क्षणमिति निश्चिकाय कश्चिद्विब्बोकैर्बकसहवासिनां परोक्षैः।।' 30 अप्रतिभोत्यापिते तु 'स्थाणुर्वा पुरुषो वा' इत्यादिसंशये नायमलद्वारः। १ 'पादमेदेन' इति ब.

१०-३६ दशम: परिच्छेद: २७

'मध्यं तव सरोजाक्षि पयोधरभरार्दितम्। अस्ति नास्तीति सन्देहः कस्य चित्ते न भासते।।' अन्रातिशयोक्तिरेव, उपमेये उपमानसंशयस्ैवैतदलङ्गारविषयत्वात्।

'मुग्धा दुग्वधिया गवां विद्धते कुम्भानधो बल्लवाः 5 कर्णे कैरवशङ्गया कुवलयं कुर्वन्ति कान्ता अपि। कर्कन्धूफलमुच्िनोति शबरी मुक्ताफलाकाङ्कया सान्द्रा चन्द्रमसो न कस्य कुरुते चित्तभ्रमं चन्द्रिका।' भस्वरसोत्थापिता भ्रान्तिर्नायमलङ्गारः। यथा-'शुक्तिकायां रजतम्' इति। न चासादश्यमूला। यथा- 10 'सङ्गमविरहविकल्पे वरमिह विरहो न सङ्गमस्तसाः । सङ्के सैव तथका त्रिभुवनमपि तन्मयं विरहे॥' कचिद्ेदाद्रहीतृणां विषयाणां तथा कचित्। एकस्यानेकधोल्लेखो यः स उल्लेख उच्यंते ॥ ३७॥ क्रमेणोदाहरणम्- 15 'प्रिय इति गोपवधूभिः शिशुरिति वृद्धैरधीश इति देवैः। नारायण इति भक्तर्बह्ेत्यग्राहि योगिभिर्देवः ॥' अत्रैकस्यापि भगवतस्तत्तदुणयोगादनेकधोल्लेखे गोपवधूप्रभृतीनां रुच्या- दयो यथायोगं प्रयोजकाः । यदाहु :- 'यथारुचि यथार्थित्वं यथाव्युत्पत्ति भिद्यते। 20 आभासोऽप्यर्थ एकस्मिन्ननुसन्धानसाधित: ।।' अत्र भगवतः प्रियत्वादीनां वास्तवत्वाद् अहीतृभेदाच् न मालारूपकम्, न च भ्रान्तिमान्, न चायमभेदे भेद इत्येवंरूपातिशयोकिः। तथा हि-'अन्यदेवाङ्गलावण्यम्-' इत्यादौ लावण्यादेर्विषयस्य पृथक्त्वेनाध्य- वसानम्। न चेह भगवति गोपवधूप्रभृतिमिः प्रियत्वाद्यध्यवसीयते । 25 प्रियत्वादेर्भगवत तत्काले तात्विकत्वात्। केचिदाहुः-'अयमलङ्कारो निर्य मेनालङ्कारान्तरविच्छित्तिमूलः। उक्तोदाहरणे च शिश्ुत्वादीनां नियमा-

१ 'इष्यते इति ज-ब. २ 'तत्र हि' इति ज-ब. ३ 'अवश्यंभावेन' इत्येतद- धिकं 'नियमेन' इत्यस्मात्पर ज-ब-पुस्तकयोः ४ 'प्रियत्वादीनां' इति नि.

२८ साहित्यदर्पणे १०-३७

प्रत्येतृभेदेन नानात्वप्रतीतिरूपो विच्छित्तिविशेष उल्लेखाखयभिन्नालद्कार- प्रयोजकः । श्रीकण्ठजनपद्वर्णने-'वज्रपज्जरमिति शरणागतैः, असुरविव- रमिति वातिकैः' इत्यादिश्चातिशयोक्तेर्विविक्तो विषयः । इह च रूपकालङ्का- रयोग: । वस्तुतस्तु-'असुरविवरं-'इत्यादौ भ्रान्तिमन्तमेवेच्छन्ति न 5 रूपकम्, भेदुप्रतीतिपुरःसरस्यैवारोपस्य गौणीमूलरूपकादिप्रयोजकत्वात् । यदाहुः शारीरकमीमांसाभाष्यव्याख्याने श्रीवाचस्पतिमिश्रा :- 'अपि च परशब्द: परत्र लक्ष्यमाणगुणयोगेन वर्तते इति यत्र प्रयोक्तप्रतिपत्रोः संग्रति- पत्तिः स गौणः, स च मेदप्रत्ययपुरःसरः' इति। इह तु वातिकानां श्रीकण्ठ- जनपद्वर्णने भ्रान्तिकृत एवासुरविवराद्यारोप इति। अत्रैव च 'तपोवनमिति 10 मुनिभिः, कामायतनमिति वेश्याभिः' इत्यादौ परिणामालङ्कारयोगः । 'गाम्भीर्येण समुद्रोऽसि गौरवेणासि पर्वतः।' इत्यादौ चानेकधोल्लेखे गाम्भीर्यादिविषयभेद: प्रयोजकः । अत्र च रूप- कयोगः । 'गुरुर्वचसि, पृथुरुरसि, अर्जुनो यशसि-' इत्यादिषु चास्य रूपका- द्विविक्तो विषय इति। अत्र हि श्रेषमूलातिशयोक्तियोगः। 15 प्रकृतं प्रतिषिध्यान्यस्थापनं स्यादपह्ुतिः। इयं द्विधा। क्चिदपह्ववपूर्वक आरोप:, क्वचिदारोपपूर्वकोऽपह्वव इति । क्रमेणोदाहरणम्- 'नेदं नभोमण्डलमम्बुराशिनैताश्च तारा नवफेनभङ्गाः। नायं शशी कुण्डलितः फणीन्द्रो नासौ कलङ्क: शयितो मुरारिः ॥' 20 'एतद्विभाति चरमाचलचूडचुम्बि हिण्डीरपिण्डरुचिशीतमरीचिबिम्बम्। उज्ज्वालितस्य रजनीं मदनानलस्य धूमं द्घत्प्रकटला्नकैतवेन।' इदं मम। एवम् 'विराजति व्योमवपुःपयोधिस्तारामयास्तत्र च फेनभङ्गा:' इत्या- कारेण च प्रकृतनिषेधो बोध्यः । 25 गोपनीयं कमप्यर्थ द्योतयित्वा कथंचन ॥ ३८ ।। यदि श्ेषेणान्यथा वान्यथयेत्साप्यपह्ठुतिः। श्लेषेण यथा- 'काले वारिधराणामपतितया नैव शक्यते स्थातुम्। उत्कण्ठितासि तरले नहि नहि सखि पिच्छिल: पन्थाः ॥' 30 अत्र 'अपतितया' इत्यत्र पतिं विनेत्युक्त्वा पश्चात्पतनाभावेनान्यथा कृतम्। अश्लेषेण यथा-

१ 'उल्लेखभिन्नालक्कार' इति नि. २ 'भ्रान्तिमत्त्वमेवेच्छति' इति नि. ३ 'पश्रात्' इत्येतन्नास्ति ज-ब-पुस्तकयोः.

१०-३९ दशम: परिच्छेद: २९

'इह पुरोऽनिलकम्पितविग्रहा मिलति का न वनस्पतिना लता। स्मरसि किं सखि कान्तरतोत्सवं नहि घनागमरीतिरुदाहता।' वक्रोक्तौ परोक्तेरन्यथाकारः, इह तु स्वोक्तेरेवेति भेद: । गोपनकृता गोपनीयस्यापि प्रथममभिहितत्वाच्च व्याजोक्तेः। अन्यन्निषिध्य प्रकृतस्थापनं निश्चयः पुनः ॥ ३९॥ 5 निश्चयाख्योऽयमलङ्कारः। अन्यदित्यारोप्यमाणम्। यथा मम- 'वदनमिदं न सरोजं नयने नेन्दीवरे एते। इह सविधे सुग्धददशो भ्रमेर मुधा किं परिभ्रमसि॥' यथा वा- 10 'हृदि बिसलताहारो नायं भुजङ्गमनायक: कुवलयद्लश्रेणी कण्ठे न सा गरलद्युतिः । मलयजरजो नेदं भसम प्रियारहिते मयि प्रहर न हरत्रान्त्यानङ्ग क्रुधा किमु धावसि ॥' न ह्य्यं निश्चयान्तः सन्देहः, तत्र संशयनिश्चययोरेकाश्रयत्वेनावस्थानात् ।15 अन्र तु भ्रमरादेः संशयो नायकादेर्निश्चयः । किं च न अ्रमरादेरपि संशयः एककोव्यनधिके ज्ञाने तथा समीपगमनासम्भवात्। तर्हि भ्रान्तिमानस्तु। अस्तु नाम अ्रमरादेर्य्रान्तिः । न चेह तस्याश्रमत्कारविधायित्वम्। अपि तु तथाविधनायकाद्युक्तेरेवेति सहृद्यसंवेद्यम् । किंचाविवक्षितेऽपि भ्रमरादेः पतनादौ भ्रान्तौ वा नायिकाचाद्वादिरूपेणैव सम्भवति तथाविधोक्तिः । न च 20 रूपकध्वनिरयम्, मुखस्य कमलत्वेनानिर्धारणात्। न चापहुतिः, प्रस्तुतस्या- निषेधात् । इति पृथगेवायमलङ्कारश्चिरन्तनोक्तालङ्गारेभ्यः। शुक्तिकायां रजतधिया पतति पुरुषे शुक्तिकेयं न रजतमिति कस्यचिदुक्तिरनायमलङ्कारो वैचित्र्याभावात्। भवेत्सम्भावनोत्प्रेक्षा प्रकृतस्य परात्मना। 25 वाच्या प्रतीयमाना सा प्रथमं द्विविधा मता ॥४० ॥ वाच्येवादिप्रयोगे स्यादप्रयोगे परा पुनः। जातिर्गुण: क्रिया द्रव्यं यदुत्प्रेक्ष्यं द्वयोरपि।। ४१॥। तद्ष्टधापि प्रत्येकं भावाभावाभिमानतः । १ 'मधुकर न मुधा परिभ्राम्य' इति जब. २ 'भ्रमरासंशयो' इति नि. ३ 'समीपागमनासम्भवात्' इति ज-ब. ४ 'एव' इत्यधिकं 'सम्भवति' इत्यस्मात्परं ज-ब-पुस्तकयोः-

३० साहित्यदर्पणे १०-४२

गुणक्रियास्वरूपत्वान्निमित्तस्य पुनश्र ताः ।।४२।। द्वात्रिंशद्विधतां यान्ति तत्र वाच्योत्पेक्षायामुदाहरणं दिब्ात्रं यथा- 'ऊरुः कुरङ्गकदशश्रञ्चलचेलाज्जलो भाति। 5 सपताक: कनकमयो विजयस्तम्भः सरसेव ।' अत्र विजयस्तम्भस्य बहुवाचकत्वाज्ात्युत्पेक्षा। 'ज्ञाने मौनं क्षमा शक्ता त्यागे श्राघाविपर्ययः। गुणा गुणानुबन्धित्वात्तस्य सप्रसवा हव ॥' अत्र सप्रसवत्वं गुणः । 10 'गङ्गाम्भसि सुरत्राण तव निःशाननिखवनः । स्नातीवारिवधूवर्गगर्भपातनपातकी।।' . अन्र स्नातीति क्रिया। 'मुखमेणीदशो भाति पूर्णचन्द्र इवापरः।' अत्र चन्द्र इत्येकव्यक्तिवाचकत्वाद्द्रव्यशब्दः। एते भावाभिमाने। 15 अभावाभिमाने यथा- 'कपोलफलकावस्या: कष्टं भूत्वा तथाविधौ। अपश्यन्ताविवान्योन्यमीदक्षां क्षामतां गतौ।' 14 अत्रापश्यन्ताविति क्रियाया अभावः । एवमन्यत् । निमित्तस्य गुण- क्रियारूपत्वे यथा-'गङ्गाम्भि-' इत्यादौ स्नातीवेत्युतप्रेक्षानिमित्तं पातकित्वं 20 गुणः । 'अपश्यन्तौ-' इत्यादौ क्षामतागमनरूपं निमित्तं करिया। एवमन्यत्। प्रतीयमानोत्प्रेक्षा यथा- 'तन्वङ्गयाः सनयुग्मेन मुखं न प्रकटीकृतम्। हाराय गुणिने स्थानं न दत्तमिति लज्या।' अन्र लज्येवेतीवाद्यभावात्प्रतीयमानोत्प्रेक्षा। एवमन्यत्। ननु ध्वनि- 25 निरूपणप्रस्तावेऽलङ्काराणां सर्वेषामपि व्यङ्गयत्वं भवतीत्युक्तम् । संप्रति पुनर्विशिष्य कथमुत्प्रेक्षायाः प्रतीयमानत्वम्। उच्यते-व्यङ्चोत्प्रेक्षायां 'महिलासहस्स-' इत्यादावुत्प्रेक्षणं विनापि वाक्यविश्रान्ति:। इह तु स्तन- योर्लजाया असम्भवाल्लजयेवेत्युत्प्रेक्षयैवेति व्यङ्गयप्रतीयमानोत्प्ेक्षयोर्भेदः। अत्र वाच्योत्प्रेक्षायाः षोडशसु मेदेषु मध्ये विशेषमाह- 30 तत्र वाच्याभिदा: पुनः। विना द्रव्यं त्रिधा सर्वाः स्वरूपफलहेतुगाः।।४३।। तत्रोक्तेषु वाच्यप्रतीयमानोठोक्षयोरमेदेयु मध्ये ये वाच्योत्ेक्षाया: पोडश भेदा स्तेषु च जात्यादीनां त्रयाणां ये द्वादश मेदास्तेषां प्रत्येकं स्वरूपफल-

१०-४३ दशम: परिच्छेद: ३१

हेतुगत्वेन द्वादशमेदतया षदत्रिशनेदाः। द्रव्यस् स्वरूपोत्प्रेक्षणमेव सम्भवतीति चत्वार इति मिलित्वा चत्वारिंशज्जेदाः । अत्र स्वरूपोत्प्रेक्षा यथा पूर्वोदाहरणेषु 'स्मरस्य विजयस्तम्भ-' इति । 'सप्रसवा हव-' इत्यादयो जातिगुणरूपा: । फलोत्प्रेक्षा यथा- 'रावणस्यापि रामास्तो मित्वा हृदयमाशुगः । 5 विवेश भुवमाख्यातुमुरगेभ्य इव प्रियम् ॥' अत्राख्यातुमिति भूप्रवेशस्य फलं क्रियारूपमुत्प्रेक्षितम् । हेतूत्पेक्षा यथा- 'सैषा स्थली यत्र विचिन्वता त्वां भ्रष्टं मया नूपुरभेकमुव्याम्। अदृश्यत त्वच्चरणारविन्दविश्लेषदुःखादिव बद्धमौनम्।।' अत्र दुःखरूपो गुणो हेतुत्वेनोळक्षितः । एवमन्यत्। 10

उत्त्यनुक्त्योर्निमित्तस्य द्विधा तत्र स्वरूपगाः । तेषु चत्वारिंशत्संख्याकेषु भेदेषु मध्ये ये स्वरूपगायाः षोडश मेदास्ते उत्प्रेक्षानिमित्तस्योपादानानुपादानाभ्यां दात्रिशज्ेदा इति मिलित्वा षट्पज्जा- शजेदा वाच्योत्प्रेक्षायाः। तत्र निमित्तस्योपादानं यथा पूर्वोदाहते 'स्ातीच-' इत्युत्प्रेक्षायां निमित्तं पातकित्वमुपात्तम् । अनुपादाने यथा-'चन्द्र इवा-15 परः' इत्यत्र तथाविधसौन्दर्याद्यतिशयो नोपातः। हेतुफलयोस्तु नियमेन निमित्तस्योपादानमेव। तथाहि-'विश्रलेषदुःखादिव' इत्यत्र यब्निमित्त बद्धमौनत्वम् 'आख्यातुमिव' इत्यत्र च भूप्रवेशखयोरनुपादानेऽसङ्गतमेव* वाक्यं स्ात्। प्रतीयमानायाः षोडशसु भेदेषु विशेषमाह- प्रतीयमानाभेदाश्र प्रत्येकं फलहेतुगाः ॥।४४ ॥ 20

यथोदाहृते 'तन्वङ्गयाः सनयुग्मेन-' इत्यत्र लज्जयेवेति हेतुरुत्प्रेक्षितः। अस्यामपि निमित्तस्यानुपादानं न सम्भवति । इवाद्यनुपादाने निमित्तस्य चाकीर्तने उत्प्रेक्षणस्य प्रमातुर्निश्चेतुमशक्यत्वात्। स्वरूपोत्प्रेक्षाप्यत्र न अवति। धर्म्यन्तरतादात्म्यनिबन्धनायामस्यामिवाद्यप्रयोगे विशेषणयोगे सत्यतिशयोक्तेरभ्युपगमात्। यथा-'अयं राजापरः पाकशासनः' इति।25 तदेवं द्वात्रिशत्प्रकारा प्रतीयमानोत्प्रेक्षा। उत्त्यनुकत्यो: प्रस्तुतस्य प्रत्येकं ता अपि द्विधा। ता उत्प्रेक्षा: । उकती यथा-'ऊरुः कुरङ्गकदश :- ' इति। अनुक्ता यथा मम प्रभावसाम्-'प्रघ्युम्न :- इह हि संप्रति दिर्गन्तरमाच्छाद्यता तिमिरपटलेन 30

१ 'हेतुगम्यत्वेन' इति नि. २ 'गुणस्वरूपगाः' इति नि. ३ 'वाकीर्तने' इति नि. ४ 'धर्मान्तर' इति नि. ५ 'प्रतिदिगन्तं' इति ज-ब.

साहित्यदर्पणे १०-४५

घटितमिवाअनपुलैः पूरितमिव मृगमदक्षोदैः। ततमिव तमालतरुमिर्वृतमिव नीलांशुकैर्भुवनम्।।' अन्नाअ्जनेन घटितत्वादेरुत्प्रेक्षणीयस्य विषयव्याप्तत्वं नोपात्तम्। यथा वा- 5 'लिम्पतीव तमोऽङ्कानि वर्षतीवाञ्जनं नभः ।' अत्र तमसो लेपनस्य व्यापनरूपो विषयो नोपात्तः। अज्जनवर्षणस्य तमःसम्पातः । अनयोरुत्प्रेक्षानिमित्तं च तमसोऽतिबहुलत्वं धारारुपेणाध :- संयोगश्च यथासंख्यम्। केचित्तु-'अलेपनकर्तृभूतमपि तमो लेपनकर्तृत्वेनो- त्प्रेक्षितं व्यापनं च निमित्तम्, एवं नभोऽपि वर्षणक्रियाकर्तृत्वेन' इत्याहुः। 10 अलङ्कारान्तरोत्था सा वैचित्र्यमधिकं भजेत् ।४५॥ तन्न सापह्ववोत्प्रेक्षा यथा मम- 'अश्रुच्छलेन सुदृशो हुतपावकधूमकलुषाक्ष्याः। अप्राप्य मानमङ्गे विगलति लावण्यवारिपूर इव ।' श्लेषहेतुगा यथा- 15 मुक्तोत्कर: सङ्गटश्चुक्तिमध्याद्विनिर्गतः सारसलोचनाया: । जानीमहेऽस्या: कमनीयकम्बुग्रीवाधिवासाहुणवत्त्वमाप ।।' अत्र गुणवत्वे श्रेषः । कम्बुग्रीवाधिवासादिवेति हेतूत्प्रेक्षाया हेतुः। अत्र 'जानीमहे' इत्युत्प्रेक्षावाचकम्। एवम्- मन्ये शङ्के ध्रुवं प्रायो नूनमित्येवमादयः। 20 क्चिदुपमोपक्रमोत्प्रेक्षा यथा- 'पारेजलं नीरनिधेरपश्यन्मुरारिरानीलपलाशराशीः। वनावलीरुत्कलिकासहस्त्र प्रतिक्षणोत्कूलितशैवलाभाः ।' इत्यत्राभाशब्दसयोपमावाचकत्वादुपक्रमे उपमा। पर्यवसाने तु जलधितीरे • शैवालस्थितेः सम्भावनानुपपत्तेः सम्भावनोत्थानमित्युत्प्रेक्षा। एवं विरह- 25 वर्णने-'केयूरायितमङ्गदैः-' इत्यत्र 'विकासिनीलोत्पलति स् कर्णे मृगाय- ताक्ष्या: कुटिल: कटाक्षः' इत्यादौ च ज्ञेयम्। भ्रान्तिमदलङ्गारे 'मुग्धा दुग्धधिया-' इत्यादौ आ्रान्तानां बल्लवादीनां विषयस्य चन्द्रिकादेर्ज्ञांनमेव नास्ति। तदुपनिबन्धनस्य कविनैव कृतत्वात्। इह तु सम्भावनाकर्तुंर्नि- घयस्यापि ज्ञानमिति द्योभेंद: । सन्देहे तु समकक्षतया कोटिदठयस् प्रतीतिः। 30 हइ वूत्कटा सम्भाव्यभूतैका कोटिः । अतिशयोक्ती विषयिण: प्रतीतस् पर्य- बसोनेऽसत्यता प्रतीयते। इह तु प्रतीतिकाल एवेति भेद:। १ 'वहेत्' इति ज-ब. २ 'पर्यवसानात्' इति ज-ब.

१०-४६ दशम: परिच्छेद: ३३

'रक्िता ु विविधास्तरुशैला नामितं नु गगनं स्थगितं तु। पूरिता नु विषमेधु धरित्री संहता नु कक्ुभस्तिमिरेण ।।' इत्यत्र यत्तवादौ तिमिराक्रान्तता रअनादिरूपेण सन्दिह्यत इति सन्देहा- लङ्कार इति केचिदाहुः, तन्न। एकविषये समानबलतयानेककोटिस्फुरणस्यैव सन्देहत्वात्। इह तु तर्वादिव्यापे: प्रतिसम्बन्धिभेदो व्यापनादेर्निगरणेन 5 रअनादे: स्फुरणं च। अन्ये तु-'अनेकत्वनिर्धारणरूपविच्छित्त्याश्रयत्वेनै- ककोठ्यधिकेऽपि भिन्नोऽयं सन्देहप्रकारः' इति वदन्ति स, तदप्ययुक्कतम्। निगीर्णस्वरूपस्यान्यतादाल्यप्रतीतिर्हि सम्भावना। तस्याश्चात्र स्फुटतया सद्भावाब्ुशब्देन चेवशब्दवत्तस्था द्योतनादुत्प्रेक्षैवेयं भवितुं युक्ता। अलम- दष्टसन्देहप्रकारकल्पनया। 10 'यदेतचन्द्रान्तर्जलदलवलीलां वितनुते तदाचष्टे लोक: शशक इति नो मां प्रति तथा। अहं त्विन्दुं मन्ये त्वदरिविरहाक्रान्ततरुणी-

इत्यत्र मन्येशब्दप्रयोगेऽप्युक्तरूपायाः सम्भावनाया अप्रतीतेर्वितर्कमात्रं 15

सिद्धत्वेऽध्यवसायस्यातिशयोक्तिर्निगद्यते ॥४६॥ विषयनिगरणेनाभेदप्रतिपत्तिर्विषयिणोऽध्यवसायः । अस्य चोतेक्षायां विषयिणोSनिश्चितत्वेन निर्देशात्साध्यत्वम्। इह तु निश्चितत्वेनैव प्रतीतिरिति सेद्धत्वम्। विषयनिगरणं चोत्प्रेक्षायां विषयस्याघ:करणमात्रेण। इहापि 20 मुखं द्वितीयश्चन्द्र इत्यादौ। यदाहु :- 'विषयस्यानुपादानेऽप्युपादानेऽपि सूरयः। अधःकरणमात्रेण निगीर्णत्वं प्रचक्षते ।।' इति। भेदेऽप्यभेद: सम्बन्धेऽसम्बन्धस्तद्विपर्ययौ। पौर्वापर्यात्ययः कार्यहेत्वोः सा पञ्चधा ततः ।।४७॥ 25 तद्विपर्ययौ अभेदे भेद:, असम्बन्धे सम्बन्धः । सातिशयोकिः। अत्र भेदेऽभेदो यथा मम- 'कथमुपरि कलापिनः कलापो विलसति तस्य तलेऽष्टमीन्दुखण्डम्। कुवलययुगलं ततो टिलोलं तिलकुसुमं तद्ध: प्रवालमस्मात् ।' अत्र कान्ताकेशपाशादेर्मयूरकलापादिमिरभेदेनाध्यवसायः। यथा वा-30 'विश्रेषदुःखादिव ब्धमौनम्'। अन्न चेतनगतमौनित्वमन्यदचेतनगतं चान्यदिति द्वयोर्भेदेऽप्यभेदः । एवम्- १ 'अनिर्धारणरूप०' इति ज-ब. २ 'कोट्यधिकोऽपि' ज-ब.

३४ साहित्यदर्पणे १०-४७

'सहाधरद्लेनास्या यौवने रागभाकू प्रियः।' अत्राधरस रागो लौहित्यम्, प्रियस्य रागः प्रेम, द्योरभेदः। अभेदे मेदो यथा- 'अन्यदेवाङ्गलावण्यमन्याः सौरभसम्पदः। 5 तस्या: पद्मपलाशाक्ष्या: सरसत्वमलौकिकम्।' सम्बन्धेSसम्बन्धो यथा- 'अस्याः सर्गविधा प्रजापतिरभूचन्द्रो तु कान्तिप्रदः शुझ्ारैकरसः स्वयं नु मदनो मासो नु पुष्पाकरः। वेदाभ्यासजड: कथं नु विषयव्यावृत्तकौतूहलो 10 निर्मातुं प्रभवेन्मनोहरमिदं रूपं पुराणो मुनिः ।।'

असम्बन्धे सम्बन्धो यथा- 'यदि स्यान्मण्डले सकमिन्दोरिन्दीवरद्यम्। तदोपमीयते तस्या वदनं चारुलोचनम् ।' 15 अत्र यद्यर्थबलादाहृतेन सम्बन्धेन सम्भावनया सम्बन्धः । कार्यकारणयोः पौर्वापर्यविपर्ययश्च द्विधा भवति । कारणात्प्रथमं कार्यस्य भावे, द्वयोः समकालत्वेन च । क्रमेण यथा- 'प्रागेव हरिणाक्षीणां चित्तमुत्कलिकाकुलम्।

20 'सममेव समाक्रान्तं दवयं द्विरदगामिना। तेन सिंहासनं पित्यं मण्डलं च महीक्षिताम्।' इह केचिदाहु :- "केसपाशादिगतो लौकिकोऽतिशयोडलाकिकत्वेनाध्य- वसीयते। केशपाशादीनां कलापादिभिरध्यवसाये 'अन्यदेवाङ्गलावण्यम्-' इत्यादिप्रकारेष्वव्यापिर्लक्षणस्य" इति, तन्न । तत्रापि ह्यनन्यद्ङ्कलावण्य- 2E मन्यत्वेनाध्यवसीयते। तथाहि 'अन्यदेव' इति स्थाने 'अन्यदिव' इति पाठेषध्यवसायस्य साध्यत्वमेवेत्युत्प्रेक्षाङ्गीकियते । 'प्रागेव हरिणाक्षीणां-' इत्यत्र बकुलादिश्रीणां प्रथमभावितापि पश्चान्भावित्वेनाध्यवसिता। अत एवात्रापीवशब्द्प्रयोगे उत्प्रेक्षा। एवमन्यत्र। पदार्थानां प्रस्तुतानामन्येषां वा यदा भवेत्। 30 एकधर्माभिसम्बन्धः सात्तदा तुल्ययोगिता ।।४८ ॥। १ 'सम्बन्धेन' इति नास्ति ज-ब-पुस्तकयोः. २ 'अन्या' इत्यधिकं 'अध्यवसाये इत्यस्मात्परं ज-ब-पुस्तकयोः. ३ " 'अन्यदेवाङ्गलावण्य' इत्यादि .... एवेत्यु- त्प्रेक्षा" इत्येतन्नास्ति ज-ब-पुस्तकयोः । प्रमदादासकृरतेम्लभाषानुवादे त्वस्त्येवैतत्.

१०-४८ दशम: परिच्छेद: ३५.

अन्येषामप्रस्तुतानां धर्मो गुणक्रियारूपः। उदाहरणम्- 'अनुलेपनानि कुसुमान्यवला: कृतमन्यवः पतिषु दीपदशाः । समयेन तेन सुचिरं शयितप्रतिबोधितस्मरमबोधिषत।।' अन्न सन्ध्यावर्णनस्य प्रस्तुतत्वात्प्रस्तुतानामनुलेपनादीनामेकबोधनक्रिया- भिसम्बन्धः । 5 'स्वेदक्गमार्दवं द्रषु: कस्य चित्ते न भासते। मालतीशशभृल्लेखाकदलीनां कठोरता।।' इत्यत्र मालत्यादीनामप्रस्तुतानां कठोरतारूपक्गुणसम्बन्ध: । एवम्- 'दानं वित्तादतं वाचः कीर्तिधमों तथायुषः। 10 परोपकरणं कायादसारात्सारमाहरे् ।।' अत्र दानादीनां कर्मभूतानां सारतारूपैकगुणसम्बन्ध एकाहरणक्रिया· सम्बन्ध:। अप्रस्तुतप्रस्तुतयोदीपकं तु निगद्यते। अथ कारकमेकं स्ादनेकासु क्रियासु चेत् ॥ ४९ ॥ 15 कमेणोदाहरणम्- 'बलावले पादुचुनापि पूर्ववत्प्रबाध्यते तेन जगज्िगीपुणा। सेती च योषित्कृतिश्च निश्चला पुमांसमभ्येति भवान्तरेष्वपि।।' अत्र प्रस्तुताया निश्चलायाः प्रकृतेरप्रस्तुतायाश्च सत्या योषित एकानु- गमनक्रियासम्बन्धः । 20 'दूरं समागतवति त्वयि जीवनाथे मिन्ना मनोभवशरेण तपस्बिनी सा। उत्तिष्ठति स्वपिति वासगृहं त्वदीय- मायाति याति हसति श्वसिति क्षणेन ।I' इंदं मम । अन्रैकस्या नायिकाया उत्थानाद्यनेकक्रियासम्बन्धः । 25 अत्र च गुणक्रिययोरादिमध्यावसानसद्भावेन त्रैविध्यं न लक्षितम्। तथाविधवैचित्र्यस्य सर्वत्रापि सहस्रधा सम्भवात्। प्रतिवस्तूपमा सा स्याद्वाक्ययोर्गम्यसाम्ययोः। एकोऽपि धर्मः सामान्यो यत्र निर्दिश्यते पृथक्॥ ५० ॥

१ 'तमोवर्णनस्य' इति ब. २ 'तदञ्' इति नि. ३ 'सतीव' इति नि. ४ 'प्रकृतत्वे अप्रस्तुतायाश्च' इति नि. ५ 'जीवनाथ' इति ब.

३६ साहित्यदर्पणे : १०-५०

यथा- 'धन्यासि वैदर्भि गुणैरुदारैर्यया समाकृष्यत नैषधोऽपि। इतः स्तुति: का खलु चन्द्रिकाया यदब्धिमप्युत्तरलीकरोति ॥' अत्र समाकर्षणमुत्तरलीकरणं च क्रियैकैव पौनरुत्तयनिरासाय भिन्नवाच- 5 कतया निर्दिष्ट। इयं मालयापि दृशयते। यथा- 'विमल एव रविर्विशद: शशी प्रकृतिशोभन एव हि दर्पणः । शिवगिरि: शिवहाससहोदरः सहजसुन्दर एव हि सज्जनः ॥I' अन्न विमलविशदादिरर्थत एक एव । वैधर्म्येण यथा- 'चकोर्य एव चतुराश्चन्द्रिकापानकर्मणि। 10 विनावन्तीर्न निपुणा: सुदृशो रतनर्मणि॥' दृष्टान्तस्तु सधर्मस्य वस्तुनः प्रतिबिम्बनम्। सधर्मस्येति प्रतिवस्तूपमाव्यवच्छेदः । अयमाप साधर्म्यवैधर्म्याभ्यां दिया। क्रमेणोदाहरणम्- 'अविदितगुणापि सत्कविभणितिः कर्णेषु वमति मधुधाराम्। 15 अनधिगतपरिमलापि हि हरति हशं मालतीमाला ।I' 'त्वयि दष्टे कुरङ्राक्ष्याः सरंसते मदनव्यथा। दृष्टानुद्यभाजीन्दो ग्लानि: कुमुदसंहतेः ॥l' 'वसन्तलेखैकनिबद्धभावं परासु कान्तासु मनः कुतो नः । प्रफुल्लमल्लीमधुलम्पटः किं मधुव्रतः काङ्कति वल्लिमन्याम् ॥' 20 इदं पद्यं मम । अन्न 'मनः कुतो नः' इत्यस्य 'काङ्कति वल्लिमन्याम्' इत्यस्य चैकरूपतयैव पर्यवसानात्प्रतिवस्तूपमैव। इह तु कर्णे मधुधाराव- मनस्य नेत्रहरणस्य च साम्यमेव, न त्वैकरूप्यम्। अत्र समर्थ्यसमर्थक- वाक्ययोः सामान्यविशेषभावेर्ऽ्र्थान्तरन्यासः। प्रतिवस्तूपमादृष्टान्तयोस्तु न तथेति भेद: ।

25 सम्भवन्वस्तुसम्बन्धोऽसम्भवन्वापि कुत्रचिद् ॥५१॥ यत्र विम्वानुविम्बत्वं बोधयेत्सा निदर्शना। तत्र सम्भवद्दस्तुसम्बन्धनिदर्शना यथा- 'कोडत्र भूमिवलये जनान्मुधा तापयन्सुचिरमेति सम्पदम्। वेद्यन्निति दिनेन भानुमानाससाद चरमाचलं ततः ।।'

१ 'विशदादेः' इति नि. २ 'चन्द्रिकाचाम' इति नि. ३ 'अथ' इति ज-ब. ४ 'विशेषभावो' इति ज-नि.

१०-५२ दशमः परिच्छेद: ३७

अत्र घेरीदृदशार्थवेदनक्रियायां केर्तृत्वेनान्वयः सम्भवत्येव । ईदशार्थज्ञाप- नसमर्थचरमाचलप्राप्तिरूपधर्मवैत्त्तत्। स च रवेरस्ाचलगमनस्य परितापिनां विपतप्राप्तेश्र विम्बप्रतिबिम्ब्रभावं बोधयति। असम्भवद्वस्तुसम्बन्धनिदर्शना त्वेकवाक्यानेकवाक्यगतत्वेन द्विविधा। तत्रैकवाक्यगा यथा- 'कलयति कुवलयमालाललितं कुटिल: कटाक्षविक्षेपः। 5 अधरः किसलयलीलामाननमस्या: कलानिधिविलासम्।' अत्रान्यस्य धर्म कथमन्यो वहत्विति कटाक्षविक्षेपादीनां कुवलयमालादि- गतललितादीनां कलनमसम्भवत्तल्ललितादिसदृशं ललितादिकमवगमयत्कटा क्षविक्षेपादे: कुवलयमालादेश् बिम्बप्रतिबिम्बभावं बोधयति। यथा वा- 'प्रयाणे तव राजेन्द्र मुक्क्ता वैरिमृगीद्शाम्। 10 राजहंसगतिः पद्यामाननेन शशिद्युतिः ।।' अत्र पादाभ्यामसम्बद्धराजहंसगतेस्त्यागोऽनुपपन्न इति तयोस्तत्सम्बन्धः कल्प्यते, स चासम्भवन्राजहंसगतिमिव गतिं बोधयति। अनेकवाक्यगा यथा- 'इढं किलाव्याजमनोहरं वपुस्तप:क्षमं साधयितुं य इच्छति। 15 ध्रुवं स नीलोत्पलपत्रधारया समिल्लतां छेत्तुमृषिर्व्यवस्यति ॥'

पःक्षमत्वसाधनेच्छा नीलोत्पलपत्रधारया समिल्लताच्छेदनेच्छेवेति बिम्बप्रति- बिम्बभावे पर्यवस्यति। यथा वा- 20 'जन्मेदं वन्ध्यतां नीतं भवभोगोपलिप्सया। काचमूल्येन विक्रीतो हन्त चिन्तामणिर्मया॥' अत्र भवभोगलोभेन जन्मनो व्यर्थतानयनं काचमूल्येन चिन्तामणि- विक्रय इवेति पर्यवसानम्। एवम्- 'क्व सूर्यप्रभवो वंशः क्व चाल्पविषया मतिः। 25 तितीर्पुर्दुस्तरं मोहादुडुपेनास्मि सागरम्।' अत्र मन्मत्या सूर्यवंशवर्णनमुडुपेन सागरतरणमिवेति पर्यवसानम्। इयं च क्वचिदुपमेयवृत्तस्योपमानेSसम्भवेऽपि भवति। यथा- 'योऽनुभूत: कुरङ्गाक्ष्यास्तस्या मधुरिमाधरे। समास्वादि स मृद्ीकारसे रसविशारदैः ॥' 30

१ 'वक्तत्वेन' इति नि. २ 'कर्मवत्त्वात्' इति नि. ३ 'असम्भवद्वस्तुनिदर्शना' इति नि. ४ 'निधेर्विलासम्' इति ज-ब (against the metre). ५ 'तपःकुमं' इति नि. ६ 'तपःक्रुमत्व' इति नि. ४ सा०

३2 साहित्यदर्पणे १०-५२

अत्र प्रकृतस्याधरस्य मधुरिमधर्मस्य द्राक्षारसेSसम्भवात्पूर्ववत्साम्ये पर्यव- सानमू। मालारूपापि। यथा मम - 'क्षिपसि शुकं वृषदंशकवदने मृगमर्पयसि मृगादनरदने। वितरास तुरंगं महिषविषाणे निद्धच्चेतो भोगविताने।।' 5 इह बिम्बप्रतिबिम्बताक्षेपं विना वाक्यार्थापर्यवसानम्। दृष्टान्ते तु पर्यवसितेन वाक्यार्थेन सामर्थ्याद्विम्तप्रतिबिम्बताप्रत्यायनम्। नापीयमर्था- पत्तिः। तन्र 'हारोडयं हरिणाक्षीणां-' इत्यादौ सादृश्यपर्यवसानाभावात्। आधिक्यमुपमेयस्योपमानान्न्यूनताथवा ॥५२॥ व्यतिरेक: 10 सच एक उक्त्ेजनुक्ते हेतौ पुनस्त्रिधा। चतुर्विधोऽपि साम्यस्य बोधनाच्छन्दतोऽर्थतः ॥५३॥ आक्षेपाच द्वादशधा श्लेषेऽपीति त्रिरष्टधा। 15 प्रत्येकं स्यान्मिलित्वाष्टचत्वारिंशद्विधः पुनः ॥५४॥ उपमेयस्योपमानादाधिकये हेतुरुपमेयगतमुत्कर्षकारणमुपमानगतं निकर्ष- कारणं च । तयोद्वयोरप्युक्तावेक: प्रत्येकं समुदायेन वानुक्तौ त्रिविध इति चतुविधेऽप्यस्मिन्नुपमानोपमेयस्य निवेदनं शब्देनार्थेनाक्षेपेण चेति द्वादश- प्रकारोऽपि श्रेषेऽपिशव्दादृश्लेषेऽपि चतुर्विशतिप्रकारः। उपमानान्यूनता- 20 यामप्यनयैव भङ्गया चतुर्विशतिप्रकारतेति मिलित्वाष्टकत्वारिंशत्प्रकारो व्यतिरेकः । उदाहरजम्- 'अकलङ्कं मुखं तस्या न कलङ्की विघुर्यथा।' अन्रोपमेयगतम कलङ्कत्वमुपमानगतं च कलङ्गित्वं हेतुद्यमप्युक्तम्। यथा- 25 शब्दप्रतिपादनाच्च शाब्दमौपम्यम् । अन्रैव 'न कलङ्वि विधूपमम्' इति पाठ आर्थम्। 'जयतीन्दुं कलङ्गिनम्' इति पाठे त्विववत्तुल्यादिपदिरहा- दाक्षिप्तम्। अन्रवाकलङ्कपदत्यागे उपमेयगतोत्कर्षकारणानुक्ति: । कलङ्गि पदत्यागे चोपमानगतनिकर्षकारणानुक्तिः । द्योरनुक्कौ द्योरनुक्तिः । लेषे यथा- 30 'अतिगाढगुणायाश्र नाब्जवद्धङ्गुरा गुणा: ।।'

१ 'स च' इति नास्ति ज-ब-पुस्तकयो :. २ 'अर्थेन' इति नास्ति नि-पुस्तके. ३ 'इवादितुल्यादिपद' इति ज-ब .:

१०-५४ दशम: परिच्छेद:

अत्रेवार्थे वतिरिति शाब्दमौपम्यम्। उत्कर्षनिकर्षकारणयोई्वयोरप्युक्ति:। गुणशब्दः श्िष्टः। अन्ये भेदा: पूर्ववदूसाः । एतानि चोपमेयस्योपमाना- दाविक्य उदाहरणानि। न्यूनत्वे दिख्यान्नं यथा- 'क्षीणः क्षीणोऽपि शशी भूयो भूयोऽमिवर्धते नित्यम्। विरम प्रसीद सुन्दरि यौवनमनिवर्ति यातं तु।।' 5 अत्रोपमेय भूतयौवनास्थर्यस्था विक्यम्। तेनान्र"उपमानादुपमेयस्याधिक्ये विपर्यये वा व्यतिरेक:' इति केषांचिल्लक्षणे 'विपर्यये वेतिपदमनर्थकम्' इति यत्केचिदाहुः, तन्न विचारसहम्। तथाहि-अन्नाधिकन्यूनत्वे सत्त्वा- सत्वे एव विवक्षिते। अत्र च चन्द्रापेक्षया यौवनस्यासत्वं स्फुटमेव। अस्तु वात्रोदाहरणे यथाकथंचिद्गतिः । 10 'हनूमदाद्यैर्यशसा मया पुनर्द्विषां हसैर्दूतपथः सितीकृतः ॥' इत्यादिषु का गतिरिति सुष्टूक्तं 'न्यूनताथवा' इति। सहार्थस्य बलादेकं यत्र स्याद्वाचकं दयोः । सा सहोक्तिर्मूलभूतातिशयोक्तिर्यदा भवेत् ॥५५॥ अतिशयोक्तिरप्य त्राभेदाध्यवसायमूला कार्यकारणपौवापर्य विपर्ययरूपा 15 च। अभेदाध्यवसायमूलापि श्लेषमित्तिकान्यथा च । कमेणोदाहरणम्- 'सहावरद्लेनास्या यौवने रागभाक्प्रियः ।' अत्र रागपदे श्रेषः । 'सह कुमुदकदम्बैः काममुल्लासयन्तः सह घनतिमिरौघैधेर्यमुत्सास्यन्तः। सह सरसिजषण्डैः स्वान्तमामीलयन्तः प्रतिदिशममृतांशोरंशवः सज्जरन्ति॥20 इंदं मम। अत्रोल्लासादीनां सम्बन्धिभेदादेव भेद, न तु शिष्टतया। 'सममेव नराधिपेन सा गुरुसंमोहविलुप्तचेतना। अगमत्सह तैलबिन्दुना नेनु दीपार्चिरिव क्षितेस्तलम् ।' इयं च मालयापि सम्भवति। यथोदाहते 'सह कुमुदकदम्बैः-' इत्यादौ। 'लक्ष्मणेन समं राम: काननं गहनं ययौ।' 25

विनोक्तिर्यद्विनान्येन नासाध्वन्यदसाधु वा। नासाधु अशोभनं न भवति। एवं च यद्यपि शोभनत्व एव पर्यवसानं तथाप्यश्ञोभनत्वाभावमुखेन शोभनवचनस्यायममिप्रायो यत्कस्यचिद्वर्णनी- यस्याशोभनत्वं तत्परसंनिधेरेव दोष: । तस्य पुनः सवभावतः शोभनत्व-30 मेवेति।

१ 'तनु' इति ज-ब. २ 'न साध्वन्यत्' इति ज-ब.

४0 साहित्यदर्पणे १०-५६

यथा- 'बिना जलदकालेन चन्द्रो निस्तन्द्रतां गतः। विना ग्रीष्मोष्मणा मसुर्वनराजिरजायत।। असाध्तशोभनं यथा- 5 'अनुयान्त्या जनातीतं कान्तं साधु त्वया कृतम्। का दिनश्रीर्विनार्केण का निशा शशिना बिना।।' निरर्थकं जन्म गतं नलिन्या यया न दष्टं तुहिनांशुबिम्बम्। उत्पत्तिरिन्दोरपि निष्फलैव दष्टा विनिद्रा नलिनी न येन।' अन्र परस्परविनोक्तिभङ्ग्या चमत्कारातिशयः। विनाशन्दप्रयोगाभावेऽपि 10 विनार्थ विवक्षायां विनोक्तिरेवेयम्। एवं सहोक्तिरपि सहशब्दप्रयोगाभावेपि सहार्थविवक्षया भवतीति बोध्यम्। समासोक्तिः समैर्यत्र कार्यलिङ्गविशेषणैः ॥ ५६॥ व्यवहारसमारोप: प्रस्तुतेऽन्यस्य वस्तुनः । अत्र समेन कार्येण प्रस्तुतेऽप्रस्तुतव्यवहारसमारोपः । यथा- 15 'व्याधूय यद्सनमम्बुजलोचनाया वक्षोजयोः कनककुम्भविलासभाजोः। आलिङ्गस प्रसभमङ्गमशेषमस्या धन्यस्त्वमेव मलयाचलगन्धवाह ।' अत्र गन्धवाहे हठकामुकव्यवहारसमारोपः। लिङ्गसाम्येन यथा- 'असमाप्तजिगीषस्य स्त्रीचिन्ता का मनस्विनः । 20 अनाक्रम्य जगत्कृत्खं नो संध्यां भजते रविः ।' अत्र पुंसीलिङ्गमात्रेण रविसंध्ययोर्नायकनायिकाव्यवहारः। विशेषणसाम्यं तु श्िष्टतया, साधारण्येन, औपम्यगर्भत्वेन च त्रिधा। तत्र श्िष्टतया यथा मम- 'विकसितमुखीं रागासङ्गाद्वलत्तिमिरावृतिं 25 दिनकरकरस्पृष्टामैन्द्रीं निरीक्ष्य दिशं पुरः। जरठलवलीपाण्डुच्छायो भृशं कलुषान्तर: श्रयति हरितं हन्त प्राचेतर्सीं तुहिनद्युतिः ।' अन्र मुखरागादिशब्दानां छिष्टता । अन्नैव हि 'तिमिरावृतिम्' इत्यन्न 'तिमिरांशुकाम्' इति पाठे एकदेशस्य रूपणेऽपि समासोक्तिरेव। नत्वेक- 30 देशचिवर्ति रूपकम्। तत्र हि तिमिरांशुकयो रूप्यरूपकभावो द्योरावर- कत्वेन स्फुटसाइश्यतया परसाचिव्यमनपेक्ष्यापि खमात्रविश्रान्त इति न

१ 'तिमिरांशुकम्' इति नि.

१०-५७ दशम: परिच्छेद: ४१

समासोक्तिबुद्धिं व्याहन्तुमीशः । यत्र तु रूप्यरूपकयोः सादश्यमसफुट तत्रैकदेशान्तररूपणं विना तदसङ्गतं स्यादित्यशाब्दमप्येकदेशान्तररूपण- मार्थमपेक्षत एवेति तत्रैकदेशविवर्तिरूपकमेव। यथा- 'जस्स रणन्तेउरए करे कुणन्तस्स मण्डलग्गलअम्। रससंमुही वि सहसा परम्मुही होइ रिउसेणा ।।' 5

अत्र रणान्तःपुरयोः सादश्यमस्फुटमेव । क्वचिच्च यत्र स्फुटसादृश्यमपि बहूनां रूपणं शाब्दमेकदेशस्य चार्थ तत्रैकदेशविवर्ति रूपकमेव। रूपक- प्तीतेर्व्यापितया समासोक्तिप्रतीतितिरोधायकत्वात्। नन्वस्ति रणान्तःपुर- योरपि सुखसज्चारतया स्फुटं सादृश्यमिति चेत्, सत्यमुक्त्तम्। अस्त्येव। किंतु वाक्यार्थपर्यालोचनसापेक्षम्, न खलु निरपेक्षम्। मुखचन्द्रादेर्मनो-10 हरत्वादिवद्रणान्तःपुरयोः स्वतः सुखसञ्चारत्वाभावात्। साधारण्येन यथा-

उदिते वासराधीशे स्मेराजनि सरोजिनी ।।' अत्र निसर्गेत्यादिविशेषणसाम्यात्सरोजिन्या नायिकाव्यवहारप्रतीतौ स्त्रीमा- त्रगामिन: समेरत्वधर्मस्य समारोप: कारणम्। तेन विना विशेषणसाम्यमात्रेण 15 नायिकाव्यव हारप्रतीतेरसम्भवात्। औपम्यगर्भत्वं पुनस्तिधा सम्भवति, उप- मारूपकसङ्करगर्भत्वात्। तन्रोपमागर्भत्वे यथा- 'दन्तप्रभापुष्पचिता पाणिपल्लवशोमिनी। केश पाशालिवृन्देन सुवेषा हरिणेक्षणा ।' अत्र सुवेषत्ववशात्प्रथमं दन्तप्रभा: पुष्पाणीवेत्युपमागर्भत्वेन समासः ।20 अनन्तरं च दन्तप्रभासदशैः पुष्पैश्चितेत्यादिसमासान्तराश्रयेण समान- विशेषणमाहात्म्याद्वरिणेक्षणायां लताव्यवहारप्रतीतिः। रूपकगर्भत्वे यथा- 'लावण्यमधुभि: पूर्णम्-' इत्यादि। सङ्करगभत्वे यथा-'दन्तप्रभापुष्प-' इत्यादि। 'सुवेषा' इत्यन्न 'परीता' इति पाठे हयुपमारूपकसाधकाभावात्स ङ्रसमाश्रयणम्। समासान्तरं पूर्ववत् । समासान्तरमहिम्रा लताप्रतीति: । 25 एषु च येषां मते उपमासङ्करयोरेकदेशविवर्तिता नास्ति तन्मते भाद्यतृती- ययो: समासोक्तिः । द्वितीयस्तु प्रकार एकदेशविवर्तिरूपकविषय एव। प्यालोचने त्वादे प्रकारे एकदेशविवर्तिन्युपमैवाङ्गीकर्तुमुचिता। अन्यथा- 'ऐन्द्रं धनुः पाण्डुपयोधरेण शरद्दधानार्द्रनखक्षताभम्। प्रमोद्यन्ती सकलङ्कमिन्दुं तापं रवेरभ्यधिकं चकार ।I' 30 इत्यन्न कथं शरदि नायिकाव्यवहारप्रतीतिः । नायिकापयोधरेणार्द्वनख- क्षताभशऋचापधारणासम्भवात्। ननु 'आर्द्रनखक्षताभम्' इत्यत्र स्थितम-

१ 'विरोधायकत्वात्' इति नि. २ 'पापं' इति ज-ब.

साहित्यदर्पणे १०५७

प्युपमानत्वं वस्तुपर्यालोचनया ऐन्द्रे धनुचि सक्कारणीयम् । यथा-'दभ्ना जुहोति' इत्यादौ हवनस्यान्यथासिद्धेर्दभनि सज्जार्यते विधि: । एवं चेन्द्रचा- पाभमार्द्रनखक्षतं दधानेति प्रतीतिर्मविष्यतीति चेत्, न। एवंविधानिर्वाहे कष्टसृष्टिकल्पनादेकदेशविवर्त्युपमाङ्गीकारस्यैव ज्यायस्त्वात्। अस्तु वात्र 5 यथाकथंचित्समासोक्तिः । 'नेत्रैरिवोत्पलै: पझमैः-' इत्यादा चान्यगत्यसम्भ- वात्। कि चोपमायां व्यवहारप्रतीतेरभावात्कथं तदुपजीविकायाः समासोक्ते: प्रवेशः। यदाहु :- 'व्यवहारोऽथवा त्त्त्वं नौपम्ये यत्प्रतीयते। तन्नौपम्यं समासोक्तिरेकदेशोपमा स्फुटा ।I' 10 एवं चोपमारूपकयोरेकदेशविवर्तिताङ्गीकारे तन्मूलसङ्करेऽपि समासोक्ते- रप्रवेशो न्यायसिद्ध एव, तेनौपम्यगर्भविशेषणोत्थापितत्वं नास्या विषय इति विशेषणसाम्ये छरिष्टविशेषणोत्थापिता साधारणविशेषणोत्थापिता चेति द्विधा। कार्यलिङ्गयोस्तुल्यत्वे च द्विविधेति चतुःप्रकारा समासोक्तिः। सर्वत्रैवात्र व्यवहारसमारोप: कारणम्। स च क्वचिलौकिके वस्तुनि लौकिक- 15 वस्तुव्यवहारसमारोपः । शास्त्रीये वस्तुनि शास्त्रीय वस्तुव्यवहारसमारोपः । लौकिके वा शास्त्रीयवस्तुव्यवहारसमारोपः । शास्त्रीये वा लौकिकवस्तु- व्यवहारसमारोप इति चतुर्धा। तत्र लौकिकवस्त्वपि रसादिभेदादनेक विधम्। शास्त्रीयमपि तर्कायुर्वेदज्योतिःशास्त्रप्रसिद्धतयेति बहुप्रकारा समासोक्तिः। दिख्ात्रं यथा-'व्याधूय यद्सनं-' इत्यादौ लौकिके वस्तुनि लौकिकस्य 20 हठकामुकव्यवहारादेः समारोपः । 'यैरेकरूपमखिलास्वपि वृत्तिषु त्वां पश्यद्िरव्ययमसंख्यतया प्रवृत्तम्। लोप: कृत: किल परत्त्रजुषो विभक्तेस्तैर्लक्षणं तव कृतं ध्रुवमेव मन्ये ।।' अन्रागमशास्त्रप्रसिद्धे वस्तुनि व्याकरणप्रसिद्धवस्तुव्यवहारसमारोपः । एवमन्यत्र। रूपकेऽप्रकृतमात्मस्वरूपसंनिवेशेन प्रकृतस्य रूपमवच्छादयति। 25 इह तु स्वावस्थासमारोपेणानवच्छादितस्वरूपमेव तं पूर्वावस्थातो विशेष- यति। अत एवात्र व्यवहारसमारोपो न तु स्वरूपसमारोप इत्याहुः। उप- माध्वनौ श्रेषे च विशेष्यस्यापि साम्यम्, इह तु विशेषणमात्रस्य। अप्रस्तु- तप्रशंसायां प्रस्तुतस्य गम्यत्वम्, इह त्वप्रस्तुतस्येति भेदः। क्तिर्विशेषणैः सामिप्रायैः परिकरो मतः ॥५७॥ यथा- 30 'अङ्गराज सेनापते द्रोणोपहासिन् कर्ण, रक्षैनं भीमाहुःशासनम्।' १ 'एवंविधनिर्वाहे' इति ज-ब. २ 'तत्त्वमौपम्ये' इति नि. ३ 'अवच्छादि- तस्वरूपेण' इति नि. ४ 'उक्तः' इति नि.

१0-५८ दशम: परिच्छेद: ४ ३

शब्दैः सवभावादेकार्थैः श्लेषोऽनेकार्थवाचनम्। 'स्वभावादेकार्थेः' इति शब्दश्लेषाद् व्यवच्छेदः। 'वाचनं' इति च ध्वनेः। उदाहरणम्- 'प्रवर्तयन्क्रियाः साध्बीर्मालिन्यं हरिता हरन्। महसा भूयसा दीप्तो विराजति विभाकरः ।।' 5 अत्र प्रकरणादिनियमाभावाद् द्वावपि राजसूर्यौं वाच्यौ। क्चिद्विशेषः सामान्यात्सामान्यं वा विशेषतः ॥५८ ॥ कार्यान्निमित्तं कार्य च हेतोरथ समात्समम्। अप्रस्तुतात्प्रस्तुतं चेद्गम्यते पञ्चधा ततः ।।५९॥ अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा साद् 10 क्रमेणोदाहरणम्- 'पादाहतं यदुत्थाय मूर्धानमविरोहति। स्वस्थादेवापमानेऽपि देहिनसतद्वरं रजः ।।' अथास्मदपेक्षया रजोऽपि वरमिति विशेषे प्रस्तुते सामान्यमभिहितम्। 'स्त्नगियं यदि जीवितापहा हृदये किं निहिता न हन्ति माम् । 15 विषमप्यमृतं क्वचिद्दवेदमृतं वा विषमीश्वरेच्छया।।' अन्रेश्वरेष्छया क्वचिद्हितकारिणोऽपि हितकारित्वं हितकारिणोऽप्यहित- कारित्वमिति सामान्ये प्रस्तुते विशेषोऽभिहितः । एवं चात्राप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा- मूलोऽर्थान्तरन्यासः। दृष्टान्ते प्रख्यातमेव वस्तु प्रतिबिम्बत्वेनोपादीयते। इह तु विषामृतयोरमृतविषीभावस्याप्रसिद्धेनं तस्य सद्भावः । 20 'इन्दुर्लिप्त इवाअनेन जडिता दृष्टिर्मृंगीणामिव प्रम्लानारुणिमेव विद्रुमदलं श्यामेव हेमप्रभा। कार्कशयं कलया च कोकिलवधूकण्ठेष्विव प्रस्तुतं सीताया: पुरतश्च हन्त शिखिनां बर्हाः सगर्हा इव ॥' अत्र सम्भाव्यमानेभ्य इन्द्वादिगताञ्ञनलिप्तत्वादिभ्यः कार्येम्यो वदनादि-25 गतसौन्दर्यविशेषरूपं प्रस्तुतं कारणं प्रतीयते। 'गच्छामीति मयोक्तया मृगदशा निश्चासमुद्रेकिणं त्यक्त्वा तिर्यगवेक्ष्य बाष्पकलुषेनैकेन मां चक्षुषा। अद्य प्रेम मदर्पितं प्रियसखीवृन्दे त्वया बध्यता- मित्थं स्रेहविवर्धितो मृगशिशुः सोत्ासमाभाषित: ।I' 30

अत्र कस्यचिद्गमनरूपे कार्ये कारणमभिहितम्। तुल्ये प्रस्तुते तुल्या- मिघाने च द्विधा श्रेषमूला सादृश्यमात्रमूला च। श्ेषमूलापि समासोक्ि-

साहित्यदर्पणे १०-५९

वद्विशेषणमान्रश्लेषे श्रेषवद्विशेष्यस्यापि श्रेषे भवतीति द्विधा। क्रमेण यथा- 'सहकारः सदामोदो वसन्तश्रीसमन्वितः । समुज्वलरुचिः श्रीमान्प्रभूतोत्कलिकाकुलः ।' अत्र विशेषणमात्रश्लेषवशादप्रस्तुतात्सह कारात्कस्यचित्प्रस्तुतस्य नायकस्य 5 प्रतीतिः । 'पुंस्त्वादपि प्रविचलेद्यदि यद्यधोऽपि यायाद्यदि प्रणयने न महानपि स्यात्। अभ्युद्धरेत्तदपि विश्वमितीद्ृशीयं केनापि दिक्प्रकटिता पुरुषोत्तमेन ।I' अन्न पुरुषोत्तमपदेन विशेष्येणापि क्िष्टेन प्रचुरप्रसिद्या प्रथमं विष्णुरेव बोध्यते। तेन वर्णनीयः कश्चित्पुरुषः प्रतीयते। 10 सादश्यमात्रमूला यथा- 'एक: कपोतपोतः शतशः श्येना: क्षुधाभिधावन्ति। अम्बरमावृतिशून्यं हर हैर शरणं विधे: करुणा।' अन्र कपोतादुप्रस्तुतात्कश्चित्प्रस्तुतः प्रतीयते । इयं च क्वचिद्वैधर्म्येणापि भवति। 15 'धन्याः खलु वने वाताः कह्ारस्पर्शशीतलाः। राममिन्दीवरश्यामं ये स्पृशन्त्यनिवारिता: ।।' अत्र वाता धन्या अहमधन्य इति वैधर्म्येण प्रस्तुतः प्रतीयते। वाच्यस्य सम्भवासम्भवोभयरूपतया त्रिप्रकारेयम्। तत्र सम्भवे उक्तोदाहरणान्येव। असम्भवे यथा- 20 'कोकिलोऽहं भवान्काकः समान: कालिमावयोः। अन्तरं कथयिष्यन्ति काकलीकोविदाः पुनः॥।' अत्र काककोकिलयोवाकोवाक्यं प्रस्तुताध्यारोपणं विनासम्भवि। उभयरूपत्वे यथा- 'अन्तरिछिद्राणि भूयांसि कण्टका बहवो बहिः। 25 कथं कमलनालस्य मा भूवन्भङ्कुरा गुणा: ।। अत्र प्रस्तुतस्य कस्यचिद्ध्यारोपणं विना कमलनालान्तश्छिद्राणां गुण- भङ्गुरीकरणे हेतुत्वमसम्भवि। अन्येषां तु सम्भवीत्युभयरूपत्वम्। अस्याश्र

माध्वनावप्रस्तुतस्य व्यंग्यत्वम्। एवं समासोक्तौ । श्लेषेऽपि द्योरपि 30 वाच्यत्वम्। उक्ता व्याजस्तुतिः पुनः । निन्दास्तुतिभ्यां वाच्याभ्यां गम्यत्वे स्तुतिनिन्दयोः ॥६० ॥ १ 'इरिहरि' इति ज-ब.

१०-६० दशमः परिच्छेद: ४५

निन्दया स्तुतेर्गम्यत्वे व्याजेन स्तुतिरिति व्युत्पत्या व्याजस्तुतिः स्तुत्या निन्दाया गम्यत्वे व्याजरूपा स्तुतिः । क्रमेण यथा- 'स्तनयुगमुक्ताभरणा: कण्टककलिताङ्गयष्टयो देव। त्वयि कुपितेऽपि प्रागिव विश्वस्ता रिपुस्तियो जाताः ।।' इदं मम। 5 'व्याजस्तुतिस्तव पयोद मयोदितेयं यजीवनाय जगतस्तव जीवनानि। स्तोत्रं तु ते महदिदं घन धर्मराजसाहाय्यमर्जया यत्पथिकान्निहत्य ।।' पर्यायोक्तं यदा भङ्गा गम्यमेवाभिधीयते। उदाहरणम्- स्पृष्टास्ता नन्दने शच्या: केशसम्भोगलालिताः । 10 सावज्ञं पारिजातस्य मञ्जर्यो यस्थ सैनिकैः ।।' अन्न हयग्रीवेण स्वर्गो विजित इति प्रस्तुतमेव गम्यं कारणं वैचित्र्य- विशेषप्रतिपत्तये सैन्यस्य पारिजातमज्ञरीसावज्ञस्पर्शनरूपकार्यद्वारेणाभि- हितम्। न चेदं कार्यात्कारणप्रतीतिरूपाप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा । तत्र कार्यस्थाप्रस्तु- तत्वात्। इह तु वर्णनीयस्य प्रभावातिशयबोधकत्वेन कार्यमपि कारणवत्प-15 स्तुतम्। एवं च-

प्रत्यर्पिताः शत्रुविलासिनीनामाक्षेपसूत्रेण विनैव हारा: ।।' अत्र वर्णनीयस्य राज्ञो गम्यभूतशत्रुमारणरूपकारणवत्कार्यभूतं तथाविध- शत्रुस्त्रीक्रन्दनजलमपि प्रभावातिशयबोधकत्वेन वर्णनाहमिति पर्यायोक्तमेव ।20 राजन्रजसुता न पाठयति मां देव्योऽपि तूष्णीं स्थिता: कुब्जे भोजय मां कुमारसचिवैर्नाद्यापि कि भुज्यते। इत्थं राजशुकस्तवारिभवने मुक्तोऽध्वगः प्जरा- च्ञित्रस्थानवलोक्य शून्यवलभावेकैकमाभाषते ।' अत्र प्रस्थानोद्यतं भवन्तं श्रुस्ा सहसैवारयः पलायिता इति कारणं 25 प्रस्तुतम्। 'कार्यमपि वर्णनाहत्वेन प्रस्तुतम्' इति केचित्। अन्ये तु-'राजचुकवृत्तान्तेन कोऽपि प्रस्तुतप्रभावो बोध्यत इत्यप्रस्तुत- प्रशंसव' इत्याङुः। सामान्यं वा विशेषेण विशेषसेन वा यदि ॥ ६१॥ कार्ये च कारणेनेदं कार्येण च समर्थ्यते। 30

१ '(द्विट् ) स्तिरियो' इति नि. २ 'सब्जीवनाय' इति नि.

४६ साहित्यदर्षणे १०-६२

कमेणोदाहरणम्- 'बृहत्सहायः कार्यान्तं क्षोदीयानपि गच्छति। -

सम्भूयाम्भोधिमभ्येति महानद्या नगापगा ॥' 5 अत्र द्वितीयार्धगतेन विशेषरूपेणार्थेन प्रथमार्धगतः सामान्योऽर्थः सोपपत्तिक: करियते। 'यावदर्थपेदां वाचमेवमादाय माधवः। विरराम महीयांस: प्रकृत्या मितभाषिणः ।।' 'पृथ्नि स्थिरा भत भुजङ्गम धारयैनां 10 त्वं कूर्मराज तदिदं द्वितयं दधीथाः । दिक्कजरा: कुरुत तत्रितये दिधीर्षी देवः करोति हरकार्मुकमाततज्यम्।' अत्र कारणभूतं हरकार्मुक्नाततज्यीकरणं पृथिवीस्थैर्यादे: कार्यस्य समर्थकम्। 'सहसा विद्धीत न क्रियाम्-' इत्यादौ सम्पेद्रणं कार्ये सहसाविधाना- 15 भावस्य विमृश्यकारित्वरूपस्य कारणस्य समर्थकम्। एतानि साधर्म्य उदाहरणानि। वैधम्यें यथा- 'इत्थमाराध्यमानोऽपि क्विश्वाति भुवनत्रयम्। शाम्येत्प्रत्यपकारेण नोपकारेण दुर्जनः ।I' अत्र सामान्यं विशेषस्य समर्थकम्। 'सहसा विदधीत-' इतत्र सहसा 20 विधानाभावस्यापत्पदत्वं विरुद्धं कार्य समर्थकम्। एवमन्यत्। हेतोर्वाक्यपदार्थत्वे काव्यलिङ्गं निगद्यते। तत्र वाक्यार्थता यथा- 'यत्वन्नेत्रसमानकान्ति सलिले मसं तदिन्दीवरं मेघैरन्तरितः प्रिये तव मुखच्छायानुकारी शशी। 25 येऽपि त्वद्गमनानुसारिगतयस्ते राजहंसा गता- स्त्वत्सादृश्यविनोदमान्नमपि मे दैवेने न क्षम्यते।' अत्र चतुर्थपादे पादत्रयवाक्यानि हेतवः । पदार्थता यथा मम- 'त्वद्वाजिराजिनिर्धूतधूली पटलपङ्गिलाम्।. न धत्ते शिरसा गङ्गां भूरिभारभिया हरः ।' 30 अत्र द्वितीयार्धें प्रथमार्धमेकपदं हेतुः। अनेकपदं यथा मम- -

१ 'अर्थ्यपदां' इति नि. २ 'सम्पत्करणं' इति नि. ३ 'आपत्प्रदत्वं' ज-नि. ४ 'देवेन' इति नि.

१०-६३ दशम: परिच्छेद: ४७

'पशयन्त्यसंख्यपथगां त्वदानजलवाहिनीम्। देव त्रिपथगात्मानं गोपयत्युग्रमूर्धनि॥' इह केचिद् वाक्यार्थगतेन काव्यलिङ्रेनैव गतार्थतया कार्यकारणभावेऽर्था- न्तरन्यासं नाद्रियन्ते, तद्युक्तम्। तथाह्यन्न हेतुस्तिधा भवति-ज्ञापको निष्पादकः समर्थकश्चेति । तत्र ज्ञापकोऽनुमानस्य विषयः, निष्पादकः5 काव्यलिङ्गस्य, समर्थकोरऽर्थान्तरन्यासस्य, इति पृथगेव कार्यकारणभावेऽर्था- न्तरन्यास: काव्यलिङ्गात्। तथाहि-यत्वन्नेत्र-' इत्यादौ चतुर्थपादवाक्य- मन्यथा साकाङ्कतयासमअ्जसमेव स्यात् इति पादत्रयगतवाक्यं निष्पाद- कत्वेनापेक्षते। 'सहसा विदधीत-' इत्यादौ तु 'परापकारनिरतैर्दुर्जनैः सह सङ्गतिः। 10 वदामि भवतस्तत्वं न विधेया कदाचन ।।' इत्यादिवदुपदेशमात्रेणापि निराकाङ्कतया स्वतोऽपि गतार्थ सहसाविधा- नाभावं सम्पद्दरणं सोपपत्तिकमेव करोतीति पृथगेव कार्यकारणभावेऽ्र्थांन्तर- न्यास: काव्यलङ्गात्। 'न धत्ते शिरसा गङ्गां भूरिभारमिया हरः। 15 त्वद्वाजिराजिनिर्धूतधूलिभि: पक्किला हि सा ॥' इत्यत्र हिशब्दोपादानेन पक्किलत्व्रादितिवद्धेतुत्वस्य स्फुटतया नायमल- द्वारः । वैचित्र्यस्यैवालङ्कारत्वात्। अनुमानं तु विच्छिन्या ज्ञानं साध्यस्य साधनात् ॥ ६३ ॥ यथा- 'जानीमहेऽस्या हृदि सारसाक्ष्या विराजतेऽन्तः प्रियवक्त्रचन्द्रः । 20

उत्कान्तिजालै: प्रसृतैस्तदुङ्गेष्वापाण्डुता कुङालताक्षिपद्मे।' अत्र रूपकवशाद्विच्छित्ति: । यथा वा- 'यत्र पतत्यबलानां दृष्टिर्निशिता: पतन्ति तन्न शराः । तच्चापरोपितशरो धावत्यासां पुरः स्मरो मन्ये ॥' 25

अत्र कविप्रोढोक्तिवशाद्विच्छित्तिः । उत्प्रेक्षायामनिश्चिततया प्रतीतिः, इह तु निश्चिततयेत्युभयोर्भेदः। अभेदेनाभिधा हेतुरहेतोर्हेतुमता सह। यथा मम-'तारुण्यस्य विल् :- ' इतन्र वशीकरणहेतुर्नायिका वशी-30 करणत्वेनोक्ता । विलासहासयोस्त्वध्यवसायमूलोऽयमलङ्कारः।

१ 'असाकाहतया' इति ब.

४८ साहित्यदर्पणे १०-६४

अनुकूलं प्रातिकूल्यमनुकूलानुबन्धि चेत् ॥ ६४ ॥ यथा- 'कुपितासि यदा तन्वि निधाय करजक्षतम्। बंधान भुजपाशाभ्यां कण्ठमस्य दढं तदा ।।' 5 अस्य च विच्छित्तिविशेषस्य सर्वालङ्कारविलक्षणत्वेन स्फुरणात्पृथगलङ्कार- त्वमेव न्याय्यम्। वस्तुनो वक्तुमिष्टस्य विशेषप्रतिपत्तये। निषेधाभास आक्षेपो वक्ष्यमाणोक्तगो द्विधा ॥ ६५ ॥ तत्र वक्ष्यमाणविषये क्वचित्सर्वस्यापि सामान्यतः सूचितस्य निषेधः, 10 क्वचिदंशोक्तावंशान्तरे निषेध इति द्वौ भेदौ । उक्तविषये च क्वचिद्वस्तु- स्वरूपस्य निषेधः, क्वचिद्वस्तुकथनस्येति हौ। इत्याक्षेपस् चत्वारो भेदाः । क्रमेण यथा- 'सरशरशत विधुराया भणामि सख्या: कृते किमपि। क्षणमिह विश्राम्य सखे निर्दयहदयस्य कि वदाम्यथवा।।' 15 अत्र सख्या विरहस्य सामान्यतः सूचितस्य वक्ष्यमाणविशेषे निषेधः। 'तव विरहे हरिणाक्षी निरीक्ष्य नवमालिकां दलिताम्। हन्त नितान्तमिदानीमा: किं हतजल्पितैरथवा ॥' अत्र मरिष्यतीत्यंशो नोक्तः । 'बालअ णाहं दूई तीअ पिओोसि त्ति ण मह वावारो। 20 सा मरह तुज्झ अभसो एअं धम्मक्खरं भणिमो॥।' अत्र दूतीत्वस्य वस्तुनो निषेधः । 'विरहे तव तन्वड्गी कथं क्षपयतु क्षपाम्। दारुणव्यवसायस्य पुरस्ते भणितेन किम् ।।' अत्र कथनस्योक्तस्यैव निषेधः। प्रथमोदाहरणे सख्या अवश्यंभावि 25 मरणमिति विशेष: प्रतीयते। द्वितीयेऽशक्यवक्तव्यत्वादि । तृतीये दूतीत्वे यथार्थवादित्वम्। चतुर्थे दुःखस्यातिशयः । न चायं विहितनिषेधः । अत्र निषेधस्याभासत्वात्। अनिष्टस्य तथार्थस्य विध्याभासः परो मतः । तथेति पूर्ववद्विशेषप्रतिपत्तये। यथा- १ 'विश्रम्य' इति नि. २ 'दूती' इति ज-ब-नि; 'दूई' इति अलङ्गारसर्वस्वसं- मतः पाठः. ३ 'तु' इति ज-ब-नि; 'तीअ' इत्यलङ्कारसर्वस्व-रामचरण-संमतः पाठ :. ४ 'कथनस्यैव' इति ज-ब.

१०-६६ दशम: परिच्छेद: ४९

'गच्छ गच्छसि चेत् कान्त पन्थानः सन्तु ते शिवाः। ममापि जन्म तत्रव भूयाद्यत्र गतो भवान्॥' अन्नानिष्टत्वाद्गमनस्य विधि: प्रस्खलदूपो निषेधे पर्यवस्यति। विशेषश्च गमनस्यात्यन्तपरिहार्यत्वरूप: प्रतीयते। विभावना विना हेतुं कार्योत्पत्तिर्यदुच्यते ॥६६॥ 5 उक्तानुक्तनिमित्तत्वाद्विधा सा परिकीर्तिता ।। विना कारणमुपनिबध्यमानोऽपि कार्योदयः किञ्ञिदन्यत्कारणमपेक्ष्यैव भवितुं युक्तः। तच्च कारणान्तरं क्चिदुक्ककं क्वचिद्नुक्तमिति द्विधा। यथा- 'अनायासकशं मध्यमशङ्कतरले हशौ। अभूषणमनोहारि वपुर्वयसि सुभ्रुवः ॥' 10 अन्न वयोरूपनिमित्तमुक्तम् । अन्नैव 'वपुर्भाति मृगीदृशः' इति पाठेडनुक्तम्। सति हेतौ फलांभावो विशेषोक्तिस्तथा द्विया ॥ ६७ ।। तथेत्युक्तानुक्तनिमित्तत्वात्। तत्रोक्तनिमित्ता यथा- 'धनिनोऽपि निरुन्मादा युवानोऽपि न चज्जलाः । 15 प्रभवोऽप्यप्रमत्तास्ते महामहिमशालिनः ।।' अन्न महामहिमशालित्वं निमित्तमुक्तम् । अत्रैव चतुर्थपादे 'कियन्तः सन्ति भूतले' इति पाठे त्वनुक्तम्। अचिन्त्यनिमित्तत्वं चानुक्तनिमित्तस्ैव भेद इति परृथङ् नोक्तम्। यथा- 'स एकस्त्रीणि जयति जगन्ति कुसुमायुधः। 20 हरतापि तनुं यस्य शम्भुना न हतं बलम्।।' अन्न तनूहरणेनापि बलाहरणे निमित्तमचिन्त्म् । इह च कार्याभावः कार्यविरुद्धसन्भावमुखेनापि निबध्यते। विभावनायामपि कारणाभावः कारणविरुद्धसन्भावमुखेन । एवं च 'यः कौमारहर :- ' इत्यादेरुत्कण्ठा- कारणविरुद्धस्य निबन्धनाद्विभावना। 'यः कौमार-' इत्यादेः कारणस्य च 25 कार्यविरुद्धाया उत्कण्ठाया निबन्धनाद्विशेषोक्तिः । एवं चात्र विभावना- विशेषोक्त्यो: सङ्करः। शुद्धोदाहरणं तु मृग्यम्।

क्रिया क्रियाद्रव्याम्यां यद्रव्यं द्रव्येण वा मिथः ॥६८॥ विरुद्धमिवे भासेत विरोधोऽसौ दशाकृतिः। 30

१ 'फलाभावे' इति नि. २ 'विरुद्धमेव' इति नि. ५ सा०

५० साहित्यदर्पणे १०-६९

क्रमेण यथा- 'तव विरहे मलयमरुद्दवानलः शशिरुचोऽपि सोष्माणः। हृदयमलिरुतमपि मिन्ते नलिनीदलमपि निदाघरविरस्याः ॥ 'सन्ततमुसलासङ्गाद्व हुतरगृहकर्मेघटनया नृपते। द्विजपत्नीनां कठिना: सति भवति करा: सरोजसुकुमाराः ।।' 'अजस्य गृह्तो जन्म निरीहस्य हतद्विषः । स्वपतो जागरूकंस्य याथार्थ्यं वेद कस्तव।।' 'वल्लभोत्सङ्गसङ्रेन विना हरिणचक्षुषः।

10 'नयनयुगासेचनकं मानसवृत्त्यापि दुष्प्रापम्। रूपमिदं मदिराक्ष्या मदयति हृदयं दुनोति च मे ।।' 'त्वद्वाजि-' इत्यादि। 'वल्लभोत्सङ्ग-' इत्यादिश्लोके चतुर्थपादे 'मध्य- न्दिनदिनाधिपः' इति पाठे द्रव्ययोर्विरोधः । अन्र 'तव विरह-' इत्यादौ पवनादीनां बहुव्यक्तिवाचकत्वाज्जातिशब्दानां दवानलोष्महृदयभेदनसूर्यै- 15 जातिगुणत्रिया द्रव्यरूपैरन्योन्यं विरोधो मुखत आभासते। विरहहेतुकत्वा- त्समाधानम् । अत्र 'अजस्य-' इत्यादावजत्वादिगुणस्य जन्मग्रहणादिक्रियया विरोधः। भगवतः प्रभावस्यातिशयित्वात्तु समाधानम्। 'त्वद्वाजि-' इत्यादौ 'हरोऽपि शिरसा गङ्गां न धत्ते' इति विरोधः । 'त्वद्वाजि-' इत्यादिकवि- प्रौढोक्या तु समाधानम्। स्पष्टमन्यत् । विभावनायां कारणाभावेनोपनि- 20 बध्यमानत्वात्कार्यमेव बाध्यत्वेन प्रतीयते। विशेषोक्तौ च कार्याभावेने कारणमेव। इह त्वन्योन्यं द्वयोरपि बाध्यत्वमिति भेद:। कार्यकारणयोर्भिन्नदेशतायामसङ्गतिः ॥ ६९॥ यथा- 'सा बाला वयमप्रगल्भमनसः सा स्त्री वयं कातरा: 25 सा पीनोन्नतिमत्पयोधरयुगं धत्ते सखेदा चयम्। साक्रान्ता जघनस्थलेन गुरुणा गन्तुं न शक्ता वयं दोषैरन्यजनाश्रयैरेपटवो जाता: स इत्यद्भुतम् ॥' अस्याश्चापवादकत्वादेकदेशस्थयोर्विरोधे विरोधालङ्कारः। गुणौ करिये वा येत्सातां विरुद्धे हेतुकार्ययोः।

१ 'इति' इत्येतन्नास्ति नि-पुस्तके. २ 'जन्म' इति नास्ति ब-पुस्तके; 'गुणस्य ग्रहणातिक्रियया' इति ज. ३ 'कार्यभावेन' इति नि. ४ 'जनाश्रितैः' इति ज-ब. ५ 'चेत्' इति नि.

दशम: परिच्छेद: ५१

यद्वारब्धस्य वैकल्यमनर्थस्य च सम्भवः ॥ ७० ॥ विरूपयो: सङ्गटना या च तद्विषमं मतम् । क्रमेण यथा- 'सद्ः करस्पर्शमवाप्य चिन्रं रणे रणे यस्य कृपाणलेखा। तमालनीला शरदिन्दुपाण्डु यशस्त्रिलोकाभरणं प्रसूते ।।' 5 अत्र कारणरूपासिलतायाः 'कारणगुणा हि कार्यगुणमारभन्ते' इति स्थितेर्विरुद्धा शुककयशस उत्पत्तिः । 'भानन्दममन्दमिमं कुवलयदललोचने ददासि त्वम्। विरहस्त्वयैव जनितसापयतितरां शरीरं मे ।।' अन्रानन्दजनकस्त्री रूपकारणात्तापजनकविरहोत्पत्तिः । 10 'अयं रत्नाकरोऽम्भोधिरित्यसेवि धनाशया। धनं दूरेऽस्तु वदनमपूरि क्षारवारिभिः ॥' अन्न केवलं काङ्गितधनलाभो नाभूत, प्रत्युत क्षारवारिभिर्वदनपूरणम्। 'क वनं तरुवल्कभूषणं नृपलक्ष्मीः क्व महेन्द्रवन्दिता। नियतं प्रतिकूलवर्तिनो बत धातुश्चरितं सुदुःसहम्॥' 15 अन्र वनराजश्रियोर्विरूपयो: सङ्कटना। इदं मम। यथा वा- 'विपुलेन सागरशयस्य कुक्षिणा भुवनानि यस्य पपिरे युगक्षये। मद्विभ्रमासकलया पपे पुनः स पुरस्तियैकतमयैकया हशा॥' समं स्यादानुरुप्येण श्राघा योग्यसय वस्तुनः।। ७१॥ 20

यथा- 'शशिनमुपगतेयं कौमुदी मेघमुक्तं जलनिधिमनुरूपं जहुकन्यावतीर्णा। इति समगुणयोगप्रीतयस्तन्र पौरा: श्रवणकटु नृपाणामेकवाक्यं विवनुः ।।' विचित्रं तद्विरुद्धस्य कृतिरिष्टफलाय चेत्। यथा- 25 'प्रणमत्युन्नतिहेतोर्जीवित हेतोर्विमुज्जतति प्राणान्। दुःखीयति सुखहेतो: को मूढः सेवकादन्यः ॥' आश्रयाश्रयिणोरेकस्याधिक्येऽधिकमुच्यते॥७२॥ आश्रयाविक्ये यथा- 'किमधिकमस्य नूमो महिमानं वारिधेर्हरियत्र। 30 भज्ञात एव शेते कुक्षौ निक्षिप्य भुवनानि॥'

१ 'वैफल्य' इति ज-ब. २ 'राज्यश्रियो:'- इत्ि ि. 8527

५२ साहित्यदर्पणे १०-७२

आश्रिताधिक्ये यथा- 'युगान्तकालप्रतिसंहतात्मनो जगन्ति यस्यां सविकाशमासत। तनौ ममुस्तत्र न कैट भद्विषस्तपोधनाभ्यागमसम्भवा मुदः ॥' अन्योन्यमुभयोरेकक्रियाया: कैरणं मिथः। 5 'त्वया सा शोभते तन्वी तया त्वमपि शोभसे। रजन्या शोभते चन्द्रश्चन्द्रेणापि निशीथिनी।' यदाधेयमनाधारमेकं चानेकगोचरम्। ७३ ॥ किश्चित्प्रकुर्वतः कार्यमशक्यस्येतरस्य वा। कार्यस्य करणं दैवाद्विशेषस्त्रिविधस्ततः॥७४॥ 10 क्रमेण यथा- 'दिवमप्युपयातानामाकल्पमनल्पगुणगणा येषाम्। रमयन्ति जगन्ति गिरः कथमिव कवयो न ते वन्धाः ।' 'कानने सरिदुद्देशे गिरीणामपि कन्दरे। पशयन्त्यन्तकसङ्काशं त्वामेकं रिपवः पुरा ।' 15 'गृहिणी सचिवः सखी मिथः प्रियशिष्या ललिते कलाविधौ। करुणाविमुखेन मृत्युना हरता त्वां वद किं न मे हृतम्।।' व्याघातः स तु केनापि वस्तु येन यथा कृतम्। तेनैव चेदुपायेन कुरुतेऽन्यस्तदन्यथा॥ ७५॥ यथा-'दशा दुग्धं मनसिजम्-' इत्यादि। 20 सौकर्येण च कार्यस्य विरुद्धं क्रियते यदि। व्याघात इस्येव। 'इहैव त्वं तिष्ठ द्रुतमहमहोमिः कतिपयैः समागन्ता कान्ते मृदुरसि न चायाससहना। मृदुत्वं मे हेतु: सुभग भवता गन्तुमधिकं 25 न मृद्दी सोढा यद्विरहककृतमायासमसमम्।।' अन्न नायकेन नायिकाया मृदुत्वं सहगमनाभावहेतुत्वेनोक्त्म्। नायि- कथा च प्रत्युत सहगमने ततोऽपि सौकर्येण हेतुतयोपन्यस्तम्। परं परं प्रति यदा पूर्वपूर्वस् हेतुता ॥ ७६॥

१ 'सविकासं' इति नि. २ 'सम्भृता' इति ज-ब. ३ 'कारणं' इति नि. ४ 'गुणा येषाम्' इति नि. ५ 'कथमपि' इति ज-ब; 'कथमिह' इति रुद्रटकृत- काव्यालङ्कार-संमत: पाठः ६ 'इति रवौ' इत्यधिकं ज-ब-पुस्तकयोः.

१०२७७ दशम: परिच्छेद: ५३

तदा कारणमाला स्ात् यथा- 'श्रुतं कृतधियां सङ्गाज्ायते विनयः श्रुतात्। लोकानुरागो विनयान्न किं लोकानुरागतः।।' तन्मालादीपकं पुनः। 5 धर्मिणामेकधर्मेण सम्बन्धो यद्यथोत्तरम् ॥ ७७॥ यथा- 'त्वयि सङ्गरसंप्राप्ते धनुषासादिताः शराः । शरैर रिशिरस्तेन भूस्तया त्वं त्वया यशः ।।' अन्नासादनक्रिया धर्मः। 10 पूर्व पूर्व प्रति विशेषणत्वेन परं परम्। स्थाप्यतेऽपोह्यते वा चेत्सात्तदैकावली दविधा ॥७८॥ ऋमेणोदाहरणम्- 'सरो विकसिताम्भोजमम्भोजं भृङ्गसङ्गतम् । भृङ्गा यत्र ससङ्गीता सङ्गीतं सस्रोदयम्।।' 15 'न तजलं यन्न सुचारुपङ्टजं न पट्टजं तद्यदलीनपटपदम्। न षटपदोऽसौ न जुगुज यः कलं न गुजितं तन्न जहार यन्मनः ।' क्वचिद्विशेष्यमपि यधोत्तरं विशेषणतया स्थापितमपोहितं च दश्यते। यथा- 'वाप्यो भतन्ति विमला: स्फुटन्ति कमलानि वापीपु। 20 कमलेषु पतन्त्यलयः करोति सङ्गीतमलिषु पदम् ।।' एवमपोहनेऽपि। . उत्तरोत्तरमुत्कर्षो वस्तुनः सार उच्यते। यधा- 'राज्ये सारं वसुधा वसुधायामपि पुरं पुरे सौधम्। 25 सौधे तल्पं तल्पे वराङ्गनानङ्गसर्वस्वम्।' यथासंख्यमनूद्देश उद्दिष्टानां क्रमेण यत् ।। ७९॥ यथा- 'उन्मीलन्ति नखैर्लुनीहि वहति क्षौमाञ्जलेनावृणु कीडाकाननमाविशन्ति वलयक्काणैः समुन्रासय। 30

१ 'वसुन्धरायाम्' इति रुद्रटकाव्यालभ्टारे (७९७)

५४ साहित्यदर्पणे १०-७९

इत्थं वसुलदक्षिणानिलकुहूकण्ठेषु साङ्केतिक- व्याहारा: सुभग त्वदीयविरहे तस्या: सखीनां मिथः॥' कचिदेकमनेकस्मिन्ननेकं चैकगं क्रमात्। भवति क्रियते वा चेत्तदा पर्याय इष्यते ॥ ८० ॥ 5 क्रमेण यथा- 'स्थिता: क्षणं पक्ष्मसु ताडिताधराः पयोधरोत्सेधनिपातचूर्णिताः। वलीषु तस्या: स्खलिताः प्रपेदिरे क्रमेण नाभि प्रथमोदबिन्दवः ।।' 'विचरन्ति विलासिन्यो यत्र श्रोणिभरालसाः । वृककाकशिवास्तत्र धावन्त्रिपुरे तव।।' 10 'विसृष्टरागादधरान्निवर्तितः स्तनाङ्गरागादरुणाच् कन्दुकात्। कुशाङ्कुरादानपरिक्षताङ्कुलि: कृतोऽक्षसूत्रप्रणयी तया करः ।' 'ययोरारोपितस्तारो हारस्तेऽरिवधूजनैः । निधीयन्ते तयो: स्थूला: स्तनयोरश्रुबिन्दवः ।' एषु च क्वचिदाधार: संहतरूपोऽसंहतरूपश्र। क्वचिदाधेयमपि। यथा- 15 'स्थिता: क्षणम्-' इत्यत्रोदबिन्दवः पक्ष्मादावसंहतरूप आधारे क्रमेणा- भवन्। 'विचरन्ति-' इत्यत्राधेयभूता वृकादयः संहतरूपारिपुरे क्रमेणा- भवन् । एवमन्यत्। अन्न चैकस्यानेकत्र कमेणैव वृत्तेर्विशेषालङ्गाराद् भेद:। विनिमयाभावात्परिवृत्ते:। परिवृत्तिर्विनिमयः समन्यूनाधिकैर्भवेत्। 20 क्रमेणोदाहरणम्- 'दत्वा कटाक्षमेणाक्षी जग्राह हृदयं मम। मया तु हृदयं दत्वा गृहीतो मदनज्वरः ॥' अत्र प्रथमेऽघें समेन, द्वितीयेडर्धे न्यूनेन। 'तस्य च प्रवयसो जटायुषः स्वर्गिण: किमिव शोच्यतेडधुना। 25 येन जर्जरकलेवरव्ययात्क्रीतमिन्दुकिरणोज्वलं यशः ।।' अन्नाधिक्येन। प्रश्नादप्रश्नतो वापि कथिताद्वस्तुनो भवेद् ॥ ८१ ॥ तादृगन्यव्यपोहश्ेच्छाब्द आर्थोऽथवा तदा। परिसंख्या 30 कमेणोदाहरणम्- 'कि भूषणं सुदढमत्र यशो न रतं कि कार्यमार्यचरितं सुकृतं न दोषः। रकि चक्षुरप्रतिहतं धिषणा न नेत्रं जानाति कस्त्वदुपरः सदसद्विवेकम्॥'

१०-८२ दशमः परिच्छेद: ५५

अत्र व्यवच्छेद्यं रसादि शाब्दम्। 'किमाराध्यं सदा पुण्यं कश्च सेव्यः सदागमः । को ध्येयो भगवान्विष्णुः किं काम्यं परमं पदम् ।।' अत्र व्यवच्छेद्यं पापाद्यार्थम्। अनयोः प्रश्नपूर्वकत्वम्। अप्रश्नपूर्वकत्वे यथा- 5 'भक्तिर्भवे न विभवे व्यसनं शास्त्रे न युवतिकामास्त्ने। चिन्ता यशसि न वपुषि प्रायः परिद्ृश्यते महताम्।' 'बलमार्तभयोपशान्तये विदुषां संमतये बहु श्रुतम्। वसु तस्य न केवलं विभोर्गुणवत्तापि परप्रयोजनम् ।।' श्रेषमूलत्वे चास्य वैचित्र्यविशेषो यथा- 10 'यस्मिंश्च राजनि जितजगति पालयति महीं चित्रकर्मसु वर्णसङ्कराश्रापेषु गुणच्छेदा :- ' इत्यादि। उत्तरं प्रश्नस्योत्तरादुन्नयो यदि ।। ८२ ।। यच्चासकृदसम्भाव्यं सत्यपि प्रश्न उत्तरम् । यथा मम- 15 'वीक्षितुं न क्षमा श्रश्रूः स्वामी दूरतरं गतः । अहमेकाकिनी बाला तवेह वसतिः कुतः ॥' अनेन पथिकस्य वसतियाचनं प्रतीयते। 'का विसमा देव्वगई, कि लद्धव्वं जणो गुणग्गाही। किं सोक्खं सुकलत्तं, किदुग्गेज्झं खलो लोओ।।' 20 अन्नान्यव्यपोहे तात्पर्याभावात्परिसंख्यातो भेदः। न चेदमनुमानम्। साध्यसाधनयोई्योनिर्देश एव तस्याङ्गीकारात्। न च काव्यलिङ्गम्। उत्तरस्य प्रश्नं प्रत्यजनकत्वात्। दण्डापूपिकयान्यार्थागमोऽर्थापत्तिरिष्यते ॥। ८३॥ मूषिकेण दण्डो भक्षित इत्यनेन तत्सहचरितमपूपभक्षणमर्थादायातं 25 भवतीति नियतसमानन्यायादर्थान्तरमापततीत्येष न्यायो दण्डापूपिका। भत्र च क्रचित्प्राकरणिकादर्थादप्राकरणिकस्यार्थस्यापतनं कचिदप्राकरणिकार्थात्प्रा- करणिकार्थस्येति हौ भेदौ। क्रमेणोदाहरणम्- 'हारोडयं हरिणाक्षीणां लुउति सनमण्डले। मुक्तानामप्यवस्थेयं के वयं स्मरकिङ्कराः।।' 30 'विललाप स वाष्पगद्गदं सहजामप्यपहाय धीरताम्। अतितप्षमयोऽपि मार्दवं भजते कैव कथा शरीरिणाम् ।' अत्र च समानन्यायस्य श्रेषमूलत्वे वैचित्र्यविशेषो यथोदाहते 'हारोऽ-

५६ साहित्यदर्पणे १०-८३

यम्-' इत्यादौ। न चेदमनुमानम्। समानन्यायस्य सम्बन्धरूपत्वाभावात्। विकल्पस्तुल्यबलयोर्विरोधश्चातुरीयुतः। यथा-'नेमयन्तु शिरांसि धनूंषि वा कर्णपूरीक्रियन्तामाज्ञा मौव्यों वा।' अन्र शिरसां धनुषां च नमनयोः सन्धिविग्रहोपलक्षणत्वात्, सन्धिविग्रह- 5 योश्चैकदा कर्तुमशक्यत्वाद्विरोधः । स चैक्पक्षाश्रयणपर्यवसानः । तुल्य- बलत्वं चात्र धनुःशिरोनमनयोर्द्वयोरपि स्पर्धया सम्भाव्यमानत्वात्। चातुर्ये चात्रौपम्यगर्भत्वेन । एवं 'कर्णपूरीक्रियन्ताम्' इत्वत्रापि। एवं 'युष्माकं कुरुतां भवार्तिशमनं नेत्रे तनुर्वा हरेः'। अत्र श्रेषावष्टम्भेन चारत्वम्। 'दीयतामर्जितं वित्तं देवाय ब्राह्मणाय वा।' 10 समुच्चयोऽयमेकस्मिन्सति कार्यस्य साधके॥८४॥ खलेकपोतिकान्यायात्तत्करः स्यात्परोऽपि चेव्। गुणौ क्रिये वा युगपत्सातां यद्वा गुणक्रिये ।। ८५।। यथा मम- 15 'हंहो धीरसमीर हन्त जननं ते चन्दनक्ष्माभृतो दाक्षिण्यं जगदुत्तरं परिचयो गोदावरीवारिभिः। प्रत्यङ्गं दहसीह मे त्वमपि चेदुद्दामदावाभिव- न्मत्तोऽयं मलिनात्मको वनचरः किं वक्ष्यते कोकिलः ॥' अन्न दाहे एकरिमिंश्चन्दनक्ष्माभृजन्मरूपे कारणे सत्यपि दाक्षिण्यादीनां 20 हेत्वन्तराणासुपादानम् । अत्र सर्वेपामपि हेतूनां शोभनत्वात्सद्योगः। अन्रैव चतुर्थपादे मत्तादीनामशोभनानां योगादसद्योगः। सदसद्योगो यथा- 'शशी दिवसधूसरो गलितयौवना का मिनी सरो विगतवारिजं मुखमनक्षरं स्वाकृतेः । 25 प्रभुर्धनपरायण: सततदुर्गतः सज्जनो नृपाङ्गनगतः खलो मनसि सप्त शल्यानि मे ।।' इह केचिदाहु :- 'शशिप्रभृतीनां शोभनत्वं खलस्याशोभनत्वमपि सद- सद्योग:' इति। अन्ये तु 'शशिप्रभृतीनां स्वतःशोभनत्वं धूसरत्वादीनां त्वशोभनत्वमिति सद्सद्योगः ।' अत्र हि शशिप्रभृतिषु धूसरादेरतन्तमनु- १ 'नम्यन्ताम्' इति ज-ब; 'नमन्तु' इति अलक्कारसर्वस्वसंमतः पाठ :. २ 'दह- सीति' इति नि.

१०-८५ दशम: परिच्छेद: ५७

चितत्वमिति विच्छित्तिविशेषस्यैव चमतकारविधायित्वं, 'मनासे सप्त शल्यानि' इति सप्तानामपि शल्यत्वेनोपसंहारश्न, 'नृपाङ्गनगतः खलः' इति प्रत्युत करममेदाहुष्टत्वमावहृति, सर्वत्र विशेष्यस्यैव शोभनत्वेन प्रक्रमादिति। इह च सले कपोतवत्सर्वेषां कारणानां साहि त्येनावतारः। समाध्यलङ्कारे त्वेककार्य प्रति साधके समग्रेऽप्यन्यस्य काकतालीयन्यायेनापतनमिति भेदः।5 'अरुणे च तरुणि नयने तब मलिनं च प्रियस्य मुखम्। मुखमानतं च सखि ते ज्वलितश्चास्यान्तरे स्मरज्वलनः ।।' अत्राद्येडर्े गुणयोयौंगपद्यम्, द्वितीये क्रिययोः। उभयोर्योगपद्े यथा- 'कलुषं च तवाहितेष्वकस्मात्सितपङ्गेरुहसोदरश्रि चक्षुः । पतितं च महीपतीन्द्र तेषां वपुषि प्रस्फुटमापदां कटाक्षैः ।' 10 'धुनोति चासिं तनुते च कीर्तिम्।' इत्यादावेकाधिकरणेडप्येष दृश्यते। न चात्र दीपकम्। एते हि गुण- क्रियायौगपद्ये समुच्चयप्रकारा नियमेन कार्यकारणकालनियमविपर्ययरूपाति- शयोकिमूलाः। दीपकस्य चातिशयोक्तिमूलत्वाभावः । समाधि: सुकरे कार्ये दैवाद्वस्त्वन्तरागमात्। 15

यथा- 'मानमस्या निराकर्तुं पादयोर्मे पतिष्यतः । उपकाराय दिष्टयेदमुदीर्णे धनगर्जितम्।।' प्रत्यनीकमशक्तेन प्रतीकारे रिपोर्यदि ॥ ८६ ॥ तदीयस्य तिरस्कारस्तस्यैवोत्कर्षसाधकः । 20

तस्यैवेति रिपोरेव। यथा मम- 'मध्येन तनुमध्या मे मध्यं जितवतीत्ययम्। इभकुम्भौ मिनत्यस्या: कुचकुम्भनिभौ हरिः ॥'

निष्फलत्वाभिधानं वा प्रतीपमिति कथ्यते। 25

क्रमेण यथा- 'यत्त्वव्ेत्रसमानकान्ति सलिले मझं तदिन्दीवरम्-' इत्यादि। 'तद्गकं यदि मुद्रिता शशिकथा हा हेम सा चेद्दयुति- स्तच्नक्षुर्यदि हारितं कुवलयैस्तच्चेत्सतं का सुधा।

१ 'चमत्कारविधायित्वं ...... विशेष्यस्यैव' इति एतन्नास्ति नि-पुस्तके तच्च प्रामादिकमिव प्रतिभाति। टीकायां व्याख्यातत्वात्।

५८ साहित्यदर्पणे

विकन्दर्पधनुर्भ्ुवौ यदि च ते किं वा बहु बूमहे यत्सत्यं पुनरुक्वस्तुविमुखः सर्गक्रमो वेघसः ।' अत्र वक्त्रादिभिरेव चन्द्रादीनां शोभातिवहनात्तेषां निष्फलत्वम्। उक्त्वा चात्यन्तमुत्कर्षमत्युत्कृष्टस् वस्तुनः ।। ८८ ॥ 5 कल्पितेऽप्युपमानत्वे प्रतीपं केचिदूचिरे। यथा- 'अहमेव गुरुः सुदारुणानामिति हालाहल तात मा स दृप्यः । नतु सन्ति भवादृशानि भूयो भुवनेऽस्मिन्वचनानि दुर्जनानाम्।' अन्न प्रथमपादेनोत्कर्षांतिशय उक्तः । तद्नुक्तौ तु नायमलङ्कारः। यथा- 10 'ब्रह्मेव ब्राह्मणो वद्ति' इत्यादि। मीलितं वस्तुनो गुप्तिः केनचित्तुल्यलक्ष्मणां।। ८९।। अत्र समानलक्षणं वस्तु क्रचित्सहजं क्वचिदागन्तुकम्। क्मेण यथा- 'लक्ष्मीवक्षोजकस्तूरिलक्ष्म वक्षःस्थले हरेः। ग्रस्तं नालक्षि भारत्या भासा नीलोत्पलाभया।।' 15 अत्र भगवतः श्यामा कान्ति: सहजा। 'सदैव शोणोपलकुण्डलस्य यस्यां मयूखैररुणीकृतानि। कोपोपरक्तान्यपि कामिनीनां मुखानि शङ्कां विदधुर्न यूनाम् ।।' अत्र माणिक्यकुण्डलस्यारुणिमा मुखे भागन्तुकः । सामान्यं प्रकृतस्थान्यतादात्म्यं सदशैर्गुणैः। 20 यथा- 'मल्लिकाचितधम्मिल्लाश्चारुचन्दनचर्चिता: । अविभाव्या: सुखं यान्ति चन्द्रिकास्वमिसारिकाः ॥' मीलिते उत्कृष्टगुणेन निकृष्टगुणस्य तिरोधानम्। इह तूभयोस्तुल्यगुण- तया भेदाग्रहः। 25 तद्ुण: खगुणत्यागादृत्युत्कृष्टगुणग्रहः।। ९० ।। यथा-

नयन्मधुलिहः श्रैत्यमुदग्रदशनांशुभि: ।' मीलिते प्रकृतस वस्तुनो वस्त्वन्तरेणाच्छादनम् । इह तु वस्त्वन्तर- 30 गुणेनाक्रान्तता प्रतीयत इति भेदैः ।

१ 'लक्षणा' इति ब. २ 'पर्यस्तपातिनः' इति ज-ब. ३ 'मेदः' इत्येतन्नास्ति ज-ब-पुस्तकयो:

90-९१ दशम: परिच्छेद:

तद्रूपाननुहदारस्तु हेतौ सत्यप्यतदुणः । यथा- 'हन्त सान्द्रेण रागेण भृतेऽपि हृदये मम। गुणगौर निषण्णोडपि कथ नाम न रज्यसि॥' यथा वा- 5 'गाङ्गमम्बु सितमम्बु यामुनं कज्जलाभमुभयत्र मजतः । राजहंस तव सैव शुभ्रता चीयते न च न चापचीयते।।' पूर्वत्रातिरक्तहृदयसम्पर्कात्प्राप्तवद्पि गुणगौरशब्दवाच्यस्य नायकस्य रक्तत्वं न निष्पन्नम्। उत्तरत्राप्रस्तुतप्रशंसायां विद्यमानायामपि गङ्गायमुनापेक्षया प्रकृतस्य हंसस्य गङ्गायमुनयो: सम्पर्केऽपि न तद्रूपता। अत्र च गुणाग्रहण-10 रूपविच्छित्तिविशेषाश्रयाद्विशेषोक्केर्भेदः । वर्णान्तरोत्पत्यभावाच् विषमात्। संलक्षितस्तु सूक्ष्मोर्थ आकारेणेङ्गितेन वा ॥ ९१ ॥ कयापि सूच्यते भख्गा यत्र सूक्ष्मं तदुच्यते। सूक्ष्म: स्थूलमतिभिरसंलक्ष्यः । अत्राकारेण यथा- 'वक्रस्यन्दिसवेदबिन्दुप्रबन्धर्द्दष्टा भिन्नं कुङ्कुमं कापि कण्ठे। 15 पुंस्त्वं तन्व्या व्यज्ञयन्ती चयस्या स्मित्वा पाणौ खङ्गलेखां लिलेख ।।' अत्र कयाचित्कुक्कमभेदेन संलक्षितं कस्याश्चित्पुरुषायितं पाणौ पुरुष- चिह्नखङ्गलेखालिखनेन सूचितम्। इद्गितेन यथा- 'सङ्गेतकालमनसं विटं जञात्वा विदग्धया। हसन्नेत्रार्पिताकूतं लीलापझं निमीलितम् ।' 20 अत्र विटस्य भ्रविक्षेपादिना लक्षितः सङ्केतकालाभिप्नायो रजनीकाल- भाविना पद्मनिमीलनेन प्रकाशितः । व्याजोक्तिर्गोपनं व्याजादुन्भिन्नस्यापि वस्तुनः ॥ ९२॥ यथा- 'शैलेन्द्र प्रतिपाद्यमान गिरिजाहस्तोपगूढोल्लस- 25 द्रोमाज्जादिविसंस्थुलाखिलविधिव्यासङ्गभङ्गाकुलः । आः शैतयं तुहिनाचलस्य करयोरित्यूचिवान्सस्मितं

नेयं प्रथमापहुतिः । अपह्ववकारिणो विषयस्यानभिधानात्। द्वितीया- पहुतेर्भेदश्च तत्प्रस्तावे दर्शितः । 30

१ 'रोमाञ्जातिविसंस्थुल' इति ज-ब.

६० साहित्यदर्पणे १०-९३

दुरूहयो: कविमात्रवेद्ययोरर्थस्य डिम्भादेः स्वयोसतदेकाश्रययोश्रेष्टा- स्वरूपयोः । यथा मम- 'लाङ्गलेनाभिहत्य क्षितितलमसककृद्दारयन्नप्रपन्वया- 5 मात्मन्येवावलीय द्रुतमथ गगनं प्रोत्पतन्विक्रमेण। स्फूर्जद्धूङ्कारघोष: प्रतिदिशमखिलान्द्रावयश्चेरष जन्तू- न्कोपाविष्टः प्रविष्टः प्रतिवनमरुणोच्छूनचक्षुस्तरघुः॥' अद्भुतस्य पदार्थस्य भृतस्याथ भविष्यतः ॥९३॥ यत्प्रत्यक्षायमाणत्वं तन्भाविकमुदाहृतम्। 10 यथा- 'मुनिर्जयति योगीन्द्रो महात्मा कुम्भसम्भवः । येनैकचुलुके दृष्टौ दिव्यौ तौ मत्स्यकच्छपौ।।' यथा वा- 'आसीदञ्जनमन्रेति पश्यामि तव लोचने। 15 भाविभूषणसम्भारां साक्षात्कुर्वे तवाकृतिम् ।।' न चायं प्रसादाख्यो गुणः । भूतभाविनोः प्रत्यक्षायमाणत्वे तस्याहेतु- त्वात्। न चान्भुतो रसः । विस्मयं प्रत्यस्य हेतुत्वात्। न चातिशयोक्तिर- लह्कारः । अध्यवसायाभावात् । न च भ्रान्तिमान् । भूतभाविनोर्भूतभावि- तयैव प्रकाशनात् । न च स्वभावोक्तिः । तस्य लौकिकवस्तुगतसूक्ष्मधर्म- 20 स्वभावस्यैव यथावद्र्णनं स्वरूपम् । अस्य तु वस्तुनः प्रत्यक्षायमाणत्वरूपो विच्छित्तिविशेषोऽस्तीति। यदि पुनर्वस्तुनः क्वचित्स्वभावोक्तावप्यस्या विच्छित्तेः सम्भवस्तदोभयो: सङ्करः। 'अनातपत्रोऽप्ययमत्र लक्ष्यते सितातपत्रैरिव सर्वतो वृतः। अचामरोऽप्येष सदैव वीज्यते विलासबालव्यजनेन कोऽप्ययम्।।' 25 अन्र प्रत्यक्षायमाणसैव वर्णनान्नायमलङ्गारः । वर्णनावशेन प्रत्यक्षाय- माणत्वस्यास्य स्वरूपत्वात्। यत्पुनरप्रत्यक्षायमाणस्यापि वर्णने प्रत्यक्षाय- माणत्वं तत्रायमलङ्कारो भवितुं युक्त:। यथोदाहते 'भासीदजनम्-' इतयादौ। लोकातिशय सम्पत्तिवर्णनोदात्तमुच्यते। ९४॥ यद्वापि प्रस्तुतस्याङ्गं महतां चरितं भवेत्। 30 कमेणोदाहरणम्-

१ 'धारयन्' इतिज-ब. २ 'एव' इति नि. ३ 'सरूपत्वात्' इति नि.

१०-९५ दशम: परिच्छेद: ६१

'अध:कृताम्भोघरमण्डलानां यस्यां शशाङ्कोपलकुट्टिमानाम्। ज्योत्सानिपातातक्षरतां पयोभि: केलीवनं वृद्धिमुरीकरोति ॥' 'नाभिप्रभिन्नाम्बुरुहासनेन संस्तूयमानः प्रथमेन धात्रा । अमुं युगान्तोचितयोगनिद्रः संहृत्य लोकान्पुरुषोऽधिशेते।' रसभावौ तदाभासौ भावस्य प्रशमस्तथा ।।९५।। 5

गुणीभूतत्वमायान्ति यदालङ्कतयस्तदा। रसवत्प्रेय ऊर्जसिवि समाहितमिति क्रमात् ॥ ९६ ॥ तदाभासौ रसाभासो भावाभासश्र । तत्र रसयोगाद्रसवदलङ्कारो यथा-'अयं स रसनोत्कर्षी-' इत्यादि। अत्र शुङ्गारः करुणसाङ्गम्। एवमन्यत्रापि। प्रकृष्टप्रियत्वात्प्रेयः । यथा मम- 10 'आमीलिताल सविवर्तिततारकाक्षी मत्कण्ठबन्धनदरश्रथबाहुवल्लीम्। प्रस्वेदवारिकणिका चितगण्डबिम्बां संस्मृत्य तामनिशमेति न शान्तिमन्तः ।।' अत्र सम्भोगशङ्गारः स्मरणाख्यभावस्याङ्गम्। स च विप्रलम्भस्य। ऊर्जो बलम्, अनौचित्यप्रवृत्तौ तदत्रास्तीत्यूर्जसिवि। यथा- 'वनेऽखिलकलासक्ताः परिहृत्य निजस्त्रियः । 15 त्वद्वैरिवनितावृन्दे पुलिन्दाः कुर्वते रतिम् ॥' अत्र श्ङ्गाराभासो राजविषयरतिभावस्याङ्गम्। एवं भावाभासोऽपि। समाहितं परीहारः। यथा- 'अविरलकर वालकम्पनैर्भ्रुकुटीतर्जनगर्जनैमुहुः। दुदशे तव वैरिणां मदः स गतः क्वापि तवेक्षणे क्षणात् ॥' 20 अन्र मदाख्यभावस्य प्रशमो राजविषयरतिभावस्याङ्गम्। भावस्य चोदये सन्धौ मिश्रत्वे च तदाख्यकाः। तदाख्यका भावोद्य-भावसन्धि-भावशबलनामानोऽलद्गाराः। क्रमेणो- दाहरणम्- 'मधुपानप्रवृत्तास्ते सुहृद्दिः सह वैरिणः । 25 श्रुत्वा कुतोऽपि त्वन्नाम लेभिरे विषमां दशाम्॥' अत्र त्रासादयो राजविषयरतिभावस्याङ्गम्। 'जन्मान्तरीणरमणस्याङ्गसङ्गसमुत्सुका। सलजा चान्तिके सख्या: पातु नः पार्वती सदा ।।' अत्रौतसुक्यलजयोश्च सन्धिर्देवताविषयरतिभावस्ाङ्गम्। 30 'पशयेत्कश्चिचल चपल रे का त्वराहं कुमारी हस्तालम्बं वितर हहहा व्युत्कम: क्ासि यासि। ६ सा०

६२ साहित्यदर्पणे १०-९७

इस्थं पृथ्वीपरिवृढ़ भवद्विद्विषोऽरण्यवृत्ते:

अत्र शङ्कासूयाध्टृतिस्मृतिश्रमदैन्यविबोधौत्सुक्यानां शबलता राजविषय- रतिभावस्याङ्गम्। इह केचिदाहु :- 'वाच्यवाचकरूपालङ्करणमुखेन रसाद्यु- 5 पकारका एवालङ्कारा:। रसाद्यस्तु वाच्यवाचकाभ्यामुपकार्या एवेति न तेषामलङ्गारता भवितुं युक्क्का' इति। अन्ये तु-'रसाद्युपकारमात्रेणेहालक्- तिव्यपदेशो भाककतश्चिरन्तनप्रसिच्चाङ्गीकार्य एव' इति। अपरे च-'रसाद्यु- पकारमात्रेणालङ्कारत्वं मुख्यतः, रूपकादौ तु वाच्याद्युपधानमजागलस्तन-

10 रसादिभिरद्गिनो रसा देवांच्यवाचकोपस्कार द्वारेणोपकुर्वन्धिरलङ्कतिव्यपदेशो लभ्यते। समासोक्तौ तु नायिकादिव्य वहारमान्नस्यैवालङ्गतिता, न त्वास्ादस्य, तस्योक्तरीतिविरहात्' इति मन्यन्ते। अत एव ध्वनिकारेणोक्तम्- 'प्रधानेऽन्यत्र वाक्यार्थे यत्राङ्गं तु रसादयः। काव्ये तस्मिन्नलङ्गारो रसादिरिति मे मतिः ॥'

15 यदि च रसाद्युपकारमात्रेणालङ्गतित्वं तदा वाचकादिष्वपि तथा प्रसज्येत। एवं च यञ्च कैश्चिदुक्तम्-'रसादीनामङ्गित्वे रसवदाद्यलङ्गारः। अङ्गत्वे तु द्वितीयोदात्तालङ्कार:', तद्पि परास्तम्। यद्येत एवालङ्गारा: परस्परविमिश्रिताः ॥ ९७॥ तदा पृथगलङ्कारौ संसष्टिः सङ्करस्तथा। 20 यथा लौकिकालङ्गाराणामपि परस्परमिश्रणे पृथक्चारुत्वेन पृथगलङ्गारत्वं तथोक्तरूपाणां काव्यालङ्काराणामपि परस्परमिश्रत्वे संसृष्टिसक्कराख्यौ पृथ- गलङ्गारौ । तत्र मिथोऽनपेक्षयैतेषां स्थितिः संसष्टिरुच्यते ॥ ९८॥ एतेषां शब्दार्थालङ्गाराणाम्। यथा-

25 'देव: पायादपायान्नः सेरेन्दीवरलोचनः। संसारध्वान्तविध्वंसहंस: कंसनिषूदनः ।।' अत्र पायादपायादिति यमकम्। संसारेत्यादौ चानुप्रास इति शब्दा- लङ्कारयो: संसृष्टिः । द्वितीये पादे उपमा, द्वितीयार्धे च रूपकमित्यर्थालङ्का- रयोः संसृष्टिः। एवमुभयोः स्थितत्वाच्छन्दार्थालङ्कारसंसृष्टिः।

१ 'विवाध' इति नि. २ 'अङ्वितो' इति नि.

१०-९९ दशम: परिच्छेद: ६३

सन्दिग्धत्वे च भवति सङ्करस्त्रिविध: पुनः ॥९९। भङ्गाद्विभावो यथा-

मन्थव्यथाव्युपशमार्थमवाश्ु यस्य मन्दाकिनी चिरमवेष्टत पादमूले।।'5 अन्र निर्मोकपट्टापह्ववेन मन्दाकिन्या आरोप इत्यपह्गुतिः । सा च मन्दा- किन्या वस्तुवृत्तेन यत्पादमूलवेष्टनं तच्चरणमूलवेष्टनमिति श्लेषमुत्थापयतीति तस्याङ्गम्। श्रेषश्च पादमूलवेष्टनमेव चरणमूलवेष्टनमित्यतिशयोक्तेरङ्गम्। अतिशयोक्तिश्च मन्थव्यथाव्युपशमार्थमिवेत्युत्प्रेक्षाया अङ्गम्। उत्प्रेक्षा चाम्बु- राशिमन्दाकिन्योरनायकनायिकाव्यवहारं गमयतीति समासोक्तेरङ्गम्। 10 यथा वा- 'अनुरागवती संध्या दिवसस्तत्पुरःसरः। अहो दैवगतिश्चित्रा तथापि न समागमः ॥' अत्र समासोक्तिर्विशेषोक्तेरङ्रम्। सन्देहसङ्करो यथा- 'इदमाभाति गगने भिन्दानं सन्ततं तमः । 15 अमन्द्नयनानन्दकरं मण्डलमैन्दवम् ।।' अत्र किं मुखस्य चन्द्रतयाध्यवसानादृतिशयोक्तिः, उत इदमिति मुखं निर्दिश्य चन्द्रत्वारोपाद्रूपकम्, अथवा इदमिति मुखस्य चन्द्रमण्डलस् च द्वयोरपि प्रकृतयोरेकधर्माभिसम्बन्धान्तुल्ययोगिता, आहोस्विच्चन्द्रस्याप्रकृत- त्वाद्दीपकम्, कि वा विशेषणसाम्यादप्रस्तुतस्थ मुखस्य गम्यत्वात्समासोक्ति:, 20 यद्वाऽप्रस्तुतचन्द्रवर्णनया प्रस्तुतस्य मुखस्यावगतिरित्यप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, यद्दा मन्मथोद्दीपन: कालः स्वकार्यभूतचन्द्रवर्णनामुखेन वर्णित इति पर्यायो- क्िरिति बहूनामळङ्टाराणां सन्देहात् सन्देहसङ्करः। यथा वा 'मुखचन्द्रं पश्यामि' इत्यत्र कि मुखं चन्द्र इवेत्युपमा, उत चन्द्र एवेति रूपकमिति सन्देहः। साधकबाधकयोर्ई्वयोरेकस्य सन्भावे न पुनः 25 सन्देहः । यथा-'मुखचन्द्रं चुम्बति' इत्यत्र चुम्बनं मुखस्यानुकूलामेत्युप- माया: साधकम्। चन्द्रस्य तु प्रतिकूलमिति रूपकस्य बाधकम्। 'मुख- चन्द्रः प्रकाशते इत्यत्र प्रकाशाख्यो धर्मो रूपकस्य साधको मुखे उपचरित- त्वेन सम्भवतीति नोपमाबाधकः । 'राजनारायणं लक्ष्मीस्त्वामालिङ्गति निर्भरम्।' 30 अत्र योषित आलिङ्गनं नायकस्य सदशे नोचितमिति लक्ष्मयालिङ्गनस्य १ 'स्पिता' इति ज-ब. २ 'आकृष्ट' इति ज-ब. ३ 'इदमिदमिति' इति नि. ४ 'चन्द्रत्वारोपान्मुखम्' इति नि.

साहित्यदर्पणे १०-९९

राजन्यसम्भवादुपमाबाधकम्, नारायणे सम्भवाद्रूपकम्। एवम्- 'वदनाम्बुजमेणाक्ष्या भाति चञ्चललोचनम्।' अत्र वदने लोचनस्य सम्भवादुपमाया: साधकता, अम्बुजे चासम्भवा- दूपकस्य बाधकता। एवं 'सुन्दरं वदनाम्वुजम्' इत्यादौ साधारणवर्मप्रयोगे 5 'उपमितं व्याघ्रादिभि: सामान्याप्रयोगे' इति वचनादुपमासमासो न सम्भ- वतीत्युपमाया बाधकः। एवं चात्र मयूरव्यंसकादित्वाद्रूपकसमास एव। एकाश्रयानुप्रवेशो यथा मम- 'कटाक्षेणापी पत्क्षणमपि निरीक्षेत यदि सा तदानन्द: सान्द्र: स्फुरति पिहिताशेषविषयः । 10 सरोमाज्जोदञ्ञत्कुचकलशनिर्भिन्नवसनः परीरम्भारम्भ: क इव भविताम्भोरुहद्दशः ।' अन्र कटाक्षेणापीषतक्षणमपीत्यत्र च्छेकानुप्रासस्य निरीक्षेतेत्यन्न क्षकार- मादाय वृत्यनुप्रासस्य चैकाश्रयेऽनुप्रवेशः । एवं चात्रैवानुप्रासार्थापत्त्यल- द्वारयोः । यथा वा-'संसारध्वान्तविध्वंस-' इत्यत्र रूपकानुप्रासयोः । 15 यथा वा-'कुरबका रवकारणतां ययुः' इत्यत्र रबका रवका इत्येकं बकार- वकार-इत्येकमिति यमकयोः । यथा वा- 'अहिणअपभोअरसिएसु पहिभसामाइएसु दिअहेसु। सोहद पसारिभगीआणं णच्ञिअं मोरविन्दाणम् ।।' 20 क्त्र 'पहिअसामाइएसु' इंत्येकाश्रये पथिकश्यामायितेत्युपमा, पथिक- सामाजिकेष्विति रूपकं प्रविष्टमिति। श्रीचन्द्रशेखरमहाकविचन्द्रसतु- श्रीविश्वनाथकविराजकृतं प्रबन्धम् । साहित्यदर्पणममुं सुधियो विलोक्य 25 साहित्यतत्व्रमखिलं सुखमेव वित्त । १०० ।। यावत्प्रसन्नेन्दुनिभानना श्रीर्नारायणसाङ्गमलङ्करोति। तावन्मन: संमद्यन्कवीनामेष प्रबन्ध: प्रथितोस्तु लोके ।१०१।।

साहित्यदर्पणे दशमः परिच्छेदः । समाप्तश्चायं प्रबन्ध: ।

१ 'रहदसपसारिभ०' इति नि. २ 'गीभाण' इति नि.

PARICHCHHEDA I.

अन्थारम्मे &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 Mangala is emphasized by so early a writer as Patanjali, who says "माङगलिक आचार्यो महतः शास्त्रौघस्य मङलार्थ सिद्ध- शब्दमादित: प्रयुङ्क्ते मङ्गलादीनि हि शास्त्राणि प्रथन्ते वीरपुरुषकाणि च भवन्त्यायुष्म- त्पुरुषकाणि चाध्येतारश्च सिद्धार्था यथा स्युरिति।" (p. 7, vol. I of the महाभाष्य ed. by Kielhorn). Compare also the interesting discussion about the necessity and efficacy of Mangala in the Siddhanta- Muktāvali and the Tarkadīpika of Annam-bhatta.

It would have been better if the author had said yiffen- निर्विध्नपरिसमाप्तिकाम: instead of निर्विघ्नेन प्रारिप्सितपरिसमाप्ति०. But he is in good company; e. g. Abhinavagupta says in his r-

(p. 1); and fary in his comment upon Rudrata's Kavya- lankara says "अविभ्नेन शास्त्रसमात्यर्थ" (p.1). निर्विन्नन प्रारिप्सित- परिसमाप्तिकाम: desiring the unobstructed completion of what he wishes to begin. वाङ्याधिकृततया (p. 1, 1. 5) वाङ्मये अधिकृततया. वाड्मय* means "Literature"; compare लिपेर्यथावद्गहणेन वाङ्मयं नदी- मुखेनेव समुद्रमाविशत् ॥। रघु. III. 28. वाङ्मयाधि० means 'Because, she (Goddess of speech ) is the constituted authority in or has sway over the province of Literature.' वाग्देवतायाः सांमुख्यमाधसे- supply aad. 'He (the author ) makes the goddess of speech favourable (to his objeot)'. विश्वनाथ wrote the Karikas as well as the Vrtti. But he speaks of himself in the third person (आधत्ते) following the practice of such writers as Mammata, who says about himself "अन्थारम्भे विश्नविधाताय ... अन्थकृत परामृशति." Compare the words of मेधातिथि 'प्रायेण ग्रन्थकाराः स्वमतं परापदेशेन नुषते' or of कुल्लक (on मनु I.4) 'प्रायेणाचार्याणामियं शैली थत्स्वाभिप्रायमपि परो- पदेशमिव वर्णयन्ति.'

शरदिन्दु० (p. 1, 11. 7-8). Construe सा शरदिन्दुसुन्दररुन्विः गिरां देवी तमः अपहृत्य मे चेतसि अखिलान् अर्थान् सन्ततं प्रकाशयतु. सा means 'well-

• For the derivation of वाङ्मय see सिद्धान्तकौमुदी on the वार्तिक 'एकाचो नित्यम्' on 'नित्यं वृद्धशरादिभ्यः' IV. 3. 144.

2 NOTES ON L 1

known.' शरदिन्दु0-Dissolve शरदिन्दोरिव सुन्दरी रन्विर्यस्या: Many writers on Rhetoric appropriately praise the goddess of speech at the beginning of their works; vide the काव्यप्रकाश, the काव्या दर्श, अलक्कारसर्वस्व &c. अस्य ग्रन्थस्य .. फलवस्वम् (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 in 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 wa 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 ereation of Poetry, the aim and purpose of Poetry must be the end and aim of this book also.f चतुरवरग०-(p. 1,1.10). Construe यतः अस्पधियामपि चतुर्वर्गफल- प्राप्ति: काव्यादेव सुखात् (भवति) तेन (तम्मात्) ततस्वरूपं (काव्यस्वरूपं) निरूप्यते. चतुर्वर्ग means 'the class of four' i.e. the four पुरुषार्थs धर्म, अर्थ, काम and मोक्ष. (p. 1, 1.12) काव्यतः चतुर्वर्गफळप्राप्तिः सुप्रतीतैव-It is well-known that the four (mentioned above) are the fruits of Poetry. रामादिवत् ..... उपदेशद्वारेण. प्रवृत्ति and निवृत्ति are to be con- strued respectively with कृत्य and अकृत्य, i. 6. कृत्ये प्रवृत्तिः अकृत्याव निवृत्ति :; compare the words of Mammata रामादिषद्वर्तितव्यं न रावणादिवदित्युपदेशं च यथायोगं ...... करोतीति (K. P. 1 ul.). The fruits of Poetry are differently given by different writers :- e. g. ae in his Kavyalankara (I. 4-13) practically says the same thing as our author. Vamana, on the other hand, says that the fruits of Kavya are प्रीति (Pleasure) and कीर्ति (I. 1. 5). Compare the words of Mammata 'काव्यं यशसेऽर्थकृते व्यवहारविदे शिवे- तरक्षतये। सघ: परनिर्वृतये कान्तासंमिततयोपदेशयुजे॥' (K. P. उल्लास I) धर्मार्थकाम० (p. 1, 11. 15-16). This verse is taken from the ancient Rhetorician Bhamaha (I. 2). A Transeript in our possession reads 'प्रीति करोति कीर्ति च साधुकाव्यनिबन्धनम्'. But the * सर्वस्यैव हि शास्त्रस्य कर्मणो वापि कस्यचिद्। यावत्प्रयोजनं नोकतं तावत तत्केन गृद्यवे।। शरोकवा. 1.12. i यथा दर्शपौर्णमासाङ्गानां प्रयाजादीनां दर्शपौर्णमासफलेनैव फलवत्त्वं तथा काव्याङ्गस्यास्य ग्रन्थस्य काव्यफलैरेव फलवत्त्वमिति भाव: ।

I 2 SAHITYADARPAŅA 3

verse is everywhere quoted as it is in the text. साधुकाव्यनिषेघणम् constant application to, or study of, good Poetry ( whether by way of composing it or reading it). प्रीति करोति causes delight (to the author as well as to the reader ). agroy means 'thorough mastery, proficiency.' किं च ...... व्युत्पत्त्याधायकत्वाच्च (p. 1, ll. 17-21). The author shows how Poetry severally leads to the attainment of each of the four goals of man. The word arara is to be connected with each of the four words धर्मप्राप्तिः, अर्थप्राप्ति: etc. एक: शब्द: सम्यग्न्नातः &c. This passage is often quoted as a Vedic one. The readings, however, are different in each case. J and B read स्वर्गे लोके च (in heaven as well as in this world ) for स्वर्गे लोके. Our reading is supported by the तत्रवार्तिक (p. 228), by कैयट (p. 10) and by the सर्वदर्शनसंग्रह (p. 139 B. I. edition). The तत्रवार्तिक adds शास्त्रान्वितः. Compare for the idea the vere गौगों: कामदुघा सम्यकपयु का स्मर्यंते बुधैः । दुष्प्रयुक्ता पुनगोत्वं प्रयोक्तः सैव शंसति॥ काव्यादर्श I. 6. अर्थप्राप्तिश्च प्रत्यक्षसिद्धा-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. कामप्राप्तिश्चार्थद्वारैव-Poetry does not directly lead to the attainment of physical comfort, but only indirectly i. e. it makes the poet rich and then he can enjoy life. Compare कामन्दक I. 49. 'धर्मादर्थोऽर्थतः कामः कामात्सख- फलोदय: ।'. मोक्षप्राप्तिश्चत ...... सन्धानात्. एतज्जन्यं (काव्यजन्यं) यद्धर्मफलं तस्य अननुसन्धानात 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. He should therefore aim at Final Beatitude (मोक्ष). This he can do only if he performs his individual duties without hanker- ing after their proffered reward and thus strives to attain te correct knowledge, knowledge contained in the Upanishads &e. Compare तद्यथेह कर्मचितो लोक: क्षीयते एवमेवामुत्र पुण्यचितो लोक: क्षीयते। छा० उप० VIII. 1. 6; पवा ह्ेते अदृढा यज्ञरूपा अष्टादशोक्तमवरं येषु कर्मं। एतच्छेयो येभिनन्दन्ति मूढा जरामृत्युं ते पुनरेवापियन्ति। मुण्डकोपनि० I. 2. 7. मोक्षोपयोगिवाक्ये व्युत्पत्याधायकत्वाच्च-The passages which are useful for attaining Moksha are those contained in the Upanishads,

4 NOTES ON I. 2

the Bhagvatgita, महाभारत, the भागवतपुराण and others. व्युत्पत्ति* means 'thorough understanding or comprehension'. व्युत्पत्त्याधाय $ra-Because it produces a thorough comprehension of. चतुर्वर्ग प्राप्तिर्हि ... काव्यादेव (p. 1,ll. 21-23). In these lines the author points out the superiority of Poetry over the Vedas &c. as regards the attainment of the four yavras. The Vedas and S'astras are equally capable of leading to u &c .; but Poetry is superior to them in three points :- I. Vedas &. 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). Compara प्रतापरुद्रीय (p. 5) 'यथा वेदशास्त्रपुराणादेर्हितप्राप्तिरहितनिवृत्तिश्च तथा सदाश्रयात्काव्यादपि। इयान् विशेष: । काव्यात्कर्तव्यताधीः सरसा अन्यत्र न तथा ॥'. परमानन्दसन्दोह-परमश्चासौ आनन्दः तस्य सन्दोह: (परम्परा). For सुकुमारमतीना &c. compare the words of प्रदीप (p. 7. Chandorkar) 'ये सुकुमारमतयोऽतिसुखिस्वभावा राजकुमारादयो · नीरसे नीतिशास्त्रे प्रवर्तयितुमशक्यास्तान्काव्यं कान्तेव सरसतापादनेनाभिमुखीकृत्योपदेशं ग्राइयति । गुडजिह्निकया शिशूनिवौषधम्।'. Compare also "ननु काव्येन क्रियते सरसानामवगमश्चतुर्वगें। लघु मृदु च नीरसेभ्यस्ते हि त्रस्यन्ति शासत्रेभ्यः॥" रुद्रटकाव्या० XII. 1; vide वकोक्तिजीवित (I.4.) 'धर्मादिसाधनोपायः सुकुमार- कमोदितः । काव्यबन्धोभिजातानां हृदयाह्लादकारकः ।.' ननु तर्हि परिणतबुद्धिमि :...... न स्याद (p. 1, l. 24-p. 2, l. 2). If an objector were to say 'Let Poetry be useful to those whose minds are not mature, but why is Poetry neessary 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 q &c., but even to them the study of the Vedas would be dry and difficult, while Poetry will be pleasing and easy, and yet will bring about the same result. Who would then not prefer the more pleasing to the one which is dry and troublesome? कटकौषधेन उपशमनीय: to be cured by bitter drugs. सितशर्करा sugar-candy. Compare for the idea कटुकौषधवच्छास्त्रमविद्याव्याधिनाशनम्। आल्हाद्यमृत- वत्काव्यमविवेकगदापह्म्॥ काव्यालङ्कारकामधेनु (p. 6. Benares edition). The last verse is taken from the वक्रोक्तिजीवित (I. 7). *See रुद्रट's definition 'छन्दोव्याकरणकलालोकस्थितिपदपदार्थविज्ञानाद। युक्तायुक्तविवेको व्युत्पत्तिरियं समासेन II' I. 18.

I. 2 SÂHITYADARPANA 5

किं च काव्यस्योपादेयत्वम्-&c. (p. 2, 1. 3 ff.). In the fore- going passage the author has established by reasoning the excellence of poetry; now he quotes ancient authority in support of his views. fayI-This Purana is a peculiar one. It is a sort of an Encyclypædia of Sanskrit literature. It has chapters on साहित्य, छन्दःशास्त्र, पालकाप्य, शालिहोत्र, &c. It gives a brief summary of the भगवद्गीता in the very words of the latter. Many of its verses are the same as in Amara's lexicon. It is something like "Enquire within for everything." a दुर्लभं occurs in अग्नि० 327. 3 and 4 (Anandas'rama). For सुदुर्लभा, the Purana has च दुर्लभा. कवित्वं दुर्लभं तत्र शक्तिस्तत्र सुदुर्लभा-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 कवित्व and शक्ति. शक्ति is the same as प्रतिभा as said by रुद्रट 'प्रतिभेत्यपररुदिता' I. 16. शक्ति or प्रतिभा is defin- ed by मम्मट as कवित्ववीजरूपः संस्कारविशेष :; by रुद्रट as 'मनसि सदा सुसमाधिनि विस्फुरणमनेकधाभिधेयस्य। अक्विष्टानि पदानि च विभान्ति यस्यामसौ शक्तिः'॥ I. 15 and by Jagannatha 'काव्यघटनानुकूलशब्दार्थोपस्थितिः' (p.8 of R.G.); 'प्रज्ञा नवनवोन्मेषशालिनी प्रतिभा मता'। भट्टतौत. त्रिवर्गसा- धनं नाट्यम्-These words occur in the Agnipurana Adhyaya 338, 7 (Anandas'rama) 'विशेषोऽवसरे वाच्यः सामान्यं पूर्वमुच्यते। त्रिवर्गसाधनं नाय्यमित्याडु: करणं च यत् ॥'. तौर्यत्रिकं नृत्यगीतवाद्यं नाव्यमिदं त्रयम्। अमर० 1. 7.10. त्रिवर्ग means the three viz., धर्म, अर्ध, and काम. नाट्य (the science of dramaturgy or dramatio representation ) is a means of accomplishing the three. काव्यालापाश् &c. This ocours in the विष्णुपुराण I. 22. 84. (ed. by Mr. Bhagvat). There we read एतद्वपुर्विष्णोर्महात्मन: for एते विष्णोरंशा महात्मन: of the text. तेन हेतुना &c. (p. 2, 1. 9)-the word तेन here is the one occurring in the कारिका 'चतुर्वर्गफलंप्राप्तिः' &c. above. तेन हेतुना for that reason. एतेनामिधेयं च प्रदर्शितम्-By the words (तत्स्वरूपं निरूप्यते ) the subject of this treatise has been indicated. After pointing out the reward of reading this book (i.e. the प्रयोजन or फल) the author points out the subject (अभिघेय i. e. विषय) of the work. According to ancient Sanskrit writers, every book has four requisites or aga-ys as they are called, viz. अधिकारिन्, विषय, सम्बन्ध and प्रयोजन. Compare वेदान्तसार p. 3. 'तत्रानुबन्धो नामाधिकारिविषयसम्बन्धप्रयोजनानि।'. Here the author spoke of प्रयोजन and now speaks of the विषय. The सम्बन्ध is that of कार्यकारणभाव between the प्रयोजन and विषय. The अधिकारी is one that wants to learn the essentials of Poetry.

6 NOTES ON I. 2

कश्चिदाह-्तददोषौ de. (p. 2, 1. 10 ff.). The author alluded to is Mammata, who defines Kavya as quoted by S. D. here. Construe अदोषौ सगुणौ पुनः क्वापि अनलङ्कृती शब्दार्थों तत् (i.e.) काव्यम् :- Poetry is constituted by word and sense which are faultless and possessed of qualities and which are further rarely with- out figures of speech. एतच्विन्त्यम् Lit. 'This should be considered' i. e. this is doubtful, improper.

Our author first seleets for criticism the word arate in Mammata's definition of poetry. यदि दोषरहितस्यैव काव्यत्वाङ्गीकार: &c. ( p. 2, I. 12 ) If you accept as poetry that alone which is free from fault, then the verse ETd &c. would not be a poem, as it has the fault विधेयाविमर्श.

न्यक्कारो ह्ययमेव &c. (p.2, II. 14-18). रामेण राक्षसक्षये क्रियमाणे क्रुब्धान्त:करणस्य रावणस्य स्वाधिक्षेपोक्तिरियम्। उ. चं. That there are enemies ( to me ) is itself a humiliation, to add to it, he is an anchorite and as such kills a uumber of Rakshasas just here ( under my nose ). Oh wonder, then, that Ravana lives yet! सोप्यत्रैव निहन्ति राक्षसकुलम्-तापसोऽपि मत्समीपे एव (लङ्कायामेव न तु दूरे) राक्षसकुलं इन्तीति न्यक्कारातिशयः जीवत्यहो रावण :- Ha! does Ravana live! ( as all this happens, Ravana must not be living, some one would say ; but alas, he is alive). घिकू घिक &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). स्वर्गग्राम .... भुजैः. The plural is used because Ravana had twenty arms ( as contrasted with the two of the ascetic Rama). स्वर्ग एव ग्मटिका (क्ुद्रग्राम: ) तद्विलुण्ठनेन वृथोच्छूनैवृथापुषटैः what is the use of these arms that are fattened or puffed up in vain with the spoils of the puny hamlet of heaven? What is called विधेयाविमर्श here is the same as the more general name, अविमृष्टवि- धेयांश i.e. 'अविमृष्टः (प्राधान्येनानिर्दिष्टः) विधेयांशः यत्र' प्रदीप p. 214. Every sentence is made up of two parts, the subject ( aar) and the predicate ( fda). It is a general rule that the subject is placed first and the predicate last. In ordinary life, we refer to the subjeet 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 'aqy' refers to the existence of enemies and it is the intention

I. 2 SÅHITYADARPAŅA, 7

of the speaker te convey, what is not known from any other source, that the existence of enemies is a great humiliation; therefore the word TErT is the predicate. The natural order, then, of the words ought to be अयमेव न्यक्वार: and not न्यक्कारोडयमेव, in accordance with the old maxim 'one should not utter the predicate before the subject is expressed' 'अनुवाद्यमनुक्त्वैव न विधेयमुदीरयेत्। न ह्यलब्धास्पदं किंचित्कुत्रचित्प्रतितिष्ठति'॥ *. The order being inverted, we understand the meaning intended after an effort. As, instead of saying अयमेव न्यककार:, the speaker says 'न्यक्वारः अय- मेव' (all distinct words), the fault is said to be वाक्यगत. वाक्यगत अविमृष्टविधेयांश is defined in the Ekavali as अनुवाद्यविधेयांशावुक्त स्यारता विपर्ययेण यदा। अविमृष्टविधेयांशो भवति तदानीं तु वाक्यगतः ॥ p. 159; see also the साहित्यदर्पण (p. 371 Nir.). "न्यक्कारो ह्ययमेव मे यत्' इत्यत्र चायमेव न्यक्कार इति न्यक्कारस्य विधेयत्वं विवक्षितम्। तच्च शब्दरचनावैपरीत्येन गुणीभूतम् । रचना च पदद्वयस्य विपरीतेति वाक्यदोषः।". अनुवाद्य and विधेय are defined as follows :- यच्छब्दयोग: प्राथम्यं सिद्धत्वं चाप्यनूदता। तच्छब्दयोग औत्तर्य साध्यत्वं च विधेयता॥। The subject is that which is connected with the relative pronoun ( aa ), which comes first in the sentence and which is accomplished ( or well known ); while the predicate is connected with the pronoun 'that' (aa), it is subse- quent (to the अनुवाद) and it is something to be accomplished (or not known). Moreover in the words वृथोच्छनैः किमेभिर्भुजै: there is अविमृष्टविधेयांश (पदगत) दोष. Here the subject is the fact of being puffed up (i.e. उच्छूनत्व is the अनुवाद) and what is predicated is the uselessness of this pride (i. e. qana is the विधेय). But this विधेय, as it forms part of the compound वृथोच्छनै:, becomes subordinate. It is the subject that is sub- ordinate in a sentencej and hence वृथा, the real विधेय, presents the appearance of being the subject, which is subordinate and thus there is अविमृष्टविधेयांशदोष. See साहित्यद० (p. 366) 'अत्र वृथात्वं विधेयम्, तच्च समासे गुणीभावादनुवाद्यत्वप्रतीतिकृत्।', प्रत्युत ध्वनित्वेन etc. (p. 2, 1. 17). Although the verse'न्यक्कारो हयमेव' is thus tainted with the fault of अविमृष्टविधेयांश, still it

• This is often quoted as from Kumārila, but we do not find it in the index to the शोकवार्तिक. It is, however, an old TTT, as it is quoted even by Hemachandra ( p. 172 of काव्यानुशासन Nir. Ed.) i See प्रदीप (p.214) 'प्राधान्यं च विघिप्रतीतियोग्यता। सा चानुपसर्जनी- भूतत्वे सत्युद्देश्यानन्तर्यम्' ।; also तरल p. 152 'इह विधेयस्य प्राधान्यं नाम तात्पर्यविषयत्वमात्रम्, अप्राधान्यं चानुवाद्यस्यातद्विषयत्वमात्रम्'।

8 NOTES ON I. 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 ध्वन्यालोक, who looks upon this verse as a specimen of the highest type of Poetry (see pp. 153-154 of the ध्वन्यालोक). Poetry is divided by Anandavardbana and others like मम्मट into three varieties, उत्तम, मध्यम, and अधम. That is उत्तम काव्य where the व्यंग्य (suggested) sense far excels the ex- pressed sense .* It is also called fd. In the verse under disoussion, मे यदरयः, तत्राप्यसौ तापस, अत्रैव, रावण:, धिग्रूधिक, भुजैः etc. suggest meanings that are far more charming than the plain expressed sense;f i. e. by the word ya: (in the plural), it is suggested that they are a mere burden; by the word arya is suggested the idea that he must be destitute of prowess. As Mammata is a great admirer of आनन्दवर्धन and as he defines उत्तम or ध्वनिकाव्य in the same way as आनन्दवर्धन does, he (मम्मट) also must be looked upon as regarding the verse 'न्यक्कारो ह्वयमेव' etc. as an example of उत्तम काव्य. Kavya is defined above as अदोषौ etc .; this verse (न्यक्ारो 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 verse in question from the province of Poetry. तस्मादव्याप्तिर्लक्षणदोष: (p. 2, 1. 19). Every definition must be free from three faults, viz. अव्याप्ति, अतिव्याप्ति and असम्भव. It must neither be too narrow, nor too wide, nor quite impossible. Here Mammata's definition of araq is open

• इदमुत्तममतिशयिनि व्यंग्ये वाच्याद्ध्वनिर्धुधैः कथितः । काव्यप्र० I. 4. t See ध्वन्यालोक p. 153 on न्यक्कारो etc .- 'अत्र हि श्रोके भूयसा सर्वेषामप्येषां स्फुटमेव व्यञ्जकत्वं दृश्यते। ... एवंविधस्य व्यज्जकभूयरत्वे च घटमाने काव्यस्य सर्वातिशायिनी बन्धच्छाया समुन्मीलति। यत्र हि व्यंग्यावभासिन: पदस्यै- कस्यैव ताददाविर्भावस्तत्रापि काव्ये कापि बन्धच्छाया किमुत यत्र तेषां बहूनां समवायः। यथात्रानन्तरोदितश्रोके; read the remarks of लोचन on these words of the ध्वन्यालोक. See हेमचन्द्र's अ. वि. p. 181 'मम अरय इति बहुवचबेन शत्रुशत्रुमन्भावो ममानुचित इति सम्बन्धानौचित्यं क्रोधविभावो व्यज्यते। तपो विद्यते यस्येति पौरुषकथाहीनत्वं तद्धितेन मत्वर्थीयेनाभिव्यक्तम् । तत्रापिशब्देन निपातसमु- दायेन तापसस्य सतः शत्रुताया अत्यन्तासम्भाव्यमानत्वमभिव्यक्तम्। मत्कर्तृका यदि जीवनक्रिया तदा इननक्रिया तावदनुचिता तस्यां च स कर्ता। अपिशब्देन मानुषमा त्रकः । अत्रैवेति मदधिष्ठितो दशोऽधिकरणम् । ...... विलुण्ठनशब्दे विशन्दस्योपसर्गस्य निर्दयावस्कन्दव्यअ्जकत्वं वृथाशब्देन स्वात्मपौरुषनिन्दा व्यज्यते। भुजैरिति बहुवचनेन प्रत्युत भारमात्रमेतदिति व्यज्यते इति।'

L 2 SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 9

to the fault of arrfa, because, as said above, it excludes such a verse as RT &c. which is universally acknowledged to be the best type of Poetry. ननु कश्चिदेवांश: चेत (p. 2,1. 18). An objection is raised against the criticism of Mammata's definition aaatt &c. In the verse =4HTT: 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 in the words तार्ह ...... निर्दोषस्यैकान्तमसम्भवात् (p. 2, 1l. 19-28). The first objection against the above compromise is contained in the words तर्हि यत्रांशे etc. up to किमपि न स्यात. That part of the verse y#TT: etc. in which there is a fault, leads us to call it non-poetry; while that part of it in which there is Dhvani i. e. 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. न च कंच्चिदेवांशं &c. (p. 2, I. 21). In these words S. D. attacks the idea that one part of a verse may be faulty, while the remainder may be good poetry. He says that such blemishes as giage etc. (harsh or jarring expression) do not mar a part of a poem merely, but the whole 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; the remainder may be good poetry.' If in FRT etc. it is admitted that there is अविमृष्टविधेयांशदोष, then the whole verse becomes faulty and hence it would not be poetry at all. On श्ुतिदुष्ट, the लोचन remarks (p. 82) "श्रुतिदुष्टा अर्थदुष्टा वाक्यार्थ- बलादश्चीलार्थप्रतिपत्तिकारिणः । यथा 'छिद्रान्वेषी महान्स्तब्धो घातायैवोपसर्पति'। कल्पनादुष्टा तु द्योः पदयोः कल्पना। यथा 'कुरु रुचिम्' इत्यत्र* क्रमव्यत्यासे। श्रुतिकटस्तु 'अधाक्षीत् अक्षौत्सीत् तृणेढि' इत्यादि।" In 'तथाहि ... उदाहृता:' (p. 2, ll. 22-26) S. D. supports what he 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. तथाहि-to explain. A दोष is defined by Mammata as * See for the meaning of this K. P. V. p. 238 (Va.)

10 NOTES ON L 2

'मुख्यार्थद्दतिदोषो रसश्च मुख्यस्तदाश्रयाद्वाच्यः । उभयोपयोगिनः र्युः शब्दाघ्यास्तेन सेव्पि सः ॥।' (7th उल्लास) and by S.D. as 'रसापकर्षका दोषाः'. A दोष is that which mars the rasa. काव्यात्मभृतस्य रसस्-rasa is said to be the soul of Poetry, e. g. धवन्यालोक II. 7, p. 78 'तमर्थमव- सम्बन्ते येऽङ्िनं ते गुणा: स्मृताः ।'; also काव्यस्यात्मा ध्वनिरिति etc. I. 1; सौद्धोदनि says 'शब्दार्थौ काव्यस्य शरीरम्, आत्मा रसः' etc. If what 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 srT- रस, because they mar the beauty of that rasa, but in बीभत्स or daTH, harshness is not a fault, as it does not mar their beauty. Mammata himself says in the 7th ul. (63rd कारिका) p. 445 (Va.) 'इदानीं क्वचिददोषा अप्येते-इत्युच्यते'. S. D. says in the 7th परिच्छेद "उक्तदोषाणां च कच्विददोषत्वं कचिद्ुणत्वमित्याह-वक्तरि क्रोधसंयुक्ते तथा वाच्ये ससुद्धते। रौद्रादौ तु रसेऽत्यन्तं दुःश्रवत्वं गुणो भवेत् ।I' p. 405 (Nir). तेषां त्रुतिदुष्टादीनाम्. अन्यथा (p. 2, l. 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. नित्य दोषानित्यदोष०- It would not be possible to divide faults into नित्य and अनित्य (as is universally done). If faultiness did not depend upon the fact of marring the rasa, then this division of arys would be impossible. A fault will always be a fault. But if you 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 दोष is अनित्य (not invariably so), e. g. श्ुतिकटु is a दोष in शृङ्गाररस, but not so in रौद्र दोषs are generally divided into नित्य and अनित्य See काव्यप्रदीप p.201 (Nir) "स चायं द्विविधः नित्योऽनित्यश्च । तत्रानुकरणादन्येन प्रकारेण समाधातुमशक्यो नित्यः । यथा च्युतसंस्कृत्यादिः। अन्यादृशस्त्वनित्यः । यथाऽप्रयुक्तादिः ।' च्युतसंस्कृति may be instanced in the use of नाथते in the sense of 'requests' for नाथति (which is the correct form in that sense). अप्रयुक्त is the employment of a word, which, though authorized, is not used by poets e. g. the word aea, which, the lexicons say, is both masculine and neuter, is used by poets only in the neuter; if one were to employ caa: in a poem, it would be अप्रयुक्तदोष. ध्वनिकृता-By the author of Dhvani i. e. the work called ध्वन्यालोक. The author's name is Anandavardhana, who flourished in the latter half of the 9th century A. D. in Kashmir. Construe अनित्या दोषाश्च ये स्रुतिदुष्टादयो दर्शिता: ते ध्वन्यात्मन्येव शङ्गारे हेया इत्युदाहता: ॥. See ध्वन्यालोक pp. 82-83 (Nir). ध्वन्यात्मन्येव शृंक्ारे means अक्तिया व्यंग्ये शङ्गारे एव

I. 2 SÂHITYADARPAŅA

(व तु कोपादिमिश्रिते शङ्गारे रौद्रादिरसे वा)-when S'ringara i. e. love is the suggested sense and is also the principal one. The अनित्यदोषs, श्रुतिदुष्ट etc., are to be avoided only when the prevail- ing is simply love and not when the prevailing rasa is Raudra or even love affected by indignation. In the latter case giaa will not be a fault, as it would not mar the beauty. लोचन (pp. 82-83) says "शङ्गार इत्युचितरसोपलक्षणार्थम्। वीरशान्ताद्धता- दायपि तेषां वर्जनात्। न त्वेषां विषयविभागप्रदर्शनेनानित्यत्वं भिन्नवृत्तादिदोषेभ्यो विविक्तं प्रदर्शितम्। नापि गुणेभ्यो व्यतिरिक्तं दोषत्वम्। बीभत्सहास्यरौद्रादौ त्वेषाम- स्माभिरुपगमाव् शङ्गारादौ च वर्जनादनित्यत्वं समर्थितमेवेति भाव:।" The S. D. quotes the verse from Dhvanyaloka for the purpose of supporting what it had said before i.e. काव्यात्मभूतस्य रसस्यान- पकर्षकत्वे तेषां दोषत्वमपि नाङ्गीक्रियते. Compare for the idea हेमचन्द्र's काव्यानुशासन "रसस्य उत्कर्षापकर्षहेतू गुणदोषौ भक्त्या शब्दार्थयोः । ते च रसस्यैव धर्मा उपचारेण तु तदुपकारिणोः शब्दार्थयोः। रसाश्रयत्वं च गुणदोष- योरन्वयव्यतिरेकानुविधानाद। तथाहि यत्रैव दोषास्तत्रैव गुणाः, रसविशेषे च दोषा:। न तु शब्दार्थयोः । यदि हि तयोः स्युस्तर्हि बीभत्सादौ कष्टत्वादयो गुणा न भवेयुर्दास्यादौ च अश्रीलत्वादयः। अनित्याश्रैते दोषाः। यतो यस्याद्गिनस्ते दोषास्तदभावे न दोषास्तन्भ्ावे तु दोषा इति अन्वयव्यतिरेकाभ्यां गुणदोषयो रस एवाश्रयः।"

र्किं च ... असम्भवाद्-(p. 2, ll. 27-28). In these words an- other objection is raised against Mammata's word अदोषौ. If, as you say, none but & 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 काव्य given by मम्मट. This objection against Mammata's definition and S. D.'s definition of ara are noticed by प्रदीप (Nir. p. 13). In all this criticism, the meaning of the negative particle in अदोषौ was taken to be अभाव, absence or non-existence. Now, a defender of Mammata's definition comes forward by saying that the negative particle should be interpreted in the sense of ईषत् 'a little, slight', and thus अदोषौ means 'a little faulty.' The meanings of T, the negative particle, are six :- तत्सादृश्यमभावश्च तदन्यत्वं तदल्पता। अप्राशस्त्यं विरोधश्च नजर्थाः षट

12 NOTES ON L 2

प्रकीर्तिताः। भाटृचिन्तामणि p.154; (प० ल० मं०, p.25, attributes it to हरि, author of वाक्यपदीय) Or नञभावे निषेधेन स्वरूपाथेडप्यतिक्मे। ईषदये च सादृश्ये तद्विरुद्धतदन्ययोः ॥' मेदिनी. According to this new interpre- tation, the definition of Poetry would be 'word and sense, a little faulty ete.' Against this S. D. brings an objection, which is as follows. (As अदोषौ i.e. ईषद्दोषौ) form 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 & 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). सति सम्भवे ईपद्दोषौ इति चेत्-An improvement is suggested in these words in the interpretation of acrat as faerai. We do not mean that 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 must 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 '4af काव्यलक्षुणे ...... सफुटः' He says that these words i. e. 'सति ua fuarui' 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 लक्षण is defined by वात्स्यायन as 'अतत्त्व- व्यवच्छेदको धर्मः' i. e. a property which serves to distinguish the thing defined from all other things. तर्कदीपिका says 'दूषणत्रयरहितो धर्मों लक्षणम्। यथा गोः सास्रादिमत्त्वम् । स एवासाधारणधर्म इत्युच्यते। From these it follows that in a definition only the most essential or peculiar attributes of a thing should find a place. कीटानुवेध 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 slight faults, if any, is not one of the essentials or peculiarities of Poetry and therefore should not find a place in the definition of poetry. af etc. Here S. D. fully explains the illustration of a jewel given by him. Such circumstances as aziaay are not able to deprive a jewel of its character of

I. 2 SÂHITYADARPANA 13

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 gfagy 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 ₹a 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). किं च ... अनुपपन्नम्-S. D. here begins his eriticism of the second word 'सगुणौ' in मम्मट's definition of काव्य. He says that this qualification of the word शब्दार्थों is inappropriate. The reason is contained in the words onrai ... प्रतिपादितत्वात्. तेनैव-काव्यप्रकाशकारेणैव. On the कारिका 'ये रसस्याङ्गिनो धर्मा: शौर्यादय इवात्मनः । उत्कर्षहेतवस्ते स्युरचलस्थितयो गुणाः ॥' (का. प्र. 8. 1) मन्मट's वृत्ति is आत्मन एव हि यथा शौर्यादय, नाकारस्य, तथा रसस्यैव माधुर्यादयो गुणाः, न वर्णानाम्. Mammata has declared that the 'excellences such as melodiousness are the properties of Rasa alone and not of anything else' (such as words ). But in his definition he says 'सगुणौ शब्दार्थों' thereby intimating that Gunas ( excellences ) are the properties of words and senses. Thus he is inconsistent.

(P. 3, 1. 9). रसाभिव्यञ्जकत्वेन ... ... चेत्. In these words some one defends मम्मट's expression सगुणौ शब्दार्थो. उपचारतः indirectly or by metaphor. The adjective auii as applied

• We translate कीटानुविद्ध 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 the price of the jewel. 'काकपदमक्षिकाकेशधातुयुक्तानि शर्करैर्विद्धम्। द्विगुणाश्रिदग्धकलुषत्रस्तविशीर्णानि न शुभानि॥ यानि च बुद्धददलिताग्रचिपिटवासीफल- प्रदीर्घाणि। सर्वेषां चैतेषां मूल्याद्धागोडष्टमो हानि: ॥।' बृहत्संहिता 80. 15-16. On मक्षिका, उत्पल remarks 'मक्षिकाभिस्तदाकृतिभिः'. In the vernacular also such defects are called 'Mas'i'.

14 NOTES ON I. 2

. to raraf is quite appropriate; since it is these i. e. words and senses, that reveal the Rasa or sentiment, the gus, which really are the properties of T, may be secondarily regarded as belonging to शब्द and अर्ध, which manifest the रस. S. D. replies that even this would not improve matters. The definition is still improper. aurf to explain. (P. 3, 1. 10-17) तयो: स्वरूपाधायकत्वम्. तयोः ... रसोऽस्ति न वा. Here two alternatives are proposed. Either Ta 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 T# (as said by yourself in the 8th Ul. lst verse), follow the presence or absence of t i. e. if रस is present, गुण is present; if रस is absent, then गुण also is absent. If then you say that in शब्द and अर्ध, there is no रस, there follows, as a matter of course, the absence of ur and therefore the adjective सगुणा cannot be applied to शब्दार्थों. If on the other hand you accept the former alternative i. e. that ₹ does exist in शब्द and अर्थ, then why did you not say रसवन्तौ शब्दार्थी instead of सगुणौ शब्दाथौं! गुणवत्त्वान्यथानुपपत्त्या=गुणवत्त्व्रस्य अन्यथा अनुपपत्या. एतलभ्यते-रसवन्तौ इति विशेषणं लभ्यते। राम०. An attempt is made in these words to defend मम्मट's words सगुणौ शब्दार्थौ. As excellences are the properties of रस, the word सगुणौ cannot properly be applied to शब्दार्थों. But by लक्षणा i. e. Indica- tion or metaphor, the word गुण conveys the idea of रस, to which it really belongs. Thus the meaning of सगुणौ शब्दार्थौं is indirectly the same as रसवन्तौ शब्दार्थौं. गुणवत्त्व (i. e. the character of possessing गुus) cannot directly be predicated of शब्दार्थौं. S. D. replies to the above in the words तर्हि ...... केनाप्युच्यवे ( p. 3, 11. 13-15). If by सगुणौ you intend to convey रसवन्ता, then why not prefer the direct mode of expression सरसौ शब्दार्थौं (काव्यम्) to the round-about and metaphorical expression सगुणो, which has to be interpreted as meaning रसवन्ता by लक्षणा. नहि० gives an illustration. n4 is a property of beings, just as गुus are the properties of रस. ननु शब्दार्थौ ......... इति चेत् (p.3, ll. 15-16 ). The round-about way of using सगुणौ for सरसौ is now defended in another way. This round-about method of expres- sion is preferred to the direct mode-syur is resorted to-for & certain purpose (प्रयोजन ) 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 as

I. 2 SÂHITYADARPANA. 15

which manifest aus 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 aJuir should not form part of the definition of काव्य. उत्तं हि ...... कटककुण्डलादिवत् (p.3, 1l. 17-20). This is given here for supporting the position above taken about the relation of गुण, शब्द, अर्थ and रस. These words summarize the views of the author of the Dhvanyaloka and others, including Mammata. गुणाः=माधुर्यौजः प्रसादा: ; see 8th Ul. of K. P. and 8th परिच्छेद of साहित्य० ; दोषाः (of काव्य); see 7th UI. of K. P. and 7th परिच्छेद of साहित्य० for them. रीति style of composition. Their number is variously given. We shall refer to them at length later on. Compare for the idea "शब्दार्थौ काव्यस्य शरीरम्' the words of दण्डिन् 'तैः शरीरं च काव्यानामलङ्काराश्च दर्शिताः । शरीरं तावदिष्टार्थव्यवच्छिन्ना पदावली'॥ काव्यादर्श I. 10. Compare generally for the whole idea the following 3i च भगवता (शौद्धोदनिना) 'शब्दार्थौं काव्यस्य शरीरम्, आत्मा रस:, गुणाः शौर्यादिवत, दोषा: काणत्वादिवत्, अलङ्कारा: कुण्डलादिवत्' इति (in अलङ्कारशेखर of केशवमिश्र P.20, Nir.); तमर्थमवलम्बन्ते येङ्गिनं ते गुणाः स्मृताः। अङ्गाश्रिता- स्त्वलङ्कारा मन्तव्या: कटकादिवत्॥ व्व० II. 7, p. 78; ये रसस्याङ्गिनो धर्माः शौर्यादय इवात्मनः। उत्कर्षहेतवस्ते स्युरचलस्थितयो गुणाः॥ K. P. 8. 1; उपकुर्वन्ति तं सन्तं येङ्द्वारेण जातुचित्। हारादिवदलङ्कारास्तेऽनुप्रासोपमादय:॥ K.P.8. 2; काव्यस्य हि शब्दार्थौ शरीरम्। तस्य च वक्रोक्तिवास्तवादयः कटककुण्डलादय इव कृत्रिमा अलङ्गाराः । नमिसाधु On रुद्रट XII. 2. (p. 3, 11. 20-23). एतेन-उत्कर्षमात्राधायकत्वात्. Here S. D. attacks the third part of Mammata's definition of काव्य 'तददोषौं शब्दार्थों सगुणावनलङ्कती पुनः क्ापि.' अस्य ह्यर्थ :...... काव्यमिति-मम्मट himself explains these words as क्वापीत्यनेनैतदाह-यत्सर्वत्र सालक्कारौ क्वच्ित्तु स्फुटाल- क्ारविरहेऽपि न काव्यत्वहानि: । K.P.p. 17 (Va). These words of मम्मट have been variously interpreted, see अदीप pp. 10-11 ( Chán ). 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. शब्दार्थों in which there is रस (a figure may or may not be present ) or in which there is a distinct figure (if the T is absent ). S. D's objection against the insertion of अनलङ्कती in the definition is as follows :- Words and 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

no reference at all ought to have been made to arogr 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 rHz's definition of ta. विश्वनाथ first attacked the word अदोषौ, 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 अदोषो were to be taken as meaning इपद्दोषौ, then this word ought not to stand in the definition, as a faultless piece would otherwise be excluded from the domain of Poetry. 2ndly, uufi is quite inappropriate; rather we should say सरसौ; गुus are the properties of रस and not of शब्द and अर्थ. Besides us simply heighten 41T, and are not of its essence and therefore should not be referred to in the definition of T -. 3rdly, no reference to figures ought to have been made in the definition of 4TaT, as they merely heighten the beauty of काव्य.

As to these objections one cannot help saying that Vis'vanatha 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 quz 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 ars, गुण and अलङ्कार. By using them, मम्मट conveys a tolerably clear and accurate idea of the character of Poetry. Vis'vanatha, on the other hand, after a good deal of hair-splitting offers us a definition, which does 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 (वाक्यं रसात्मकं काव्यम्) has not satisfied other critics. See for example the criticism of sHr .*

*P. 13. (Nir.) अर्वाचीना: इत्यस्वरससूचनम्। तद्वीजं तु वस्त्वलक्कारप्रंधानेषु काव्येषूक्तलक्षणस्याव्याप्तिः। न चेष्टापत्तिः। महाकविसंप्रदायभङ्गप्रसङ्गात्।लक्ष्यानुसारेण हि लक्षणव्यवस्था न तु वैपरीत्येन। वर्णितानि च महाकविभिर्जलप्रवाहवेगादीनि कपिना-

I. 2 SAHITYADARPANA. 17

On विश्वनाथ's criticism of 'मम्मट's word अदोषौ, the उद्योत says: The word aly 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 'तथाभूतां' (वेणीसंहार I), on account of the apprehension of the strikingness of the suggested sense, the knowledge 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 काव्यप्रकाश 7th उल्लास under न्यूनपद्दोष, on page 339, Va). Just as a piece which is अप्रतीत (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 ynz himself will say later on 'Even a fault is sometimes an ornament on account of the appropriateness of the speaker etc.' This is the meaning of the

लादिचरितानि चेति। यच्तु दोषरहितं काव्यं दुर्लभमिति 'न्यक्कारो द्ययं' इत्यादौ, 'तथाभूतां दृष्' इत्यादौ काव्यत्वं सर्वानुभवसिद्धं नोपपद्यत इति तत्रोच्यते-दोषतवं ह्युद्देश्यप्रतीतिप्रतिबन्धकत्वम्। तच्चानुभवबलात्तत्तद्व्यंग्यवाच्यवैचित्र्यप्रतीतिविर द्विशिष्ट- दोषस्य तद्द्रानस्य चेति 'न्यक्कारः' इत्यादौ विशिष्टाभावसम्भवान्न काव्यत्वक्षतिः । यस्य च न व्यंग्यवैच्चित्यप्रतीतिस्तं प्रति दुष्टत्वामिप्रायेण तदुदाहरणम् । अत एव 'वक्त्रादयौचित्यव- शाद्दोषोपि गुण: क्कच्वित्' इति वक्ष्यते। तथा अप्रतीतत्वं तच्छास्त्रज्ञं प्रत्यदोष:, अन्यं प्रति तु दोष इति। 'कीटानुविद्ध'-इत्यस्यापि रसादिवैचित्र्ये दुष्टस्यापि काव्यत्वं विशिष्टदोषवि- रद्दादिति तात्पर्यमिति दिक्। *P.15.(Chan.) अत्रारुचिबीजं तु लक्षणे दोषपदं स्फुटदोषपरम्। स्फुटत्वं च रसोद्वोधविरोधित्वम्। एवं च 'तथाभूताम्' इत्यादौ प्रतिपदजीवातुव्यंग्यवैचित्र्यप्रतीत्या दोषज्ञानतिरोधानात् रसोद्वोधस्य सत्वेन काव्यत्वं तद्विशेषव्वनित्वं चाव्याइतमेव। यस्य तु व्यंग्यवैच्चित्र्यप्रतीतिविरहस्तं प्रति दुष्टत्वमेवेति दोषोदाहरणमप्यविरुद्धम्। एकस्यैव सामाजिकमेदेन काव्यत्वमकाव्यत्वं चेष्टमेव। यथाऽप्रतीतस्य तत्तच्छास्रज्ञं प्रत्यदुष्टतेन काव्यत्वमितरं प्रति अकाव्यत्वं तद्त्। वक्ष्यति हि 'वक्त्राधौचित्यवशाद् दोषोऽपि क्वचिद्गुणः' इति। कीटादीत्यस्याप्ययमर्थः। यथा प्रतिभातिशयेन दोषतिरोधानान्न रलस्वरूपभङ्ग, तथा काव्येऽ्रपि व्यंग्यवैचित्र्येणेति। वस्तुतस्तु, अनुपद्दसनीय काव्यत्वरूपलक्ष्यतावच्छेदकाक्रान्तस्य हीदं लक्षणम्। दोषवत्युपह्दसनीयत्वस्य दुर्वारत्वात। .... सामान्यकाव्यलक्षणं तु, अदो- षाघटितमेव। अत एव दुषटं काव्यमित्यादेरुपपत्तिरित्याङुः ।

18 NOTES ON I. 2

verse कीटानुबिद् eto :- Just as a jewel does not lose its character as a jewel, becsuse all its blemishes are merged away in the excess of its brilliance, so also, as regards a poem, on account of the strikingness of the suggested sense ( the faults are not seen ). Really speaking, this definition of काव्य given by मम्मट is the definition of suoh a poem as does not deserve to be ridiouled; since it is extremely hard to avoid ridicule, when a poem possesses faults ...... The general definition of poetry should not include the word aarn in it. Hence it is that such expressions as 'a faulty poem' obtain in ordinary life.

पतेन ...... अलक्काररूपत्वात (p.3, ll. 23-25). विश्वनाथ extends his romarks against मम्मट to the views of the वक्रोक्तिजीवितकार The latter said that Vakrokti (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. वक्रोक्तिजीवितकार is a writer who is later than आनन्दवर्षन, author of ध्वन्यालोक (latter half of 9th century A. D.) and earlier than (अलक्कारसर्वस्व middle of 12th century ); see the remark of जयरथ on p. 12 of अलक्कारसर्वस्व "यद्यपि वक्रोक्तिजीवितहृदय- दर्पणकारावपि ध्वनिकारानन्तरभाविनावेव तथापि तौ चिरन्तनमतानुयायिनावेवेति तन्मतं पूर्वमेवोदिष्टम्।" वक्रोक्ति-Dandin does not define वक्रोक्ति but says of it 'िषः सर्वास पुष्णाति प्रायो वक्रोक्तिषु श्रियम्। मिन्नं द्विया स्वभावोक्तिर्वकोक्तिश्रेति वाड्मयम्।' K.D.II, 363. भामइ says that वकोक् enters into the composition of all Alankaras and seems to identify वक्रोक्ति with अतिशयोक्ति (अतिश- येन उक्तिः) 'सैषा सर्वैव वक्ोकिरनयाडयों विभाव्यते। यल्लोऽस्यां कविना कार्य: कोलङ्वारो इनया विना।। भामइ II. 75. This verse is quoted as from भामइ on p. 208 of ध्वन्यालोक. K.P.also quotes it (X on विशेष). रुद्रट regards it as one of the five शब्दालङ्कारs and gives two varieties ऋेषवक्रोक्ति and काकुवक्रोक्ति 'वक्त्रा तदन्यथोक्तं व्याचष्टे चान्यथा तदुत्तरदः। वचनं यत्पदभङ्गैर्ज्ञेया सा ेषवक्रोक्ति:॥' रुद्रट II. 14. An example of this is किं गौरिमां प्रति रुषा ननु गौरहं कि ( why, oh, Gauri, towards me with anger; am I a cow 1). In the first antft is in the Vocative; in the second we read कि गौः इमां etc. काकुवक्रोक्ति is defined as 'विस्पष्ट क्रियमाणादक्विष्टा स्वरविश्ेषतो भवति। अर्थान्तरप्रतीतिर्यत्रासौ काकुवक्ोक्ति: ।' रुद्रट II. 16. मम्मट defines briefly, but in the same way as रुद्रट, 'यदुक्तमन्यथा वाक्यमन्य- भान्येन योज्यसे। श्रेषेण काक्ा वा ज्ेया सा वक्रोक्तिस्तथा दविया ॥ K. P. IX. p. 491 (Va). काकु: (काकु: सियां विकारो यः शोकमीत्यादिभिर्घ्वनेः॥ अमर I,6. 12) means 'a change of the tone or voice.' An example of काकुवक्रोक्ति is 'गुरुजनपरतब्रतया बत दूरतरं देशमुद्यतो गन्तुम्। अलिकुलकोकिलललिते नैष्यति

I, 2 SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 19

सखि सुरमिसमयेऽसौ II.' Here by a change of voice the word नैष्यति may convey two meanings; in the mouth of the heroine it mean 'ho will not come'; in the mouth of her friend, it means ' Will he not come P i. e. he will come. The अलक्कारसर्वस्व remarks 'वक्रोकि- सब्दश्चालक्कारसामान्यवचनोऽपि इहालङ्कारविशेषे संश्ञितः' p. 177. For more examples see रुद्रट and सर्वस्व. Vamana defines वक्रोक्ति quite diffe- rently 'सादृश्याल्क्षणा वक्रोक्तिः' काव्या० सूत्र IV. 3.8. (Vakrokti is indication based upon resemblance ). The वक्रोकिजीवितिकार says 'वक्रोकिरेव वैदग्ध्यभङ्गीभणितिरुच्यते' (1st उन्मेष). 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 syaR- वक्रता i. e. वक्रोकि based upon metaphor. It is not the suggested sense (ajra) that is the essence of poetry, but striking speech. His definition of काव्य is 'शब्दार्थौ सहितौ वक्रकविव्यापारशालिनि। बन्धे व्यवस्थितौ काव्यं तद्विदाल्हादकारिणि ॥'. According to him वकता has six principal varieties 'कविव्यापारवक्रत्वप्रकाराः सम्भवन्ति षट्। प्रत्येकं बहवो मेदास्तेषां विच्छित्तिशोभिन: ॥'. The six varieties are वर्णविन्यासवकता, पदपूर्वार्थवक्रता, प्रत्ययाश्रयवक्रता, वाक्यव०, प्रकरणव०, प्रबन्धव०. His views are briefly summarized by अ. स० p. 8 'वक्रोक्तिजीवितकारः पुनर्वेदग्ध्य- भङ्गीभणितिस्वभावां बद्ुविधां वक्रोक्तिमेव प्राधान्यात्काव्यजीवितमुक्तवान्। व्यापारस्य प्राधान्यं च काव्यस्य प्रतिपेदे। अमिधानप्रकारविशेषा एव चालक्वाराः। सत्यपि त्रिमेदे प्रतीयमाने व्यापाररूपा भणितिरेव कविसंरम्भगोचरः । उपचारवक्रतादिमि: समस्तो ध्वनिप्रपञ्नः स्वीकृतः । केवलमुक्तिवैच्चित्यजीवितं काव्यं न व्यंग्यार्थजीवितमिति तदीयं दर्शनं व्यवस्थितम्।' (P. 3, 11. 25-29 ). यत्त ...... समुत्कण्ठते इति. On p. 17 (Va) Mammata cites this verse and remarks 'अत्र स्फुटो न कश्रिदलङ्कार, रसस्य च प्राधान्यान्नालद्कारता।. He quotes this verse in illustration of his words अनलक्कती पुनः क्वापि. He says :- in this verse there is no distinct figure of speech. It cannot also be said that there is the figure called रसवद् by भामह and उद्भट. That figure occurs only when the T# is subordinate i. e. when it heightens another Rasa or the expressed sense. But in this verse the ganTa is the principal one and therefore there is no रसवदू अलद्धार. This ob- jection and answer of qmz are with reference to the views of भामइ and उद्ूट. He himself does not admit रसवद् as an अलङ्कार. यः कौमारहर: etc .- शीलाभट्टारिकाया: पद्यमिदमिति शाङ्गधरपद्धतौ स्वष्टम् (वामना- चार्य)। स्वाधीनपतिका काचिदसकृदुपभुक्तेष्वपि वरोपकरणादिषु उत्कण्ठोत्पत्त्या तेषामत्यन्तोपादेयतां सूचयन्ती सखीमाह-यः कौमारहर इति। अत्र हिशब्दस्य यद्यपीत्यर्थकतया अस्तिक्रियाध्याहारेण च यः कौमारहरो वरः स एव यद्यप्यस्ति, चैत्रक्षपासा एव यद्यपि सन्ति, अस्मि च सैव यद्यप्यस्मि तथापि तन्न रेवारोभ-

20 NOTES ON I. 2

सि तत्र वेतसीतरुतले तत्र सुरतव्यापारलीलाविधा चेतः समुत्कण्ठते इत्यन्वयः। कौमारं वाल्यं परमरसिकतया तदवस्थायामपि सम्भोगेच्छोत्पादनेन हृतवांश्रोरितवानिति कौमारहरः। ततश्चाकृत्रिमप्रेमपात्रताप्रकटनेनानुरागदार्ढ्यध्वननम्। त्रियते प्रियत्वेनाङ्गी- क्रियते स्वयमिति वरः। तेनोभयानुरागलाभः। स एव। उपभुक्तान्यो नेत्यर्थः। ...... उ- न्मीलिता विकसिता या मालती तया सुरभयः। .. प्रौढा रत्युद्दीपनादिप्रागल्भ्यशा- लिनः। कदम्बस्य धूलीकदम्बाख्यपुष्पविशेषस्य सम्बन्धिनः । वसन्ते कदम्बान्तरस्यासम्भ- वात्। चोडवधारणे। अत एवेत्यर्थः । अत्र च प्रौढा इति श्रिष्टविशेषणबलान्मालत्यनिलयो- र्नायिकानायकत्वप्रतीतिः । चकारोऽप्यर्थों मिन्नक्रमः । अस्मीत्यह्मर्थकमव्ययम्। अन्यथा सैवेत्यस्योद्देश्यालामात्। सैवेत्यस्य उत्कण्ठाहेत्ववस्थान्तरं न प्राप्तेत्यर्थः । तथापि एतेषाम- सकृदुपभोगेपि। तत्रेत्युपभुक्त इत्यर्थकं सप्तम्यर्थ त्रितयेप्यन्वेति। ...... सुरतानुकूलव्यापा- ररूपा या लीला कुसुमाभरणादिप्रसाधनरूपा स्मिताश्लेषचुम्बनादिरूपा वा तस्या विधो सम्पादने चेतः समुत्कण्ठते उत्सुकं भवति। उ. चं. as quoted in प्रदीप p.11 (Nir). In this verse, no figure other than विशेषोक्ति and विभावना is worth pointing out. Those two also are not distinct, as explained below :- faaalfi* 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 चेतः समुत्कण्ठते) even though the cause i. e. the enjoyment of them in the past, is present. Thus there is विशेषोक्ति 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. i विभावना is the statement that an effect is produeed 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 having * विशेषोक्तिरखण्डेषु कारणेषु फलावच: । K. P. X. सति हेतौ फलाभावो विशेषोक्तिस्तथा द्विधा। S. D. X. 1 विशेषोक्तिस्तावत्कारणसत्वेऽपि कार्याभाववचनम्। अत्र च अनुत्कण्ठा- कारणं वरोपकरणयोरनुपभुक्तता। तत्सत्वे यद्यप्यनुत्कण्ठाभावः उत्कण्ठारूपो निर्दिष्ट एव तथापि नानुत्कण्ठाऽभावत्वेन किं तूत्कण्ठात्वेनैव । तस्मादस्फुटत्वमस्याः । यदि चेतोऽनुत्कण्ठितं नेत्यमिधीयते तदा स्फुटत्वं भवेत्। प्रदीप (p. 12 Nir). 1 क्रियायाः प्रतिषेधेऽपि फलव्यक्तिर्विमावना। K.P. X. विभावना विना हेतुं कार्योत्पत्तिर्यदुच्यते।S. D. X.

I. 2 SÂHITYADARPAŅA, 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 विभावना in the verse. But it is not distinct, for the absence of the cause is stated in the form 'although the husband etc. have been frequently enjoyed by me before.' Thus like विशेषोक्ति above विभावना also is indistinct here .* The two figures being indistinct the union of these which con- stitutes a separate figure called सन्देइसङ्कर is also indistinct. Where there are no circumstances which unable us to deter- mine that a verse contains a particular figure to the exclusion of others which are possible, there is सन्देहसङ्कर.t The S. D. objects to the abovementioned view of mmnz by saying that both the figures विशेषोक्ति and विभावना are distinct and there- fore the HaT based upon them is also distinct. His view appears to be that विशेषोक्ति 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 in the case of विभावना. His words are "इह च कार्याभावः कार्यविरुद्धसन्भ्रावमुखेनापि निबध्यते। विभावनायामपि कारणाभाव: कारणविरुद्ध- सन्भावमुखेन । एवं च 'यः कौमारहरः इत्यादेरुत्कण्ठाकारणविरुद्धस्य निबन्ध- नाद्िभावना। 'यः कौमार'-इत्यादे: कारणस्य च कार्यविरुद्धाया उत्कण्ठाया निबन्धना- farfo: I". S. D.'s remarks appear to be based upon the words of the Alankara-sarvasva of Rajanaka Ruyyaka, where we read under विशेषोक्ति 'कार्यानुत्पत्तिश्वात्र कचित्कार्यविरोधोत्पत्त्या निबध्यते। एवं विभावनायामपि कारणाभाव: कारणविरुद्धमुखेन क्वचित्प्रतिपाद्यते। p. 127 of अलं. स .; on p. 200 he gives 'यः कौमारइर: etc.' as an instance of सन्देहसक्कर and remarks 'तथाह्यत्कण्ठाकारणाभावे (कौमारइरवराद्यसंनिधानरूपस्य

• अत्र वरोपकरणादीनामनुपभुक्तत्वस्य प्रसिद्धस्य कारणस्याभावेपि तत्कार्य- स्योत्कण्ठारूपस्योत्पत्तिकथनरूपा विभावनालक्कारः । वरोपकरणादीनामत्यन्तोपादेयत्व- स्याप्रसिद्धस्य कारणस्य विभावनात। अस्फुटत्वं चानुपभुक्त्तत्वाभावेनाकथनान् । उ. चं. p.11 of प्रदीप (Nir.) एकस्य च ग्रहे न्यायदोषाभावादनिश्चयः। K.P.X. यत्र द्वयोरबहूनां नारक्काराणामेकत्र योग्यत्वेऽपि विरोधानैकदा व्यवस्थिति:, न चैकतरस्य परिग्रहे साधकं तदितरपरिय्हे बाधकं येन तदेव व्यवसिष्ठेत सोप्यनिश्चयरूपो द्वितीय: सङ्करः। प्रदीप. Here in the verse 'य: कौमारहरः' etc. the सन्देह is as follows :- 'उत्कण्ठायाः पत्याद्यमावरूपकारणं विना उत्कण्ठारूपकार्यकथनमितीयं विभावना, किंवा उत्कण्ठाभावस्य कारणसत्वे तस्याः कथनमिति विशेषोक्तिरिति सन्देद्दात सन्देहस- डरालक्कारोडयम् ।' राम० p. 15. ईअलं. स. defines विशेषोक्ति as 'कारणसामग्ये कार्यानुत्पत्तिर्विशेषोक्तिः । V

22 NOTES ON L 2

कारणस्याभावे इत्यर्थ: । अ.स. वि.) "उत्कण्ठाया उत्पत्तौ विभावना। स च कारणा- भाव: 'यः कौमारहरः' इत्यादिना कारणविरुद्धमुखेन प्रतिपादितः । तथा च 'यः कौमार- हरः' इत्यादुत्कण्ठाकारणसन्भ्ावेऽपि अनुत्कण्ठाया अनुत्पत्तौ विशेषोक्तिः। सा चानुत्पत्तिः 'समुत्कण्ठते' इति विरोधोत्पत्तिमुखेनोक्ता। अत एव द्योरप्यस्फुटत्वमन्यत्र (काव्यप्रका- झादौ। अ. स. वि.) उक्तम्।" (P. 4, ll. 1-3). एतेन ...... अपास्तम्. The verse is quoted from the सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण (I.2.) of भोज. The Benares edition reads निर्दोषं for अदोषम्. S. D. extends his criticism against मम्मट's words अदोषौ, सगुणौ and अनलङ्गती to the definition of Kavya given by भोज.

(P. 4, ll. 3-6). यत्तु ध्वनिकारेणोक्तम् ... ब्रूम: 'काव्यस्यात्मा ध्वनिः'- these words are contained in the first verse of the ध्वन्यालोक काव्यस्यात्मा ध्वनिरिति बुधैर्यः समाम्नातपूर्वस्तस्याभावं जगदुरपरे भाक्तमाहुस्तमन्ये। केचिद्वाचां स्थितमविषये तत्त्वमूचुस्तदीयं तेन बरूम: सहृदयमनःप्रीतये तत्स्वरूपम् ॥।' 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 three fold aspects-(1) aa matter, (2) अलङ्गार embellishment and (3) रस flavour etc .; or does he mean that the soul of poetry is only <u etc. ( and not the three वस्तु, अलङ्गार, रसादि)? वस्तु, अलङ्गार and रस must be clearly explained. ध्वनि is defined by the ध्वन्यालोक as 'यत्रार्थः शब्दो वा तमर्थमुपसर्जनीकृतस्वाथौं। व्यंक्त: काव्यविशेषः स ध्वनिरिति सूरिभिः कथितः' ॥ p. 33 ('तमर्थम् व्यंग्यार्थ; उपसर्जनीकृतौ गुणीभूतौ स्वार्थौ स्वं चासौ अर्थश्चेति याभ्याम्। यथासंख्येन तेनाथों गुणीकृतात्मा, शब्दो गुणीकृतामिधेयः । व्यंक्त: द्योतयतः । लोचन.') ध्वनि is divided into three kinds, वस्तुध्व०, अलङ्गारध्व०, and रसध्वनि as said in ध्वन्यालोक p. 15 'स ह्यर्थो वाच्यसामर्थ्याक्षिप्तं वस्तुमात्रमलङ्गारा रसादयश्चत्यनेक- अ्रभेदप्रभिन्नो दशयिष्यते'; । or in the काव्यानुशासन of हेमचन्द्र p. 26 'स च (व्यंग्योर्थः) ध्वन्यते द्योत्यते इति पूर्वाचार्यैर्ध्वनिरिति संज्ञितः । अयं च वस्त्वलङ्कार- रसादिमेदात् त्रिधा ।.' As to वस्तुध्वनि, लोचन says 'प्रतीयमानस्य तावत् दौ मेदौ लौकिक: काव्यव्यवहारगोचरश्चेति। लौकिको यः शब्दवाच्यतां कदाचिदधिशेते। स च विधिनिषेधाद्यनेकप्रकारो वस्तुशब्देनोच्यते।' p. 15. An example of वस्तुध्वनि is 'शिखरिणि क्व नु नाम कियच्चिरं किमभिधानमसावकरोत्तपः। सुमुखि येन तवाधरपाटलं दशति बिम्बफलं शुकशावकः । अत्रानेन कविनिबद्धस्य कस्यचित्कामिन: .. ऑढोक्तिसिद्धेन वस्तुना तवाधरः पुण्यातिशयलभ्य इति वस्तु प्रतीयते।. A distinct subject or topic is suggested, viz. that your lip (i. e. a kiss) is to be gained only by excessive merit. अलङ्गारध्वनि is that in which the suggested sense would constitute a figure of speech ; the expressed sense does not, however, do so. An example of अलङ्कारध्वनि is 'दिशि मन्दायते तेजो दक्षिणस्यां रवेरपि। तस्यामेव रघोः पाण्ड्याः प्रतापं न विषेहिरे॥ अनेन स्वतःसम्भविना वस्तुना रवितेजसो रघुप्रतापोऽषिक इति व्यतिरेकालङ्कारो व्यज्यते।'

I. 2 SÂHITYADARPAŅA, 23

रसध्वनि occurs there where रस, 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 धवन्यालोक 'वाच्यवाचकचारुत्वहेतूनां विविधात्मनाम् । रसादिपरता यत्र स ध्वनेर्विषयो मतः ॥ P. 67. रसध्वनि may be instanced in "शून्यं वासगृहं विलोक्य शयनादुत्थाय किश्रिच्छनैः निद्राव्याजमुपागतस्य सुचिरं निर्वर्ण्य पत्युर्मुखम्। विस्रब्धं परिचुम्ब्य जातपुलकामालोक्य गण्डस्थलीं लज्जानम्रमुखी प्रियेण हसता बाला चिरं चुम्बिता।' अत्र शृङ्गारध्वनि: Against this threefold division of ध्वनि,* S. D. brings an objection in the words प्रहेलिकादावतिव्याप्तेः. प्रहेलिका mean 'a riddle or conundrum.' Even the कादम्बरी mentions प्रहेलिका.' Wefind a full exposition and illustration of प्रहेलिका in the काव्यादर्श and the सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण. प्रहेलिका is defined by रुद्रट as 'स्पष्टपरच्छन्नार्था प्रहेलिकाऽव्याहृतार्था च।' Ru. V. 25. नमिसाधु explains as follows :-- 'प्रहेलिका द्विविधा। स्पष्टप्रच्छन्नार्था अव्याहृतार्था च। तत्र स्पष्टः पदारूढत्वात् प्रच्छनश्ष प्रश्नवाक्ये एवान्तर्गतत्वेन भ्रमकारित्वादर्थों यस्याः सा तथाविधा। तथाऽसाधारणविशेषणो- पादानादेवाधिगतत्वेनाव्याहृतः साक्षादनुक्तो अर्थो यस्याः सा तथाविधा।. An example of the above two kinds is given by az in one verse 'कानि निकृत्तानि कथं कदलीवनवासिना स्वयं तेन। कथमपि न दृश्यतेऽ्सावन्वक्षं हरति वसनानि ॥I' Ru. V. 29. The first half is an example of स्पष्टप्रच्छन्नार्था. Construe कदलीवनवासिना तेन कानि कथं स्वयं निकृत्तानि. This is the question. The answer is contained in the same line. कानि (शिरांसि) निकृत्तानि, कथं कदलीव (like a plantain tree) असिना (खड्गेन), (कियन्ति) नव (नवसंख्याकानि), स्वयम्, तेन (दशाननेन). The second line is an example of अव्याहृतार्था. अन्वक्ष means प्रत्यक्षम्.

• A different and more elaborate division of ध्वनि is given in the ध्वन्यालोक (1st and 2nd उद्योत), काव्यप्रकाश (4th उल्लास) and साहित्यदर्पण (4th प०). We give below a brief out-line.

ध्वनि

I लक्षणामूल or अविवक्षितवाच्य II अमिधामूल or विवक्षितान्यपरवाच्य.

1 (a) अर्थान्तरसंक्रमितवाच्य (b) अत्यन्ततिरस्कृतवाच्य. (c) असंलक्ष्यक्रमव्यंग्य or रसध्वनि. (d) संलक्ष्य- क्रमव्यंग्य.

(1) शब्दशत्तयुद्धव (2) अर्धशत्तयुद्भव (3) उभयोद्भव

वस्तु अलङ्गार वस्तु अलङ्कार

मम्मट divides अर्थशक्त्युद्धव into twelve varieties.

24 NOTES QN I. 2

This applies only to the wind and not to a thief etc. Dandin mentions 16 varieties of good प्रहेलिकाs and refers to 14 kinds of bad ones. See Kavyad. III, 106. We shall quote two intere- sting examples. नासिक्यमध्या परितश्चतुर्वर्णविभूषिता। अस्ति काचितपुरी यस्या- मष्टवर्णहया नृपाः॥ Kavyad. III, 114. The town is काज्री and the family of the kings is पुण्ड्क, which has 8 letters. विजितात्मभवद्ेषिगुरु- पादइतो जनः । हिमापद्यामित्रधरैर्व्याप्तं व्योमामिनन्दति॥ काव्यादर्श III, 120. (विना पक्षिणा गरुडेन जितः इन्द्रस्तस्यात्मभवः अर्जुनः तस्य द्वेषी कर्णः तस्य गुरुः पिता सूर्य: तस्य पादैः किरणैः हतः । हिमापहो वहिः तस्यामित्रो जलं तद्धरैर्मेंघैर्व्यांसं etc.). But even Dandin and arr had a clear perception of the value of these riddles. रुद्रट says 'मात्राबिन्दुच्युतके प्रहेलिका कारकक्रियागूढे। प्रश्नोत्तरादि चान्यत क्रीडामात्रोपयोगमिदम्॥। Ru. V. 24. क्ीडागोष्ठीविनोदेषु तज्ज्ञैराकीर्णमत्रणे। परव्यामोहने चापि सोपयोगा: प्रहेलिकाः॥ काव्यादर्श IIL 97. They do not look upon प्रहेलिका as constituting poetry, much less आनन्दवर्धन, the author of the ध्वन्यालोक who says "इदानींतनानां तु न्याय्ये काव्यनयव्यव स्थापने क्रियमाणे नास्त्येव ध्वनिव्यतिरिक्त काव्यप्रकारः। यतः परिपाकवतां कवीनां रसादितात्पर्यविरहे व्यापार एव न शोमते।" p. 221. He does not recognise any piece of poetry, in which Tetc. are absent. But the S. D. . objects that, if by ध्वनि you understand the three, viz. वस्तु, अलक्कार and रस, then, even प्रहेलिका would be included under ध्वनि, as in प्रहेलिका also, there is some suggested sense other than the expressed one, just as there is in वस्तुध्वनि instanced above. द्वितीयश्रेदोमिति जूम: 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, ll. 6-10). ननु यदि ...... इति चेत्. 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 वस्तु nor अलक्कार). अच्ता एत्य &c .* This is the 67th verse in the 7th शतक of the गाथासप्तशती of हाल. रात्र्यन्धकत्वेन कथितात्मानं पमिकं प्रति स्वयंदूत्या ( of a woman who introduces herself to her paramour without the intercession of a go-between ) उक्तिरियम्। TTHo. The expressed meaning is 'Don't tumble on our bed.' But the suggested sense is quite the opposite. 'अत्र गृहे विधमानायाः शशवा अतिवृद्धतया बधिरनिश्चेष्टत्वादियोगादन्यस्य चासत्त्वान्निःशङ्क व्यवहरेति वक्तु- प्रतिपाद्यवैशिष्ट्ात्प्रतीयते।' उ० चं० p. 65. This is given as an example * The printed edition of the सप्तशती reads 'एत्थ णिमब्जर अचा एत्थ महं एत्थ परिअणो सभलो । पन्थिअ रत्तीअन्धअ मा मह सअणे िमज्जिहिसि॥.' The ध्वन्यालोक, काव्यप्रकाश, हेमचन्द् and others present many various readings.

I. 2 SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 25

of वस्तुष्वनि on p. 20 of the ध्वन्यालोक. Here another matter merely is suggested ( viz. the traveller's doing the opposite of what is expressed ) and hence, if रसादिरूपमात्रध्वनि were to be the soul of Poetry, such a verse cannot be called Poetry.

S. D. replies to the above by saying अत्रापि रसाभासवत्तैव 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 व्यंग्यवस्तु can constitute the soul of Poetry. S. D. says further on that under रस are included भाव, रसाभास, भावाभास. भावशान्ति, भावोदय, भावसन्धि, भावशबलत्व. रसाभास is defined as 'अनौचित्य प्रवृत्तत्व आभासो रसभावयोः ।' S. D. III. 262. Here the love is improper and illegitimate and therefore there is THrR.

(P. 4.l. 11). अन्यथा = वस्तुमात्रस्य व्यंग्यत्वेऽपि काव्यत्वस्वीकारे। राम०. If we were to admit that a piece is a poem, even if merely the matter were suggested, then such a sentence as aaau 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 ₹ etc.

(P. 4, 1l. 12-13). अस्त्वति ... काव्यत्वाज्गीकाराव-If it were said "Let this sentence 'aacu 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 रस. काव्यस्य प्रयोजनं ..... उक्तत्वाव् This is a reply to those who would admit a piece to be poetry even if it be destitute of रस. Construe काव्यस्य प्रयोजनं ..... प्रवृत्ति- निवृत्युपदेश :. विनेय-those who are to be taught, students. रसास्वादसुख- fuseTo does not appear to be a good reading. Instead of सुखपिण्ट the author would have said सुखसन्तान etc. रसास्वादसुखसन्तान- द्वारेत्यर्थ: 1 राम०, by means of giving a fund of delight in the form of the relishing of Rasa. मुखपिण्ड means 'an inducement.' Com- pare को न याति वशं लोके मुखे पिण्डेन पूरितः। मृदङ्गो मुखलेपेन करोति मधुर- ध्वनिम् ॥I. रामादिवत this has occurred above. Compare for the idea the wordsof the ancient rhetorician भामह 'स्वादुकाव्यरसोन्मिशं शास्त्रमप्युपयुजते। प्रथमालीढमधवः पिबन्ति कट भेषजम्॥" V.3. (The लोचन p. 182. quotes this as from भामह, but reads वाक्यार्थम् for शास्त्रमपि.) Compare व्यक्तिविवेक I p. 20 'एवं च ये सुकुमारमतयो ... ये चात्यन्ततोपि जडम- य :... उभयेपि तेभिमतवस्तुपुरस्कारेण गुडजिहिकया रसास्वादसुखं मुखे दत्त्वा तत्र कटुकी षयपानादाविव प्रवर्तयितव्याः।'.

26 NOTES ON 1. 2

(P. 4, 11. 16-20). तथा च ... तत्सिद्धे:, इत्यादि. The author citea the testimony of three ancient authors in support of his position that the soul of Poetry is suggestion which assumes only the form of रसादि. 'वाग्वैदग्ध्यप्रधानेपि' etc. occurs in अग्निपु० 337.33. अत्र= काव्ये- वाचो वैदग्ध्यं प्रधानं यस्मिन् तत् (काव्यं), that in which the chief element is the cleverness of speech; or we may dissolve as वाग्वैदग्ध्येन प्रधानं (उत्तमं ),'in Poetry which becomes first-rate by skill in speech. The Agnipurana says 'Rasa alone (and not वस्तु्व० nor अलङ्गारध्व०) is the life of Poetry, in which the chief element is skill in speech etc. व्यक्तिविवेककार-author of व्यक्तिविवेक ( which means 'investigation of the true nature of suggestion' ). His name is Mahimabhatta. He is later than अभिनवगुप्त (about 1000 A. D. ) and earlier than ATHE, who criticizes him ( 5th उल्लास). He wrote his work to demolish thetheory of the ध्वन्यालोक and to establish that what is called suggestion is included under अनुमान 'Inference'. 'अनुमानेऽ्न्तर्भावं सर्वस्यैव ध्वने: प्रकाशयितुम्। व्यक्ति- विवेकं कुरुते प्रणम्य महिमा परां वाचम्।' व्यक्तिविवेक 1st verse. काव्यस्यात्मनि ete. As to the fact that the soul of Poetry, which is always to- be found in it, is T and the like, there is no difference of opin- ion. सङ्गिनि -अवश्यंस्थायिनि । राम० सङ्ग means'attachment or conne- ction.' The words काव्यस्यात्मनि occur in the व्यक्तिविवेक I. p. 22 (Trivandrum ed. 1909 ). The printed edition reads संज्ञिनि for सज्विनि The position of the व्यक्तिविवेककार is that be does not dis- pute that ₹ is the soul of poetry, but the point on which he lays stress is that the essence of poetry ( viz. TH &c. ) is gras- ped by अनुमान and not by an independent power of words such as व्यअ्ञना. As regards the thing (संज्ञी) there is no dis- pute; there is a difference only in HsT (in the appellation of the thing ). He calls it by the name of अनुमान, while the ध्वनि school calls it by the name of ध्वनि. ध्वनिकारेणाप्युक्तम् ... तत्सिद्धेः इत्यादि- The ध्वन्यालोक reads ०निर्वहणेन किंचित्प्रयोजनम् । इतिहासादेव तत्सिद्धे :. 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 accomplished, because that, viz. the mere narration of events, can be effected by History ( such as the महाभारत) and the like.' इतिवृत्त means the same thing as वस्तु or कथाशरीर as said in the भावप्रकाश 'वस्तु यत् स्यात् प्रबन्धस्य शरीरं कविकल्पितम्। इतिवृचं तदेवाहुरनाव्यामिनयकोविदाः।।'. We take आत्मलाम := काव्यात्मनः लाभ: We may also take आत्मलाभ: is mean कविपदलाभ:, and then the whole means 'a poet does not attain the possition of a poet by confin- ing himself to the simple narration of events.' The idea is :-

I. 2 SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 27

The poet's business is to develop T 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 poem, 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 poet's 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 आत्मलाभ: to the first, as it suits the con- text better. The reading प्रयोजनम् of the ध्वन्यालोक means 'the poet has nothing to do with the mere narration etc.' The words of the ध्वन्यालोक preceding the line are 'कविना प्रबन्धमुपनिबभ्नता सर्वात्मना रसपरतत्रेण भवितव्यभ्। तत्रेतिवृत्ते यदि रसाननुगुणां स्थिति पश्येत्तां भंक्त्वापि स्वतत्रतया रसानुगुणं कथान्तरमुत्पादयेत्। न हि कने: etc. p. 148 of ध्वन्या०. (P. 4, ll. 20-24). ननु तर्हि ...... गौण एव. तर्हि 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 ननु कश्िदंशोऽन्र gg: etc., whether the composition as a whole is poetry or not). S. D. replies to this objection in रसवत्पद्या ..... ... अङ्गीकारात्- यथा रसवत्पद्यान्तर्गतनीरसपदानां पद्यरसेन रसवत्ता अङ्गीक्रियते तथा तेषां (नीरसानां पद्यानां) प्रबन्धरसेनैव रसवत्ता अङ्गीक्रियते . Certain words in a verse may be without ₹#; still, as the whole verse has a {#, the words may be said to have a ₹H, as being included in the verse; similarly here. यत्तु नीरसेष्वपि ...... गौण एव. The idea is :- The name of poetry is strictly applicable only to such pieces as have ary in them; the application of the term arar to such pieces as are without any TH, but possess letters which manifest some excellence, which are without faults and possess ornament, is quite secondary (mu ) and not strict, which application is based on the resemblance of these latter to such pieces as contain a T. गुणामिव्यअकवर्णसद्भावात्-The Gunas are three, माधुर्य, ओजसू and wene. They are the properties of ₹; but are said to be revealed by certain favourable letters, e. g. मूर्ध्नि वर्गात्यगा: स्पर्शा अटवर्गा रणौ लघू। अवृत्तिर्मध्यवृत्तिर्वा माधुर्ये घटना तथा॥ K. P. 8. Ul. i. e. माधुर्य is revealed by the letters from कू to म् except the टवर्ग, each letter being preceded by the nasal of the class to which it belongs, by the letters { and u combined with a short vowel etc.

28 NOTES ON I. 2 (P. 4, ll. 24-26) यत्त वामनेन ..... भिन्नत्वाव. वामन wrote काव्यालक्कारसूत् in five अघिकरण. He wrote a comment on his own Sutras. He belongs probably to the latter half of the 8th century. रीतिरात्मा काव्यस्य-is काव्यालक्कार I. 2. 6. रीति means a style of composition, as वामन himself defines it as 'विशिष्टा पदरचना fa" I. 2.7. These styles must be numerous, but writers on rhetoric generally select a few of the most prevalent ones for definition. दण्डिन् says 'अस्त्यनेको गिरां मार्ग: सूक्ष्ममेद: परस्परम्। तत्र वैदर्भ गाडीयौ वण्येंते प्रस्फुटान्तरौ ।।' काव्यादर्श I. 40. He then tells as that ten गुus are theessential attributesof वैदर्भी रीति, and the opposite of them of the गौडी रीति; 'श्ेषः प्रसाद: समता माधुर्ये सुकुमारता । अर्थव्यक्ति रुदारत्वमोज: कान्तिसमाधयः ॥ इति वैदर्भमार्गस्य प्राणा दश गुणा स्मृताः। एषां विपर्ययः प्रायो दृश्यते गौडवर्त्मनि।' कान्यादर्श I. 41 and 42. भामह vehe- mently protests against this division of styles into aauff and met 'वैदर्ममन्यदस्तीति मन्यन्ते सुधियोऽपरे। तदेव च किल ज्यायः सदर्थमपि नापरम् । गौडीयमिदमेतचु वैदर्भमिति किं पृथक्। गतानुगतिकन्यायान्नानाख्येयममेघसाम्। ननु चाइमकवंश्ादि वैदर्भमिति कथ्यते। कामं तथास्तु प्रायेण संजेच्छातो विधीयते ॥' I. 31-33. वामन mentions three वैदर्मी, गौडी and पाञ्चाली. विश्वनाथ adds a fourth लाटी. The same are given by the अग्निपुराण. मोज gives two more, viz. आवन्तिका and मागधी. It will be seen from the above that each country is credited with a particular style of composition. मम्मट includes them under वृत्त्यनुप्रास (उपनागरिका, परुषा and कोमला correspond to वैदर्मी, गौडी, and पाञ्चाली). वामन stands perhaps alone in regarding रीति as the soul of Poetry. S. D.'s objection is very proper and is as follows :-- fifa 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 शब्द and अर्थ are the body of काव्य. The various arrangements of the limbs of this body i. e. the different arrangements of words etc. can never constitute the soul. (P. 4,126-p.5,1.2). यञ्च ध्वनिकारेण ...... अपास्तम्. अर्थः सहृदय etc. This occurs on p. 12 of the ध्वन्यालोक. '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. ary, the expressed or literal sense, and प्रतीयमान the understood or suggested sense. Here ध्वनिकार declares that अर्थ is the soul of Poetry and that वाच्य is a variety of अर्थ. Thereby he declares that expressed

1.2 SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 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 ध्वनिकार is shown to be inconsistent. See, how- ever, the लोचन on pp. 12-13, which reconciles these two appare- ntly conflicting dicta of the ध्वन्यालोक .* The ध्वन्यालोक here speaks of अर्थ, the soul of Poetry, as divided into वाच्य and प्रतीयमान in accordance with ordinary ideas. अर्थ is of twokinds; the real soul of Poetry is व्यंग्य, but there are people who regard the प्रतीयमान as not different from वाच्य. So what the ध्वनिकार says is not that वाच्य is the soul of Poetry, but that अर्थ is of two kinds, वाच्य and प्रतीयमान. As to what is the soul of Poetry, there is difference of opinion.

(P. 5, 1l. 4-7). वाक्यं रसात्मकं ...... गृह्यन्ते. रसात्मकं वाक्यं काव्यम्- Poetry is a sentence the soul whereof is रस. निरूपयिष्याम: We shall describe ( in the 3rd परिच्छेद). रसात्मक is explained in the words रस एवात्मा etc. Rasa alone is the soul (of Poetry) i.e. it endows it (काव्य) with lifeas being essential. तेन विना=रसेन विना. "It has been established above that, without रस, a piece cannot be called a poem." This has been shown in the words अन्यथा देवदत्तो ग्रामं याति (p. 4,l 11) etc. Under रस are included भाव (incomplete flavour ) and the semblances of रस and भाव (which will be treated of in the 3rd परिच्छेद), since the word is derived from the root ra 'to taste or relish' and means 'what is tasted or relished.' भाव, incomplete flavour etc., also can be relished and therefore may be included under er. See S.D.III. p. 188 'रसभावौ तदाभासौ भावस्य प्रशमोदयौ। सन्धिः शबलता चेति सर्वेऽपि रसनाद्रसाः।।'

जगनाथ criticizes the definition of काव्य given by the साहित्यदर्पण as follows :- "यत्तु 'रसवदेव काव्यम्' इति साहित्यदर्पणे निणींतम्, तन्न। वस्त्व- लक्कारप्रधानानां काव्यानामकाव्यत्वापत्तेः। न चेष्टापत्तिः। महाकविसंप्रदाय- स्याकुलीभावप्रसङ्गात्। तथा च जलप्रवाहवेगनिपतनोत्पतनभ्रमणानि कविभिर्वर्णितानि। कपिवालादिविलसितानि च। न च तन्रापि यथाकथञ्चित्परम्परया रसस्पशोस्त्येवेति

• स एक पवाथों द्विश्ाखतया विवेकिमिर्विभागबुद्धथाभियुज्यते । तथाहि- तुस्येऽर्धरूपत्वे किमिति कस्मै्वित्सहृदय: शाघते। तद्भवितव्यं केनचिद्विशेषेण। यो विश्ञेष: स प्रतीयमानभागो विवेकिभिर्विशेषहेतुत्वादात्मेति व्यवस्थाप्यते। वाच्यसङ्कलनाविमोहि- त्रहृदयैस्तु तत्पृथग्भावो विप्रतिपद्यते चार्वाकैरिवात्मपृथग्भावः । अत एवार्थ इति एकतयो- पक्रम्य सहृदयश्ाष्य इति विश्ञेषणद्वारा हेतुमभिषायापोद्धारणदृशा तस्य दौ मेदावंशावि- स्युक्तम्। न तु द्वावप्यात्मानो काव्यस्य। लोचन p.13.

30 NOTES ON I.3

वाच्यम्। ईदृशरसस्पर्शस्य 'गौश्चलति' 'मृगो धावति' इत्यादावतिप्रसक्तत्वेनाप्रयोजक ल्वात्। अर्थमात्रस्य विभावानुभावव्यमिचार्यन्यतमत्वादिति दिक । R. G. pp. 7-8. रस is defined as 'विभावेनानुभावेन व्यक्तः सञ्चारिणा तथा। रसतामेति रत्यादि: स्थायिभावः सचेतसाम् ॥' S.D. III. 1. Love and the like, which are permanent moods or underlying sentiments in any composition, when manifested by विभाव etc. (and not by direct mention thereof ) attain to the condition of T ( Flavour ) in the man of taste. The रसs are 8 (or 9) शृङ्गार, हास्य, करुण, रौद्र, वीर, भयानक, वीभत्स, अद्भुत (the 9th is शान्त). The स्थायिभावs, permanent or underlying sentiments, corresponding to the 8 ₹4s are रति, हास, शोक, क्रोध, उत्साह, भय, जुगुप्सा, विस्मय. विभावs are those which are the causes of the स्थायिभावs i. e. on account of which the स्थायिभावs रति etc. are manifested, and those which nourish them (रति etc.), when they are produced. विभावs are of two kind's, आलम्बनविभाव and उद्दीपनविभाव. Women etc. are the examples of आलम्बनविभाव because they produce the स्थायि- भाव रति; while चंद्रोदय, वसन्त ete. are the उद्दीपनविभाव, because they nourish love. अनुभावs (अनुभावो विकारस्तु भावसंसूचनात्मकः। दशरु. IV. 3. ) are the effects of रति etc. i. e. glances, perspiration etc. Under अनुभाव are included the eight सात्विकभावs स्तम्भ, स्वेद, रोमाज्, स्वरभङ्ग, वेपथु, वैवर्ण्य, अश्रु, प्रलय. व्यमिचारिभावs are those which help or are accessory in apprehending स्थायिभाव or its effects ; they are so called because they are not permanent, but appear and disappear as waves in the ocean. The व्यभिचारिभावs are 33 viz. निर्वेद, ग्लानि, शङ्का, असूया etc. They are not main sentiments in a composition ; they are found associated with the main sentiment. स्थायिभाव is defined as विरुद्वैरविरुद्वैवा भावैर्विच्छियते न यः। आत्मभावं नयत्यन्यान् स स्थायी लवणाकरः ॥ (दशरू. IV. 32) यथा मालतीमाधवे शमशानाक्के बीभत्सेन मालत्यनुरागस्याविरस्कारः।

(P. 5, 1l. 7-12) तत्र रसो यथा ...... रस: शून्यं वासगृहं-occura in अमरुशतक 82. नवोढाया अभिनवसमागमवर्णनमिदम्। उ० चं० p. 88 of प्रदीप. वासगृहं=रतिमन्दिरम्. निद्राव्याजमुपागतस्य of him who was coun- terfeiting sleep or who was feigning to be asleep. विश्रब्धं विश्वस्तं यथा स्यात्तथा. Supply पत्यु:, before गण्डस्थलीम् ( cheek). This verse is given as an example of सम्भोगशृद्गार. शृङ्गार is of two kinds, सम्भोग and विगलम्भ ( that of separated lovers). The former is defined a8 'अनुकूलौ निषेवेते यत्रान्योन्यं विलासिनौ। दर्शनस्पर्शनादीनि स सम्भोगो मुझा- न्वितः॥' दशरूपक IV. 63. विप्रलम्भ शृद्गार is defined as 'भावो यदा रतिर्नाम प्रकर्षमधिगच्छति। नाषिगच्छति चामीष्टं विप्रलम्भस्तदोच्यते॥।' or briefly. 'सम्भोग: सङ्गतयोर्वियुक्तयोर्यश्च विप्रलम्भोऽसौ।' रुद्रट XII. 6. तत्र सम्भोगो नायिका-

I. 3 SÂHITYADARPANA. 31

रब्घो नायकारब्यश्ष. In this verse, the शृङ्गार is on both sides. But that on the part of the नायिका is the principal one, as said by प्रभा 'अत्र नायिकारब्धतया तद्गताया रतेः प्राधान्यम् । p. 88 of प्रदीप. 'तत्र नायक आलम्बनम्। शून्यगृहमुद्दीपनम् । नायकचुम्बनमनुभावः। लज्जा व्यभिचारिभाव: ।' प्रभा p. 89. (P. 5,11. 13-18). भावो यथा ... रतिर्भाव :. भाव is defined by K.P. as 'रविर्देवादिविषया व्यमिचारी तयाञ्चितः। भावः प्रोक्तः । IV. ul p. 118 (Va). 'आदिशब्दान्मुनिगुरुपुत्रादिविषया। कान्ताविषया तु व्यक्ता शृङ्गारः,' The meaning is :- When the स्थायिभावs such as love have for their objects God, king, son etc. (and not lovers ); when the स्थायिभावs, love etc. are not well nourished so as to reach the condition of rasa or when the व्यमिचारिभावs such as असूया, are manifested as the principal sentiments in a composition, there is ra. महापात्र =great minister, according to the मेदिनी. 'पात्रं स्त्रुवादौ पर्णे च भाजने राजमत्रिणि।' (under रद्विकम्). सान्धिविग्रहिका- णाम्=The plural is used to show respect. सान्धिविग्रहिक means fentrusted with the affairs of peace and war' i. e. very much like minister for foreign affairs. This is a very old office. Com- pare प्राचीनलेखमाला vol. III. p.175, No. 164 (inscription of श्रीधरसेम A. D. 571) 'लिखितः सन्धिविग्रहाधिकृतस्कन्धभट्टेन.' Vide J. B. B. R. A. S. vol 9 p 219 for महासान्धिविग्रहिक (Ambernath inscription). यस्यालीयत etc. In this verse, the ten aaars of Vishnu are referred to. The verb अलीयत is to be construed with ten sentences. यस्य शल्कसीम्ि जलधिरलीयत (मत्स्यावतार) in only the fringe of whose scales the ocean was contained. यस्य पृष्ठे जगन्मण्डलमलीयत refers to कूर्मावतार; दंड्रायां धरणी (अलीयत) refers to वराहावतार; compare गीतगोविन्द 'वसति दशनशिखरे धरणी तव लझा। शशिनि कलङ्गकलेव निमग्ना' ॥. नखे दितिसुधाधीशः (हिरण्यकशिपुः) अलीयत refers to नृसिंदावतार. Compare 'तव करकमलवरे नखमन्भुतश्रृङ्गम्। दलित हिरण्यकशिपुतनुभृङ्गम् ।' गीतगोविन्द पदे रोदसी (heaven and earth) (अलीयेताम्) refers to वामनावतार; कोधे क्षत्रगण: refers to परशुराम; शरे दशमुखः to राम; पाणौ प्रलम्बासुरः refers to कृष्ण (see विष्णुपु० V. 9 where बलराम kills प्रलम्ब with his fist). ध्याने विश्ववमलीयत In whose contemplation as aa, the Universe melted into nothing- ness. बुद्ध taught the doctrine of शून्यवाद (annihilation). असौ अधार्मिककुलं=on whose sword, the race of evil-doors ( will perish, when Kalkin will come down). Compare गीतगोविन्द 'म्लेच्छनिवह- निघने कलयसि करवालम्।'. कस्मैचिदस्मै नमः Hail to him whoever he be; or hail to him who is indescribable. Compare for the idea 'वेदानुद्धरते जगन्निवहते भूगोलमुद्रिभ्रते दैत्या दारयते बलिं छलयते क्षत्रक्षयं कुर्वते। पौलस्त्यं जयते हलं कलयते कारुण्यमातन्वते म्लेच्छान्मूछयते दशाकृतिकृते कृष्णाय तुभ्यं नमः ॥' गीतगोविन्द. In this verse as the sentiment of love has for

32 NOTES ON I. 3

its object the deity, there is aa ( incomplete flavour). The deity cannot be a fit object of those tendernesses which are exchanged between man and woman and which belong to the sentiment of love proper. See भागवतपुराण I. 3 for अवतार. (P.5,1l. 19-22). रसाभासो ...... तिर्यग्विषयत्वाद्रसामास :. S.D. de- fines रसाभास as 'अनौचचित्यप्रवृत्तत्व आभासो रसमावयोः'-when रस and भाव proceed with impropriety, there is रसाभास and भावाभास respeo- tively. Then S.D. gives some exmples. उपनायकसंस्थायां मुनिगुरुपली गतार्यां च। बहुनायकविषयायां रतौ तथानुभयनिष्ठायाम्। प्रतिनायकनिष्ठत्वे तद्ददधम- पात्रतिर्यगादिगते। शङ्गारेऽनात्वित्यं रौद्रे गुर्वादिगतकोपे ॥। III, p. 191. There is an impropriety in the Erotic when love resides in a secondary hero, and when it is fixed on the wife of a sage or teacher, 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 in low persons or lower animals etc. मधु द्विरेफ: etc. This occurs in the कुमारम्सभव III. 36. स्वां प्रियां अनुवर्तमान: द्विरेफ: कुसुमैकपात्रे मधु पपौ. द्विरेफ: bee (भ्रमर). अनुवर्तमान := Waiting upon, coaxing. कुसुमैकपात्रे कुसुममेव एकं साधारणं पात्रं तस्मिन्. कृष्णसार: black deer. Here the रस is सम्भोग- *FRT ( love in union ) but as love is here spoken of with refer- ence to lower animals, there is HrTTH ( semblance of that flav- our). एवमन्यत्-similarly the rest i.e. भावाभास, भावशान्ति, भावोदय, भावसन्धि, भावशबलत्व. दोषा :...... वक्ष्यामः (P.5, 1l. 24-28). तस्य-रसस्य. Faults are those that mar the रस. श्रुतिदुष्टापुष्ट etc. यथा काणत्वखज्जत्वादय: देहद्वारेण आत्मान- मपकर्षयन्ति मूर्खत्वादयश्च साक्षादात्मानमपकर्षयन्ति एवं श्रुतिदुष्टापुष्टार्थत्वादय: सब्दार्थ- द्वारेण काव्यस्यात्मभूतं रसमपकर्षयन्ति व्यमिचारिभावादे: स्वशब्दवाच्यत्वादयो दोषा: साक्षात्काव्यस्थात्मभूतं रसमपकर्पयन्ति ।. As blindness (of one eye) and lameness operate depreciatingly on man through the body (i. e. indirectly), so harshness, uselessness, or superfluity etc. operate on the soul of Poetry, i. e. TH, 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 TH). Both these classes are called दोषs. श्रुतिदुष्ट has been explained above. अपुष्टार्थत्वम् means 'मुख्यानु- पकारित्वम' what does not help or what is not needed for under- standing the principal idea; e. g. विलोक्य वितते व्योमि विधुं मुन्र रूषं प्रिये. Here the word वितत serves no purpose as regards the giving up of wounded pride. व्यमिचारिभावादे: स्वशब्दवाच्यत्वादय :-

I 3 SÅHITYADARPANA, 33

To mention रस, स्थायिभाव or व्यमिचारिभाव under its own name in a piece is generally looked upon as a fault. See K. P. VII under रसदोष p. 433 (Va) 'व्यमिचारिरसस्थायिभावानां शब्दवाच्यता । ... रसे दोषाः स्युरीदृशाः । रसस्य स्वशब्देन शृङ्गारादिशब्देन वा वाच्यत्वम् (दोषः)'. 'जाता लज्जा- वती मुग्धा प्रियस्य परिचुम्बने' is an example of the mention of व्यभिचारि- भाव under its own name. Here the वयभिचारिभाव 'लब्जा' is directly mentioned; it would be free from fault if we convey the idea of लज्जा by reading 'आसीन्मुकुलिताक्षी सा प्रियस्य परिचुम्बने.' विशेषोदाहरणानि a&rH: we shall speak of their distinctions and examples in the 7th परिच्छेद. गुणादय: किस्वरूपा :...... वक्ष्यामः (P. 6, 1l. 1-8). Excellences, figures and styles are spoken of as the causes of the heightening of रस. गुणा: शौर्यादिवत् etc. This we had above (उक्त हि-शब्दार्थौ p.3, 1. 17). Here i. e. acoording to the view of Rhetoricians like myself. An objector might ask "How do you say that Gunas heighten {w through words and senses ? gs are the proper- ties of रस alone and not of शब्दार्थ; therefore having nothing to do with शब्द and अर्थ, they cannot heighten रस through शब्द and अर्थ." We reply :- The word गुण here is secondarily employed ( i. e. by HUT ) 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 ( 'रसाभिव्यअकत्वेनोपचारतः उपपद्यते' etc. p.3, 1. 9). वक्ष्याम :- in the 8th परिच्छेद (गुणs), in the 9th (रीति) and in the 10th अलक्कार

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 वाक्यं स्यात् 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 वाक्य are :- साकांक्षाणां पदानामनेकानां समूहो वाक्यम्। अ० वृ० मा०; वाक्यं पदसमूददः । तर्कसंग्रह; वाक्यं त्वाकांक्षायोग्यतासंनिधिमतां पदानां समूहः । T. B. p. 47. योग्यता means the absence of absurdity in the mutual relation of the things denoted by the words. A sentence like पयसा सिश्चति has योग्यता because water has the fit- ness, owing to its liquidity which is necessary for sprinkling. But a sentence like वहिना सिञ्चति has no compatibility, since fire lacks liquidity which only can make a thing an instrument in the act of sprinkling. पदोच्चयस्य एतदभावेपि-एतदभावे means योग्यता- a. '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 'वहिना सिञ्नति' would be a sentence; but no one would say that the above (वह्निना सिञ्नति ) is a proper sentence.' P. L. M. defines योग्यता as 'परस्परान्वय प्रयोजकधर्मेवत्त्वम्' and then says 'वेन पयसा सिञ्चतीति वाक्यमयोग्यम् । अस्ति च सेकान्वय- प्रयोजकद्रवद्रव्यत्वं योग्यता जले कारणत्वेन जलान्जयप्रयोजकार्द्रीकरणत्वं योग्यता सेक- क्रियायाम्। अत एव वह्निना सिश्चतीति वाक्यमयोग्यम् । वहेः सेकान्वयप्रयोजक द्रवद्रव्यत्वाभावात् । p. 13; see also T.B. on योग्यता p. 47. आकांक्षा-प्रतीति- पर्यवसानविरह: प्रतीते: पर्यवसानं तस्य विरहः (अभाव:) absence of the com- pletion of the sense. स च --- this refers to o विरह :. 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 rx:, & desire ( FTHT) 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 धाव्ति. T.S. defines आकांक्षा as 'पदस्य पदान्तरव्यतिरेकप्रयुक्तान्वयाननुभावकत्वम्', the incapacity of a word to convey the idea of its connection, which incapacity is due to the absence of some other word. V. P. says 'पदार्थानां परस्पर- जिज्ञासाविषयत्वयोग्यत्वमाकांक्षा। क्रियाश्रवणे कारकस्य तस्य श्रवणे क्रियायाः करणश्रवणे इतिकर्तव्यतायाश्र जिज्ञासाविषयत्वात् ।' निराकांक्षस्य वाक्यत्वे-supply पदोच्चयस्य after निराकांक्षस्य. गौरश्वः पुरुषो हस्ती-these words do not constituto a sentence, because they lack one of the requisites of a sentence,

İI. 1 SÂHITYADARPAŅA 35

viz. anigr; these words have no expectancy as regards one an- other i. e. when the word oft: is uttered, desire is produced in the mind to know something about the cow. But this desire is not satisfied by the word अश्वः. आसत्तिर्बुद्धथविच्छेद :- बुद्धे: पदार्थोपस्थि- तरविच्छेद: अव्यवधानम्, अव्यवहित-पदार्थोपस्थितिरिति तात्पर्यार्थः । राम०. Jux- taposition 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 आसत्ति more clearly as 'अव्यवधानेन पदजन्यपदार्थोपस्थितिः' p.265, the knowledge of the meanings of words resulting from the words ( being heard ) without any long pause ( between the several words ). P. L. M. also defines it similarly प्रकृतान्वयबोधानुकूलपदाव्य- वधानमासत्ति: T. D. says अविलम्बेन पदार्थोपस्थितिः संनिधि: (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 necessary that the impression made by each word should remain fresh until this combination is effected. If we utter the two words गाम् and आनय 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 prin- ted book we have no utterance and yet we apprehend the sense because the words occur in juxtaposition. These three, viz., आकाक्षा, योग्यता and आसत्ति or संनिधि are declared to be the cau- ses of वाक्यार्थज्ञान; T.S. says आकांक्षा योग्यता संनिधिश्च वाक्यार्धज्ञानहेतुः। P. 52; V. P. says वाक्यजन्ये च ज्ञाने आकांक्षायोग्यतासत्तयस्तात्पर्यज्ञानं चेति चत्वारि कारणानि p. 247; P.L. M. says शाब्दबोधसहकारिकारणानि आकाक्षा- योग्यतासत्तितात्पर्याणि (p.12). अत्राकांक्षायोग्यतयोरात्मार्धधर्मत्वेपि पदोच्चयधर्म- त्वमुपचाराव (p. 7, 1. 8.). The words आत्मा and अर्थ are to be construed respectively with आकांक्षा and योग्यता; अत्र आकांक्षाया आत्मधर्मत्वेपि योग्यताया अर्थधर्मत्वेऽपि तयोर्यत्पदोच्चयधर्मत्वमुक्तं तदुपचारात् (ie. लक्षणया) 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 colleotion of words in a secondary sense. aTi&T, as said in the text, is a desire to know (fsTT). Desire cannot reside in the words, nor properly speaking, in the senses. Desire is a property of sentient beings alone. It is therefore that aTai&T is said to be THyA in the text. Then how is it that a word is said to be Tai1 We reply that this mode of speech is based on grorr; a पद is said to be साकाक्ष because it conveys a meaning which is itself साकाक्ष; a sense is said to be साकाक, 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. योग्यता ( fitness or compatibility ) really subsists between the things signified by words. The thing 'water' is a fit object to irrigate with. The thing 'fire' is not a fit object to irrigate with. The words are said to possess योग्यता, 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; वाक्यसमयग्राहिका आ्काक्षा। सा चैकपदाधज्ञाने तदर्थान्वय- योग्यार्थस्य यज्ज्ञानं तद्विषयेच्छा अस्य अन्वयी अर्थः क इत्येवंरूपा पुरुषनिष्ठैव तथापि तस्या: स्वविषयेऽर्थे आरोपः। अयमरथोऽर्थान्तरमाकांक्षते इति व्यवहारात। ...... पदं साकांक्षमिति तु साकांक्षार्थबोधकमित्यर्थकम्। P. L. M. p. 12. Compare T. B. pp.47-49 नन्वत्रापि पदानि न साकांक्षाणि ककिं त्वर्थाः, फलादीनामाघेयानां तीराद्याधाराकांक्षितत्वात्। न च विचार्यमाणे अर्था अपि साकांक्षा। आकांक्षाया इच्छात्मकत्वेन चेतनवर्मत्वात्। सत्यम्। अर्थास्तावत्स्वपद श्रोतुरन्योन्यविषयाकांक्षाजन- कत्वेन साकांक्षा उच्यन्ते। तद्द्वारेण तत्प्रतिपादकानि पदान्यपि साकांक्षाणीत्युपचर्यन्ते। ... एवमर्थाः साकांक्षाः परस्परान्वययोग्याः । तद्द्वारा पदान्यपि योग्यानीत्युपचर्यन्ते।. The author implies that anufd is directly an attribute of words themselves. When words are uttered or written by a man in juxtaposition, the meaning is conveyed. T. B. says ( p. 49) संनिहितत्वं तु पदानामेकेनैव पुंसा अविलम्बोच्चारितत्वम्। तच्व साक्षादेव पदेषु सम्भवति नार्थद्वारा।

(P. 7, 1. 10. ). वाक्योच्चयो महावाक्यम् etc. विश्वनाथ says in the words योग्यता ... एव that the collection of sentences which consti- tute a great sentence, i. e. a passage, must possess the three attributes of आकांक्षा etc. योग्यताकांक्षासत्तियुक्त एव वाक्योच्चयो महावाक्यम् Two such sentences as रामो गच्छति, गगनं दृश्यते cannot constitute महावावय, because there is no expectancy between them. इत्थं वाकय ...... रघुवंशादि (p. 8, 11 13-17). Having given a twofold divi- sion of ar4, the author supports it with the authority of Kuma- rilabhatta. स्वार्थबोधे etc .- This occurs in तच्रवार्तिक p. 329. Prama- dadasa, in his translation, ascribes the verse to the वाक्यपदीय. The तब्रवार्तिक reads अङ्गाङ्गित्वाद्यपेक्षया for ०गित्वव्यपेक्षया. V.P. (p. 291) follows the printed तन्नवार्तिक. The meaning is :- a syntactical 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 occount of the sentences being viewed as standing in the relation of principal and subordinate et. The example of वाक्य is शून्यं वासगृहं etc. which occurs in the Ist परिच्छेद.

II. 2 SAHITYADARPANA 37

(P. 7, ll. 18-22). पदोच्चयो ...... मविवक्षितम्-Having defined a sentence as a colletion of words, the author now defines a word. वर्णाः पदं प्रयोगार्हानन्वितैकार्थबोधका :- प्रयोगार्शाश्च अनन्वितैकार्थबोधकाश्च। राम० ' A word means letters so combined as to be suited for use, not in logical connection, conveying a meaning and only one meaning.' प्रयोगार्हेति etc. By the expression 'suited for use' employed in the definition, a crude form (प्रातिपदिक) is excluded from being regarded as a word. A प्रातिपदिक 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. अनन्वित etc .- supply व्यवच्छेद: after महावाक्ययो: and also in the following two clauses. The words ' not in logical connection ' serve to exclude वाक्य and महावाक्य. 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 ( arfaa ) in logical eonnection with one another and not अनन्वित, as in a word (the letters constituting which are not logically connected). fa etc .- साकांक्षाणि च तानि अनेकानि पदानि वाक्यानि च. The expression 'only one' in the definition serves to exclude many words and sentences that are inter-dependent ( arater). There may be certain words and sentences which are suited for use and inter- dependent, but do not possess योग्यता or आसत्ति. Such a collec- tion of words or sentences may have to be called letters. This possibility is excluded by the words 'only one'. The words or sentences spoken of above convey not one but many senses ; while a qa must convey only one sense. An example of such a collection of words would be देवदत्तो डयते. Here the आकांक्षा created by the utterance of the word daed: is satisfied by the word डयते; but there is no योग्यता between the two, as a man cannot fly. This collection of words is not a sentence. An objection might be raised that ua in the definition is superfluous as अनन्वित would serve the same purpose, i. e. would exclude a number of words and sentences that are interdependent. We reply that aafaa serves to exclude only those sentences and great sentences which are properly so called i. e. which possess आकांक्षा, योग्यता and आसत्ति, while एक serves to exclude a number of words and sentences, which though possessing anate, do not possess योग्यता or आसतति and hence cannot properly be called 2 वाक्य or a महावाक्य. If साकांक्ष पदs and वाक्यs are excluded by एक in the definition, निराकांक्ष ones are much more excluded. A collection of words without आकांक्षा or योग्यता or आसत्ि is प्रयोगाई and aafaa. But as the unconnected words present many

38 NOTES ON IL 2

senses they are excluded by the word na in the definition. अर्थबोधका: etc.By the expression employed in the definition *conveying a sense,' the exclusion is effected of such unmeaning combinations of letters as z aq ( which are the first letters of the five classes of consonants). वर्णा इति-By 'etters', it is not intended to speak of a plurality i. e. as the plural aur: oocurs 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. HT (wealth). Other definitions of पद are :- ते (वर्णाः) विभक्तयन्ताः पदम्। न्या. सू. II. 2.60 सुप्तिङन्तं पदम्। पा० I. 4. 14. Both these definitions mean 'a word is what is inflected'. शक्तं पदम्। T. S. A word is what has power or significance.

(P. 7, 1. 23-p. 8, I.1.) अथों वाच्यश्च .. अमिधाद्या :. The author defined a word as 'letters conveying a sense ete.' It is there- fore now necessary to know the nature of ard ( sense ). The meaning that may belong to a word is held to be threefold viz. Expressed, Indicated and Suggested. वाच्योर्थोऽभिधया बोध्य: The expressed meaning is that which is conveyed by the word's power of direct signification (अभिधा). लक्षणया by the power of indication. व्यअ्जनया by the power of suggestion. ताः स्युस्तिस्रः शब्दस्य T4: 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 afa ( function ). Compare the titles of certain works such as arfor- धावृत्तिमातृका, वृत्तिवार्तिक etc .; सा च वृत्तिस्त्रिधा शक्तिर्लक्षणा व्यअ्ना च। P.L. M. p. 2; 'तिस्रो वृत्तयः पदानां भवन्ति शक्तिर्लक्षणा व्यक्षना चेति' अलं० शे. p. 9. Sometimes the word व्यापार is used in the same sense; मम्मट wrote a work called शब्दव्यापारविचार; स मुख्योऽर्थस्तत्र मुख्यो व्यापारो डस्यामिघोच्यते। K.P.2nd. UI. Our author here uses the word शक्ति for वृत्ति; while many other writers restrict the word शक्ति to only one of the वृत्तिs, viz. अभिधा; as for example in the P. L. M. just quoted.

(P. 8, 1. 2-11) तत्र सङ्केतितार्थस्य etc. तत्र means 'among the three powers of a word.' सङ्केतितश्चासौ अर्थश्च. सङ्केतित-सङ्केतः कृत: अस्य. The primary one is अभिधा (primary power), since it con- veys to the understanding the meaning which belongs to the word by convention. शक्ति is defined in T.S. as 'अस्मात्पदादयमर्थो बोद्धव्य इतीश्वरेच्छा सङ्केतः शक्तिः' i c S'akti is the convention made by God that such and such a meaning should be understood

IL 4 SAHITYADARPANA. 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 इच्छामात्रं शक्ति:, there- by intimating that even the human will can endow words with meanings, as in the case of proper names like adat, डित्थ etc. To avoid this controversy T. D. defines शक्ति as अर्थ- स्मृत्यनुकूल: पदपदार्थसम्बन्ध: शक्तिः '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 शक्ति that the तार्किकs identified शक्ति and सङ्केत or इच्छा. The अलङ्गारशेखर says 'शक्तिरीश्वरेच्छा या सङ्केत इत्युच्यते' p. 9. The मीमांसकs on the other hand hold that शक्ति is an independent पदार्थ. शक्ति is said by them to be aaene i. e. 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 word to express that parti- cular sense. The Grammarians follow the #fruiuas on this point; vide उद्योत p.39 (Chan.) "कारिकया 'सङ्केतग्राह शक्तयाख्यपदार्थान्तरमभिधा' 'तादृशं शब्दार्थयोस्तादात्म्यमभिधा' इति मीमांसकपातअ्जलमतमुपनिबद्धमिति बोध्यम्।"; P.L.M., p. 3 'उक्त ईश्वरसङ्केत एव शक्तिरिति नैयायिकमतं न युक्तम्। अयमे- तच्छक्योऽत्रास्य शक्तिरिति अस्य सङ्केतस्य शक्तित: पार्थक्यात् ।'. See also V.P. pp. 271-273. The Rhetoricians generally follow the Gramma- rians on this point. Our author seems to do the same. sauga- an old man who gives directions to another. neaugz middle- aged man to whom directions are given by his senior. wf- मत्पिण्ड a body possessing a dewlap etc. सास्ा तु गलकम्बलः। अमर. II. 9. 63. gaw-Before he grasps the primary meaning of each word. प्रतिपद्यते understands. आवापोद्वापाभ्याम्-अन्वयव्यतिरेकाभ्याम्। TTHo. By the insertion and omission ( of the portions of the sentence 'bring the cow '). सङ्केतमवधारयति he ascertains the con- vention. The idea is :- When a child begins to learn a langu- 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 sees 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 m and ny. 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 sentences, a

40 NOTES ON II. 4

portion, namely गामू, is common to the sentence गामानय, but another portion (आनय) is omitted and something else inserted (बधान). As in the case of both the sentences (गामानय and गां बधान) the same body was dealt with, he naturally associates the portion anq with the body ( cow ). Thus he ascertains that the word at has a convention in respect of cow. The ascerta- inment of the convention leads him to understand that the primary meaning of the word f is cow. Compare T. D. ₹rfif- ग्रहश्च वृद्धव्यवहारेण। व्युत्पित्सुर्बालो गामानयेत्युत्तमवृद्धवाक्य श्रवणानन्तरं मध्यमवृद्धस्य प्रवृत्तिमुपलभ्य गवानयनं दृष्ट्ा मध्यमवृद्धप्रवृत्तिजनकज्चानस्यान्वयव्यतिरेकाभ्यां वाक्य जन्यत्वं निश्चित्याश्वमानय गां बधानेति वाक्यान्तर आवापोद्वापाभ्यां गोपदस्य गोत्वविशिष्टे शक्तिरश्चपदस्याश्वत्वविशिष्टे शक्तिरिति व्युत्पद्यते। p. 50. In this case the सङ्केत is ascertained by the usage of elders (वृद्धव्यवहार). कचिच्च प्रसिद्धपद etc .- supply सङ्गेतमवधारयति. वृद्धव्यवहार 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 इह प्रभिन्नकमलोदरे 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 nyar means a bee :- कमलाभ्यन्तरे भ्रमर एव मधु पिबतीति जानता जनेन कमलपदसमभिव्याह्वारान्मधुकरपदस्य अरमरे सङ्केतो गृह्यते। राम०. कचिदाप्तोपदेशात् sometimes the conventional meaning is understood from the instruction of one worthy of confidence, as in the example ' This ( pointing at the animal ) is what is denoted by the word horse.' An ang is defined by T. B. as आप्तस्तु यथाभूतस्यार्थस्योपदेष्टा पुरुष :; by T.S. as आप्तस्तु यथार्थवक्ता. The following couplet mentions eight ways in which naa is learnt. शक्तियहं व्याकरणोपमानकोशाप्वाक्याद्व्यवहारतश्च । वाक्यस्य शेषाद् विवृतेर्वदन्ति सानिध्यतः सिद्धपदस्य वृद्धाः॥ quoted in P. L. M. p. 145. Of these, the text illustrates three व्यवहार, आप्तवाक्य and सिद्धपद- सांनिध्य; 4 व्याकरण-we learn from Grammar the meanings of roots, terminations, derivatives ete; 5 syar as when the meaning of गवय is known by the similarity of a Gayal with the cow; 6 कोश as when we know from a dictionary the synonyms भजर, अमर, देव etc .; 7 वाक्यशेष (the rest of the passage i.e.) context, as in the Vedic text अक्ता: शर्करा उपदधाति the exact meaning of अक्ताः is understood from the context तेजो वै घृतम् ('सन्दिग्धेषु वाक्यशेषात्' पू. मी. सू. I. 4. 29 .- ); 8 explanation (विवृति), as in रसाल: आम्र :. Compare also अलं. शे. p. 9 "सा (शक्तिः) च 'कोशव्याकरणाझोक्तिवाक्यशे- घोपमादितः। प्रसिद्धपदसम्बन्धाद् व्यवहाराच्च वुध्यते।' ". शक्त्यन्तरानन्तरिता- खन्या शक्ति: शक्त्यन्तरं तेन न अन्तरिता (व्यवहिता)-without the inter- vention of any other power of the word. That power of a

II. 4 SÅHITYADARPANA. 41

word which conveys to the understanding the conventional meaning without the intervention of any other power of the word is called in the text अभिधा. (P. 8, 1l 11-17 ). सक्केतो गृह्यते जातौ ...... आनन्त्यव्यमिचारदोषापा. तात सङ्केतो गृह्यते जातौ गुणद्रव्यक्रियासु च 'A convention ( whereby the expressed meaning of a word is settled ) is accepted in regard to universals, qualities, things and actions.' Having defined arforer as that power which conveys the conventional meaning, the author now deals with the question-where is the convention understood ? In other words the question is, what does a word like qz primarily signify ? Do we understand the aaa with reference to the object jar, or the common pro- perty ( qara 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 केवलव्यक्ति- वादिन:, II जातिविशिष्टव्यक्तिवादिन:, III अपोहवादिन:, IV केवलजातिवादिन, V जात्यादिवादिन :- I. When one says 'bring a jar' one desires the object (arfer) qz, as it is the object that is useful for one's purpose and not the property jarness. Therefore by the word 'jar,' the object 'jar' 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 az pri- marily denotes the व्यक्ति. Compare कैयट's प्रदीप 'व्यक्तिवादिनस्त्वाङ: । शब्दस्य व्यक्तिरेव वाच्या। जातेस्तूपलक्षणभावेन आश्रयणादानन्त्यादिदोषानवकाशः'। p. 17. II. But there are many objections against this theory. If the word 'jar' denotes a particular afer we should require as many separate words as there are jars in the world and the waa 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 az, and when we know its significance as & कम्बुग्रीवादिमद्वस्तु, we apply it to all objects having that shape. घट therefore denotes not only the घटव्यक्ति but also the property कम्बुग्रीवादिमत्त्व, and that it is similar to all jars in the world i. e, when we say घट, we refer to the व्यक्ति घट, the जाति घटत्व and the peculiarity or आकृति कम्बुग्रीवादिमत्त्व. गौतम puts this as 'व्यक्त्यकृति- जातयस्तु पदार्थ:' । N. S. II. 2-68. This is the view of the ancient Naiyayikas whom Annambhatta follows; vide the काव्यप्रकाशसङ्केत (p. 15.) on the words अपोहो वा शब्दार्थ: कैचिदुक्तः 'जातिव्यक्तितद्योगजाति-

42 NOTES ON IT. 4

शब्दार्थ इति बौद्धा :; T. D. गामानयेत्यादौ वृद्धव्यवह्ारात्सर्वत्रानयनादेर्व्यक्तावेव सम्भवेन जातिविशिष्टव्यक्तावेव शक्तिकल्पनाव्। III. The Bauddhas say that the import of all words is अपोह or अतद्व्यावृत्ति, distinction from all other different objects. As individuals are innumerable we cannot understand the सङ्केत with reference to them. As all things are क्षणिक, a जाति (which is defined as नित्यमेकमनेकानुगतं सामान्यम्) is impossible. Therefore what the wordaz really signifies is that a certain thing possesses peculiarities which distinguish it from all other things. We do not exactly know what q is; we know what it is not; we know that it is not पट or anything else. 'सौगतास्तु व्यक्तावानन्त्या- दिदोषाद्भावस्य च देशकालानुगमाभावात्तदनुगतायामतद्व्यावृत्तौ सङ्केतः' प्रदीप. IV Words, according to the Mimansakas, signify the arfa alone primarily. As the arfas are many it is not possible to understand the सङ्केत with reference to them all; it may be said. that जाति cannot be the import of a word, because, when we say घटमानय, we wish the व्यक्ति घट to be brought to us; if a word signified जाति only, the above sentence would mean घटत्वमानय The मीमांसक replies by saying that as व्यक्ति is inseparably conne- cted with जाति, we understand from each word by आक्षेप ( implication or inference ) the व्यक्ति, although the primary significance of a word is जाति. The मीमांसकड go so far as to say that even in proper names like डित्थ there is जाति. For a sum- mary of their views, vide K. P. 2nd Ul. pp. 35-38 (Va); T. S. says 'गवादिशब्दानां जातावेव शक्तिर्िशेषणतया जातेः प्रथममुपस्थितत्वाद्व्यक्ति लाभस्तु आक्षेपादिनेति केचित्'।; 'आकृतिस्तु क्रियार्थत्वात्।' पूर्वमीमांसासूत्र I. 3-33; 'आकृतिरेव शब्दार्थ इति सिद्धम्' तब्रवार्तिक p. 279; see शास्त्रदीपिका on the आकृतिशक्त्यधिकरण 'प्रथमं च सामान्यमेव शब्दाद्गम्यते पश्चाच्च व्यक्तिष्वा कांक्षामात्रं जायते ततस्तदेवाभिधेयं न व्यक्तिविशेषः। शा. दी .; कैयट says: (vol I p. 17 निर्णय० ed) 'जातिरेव शब्देन प्रतिपाद्यते व्यक्तीनामानन्त्या- तसम्बन्धग्रहणासम्भवात्। सा च जाति: सर्वव्यक्तिष्वेकाकारप्रत्ययदर्शनादस्तीत्यवसीयते। तत्र गवादय: शब्दा: भिन्नद्रव्यसमवेतां जातिमभिदधति। तस्यां प्रतीतायां तदावेशात् तदवच्छिन्नं द्रव्यं प्रतीयते। ...... संज्ञाशब्दानामप्युत्पत्तिप्रभृत्याविनाशात्पिण्डस्य कौमार- यौवनाद्यवस्थामेदेऽपि स एवायमित्यमिन्नप्रत्ययनिमित्ता डित्थत्वादिका जातिर्वाच्या। क्रियाशब्देष्वपि जातिर्विद्यते सैव धातुवाच्या।', V. The Grammarians hold that the import of words is either जाति, गुण, क्रिया or द्रव्य i. e. there are four groups of words, जातिशन्द, गुणशब्द, त्रियाशब्द, or द्रव्यशब्द (संज्ञाशब्द). Their view is based upon the words of the Mahabhashya चतुष्टयी शब्दानां प्रवृत्ति: (vide महाभाष्य on the वार्तिक 'लकारोपदेशो यटृच्छा-अशक्तिजानुकरणप्रुत्याद्यर्थः'

II. 4 SAHITYADARPAŅA. 43

on the सूत्र 'ऋलक'). कैयट says on this 'अर्थगतं प्रवृत्तिनिमित्तमनपेक्ष्य यः शब्द: प्रयोक्त्रभिप्रायेणैव प्रवर्तते स यदृच्छाशब्दो डित्थादि:' नागोजीभट्ट says on this 'स्वेच्छयैकस्यां व्यक्तौ सङ्केत्वमानः शब्दो यदृच्छाशब्दः. The Rhetorici- ans generally follow this view. Our author does the same. Vide K. P. II Ul. pp. 32-35 (Va.); तत्र मुख्यश्चतुर्मेदो ज्ञेयो जात्या- दिभेदतः । ... चतुष्टयी हि शब्दानां प्रवृत्तिर्भगवता महाभाष्यकारेणोपवर्णिता चतुष्टयी शब्दानां प्रवृत्तिरिति जातिशब्दा गुणशब्दा: क्रियाशब्दा यदृच्छाशब्दाश्चेति। तथाहि सर्वेषां शब्दानां स्वार्थामिधानाय प्रवर्तमानानासुपरञ्चितविषय विवेकत्वादुपाघिनिबन्धना पवृत्तिः। अ० वृ० मा०p. 4 (on कारिका 2); मम्मट says in his शब्दव्यापार- विचार 'जातिः क्रिया गुणः संज्ञा वाच्योऽर्थः समितध्वनिः। ...... कथं चतुष्टयी शब्दानां प्रवृत्तिः। उच्यते। संस्थानावस्थानप्रमाणवर्णैरभेदेऽपि व्यक्तीनां शाबलेये गौः धावलेये गौरित्यभिन्नप्रत्ययहेततुत्वं जातेरेव, हंसहारादीनां घृतगुडादीनां शुकशारिकाद्यदीरितडि- त्थादिशब्दानां नानावस्थडित्थाद्यर्थानां च भेदेऽपि हंस: शुक्को हंस: शुक्धः घृतं पच्यते गुडं पच्यते डित्थशब्दो डित्थशब्दः, डित्थो डित्थ इति एकाकारावगतिनिबन्धनत्वादे- करूपत्वमेव गुणक्रियायदृच्छानामिति नैतासां भिन्नेष्वभिन्नाभिधानप्रत्ययहे तुर्जातिर्घटते इति चत्वार्येव शब्दप्रवृत्तिनिमित्तानि'। p. 2. In the महाभाष्य (vol I p. 1) we read यत्तहि तद्भिन्नेष्वभिन्नं छिन्नेष्वच्छिन्नं सामान्यभूतं स शब्दः। नेत्याह। आकृतिर्नाम सा, on which नागेश says आकृतिर्जाति: संस्थानं च. जातिर्गोपिण्डादिषु (P. 8, 1. 12). गोपिण्डादिषु=गोव्यक्तिषु. By जाति ( Genus ) is meant गोत्व (nature of a cow) residing in the indi- vidual cows. It is in virtue of this जाति that the thing is a c0w. Hence जाति is called प्राणप्रद i. e. by its connection with the thing, it (arfa) makes it a fit object of our thoughts and speech. गुणो विशेषाधानहेतु: etc. विशेषाधानहेतुः-सजातीयेभ्यो व्यावर्तनं विशेष: तस्य आधानं बोध: तस्य हेतु :- a quality is an accomplished (सिद्ध 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 ET serves to distinguish a white cow from other cows (not white). सिद्ध :- सङ्केत is understood, as said above, on जाति, गुण, क्रिया and संज्ञा. These are the उपाधिs or विशेषणs of व्यक्ति. उपाधि is classified as follows :-

उपाधि

वक्तयदृच्छासंनिवेशित (संज्ञा or द्रव्य) T वस्तषम

साध्य (क्रिया)

प्राणपद (जाति) विशेषाधानहेतु (गुण).

44 NOTES ON IL 4

An Upadhi is of two sorts, वस्तुधर्म (attribute inhering in a thing) and वक्तयदृच्छया संनिव्रेशित (an attribute which is imposed upon & thing by the will of the speaker, such as a proper name). gv is also of two kinds, an attribute that is fully accomplish- ed and that which is in process of accomplishment. A सिद्ध वस्तुधर्म again is of two kinds, sruge that which gives life to a thing and विशेषाधानहेतु. The former is called जाति and the latter is called गुण. What is the distinction between जाति and गुण? जाति is never found dissociated from the individuals in which it resides, while a quality like serves to distinguish a thing from other things belonging to the same जाति. गुण may be disso- ciated from the thing in which it resides. The Taca of a piece of cloth may give place to blackness; but the जाति गोत्व will always be associated with गो. साध्य वस्तुधर्म ( an attribute of a thing in process of accomplishment ) is a fher. When I say qz:, the whiteness of the piece of cloth is an accomplished fact. But when I say तरुश्छिदते I advert not to one single ac- complished 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 वाक्यपदीय 'गुणभूतैरवयवैः समूहः करमजन्मनाम्। बुद्धया प्रकल्पितामेदः क्रियेति व्यपदिश्यते॥'. P. L. M. explains this as 'क्रमजन्मनां व्यापाराणं समूहं प्रति गुणभूतैरवयवैर्युक्त: सङ्कलनात्मय कत्वबुद्धया प्रकल्पितामेदरूपः समूहः क्रियेति न्यवह्ियते इति।' p. 16. व्यावर्तयन्ति-Differentiate. द्रव्यशब्दा: names of things i.e. proper names. क्रिया साध्यरूपाः वस्तुधर्मा :- This has been explained above. एषु=साध्यरूपवस्तुधर्मेषु. अधिश्रयणावश्रयण 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." अधिश्रयणं-चुह्नयां स्थाल्या आरोपणम्; अवश्रयणं-स्थाल्या अवरोपणम् पूर्वापरीभूत: occupying successive periods of time from first to last. अधिश्रयणं च अवश्रयणं च अधिश्रयणावश्रयणे, आदिश्च अन्तश्च अन्तादी (according to 'राजदन्तादिषु परम्'। पा० IL 2.31), अधिश्रयणावश्रयणे अन्तादी यस्य सः अधिश्रयणावश्रयणान्तादि: स चासा पूर्वांपरीभूतश्च व्यापारकलाप: एष्वेव हि व्यक्तेरुपाधिषु सङ्केतो गृद्यते न व्यक्तौ (p. 8, 1I. 16-17). This has been explained above when dealing with जात्यादिवादिन :. आनन्त्यव्यमिचारदोषापाताल-If it were supposed that the convention is made in respect of individuals ( and not in respect of the four syrfrs-attributes ), then will follow the faults of endless-

II. 4 SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 45

ness and violation. To explain-If it be not admitted that a word imports जाति, गुण, etc., we ask what does it import! You reply-it imports afi. We ask a further question-Is the convention made in respect of all individuals ( say, all cows in the case of nt ) or in respect of some one only ? If you admit the first alternative, you are liable to the fault of anat; i. e. if you say that the convention of a word like af 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 व्यभिचार, 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 rft :. Now, according to the केवलव्यक्तिवादिन, the child understands the सङ्केत of the word गौ: with reference to that individual red bull. Suppose, a short time afterwards, the child sees a black bull. The child will call the animal गौ :. But the सङ्केत of the word m: was understood with reference to a red bull. The black bull was सङ्केताविषय and yet the child applied the word गौ: to it. A घट is also equally सङ्गेताविषय, as the black bull was when the child understood the सङ्केत in respect of the red bull. There- fore, as the black bull and घट are both सङ्केताविषय, it follows that the child should apply the word of: to qz, just as it app- lied the word गौ: to a black bull which was सङ्गेताविषय. 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 waa was not made, then the rule सङ्गेतितस्यैव शाब्दबोध: is violated. Read the K. P. Pr. pp. 32-32 'किं हि व्यक्तिपु सर्वांसु शक्तिग्रहो व्यवहाराङ्गम् (गोपदजन्य- शाब्दबोधाङ्गम्। प्रभा), उत यस्यां कस्यांचित। नाद्यः। आनन्त्यात् (गवादिव्यक्ती- नामनन्तत्वेनोपस्थापकाभावात्। प्रभा; तथा च शक्तिग्रह्सम्भवः । उद्योत)। नान्त्यः। व्यभिचारप्रसङ्गात् (सङ्केतित स्यैव शाब्दबोध इति नियमाभावप्रसङ्गादित्यर्थः)। यतोऽगृही- तसक्केतगोपिण्ड इव घटादेरपि गोपदात्प्रतीतिः प्रसक्ता। अगृहीतसङ्केतत्वस्य तुल्यत्वात्। किं च। न यत्र सङ्केतग्रहस्तस्यापि प्रतीतिरिति व्यभिचारान्न व्यक्तौ सङ्केतः (सङ्केता- विषयगोपिण्डस्यापि प्रतीतेर्व्यभिचार इत्यर्थः । प्रभा ). अथ लक्षणा-मुख्यार्थबाघे etc. (P. 8, 1. 18. ff). Having dealt with the first power of a word, viz. अभिधा, the author now begins the treatment of the second, viz. लक्षणा. यया अन्योडर्थः प्रती- यते असौ लक्षणा शक्ति :- this is the definition. मुख्यार्थबाधे, तद्युक्तो, रूढे:

46 NOTES ON II. 5

qulereT-these expressions refer to the three conditions सुस्यार्यवाय, मुख्यामेसम्बन्ध, रुढिप्रयोजनान्यतरत्व) under which alone aaun is possible and in the absence of any one of which 4nT would be impossible. The word afuar is doscriptive. It brings out the point which distinguishes grur from afirn. 'Where the primary 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 motive'. तधुक्तो-मुख्यार्थसम्बद्ध: अम्य := मुख्यार्थादन्य :. रूढिः = प्रसिद्धि प्रयोजनाद-प्रयोजनाभिसन्वेरित्य्थः। प्रयो- बनाभिसन्धिपूर्वकं लाक्षणिकशब्दप्रयोगे वक्तः प्रवृत्तिर्भवतीति तस्य लक्षणाप्रयोजकत्वं नोभ्यम्। उद्योत. 'कलिङ्ग: साहसिक:' etc. (p.8, 1 21). साइसिक means 'rash'. The word af primarily signifies a country ( Orissa of the present day ). But as rashness is a quality found in sentient beings only, the primary meaning of af is hero inappropriate. Thus there is मुख्यार्थबाघ. Honce the word कलिक् cansos us to think of the men residing in the country, which meaning is connected with the primary meaning 'country'. Thus there is तदोग (मुख्यार्थसम्बन्ध). स्वसंयुक्तान्-स्वार्थसम्बद्धान्. To take another example. गङ्गायां घोष: 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 rarT. This impossibility leads us to think of the bank, which is connected with itself ( i. c. the Ganges ) by the rela- tion of proximity etc. Thus thero is aet. This power of a word by which we understand 'men' from the word afr and 'bank' from the word Ganges, and which is arfua, is called मक्षणा. अर्पिता is explained as स्वाभाविकेतरा (स्वाभाविकाठ इतरा) or ईश्वरा- नुद्भावित्ता (ईश्वरेण अनुद्भाविता अनुत्थापिता). These two explanations of अर्पित refer to two views about अभिषा, the primary power. Some say that afra is that power of a word which is natural. According to their opinion, aaunr is a power other than the power which belongs to a word naturally. Others say arfren 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 सक्ेत which is identified by the नैयायिकs with अभिधा. Now, aocording to this view, the arafor meaning of a word is not given to it by God, but by the human will. Hence gq is a power not communicated to a word by God, unlike ufrn.

4I.5 SÂHITYADARPAŅA.

gtr etc. (p. 8, 1. 25). In the former example, 'rash afeg', the reason why the word sfar, primarily signifying a country, has the power of indicating an inhabitant of that region, is Usage i. e. the fact that all people familiarly employ the name of a country to signify an inhabitant of the country. SRT etc. In the latter example, the motive ( for using the word Ganges when we really mean 'bank of the Ganges' ) consists in this that it leads us to think of the excess of coolness and purity ( which belong to the Ganges itself ) which cannot be had from the statement ( of the same idea in the form of the expression ) 'a herd-station on the bank of the Ganges.' e and qracree exist in abundance in the Ganges and not on the bank. If we simply say गङ्गातटे घोष:, we convey no idea of the शल्य and पावनत्व pervading the hamlet. The motive that leads us to say nsrai qrq: is that we want to convey the fact that the hamlet is situated in a spot which is full of coolness and holiness, the two characteristics of the Ganges, What we want to suggest by 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 mode of expression गङ्गातटे घोष: हेतुं faasfy etc. (p. 8, 1. 27)-In the text it is said that Indication arises through Usage or Motive, because, if a word were to indicate, apart from these two, anything what-soever that has any relation to the primary meaning ef the word, then there would be an excessive stretching; i. e. as everything in the world is related to everything else in some way or other, however far-fetched it may be, any word may indicate any- thing and then there will be a confusion of all ideas.

केच्वित्त कर्मणि कुशल :... शयनकालेपि प्रयोगात्. (P. 9, 11. 1-7). It is Mammata who gives कर्मणि कुशल: as an example of Indication arising from Usage. The words of मम्मट are 'कर्मणि कुशल इत्यादी दर्भग्रहणादयोगात् ... मुख्यार्थस्य बाघे ... विवेचकत्वादौ सम्बन्धे रूढित: (प्रसिद्धेः) ... मुख्येन अमुख्योषर्यों लक्ष्यते ... यत्सा लक्षणा । कुशल कुशॉल्ातीति-One who takes FET ( sacrificial grass ). What Mammata means is :- The primary meaning of the word F3rS, viz. 'gatherer of aET grass' being 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 disoriminating person (which the gatherer of FT grass must be, else he could

48 NOTES ON II. 5

not tell one kind of grass from another). The saur is here based upon f, usage i. e. it is a general practice to use the word FETs in the sense of 'expert.' The three conditions of लक्षणा are here satisfied, viz. मुख्यार्थबाध, तद्योग and रूढिप्रयोजनान्यतरत; and a meaning other than the primary one is indicated. तदन्ये न (p. 9, 1. 3). Othors do not like this view of the matter (inoluding विश्वनाथ himself). Their idea is as follows :- The primary meaning of the word FETa is 'expert' itself, although the sense of 'gatherer of F7 grass' might be gathered from the etymology. The etymological meaning is not necessarily the primary meaning. It is the grammarians who find out the etymology of every word that is not a radical and often times they derive 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 by convention. अन्यद्धि शब्दानां व्युत्पत्तिनिमित्त etc. The reason for the etymology of words is one thing, viz, the theories and conve- nience of Grammarians; and the reason for the employment of a word is quite another, viz, the long-standing practice of using the word in a particular sense. व्युत्पत्तिलभ्यस्य मुख्यार्थत्वे-If it were said that the primary meaning of a word is what is gathered from its etymology, then in the sentence 'the cow is lying' there would be Indication; because, as the word ar is formed from the root गम् 'to go' by the addition of the affix डो (ओ) according to the Unadi-sutra (235 asi:), it means 'what is moving' and it cannot be primarily applied to the cow when lying down; there would be incompatibility in saying 'what is moving is sleeping'. The मुख्यार्थ will be बाधित and we shall have to resort to &nn. But no one holds this absurd view as regards गौ :; similarly then we must look upon कुशल. कर्मणि कुशल: must therefore be looked upon not as an example of लक्षणा, but rather of अभिधा. Compare the सर्वदर्शनसंग्रह p. 161 'न च व्युत्पत्तिबलादेव सर्वत्र शब्द: प्रवर्तते। तथात्वे गच्छतीति गौरिति व्युत्पत्तेर्तिष्ठन्गौर्न स्यात् गच्छतो देवदत्तस्य स्यात्। '; also काव्यानुशासन of हेमचन्द्र "कुशल-द्विरेफ- द्विकादयस्तु साक्षात्सङ्केतविषयत्वान्मुख्या एवेति न रूढिर्लक्ष्यस्यार्थस्य हेतुत्वेना- स्माभिरुक्ता।" p. 25. तन्जेदानाह मुख्यार्थस्य ... अजहृत्सार्थेत्युच्यते। (p. 9, 11 8-16). The author now comes to the divisions of लक्षणा. Construe (यया वृस्या) मुख्यार्थस्य वाक्यार्थेऽन्वयसिद्धये इतराक्षेपो (भवति) मषा आत्मनोष्यु-

II. 6 SÂHITYADARPAŅA, 49,

पादानात् (मुख्यार्थस्याप्यपरित्यागात्) उपादानलक्षणा. इतराक्षेप 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 उपादानलक्षणा (Inclu- sive Indication ), so called because, the primary meaning also is taken in or included (उपादीयते मुख्याथोंपि अनयेति). An example of उपादानलक्षणा based upon usage is 'the white gallops'; and of one based upon motive is 'the lances enter'. अनयो: In these two examples. श्वेतादिभि :... अन्वयमलभमानैः (p. 9,11 12-13) 'white' and lances' being inanimate cannot have by themselves ( *aa: ) a logical connection, as agents, with the actions 'gallop- ing' and 'entering'. एतत्सिद्धये-धावनप्रवेशनकर्तृत्वान्वयसिद्धये-for the purpose of establishing a logical connection among the things expressed in each sentence. So what we understand in the two sentences is 'the white horsc gallops' and 'the men with lances enter. पूर्वत्र.रूढि :- In श्ेतो धावति, 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 उपादानलक्षणा, the 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 लक्षणलक्षणा (Exclusive Indication') there is mere indication of another thing to the exclusion of the primary sense; e. g. गङ्गायां घोष: Here the word 'Ganges' enti- rely gives up its primary sense and indicates the bank. This is the difference between उपादानलक्षणा and लक्षणलक्षणा which are briefly defined by मम्मट as 'स्वसिद्धये पराक्षेपः परार्थ स्वसमर्पणम्। उपादानं लक्षणं चेत्युक्ता शुद्धैव सा दविधा॥।' upon which प्रदीप remarks 'स्वार्थापरित्यागेन परार्थलक्षणमुपादानमित्यर्थः । स्वार्थपरित्यागेन परार्थलक्षणं लक्षणम् ।'. इयमेव= उपादान- लक्षणैव. अजहत्स्वार्था-अजहत् स्वार्थो याम्। राम० लक्षणा is divided by some into three kinds जहलक्षणा, अजहलक्षणा, जहदजहलक्षणा. जहल्क्षणा is that where the primary sense is wholly abandoned and a new one substituted, as in मन्जा: क्रोशन्ति, where मन् signifies a child slee- ping on a cot and not the cot itself. In अजहत्सवार्था, the word retains its primary sense and conveys something in additoin, as in काकेभ्यो दधि रक्ष्यताम्, where the word काक signifies not only the

50 NOTES ON II 6

crow, but all the other दध्युपघातक creatures. Compare वाक्यपदीय II. 314 'काकेभ्यो रक्ष्यतां सर्पिरिति बालोपि चोदितः। उपघातपरे वाक्ये न श्वादिभ्यो न रक्षति॥।'. In जहदजहल्क्षणा a part of the primary meaning is retained and a part is left out, as in alsi देवदत्त :; the word सः means तत्कालीनो देवदत्तः, while अयम् signifies एतत्कालीनो देवदत्तः and so to establish the identity of the two we leave out the qualification तत्कालीन and एतत्कालीन. See T.D. p. 5 'यत्र वाच्यार्थस्यान्वयाभावस्तत्र जहती यथा मञ्चाः क्रोशन्तीति। यत्र वाच्यार्थस्याप्यन्वयस्तन्राजहती यथा छत्रिणो गच्छन्तीति। यत्र वाच्यैकदेशत्यागेनैक- देशान्वयस्तत्र जहदजहती यथा तत्त्वमसीति।'. See V. Sara. pp. 43-47; but see V. P. pp. 283-285 against the view of V. Sara; मल्िनाथ in his commentary on एकावली gives the following संग्रहश्लोक "स्वार्धत्यागे समानेऽपि सह तेनान्यलक्षणा। यत्रेयमजहत्स्ार्था जहत्स्ार्था तु तं विना। स्वार्थैकांश- त्यागादंशान्तरमेव लक्ष्यते यत्र। सा जहदजहृत्स्वार्था तत्त्वमसीत्यादिविषयदृश्येयम्।।" p. 68.

अर्पणम् स्वस्य ...... जहत्स्वार्थेत्युच्यते। (P. 9, 11. 17-27). Construe (यया वृत्या) वाक्यार्थे परस्यान्वयसिद्धये स्वस्य अर्पणं स्यादेषा उपलक्षणहेतुत्वात लक्षणलक्षणा (उच्यते). स्वस्य अर्पण-स्वार्थस्य परित्याग :. 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 लक्षणलक्षणा ( Exclusive Indication ), since it is the cause of an indication pure and simple and nothing more. The word उपलक्षणहेतुत्वात् shows why this kind of लक्षणा is called लक्षणलक्षणा (उपलक्ष्यते अनेन इति उपलक्षणम्). The rash Kalinga' is an example of लक्षणलक्षणा based upon usage. Here, the primary meaning of कलिन is entirely given up (स्वस्य अर्पणम्) and the meaning 'inhabi- "tant of कलिङ" 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 लक्षणलक्षणा based upon प्रयोजन is a 'hamlet on the Ganges'. Here, the primary meaning of 'TST', viz. a stream of water, is entirely 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.

यथा वा उपकृतं-बदुभिरपकारैस्ताप्यमानस्योक्तिरियम्। शब्दव्यापारविचार p.4. 'यत् त्वया बडु उपकृतं तद्विषये किं वाच्यम्। बद्डुत्वादुपकाराणां वक्तुं न शक्यते इत्यर्थः । भवता परं केवलं सुजनता प्रथिता प्रकटीकृता। ... हे सखे तस्ाव ईद्टशमेव सदा विदधव (कुर्वन्) शरदां वर्षाणां शतं सुखितं सुखयुक्तं यथा स्यात्तथा आस्स तिष्ठेति मुख्योऽर्थः। स च प्रकरणादिना बुद्धापकारिभावं प्रति वाधितः सन विपरीतं लक्षयति। तथथा-उपकृतमपकृतम्। सुजनता दुर्जनता ।' ... ड. चं०. The

1I. 7 SAHITYADARPANA. 51.

primary meaning of the sentence is 'Oh friend, you have highly obliged me, how shall I express the obligation 1 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 a7 etc. mean their opposites by Indication. wz himself remarks in श० व्या० वि० 'अतो वक्तमहिन्ना मूर्खे बृहस्पतिशब्देन मूर्खत्वमिवापकारि- दुर्जनत्वादि अत्र लक्ष्यते.' This verse is cited by Mammata in the 4th Ul. of K. P. as an example, where the expressed sense, being quite improper, is altogether given up 'कच्विदनुपपद्यमानतया अत्यन्तं तिरस्कृतम् (वाच्यम्)' p. 83 (Va). अत्रापकारादीनां वाक्याथेऽन्वयसिद्धये- 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. उपकृतादय: शब्दा आत्मानमर्पयन्ति the words 3ua etc. give themselves up and stand ironically for injuries. The मुख्यार्थ is बाधित, 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 we ironically apply the word बृहस्पति te a fool. फरमपकारातिशय :- The result of this mode of expression is that excess of injury is understood. इयमेव-लक्षणलक्षणैव. जहत्सवार्था-This we have explained above under अजहत्स्वार्था.

आरोपाध्यवसानाभ्या etc. (P. 9, 11.28.ff). So far we have spoken of four varieties of लक्षणा, viz. उपादानलक्षणा (based upon रूढि1 and प्रयोजन2) and लक्षणलक्षणा (based upon रूढि and प्रयोजन4). Now a further basis of division is introduced. आरोप means the expre- ssing in words of an object and of the thing with which it is identified; e. g. the words माणवक and अग्नि. If we say अभिर्माणवकः we identify माणवक with अधि and both of them are expressed in words. अध्यवसान-When an object is swallowed up i. e. not expresseed in words, by the thing with which it is identified, there is अध्यवसान, e.g. when we say with reference to a boy 'अगनिरयम्', there is अध्यवसान, because the boy is not referred to by name, and he is identified with 'fire.' In this example, माणवक is the विषय (an object upon which another is superimpos- ed ) and अभि is the विषयिन (an object which is super-imposed apon another). प्रदीप says 'विषयविषयिणों में देनोपन्यासस्या श्रा रोपपदार्थत्वाद' and 'विषयिणा विषयतिरोभावस्यात्राध्यवसानपदार्थत्वात'. विषियस्यानिगीर्णस्य ...... पूर्वोदाइरणान्येव (P. 9, 1. 30-p. 10, -1. 15). विषयस्य &C. अनिगीर्णस्य not swallowed (by the विषयिन् i e. what

52 NOTES ON II. 8

is superimposed upon another). अन्यतादात्म्यप्रतीतिकृत्-अन्यतादा- त्म्थस्य प्रतीति करोतीति-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 called सारोपा लक्षणा, Superimponent Indication. (विषयिणा) निगीर्णस्य विषयस्य अन्यतादात्म्यप्रतीतिकृत् साध्यवसानिका मता. 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 it were inside of that with which it is identified. साध्यवसाना अध्यवसानेन सह (वर्तते) इति. An example of उपादानलक्षणा सारोपा based upon रूढि is 'the horse- the white-gallops.' हि because. अनिगीर्णस्वरूप :- अनिगीर्ण स्वरूपं यस्य who is not swallowed up i. e. who is expressed by the word अश्र. स्वसमवेतश्वेतगुणतादात्म्येन प्रतीयते is thought of as identical with the quality i. e. the colour 'white', which is in intimate relation with it (with अश्व). समवेत-समवायसम्बन्धेन सम्बन्द्. The relation of समवाय holds between गुण and गुणिन्. See T. S. or T. B. We understand here that the words 'the horse' and 'the white' mean just one and the same thing. An example of उपादानलक्षणा सारोपा based upon प्रयोजन is 'These-the lances enter.' Here the men carrying lances are denoted by the pronoun एते. They are also referred to by the word कुन्ता: and thus there is here सारोपा लक्षणा. An example of लक्षणलक्षणा सारोपा based upon afa is 'The Kalinga-the man-fights.' Here पुरुष is the विषय and कलिङ् is the विषयिन्. Both are expressed, therefore there is सारोपा. आधाराधेयभाव: सम्बन्ध :- आधार support, . location; आघेय thing located. An example of लक्षणलक्षणा सारोपा arising form प्रयोजन is 'Longevity-Ghee.' कार्यकारणभावसम्बन्धसम्बन्ध्यायु स्तादात्म्येन ( p. 10, 1l. 7-8). कार्यकारणभावसम्बन्धेन सम्बन्धि यदायु: तेन तादात्म्येन. Here Ghee, the cause of longevity, is thought of as identical with the longevity related to it through the relation of cause and effeot. अन्यवैलक्षण्येन etc .- Following the words of K. P. and Pradipa [शुद्ध मेदयोस्त्वन्यवैलक्षण्येनाव्यभिचारेण च कार्यकारित्वादि (प्रयोजनम्) K. P; शुद्धमेदे तु सारोपे अन्यवैलक्षण्येन कार्यकारित्वादेः, साध्यवसाने तु अव्यभिचारेण कार्यकारित्वादेः प्रतीतिः फलम्। Pradipa], we should read अन्यवैलक्षण्येन आयुष्करत्वं प्रयोजनम्. Here only सारोपा लक्षणलक्षणा based upon प्रयोजन is spoken of. The प्रथोजन in this case, as said by प्रदीप, is अन्यवैलक्षण्येन आयुष्करत्वम् अव्यभिचारेण आयुष्करत्वं is the प्रयोजन in साध्यवसाना लक्षणा only, which will be referred to later and therefore the word अव्यमिचारेण should not ocour here. राम० also remarks 'अन्यवैलुक्षण्ेनाव्यमिचारेणे-

II. 9 SÂBITYADARPAŅA. 53

त्यन्न वाकारो बोध्यः'. अन्यवैलक्षण्येन 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 olse i. e. in a manner superior to anything else-no other article of our diet being so nutritious. qUT aT etc. In the above we see that for aguT there must be some kind of direct relation () between the primary and the indicated sense. In आयुर्धृतम् the सम्बन्ध is that of cause and effect. The author now points out some other relations which are at the root of लक्षणा. राजकीयः पुरुष :- When a man belonging to the king i. e. in the king's employ. The प्रयोजन in calling a king's servant a king is राजवदलंध्यशासनत्व i. e. that he is endowed with so much authority that his orders must be implicitly obyed like those of the king. अग्रमात्रेऽवयवे etc. (p. 10111,). When there is meant only the foremost portion of the arm from the elbow, ( the whole arm being, in Sanskrit, called ₹), one employs the word a (to denote a part only of what is really the hand ). Here guT is due to the relation of the whole and its parts. This may be said to be based upon रूढि or there may be a प्रयोजन-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 Vamana on the word अग्रहस्त 'हस्ताग्राग्रहस्तादयो गुणगुणिनोर्भेदामेदाभ्याम् ।' काव्यालक्कारसूत्र V.2. 20. तात्कर्म्यलक्षण: that of doing the work of so and so; तस्य कर्म तत्कर्म तस्य भावः तात्कर्म्यम्. 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 aTar 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 प्रयोजन here is the conveying of thorough mastery in the craft, although he is a Brahmana, इन्द्रार्थासु स्थूणासु etc. (p. 10 1. 13) as regards sacrificial posts which are useful for Indra ( i. e. to which the victims to be offered to Indra are to be tied ), one may say 'the Indras.' तादर्थ्यलक्षण :- तस्मै इदम् तदर्थम् तस्य भाव: तादर्थ्यम्-The relation is that of 'serving the purpose of.' The motive here is the fact that the posts deserve to be honoured as much as Indra himself. अस्याश्रतुर्षु भेदेषु &c. (p. 101.15). The four examples of साध्यवसाना are in order श्वेतो धावति (रूढौ उपादानलक्षणा), कुन्ताः प्रविशन्ति (प्रयोजने उपादानलक्षणा), कलिङ्ग: साहसिक: (रूढौ लक्षणलक्षणा), and गज्गायां घोष- (प्रयोजने लक्षणलक्षणा). All these are साध्यवसाना, because the िषय

54 NOTES ON II. 9

in each case is swallowed up by the विषयिन e. g. अन् in the first is not expressed, in the 2nd yrar: and so on. The relations (arrys ) which are at the root of aaur are summarized in differant works differently; e. g. श० व्या० वि० p.8 'यश्च सम्बन्धो कक्षणाया निमित्तं तं पञ्चविघमाङगः। तथोक्तम्। अभिधेयेन सम्बन्धात्सादृश्यात् सम- वायतः । वैपरीत्यात्क्रियायोगालक्षणा पञ्चधा मता॥' The अभिधावृत्तिमातृका asri bes this verse to आचार्यभर्तृमिश्र (भर्तृहरि author of वाक्यपदीय) and quotes it for the same purpose; see कारिका 10; the Nyayasutra gives an exhaustive list of the relations on accout of which one word is used in a secondary sense for another; सहचरण-स्थान- तादर्थ्य-वृत्त-मान-धारण-सामीप्य-योग-साधन-आधिपत्येभ्यो ब्राह्मण-मञ्न-कट-राज- सक्त-चन्दन-गङ्गा-शकट-अन्न-पुरुषेष्वतद्भ्ावेऽपि तदुपचार: । N.S. II. 2.63 .; for explanation see वात्स्यायन's भाष्य; see P.L.M. p. 7 'तात्स्थ्यात्तथैव ताद्र्म्यांत्तत्सामीप्यात्तथैव च। तत्साइचर्यात्तादर्थ्याज्ज्ञेया वै लक्षणा बुघैः ॥'. The examples in order of this last Karika are मञ्ना हसन्ति, गौर्वाहीक, गङ्गायां घोष:, यष्टी: प्रवेशय, इन्द्रार्था स्थूणा इन्द्र इति. This is based on the words of the महाभाष्य 'चतुर्भिः प्रकारैरतस्मिन्स इति भवति तात्स्थ्यात्ताद्वर्म्याद तत्सामीप्याव तत्साहचर्यादिति' (vol II p. 218). The examples in order are मञ्चा इसन्ति, यान्तं जटिनं ब्ह्मदत्त इत्याह, गङ्गायां घोष:, कूपे गर्गकुलम्. सादृश्येतरसम्बन्धा: ctc. (P. 10, 1. 16 ff). The author introdu- ces a further basis of division. ताः सकला :- The eight kinds already spoken of, viz. उपादानलक्षणा and लक्षणलक्षणा each of which is first divided into two varieties रूढिमूला and प्रयोजनवती, each of these four being either सारोपा or साध्यवसाना. सादृश्येतरसम्बन्धा :- सादृश्याव इतरः सादृश्येतर: सम्बन्ध: यासाम्. All these eight kinds of लक्षणा, when the relation on which they are based is some one other than that of similarity, are called Pure; but when they arise from likeness, they are called Qualitative. Thus the aos now amount to 16. गौणी-गुणनिमित्ता वृत्तिर्गौणी वृत्ति: or गुणेभ्य आगता गौणी. सादृश्येतरसम्बन्धा :- The relations other than that of सादृश्य are those of कार्यकारणभाव, स्वस्वामिभाव etc. The eight examples of शुद्धा are the eight examples already given above i. e. श्रेतो धावति, अश्वः श्रेतो ावति etc. (p.10 1. 2.ff). An example of उपादानलक्षणा गौणी based upon f is These oils are pleasant in the cold weather.' Here the word as, 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- tard seed. Thus this is उपादानलo. The word तैल is by usage applied to all oils ( not only to that extracted from fa ). Therefore the लक्षणा is रूढिमूल. It is गौणी, as the oil .of mustard etc. is so called because its qualities are similar in certain

I1. 9-10 SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 55

respects to those of the oil of sesamum. The लक्षणा is सारोपा because the pronoun एतानि is mentioned. An example of उपादानलक्षणा सारोपा arising from प्रयोजन is 'these, the princes are going,' when this sentence is employed with reference to pri- nces and person like them that are going. An example of साध्यवसाना गौणी उपादानलक्षणा arising from usage is 'oils aro pleasant in the cold weather,' omitting the pronoun vaif. In the same way, the example under प्रयोजन would be 'the princes go,' omitting the pronoun एते. An example of सारोपा लक्षणलक्षणा गौणी arising from रूढि is 'the king clears away the foe-the chief of Gauda'. This is लक्षणलक्षणा because the word कण्टक 'thorn' entirely gives up its primary meaning, and implies 'a foe' from the likeness of the two. Therefore it is गौणी. The word कण्टक is by common practice used in the sense of 'foe'. Therefore it is रूढिमूल. As (the विषय) गौडेन्द्र (on whom कण्टकत्व is superimposed) is mentioned, it is सारोपा. If we omit the word गौडेन्द्र it will be an example of साध्यवसाना, as done below. An example of सारोपा गौणी लक्षणलक्षणा arising from a Motive is 'Vahika is a bull'. If we omit वाहीक (the आरोपविषय) as in 'The bull prattles,' there is साध्यवसाना. वाहीक is derived in two or three ways. वाहीको नाम देशविशेष: तत्रत्यः पुरुषः वाहीक: an inhabitant of Vahika (Panjab). नागेशमट्ट on कैयट under एढू प्राचां देशे (पा. I. 1. 75) says वाहीकलक्षणं च 'पञ्चानां सिन्धुषछानां नदीनां येऽन्तराश्रिताः। तान्धर्मबाद्यानशुचीन् वाहीकान् परिवर्जयेत्॥' कर्णपर्व 44.7 and then adds एवं च धर्मवद्दिर्भूतत्वाद्वाहीकत्वम् Another way is बहिर्भवो बाहीक: बवयोरमेदाव वाहीकः इति शास्त्रीयाचारा- द्धहिर्भूत इत्यर्थ: Panini appears to favour the idea that वाहीक is the name of a country, see his sutra वाहीकया मेभ्यश्च IV. 2. 117. A Vartika on पा० IV. 1. 85 says 'बहिषष्टिलोपो यक्न' (बाह्यः). Another says 'ईकक्' (वाहीकः) मत्र केचिदाडु: etc. (P. 11,l.1. ff). The author here expounds the different views held as to the way in which the गौणी लक्षणा takes effect. अत्र =गौर्वाहीक इत्यादौ. गोसहचारिणो गणा ...... लक्ष्यन्ते. The qualities residing in a bull, such as sonselessness and dulness, are indicated. The idea is :- The word af primarily means the जाति गोतव; the qualities जाड्य and मान्न are only iudicated, as they are always associated in each individual bull with mter. We have to explain now how the word 'bull' is put in the same case-relation with 'वाहीक'. ते च गोशब्दस्य-These qualities, thus indicated, serve as the causes why the word or is practically used for the object वाहीक. वाहीकामिधाने=वाहीकस्य अभिधया बोधने. The idea is :- The qualities जाड्य and मान्य etc. are found in

56 NOTES ON II. 9-10

वाहीक. Whoever possessess जाड्य and मान्य is to be called गो as it indicates these. This is the principle which regulates the practical employment of the word गो. As जाड्य and मान्ध are- found in वाहीक, he is spoken of as गो. These theorists say that the primary mening of गो is गोत्व, which indicates जाड्य and मान्; the possession of these by वाहीक enables us to employ the word r to denote Vāhika i. e. a second power of primary signi- fication is given to the word गो. Their idea is गोशब्दात् लक्ष- णया प्रथमं जाड्याद्युपस्थितिः, ततः अभिधया घाहीकस्य बोध :. They do not say that 'the man वाहीक' is indicated by the word 'गो, but that he is denoted by गो; what is indicated is the qualities जाड्य and मान्द of गो. This view is improper for the following reasons :- गोशब्दस्य ...... असामर्थ्यात् (p 11.12). Because the word गो cannot denote, as the theorists say, the object called वाहीक in respect of which no convention was made (it being only through wa that a word can primarily signify anything ). गोशब्दार्थमात्रबोधनाच्-and because the word गो 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, गोत्व). These theorists say that the word गो first express गोत्व and secondly वाहीक also. This is declared to be impossible. गो means गोत्व only and as such denotes any individual bull, after which, its power of denotation is ex- hausted; it cannot further denote anything; it may indicate or suggest. Compare the प्रभा 'वाहीके गोपदशक्तौ सङ्केताधभावान्न किंचित्प्- माणम्.' उद्योत speaks of another objection against this view 'जाड्यस्य लक्ष्यत्वात् वाहीके सङ्कतविरहेण तस्य गोपदाशक्यत्वाच्च गोवृत्तिजाड्यस्य तदवृत्तित्वाच्चेति भाव: ।'. अन्ये च पुनर्गोंशब्देन वाहीकार्थो नाभिधीयते ... लक्ष्यन्ते (p.1111.5-6). The object वाहीक is not denoted by the word गो (as said by the theorists referred to above), but only the gualities belonging to aeim are indicated as being of the same kind as the qualities belonging to the object which the word 'bull' itself denotes. Their idea is :- in गौर्वाहीक: what is indicated by the word गो is the qualities जाड्य and मान्घ belonging to वाहीक on account of their being similar to and hence being looked upon as identical with the properties 'dulness' etc. which reside in what is denoted by गो. The word गो does not denote वाहीक (as the theorists mentioned above say ), nor does it indicate the

II. 9-10 SAHITYADARPANA. 57

invididual वाहीक. What is indicated is the qualities जाडथ and मान्य belonging to वाहीक. The individual वाहीक is not indicated by the word t, because he is apprehended from the word arela 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 वाहीक is denoted by the word गो; according to the second, the individual वाहीक is neither denoted by the word nr nor indicaled by it. II. According to the first view, dullness and stupidity co- existing in a bull are indicated by the word t; according to the 2nd view, what is indicated is the qualities dullness etc, belonging to वाहीक (and not to गो) which are similar to and hence looked upon as identical with those of m. The only point in which the two theories coincide is that both of them regard that the word at indicates qualities and not the individual वाहीक. तदपि अन्ये (p. 11. 1. 6). This second view also is not approved of by others (including विश्वनाथ). तथाहि to explain. अत्र गोशब्दात् etc. (p.11. 1 7). In the example under discussion ' Vahika is a bull', is the sense of the individual areis 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 Vabika ) 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. तत्र न प्रथम: The first of this second and subordinate pair of alternatives is improper ; because the convention of the word 'bull' was not made in respect of the individual arete ( and therefore the individual Vahika cannot be denoted by the word गो). अस्य-गोशब्दस्य. Nor is the 2nd of the subordinate pair of alternatives proper. The idea of this 2nd view is :- The word गो indicates the qualities जाडय and मान्ध residing in aeis, because they are similar to and hence identical with those of गो. The individual वाहीक is understood from the word गो not by Denotation (अभिधा) nor by Indication (लक्षणा) but by the process of reasoning which enables us to think of the individual Vāhīka, because the indicated qualities ea and - must have a substratum to reside in. This is improper. अविनाभावलभ्यस्य etc. (p. 11, 11 9-10) .- Be- cause, the word ir is here placed in apposition to the word ११

58 NOTES ON IL 9-10

aais 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. शाद्वी हाकांक्षा *- 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 गौर्वाहीक: is गोगतजाड्यसजातीयजाडयवान्वाहीक: accord- ing to the 2nd view. न द्वितीय :- Nor is the 2nd alternative of the first pair possible (the 2nd alternative is that the indivi- dual वाहीक is not understood from the word गो ). यदि हि गोशब्दाव etc. (p. 11, ll. 10-12). If the individual Vāhika were not understood from the word at, then the agreement in case of this word ( i. e. गो ) and of the word वाहीक, which the example exhibits, would be improper-it being only words signifying the same thing that agree in case. The word t indicates qualities according to this theory and not the individual and Vāhīka denotes an individual, The same objection is raised by yaty against this view 'गौर्वाहीक इति सामानाघिकरण्यानुपपत्तेः'; on this the प्रभा remarks 'एकधर्मिबोधकत्वाभावादिति भावः' तस्मादत् etc. (P. 11, 1.13. ff). This is the view of विश्वनाथ himself. Mammata also appears to agree. गोशब्दो मुख्यया वृत्त्या 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 mhatels: conveys the identity of the two things denoted by the two words. But if we take only the primary meaning of nf and of ara that identity cannot be established. Therefore we have to take the word ar in a secondary sense, in order that its meaning may be logically connected with Vahika. वाहीकस्या- *This is a न्याय often quoted; see रुचिदत्त's comment on उदयन's कुसुमाअलि p.478 (B.I.edition) 'यत्रापि पदात्पदार्थोपस्थितिस्तत्रापि पदार्था एवान्वयबोधकाः, न तु पदान्यपि। पदार्थस्मृत्यैव अन्यथासिद्धत्वात्। कथमन्यथा श्वेतरूपदर्शनाद्धेषाशब्दश्रवणात् .. शब्दं विना श्रेवोऽश्रो घावतीति घीः । न चैवं पचवीत्युक्ते प्रत्यक्षोपस्थितकलायेनान्वयबोधापत्ति: शब्दोपस्थिते पदार्ये शब्दोपस्वापित- पदार्थान्तरेणैव अन्वयात्। शाब्दी.झार्काक्षा शब्देनैव प्रपूर्यते इति न्यायात्। अत एव श्ुतार्थापत्तिस्थलेऽपि शब्द एव कल्प्यते इत्यर्थः।'

II. 9-10 SÅHITYADARPAŅA. 59

ऋ्त्वाद्यतिशय ete. The motive (from which arises this secondary use of the word at) is to convey the excessive ignorance etc. of the man. The three views expounded above are very briefly put by Mammata as follows :- 'अत्र हि स्वार्थसहचारिणो गुणा जाड्यादयी लक्ष्यमाणा अपि गोशब्दस्य परार्थाभिधाने प्रवृत्तिनिमित्तत्वमुपयान्ति इति केचित्। स्वार्थसइचारिगुणाभेदेन परार्थगता गुणा एव लक्ष्यन्ते न तु परार्थोडमिचीयत इत्यन्ये। साधारणगुणाश्रयेण परार्थ एव लक्ष्यत इत्यपरे'। K. P. II. इयं च गुणयोगात 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 गौणीलक्षणा is so called. 'गुणतः सादृश्यमस्याः प्रवृत्तिनिमित्तम्' तरल p.68; 'गुणेभ्य आगतत्वाद्रौणशब्देनाभिधीयते। अ० वृ ० मा० कारिका 4p.8. पूर्वा तूपचारामिश्रणात-The former i. e. the eight varieties of लक्षणा exemplified in श्रेतो धावति etc., is pure, because there is no admixture of metaphor in it. उपचारो हि नाम 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 'muras' ( who is so fiery-tempered that we call him perfect fire). There is a good deal of fluctuation in the meaning of the word उपचार. मम्मट uses the word in two places in two different senses. I कचित्तादर्थ्यादुपचार: K.P. II. p. 53(Vz); 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 लक्षणा; the प्रभा explains it as उपचारो लक्षणया सामानाधिकरण्येन प्रयोग :; II उभयरूपा चेयं शुद्धा। उपचारेणामिश्रितत्वात K.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 प्रदीप 'उपचारश्च सादृश्यसम्बन्घेन प्रवृत्तिः, सादृश्यातिश- यमहिम्रा भिन्नयोरभेंदप्रतीतिस्थगनं वा'. 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 assigned to the word 3yzI7; the second is a more technical meaning of the word उपचार; it is पारिभाषिक, peculiar to the अलक्कारशारत्र. In support of the first meaning, of न्यायवार्तिक on N. S. II. 2. 63 which explains उपचार &S 'अतच्छव्दस्य तच्छ्देनाभिधानमुपचारः। यथा यष्टिकाशब्देन द्रव्यविश्ेषोऽभिधीयते इति यष्टिकाशब्दात्त पुनः साहचर्यात् ब्राह्मणविशेषोऽभिधीयते। यथा यष्टिकाः प्रवेशयेति।. अभिनवगुप्त in his लोचन (p. 51) says 'उपचारो गुणवृत्तिर्लक्षणा' 1; Mallinatha says in his तरल 'अतत्त्वस्य तत्त्वेन व्यपदेश

60 NOTES ON II. 9-10

#yaR:' p. 70. These quotations recognize the first meaning of उपचार given above. The अभिधावृत्तिमातृका says 'उपचारमिश्रा तु यत्र वस्त्वन्तरे वस्त्वन्तरमुपचर्यते यथा गौर्वाहीक इति। अत्र हि गोशब्दो वाहीकशब्देनानु पपद्यमानसामानाधिकरण्याद् वाधितमुख्यार्थः सन् गोगता ये जाड्यमान्दादयो

जाड्यमान्द्यादिगुणोपेते वाहीके उपचरितः ।' on कारिका 2. Here the writer seems to favour the 2nd meaning of syarT given above. But further on (कारिका 4-5) he speaks of शुद्ध उपचार and गौण उपचार and gives आयुर्धृतम् as an example of शुद्ध उपचार and गौर्वाहीक: as an example गौण उपचार. On अगनिर्माणवक: the तन्रवार्तिक remarks 'वहित्वलक्षितादर्थाद्यत् पैङ्गल्यादि गम्यते। तेन माणवके बुद्धिः सादृश्यादुपजायते'॥ p. 318. शुककपटयोस्तु etc. (p.11, 11.17-18). But in 'white' and 'cloth' there is no apprehension of any very great difference between the two. That which is really '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 is metaphorically called 'fire'. तस्मादेवमादिषु-Hence in such cases as शुक्क: पट :. व्यंग्यस्य गूढागूढत्वात् ...... स्फुटं प्रतीयते (p. 11, 1l. 19-26). व्यंग्यस्य ...... &T :. Indications arising from a purpose are two-fold on account of the abstruseness or obviousness of the suggested sense. Here फल is used in the same sense as प्रयोजन. The eight varieties of anonr arising from & Motive are further divided on the ground that the प्रयोजन which is व्यंग्य (suggested ) is either abstruseor obvious. गूढ :- काव्यार्थभावनापरिपक्कबुद्धिविभवमात्रवेद्य :- 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 गूढ given by प्रदीप 'काव्यभावना- परिपक्कबुद्धि: सहृदयः । तन्मात्रवेद्यं गूढम्'. An example where the प्रयोजन is गूढ is the verse 'उपकृतं बहु' etc. which occurs above. अगूढ: 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.' 'सुकुमारतयाङ्गानां विन्यासो ललितं भवेत्.' ललित 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 'श्रीपरिचयाज्जडा अपि भवन्त्यभिज्ञा विदग्धचरितानाम्!' Instruction, which consists in the employment of words favourable to the eonveying of knowledge, is possible only in sentient beings and therefore the word उपदिशति is inapplicable to यौवनमर्न, which is अचेतन, in its primary sense. Therefore

II. 10 SÂHITYADARPANA 61

the word उपदिशति indicates 'manifests.' आविष्कारातिशयश् and the idea of thorough manifestation is apprehended as clearly as if it had been stated expressly ( and not indicated by the word उपदिशति). The ·यंग्य sense, the fact that young women learn blandishments easily, all (whether सहृदय or not) can un- derstand. मम्मट (K.P.II.) remarks on this verse. 'अत्रोपदिशतीति। अनायासेन शिक्षणमभिधेयवत्स्फुटं प्रतीयते'। on which प्रदीप says 'उपदिश- तिपदेन अनायासेन शिक्षादानमभिव्यज्यते। तच्व सहृदयासहृदययोरप्यभिधेयवत्प्र- काशते।'.

धर्मिधर्मगतत्वेन ...... अतिशयः फलम् (p. 11,1.27-p. 12, 1.9). The लक्षणा 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. धर्मिधर्मगतत्वेन फलस्य- Through the fact that the fruit ( i. e. the suggested meaning ) pertains to the thing indicated or to a quality. धर्मी लक्ष्यः, धर्मः तद्दत्तिपंदार्थो धर्मः । रामचरण. स्न्निग्धश्यामल etc .- This verse occurs in ध्वन्यालोक II. 1, p. 61, का० प्र० IV. p. 188 (Va), अभिधा० (on कारिका 7 p. 11). उ• चं० says विरहिणो रामस्येयमुक्ति :. The लोचन comments on this verse as follows :- स्न्निग्धया जलसम्बन्धसरसया द्रविडवनितोचितासि- तवर्णया कान्त्या -....... लिप्तमाच्छुरितं (व्याप्ं) वियत नभो यैः। वेल्न्त्यो विजृम्भमाणास्तथा चलन्त्यः प्रहर्षवशाच्च बलाकाः (बकपंक्तयो) ...... येषु ते एवंविधा मेघाः । एवं नभस्तावद्दुरालोकं वर्तते दिशोऽपि दुःसहाः। यतः सूक्षमजलक णोद्गारिणो वाता इति मन्दमन्दत्वमेषामनियतदिग्भागगमनं च बहुवचनेन सूचितम्। तहि गुद्दासु क्वचित्प्रविश्य आस्यतामित्यत आह। पयोदानां ये सुहृदस्तेषु च सत्सु शोभनहृदया मयूरा: (or as उ० चं० says पयोदा: सुहृदः येषां ते मयूराः) तेषामानन्देन हर्षेण कला :...... मधुराः केका: शब्दविशेषाः। ताश्च सर्वे पयोदवृत्तान्तं दुःसहं स्मारयन्ति स्वयं च दुःसहा इति भावः। एवमुद्दीपनविभावोद्वोधितो विप्रलम्भः । .. इत एव प्रभृति प्रियतमां हृदये निधायैव स्वात्मवृत्तान्तं तावदाह। कामं सन्त्विति दृढमिति सातिशयम्। कठोर इति। रामशब्दार्थध्वनिविशेषावकाशदानाय कठोरहृदयपदम्। ... अस्मीति। स एवाहं भवामीत्यर्थः (उ० चं० SayS सुदृढमतिशयितं कठोरहृदयोऽहं राम: सकलदुःखपात्रत्वेन प्रसिद्धोऽस्मि। अत एव सर्वमुक्तोद्दीपकाति- शयजनितं क्ेशं सहे)। भविष्यतीति क्रियासामान्यम्। तेन कि करिष्यतीत्यर्थः। अथ च भवनमेव अस्या असम्भाव्यमित्युक्तप्रकारेण हृदयनिहितां प्रियांप्रत्यक्षीभावितां हंदयस्फोटनोन्मुखीं ससम्भ्रममाह। हद्दाहेति। (उ०-चं० says हहाहेति त्रयो निपाताः खेदातिशये।) देवीति। युक्कं तव धैर्यमित्यर्थः । (उ० चं० 'धीरा भव धैये कुरु। अत एव देवीति सम्बोधनम्। देवत्वेन धैर्यस्योचितत्वात' ।). वेल्द्वलाका घना :- The clouds, in which the cranes disport. शीकरिणो वाताः dewy winds. कला: melodious. सर्व सहे I endure all, (though it is hard to bear all these suggestive vernal sights and sounds

.62 NOTES ON II. 11

with patience, which heighten the joy of lovers when united ). अत्रात्यन्तदुःखसहिष्णु etc. Here Rama is indicated by the ex- pression रामोडस्मि (which taken literally is insignificant) as a person extremely patient under afflictions and this indicated Rama is the yrf ( possessor of the quality of pati- ence, which is suggested by the employment of the word Rama). तस्यैव-दुःखसहिष्णोः रामस्य एव. The fruit i. e. the excess of patience belongs to him i. e. WTH who is indicated. The ध्वन्यालोक remarks upon this 'अत्र रामशब्दः । अनेन हि व्यंग्यधर्मान्तररू- पपरिणतः संज्ञी प्रत्याय्यते, न संज्ञामात्रम्.' The idea is :- The word राम is a proper name and denotes simply an individual, the son of दशरथ here. There is no very great propriety in saying रामोडस्मि, 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 Tw 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 Sita.' Here, then, the suggested sense, viz. the excess of patience, pertains to the patient Rama who is indicated by the word राम in रामोस्मि. गङ्गायां घोष :... फलम् (p. 1219) 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.

तदेवं ...... बुघैः (p. 12, 1. 10). The varieties of लक्षणा arising from usage are 8 and we have seen above that those arising from प्रयोजन are 32. Thus in all there are 40.

पदवाक्यअशीतिप्रकारा लक्षणा (p.12.1l 13 -- 16). पदवाक्यगतत्वेन- according as the power of Indication resides in a word or sentence. An example of पदगतलक्षणा is गङ्गायां घोष: Here the word गङा has indicated sense. An example of वाक्यगतलक्षणा is 'उपकृतं बहु'. Here the लक्षणा does not reside in any particular word, but in the whole sentence. Thus then the varieties of लघ्ण amount to 80.

The divisions of agon are differently given by different writers. Mammata's divisions, according to ydu, are as follows :-

II. 12 SAHITYADARPANA 68

लक्षणा

शुद्धा गोणी

उपादान लक्षण सारोपा (गौर्वाहीकः) साध्य० (गौरयम्)

सारोपा साध्य० सारोपा (आयुर्धृतम्) साध्य० (आयुरेवेदम्) (as in कुन्ताः (as in कुन्ताः पुरुषा: प्रविशन्ति) प्रविशन्ति)

The वृत्तिवार्तिक divides लक्षणा as follows :-

निरूढा १ गौणी- सारोपा फ साध्यवसाना

निरूढा २ शुद्धा फल-सारोपा, साध्यवसाना, जहलक्षणा, अजह० and जहदजहल्लक्षणा.

The रसगङ्गाघर divides लक्षणा as follows :-

लक्षणा

निरूढा (as in अनुकूल, प्रतिकूल) प्रयोजनवती

1- गौणी शुद्धा

सारोपा साध्यवसाना जहत्स्वार्था अजहत्स्वारथा सारोपा सा्य० ( in मुखं चन्द्र:) (in चन्द्रोडयम्) विरतास्वमिघाद्यासु ...... व्यञ्जना नाम (p. 12, 11. 18-23). विरतासु ...... अर्थादिकस्य च-अभिधाद्यासु विरतासु यथा पर: अर्थः बोध्यते सा शब्दस्य अर्थादिकस्य च वृत्तिर्व्यज्जना नाम-When Denotation and other powers cease after discharging their function, that function of a word or its sense etc., by which & further meaning is conveyed, is what is called suggestion. शब्दवुद्धि ...... नयेन. In accordance with the maxim that when a word, a cognition and action cease after a

64 NOTES-ON II. 12-13

single effort, 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 "'विशेष्यं नामिधा गच्छेत क्षीणशक्तिर्विशेषणे' इत्यादिना अभि- धाव्यापारस्य विरम्य व्यापारासम्भवाभिधानात्" लोचन p. 16. This view is diametrically opposed to that of भट्टलोलट and others who main- tain 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 ajrr sense in such a verse as निःशेषच्युत० is brought out by the अभिधा itself, and not by व्यञ्ञना as said by the आलक्कारिक Their view is vigorously criticised by Mammata in the 5th Ullasa (pp. 225- 226 ff, Va). "ये त्वभिदधति 'सोऽयमिषोरिव दीर्घदीर्घतरो व्यापारः' इति, 'यत्पर: शब्द: स शब्दार्थः' इति च विघिरेवात्र ('निःशेषच्युत' इत्यादौ नायकान्तिकगमनरूप:) वाच्य इति" K.P. प्रदीप explains the view of भट्टलोल्लट as follows :- 'यथा बलवता प्रेरित इपुरेकेनैव वेगाख्येन व्यापारेण वर्मच्छेदमुरोमेदं प्राणहरणं च रिपोविधत्ते तथैक एव शब्द एकेनैवाभिघाख्यव्यापारेण पदार्थस्मृ्ति वाक्यार्थानुभवं व्यंग्यप्रतीति च विधत्ते। अतो व्यंग्यत्वाभिमतस्यार्थस्य वाच्यत्वमेव। किं च यत्र शब्दस्य तात्पर्ये स शब्दार्थ इति 'निःशेष'० इत्यादौ तात्पर्यविषयतया विधिर्वाच्य एवेति।', The काव्यप्रकाशसङ्केत (p. 110) explains 'यथा शरो वर्मोरसी भित्त्वा जीवित- मादत्ते तथा वाक्यमप्यभिघयैव वाच्यव्यंग्ये वक्तीति भावः । अभिधा हि यत्पर्यन्ता तत्रै- वाभिधायकत्वं तत्पर्यन्तता प्रधाने ध्वनावेव। एतेन वाच्यव्यंग्ययोरभिधैव व्यापारः।' अभिनवगुप्त refers to the view of भट्टलोलट, refutes it and approves of the maxim quoted by our author "योप्यन्विताभिधानवादी 'यत्पर: शब्द: स शब्दार्थ:' इति हृदये गृहीत्वा शरवदभिधाव्यापारमेव दीर्घदीर्घमिच्छति तस्य यदि दीर्घदीघों व्यापारस्तदेकोऽसाविति कुतः । भिन्नविषयत्वात। अथानेकोऽसी तद्विषय- सहकारिमेदादसजातीय एव युक्तः । सजातीये च कार्ये विरम्य व्यापार: शब्दकर्मबुद्धया- दीनां पदार्थविद्धिर्निषिद्धः । असजावीये चास्मन्नय एव" p. 18 of लोचन. Vide also व्यक्तिविवेक I. p.27. अभिघालक्षणातात्पर्या ख्यासु.उपक्षीणासु-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. arforen and लक्षणा have been explained above. But the function called तात्पर्य requires a little explanation. When the senses of the words used in a sentence are connected together on account of Expe- ctancy, Compatibility and Juxtaposition, a new sense arises, which is called the Drift or Purport which is apart from the

II. 12-13 SAHIȚYADARPAŅA 65

meanings of the words taken separately. The power by which this purport is conveyed is called तात्पर्याख्यवृत्ति. Mammata refers to this तात्पर्य in many places 'तात्पर्यार्थोऽपि केषुचित्' K. P. 2nd Ul. p. 25 (Chan.); 'ते च अभिधातात्पर्यलक्षणाभ्यो व्यापारान्तरेण गम्याः'. But it does not appear that Mammata entirely approved of this view. Otherwise he would not have said 'केषुचित', but would have simply declared that arys is one of the functions. Our author also appears to hold views similar to those of Mammata. He first emphatically said above that there are three powers of a word. He did not mention ary 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 पूर्वमीमांसा called अभि- हितान्वयवादिनS. Their idea of तात्पर्य is as follows :- In a sentence the meanings of certain words are faa 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 (साध्य or भव्य). Let us take an example. The moving about of priests being known from other sources, in the sentence 'लोहितोष्णीषा ऋत्विजः प्रचरन्ति,' the assertion is meant simply to lay down that the priests should wear red head- dress, not to lay down that they should move about. See the remarks of प्रदीप (K.P. V.) on तात्पर्य p. 176 (Nir). The आलक्कारिकs generally do not accept the तात्पर्यार्थ as a separate पदार्थ, but look upon it as included under the व्यंग्य sense; e. g. एकावली says अनुवाद्यानामर्थानां विधेयार्थपरत्वं तात्पर्यमिति व्यापारान्तरं परैरभ्युपगतम्' p. 56. सा शब्दस्य ...... व्यज्जना नाम-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 aqs7 (suggestion), ध्वनन (hinting), गमन (conveying), प्रत्यायन (acquainting), is what is called the power of suggestion. Compare K. P. II Ul. p. 63 (Va) 'तच्च व्यअ्जनध्वननद्योतनादिशब्दवाच्यमवश्यमेषितव्यम्'. व्यअ्ञना-The author of the ध्वन्यालोक establishes the existence of a व्यंग्य sense at great length (pp. 182-197). There are many who deny the existence of a separate वृत्ति called व्यञ्ञना. They includeन्यंग्यार्थ under तात्पर्य- Others, like the author of the व्यक्तिविवेक, include it under अनुमान, or under लक्षणा. Note the words of T. D. 'व्यञ्जनापि शक्तिलक्षणान्तभूँता। अशक्तिमूला चानुमानादिनान्यथासिद्धा'।; the अमिधावृत्तिमातृका of मुकुल says 'लक्षणामार्गावगाहित्वं तु ध्वनेः सहृदयैर्नूतम- वयोपवर्णिवस्य विद्यत इति दिशमुन्मूलयितुमिदमत्रोक्तम्।; see also P. L. M. p. 9.

66 NOTES ON II. 13

अभिधालक्षणा ... द्विधा-व्यञ्ञना is 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). अनेकार्थस्य शब्दस्य ...... विप्रयोगादयः Construe अनेकार्धस्य शब्दस्य संयोगादैः एकत्र अर्थे निय्तिरिते (या) अन्यधीहेतुः सा अभिधाश्रया व्यज्ञना-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. ra-By the expression 'are' are meant 'disjunction and others.' उक्तं हि ...... नोदाहृतम् (P. 13, l1. 2-15). उक्त It has been said. ( by Hari or भर्तृहरि in his वाक्यपदीय). The two verses quoted. 1.

here are from वाक्यपदीय II. 317 and 318. The reading in the printed text of the Vakyapadiya is संसरगों for संयोगो. Almost everywhere we read the quotation as संयोगो. हेमचन्द्र reads संसर्गो (p. 39 काव्यानुशासन)- Wemust also notice another peculiarity about these two verses. They are universally quoted as em- bodying the views of Hari. But the commentator quexta 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 ). पुण्यराज's words are 'अत्रेदं गौणमिदं मुख्य मिदं नान्तरीय कमित्येवं शब्दार्थनिर्णयप्रस्तावे तत्तन्निश्चयोपायानुपदर्शयितुकाम आह। वाक्यात्प्रकरणादर्थादौचकित्याद्देशकालतः । शब्दार्थाः प्रविभज्यन्ते न रूपादेव केवलात्।। (वाक्यपदीय II. 316) ... तथा चापरैः संसर्गादयः शब्दार्थावच्छेदहेतवः प्रदर्शिता इत्याह । संसर्गो विप्रयोगश्च'. साहचर्य companionship; विरोधिता hostility or incompatibility of co-existence; अर्थ motive; प्रकरण context; लिङ् attribute or characteristic; शब्दस्यान्यस्य संनिधि: juxtaposition of another word; सामर्थ्य power; औचिती congruity; व्यक्ति gender; स्वर accent. शब्दार्थस्यानवच्छेदे विशेषस्मृतिहेतव :- (These) are the causes of one's recolleeting a special sense of some word, when the sense of the word is not of itself definitely ascertained. 'तदेवमेते शब्दार्थस्य सन्देहनिराकरणद्वारेण नियतार्थावसायहेतुत्वाद्विशेषस्मृतिहे तवो निर्णयहेतवः संसर्गाद्य इति बोद्धव्यम्।' पुण्य०. रसगं० explains अनवच्छेदे as तात्पर्यसन्देहे and विशेषस्मृति as एकार्थमात्रविषया स्मृति: 1. सशङचक्रो हरि :- This is an example where संयोग defines the meaning of a word. Here af means 'Vishnu' alone and not 'a monkey' or 'lion' ( which are also the possible meanings of the word हरि as said by अमर० 'यमानिलेन्द्रचन्द्रार्कविष्णुसिंहांगुवाजिषु। शुकाहिकपिमेकेषु हरिनां कपिले त्रिषु'), because of the conjunction of

II. 14 SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 67

conch-shell and discus, which are generally associated with Vislinu. संयोग is defined as a connection between two things such as is generally known to exist between those two things only. प्रदीप defines it as 'संयोग: प्रसिद्धार्थस्य (तदर्थमात्रवृत्तितया प्रसिद्धस्य अर्थस्य । प्रभा) गुणविशेषरूपः सम्बन्धः'. 2. तद्वियोगेन (शङ्मचक्रवियोगेन ) तमेव (विष्णुमेव )-supply अभिघत्ते after तमेव. The word हरि in this example denotes Vishnu alone on account of the disjunction of 5 and F. There would be no propriety in saying that 'a lion' etc. are without a and चक्र, because they are never connected with शङ्द or चक्र. There- fore the very fact that aft is here spoken of as being without ag and 5 is the means of restricting the meaning of the word हरि to Vishnu. विप्रयोग is defined by प्रदीप as तादृशसम्बन्धध्वंस:, disa- ppearance of the connection that is generally known to exist between two things. 3. In the example 'Bhima and Arjuna,' Arjuna is the son of Prtha, (and not सहस्रार्जुन कार्तवीर्य who was killed by परशुराम) on account of साहचर्य i. e. because अर्जुन (the son of पृथा) is associated with भीम and not कार्तवीर्य अर्जुन साहचर्य is defined by रसगं as 'एकस्मिन्कार्ये परस्परापेक्षित्वम्.' The example of साहचर्य generally given is रामलक्ष्मणौ upon which पुण्य says 'रामलक्ष्मणावित्युक्ते लक्ष्मणसाहचर्याद्दाशरथेरेव प्रतीतिः'. The word राम is applied to बलराम, परशुराम and दाशरथि राम. An objection is raised that संयोग and साहचर्य are not different. The example of संयोग will be an example of साहचर्य also and vice versa. To this, Jagannatha replies :- What the ancients mean by regarding संयोग as different from साहचर्य is :- When any well-known connection which restricts the denotation of a word is expressed by a distinct word, that is an example of संयोग, as in the example सशङ्वचक्रो हरि: where the connection between शङ्गचक्र and विष्णु is संयोग because it is expressed by a distinct word स (in सशङ्गचक्र:); but when one of the सम्बन्धिs restricts the sense of the other by forming a Dvandva com- pound with it, there is said to be साहचर्य; as in रामलक्ष्मणौ where the word aeno itself restricts the meaning of ITH, both form- ing a दूंद्ू compound. Thus सगाण्डीवोर्डर्जुन: is an example of संयोग and गाण्डीवार्जुनौ is an example of साहचर्य. 'संयोगशब्दस्य सम्बन्धसामान्य- परतया यत्र शब्दोपात्तं प्रसिद्धं सम्बन्धसामान्यं शक्तिनियामकं तदादयस्य, यत्र त् द्वंद्वादिगतः सम्बन्ध्येव केवलस्तथा तत्साइचर्यस्योदा हरणमिति प्राचामाशयात्। इत्थं च सगाण्डीवोर्ऽर्जुन. इति संयोगस्य, गाण्डीवार्जुनाविति साहचर्यस्योदाहरणम्।' p.120 रसगं०

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, because his hostility ( विरोधिता) to Arjuna is famous. विरोधिता is defined as 'प्रसिद्धं वैरं सहानवस्थानं च'. An example of विरोधिता in the 2nd sense (सहानवस्थान not remaining together) is छायातपौ (shade and light ). छाया may mean 'lustre' elsewhere. But here छाया means 'shade' as that meaning is विरुद्ध to that of आतप (light). The usual example of विरोधिता is रामार्जुनौ or रामार्जुनगतिस्तयो: as in K.P. This example is adversely criticised by वृत्तिवार्तिक p. 6. अप्पयदीक्षित gives रामरावणा as an example of विरोधिता. The रसगङ्गाधर (pp. 120-121) attacks, as usual, the वृत्तिवार्तिक and defends K. P. Jagannatha says that रामरावणौ will be an example of साहचर्य. Vide the ingenious remarks of the रसगङ्गाधर 5. ae :- In the example I salute Sthanu' the word Sthanu means 'S'iva' and not 'a post', as there is no purpose served in saluting a post. अर्थ means प्रयोजन. 6. au-In the example 'my lord knows everything, the word aa means 'you, sir,' and not God, the context being that the words are addressed to a king. yau is defined as 'वक्तश्रोतृबुद्धिस्थता' प्रदीप and वृत्तिवार्तिक p. 6 (being in the mind of the speaker and hearer ). Another example, where yaro restricts the meaning of a word, is सन्धवमानय. 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. @a-In the example 'the angry one, on whose banner is the alligator,' the God of Love is meant (by the word Hat- स्वज ) and not the ocean which also is called मकरध्वज, because the characteristic 'anger' is intimately connected with the God of Love only and with no other meaning of the word मकरध्वज. लिङ्ग means 'a charateristic connected with one of the things expressed by a word by some relation other than संयोग and separated from everything else denoted by the word." लिङ्गं संयोगातिरिक्तसम्बन्घेन परपक्षव्यावृत्तो धर्मः । प्रदीप Or 'लिङ्गं प्रयुक्तनानार्थपद- वाच्यान्तरव्यावृत्तो धर्मः ।' वृ० वा०, an attribute which is excluded from the other meanings of a word which has been employed and and is capable of several meanings. Some say that Ry means 'a peculiar characteristic,' but if this meaning were taken, then कुपितो मकरध्वज: is not a proper example where लिङ् defines

II. 14 SÂHITYADARPAA. 69

the meaning of a word, because ary is not a peculiar character- istic of मदन (being found in human beings also ) and because then सशङ्ञचक्रो हरि: would be an example under लिन्. Therefore Os means 'any property or characteristic which belongs to one only out of the several meanings of a word by a relation other than संयोग and is not at all found in the other meanings of that word.' वृ० वा p. 6 thus distinguishes between संयोग and लिङ्ग 'संयोगोदाहरणे प्रसिद्धिप्राचुर्यम्, शङ्गादेरिन्द्रादावर्थान्तरेऽपि संयोगा- विरोधात्। लिङ्गोदाहरणे तु सर्वथा अर्थान्तरव्यावृत्तिरिति मेदः ।'

8. शब्दस्यान्यस्य संनिधि :- In the example 'the God, the foe of Pura,' the word grrft means S'iva, as we gather from the proximity of the word 'God,' for otherwise the word yrrf might as well stand for 'the enemy of the city,' some king. प्रदीप defines संनिधि as 'नियतार्थकशब्दान्तरसामानाधिकरण्यम्' agreement in case with another word having a fixed sense. This defini- tion is strongly criticised by the वृत्तिवार्तिक p. 7 as well as by the रसगङ्गाधर. वृत्तिवार्तिक defines it as 'नानार्थपदैकवाच्यसंसर्ग्यर्थान्तरवाचिपद- समभिव्याहारः' 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 प्रदीप are "'करेण राजते नागः' इत्यादावव्यापनात्तन्नियामकान्तरस्य गवेषणे गौरवात्, 'कुपितो मकरध्वजः' इति तन्मूलोक्ते लिङ्गोदाइरणेऽतिव्यापनाच्चोपेक्ष्यम्." 9. सामर्थ्य-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. सामर्थ्य is explained as कारणत्वम्

9. औचिती-In the example 'may the favourableness of your beloved preserve you,' the word za means 'favour- ableness or coming face to face,' because here the word ge in the sense of face has no propriety with reference to the act of preserving. The preservation 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 मुख is taken to mean 'सांमुख्य.' "'पातु वो दयितामु- खम्' इत्यत्र दयितामुखकर्तृकरक्षणकर्मत्वाक्षिप्तकामार्तानां सम्बोध्यपुरुषाणं त्राणं हि तस्या: सांमुख्येनैव भवति। न तु मुखमात्रेण। वैमुख्ये तेन (मुखेन) त्राणायोगात्। अतस्त्राणाईत्वं वदनसांमुख्योभयप्रत्यायकस्य मुखशब्दस्य" रसगं० p.124. १२

70 NOTES ON II. 14

11. T-In the example 'the moon shines in the sky,' we are led to take ag in the sense of 'moon,' by the presence of the place 'sky'. The word also means 'camphor' or 'gold,' as said by अमर० 'स्वर्णेडपि भूरिचन्द्रौ द्वौ' or by मेदिनी 'चन्द्रः कर्पूरकांपिल्लसुधांशुस्वर्णच [ चा! ] रुषु.'

12. काल-In the example 'चित्रभानु at night,' we know that fnna means 'fire' here, from the time specified, viz. 'night.' fng also means 'the sun,' if spoken of by day.

13. व्यक्ति-In the sentence 'the wheel glistens,' we know that the word {a15 means 'a wheel' and not 'the chakravaka, the ruddy goose' from its being in the neuter gender. T915 means चक्रवाक when it is masculine. अमरo says 'चक्रं रथाङ्गम्' and मेदिनी says 'रथाङ्गं न द्वयोश्चके ना चक्राङ्गविह्ृङ्गमे.' 14. (P. 13. 11. 14-15) स्वरस्तु वेदे एव ... नोदाहतम्. As accent modifies sense in the Vedas alone and not in Poetry, no example of its occurrence is given here. An example from the Vedas, where accent modifies the sense is RTT :* in the sentence इन्द्रशुर्वर्धस्व. The word इन्द्रशन्ु may be dissolved in two ways इन्द्रस्य शत्रु: or इन्द्रः शत्रुर्यस्य. If it be taken as a तत्पुरुष, it will mean 'the killer of Indra' and the sara accent will lie on the last letter of the whole compound according to the Sūtra of Panini 'समासस्य' VI. 1. 223 (समासस्य अन्तः उदात्तः स्यात्). In this case the word इन्द्रशञु: will be written in the पदपाठ as इन्द्रशतु: If we dissolve the word as इन्द्रः शत्रुः यस्य i e. as a agafife compound, it will mean 'whose killer is Indra' and the sGT accent will be the same as the natural accent of the first member of the बहुव्रीहि compound, viz. इन्द्र, according to the Sutra 'बहुव्रीहौ प्रकृत्या पूर्वपदम्' पा. VI. 2. 1. The word इन्द्रशत्ु: in this latter case will be written in the पदपाठ as इन्द्रशघ्रु :. Our author lays down here that accent modifies the sense in the Vedas alone and not in Poetry. Accents were employed only in the Vedic Literature and not in classic Sanskrit. Compare the words of मम्मट 'इन्द्रशत्ुरित्यादौ वेदे एव न काव्ये स्वरोर्थविशेषप्रतीतिकृत्.' Our author simply echoes the words of Mammata.

*Compare S'atapatha Brahmana I. 6. 3. 1. ff 'अथ यदबवीदिन्द्र- शत्ुर्वर्वस्वेति तस्मादु हैनं इन्द्र एव जघान। अथ यद्ध शश्रदवक्ष्यदिन्द्रस्य शत्रुर्वर्षस्वेति शश्रदु इ स एवेन्द्रमहनिष्यत्।'; also the पाणिनीयशिक्षा 'मन्नो हीनः खरतो वर्णतो वा मिथ्याप्रयुक्तो न तमर्थमाह। स वाग्वज्रो यजमानं हिनस्ति यथेन्द्रशत्ुः खरतो- पराधात् ॥।' verse 52.

D. 14 SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 71

(P.13. 11 16-24) इदं च केऽप्यसहमाना .... कटाक्षनिक्षेपेण. इदं च ...... आहुः some, not enduring this assertion, say. इदं refers to the words of #THz ( and of our author also ) quoted above 'वेदे एव न काव्ये स्वरोऽर्थविशेषप्रतीतिकृत्.' विश्वनाथ gives us here the criticism of Mammata's dictum by some commentator and then rebukes him for criticizing a respectable writer like Mammata without sufficient reason. स्वरोऽपि काक्कादिरूप: काव्ये विशेषप्रतीतिकृदेव- '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 ambiguous'. The word स्वर in the कारिका of हरि may mean 'a Vedic accent, उदात्त, अनुदात्त or fa' or it may mean simply 'change of voice, or tune.' So काकु, which is defined by अमर० as 'काकुः स्त्रियां विकारो यः शोकभी- त्यादिभिर्ध्वनेः' ( a change of voice which is due to sorrow, fear, ete. ) will be denoted by the word F7. We have seen above that the same sentence, when uttered with a different tone will mean different things, e. g. in the verse 'मशनामि कौरवशतं समरे न कोपात' etc. (वेणीसंहार I 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 T ( in the shape of change of voice) does modify the meaning of words in a poem, notwithstanding Mammata's words to the contrary. उदात्तादिरू- पोऽपि ... विशेषप्रतीतिकृदेव-According to the way laid down in his treatise by the holy sage Bharata, accent in the shape of an ( acute ) etc. does really convey some particular Rasa, as for example, the Erotic, ( when in the absence of- the accent, the रस would have been doubtful). मुने :- The मुनि is here भरत, the author of a नाट्यशास्त्र in 37 chapters, which he is said to have received from Brahma. We should read मुनेः पाठ्यगुणोक्तिदिसा for पाठोक्तदिशा. भरत says (p.187 नाट्यशास्त्र) 'पाठ्यगुणानिदानीं वक्ष्यामः, तचथा सप् सवराः, त्रीणि स्थानानि etc.' The word पाठ does not yield a good sense. But there is no Ms. to support our conjecture. भरत says (p.187 of नाट्यशास्त्र) 'उदात्तश्वानुदात्तश्च स्वरितः कम्पितस्तथा। वर्णा- शत्वार एव स्यु: पाठ्ययोगे तपोधनाः ॥ तत्र हास्यशृङ्गारयोः स्वरितोदात्तैवीररौद्राङ्वतैः (तेषु १) उदात्तकम्पितैः करुणवात्सल्यभयानकेषु अनुदात्तस्वरितकम्पितैर्वर्णैः पाठ्यमुप- पादयति "'. So we are told that in a dramatic representation the

/

72 NOTES ON II. 14

speeches should be recited with स्वरित and उदात्त letters respectively in हास्य and शृद्गार. So even such स्वर as उदात्त is cited by the sage wTa as defining a meaning; and we have seen above that काकुस्वर also modifies the meanings of words. एतद्रिषये उदाहरण- भुचितमेव इति. In the case of this also i.e. स्वर, some exemplifica- tion is proper, as in the case of the 13 other defining causes. Here ende the criticism of Mammata's dietum. The rnga4 of रतकण्ठ has a similar note upon the words 'वेद एव न काव्ये' in 'अत्र यद्यपि चोदात्तादिः स्वरः काव्ये विशेषप्रतीतिनिमित्तं न भवति तथापि स्वरः काकुस्वरः काव्ये विशेषप्रतीतिहेतुर्भवति यथा "मन्नामि कौरवशतम्" इति च ग्रन्थकृता तु एतदपरामृश्योदात्तादिनिषेध: काव्ये कृतः ।'. तन्न ..... निक्षेपेण (p.13, 11. 18- 24). विश्वनाथ answers these criticisms. स्वरा :..... .विशेषम्. The सवरs, whether regarded as changes of voice or the accents उदात्त 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 व्यंग्य). The idea is-संयोग etc. restrict a word to a parti- cular meaning out of several possible meanings which are all primary. As स्वर is mentioned along with संयोग etc., it also must restrict a word to a particular meaning out of several possible and primary meanings. But ar in the form of 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. Vide the words of प्रदीप 'काकुस्थले तु न नानार्थाभिधानियमनं किं त्वपदार्थस्यैव व्यञ्जनम्.' Similarly स्वर in the form of sara referred to by Bharata-muni does not rest- rict the meaning of a word, but it serves to bring out by its employment, the sentiment of Love etc. in a recitation. Thus aT, as interpreted by the critic, would not be on all fours with the other defining agencies such as HfT; and therefore the interpretation of the critic is wrong and must not be accepted. किंच, यदि यत्र ...... श्रेषानङ्गीकारप्रसङ्ग :- 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 %y (Paronomasia). The idea is :- If accents such as earm were admitted as defining

II. 14 SÂHITYADARPAŅA, 73

the meanings of words in Poetry, then the शषालङ्वार must be given up; e. g. the expression सर्वदोमाधव: is छिष्ट. We may take it as equal to सर्वदा उमाधवः Or सर्वदो माधव: If accent were admi- tted as defining the meanings of words, सर्वदो माधवः will mean only one thing, and thus it will not be an example of शेष. न च तथा-But it is not so (i. e.it is not seen that ऋष is not recogni- sed). ay is recognised by all authorities as a figure of speech. अत एवाहु :... नये इति-Hence is it that they say while treating of 4 "according to the maxim 'in the province of Poetry, accent is not regarded.'" आहु: This refers to मम्मट himself The plural is used to show respect. काव्यमार्गे etc .- These are the words of मम्मट, who says "अर्थमेदेन शब्दभेदः' इति दर्शने, 'काव्यमागे स्वरो न गण्यते' इति च नये वाच्यभेदेन भिन्ना अपि शब्दा यद् युगपदुच्चारणेन क्विष्यन्ति मिन्नं स्वरूपमपह्ववते स क्रेषः" K. P.IX (p. 510, Va). इत्यलं ...... निक्षेपेण- Enough of this censorious glancing on the part of these objectors at the explanations of the venerable (author of काव्यप्रकाश), who is the source of inspiration (lit. the bestower of livelihood) to the critic as well as to me (i. e. to all). व्याख्यानेषु-This refers t0 मम्मट's note on the word स्वर in the कारिका of हरि.

The words इदं च केप्यसहमाना: of the text most probably refer to रुचक (who is generally identified with रुय्यक, the author of अलङ्कगारसर्वस्व, which is the guide of our author). Ruchaka in his काव्यप्रकाशसङ्केत, while commenting upon the words of Mammata 'वेदे एव न काव्ये स्वरोरऽर्थविशेषप्रतीतिकृत्' says "न विशेषप्रतीतिहेतुरिति। यद्यपि चोदात्तादि: काव्ये न विशेषप्रतीतिनिमित्तं तथापि काकुस्वरो विशेषप्रतीतिहेतुर्भवति। वथा-मन्नामि कौरवशतं समरे न कोपादिति, स्वस्था भवन्ति मयि जीवति धार्तराष्ट्रा इति च गुरुकृत ...... दौत्यादिनिषेध: कृतः ।". We take मान्य and उपजीव्य as referring to Mammata and व्याख्यानेपु as referring to मम्मट's words on the expression स्वरादय: occurring in Hari's Karika. It is possible that मान्य and उपजीव्य refer to Ruchaka and the words व्याख्यानेषु refers to Ruchaka's remarks upon the words of Mammața. The above quotation from Ruchaka is due to the courtesy of Dr. S. K. Belvalkar of the Deccan College.

(P. 13, 11. 25-26) आदिशब्दात् ...... कोरकाद्याकारत्वम्. By the word आदि in स्वरादय: is 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 etc. On the word आदि in स्वरादय: Mam- mata says "आदिग्रहणात् 'एद्दहमेत्तत्थणिआ एद्दद्मेत्तेहि" अच्छिवत्तेहि। 'एद्दद्मेत्तावत्था एद्दहमेत्तेहि" दिअएहि" ॥।' इत्यादावभिनयादय:" Gn this

74 NOTES ON II. 14

प्रदीप says 'स्वरादय इत्यादिग्रहणादभिनयापदेशौ गृघ्येते । अन्ये चोक्तान्तर्भूताः' The verse quoted above in Prakrit ( एतावन्मात्रस्तनिका एनावन्मात्रा भ्यामक्षिपत्राभ्याम्। एतावन्मात्रावस्था एतावन्मात्रैदिवसैः ॥) is an example of अभिनय gesticulation. अभिनय is defind as 'विवक्षितार्थाकृति- प्रदर्शको इस्तादिव्यापारः' वृ. वा. p. 8. अभिनय is a motion of the hand etc. conveying to another the idea of the size of a particular object. The verse एतावन्मात्रस्तनिका etc. is commen- ted upon as follows "सौन्दर्यातिशयशालिन्या नयनगोचरमगताया गुणश्रवण- मात्रजनितानुरागेण नायकेनावस्थायां पृष्टायां दूत्या इयमुक्तिः। ... एतावत्परिमाणौ आमलकादिपरिमाणौ स्तनौ यस्याः सा एवमेतावत्परिमाणं ययोस्ते एतावन्मात्रे विवक्षितकमलदलादिपरिमाणे ताभ्यामक्षिपत्राभ्यां नयनदलाभ्याम्। उपलक्षितेत्यर्थः। उपलक्षणे तृतीयानुशासनात्। तथा एतावन्मद्विवक्षितपरिमाणं दीर्घादि यस्यास्तथा- भूता अवस्था स्वरूपं यस्या: सा एवमेतावद् बुद्धिस्थं परिमाणं संख्या येषां तथाविधैर्दि- वसैर्लक्षणया संवत्स रैरुपलक्षिता। परिच्छिन्नति यावत्। वर्षकथनस्यैव प्रायशो लोकव्यव- हारसिद्धत्वात्। दिवसैरिति करणे वा तृतीया। अत्र सुकुलाकारइस्ताभिनयेन स्तनपरि- माणविशेषे, पझ्मदलाकृतिना तेन नेत्रपरिमाणविशेषे -. अङ्गुल्यङ्कधारणादिरूपेण च दिव- ससंख्याविशेषे बुद्धिस्थमात्र शक्त्या एतावच्छव्दा नियमितशक्तयः।" उ० चं० p. 54. अपदेश, the second defining cause included under आदि in स्वरादय, is defined by वृ. वा. as 'विवक्षितार्थस्य शृङ्गगाहिकया निर्देशः' (p. 8.) i. e. pointing out the person or thing intended in some direct way, as if it were caught by the horn. An example is 'sa: स दैत्य: प्राप्तश्रीनेत एवार्हति क्षयम्' ( Kumarasam. II. 55). Here, in as much as by placing bis hand upon his chest, the speaker designates himself, the word ga: is restricted to the speaker by अपदेश. (p. 13, 1. 27-28) एवमेकस्मिन् ... व्यञ्जना. '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) यथा मम ...... एवमन्यन्. महापात्र and सान्धिविग्रहिक have been explained above (p. 31). चतुर्दशभाषाविला सिनीभुजङ्ग-The lover of the nymphs in the form of fourteen languages i. e. who intimately knew fourteen languages. दुर्गालङ्गितविग्रह: etc. This verse has two applications, one to the king भानुदेव whose glorification is the matter in hand, and the other to S'iva. We shall first explain the verse as applied to the king. दुर्गालङ्गितविग्रहः-दुर्गैः मलङ्वितो विग्रहो यस्- fang 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 aftorded by forts but who fighte

II. 14 SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 75

on the open plain.' मनसिजं संमीलयंस्तेजसा who by his lustre throws into the back-ground the god of love. प्रोद्द्राजकल :- प्रोद्यत् प्रकृष्टाभ्यु- दययुक्तं राजकं राजसमूहं लाति वश्यतया गृह्लाति who subdues flourishing chiefs. गृहीतगरिमा one who has attained greatness. विष्वग्वृतो affr :- surrounded on all sides by gay people ( voluptuaries ). नक्षत्रेशकृतेक्षण: क्षत्रेशे क्षत्रियश्रेष्ठे कृतेक्षणो दत्तदृष्टिर्न भवतीति तत्रापि तुच्छबुद्धिरिति भाव: । राम०-who does not condescend even to cast a look at the best of Kshatriyas. गिरिगुरौ गाढां रुचि धारयन who has the deepest devotion for S'iva (गिरि: गुरुः श्शुरः यस्य). गामाक्रम्य- Having made the earth his own. विभूतिभूषिततनुः (विभूत्या भूषिता तनुर्यस्य 'विभूतिर्भूतिरैश्वर्यमणिमादिकमष्टधा' अमर०) whose body is de- corated by prosperity or wealth. उमावलभ :- hushand of Uma. The verse as applied to शिव means :- दुर्गालद्गितविग्रहः-दुर्गया लङ्गितः आक्रान्त: विग्रहः देहः यस्य-whose body is embraced by Durga i.e.Parvati. मनसिजं संमीलयंस्तेजसा-overwhelming by his fire (from the third eye) the god of love. प्रोदयद्राजकल :- प्रोद्यन्ती राज्: चन्द्रस्य कला यस्य who wears the rising uigit of the moon. गृहीतगरिमा-One who has attained vast proportions. भोगिभि :- सर्पे :- by serpents. नक्षत्रेशकृनेक्षण :- नक्षत्राणां ईशः चन्द्रः तेन कृतं ईक्षणं -who looks upon everything by means of the Lord of the Nakshatras. गिरिगुरौ गाढां रुचिं धारयन्-(गिरीणां गुरु: हिमालयः) who has the deepest affection for the Lord of Mountains गामाक्रम्य having mounted on a bull. विभूतिभूषिततनु: with his body adorned with ashes. उमावलभ: husband of उमा i e. Parvati. अत्र प्रकरणेन ... बोध्यते. अभिधेये-अभिधया बोध्ये; connect अभि- धेये with नियत्रिते. Here by the context the meaning of the word उमावल्लभ being restricted in respect of Denotation, to the king Bhanudeva, the lord of the great queen Umā, the sense.of the 'husband of the goddess Gauri' i. e. the god S'iva, is understood only through suggestion. The suggestion is here based upon arfuT. The reason is :- Out of severa 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. (P.14,1l.8-12) लक्षणोपास्यते .. लक्षणामूला व्यञ्जना. लक्षणोपा- स्यते ... व्यञ्ञना लक्षणाश्रया-यस्य कृते लक्षणा उपास्यते तत् प्रयोजनं तु यया प्रत्याय्यते सा लक्षणाश्रया व्यञ्जना स्यात् That 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. Compare K. P. II. Ul. (p. 59 Chan) यस्य प्रतीतिमाधातुं

76 KOTES ON IL 15

लक्षणा समुपास्यते। फले शब्दैकगम्येऽन्र व्यञ्ञनान्नापरा क्रिया॥ upon which प्रदीप says 'यस्य पावनत्वादेः फलस्य प्रतीत्यर्थ लक्षणाश्रयशब्दप्रयोगस्तत्फलं तस्मादेव शब्दाद्गम्यते न तु प्रमाणान्तरात्।'

गङ्गायां घोष :. .... लक्षणामूला व्यक्षना-supply विरतायां after अभिधा- TH. 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 'गङ्गायां घोष:' the word गङ्गा 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 (लक्षणोपास्यते यस्य कृते तत्तु प्रयोजनम्). In the example गङ्गायां घोष: we understand this motive by a special power of words. It cannot be said that excess of coolness is understood by अभिधा; because the conven- tion (of the word ST) was not made in respect of coolness ete., but in respect of a stream of water. Nor can we say that the excess of coolness is understood by 3&T, because the conditions of 3&oT are not satisfied. There must be मुख्यार्थबाध, तद्योग and रूढिप्रयोजनान्यतरत्व. The primary meaning of TST being inapplicable, we take it to mean 'bank' by Indication. If it be said that the प्रयोजन also is indicated by the word गङ्गा, then we reply that the प्रयोजन would be indi- cated by 'the Ganges' only if the sense of the bank is inappli- cable. Besides the bank has no direct connection (तद्योग= साक्षात्सम्बन्ध) with the properties coolness etc .; moreover, if प्रयोजन be indicated, we ask what the motive is for indicating the yat- जन from the word गङ्गा. So, none of the conditions of लक्षणा are satisfied. Nay, they are not even necessary. The word 'IST' has the power to convey शैत्यपावनत्वाद्यतिशय. Therefore, the प्रयोजन is suggested. And as this suggestion comes in only when a word is employed in a secondary ( लाक्षणिक) sense, the न्यजना is said to be based upon लक्षणा. (P. 14, 1. 13) एवं शाब्दी ...... आर्थीमाइ. विश्वनाथ divides व्यञ्ञना into two varieties शाब्दी and आर्थी. The शाब्दी again he divides into अभिधामूला and लक्षणामूला. In this division he appears to

II. 15 SAHITYADARPANA. 77

follow Mammata. प्रदीप says 'सा (व्यज्ना) च द्वेधा-शब्दनिष्ठा अर्धनिष्ठा च । आद्या तु द्वेधा-अभिधामूला लक्षणामूला च' pp. 45-46 (Nirnaya). Our author and प्रदीप include अभिधामूला and लक्षणामूला under शाब्दी. The reason appears to be that लक्षणा and अभिधा are both powers of a word. The उद्योत remarks on शाब्दी व्यञ्ञना 'शब्दस्य परिवृत्त्यसहत्वाच्च शब्दमूलकत्वेन व्यपदेशः' 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 'दुर्गालङ्गितविग्रहः ... उमावल्लभः', if we substitute पार्वती for 3Hr, it won't do. The matter in hand is the glorification of the husband of the queen named Uma. So we cannot employ the word पार्वती there. Thus in this case of अभिधामूल- व्यञ्जना, the definition of उद्योत applies. But how will it apply to लक्षणामूलव्यअ्ना instanced in गङ्गायां घोष :? There even if we substitute भागीसथ्यां for गङ्गायां, there is suggestion still. Our author does not expressly tell us why he includes लक्षणामूल व्यञना under शाब्दी. The reason may be as follows :- It is true that we can substitue भागीरथी for गङ्गा; but the शब्दपरिवृत्त्यसहत्व does not lie in this. We understand शैत्यपावनत्वाद्यतिशय from the expression गङ्गायां घोष :; but if we substitute in its place गङ्गातीरे ary: the suggested sense vanishes. We may employ another synonym, भागीरथी. But here also, there is लक्षणा; what we cannot do is to substitute a direct expression like Tardk or भागीरथीतीर for गङ्गा or भागीरथी. Herein consists the परिवृत्यसहत्व. It is not meant that in शाब्दी व्यञ्ञना, the अर्थ ( meaning ) is not necessary. What is meant is that in शाब्दी व्यज्ञना, the particular words employed are most important; the circumstances which constitute आर्थी व्यज्ञना 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 व्यअ्ना, it is called शाब्दी or शब्दनिष्ठा in accordance with the न्याय 'प्राधान्येन व्यपदेशा भवन्ति.'

(P.14,l1.14-16) वक्तबोद्धव्य ......... अर्थसम्भवा. Construe या (व्यञ्जना) वक्तबोद्धव्यवाक्यानाम् अन्यसंनिघिवाच्ययोः प्रस्तावदेशकालानां काकोः चेष्टादिकस्य च वैशिष्टयात् अन्यम् अर्थम् बोधयेत् सा अर्थसम्भवा (व्यज्जना). That suggestion is said to arise from the sense of words, 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 expre- 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 'वक्तबोद्धन्यकाकूनां वाक्यवाच्यान्यसंनिधेः ॥ प्रस्तावदेशकालादेवैशिष्ट्यात् प्रतिभाजुषाम्। योऽर्थस्यान्यार्थचीहेतुर्व्यापारो व्यक्तिरेव सा ॥' K.P. III. 2-3, p. 72 (Va). On बोद्व्य, मल्िनाथ in his तरल remarks "बोद्धव्यो बोधयितव्यः प्रतिपाद्ो जन इत्यर्थः । अन्तर्नी (णी?) तणिजर्थः प्रायेणायं बुधिधातुः। यथा 'एकश्रुति दूरात् सम्बुद्धौ' (पा० १.२. ३३. ) इत्यत्र सम्बुद्धिशब्दे" p.78. प्रस्ताव := प्रकरणम्. काकु has been explained above. अन्यः अर्थः-वाच्यलक्ष्यव्यतिरिक्त: (P. 14, ll. 18-22) तत्र वक्त -. दोत्यते. वक्तृ etc. विश्वनाथ cites his own verse as an example, where there is some specialty in respect of the speaker, the sentence, the occasion, the place and the time. कालो मधु :- etc. खेद-exhaustion. समीर :- wind. केलीवनीयमपि- separate केलीवनी इयमपि, this pleasure-garden also. वञ्जलकुज्मअ् :- वज्जलः अशोक: (see अमर. II. 4.64) तेषां कुजाः तैः मञ्ज :- Lovely with the bowers of As'okas. प्रच्छन्नकामुक :- Paramour. The specialty of the five, viz. वक्तृ, वाक्य, देश, काल, and प्रस्ताव is well brought out by राम० as follows :- 'वक्त्याः कामुकत्वम्, वाक्यस्योद्दीपन- विभावसमूहकामोद्रेकजनकतत्कालपत्यलाभकर्तव्यानिश्चयविषयत्वम्, प्रस्तावस्य सुरत- विषयत्वम्, कालदेशयोः कामोद्रेकजनकत्वम्।' (P. 14, 1 23 ff). बोद्धव्यवैशिष्टथे etc. Where the specialty is in respect of the person addressed the example is निःशेष etc. निःशेषच्युत etc. This verse occurs in the printed अमरुशतक a9 No. 105. It is not commented upon by अर्जुनवर्मदेव (1216 A. D.), but is commented upon by वेमभूपाल. A great deal of controversy has raged about the meaning of this verse. Our author appears to bold that this verse is an example of व्यअ्ना based upon लक्ष्यार्थ, as is made clear by his remark 'तदन्तिकमेव गतासीति विपरीतलक्षणया लक्ष्यम.' Let us first understand the meaning of the verse as interpreted by our author. नायकानयनाय प्रेषितां तं सम्भुज्यागतां दूतीं प्रति विदग्धोत्तमनायिका स्नानकार्यत्वप्रतिपादनमुखेन सम्भोगचिह्नान्युद्धाटयितुमाह* ।'

• मिथ्यावादिनि मया गत्वा बहुधा प्रसादितोऽपि नागत इति मिथ्यामाषणशीले। वान्धवजनस्य मद्रपस्य अज्ञातः स्वार्थपरायणतयाऽनाकलितः पीडाया आगम: आगमनं यया तथाविधे। दूति, नतु सखि। ...... इतो ममान्तिकात वापीं प्रति स्नानाय गतासि। खानकालानतिक्रमलोभात्। पुनरिति एवाथें। नैवेत्यर्थः । तस्य बहुधा कृतापराधस्य। अत एव अधमस्य परवेदनानमिज्ञतया दुःखप्रयोजककर्मशीलस्य। अन्तिकं समीपं गतासीत्यनुषङ्ग:। उक्तार्थे साधकमाह निःशेषेत्यादि। उ० चं०। स्तनतटं कुचतर्टं निःशेषच्युतचन्दनं निःशेषं यथा भवति तथा च्युतं गलितं चन्दनं यस्मात्ततथोक्तम्।; on the propriety of this word निःशेष, चित्रमीमांसा remarks p.3 'साने हि सर्वत्र चन्दनच्युतिः स्यात् तव तु स्तनयोस्तटे उपरिभागे एव दृश्यते। इयमाश्रेषकृतैव.' निर्मृष्टरागोऽधरः-मधर lower lip. निर्मृष्टरागः अपगतालक्तक:

II. 16-17 SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 79

0 o I 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 (मुख्यार्थ) 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 निःशेष etc. apparently denote the effects of bathing. But as the apparent meaning ( वापीस्नान) is incompatible under the circumstances, the meaning 'you went to the wretch' is indicated by विपरीतलक्षणा. The words निःशेष etc. are then properly construed with this meaning .* This is what the author says in the words 'अत्र तदन्तिकमेव गतासीति विपरीतलक्षणया लक्ष्यम्'. तस्य च ... ... बोध्यते. तस्य=लक्ष्यस्य. From this indicated sense, is understood the suggested sense 'your purpose was dallying with him ' through the specialty of the messenger addressed. There- fore the verse is an example of the specialty of the बोद्धव्य. The motive, here, in resorting to &&f, as done by our author is to convey the idea of dallying.

The above view about this vesse is entirely opposed to that of Mammata, his commentators like Pradipakara and Nages'a, and to that of Jagannatha. The words of मम्मट are 'अत्र तदन्तिक मेव रन्तुं गतासीति प्राधान्येन अधमपदेन व्यज्यते.' Here मम्मट says that the sense 'you went near him only for dallying with him' is suggested by the word aryw which is most prominent ( according to Pradipa ) or the fact that 'you went only to dally with him,' which is the most prominent, is suggested by

अपगतताम्बूलरागो वा. In bathing the colour of both the lips would be washed away, if at all. 'तथा निर्मृष्टरागोऽधर इत्यत्र ताम्बूलग्रहणविलम्बात प्राचीनरागस्य किंचिन्मृष्टतेत्यन्यथासिद्धिपरिहाराय निर्मृष्टराग इति रागस्य निःशेष- मृष्टतोक्ता। पुनः स्नानसाधारण्यव्यावर्तनेन सम्भोगचिह्वोद्वाटनाय अधर इति विशिष्य ग्रहणम्। उत्तरोष्ठे सरागे अधरोष्ठमात्रस्य निर्मृष्टरागता चुम्बनकृतैव। नेत्रे दूरमनञ्जने- नेत्रे दूरमत्यर्थ कज्जलरहिते। दूरमत्यर्थमिति आपाततोऽर्थ. (the meaning at first sight)। कालतः स्नानेन वा सर्वतोऽज्नलोप: स्याद, तव तु लोचनयोः कचित्प्रान्त एव अनजनत्वम्। इदं चुम्बनकृतमेवेति। चि. मी. तन्वी slender. तन्वी तवेयं तनुः पुलकिता सरोमाक्ना। आपाततः तन्वीति सहजतानवकीर्तनेन पुलकितेति सनानचिह्नो- पन्यासः । पुलकिताऽपि तन्वी वर्तते इति हृदि स्थितोऽन्वयः। तेन च स्ानेन पुलकिता तनुः किंचिदुच्छसिता भवति। इयं तु न तथेति रतिक्लेशजनितावेव तानवपुलकोद्गमौ इति मर्मोद्ाटनम्'। चि.मी. p.3. * As done in the ्ि० मी० quoted above.

80 NOTES ON II. 16-17

the word अधम (according to उद्योत). मम्मट's idea is that in this verse, you cannot resort to &T0T at all. Herein he differs from our author. Moreover he says that the whole व्यंग्य sense can be had from the word अधम. The words निःशेष etc. are common both to वापीसान and dallying with him. They are not to be interpreted as being inapplicable to वापीस्ान and specially appropriate to तदन्तिकगमन, as is done by the चवित्रमीमांसा. Vide the words of मम्मट in the 5th UI. "तथा 'निःशेषच्युत' इत्यादौ गमकतया यानि चन्दनच्यवनादीन्युपात्तानि, तानि कारणान्तरतोऽपि सम्भवन्ति अतश्च अत्रैव स्नानकार्यत्वेनोक्तानीति नोपभोगे एव प्रतिबद्धानि इत्यनैकान्तिकानि" p. 256 (Va). The रसगङ्गाधर explains निःशेष etc. as applied to the bathing in the well as follows :- 'निःशेषच्युतचन्दनं स्तनयोस्तटमेव नोरः-

स्यैवोन्नततया मुहुरामर्शात।' pp. 15-16. *

After giving the explanations of निःशेष etc. as applied to bathing in a well, the रसगङ्गाधर remarks that there is no necessity for resorting to Indication, as the primary sense is not alto- gether inapplicable, because the words निःशेष 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 bero have a specialty of their

• The उद्योत comments as follows :- " ... इतः मत्सकाशात्। वापीमिति। स्नानकालातिक्रमभयात् नदीमदीयप्रिययोर- न्तिकमगत्वैवेत्यर्थः । तस्य परवेदनानभिज्ञस्य। ...... अधमस्य कृतापराधस्य स्वशरणा रक्षकस्य वा। स्नानोपपादकमाह निःशेषेति। यतस्तव स्तनयोः तटं प्रान्तदेशः निःशेषं यथा स्यात्तथा ्युतं रखलितं चन्दनं यस्मात तथा। न तु उरःस्थलं नापि संध्यादिरूपनि- म्नोन्नतभागोऽपि। वाप्या गम्भीरजलाशयत्वात् पिच्छिलतीरत्वात् तद्गतबहुलयुवजनत्र- पापारवश्यादंसद्वयलस्नाग्रस्वस्तिकीकृतभुजलतायुगलेन तटस्यैव उन्नततया परामर्शात्। अत एव च्युतं न तु च्यावितं क्षालितं वा। व्यंग्यपक्षे तु तत्रैव मर्दनाधिक्यात्। संध्यादौ नायककरपरामशायोगाच्च। एवमुत्तानतया बहुलजलसम्बन्धात् रदनशोधनाङ्गल्यादीनाम- धिकसंमर्दवहनाच्चाधर एव नितरां मृष्टरागः न तु ईषत्। न तु उत्तरौष्ठः। न्युब्जतया तत्सम्बन्धमान्दयात्। त्वरया सम्यगक्षालनाच्च। व्यंग्यपक्षे तु तत्रैव चुम्बनविधेः, उत्तरोष्ठे तन्निषेधाच्च तत्रैव तत्कृतं (चुम्बनकृतं) तथात्वम् (निर्मृष्टरागत्वम्)। नेत्रे दूरं प्रान्तभागे एव अनअने। स्त्नानकाले मुद्रणात् मध्ये जलसम्बन्धाभावात्। व्यंग्यपक्षे प्रान्ते एव (नेत्रप्रान्ते एव) चुम्बनविधे:, मध्ये तन्निषेधाच्च तत्रैवानज्ञनत्वम्। दूरमत्यर्थमिति तु अयुक्तमेव। इयं तव तनुः तन्व्री कृशा स्नानोत्तरमभोजनात्। अत एव पुलकिता जनभयादङ्गजलादूरीकरणात्। पुलको रोमोद्रमः। व्यंग्यपक्षे कारश्य सुरतश्रमात् पुलकश्च तत्रानुभूताद्द्तरसस्मरणात्। असम्पूर्णरतत्वादवा। स्नानसाधारण्यसम्पादनाय वापीमि- र्युक्तम्। न तु गृहं सर इति वा। p. 17 (Chan).

II. 16-17 SAHITYADARPANA. 81

own. The word ayy 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 au yields the sense of 'one who causes pain by dallying with the maid.'- 'एवं साधारणेष्वेषु वाक्यार्थेषु मुख्यार्ये बाधाभावात्, तात्पर्यार्थस्य झटित्यनाकलनात्कुतोऽत्र लक्षणावकाशः । अनन्तरं च वाच्यार्थप्रतिपत्तेः वक्तबोद्धव्य- नायकादीनां वैशिष्टयस्य प्रतीतौ सत्यामधमपदेन स्वप्रवृत्तिप्रयोजको दुःखदातृत्वरूपो वर्म: साधारणात्मा वाच्यार्थदशायामपराधान्तरनिमित्तकदुःखदातृत्वरूपेण स्थितो व्यञ्ञना व्यापारेण दूतीसम्भोगनिमित्तकदुःखदानृत्वाकारेण पर्यवस्यतीत्यालक्कारिकसिद्धान्त- निष्कर्ष: ।' p. 16 रसगंo. This is the reason why the word अम is the most prominent in the verse, as suggested by Mammata's specific mention in the words 'अधमपदेन व्यज्यते.' As for चन्दनच्यवन 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 निःशेषच्युत etc. are subordinate in conveying the व्यंग्य sense and the word अधम is prominent. Another reason for rejecting lakshana and regarding the word ayn as pradhana in bringing out the suggested sense may be suggested. Even supposing for the sake of argument that there is विपरीतलक्षणा as said by our author, the word ayy will then mean 'noble' and as such will obstruct the a्यंग्य which, as admitted by all, is dallying with the दूती. Hence the presence of the word aryy in the verse precludes विपरीतलक्षणा and it is thus the most prominent word to suggest the sense intended, the remaining words being equally applicable either way. 'विदग्धाया गूढतात्पर्यया अनया वाचोयुक्त्या स्नानसाधारण्येनैतेषु अर्थेपु अवगतेषु वक्तृबोद्धव्यादिवैशिष्टयबलात् दुःखप्रयोजककर्म- शीलत्वरूपाधमपदार्थघटककर्मपदार्थो वाच्यतादशायां कर्मान्तरसाधारण्येन अवस्थितोऽपि व्यअ्ञनया दूतीसम्भोगरूपतादृशकर्माकारेण पर्यवस्यतीति। इदमेव अधमपदस्य अधम- पदेनेति उत्तिध्वनितं प्राधान्यम्। झटिति इतरानपेक्षतया व्यंग्यबोधकत्वाच्च। चन्दनच्य- वनादीनां तु स्नान कार्यतया निबद्धानां योग्यतया सम्भोगाङ्गभूताक्षेष चुम्बनादिकार्यत्वस्यापि प्रतिसन्धाने सति तद्व्यअ्नद्वारा तत्साहित्येनैव सम्भोगगमकत्वमिति विशेष: ।' उद्योत p. 18 (vide the lucid and interesting remarks of R. G. pp. 12-16.) (P.15,11. 1-6) अन्यसंनिधि ...... प्रयोजकम्. उम ...... सङ्गसुत्ति व्- (संस्कृतम्) पश्य निश्चलनिष्पन्दा बिसिनीपत्रे राजते बलाका। निर्मलमरकतभाजन- परिस्थिता शङशुक्तिरिव ॥।. This is the fourth verse of the गाथासप्तशती of हाल alias सातवाहन, who is referred to even by Bana. *अविनाशिनमग्राम्यमकरोत् सातवाहनः । विशुद्धजातिभिः कोशं रत्नैरिव सुभाषितैः।' १३

82 NOTES ON II. 16-17

io 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.' 'उभ इत्यव्ययं पश्येत्यर्थे। काचिदुपनायकं प्रति वदति। बिसिनी कमलिनी तस्या: पत्रे बलाका प्रसिद्धः पक्षिविशेषः। शोभते त्वं पश्येति वाक्यार्थस्य कर्मत्वेनान्वयः। समीहितसूचनाय विशिनष्टि-निश्चलेत्यादि। निश्चला चासौ निष्पन्दा चेति कर्मधारयः। चलनं शरीरक्रिया स्थानान्तरप्रापिका। स्पन्दस्त्ववयवक्रिया तदप्रापिका । 'स्पदि किंचिच्चलने' इति धात्वनुसारात्। निर्भले सच्छे मरकतस्य नीलमणेर्भाजने स्थिता शङ्कस्य शुक्ति: शङ्घटितं शुक्तिसद्टशं चन्दनादिनिधानपात्रम्। न तु मुक्ताशुक्तिः। तस्या बलाकावर्णेसदृशवर्णत्वाभावात्। शङशुक्तिपदस्य तत्रासामर्थ्याच्च। एवं चाचेतनोपमया आत्यन्तिकक्षोभाभावः सूच्यते।' ao 4o p. 23. This verse is addressed by a damsel to her paramour. निश्चलनिष्पन्दा may be taken as one word or as two words. In the first case, fara would mean 'not moving to another place' and fsura 'not moving any part of its body'; in the latter, fars would be addressed to the paramour and would mean 'lazy, not quick to seize the opportunity' (जनशङ्कया विहारव्यापारनिरुद्योग। उद्योत). अत्र बलाकाया ... प्रत्युच्यते 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 निष्पन्द suggests the sense of security (विश्वस्तत्व). 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 व्यङ्गयार्थ gives rise to another. Therefore this is an example of आर्थीं व्यञञना. The last व्यंग्यार्थ i. e. सङ्केतस्थानमेतद्, 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 अन्यसंनिधिवैशिष्टय. अत्रैव In these words the author seems to give us an example of arreff .. प्रयोजकम्-

व्यज्ञना due to the वैशिष्टय of वाच्य. He exemplied the वैशिष्टय of वक्तृ, प्रस्ताव, देश, काल, and वाक्य in 'कालो मधुः that of बोद्धव्य and अन्यसंनिधि in 'निःशेष etc' and 'उअ etc,' respectively. Further on he will speak of the वैशिष्ट्य of काकु and चेष्टा So out of the ten specialties mentioned above, वाच्यवैशिष्टय alone remains to be dealt with. We interpret this line as follows :- In this very example 'उअ णिचचल etc.' the specialty of the suggested sense, viz. the loneliness of the spot, is what leads to ( the appre-

II. 16-17 SÅHITYADARPANA. 83

hension of a further suggested sense ). Here we must put a wide interpretation upon the word are so as to take it to mean 'वाच्य, लक्ष्य, or व्यंग्य अर्ध'. So according to this inter- pretation, the verse is an example of वाच्यवैशिष्टय as well as अन्यसन्निधिवैशिष्टय. Pramadadasa does not understand the passage as an example of वाच्य, as we do. The व्यंग्य sense in the verse 'उअ णिच्चल etc.' is brought out in two ways by Mammata, one sense favouring सम्भोग शृङ्गार and the other विप्रलम्भशृद्गार. The first is the same as that brought out by our author. The second is 'अथवा मिथ्या वदसि न त्वमत्रागतो भूरिति व्यज्यते' which is explained by प्रदीप as 'निष्पन्दत्वेन आश्वस्तत्वम्, तेन जनागमनाभावः अतो न त्वमत्रागत इति मिथ्या वदसीति कथाच्ित् दत्तसङ्केता त्वं नागता अहं ल्वागत इति वादिनं प्रति s4a l'. 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 fisqa, 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. गङ्गाधरभट्ट in his comment upon this verse in the गाथासप्तशती gives another meaning altogether.

(P. 15, 11. 7-11) 'भिन्नकण्ठ ...... काक्का व्यज्यते. 'भिन्नकण्ठ ...... अभिधीयते।' This is quoted in जयरथ'S अलङ्गारसर्वस्वविमर्रिनी p. 175, the first half being 'वाक्याभिधे (धी?) यमानेऽयें येनान्यः प्रतिपद्यते।'. This is a definition of ara, which we have explained above. This definition means 'That is called by the wise ares, emphasis or modulation of voice, which is an alteration of the sound in the throat.'

आकरेभ्यो ज्ञातव्या :- The varieties of काकु should be known from original works. The word anTaT is used for the works on any S'astra, in which the topics peculiar to a are are authoritatively and completely dealt with; e. g. the तत्त्वबोधिनी (commentary on the सिद्धान्तकामुदी ) applies the word आकर to the महाभाष्य of पतजलि "अन्नाहु :- संज्ञाजातिक्रियाशब्दान् दित्वाऽन्ये गुणवाचिनः । चतुष्टयी शब्दानां प्रवृत्तिरित्याकरग्रन्थनिष्कर्षादेव निर्णय इति" p. 119 on वोतो गुणवचनात्। पा० IV. 1. 44; similarly नागेशभट्ट in his वैयाकरणसिद्धान्त- मख्जषा says 'अत एव निपातानां द्योतकत्वमाकरे उक्तम्.' काकु is divided into two varieties साकांक्षा and निराकांक्षा in भरत'S नाट्यशास्त्र 17th अ0 pp. 187-188. See also the काव्यानुशासन of हेमचन्द्र pp. 234-239. 'गुरुपर ...... समयेऽसौ'-Being dependent on his elders, alas, he is

84 NOTES ON II. 16-17

about to depart to a far-off land. In the spring-time, deliciously charming on accout 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 Aoyfa it is suggested that he will surely come back. So this is an example of आर्थी व्यजना due to काकु. Mammata cites this verse as an example of काकुवक्रोक्ति (K. P. 9th Ul. p. 493). 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?' Vide प्रदीप 'अत्र नैष्यतीति नायिकया निषेधाभिप्रायेणोक्तं सख्या तु नैष्यति अपि तु एष्यति मवेत्यर्थकतया काका योज्यते.' In the verse as interpreted by विश्वनाथ in the text, the heroine utters the verse with the apparent meaning that he won't come, but by a change of voice she suggests herself the idea that he would surely come. (P 15, 11. 12-15 ) चेष्टावैशिष्टये ...... दोत्यते. सङ्गेतकालमनसं ......... निमीलितम्. This verse is quoted in the ध्वन्यालोक (p.103). It is cited by Mammata ( and by our author also ) as an example of सूक्ष्मालक्कार 'विटं जारम्। सक्केतकाले मनो यस्य। तं जिज्ञासुमित्यर्थः। अत एव हसद्द्रयां नेत्राभ्यां अर्पितं सूचितं आकूतं रहस्यं येन तादृशं (विटं) ज्ञात्वा विदग्धया नायिकया लीलासम्बन्धि पद्मम् निमीलितमित्यन्वयः' उ० चंe p. 440. We may also construe हसन्नेत्रार्पिताकृतं as an adverb or as an adjective qualifying लीलापझ्म. 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 playing in such a manner as to convey her import by her laughing eyes. ar संध्या ...... दोत्यते. 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 (er ) of closing the lotus, she suggests the time. Here the ajy sense viz., the time of twilight, is due to the वैशिष्ट्य of चेष्टा. एवं ..... बोद्धव्यम्. व्यस्त taken separately. समस्त taken in combination.

(P. 15, 1. 17) त्रैविध्यादियं ..... त्रिविधा मता. As meanings are three-fold, the power of suggestion is held to be, in respect of each of the above-mentioned varieties ( in वक्तृवोद्धव्य etc.), three-fold.

(P. 15, 11. 18-21) अर्थानां ...... प्रपञ्चयिष्यते. Meanings are three-fold, viz. वाच्य, लक्ष्य and व्यंग्य. अनन्तरोका: mentioned just above. An example of the power of suggestion belonging to an expressed sense is 'arer ny"', where all the words are to be

II. 17 SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 85

understood literally and then give rise to the suggested sense. An example of suggestion belonging to an indicated meaning is 'निःशेषच्युत etc.', where the words indicate the reverse of what is said and the suggestion originates in this indicated meaning; and 3rdly, an example of suggestion belonging to a suggested meaning is 'उभ णिच्चल etc.', where the suggestion of its being a fit place of meeting arises from the suggested sense of its being a lonely place. yafa 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 yf pp. 221 ff, ( Nir.). 'पदांशवर्णरचनाप्रबन्धेष्वस्फुटक्रमः । असंलक्ष्यक्रमव्यंग्यो ध्वास्तत्र पदांशप्रकृतिप्रत्ययोपसर्गनिपातादिमेदादनेकविधः।'. An example isthe verse 'न्यक्कारो' etc. where the plurals अरयः and भुजै:, the तद्धित affix in ग्रामटिका etc. suggest senses.

(P. 15, 11. 22-25) शब्दवोध्यो व्यनक्त्यर्थः ...... अङ्गौकर्तव्या. शब्दबोध्यो ... HanTRar. 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 व्यज्ना into शाब्दी and आर्या. When you say that व्यञ्ञना is आर्थी, do you mean that in that case a is of no account ? Similarly, when you say that व्यञना is शाब्दी, do you mean that अर्थ 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 the व्यञ्ञना is आर्थी, we do not mean that it has nothing to do with &Ta. What we mean is that it is there primarily concerned with अर्ध, and in a subordinate manner with शब्द. यतः शब्दो ... शब्दम्. '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 शाब्दी (अभिधामूल) व्यअ्ञना, the word उमावल्भ: suggests S'iva, only when it denotes another meaning, viz. the husband of Uma. So here also, sense is required (सहकारितया) as a helper. तद् -तस्माव. एकस्य व्यक्षकत्वे-When one suggests, the co-operation of the other must needs be admitted. The name शाब्दी or आर्थी is employed, as said above, because we look only to what plays the prominent part in the व्यञना.

(P. 15, 1l. 26-27) अभिधादि ...... व्यअ्जकस्तथा. A word also is held (like the meaning) to be three-fold on account of its being

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 'स्यादवाचको लाक्षणिक: शब्दोSत्र व्यञ्जकस्त्रिधा। वाच्यादयस्तदर्थाः स्युः' K. P. II. UI. (P.16,11.2-6) तात्पर्याख्यां वृत्ति ...... मतम्. तात्पार्याख्यां ...... परे. Consrtue :- परे पदार्थान्वयबोधने तात्पर्याख्यां वृत्ति तदर्थ तात्पर्यार्थ तद्वोधकं च वाक्यमाहु: 'Others say that there is a function called Purport (तात्पर्य ) 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.' अभिधाया ......... तात्पर्ये नाम वृत्ति :- 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. तदर्धश्च तात्पर्यार्थ :- The sense arising from the function called तात्पर्य is the Drift. तद्वोधकं च वाक्यम्. The sentence as a whole conveys the तात्पर्यार्थ through the power called तात्पर्य. This is the opinion of the अभिहितान्वयवादिन्s. What is meant is this :- There is a fourth function called ary, in addition to the three treated of, viz., अभिधा, लक्षणा and व्यञ्ञना. This function consists in conveying the connected meaning of several words and is not like अभिधा, लक्षणा and व्यञ्ञना which convey the meaning of a particular word. As the meaning conveyed by लक्षणा is called लक्ष्य, that conveyed by व्यञ्चना is called व्यंग्य, so the meaning conveyed by this वृत्ति (तात्पर्य) is called तात्पर्यार्थ. It is generally the word that conveys the अभिधेय or लक्ष्य meaning; the तात्पर्यार्थ is conveyed not by a word, but by the whole sentence. This view is held by that school of the पूर्वमीमांसा, which is called अभिहितान्वयवादिन्. The opposing school is designated अन्विताभिधान- वादिन्. अभिहितान्वयवादिन :- 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 aley based upon आकांक्षा, योग्यता and संनिधि. This तात्पर्यार्थ that arises is distinct from the meanings denoted by the words. In the example गामानय, गो means. 'सास्रादिमान्पदार्थः' generally, the affix अम् shows कर्मत्व generally, नी shows motion generally. The simple word at by itself does not express the of meant in the sentence, viz. the आश्रय of the कर्मत्व denoted by अम्. The conneotion between the पदार्थs is known from आकांक्षा, योग्यता and संनिधि and when the connection is known. a special sense

II. 20 SAHITYADARPANA. 87.

arises, which is called तात्पर्यार्थ or वाक्यार्थ. The views of these मीमांसकs are expressed as follows by भट्टकुमारिल (from whom the अभिहितान्वयवादिन्s are called भाटृड) in his श्रोकवार्तिक 'साक्षाद्द्यपि कुर्वन्ति पदार्थप्रतिपादनम्। वर्णास्तथापि नैतस्मिन् पर्यवस्यन्ति निष्फले॥ वाक्यार्थमितये तेषां प्रवृत्तौ नान्तरीयकम्। पाके ज्वालेव काष्ठानां पदार्थप्रतिपादनम्' verses 342- 343, p. 943. Mammata explains their views as follows :-- आर्काक्षायोग्यतासंनिधिव शाद्वक्ष्यमाणस्वरूपाणां पदार्थानां समन्वये तात्पर्यार्थो विशेष वपुरपदार्थोऽपि वाक्यार्थः समुलसतीत्यभिहितान्वयवादिनां मतम्' K. P. II. UI. pp. 25-26 (Chan). पार्थसारथिमिश्र in his न्यायरलमाला supports अभिहितान्वयवाद by quoting the authority of जैमिनि and शबर. "अभिहितान्वय एव ज्यायान्। तथा च सूत्रकारः (पू. मी.सू. I. 1.25) 'अर्थस्य तन्निमित्तत्वात्' इति व्यक्तमेव पदार्थनिमित्तकत्वं वाक्यार्धस्य दर्शयति। भाष्यकारोऽपि हि 'अमूनि पदानि स्वं स्वमर्थमभिधाय निवृत्तव्यापाराणि, अथेदानीं पदार्था अभिहिताः सन्तो वाक्यार्थमवबोधयन्ति' इत्याह।" p. 97. The reason why they are called अभिहितान्वयवादिन्s is-'अभिहितानां पदार्थानां अर्थाभिधायिनां वा पदानामन्वयः इति ये वदन्ति ते अभिहितान्वयवादिनः.'

अन्विताभिधानवादिन :- 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 'गामानय', he sees the servant move a सास्त्नादिमत्पदार्थ from one place to another and infers that the servant understood from the sentence the bringing of a सास्त्नादिमत्पदार्थ. He then hears 'अश्वमानय' where the word आनय is the same as before. He then knows the meanings of the words uff and au, not 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 uaa 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 वृत्ति called तात्पर्य, from which we are to understand the meaning of a sentence. No afi is necessary to logically connect the meanings of words, as said by the अभिहितान्वयवादिन्s, but the several meanings themselves connectedly denoted by the words constitute the meaning of the sentence. Their views are clearly set forth by Mammata in the 5th Ul. pp. 265-268 ( Va). "'देवदत्त गामानय' इत्यायुत्तमवृद्ध- वाक्यप्रयोगादेशाद्देशान्तरं सास्ादिमन्तमर्थ मध्यमवृद्धे नयति सति 'अनेनास्माद्वांक्या- देवंविधोऽर्थः प्रतिपन्नः' इति तच्चेष्ट्यानुमाय तयोरखण्डवाक्यवाक्यार्थयोः अर्थापत्या

88 NOTES ON IL 20

वाच्यवाचकभावलक्षणं सम्बन्धमवधार्य बालस्तत्र व्युत्पद्यते। परतः 'चैत्र गामानय, देवदत्त अश्वमानय, देवदत्त गां नय,' इत्यादिवाक्यप्रयोगे तस्य तस्य शब्दस्य तं तमर्थमवधार- यतीति अन्वयव्यतिरेकाभ्यां प्रवृत्तिनिवृत्तिकारि वाक्यमेव प्रयोगयोग्यमिति वाक्य- स्थितानामेव पदानामन्वितैः पदारथैरन्वितानामेव सक्केतो गृह्यते इति विशिष्टा एव पदार्था वाक्यार्थः, न तु पदार्थानां वैशिष्टयम्। यद्यपि वाक्यान्तरप्रयुज्यमानान्यपि प्रत्यभिज्ञा- अत्ययेन तान्येवैतानि पदानि निश्चीयन्ते इति पदार्थान्तरमात्रेणान्वितः पदार्थ: सङ्केतगोचरः, तथापि सामान्यावच्छादितो विशेषरूप एवासौ प्रतिपद्यते व्यतिषक्तानां पदार्थानां तथाभूतत्वादिति अन्विताभिधानवादिन:". The reason why they are called अन्विताभिधानवादिन: is-अन्वितानामेव पदार्थानामभिधानं शब्दैः प्रतिपादनं इति ये वदन्ति ते अन्विताभिधानवादिनः।'; see भाटृचिन्तामणि p. 172. The अभिधावृत्तिमातृका (on कारिका 7-8) clearly explains the two views 'इह केषांचिदन्वयव्यतिरेकावसेयसामान्यभूतस्वार्थमात्रविश्रान्तेषु पदेषु पदार्थाकांक्षासंनिधियोग्यतामहिम्रा वाक्यार्थस्यानभिधेयभूतस्य हर्षशोकादिवदवसेयत्व- मेव। यदा हि ब्राह्मण पुत्रस्ते जातः, ब्राह्मण कन्या ते गर्भिणीति यथाक्रमं पुत्रजन्मकन्यागर्भिणीत्वनिमित्तौ हर्षशोकौ स्वशब्देनानमिहितावपि शब्दाभिधेयभूतवस्तु- सामर्थ्यादाक्षिप्येते। एवं वाक्यार्थस्यानभिघेयभूतस्यैव पदार्थाक्षेप्यत्वं द्रष्टव्यम्। एषा चैवंवादिनां मतेनार्थानामभिहितानामुत्तरकालं परस्परान्वयादभिहितान्वयः। अपरे त्वाहुः। वृद्धव्यवहाराच्छब्दार्थसम्बन्धावसायः । स च वृद्धव्यवहारः प्रवृत्तिनिवृत्ति- रूपः । प्रवृत्तिनिवृत्ती च विशिष्टार्थनिष्ठे। अतो विशिष्ट एवार्ये पदानां सम्बन्धावधृतिः। ततश्च विशिष्टा एव पदार्था न तु पदार्थानां वैशिष्टयम्। एवं च परस्परान्वितानां वाक्यार्थरूपतापन्नानां तत्तत्सामान्यावच्छादितत्वेन गृहीतस्ववाचकसम्बन्धानां पदैः प्रत्यायनादन्विताभिधानमिति।' p. 15.

PARICHCHHEDA X.

(P. 17,11. 3-4) अथ ...... उपमामाह. अथ=शब्दालङ्कारवर्कपणानगारम्. अवसरप्राप्तेषु अर्थालङ्कारेषु .- The occasion for treating th figures of sense having arrived. प्राधान्यात् ... लक्षितव्येषु-those that are basec upon similitude should be defined first, as being the principa ones. Alankaras are often classified as those based upon HIEy, विरोध, लोकन्याय etc. We shall speu' of these classifications later on. तेषामप्युपजीव्यत्वेन-he speaks of simile first,/ which is the root of even those (सादृश्यमूल अलक्वारs). Compare the words or राजशेखर as quoted in अलं० शे० p. 32 'अल. रशिरतरतं सर्वस्वं काव्य- सम्पदाभ्। उपमा कविवंशस्य मातैवेति मतिर्मम॥'; अलं. स. p. 26 'उपमैवानेकप्रकार- वैचित्र्येणानेकालङ्कारबीजभूतेति प्रथमं निर्दिष्टा।'; तरल p.195 'मुखमव चन्द्र: मुखचन्द्र:, मुखं चन्द्रश्च शोभते, मुखं वा चन्द्रो वा, न मुखं कि तु चन्द्र इत्यादिसादृश्य- विच्छित्तिविशेषै रूपकदीपकाद्यनेकालक्कारबीजतयोपमायाः प्रथमं निरूपणमित्यर्थः।' (P. 17, 11. 5-7) साम्यं वाच्यं ...... इत्यस्या मेद :. साम्यं ...- द्वयोः -* construe वाक्यैक्ये (सति) द्योः (वस्तुनोः) वाच्यं अवैधर्म्य साम्यं उपमा- Simile is the resemblance between two things expressed in a single sentence and unaccompanied with the statement of difference. रूपकादिषु ...... इत्यस्या मेद :- The author now proceeds to explain the propriety of each of the words used in the definition. The word वाच्य serves to distinguish उपमा from रूपक (metaphor). An example of metaphor is मुखं चन्द्र: ( tha face itself is the moon ); while an example of simile is मुखं चन्द्र इव ( the face is like the moon ). In metaphor, when we reflect twnon the fact that the face cannot be identified with the moor 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 (bay the word इव in the example). व्यतिरेके च- In व्यतिरेक (Contras.), points of difference also ( between two objects ) are expriessly mentioned. In व्यतिरेक, the उपद ( the object of comparisola,) is said to brsuperior to the synra ( standard of comparison ), which superiority may be due to the excellence of the Upameya, or to the inferiority of the Upamana. So in व्यतिरेक there is not only resemblance between * The figure 14 is put after this line in the text, because there are 13 Karikas in the 10th Pari. dealing with TrtTs which we have omitted.

90 NOTES ON X. 14 उपमा.

two things, but it is also pointed out that one thing excels another in a certain point (वैधर्म्यस्य उक्तिः); while in simile, resemblance alone is referred to and hence अवैधम्यंम् serves to oxolude ्यतिरेक. An example of व्यतिरेक is 'अकलङ्क मुखं तस्या न कलक्कि विधुरयथा'. उपमेयोपमायां वाक्यद्वयम्-In उपमेयोपमा, the उपमान is compared with the उपमेय and the उपमेय is compared with the Upamana a e. what was Upameya becomes the Upamana and what was pamana becomes the Upameya, An example of उपमेयोपमा is 'कमलेव मतिर्मतिरिव फामला' ( the intellect is like wealth 1 ana wealth is lika the intellect ). But the above example contain.s tmo santences. Therefore by the word वाक्यक्ये, उपमेयोपमा, vhlch has two sentenoes, is exoluded. अनन्वये तु ... भेद: In aray (e<comparison' ) the same thing is compared to itssit, the purpose being to show that no second thing resembling it is known to exist. An example is 'रामरावणयोर्युद्ध रामरावणयोरिव'. In Upama two things are compared and there- fore the word दयो: serves to exclude the figure अनन्वय, in which there is HIT4, but not between two things that are distinct. Some other definitions of Upama are given below :- 'अथात उपमा यवतत्तरसदृशमिति गार्ग्यस्तदासां कर्म' etc. निरुक्त III. 13; यत्किञ्चित्काव्यबन्धेषु सादृदयेनोपमीयते। उपमा नाम सा ज्ञेया गुणाकृतिसमाश्रया॥ भरतनाट्य० 16.42; विरुद्धेनोपमानेन देशकालक्रियादिभिः। उपमेयस्य यत्साम्यं गुणलेशेन सोपमा॥ भामह II. 30; यच्चेतोहारि साधर्म्यमुपमानोपमेययोः। मिथो विभिन्नकालादि शब्दयोरुपमा तु तत्।। उद्भ्ट I. 34; उपमा यत्र सादृश्यलक्ष्मीरुल्सति दयोः ॥ चन्द्रालोक V.3. (P. 17,1l. 8-11) सा पूर्णा .. उपमानं चन्द्रादि. Construe सा (उपमा) पूर्णा (भवति) यदि सामान्यधर्मः औपम्यवाचि (पदम्) उपमेयं उपममं च वाच्यं भवेत्-The simile is fully expressed, when the comon property, the word imploying comparison, the obiet of com- parison and the standard of comparison ae all expressed. The author now comes to the divisions,f Upama. Simile is divided into पूर्णा and लुप्ता. There is a.ully expressed simile .when all the four elements of comparisn are expressed. In the example 'मुख कमलमिदन सुन्दरम्' the wod मुख is the उपमेय, कमल is the Upamana, इव is the आपम्यवाची शब्द and सुन्दरम् 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 elliptioal उपमा. साधारणधर्मों ..... मनोज्ञत्वादि-The common property i. e. the quality or action which causes the similarity of two objects is such as loveliness etc. (in the example r ₹5 मनोजं मुखम्).

X. 15-16 उपमा. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 91

( P. 17, 1l. 12-21 ) इयं पुनः वतेरुपादाने. इयं=पूर्णा. पूर्णा is divided into two varieties शौती and आर्थी. That (पूर्णा) again is Direct (sidt ) in which the notion of comparison is conveyed by particles, such as यथा, इव, वा, or by the affix aa when it is equivalent to ga; it is Indirect when the notion of comparison is conveyed by attributive words such as तुल्य, समान etc. or the affix वत् is employed in the sense of तुल्य (equal). The author tells us that the उपमा is श्रीसी, when the words यथा, इव, वा, etc. are cmployed to express thre comparison and that it is आधी when words like तुल्य are em- ployed. A question arises :- what is the difference between the words यथा etc. and तुल्य etc. The difference between the two classes of words is as follows :- The words इव, यथा, वा, etc. primarily express HIT4 i. e. relation of two things based upon their possessing a common property 'व घा यथा तथवैवं साम्ये'। अमर IIT. 4.9. 'यथेवशब्दौ सादृश्यमाहतुर्व्यतिरेकिणोः ।' भामह II. 31. The words qur 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 'पञ्मिव मुखम्' by the very employment of the word a, the two things qar and मुख are shown to be related together as उपमेय and उपमान on account of their possessing some property in common. The words Eeetc. on the other hand, are used in the sense of 'similar' (सदृश). In the example 'पझ्मन तुल्यं मुखम्', the word तुल्य expresses that is an object similar to another. Here the word तुल्य does not convey the idea of सादृश्य directly; it only expresses that one thing has similarity in it. The word Je4 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 considor that similarity cannot exsit unless there be some property in common. Compare the words of Mallinatha in his तरल 'इवादीनामप्यर्थात्सदृशपर्यवसानं श्रुत्या तु सादृश्यगमकत्वमेवेति तत्प्रयोगे श्रौतीत्यथः। तुल्यादिशब्दानां तु श्रुत्या सदृशपरत्वमर्थात्त सादृश्यपर्यवसानमिति तेषां प्रयोगे त्वार्थीत्याह।' p. 198. यथेववादयः शब्दा :- वा has two senses 'उपमायां विकल्पे वा' अमर. 11. 3. 249. उपमानानन्तर etc .- Although they are quite similar to words like e when employed after the उपमान. The particles इव, यथा etc. are used after the उपमान as in चन्द्र इव मुखम्. तुल्य etc. may be used with the उपमान or उपमेय or both. When तुल्य is used after the उपमान, it and इव would be quite similar (as in

92 NOTES ON X. 16 उपमा.

पझ्मं तुल्यं मुखेन). What difference is there between इद and तुल्य when so used ? The author replies as follows :- श्रुतिमात्रेण ...... बोधयन्ति-They (यथा etc.) convey the notion of the relation of similarity between the उपमान and उपमेय by the very word. तत्सद्भावे=यथेवादिसद्भावे. श्रौती उषमा-The उपमा is said to be direct because words like यथा, employed in it, directly (अुत्या) convey the notion of सादृश्य. Compare 'यथेवशब्दयोगेन सा श्रुत्यान्वयमर्हति।' उन्द्ट. I. 35; 'श्रौतत्वं चोपमानोपमेययोः साधारणधर्मसम्बन्धरूपायास्तस्याः शाब्दबोधविषयत्वम्। अर्थापत्तिगम्यत्वं चार्थत्वम्।' प्रदीप ( p. 4 Chan). एवं ... ... वतेरुपादाने-It is so (i. e. the उपमा is श्रौती) when the afix वत् is employed in the sense of sa as laid down in the sutra of qrforf 'तत्र तस्येव' V. I. 116, which means 'the affix वत् is applied to a standard of comparison in the locative or genitive case and takes the place of the case affix and of aa'; examples of this rule are 'मथुरावत् (मथुरायामिव) स्रन्ने प्राकारः' and 'चैत्रवन्मैत्रस्य गावः' (चैत्रस्येव). तुल्यादयस्तु ... आर्थी-The (power of ) words like तुल्य is exhausted in the उपमेय in such examples as 'the face is similar to the lotus'; in the उपमान 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 go is exhausted in being attributive to the Upamana when they qualify it etc. They have not the further power of expressing the notion of HIERy 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 सादृश्यसम्बन्ध. Hence the उपमा is said to be आर्थी. एवं ...... वतेरुपादाने-s0 (the Upama is Arthi) in the case of the employment of वत् (in the sense of तेन तुल्य) as laid down in Panini's rule 'तेन तुल्यं क्रिया चेदतिः' V. I. 115., which means 'the affix aa is applied to a noun ( which would otherwise be in the Instrumental ) in the sense of तेन तुल्य, if the similarity consists in an action ( and not u, quality )' e. g. ब्राह्मणवदधीते (ब्राह्मणेन तुल्यमधीते). Here the similarity is in studying. Compare भामह 'वतिनाऽपि क्रियासाम्यं तद्वदेवाभिधीयते। द्विजाति- वदधीतेऽसौ गुरुवच्चानुशास्ति नः ॥'. But we cannot say चत्रवत् कृश:, because कृशत्व is a गुण; in this case we must say 'चैत्रेण तुल्यः कृशः'. Our author in this passage borrows the words of Mammata

X. 16 उपमा. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 93

almost verbatim. See K. P. X. "'तत्र तस्येव' इत्यनेन इवार्थे विहितस्य वतेरुपादाने। 'तेन तुल्यं मुखम्' इत्यादावुपमेये एव, 'तत्तुल्यमस्य' इत्यादौ चोपमाने एव, 'इदं च तच्च तुल्यम्' इत्युभयत्रापि तुल्यादिशब्दानां विश्रान्तिरिति साम्यपर्या- लोचनया तुल्यताप्रतीतिरिति साधर्म्यस्यार्थस्वात् तुल्यादिपदोपादाने आ्थीं। तद्वत् 'तेन तुल्यं क्रिया चेद्वतिः' इत्यनेन विहितस्य वतेः स्थितौ।"

(P. 17, 1. 22-p. 18, 1. 1) द्वे ... त्रिविधा आर्थी. द्वे etc .- द्वे both (i.e. औ्ती and आर्थी) are to be set forth by a nominal affix (तद्धित), by a compound and by a sentence. सौरभ etc .- मुखस्य सौरभभ्- अम्भोरुहवत् the fragrance of thy face is like that of the lotus पीन plump. तव वदनं हृदयं मदयति यथा शरदिन्दुः (मदयति) your face gladdens the heart as the autumnal moon. In this verse अम्भो- रुहवत् is an example of तद्धितगा औ्ौती पूर्णा. Affixes like वत्, कल्प etc. are तद्धितs. This is श्रौती because here वत् is used in the sense of इद in accordance with the sutra 'तत्र तस्येव' (अम्भोरुहृवत् =अम्भोरुहस्य इव). कुम्भौ इव is an example of समासगा श्रौती. Here the word इव is compounded with कुम्भा in accordance with the Vartika 'इवेन (नित्य) समासो विभक्तयलोपः (पूर्वपदप्रकृतिस्वरत्वं) च' on Panini II. 4. 71. The words in brackets are not found in the सिद्धान्तकौमुदी (with तत्त्वबोधिनी printed by the Nir. press), but are found in K. P. In the महाभाष्य (vol. I. p. 417) on the sutra कुगतिप्रादय: we have the words 'इवेन विभक्त्यलोपः पूर्वपदप्रकृति- स्वरत्वं च' (but not printed by Kielhorn as a Vartika). The reading नित्यसमास: appears to be wrong, as this compound is optional and not नित्य (obligatory). The Vartika means 'the word sa is compounded with a noun which does not, however, lose its case-termination' ( as all nouns generally do in a compound). वदनं ..... शरदिन्दुर्यथा is an example of वाक्यगा श्रौती- मधुरः* सुधावदधरः ... तस्याः-पेलव soft, or delicate. In this verse, सुधावत्, पलवतुल्यः, चकितमृगलोचनाभ्यां सदृशे are respectively the examples of तद्धितगा आर्थी, समासगा आर्था and वाक्यगा आर्थी. पूर्णा षडेव तन्-Thus the fully expressed simile is six-fold. उपमा was first divided into पूर्णा and लुप्ता. Purna was divided into शौती and aTaf and each of these two was divided into three varieties. So there are six varieties of पूर्णा.

(P. 18, 1l. 4-5) लुप्ता ...... पूर्ववत्. Construe-सामान्यधर्मादेरेकस्य यदि वा द्वयोः त्रयाणां वा अनुपादाने लुप्ता, सा अपि (लुप्ता अपि) पूर्ववत् (पूर्णावत्) श्रौती आर्थी (च). It is Elliptical when one, two or three of the

• This example appears to break the rule of Panini con- tained in 'तेन तुल्यं क्रिया चेद्तिः' १४

94 NOTES ON X. 17-18 उपमा-

four ( viz. सामान्यधर्म, औपम्यवाचिपद, उपमेय and उपमान) beginning with the common property are omitted. This also like the former is Direct or Indirect.

(P.18,11. 7-11) पूर्णावद्धर्म ...... अश्मवत्. पूर्णावत् ...... तद्धिते-सा (लुप्तोपमा) धर्मलोपे पूर्णावत् तद्धिते तु श्रौतीं विना. The धर्मलुप्ता has five varieties viz. वाक्यगा and समासगा श्रीती, वाक्यगा, समासगा and त्द्धितगा आर्थी. तद्धितगा श्रौती, when the common property is omitted, is impossible. The reason is as follows :- the तद्धितगा श्रीती उपमा is possible only when the तद्धित afix is used in the sense of इव. Such an affix is वत् only, when it is used according to the sutra 'तत्र तस्येव'. When वत is used it always requires the express mention of the ground of comparison, as in चैत्रवन्मैन्रस्य गाव: or in मथुरावत सने प्राकार, where गाव: and SaIT: are the ground of comparison. We cannot simply say चैत्रवन्मैन्नस्य; we must mention the common attribute if we are to have any complete sense out of the words. But here aa is said to be omitted and therefore शौती तद्वितगा (which occurs only when वत् is employed in the sense of इव ) is impossible. मुखम् ...... अश्मवत्. Here इन्दुर्यथा and पल्लवेन समः are examples of वाक्यगा श्रौती and वाक्यगा आर्थी; सुधा इत्, बिम्बतुल्यः and अश्मवत् are examples समासे श्रौती, समासे आर्थी and तद्धिते आर्थी respectively. In none of these five varieties is the common property mentioned.

(P.18,1l. 12-19) आधार ...... एवमन्यत्र. आधार ...... पुनः-This ( i. e. धर्मलुप्ता ) is five-fold, being possible in the two sorts of the affix aya respectively applied in the sense of position and object, in the case of the affix au, and in the case of the gerundial affix qge added in the sense of the agent or object. ( 1 ) The affix aqa is applied to a noun in the objective case, which is expressive of Upamana, in the sense of 'behaviour'. 'उपमानादाचारे' पा० III. 1.10. 'उपमानात् कर्मणः सुबन्तात् आचारे अर्थे क्यच् स्यात्। पुत्रमिवाचरति पुत्रीयति छात्रम्।' सि० कौ०. An example is पुत्रीयति. Here the affix क्यच् is applied to पुत्र which is an Upamana in the objective case (पुत्रमिव), in the sense of आचार (पुत्रमिव आचरति व्यवहरति पुत्रीयति छात्रम् he behaves towards his pupil as towards his own son ). ( 2) A Vartika on the above sutra says 'अधिकरणाच्चेति वक्तव्यम्' which means that 'the affix a is applied to an Upamana in the locative, in the sense of आचार; e. g. प्रासादीयति कुट्यां मिक्षु: the bhikshu behaves in his hut as if he were in a palace (प्रासादे इव आचरति कुट्यां मिश्षुः). (3) 'कर्तुः क्यड् स लोपश्च' पा० III. 1.11. 'उपमानात्कर्तुः सुबन्तात् आचारे

X. 19 उपमा. SÅHITYADARPAŅA. 95

नयड् वा स्यात्। सान्तस्व तु कर्तवाचकस्य लोपो वा स्यात्।' सि० कौ० The affix ag is applied to a noun in the nominative case and expresses the sense of 'behaving like' e. g. कृष्णायते (कृष्ण इव आचरति). Here कृष्ण is a noun in the nominative case and is an उपमान. The क्यङ् affix makes the denominative verb Atmanepadi. The orge (a) affix forms gerunds from verbs when repetition of an action is to be implied, according to the sutra 'आभीक्ष्ण्ये णमुल च' पा० III. 4. 22, e.g. स्मारं स्मारम् having again and again re- membered. (4 and 5) 'उपमाने कर्मणि च' III. 4. 45. 'चात् कर्तरि। घृतनिधायं निहितं जलम्। धृतमिव सुरक्षितम्। अजकनाशं नष्टः। अजक इव नष्ट इत्यर्थः ।' सि० कौ०. The affix अम is applied to a root compounded with a noun in the accusative or nominative, which is an उपमान; e. g. in अजकनाशं नष्टः the affix अम् is applied to the root नशू and the gerund is compounded with the noun अजक which is in the nominative case and is an उपमान. क्यच् ..... णम :- Kalapamata is a grammar of the Sanskrit language, the author of which, शर्ववर्मा, is said to have received it from कार्तिकेय. शर्ववर्मा taught it to king Satavahana, who made his teacher king of Bharukachchha (Broach) out of gratitude. The Grammar is is called anq because it is small as compared with Panini's and also कालापक from the कलाप (tuft of hair) of the peacock which is the vehicle of कार्तिकेय; see for the story बृहत्कथामञ्जरी I. 3 and कथासरित्सागर I. 6 and 7. 'प्रतिज्ञायेति तपसा विलोक्य वरदं गुहम्। स कातत्रेण नृपति मासैश्चक्रे बहुश्रुतम् । बृहत्कथा० I.3. 48; अथासौ भगवान् साक्षात् षड्भिराननपङ्गजैः । सिद्धो वर्णसमाम्नाय इति सूत्र- सुदीरयत्॥ तच्छ्रत्वैव मनुष्यत्वसुलभाच्चापलाद्वत। उत्तरं सूत्रमभ्यूह्य स्वयमेन मयोदि- तम्॥ अथातवीत स देवो मां नावदिष्यः स्वयं यदि। अभविष्यदिदं शासत्रं पाणिनीयोप- मर्दकम्॥ अधुना स्वल्पतत्रत्वात् कातत्राख्यं भविष्यति। मद्वाहनकलापस्य नाम्रा कालापकं तथा॥ कथासरित्सागर I. 7. 10-13. Vis'vanatha says that. in the Katantra Grammar यिन्, आयि and णम् stand for the क्यच्, क्यड and णमुल of पाणिनि. क्यच् ... णमः-कातन्र (B. I. ed.) 'उपमानादाचारे' III. 2. 7, 'उपमानान्नाम्नः आचारेऽभिघेये यिन् परो भवति। पुत्रीयति माणवकम्।' दुर्गसिंह; then for आयि see 'कर्तुरायिः सलोपश्च' III. 2.8. and for णम् 'णम् चाभीक्ष्ण्ये सलोपश्च' IV. 6. 5. अन्तःपुरीयसि ... क्षितीश-रणेषु अन्तःपुरीयसि (अन्तःपुरे इव आचरसि) is an example of आधारक्यच् त्वं पौरं जनं सुतीयसि (सुतमिव आचरसि) is an example of कर्मक्यच्. श्रीः सदा रमणीयते (रमणी इव आचरति) 'fortune hehaves as a wife towards you'-is an example of क्यङ्र. प्रियाभि: अमृतद्यतिदर्श दृष्ट :- looked upon by the beloved ladies as the moon (whose beams are nectar-like)-is an example of कर्मणमुल; because अमृतद्युतिदर्शम् is equal to अमृतद्यतिमिव दृद्टा

96 NOTES ON X. 19 उपमा.

In the case of certain roots like aq etc. the same verb, to which qge is affixed, must be repeated after the Gerund according to the sutra 'कषादिषु यथाविध्यनुप्रयोगः पा० III. 4. 46, 'यस्माण्णमुलुक्त: स एव धातुरनुप्रयोक्तव्यः' सि० कौ०. भुवि इन्द्रसञ्चारं सञ्नरसि- Thou walkest on the earth like Indra himself. This is an example of कर्तृणमुल (i. e. where the णमुल is affixed to a root which is compounded with a noun in the nominative case, इन्द्र इव चरित्वा). Thus in one verse the five varieties of धर्मलुप्ता are exemplified. अत्र .. .. लोप :- Here in the word अन्तःपुरीयसि, the common property, viz. the circumstance of being a place of pleasant sports is omitted and in the word सुतीयसि, the circumstance of being full of affection is omitted. एवमन्यत् similarly ( the common property is omitted ) in the remaining ( three expressions ). (p. 18, 1. 20) इह च ... नास्ति-In these five varieties, i.e. those due to qqq etc., there is no necessity of discussing whether these are शौती or आर्थी similes, because in them the words यथा, तुल्य etc. are absent. (p. 18, 1l. 20-21) इदं च ...... उदाहरन्ति-Some instance these ( five based upon rq etc. ) as the cases of the omission of a etc. expressive of comparison. It is Mammata who instances these as varieties of वादिलुप्ता. 'वादेलोंपे समासे सा कर्माधारक्यचि क्यडि । कर्मकत्रोर्णमुलि' K.P.X. मम्मट says that in the कर्मक्यचू or आधारक्यच्, क्यड and णमुल we have instances of वादिलुप्ता ( omission of words conveying the simile ) and not of धर्मलुप्ता. तदयुक्तम्-This is improper. क्यडादेरपि ...... प्रतिपादकत्वात तदर्थ- विहितत्वेन = इवादयर्थविहितत्वेन. Mammata's view is not right, because वयन etc. also, being added in the sense of इव etc. (as laid down in the sutras of Panini ) convey comparison. Therefore FIT etc, cannot be examples of वाचकलुप्ता. (P. 18, 1l. 22-p. 19, 1. 2) ननु ...... लुप्ता Nor can you say that the affixes ayg etc. do not well convey comparison, because being affixes they are not independently expressive and because such words as are not used in these cases. The words ननु ...... प्रयोगाभावाच्चेति raise an objection against Vis'va- natha's position that aig ete. convey comparison as q etc. do and that therefore etc. should not be regarded as cases of नाचकलुप्ता. The objection is based on two grounds; I क्यड is a termination and not a word like sa. Some say that a ter- mination has no independent meaning. It has a meaning only

X. 19 उपमा. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 97

when connected with a word. So as ae by itself has no meaning, it cannot well convey afyr. II It is generally acknowledged that words like इव, वत् etc. are उपमाप्रतिपादक. क्यङ् etc. are not so recognised and therefore when arg etc. are used, the comparison is not so well conveyed as when sq etc. are used. For these two reasons qyg etc. should be cited as cases of वादिलुप्ता (i. e. वाचकलुप्ता) and not of धर्मलुप्ता. S. D. replies in the words कल्पबादावपि तथा प्रसङ्गात् 'the same might be urged against कल्प etc.' (which are admitted by मम्मट as expressive of comparison in 'विषकल्पं मनो वेत्सि यदि जीवसि तत्सखे' which is an example of वर्मलुप्ता तद्धितगा आर्थी). What S. D. means is that कल्प is an afix just like ayg and not an independent word like sa. Therefore, if you say that aqg cannot well convey comparison, being an affix, then arq also being an affix cannot convey comparison. But you admit it to be expressive of comparison. So you are inconsistent. You must admit that Ig is उपमाप्रतिपादक like कल्प. So क्यड् etc. should not be cases of वाचकलुप्ता, but of धर्मलुप्ता. The affix कल्प is applied according to the sutra 'ईषदसमाप्तौ कल्पव्-देश्य-देशीयरः' पा० V. 3.67. The affixes कल्प, देश्य and देशीय are added in the sense of 'a little less then'; e. g. ईषदूनो विद्वान् विद्वत्कल्पः नच ...... द्योतकत्वम्-'Nor can it be argued that aey etc. as being equivalent to za etc. are expressive of comparison, while ayg etc. are only suggestive of it.' Here the objector brings forward the idea that acu, though an affix, is used in the sense of aa and is therefore, like इव, साक्षात् औषम्यप्रतिपादक; while क्यड etc. are only suggestive of comparison. S. D. answers this objection by simply denying what the objector assumes as indisputable. Grammarians say that निपातs (like च etc. ) are द्ोतक and not वाचक. 'चादयो न प्रयुज्यन्ते पदत्व्रे सति केवलाः । प्रत्ययो वाचकत्वेऽपि केवलो न प्रयुज्यते ।।' वाक्यपदीय II. 196, on which पुण्यराज says 'एते हि चादयः केवला न प्रयुज्यन्ते ततो वाचका न भवन्तीति बोद्धव्यम्'. इव is included in the चादिगण. Therefore S.D. says इवादी ...... निश्चयाभावात्-There is no certainty as to whether इव etc. are expressive. वाचकत्वे वा. ... साम्यमेवेति. 'Granting that कल्प etc. are expressive, there can be no difference between the affixes of the aa class and those of the ayg 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 significancc.' 8. D.'s idea is as follows :- He first threw doubt on the theory that इन etc. are वाचक. He concedes that कल्प (and therefore इव

98 NOTES ON X. 19 उपमा.

etc. also ) are arag. He says that, even conceding this, his position is not in the least affected. As aeq is an affix ( and not an independent word ), so is ag also. So what holds good of कल्प must hold good of क्यड also. If कल्प is वाचक (of औपम्य), then so is क्यड 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, प्रकृति (base) and प्रत्यय { affix ), for the easy comprehension of language. P. L. M. 'तत्र प्रतिवाक्यं सङ्गेतग्रहासम्भवाद् वाक्यान्वाख्यानस्य लघूपायेनाशक्यत्वाच्च कल्पनया पदानि प्रविभज्य पदे प्रकृतिप्रत्ययभागान् प्रविभज्य कल्पिताभ्यामन्वयव्यतिरेकाभ्यां तत्तदर्थविभागं शास्त्रमात्रविषयं परिकल्पयन्ति स्माचार्याः। तत्र शास्त्रप्रक्रियानिर्वाहको चर्णस्फोटः। प्रकृतिप्रत्ययास्तत्तदर्थवाचका एवेति तदर्थः। उपसर्गनिपातघात्वादिविभागोऽपि काल्पनिक: । .... एवं च स्थानिनां वाचकत्वमादेशानां वेति विचारो निष्फल एव कल्पितवाचकत्वस्योभयत्र सत्त्वात्। मुख्यं वाचकत्वं तु कल्पनया बोधिते समुदाय- रूपे पदे वाक्ये वा। लोकानां तत एवार्थबोधात् । pp. 1-2. Note the words of the वाक्यपदीय I. 73 'पदे न वर्णा विद्यन्ते वर्णेष्ववयवा न च। चाक्यात्पदानामत्यन्तं प्रविवेको न कश्चन ॥I'. This is the view of those (the वैयाकरणS) who are स्फोटवादिन्s. 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, प्रकृति and प्रत्यय; e. g. in the word पाचक, the root पचू simply denotes the action of boiling and the affix ar denotes an agent in general. These two meanings being combined, we get from qraa the idea of 'cook', which is not singly expressed by any one of the two i. e. पचू and अक. See पूर्वमीमांसा II. 1. 1. and तत्रवार्तिक p.348 *प्रत्ययार्थ सह व्रतः प्रकृतिप्रत्ययौ सदा। प्राधान्यान्भावना तेन भावनार्थोऽवधार्यते॥' Compare the following from the न्यायरत्नमाला of पार्थसारथिमिश्र "प्रत्ययेन स्वार्थोऽमिीयमानः प्रथमावगतप्रकृत्यर्थानुरक्त एवावगम्यत इति तत्रान्वय- च्यतिरेकाभ्यां प्रकृते: प्रत्ययस्य च स्वरे स्वेथे अनुरागांशे च प्रकृतिप्रत्ययसमभिव्याहारस्यैव पदार्थान्तरानुरागनिमित्तत्वं विविच्यते। ...... यथा ग्रहणस्मरणात्मना प्रत्यभिज्ञाने ग्रहणां. शस्येन्द्रियनिमित्तत्वं स्मरणांशस्य च संस्कारनिमित्तत्वम् ...... तथात्रापि अनुरागांशस्य प्रकृतिप्रत्ययसमभिव्याहारादेव प्रतीतिसिद्धेन प्रत्ययस्य तदभिधायकत्वं स तु स्वार्थ- मेवाभिधत्ते। आह च। 'प्रकृतिप्रत्ययौ बतः प्रत्ययार्थ सहेति यत्। मेदेनैवामिधानेऽपि प्राधान्येन तदुच्यते॥ पाकं हि पचिरेवाह कर्तारं प्रत्ययोऽप्यकः। पाकयुक्त पुनः कर्ता वाच्यो नैकस्य कस्यचित्॥'" p. 101. Col. Jacob (Laukika N. III.

X. 19 उपमा. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 99

p.59) traces the maxim 'प्रकृतिप्रत्ययौ ब्रतः प्रत्ययार्थ सद' to the Mahabhashya; but he leaves the meaning of प्रत्ययार्थ in doubt. The above quotation sheds much light upon its meaning. We think it clearly established from the above that yer means here also 'an affix'; the quotation cited by पार्थसारथि explains the reason of the maxim. On the question whether ta etc. are वाचक or दोतक the R.G. has the following interesting note :-

'तत्रेवादीनां द्योतकत्वमेव न वाचकत्वम्। निपातत्वादुपसर्गवत्। द्योतकत्वं च स्वसमभिव्याहृतपदान्तरेण शक्त्या लक्षणया वा तादृशार्थबोधने तात्पर्यग्राहकत्वेनो- पयोगित्वमिति वैयाकरणाः। उपसर्गाणां द्योतकत्वमावश्यकम्। अन्यथा उपास्यते गुरु=, अनुभूयते सुखमित्यादौ गुर्वादेलेन अभिधानं न स्यात्। धात्वर्थकर्मताविरहात्॥ इवादीनां तु वाचकत्वम्। वाधकाभावात्। प्रागुक्तहेतुस्त्वप्रयोजकत्वान्न साधकः। अन्यथा अव्ययत्वादिति हेतुना अव्ययमात्रस्यैव द्योतकतापत्तिरिति नैयायिकाः । p. 191. Whichever of the above two views about affixes we may hold, वत, कल्प etc. and क्यड etc. are similar. If कल्प is औपम्यवाचक, then क्यड also must be so; and therefore क्यड etc. are cases of धर्मलुप्ता and not of वाचकलुप्ता. यञ्ब केचिदाहुः ...... इति-As to what some say that affxes like aa are directed by Panini to be employed in the sense of a, while ay etc. are directed to be employed in the sense of 'behaviour' ( as in 'उपमानादाचारे')- What these people mean is as follows :- Panini lays down that वत् etc. are to be used in the sense of इव ('तत्र तस्येव'); therefore just as इव is औपम्यवाचक, so are वत्, कल्प etc. But क्यच्, क्यछ् are applied in the sense of आचार (behaviour) only. Panini does not expressly say that they are affixed in the sense of इव. So in his opinion there is a difference between वत् etc. and etc. The latter, being affixed in the sense of simple behaviour, do not denote afqrq and therefore are fit cases of वाचकलुप्ता. To this Vis'vanatha replies as follows :- 'तदपि न ... fa.' This view also is wrong; for ayg etc. do not simply imply behaviour, but similar behaviour. Vis'vanatha says that Panini's very words suggest the idea that aq etc. are applied in the sense of similar behaviour ('उपमानादाचारे'). He directs that च्यच् etc. are to be applied to an उपमान in the sense of 'behavi- our' to form denominative verbs. So the presence of the word Upamana clearly suggests that the behaviour meant is similar bebaviour. Therefore क्यड् etc. are सादृश्यवाचक and hence when they are employed, there cannot be aragHr. When they are employed, the common property 'similar behaviour' is not directly expressed and hence they are cases

100 NOTES ON X. 19 उपमा.

of धर्मलुप्ता. तदेवं ...... लुप्ता. Thus धर्मलुप्ता is tenfold, i. e. वाक्यगा श्रौती and आर्थी, समासगा श्रौती and आर्थी, तद्धितगा आर्थी (5 in all) and कर्मक्यच्, आधारक्यच्, क्यड, कर्मणमुल, and कर्तृणमुल. R G.looks upon कर्मक्यच्, आधारक्यच्, and क्यड (but not णमुल) as cases of the omission of both वाचक and धर्म. Vide his remarks "अत्रेदमवधेयम्-कर्माधारक्यचि क्यडि च वाचकलुप्तोदाहरणं प्राचामसङ्गतमिव प्रतीयते। धर्मलोपस्यापि तत्र सम्भवात्। न च क्यजादर्ष आचार एव साधारणधर्मोस्तीति वक्तव्यम्। धर्ममात्ररूपस्याचारस्योपमाप्रयोजकत्वाभावात्। 'नारीयते सपलसेना' इत्यादौ वृत्त्यन्तरनिवेदितैः कातरत्वादिभिरभिन्नतयाध्यवसितस्या- चारस्योपमानिष्पादकत्वात्। यदि च क्यडर्थ आचारमात्रमुपमानिष्पादकं स्यात् तदा 'त्रिविष्टपं तत्खलु भारतायते' इत्यादौ सुप्रसिद्धत्वादिरूपाचारोपस्थितावप्युपमालङ्गतेर- निष्पत्तेः । तस्यैव च 'सुपर्वभिः शोभितमन्तरात्रितैः' इति चरणान्तरनिर्माणे तस्या निष्पत्ते: क्यडाद्यर्थः साधारणोऽपि नोपमां प्रयोजयति। उपमाप्रयोजकतावच्छेदकरूपेण साधारणधर्मवाचकशून्यत्वस्यैव धर्मलोपशब्देनाभिधानात्। अन्यथा 'मुखरूपमिदं वस्तु प्रफुल्लमिव पङ्कजम्' इत्यादौ पूर्णोपमापत्तेरिति दिक्।" pp. 169-170. (P. 19, 1l. 3-9). उपमानुपादाने ..... वोक्तम्. उपमाना ..... समा सयो :- When the Upamana is omitted, the लुप्ता is two-fold, in a sentence and in a compound. अत्र ...... उपमानलोप :- Here objects answering to the face and eye being simply suggested (and not expressed ) there is omission of the Upamana. In the words मुखेन सदृशं रम्यं we have वाक्यगा उपमानलुप्ता and in नयनतुल्यं रम्यं we have समासगा उपमानलुप्ता. अत्रैव ...... सम्भवति-In this very verse, if we read मुखं यथेदं for मुखेन सदृशं and दृगिव for नयनतुल्यं we shall have शती (उपमानलुप्ता) also. Thus वाक्यगा and समासगा उपमानलुप्ता will each have two varieties, श्रौती and आर्थी and there will be four varieties of उपमानलुप्ता. प्राचीनानां ..... उक्तम्-Yet following the manner of the ancients, we have spoken of उपमानलुप्ता as of two sorts only. It must be said that these remarks of विश्वनाथ are quite wrong, as they are opposed to all ordinary ideas. The words इव and यथा when placed after a noun lead us to understand that the noun is an Upamana. Compare the words of Mammata 'यथेववादिशब्दा यत्परास्तस्यैवोपमानताप्रतीतिरिति' etc. If we say दृगिव, or मुखं यथेदं, दृक and ye will be looked upon as Upamanas, if we are to pay any regard te ordinary modes of speech. Therefore in the उपमानलुप्ता we cannot employ such words as इव or यथा. Hence there can be no शौती उपमा in उपमानलुप्ता and only two varieties remain. Compare the words of Pradipa 'न वा शती (सम्भवति)। इवादीनामुपमानमात्रान्विततया तदनुपादाने (उपमानानुपादाने) तेषामप्यनुपादानाव। अतो वाक्यसमासयोरेव। तयोरप्यार्थी एवेति द्विप्रकारा लुप्तोपमानोपमा।" p. 13

X. 20 उपमा. SÂHITYADARPANA. 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 अनन्वय.

(P. 19, 11. 10-15) औपम्य ... निर्देशात्. औपम्य ... द्विधा-When the word or affix expressive of comparison is omitted, the gar is two-fold being possible in a compound or the farq affix. सुधाकरमनोहरम्-सुधाकर इव मनोहरम्. Here, इव being omitted, the example is one of वाचकलुप्ता समासगा. As the औपम्यवाचक words, यथा, वत्, इव, तुल्य etc. are omitted, in this variety there can be no discussion about श्रौती or आर्थी nor can there be तद्धितगा; for all तद्धितs like वत्, कल्प, being included as affixes of comparison, are to be omitted. Nor can there be वाक्यगा because the sentence मुखं चन्द्रो रमणीयम् conveys no conmected sense. So only समासगा remains. The author adds one more due to the fay affix, which is added according to the Vartika 'सर्वप्रातिपदिकेभ्यः क्विव्वा वक्तव्यः'. The afix कविप may be applied option- ally to all nouns in the sense of 'behaviour' to form denomina- tive verbs. The difference between कविप् and क्यड is that the latter leaves some trace of itself in the verb formed by adding it (as in नारीयते); but the किपू affix leaves no sigu of itself (as in गर्दभति). गर्दभति श्रुतिपरुषं ..... पुरतः-'He acts the ass, loudly and hoarsely screaming before the great.' Here, in गर्दभति, the क्विप् affix expressive of comparison is omitted. न च ...... निर्देशात It cannot be said that in this example the उपमेय is also omitted; because the उपमेय is pointed out by the word निनदन् (screaming) itself, which is the subject of the verb गर्दभति. It should be noted that Mammata cited किब्गा लुप्तोपमा under धर्मवाचलुप्ता (where both the common property and the word expressive of comparison are omitted ). Our author cites क्विब्गा uder वाचकलुप्ता. Our author says above that क्यड is a case of र्मलुप्ता. As किप् is applied in the senses of au optionally, andis the affix fay is omitted al- together, we shoald look upd किब्गा as a case of धर्मवाचकलुप्ता according to our author's owa reasoning. So he is inconsistent.

(P. 19, 11. 16-18). द्विधय समासे .दाहरणम्. When both धर्म and उपमान are omitted, we nud not discuss whether श्रौती is possible; because za etc. are used only with the Upamana; for the same reason तद्धितगा is excluded If in the verse 'तस्या मुखेन' etc. we read 'ata' in place of 'TRr' we shall have the two examples of वाक्यगा and समासगा धर्मोपमानलुप्ता. 'मुखेन सदशं लोके नास्ते'

102 NOTES ON X. 21 उपमा.

will be वाक्यगा. Here only the उपमेय and वाचकशब्द are ex pressed; the suma and common property are omitted. Similarly in the next.

(P. 19, 1l. 19-23) क्विप्समासगता ... समासगा. विधवति मुखाब्जमस्याः Her lotus-like face shines like the moon (विधुरिव आचरति). Here the औपम्यवाचकशब्द and the common property, viz. loveliness are both omitted. केच्वित्तु ...... आहुः 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 वाचकलुप्ता (i. e. गर्दमति ); and so this is an example of mere वाचकलुप्ता and not of धर्मवाचकलुपता as the author says. 'मुखाब्जम्' is an example of समासगा धर्मवाचकलुप्ता. The compound is formed according to the sura 'उपमितं व्याघ्रादिमि: सामान्याप्रयोगे' पा० I 1. 56. Here only the उषमान and उपमेय are mentioned and they are compounded.

(P. 19, 1. 24-p.20, 1,2) उपमेयस्य ...... अनुशासनविरुद्धत्वात्. The उपमेयलुप्ता is possible only in the क्यच affix. अराति ... सहस्रायुवीयति- This verse is given by Mammata in the connection in which our author gives it. अरातिविक्रमालोकेन वैरिपराक्रमदर्शनेन विकस्वरे विकासशीले विलोचने नयने यस्य सः। कृपाणेन खड्गेन उदग्र: भीषणः दोर्दण्डो बाहुर्यस्य सः सहस्रायुवीयति सहस्रमायुधानि यस्य तमिव आत्मानमाचरतीति कर्मणि वयच् I. सहस्रायुधीयति is a denominative verb formed from सहस्रायुध by the affix y and means 'he conducts himself like one who wields a thousand weapons.' अत्र ... लोप :- Here the उपमेय, viz. the word आत्मानम् is omitted, for the expression सहस्रायुधीयति when expanded is equivalent to the sentence 'he conduots. himself like one who wields a thousand weapons.' An objection may be raised against this that here the sydy is directly ex- pressed in the word #: and therefore this cannot be an example of उपमेयलुप्ता. The answer is :- Although the person denoted by सः is the उपमेय, he is the Upameya, not in his capacity as the agent, but in his capacity as the ibject. If it were said that : is the Upameya and that the person is the Upameya in his capaeity as agent (aai ), then we reply that in that case the affix क्यचू cannot be applied to सहस्रायुध to form a denominative vorb. The aa aflix, as said above, is applied to a noun which is an Upamana and which is an object. Now here if #: is the Upameya, सहस्रायुधीयति will have to be explained as सहस्रायुध एव आचरति. But here सहस्रायव would be in the nominative case and कयचू cannot be applied. So सहस्रायुषीयति must be interpreted a5 सहलायुधमिव आत्मानं आचरति Thus we see that आत्मानम् is the

X. 22 उपमा. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 103

उपमेय, सहस्रायुधम् is the उपमान and in the objective case. As आत्मानम् is omitted there is उपमेयलुप्ता. Compare the words of Pradipa 'अत्र यद्यपि विशेषणद्वारोपात्तः कर्तैवोपमेयः तथापि न तथात्वेन किं तु कर्मत्वेन। अन्यथा क्यचोऽसङ्गतत्वापत्तेः ।'. न च ...... न्यायात् nor can it be said that there is here the omission of the word expressive of comparison for reasons already stated above ( when treating of कर्मक्यच् etc.). He has established that क्यच् etc. are वाचक or द्योतक like कल्प or वत्. अत्र केचित् ...... लोप इति-some people, in order to get over the objection that the उपमेय is directly mentioned in the word सः, read स सहस्रायुधीयति as one word and interpret it as follows :- सहस्रायुधेन सह वर्तते इति ससहस्रायु: one who is possessed of a thousand weapons. They then apply the afflx q and interpret ससहस्रायुधीयति as ससहस्रायुध इव आचरति (He behaves like one who possesses a thousand weapons ). Then they say that the person who is the subject of deseription (विशेष्य) not being directly mentioned by any word, there is omission of Upameya. To this our author replies by saying that the view is untenable. The employment of y with the nominal base (ससहस्रायुध) signifying an agent is opposed to the rules of Panini. क्यच् is applied to a noun in the objective case. It is क्यद् that is applied to a noun which is an agent (कर्तुः क्यड). But the verb formed by the affix ayg takes the Atmanepada. So in सहस्रायुधीयति the aflix is क्यचू and the word is an example of उपमेयलुप्ता.

(P.20,11. 3-7) धर्मोपमेय .. लुप्तौ. भवतः यशसि प्रसरति सति सर्वे सागराः क्षीरोदीयन्ति क्षीरोदमिव आत्मानमाचरन्ति When thy fame spreads, all the oceans conduct themselves like the ocean of milk. Fame is, according to the convention of poets, white. Here, as in सहस्रायुवीयति above, the उपमेय 'आत्मानम्' is omitted, as we shall see when we explain the word क्षीरोदीयन्ति as 'they conduct themselves like the ocean of milk.' The common property ' whitenese ' also is omitted. So this is an example of ध्मोंपमेयलुप्ता. (P. 20,11. 8-12) त्रिलोपे ...... लोप :. When three out of the four elements of comparison are omitted, a simile is possible only in a compound. The word मृगलोचना is to be explained as मृगलोचने इव चन्नले लोचने यस्या: 'she whose eyes are as tremulous as those of a stag.' Here मृगलोचने is the उपमान, इव is औपम्यवाचक शब्द and aaa is the common property. All these are omitted and the उपमेय 'लोचने' alone remains. The उपमान is मृगलोचने and not मृग

104 NOTES ON X. 22 उपमा.

and hence the presence of does not matter. The question is :- why is the word लोचन dropped from the word मृगलोचने! The answer is :- according to the Vartika 'सप्तम्युपमानपूर्वपदस्य बहुत्रीहिरुत्तरपदलोपश्च'* on 'अनेकमन्यपदार्थे' पा० II 2. 24., a compound word, containing in itself a word in the locative case or an Upamana, enters into a Bahuvrīhi compound with another word and then the latter part of the first member (which contained in itself a noun in the locative case or an Upamana ) of the Bahuvribi compound is dropped; e. g. उरसिस्थानि लोमानि यस्य सः उरसिलोमा, where उरसिस्थ (a compound word which contains in itself as its first member arfa which is in the locative case ) is compounded with लोमनू to form a Bahuvrihi and then the latter part (i.e. स्थ) of the first member (i.e. उरसिस्थ) of the Bahuvrihi is omitted and we get उरसिलोमा. Similarly मृगलोचना where मृगलोचने is उपमान, मृग, being a part of it, is also EyHI, because the property of the whole may be attributed to the part or vice versa as said by कैयट (2nd अo, p.120,Benares ed.) in his gloss on उद्गमुख 'अवयवधर्मेण समुदायस्य व्यपदेशात् उष्टस्योपमान- तेति उपमानपूर्व उष्ट्मुखशब्दः'. So मृगलोचने is उपमानपूर्वपद i. e. com- pounded word which has an Upamana as its first member (here, मृग) and when it is compounded with लोचने, the com- pound is a Bahuvrihi and the latter member of the first compounded word i. e. लोचने outof मृगलोचने, is dropped.

There are, however, some who say that the word T stands by Indication for मृगलोचने; according to this view मृगलोचना would not be an exampleof त्रिलोपोपमा. Compare the words of Pradipa 'अत्र यदि मृगशब्देन लक्षणया तलोचने विवक्ष्येते तदा नेदमुदाहरणम्। यदा तु मृगलोचने इव लोचने यस्या इत्यर्थों विवक्ष्यते तदा 'सप्तम्युपमानपूर्वपदस्य बहुव्रीहिरुत्तरपदलोपश्च' इत्यनेन मृगलोचनेत्युपमानपूर्वपदस्य नयनशब्देन बहुव्रीहौ उपमानवाचचिनि मृगलोचने इति पूर्वपदे उत्तरपदभूतस्य लोचनशब्दस्य लोपे उपमे- यभूतस्य नयनमात्रस्योपादानादिदमुदाहरणम् ।' p. 18 (Chan.). (P. 20, 11. 13-14). तेनोपमाया ....... सप्तविंशतिप्रकारोपमा. Thus there are 27 sub-divisions of Upama, 6 of the Pūrņa and 21 of the Lupta, viz. 10 of धर्मलुप्ता, 2 of उपमानलुप्ता, 2 of वाचकलुप्ता, 2 of धर्मोपमानलुप्ता, 2 of धर्मवाचकलुप्ता, 1 of उपमेयलुप्ता, 1 of धर्मोंपमेयलुप्ता and 1 of त्रिलोपा. Our author in these sub-divisions follows *The Mahabhashya comments upon it as follows :- सप्तमीपूर्व- स्योपमानपूर्वस्य च बदुन्रीहिर्वक्तव्य उत्तरपदस्य च लोपो वत्तव्यः। कण्ठेस्थः कालोडस्य कण्ठेकालः । उष्ट्रमुखमिव मुखमस्योष्टमुखः। खरमुखः।' Vol. II. p. p. 423 ( Kielhorn).

X. 23 उपमा. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 105

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 Pūrņa, which are the same as our author's and 19 of Lupta. The latter are as follows :- 5 of धर्मलुप्ता (श्रौती and आर्थी वाक्यगा and समासगा and आर्थी तद्धितगा); 2 of उपमानलुप्ता (वाक्यगा and समासगा), 6 of वाचकलुप्ता (समासगा, कर्मक्यज्गा, आधारक्यज्गा, क्यङ्गा, कर्तृणमुलगा and कर्मणमुलगा) 2 of वाचकधर्मलुप्ता (कविबूगा and समासगा), 2 of धर्मोपमानलुप्ता (समासगा and वाक्यगा), 1 of वाचकोपमेयलुप्ता (क्यज्गा), and 1 of त्रिलोपा (समासगा). The curious reader may also consult the चित्रमीमांसा and रसगङ्गाधर. The grammatical basis of the divisions of Upama appears to have first originated with Udbhata. Vide his remarks "यथेवशब्दयोगेन सा श्रुत्यान्वयमईति । सदृशादिपदश्लेषादन्यथेत्युदिता द्विघा॥ संक्षेपाभिहिताप्येषा साम्यवाचकविच्युतेः । साम्योपमेयतद्वाचिवियोगाचच निबध्यते।। उपमानोपमेयोक्ता साम्यतद्वाचिविच्यवात्। क्वचित् समासे तद्वात्िविरहेण क्वचिच्च सा।। तथोपमानादाचारे क्यच्प्रत्ययबलोक्तितः । क्वचित्सा कर्तुराचारे क्यडा सा च क्किपा ककच्वित्।। उपमाने कर्मणि वा कर्तरि वा यो णमुल कषादिगतः । तद्वाच्या सा वतिना च कर्मसामान्यवचने न। षष्ठीसप्तम्यन्ताच्च यो वतिर्नामतस्तदभिधेया। कल्पप्प्रभृतिभिरन्यैश्च तद्धितैः सा निबध्यते कविभिः ॥" अलक्कारसारसंग्रह I. 35-40. On the divisions of Upama as given by Mammata and our author, the author of Chitramimansa makes some very appropriate 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. Vide his remarks "एवमयं पूर्णालुप्ताविभागो वाक्य- समासप्रत्ययविशेषगोचरतया शब्दशास्त्रव्युत्पत्तिकौशलप्रदर्शनमात्रप्रयोजनो नातीवाल झ्वारशास्त्रे व्युत्पाद्यतामहति। न वा लुप्तानामयं सामस्त्येन विभाग: etc." चि. मी. p. 27.

(P. 20, 11. 15-26) एषु ... निर्दिष्टे. The author now expounds a peculiarity of those varieties of simile in which the common property is not omitted. एकरूप :...... भिदा. Construe साधारणो . गुण: कचित एकरूप:, क्वापि भिन्नः, भिन्ने (साधारणे गुणे) बिम्बानुबिम्बत्वं शब्दमात्रेण वा भिदा (भेद:) सम्भवति. The common property is sometimes the same in both the उपमान and उपमेय; 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 बिम्बप्रतिबिम्बभाव (prototype and copy, or original and image ) or there is merely a verbal difference. What our author means is as follows :- the arr may appear under three aspects; I It may be mentioned only once and is con- १५

106 NOTES ON X. 23-24 उपमा.

nected with both Upamana and उपमेय, as in the example मधुरः सुधावदधरः, where मधुरत्व 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 by mentioned in two words, as for example, in the vere 'यान्त्या मुद्दुर्वलितकन्धरमा- ननं तदावृत्तवृन्तशतपत्रनिभं वहन्त्या the two words वलित (turned ) and aET (turned) mean the same property, but one of the words is connected with कन्धरा (neck) and the other with वृन्त (stalk oflotus etc.). This aspect is referred to by our author as 'भिन्ने शब्दमात्रेण मिदा, which is elsewhere called वस्तुप्रतिवस्तुभाव; 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 wery- afna: etc. the heads are compared to honey-combs, the common property being twice mentioned in wya: and सरघाव्याप्त: (teeming with bees); here रमश्रुल and सरघाव्याप are not essentially the same, but they are so alike that they may be looked upon as identical. This is called निम्बप्रतिबिम्बभाव. 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.' y has the following note here 'अत एवात्र बिम्बप्रतिबिम्बभावव्यप्रदेशः । लोको हि दर्पणादौ विम्बात्प्रतिबिम्बस्य भेदेऽपि मदीयभेवात्र वदनं संक्ान्तमित्यमेदेना- भिमन्यते। अन्यथा हि प्रतिबिम्बदर्शने कृशोऽहं स्थूलोऽहमित्याद्यभिमानो नोदियाद, भूषणविन्यासादौ च नायिका नाद्रियेरन्।' p. 28 अ० स० वि०. बिम्बप्रतिबि- म्वत्बे ...... क्षौद्रपटलैरिव-The verse is Raghuvams'a IV.63.'He covered the earth with their ( Persians') bearded heads severed by the lance, as with honey-combs teeming with bees.' Here corresponding to 'bearded' there is the word 'teeming with bees', as in the figure दृष्टान्त. दृष्टन्त is a figure where the Upamana, Upameya and the common property are represented as if reflected, i. e. where no q4T, s4, 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. शब्दमात्रेण ...... माकृतम्. Where the words are different, but the common property is in

X. 23-24 उपमा. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 107

reality the same. This is वस्तुप्रतिवस्तुभाव. 'स्मेरं विधायमाकूतम्.' स्मेर expanding. मनोगतभ् आकृतम् The secret meaning lying in her heart. Here the same common property is expressed in two different words (स्मेर and विकसित) as in प्रतिवस्तूपमा In प्रतिवस्तूपमा the 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. तत्रापि साधारणधर्मस्य क्वच्िदनुगामितया ऐकरूप्येण निर्देशः । क्वचिद्वस्तुप्रतिवस्तुभावेन पृथङ् निर्देशः । पृथङ्निर्देशे च सम्बन्धिभेदमात्रं (न पुनः स्वरूपमेद: कश्चिदित्यर्थः । जयरथ) प्रतिवस्तूपमावत्। विम्बप्रतिबिम्ब्भावो वा दृष्टान्तवत् । pp. 26-27. The चवित्रमीमांसा explains वस्तुप्रतिवस्तुभाव as 'एकस्यैव धर्मस्य सम्बन्धिभेदेन द्विरुपादानं वस्तुप्रतिवस्तुभावः' ( i. e. mentioning the same common property in two different words on account of its being connected with two di- fferent substrates ) and बिम्बप्रतिबिम्बभाव as 'वस्तुतो भिन्नयोर्धमैंयोः परस्परसादृश्यादभिन्नतयाध्यवसितयोर्द्विरुपादानं विम्बप्रतिबिम्बभाव: 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 same definitions (p. 205). For further information on these aspects of the common property, see चित्रमीमांसा pp. 18-21 and रसगङ्गाघर pp. 174-177. एकदेश ... गम्यम् (p.20, 1. 27-p. 21,1.4). एकदेश ... साम्यस्य-यत्र साम्यस्य वाच्यत्वगम्यते भवेताम् (सा) एकदेशविवर्तिनी उपमा-There is partial simile when the resemblance is expressed (in one part) and implied (in another). नेत्रैरिव .. स्तनैरिव-This occurs in Udbhța's Alankārasārasangraha (I. 42), except the third pada, which is तरुण्य इव भान्ति स in Udbhata. Our author appears to have changed the third pada for his own purpose. Construe सरःश्रियः उत्पलैः नेत्रैरिव, पझ्मैः मुखैरिव, चक्रवाक: स्तनैरिव, पदे पदे विभान्ति स-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 (7a ) as with breasts. Here resemblance between blue lotuses and eyes ete. is directly expressed, while that between the charms and women is implied; i. e. the word as 'women' is not mentioned at all; from the fact that नेत्र, मुख and स्तन are mentioned we infer that सरःश्रिय: must have been compared to women. Jagannatha also speaks of एकदेशविवर्तिनी उपमा. 'इयमपि रूपकवत्केवलनिरवयवा, मालारूपनिरवयवा, समस्तवस्तुविषयसावयवा, एकदेशविवर्तिसावयवा, केवलश्विष्टपरम्परिता, मालारूपशिष्ट-

108 NOTES ON X. 24 उपमा.

परम्परिता, केवलशुद्धपरम्परिता, मालारूपशुद्धपरम्परिता चेत्यष्टघा p. 181. His example of एकदेशविवर्तिनी is 'मकरप्रतिमैर्महाभटैः कविभी रलसमैः समन्वितः । कवितामृतकीर्तिचन्द्रयोस्त्वमिहोवींरमणासि कारणम् ॥' p. 183. Here, the sea, the Upamana of the king, is omitted, while Ha and ta associated with the sea are Upamanas of soldiers and poets associated with the king.

कथिता ..... विहाय: (p. 21, 1].5-9). कथिता ... उपमानता-construe यदि यथोर्ध्व उपमेयस्य उपमानता स्यात् (तर्हि) रसनोपमा कथिता. 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 उपमेय in a simile becomes the उपमान in another simile and is compared with a new उपमेय, which again is turned into an Upamana and again compared to another Upameya and so on, there is रसनोपमा (रसना means 'girdle worn by women'). चन्द्रायते ...... विहाय :. 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 हंस is at first the उपमेय; then it is turned into an Upamana and ar-aT becomes the उपमेय; and so on. मालोपमा ...... सहस्रधा दर्शनात् (p. 21, 1l. 10-22). मालोपमा ... दृश्यते. यद् एकस्य (उपमेयस्य) बडु उपमानं दृश्यते (तदा) मालोपमा-When we have several Upamanas in connection with one Upameya, we have a garland of similes. वारिजेन ...... मनोहरा-सरसी a lake. y virtue or justice. Here aff is compared to many Upamanas, viz. सरसी, निशीथिनी and वनिता. Here the common property (मनोहरत्व) is the same. Sometimes the common property may be different with each Upamana, as in 'ज्योत्स्नेव नयनानन्दः सुघेव मदकारणम्। प्रभुतेव समाकृष्टसर्वलोका नितम्बिनी ॥'. क्वचित् ...... दृश्यते 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 nothing to do with the subject of discussion. हंसश्चन्द्र: शरदागमे. शरदागमे 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 etc. are प्रस्तुत. अस्य राज्ञो ... .. कल्पवृक्षभवा इव. पुरन्दर is Indra. कल्पवृक्षभवा: born of the celestial tree ( which yielded every desired object ). Here we have a case of the simile of Implication, since by the word विभूतयः, which is the Upameya, are suggested the treasures,

X. 26 उपमा. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 109

which are the Upamanas and which are qualified as 'born of 'the celestial tree'. In this very example, since the sense of thouse is repeated by the word भवने, this is प्रतिनिर्देश्योपमा. 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 '(मालोपमा रसनोपमा च) न लक्षिता। एवंविधवैचित्र्यसहस्रसम्भवात्। उक्तभेदानतिक्रमाच्च।' K.P.X.

2 अनन्वयः (Self=comparison)

(P. 21, 1. 23-p. 22, 1.2) उपमानोपमेय ...... प्रयोजकम् इति. एकस्यैव उपमानोपमेयत्वम् अनन्वयः When the same object occupies the position of both Upamana and Upameya i. e. when a thing is compared to itself, there is अनन्वय. It follows as a matter of course that the comparison must be expressed in a single sentence. राजीव .. शरत्समुदयोद्यमे-When Autumn began to manifest itself, the lotus blushed like the lotus etc. aa -:- 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 araray 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 जयरथ's words 'एवं चास्य द्वितीयसब्रह्मचारिनिवृत्तिरेवालङ्कारत्वप्रतिष्ठापकं प्रमाणम्' p. 30. Vamana de- fines अनन्वय similarly 'एकस्योपमेयोपमानत्वेऽनन्वयः' काव्यालङ्कारसूत्र IV. 3.14 and gives the following as an instance 'गगनं गगनाकार सागर: सागरोपम: । रामरावणयोर्युंद्धं रामरावणयोरिव ॥.' भामह and उद्भट define in the same words 'यत्र तेनैव तस्य स्यादुपमानोपमेयता। असादृश्यविवक्षातस्तमित्या- हुरनन्वयम् ॥'. Udbhata's example is 'यस्य वाणी स्ववाणीव स्वक्रियेव क्रियाडमला। रूपं स्वमिव रूपं च लोकलोचनलोभनम्॥I' उद्भट IV. 8. राजीवमिव ... विषय :- The province of this figure is quite distinct from that of Latanuprasa, as in the example 'राजीव मिव पाथोजम्' where the figure is अनन्वय, although for राजीव we use a synonym पाथोज; while in लाटानुप्रास, the same word must be employed. लाटानुप्रास is defined by the Alankarasarvasva as 'तात्पर्यभेदवत्तु (शब्दार्थपौनरुक्त्य) लाटानुप्रासः' p. 24. On this the वृत्ति is 'तात्पर्यमन्यपरत्वम्। तदेव भिद्यते, न तु शब्दार्थस्वरूपम्।', When the same words are repeated in the same sense, but with a different construction, there is लाटानुप्रास, which is so called

110 NOTES ON X.26 अनन्वय.

because it is dear to the poets of Lata, the country about Surat. This लाटानुप्रास is treated of at lenght in Udbhata and Mammata. उद्भट defines it as 'स्वरूपार्थाविशेषेपि पुनरुक्ति: फला- न्तरात्। शब्दानां वा पदानां वा लाटानुप्रास इष्यते॥' I. 13. Examples of लाटानुप्रास are .- क्वचिदुत्फुल्लकमला कमलभ्रान्तषट््पदा। षट्पदक्काणमुखरा मुख- रस्फारसारसा।। प्मिनीं पझ्मिनीगाढस्पृद्यागत्य मानसात्। अन्तर्दन्तुरयामासुईसा इंसकुलालयात्।। उङ्धट I. 18 and 20. 'दिनकरकुलचन्द्र चन्द्रकेतो सरभसमेहि दृढं परिष्वजस्व ।' उत्तरराम० 6. Here the words कमल, षट्रपद, पझ्मिनी, Eu etc. are repeated in the same sense, but in a different connection. What then is the difference between लाटानुप्रास and अनन्वय ? 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 अनन्वय, 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 for अनन्वय that the same word should be used; a synonymous word may do as well, as in राजीवमिव पाथोजम्; 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 लाटानुप्रास, 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 शब्दार्थपौनरुक्त्य; while in सनन्वरय, it is not absolutely necessary that the same word should be used i. e. there is अर्थपौनरुक्त्य; 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. किं तु. श्रेयान But it is better to employ the same word, as this is more suitable for leading us to understand that the उपमान and उपमेय are the same. The एकावली distinguishes the two as follows :- 'पौनरुक्त्यस्य तात्पर्यमात्र- भिन्नस्यात्र प्रयोजकत्वात्। अनन्वये चार्थमात्रगतयुगपदुपमानोपमेयभावस्य उपयुक्तत्वाव्। शब्दैक्यस्य पुनरौचितीवशेन प्रसङ्गसङ्गतत्वात्।' p. 193. On this the तरल says 'उभयपौनरुक्त्यं लाटानुप्रासे प्रयोजकमनन्वये त्वर्थपौनरुक्त्यं तावतैवैकस्य युगपदुपमानोपमेयभावसिद्धेरित्यर्थः । किमर्थ तहि तत्र शब्दैक्यं कुर्वन्ति कवयो नियमेनेत्याशंक्याइ। शब्दैक्यस्य पुनरिति। औचितीवशेनेति। उद्देशप्रतिनिर्देश- योरैकरूप्यमिति न्यायबलेनान्यथा पर्यायप्रक्रमभङ्गापत्तेन तु लक्षणत्वेनेत्यर्थः ।' तदुक्तम् ... प्रयोजकम्-This verse is found in अलं. स. p. 24. In aaqy, sameness of words is accidental because it is more

X. 26 अनन्वय. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 111

suitable; while in the लाटानुप्रास it is directly essential ( to constitute the figure itself). On आनुषंगिकम्, विमर्शिनी says 'न पुनः साक्षात् प्रयोजकमित्यर्थः । शब्दैक्यं विनापि अनन्वयस्य प्रतिपादनात्।' and on 'साक्षादेव' it says 'शब्दैक्यं विना अस्य (लाटानुप्रासस्य) अनुत्थानात p. 24.

3 उपमेयोपमा ( Reciprocal Comparison) पर्यायेण ...... भिप्रायः (P. 22, 1l. 3-8) द्वयोः पर्यायेण एतद् (उपमानोपमेयत्वम्) उपमेयोपमा मता. That is regarded as उपमेयोपमा, when two things alternately occupy the position of Upamana and Upameya. This must of course take place in two sen- tences. कमलेव मतिः ... बत यस्य-This is cited by Mammata as an example of उपमेयोपमा. 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 कमला and मति etc. Our author's definition is word for word the same as Ruyyaka's 'द्यो: पर्यायेण तस्मिन् (उपमानोपमेयते) उपमयोपमा' p.31. The figure is called उपमेयोपमा, because in it, with the उपमेय of the first sentence is compared the उपमान of that sentence, i.e. 'उपमेयेन उपमा' as Mamimata 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 जयरथ "अस्याश्चोपमानान्तरतिरस्कार एव फलम्। अत एवोपमेयेनोपमा इत्यस्या अन्वर्थाभिधानम्। यत्र पुनरुपमानान्तरतिरस्कारो न प्रतीयते तत्र नायमलङ्कारः । यथा 'सविता विधवति विधुरपि सवितरति तथा दिनन्ति यामिन्यः । यामिनयन्ति दिनानि च सुखदुःखवशीकृते मनसि।' न ह्यत्र विधुसवित्रादीनामुपमानान्तरतिरस्करणं विवक्षितं किंतु सुखदुःखवशीकृतमनसामेवं विपरीतं भवतीति।" p. 32. The word दयो: in the definition serves to exclude रसनोपमा, where also one thing becomes उपमेय and उपमान in two successive sentences as in चंद्रायते शुककरुचापि इंसो etc .; but in रसनोपमा two things are not compared to one another. The distinction between अनन्वय and उपमेयोपमा 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 उपमेयोपमा two things are compared together alternately with the purpose of excluding a third thing similar to the two mentioned. In JyHT, there is only one sentence setting it forth and there is no suggestion of तृतीयसदृशव्यवच्छेद; while in उपमेयोपमा two sentences are required to constitute it and there is such a snggestion.

112 NOTES ON X. 27 उपमेयोपमा.

Other examples of उपमेयोपमा are :- सुगन्धि नयनानन्दि मदिरामदपाटलम्। अम्भोजमिव वक्त्रं ते त्वदास्यमिव पङ्कजम्॥ भामह III; खमिव जलं जलमिव खं हसश्न्द्र इव हंस इव चन्द्रः। कुमुदाकाराखारास्ताराकाराणि कुमुदानि॥। अलं. स. p. 32. 4 स्मरणम् ( Reminiscence) सदृशानुभवात् ...... राम: (P.22,ll.9-17). सदृशानुभवात् वस्तुस्मृतिः wTory-A recollection of an object arising from the perception of something like it, is termed HTuf. The Naiyāyikas say that knowledge ( बुद्धि or ज्ञान) is of two kinds, स्मृति and अनुभव. स्मृति is that knowledge which is produced by im- pressions alone; while aawa ( apprehension ) is all knowledge other than wgia. We apprehend a thing such as a jar. This apprehension leaves traces on the mind which are called संस्कार (भावनाख्य); these impressions when awakened give rise to remembrance. So mental processes may be represented as अनुभव-संस्कार-स्मृति, each preceding one being the cause of the following. Compare the words of T. S. 'सर्वव्यवहारहेतुरबुद्धिर्ज्ञानम्। सा द्विविधा स्मृतिरनुभवश्चेति। संस्कारमात्रजन्यं ज्ञानं स्मृतिः। तद्भित्नं ज्ञानमनुभवः ।' and also 'संस्कारस्त्रिविधः। वेगो भावना स्थितिस्थापकश्रेति । अनुभवजन्या स्मृतिहेतुर्भावना आत्ममात्रवृत्तिः ।'. When after perceiving a thing similar to one which was formerly apprehended, one remembers the latter, there is स्मरणालङ्कार. अरविन्द ...... चञ्चललोचनम्-खेलत्खञ्ञनमअ्जलम् -Charming with the sporting wagtail bird. Here the perception of the lotus on which the e bird was playing stirs up the latent impressions (araRT ) which cause the remembrance of the face with tremulous eyes. There is similarity between face and lotus. To constitute the figure PUT, it is necessary that the remembrance 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 स्मरणालङ्कार. In the verse 'मयि सकपट etc. the remembrance being produced without the apprehension of similarity there is no nSTT. The verse in question is Vis'vanatha's own and was cited by him in the 3rd ufd as an example of the व्यर्मिचारिभाव called स्मृति. The verse is मयि सकपटं किंचित्कापि अणीतविलोचने किमपि नयनं प्राप्ते तिर्यग्विजुम्भिततारकम्। स्मतमुपगतामालीं टृष्टा सलज्जमवाञ्रितं कुवलयदटशः स्मेरं समेरं स्मरामि तदाननम्।। 'Oh how well I recollect the ever-smiling face of the lotus-eyed one, bashfully held down on seeing her female friend smiling, when I,

X. 27 स्मरण. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 113

artfully directing my eyes some-what 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!). राघवानन्द ..... मिच्छन्ति. The great minister Raghavananda would have the figure n7u even where the recollection arises from dissimilarity (or contrast ). राघवानन्द has been referred to already in the 1st Pari. He appears to have been some relative of Vis'vanatha. We said above that to constitute the figure aru the remembrance must be due to the apprehension of a similar object. Rāghavananda says that even when the remembrance is due to the apprehen- sion of contrast, there is स्मरणालङ्गार His instance is शिरीषमृद्दी ete. शिरीषमृद्दी tender like the S'irisha flower. सौख्यलक्षाणि lakhs of felicities. गलद श्रु is an adverb- गलन्ति अश्रणि यथा स्युस्तथा. Here by the perception of Sita's sufferings which are contrast- ed with (विसदृश) her pleasures at home, Rama remembers the latter. The definition of aRy in the text is the same as that of अलं० स. 'सदृशानुभवाद्वरत्वन्तरस्मृतिः स्मरणम्' p. 33. Ruyyaka remarks 'सादृश्यं विना तु स्मृतिर्नायमलङ्कारः' Pp.33. जगन्नाथ defines as 'सादृश्यज्ञानोद्वु- द्धसंस्कारप्रयोज्यं स्मरणं स्मरणालङ्कारः p. 216. Jagannatha further re- marks 'अयं चालङ्कारिकाणां संप्रदायो यत्सादृश्यमूलकत्वे स्मरणं निदर्शनादिवदल- क्वारः। तस्याभावे व्यंग्यतायां भावः । तयोरभावे तु वस्तुमात्रम्'। p. 217. Jagannatha criticises the use of the word सदृशानुभवात् in the 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 HrIT which is stirred up by the remembrance (स्मरण and not अनुभव ) 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 सदृशानुभवात् the word सदृशज्ञानात्, as ज्ञान includes both अनुभव and स्मृति. "यदपि 'सद्ृशानुभवाद्वस्त्वन्तरस्मृतिः स्मरणम्' इत्यलंकारसर्वस्वरलाकरयोः स्मरणालङ्गारलक्षणमुक्तं तदपि न। सदृश- स्मरणादुद्धद्वेन संस्कारेण जनिते स्मरणे अव्याप्तेः । यथा-'सन्त्येवास्मिम्जगति बहवः पक्षिणो रम्यरूपास्तेषां मध्ये मम तु महती वासना चातकेषु। यैरध्यक्षैरथ निजसखं नीरदं स्मारयद्दि: स्मृत्यारूढं भवति किमपि ब्रह्म कृष्णामिधानम् ॥' अत्र च चातकदर्श- नादेकसम्बन्धिज्ञानादुत्पन्नेनापरसम्बन्धिनो जलधरस्य भगवत्सटृशस्य स्मरणेन जनितं भगवतः स्मरणं भगवद्विषय-रतिभावाङ्गम्। यदि च 'सदृशानुभवात्' इत्यपहाय 'सटृशञ्ञानात्' इति लक्षणे निवेश्यते तदा भवत्यस्यापि संग्रह इति दिकू" pp. 221-22. A good example of स्मरण is 'अतिशयितसुरासुरप्रभावं शिशुभव-

114 NOTES ON X. 27 सरण.

लोक्य तवैव तुल्यरूपम्। कुशिकसुतमखद्विषां प्रमाथे धृतधनुषं रघुनन्दनं स्मरामि ।।' उत्तररामचरित V. 4. Mere remembrance, not produced by the apprehension of similarity, is not स्मरणालंo, as in 'स तथेति प्रतिज्ञाय विसृज्य कथमप्युमाम् । ऋषीञ्ज्योतिर्मयान्सप्त सस्मार स्मरशासनः ॥' कुमारसम्भव VI. 3.

5 रूपकम् (Metaphor) रूपकं रूपितारोपाद् विषये निरपह्नवे-Metaphor consists in the re- presentation of the subject of description, which ( subject) is not concealed, as identified with another (a well-knowu standard ). विषय is an object upon which something is. superimposed, as face upon which a is superimposed; विषयिन् is the object superimposed upon another, as चन्द्र on मुख. So विषय and विषयिन are here equivalent re- spectively to उपमेय and उपमान रूपितस्यारोप: रूपितारोप: It would have been better if the author had said 'रूपितारोप:' instead of 'रूपितारोपाद्'. An example of रूपक is मुखं चन्द्रः. The name Rūpaka is quite appropriate, as in it the farfi imposes its form (रूप) on the विषय; note the words of अलं. स. 'विषयिणा विषयस्य रूपवतः करणाद्रपकम्' p. 35,, or the एकावलि 'यदा तु विषयी विषयं रूपयति रूपवन्तं करोति तदान्वर्थाभिधानं रूपकम्' p. 212. रूपित ...... व्यवच्छेद :- The word रूपित in the definition serves to distinguish Rupaka from the figure qftuIrH- We shall discuss this point, when we come to the de- finition of Parinama. The word 'निरपह्ववे' serves to exclude अपहुति. In अपहृति, an object is denied to be what it really is and something else is established in its stead; e. g. नेदं मुखं किं तु चन्द्र :. In रूपक, there is no such denial. On account of the extreme similarity of two things we identify one with the other and say 'मुखं चंद्रः'. तत्परम्परितं ...... त्रिषा (P. 22, 1. 21). The author divides Rupaka first into three varieties परम्परित (Consequential), साङ्ग ( Entire ), निरङ्ग ( Deficient). यत्र कस्यचिदारोप ....... इति केचित् (P. 22,1. 24-p. 23, 1.16). यत्र ...... चतुविधम-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 four varieties of परम्परित, viz. क्िष्टकेवलपरं०,

X. 29-30 रूपक. SÂHITYADARPANA. 115

माला श्िष्टपरं°, केवल अश्रिष्ट परं०, माला अश्विष्ट परं०. An example of केवलपरम्परित resting upon Paronomasia is 'आहवे' etc. जगदुद्दण्डश्च असौ राजमण्डलराहुश्च-राजमण्डल may mean 1) the full orb of the moon or (2) the entire assemblage of kings. राजमण्डलमेव राज- मण्डलम्. Here राजमण्डल (in the sense of 'the orb of the moon') is superimposed upon राजमण्डल (in the sense of 'assemblage of kings'). This superimposition is the cause of the superim- position (आरोप) of Rahu upon the arm of the king. An example of मालापरम्परित resting on श्रेष is 'पझ्मोदय' etc. पद्मोदयः is equivalent to पद्मानामुदयः (पझ्म+उद्य्), or पझ्मायाः उदय: (पझ्मा +उदय). पद्मा means 'Goddess of wealth.' सदागति may be explained as 'सदा गतिः' (constant motion ) or as 'सतामागतिः' ( the resort of the good ), ya means 'mountain' or 'king'. दम्भोलि (m. f.) means 'Thunderbolt'. Here we identify पझमोदय ( attainment of fortune ) with पझोदय (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 पद्मोदय on पदमोदय is the cause of identifying the king with the lord of the day. Similarly the superimposition of सदागति ( constant motion, a characteristic of the wind) on सदागति (resort of the good ) is the cause of identifying the king with the wind and the identification of भूभृत् ( king) with aya ( mountains, which were cleft by Indra 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 'आहवे' etc. ) and therefore this is मालापरंo. An example of केवलपरम्परित not resting upon श्रेष is 'पान्तु वो' etc. शार्ङ्गज्याघातकर्कशा :- hardened by the strokes of the string of his bow (made of horn). त्रैलोक्यमण्डपस्तम्भा :- pillars of the dome ( usy ) in the form of the three worlds. Here the super- imposition of मण्डप uon त्रैलोक्य is the cause of the superim- position of r upon the arms. As there is a single super- imposition causing another single superimposition, this is केवलपरंe. An example of मालापरं, not based upon श्रेष, is 'मनो- जराजस्य' etc. मनोजराजस्य=मनोजः (मदनः) एव राजा तस्य. सितातपत्रम्- white umbrella. श्रीखण्डचित्रम्-श्रीखण्ड (m) means 'sandalwood' as said in the त्रिकाण्डशेष 'माल्यस्तु स्याशच्छीखण्डो रौहिणश्च सः' and चित्र means 'the ornamental mark on the forehead (तिलक)' as said by मेदिनी 'तिलकालेख्ययोः कीब कर्बुराज्जुतयोरपि' हरित् means 'Direction or quarter'. हरिदेव अङ्गना हरिदङ्गना. व्योम एव सरः तस्मिन् सरोजम् कर्पूरपूरप्रभम् resembling a lump of camphor. In this verse

116 NOTES ON X. 29-30 रूपक.

the superimposition of the nature of a 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 aRa is the cause of the ascription of the nature of the faaa ( 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 परम्परित are exemplified. एषु च ... केचित्-It is the opinion of some that in these ( four examples of qrzqfta ), the superimposition of Rahu etc. upon the arm of the king etc. is the cause of the ascription of the nature of the fara etc. to Hus etc. This view is exactly the opposite of Vis'va- natha's. विश्वनाथ's view appears to be better, as it is in ac- cordance with the views of Mammata and other famous rhetoricians. Moreover, between HvEs ( disc of the moon ) and राजमण्डल (assemblage of kings), there is something in common i. e. the fact of being expressed in the same words, but bet ween Rahu and the king's arm, there is nothing in common that is well-known.

The name परम्परित is given to this variety because here there is a series of Rupakas (परम्परा सञ्जाता अस्येति), one of which is the cause of the other. Jayaratha explains the term as 'परम्परया एकस्य माहात्म्यादपरस्यारूपणत्वमायातं यत्र तत्तथोक्तम्' p. 36; and एकावली as 'परम्परा जाता अस्येति' p. 215. अङ्विनो ...... चोपचरितत्वात् (P. 23, 1. 17-p. 24, 1. 2). That is Hs ( 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. आरोप्याणाम् ...... मतम्-When all the things to be superimposed are expressed, it is समस्तवस्तुविषय शाब्दत्वे means शब्देन अभिधेयत्वे. An example of साङ्गरूपक (समस्तवस्तुविषय) is 'रावणावग्रह' etc. This verse occurs in Raghu, X. 48. रावण एव अवग्रह: तेन क्ान्तम् अवग्रह means 'drought'. वागेव अमृतम् वागमृतम्• मरुतः एव सस्यम्=मरुत्सस्यम् कृष्णमेघ: कृष्णः एव मेघ :. The cloud-Krshna disappeared, having thus rained down the nectar of words upon the corn in the form of the deities, that withered in the drought in the form of Ravana. Here कृष्ण is the principal object of description; रावण, वाकू, मरुद are the subordinate elements associated with him; aq and its subordinate elements, such as अवग्रह, अमृत and सस्य are

X. 30-31 रूपक. SAHITYADARPANA. 117

directly expressed. So this is ars and as all the angas are expressly mentioned and are not to be understood, it is समस्तवस्तुविषय Mammata explains the term समस्तवस्तुविषय as 'समस्तानि वस्तूनि विषयः अस्य' and Jayaratha as 'समस्तमारोप्यमाणात्मकं वस्तु अभिधाया विषयो यत्र तत्तथोक्तम्' p.36. When मेघ, the principal one (अङ्विन्), is superimposed upon कृष्ण (the अङ्गिन्), then अमृत etc. (the अङ्s ) are superimposed upon वाकू etc. (which are also अङ्ग). यत्र ...... तत्-It is said to be एकदेशविवर्ति ( residing in a part ), when some one of the superimposed things (आरोष्यमाण) is understood (and not expressed in words). An example of एकदेशविवर्ति is 'लावण्यमधुभिः' etc. लावण्यमेव मधु. विकस्वर-expanding, blooming. लोकलोचन etc. लोकानां लोच- नान्येव रोलम्बा: भ्रमरा: तेषां कदम्बैः-By what cluster of bees in the form of the eyes of the people. Here, the superimposition of ny on 'beauty' is directly expressed; while the superimposi- tion of 'louts' on 'the face' is indirect (i. e. is only suggested ). As 'honey' is superimposed on 'beauty' and 'bee' on teyes', so we infer that it is meant that 'lotus' should be identified with 'face.' As here one of the constituent Rūpakas is not directly exprssed, this is एकदेशविवर्ति. This term is explained by जयरथ as 'एकदेश आरोपविषयाणामर्थात्तदात्मक एवारोप्यमाणप्रयोजनप्रतिपाद- नाय तद्रपतया विवर्तते परिणमति यत्र तत्तथोक्तम्' p. 36; or by Uddyota as रूपकसङ्कातस्य अवयविनः अवयवरे कसिमिश्चिद्रपके विशेषेण शब्दमुखेन स्फुटतया (वर्तते) इत्यर्थः'. न चेय ... उपचरितत्वात्. Nor can you say that this is एकदेशविवार्िनी simile (exemplified in 'नेत्रैरिवोत्पलैः' etc. above), 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 मुखचन्द्र:, if we dissolve the compound as मुखं चन्द्र इव, there is Upama, but the word yr would be prominent in that case and x: would be subordinate. If we dissolve the compound as मुखमेव चन्द्र: it would be a Rupaka and the word चन्द्र would be prominent and y would be subordinate. From the other words used in the sentence, we can often judge whether the one or the other is meant. If I say 'मुखकमलं प्रफुलम्', the compound is Rupaka (मुखमेव कमलम्), as the word 'प्रफुल्ल' (fully blooming ) primarily agrees with 'lotus' alone. The compound, therefore, must be so dissolved here as to give prominence to the word 'lotus', which is possible only if we dissolve it as १६

118 NOTES ON X. 31 रूपक.

मुखमेव कमलम्. If I say 'मुखकमलं इसति', 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 ga, which is pos- sible only in Upama (मुखं कमलमिव). So here, as विकस्वर (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 Rūpaka.

निरङं ...... व्यथा मे (p. 24, ll. 3-12). If the principal object alone is metaphorically represented, there is निरङ्गरूपक, which is two-fold being serial or single. An example of निरङ्ग (माला) is 'निर्माणकौशलं etc.' सा इयं इन्दीवरेक्षणा धातुः निर्माणकौशलं लोकचक्षुषां चन्द्रिका अनङ्गस्य क्रीडागृहम्. धातुर्निर्माणकौशलम् The very skill of the Creator in creating. Here the woman (afsy, the principal subject) is alone compared; the subordinate elements are not referred to all; hence this is निरङ्ग. An example of केवलनिरङ्ग is 'दासे कृतागसि etc.'-This verse is cited by the अलं. स. as an example of केवलनिरवयवरूपक. Arjunavarmadeva, in his comment upon the Amarus'ataka, ascribes it to king Vākpatirāja alias Muñja (the uncle of Bhoja) "यथास्मत्पूर्वजस्य वाक्पतिराजापरनाम्नो मुअदेवस्य 'दासे कृतागसि' etc." p. 23 Amaru. Construe कृतागसि (कृतापराधे) दासे प्रभूणां पादप्रह्ारः उचितः भवेदिति (मत्वा) सुन्दरि नात्र दूये। यत् (तव) मृदु पदं उद्यत्कठोरपुलकाङ्करकण्टकायैः खिद्यते ननु सा व्यथा मे. दूये I grieve. उदन्तः ये कठोरा: पुलकाङ्करा ते एव कण्टका: तेषां अगैः by the points of those thorns in the form of the hard shoots of my hair that stand erect ( at thy 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 पुलकाङकूर is identified with कण्टक; and there is no other superimposition.

तेनाष्टौ ... मृग्यम् (p. 24. 11 13-17). Thus eight varieties are mentioned by the ancients. Bhamaha mentions only two, uae- वस्तुविषय and एकदेशविवर्ति (II. 22). Similarly Udbhata gives two varieties समस्त० and एकदेश०. It is Mammata who gives exactly the same number of divisions as our author. quyfta is divid- ed into 4 varieties, साङ् into 2 (समस्त० and एकदेश०), निरङ्ग into 2 (केवल and माला). The अलं. स. gives the same number. Our author does not appear to be satisfied with this division,

X. 33 रूपक. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 119

as the varieties are not mutually exclusive. He says that a परम्परितरूपक may also be एकदेशविवर्ति. In परम्परित the 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 (अङ्गिन् and अङ्ग); while in साङ्गरूपक (of which एकदेशविवर्ति 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 'खङ्ग: क्ष्मासाविदलः' as an example of परम्परितपकदेशविवर्ति. Our author follows here the अलं. स. This line is the last one of a verse cited by अलं० स०. The first three lines are 'पर्यङ्को राजलक्ष्म्या हरितमणिमयः पौरुषाब्धेस्तरङ्गो

लाम्बुवाह:'. On this verse the अलं० स० remarks 'अत्र क्ष्मासौविदल्ल इति परम्परितमप्येकदेशविवर्ति' p. 38. क्ष्मा means 'the earth' and सौविंदल् is कञ्नकिन्, the guard on the king's harem 'अन्तःपुरे त्वधिकृतः स्वादन्तवैशिको जनः । सौविदला: कक्चकिनः स्थापत्याः सौविदाश्च ते ॥' अमर. II. 8. 8. मालवाखण्डल :- That Indra in the form of the king of Malva. अत्र आर्ध: etc. Here the implied superimposition 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 महिषी upon क्ष्मा is the cause of the superimposition of सै।विदल upon खड्ग there is परम्परितरूपक. But as 'महिषी' is not directly expressed, and सौविदल alone is expressed, this is एकदेशविवर्ति. अस्य मेदस्य etc .- The reader should search out for himself an example of एकदेशविवर्तिपरम्परित, where there is a series of super- impositions. दृश्यन्ते ...... बोध्यम् (P.24,1.18-p.25, 1.12). Even in the साङ्ग metaphor, we see that the things superimposed (आरोप्य) are founded upon aq ( Paronomasia ). Mammata divided साङ् into two varieties समस्तवस्तुविषयं and एकदेशविवर्ति. He did not say that these two may be founded on sq. Our author points out that this is possible. An example of एकदेशविवर्ति based upon श्रेष is 'करमुदय' etc. Construe गलिततम :- पटलांशुके (गलितं तम:पटलमेव अंशुकं यस्मात) उदयमहीधरस्तनाग्रे (उदयमहीधरः उदयपर्वत एव स्तनः तस्य अग्रे) करं ( करमेव किरणमेव करं हस्तम् ) निवेश्य अयं सुधांशुः (चन्द्रः) अमरेशदिशः (अमरेशः इन्द्रः तस्य दिक् प्राची तस्या:) विकसितकुमुदेक्षणं (विकसितं कुमुदमेव ईक्षणं यस्य) मुखं विचुम्वति. Here the word करमू is Paronomastic. This is एकदेशविवर्ति because here the word 'woman' superimposed upon अमरेश्वदिक्

120 NOTES ON X. 33 रूपक.

is not expressed, while the other constituent elements as स्तन, अंशुक, ईक्षण are mentioned. If we read 'चुचुम्बे हरिदबलामुख- मिन्दुनायकेन' for 'विचुम्नति ... सुधांशुः' we shall have क्रिष्टसमस्तवस्तुविषय, as in this case 'the woman' superimposed upon 'the direction' and 'the hero' upon 'the moon' will both be expressed in words. न चात्र ... असङ्गतम् (p. 24. 1l. 23-25). It cannot be said that this is क्िष्टपरम्परित (and not क्रिष्टसाङ्ग). In छ्रिष्टपरं०, e. g. in 'भूभृदावलिदम्भोलि:' etc., without the superimposition of mountain 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 'करमुदय' etc, the superimposition of कर upon कर, or of नायक upon सुधांशु, or of woman upon 'अमरेशदिक' 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. aft ...... ary. An objection is raised against the above reasoning in these words. If you say that 'भूभृदावलिदम्भोलिः' is an example of परम्परित, then how is it that you cite 'पझ्मोदयदिनाधीश: etc.' as an example of q-fta? The king can be identified with the sun, as there is between the two great similarity founded upon both being तेजस्वि (glorious). This superim- position is independent of the superimposition of qnay upon पझ्मोदय. Hence 'पद्मोदयदिनाधीशः' should be an example of साङ्ग and not of परम्परित. तथाहि.विवक्षितत्वात्. The foregoing ob- jection is answered in these words. It is quite true that the resemblance of the king to the sun as possessing glory is quite manifest; but it is not intended in the example under discussion. It is पद्मोदयत्व ( the identity of the attainment of fortune with the bloomiug of lotuses based upon Paronomasia ) that is intended to be the common attribute of the two. And hence, the superimposition of पद्मोदय on पद्मोदय is the cause of the superimposition of the 'sun' on the king and 'qeney' etc.' is an example of परम्परितo. इद तु ...... इति न क्रिष्टपरम्परितम्. But here the similarity of the mountain to the female breast in plump- ness and prominence is quite manifest of itself and hence there is no छिष्टपर, but क्रिष्टसाङ्ग. कचवित्समासाभावेपि etc. some- times Rupaka is found without a compound. The author appears to allude to the words of Dandin, who divides Rupakas into व्यस्त (without a compound), समस्त (in a com-

X. 33 रूपक. SÂHITYADARPANA,

pound ) and araenn ( partly compounded and partly not ). 'उपमैव तिरोभूतमेदा रूपकमिष्यते। यथा बाहुलता पाणिपझमं चरणपल्लवः ॥ अङ्गुल्यः पहवान्यासन् कुसुमानि नखाचिषः। बाहू लते वसन्तश्रीस्त्वं नः प्रत्यक्ष- चारिणी।। इत्येतदसमस्ताख्यं समस्तं पूर्वरूपकम् (बाहुलता etc. )। स्मितं मुखेन्दोज्योत्सेति समस्तव्यस्तरूपकम् II' काव्यादर्श II. 66-68. क्वचिद्वैयधिकर- usf etc .- In Rupaka, the Upamana and Upameya are generally in apposition, as in मुखचन्द्रः, बाहुलता etc. 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 भलता and मधुपश्रेणी are in different cases. The Nirnaya-sagara edition wrongly omits the words from विदधे to वैधम्येऽपि यथा. It thus makes 'सौजन्याम्बु etc.' an example under वैयधिकरण्य, which it is not. Besides the अलं स cites 'सौजन्याम्बु' etc.as an example under वैधर्म्य; see pp, 38-39. The printed editions put the words इदं मम' after the verse 'ar' etc; this seems to us to be wrong; the verse is quoted by Ruyyaka, who preceded Vis'vanatha by some centuries. सौजन्याम्नु पुच्छच्छटा are in apposition with राजावली. यैः ...... सेविता They, who, inspired with foolish hopes, have served the princes of the Kaliyuga (Iron Age). सौजन्य etc .- सौजन्यमेव अम्बु तस्य मरुस्थली the sandy desert for the water of courtesy ( i. e. as in Marwär there is no water, so there is no courtesy in princes). सुचरित etc. सुचरितमेव आलेख्यं तस्य दभित्ति :- 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.). गुणज्योत्साकृष्णचतु- दशी-गुणा एव ज्योत्सा तस्या: कृष्णचतुदशी 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). सरलता etc .- सरलता कौटिल्यराहि- त्यमेव सरलता ऋजुता तस्या: योगे श्वपुच्छच्छटा the very perfection of the dog's tail in respect of rectitude (i. e. as the dog's tail can never be straight, so there is no straightforwardness in the princes). तेषां ...... कौशलम्-for these (hard workers), how much ability would be required to serve God S'iva who is to be attained by faith alone ?

अत्र केषां ...... गणनम् (p. 25, 1l. 11-12). Although some of the Rupakas exemplified above are based upon Paronomasia (of words ), they are counted as alankaras of sense, as they are species of Rupaka. शेष is of two kinds, शब्दक्षेष and अर्थक्रेष.

-122 NOTES ON X. 33 4.

In the former the word itself is important; if we subatitute another in its place, the charm vanishes; e. g. srf पक्षच्छेदक्षणक्षमः स विबुधेन्द्रो राजते; here विबुधेन्द्र: means Lord of Gods or lord of learned men'; uaruf means 'of the families of enemies' or 'of the best mountains' and so on. Here if we substitute the word वंश and पण्डित for गोत्र and विबुध respectively, the double meaning vanishes and then there will be no sq; Therefore as the word is here the chief element, this is called aa4, which is an alankara of S'abda and not of Artha. In some of the Paramparita Rupakas founded upon ar, the particular word employed is very important; as e. g. in 'भूमृदावलिदम्भोलिः'. If we substitute here the word पर्वत for भूमृत, then there will be no aq, and this verse would cease to be an example of faeqrufta. So then, the verse appears to be an example of TT7. Our author remarks that, although in such verses the particular words employed are important, still the prominent figure is Rūpaka and au serves only as a means to an end. Hence it is that the verses are cited under figures of sense. ua ... area-The same is to be under- stood with respect to alankaras to be spoken of later on.

अधिका .. वैशिष्टयम् (p.25, ll. 13-19). Construe (यस्) अधि- कारूढवैशिष्टयम् रूपकं तत तदेव .- That Rupaka in which the ex- eellence rises to an excessive pitch is termed the same (i. c. अधिकारूढवैशिष्ट्य). अधिकं आरूदवं वैशिष्ट्थम् यस्मिन् तत्. An example of this is 'इदं वक्त्रं' etc. अधरः सुधाधाराधारः चिरपरिणतं बिम्बम-the lower lip, the receptacle of nectar is a bimba fruit ripened after a long time. तनुः अवगाहे सुखतरः लावण्यानां जलवि: 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 fra 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 ye, but of arfate. In व्यतिरेक, the superiority of the उपमेय over the उपमान is pointed out. The same is done here. Or if it be said that the superiority of ayny is not 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 4. रूपक. SÅHITYADARPAŅA. 123

certain properties in the उपमेय which are not found in the उपमान. Similarly here, the fact that the face is कलक्करहित while the moon is Hac 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- mãna does not prevent us from identifying Upamana and Upameya. "वामनस्तु-'एकगुणहानिकल्पनायां साम्यदाढ्य विशेषोक्तिः' (काव्यालक्कार० IV. 3.23.) इत्याह उदाजहार च-'दतं हि नाम पुरुषस्यासिंहासनं राज्यम्' (मृच्छकटिक) इति। अत्र हि द्यते राज्यं तादात्म्येनारोप्यते। तन्र सिंहासनरहितं हि द्यूतं सिंहासनसहितराज्यतादात्म्यं कथं वहेदिति आरोपोन्मूल- कयुक्तिनिरासायारोप्यमाणे राज्येऽपि सिंहासनराहित्यं कल्प्यते। तेन दृढारोपं रूपकमेवेदम्। न विशेषोक्तिः । एवं च 'अचतुर्वदनो ब्रह्मा द्विबाहुरपरो हरिः । अभाललोचन: शम्भुर्भगवान्बादरायणः ।' इति पौराणपद्ेऽपि रूपकमेव। तथा गुणाघिक्यकल्पनायामपि तदेव । यथा-'धर्मों वपुष्मान्भुवि कार्तवीर्यः' इत्यादौ।" p. 439. R. G.

6 परिणाम (Commutation)

विषयात्मतया ...... परिणामः (P. 25, l1. 20-22) Construe आरोप्ये (i.e. विषयिणि i, e. उपमाने ) विषयात्मतया प्रकृतार्थोपयोगिनि (सति) परिणामो भवेत-When what is superimposed serves the purpose in hand as being identified with the subject of superimposition ( the उपमेय), it is परिणाम, which is two-fold as being apposi- tional or non-appositional. तुल्याघिकरण: is the same as समानाघि- करण: and अतुल्याधिकरण: is equivalent to व्यधिकरण :. The name is given to this figure, because the object superimposed is commuted into the nature of the subject of superimposition. यथा ... तादात्म्येन (P. 25, 1. 23-p. 26, 1. 3). An example is 'स्मितेन' etc .- construe दूराव आगतस्य मम तया सि्मितेन उपायनं कृतम्; दते स्तनोपपीडम् आश्रेष: तया पणः कृत :- She made a present to me, who had come from afar, of a smile; and the wager laid in gambling was an embrace with the pressure of the breasts (i. e. a close embrace). स्तनोपपीडम् is a gerund in अम् and means स्तनौ उपपीड्य. अन्यत्र In other cases i. e. in ordinary cases. उपायनपणौ ... उपयुज्येते-In other cases 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. अत्र तु ...... श्रेषरूपतया-supply 'उपयुज्येते' after स्मिताश्रेष- ya4T. In the present case of welcoming a lover and gaming

124 NOTES ON X. 34-35 परिणाम. ,

with him, the present and the wager assume the form of & smile and an embrace. Here the आरोप्यमाण is उपायन in the first case and पण in the second, while the विषय (i. e. उपमेय) is स्मित in the first and आश्रेष in the 2nd. Now here the आरोप्यमाण i. e. उपायन 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 विषय i. e. स्मित. A lover must be welcomed by a smile etc .; ordinary presents would not do. Therefore, here the anTTAToT 34147 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 आश्वेष. प्रथमार्घे ...... सामानाधिकरण्येन- In the first half of this verse, the figure is used without apposition (of उपमान and उपमेय) i. e. स्मितेन is in the Instrumental and sur in the Nominative, and in the second half with an apposition (of उपमान and उपमेय i. e. पण: and आश्रेष: are both in the nom.). रूपके ..... तादात्म्येन. The author here distinguishes between 44 and qRunT. 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 (उपायन, the आरोप्यमाण or उपमान) is completely identi- fied with the subject of superimposition, viz. the lady's smile (the आरोपविषय or उपमेय ); and the present as so identified sub- serves the purpose in hand, viz. honouring the lover. aa qa ...... अत्र तु तादात्म्येन-Hence is it that in Rupaka, what is super- imposed ( the 3yHr ) is construed simply as characterizing or distinguishing the subject; but in qfuTH, the thing super- imposed (आरोष्य) is construed as being completely identical. The word aq-a is a technical one, of which the Naiyayikas are very fond. It means 'a determining attribute.' When we say मुखचन्द्रः, what the word चन्द्र 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 Rūpaka and Parinama when briefly stated is this :- In Rupaka, the उपमान tinges or colours the Upameya simply, but the उपमान is not necessarily of any use for the matter in hand; as in मुखचन्द्रं पश्यामि, where the moon subserves no purpose in the act of seeing. In परिणाम, on the other hand, the उपमान

X. 34-35 परिणाम. SAHITYADARPAŅA, 125

is completely identified with the Upameya and subserves the purpose in hand by being so identified e. g. प्रसन्नेन दृगब्जेन वीक्षते मदिरेक्षणा; here the word अब्ज (lotus) is connected with the action of seeing as its agent. But a lotus 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 347 is superimposed upon the Upameya, which is the subject of discussion; while in Pariņāma the उपमान passes over entirely into the nature of the Upameya and subserves the purpose in hand. So it is प्रकृतोपयोगित्व that distinguishes this figure from Rupaka. The word afa 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 ya there is simply a superimposition of the fa ( i. e. of what gives its form to another ). Our author, in distinguishing रूपक and परिणाम, appears to borrow the words of Ruyyaka; "आरोप्यमाणं रूपके प्रकृतोपयोगित्वाभावात्प्रकृतोपरअ्जकत्वेनैव केवलेनान्वयं भजते परिणामे तु प्रकृतात्मतया आरोप्यमाणस्योपयोग इति प्रकृतमारोप्यमाणरूपतया परिणमति ।" p. 40 अलं० स०, on which जयरथ remarks "एवमत्र प्रकरणोपयोगित्वा- भावादित्यारोप्यमाणस्योपयोग इति चान्वयव्यतिरेकाभ्यां प्रकृतोपयोगित्वस्य असाधारणत्वं दर्शितम्। असाधारणत्वस्य हि धर्मस्य तत्त्वव्यवस्थापकत्वाल्लक्षणत्वम्।" p. 41. Our author is not very clear in his exposition of Pari- nama. The Chitramīmansa is very explicit on this point. "यच्चारोप्यमाणं किंचित्कार्योंपयोगित्वेन निबध्यमानं स्वतस्तस्य तदुपयोगित्वासम्भवा- त्प्रकृतात्मतापत्तिमपेक्षते तत्रव परिणामाङ्गीकारात्। 'प्रसन्नेन दृगब्जेन वीक्षते मदिरेक्षणा' a l" p. 55. He then explains how this verse is an example of परिणाम; "अत्र तु अब्जस्य वीक्षणोपयोगित्वं निबध्यते। मयूरव्यंसकादिसमासेनोत्तर- पदप्राधान्यात्। न चोपमिति( त?)समासाश्रयणेन पूर्वपदार्थप्राधान्याद्दश एव तदुपयोगित्वं निबध्यत इत्यसस्विति वाध्यम्। प्रसन्नेनेति सामान्यधर्मप्रयोगात्। 'उपमितं व्याघ्रादिभि: सामान्याप्रयोगे' (पा. II. 1. 56) इति तदप्रयोग एवोपमितसमासानु- शासनात्। अब्जस्य च वीक्षणोपयोगित्वं न स्वात्मना सम्भवति । अतः प्रकृतट्टगात्मतापत्त्य- पेक्षणात् परिणामाळक्कारः।" p. 55. The चि. मी. distinguishes रूपक and परिणाम as 'रूपके प्रकृतमप्रकृतरूपापन्नं भवति परिणामे तु अप्रकृतं प्रकृतरूपापन्नं भवति' p. 59. Similarly, Jagannatha very clearly defines Parinama as 'विषयी (i. e. उपमानम्) यत्र विषयात्मतयैव प्रकृते प्रकृतोपयोगी न स्वातन्त्र्येण (i.e. स्वस्वरूपेण) स परिणामः' R. G. p. 248. His example of परिणाम is a beautiful one. 'अपारे संसारे विषमविषयारण्यसरणौ मम भ्रामंभ्रामं विगलितविरामं जडमतेः । परिश्रान्तस्यायं तरणितनयातीरनिलय: समन्तात्सन्तापं इरिनवतमालस्तिरयतु II'. Upon this verse he remarks

126 NOTES ON X. 34-35 परिणाम.

'भगवदात्मतयव तमालस्य संसारतापनिवर्तनक्षमत्वम्। मार्गश्रान्तजनसन्तापद्दारकत्वात् रमणीयशोभाधारत्वाच्च तमालो विषयितयोपातः ।' R. G. p. 248. In the above example, the तमाल ( 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 एकावली defines परिणाम quite differently 'तं परिणामं द्विविधं कथयन्त्यारोप्यमाणरूपतया। परिणमति यत्र विषयः प्रस्तुतकायोंपयोगाय॥ यत्रारोपविषय: (i. e. उपमेय) प्रकृतकार्यसिद्धयर्थमारोप्यमाणात्मतया परिणमति तत्र यथार्थाभिधान: परिणामः' । pp. 220-21. This is directly opposed to the words of our author आरोप्ये (उपमाने) विषयात्मतया (उपमेयात्मतया) प्रकृताथोंपयोगिनि etc. and of Jagannatha 'विषयी (उपमानम्) यत्र विषयात्मतयैव (उपमेयात्मतयैव) प्रकृते प्रकृतोपयोगी etc.' The Ekavali means that where the Upameya 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 परिणाम; 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 परिणाम. The एकावली seems to follow the अलं. स० which says 'प्रकृत- मारोप्यमाणरूपत्वेन परिणमति' p. 40. But the अलं० स० appears to us to be self-contradictory. It defines परिणाम a9 'आरोप्यमाणस्य प्रकृता- पयोगिते परिणामः and says further on 'परिणामे तु प्रकृतात्मतया आरोप्यमाणस्योपयोगः This is exactly our author's view; but the words 'प्रकृतमारोप्यमाणरूपत्वेन परिणमति' placed after आरोप्यमाणस्योपयोगः are exactly the reverse of what our author says. An example of परिणाम according to the एकावली is "राजन् नृसिंह भवतः समरोत्सवेषु धूलीभिरन्धतमसं सपदि व्यधायि। निख्त्रिंशकृत्तशिरसाममरत्वभाजां स्वर्गाज्गनासुरतकेलिषु आात्रवाणाम्। अ्रारोप्यमाणान्धतमसरूपतया परिणतानां धूलीनां प्रस्तुतसुरतोपयोगित्वम्।" p. 222. It should be noted that Mammata does not recognize the figure Parinama. उद्द्योत takes the same view. Vide its remarks "यत्त 'आरोप्यमाणो यत्र विषयात्मतयव प्रकृतकायोंपयोगी न स्वातव्रयेण स परिणामः (this is जगन्नाथ's लक्षण)। अत्र च विषयामेदः आरोप्यमाणे उपयुज्यते रूपके तु नैवमिति विशेष: (these are the words of R.G.p. 248)। वदनेन्दुना तन्वी स्मरतापं विलुम्पति-इत्यादि उदाहरणम्। अत्र हि स्मरतापनाशनसामर्थ्य मुखात्मनैवेन्दोः। ग्रीष्मसन्तापहारकत्वाद रमणीयशोभाधारत्वाच्चेन्दुर्विषयतयोपात्तः' इति दाक्षिणात्याः। तन्न। इन्दौ वदनतादात्म्य- प्रतीतेर्वर्णनीयमुखाद्यनुत्कर्षकत्वेनालङ्गारत्वाभावाद इति दिक्।" p. 30 (Chan). दासे ...... घटनार्थेमनुसन्धीयते. (P. 26, 11. 3-6). In the verse 'दासे' etc. quoted above, there is Rupaka and not परिणाम. It may be objected that in the verse 'दासे कृतामसि' there is परिणाम, as the आरोप्यमाण कण्टक, which is well-known as the cause of piercing

X. 34-35 परिणाम. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 127

the foot, is here identified with पुलक (the उपमेय). पुलक cannot be connected in its own sense with पादमेदन, but only when identified with auza. Thus the verse will be an example of परिणाम according to the view of the एकावली, which says 'यत्रारोपविषयः (i. e. उपमेय; here पुलक) प्रकृतकार्यसिद्धयर्थम् (here पादमेदन- रूपप्रकृतकार्यसिद्धयर्थम् ) आरोष्यमाणात्मतया (here कण्टकात्मतया) परिणमति तन्र परिणाम:।'. To this our author replies that in 'दासे' etc. there is y5; because, the act of piercing the foot, brought about by the thorn which is the आरोष्यमाण, is not the matter in hand. If पादमेदन is not the matter in hand there cannot be परिणाम, of which the characteristic mark is प्रकृतोपयोगित्व. In 'दासे' etc., the प्रकृत is the removal of the sense of wounded pride. It may be said that although पादमेदन is not the matter in hand, still it helps to bring out the प्रकृत sense (मानभङ्ग) and is thus प्रकृतोपयोगि. The author replies 'न खलु' etc. तत्= पादभेदनम्. Nor is the piercing of the foot understood to help towards the bringing out of any of the matters in hand in that verse.

अयमपि ...... वैशिष्ट्यम् (P. 26, 11. 7-11). As the author spoke of अधिकारूढवैशिष्ट्यरूपक, so he speaks of अधिकारूढवैशिष्ट्यपरिणाम "वनेचराणां ... सुरतप्रदीपाः". This is Kumarasam. I.10. यत्र=हिमालये. दरी एव गृहं तस्य उत्सङ्ग: (lap i, e. interior) तस्मिन् निषक्ता: भास: यासाम्-This qualifies ओषधयः. अतैलपूरा: qualifies प्रदीपा: and means 'unfed by oil.' वनितासखानां वनेचराणां to the foresters accompanied by their consorts. In this verse ओषघय: are आरोपविषय or उपमेय; प्रदीपा: are the आरोप्यमाण or उपमान. The qa is the removal of darkness, which is favourable to dalliance. The lamps subserve the purpose in hand as identified with the ओषधिs, the आरोपविषय, and hence there is परिणाम. As the lamps are said to be unfed by oil, there is अधिकारूढवैशिष्टय, while ordinary lamps require to be fed by oil. In our view this is, as remarked by Jagannatha, Rūpaka it- self. In explaining the application of his definition of yfrunra to this verse, the author appears to have broken down completely. One may well argue that the lamps ( विषयी) can in their own nature very well serve the matter in hand i. e. removal of darkness. It is ओषधिs that cannot well serve tho matter in hand and do so only when completely identified with lamps; i. e. here the आरोप्य ( the lamps) are not विषयात्मतया प्रकृतारथोपयोगि but in their own nature. Hence the definition of परिणाम as given by विश्वनाथ does not apply to

128 NOTES ON X. 34-35 परिणाम.

this verse. The definition of एकावली applies; यत्र विषय: (i. e. here ओषधयः) प्रस्तुतकायोंपयोगाय (i.e. अन्धकारनाशाय) आरोप्यमाणरूंपतया (i. e. प्रदीपरूपतया) परिणमति स परिणाम :. The word अतैलपूरा: is to be kept aside, according to our author, so far as mere परिणाम is concerned; the addition of that word makes this verse an example of अधिकारूढवैशिष्टय परिणाम. So the figure परिणाम is con- stituted by the words यत्र रजन्यां ओषधयः सुरतप्रदीपा भवन्ति. In that case, it is difficult to see how the author's remarks अत्र प्रदीपाना .... योग: apply to the example. 7 सन्देह ( Doubt)

प्रकृतेऽन्यस्य प्रतिभोत्थितः संशयः सन्देहः-'When an object under discussion is poetically suspected to be something else, it is called a Doubt.' It is three-fold, शुद्ध, निश्चयगमं (containing a certainty ) and निश्चयान्त (ending in a certainty). प्रकृत means उपमेय. अन्यस्य=अप्रकृतस्य i. e. उपमानस्य. Two things are necessary to constitute the figure सन्देह; (I) the doubt must be due to सादृश्य and (II) the doubt must be poetical and not matter of fact ( i. e. it must be चमत्कृतिजनक); e. g. 'इतो गता सा क्व गता न जाने गेहं गता मे हृदयं गता वा here there is a doubt but it is not due to सादृश्य; therefore there is no सन्देशालङ्कार; in 'स्थाणुर्वा पुरुषो वा', the doubt, though it may be सादृश्यमूलक, is not poetical; therefore there is no सन्देहालङ्कार. यत्र ... शृङ्गारिण: (p.26, 11.14-18). It is शुद्ध where it terminates in doubt. कि तारुण्य ...... शृद्गारिण :- This verse is ascribed to Bandhu in Subha ( No. 1471 ). It is cited by अलं. स. also. तारुण्यमेव तरु :. 'Is she a new sprout, that from an exuberance of रस ( juice, also feeling ) has burst forth from the tree of youthfulness?' वेलाप्रो्छलितस्य=वेलायां प्रोच्छलितस्य उद्गतस्य overflowing the shores. लावण्यमेव वारांनिधि: उदधि: स्वसमयोपन्यासविश्रम्भिणः (स्वसमयस्य स्वसिद्धान्तस्य उपन्यासे ज्ञापने विश्रम्भिणः प्रणयिन: । राम०) देवस्य शृङ्गारिणः (मदनस्य) किं उद्गाढोत्कलिकावताम् (अगाधोत्कण्ठाशालिनाम्) साक्षादुपदेशयटि :- 'Is she the chastising rod of the Deity of love, eager to expound his doctrines to men who are deeply agitated ( by fancy )? Here, no conclusion is arrived at; and therefore this is an example of शुद्धसन्देह. यत्र ...... निश्चयमध्य :- That is निश्चयमध्य where there is a doubt at the beginning and another at the end; but certainty in the middle. Compare अलं० स० 'निश्चयगरभो यः संशयोपक्रमो निश्चयमध्यः संशयाम्तश्च' P.43. 'अयं मार्तण्ड :...... प्रतिभटाः'-मार्तण्डः The sun. इतः= युक्त: कृशानु :- अभि: एष := अग्निः. प्रतिभटा := foemen. विकल्पान्विद्धति en- tertain doubts. This verse is cited by Mammata as well as by

X. 35-36 सन्देह. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 129

Ruyyaka. 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. निश्चयः गर्भे यस्य). 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 HiRTT first, then निश्चय (dispelling of that संशय) and then there is another doubt. यत्रादौ ...... परोक्षः (p. 26, 11. 27-29). Compare अलं. स. 'यत्र संशय उपक्रमो निश्चये पर्यवसानम्' p. 43. किं तावत् ... परोक्षैः-This occurs in शिशु० VII. 29. आरात् near. बकसहवासिनां (पझ्माना) परोक्ष (अपरिच्वितैः) बिब्बोकै: (शङ्गारभावजैः चेष्टाविशेषैः as defined in 'बिब्बोकोऽभिमत- प्राप्तावपि गर्वादनादरः' ) 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. मध्यं तव ...... भासते. पयोधरभरेण अर्दितम् oppressed by the weight of the breasts. This is an example of अतिशयोक्ति (Hyperbole ) and not सन्देह; because when the उपमान is suspected in place of the उपमेय, it is सन्देह. In 'मध्यं तद' etc., no उपमान 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 Ekavali and our author call this figure सन्देह; while दण्डिन्, भामह, उन्भट, मम्मट and Jagannatha call it ससन्देह, which उद्योत explains as 'सन्देहेन सह विषयतया तद्विशिष्टः इति ससन्देहः' p. 26. Dandin includes it under उपमा; 'अनन्वयससन्देहावुपमास्वेव दर्शितौ' काव्यादर्श II. 358. भामह's example is 'किमयं शशी न स दिवा विराजते कुसुमायुधो न धनुरस्य कौसुमम्। इति विस्मयाद् विमृशतोऽपि मे मतिस्त्वयि वीक्षिते न लभतेऽ्र्धनिश्चयम्॥'III. An example of this figure is 'प्रश्चोतनं नु हरिचन्दनपल्लवानां निष्पी- डितेन्दुकरकन्दलजो नु सेकः । आतप्तजीविततरोः परितर्पणो मे सज्जीवनौषधिरसो नु हृदि प्रसिक्तः ॥' उत्तरराम III.

8 भ्रान्तिमान् ( Error) साम्याव अतस्मिन् तद्वद्धि: भ्रान्तिमान् (अलङ्कारः) (यदि) प्रतिभोत्थित :- Error is the apprehension, from resemblance, of an objeot as being what it is not, if it is suggested by poetical fancy. gaT दुग्घघिया etc. मुग्धा बलवा: simple cowherds, गवामयः कुम्भान् विदपत OE RANS १७

130 NOTES ON X. 36 भ्रान्तिमान्.

place their jars beneath the cows. कैरव white lotus (सिते कुमुद- कैरवे । अमर I. 10.37). कुवलय-blue lotus. कर्कन्धू=बदरी the jujube tree. सान्द्रा चंद्रिका-The profuse moonlight. In this verse, the profuse light of the moon is represented as causing errors. 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 तत् in तद्वद्ि refers to the उपमान i. e. अप्राकरणिक and अतत् means the उपमेय or प्राकरणिक. अस्वरसोत्थापिता 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 mother-o'-pearl; or of a snake on a rope. An illusion not arsing from resemblance is not the subject of the present figure; as in सङ्गम etc. सङ्गमविरहविकल्पे-In a choice between her company and her separation. सङ्गे .... विरहे-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 ₹4 (but to love ) and there is no आरितमान्.

The अलं० स० explains the name भ्रान्तिमान् as follows-भ्रान्ति- श्वित्तधर्मः । स विद्यते यस्मिन्भणितिप्रकारे स भ्रान्तिमान् ।' p. 44, on which जयरथ remarks 'अतश्चालक्कारे भ्रान्तिसद्भाव उपचरितः।'. Error is a property of the mind and hence anfranra would mean 'a person who is in error.' The asar is not in error and so cannot be primarily called भ्रान्तिमान्. But the figure is called ्रान्तिमान् in a secondary sense, as in it expression is given to a person's error. Similarly जगन्नाथ remarks "अत्र च भ्रान्तिमात्रमलक्कारः। आ्रन्तिमानलङ्कार इति व्यवहार- स्त्वौपचारिकः । तथा चाङुः। 'प्रमात्रन्तरधीर्भ्रान्तिरूपा यस्मिन्ननूद्यते। स भ्रान्तिमानिति ख्यातोऽलङ्कारे त्वौपचारिकः ॥'" R. G. P. 266.

Two conditions are essential to constitute this figure; ( I ) The error must be due to similarity ( and not to a stroke etc. ) and ( II ) the error must be poetical. The verse 'दामोदर- कराघातचूर्णिताशेषवक्षसा। दृष्ट चाणूरमल्लेन शतचन्द्रं नभस्तलम् ।।' is not an example of भ्रान्तिमान्, because here the illusion is due to the heavy blow (and not to सादृश्य). Although in 'शुक्तौ रजतमिति' etc., there is similarity and error, there is no भ्रान्तिमान्, as there is no poetic beauty in it (वैच्वित्र्य). Jagannatha defines भरान्तिमान् as 'सदृशे धर्मिणि तादात्म्येन धर्म्यन्तरप्रकारकोऽनाहार्यो निश्चयः सादृश्यप्रयोज्यश्चमत्कारी प्रकृते भ्रान्तिः । सा च पशुपक्ष्यादिगता यस्मिन्वाक्यसन्दर्भेंऽनूदते स भ्रान्तिमान्।' R. G. p. 266. He finds fault with those, who cite a verse containing many errors as an example of wrfar7 ( as our author

4

X. 36 भ्रान्तिमानू. SAHITYADARPAŅA. 131

does ). He says there must be a single error, or otherwise the figure aera 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 'लक्षणे चात्रैकत्वं विवक्षितम्। अन्यथा वक्ष्यमाणा- नेकग्रहीतृकाने कप्रकारकैकविशेष्य कभ्रान्तिसमुदायात्मन्युल्लेखेSतिप्रसङ्गापत्तेः।' R.G. p. 267. His example of भ्रान्तिमान् is 'रामं स्त्निग्घतरश्यामं विलोक्य वनमण्डले। धाराधरघिया धीरं नृत्यन्ति स्म शिखावला: ॥' R. G. p. 270. What distinguishes Rupaka from भ्रान्तिमान् is that in Rupaka the knowledge is आहार्य, while in भ्रान्तिमान् it is अनाहार्य आहार्य means बाधकाली नमिच्छाजन्यं ज्ञानम्. In Rupaka, we identify the उपमान (चन्द्र ) with the उपमेय; this we do in भ्रन्तिमान् also. But in Rupaka, we are conscious that nu and r are quite distinot and we identify them because there is great similarity between them; in भ्रान्तिमान, there is no consciousness that the उपमान and उपमेय are separate; the उपमान is rather mistaken for the उपमेय. 9 उल्लेख (Representation) क्वचित् गृहीतणां मेदात् तथा क्वच्विदू विषयाणां भेदात् एकस्य यः अनेकधा उल्लेखः स उल्लेख उच्यते-The description of one under different characters arising from a difference of perceivers or from difference of the object, is termed Representation. Our author gives two varieties of उल्लेख. The first is that, where a certain object is apprehended by different persons in different ways through different causes; e. g. the verse 'प्रिय इति' etc. Here the Lord (who is one ) is apprehended as प्रिय, शिशु, अधीश, नारायण and ब्रह्म by the milkmaids, by elderly men like Nanda, by other gods, by devotees and by ascetics respectively through different causes. The milkmaids call him fy because they love him, the devotees call him RTuT 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 विषय Or आश्रय, although there are not many perceivers. An example is 'सव्रीडा दयितानने सकरुणा मातङ्गचर्माम्बरे सत्रासा भुजगे सविस्मयरसा चन्द्रेऽमृतस्यन्दिनी। सेर्ष्या जह्वसुतावलोकनविधौ दीना कपालोदरे पार्वत्या नवसङ्गमप्रणयिनी दृष्टिः शिवायास्तु वः ॥' (quoted in K. P. VII. p.434 Va and by T4 p. 49). In this verse the sight of Parvati, which is one, is represented as of different sorts (bashful or jealous etc. ) on account of the variety of objects (विषयमेद) on which it falls. This second variety is alluded to by the ar. स. also; 'पूर्वत्र ग्रहीतृमेदेनानेकधात्वोलेखः, इह तु विषयमेदेन ।' p. 49. The चित्रमीमांसा defines this 2nd variety clearly as 'ग्रहीतृमेदाभावेडपि

132 NOTES ON X. 37 उल्लेख.

विषयाश्रयमेदतः। एकस्यानेकधोलेखमप्युल्लेखं प्रचक्षते॥I' p. 69. See R.G. p. 274. अत्रैकस्यापि ...... प्रयोजका :- Here the Lord, who is one, being posse- ssed of many qualities ( such as प्रियत्व etc. ) is differently represented; the reasons for the manifold representations being the love etc. of the milkmaids etc. Compare अलं. स. 'यत्रैकं वस्तु अनेकधा गृह्यते स रूपबाहुल्योल्लेखनादुललेखः। न चेदं निर्निमित्तमुलेखमात्रमपि तुनाना- विधधर्मयोगित्वाख्यनिमित्तवशादेतत्क्ियते। तत्र रुच्यर्थित्वव्युत्पत्तयो यथायोगं प्रयो- जिका:।' p. 47. यदाहु :...... साधित :- The verse is quoted in the अलं. स. p. 47. जयरथ tells us that it is from the प्रत्यभिज्ञा of उत्पल; उक्तमिति श्रीप्रत्यभिज्ञायाम्।'. 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 अनुराग by Mallinatha (Ekavali p.228) and 'स्वातन्त्र्येण विकल्प- नम्' by जयरथ; अर्थित्वम् as लिप्सा and व्युत्पत्ति as शब्दार्थसङ्गतिग्रद्दः by Mallinatha; and अर्थक्रियाभिलाषपरत्वम् and वृद्धव्यवहारशरणता respec- tively by जयरथ. 'अनुसन्धानं नाम बहूनां विशेषाणां गुणप्रधानतया व्यामिश्रणेन विमर्शनम्' समुद्रबन्ध (Trivandrum ed.). अत्र ...... तात्विकात् (P.27, 11. 22-26). The author now proceeds to distinguish the figure from other figures. The verse 'प्रिय इति' etc. is not an example of मालारूपक. In मालारूपक instanced above in 'निर्माणकौशलं' 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 'प्रिय इति' there is no mere superim- position of प्रिय (lover), नारायण etc. upon the Lord; here there is no आरोप; but the Lord is, as a matter of fact, प्रिय to the milk- maids. Besides, the perceivers are here many. In मालारूपक the perceiver is one. Nor is this verse an example of भ्रान्तिमान्- An objector may say that 'प्रिय इति' is an example of भ्रान्तिमान्, as here there is अतस्मिंस्तद्वद्धिः- Our 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 चि. मी. says that what distinguishes उल्लेख from भ्रान्तिमान is that in the former there is always निमित्तमेद; while in the latter there is a single निमिन्त; e. g. in 'प्रिय इति' etc. the निमित्तs are रुचि, अर्थित्व etc .; while in 'मुग्धा दुग्धधिया' etc. the निमित्त is one i. e. the profuse moonlight. According to Jagannatha, in भ्रान्तिमान there is a single error that is charm- ing; उल्लेख is constituted by many errors, the charm lying in the number of illusions on the part of many as regards the

X. 37 उल्लेख. SAHITYADARPANA 133

same object; 'लक्षणे चात्र (भ्रान्तिमति) एकत्वं विवक्षितम्। अन्यथा वक्ष्यमाणा नेकगहीतृकानेकप्रकार कैक विशेष्यकभ्रान्तिसमुदायात्मन्युल्लेखेSति प्रसङ्गापत्तेः*।' R. G. p. 267. According to Jagannatha's view the verse 'मुग्धा दुग्ध' etc. will be an example of उल्लेख. Nor is this verse 'प्रिय इति' etc. an example of अतिशयोक्ति consisting in making a distinction where there is none. अतिशयोक्ति, 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 'अन्यदेवाङ्गलावण्यमन्याः सौरभसम्पदः। तस्याः पझ्मपलाशाक्ष्याः सरसत्वमलौकिकम् ॥'. Here, although beauty is always one and the same, the poet says that the beauty of a particular woman is a strange one, quite distinct from all other beauty. In this verse the objects, beauty etc. are represented as distinct. न चेह ...... तात्त्विकत्वात्-But here (i. e. in 'प्रिय इति') 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 ). केचिदाहु :...... इह च रूपकालक्कारयोग: (P. 27, 1. 26-p. 28, 1. 4). नियमेन Invariably. अलङ्गारान्तरविच्छित्तिमूल :- विच्छित्ति means 'charm or strikingness'; अलङ्कारान्तरं विच्छित्तिमूलं यस्य That which derives its charm from another figure. Some say that ada cannot be found by itself; it is always associated with some other figure from which it derives its charm. In the example (प्रिय इति etc.) there is अतिशयोक्ति (Hyperbole) inasmuch as Krshna, though really one and the same, is represented as distinct ( भिन्नत्वाध्य- qHT4: ) 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. The Lord Krshna is repres- ented as प्रिय; then it is meant that to them he is not शिशु ete. So in Krshna, who is one and the same, different characters are assumed as in 'अन्यत् एवाङ्गलावण्यम्'. So there is अतिशयोक्ति (अमेदे मेद: ); and we need not define उल्लेख as a separate figure. Our author replies :- तत्सद्भावेऽपि ...... प्रयोजक :- He admits that अतिशयोक्ति is present in the verse 'प्रिय इति etc .; notwithstanding this, the peculiar charm consisting in the apprehension of the same object as different due to a difference of perceivers cons- titutes a separate figure called उल्लेख. श्रीकण्ठजनपदवर्णने ... रूपकालक्कार-

• The अलं. स. appears to hold the same view 'एवं हि तत्र विषये भ्रान्तिमदलङ्कारोडस्तु। अतद्रपस्य तद्रपप्रतीतिनिबन्धनत्वाद। नैतत्। अनेकथाग्र- हणाख्यस्य अपूर्वस्य अतिशयस्य अभावात्।' p. 48.

134 NOTES ON X. 37 उल्लख.

योग :- In the description of the country called श्रीकण्ठ (in हर्ष- aRa III. para 10 ff of our 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 treasures'* is an instance of उल्लेख, apart from अतिशयोक्ति, it being here associated with रूपक. It is the अलं. स., which says that here उल्लेख is associated with रूपक; "नन्वेतन्मध्ये 'वज्रपअ्जरमिति शरणागतैरसुरविवरमिति वातिकः' इत्यादौ रूपकालङ्कारयोग इति वाथमयमुल्लेखालक्कारविषयः। सत्यम्। अस्ति तावत् 'तपोवनम्' इत्यादौ रूपकविविक्तोऽस्य विषयः । यदत्र वस्तुतस्तदूपताया: (i e. तपोवनादिरूपतायाः) सम्भवः ।" p. 47. वस्तुतस्तु ...... प्रयोजकत्वाद् (p. 28, ll. 4-5 ) strictly speaking, in the clause 'mine' ete'. they would have the figure भ्ान्तिमान् and not Rupaka. Our author disagrees with the view of the aso ao and says that in 'असुरविवरम्' etc. there is आ्रन्तिमान् and not रूपक as admitted by अल. स. भेदप्रतीति ...... प्रयोजकत्वात्. The superimposition of some- thing, only when preceded by the apprehension of its distinction from what it is superimposed upon, gives rise to the figure रूपक, which is founded upon गौणीलक्षणा. In रूपक, the आरोप्यमाण and आरोपविषय are apprehended as distinct, but the former is superimposed upon the latter on account of their possessing certain properties in common. In saying मुखं चन्द्रः, the word चन्द्र: is used in a secondary sense i. e. there is लक्षणा which is here गौणी as it is due to सादृश्यसम्बन्ध.

यदाहु :.. पुरःसर इति. The author quotes a venerable writer in support of his statement that in Rūpaka, which is based upon गौणी लक्षणा, there is apprehension of the difference of उपमान and उपमेय. वाचस्पतिमिश्र wrote a comment called भामती on the शारीरकभाष्य of शङ्कराचार्य; शङ्कराचार्य expounds the Vedantasutras of Badarayana. The quotation occurs on p. 7 of the Bhamati (Nirn. edition). अपि च परशब्द :...... पुरःसरः-A word (implying, the उपमान ) is used to signify something else (i. e. उपमेय) 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 'अम्बरविवरमिति वातिकैः'. Pramadadasa translates ' the ethereal void by the chatakas' (so he read araa:). Our reading is that of the Harshacharita as printed. The commentator explains वातिकैः as विवरव्यसनिभिराचाये :. The मलं० स० reads as we do. असुरविवर 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 9aRa p. 90. notes ).

X. 37 उल्लेख. SAHITYADARPANA. 135

the hearer have the right apprehension ( i. 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 moft, there is apprehen- sion of difference, so in रूपक, founded on गौणी लक्षणा, there must be also apprehension of difterence. इह तु वातिकानां etc. But here in the description of the country aftava, the imposi- tion upon it of the nature of असुरविवर is due to the mistake of the vatikas. So as there is error and not apprehension of difference, there is no Rupaka, as said by arso Ho, but thero is ्रान्तिमान् in 'असुरविवरम्' etc. अत्रैव च ... परिणामालक्कारयोग :- In the same passage, in 'a sacred grove by the ascetics, the temple of Love by courtezans' we have an instance of the association of उलेख with the figure परिणाम. Here the things superimposed, viz., तपोवन and कामायतन, subserve the purpose in hand, viz., the performance of austerities and carrying on love affairs; therefore there is Parinama. The erso ao gives these words as an example of उललेख (p. 47), in which there is no रूपक. गाम्मीयेंण ...... योगः (P. 28, ll. 11-14). The author now comes to the treatment of the 2nd उल्लेख, viz. विषयभेदात् एकस्यानेकधा उल्लेख :- गाम्भीयं Depth. गौरव weightiness. The distinction of the objects i. e. the qualities of solemnity etc. are the cause of the manifold representation of the same man, In the first variety, the representation is due to the manifold perceivers; in the 2nd, it is due to the manifold attributes. Here the figure is associated with Rupaka. 'गुरुर्वचसि' etc .- this is हर्षचरित III. 16. This is another example of the 2nd sort of उल्लेख. 'In speech he is Guru ( weighty or बृहस्पति, who is the god of eloquence). In chest he is qथ ( vast, or the king पृथु son of वेन ); in fame he is aa (white or Arjuna, one of the Pandavas).' This is a case in which it has a province apart from Rūpaka ( i. e, there is no Rupaka here ). Here उल्लेख is associated with अतिशयोक्ति based upon श्रेष (i. e. the words गुरु, पृथु, अर्जुन are paronomastic). 'पृथुरुरसि, अर्जुनो यशसि' are cited by the अलं० स० (p.49). Compare चन्द्रालोक V.20 'एकेन बहुधोलेखोऽप्यसौ विषयभेदतः । गुरुर्वचस्यर्जुनोडयं कीतों भीष्मः शरासने॥'. An example of the Ist sort as given by the चन्द्रालोक is 'बडुमिर्बहचोलेखादेकस्योललेख इष्यते। स्त्रीभिः कामोऽर्िभि: स्वर्द्गः काल: शत्रु- मिरैक्षि सः ।' V. 19. 10 अपहुति (Concealment). प्रकृतम्-उपमेयम्. निषिध्य denying i. e. representiug as being not what it is, but as something else. अन्यस्य अप्रकृतस्य (उपमानस्य)

136 NOTES ON X. 38 अपह्वति.

स्थापनम् कच्िदप ..... sia-Sometimes the attribution of another charaeter is preceded by the denial of the real nature and sometimes the denial of the real nature is preceded by the superimposition of another. नेदं नभोमण्डलमम्बुराशि: This is not the sky, but the ocean. नवफेनभङ्गा: fragments of fresh foam. कुण्डलित: फणीन्द्र :- शेष with a coiled tail. Here there is first of all अपहव i. e. denial of the nature of नभोमण्डल and then the attribution of अम्बुराशि. एतद्विभाति ...... कैतवेन. चरमाचलचूडचुम्बि kissing the crest of the setting mountain. हिण्डीर: means'foam' .* हिण्डीरस्य पिण्डस्तस्य रुच्चिरिव रुच्चिर्यस्य स चासौ शीतमरीचिश्च (चन्द्रः) तस्य बिम्बम्. रजनीम् उज्ज्वालितस्य मदनानलस्य धूमं प्रकटलान्छनकैतवेन दधत् (बिम्बम्) bearing the smoke, under the disguise of the clearly seen spot, of the fire of love kindled during the night. aa is superimposed upon the spot in the moon and then by the word aaq the spot is denied to be what it really is (अपह्व). विराजति ... बोध्य :- 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 उपमेय व्योम is not directly negatived, but the negation is to be understood from the word वपु :. The अलङ्कारसर्वस्व says that the figure अपह्ति presents three aspects; 'तस्य च त्रयी बन्धछाया-अपह्ववपूर्वक आरोपः ।

वाक्यमेदः । तृतीयभेदे त्वेकवाक्यम्।' p. 50. On the employment of the word वपुः in the example 'विराजति व्योमवपुः पयोधि:', compare the remarks of अलं. स. 'कचित्युनरसत्यत्वं वस्त्वन्तररूपतामिधायिवपुःशब्दादिनि- बन्धनम्' p. 52. The word वपु: 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. arna's example of अपह्वति is 'नेयं विरौति भृङ्गाली मदेन मुखरा मुङ्गः। अयमाकृष्यमाणस्य कन्दर्पधनुषो ध्वनिः ॥।' III. 23. उद्धट gives 'एतद्धि न तपः सत्यमिदं हालाहलं विषम् । विशेषतः शशिकलाकोमलानां भवादृशाम्॥' V. 4. The verse i 'न विषं विषमित्याहुर्ब्रह्मस्वं विषमुच्यते। विषमेकाकिनं हन्ति ब्रह्मस्वं तु ससन्ततिम् ॥।' is not an example of अपह्वति, but of रूपक. Here 1 the nature of faq is not denied and nothing else is established in its place; on the contrary ब्रह्मस्व (the wealth of a Brahmana) * 'हिण्डीरोऽब्धिकफ: फेनः' अमर० III. 9.105. This occurs in वसिष्ठवर्मसूत्र 17. 86, where we have पुत्रपौत्रकम् for तु ससन्ततिम् The बौधायनधर्मसूत्र (I. 5. 102). reads 'ब्रह्मस्वं पुत्रपौन्नमं विषमेकाकिनं हरेद। न विषं.मुच्यते।।.'

X. 38 अपह्ृृतति. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 137

is here identified with विष (i. e. विष is आरोपित upon ब्रह्मस्व) and therefore there is रूपक; if we say 'न ब्रह्मस्वं विषमिदम्', then there is अपह्ृति. What distinguishes अपह्वति from रूपक is that in the former there is a poetic denial, expressed or implied, of the nature of the प्रकृत (i. e. उपमेय) and something else is established in its stead; while in the latter, there is no such denial; only the प्रकृत is identified with the अप्रकृत on account of their great resemblance.

गोपनीयं ..... व्याजोक्ते: (p.28, 1. 25-p.29,1.4) कमपि गोपनीयमर्थ कथंचन द्योतयित्वा यदि क्रेषेण अन्यथा वा अन्यथयेत् सा अपि अपह्नति :- 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 अपहृति. An example of this variety of अपह्ृति based upon श्रेष is 'काले' etc. अपतितया-अविद्यमानः संनिधौ अवर्तमानः पतिर्यस्याः सा अपतिः तस्याः भावः अपतिता तया. In this season of clouds it is really impossible to remain without one's husband. तरले Oh restless woman! उत्कण्ठितासि-Are you agitated by passion? 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 'उत्कण्ठितासि तरले' 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 श्ेष. The word अपतितया may also mean 'without falling' (न पतिता अपतिता तया). The first half would now mean 'in the season of clouds it is impossible to remain without falling (as the roads become slippery ).' An example of this variety not based upon श्रेष is 'इह पुरो' etc. Construe इह पुरः का लता (या) अनिलकम्पितविग्रहा (अनिलेन वायुना कम्पितः विग्रह: कायः यस्याः) वनस्पतिना न मिलति "What creeper is this before me that does not cling close to the tree, with its body agitated by the wind ?" (or 'what creeper when agited by the wind would not cling close to the tree'). This is said by some woman. Her friend asks her 'समरसि ... तसवं'-Do you, Oh friend, remember your festive dalliance with your lover ? ( inasmuch as you refer to clinging on the part of the creeper). The woman, wishing to conceal her secret, replies 'fa etc.'-No; I only referred to a feature of the rainy season ( when creepers should oling closer to the tree for support being agitated by the wind ).

138 NOTES ON X. 38-39 अपद्गति

anthr etc .- The author now proceeds to distinguish this figure from some others. We have above (in the 1st Pari. notes p. 18) defined वक्रोक्त. In crooked speech, a different construc- tion is put on another's words; while in this variety of arugfa, a different construction is put on one's own words. This variety of अपह्ृति differs from व्याजोक्ति also. व्याजोक्ति is the concealment, under a pretext, of the nature of an object, though it may manifest itself. For an instance of व्याजोक्ति see further on. गोपनकृता-गोपनं करोतीति गोपनकृत् तेन. In this variety of अपह्ृति, the secret is first expressed by the person who afterwards conceals it, as in 'd etc. ( where the woman herself expresses the state of her feelings and afterwards tries to conceal it); while in व्याजोक्ति, 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 अपह्वति, the उपमेय is denied its nature and the उपमान is established in its place i.e. अपहृति is based upon औपम्य. Compare the words of मम्मट "उपमेयमसत्यं कृत्वा उपमानं यत्सत्यतया स्थाप्यते सा तु अपह्ृतिः ।'. Our author follows this definition in his first variety of अपहृति. But in the second variety which he states there is no गम्यमान औपम्य Something is concealed by representing it to be something else. There is no implied relation of उपमान and उपमेय, as for example in 'काले' etc. In this second variety of अपहुति our author appears to follow writers like Dandin. Dandin de- fines अपह्ृति as "अपह्तिरपह्वत्य किश्चिदन्यार्थदर्शनम्। न पञ्नेषुः स्मरस्तस्य सहसं पत्रिणामिति ॥' K. D. II 304. Dandin says that the denial of something and the representing of something else in its place constitute अपह्ृति. There need be no औपम्य. In his example the पञ्चशरत्व of काम is denied and it is said that he hits with a thousand arrows. नागेश in his उदोत takes the same view किंच्िदपह्वत्य कस्यचित्प्रदर्शनमपह्कुतिरित्येव लक्षणम् ।' p. 39.

11 निश्चय (Certainty). अन्यत् (i. e. उपमानम्) निषिध्य (भिन्नत्वेन आख्याय) प्रकृतस्य (उपमेयस्य) स्थापनम् (अवधारणम्) निश्चय :- Certainty is the emphatic establish- ing of the real character, having denied the other (i. e. the fancied character ). An example is 'वदनमिदं' etc. इन्दीवरे-two blue lotuses. मृगदृशः सविधे near the deer-eyed lady. Here on

X. 39 निश्चय. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 139

account of the extreme similarity between the सरोज and वदन (the उपमान and उपमेय), 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 fauoar etc.'-This is the utterance of a lover in separation. This verse occurs in the गीतगोविन्द. It is also quoted as of जयदेव in सुभा० (No. 1314). हृदि बिसलताहार :- This is a garland of lotus stalks on my chest. Lassen reads 'विषलता'. भुजङ्ग- 4F :- The lord of serpents ( which are the ornaments of S'iva). मलयजरसो नेदं भस्म It is not ashes but the watery powder of sandal that besmears my body. अनङ्ग हरभ्रान्त्या न प्रहर किमु क्ुधा धावसि. Oh Cupid, do not strike me mistaking me for S'iva ( who is your foe ); why do you rush at me with anger? 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 ).

न ह्ययं. ... सम्भवात् (p. 29, 11. 15-17) It cannot be said that in these examples, the figure is निश्चयान्तसन्देह, because in the latter the doubt and certainty successively reside in the same person; e. g. in किं तावत्सरसि सरोजम्', 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. किं च ...... सम्भवात्. The author says that in the verses (under निश्चय) there is really no doubt at all even in the bees. एककोट्यनधिके एका चासौ कोटिश्च तस्या: न अधिकम् तस्मिन् i. e. एककोटिमात्रा- वगाहिनि. कोस्य ...... झञाने when its cognition has not more than one alternative, i. e. when it does not vacillate between two ideas, but is certain. तथा refers to the words इह ... भ्रमसि. तथा समीपगमनासम्भवात् ( because the bee's approaching so near would be impossible ) is the reading of all editions. But the context requires the reading तथा-समीपगमनसम्भवात्, the bee's approaching so near ( as described 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. Pramadādāsa translates as we do. It is noteworthy that रामचरण paraphrases समीपगमनासम्भवात् as सन्देहप्रसन्गायोगाव i. e. he draws the same meaning, as we give above, from the reading oगमनासम्भवात्. We cannot see how this can be done.

140 NOTES ON X. 39 निश्चय.

ताराहि भ्रान्तिमानस्तु ... An 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 आरन्तिमान्. Our author replies- अस्तु नाम etc. We grant that the bee etc. (in the two examples of निश्चय) 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 of 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 निश्चय and not भ्रान्तिमान्, as it is the emphatic assertion on the part of the lover etc. that con- stitutes the charm in these verses. किं च ...... तथाविधोक्ति: (p. 29, ll. 19-20 ). In these words, our author takes up the position that निश्चय need not necessarily be based upon भ्रान्तिमान् etG. It may be said that in the two verses, भन्तिमान is at the root of the figure farr. Even if it be not really meant that the bee did fly towords the face of the woman or was under a mistake, such a mode of speech (as वदनमिदं न सरोजम्) may be employed simply by way of offering a flattering compliment to the heroine. 'चट चाट प्रिये वाक्ये'. 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 निश्चय. न च रूपकध्वनि ...... अनिर्धारणात् (p. 29, 11. 20-21). Nor is this that form of suggested poetry called अलङ्कारध्वनि (here 4tqo ); 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 ध्वनि, viz. वस्तु, अलद्कार and रस. रूपकध्वनि is that where, if the suggested sense were fully expressed, it would assume the form of a metaphor. An example of qntaf is 'लावण्य कान्तिपरिपूरितदिङ्मुखेऽस्मिन्सेरेडधुना तव मुखे तरलायताक्षि। क्षोभं यदेति न मनागपि तेन मन्ये सुव्यक्तमेव जलराशिरयं पयोधि: ॥' ध्वन्या० p. 110. In this verse, the fact that the sea is found fault with ( जलराशि :- जड़राशि:) 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 रुपकध्वनि. In वदनमिदं न सरोजम् there is no रूपक्वनि, because there is not only no suggested superimposition of the lotus on the face, but there is an express denial of the lotus boing

X. 39 निश्चय. SÂHITYADARPANA. 141

identical with the face. न चापह्वति: etc. Nor is this अपह्वति; because here the प्रस्तुत (i. e. उपमेय) वदन is not denied to be what it really is. In अपह्वति we knowingly deny the nature 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. शुक्तिकायां ...... वैचित्र्याभावाद ( p. 29, Il. 22-24 )-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 alankāra ). We can only remark that the figure निश्चय 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 भ्रान्तिमान्. 12 उत्प्रेक्षा (Poetical Fancy). प्रकृतस्य परात्मना सम्भावना उत्प्रेक्षा-Poetical fancy is the im- agining of an object under the character of another. The term उत्प्रेक्षा is explained by उद्योत as 'उत्कटा प्रकृष्टस्य उपमानस्य ईक्षा ज्ञानं उत्प्रेक्षा' p. 23. i.e. a prominent apprehension of the Upamana. प्रकृतम्-उपमेयम् परात्मना=उपमानरूपेण सम्भावना means उत्कटकोटिक: सन्देह: 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 स्थाणुर्वा पुरुषो वा); III we may be in doubt, but we lean more towards one side than towards another (as in प्रायेणानेन पुरुषेण भवितव्यम्). In सन्देह both the sides (कोटि) are equally prominent. In सम्भावन, one side ( or alternative ) is more powerful than the other. In उत्प्रेक्षा, the mind leans more towards विषयिन् (उपमान) than towards विषय (i. e. उपमेय ) and the विषय is imagined as being almost the विषयिन्. In उत्प्रेक्षा the conceiving of an object as almost another is आहार्य (volitional ) and not अनाहार्य as in आन्तिमान; i. e. all along weare conscious that the प्रकृत and अप्रकृत are both distinct, but we say poetically that the yaa is almost identicsi with the ayaa on account of some cause. We do not mis ,ake the one for the other as in भ्रान्तिमान्, but we simply represent the one as being the other for poetical purposes. १८

142 NOTES ON X. 40-43 उत्प्रेक्षा.

वाच्या .. द्ात्रिशद्यतां यान्ति (p.29, l. 26-p. 30, 1. 2). Our author elosely follows the अलं० स० in the subdivisions of उत्प्रेक्षा ( see pp. 57-58). उत्प्रेक्षा is first divided into वाच्या (expressed) and प्रतीयमाना (implied). The expressed उत्प्रेक्षा occurs when particles like इव etc. are employed and the प्रतीयमाना, when they are not employed. Compare अलं० स० 'सा च वाच्या इवादि- शब्दैरुच्यते। प्रतीयमानायां पुनरिवाद्यप्रयोगः ।' p. 57; and काव्यादर्श 'मन्ये शक्के ध्रुवं प्रायो नूनमित्येवमादिभिः । उत्प्रेक्षा व्यज्यते शब्दैरिवशब्दोऽपि तादृशः॥' II. 234. Since in each of these two, the thing fancied may be either a जाति (genus), गुण, क्रिया or द्रव्य, 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 arien may either be a quality or action and thus there are 32 varieties.

तत्र वाच्योत्प्रेक्षायाम् etc ....... एवमन्यत् (p.30, 1l. 3-20). ऊरुः कुरङ्गकटटशः etc. कुरङ्गकदृश: of the woman whose eyes are like those of a fawn. चञ्जलचेलाञ्जल: on which flutters the skirt of her garment. विजयस्तम्भ :- triumphal column. Here the thigh of the woman is figured as if it were the triumphal column of Cupid. Here as the word विजयस्तम्भ denotes many objects, i.e. is a generic name (and not a proper name) we have जात्युत्प्रेक्षा. ज्ञाने मौनं etc. This is Raghu I. 22. तस्य = दिलीपस्य. ज्ञाने मौनमू silence in knowledge ( i. e. he knew so much, still he kept aloof from all pedantic wrangling). त्यागे श्राघाविपर्ययः absence of vaunting in liberality ( i. e. although he was very generous, he never vaunted of his gifts ). JuTr ...... a his virtues, occasioning as they did other virtues, were, as it were, productive. Here what is fancied is सप्रसवत्व (i e. representing the qualities as having children ), which is a गुण. गङ्गाम्भसि. पातकी. सुरत्राण is a sanskritized form of the Arabic word 'sultan'. निःशाननिस्वन :- the sound of the drums beaten at the marching. अरिवधूवर्गस्य गर्भपातनमेव पातकम् तत् अस्य अस्तीति guilty of causing the abortion of the wives of thy foemen. गङ्गाम्भसि स्रातीव 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. मुखमेणी ...... अपर: एणीदृश :- मृगीदृशः, Here the word 'moor signi= fying, as it does, a single individual, is denotati e 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

X. 40-43 उत्प्रेक्षा. SAHITYADARPAŅA. 143

. another moon. If we omit the word aur: here, the figure will be उपमा. If we omit both इव and अपर:, the figure will be रूपक. If we omit इव, then it will be अतिशयोक्ति. The above are the ex- amples, when the fancy is positive. The following are examples of the negative fancy. कपोल ... गतौ. This example occurs in उङ्ट (III.7) and is cited in the अलं० स०. कष्टम् Alas, it is a pity. अस्या: कपोलफलकौ तथाविधौ (अतिसुन्दरौ) भूत्वा अन्योन्यमपशंयन्तौ इव ईदृक्षां क्षामतां गतौ. The cheeks of this lady, so fair, have been reduced to this thinness, as if not seeing each other. Here the cheeks, which have become thin through the lady's separation from her husband, are represented as if growing thin on account of their not seeing one another. In the word anay-n, we have the negation of an action. निमित्तस्य --.... क्रिया-The examples, where the occasion ( or the source ) is a quality or action, are :- in the example 'nsirufd' ete. the source of the fancy contained in 'as it were bathes', is the quality of being guilty; in 'कपोलफलका' &c. the cause of the fancy is an action, viz. being reduced to thinness. The author has so far exemplified वाच्योत्प्रेक्षा (though only partially ). प्रतीयमानोत्प्ेक्षा ...... एवमन्यत् (p.30, ll. 21-24). The author now comes to प्रतीयमानोत्प्रेक्षा. तन्वंग्या ...... लज्जया '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 गुणिन् (i. e. 'excellent,' or also 'stringed'). Not giving ( a gift ) causes shame. Here as words like इव are absent in connection with लज्जया ( the real meaning being 'as if from shame') there is implied d&T. ननु ...... भेदः (p.30, 1l. 24-28) ननु ...... प्रतीयमानत्वम्. An objection is raised in these words against the division of उत्प्रेक्षा into प्रतीयमाना and वाच्या. It was said, while treating of ध्वनि (suggestion), that all figures are capable of being suggested; why is it that you particularly assert that rdan is implied ( and not any other figure )? In the 4th uftvda, the author speaks of अलङ्गारध्वनि as a variety of ध्वनि. If all alankaras can be suggested, why say that an may be implied. Every other figure also may be implied. So प्रतीयमाना need not have been specially mentioned in connection with उत्प्रेक्षा. Our author replies in the words 'न्यंग्योत्प्रेक्षायां ...... भेंदः'. In such an example of suggested उत्प्रेक्षा as 'महिलासहस्स' etc., the sentence is logically complete even without the fancy

144 NOTES ON X. 40-43 उत्प्रेक्षा.

( which is, that the lady grows thin as if to get room in the . heart of the youth ). The verse 'महिलासहस्स' occurs in the 4th uRra (p. 209, Nir. ) of the S. D. The whole verse is 'महिलासहस्सभरिए तुह हिअए सुहअ सा अमाअन्ती। अणुदिणमणण्णकम्मा अंगं तणुअं पि तणुएइ ।' गाथासप्तशती* II. 82 (महिलासहस्रभरिते तव हृदये सुभग सा अमान्ती। अनुदिनमनन्यकर्मा अङ्गं तन्वपि तनयति ॥). 'विरहकृशां नायिकां नायकांय आवेदयन्त्या: सख्या उक्तिरियम्। हे सुभग, महिलानां स्त्रीणां सहस्रैर्भरिते व्याप्ते तव हृदये अमान्ती अवकाशमलभमाना सा नायिका अनुदिवसं नान्यत्कर्म कर्तव्यं यस्या: (सा अनन्यकर्मा) तथाभूता कृशमपि अङ्गं तनयति तनूकरोति। अत्र सुभग इत्यनेन नायिकाया एव अनुरागविषयसत्वं न तु सा तवेति ध्वन्यते।' उ० चं० p. 127. Here the sentence becomes complete even if we take the plain meaning ( viz. that the woman not finding a niche in 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 necessary to understand the logical connection of the sentence. But in the verse 'तन्वंग्या :...... लब्जया,' the breasts cannot possibly feel shame and hence the sentence becomes logically complete only when we understand लज्जया as equivalent to लज्जया इव (as if through shame). Supply वाक्यविश्रान्ति: after उत्प्रेक्षयैव. Thus there is a difference between व्यंग्योत्प्रेक्षा and प्रतीयमानोत्प्रेक्षा, which is that in व्यंग्योत्प्ेक्षा the sentence is logically complete as regards the sense even without the suggested fancy, while in प्रतीयमानोत्प्रेक्षा the plain meaning of the words is not logical until we under- stand an Utprekshā. अत्र वाच्योत्प्रेक्षाया :...... हेतुत्वेनोत्प्रेक्षित: (p.30,1. 29-p. 31,1.10). तत्र वाच्यामिदा ...... हेतुगा :- 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. वाच्योत्प्रेक्षाया षट्त्रिशद्देदा: Of the 16 sorts of वाच्योत्प्रेक्षा, the twelve belonging to the three, viz. जाति, गुण and क्रिया, 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 40 varieties in all of the वाच्योत्प्रेक्षा. It is said that an object (द्रव्य) denoted by a proper name does not give rise to उत्प्रेक्षा, if fancied as the fruit or cause of a certain event. Our author here appears to follow the अलं० स० but goes a step further. Compare द्रव्यस्य प्रायः स्वरूपोत्प्रेक्षणमेवेति हेतुफलोत्प्रेक्षाभेदास्ततः पातनीयाः।' * The printed गाथा० has 'दिअहमणण्ण eto.'

X. 43 उत्प्रक्षा. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 145

p.57, upon which जयरथ remarks 'प्रायःशब्देन च हेतुफलयोः कुत्रापि सम्भवोऽस्तीति दर्शितम् ।'. An example of स्वरूपोत्प्रेक्षा with reference to जाति is 'स्मरस्य विजयस्तम्भः' above, where the nature of the thigh ( which is a generic term ) is fancied to be almost the same as the nature (स्वरूप) of a विजय-स्तम्भ (which also is a generic name ); an example of स्वरूपोत्प्रेक्षा with reference to a quality is 'सप्रसवा इव' occurring above. A फलोत्प्रेक्षा generally contains a word in the dative or an infinitive. An example is 'रावण्मस्यापि etc.' रावणस्यापि ... प्रियम्. This is Raghu. XII. 91. रामास्त: रामेण क्षिप्त: आशुग: बाण: रावणस्यापि हृदयं भित्त्वा उरगेभ्यः (पातालवा- सिभ्यो नागेभ्यः) प्रियम् आख्यातुमिव (निवेदयितुमिव) भुवं विवेश. 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 आख्यातुम्, an action, that has been fancied in connection with the arrow's entering the earth. In a हेतूत्प्रेक्षा there is generally a noun in the ablative or instrumental. An instance of हेतूत्प्रेक्षा is "सैषा स्थली'etc. 'सैषा स्थली ... बद्धमौनम्'. This is Raghu. XIII. 23. स्थली spot. सैषा स्थली यत्र स्वां विचिन्वता (अन्विष्यता) मया त्वच्चरणारविन्दविश्रेषदुःखादिव बद्धमौनम् उर्व्यो भ्रष्टम् एकं नूपुरम् अदृश्यत. Here, the anklet, which was not resounding because it was not worn by any one, is represented as being silent through sorrow due to separation from the lotus-like feet of Sita. Here the cause of the natural silence of the anklet is represented to be sorrow, which is a or ( according to the Nyaya-Vais'eshika philosophy ). उक्त्यनुत्तयो: वाक्यं स्यात् (p. 31, 11. 11-19). Out of the above 40 varieties of वाच्या, the 16 varieties of स्वरूपोत्प्रेक्षा are subdivided into 32 according as the source (निमित्त) of the उत्प्रेक्षा is mentioned or not. Thus the varieties of वाच्या come to be 56 ( i. e. 32+24, after subtracting 16 from 40). An example where the nimitta is mentioned is the verse STHfH etc. in which the occasion of the fancy in 'bathes as it were,' viz. 'being guilty' is mentioned. In 'मुखमेणी etc,' the cause of the fancy in 'as if it were another moon,' viz. excess of peculiar beauty, is not mentioned. हेतुफलयोः वाक्यं स्यात. In हेतूत्प्रेक्षा and फलोत्प्रेक्षा, the निमिन्त must invariably be mentioned. In हेतूत्प्रेक्षा, the निमित्त is the fruit or consequence of what is fancied; and in फलोत्प्रेक्षा, the निमित्त is the cause of what is fancied. To explain :- in 'सैषा स्थली' etc. 'holding silence

146 NOTES ON X. 44 उत्प्रेक्षा.

is the निमिन्त of the fancy 'as if through sorrow'; in 'रावणस्यापि' etc. the निमित्त of the fancy 'as if to tell' is 'entering into the earth.' If both these निमित्तs be not mentioned, then the sentences would be unconnected i. e. if बद्धमौनत्व be omitted, there would be no propriety in saying विश्रेषदुःखादिव. प्रतीयमाना ...... प्रतीयमानोत्पेक्षा (p. 31, 11. 19-26). The 16 varieties of प्रतीयमाना become 32 with reference to हेतु and फल. In 'तन्वङ्ग्या: स्तनयुग्मेन' etc. we have a cause fancied in 'as if through shame.' अस्यामपि-In प्रतीयमाना also (as in वाच्या with reference to हेतु and फल), it is impossible that the occasion (निमित्त) should not be mentioned; for if the particles इव etc. be not mentioned (as they are not in प्रतीयमाना) and if also the oecasion 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 अलं० स० 'प्रतीयमानायास्तु यद्यपि उद्देशत एतावन्तो भेदास्तथापि निमित्तस्यानुपादानं तस्यां न सम्भवतीति तैर्भेदैन्यूनोऽयं प्रकारः । इवाद्यनुपादाने निमित्तस्य चाकीर्तने उत्प्रेक्षणस्य निष्प्रमाणकत्वात् ।' pp. 57-58. In प्रतीयमाना, स्वरूपोत्पेक्षा is not possible. अस्याम्-स्वरूपोत्रेक्षायाम् धर्म्यन्तर etc. अन्यः धर्मी धर्म्यन्तरं तेन तादात्म्यं निबन्धनं यस्याः सा तस्याम् (In स्वरूपोत्प्रेक्षा ) which consists in the identification of one concrete object with the subject of deseription. इवाद्यप्रयोगे .. अभ्युपगमात् If aq etc. be not used and an epithet be added to the character fancied, it is our position that there is Hyperbole as in 'This king is another Indra'. Compare अलं० स० 'प्रायश्च स्वरूपोत्प्रेक्षा अत्र (प्रतीयमानायां) न सम्भवति' p. 58. On अतिशयोक्ेरभ्युपगमात्, compare अलं० स० "'अपर इव पाकशासनः' इत्यादौ अपरशब्दाप्रयोगे उपमैवेयम्। तत्प्रयोगे (अपरशब्दप्रयोगे) तु प्रकृतस्य राज्जः पाकशासनत्वप्रतीतावुत्प्रेक्षेवेयम्। इवशब्दाप्रयोगे तु सिद्धत्वादध्यवसायस्यातिशयोक्तिः । अपरशब्दस्याप्रयोगे तु रूपकम् ।" pp. 61-62. The reason why the figure is अतिशयोक्ति when इव etc. are omitted in such a sentence as 'He is another Indra', is that when इव etc. which denote सम्भावन, are absent the अध्यवसाय becomes सिद्ध and ceases to be साध्य. We shall explain these terms later on under अतिशयोक्ति.

उक्त्यनुक्त्यो: .. इत्याड्ः (p. 31,1. 27-p. 32, 1. 9). प्रस्तुतस्य= उपमेयस्य-the subject of the fancy. It is possible that the उपमेय may be omitted or not. 'ऊरुः कुरङ्गक' etc. is an instance, where the उपमेय (ऊरु:) is mentioned. 'An instance, where उपमेय is omitted, is the following from my drama Prabhavati.' The author quotes from a नाटिका composed by him. घटितमिव ...... भुवनम् {on account of the thick darkness) the world appears as

X, 45 उत्प्रेक्षा. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 147

if it is made up of masses of collyrium; it appears filled, as it were, with the particles of musk (Ha ); 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 (विषय i. e. उपमेय), viz. the being pery-ded (aa ), is not mentioned in connection with the thing fancied ( the विषयिन् or उत्प्रेक्ष्य), 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 'लिम्पतीव' etc. This is from the मृच्छकटिक (I Act). The last half is 'असतपुरुषसेवेव दृष्टिर्विफलतां गता।'. The darkness besmears, as it were, our bodies and the sky rains, as it were, collyrium. अत्र ...... तमःसम्पात :. Here the विषय 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. व्यापन and तमःसम्पात, the विषयs (or उपमेयs) are omitted. अनयोः ..... यथासंख्यम्. यथासंख्यम् 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 (aq also is thick ) and so on. ITHo 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 'तत्र द्रव्याणि पृथिव्यप्तेजोवाSवाकाशकालदिगात्ममनांसि नवैव।' T. S. In his remarks upon the verse 'Darkness besmears' etc. our author follows Mammata who says 'व्यापनादि लेपनादिरूपतया सम्भावितम्'. केचित्त .... इत्याहुः some say 'Darkness, which is not really an agent in besmearing ( i. e. darkness can never as a matter of fact besmear anybody, being अचेतन), 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 अलं.स.,which says "(निमित्तस्य) अनुपादाने यथा-'लिम्पतीन. तमोऽक्गानि' इत्यादौ। अत्र तमोगतत्वेन लेपनक्रियाकर्तृत्वोत्प्रेक्षायां व्यापनादि- निमित्तं गम्यमानम्। व्यापनादौ तूत्प्रेक्षाविषये निमित्तमन्व्रेष्यं स्याद्। न च विषयस्य गम्यमानत्वं युक्तम्। तस्योत्प्रेक्षिताधारत्वेन प्रस्तुतस्याभिधातुमुचितत्वात्। तस्माघयोक्तमेव साधु।" p. 63. The views of Mammata and our

148 NOTES ON X. 45 उस्प्रेक्षा.

author on the one hand and the Alankara-sarvasva on the other as regards the verse 'लिम्पतीव' may be briefly stated as follows .- Our author says that here न्यापन is the प्रस्तुत (or विषय) and is fancied as लेपन; while Sarvasva says that तमः: is the प्रस्तुत (or विषय) and it is fancied as probably identical with the लेपनकर्तृ; 2ndly our author says that the निमित्त (the reason ) of the fancy is the thickness of the darkness, while Sarvasva says that it is Ta (pervasion) which is the reason; 3rdly, our author cites this verse as an instance of that variety of उत्प्रेक्षा, where the प्रस्तुत (here व्यापन) is not mentioned, while Sarvasva cites this verse as an instance of निमित्तानुपादान (here व्यापन, according to अलं. स. being the निमित्त). The अलं० स० criticizes those who regard ्यापन as the प्रस्तुस and as not mentioned. It says that if व्यापन is the प्रस्तुत, it must be mentioned, because it is the subject upon which something else is to be fancied. If aTqa, the subject, were swallowed up by लेपन we cannot understand लेपन as poetically predicated of it. So the Sarvasva argues that it is better to say that in darkness, which is the yni, the attribute of perva- sion (व्यापन) is swallowed up by, and is fancied as identical with the attribute of being the agent of the action of besmear- ing (लेपनक्रियाकर्तृत्व). 4thly, Mammata and our author say that Utpreksha occurs everywhere by the relation of identity (अमेद); e. g. मुखं चन्द्रं मन्ये where one धर्मी (i. e. मुख) is fancied as if identical with another धर्मी (i.e. चन्द्र); in 'लिम्पतीव' etc. they say the धर्मी (व्यापन) is fancied as if identical with another धर्मी (लेपन); the अलं० स० does not admit that Utpreksha occurs invariably by the identity of two qrffs; it says that Utpreksha occurs also when an attribute ( ) is fancied as belonging to a subject (धर्मिन्). It says that व्यापन, if it be the qaa, cannot be omitted for reasons given above. So it is better to admit two kinds of Utpreksha, धर्म्युत्प्रेक्षा and धर्मोत्प्रेक्षा. लिम्पतीव &c. is an instance of धर्मोत्प्रेक्षा, where the धर्म (लेपन) may be fancied as probably belonging to darkness (धर्मी). Those who uphold Mammata say against the criticism of Sarvasva that what the poet intends to fancy is the identity of the two actions (लेपन and व्यापन) 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 quT pp. 381-382 and R. G. 296-304.

X. 45 उत्प्रेक्षा. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 149

"अ्र च प्राचामर्वाचां चानेकधा दर्शनं व्यवस्थितम्। तत्र प्राचामित्थम्-सर्वत्र अमेदेनैव विषयिणो विषये उत्प्रेक्षणं न सम्बन्धान्तरेण। तथाहि-धर्मिस्वरूपोत्प्रेक्षायां 'मुखं चन्द्रं मन्ये' इत्यादौ तावद्विषयिणश्चन्द्रस्यामेदो विषये मुखे स्फुट एव। ... एवं 'अस्यां मुनीनामपि मोहमूहे' इत्यत्र नैषधपदे (नै. VII. 94) धर्मस्वरूपोत्प्रेक्षायामपि मुनिसम्बन्धिनि धर्मान्तरे विषये दमयन्तीविषयकमोहस्य विषयिणोSमेदेनैवोत्प्रेक्षा। (p. 296) ...... तत्र विचार्यते। न सर्वत्राभेदेनैवोत्प्रेक्षणमिति नियमे किं्चिदस्ति प्रमाणम्। लक्ष्येषु मेदेनापि उत्प्रेक्षणस्य दर्शनात्। ...... नहि अमेदेनैव उत्प्रेक्षणमिति वेदेन बोघितम्। यदर्थमयमाग्रहः स्यात्। लक्षणनिर्माणस्य पुरुषाधीनत्वात्। 'लिम्पतीव तमोडगानि' इत्यत्रापि लेपनादिकर्तृत्वं तमआदिषु विषयेषु उत्प्रेक्ष्यते इत्येव युक्तम्। R. G. p. 298. On these manifold subdivisions of Utpreksha, Jagannātha 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 Utpreksha should be given, viz., हेतु, फल and स्वरूप. 'इह जात्यादयो हि भेदा: प्राचामनुरोधादुदाहताः । वस्तुतस्तु नैषां चमत्कारे वैलक्षण्यमस्तीति अनुदाह्यार्यतैव। चमत्कारवैलक्षण्यं पुनहेंतुफलस्वरूपात्मकानां त्रयाणां प्रकाराणामेवेति।' R. G. p. 295. अलङ्कारान्तरोत्था ...... उत्प्रेक्षावाचकम् (p.32,1l. 10-18). अलङ्गारा- न्तरोत्था-अलङ्कारान्तरादुत्तिष्ठतीति when arising from another figure. An example of Utpreksha founded upon concealment (अपह्ति) is 'अश्रुच्छलेन' etc. हुतपावकधूमेन कलुषे अक्षिणी यस्या: तस्या: सुदृशः लावण्यमेव वारि तस्य पूरः अङ्गे मानमप्राप्य अश्रुच्छलेन विगलति इव. The flood of beauty of that fair-eyed lady, incapable of 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 उत्प्रेक्षा based upon शरष is 'मुक्तोत्करः' etc. 'The pearls, we believe, that issued from the narrow womb of the oyster, have attained this गुणवत्त्व ( possession of a fair quality or being stringed ) from dwelling upon the charming conch-like neck of this lotus-eyed damsel'. Here the word गुणवत्त्व is paronomastic; and it is the cause (निमित्त) of the हेतूत्प्रेक्षा contained in the words 'कम्बुग्रीवाधिवासादिव' (as if from dwelling upon the conch-like neck ). The word 'जानीमहे' is denotative of उत्प्रेक्षा. मन्ये ...... इत्येवमादयः. Besides जानीमहे, मन्ये, शङ्के, ध्रुवं, प्रायः, नूनम्, इव etc. are some of the words that are denotative of उत्प्रेक्षा. We quoted above the words of Dandin on tbis point. There are other words also that express सम्भावन or उत्प्रेक्षा, such as तर्कयामि, सम्भावयामि, जाने, उत्प्रेक्षे, स्यात्. A question naturally arises :- How are we to distinguish उत्प्रेक्षा from उपमा, when इव is

150 NOTES ON X. 46 उत्प्रेक्षा.

employed, as इव is सादृश्यवाचक also; i. e. on what ground is it that we regard the verse 'ऊरु :...... स्मरस्येव' as an example of उत्प्रेक्षा and not of उपमा ? The verse can as well be taken as an Upama (ऊरुः स्मरस्य स्तम्भ इव भाति). Our author nowhere explains this difficulty. चक्रवर्तिन्, the author of the अलङ्गारसर्वस्व- सज्जीविनी, says on this point 'यदाऽयमुपमानांशो लोकतः सिद्धिमृच्छति। तदोपमैव येनेवशब्दः साधर्म्यवाचकः ॥ यदा पुनरयं लोकादसिद्ध: कविकल्पितः । तदोत्प्रेक्षेव येनेवशब्दः सम्भावनापरः ॥' (quoted by उद्योत p. 24.). When the Upamana is one from ordinary life, there the figure is Upama and the word za is then expressive of similarity. But when the Upamana ( i. e. the अप्रस्तुत or विषयिन्) is not one from ordinary life, but is simply due to the poet's fancy, then the figure is Utpreksha, so that there the word sq has the sense of सम्भावन ( representing as probably identical ). When is employed in aT, 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 चि० मी० remarks 'यत्र यत्राप्रकृततादात्म्यसम्भावनोपयुक्तवि- शेषणकल्पना तत्र सर्वत्राप्युत्प्रेक्षाऽवगन्तव्या। यत्र तु सम्भावनोपयुक्तविशेषणकल्पना- रहितमुपमानं निबध्यते तत्र परमिवशब्दः सादृश्यपर इत्युपमालक्कार: ।' p. 74. ( and then it quotes the words of चक्रवर्तिन्). Appayadikshita bases the difference upon the existence of adjectives or attributes that would contribute towards the poetic represen- tation of the identity of the प्रकृत and अप्रकृत. If these exist there is saen; but if there is the Upamana purely without any attributes serving to lead on to सम्भावन, then there is Upama and q denotes similarity. क्कचिदुपमोक्रमोत्प्रेक्षा ...... जेयम् (p.32, 1l. 20-26). उपमा उपक्रमे यस्या: सा उपमोपकमा. Sometimes, an Utpreksha begins with a simile. 'पारेजलं ... शैवलाभाः' This is शिशु० III. 70. मुरारिः (कृष्णः) नीरनिधे: पारेजलं आनीलपलाशराशीः (हरितपर्णपूर्णाः) उत्कलिकासहस्रप्रतिक्षणो- त्कूलितशैवलाभाः (उत्कलिकासहस्त्रेण तरङ्गसहस्त्रेण प्रतिक्षणमुत्कूलिताः तीरं प्रापिताः ये शैवलास्तत्तल्याः) वनावलीः (वनराजीः) अपश्यत्. Krshna 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. इत्यत्र ..... जेयम्. In the above verse, the word आभा (in शैवलाभा:) denotes comparison and hence there is a simile at first, but in the end there is fanoy, inasmuch as the existence of huge masses of moss on the sea- shore is imagined as possible, notwithstanding its improbablity. Similarly it is to be understood in the description of the

X. 46 उत्प्रेक्षा. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 151

emaciation of certain lovelorn ladies, as in 'their bracelets were turned into armlets' (केयूरं इव आचरितम्) and also in 'the side glance of her with deer-like eyes acts the part of a blooming lotus on the ear' ( विकासिनीलोत्पलमिव आचरति). In both the examples, there is at first 3qHT, because the affixes (in केयूरायितम् and क्विप् in नीलोत्पलति) 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. *

भ्रान्तिमदलङ्कारे ...... इति भेद: (p.32, ll. 26-29) The author now distinguishes Utpreksha from other figures of speech. He first distinguishes between ्रन्तिमान् and उत्प्रेक्षा. In भ्रान्तिमान् as instanced in 'मुग्धा दुग्धधिया' etc., the cowherds etc. 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 Utpreksha, however, the person who indulges in the fancy has a conscionsness of the subject also. What distinguishes भ्रान्तिमान् from उत्प्रेक्षा is this :- In the former, the knowledge is अनाहार्य; while in the latter it is आहार्य; 2ndly, in the farmer, the fagr is not perceived in its real nature, it is mistaken for something else ( the विषयिन् ); in उत्प्रेक्षा both the विषय and विषयिन are cognised as distinct, there is no mistake, but for poetical purposes it is represented that the विषय is almost identical with the विषयिन्.

सन्देहे ...... भेद: (p. 32, 1l. 29-31) What distinguishes सन्देह from &T 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. अतिशयोक्तौ ... मेद: In Hyperbole, the unreality of the character fancied (fuf) is apprehended after the sense of the sentence is understood; and here it is *The अमरकोश says that केयूर and अङ्गद mean the same thing (केयूरमङ्गदं तुल्ये ); but the poet seems to have used अङ्गद in the sense of bracelet and qr 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 उत्प्रेक्षा.

apprehended at the very time of the sense being understood. An example of अतिशयोक्ति is 'कमलमनम्भसि कमले च कुवलये तानि कनकलतिकायाम् ।'. Here the face is apprehended and spoken of as कमल, the eyes as कुवलय and the body as कनकलतिका. At the time of using this mode of speech, it is not intended that the faufe (कमल) is understood as distinct. The unreality of the identity of विषय and विषयिन comes in only when we reflect upon the sense of the verse. In Utpreksha, when we use such an expression as 'नूनं मुखं चंद्र मन्ये', we are perfectly conscious of the विषयिन् (i. e. उपमान चंद्र ) not being the विषय (मुख). रज्जिता नु ... प्रकारकल्पनया (p.33, 1l. 1-10). 'रज्जिता नु ... तिमिरेण.' This is किरातार्जुनीय IX. 15. रज्जिता नु ... शैला :- Has darkness coloured black the various trees and hills? स्थगितम्-screened. विषमेषु in uneven portions. संहृता नु ककुभस्तिमिरेण has darkness annihilated the regions of space? The printed editions have संहता: for संहृता: The Sarvasva reads संहृता: इत्यत्र ... केचिदाङु: some say that the figure here is -ag, inasmuch as the trees pervaded by darkness are suspected to be coloured and so on. It is the अलं० स० which cites this verse as an instance of सन्देह, where the things superimposed have each a separate substratum (क्वचिदारोप्यमाणानां मिन्नाश्रयत्वे दृश्यते। यथा 'रज्जिता ete.' p. 43). The Sarvasva remarks on this verse 'अन्रारोपविषयतिमिरे रागादि तर्वादि मिन्नाश्रयत्वेनारोपितम्' p. 44. 'रागादि रञ्जनादि । आदिशब्देन नमनस्थगनपूरण- संहरणानि गृह्यन्ते। तर्वादीत्यादिशब्देन गगनधरित्रीककुभः । अत्र व्याप्नवत् तिमिरं विषयः, रञ्जनादिर्धमों विषयी।' समुद्रबन्ध's comment. एकविषये. स्फुरणं च. Our author says that this is wrong; for the figure -aa 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 distingui- shed 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. What our author means is :- In Sandeha, the same object is perceived under two or more alternatives, as in 'अयं मार्तण्ड: कि' 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 उत्प्रेक्षा. SAHITYADARPANA. 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 Utpreksha. अन्ये तु ...... वदन्ति सम others say that the present verse is a distinct sort of the figure Hag, 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 विषयिन् (रजन) is no doubt more prominent; still the figure is not &T, but another kind of सन्देह. Here व्यापन (the विषय) is determined to be the same as रजन, स्थगन, पूरण etc. (which are many). Therefore, as in the ordinary u-ag, one thing is suspected under different characters, so here also one thing is determined under different characters; and therefore there is a-ar. This view appears to be the same as the one mentioned by Sarvasva 'केचित्त्वध्यवसाया- श्रयत्वेन सन्देहप्रकारमाहुः p. 44. Our author rejects this view also. निगीर्ण ... कल्पनया 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 T, as well as by . Therefore the figure ought to be Utpreksha. 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 'ferar etc. as an instance of Utpreksha. 'अन्ये तु नुशब्दस्य सम्भावनाद्योतकसत्वादुत्प्ेक्षा- प्रकारमिममाचक्षते' p. 44. यदेतचन्द्रा ... नासावपह्ववोत्प्रेक्षा (p.33, 1l. 11-16). 'यदेत ...... तनुम्'. This verse is cited by अलं० स० p. 51 as an example of अपह्ृति (अपह्ववपूर्वक आरोप:). जलदलवलीलां वितनुते-spreads the charm of a flake of cloud. नो मां प्रति तथा to me it does not appear to be s0. अहं ...... तनुम् 'I believe the moon to be marked by the black scars of the wound 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 'manye' is employed ( it being one of those words that imply Utpreksha, 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 Utpreksha founded upon conceal- ment here. In the first half of the verse, the author began by denying that the spot on the moon is 'RTTa' ( i. e. there is first अपहव). After denying the nature of 'शशक' he ought 98

154 NOTES ON X. 46 उत्प्रेक्षा.

to have superimposedsomething else on the शशक. But he speaks of the moon in the next half, and not of Trr at all. Therefore there is no अपहृति. It may be said that, as there is अपह्वव in the first half and the word मन्ये (which is उत्प्रेक्षाद्योतक) occurs in the 2nd half, there is सापह्ववोत्प्रेक्षा. Our author replies that the mere presence of the word मन्ये is not snfficient. We must have सम्भावना, which does not exist in the verse under consideration. The author of the सर्वस्व also was not quite satisfied with the instance he himself gave. On 'यदेतच्चन्द्रा' etc. he remarks 'अन्र ऐन्दवस्य शशकस्यापह्ववे उपक्षिप्ते शशकप्रतिवस्तुकिणवत इन्दोरारोपो नान्वयघटनां पुष्यतीति न निरवद्यम्' p. 51 and also "तस्याः (उत्प्रेक्षायाः) चेवादिशब्दवन्मन्येशब्दोऽपि प्रतिपादकः। किंतु उत्पेक्षासामगर्यभावे मन्येशब्दप्रयोगो वितर्कमेव प्रतिपादयति। यथोदाहृतं प्राक् 'अहं त्विन्दुं मन्ये' इत्यादि, (on p. 51 )" p. 64.

What constitutes the essence of उत्प्रेक्षा is that the प्रस्तुत (उपमेय) must be represented as probably identical with the अप्रस्तुत (उपमान) and that this representation must be charming. उत्प्रेक्षा must be based upon implied resemblance. 'नूनमनेन स्थाणुना . भाव्यम्' cannot be an उत्प्रेक्षा, because there is no charm in it. The fancy must be आहार्य ( volitional ) and not due to mistake. 'रामं स्निग्धतरश्यामं विलोक्य वनमण्डले। प्रायो धाराधरोऽयं स्यादिति नृत्यन्ति केकिन: ॥l' is not an example of उत्प्रेक्षा, because here the peacocks mistake him to be a cloud and, as a result, dance. They have no distinct apprehension that he is Rama. The mere presence of उत्प्रेक्षाद्योतक words would not constitute a verse an instance of Utpreksha; e. g. the word प्राय: in the above verse.

Examples of Utpreksha are sown broad-cast in the works of Kalidasa and Bana; vide the following 'मुक्तेषु रश्मिषु निरायतपूर्वकाया निष्कम्पचामरशिखा निभृतोर्ध्वकर्णाः । आत्मोद्धतैरपि रजोमिरलङ्गनीया धावन्त्यमी मृग- जवाक्षमयेव रथ्याः ॥' शा. I.

13 अतिशयोक्ति (Hyperbole). सिद्धत्वे ...... प्रचक्षते इति (p. 33, 11. 17-23). When the intro- susception is complete, it is styled Hyperbole. विषयनिगरणेन ...... अध्यवसाय :- These words are quoted verbatim from अलं० स० p. 56. When the विषयिन् (i. e. उपमान or अप्रस्तुत ) swallows up (or al- together takes in ) the विषय (the subject on which something else in superimposed ) and there is therefore an apprehen- sion of identity, it is अध्यवसाय (Introsusception). In Utpraksha, the अध्यवसाय is incomplete (or in process of

X. 46 अतिशयोक्ति. SAHITYADARPANA. 155

completion ) as the विषयिन is expressed there with uncertainty (i. e. विषयिन् is there represented as probably identical with the विषय, and not with certainty). But in अतिशयोक्ति, tha अध्यवसाय is complete because the subject is apprehended with certainty. The two-fold division of अध्यवसाय is borrowed by our author from the अलं० स०. अध्यवसाय is brought about in two ways; (I) the विषयिन् entirely swallows up the विषय, which is consequently not expressed in words at all; (II) the विषयिन् as it were swallows up the विषय, which though expressed in words and therefore seeming to be different, is yet identified with the विषयिन्. In the first case the अध्यवसाय is said to be सिद्ध and in the latter साध्य. The अध्यवसाय is said to be सिद्ध, because the विषय not being expressed in words and being swallowed up by the विषयिन्, the विषयिन् (which is अध्यवसित, superimposed ) is predominant. अध्यवसाय is said to be साध्य, because the विषय is in process of being represented as probably identical with the विषयिन् ( it is not निगीर्ण, but निगीर्यमाण) and therefore it is this process ( which is being accomplished ) that is predominant. Vide विमर्शिनी on अलं० स० "स (अध्यवसायः) च द्विविध :- सिद्ध: साध्यश्च। सिद्धो यत्र विषयस्यानुपात्ततया निगीर्णत्वादध्यवसित- प्राधान्यम्। साध्यो यत्रेवाद्युपादानात्सम्भावनाप्रत्ययात्मकत्वाद्विषयस्य निगीर्यमाणत्वा दध्यवसायक्रियाया एव प्राधान्यम्।", A question might be asked what is the difference between अध्यवसाय and आरोप (as in मुखं चन्द्रः)? The reply is :- in आरोप, the विषय is apprehended as the विषयिन्. But here ( in सिद्ध अध्यवसाय), the विषय being entirely swallowed up by the विषयिन् and therefore not being expressed, only the विषयिन् is apprehended; in साध्य अध्यवसाय ( which is the province of उत्प्रेक्षा), the विषय may or not be expressed (while in आरोप it must always be expressed ) and, even when it is expressed, it is in process of being swallowed up by the विषयिन् ( as in मुखं चन्द्रं मन्ये). 'अत एव चात्र विषयस्य निगीर्यमाणत्वादारोपगर्भत्वं न वाच्यम्। तत्र विषयस्य विषयितया प्रतीतिः। इह (उत्प्रेक्षायाम्) पुनर्विषयस्त्र निगीर्यमाणत्वेन विषयिण एव प्रतीतिः ।' विमर्िनी p.55. An objection might be raised as follows :- अध्यवसाय is certain knowledge of the विषयिन्, which swallows up the विषय. It is said above that in उत्प्रेक्षा, there is साध्य अध्यवसाय. In उत्प्रेक्षा, the विषय is generally expressed and not swallowed up. Besides, उत्प्रेक्षा is constituted by representing something as probable. There is no certainty in it. Therefore it is improper to say that in उत्प्रेक्षा there is साध्य अध्यवसाय. The reply is :- अध्यवसाय is of two kinds, स्वारसिक and उत्पाद्य. In the former, the real nature of an object is not known at

156 NOTES ON X 46 अतिशयोक्ति.

all, but through mistake the विषय is identified with the विषयिन् In the latter (उत्पादय), a man, although well knowing that विषय is distinct from विषयन्, superimposes the विषयिन् upon the विषय for some poetical purpose. स्वारसिक अध्यवसाय is the province of भ्रान्तिमान्, in which the poet speaks of the mistaken notions of others. उत्पाद्य अध्यवसाय (i.e. आहार्य) is the province of उत्प्रेक्षा. अध्यवसाय is defined as विषयनिगरण. In उत्प्रेक्षा, although there is no complete swallowing up, still the विषय is in process of being swallowed and therefore, we may say that there is अध्यवसाय. Hence there is nothing wrong in saying that साध्य अध्यवसाय is the province of उत्प्रेक्षा. 'एवमप्यनिश्चयात्मकसम्भावनाप्रत्ययमूलत्वादुत्प्रेक्षाया कथमध्यवसायमूलत्वम्। तस्य हि विषयनिगरणे (णं?) विषयिनिश्चयश्च स्वरूपम्। न चात्रैकमपि सम्भवति। वषयोपादानान्निश्चयाभावाच्चेति । अत्रोच्यते। इह द्विधास्त्यध्यवसायः स्वारसिक उत्पादितश्च। तत्र स्वारसिके विषयानवगम एव निमित्तसामर्थ्यात्स्वरसत एव विषयप्रतीतेरु्ल्लासात् । ...... इतरत्र तु विषयमवगम्यापि तदन्तःकारेण प्रतिपत्तौ स्वात्मपरतन्त्रविकल्पनाव विषये प्रतिपत्तिमुत्पादयेत्। जानान एव हि विषयिविविक्तं विषयं तत्र प्रयोजनपरतया विषयिणमध्यवस्येत्। तत्राद्यो भ्रान्तिमदादिविषयः। तत्र हि प्रमात्रन्तरगता स्वारसिक्येव तथाविधा प्रतिपत्तिर्वक्त्रानूद्यते न तूत्पाद्यते । ...... इतरस्तूत्प्रेक्षाविषयः । ............ ननु विष्यनिगरणमव्यवसायस्य लक्षणमिह पुन- र्विषयस्य निगीर्यमाणतेति कथमत्राध्यवसायतेति चेत्। नैतत्। 'विषय्यन्तःकृतेऽन्य- स्मिन्सा स्यात्साध्यवसानिका' (का. प्र. II.) इत्यायुवत्याध्यवसायस्य विषयिणा विषयस्यान्तःकरणं लक्षणम्। तञ्च विषयस्य निगरणेन निगीर्यमाणत्वेन वा भवतीति न कश्चिद्विशेषः । निगीर्यमाणमपि पूवोंक्तनीत्या विषयस्योपात्तस्यानुपात्तस्य वा भवतीत्यपि न कश्चिद्विशेष:।" विमर्शिनी p. 55. विषय ...... प्रचक्षते इति (p. 33, l1. 20-23) In Utpreksha, 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 अतिशयोक्ति ) as in 'the face is a second moon.' The author means that for swallowing up as required in उत्प्रेक्षा (साध्य अध्यवसाय), it is not necessary that the विषय must not be mentioned. What is meant by निगरण is here simply that the विषय should be in quite a subordinate position as regards the purpose in view (i. e. the charm of the सम्भावना). Similarly even in अतिशयोक्ति, the विषय (i. e. मुख here ) need not necessarily be omitted ( as in 'the face is a second moon' ).

The name given to this figure is significant 'अतिशयस्योक्तिरिति' यौगिकत्वमस्याः' एका. P. 237; 'विषयिणा विषयस्य निगरणमतिशयः । तस्योक्तिः' R. G. p. 307.

मेदेडप्यभेदः ...... ततः (p. 33, ll. 24-25). Our author, following the अलं. स० (p. 66), divides अतिशयोक्ति into five varieties. I

X. 47 अतिशयोक्ति. SAHIIYADARPANA. 157

मेदेडपि अभेद: Denial of difference where there is difference in reality; II. अभेदे मेद: (the opposite of the preceding) statement of a difference, where there is none in reality; III. =a arsry: negation of connection where there is a connection; IV. असम्बन्धे सम्बन्ध: (which is the reverse of III); V. कार्यकारण- पौर्वापर्यात्यय :- the invertion of the sequence of cause and effect. Mammata following 3RT ( II. 24-26 ) gives four varieties, by omitting III and IV and substituting in their place "यद्यथोंक्तो ay" ( a supposition under a condition introduced by 'if '). मल्िनाथ in his तरल criticizes Mammata and says that 'यद्थोंक्तौ etc.' is included either under ara-asq .: or its reverse ( see P. 237). उद्योत remarks that 'यद्यथोक्तौ च' etc. ineludes सम्बन्धेS- c: and its reverse by Indication.

An instance of भेदेडभेद: is 'कथमुपरि' etc. कथं ...... कलाप: How is it that the peacock's tail shines above अष्टमीन्दुखण्डम्-The digit of the moon on the 8th night of the fortnight. an: next to it. प्रवालमस्मात-still lower a tender leaf. Here we have the introsusception of the tresses of a woman in the peacock's tail with which they are identified. Here केशपाश, भाल, नेत्र, नासिका, and अधर are swallowed up respectively by कलाप, इन्दुखण्ड, कुवलय, तिलकुसुम and प्रवाल, although they are distinct (भेदऽप्यभेद:). Another example of this is 'विश्रेषदुःखादिव' etc., which was cited above under Utpreksha. 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 बद्धमौन conveys both the meanings. 'सहाधर ... प्रियः' is another example of the same. In her youth, her lover is possessed of rāga ( 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 'पझोद्यदिनाधीशः' etc. instanced above under परम्परित (फिष्ट), will be an example of this kind of अतिशयोक्ति, so far as the word पझ्मोदय is concerned. An example of अभेदे भेद: is 'अन्यदेव' etc. सौरमसम्पद: the riches of the fragrance breathed by her. सरसत्वम् charmingness. Here though beauty is one and the same, the beauty of & woman is represented as being quite different from all other

158 NOTES ON X. 47 अतिशयोक्ति.

beauty. Another example of this variety may be given from the S'akuntala 'स्त्रीरतसष्टिरपरा प्रतिभाति सा मे धातुर्विभुत्वमनुचिन्त्य चपुश्च तस्या: ।' An example of सम्बन्धेडसम्बन्ध: is the verse 'अस्याः सर्गविधौ', which occurs in the Vikramorvas'iya (1st act ). The same verse is cited by the aso Ho as an example of this variety. अस्या :...... कान्तिप्रद: 'Was it the moon, the source of lovely radiance, that was the creator in forming her?' शृद्गार एव एको रस: यस्य who is solely devoted to the sentiment of love. पुष्पाकर: spring. जड: dull, free from emotions. विषयेभ्यः व्यावृत्तं कौतूहलं यस्य whose mind is turned away from objects of sense. पुराणो मुनिः 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 1

Mammata as an instance of ससन्देह (or सन्देह of our author). sala remarks (p. 59) that this verse cannot be an example of अतिशयोक्ति as there is no certainty here. In अतिशयोक्ति, there must be certain knowledge. In the above verse, the speaker raises doubts as to who created the woman.

An instance of 'असम्बन्धे सम्बन्धः' is 'यदि स्यान्मण्डले etc.' Here, a connection, which is unreal, is fancied by means of a supposition brought in by the force of the word 'if.' इन्दीवरद्वय does not exist in the moon i. e. there is anna y; but by the force of the particle afa this connection of lotuses with the moon is brought in. Therefore there is असम्बन्धे सम्बन्ध: A beautiful example of this variety is cited by Vamana 'उभौ यदि न्योम्रि पृथवप्रवाहावाकाशगङ्गापयसः पतेताम्। तेनोपमीयेत तमालनीलमामुक्तमुक्ताल- तमस्य वक्ष: ॥' शिशु० III. 8.

कार्यकारण ...... महीक्षिताम् (p. 34, ll. 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 'प्रागेव हरिणाक्षीणां' etc. Supply जातम् after उत्कलिकाकुलम् and जाता: after श्रियः. उत्कलिकाकुलम्-agitated by fancy. उद्धिन्नाना प्रफुल्लानां बकुलानां रसालमुकुलानां (आग्रमुकुलानां) च श्रिय: the beauty of the blooming bakula and the blossoming mango ( manifested itself ). Mangoes put forth blossoms, which generally are the excitants of love ( उद्दीपन). But here this sequence is inverted. The heart is said to be agitated first and then the mangoes blossomed. Another instance of

X. 47 अतिशयोकि. SAHITYADARPANA. 159

this variety is 'हृदयमधिष्ठितमादौ मालत्याः कुसुमचापबाणेन। चरमं रमणीवल्लभ लोचनविषयं त्वया भजता ॥।' (दामोदरगुप्त's कुट्टनीमतम् verse 96). Another is 'तव प्रसादस्य पुरस्तु सम्पदः' शा० 7. An example of the cause and effect taking place at the same time is 'सममेव etc.' This is Raghu. IV. 4. समाक्रान्तम् was trodden, was attained. सममेव 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 'कारणस्य शीघ्रकारितां वक्तु कार्यस्य पूर्वमुक्तौ' etc. इह केचिदाहु :...... लक्षणस्य इति (p. 34, l. 22-24). In these words our author refers to the view of the अलं० स०. The question is :- in अतिशयोक्ति what is introsuscepted in another? For अतिशयोक्ति, सिद्ध अध्यवसाय is necessary. When it is said that two varieties of अतिशयोक्ति are भेदेडमेद: and अभेदे भेद:, the ques- tion arises what two things are अभेदेन अध्यवसित. According to the view of the अलं. स. the ordinary excellence belonging to the woman's tresses etc. in the verse 'कथमुपरि कलापिनः' 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 अभेदेन अध्यवसित is natural beauty (वास्तव सौन्दर्य) which is here fancied to be identical with the beauty imagined by the poet (कविसमर्पित सौन्दर्य). It is not the केशपाश that is fancied to be identical (अभेदेन अध्यवसित) with the pe- acock's tail. If it were intended to be so (. e. if it were intend- ed thatthe अध्यवसाय in this variety should be between two धर्माs, such as केशपाश and कलाप and not between the two धर्मs, वास्तव सौन्दर्य and कविसमर्पित सौन्दर्य), then the definition of the figure would not include, as it ought to incude, such instances as 'Different is the beauty etc.' The reason why the instance 'अन्यदेवाङ्ग' etc. would be excluded is :- If we say that केशपाश and कलाप are अभेदेन अध्यवसित, we mean that for अध्यवसाय, two धर्मीs are necessary; two धर्मs would not do. In 'अन्यदेवाङ्गलावण्यम्' etc. there are no two धर्माs, but only two धर्मs. If two धर्माs were necessary for अध्यवसाय, this instance cannot be an example of अतिशयोक्ति. Therefore in order to include it, we should say that it is two धर्मs that are everywhere अध्यवसित. Vide the words of the अलं. स. p. 69 "एषु पञ्चसु भेदेषु भेदेऽभेदादिवचनं लोकातिक्रान्त- गोचरम्। अत्र चातिशयाख्यं यत्फलं प्रयोनकत्वान्निमित्तं तत्राभेदाध्यवसायः। तथाहि 'कमलमनम्भसि' इत्यादौ वदनादीनां कमलायैमेंदेडपि वास्तवं सौन्दर्य कविसमपितेन

160 NOTES ON X. 47 अतिशयोक्ति.

सौन्दर्येणाभेदेनाध्यवसितं भेदेऽ्मेदवचनस्य निमित्तम्। तत्र च सिद्धोऽव्यवसाय इति अध्यवसितप्राधान्यम्। न तु वदनादीनां कमलादिमिरभेदाध्यवसायो योजनीयः। अभेदे भेद इत्यादिषु प्रकारेषु अव्याप्तेः। तत्र हि 'अण्णं लडइत्तणअं' इत्यादौ सातिशयं लटभात्वं निमित्तभूतमभेदेनाध्यवसितम्। एवमन्यत्रापि ज्ञेयम्।". 0n this जयरथ remarks "कमलमनम्भसि' इत्यत्र यदि वदनादीनां धर्मिणामभेदाध्य- वसाययोजनं क्रियते तत्तस्य धर्मिगतत्वेनैवेष्टेरिह धर्माणां न स्यादव्याप्तिः। अतश्च पूर्वत्र धर्माणामेवाध्यवसायो योजनीयो येन सर्वत्रैक एव पक्षः स्यादिति तात्पर्यार्थः।" p. 69. The two verses, referred to in this passage, are 'कमलमन- म्भसि कमले च कुवलये तानि कनकलतिकायाम्। सा च सुकुमारसुभगेत्युत्पातपरम्परा केयम्॥।' (भेदेडमेदः); 'अण्णं लडहत्तणअं अण्णा वि अ कावि वत्तणच्छाआ। सामा सामण्णपआवइणो रेहच्चिअ ण होइ।। (अन्यत् सौन्दर्यमन्यापि च कापि वर्तन- च्छाया। श्यामा सामान्यप्रजापते रेखैव न भवति।). Our author replies to the above reasoning in the words 'तत्रापि ete.' तत्रापि ... अध्यवसीयते There too, i. e. in 'अन्यदेवाङ्गलावण्यम्' the lady's beauty, which is generally not different from that of other women, is fancied as different. So that here also there is अध्यवसाय. We need not say that वास्तवसौन्दर्य is fancied to be identical with कविसमर्पितसौन्दर्य. In 'अन्यदेवाङ्ग' etc. one thing viz. the beauty of the woman, is poetically represented as being another thing, viz., a beauty different from all other beauty. तथाहि to explain, to make clear what is meant. अन्यदेव ... अङ्गीक्रियते If we substitute अन्यदिव for अन्यदेव in the verse 'अन्यदेवाङ्ग etc.'(in which case it would mean 'her beanty is, as it were, quite apart from that of other women'), we should admit the figure उत्पक्षा, as there is then साध्य अध्यवसाय. Everybody admits that in 'अन्यदिवाङ्गलावण्यम्', there is उत्प्रेक्षा. We have shown above that in Utpreksha there is अध्यवसाय (साध्य of course). So we must admit that in 'अन्यदेवाङ्ग' etc. also there is अध्यवसाय, which is सिद्ध, because the word इव, which is सम्भावनाद्योतक, is absent. In 'प्रागेव हरिणाक्षीणां' etc., the beauty of bakula though coming first is fancied as coming last i. s. there is अध्यवसाय. Herealso if we employ the word इa, there is उत्प्रेक्षा. Similarly in the other two, सम्बन्घेडसम्बन्य: and असम्बन्धे सम्बन्ध: i. e. प्रजापति, 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 (अध्यवसित) with two lotuses connected with the moon. Hence the opinion of the मलं. स. that there is अध्यवसाय of two धर्मs (one वास्तव and the other कविसमर्पित) and not of धर्मीs is wrong. जयरथ also finds fault with the अलं. स. "उपलक्ष्यं चैतत्। यावता अध्यवसितप्राधान्यमस्या

X. 47 अतिशयोक्ति. SAHITYADARPAŅA. 161

लक्षणम्। तच्च धर्मिणामस्तु धर्माणां वेति को विशेषो येनाव्याप्ति: स्याद्। प्रत्युत धर्मयोरभेदाध्यवसायाभ्युपगमे उपमादीनामप्यतिशयोक्तिप्रसङ्ग: स्यात् । तत्रापि धर्माणामेव भदेऽमेदविवक्षणात्। एवं च विजातीयत्वेन भेदे धर्मयोरप्यव्याप्तिः प्रसज्यत इत्यलमसङ्गतग्रन्थार्थोदीरणेन ।' pp. 69-70. As to the remark of our author that when we read 'अन्यदिव' for 'अन्यदेव' in 'अन्यदेवाङ्ग- लावण्यम्' etc. there is उत्प्रेक्षा, vide the remarks of R. G. and Nages'a thereon (p. 315.) "यदपि तैरेव (अप्पदीक्षितैः) उक्तम् 'सम्बन्धातिशयोक्तिः स्यादयोगे योगकल्पनम्। सौधाट्टानि पुरस्यास्य स्पृशन्ति विधुमण्डलम् ॥I' तदपि न । अत्रैव 'स्पृशन्तीवेन्दुमण्डलम्' इति कृते कोडल- क्वारः । उत्प्रेक्षेति चेत, तर्हीवादेरभावाद्गम्योत्प्रेक्षेयमुचिता । इवादिसत्त्वे या वाच्योत्प्रेक्षा सैवेवाद्यभावे गम्योत्प्रेक्षेति नियमस्य सर्वसंमतत्वात्। 'त्वत्कीर्तिर्भ्रमणश्रान्ता विवेश स्वर्गनिम्नगाम्' इति त्वदुक्तगम्योत्प्रेक्षायाः 'सौधाट्टानि' इत्यस्य चोत्प्रेक्षांशे विशेषानुपलम्भात। ...... तस्मादुत्प्रेक्षासामग्री यत्र नास्ति तादृशमुदाहरणमुचितम् । यथास्मदीयं 'धीरध्वनिभिरलं ते नीरद मे मासिको गर्भः। उन्मदवारणबुद्धया मध्येजठरं स- मुच्छलति ॥' इत्यादि। सुन्दरत्वे सति उपस्कारकत्वमलङ्कारसामान्यलक्षणमिह्दापि न विस्मरणीयम्।" p. 315.

14 तुल्ययोगिता (Equal Pairing). पदार्थाना ...... क्रियाभिसम्बन्धः (P. 34, 1. 29-p 35 1. 5). When objects in hand or others are associated with one and the same attribute, the figure is तुल्ययोगिता. An attribute is either a quality or an action. So, although our author does not say so specifically, तुल्ययोगिता has four varieties; all the things may be प्रस्तुत, or all may be अप्रस्तुत; and the common attribute in each case may be a गुण or a क्रिया. There is another point on which our author is silent. उद्भट, अलङ्गारसर्वस्व, एकावली and many others say that in तुल्ययोगिता, औषम्य is always implied; compare 'औपम्यस्य गम्यत्वे पदार्थगतत्वेन प्रस्तुतानामप्रस्तुतानां वा समान- धर्माभिसम्बन्धे तुल्ययोगिता' अलं० स०. This means that between the प्करणिक or अप्राकरणिक things that are connected with the same attribute, there must be implied resemblance. It is not sufficient that they are connected with the same attribute. Our author, by omitting the words औपम्यस्य गम्यत्वे, leads ns to infer that he did not regard implied resemblance between the आकरणिक or अप्राकरणिक things as necessary to constitute the figure तुल्ययोगिता. The reason why the figure is called तुल्य- योगिता is given by एकावली as 'तुल्यधर्मेण योगो जातोऽस्यामिति अन्वर्थनामा तुल्ययोगिता' p. 239. i. e. that in which there is a connection (of प्रकृत or अप्रकृत things) with the same attribute. अनुलेपनानि ...... अबोघिषत-This is S'isu. IX. 24. The printed edition of Sis'u. reads दीपशिखा: for दीपदशाः and 'चिरसप्तमनोभव-

162 NOTES ON X. 48 तुल्ययोगिता.

नोधनं सममबोधिषत' for 'सुचिरं शयितप्रतिबोधितस्मरमबोधिषत ॥', Construe- तेन समयेन अनुलेपनानि, कुसुमानि, पतिषु कृतमन्यवः (कृतकोपाः) अबला, दीपदशाः (दीपज्वालाः) सुचिरं शयितप्रतिबोधितस्मरं (सुचिरं शयितः पश्चाद् प्रतिबोधित: स्मरः कामः यथा स्यात्तथा) अबोधिषत (बोधितानि). 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 yrga; they are all connected with the one action (क्रिया) of बोधन (being lighted up).

त्वदङ् ...... सम्बन्ध: (p. 35, 11. 6-13). त्वदङ्-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 ? Here the heroine is the subject of description and मालती etc:, which are the उपमानs, are (generally, of course ) अप्रस्तुत. They are all connected with the single attributa 'hardness' (which is a गुण). दानं ... आहरेत्. दानं वित्तात, ऋतं (सत्यं) वाच: 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 दान, ऋत, कीर्तिधर्म, परोपकरण, 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 an example of तुल्ययोगिता where all the things are con- nected with the same गुण and the same क्रिया. An example where all प्राकरणिक things are connected with the same गुण is 'योगपट्टो जटाजालं तारवी त्वङ्मृगाजिनम् । उचितानि तवाङ्गस्य यद्मूनि तदुच्यताम् ।' उद्भट V.13.

15 दीपक (Illuminator).

अप्रस्तुतप्रस्तुतयोः (एकधर्माभिसम्बन्धः यदा स्यात्तदा) दीपकं तु निगद्यते। When a thing, which is the subject in hand, and another which is not the subject in hand, are connected with the same attribute, there is दीपक. Also when the same case (कारक) is connected with more than one verb.

Some writers like उद्गट, जगन्नाथ etc. say that in दीपक also there must be गम्य औपम्य. Our author is silent on this point. It must be noted that if गम्य औपम्य is necessary for दीपक, then

X. 49 दीपक. SÂHITYADARPAŅA, 163

the 2nd variety of atya 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 reasonwhy this figure is called atqa is that it is like & lamp, which, when employed for illuminating one object, also illumines others. 'प्राकरणिकाप्राकरणिकयोर्मध्यादेकत्र निर्दिष्टः समानो

p. 72; 'प्रकृताप्रकृतान्यतरसांनिव्यमधितिष्ठन्नपि साधारणो धर्मः प्रसङ्गेनान्यदपि दीपयतीति दीपकम्।' एका० p. 242; 'प्रकृतार्थमुपात्तो धर्मः प्रसङ्गादप्रकृतमपि दीपयति प्रकाशयति सुन्दरीकरोतीति दीपकम्। यद्वा दीप इव दीपकम्। संज्ञायां कन् (पा० V. 3. 75) दीपसादृश्यं च प्रकृताप्रकृतप्रकाशकत्वेन बोध्यम्।' R. G. p. 322.

बलावलेपा ...... भवान्तरेष्वपि (p. 35, 11. 17-18)-This is S'is'u I. 72. जिगीषुणा तेन (शिशुपालेन) बलावलेपात् (बलगर्वात्) पूर्ववत् अधुनापि जगत् प्रबाध्यते। भवान्तरेष्वपि (जन्मान्तरेष्वपि) सती योषित् (साध्वी भार्या) निश्चला प्रकृतिः (स्वभावः) च पुमांसमभ्येति. Here unchanging nature is the subject of description; while, chaste wife is anyaa. Both of them are connected with one dharma viz., the one action of 'accompanying'. The printed edition of S'is'u. reads सतीव योषित् प्रकृतिः सुनिश्चला. The Nirnayasagara edition of S.D. reads सतीव for सती च. But then the figure would be उपमा. In the above verse, there is अर्थान्तरन्यास also. दूरंक्षणेन (p. 35, ll. 21-24). This is an instance of the 2nd kind of arqa, called by some कारकदीपक. Here, the heroine, who is one, is connected with many actions, viz., rising, sleeping, going to the house of the lover and so on.

अत्र च ... सम्भवात् (p.35, 1. 26-27)-Some say that this figure has three varieties according as the single धर्म, whether गुण or faT, is mentioned in the beginning, middle or end. The Kavyadars'a, Bhamaha, Udbhata and many others divide Dipaka into three varieties according as the single dharma occurs in the beginning, middle or end. "आदिमध्यान्तविषयं त्रिधा दीपकमिध्यते। एकस्यैव त्र्यवस्थत्वादिति तन्गिद्यते त्रिधा॥ अमूनि कुर्वतेन्वर्था- मस्याख्यामर्थदीपनात्। त्रिमिर्निदर्शनैश्चेदं त्रिधा निर्दिश्यते यथा ॥" भामह II. 15-16; 'आदिमध्यान्तविषयाः प्राधान्येतरयोगिनः। अन्तर्गतोपमा धर्मा यत्र तद्दीपकं विदुः ।'उन्द्ट I. 30. An example of आदिदीपक is 'श्यामला प्रावृषेण्या भिर्दिशो जीमूतपंक्तिभिः । भुवश्च सुकुमाराभिर्नवशाद्लराजिभिः ॥' काव्या० II. 100, where श्यामलत्व, the common property is mentioned in the beginning of the verse. 'मालिनीरंशुकभृतः स्त्रियोऽलङ्डुरुते मधुः । हारीतशुकवाचश्र भूधराणामुपत्यकाः ॥' (भामह II. 18)

164 NOTES ON X. 49 दीपक.

and 'तदानी स्फीतलावण्यचन्द्रिकाभरनिर्भरः। कान्ताननेन्दुरिन्दुश्च कस्य नान न्दकोडंभवत् ॥।' (उद्भट. I. 33) are examples of मध्यदीपक and अन्तदीपक 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 beginning or end it does not matter. The charm of this figure lies in several प्रकृत and अप्रकृत things being connected with the same attribute.

The distinction between Dipaka and तुल्ययोगिता may be stated as follows :- In Dipaka, one or more yrga things and one or more अप्रस्तुत things are connected with one attribute; while in तुल्ययोगिता, all the things must be either प्रस्तुत or अप्रस्तुत; there cannot he both प्रस्तुत and अप्रस्तुत things. Those who regard औपम्य as implied in both the figures make a further distinction. In Dipaka, the Upameya is प्रस्तुत and the उपमान (implied, of course ) is अप्रस्तुत; while in तुल्ययोगिता, as all things are either प्रस्तुत or are all अप्रस्तुत, it is left to the volition of the hearer to regard one as the Upameya and the other as the Upamana. 'अयं चानयोरपरो विशेषः। उभयोरनयोरुपमालङ्कारस्य गम्यत्वाविशेषेऽपि अत्र (दीपके) अप्रस्तुतमुपमानं प्रस्तुतमुपमेयमिति व्यवस्थित उपमानोपमेयभावस्तत्र (तुल्ययोगितायां) तु विशेषाग्रहणादैच्छिकः स इति॥' कुव p. 51. In Dipaka, the प्रस्तुत (उपमेय) and the अप्रस्तुत (उपमान) are connected with the same attribute. A question arises :- how are we to distinguish दीपक from उपमा as in 'कमलमिव मुखं मनोजम्' where कमल is उपमान (and therefore अप्रस्तुत ) and मुख is उपमेय (i. e. प्रस्तुत) and both are connected with the single attribute मनोजञत्व. The reply is that in Dipaka the resemblance is only implied, if at all and there are no words, like sa, expressive of simile; while in simile the resemblance is directly expressed.

Vide Jagannatha's criticism of those who cite कारकदीपक as a separate variety; R. G. pp. 324-326 'प्रथमार्धगतलक्षणेनैव दीपक- द्वयस्यापि संग्रहाद्द्वितीयं लक्षणं व्यर्थम्। गुणिनां कारकाणां च गुणक्रियारूपधर्मस्येव क्रियाणामपि कारकरूपधर्मस्य सकृद्वृत्तेः साम्राज्यात्। ..... एवं च 'स्विद्यति कूणति वेल्वति विवलति निमिषति विलोकयति तिर्यक्। अन्तर्नन्दति चुम्बितुमिच्छति नवपरिणया वधू: शयने ।।' (मम्मट's example of कारकदीपक ) इत्यादुदाहरणमपि न सङ्गच्छते। क्रियाणां शुद्धप्रकृतत्वात्। कि च दीपकतुल्ययोगितादौ गम्यमानमौपम्यं जीवातुरिति सर्वेषां संमतम्। न चात्र स्वेदनकूणनादीनामेककार- कान्वितानामप्यौपम्यं कविसंरम्भगोचरः। तस्मात्समुच्चयालक्कारच्छायात्रोचिता ।' Jagannatha further criticizes those who regard ave and तुल्ययोगिता as two distinct figures. He says that they should

X. 49 दीपक. SÅHITYADARPAŅA. 165

not be considered as separate, because the charm in both is the same, viz., the occurrence of the common attribute only once. What leads to the separate enumeration of figures is some difference in charm. It cannot be said that, because in दीपक the common dharma is connected with both प्रकृत and अप्रकृत things and in तुल्ययोगिता either with प्रकृत things or with sna things, there is difference of charm in the two figures; because, in तुल्ययोगिता also, as defined by you, you will have to make two figures according as the common dharma is co- nected with only प्रकृत things or with अप्रकृत things. But you do not do so. Therefore regard alua also as a variety of तुल्ययोगिता. "अत्रेदं बोध्यम्। तुल्ययोगितातो दीपकं न पृथग्भावमदति। धर्मसकृद्धत्तिमूलाया विच्छित्तेरविशञेषात्। हेतुत्वात्। न च धर्मस्य सकृद्धत्तेरविशेषेपि धर्मिणां प्रकृतत्वाप्रकृतत्वाभ्यां प्रकृताप्रकृतकत्वेन च तुल्ययोगिताया दीपकस्य विशेष इति वाच्यम्। तवापि तुल्ययोगितायां धर्मिणां केवलप्रकृतत्वस्य केवलाप्रकृतत्वस्य च विशञेषस्य सत्त्वादलक्कार- द्वेतापत्ते: ।ऋ्रेषेऽपि द्वैतापत्तेश्च। सर्वेषामप्यलङ्काराणां प्रमेदवैलक्षण्याद्वैलक्षण्यापत्तेश्र। ..... तस्मात्तत्ययोगिताया एव त्रैविध्यमुच्चितम् । प्रकृतानामेव धर्मस्य सकृद्ृत्तिः, अप्नकृतानामेव, प्रकृताप्रकृतानां चेति। एवं च प्राचीनानां तुल्ययोगितातो दीपकस्य पृथगलङ्कारतामा चक्षाणानां दुराग्रइमात्रमिति नव्याः ।" R. G. pp. 326-327. An example of कारकदीपक is 'कामान्दुग्घे विप्रकर्षत्यलक्ष्मीं कीर्ति सूते दुष्कृतं या हिनस्ति। तां चाप्येतां मातरं मङलानां घेनुं धीरा: सूनृतां वाचमाङ्गः।।' उत्तरराम० V.

16 प्रतिवस्तूपमा (Typical Comparison). यत्र गम्यसाम्ययोवाक्ययोः एकोऽपि सामान्यः धर्मः पृथक निर्दिश्यते सा प्रतिवस्तूपमा-That is प्रतिवस्तूपमा, where in two sentences, resem- blance between which is implied, the same common attribute is differently expressed. We have explained above under Upama the meaning of the word वस्तुप्रतिवस्तुभाव. धन्यासि ...... तर- लीकरोति (p.36. 1l. 2-3). This is Naishadhiya III. 116. वैदर्भि- Oh Damayanti! उदार: noble. इत: etc .- What greater praise can be bestowed upon the moonlight than this that it agitates even the ocean! 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. समाकर्षण and उत्तरलीकरण are really one and the same in sense. But if the word 'uTaej' had been used in the 2nd sentence, the fault called पौनरुक्त्य (repetition of the same word in the same sense ) would have been committed. Therefore in

166 NOTES ON X. 50 प्रतिवस्तूपमा.

प्रतिवस्तूपमा the same common property is expressed in two different but synonymous expressions. This figure is found in a series also. विमल ...... सज्जन :- (p. 36 lL. 6-7). सिवगिरि: mountain of S'iva i. e. Kailasa, which is white. Compare 'fer: करस्थीकृतकाञ्जनाद्रि: कुबेरमित्रं रजताचलस्थ: ।' विश्वगुणादर्श०. शिवहाससहोदर: Brother of i. e. akin to S'iva 's laughter. Here the words ."glorious,' 'pure' etc. are the same in their ultimate meaning. This figure also occurs under a negation of the attribute. r एव ...... रतनर्मणि (p.36 11. 9-10). This verse ooours in अलं. स० pp. 74-75 in the same connection. विनावन्तीन etc. 'none but the fair ones of Avanti are skilled in the pranks of love.' Other examples of प्रतिवस्तूषमा under वैधर्म्य are :- 'वंशभवो गुणवानपि सङविशेषेण पूज्यते पुरुषः । नहि तुम्बीफलविकलो वीणादण्डः प्रयाति महिमानम्॥'; यदि सन्ति गुणा: पुंसां विकसन्त्येव ते स्वयम्। नहि कस्तूरिकामोद: शपथेन विभाव्यते॥' कुव० p. 54. The reason why this figure is called 'प्रतिवस्तूपमा is given by कुव aS 'प्रतिवस्तु प्रतिवाक्यार्थमुपमा समानवमोडस्यामिति' p.52. Here the sense of the sentence constitutes the उपमान or the उपमेय. मम्मट says वस्तुनो वाक्यार्थस्योपमानत्वात' on which उद्योत remarks 'एवं चोपमेयत्वमपि वाक्यार्थस्येति ध्वनितम्'. 'वस्तुशब्दस्य वाक्यार्थाभिधायित्वाव प्रतिवाक्यार्थमुपमेति सार्थकताभिधानेयं द्विा' एका pp. 243 and 254. The distinction between Upama and प्रतिवस्तूपमा is as follows :- In Upama, the resemblance is expressed, while in प्रतिवस्तूपमा it is only implied; 2ndly, in Upama there is only one sentence, while in प्रतिवस्तूपमा there are two sentences; 3rdly in प्रतिवस्तूपमा, words like इव are always absent, while in Upama they are generally present. A beautiful example of this figure occurs in Sak. (-1st act) 'मानुषीषु कथं वा स्यादस्य रूपस्य सम्भवः। न प्रभातरलं ज्योतिरुदेति वसुधातलाव।'. Another is 'भानु: सकृदयकतुरङ् एव रात्रिदिवं गन्धवहः प्रयाति। शेषः सदवाहितभूमिभार: षष्ठांशवृत्तेरपि धर्म एषः ॥ सा० 5. 17 दृष्टान्त (Exemplification). सधर्मस्य* =सदृशस्य. दृष्टान्त is the reflective representation of a similar subject. We have explained above under Upama what is meant by बिम्बप्रतिबिम्बभाव. The word 'सधर्मस्य' serves to distinguish this figure from प्रतिवस्तूपमा. This figure also is two- fold, being founded either on similarity or on contrast. अविदित ... * Should we not rather expect areiu: according to the sutra 'धर्मादनिच्केवलात्' (पा. V. 4.124)?

X. 51 दष्टान्त. SÅHITYADARPAŅA. 167

... मालतीमाला (p. 36, 11. 14-15). This is taken from the Vasava- datta, a romance of Subandhu (p.8, Hall's edition). अविदित ... ...... forfa :- A good poet's song, though its merits have not been closely examined. अनधिगतपरिमलापि although its fragrance has not been perceived. Now, here, the subject of description is the song of the poet, which pours a honeyed stream into the ear. Corresponding to 'pouring ete.', we have the attribute 'riveting the eye'. 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 माला corresponds to भणिति and अनधिगतपरिमला to अविदितगुणा. त्वयि दृष्टे ...... कुमुदसंहतेःसंसते stops, is gone. अनुदयभाजि इन्दौ कुमुदसंहते: ग्लानि: दृष्टा the assemblage of water-lilies has been seen to droop, when the moon is not risen. This is an example based on aur. 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. वसन्त ... वल्लिमन्याम् (p. 36, 1l. 18-19). वसन्तलेखायामेव एकस्यां निबद्ध: भाव: यस्य तत् (मन:) the affections of which are fixed upon Vasantalekha alone. प्रफुल्ल ... मन्याम् Does the bee, extremely fond of the honey of the blooming jasmine, desire any other plant? In this verse the figure is not zera, but प्रतिवस्तूपमा, because the two expressions, viz., 'how can our mind turn' and 'Does the bee desire another plant,' ultimately convey the same sense. In zer-a, in the two sentences the attributes are only similar and not the same ( but differently expressed ) as in प्रतिवस्तूपमा. इह तु. न त्वैकरूप्यम्-In the present figure, in the example 'arfafen etc.', 'the pouring of a stream of honey' and 'riveting the eye' are only similar, and not identical. The term gera 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 'दृष्टः अन्तः निश्चयः यत्र', which Mallinatha explains as 'दार्ष्टान्तिके सन्दिग्वस्यार्थस्यात्र निश्चयदर्शनादयं दृष्टान्त:' p. 245 तरल. The distinction between प्रतिवस्तूपमा and दृष्टान्त may be stated as follows :- Although in both similarity is implied, still in प्रतिवस्तूपमा the attribute is the same in both the sentences, being only expressed in different words; while in ger-a, the attribute in one sentence is only similar to ( and not identical with ) the attribute in the second sentence. Inze-a the two attributes

168 NOTES ON X. 51 दष्टान्त.

mentioned in the two sentences stand in the relation of the original and its reflection. 'अस्य चालक्वारस्य प्रतिवस्तूपमया मेदकमेतदेव यत्तस्यां धर्मों न प्रतिविम्बितः, किं तु शुद्धसामान्यात्मनैव स्थितः । इह तु प्रति- विम्बितः । R.G. p. 337. जयरय draws another distinction. In प्रतिवस्तूपमा something is stated in order to convey the idea that it is similar to the matter in hand; while in zera, in order that the matter in hand should not be indistinctly apprehended, we give an instance where a similar state of things exists. 'यतोउया: प्रकृताथैस्व विशेषाभिषित्सया सादृश्यार्थमप्रकृतमर्थान्तरमुपादीयते। भत एव चात्र प्रकृतापकृतयोरुपमानोपमेयभावः। दृष्टान्ते पुनरेतादृशो वृत्तान्तोऽन्यत्रापि स्वित इति प्रकृतस्थार्थस्याविस्पष्टा प्रतीतिमा भूदिति प्रतीतिविशदीकरणार्थमर्थान्तर- मुपादीयते।' विमर्शिनी p. 74. जयरथ says further on that similarity is not absolutely necossary for qera. Vide the severe criticism of these views of जयरथ in R.G. pp. 337-339. अत्र ...... न तथेति मेंद: (p. 36, ll. 22-24). In अर्थान्तरन्यास a general proposition is strengthened by particular instances or a particular instance is confirmed by a general proposition. In प्रतिवस्तूपमा or दृष्टान्त the twe 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 जयरथ's words 'केत्विच दृष्टान्ते द्रयोः समर्थ्यसमर्थकभावेन अनयोः (of प्रतिवस्तूपमा and दृष्टान्त) मेदमाङ्ग: । तदसत् । यतः सरूपयोर्विशेषयोः समर्थ्यसमर्थकभावो न भवति। वस्त्वन्तरेण वस्त्वन्तरसिद्यनुपपत्ते: ... यदि चात्र समर्थ्यसमर्थकभावः सवादर्थान्तरन्यासादख पृथगलक्कारता न स्यात्।' विम० p. 75. Jagannatha is willing to regard प्रतिवंस्तूपमा and दृष्टान्त as twa varieties of one figure. 'यदि तुन तेषां दाक्षिण्यं तदैकस्यैवालक्कारस् दौ भेदौ प्रतिवस्तूपमा दृष्टान्तश्च। यच्चानयोः किश्रिदैलक्षण्यं तत्प्रभेदताया एव साधकं 4 नालक्कारताया इति सुवचम् 1 R. G. p. 339. A good example of era is the following from Raghu. कामं नृपा: सन्ति सहस्रशोऽन्ये राजन्वतीमाडुरनेन भूमिम्। नक्षत्रताराग्रहसङ्कलापि ज्योतिष्मती चन्द्रमसैव रात्रिः ॥; also स्वसुखनिरमिलाषः खिदसे लोकदेतोः प्रतिदिनमथवा ते वृत्तिरेवंविधैव। अनुभवति हि मूर्धा पादपस्तीव्रमुष्णं शमयति परितापं छायया संश्रितानाम्॥ श्रा० V; कुतो धर्मक्रियाविम्रः सतां रक्षितरि त्वयि। तमस्तपति धर्माशी कथमाविर्भविष्यति॥ शा० V. 18 निदर्शना (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 निदर्शना.' An example of निदर्शना under a possi- ble connection of things is 'कोsन' etc. Construe ततः दिनेन अत्र भूमिवलये जनान्मुधा तापयन्क: सुचिरम् सम्पदम् मति इति वेदयन् भानुमान्

x. 51-52 निदशंना. SÂHITYADARPANA. 169

चरमाचरुम् आससाद-"'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 eonveying such an idea. स च refers to वेदनक्रियायां कर्तत्वेनान्वय :. 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 others. The ingredients which constitute fceiar 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 अस्ताचलगमन and विपत्प्राप्ति. The second variety of निदर्शना, where an impossible connection of things causes us to suppose the existence of similarity, is of two kinds, as (1) occurring in a single sentence or (2) in more sentences than one. An instance of B (1), is 'naqfa etc.' (p. 37, 1l. 5-6). 'Her sidelong darting glance bears the loveliness of the blue lotus; her underlip, the fairness 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 एकवाक्यगा because there is a single sentence in 'कटाक्षविक्षेप: कुवलयमालाललितं कलयति.' Another example of the same is प्रयाणे 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 ) is only fancied; this fancied connection, being actually impossible, implies a gait similar to that of the swan. An example of fai-IT based upon an impossible connection of things ( i. e. B. above ) occurring in more sentences than one is 're fho ete.' (p. 37 ll. 15-16). This verse occurs in Sāk. I. Here the connection of identity bewteen the significations

170 NOTES ON X. 51-52 निदर्शना.

of the two sentences, respectively marked by the relative pro- noun यदू and the demonstrative तद् (i.e. यः साधयितुं इच्छति स च्छेत्तं व्यवस्यति) being impossible, terminates in the relation of विम्बप्रतिबिम्बभाव 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. 'जन्मेदं etc.' (p. 37 11. 21-22). वन्ध्यतां नीतम् rendered fruitless. भव ... लिप्सया by the desire to enjoy the pleasures of the world. काचमूल्येन ... मया I have sold the (invaluable) Chintāmani (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 Chintāmani 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 Chintamani at the price of glass. क .- सागरम् (p. 37 1l. 25-26). This is Raghu. 1. 2. अल्पविषया मति: Intellect of little compass. उडपेन 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. इयं च ...... भोगविताने (p. 37, l. 28-p. 38, 1. 4). इयं च ... ' अवति-This variety (अभवन्वस्तुसम्बन्ध) may also be found where some circumstance belonging to the aydy cannot be found in the Upamana. In the foregoing examples, e. g. in 'कलयति कुवलयमालाललितं' a property of the उपमान (here ललितं of the कुवलयमाला) was represented as borne by the Upameya, कटाक्षविक्षेप :; 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 'योऽनुभूत: etc.' मृद्दीकारसे 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 उपमेय), being impossible in the grape-juice (the उपमान), the sense terminates in bringing out a comparison, as in the preceding examples. Our author here closely follows the अलं० स० "इयं सामान्येनैवासम्भवात् प्रतिपादिता उपमेयवृत्तस्योपमानेऽसम्मवादपि भवति। उभयत्रापि सम्बन्धविघटनस्य विद्यमानत्वाद। तबथा 'वियोगे गौडनारीणां यो गण्डतलपाण्डिमा। अलक्ष्यत स सर्जूरीमअ्जरीगर्भरेणुषु।।' अत्र गण्डतलं प्रकृतम्"

X. 51-52 निदर्शना. SAHITYADARPANA. 171

P. 78. निदर्शना is found in a series also, as in क्षिपसि ete. वृषदंशकः a cat. मृगादन: a hyena (तरक्षुस्तु मृगादनः । अमर० II. 5. 1). रदनः a tooth. भोगविताने चेतो विदधव (त्वम्) thou who settest thy heart on the series of worldly enjoyments. इह बिम्ब ...... सादृश्यपर्यवसानाभावात (p. 38, 11. 5-7). The author distinguishes between निदर्शना and दृष्टान्त. 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 gET-a, the sense of the sentences is complete; and then through the completed sense we understand the relation of type and prototype. Briefly put, in निदर्शना, resemblance is supposed in order to account for the bringing together of two things; while in zura, the sense is quite complete and then that sense simply implies resemblance. The अलं० स० draws another distinction. In दृष्टान्त, the two sentences are independent and stand in the relation of type and prototype; while in निदर्शना, 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. "निरपेक्षयोर्हि वाक्यार्थयोर्विम्बप्रतिबिम्बभावो दृष्टान्तः। यत्र च प्रकृते वाक्यार्थ वाक्यार्थान्तरमारोप्यते सामानाधिकरण्येन तत्र सम्बन्धानुपपत्तिमूला निदर्शनैव युकका न दृष्टान्त: ।" अलं. स. p. 77. Nor can it be said that this figure is the same as अर्थापत्ति (Natural Inference), because in the oxample of the latter, 'grisy' etc., the sense does not terminate in a comparison, as it does in निदर्शना. In the ex- ample 'कोड्र भूमिवलये' etc., one may say that the meaning is "Even the sun, who torments people, sets; what of others ?' Therefore there is aivfa, which will be explained below. Our author replies that this is not so. The essence of निदर्शना is that we must be led on to suppose comparison. This is not so in अर्थापत्ति. In 'कोsन' etc. we are led to suppose a comparison and therefore it is not an example of अर्थापत्ति. Some writers like रुय्यक divide असम्भवद्वस्तुसम्बन्धा into two varieties, पदार्थवृत्ति and वाक्यार्थवृत्ति, which correspond to एकवाक्यगा and अनेकवाक्यगा of our author. The अलं० स० gives 'तवत्पादनखरलानां यदलक्तकमार्जनम्। इदं श्रीखण्डलेपेन पाण्डुरीकरणं विधो:।' as an example of निदशंना. R. G. finds fault with it and calls it वाक्यार्थरूपक (p. 343). Uddyota defends the ao wo and says that this is शाब्दी निदर्शना, while 'क सूर्य' etc. is an example of आर्थी निदर्शना His roasons are 'न चेदं वाक्यार्थरूपकम्। लोकप्रसिद्धोपमानत्वोपमेयत्ववतोरमे-

172 NOTES ON X. 51-52 निदर्शना.

दस्यैव रूपकत्वाद। कि च तत्र सादृश्यलक्षणामूलाSमेदप्रवीतिः । इह तु प्रतीयमाना- भेदानुपपत्या तत्त्वकल्पनेति भेदात्l p. 47. R. G. is willing to regard 'त्वत्पादनखरलानि यो रअयति यावकै। इन्दुं चन्दनलेपेन पाण्डुरीकुरुते हि सः ॥' ( p. 344 ) as an example of निदर्शना. Some good examples of निदर्शना are :- (A) सम्भवद्वस्तुनिदर्शना-चूडामणिपदे धत्ते यो देवं रविमागतम्। सवां कार्यातिथेयीति बोधयन्गृहमेधिनः ॥ अयं मन्ददयुतिर्भास्वानस्तं प्रति यिया- सति। उदय: पतनायेति श्रीमतो बोधयन्नरान्॥ भामद III; उदयन्नेष सविता पद्मेष्वर्पयति श्रियम्। विभावयितुमृद्धीनां फलं सुहृदनुग्रहम् i। K. D. II. 349. (B) असम्भवद्वस्तुसम्बन्धनिदर्शना-विनोचितेन पत्या च रूपवत्यपि कामिनी। विधुवन्ध्यविभावर्या प्रबिभर्ति विशोभताम्। उद्भट V.19; शुद्धान्तदुर्लभ- मिदं वपुराश्रमवासिनो यदि जनस्य। दूरीकृता: खलु गुणरुद्यानलता वनल- तामिः॥l S'ak. I .; साक्षानियामुपगतामपहाय पूर्व चित्रार्पितां पुनरिमां बहु मन्यमान: । स्रोतावहां पथि निकामजलामतीत्य जात: सखे प्रणयवान्मृगतृष्णिकायाम्।। त्रा. VI. 19 व्यतिरेक (Contrast, Dissimilitude). When the Upameys excels or falls short of the Upamana, it is व्यतिरेक. The word व्यतिरेक means 'difference or excellence'. The name व्यतिरेक given to the figure is therefore quite appropriate, as in it the excellence of the Upameya over the Upamāna or vice versa is pointed out. qa ...... faer (p. 38, 1. 11). This is single, when the reason is mentioned and threofold when the reason is not mentioned. The reason of the superiority of the Upameya over the Upamana 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 व्यतिरेक; when any one of the two is mentioned (but not both) there are two more varieties; when none of the two is mentioned there is one more. Thus there are in all four varieties. चतुर्विधोऽपि. ... अष्टचत्वारिशद्विधः पुन :- The fourfold न्यतिरेक becomes twelvefold according as the relation of Upamana and Upameya is directly expressed by words or indirectly through the sense or is only implied. आक्षेप means 'implication.' These twelve varieties become twenty-four ( three times eight ) according as there is Paronomasia or not ( the words 'sasna in the karika implying the idea of agusf ). These 24 varieties ocour when the Upameya is superior to the Upamana.

X. 53-54 व्यतिरेक. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 173

These 24 varietios also occur in the same manner as above, when the Upameya is inferior to the Upamana. Thus there are in all 48 varieties. अकलङं ...... आधिक्य उदाहरणानि (p. 38, 1. 23-p. 39, 1. 3). In 'araar"' etc., both the circumstances, viz., 'spotlessness' belonging to the Upameya and tthe stainedness' of the moon (the Upamana) are expressed. If we read 'न कलक्कि विधूपमम्' for 'न कलक्कि विघुर्यथा' there is indirect comparison. We have to remember the distinetion of श्रौती and आर्थी उपमा based on the employment of words like यथा, इव or तुल्य etc. If we read 'जयतीन्दुं कलक्किनम्' (triumphs over the spotted moon ) for 'न कलक्ि Aga', we shall have an implied comparison, as words like इवं, तुल्य are absent. The face cannot defeat anything; so we are led to infer similarity between the face and the moon. द्योरनुक्तौ-when both अकलद्ं and कलक्ि are omitted we shall have an example of व्यतिरेक, where there is no mention of उपमेयगतमुत्कर्ष- कारणम् or of उपमानगतनिकर्षकारणम्. In this case the sentence would stand as 'मुखं तस्या न विघुर्यथा'. Our author's view is open to the following oriticism. Here it is simply stated that her face is not like the moon; i.e. there is pure सादृश्यनिषेध 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 expressing the superiority of one over the other. What we do is to negative similarity. So, those varieties of व्यतिरेक (viz. शाब्द, आर्थ and आक्षिप्त) which occur when both उपमेयगतोत्कर्ष and उपमानगतनिकर्ष are omitted, should really be not counted at all. Compare the criticism of R. G. "इदं तु बोध्यम्-इहोभयानु पादानमेदत्रयं दुरुपपादम्। वैधर्म्यानुपादाने हि किमाश्रयः श्रेषः स्यात्। न च यत्र द्विजसुरालय मातरि श्वादिशब्दवेघ्येषूपमानोपमेयेपु स्वशन्दोपास्त एव श्रेषो व्यतिरेकोत्थापक- स्तत्रेव तदुदाहरणं सूपपादमिति वाच्यम्। तत्र स्वशन्दवेघ्यस्यैव वैधर्म्यस सम्भवाद्। इत्थं च चतुर्विशतिभेदा इति प्राचामुक्तिर्विपुलोदाहरणामिज्ञैर्यथाकथश्िदुपपादनीया। कि चोपमाप्रमेदाः सर्व मवात्र सम्भवन्तीत्यलं चतुर्विशतिमेदगणनया।" p.350. क्रेषे ...... उदाहरणानि (p. 38, 1. 29-p. 39, 1. 3). अति etc. This is imitated from Mammata's words 'अतिगादगुणस्यास्य नाब्जवद्धङ्गुरा गुणाः. गुण means 'fibre' as well as 'merit'. भङूर frail. Here वत is used in the sense of इव (according to the sutra 'तत्र तस्येव'). Therofore it is शाब्दव्यतिरेक. Both the superiority of the Upameya (गाढगुणत्व) and the inferiority of the उपमान (भङ्गरगुणत्व) are mentioned. goy is paronomastic. Other varieties should be understood as before. Another example of छिष्टव्यतिरेक (आम)

174 NOTES ON X. 53-54 व्यतिरेक.

is "अंखण्डमण्डलः श्रीमान्पशयैष पृथिवीपतिः। न निशाकरवज्जावु कलावेकल्य- ana: I". Here the word ae1 is Paronomastic ( meaning 'phases' or 'arts' ). All these are examples of the cases where the उपमेय excels the Upamana.

न्यूनत्वे दिङ्मान्रं यथा ...... स्याधिक्यम् (p. 39, 1l. 3-6). क्षीण: क्षीणोऽपि ... यातं तु. This is रुद्रट VII. 90. यातं तु यौवनं अनिवर्ति- Youth, when gone, never comes back again. Here, the Jynra is the moon and the Upameya is youth. The moon is pointed out as waxing again after waning, while ( the syaa ) youth never waxes, when once it is lost. So youth is inferior to the moon. This is the opinion of our author, who closely follows the अलं. स. which defines व्यतिरेक as 'मेदप्राधान्ये उपमाना- दुपमेयस्याधिक्ये विपर्यये वा व्यतिरेक:' p. 79. The अलं. स. following रुंद्रट cites 'क्षीणः' etc. as an example of उपमेयन्यूनत्व. It remarks upon 'क्षीणः' etc. 'चन्द्रापेक्षया च यौवनस्य न्यूनगुणत्वम् । शशिवैलक्षण्येन तस्ा grra l' p. 80. This view is sharply opposed to that of Mammata, Jagannatha and others, who say that fat occurs only when the sudy is superior to or excels the Upamana in some way. They do not regard that the variety where aqdy is inferior to the Upamana has any charm in it. They say that 'क्षीणः क्षीणः' is an example of व्यतिरेक as defined by them; i. e. in it also the audy excels ( and is not inferior to ) the Upamana. The views of Mammata and others are summed up by our author in 'अन्रोपमेय ...... यत्केच्विदाङ्ः. 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 - su- perior, because it ean never return when once gone. Therefore what the poet here intends to convey is the superiority 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. This sense is quite favourable to the object desired, viz., soothing tho heroine's wounded feelings. But, if we take the moon as the 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

X, 53-54 व्यतिरेक. SÂRITYADARPAŅA. 175

is.' Therefore in this verse also, there is आधिक्य of उपमेय over उपमान. Therefore the words 'विपयये वा' employed in the definition of व्यतिरेक by some (e. g. अलं. स.) are useless. व्यतिरेक can never oocur when the उपमेय is represented as being inferior to the Upamana. These are the views of Mammata and others. Our author does not agree with them. तन्न विचारसहम् ...... स्फुटमेव (p. 39, 11. 8-9). By आधिक्य and Rar, 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 जयरथ 'शशियौवनयोर्हि समानेऽपि गत्वरत्वे शशिनः पुनरागमनमपि सम्भवति न तु यौवनस्वेति ततोऽस्य न्यूनगुणत्वम् । नन्वत्र विपर्ययमेवेति (विपर्यये वेति१) सूत्रितं भेदान्त- रमयुक्तम् । उपमानादुपमेयस्य न्यूनगुणत्वे वास्तवत्वाचत्त्वे चालङ्गारत्वानुपपचे:। यौवनस्य चात्रास्थिरत्वे प्रतिपाधे चन्द्रापेक्षयाधिकगुणत्वमेव विवक्षितम्। यदेत- चन्द्रवद्यातं सन्न पुनरायातीति। (जयरथ replies) असदेतत्। यतोऽन चन्द्रवद्गतं सदयावनं यदि पुनरप्यागच्छेत्तत्प्रियं प्रति चिरमीर्ष्यानुवन्धो युज्येत कालान्तरेऽपि ह्यस्य तदवलोकनादिना सफलीकारः स्यात्। इंदं पुनर्दतयौवनं यातं सत्पुनर्नागच्छतीति ईर्ष्याद्यन्तरायपरिदवारेण निरन्तरतयैव प्रियेण सद्द सफलयितव्यमिति 'धिगीष्या, त्यज प्रियं प्रति मन्युं, कुरु प्रसादम्' इत्य- सिमन् प्रियवयस्योपदेशे प्रियं प्रति कोपोपशमाय चन्द्रापेक्षया यौवनस्यापुनरागमनं न्यूनगुणत्वेनैव विवक्षितमिति वाक्यार्थविद एव प्रमाणम्। न चैतद्वास्तवमुपमेयस् न्यूनगुणत्वम्। तस्यैव सातिशयत्वेन प्रतिपाद्यत्वात्। प्रकृताथोंपरअकत्वे हि सर्वया कवेः संरम्भ: । तच्चाधिकगुणमुखेन भवत्वितरथा वा को विशेषः। तस्माद्युक्तमेव विपर्यये वेति सूत्रितम्॥।" p.80. विम० अस्तु वा ...... न्यूनताथवा इति (p. 39, 1l. 9-12). Our author concedes for argument's sake, that in 'ftur; aftur:' there is उपमेयाधिक्य (and not उपमेयन्यूनता). The reason why he concedes this is probably as follows :- That verse is intended to soothe a proud woman. It can produce the desired effect 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 यौवन as the उपमेय and as being inferior to the moon, it is better to point out that यौवन is the most unstable thing in the world (i. e. यौवनास्थैर्य is the उपमेय ) and that the most must be made of it. After conceding that 'aitr:' etc. may be an example of उपमेयगताधिक्य, our author cites 'हनूमदायैः etc. as an example, where there is उपमेयगतन्यूनत्व and says that here the explanation offered on 'क्षीणः' ewod not hold god. हनूमदाै .. सिवीकृत:

176 NOTES ON X. 53-54 व्यतिरेक.

This is the last half of Nai. IX. 123, the first half being 'रवनाम यत्राम सुधाभ्यधामहो महेन्द्रकार्य महदेतदुज्झितम् ।. The printed text of the नैषधीय reads दूत्यपथ, 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 इनूमत and others (i.e. उपमान ) are superior, because they carried out the errand on which they were sent by their masters; the sudy, 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 'का गतिः', that we cannot anyhow show that the Upameya is superior to the Upamana here. Therefore it is quite proper that the words न्यूनताऽथवा are inserted in the definition. But the उद्योत shows that even here it is उपमेयगताधिक्य and not उपमेयगतन्यूनख that is intended "अत्र नलमहीपतेः खवनिन्दया लब्धनिर्वेदातिशयरूपप्रकृतवाक्यार्थें दूत्यगत- न्यूनताया एवानुगुणत्वेनाविक्यरूपत्वाद।" p. 70. The R. G., after quoting the as. H. and the discussion of विमर्शिनी cited by us above, refutes their views as follows :- "तदुभयमप्यसत्। अस्मिन्हि प्रियहितकारिण्या वचने चन्द्रादप्यधिकगुणत्वमेव विवक्षितम्, न न्यूनगुणत्वम्। चन्द्रो हि पुनःपुनरागमनेन लोके सुलभः। अत एव न तादृशमाहात्म्यशाली। इदं च पुनर्योवनमपुनरागमनेनातिदुर्लभतरत्वादत्युत्कृष्टमिति मानादिमिरन्तरायैः शठजनश्ाघनीयैर्विदग्धया भवत्या मुधा गमयितुमसांप्रतमिति तावदुपात्तगुणकृतमुस्कृष्टत्वं स्फुटमव। सकलसुखनिदानत्वाद्यनुपात्तगुणकृतोऽप्युत्कर्षोडन् वाक्यार्थपरिपोषाय सहृदयहृदयसरणिमवतरति। अन्यथा 'किमित्यस्य कदर्यस्य यौवनस्य कृते मया मानाद्विरंस्यते यातु नाम यौवनमिति' प्रतिकूलेनार्थेन प्रकृतार्थस्यापुष्टतापत्तेः। किंच यत्र क्वापि शाब्द उपमेयस्यापकर्षस्तत्रापि स तस्य वाक्यार्थपर्यवसायितयोत्कर्षात्मना परिणमति। यथा 'द्रोहो निरागसां लोके हीनो हालाइलादपि। अयं इन्ति कुलं सायं भोक्तारं केवलं तु सः ॥।' अत्र हीन इत्यपकर्षो दारुणताधिक्यरूपोत्कर्षात्मना परिणमति।" R.G. p. 353. 20 सहोकि (Connected Description). When a single expression, by the force of a term denoting conjunction, signifies two facts, it is सहोक्ति, 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 सह, सार्धम्, साकम् etc., it is सहोक्ति. In पुत्रेण सहागत: पिता, the father is connected with the action of coming as well as the son. But the father, being in the nomi- native case, is principal, while ys, being in the Instrumental

X. 55 सहोक्ति. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 177

is indirectly (and therefore subordinately ) connected with the action of coming. The employment of the word we denotes the idea of गुणप्रधानभाव between the words, not necessarily between the things. It should never be forgotten that striking- ness is the essence of every figure. Hafer also must be striking. So पुत्रेण सहागतः पिता is not an example of the figure. सहोकि is striking only when it is based upon अतिशयोक्ति. This अतिशयोक्ति may be of two kinds (1) based upon अभेदाध्यवसाय (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 ) a Paronomasia, or (b) fiot. The अलं. स. remarks that in सहोक्ति the poet intends to convey the relation of उपमान and उपमेय, but it is not the natural one (as that of चन्द्र and मुख), but is entirely left to the volition of the writer. 'सहार्थप्रयुक्तश्चात्र गुणप्रधानभावः। उपमानोपमेयत्वं चात्र वैवक्षिकम्। द्वयोरपि प्राकरणिकत्वादप्राकरणिकत्वाद्वा। सहार्थसामर्थ्याद्ि तयास्तुल्यकक्षत्वम्। तत्र तृतीयान्तस्य नियमेन गुणत्वादुपमानत्वम्, अर्थाच्च परिशिष्टस्य अधानत्वादुपमेयत्वम्। शाब्दश्रात्र गुणप्रधानभावः। वस्तुतस्तु विपर्ययोऽपि स्याद्। तत्र नियमेनातिशयोक्तिमूलत्वमस्याः ।सा च कार्यकारणप्रतिनियमविपर्ययरूपा अभेदा- ध्यवसायरूपा च । अभेदाध्यवसायश्च श्रेषमित्तिकोऽन्यथा वा।" p. 81. सहाधरदलेन etc. Here the word रागभाकू is Paronomastie, There is अमेदाध्यवसाय between राग meaning 'redness' and राग meaning 'love.' Therefore this is अभेदाध्यवसायमूलातिशयोक्तिमूला सहोक्ति (i. e.1a). सह कुमुद .. सञ्जरन्ति. सह .. उल्लासयन्त: 'awake ning love along with the assemblage of water-lilies.' E सरसिज ...... मीलयन्त: 'closing the heart (in the contemplation of the beloved one) along with the multitude of lotuses.' Here the words aaTH etc, are distinct, from the difference of the things they relate to, but not under a Paronomasia. The idea is :- in 'सहाधर' etc. the two literal senses of the word राग (love, redness ) are identified; while here, the word ser 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 Haifir based upon the inversion of the sequence of cause and effect is 'सममेव' etc. सममेव ...... तलम्. The Nirn. edition says that this is taken from the Raghuvams'a. But this seems to be wrong. There is a similar verse in Raghu. "वपुषा करणोज्झितेन सा निपतन्ती पतिमप्यपातयत्। ननु तैलनिषेक- २१

178 NOTES ON X. 55 सहोक्ति.

बिन्दुना सह दीपार्चिरुपैति मेदिनीम्॥।" VIII. 38. गुरुसंमो हविलुप्तचेतना whose consciousness 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 सहोक्ति based upon कार्यकारणपौर्वापर्यविपर्यय ( i. e. 2 above ). लक्ष्मणेन ...... नायमलंकार: In लक्षमणेन etere is सहोक्ति, because there is no अतिशयोक्ति at the basis. Jagannatha very strongly criticizes those who regard कार्यकारणपौर्वापर्यविपर्ययमूला सहोक्ति as a separate figure. He says that the charm lies simply in the inversion and therefore the figure is अतिशयोक्ति and not सहोक्ति. Vide his lucid and pointed remarks, R. G. pp. 361-362. Other examples of सहोक्ति are :- 'सह दीर्घा मम श्वासैरिमाः संप्रति रात्रयः। पाण्डुराश्च ममैवाङेः सह ताश्रन्द्रभूषणाः । वर्धते सह पान्थानां मूच्छया चूतमञ्जरी। पतन्ति च समं तेषामसुमिर्मलयानिलाः॥'K. D. II. 352-353. 21 विनोक्ति (Speech of Absence). यद् अन्येन विना अन्यद् न असाधु, असाधु वा (सा) विनोक्ति :- That is विनोक्ति, when a thing in the absence of another is represented (1) as not disagreeable, or (2) as disagreeable. arerg means that it does not become unsightly. Thus, though the meaning of the words न असाधु is ultimately the same as 'शोमन' i agreeable, still the reason why the attribute of agreeableness is expressed through the negative of disagrecableness (i: &. not positively as शोमन, but through two negatives as in न मशोमन) is to convey the idea that the अशञोभनत्व (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. Compare अलं. स० 'अत्र च शोभनत्वाशोभनत्वसत्तायामेव वक्तव्यायामसत्तामुखे- नाभिधानमन्यनिवृत्तिप्रयुक्ता तन्निवृत्तिरिति ख्यापनार्थम्। एवं च तदन्यनिवृत्ती विधिरेव प्रकाशितो भवति ।' p. 83. विना etc. निस्तन्द्रतां गतः attained her unslumbering state ( i. e. shone with all her natural brilliance). ग्रीष्मोष्मणा विना without the heat of summer. मञ्जु: charming. Here the moon and woods are naturally charming, but become ia 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 'अन्येन विना अन्यत् अश्ञोमन न.' जनावीतं कान्तमनुयान्त्या By you, who followed thy lord

X. 56 विनोक्ति. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 179

who is dead. Here दिनश्री is अशोभन without the sun; i.e. अन्येन विना अन्यत् अशोभनम् निरर्थकं ...... न येन (p. 40, 11. 7-8). This occurs in अलं. स. p. 84 as an example of विनोक्ति. It is ascribed to विल्हण and राजकन्या in the सुभाषितावलि (No. 1964). तुहिनांशुः means 'the moon.' विनिद्रा awakened i. e. blooming. The Sarvasva reads the last pada as 'न येन दृष्टा नलिनी प्रबुद्धा.' In this verse, there is a special strikingness, as there is a विनोक्ति with reference to each of the two i.e. नलिनीजन्म is said to be अशोभन without चंद्रदर्शन and चन्द्रोत्पत्ति is said to be अशोभन without विनिद्रनलिनीदर्शन. अलं. स. remarks in the same way on निरर्थकं ete. 'इत्यादौ विनोक्तिरेव तुहिनांशुदर्शनं विना नलिनीजन्मनोऽशोभनत्वप्रतीतेः । इयं च परस्परविनोक्तिभंग्या चमत्कारातिशयकृत । यथोदाहते विषये।' p. 84. विनाशब्द etc. Although the very particle विना is not employ- ed here, still, the figure is विनोक्ति, since the sense intended to be conveyed is that of विना. Similarly सहोक्ति may occur without the actual employment of सह. 'अत्र विनाशब्दमन्तरेणापि विनार्थविवक्षा यथाकथंचिन्निमित्तीभवति । यथा सहोक्तौ सहार्थविवक्षा ।' अलं. स. 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 अलङ्कारभाष्यकार defines it differently. विमo says "यदाहालङ्कारभाष्यकारः । 'नित्यसम्बद्धानामसम्बन्धवचनं विनोक्तिरिति विनोक्तिरुपसं- ख्यास्यते इति' " p. 83. An example of this विनोक्ति will be "'तस्या: शैत्यं विना ज्योत्सा पुष्पर्द्धिः सौरभं विना। विनोष्णत्वं च द्रुतभुक्त्वां विना प्रतिभासते।।" इत्यत्र विनोवत्यलङ्कारत्वमाहुः । अत्र हि ज्योत्खादीनां शैत्यादिना नित्यमविनाभावेऽपि विनाभाव उपनिबद्धः ।" विम० p. 83. Jagannatha also rofers to this अलङ्कारभाष्यकार, quotes his definition and cites the following as an example :- मृणालमन्दानिल चन्दनानामुशीर शेवालकुशे- शंयानाम् । वियोगदूरीकृतचेतनाया विनैव शैत्यं भवति प्रतीतिः ।। R. G. pp. 365-366. 22 समासोक्ति (Speech of Brevity). यत्र समैः कार्यलिङ्गविशेषणैः अन्यस्य वस्तुनः प्रस्तुते व्यवहारसमारोपः सा समासोक्ति :- '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 समासोक्ति. Another means 'a thing which is not the subject in hand.' In समासोक्ति the अप्रकृत thing is not mentioned in words; on the प्रकृत, the be- haviour of the अप्रकृत is superimposed on account of a similarity of actions or on account of the gender of the word employed or on account of adjectives.

180 NOTES ON X. 56 समासोकि.

An example of समासोक्ति, where the behaviour of the अप्रस्तुत is ascribed to the प्रस्तुत from a sameness of action, is व्याघूय etc. व्याधूय ... गन्धवाह (p. 40, ll. 15-16). अम्बुजलोचनायाः (कमलनयनाया:) कनककुम्भविलासभाजोः वक्षोजयोः (स्तनयोः) वसनं (वसत्रं) व्याधूय (दूरमपसार्य), यद् अस्या: अशेषं (सर्वे) अङ्गं प्रसभं (हठात) आलिङ्गसि (तत्) (हे) मंलयाचलगन्धवाह (मलयपर्वतसम्बन्धिवायो) त्वमेव धन्यः 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. 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 argaa- प्रशंसा and not समासोक्ति समासोक्ति from a sameness of sex or gender (i. e. 2 above) is exemplified in 'असमाप्' etc. असमाप्त ...... रवि: (p. 40, ll.19-20). This is Rajatarangini IV. 441. 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.' In this, verse, the behaviour of lover and heroine is ascribed to the sun and the evening, simply because of the words being respec- tively in the masculine and feminine genders. There is अर्थान्तरन्यास also. Sameness of attributes ( i. e. 3 above ) may occur in three ways; (a ) from a Paronomasia; (b) from community and (c) as implying resemblance. An example of (3 a) is faafaa etc. (p. 40, ll. 24-27). तुहिनद्यतिः (हिमांशुः चन्द्रः) पुरः (पुरतः) विकसित- मुखीं (विकसितं मुखं एकदेशः यस्याः सा; विकसितं मुखं वदनं यस्या: सा) रागासज्जाव (रागस्य रक्तवर्णस्य आसङ्गात; रागस्य अनुरागस्य आसङ्गात्) गलत्तिमिरावृतिम् (गलन्ती अ्रश्यन्ती तिमिरस्य अन्धकारस्य आवृतिः आवरणं यस्याः सा; पक्षे गलन्ती तिमिरावृति: तिमिरसदृशं वसनं यस्या: सा) दिनकरकरस्पृष्टाम् (सूर्यकिरणस्पृष्टाम्; करः हस्तः तेन स्पृष्टाम्) ऐन्द्री (प्राचीं) दिशं निरीक्ष्य, जरठलवलीपाण्डुच्छाय: (पक्कलवलीवत् पाण्ड: छाया कान्तिर्यस्य सः) कलुषान्तरः (कलुषं मलिनं अन्तरं यस्य; पक्षे कलुषं ईर्ष्यया आ- कुलं अन्तरं मनः यस्य सः) प्राचेतसी (वरुणाधिष्ठितां प्रतीचीं) हरितं (दिशं) श्रयति (भजते). In this verse, the words मुख, राग 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. The Paronomastic adjectives

X. 56-57 समासोक्ति. SAHITYADARPANA. 181

convey the idea that, on seeing that his beloved (afickle 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 an unchaste woman.

अत्रैव हि ...... सुखसव्चारत्वाभावात (p. 40, l. 28-p. 41, l.11). अत्रैव ...... समासोक्तिरेव. In the above example, even if we read 'तिमिरांशुकाम्' for 'तिमिरावृतिम्' and thus turn a part of the verse into a metaphor (गलत्तिमिरांशुकाम् would be equal to गलत् तिमिरमेव अंशुकं यस्या: सा), the figure is still समासोक्ति and not एकदेश्विवर्तिरूपक तत्र ...... ईश: The author now proceeds to assign his reasons for saying that there is uralfen- There (i. e. in तिमिरांशुकाम्) 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 (रूप्यरूपकभाव:) could not preclude our recognizing auraifn to be the figure in this verse. What the author means is :- तिमिर and अंशुक 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 अंशुक on तिमिर would be quite independent of any other artty 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 समासोक्ति although in one part (i.e. तिमिरांशुकाम् read for तिमिरा- वृतिम्) there is Rupaka. यत्र ...... रूपकमेव. 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 ace- विवंर्तिरूपक. The author says :- in एकदेशविवर्तिरूपक, 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 'विकसितमुखीं' etc. the रूपक in ffrigm is quite independent of any other Rupaka, as the two things greatly resemble one another. We need not suppose, to aceount for तिमिरांशुक, that there is a रूपक of प्राची and नायिका, although it is not directly expressed. Therefore fafarirs.

182 NOTES ON X. 56-57 समासोकति.

standing by itself, the figure in the whole verse is समासोक्ति and not एकदेशविवर्तिरूपक. An example of एकदेशविवर्तिरूपक is 'जस्स' etc. (p. 40, 1l. 4-5). 'यस्य रणान्तःपुरे करे कुर्वतो मण्डलाग्रलताम्। रससंमुख्यपि सहसा पराङमुखी भवति रिपुसेना I'. This verse is cited in the K. P. as an example of एकदेशविवर्तिरूपक. 'मण्डलाग्लताम् खङ्गलताम्। करे कुर्वतः धारयतः । युद्धार्थ रतार्थ च। अन्तःपुरत्वारोपसामर्थ्याल्ताया नायिकात्वावगमात्। रसेन वीररसेन शृङ्गारेण च। संमुखी युयुत्सू रिरंसुश्च । पराङ्मुखीभवति भयाद्यद्ान्नि- वर्तते कोपात्प्रियसङ्गमाच्च।' उ. च. p. 385. Here the resemblance between battle-field and the ara:yr is not quite evident. Here, although there is the superimposition of the character of a heroine on मण्डलागलता, because the gender of both words is the same and although the behaviour of the rival heroine ( ma- faT) 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 एकदेशविवर्तिरूपक (and not समासोक्ति where also there is the superimposition of अप्रस्तुतव्यवहार on a प्रस्तुत thing); for these two superimpo- sitions (of नायिका on मण्डलागलता and प्रतिनायिका on रिपुसेना) are made solely to account for the superimposition of ar-a:yr on रण. क्कत्विच्च ... •तिरोधायकत्वात्. 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 एकदेशविवर्ति- रूपक. The author said above that even if we read (in 'विकसि- तमुखी' eto.) 'तिमिरांशुकाम्' the figure will be समासोक्ति; the Rupaka in तिमिरांशुकाम् 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. Now the question is :- Is the figure of the whole verse qaraif or एकदेशविवर्तिरूपक ? It may be said that, as in तिमिरांशुकाम, the Rupakas, being all of them as regards things between which there is evident resemblance, may stand by themselves and the figure will be aatfer as there is one superimposition which is implied ( as in HHTalfi ) 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 Rapakas ) and as this all pervading cognition prevails over

X. 56-57 समासोकिं. SAHITYADARPANA. 183

the cognition of HaTetfir (which is possible, in the case supposed, in a solitary part of the whole verse ). ननु ...... चेतू. It was said above that the resemblance bet- ween रण and अन्तःपुर was not quite evident. An objection is raised against this in these words :- 'There is evident resem- blance between रण and अन्तःपुर, as in both of them the hero moves with ease.' The author replies 'सत्यं ... सुखसव्चारत्वाभावात.' It may be conceded that there is a clear resemblance between रण and अन्तःपुर; 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 aa:gr are not, in themselves, places for easy movement, as a face and the moon are charming in their very nature; i.e. as मुख and चन्द्र are charming independently of anything else, we may independently superimpose the one on the other; but {u and ard:yt 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. साधारण्येन ...... प्रतीतेरसम्भवात् (p. 41, 11. 11-16). An example of 3 b above is 'निसर्ग etc. निसर्ग ... सरोजिनी-उदिते वासराधीशे (सूये) निसर्गसौरमेण उद्भान्ता: ये भृङ्गा: तेषां यत्सङ्गीतं तेन युक्ता सरोजिनी (कमलिनी) स्मेरा (स्मितवती) अजनि (जाता). In this verse, the adjeetive 'निसर्ग ... शालिनी' 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 lotus under the character of the heroine, by reason of the attribution of the action of smiling ( the meaning of ir being 'smiling'), which belongs only to a human being ( and not to the plant ). स्मेरत्व primarily belongs to the woman only; it is then identified with the विकास of the lotus. So the adjective स्मेरा 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 अप्रस्तुत, as स्मेरा here), it would be impossible to recognise the behaviour of a woman (in the lotus plant ) merely from a community of epithets. a. फलितम् ।' राम०. Compare the words of जयरथ 'तदेवं साधारण्येन समासोक्तेर्विशेषणसाम्ये सत्यप्यप्रकृतसम्बन्धिधर्मकार्यसमारोपमन्तरेण तद्व्यवहारप्रती तिर्न भवतीति सिद्धम् ।' p. 86 and vide the adverse criticism of R. G. pp. 379-380.

184 NOTES ON X. 56-57 समासोकि.

औपभ्यगर्भत्वं ...... प्रतीति: (p. 41, ll. 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, a metaphor, or a commixture (of the two figures) is included. तत्रोपमागर्भत्वे etc. दन्तप्रभा ...... हरिणेक्षणा. This oceurs in ars. H. p. 86. Compare the following from उद्भट (II.23.) 'दन्तप्रभासुमनसं पाणिपलवशोभिनीम्। तन्वीं वनगतां लीनजटाषट्- चरणावलिम् ॥'. In this verse the adjective सुवेषा (well dressed) applies primarily to the woman. Therefore the other adjec- tives aayar etc. must be interpreted in such a way as to be applicable to her. दन्तप्रभापुष्पचिता is to be dissolvd as दन्तप्रभा: पुष्पाणि इव तैः चिता. In so dissolving, the word दन्तप्रभा: will be. prominent, and the figure, in the compound, will be Upama. Afterwards, the compound दन्तप्रभापुष्पचिता being dissolved in another manner (as दन्तप्रभासदृशैः पुष्पैश्चिता, which is a मध्यमपदलोपि- HRH, 'covered with flowers resembling the brightness of the teeth' ) we recognise the fawn-eyed lady under the character of a creeper, by the force of the qualifications (such as दन्तप्रभापुष्पचिता, पाणिपल्लवशोमिनी etc.) which are equally applicable both to the lady and the creeper (by a difference in the way of the dissolution of the compounds). Our author here copies the very words of the अलं. स. p.16 'अत्र दन्तप्रभा: पुष्पाणीवेति सुवेषत्ववशादुपमागर्भत्वेन च कृते समासे पश्चाद्दन्तप्रभासटृशैः पुष्पश्चितेति समासान्तरा- श्रयणेन समानविशेषणमाहात्म्यालताव्यवहारप्रतीतिः ।'. रूपकगर्भत्वे ...... इत्यादि ( p. 41 11 22-23 ). The verse 'लावण्यमधुभि: has been cited above as an example of एकदेशविवर्तिरूपक. The way in which this verse will be समासोत्ति is as follows :- लावण्य and मधु are both delight ful; similarly लोचन and रोलम्ब are both श्याम; therefore there is evident resemblance between them. These two Rūpakas may stand by themselves; they are independent and do not require the आरोप of पद्म on मुख. The adjective विकस्वर (expanding) primarily applies to पद्य and not to मुख. Therefore, as in 'निसर्ग- सौरम' eto., the figure is समासोक्ति. 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 aureifer. It will be seen below that our author's view is quite different and that he does not approve of रूपकगर्भा समासोक्ति. In giving this example he simply follows ancient writers. सङ्करगर्भत्वे ...... प्रतीतिः- ( p. 41 11.23-25). # will be treated of at length below. It has been briefly explained in the notes (p. 21) on 'q: कौमारहर:'. If we read परीता for सुवेषा in 'दन्तप्रभा' etc, then

X. 56-57 समासोक्ति. SAHITYADARPANA. 185

समासोक्ति will be सङ्करगर्भा (of उपमा and रूपक). परीता is an adjective that may apply to the woman as well as to the creeper. There is no criterion for settling whether there is a simile or a metaphor in दन्तप्रभापुष्पचिता. Therefore there is सन्देहसक्कूर. 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 "अन्रैव 'परीता हरिणेक्षणा' इति पाठे उपमारूपकसाधकवाधकाभावात्सङ्कर- समाश्रयणेन कृते योजने पश्चात्पूर्ववत् समासान्तरमहि्रा लताप्रतीतिज्ञेया।" अलं. स. pp. 86-87. एषु च .... मुचिता (p. 41, ll. 26-28). Of these three cases (viz. उपमागर्भ, रूपकगभं, and सङ्गरगर्भ) there is समासोक्ति in the first and third according to the opinion of those who hold that a simile and सङ्कर cannot be partial. It is उद्धट who re- gards that उपमा and सदूर cannot be एकदेशविवर्ति. Compare जयरथ on the words of अलं. स. p. 87. 'उपमासङ्करयोरेकदेशविवार्तनोरभा- वात्'-"अभावादिति उद्भटमते यदाङ्डु: 'न च रुद्रटस्येवोन्द्टस्यैकदेशविवर्तिरूपक- वदुपमासक्करावेकदेशविवर्तिनौ स्तः ।' अतश्च एतन्मताभिप्रायेणोक्तम्।" p. 87. The author of अलं. स., perhaps simply following Udbhata, says that उपमा and सङ्कर cannot be एकदेशविवर्ति; but afterwards (on p. 92) he himself says that एकदेशविवर्तिनी उपमा must be admitted "एकदेशविवर्तिन्युपमा यदि प्रतिपदं नोक्ता तदा सा केन प्रतिषिद्धा। सामान्यलक्षणद्वारे- णायातायास्तस्या अत्रापि सम्भवात्।". Jagannatha takes Ruyyaka to task for this inconistency; 'न चोन्भटमते एकदेशविवर्तिनोरुपमासङ्करयोर- स्वीकारात्तथोक्तमिति वाच्यम् । अनुपदमेव स्वयं तत्स्वीकारात् ।'. द्वितीयस्तु ...... एव. The 2nd (viz. रूपकगर्भसमासोक्ति) is nothing but एकदेशविवर्तिरूपक. In लावण्यमधुभि: पूर्ण etc. there is एकदेशविवर्तिरूपक and not समासोक्ति (as the author said following ancient writers); be- cause here the charm lies in the Rupaka and not in Har- सोक्ति; besides what is first perceived is the Rupaka. मधु cannot possibly be connected with the face and hence from the very first we must superimpose पद्मत्व on मुख. Compare 'मुखे मध्वादयन्वयस्यासम्भवात्प्रथमत एव पझ्माध्याहारेण प्रतीतिः । कुतो व्यज्ञनामात्रप्राणा समासोक्तिरिति भाव: ।' राम०. 'रूपकगर्भत्वेन तु समासान्तराश्रयणात्समानविशेषणत्वं भवदपि न समासोक्ते प्रयोजकम्। एकदेशविवर्तिरूपक मुखेनैवार्थान्तरप्रतीतेस्तस्या वैयर्थ्यात्।' अलं. स. p. 87. पर्यालोचने ..... उचिता. On careful con- sideration, however, it will appear that in the first variety (viz., उपमागर्भसमासोक्ति) it is proper to recognize no otber figure than Partial Simile. अन्यथा ... धारणासम्भवात् (p. 41, 1. 28-32). ऐन्द्रं ... चकार. This verse ocours in अलं. स. p. 92 and सुभाषितावलि, both of which

186 NOTES ON X. 56-57 समासोक्ति

read प्रसादयन्ती (which is better ) instead of प्रमोदयन्ती *. पाण्डुपयो- धरेण आर्द्रनखक्षताभम् ऐन्द्रं धनुः दधाना शरद् सकलङ्कमिन्दुं प्रमोदयन्ती रवेः अभ्यधिकं तापं चकार. The autumn bearing on her pale पयोधर ( cloud ; breast ) the bow of Indra ( the rain-bow ) resembling the fresh wound of the nail and delighting the spotted moon, increased the distress (or the heat ) of the sun. If एकदेशविव- तिनी उपमा be not admitted and in its place समासोक्ति be recognis- ed, 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 rain-bow resembling & 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 whether this apprehension is due to Upama or समासोक्ति, or whether the fgure in the verse is एकदेशविवर्तिनी उपमा or समासोक्ति. The words मर्द्रनखक्षताभम् ऐन्द्रं धनु: convey, by the force of the word आभ, that the figure is Upama. The only thing that is specially noteworthy is that all the angas are not mentioned in words. नायिका and नायक are not mentioned, but we can understand that they are the Upamanas here from the fact that ur : is expressly compared to आर्द्रनखक्षत. So the figure is एकदेशविवर्तिनी उपमा. But, it is said by some that the figure is समासोक्ति Here the qualification प्रमोदयन्ती (or better प्रसादयन्ती 'making clear of clouds;' 'propitiating') is common to both 4 and नायिका and therefore here, the behaviour of the नायिका and of नायक is attributed to शरदू and रविचन्द्र respectively. Thus the figure is amraifir. Our author brings forward against this the objection that then the qualification 'आर्द्रनखक्षताभं येन्द्रं धनुर्दधाना' cannot be applied to the Nayika. It is applicable only to Autumn. It cannot be applied to Nāyikā, whose breast cannot be said to bear the rainbow. So, in taking समासोक्ति to be the figure, one qualification would have to be regarded as practically purposeless. This is not good. We must understand the figure to be that which would explain overything. If we take एकदेशविवर्तिनी उपमा to be the figure, then we can explain ऐन्द्रं धनु: as compared to नखक्षत, शरदू to नायिका and the moon to a नायक; and so on. 'प्रसादयन्ती सकलङ्कमिन्दुमिति विशेषणसाम्याच्छरदो नायिकात्वप्रतीतौ तदानुगुण्यात्तयोः (इन्दुसूर्ययोः) समासोक्ला नायकत्वप्रतीतिरिति चेद, आर्द्रनखक्षताभमैन्द्रं धनुर्दधानेत्येतद्विशेषणं कथं साम्येन निर्दिष्टम् ।' अलं. स. p. 92. * The Subha. ascribes the verse to Panini.

X. 56-57 समासोक्ति. SAHITYADARPANA. 187

ननु ...... भविष्यतीति चेत् (p. 41, 1. 32-p. 42, 1.3). An objec- tion is raised in these words against the position taken above that the figure is एकदेशविवर्तिनी उपमा, as in one part, viz., नखक्षताभम्, it is directly expressed. Though here, according to the letter, the character of Upamana belongs to the nail wound, 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 आाभ is used after नखक्षत, at first sight it appears that नखक्षत is the Upamana; but if we reflect upon the spirit of the passage, which is the apprehension of the behaviour of Nayika, we shall find that Faga is the Upameya and ऐन्द्रं धनु: is the Upamana; therefore we should construe the words in a different way., viz, ऐन्द्रचापाभं नखक्षतं I-T. A parallel instance of interpretation is given in the words 'यथा दभा ... विधिः'. विधि is a Vedic sentence which enjoins something which is not known from any other source, 'विधिरत्यन्तमप्राप्तौ.' Vide notes below on परिसंख्या. The sentence 'दमा जुहोति' (he makes an oblation of curds) is a विधि. The question is :- what is laid down in this sentence; whether a is laid down or the oblation of curds is laid down. The reply is :- The Vedic sentence अगिदोत्रं नुहोति has already enjoined हवन. So, although in दभा जुदोति the verbg ocours, still, what is enjoined is not हवन, which is अन्यथासिद् (i. c. which we alrerdy know from another source, viz., the Vedic injunction अगिनहोत्रं जुहोति), but दधि as the material with which the aqa is to be effected. Here the words apparently lay down ga7, but from the spirit of the passage and other circu- mstances, we say that the object is not to lay down gar, but to give information about the material to be used. Similarly, the clause 'ऐन्द्रं धनुः आर्द्रनखक्षताभं दधाना' will imply 'ऐेन्द्रचापाभं नखक्षतं दधाना.' The words from ननु प्रतीतिर्भविष्यतीति aro copied almost verbatim from the अलं.स. "अथात्र नोपमानलवेन नायक: स्वरूपेण प्रतीयते तथापि रविशशिनोरेव नायकव्यवहारप्रतीतिः। तयोरत्र नायकत्वात्। तदत्रार्द्रनखक्षताभमित्यत्र स्थितमपि श्त्योपमानत्वं वस्तुपर्यालोचनया पेन्द्रे धनुषि सञ्चारणीयम्। इन्द्रचापाभं नखक्षतं दधानेति प्रतीतेः । यथा 'दभा जुद्ोति' इत्यादौ द्नि स्नार्यते विधिः, एवमियमुपमानुप्राणिता समासोकिरेव।" p. 92; om यथा दश्ना etc. जयरथ remarks "एतदेव शास्त्रान्तरप्रसिद्धदृष्टान्तमुखेन हृदयंगमी- करोति-यथेत्यादिना। अग्निहोत्रं जुद्ुयादित्यनेनोत्पत्तिविधिवाक्येन हि होमो विदितस्तस्य च पुनर्विधानमदग्धदहनन्यायेन यावदप्राप्तं विधेर्विषय इत्यभ्युपगमाज्न सुज्यत इति तत्रायुक्तत्वादुपपदे दव्नि स्चार्यते इत्यर्थः ।"; compare "'भूतभ भुच्ारणे भूतं भव्यायोपदिश्यते' इति कारकपदार्थाः क्रियापदार्थेनान्वीयमानाः प्रषा- भूतभन्यस-

188 NOTES ON X. 56-57 समासोकि.

नक्रियानिर्वर्तकस्वक्रियाभिसम्त्रन्धात् साध्यायमानतां प्राप्ुवन्ति, ततश्चादग्धदददनन्यायेन यावदप्राप्तं ताबद्विधीयते यथा ऋत्विकप्रचरणे प्रमाणान्तरात्सिद्धे 'लोहितोष्णीषा ऋत्विजः प्रचरन्ति' इत्यत्र लोहितोष्णीषत्वमात्रं विधेयम्; हवनस्यान्यतः सिद्धेः 'दम्ना जुहोति' इत्यादौ दध्यादेः करणत्वमात्रं विधेयम्। K. P. 5th Ul. pp. 226-227 (Va); "यथा दहने नादग्धमात्रं दह्यते न तु दग्धमपि तथा यावदेवाप्राप्तं तावदेव शब्देन विधीयते न तु प्राप्तमपि। यथा ...... हवनस्य अन्यतः सिद्धो च 'दभा जुहोति' इत्यनेन दभ्नः करणत्वं न तु दधि हवनं वा" प्रदीप pp. 176-177; the प्रभा says on न तु दघि etc. "केवलमित्यर्थः । दधिवत्तत्कर- णताया अपि अप्राप्तेः । प्रकाशेऽपि 'दध्यादेः करणत्वमात्रम्' इति मात्रचा

एवं ...... ज्यायस्त्वाव (p. 42, ll. 3-4). Our author replies to the above ingenious argument in these words. It is better to admit the existonce of एकदेशविवर्तिनी उपमा 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 diffi- eulty (अनिर्वाहे). अस्तु वात्र ...... गत्यसम्भवात (p. 42, ll. 4-6). Granting, however, that समासोक्ति may somehow be recognized in the verse 'ऐन्द्रं धनुः', we shall still have to admit एकदेशविवर्तिनी उपमा in such a verse as 'नेत्रैरिव' (cited on X. 24 p. 21 of the text above), as there is no other alternative. The word अन्यगत्यसम्भवात् is to be connected with 'एकदेशविवर्तिन्युपमवाङ्गीकर्तुमुचिता' above. The particle इव is invariably associated with the Upamana; so in "afta' etc., उत्पल, पद्म and चक्रवाक are compared expressly with नेत्रं, मुख and स्तन respectively; अङ्गना, the उपमान of सरःश्री, is not expressed. We cannot construe इव with उत्पल, the Upameya, as आम was above taken away from its place and construed with ऐन्द्रं धनु: The words तुल्य etc. (of which आम is one) are construed with the Upamana or Upameya or both; but as said above ( on p. 91 ) sa goes with the Upamana alone. So in 'नेत्रैरिवोत्पलैः' समासोक्ति is not possible. किं च ... स्फुटा. Besides, how can समासोक्ति (which consists in the attribution of the behaviour of one thing to another) have room in simile, on which ( in such examples as दन्तप्रभा etc.) समासोक्ति 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 thing; while in समासोक्ति 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 'दन्तप्रभा etc'; is an example of समासोक्ति based upon HT. Our author says that if you once admit that there is

X. 56-57 समासोक्ति. SAHITYADARPANA. 189

simile, you cannot in the same breath admit समासोक्ति. 'विशेषणानां सादृश्योपलम्भमहिम्ना विशेष्यस्याप्यध्याहारेण प्रथमत एव सादृश्य- प्रसीतिरनुभवसिद्धा तयैव श्रोतुराकांक्षाविरद्वाद् व्यवहारव्यञ्ञनं न भवतीति भाव:।' राम०. Compare "'नेत्रैरिव' इत्यत्र सरःश्रियां नायिकात्वप्रतीतिर्न समासोक्त्या। विशेषणसाम्याभावात् । तस्मान्नायिकात्रोपमानत्वेन प्रतीयते न तु सरःश्री- धर्मत्वेन नायिकाप्रतीतिरित्येकदेशविवर्तिन्युपमैवाभ्युपगम्या। गत्यन्तरासम्भवात्।" अलं. स. p. 93. The author supports his position by a quotation. "व्यवहारो ... स्फुटा'. All the printed editions read तन्नौपम्यं समासो्ति: which is also the reading of ₹rqo. Pramadadasa, in a foot-note (p. 400), asks us to read तन्नौपम्यसमासोक्ति: This latter is better, because the context is favourable to it. The author is discussing' whether समासोक्ति based upon औपम्यगर्भविशेषणs is possible. If we read तन्नौपम्यसमासोत्त:, the verse will mean that समासोक्ति based on औपम्य (i. e. औपम्यगर्भविशेषण) is not possible. If we read तन्नौपम्यं समासोक्ति: and also तत्त्वमौपम्ये as N does, the meaning will be :- व्यवहारो अथवा तत्त्वम् (स्वरूपं) यत् औपम्ये प्रतीयते तद् औपम्यं समासोक्तिर्न (सा) एकदेशोपमा सफुटा. 'That resemblance in which the behaviour or the nature of two things is understood ( to be similar ) is not समासोक्ति, but it is evidently partial simile.' An objection against this is that the word arqe is needlessly repeated in the second half. TH. supports this interpretation. B and J read तत्त्वं नौपम्ये. There the meaning would be 'since in उपमा, neither the identical action nor the nature (of the उपमान) is understood ( to be attributed to the Upameya ), there is no * such thing as aurelfm (in which this is done) based upon simile but it is evidently एकदेशविवर्तिनी उपमा.' To us this appears better, as it agrees well with the words above 'कि चोपमायां व्यवहारप्रती- तेरभावात् etc.' Some say that in समासोक्ति the nature (रूप) 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 (व्यवहार) of another. In Upama one thing is simply understood to be similar to another. एवं च ...... नास्या विषय इति (p. 42, 11. 10-11). Thus the possi- bility of a partial simile and partial metaphor being admitted, it follows logically that समासोक्ति is not possible in a सङ्कर (com- mixture ) founded upon the two ( Upama and Rūpaka ). So in fact, समासोक्ति does not admit of being sustained by epithets implying comparison. The author said above that विश्ञेषणसाम्य is possible in three ways, श्िष्टतया, साधारण्येन, औपम्यगर्भत्वेन. The last he divided into three, उपमागर्म, रूपकगर्भ and उपमारूपक- २२

190 NOTES ON X. 56-57 समासोक्ति.

#rA. He established above that the first and second of these latter are respectively एकदेशविवर्तिनी उपमा and एकदेशविवर्ति- रूपक. He shows here that the third also is not समासोकि but purely सङ्कर. So, विशेषणसाम्य as based upon औपम्यगर्मत्व 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. विशेषण ...... बहुप्रकारा समासोक्तिः (p. 42, ll. 12-18). The author now tells us finally that the 3rd variety of समासोक्ति (viz. विशेषणसाम्य, the other two being कार्यसाम्य and लिङ्गसाम्य) is only twofold ( and not three-fold as said above ), as resting upon Paronomastic or common epithets. समासोक्ति is due to कार्यसाम्य, लिङ्गसाम्य or विशेषणसाम्य; the last is of two kinds, छिष्टविशे- षण or साधारणविशेषण. Thus समासोक्ति has four varieties. In all these four varieties, the essence is the attribution of the behaviour of one thing to another. Compare 'सर्वत्र चात्र व्यवहार- समारोप एव जीवितम् ।' अलं. स. p. 89. स च ...... इति चतुर्धा-सः means व्यवहारसमारोप: 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 attribnted to another thing pertaining to science; (3) The behaviour of a लौकिकवस्तु is ascribed to a शास्त्रीयवस्तु; (4) The behaviour of a शास्त्रीयवस्तु is attributed to a लौकिकवस्तु. These four are mentioned by अलं. स. p. 89 and by R.G.p.384. लौकिकवस्त्वपि ... अनेकविधम्. The things belonging to ordinary life may be divided into many classes from the difference of rasas etc, which they are capable of developing. दिख्ात्रं यथा ...... एवमन्यत्र ( p. 42, ll. 19-24). In the verse 'व्याधूय' etc. occurring above 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. यै रेकरूप ... मन्ये-This verse is cited in the अलं. स. p. 90, with the remark 'अत्रागमशास्त्रप्रसिद्धे वस्तुनि व्याकरणप्रसिद्धवस्तुसमारोपः' Here ईश्वर is addressed. यैः अखिलासु (सर्वांसु) अपि वृत्तिषु (विवर्तेषु; कृत्तद्धि- तादिषु वृत्तिषु, as said in सि. कौ. 'कृत्तद्धितसमासैकशेषसनादयन्तधातुरूपाः पञ्च वृत्तयः । परार्थामिधानं वृत्ति:' p.201) एकरूपं अव्ययं (अविनाशिन; अव्ययपदवाच्यं च) असंख्यतया प्रवृत्तम् (अनन्तरूपैः परिदृश्यमानम्; संख्याप्रतिपादकाभाववत्वेन चर्तमानम्) पश्यन्द्रिः (औपनिषदैः; बुधैवैयाकरणैः) परत्वजुषः (उत्कर्षभाजस्तव; परवर्तिन्याः) विभक्तेः (मेदस्य; स्वादेः तिडादेवा according to Panini's sutra

X. 56-57 समासोक्ति. SAHITYADARPANA. 191

'विभक्तिश्च' I. 4.104. सुप्िडौ विभक्तिसंश्ञौ स्तः। सि. कौ.) लोपः कृत: तैः तब लक्षणं ध्रुवमेव कृतं इति मन्ये. 'They, I think, have surely definitely understood Thee, who (they), seeing Thee as the ono 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 अप्रस्तुत also, viz. निपात (a particle like च, इव etc.), through the force of the qualifications एकरूपम्, अव्ययम् etc., although the word निपात is not mentioned. The grammatical meaning would be 'they, I think, have defined thee ( properly ), (Oh nipāta ), who seeing thee the same in all connections, called an अव्यय, used without reference to number, omit the application of terminations after thee." Compare Panini's sutras 'प्राग्रीश्वरान्नि- पाताः' I. 4. 56; 'चादयोऽसते' I. 4. 57 (अद्रव्यार्थाश्चादयो निपातसंज्ञाः स्युः 1 सि. कौ.); 'प्रादयः' I. 4. 58 (अद्रव्यार्थाः प्रादयस्तथा । सि. कौ.); on अद्रव्या:, the तत्त्वबोधिनी remarks 'लिङ्गसंख्यान्वितं द्रव्यम्.' In the above verse, the properties of a thing known from the science of Grammar are ascribed to the Being (God) known from the Vedas. Many Vedic passages say that the truth about God can be known only from the Vedas; compare 'तं त्वौपनिषदं पुरुषं पृच्छामि' etc. एवमन्यत्र. The author has given examples of two varieties only, viz. लौकिके वस्तुनि लौकिकवस्तुव्यवह्ारसमारोप and शास्त्रीये शास्त्रीयवस्तुव्यवहारसमारोप. For the examples of the other two, see as. . pp. 90-91 and R. G. pp. 384-5. An example of लौकिके वस्तुनि शास्त्रीयवस्तुव्यवहारसमारोप: (4 above) is परार्थव्या- सङ्गादुपजहदथ स्वार्थपरताममेदैकत्वं यो वहति गुणभूतेषु सततम्। स्वभावाद्यस्यान्त: स्फुरति ललितोदात्तमहिमा समर्थों यो नित्यं स जयतितरां कोडपि पुरुषः ॥l अत्र समर्थ- सूत्रगतमहाभाष्यार्थस्य (समारोपः)। तत्र हि 'अथ ये वृत्ति वर्तयन्ति किं त आहुः' इत्यादिना जहत्स्वार्था वृत्तिरजहत्स्वार्था वृत्तिरिति पक्षद्वयं निरूपितम्। तत्रैवोपसर्जनार्थे अमेदैकत्वसंख्यापि ध्वनिता । R. G. p. 384. An example of शास्त्रीये वस्तुनि लौकिकव्यवहारसमारोप: (3 above) is कृत्वा सूत्रैः सुगूढाथैः प्रकृतेः प्रत्ययं परम्। आगमान्भावयन्भाति वैयाकरणपुङ्गवः। अत्र राजव्यवहारस्य । R.G. p. 385. The reason why this figure is called समासोक्ति is given by Mammata as 'समासेन संक्षेपेण (एकेनैव शब्देन) अर्थद्वयकथनात्' because (one and the same word) briefly conveys two things. प्रस्तुताद्वा- च्यादप्रस्तुतस्य प्रतीयमानत्वे संक्षेपेणार्थयोः कथनमित्यन्वर्था समासोक्ति:।' एकावली p. 254.

Mammata defines समासोक्ति differently 'परोक्तिभेंदकैः शिषैः auralfa :. There are two points in which Mammata appears to

192 NOTES ON X. 56-57 समासौक्ि.

differ from our author. (1) According to Mammata, Parono- mastic adjectives are necessary to constitute समासोक्ति, while acccording to our author Paronomastic adjectives are not necessary. (2) Mammata simply says 'परस्य अप्रस्तुतस्य उक्ति: he does not intimate that in समासोक्ति, the behaviour of the अप्रस्तुत is attributed to the aaa while our author distinctly says so. रूपके ...... भेद: (p. 42, ll. 24-28). The author now proceeds to distinguish समासोक्ति from other figures of speech. रूपके ...... इत्याडु: In रूपक 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 in. समासोक्ति the अप्रकृत, by the attribution of its own condition ( to the प्रकृत ), distinguishes the ya from its original condition, without covering its nature. It is therefore that they say that here (i. e. in समासोक्ति) there is simply the attribution of the behaviour of the अप्रकृत to the प्रकृत and not the superimposition of the nature of the अप्रकृत on the प्रकृत. The author here appears to refer to the words of the अलं. स. 'विशेषणसाम्याद्धि प्रतीय मानमप्रस्तुतं प्रस्तुतावच्छेदकत्वेन प्रतीयते। अवच्छेदकत्वं च व्यवहारसमारोपो न रूपसमारोपः। रूपसमारोपे त्ववच्छादितत्वेन प्रकृतस्य तद्रपरूपित्वादेव रूपकम्।' p. 85. जयरथ remarks 'एवं समासोक्तौ व्यवहारसमारोपादप्रस्तुतेन प्रस्तुतस्य वैशिष्टयलक्षणमवच्छेदकत्वं विधीयते। रूपके तु रूपसमारोपाद्रपरूपितत्वाख्याच्छादक- त्वमित्यनयोभेंद: ।'. In Rupaka, as instanced in मुखं चन्द्रः, the very nature of the moon (54) 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 moon. In समासोक्ति, as instanced in 'ऐन्द्रीमुखं चुम्बति चन्द्रमाः', the nature of the अप्रस्तुत i. e. नायक is not superimposed upon चन्द्र, but the behaviour of the Nayaka is attributed to the moon. This attribution of behaviour only results in heightening the beauty of the अप्रस्तुत (it results in the distinguishing of the अप्रस्तुत 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 व्यवहार and its आश्रय, that in which the behaviour rests. The aga which is thus suggested only distinguishes the प्रस्तुत ( but does not cover it ), as a crow sitting on a house-top serves to distinguish the house but does not cover it. 'न ह्यन्यधर्मिसम्बन्धिनो धर्माः स्वधरमिण-

X. 56-57 समासोक्ति SAHITYADARPANA. 193

मन्तरेणान्यत्रावतिष्ठन्ते। न हयनायके नायकधर्माणामन्वयो युज्यते। अन्यधर्माणा- मन्यत्रान्वयासम्भवात् । अत एवान्यत्रारोप्यमाणोऽन्यव्यवहारोऽन्यत्र न सम्भवतीति तदविनाभावात्स्वव्यवहारिणमाक्षिपतीत्याक्षिप्यमाणेना प्रस्तुतेन धर्मिणैव प्रस्तुतो धर्म्य- वच्छिद्यते न पुनराच्छाद्यते।' विम० p.85; 'एवं च समासोक्तौ प्रकृतव्यवह्दारेऽ- प्रकृतव्यवहारारोपः। रूपके तु विशेष्ये प्रकृतेऽप्रकृतरूपारोपः ।' उद्योत p. 43; 'तस्माद्विशेषणसाम्यमहिस्रा प्रतीतोSप्रकृतवाक्यार्थः स्वानुगुणं नायिकादिमर्थमाक्षिप्य तेन परिपूर्णविशिष्टशरीरः प्रकृतवाक्यारथे स्वावयवतादात्म्यापन्नतदवयवोडमेदेनाव- तिष्ठते। ... अत्र चाप्रकृतार्थस्य पृथक्शब्दानुपादानाद्रपकाद्वाक्यार्थसम्बन्धिनो वैलक्षण्यं पदार्थरूपकान्तु स्फुटमेव।' R. G. p. 371; 'समासोक्तौ हि प्रकृतवृत्तान्तोऽप्रकृत- वृत्तान्ताभेदेन स्थित इति सर्वसंमतम्।' R. G. p. 483. उपमाध्वनौ ... विशेषणमात्रस्य-In the suggestion of simile and in अर्थश्रेष, there is sameness of the विशेष्य ( the thing qualified ) also; while in समासोक्ति, there is sameness of the attributes alone. उपमाध्वनि occurs when the sentence as a whole suggests a comparison as the principal meaning, as remarked by R. G. 'एषैव च यदा सकलेन वाक्येन प्राधान्येन ध्वन्यते तदा परिहतालक्कारभावा ध्वनिव्यपदेशहेतुः ।' p. 185. An example of उपमाध्वनि is 'अविरलविगलद्दानोदकधारासारसिक्त धरणितलः। धनदाग्रमहितमूर्तिर्जयतितरां सार्वभौमोऽयम् ॥' on which Nagoji- bhatta comments 'अयं राजा सार्वभौमः सर्वभूमीश्वरः । उदग्दिग्गजश्च। ... धनदातणामग्रे पूजितमूर्तिः । कुबेराग्रे पूजितमूर्तिश्रं' R. G. p. 185. Here दान in the first line means 'gift' or 'the juice issuing from an elephant's temples'. Here the word सार्वभौम means a sovereign and the दिग्गज of that name. A comparison between the two is suggested. The विशेष्य 'सार्वभौम' is the same (and not only the विशेषण अविरल etc.). अर्धक्षेष will be treated of below. R. G., after defining समासोक्ति as 'यत्र प्रस्तुतधर्मिको व्यवहारः साधारणविशेषणमात्रोपस्थापिताप्रस्तुतधर्मिकव्यवहारामेदेन भासते सा समासोक्तिः', says about the insertion of मात्र after विशेषण "शब्दशक्तिमूलध्वनिवार- णाय मात्रेति। तत्र (as exemplified in अविरल etc. above) विशेष्यस्यापि

p. 367. अप्रस्तुत .. ... भेद :- अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा will be defined below; in that figure, it is the प्रस्तुत that is implied from the mention of the अप्रस्तुत, while in समासोक्ति, it is the अप्रस्तुत that is implied. Compare 'गम्यत्वं प्रस्तुतनिष्ठमप्रस्तुतप्रशंसाविषयः । अप्रस्तुतनिष्ठं तु समासोक्ति विषयः । अलं. स. pp. 84-85. Some examples of समासोक्ति are 'उपोढरागेण विलोलतारकं तथागृहीतं शशिना निशामुखम्। यथा समस्तं तिमिरांशुकं तया पुरोपि रागाद्गलितं न लक्षितम्।।' quoted in the ध्वन्यालोक I p.35; 'उत्सक्के तव गङ्गे पायं पायं पयोतिमधुरतरम्। शमिताखिलश्रमभरः कथय कदाहं चिराय शयिताहे ॥।' R. G. p. 377 (अत्र शिशुजननीवृत्तान्तामेदेन स्थितः प्रकृतवृत्तान्त:).

194 NOTES ON X. 57 परिकर.

23 परिकर (Insinuator, the significant.) A speech with a number of significant epithets is the figure called परिकर. The plural विशेषणैः in the definition implies that there must be many significant epithets to constitute the figure. The example is aRTTa ete. It occurs in the Veni- samhara (III). These words were addressed by As'vatthaman to Karna, who had ridiculed Drona and also his son, when TTH7 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. 'तथा च राज्ञो जगद्रक्षितव्यमस्य पुनरनुजमात्ररक्षणासिद्धेरन्यदेव नाममात्रेण राजत्वमित्युपहासपरत्वम् 1' विम०. p. 95. In this figure the adjectives are साभिप्राय 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. 'विशेषणानां सामिप्रायत्वरं प्रतीयमा- नार्थगभींकारः। अत एव प्रसन्नगम्भीरपदत्वान्नायं ध्वनेर्विषयः। एवं च प्रतीयमानांशस्य चाच्योन्मुखत्वात परिकर इति सार्धकं नाम।' अलं. स. p. 94. (परिकरः पर्यक्क- परिवारयोः ॥ अमर० III. 3. 165 ). There is a difference of opinion among rhetoricians in connection with this figure. Mammata, Sarvasva, the Vima- rs'ini, Ekavali, 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 :-- 'विशेषणैर्यत्साकूतैरुक्तिः परिकरस्तु सः' K.P.X. 'यद्यप्यपुष्टार्थस्य दोषताभिधाना- त्तन्निराकरणेन पुष्टार्थस्वीकार: कृतः, तथाप्येकनिष्ठत्वेन बहूनां विशेषणानामेवमुपन्यासे वैचित्र्यमित्यलङ्कारमध्ये गणितः' वृत्ति in K.P .; 'विशेषणानां चात्र बद्गत्वमेव विवक्षितम्। अन्यथा ह्यपुष्टार्थस्य दोषत्वामिधानात्तन्निराकरणेन स्वीकृतस्य पुष्टार्थस्यायं विषयः स्यात्। एवमेवंविधानेकविशेषणोपन्यासद्वारेण वैचित्र्यातिशयः सम्भवतीत्यस्ा लङ्कारत्वम् ।' विम० p. 94. They mean :- Epithets that do not nourish the meaning are said to be अपुष्ट; अपुष्टत्व is a fault. An example of it is 'विलोक्य वितते व्योमि विधुं मुन्न रुषं प्रिये; here the word faaa 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 परिकर. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 195

alankara, 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 yffa. So according to Mammata and others of the same school, the charm lies in the number of signi- ficant 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 अपुष्टार्थत्व may be brought about by not employing epithets at all; that there- fore परिकर is not the same as the absence of अपुष्टार्थदोष and that a distinct charm is perceived from a single significant epithet. "ताटृशैकविशेषणोपन्यासेऽपि अलङ्गारत्वमुचितम्। अपुष्टार्थत्वविरहस्य निर्विशेषणतयाS प्युपपत्तेरर्थसिद्धत्वाभावाद्वैचित्यस्य चानुभवसिद्धत्वात् ।' प्रदीप; "ननु निष्प्रयोजन-

चितुमईति, न त्वलक्कार इति। अत्र विमर्शिनीकारादय आङु :- 'विशेषणानां बद्ुत्वमत्र विवक्षितम्। साभिप्रायविशेषणगतबह्ुत्वकृत एव चात्र वैचित्र्यातिशयः। एकविशेषणं तु दोषाभावमात्रस्यावकाशः ।' इति। तदसत्। विशेषणानेकत्वं हि व्यंग्याधिक्याधाय- कत्वाद्वैचित्र्यविशेषाधायकमस्तु नाम। न तु प्रकृतालङ्कारशरीरमेव तदिति शक्यं वक्तम्। 'वीचिक्षालितकालियाहितपदे* इति पागुक्त एकस्वैत्र विशेषणस्य चमत्कारिताया अनपह्ववनीयत्वात्। अयि लावण्यजलाशय तस्या हा इन्त मीननयनायाः । दूरस्थे त्वयि किं वा कथयामो विस्तरेणालम्।।' अत्रैकैकविशेषणमात्रेणैव सकलवाक्यार्थ- सज्जीवनाच्च।" R.G. p. 387; "यथा नित्ये संध्यावन्दनादौ दोषाभावस्वान्ग- वैकल्येऽपि सिद्धौ, साङ्गतत्करणं फलातिशयायैव। तथा दोषाभावस्य विशेषणानुपादानेऽपि सम्भवेन साभिप्रायैकविशेषणनिबन्धनश्चमत्कारो दुरपह्व इति भाव:। किं च 'सुधांशुकलितो त्तंसस्तापं हरतु वः शिवः' इत्यादौ यत्र सुधांशुकलितोत्तंस इति विशेषणाभावेऽपि तापहरणसामर्थ्यस्य सामर्थ्यातिशयेनाप्युपपत्तेस्तद्विशेषणानुपादानेऽपि न क्षतिस्तत्र तद्विशेषणोपादानमधिकचमत्कारायैवेति बोध्यम्।" उद्योत p.108. Some writers, like विद्याधर (author of एकावली), Appaya- dikshita speak of a figure called परिकराङ्कूर, which occurs when the विशेष्य is significant and not the विशेषणs. An example is 'चतुर्णा पुरुषार्थाना दाता देवश्चतुर्भुजः।'. Here the विशेष्य, चतुर्भुज (विष्णु), 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 अलक्कारशासत्र, however, do not speak of परिकराक्कुर. Uddyota remarks that the word faauo: in the definition of परिकर is to be taken as comprehending विशेष्य also and therefore परिकराङुर is not a separate figure. "अत्र विशेषणैरित्युपलक्षणं विशेष्यस्यापि।

• 'वीचिक्षालितकालियाहितपदे स्वलोककल्लोलिनि त्वं तापं तिरयाधुना भवभय- च्यालावलीढात्मन:।।' This is the latter half of a verse quoted in R. G. p. 386 under परिकर.

196 NOTES ON X. 57 परिकर.

तेन साभिप्राये विशेष्येऽप्ययम्। यथा 'चतुर्णा' इत्यत्र। अत्र चतुर्भुज इति विशेष्यं पुरुषार्थचतुष्टयदानसामर्थ्याभिप्रायगर्भम्। बाहुलकलभ्यकर्मल्युडन्तकरणन्युडन्तविशेषण- शब्दयोरेकशेषो वा। उत्तिरित्यस्यार्थकथनमित्येवार्थः । एतेन 'साभिप्राये विशेष्ये परिकराङ्कुरनामा भिन्नोलङ्गारः' इत्यपास्तम्।" उद्योत p.108. A good example of परिकर is 'तव प्रसादात्कुसुमायुधोऽपि सहायमेकं मधुमेव लब्धा। कुर्या हरस्यापि पिनाकपाणेषैर्यच्युति के मम धन्विनोऽन्ये ।।' कुमारसं० III. 24 शेष (Paronomasia). The expression of more than one meaning by words natu- rally bearing one signification is called Nq. The words 'naturally bearing one signification' serve to distinguish this figure (अर्थश्रेष) from शब्दक्रेष; and the word 'expression' serves to distinguish this figure from ध्वनि ( suggestive Poetry ). We shall explain this below. An example of अर्थश्रेष is 'प्रवर्तयन् etc.' (p. 43, 11. 4-5 ). विभाकर: the sun; or a king so called. प्रवर्तयन् क्रिया: साध्वी: occasioning the performance of good actions ( the sun and the king both do this). मालिन्यं हरन् dispelling the gloom of the quarters ( the sun by his lustre, and the king by his spotless fame). भूयसा महसा दीप्: brilliant with excessive glory ( both the sun and the king are brilliant ). In this verse as there is no such determining element as yatu (context) etc. both the king and the sun are expressly meant. We have seen above (परिच्छेद II.) that संयोग etc. determine the sense of a word capable of many significations. Here there is no such de- termining element; therefore the word विभाकर is used to express both the king and the sun; both of them are the subjects of description (प्राकरणिक). We cannot say that one is प्रस्तुत and the other अप्रस्तुत. Both are intended to be expressed. The words क्रिया: प्रवर्तयन्, मालिन्यं हरन्, महसा दीप: are applicable both to the . king and the sun and even if we substitute such words as कर्माणि, श्यामतां, तेजसा for क्रियाः, मालिन्यं and महसा respectively, the figure will still be the same. It must be remarked that in the word विभाकर there is शब्दशेष and not अर्थश्ेष, as, if we substitute another word for विभाकर such as प्रभाकर, it will not apply to the king. So in this example both शब्दश्रेष and अर्थश्रेष are combined; it is not an example of pure अर्धश्रेष. 'नन्व्रेवं शब्दक्रेष एवायं विभाकरपदस्य राजसूर्योभयवाचकत्वादिति चेत, सङ्कीर्णमेवेदसुदाहरणम्।' राम०. It was said above that this figure is to be distinguished from शब्दश्रेष. श्रेष is of two kinds शब्दश्रेष and अर्थश्रेष. शब्दश्रेष is, according to our author, of three kinds, सभङ्क्रेष, अभङ्गश्रेष

X. 58 श्ेष. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 197

and उभयात्मक (i. e. both सभङ्र and अभङ्ग). An example of all the three varieties of शब्दश्ेष is येन ध्वस्तमनोभवेन बलिजित्काय: पुरास्त्रीकृतो यश्चोद्वृत्तभुजङ्गहारवलयो ग्ङ्गां च योऽधारयत्। यस्याहुः शशिमच्छिरो- हर इति स्तुत्यं च नामामराः पायात्स स्वयमन्धकक्षयकरस्त्वां सर्वदो माधवः ॥। In this verse, both Vishnu (माधवः ) and S'iva (उमाधवः) are addressed. लोचन comments on this :- येन ध्वस्तं बालक्रीडायाम् अनः शकटम्। अभवेन अजेन सता (i. e. the word ध्वस्तमनोभवेन is to be split up into ध्वस्तम् अनः अभवेन) बलिनो दानवान्यो जयति तादृग्येन काय: वपुः पुरामृतहरणकाले (स्त्रीकृतः) स्त्रीत्वं प्रापितः । यश्चोद्वृत्तं समदं कालियाख्यं भुजङ्रं हतवान् (the word ends with भुजङ्गहा, nom. singular of भुजङ्गहन्)। रवे शब्दे लयो यस्य 'अकारो विष्णुः' इत्युक्तेः। यश्च अगं गोवर्धनपर्वतं गां च भूमिं पातालगतामधारयत् (i. e. we have to suppose that there is an अवग्रह after वलयो)। यस्य च नाम स्तुत्यमृषय आहु:। कि तत् शशिनं मथ्नातीति क्विपू (i. e. we get शशिमथू meaning राङु:) तस्य शिरोहरः मूर्धापहारकः । स त्वां माधवः विष्णुः सर्वदः (सर्वे ददातीति) पायाद (अवतु)। कीटृकू। अन्धकनाम्नां (a clan of the Yadavas) जनानां येन क्षयो निवासो द्वारकायां कृतः । यद्ा मौसले इषीकाभिस्तेषां क्षयो विनाशो येन कृतः ।. This is the meaning when Vishnu is meant to be addressed. The second meaning, when fara is meant to be addressed, is given by लोचन (Pp. 95-95) as follows :- येन (व्वस्तमनोभवेन) व्वस्तकामेन सता बलिजितः विष्णोः कायः पुरा त्रिपुरनिर्दहनावसरे अस्त्रीकृतः शरत्वं नीतः। उद्वृत्ता भुजङ्गा एव हारवलयाश्च यस्य। गङ्गां मन्दाकिनीं च योऽधारयत्। यस्य च ऋषयः (we have अमराः; लोचन appears to read नामर्षय: for नामामरा:) शशिमत् चन्द्रयुक्तं शिर आङुः । हर इति च नाम स्तुत्यमाङ्गुः । स भगवान् स्वयमेवा- न्धकासुरस्य विनाशकारी त्वां सर्वदा सर्वकालम् उमाया धवो वल्लभ: पायादिति। In the above verse, in ध्वस्तमनोभवेन etc. there is सभङ्गश्रेष, because the expression has to be differently split up in each connection (once as ध्वस्तम् अनः अभवेन; and then as ध्वस्तः मनोभवः येन तेन). If we substitute for मनोभव the word मदन, the second sense will vanish altogether; ध्वस्तमदनेन will not yield the 2nd sense yielded by ध्वस्तमनोभवेन (ध्वस्तम् अन: etc.). So here the particu- lar word employed is the most important thing. In अन्धकक्षयकर: there is अभङ्गश्रेष, as the expression is not split up differently, but in the same way (अन्धक + क्षय); the only thing note-worthy being that here also the particular word employed is the most prominent thing. We cannot substitute another word for अन्धक or क्षय. If we do so, we shall get only one sense. As both सभङ्गश्रेष and अभङ्गश्रेष, are exemplified in the same verse, it is also an example of उभयात्मकश्रेष. All these three varieties are called शब्दश्रेष, because here everything depends upon the particular word employed. The determining element in calling

198 NOTES ON X. 58 शेष.

a figure as belonging to शब्द or अर्थ is अन्वयव्यतिरेक. If an alankara 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 alankara of aoa. In all the three abovementioned varieties of शब्दक्रेष, the particular word em- ployed was necessary for the figure, which would disappear if other words were used (as shown above ). But in अर्थक्रेष, as instanced in 'प्रवर्तयन etc.' even if we substitute synonymous words for क्रिया, मालिन्य etc., the figure will still persist i. e. this figure does not depend upon the particular word employed, but upon the sense. Hence is it that the words स्वभावादेकाथै: distinguish this figure from शब्दश्रेष. On this point there is a great divergence of opinion among the different writers on Rhetoric. (I) Udbhata speaks of 2y as an अर्थालद्कार only. He then divides it into two, अर्थश्रेष and शब्दश्रेष, which correspond respectively to our author's अभङ्ग and सभङ्गश्रेष. An example of the two is 'स्वयं च पल्लवाताम्रभास्वत्कर- विराजिनी। प्रभातसंध्येवास्वापफललुब्धे हितप्रदा ॥' उद्धट IV. 26 ('न केवलं स्वामिसापेक्षतयैव फलप्रदा गौरी कि स्वयं च स्वयमपि अस्वापे दुष्प्रापे फले लुब्धाना- मिष्टप्रदेत्यर्थः। केव प्रभातसंध्येव। कीदृशी। पल्लवातात्रौ पलवारुणौ भास्वन्तौ कान्तियुतौ करौ हस्तौ ताभ्यां विराजिता शोमिता । संध्या तु तादृशैर्भांस्वतः सूर्यस्य करैः किरणैर्विराजिता। तथा अस्वापः तदानी निद्राऽभावः तत्फलं लक्ष्मीलाभः तत्र लुब्धे जने हितप्रदा।' उ. च. pp. 351-52. In this verse, there is अर्थक्षेष (i e. अभङ्गश्रेष of our author) in the first half and शब्दक्रेष (i.e. सभङ्गश्ेष). in the 2nd. (II) The views of Mammata and our author coincide. They say that what is called अर्थक्रेष by Udbhata. is really शब्दशेष and that there is contradiction in saying (as Udbbata does) that शेष is an अर्थालक्कार and yet dividing it into two varieties called शब्दश्रेष and अर्थश्रेष. 'ननु स्वरिता- दिगुणमेदात मिन्नप्रयलोच्चार्याणां, तदभावादभिन्नप्रयलोच्चार्याणां च शब्दानां बन्धे- डलङ्कारान्तरप्रतिभोत्पत्ति: शब्दशेषोरऽर्थश्ेषश्रेति द्विविधोप्यर्थालक्कारमध्ये परिगणितोऽन्यै- रिति कथमयं शब्दालङ्कारः । उच्यते। इह दोषगुणालद्काराणां शब्दार्थगतत्वेन यो विभाग: सः अन्वयव्यतिरेकाभ्यामेव व्यवतिष्ठते। तथाहि कष्टत्वादिगाढत्वाद्यनुप्रासादयः व्यर्थत्वा- दिश्रौ ढ्याद्यपमादयस्तन्भ्ावतदभावानुविधायित्वादेव शब्दार्थगतत्वेन व्यवस्थाप्यन्ते। 'स्वयं च पल्वाताम्र' इति अभङ्ग:, 'प्रभातसंध्येव' इति सङ्गः, इति द्वावपि शब्दैकसमाश्रया विति द्वयोरपि शब्दक्रेषत्वमुपपन्नम्, न त्वाद्यस्यार्थश्रेषत्वम्। अर्थश्रेषस्य तु स विषयो यत्र शब्दपरिवर्तनेऽपि न श्रेषत्वखण्डना। यथा-स्तोकेनोन्नतिमायाति स्तोकेनायात्यधोगतिम्। अहो सुसदृसी वृत्तिस्तुलाकोटे: खलस्य च ।I" K.P. IX. UI. pp. 516-520 (Va); "शब्दश्रेष इति चोच्यते अर्थालङ्कारमध्ये च लक्ष्यते (यथा उद्भटेन) इति कोडयं नय:" K.P. IX Ul. p 527. In this passage Mammata clearly enunciates the difference between शब्दश्रेष and अर्थश्रेष.

X. 58 शेष. SAHITYADARPANA. 199

The former is शब्दपरिवृत्त्यसह (i. e. incapable of enduring a change of words), while the latter is शब्दपरिवृत्तिसह (capable of enduring a change of words ). (III) The अलं. स. treats of श्रेष among the अर्थालङ्कारs just as Udbhata does. He then divides it into three varieties (and not two as उद्भट does), viz. शब्दरूष, अर्थश्रेष and उभयक्रेष. 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 स्वरित 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 the wood. asy 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 अन्धकक्षय above). उभयक्षेष is that where both these varieties ocour. "एष च शब्दार्थोभयगतत्वेन वर्तमानत्वात् त्रिविधः। तत्रोदात्तादि- स्वरमेदात्प्रयलमेदाच्च शब्दान्यत्वे शब्दश्रेषः। यत्र प्रायेण पदभङ्गो भवति। अर्थक्रेषस्तु यत्र स्वरादिभेदो नास्ति । अत एव तत्र न सभङ्गपदत्वम्। सङ्गलनया तूभयक्रेषः।" अलं. स. p. 96. All these three views are very clearly and concisely put forward by R.G. "सोडयं क्रेषः समङ्गोमङ्गश्नाथालक्कार एवेल्याइटाः । (२) उभावाप्येतौ शब्दालङ्कारी। शब्दस्य परिवृत्त्यसहत्वादन्वय- व्यतिरेकाभ्यां तदाश्रितत्वावधारणात्। तृतीयस्त्वर्थालङ्कारः। अर्थमात्राश्रितत्वात्। इति मम्मटभट्टाः।(३) अन्वयव्यतिरेकाभ्यां हि हेतुत्वावगमो घटं प्रति दण्डादेरिवास्तु। न त्वाश्रयत्वावगम: (This is an attack on Mammata)। स तु पुनस्तद्वत्तित्वज्ञानाधीनः । इह हि सभङ्गश्केषस्य शब्दद्वयवृत्तित्वं जतुकाष्ठन्यायेन, अभङ्गस्य चार्थद्वयवृत्तित्वमेकवृन्तगतफलद्वयवच्च स्फुटमेवेत्येकस्य शब्दालक्कारत्वम- परस्यार्थालङ्कारत्वम्। ...... इत्यलङ्गारसर्वस्वकारादयः।" R. G. pp. 401-402. 'वाचनं' इति च स्वने :- We have now to distinguish between क्ेष and. शब्दशक्तिमूलध्वनि. In श्रेष, both the विशञेषण and the विशेष्य are छिष्ट (Paronomastic). In ध्वनि (शब्दशक्तिमूल) also, they are ष्ट (as exemplified in दुर्गालङ्गितविभ्हः in the 2nd Pari ). But the difference between them is :- In wq, the विशेष्यs are both प्राकरणिक or अप्राकरणिक; while in ध्वनि, only one 'topie is प्राकरणिक, the expressive power of the words being limited by the context ete .; but another अप्रस्तुत meaning is suggested, after the प्राकरणिक meaning is understood, by the force of the double-meaning expressions. In प्रवर्तयन् क्रियाः ( example of अर्थक्ेष ), there is nothing to tell us that only the king or the sun is the subject of description. Both may be प्रकृत or both may be अप्रकृत. But in 'दुर्गालङ्गितविग्रहो' etc., from

200 NOTES ON X. 58 शेष.

the context we know that the miga is the king, who was the husband of queen Uma; while by the power of suggestion, another meaning, viz. the description of S'iva ( who is अप्रस्तुत) is conveyed. An example of शब्दशक्तिमूलध्वनि given by Ananda- vardhana is 'उन्नतः प्रोहसद्वारः कालागुरुमलीमसः। पयोधरभरस्तस्याः कं न चक्रेडभिलाषिणम् ।' (उन्नतः महान् उच्चतरश्च; प्रोल्सन् हवारः यस्मिन्, प्रोल्लसन्ती धारा यस्मिन् कालागुरुणा मलीमसः श्याम, कालागुरुवत् मलीमस; पयोधरः स्तनो qar ). 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. प्रदीप puts the difference between श्रेष and शब्दशक्तिमूल- ध्वनि as "यत्रोभयोरर्थयोस्तात्पर्य स श्रेषः। यत्र त्वेकस्मिन्नेव तत, सामग्रीमहिस्रा तु द्विती- यार्थप्रतीतिः सा व्यज्ञनेति।" p. 56 (Nir.); 'विशष्यविशेषणसाम्येन पुनयंत्र प्रकरणादिना प्रकृतार्थे एव शृङ्गलितायामभिधायामप्रकृतार्थाभिधानाय सामर्थ्यविधुर- त्वेडपि शब्दस्याप्रकृतार्थोपि प्रतीतिसरणिमनुसरति तत्र शब्दशक्तिमूलानुरणनरूपव्यंग्यो ध्वनिः।" एका p.261; "यत्र तु प्रकृताप्रकृतोभयविशेष्ययोरपि श्विष्टपदोपात्ततवं स तु ध्वनेर्विषय: ।" R. G. p. 396. The difference between Mेष and समासोक्ति is as follows :- in the former, both the विशेषणs and विशेष्यs are क्िष्ट; while in समासोक्ति only the विशेषणs may be श्िष्ट. Besides in शेष, the two objects are either both प्रकृत or both अप्रकृत; while in समासोक्ति one is प्रकृत and the other अप्रस्तुत. "केवलविशेषणसाम्यं समासोक्तावुक्तं विशेष्ययुक्तविशेषणसाम्यं त्वधिकृत्येदमुच्यते।" अलं.स. p. 95; "नायं समासोक्तिः, विशेषणमात्रसाम्यस्य तां प्रति प्रयोजकत्वाद्। विशेष्यविशेषणसाम्यमधिकृत्य चास्य (श्रेषस्य) प्रवृत्तत्वाद्।" एका० p. 259; "यत्र तु न विशेष्ये श्रेषः, नापि द्वितीयार्थोपस्थिति विनाऽन्वयानुपपत्ति, तत्र प्रस्तुतान्वयबोधोत्तरं विशेषणश्रेवमात्रमाहात्म्येन अप्रस्तुतवृत्तान्ते उपस्थिते व्यअ्ञनया तदभिन्नप्रस्तुतवृत्तान्तारोप: प्रकृते तत्र समासोकिः ।' उद्योत p. 72. There is another point in connection with $y on which also a fierce controversy has been carried on. We have seen above that शेष is at the root of many figures, e. g. रूपक, समासोक्ति etc. The question arises whether q 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 "अयं चालक्कारः प्रायेणालक्कारान्तरस्य विषयमभिनिविशते तत्र किमस्व बाधकत्वं स्वादाहोस्वित्सक्कीर्णत्वमुताहो बाध्यत्वमिति ।" 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 Alankarasarvasva p. 97 ff.,

X. 58 शेष. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 201

R. G. pp. 393-396. The first view mentioned above is that of उन्ट, who says that ऋेष is more powerful than any other figure, that when it is present, there is merely the appearance of another figure ( like 34Hr ) and that the real figure in such verses ( where उपमा etc. and ्ेष appear to be combined) is क्ेष and not the former. His words are "एकप्रयलोच्चार्याणां तच्छायां चैव बिभ्रताम्। स्वरितादिगुणैभिन्नर्बन्ध: किष्टमिहोच्यते॥ अलङ्कारान्तरगतां प्रतिभां जनयत्पदैः । द्विविधैरर्थशब्दोक्तिविशिष्टं तत्प्रतीयताम् ।।" उद्भट IV. 24-25. The second is the view of Mammata, Sarvasva, Jagannatha and almost all writers on Rhetoric. The अलं. स. briefiy puts all the three views "एष च नाप्राप्ेषु अलङ्कारान्तरेष्वारभ्यमाण- स्तद्बाधकत्वेन तत्प्रतिभोत्पत्तिहेतुरिति केचिद्। (2) 'येन व्वस्तमनोभवेन बलिजित्काय: पुरास्त्रीकृतः' इत्यादौ विविक्तोऽस्य विषय इति निरवकाशत्वा- भावान्नान्यवाधकत्वमित्यन्यैः सह सङ्करः । (3) दुर्बलत्वाभावान्नान्यबाध्यत्वमित्यन्ये (दुर्बलत्वान्नान्यबाधकत्वमित्यन्ये?)।" p. 97. "अत्राहुरुद्भटाचार्याः-'येन नाप्राप्ते य आरभ्यते स तस्य बाधकः' इति न्यायेनालङ्कारान्तरविषयः एवायमारभ्यमाणोड़ लङ्कारान्तरं बाधते। न चास्य विविक्तः कश्चिदस्ति विषयो यत्र सावकाशो नान्यं बाधेत। ...... 'नदीनां सम्पद विभ्रद्राजायं सागरो यथा' इत्यादौ उपमादीनां प्रतिभानमात्रं न तु वास्तवा स्थितिः। ... तस्मादुपमादिप्रतिभोत्पत्तिहेतुः श्रेष एव स्वविषये सर्वत्रालक्कार: इति। (2) एतच्चापरे न क्षमन्ते। ...... ऋ्ेषस्य नापवादकत्वं सङ्कीर्णत्वं तु स्याद। ...... (3) अलङ्कारान्तरोपस्कारकतया स्थितः श्रेष: कथङ्कारं स्वगृहस्थ इव क्रेषालक्कारव्यपदेशं वोदुमीष्टामिति वाध्यप्राय एव-इत्याह्:" R. G. pp. 393-396. About ay Jagannatha says that it enters into combination with many figures and produces ever fresh charms in poetry. 'अयं चोपमेव स्वतत्रोऽपि तत्र तत्र सकलालक्कारानुग्राहकतया स्थितः सरस्वत्या नवं नवं सौभाग्यमावहन्नानाविधेषु लक्ष्येषु सहृदयैविभावनीय इति ।' R. G. p. 402. Similarly Dandin says 'शृषः सर्वासु पुष्णाति प्रायो वक्रोक्तिषु श्रियम्। मिन्न द्विधा स्वभावोक्तिर्वक्रोक्तिश्ेति वाङ्मयम्' । K.D. II. 363. 25 अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा ( Indirect Description). When (1) a particular from a general, or (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 resom- bles it, is understood, each of the former being in question and the latter not so, it is अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, which is thus five-fold. कमेणोदाहरणम् ... सामान्यममिहितम् (p. 43, 1l. 11-14). पादाहतं ... रज: This is S'isu. II. 46. यत् (रजः) पादाहतं (सत्) उत्थाय मूर्धानम- घिरोइति तद् रजः अपमानेऽपि स्वस्थात् (अक्षु्धात) देहिन: (नराव) वरम्. 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.' २३

202 NOTES ON X. 58-60 anregasirer.

स्नगियं ... विषमीश्वरेच्छया-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 benefi- cial may do evil. This general proposition being yaa the author speaks of only a particular example, viz. poison and nectar. Thus, there is the figure called अर्थान्तरन्यास founded on अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा In अर्थान्तरन्यास a general proposition is sup- ported by particular instance or particular instances are supported by general 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 अर्थान्तरन्यास. But instead of laying down the general proposition, which was प्रकृत, he cites a particular case. Therefore there is अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा. It might be said against this that the figure is era, since fag acting rarely as nectar or nectars as poison is exactly parallel to (प्रतिबिम्बनम) the garland, which is generally beneficial, killing the queen. Our author declars that this is not era; because in zgra a well-known object alone is taken as the type (प्रतिबिम्ब), as instanced in अविदितगुणापि etc. above. But in this verse gura is not possible, because the fact of poison and nectar tarning into nectar and poison respectively is not well-known. इन्दुर्लिप्त ...... पतीयते (p. 43, 1l. 21-26). इन्दुर्लिप्त ...... सगर्हा इव. This oceurs in as. a. p. 105 in the same connection. For विद्ुमदलं we read there विद्ुमरुचि: and for कलया च we have कलयामि. #ftarqr: gra :- These words are to be construed with every clause. In the presence of Sita, the moon is, as it were, besmeared with lamp-black. जडिता montionless. प्रम्लानारुणिम इव विद्रुमदलम्-प्रम्लान: अरुणिमा यस्य तत्. The redness of the leaf-like coral appears to fade. The reading aanf ( I think ) would be better. कार्कश्यं कलया.प्रस्तुतम्-It appears, as it were, that harshness has begun to manifest itself to a cer- tain extent (कलया) in the throats of female cuckoos. बहा: ri a-The long tails display as it were their defects ( on account of the absence of blueness and delicacy). Here what is uaa is the extreme beauty of the face etc. of Sita. This

8.58-60 अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा. SAHITYADARPANA. 203

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., सौन्दर्य, which is प्रस्तुत, the effects, viz., the fancy of the moon as besmearead etc., are spoken of. Therefore there is अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा. "अत्र सम्भाव्यमानैरिन्द्वादिगतैरअनलिप्तत्वादिमि: कार्यरू- पैरप्रस्तुतैलोंकोत्तरो वदनादिगतः सौन्दर्यातिशयः कारणरूपः प्रस्तुतः प्रतीयते। वेनेयमप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा।" अलं. स. p.105. गच्छामीति ... कारणममिहितम् (p.43, 11. 27-31). These words are addressed to his friend by a person who postponed his intention of going abroad. मृगदृशा is to be connected with आभाषितः उद्गेकिणं निश्वासं त्यक्त्वा heaving a swelling sigh. मदर्पितं मथि अर्पितम्. सोत्प्रासम् with a sad smile. Here what is प्रस्तुत is the prevention of departure. Instead of speaking of it, the cause of the prevention (viz., the lady'a intimation that she would die if her lover went away ) is mentioned. तुल्ये प्रस्तुते ...... प्रस्तुतः प्रतीयते (p. 43, 1. 31,-p. 44, 1.13). That variety (5th) of अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा in which one thing being in question, another thing, which is अप्रस्तुत 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 qus is again two-fold, ( a ) according as there is Paronomasia in the epithets alone as in समासोक्ति, or (b) as there is Parono- masia in the विशेष्य also as in क्ेष. Compare K. P. X. "तुल्ये प्रस्तुते तुल्याभिधाने त्रयः प्रकारा, श्रेषः समासोक्ति सादृश्यमात्रं वा तुल्यात्तल्यस आाक्षेपे हेतु:"; on which Uddyota remarks 'प्रकाशे श्रेषसमासोक्तिपदे छ्िष्टशब्दश्िष्टविशेषणपरे' p. 53. सहकार: नायकस्य प्रतीतिः-सहकारः भात्र: सदामोद: (सदा आमोद: सौरभं यस्य; सदा मोद: आनन्दः यस्य) वसन्तश्रीसमन्वितः (वसन्तश्रिया समन्वितः; वसन्तकालानुरूपवेशयुक्तः) समुज्वलरुच्िः (समुज्ज्वला रुचि: कान्तिर्यस्य applies to both) श्रीमान् (शोभावान्, सुवेशशाली) प्रभूतोत्कलिकाकुल: (प्रभूताभिः उद्गताभि: कलिकाभि: मुकुलै: आकुल: पूर्ण-, प्रभूतया उत्कलिकया नायिकाविषयकोत्कण्ठया आकुल:). Here the lover, the subject of description, is understood by the Paronomastic epi- thets alone from the description of a mango-tree, which is अप्रस्तुत. पुंस्त्वाद्यदि ......... पुरुषः प्रतीयते. This verse occurs in भल्लटशतक (verse 79 ). It is quoted in the K. P. also. The उद्योत com- ments as follows :- "पुस्त्वं पौरुषं पुंव्यंजनं च। नारीभूय अमृतहरणाद्। अधः सम्पद्अंशः पातालं च। वराहावतारे पातालं मत्वा पृथिव्युद्धरणात्। प्रणयने याचने। न महान् महत्त्वरहितः अल्प इत्यर्थः। बलिप्रार्थने वामनत्वप्राध्या जगद्रक्षणात्। विश्वस्योद्धरणं विपद्विनाशनेन रक्षणम्। दिकू प्रकारः। पुरुषोत्तमः पुरुषश्रेष्ठ: श्रीकृष्णश्ष।" p. 53. राम० takes Parushottama to be the name of a king. Here the विश्ेष्य पुरुषोत्तम, as well as the qualifications

204 NOTES ON X. 58-60 अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा

पुंर्त्वादपि etc. is Paronomastic, as it is in श्रेष. पुंस्त्वादपि प्रविचलेत- 'Though he may give up the state of a male, as Vishnu did when he assumed the form of a damsel to tempt the demons into destruction'; as applied to the person it means 'although he may lose one of the cherished objects of man (पुरुषार्थ).' अधोऽपि यायात् although he may go down to the infernal regions, as Vishnu did to raise up the earth submerged under water; with reference to the person "although he may be reduced to a low condition." अत्र ...... पुरुषः प्रतीयते-Here from the विशेष्य पुरुषोत्तम which is Paronomastic is first understood Vishnu because the word Purushottama is generally used in that sense. But 2s विष्णु is अप्रस्तुत, some person intended to be described is understood from the word पुरुषोत्तम. Iţ might be said that in this verse the figure is sq, as 'both the विशेषणs and the विशेष्य are श्रिष्ट, and not अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा Both the senses, viz. fauy and some person, may be looked upon as intended to be expressed ( qiga). To this we reply :- this is not श्रेष, but अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा; because what we first understand is Vishnu, as that is the conventional mean- ing of the word पुरुषोत्तम and then we understand the etymolo- gical meaning 'best of men'; i. e. both meanings are not at once expressed; therefore there is no q. 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. y is subordinate as it simply helps to bring out this intention, Therefore the principal figure is अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा. सादृश्यमात्र ..... प्रतीयते. अम्बरमावृतिशून्यम्-The sky (the atmospheric region ) affords no shelter ( cover ). rui faa: un Divine Grace is the only refuge. Here, from the description of the pigeon, which is aga, is understood some person, the subject of description, whom many enemies are pursuing. Here there is mere similarity between कपोत (the अप्रस्तुत ) and the person (the प्रस्तुत). इयं च ...... प्रस्तुतः प्रतीयते (p. 44, 11. 13-17). The figure also occurs under a contrast. The अलं. स. says that the fifth variety of अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा viz., सारूप्यमूला, is of two kinds, as basee upon साधर्म्य and वैधर्म्य and gives 'धन्याः खलु' as an instance of वैधर्म्य; 'तत्रापि सारूप्यहेतुके मेदे साधर्म्यवैधम्यांम्यां दवैविध्यम्।' p. 104. कल्हारस्पर्शसीतला: cooled by contact with lotuses. राम tells us that these are the words of दशरथ. Here the प्रस्तुत is दशरय and

X .. 58-60 अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा. SAHITYADARPANA. 205

is understood under a contrast, viz. 'the winds are blessed, while I am unfortunate.' "अत्र वाता धन्या इति अप्रस्तुतादर्थादहमधन्य इति वैधम्येंण प्रस्तुतोडर्थः प्रतीयते।" अलं. स. p. 108. वाच्यस्य ...... उभयरूपत्वम् (p. 44, 11. 17-27). The figure again is three-fold, according as the expressed sense (which is argrga) is possible, impossible or both. Of these three cases, that of possibility is illustrated by the above examples. 'वाच्यस्य सम्भवा- सम्भवोभयरूपताभिसत्रयः प्रकाराः ।' अलं. स. p. 104. An example of impossibility is 'कोकिलोहं' etc. काकलीकोविदा :- ( काकली तु कले सूक्ष्मे ध्वनौ तु मधुरास्फुटे। कलः' अमर. I. 7. 2). Those who know soft melody. Here the अप्रस्तुत is the dialogue between a crow and a cuckoo; but this is impossible in the nature of things, unless we superimpose upon them the character of two persons, whose exteriors are alike, but whose qualities vastly differ. वाकोवाक्य- 'उत्तिप्रत्युक्तिमद्वाक्यं वाकोवाक्यं विदुर्बुधाः। द्वयोर्वक्त्रोस्तदिच्छन्ति बहूनामपि सङ्गमे II' सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण of Bhoja, परि० II. p. 293 (Benares ed.). अन्त ... गुणा :- This is the 23rd verse of भल्लटशतक and is cited in अलं. स. p. 108. छिद्राणि विवराणि दोषाश्च, भूयांसि बहुतराणि, कण्टका: तीक्ष्णाग्रवृक्षावयवा: क्षुद्रशत्रवश्ध, कमलनालस्य गुणाः तन्तवः यशांसि च कथं मङ्कुरा मा भूवन् (भवन्तु नाम). The expressed sense is the splitting of the lotus-stalk. This meaning is auga 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 superimposing the notion of some person who is प्रस्तुत on the कमलनाल, the posses- sion of holes cannot possibly be the cause of making the fibres fragile. So this is an example where both possibility and impossibility are found. "अत्र वाच्येड्ये कण्टकानां भङ्गरीकरणे हेतुत्वं सम्मवि च्छिद्राणां त्वसम्भवीत्युभयरूपत्वम्। प्रस्तुतस्य तात्पर्येण प्रतीतेस्तदध्यारोपाचत्र सक्कतमेवैतदिति नासमीचीनं किञ्ञित्।" अलं. स. p.108. अस्याश्च ...... दयोरपि वाच्यत्वम् (p. 44, ll. 27-30). The author now proceeds to distinguish this figure from other figures. This figure, when founded upon sq, differs from suggestion of matter (वस्तुध्वनि) founded upon the power of words, because like * समासोक्ति, this figure has as its very essence the ascription of the behaviour of one to another. We have above given a divisiom of ध्वनि in the 1st Pari. An example of शब्दशक्तिमूलवस्तुध्वनि is "निर्वाणवै- ंदहना: प्रशमादरीणां नन्दन्तु पाण्डुतनया: सह माधवेन। रक्तप्रसाधितभुवः क्षतनि- ग्रहाश्च स्वस्था भवन्तु कुरुराजसता: समृत्याः ॥" (वेणीसंवरणे प्रथमाक्के सूत्रधारोक्ति- रियय् + अरीणां प्रशमात कळहोपशमात निर्वाणः ज्ान्तो वैरमेव दहनोऽगरिर्येषां तादृक्ा: पाण्डुतनया: पाण्डवा माधवेन कृष्णेन सह नन्दन्तु। तथा कुरुराजस भुतरा्रस

206 NOTES ON X. 58-60 अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा.

सुता दुर्योधनादयः सभृत्याः स्वस्था निश्चिन्ता भवन्तु। कीदृशाः कुरुराजसुताः। रक्ता अनुरक्ता प्रकर्षेण साधिता भूर्यैस्तादृशाः । क्षतो निवर्तितो विग्रहः कलहो यैस्तथाभूताः । अत्र प्रशमात् नाशात्, रुधिरशोभितभूमयः, खण्डितशरीरा, स्वर्गस्था:, इति अभङ्गलाश्लीलं भाव्यर्थसूचकतया गुणः । उ० च० p. 302). In this verse, the plaiu sense is "may the sons of धृतराष्ट्, who have made the world contented and who have brought all quarrels to an end rest in ease." But by the force of the double-meaning words रक्तप्रसाधितभुव: 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 (स्व:स्था: * means 'remaining in heaven' 'स्वरव्ययं स्वर्गनाक etc.' aAT. )' This second sense is suggested purely by the force of the words; शब्दशक्तिमूलवस्तुध्वनि is based purely on double- meaning words; while अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा is not necessarily so based. Even when the latter is based upon words with two meanings it differs from शब्दशक्तिमूलवस्तुध्वनि. In the ध्वनि, the expressed sense is complete in-itself and then suggests another matter; but there is no attribution of the behaviour of one to another; while in अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, the expressed sense is अप्रस्तुत and is identified with the suggested sense, which is प्रस्तुत; as e. g. in अन्तरिछद्राणि etc., the behaviour of कमलनाल is identified with that of a person who has many onemies. In समासोत्ति also, the behaviour of one is superimposed upon another. Then what is the difference between समासोक्ति and अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा ? It is as follows :- In समासोक्ति, the प्रस्तुत is described and suggests the अप्रस्तुत; while in अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, what is अप्रस्तुत is expressed and. suggests the प्रस्तुत i. e. अप्रस्तुतप्रसंसा is exactly the opposite of समासोक्ति 'प्रस्तुतादप्रस्तुतप्तीता समासोक्तिरुक्ता अधुना तद्वैपरीत्येनाप्रस्तुता त्प्स्तुतप्रतीतावप्रस्तुतप्रशंसोच्यते।' अलं. स. p. 103 .; 'अप्राकरणिकेन प्राकरणिकाक्षेपोऽप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा प्राकरणिकेनाप्राकरणिकाक्षेप: समासोक्तिरिति विवेकः ।' प्रदीप p. 50 (Chan.). उपमा ... व्यंग्यत्वम्. An example of उपमाध्वनि, has been given above and explained under समासोक्ति. In उपमाध्वनि, the अप्रस्तुत is only suggested; while in अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, the अप्रस्तुत is expressed and the प्रस्तुत is suggested. एवं समासोक्तौ similarly in समासोक्ति (the अप्रस्तुत is implied and not expressed as in अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा). The printed editions do not put a stop after समासोको, but we think it is necessary. The author himself said above under समासोक्ति 'अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसायां प्रस्तुतसय गम्वल्म्, दद तु अप्रस्तुतस्येति मेद :- ' क्रेषेऽ्रपि ..... वाच्यत्वम्. In क्ेष, both the things * :: may also be written as wrere ascording to the Vartika खर्परे शरि वा विसर्गलोपो ककव्य: On पा0 VIII. 336.

X.58-60 अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा. SAHITYADARPANA, 207

denoted by the word are expressed, because there is no deter- mining element such as प्रकरण etc. to tell us that a particular sense is प्रस्तुत and the other अप्रस्तुत. In अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, the अप्रस्तुत is expressed, while the प्रस्तुत is implied. Even when Parono- mastic words are employed in अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, the first meaning that strikes us is connected with the अप्रस्तुत. '्रिष्टशब्दप्रयोगे त्वर्थान्तरस्थावाच्यत्वाच्छेषाद्विशेष:। शेषे ह्यनेकार्थस्य वाच्यत्वमित्युक्तम्।' अलं. स. p. 104. The word प्रशंसा in अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा does not mean 'praise' but simply 'mention, description' (कथनम्). 'इहाप्रस्तुतस्याप्रस्तुतत्वादेव वर्ण- नमनुचितमपि प्रस्तुतपरत्वेनाचितीमालम्बत इति प्रस्तुतं व्यंग्यमप्रस्तुततस्य वाच्यस्य सिद्धिमादधातीति वाच्यसिद्धयङ्गमिदं गुणीभूतव्यंग्यम्। अत एवाप्रस्तुतस्य प्रशंसा कथनमित्यन्वर्थताश्रयणसामर्थ्यादप्रस्तुतस्य वाच्यत्वमत्र सूत्रानुपात्तमपि लभ्यते।' एका. p. 293; 'एवं च लक्ष्यलक्षणयोः प्रशंसाशब्द: स्तुतिनिन्दास्वरूपाख्यानसाधारण- कीर्तनमात्रपरो दृष्टव्यः ।' कुव. p. 79; 'प्रशंसनं च वर्णनमात्रम्, न तु स्तुतिः' R. G. p. 402.

The student is advised to read the R. G. for some very beautiful examples of the 5th variety of अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा (viz. तुल्ये प्रस्तुते तुल्याभिधानम्); some of them are :- नितरां नीचोऽसीति त्वं खेदं कूप मा कदापि कृथाः । अत्यन्तसरसहृदयो यतः परेषां गुणग्रहीताऽसि॥ तावत्कोकिल दिवसान्यापय विरसान्वनान्तरे निवसन्। यावन्मिलदलिमाल: कोऽपि रसाल: समुल्- सति॥ pp .- 403-404. 26 व्याजस्तुति: (Artful Praise). When from blame and praise, that are expressed, are understood praise and blame respectively, it is termed व्याजस्तुति. निन्दया ...... व्याजस्तुति: When praise is understood from apparent blame, the figure is properly ealled व्यानस्तुति, because it etymo- logically means '-यानेन स्तुतिः' (तृतीयातरपुरष) i. e. praise by an artifice or disguise. But when blame is understood from apparent praise, how can the figure be called न्याजस्तुति (it should rather be called, it might be said, व्पजनिन्दा ): The author says that in this second case, the word न्याजस्तुति is to be explained in another manner, i. e. as meaning 'false praise.' Compare the words of मम्मट "व्याजरूपा व्याजेन वा स्तुतिः"; "वत्र स्तुतिरमिधीयमानाऽपि अमाणान्तराद्वाघितस्वरूपा निन्दायां पर्यवस्यति तत्रासत्यत्वाद्व्याजरूपा स्तुतिरि- त्यनुगमेन तावदेका व्याजस्तुतिः । यत्रापि निन्दाशव्देव प्रतिपाधमाना पूर्ववद्बाधित- स्वरूपा स्तुतिः पर्यवसिता भवति सा द्वितीया व्याजस्तुति: व्याजेन निन्दामुखेन खतिरिति कृत्वा"। अलं. स. p.112; 'तृवीयातत्पुरुषकर्मवारयाम्यां योगार्धदयेन द्वयोरमि शन्दार्थत्वम्'। R. G. p. 416.

208 NOTES ON X. 60 व्याजस्तुति, स्तनयुग ...... जाता: (p. 45, ll. 3-4). The reading in the text makes the metre of the verse faulty. If we read ftyferr: there are 16 matras whereas there should be only 15 in the last pada of an Arya. It is tberefore that the Nirņaya-sagara edition proposes farfer :. But for this there is no warrant. स्तनयुगे मुक्ताभरणं हारो यासां ताः (पक्षे, स्तनयुगाव मुक्तं गलितं आभरणम् वस्त्रं यासाम् ताः) कण्टकैः रोमाझ्जैः कलिता: व्याप्ताः अङ्गयष्टयः देहलतिका: यासां ताः (पक्षे, कण्टकैः तीक्ष्णाग्रवृक्षावयवैः कलिताः अङ्गयष्टयः यासाम्), त्वयि कुपितेऽरपि प्रागिव (कोपात् पूर्वस्मिन् काले इव) रिपुस्त्रियः विश्वस्ताः निश्चिन्ताः (पक्षे, विधवाः 'विश्वस्ताविधवे समे' अमर. II. 6. 11.) जाता: The women formerly wore pearl necklaces etc .; now also they are RrT etc. (i. e. in running away, when their lords were killed, for fear of capture, they had no time even to look to their garments). Formerly they felt secure ( fRaT: ); now also they are faadr: (widowed). Here in this verse, at first sight it appears that the king is blamed for causing trouble to women ( whose delicate bodies were piereced by thorns when fleeing for life into a forest etc.), but ultimately we perceive that praise is meant, because he utterly routes his enemies. व्याजस्तुतिस्तव ...... पथिकान्निहत्य. (p. 45, II. 6-7). यत् जगतः जीवनाय तव जीवनानि (पयांसि), इयं (हे) पयोद (मेघ) मया तव व्याजस्तुतिः असत्यस्तुतिः उदिता उक्ता। घन (हे मेघ, पक्षे कठिनहृदय) इंदं तु ते तव महत् स्तोत्रं स्तुतिः यत् पथिकान् निहृत्य (प्रियाविरहितानां पथिकानां चेतो मेघालोके उत्कण्ठितं भवति) धर्मराजस्य (यमस्य) साहाय्यमर्जयसि. "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 u himself; but ultimately we perceive that censure is meant, because the cloud kills poor wayfarers. In aega, 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 angfa and that af in which a sense, exactly opposed to that which is expresss ed, is suggested! The reply is :- in f, the expressed senso dan stand by itself; it is not improper or improbable in itself; another sense is suggested when we reflect upon the speaker,

X. 60 व्याजस्तुति. SÅBITYADARPAŅA. 209

the context etc; while in व्याजस्तुति 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. "अत मवास्या ध्वनेभेंदः । स हि विश्रान्ते वाक्यार्थे वक्तृवाच्यौचित्यपर्यालोचनबलादवगम्यते। इह पुनः प्रमाणान्तराद्वाधितः सन्वाक्यार्थः स्वयमनुपपद्यमानत्वात्परत्र निन्दादौ स्वं समर्पयति। तत्रैव प्रकृतवाक्यार्थस्य विश्रान्तेः।" विम० p. 112; "(आमुखप्रतीताभ्यां निन्दास्तुतिभ्यां स्तुतिनिन्दयोः करमेण पर्यवसानं व्याजस्तुतिः) आमुखेत्यादिविशेषणेन तयोः पर्यवसानाभावं वदन्वाधितत्वममिप्रैति। अत एव नास्या व्वनित्वम्। ध्वनौ हि निर्बाधेन वाच्येनागूरण- महिस्नाऽर्थान्तरमवगम्यते। न चैवं प्रकृते।" R.G. p.416. व्याजस्तुति must be distinguished from अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा. In both, something else is suggested by the expressed sense. From अप्रस्तुता निन्दा or स्तुति we understand प्रस्तुता स्तुति or निन्दा. But in अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, we understand a cause from an effect or vice versa, a general from a particular or vice versa, or a thing similar from anothet like it; but in व्याजस्तुति, there is no such thing. Besides in व्याजस्तुति, the charm lies in understanding blame or praise from praise or blame. स्तुतिनिन्दारूपत्वस्य विच्छित्तिविशञेषस्य भावादप्रस्तुत- प्रशंसातो मेद: । अलं. स. p.112; on which जयरथ remarks 'तत्र हि सामान्यविशेषादीनां गम्यत्वम्' p.113 .; "न चात्राप्रस्तुतप्रशंसैवास्तु। स्तुति- निन्दात्मकतया विच्छित्तिविशेषाद्। कार्यकारणभावादिसम्बन्धाभावाच्च॥।" उद्योत p.89. It should be remembered that न्याजस्तुति 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. 'इयं च व्याजस्तुतिर्यस्यव वस्तुनः स्तुतिनिन्दे प्रथममुपक्म्येते तस्यैव चेनिन्दास्तुत्योः पर्यवसानं भवेत्तदा मवति। वैयधिकरण्ये तुन इति प्राचामलक्कार- शासत्रपवर्तकानां समय: ।' R. G. p. 419. Where from the praise or blame of one, we understand the praise or blame of another, there is no व्याजस्तुति, but it is an example of व्यंग्यकाव्य "किं वृत्तान्तैः परगृहगतैः किं तु नाहं समर्थस्तूष्णी ख्ातुं प्रकृतिमुखरो दाक्षिणात्यस्वभावः। देशे देशे विपणिषु तथा चत्वरे पानगोष्ठयामुन्मत्तेव अ्रमति भवतो वलभा देव कीर्ति:॥।". This is cited as an example of व्याजस्तुति by लोचन. The अलं. स. and विमर्शिनी ( p. 113.) say that it is not a proper example (इत्यत्र प्रक्रान्ताऽपि. स्तुतिपर्यवसायिनी निन्दा इन्त कीर्तिरिति भणित्या उन्मूलितेति न प्रोहं गमितेति किष्टमेतदुदाहरणम्। अलं. स. ). Jagannatha defends the Lochana and says that it is an example of व्याजस्तुति (R.G. p. 418) "'कि वृत्तान्तैः' इत्यादिना निन्दाया एव प्रथममुन्नयनात्समासोक्त्ेरुद्रतेर्वांच्यत्वस्यातत्रतवात। अन्वयक्रमेणादौ वल्भयैवान्वये वस्वाश्च कीर्त्यभिन्नत्वेनावस्थाने सति पश्चात्करणादिपर्यालोचनवशाद्व्युस्क्रमेणान्वय- शोवाच। तसमाद् ध्वन्यालोकलोचनकारैरुकमुदाहरणं सङ्गतमेव." Another

210 NOTES ON X. 60 व्याजस्तुति.

example of न्याजस्तुति is 'अर्घ दानववैरिणा गिरिजयाप्यर्ष शिवस्याहृतं देवेत्थं जगतीतले स्मरहराभावे समुन्मीलति। गङ्गा सागरमम्बर शशिकला नागाधिप: क्ष्मातलं सर्वशत्वमचीश्वरत्वमगमर्त्वा मां च भिक्षाटनम्॥" (सर्वश्ञः सर्वेश्वरोऽसीति राश्ः स्तुस्या व्याजरूपया मदीयवैदुष्यादि दारिद्यादि सर्व जामन्नपि बडुप्रदानेन रक्षितुं शक्तोऽपि मह्यां किमपि न ददासीति निन्दा व्यज्यतै। कुव० p. 92). 27. पर्यायोक्तम् ( Periphrasis). 'Periphrasis oeeurs when the faot to be intimated is expressed by a tura of speech.' भङ्ि means प्रकार 'mode' (of speech ). When what is to be conveyed is expressed, there is पर्यायोक्त It may be asked, 'how can that which is गम्य be at the same time सच्य' i. e. the same thing cannot be गम्य and वाच्य a the same time. The reply is :- the mp 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 apa). This is what is meant by गम्यस्य भङ्गया (पकारान्तरेण i. e. कार्यादिद्ारेण) अभिधानम्. Our author closely follows the अलं.स. in defining this figure. "गम्यस्यापि अङ्गथन्तरेणाभिव्वानं पर्यायोक्तम्। सूत्र। (वृत्ति) यदेव गम्यत्वं तस्यैवामिधाने पर्यायोक्तम्य गम्यस्य सतः कथमभिधानमिति चेत, गम्यापेक्षया प्रकारान्तरेणा भिधानस्याभावाव। न हि सस्यैब तदैव तयेव विच्छित्त्या गम्यत्वं वाच्यत्वं च सम्भवति। अतः कार्यमुख द्वारेणाभिधानम् । अलं. स. p.lll. An example of पयायोक्त is 'स्पृष्टाः' etc. स्पृष्टाः ...... सैनिक: (p. 45, 11. 10-11). The verse is cited by ars. #. p. 112 as an example of पर्यायोक्त यस्त (हयग्रींवस्य) सैनिक: नन्दने (इन्द्रस्योपवने) शच्या: (इन्द्राण्याः) केशसम्भोगलालिता: (केशानां सम्मोगाय भूषणाय लालिता यलेन संवर्धिता:) पारिजातख मजर्यः सावजं स्ृष्टाः The word सावश्म ( with contempt ) implies that they were not afraid of Indra at all. Hence it is clearly implied that the heavens were conquered by Hayagriva. Here what is maa and is to be intimated is the fact of the conquest of Heaven by Hayagriva, which fact is the cause, and is expressed through the effect, viz., the scornful touching of the flowers of Parijata by the soldiers. The reason why the cause is expressed through the effect is that the description should be specially charming. न चेदं ...... प्रस्तुतम् (p. 48, ll. 14-16). It cannot be said that the figure is अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा of that sort where a cause is understeod from an effect. In अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, the description of the effect is अप्रस्तुत as in इन्दुर्लिप्त इ्वाअनेन ete. above. While here (in egmm= ete. ) the effect equally with the oause, is प्रस्तुत, as conveying the greatness of the power of the person who is the

X.61 पर्यायोक्तम्. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 211

subject of description. 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 "इह यत्र कार्यात्कारणं प्रतीयते तत्र कार्य प्रस्तुतमप्रस्तुतं चेति द्यी गतिः। यत्र प्रस्तुतत्वं कार्यस्य कारणवत्तस्याषि वर्णनीयत्वात्तत्र कार्यमुखेन कारणं पर्यायेणोक्तमिति पर्यायोक्तालद्वारः । तत्र हि कारणापेक्षया कार्यस्यातिशयेन सौ- न्दर्यमिति तदेव वर्णितम्। ...... यत्र पुनः कारणस्य प्रस्तुतत्वे कार्यमप्रस्तुवं वर्ण्यते तत्र सपष्टवाप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा। यथा 'इन्दुर्लिप् इवाञ्नेन' इत्यादौ। अत्र हि इन्द्ादयः स्फुटमेवा- आकरणिकाः । तत्प्रतिच्छन्दभूतानां मुखादीना प्राकरणिकत्वाव। तेनात्रेन्द्वादिगतेनाजन- लिप्तत्वादिना अप्रस्तुतेन कार्येण प्रस्तुतं मुखादिगतं सौन्दर्य सहृदयाल्हादकारि गम्यते इति अत्राप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा। एवं च यत्र वाच्योऽथोरऽर्थान्तरं तादशमेव सवोपस्कारकत्वे- नागूरयति तत्र पर्यायोक्तम्। यत्र पुनः स्वात्मानमेवाप्रस्तुतत्वात् प्रस्तुतमर्था- न्तरं प्रति समर्पयति तत्राप्रस्तुतप्रशंसेति निर्णयः"। अलं. स. pp. 106-107. एवं च .. पर्यायोक्तमेव (p. 45, lL. 16-20). अनेन ... हारा: This is Raghu. VI. 28. The printed editions of the Raghuvams'a read उन्सुच्य सूत्रेण for आक्षेपसूत्रेण. The reading in the text is supported by राम०. It must be said that the reading उन्मुच्य is better, as it agrees very well with प्रत्यर्पिता: (returned or restored). सत्रुविलासिनीनां स्तनेषु मुक्ताफलस्थूलतमान् अश्चुबिन्दून् पर्यासयता (प्रस्तारयता पात- मता) अनेन (अङ्गनाथेन) आक्षेपसूत्रेण (ग्रथनगुणेन) विनैव द्वारा: प्रत्यर्पिता: '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 weeping wives of the slaughtered enemies-is as much प्रस्तुत as the cause, which is merely गम्य ( suggested ) viz, the killing of the enemies, as it (the descrip- tion of the tears ) conveys the great prowess of the king who is the subject of description. Therefore the figure is no other than पर्यायोक्त. राजन् ... इत्याडु: (p. 45, ll. 21-28). राजन् ... आभाषते These words are addressed by some person to a king, who was preparing to march out against his enemies. राज्च: शत्रुभूतस्य शुकस्तवारिभवने अध्वगैः पान्थैः पञ्जरात मुक्तः शून्यायां वलभौ भित्तौ चित्रस्थान् (राजादीन्) अवलोक्य एककं प्रति इत्थमाभाषते इत्यन्वयः । कीदृक। तत्राह। राजन्नित्यादि । कुब्जे तादृशायाः भोजिकाया: सम्बोधनम्। कुमारसहितैः सचिवैः अद्यापि कि न भुज्यते इति काकुः । (एषां भोजनसमये शुकस्यापि भोजनलाभ:) उ. च. p. 397. Here, the cause of the state of things dscribed is in question, viz., 'the enemies have suddenly fled away, hearing that your majesty was ready to march.' With respect to this verse, some say that the effect too, viz., the talk of the parrot is sar as being fit to be described in connection with the cause, which is sa, and

212 NOTES ON X.61 पर्यायोक्तम्.

therefore the figure in this verse is पर्यायोक. Others say that the figure is none but अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, inasmuch as the in- desoribably great power of the king in question is understood from the account of the royal parrot,, which is enrga (not connected with the subject ). It is Mammata who cites राजन्राजसुता etc. as an example of अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा 'अन्र प्रस्थानोदतं भवन्तं ज्ञात्वा सहसव त्वदरयः पलाय्य गता इति कारणे प्रस्तुते कार्यमुक्तम्' K.P.X. The अलद्वारसर्वस्व, on the other hand, says that the verse is an example of yeniair as defined by it. "ततश्चानया प्रक्रियया 'राजन्राजसुता' इत्यत्र पर्यायोक्तमेव बोध्यम्। अन्ये तु दण्डयात्रोद्यतं त्वां बुद्ध्वा त्वदरयः पलाय्य गता इति कारणरूपस्यैवार्थस्य प्रस्तुतत्वाव कार्यरूपोऽथाऽप्रस्तुत एव राजशुकवृत्तान्तस्याप्रस्तुतत्वाव प्रस्तुतार्थ प्रति स्वात्मानं समर्पयतीत्यप्रस्तुतप्रशंसैवात्र न्याय्येति वर्णयन्ति"। अलं. स. p. 107. There is a great difference in the definitions of पर्यायोक्त given by Mammata and Ruyyaka. We shall speak of it later on. As regards the present verse, the whole dispute lies ronnd the question whether the talk of the parrot is प्रस्तुत or अप्रस्तुत. The अलं. स. takes it to be प्रस्तुत and according to its definition of पर्यायोक्त, the figure must be पर्यायोक्त. Mammata, on the other hand, regards शुकाभाषण as अप्रस्तुत and therfore naturally says that the figure is अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा. To us the opinion of Mammata appears to be more reasonable. If Tarmor, which is one of the many effects of the running away of the enemies, is to be looked upon as yga, then any other effect, however remote, will have to be regarded as gga. It will be then hard to say what effects are प्रस्तुत and what are अप्रस्तुत. So it is better to regard effects like जुकामाषण as अप्रस्तुत. Vis'vanātha does not positively declare what side he takes. But from the fact that he defines पर्यायोक्त as the अलं. स. does, and cites the opinion of a. H. on this verse first, we may infer that he leans to the view of the अलं. स. (and regards राजन्राजसुता as an example of पर्यायोक्त) 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 in the same manner. 'पर्यायोकं यदन्येन प्रकारेणामिधीयते। वाच्यवाचक वृत्तिभ्यां शून्येनावगमात्मना ।।' उद्ट IV. 12. Where the प्रस्तुत meaning is conveyed in another manner, viz. by suggestion, which is apart from the primary power, there is पर्यायोंक्त. 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 then they would otherwise have been.

X.61 पर्यायोक्तम्. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 213

Bhamaha and Udbhata do not seem to have recognised श्वनिकाव्य as the best and a separate variety of काव्य. They included all suggestive poetry under पर्यायोक. The meaning of पर्यायोक्त as defined by them is given by Lochana as follows :- अत एव पर्यायेण प्रकारान्तरेण अवगमात्मना व्यंग्येनोपलक्षितं सददभिधीयते तदभिधीयमानमुक्तमेव सत् पर्यायोक्तमेवाभिचीयते इति लक्षणपदम्, पर्यायोक्तमिति लक्ष्यपदम्, अर्थालक्कारत्वं सामान्यलक्षणं चेति सर्वे युज्यते।" p. 39. Mammata following उद्भट defines पर्यायोक्त as पर्यायोक्तं विना वाच्यवाचकत्वेन यद्वचः । वृत्ति। वाच्यवाचकभावव्यतिरिक्तेन अवगमनव्यापारेण यत् प्रतिपादनम्, तत् (पर्यायेण भंग्यन्तरेण कथनात) पर्यायोक्तम्. 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 Udbhata is that the former recognizes ध्वनिकाव्य. When the suggested sense is most prominent, there is taf; but in . ti tr, the suggested sense is not most prominent; besides the charm lies in the method of expression which is striking. The word पर्यायोक्त is to be explained as 'पर्यायेण भंग्यन्तरेण उक्तम् अभिहितं व्यंग्यं यत्र' R. G. p. 410. अलं. स., the Ekavali and our author define पर्यायोक्त in a different manner. When the su- ggested sense is expressed in a different manner there is पर्यायोक. 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 प्रस्तुत. So according to these writers, पर्यायोक्त occurs only when the qaa cause is suggested through the description of the effect, which also is graa. It must be said that this unneces- sarily limits the scope of the figure and is opposed to the views of very respectable writers like Udbhata, Mammata, Jagannatha etc. Jagannatha 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 प्रस्तुत, or (b) when the प्रस्तुत cause is suggested through the description of the effect which also is प्रस्तुत, or (c) when one thing which is प्रस्तुत is suggest- ed by the description of another, without any causal relation between the two. 'अयं चालक्कारः क्चित्कारणेन वाच्येन कार्यस्य गम्यत्वे कचित्कार्येण कारणस्य, क्चिदुभयोदासीनेन सम्बन्धिमात्रेण सम्बन्धिमात्रस्य चेति विपुलविषय: II' R. G. 415. An example of (a) is अपकुर्वद्भिरनिशं भृतराष्ट्र तवात्मजैः । उप्यन्ते मृत्युवीजानि पाण्डुपुत्रेषु निश्चितम् ॥. Here, the description of the sowing of seeds, which is a cause, suggests २४

214 NOTES ON X. 61 पर्यायोक्तम्.

the effect which is sega, viz. destruction of the whole family. An example of (b) is त्वद्विपक्षमहीपाला: स्वर्यालाधरपल्लवम्। पीडयन्वितर्रा वीमदारुणदशनक्षतैः I. Here the description of the effect, viz. सूरवभूसम्भोग on the part of the enemies, suggests the cause which is प्रस्तुत viz. their death. An example of (c) is सूर्याचन्द्रमसा यस् वासो रअयत: करैः। अङ्गरागं सृजत्यगनिस्तं वन्दे परमेश्वरम् ॥. Here शिव is anggested to be aarar ( 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 the fire. Between the suggested sense गगनाम्वरत्व and the description सूर्यचन्द्रकररज्यमानवस्त्रत्व there is no causel relation; and yet there is पर्यायोक्त Therefore the views of अलं. स. and its followers that पर्यायोक्त occurs only when there is a causal relation is, in our opinion, wrong. Jagannātha points out that the modes of expressing an idea are number- less. "तदेवं संक्षेपतस्त्रिविधः। वाग्भङ्गीनां तु पर्यालोचने एकस्मिन्नेव विषयेऽन- न्तप्रकार: सम्पदयते किमुत विषयमेदे। यथा-'इह भवद्भिरागन्तव्यम्' इति विषये 'अयं देशोऽलङ्कर्तव्यः' इति, 'पवित्रीकर्तव्यः' इति, 'सफलजन्मा कर्तव्यः' इति, 'प्रकाशनीयः' इति, 'देशस्यास्य भाग्यान्युज्जीवनीयानि' इति, 'तमांसि तिरस्करणीयानि' इति, 'अस्मन्नयनयोः सन्तापो हरणीयः' इति, 'मनोरथः पूरणीयः' इत्यादि:।" R. G. p. 416.

Some examples of पर्यायोक्त are :- येन लम्बालक: सास्र: कराघातारुण स्तनः । अकारि भन्नवलयो गजासुरवधूजनः । उद्भट IV. 13; चक्राभिघातप्रसभाश्यैव चकार यो राहुवधूजनस्य । आलिङ्गनोद्दामविलासशून्यं रतोत्सवं चुम्बनमात्रशेषम्।। quoted by the ध्वन्यालोक (p.89.); नमस्तसै कृतौ येन मुधा राङुवंधूकुची। चन्द्रालोक.

28 अर्थान्तरन्यास: (Corroboration). When a general proposition is strengthened by a particu- lar or a particular by a general one and when an effeet is justified by a cause or vice versa, either under a similarity or a contrast, there is अर्थान्तरन्यास which is thus eight-fold.

बृहत्सहाय :...... नगापगा ( p. 46, 11. 3-4). This is S'is'u. II. 100. बृहत्सहाय: (बृहन्तः महान्तः सहायाः यस्य) क्षोदीयान् अपि (क्षुद्रतरोऽपि) कार्यान्तं (कार्यस्य अन्तं) गच्छति (कार्य साधयवीति यावत)। नगापगां (िरेरुद्रता निर्झरिणी) महानद्या सम्भूय (मिलित्वा) अम्मोषि (सागर-) arafa. Here the general proposition laid down in the first half of the verse is confirmed by a particular illustration contained in the 2nd half.

X.61-62 अर्थान्तरन्यास. SAHITYADARPANA. 215

यावदर्थपदा ...... मितभाषिण: (p. 46, 11. 7-8). This is S'is't. म. 13. यावदर्थपदाम् (यावान् अर्थः यावदर्थम् अव्ययीभावः। यावदर्थ फ्दानि वस्ां सा) अभिधेयसमिताक्षराम् वाचम् एवम् आदाय (गृहीत्वा उक्त्वेत्यथैः) माधवः (कृष्णः) विरराम। महीयांसः (महत्तरा जना:) प्रकृत्या मितभाषिण: (भवन्ति). यावदर्थपर्दा वाचमादाय having discoursed in words that exactly conveyed the sense required to be expressed. The Nir. edition of S. D. reads यावदर्थ्यपदा and is supported by राम०. Our reading is supported by Mallinatha. यावदर्थ्यपर्दा will mean "यावन्ति अर्थ्यानि (अर्थादनपेतानि according to the sutra 'धर्मपथ्यर्थन्यायादनपेते'। पा० IV. 4. 92) पदानि यस्याम्" that in which all the words are significant. Here the particular proposition, viz. that Krshna 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 spoech.

पृथ्वि स्थिरा ...... आततज्यम् (p. 46, 11. 9-12). This is cited by the अलं.स. p. 110. This occurs in the हनुमन्नाटक I. 27 (a ms. in the library of the Bom. Branch of the Royal Asiatig Souiety ). These are the words of Lakshmana when Rama was about to make the bow of S'iva strung. पृथ्वि स्थिरा भंव be firm, Oh earth ( or otherwise by the formidable pressure it might totter ). भुजङ्गम (शेष) एनां (पृथ्वीं) धारय; कूर्मराज! त्वं इद द्विवयं (शेषं पृथ्वीं च) दधीथाः (धारयस्व); दिक्कअ्राः (दिम्गजाः!) तच्नितये (वेरषा त्रितये कू्मे अनन्ते पृथ्व्यां च) दिधीर्षा (धारणेच्छां) कुरुत; देवः (रामः) हरकामुंकम् (हरस्य शिवस्य धनुः) आततज्यम् (आतता ज्या यस्मिन् तत्) करोति. For the idea that the great Tortoise, the serpent and the elephants of the quarters support the earth, compare "u5or- चलदिम्मजफणिपतिविधृतापि चलति वसुधेयम्" भर्तृहरि. Here we under- stand that the firmness etc. are the effects, as they are the things which are enjoined upon the earth etc .; the earth is naturally firm; so what is to be conveyed by the injunction is that it should be specially firm. The special firmness roquired is justified by the cause or occasion, viz., the stringing of Si'va's bow.

सहसा ...... कारणस्य समर्थकम् (p. 46, II. 14-15). सहसा विद्धीत नं क्रियामविवेक: परमापदां पदम्। वृणते हि विमृश्यकारिणं गुणलुब्धाः स्वयमेद arqa:l This is Kirata. II. 30. Here, the effect, viz., prosperity's choosing the prudent man, justifies the cause, viz., the roverse of rash dealing i. e. prudence. Here, as the reverse of rash dealing is enjoined upon all ( in the potential mood faqsta ),

216 NOTES ON X. 61-62 अर्थान्तरन्यास.

we understand that it is the means to an end. Unless that end is mentioned, it cannot properly be the means. Therefore सम्पद्दरण is put in (as the effect) to justify the cause, viz., सददसा- विधानाभाव. The above four verses are examples (four ) resting upon साधर्म्य.

वैधम्ये ...... एवमन्यत् (p. 46, 11, 16-20). इत्थमाराध्यमान :.... दुर्जन :. 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 वैधर्म्य. सहसा विद्धीत 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 सहसाविधानाभाव) viz., causing adversity. एवमन्यत् Out of the four varieties of अर्थान्तरन्यास under वैधर्म्य, our author exemplifies only two, viz. विशेषस्य सामान्येन समर्थनम्, and कारणस्य कार्येण समर्थनम्. Examples of the other two, viz., (3) सामान्यस्य विशेषेण वैधर्म्येण समर्थनम्, and (4) कार्यस्य कारणेन वैधर्म्येण समर्थनम, are :- (3) गुणानामेव दौरात्म्याद्धरि धुयों नियुज्यते। असआ्तकिणस्कन्धः सुखं स्वपिति गौर्गलिः ॥ (गुणरूपदोषादेव धुर्यः श्रेष्ठः धुरि कार्यभारे नियुज्यते। असज्ञातकिण: स्कन्धः यस्य। यः आसजितं युगं बलात्पातयति स गौर्गलि: । उद्योत p. 82); (4) सहसा विदधीत etc .- Here the effect of अविवेक (which is the opposite of सहसाविधानाभाव) viz., आपत्पदत्व, is justified by the cause सहसाविधानाभाव (which is the same as विमृश्यकारित्व mentioned in the 2nd half).

The name अर्थान्तरन्यास is significant. 'अर्थ्यते इति अर्थः प्रस्तुतः इति यावत्।' एकावली p.266. अन्यः अर्थः अर्थान्तरम् तस्य न्यास: Compare the following definitions 'ब्ेयः सोऽर्थान्तरन्यासो वस्तु प्रस्तुत्य किंचन। तत्साधनसमर्थस्य न्यासो योन्यस्य वस्तुनः ।।'K. D. II. 169; 'उपन्यसनमन्यस्य यदर्थस्योदितादृते। ज्ञेय: सोऽर्थान्तरन्यास: पूर्वार्धानुगतो यथा ॥' भामह II. 71. Our author, in the treatment of अर्थान्तरन्यास slavishly follows the अलं. स. Although this figure is of the most frequent occurrence, next to उपमा, रूपक and उत्प्रेक्षा, he borrows some of the examples also from अलं. स. 'निर्दिष्टस्याभिहितस्य समर्थनार्हस्य प्रकृतस्य समर्थकात् पूर्व पश्चाद्वा निर्दिष्टस्य यत्समर्थनं उपपादनम्, न त्वपूर्वतवेन प्रतीतिरनुमानरूपा सोडर्थान्तरन्यासः। तत्र सामान्यं विशेषस्य विशेषो वा सामान्यस्य समर्थक इति दौ मेदौ। तथा कार्ये कारणस्य कारणं वा कार्यस्य समर्थकमित्यपि द्वौ मेदौ। तत्र मेदचतुष्टये प्रत्येकं साधर्म्यवैधर्म्याभ्यां मेदद्येऽटटौ मेदाः । हिशब्दाभि- धानानभिधानाभ्यां समर्थकपूर्वोपन्यासोत्तरोपन्यासाभ्यों च मेदान्तरसम्भवेऽपि न तंद्रणना सहृदयहृदयहारिणी। वैन्वित्र्यस्याभावात। तस्मान्भ्ेदाष्टकमेवेह्योट्टङ्कितम्।' अलं.स. p. 109. In अर्थान्तरन्यास, the proposition to be supported is generally placed first and the proposition that supports is placed

X.61-62 अर्थान्तरन्यास. SAHITYADARPANA. 217

last. But this order may be reversed. Similarly the relation of समर्थ्य and समर्थक may be directly expressed by such words as यतः, यत्, हि etc. or it may be left to be understood. "अस्मिन्नलङ्कारे समर्थ्यसमर्थकभाव आर्थः शाब्दश्चालङ्कारताप्रयोजकः । न तु काव्यलिक्े हेतुहेतु- मन्भाव इवार्थ एव। हि यत् यतः इत्यादेः प्रतिपादकस्याभावे आर्थः। .... तत्सत्त्वे शाब्द: ।" R.G. p. 472. Compare 'समर्थकस्य पूर्व यद्धचोऽन्यस्य च पृष्ठतः । विपर्ययेण वा यत्स्याद्िशब्दोत्तयाऽन्यथाऽपि वा ॥ ज्ञेयः सोऽर्थान्तरन्यास: प्रकृतार्थसमर्थनात्। अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसाया दृष्टान्ताच्च पृथविस्थितः ॥" उद्भट II. 7-8. The अलं. स. has been severely criticized for saying that मर्थान्तरन्यास occurs also when an effect is justified by a cause or vice versa. The अलं. स. and our author perhaps stand alone in holding this view. Even Jayaratha, the commentator of सर्वस्व says 'कार्यकारणभावाश्रयस्य मेदद्वयस्य काव्यलिङ्गत्वं ग्रन्थकृदेव वक्ष्यतीति सामान्यविशेषभावाश्रयमेव भेददयमाश्रयणीयम्।' विम० p. 109. Jagannatha says that when the cause is justified by the effect or the effect by the cause, the figure is काव्यलिङ्ग (which is admitted by the अलं. स. and our author also). "यत्त 'कारणेन कार्यस्य कार्येण कारणस्य वा समर्थनम्' इत्यपि भेदद्वयमर्थान्तरन्यासस्यालङ्गारसर्वस्वकारो न्यरूपयद, तन्न। तस्य काव्यलिङ्गविषयत्वात, अन्यथा 'वपुःप्रादुर्भावात्' इति सकलालङ्कारिकसिद्धं कांव्यलिङ्गोदाहरणमसङ्गतं स्यात्। अपरार्धे वाक्यार्थद्वयस्य कारणत्वेनार्थान्तरन्यासो- दाहरणतापते:।" R. G. p. 474. The verse referred to in the quotation from R. G. is "वपुःप्रादुर्भावादनुमितमिदं जन्मनि पुरा पुरारे न प्रायः क्वच्विदपि भवन्तं प्रणतवान्। नमन्मुक्तः संप्रत्यइ्मतनुरग्रेऽप्यनतिभाग महेश क्षन्तव्यं तदिदमपराधद्वयमपि॥". This is cited as an example of काव्यलिन by Mammata and many other rhetoricians. Here, the effect viz., अपराधद्वयम्, is justified by the two causes, पुरा क्वचिदपि न प्रणतवान्, अग्रेऽपि अनतिभाकू. This would be an example of अर्थान्तरन्यास according to the अलं. स. and our author. But that would be going against all weighty authority. So अर्थान्तरन्यास should be so defined as not to trench upon the province of काव्यलिङ्ग. This can be effected by saying that अर्थान्तरन्यास occurs when a particular is supported by a general proposition and a general by a particular; while in काव्यलिङ the effect is justified by the cause or vice versa. Compare उद्योत 'कारणेन कार्यस्य कार्येण कारणस्य वा समर्थनं काव्यलिङ्गस्य विषय इति बोध्यम्। समर्थ्यसमर्थकयोः सामान्यविशेषभावसम्बन्घेडयं, तदितरसम्बन्धे काव्यलिङ्गमित्युपगमातू।' 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 अर्थान्तरन्यास is defined as done by him, काव्यलिद will have a province quite distinct from अर्थान्तरन्यास. We shall see this later on under काव्यलिन्न

NOTES ON X. 61-62 अर्थान्तरन्यास.

अर्यान्तरन्यास must be distinguished from दृष्टान्त. In the former, a-particular proposition is supported by a general one and vice tiersa; while in the latter, a general is illustrated by a general and a particular by a particular. Compare 'अनुषपद्यमानतया सम्भाव्य- मानस्यार्थस्योपपादनार्थ यदर्थान्तरं न्यस्यते सोऽर्थान्तरन्यासः । दृष्टान्ते तु सामान्यं सामान्येन विशेषो विशेषेण समथ्यंते इति ततो भेदः ।' उद्योत p.81. We must also distinguish between अर्थान्तरन्यास and अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा, where from the deseription of an अप्रस्तुत विशेष or सामान्य, the प्रस्तुत सामान्य or विशेष is implied In अर्थान्तरन्यास, both the general and particuar propositions are expressly mentioned; while in अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा the अप्रस्तुत विशेष or सामान्य is expressly mentioned and the general or particular ( which is प्रस्तुत ) is left to be implied. Jagannatha speaks of an अलद्कार called उदाहरण, 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 अवयव and अवयवि is expressed by-such word as इव, यथा, निदर्शन etc. 'सामान्येन निरूपितस्यार्थस्य सुखप्रतिपचये तदेकदेशं निरूप्य तयोरवयवावयविभाव उच्यमान उदाहरणम्। p. 213. Ex- amples are 'अमितगुणोऽपि पदार्थो दोषेणैकेन निन्दितो भवति। निखिलरसायनराजो गन्घेनोग्रेण लशुन इव ॥ उपकारमेव कुरुते विपद्गतः सद्गुणो नितराम्। मूच्छी गतो मृतो वा निदर्शनं पारदोडत्र रसः ।।'. What distinguishes this figure, according to Jagannatha, from अर्थान्तरन्यास is that in उदाहरण, some word, such as इव, यथा, निदर्शन, which convey's the relation of अवयव and अवयवि is present, while in अर्थान्तरन्यास it is wot present; and that in उदाहरण the predicate of the particular case is the same as that of the general proposition first laid down, as निन्दितो भवति in 'अमितगुणोपि' etc. "असिश्वाल्क्कारेड चयवावयविभावबोधकस्येवशब्दादे: प्रयोग: सामान्यविशेषयोरेकरूपविधेयान्वयश्चार्थीन्तर- न्यासमेदाद्लक्षण्याचायक इति." R. G. p. 215; also pp. 472-473. On this, some say that the figure in उपकारमेव etc. is nothing but अर्थान्तरन्यास, for निदर्शन means nothing but समर्थक. Others say that the figure is Upama. Very few writers recognise this figure. "प्राज्जस्तु वदन्ति 'नायमलङ्कारो ( उदाहरणालक्कारो) अतिरिक्तः। उपमयैव गतार्थत्वात्। न च सामान्यविशेषयोः सादृश्यानुल्लासात्कथमुपमेति वाच्यम्। 'निर्विशेषं न सामान्यं' इति सामान्यस्य यत्किञ्चिद्विशेषं विना प्रकृतत्वायोगाचाटस- विशेषमादाय विशेषान्तरस्व सादृश्योल्लासे बाधकाभावादिवादिभिरामुखे प्रतीयमानस्यापि सामान्यविशेषभावस्य परिणामे सादृश्ये एव विश्रान्तेः' इत्यप्याहः।" R.G. pp. 215-16. "ननु 'उपकारमेव' इत्यत्र कोऽलक्कार इति चेदयमेष (अर्धान्तरन्यास एव)। निदर्शनशब्दस्य समर्थकपरत्वात्। उपमाऽनालक्कार इति कशषिव। एतेनोदाहरणालङ्कारोऽयमतिरिक्त इत्यापास्तम्।" उघ्ोत p.82. The Chand- raloka and the Kuvalayananda speak of another figure called

X61-62 अर्थान्तरन्यास. SAHITYADARPANA. 219

"AaT where first a particular proposition is supported by a general one and then a particular case is mentioned. 'afer न्विशेषसामान्यविशेषा: स विकस्वरः। स न जिग्ये महान्तो हि दुर्र्षाः सागरा इव॥।". The कुवलयानन्द cites the following as an example :- 'अनन्तरतप्रभवस्य यस्य हिमं न सौभाग्यविलोपि जातम् । एको हि दोषो गुणसंनिपाते निमज्जवीन्दोः किरणेष्विवाङ्क: ॥' कुमार I. 2. This, however, does not deserve to be a separate figure. There is aafe of two अर्थान्तरन्यासs or of अर्थान्तरन्यास and उपमा. "एवं चार्थान्तरन्यासस्य तस्य चार्थान्तरन्यासप्रमेदयोश्च संसष्टयैवोदाहरणानां त्वदुक्तानां गतार्थत्वे नवीनालक्कार- स्वीकारानौचचित्यात्। अन्यथोपमादिप्रभेदानामनुग्राह्यानुग्राहकतया संनिवेशेऽलद्कारा- न्तरकल्पनापत्तेः । 'वीक्ष्य रामं घनश्यामं ननृतुः शिखिनो वने ।' इत्यत्रोपमापोषितायां भ्रान्तावलङ्कारान्तरत्वप्रसङ्गाच्च।" R. G. p. 475. This figure occurs very frequently. The S'atakas of Bhartrhari exhibit many charming examples. Kalidasa also is very fond of this figure. Compare 'सरसिजमनुविद्धं शैवलेनापि रम्यं मलिनमपि हिमांशोर्लक्ष्म लक्ष्मी तनोति । इयमधिकमनोज्ञा वल्कलेनापि तन्वी किमिव हि मधुराणां मण्डनं नाकृतीनाम्॥।' श्ा. I; 'भवन्ति नम्रास्तरवः फलागमैर्नवाम्बुमिर्दूरविलम्बिनो घनाः । अनुद्धता: सत्पुरुषाः समृद्धिभि: स्वभाव एवैष

figures also. परोपकारिणाम् ।।' शा० V. In both these verses, there are other

29 काव्यलिङ्गम् ( Poetical Cause). When a reason is implied in (1) a sentence or (2) a word, it is termed काव्यलिङ्ग हेतोर्वाक्यपदार्थत्वे-हेतोर्वाक्यार्थत्वे पदार्थत्वे च.

तत्र वाक्यार्थता ...... गोपयत्युग्रमूर्धनि (p. 46, l. 22-p. 47, 1. 2). यत्त्वनेत्र ..... क्षम्यते. क्षेमेन्द्र in his सुवृत्ततिलक (p. 47) ascribes this verse to श्रीयशोवर्मन् (probably the same as the patron of भवभृति and वाक्पतिराज, about 700 A. D.); the verse is cited as an example of काव्यलिङ् in the अलं. स. (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 (rHe ). यत् त्वन्नेत्रसमानकान्ति (त्वन्नेन्राभ्यां समाना कान्तिर्यस्य) इन्दीवरं तव सलिले मंग्रम्; मुखस्य च्छायां कान्तिमनुकरोतीति मुखच्छायानुकारी शशी मेपैः अन्तरित: (तिरोहित: ); येऽपि त्वद्गमनानुसारिगतयः (त्वद्रमनानुसारिणी गतिः येषां) वे राजइंसा गताः (मानससरोवरमिति शेषः); त्वत्सादृश््यविनोदमात्रमपि (तव सादृश्यं तेन विनोद:, विनोद एव विनोदमात्रम्) मे दैवेन न क्षम्यते. In this stanza, the fourth line asserts that 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 काव्यलिङ्गम.

(हेतोर्वाक्यार्थता). The second variety, viz. हेतोः पदार्थता, may oceur, when the a is implied in a single word or in many words ( not forming a sentence). त्वद्वाजि ...... हरः-तवद्वाजिराजिभि: (तव अश्वनिवहैः) निर्धूतं यत् धूलीपटलं तेन पक्किलाम् (पङ्कमयीं) गङ्गां भूरिभारभिया हर: (शिवः) शिरसा न धत्ते. In this verse, the first half, which is a single word (being a compound), implies the reason of the assertion made in ths 2nd. पश्यन्त्यसंख्य ...... मूर्धनि. देव (राजन्), त्वद्दानजलवाहिनीम् असंख्यपथगां (संख्यातीतैः प्रवाहैः गच्छन्तीम्) पश्यन्ती त्रिपथगा (गङ्गा; पक्षे त्रिमिः एव मार्गेर्गच्छतीति) आत्मानम् उग्रमूर्धनि (उग्र: शिवः, 'उग्र: कपरदी श्रीकण्ठः' अमर. I. 1.32. तस्य शिरसि ) गोपयति. Here, for the assertion that the Ganges hides herself on the head of S'iva, the implied reason is contained in the words पश्यन्त्यसंख्यपथगां त्वद्दानजलवाहिनीम्. 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 काव्यलिङ्ग, the हेतु must be implied and not expressed by the instrumental or ablative case. Therefore the verse "yati विनयाधानाद्रक्षणाज्भरणादपि। स पिता पितरस्तासां केवलं जन्महेतवः ॥।" (रघु० I. 24 ) is not an example of काव्यलिङ्ग, as the हेतु is directly mentioned by the ablative case. Compare "तेन 'भयानकत्वात्परि- वर्जनीयो दयाश्रयत्वादसि देव सेव्यः' इत्यादौ नायमलङ्कारः। गम्यमानहेतुत्वकस्यैव हेतोः सुन्दरत्व्रेनालङ्कारिकः काव्यलिङ्गताभ्युपगमात्।" R. G. p. 466. The word foa means 'a sign, reason'. The reason why the figure is called काव्यलिंग is given by कुव० (p.127 ) as "व्याप्तिधर्मता- [ व्याप्तिपक्षधर्मता?]सापेक्षनैयायिकलिङ्गव्यावर्तनाय काव्यविशेषणम्." Vide "पक्ष- धर्मत्वान्वयव्यतिरेकानुसरणगर्भतया यथा तार्किकप्रसिद्धा हेतवो लोकप्रसिद्धवस्तु- विषयत्वेनोपनिवध्यमाना वैरस्यमावहन्ति न तथा काव्यहेतुः। अतिशयेन सर्वेषां जनानां योऽ्सौ हृदयसंवादी सरसः पदार्थस्तन्निष्ठतया उपनिबध्यमानत्वात्। अतः काव्यलिङ्गमिति काव्यग्रह्णमुपात्तम्। न खल तच्छास्त्रलिङ्गं, किं तहि काव्यलिङ्गमिति काव्यग्रहणेन प्रतिपादयते।" प्रतीहारेन्दुराज on उद्भट VI. 16. इह केचिद् ...... काव्यलिङ्गात् (p. 47, 11. 3-7). इह केचिद् ...... नाद्ि- यन्ते. Some writers do not admit those cases of अर्थान्तरन्यास which are based upon the relation of causation, because they suppose that they fall under काव्यलिङ् 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 अर्थान्तरन्यास. तदयुक्तम् ...... इति पृथगेव etc. Our author declares that this view is quite wrong. The reason is as follows :- A cause is here i. e. in the province of poetry, three-fold, viz. Indicative ( 1q lit. Informative ), Productive, Justificative

X. 63 काव्यलिङ्गम्- SÂHITYADARPANA. 221

( or confirmatory ). The uadg is the province of the figure called Inference, the निष्पादक that of काव्यलिङ् and the समर्थक that of अर्थान्तरन्यास. Thus अर्थान्तरन्यास founded upon the relation of causation is quite distinct from काव्यलिङ्. What the author means by the three words झापक, निष्पादक and समर्थक is as follows :- When we see smoke on a mountain, we infer fire. Here smoke is the aa of the inference of fire. Smoke simply indicates that there is fire ( i. e. the aa is Tq ); it does not produce fire ( i. e. it is not fsqraa ). 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 'लक्षणहेत्वोः क्रियायाः (where the word लक्षण containing three syllables is placed before हेतु containing only two) and thereby indicates that the rule above referred to is not rigid ( i. e. the sūtra is a ya ). Sometimes a aa actually produces a thing or a state of things. For example, in the verse पश्यन्त्यसंख्य 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 ag actually pro- duces or would produce a result, and does not merely indicate the existence of another thing (as smoke does). By a समर्थकहेतु as exemplified in 'पृथ्वि स्थिरा भव, the author means :- A special degree of firmness is demanded of the Earth, which is already firm; this special demand is justified by the aa, viz, Rama's stringing the bow of S'iva. It must be remarked upon these views of our author that he is perhaps alone in this three-fold classification of ह्ेतुs. The line drawn between निष्पादक and aia appears to us, to say the least, very thin. There is no reason why what is called समर्थक cannot be निष्पादक as well. Rama's stringing the bow of S'iva would actually give rise to a demand for more firmness on the part of the earth, i. e. the ag is Aoen, 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 aas ( apart from अभावहेतु) 'कारकज्ञापकौ हेतू तौ चानेकविधौ यथा ॥' K.D. II. 235. An example of कारकहेतु is 'चन्दनारण्यमाधूय स्पृष्टा मलयनिर्झरान्। पथिकानामभावाय पवनोऽयमुपस्ितः ॥'. Here the advent of the breeze charged with the fragrance of sandalwood is what actually

222 NOTES ON X. 63 काव्यलिजमं-

would cause the death of the love-lorn travellers; i. e. the ag is कारक An example of ज्ञापकहेतु is 'गतोऽस्तमकों भातीन्दुर्यान्ति ससाय पक्षिणः । इतीदमपि साध्वेव कालावस्थानिवेदने।।' K. D. II. 241, Here the setting of the sun etc. indicate that it is time to perform the Sandhya-adoration. The afargo ( B. I. edition ) defines हेतु a.s 'सिसाधयिषितार्थस्य हेतुर्भवति साधकः। कारको श्ापक इति द्विया सोप्युपजायते ॥' म० 343. 29-30 (हेतु is that which is a means to accomplish or prove what is desired to be accomplished or proved). The सरस्वतीकं०, strictly following the dogma of the grammarians, says 'क्रियाया: कारणं हेतुः कारको ज्ञापकश्च सः। अभावश्चि न्हेतुश्च चतुर्विध इहेष्यते॥' p. 313. The कारकहेतु is defined as 'यः प्रवृत्ति निवृत्ति च प्रयुकि चान्तरा विशन्। उदासीनोऽपि वा कुर्याद कारकं तद् प्रचक्षते ॥।' सरस्वतीकं० p. 314 (That which, whether itself acting or not, causes motion, cessation or continuity is termed R). About a ज्ञापकहेतु it is said 'द्वितीया च तृतीया च चतुर्थी सप्तमी च यम् क्रियानाविष्टमाचष्टे लक्षणं ज्ञापकश्च यः ॥।' A ज्ञापक has no व्यापार of its own and it serves as a characteristic of another thing. A vs 2a does not produce an object, but it only indicates its existence; it may itself be the effect and may lead us to infer its çause, as the sight of a flood of water leads us to the inference of heavy rains at the source of a river. The arfago ( B. I. Ed. ) observes 'प्रवर्तते कारकाख्यः प्राकू पश्चात्कार्यजन्मनः ॥ पूर्वशेष इति ख्यातस्तयोरेव विशेषयोः । कार्यकारणभावाद्ा स्वभावाद्ा नियामकाव। ज्वापकाख्यस् मेदोऽसित नदीपूरादिदर्शनाव।' अ० 343. 30-32. The निष्पादक and समर्थक हेतुs of our author are both included under FRa; for we have shewn above that no clear line of division can be drawn between them; तथाहि.काव्यलिसात् (p. 47, 11 7-14). The author now shows, by referring to the examples, how arfe is different from अर्थान्तरन्यास as based upon the relation of causation. यत्त्व- केत्र इत्यादौ ...... अपेक्षते. अन्यथा means 'in the absence of the three sentences which are the reasons'. In the verse 'anan' 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 firat 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 anig; it requires the presente of those cireumstances which gave rise to the stato mentioned in it. 'सइसा विद्धीत' इत्यादी -- सोपपत्तिकमेव करोतीति. Conatrue विषेया with सङ्ति: वदामि भवतः जखं is parenthetical and means I tell you the truth.' The probibition of heedless

X.63 कान्यलिङ्गम्: SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 229

dealing contained in 'सहसा विदधीत' 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 'परापकार ete.' सम्पद्वरणं is the snbjeot of करोति, the objeot being सहसाविधानाभावम् सोपपत्तिकमेव goes with सहसाविधानाभावम्. 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 'सहसा विदधीत 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 'e Arda' etc, people are warned against acting rashly. This advice is intelligible in itself; it is निराकांक्ष. If the reason is at all mentioned, it is only to justify the advice given. That is to say, in अर्थान्तरन्यास based upon कार्यकारणभाव, one proposition. is quite independent of the other; while in काव्यलिन, one proposition depends upon another ( i. e. is air) and would be unintelligible without it. इति पृथगेव ...... काव्यलिङ्गात. For this reason काव्यलिन is quite distinct from अर्थान्तरन्यास based upon कार्यकारणभाव. It may be remarked here that the author has. not succeeded in convincing us. The only distinetion that he has been able to point out does not lie so much in the diffor- ence of the ह्ेतुs, as in the fact that in अर्थान्तरन्यास one proposi- tion is independent of the other, while in rafe one is dependent on the other. But this also is not a sure guide. In 'पृथ्वि स्थिरा' etc. which is an example of अर्थान्तरन्यास according to our author, it cannot be said that the sentences पृथ्वि स्थिरा भव 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 'पृथ्वि स्थिरा भव' does stand in need of the sense contained in the last line in order to complete its own sense; i. e. the sentence पृथ्नि स्थिरा भव is साकांक्ष, just as 'त्वत्सादृश्यविनोदमात्रमपि etc.' is; it may, hence, be said that 'पृथ्वि स्थिरा भव' is an example of काव्यलिङ्ग. It should also be noticed that the as. #. which appears to have been the guide of our author surrenders the position taken up by it, viz. that अर्थान्तरन्यास based upon causation is different from काव्यलिन्न and says that in holding that view it simply followed . It says that the legitimate province of अर्थान्तरन्यास is the relation of सामान्य and विशेष; and that wherever the sense of a sentence constitutes the हेतु, there is काव्यलिङ्. It also says that a समर्षक-

224 NOTES ON X. 63 काव्यलिङ्गम्•

वाक्य cannot be said to be independent. "यत्र तु वाक्याथों हेतुस्तत्र हेतुप्रतिपादकमन्तरेण हेतुत्वायोपन्यासे (हेतुतयोप० १) काव्यलिङ्गमेव तटस्थत्वेनो- मन्यस्तस्य हेतुत्वेनार्थान्तरन्यासः। एवं चास्यां प्रक्रियायां कार्यकारणवाक्यार्थयोहेतुत्वे काव्यलिङ्गमेव पर्यवस्यति। समर्थकस्य सापेक्षत्वात् ताटस्थ्याभावात्। ततश्च सामान्य विशेषभावोरऽ्र्थान्तरन्यासस्य विषयः। यत्पुनरर्थान्तरन्यासस्य कार्यकारणगतत्वेन समर्थ- कत्वमुक्तम्, तदुक्तलक्षणकाव्यलिङ्गमनाश्रित्य। तद्विषयत्वेन लक्षणान्तरस्यौद्टैरनाश्रि- तत्वात्।" (अलं. स. P. 148. द्घटैराश्रितत्वाद्?). उन्ट defines काव्यलिन् as 'श्रुतमेकं यदन्यत्र स्मृतेरनुभवस्य वा। हेतुतां प्रतिपदेत काव्यलिङ्गं तदुच्यते॥' उद्ट VI. 16. His example is 'छायेयं तव शेषाङ्गकान्तेः किंचिदनुज्ज्वला। विभूषाघटना- देशान् दर्शयन्ती दुनोति माम् ॥' VI. 18. This is an example of हेतोः पदार्थता. Since Udbhata does not give an example of हेतो: वाक्यार्थता, it follows that he included हेतोः वाक्यार्थता under अर्थान्तरन्यास His definition also is favourable to this construction.

न धत्ते ... अलङ्कारतत्वात् (p. 47, 11. 15-18). In न धत्ते ... पक्किला हि सा, there is no काव्यलिङ्ग, because the reason is clearly and directly mentioned by the use of the particle fe, as if we were to employ the formal expression पङ्किलत्वात (हरः भूरिभारमिया गर्ङ्गा शिरसा न धत्ते। पङ्किलत्वात् etc.). It has been said above that only a गम्यहेतु (and not an expressed one) constitutes the figure काव्यलिङ्ग. There is no charm in the formal expression पङ्किलत्वात्; and it is strikingness alone that constitutes a figure.

काव्यलिङ must be distinguished from परिकर. In the latter, the epithets are significant and the sense suggested from the words contributes to make the expressed meaning striking; while in काव्यलिङ, the sense of the sentence or word itself becomes the reason of another assertion. For example, in अङ्गराज, द्रोणोपहासिन etc. (which was cited above as an instance of qftar) the words suggest a sense which makes the express- ed meaning more charming; while in 'यत्त्वन्नेत्र' etc, the sense of the first three lines constitutes the reason of the assertion con- tained in the 4th line. 'ननु साभिप्रायपदार्थवाक्यार्थविन्यसनरूपात्परिकरात् काव्यलिङ्गस्य को मेदः । उच्यते। परिकरे पदार्थवाक्यार्थबलात् प्रतीयमानार्थौ वाच्योपस्कारतां भजतः । काव्यलिङ्गे तु पदार्थवाक्यार्थावेव हेतुभावं भजतः ।' कुव० p. 129. Some say that in अर्थान्तरन्यास one sentence is indepen- dent and is confirmed by another; while in काव्यलिङ्ग, one sen- tence is not complete in itself and requires the help of another यत्रेतरनिरपेक्षस्य वाक्यार्थस्य हेतुत्वं तत्रार्थान्तरन्यासः ।" एका० p. 300, on which तरल observes 'समर्थ्यसमर्थकवाक्यार्थयोः सापेक्षत्वे काव्यलिङ्गं निरपेक्षत्वे तु अर्थान्तरन्यास इत्यर्थ:।'. It would be better to say that when two sentences stand in the relation of सामान्य and विशेष and one

X. 63 काव्यलिङ्गम्. SÅHITYADARPAŅA. 225

of them confirms the other, there is अर्थान्तरन्यास; and when two sentences stand to each other in some other relation and one justifies the other there is काव्यलिङ्ग. "किं च काव्यलिङ्गेऽपि न सर्वत्र समर्थनसापेक्षत्वनियमः। ... तस्मादुभयतो व्यभिचारात् समर्थनापेक्षसमर्थने काव्य- लिंहं तन्निरपेक्षसमर्थनेऽर्थान्तरन्यास इति न विभाग:, किं तु समर्थ्यसमर्थकयोः सामान्य- विशेषसम्बन्वेऽर्थान्तरन्यासस्तदितरसम्बन्धे काव्यलिङ्गमित्येव व्यवस्थावधारणीया।" कुव० p. 132-133. Or to put it in another way, in काव्यलिङ् we understand from the sense a कारकहेतु, while in अर्थान्तरन्यास another proposition is put down for the purpose of a.thorough understanding of what is already said. "तस्मात् साक्षात्परम्परया वा यत्र कारकहेतुरर्थतोऽवगम्यते तत्काव्यलिङ्गम्। उक्तार्थदृढप्रत्ययाय यत्रार्थान्तरन्यसनं तत्रार्थान्तरन्यास:।" प्रभा p. 425. Ancient writers like Dandin and Bhamaha do not speak of काव्यलिङ at all. Some say that काव्यलिङ is not a figure at all, because in it there is no special charm that is striking. A striking charm is due to the poet's imagination. But in काव्यलिन् 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 काव्यलिस when combined with शेष, the reply is that, then the charm being due to w alone, the figure will be शेष and not काव्यलिङ. Therefore, they say that what is called काव्यलिङ् is simply the absence of the fault called निर्हेतुत्व *. "अत्र वदन्ति-काव्यलिङ्गं नालङ्गारः। वैचित्र्यात्मनो विच्छित्तिविशेषस्याभावाद्। स हि जन्यतासंसर्गेण कविप्रतिभाविशेषः तन्निर्मितत्वप्रयुक्तश्मत्कृतिविशेषो वेत्युक्तम्। न चानयोरन्यतरस्याप्यत्र सम्भवः । हेतुहेतुमन्भावस्य वस्तुसिद्धत्वेन कविप्रतिभानिर्वर्त्या- योगात्। अत एव चमत्कृतिरपि दुर्लभा। श्रेषादिसंमिश्रणेन विच्छित्तिविशेषोड्न्राप्यस्तीति तु न वाच्यम् । तस्य श्रेषादंशप्रयोज्यत्वेन काव्यलिङ्गस्यालङ्कारतायास्तथाप्यसिद्धेः। यत्र तूपस्कारकवैच्चित्र्याद्विलक्षणं तदुपस्कार्यवैचित्रयं तत्रास्तु नामोपस्कारकादुपस्कार्यस्य पृथगलङ्कारत्वम् । यथातिशयोक्तेर्हेतुफलोत्प्रेक्षयोः । यत्र तूपस्कारकवैच्वित्र्य एव विश्रान्तिस्तत्रोपस्कार्यमनलङ्गार एव। यथा प्रकृते। एवं तहि बहूनामलङ्कारलेन प्राचीनैरूरीकृतानामनलक्कारतापत्तिरिति चेत, अस्तु। कि नश्छित्रम्। तस्मात निर्हेतुरूपदोषाभाव: काव्यलिङ्गम्' इत्यपि वदन्ति।" R. G. p. 470. 30 अनुमानम् (Inference). साधनात् साध्यस्य विच्छित्या ज्ञानं अनुमानम्-Anumana is the knowledge of the sadhya, expressed in a striking manner, * On this दोष, प्रदीप remarks "निहेतुर्निष्क्ान्तो हेतुर्यस्मात्। यथा- गृहीतं येनासी: परिभवभयान्नोचितमपि प्रभावादयस्याभून्न खलु तव कश्चिन्न विषयः। परित्यक्तं तेन त्वमसि सुतशोकान्न तु भयाद्विमोक्ष्ये शस्त्र त्वामहमपि यतः स्वस्ति भन्ते ॥'-अत्र स्वशस्त्रत्यायहेतुर्नोपाचः।" p. 280. २५

226 NOTES ON X 63 अनुमानम्-

from the sadhana. The words साध्य and साधन are well-known to the student of Nyaya. HT is that which goes to prove the axistence of one thing on another, as in 'पर्वतो वह्िमान् धूमासू,' where धूम is the साधन, which being known to be invariably associated with fire, proves the existence of fire on the mountain. are is that the existence of which on a particular thing is to be proved by means of the साधन. The word विच्छित्त्या serves to distinguish a poetic argara from one which is 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 'पर्वतो वह्निमान्' etc. is not an example of the figure called अनुमान. Besides, in a poetical अनुमान, the five members of a complete logical syllogism are not mentioned; only the Hrea and साधन (and of course पक्ष) are mentioned. "अस्य च कवि- प्रतिभोलिलिखितत्वेन चमत्कारित्वे काव्यालङ्गारता" R. G. p. 475; "यत्र शब्दवृत्तेन पक्षधर्मान्वयव्यतिरेकवत् साधनं साध्यप्रतीतये निर्दिश्यते सोऽनुमानालङ्कारः। विच्छित्तिविशेषश्चात्रार्थाश्रयणीयः । अन्यथा तर्कानुमानात्क वैलक्षण्यम्।" अलं. स. p. 146; "अत्र साध्यसाधनकथनमात्राभिधानं व्याप्यादिप्रदर्शनं न कर्तव्यमित्युपदेशे पर्यवसितम्। इतरथा कथमेतत्तर्कानुमानतो भेदं भजेत्। किं च पञ्चावयवत्वे सत्यपि अवयवान्तरानुपादानं पौनरुक्त्यपरिहाराय।" एका० p. 302. जानीमहे ...... कुकालताक्षिपझ्े (p. 47, ll. 21-22). अस्याः सारसाक्ष्या: (कमलनयनायाः) हृदि प्रियवक्रचन्द्रः (प्रियस्य वक्रमेव चन्द्रः) अन्तः विराजते (इति) जानीमहे (तर्कयामः) प्रसृतैः उत्कान्तिजालै: (उद्ता कान्तिः उत्कान्तिः तस्याः जालै: ) तदङ्ेषु (तस्याः अङ्गेषु) आपाण्डुता (वर्तते इति शेष:), अक्षिपद्मे (अक्षि एव पझ्मम् तस्मिन्) कुझलता (वर्तते). The paleness of the limbs and the closing (कुडलता 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 साध्य is the moon shining. The साधन is the paleness of the body and the closing of the eyes caused by the bursting rays of the moon. The qar is the heart of the woman. The argument may be put in a syllogism as follows :- areT: हृदयं विराजत्प्रियवक्रचन्द्रयुक्तम्, किरणजन्याङ्गपाण्डुताक्षिपद्मकुङ्ालत्वाद्, i. e. the प्रतिभ्ा is 'her heart (पक्ष) has a moon in the form of her lover's face shining in it' (साध्य); the reason (हेतु or साधन) is 'because there is paleness of limbs in her and closing of lotuses ( eyes ) caused by the moon's rays'.

X. 63 अनुमानम् SAHITYADARPANA.

अत्र ...... विच्छित्ति: In the foregoing verse the strikingness was based upon the figure रूफक. The अनुमान here is helped by the superimposition of चन्द्र on वत्र and पद्म on अभ्षि. In the same way अनुमान may be based on other figures. यत्र पतत्यबलानां ..... समरो मन्ये (p. 47, ll. 25-26). (यतः) यत्र अवलानां दृष्टिः पतति तत्र निशिता: शराः पतन्ति तत् (तस्मात्) चापरोपितशरः (चापे रोपिताः शराः येन) स्मरः (मदनः) आसां अबलानां पुरः धावति (इति) मन्ये. Here the साध्य is Cupid's running in front of the women with a strung bow; the Hra is the falling of arrows in the form of the glances of the women; and the qa is women. The argument may be put as follows :- एता: अबलाः पुरोधावच्चाप रोपितशरत्वविशिष्टमनोभवाः, निपतन्निशितबाणदृष्टियुक्तत्वात; i.e. the प्रतिश्ञा is 'these women ( qaT ) have Cupid running before them with a bow etc. (the TEq );' the reason is 'because they shoot glances which are sharp arrows etc.' अत्र कवि ... ... विच्छित्ति :- Here the charm rests simply upon the imaginative description of the poet ( and not upon q or any other figure as in the first example ). The second example is closely similar to the example of अनुमान cited by Mammata (and by अलं. स. also), viz. 'यत्रैता लहरीचलाचलदृशो व्यापारयन्ति भ्रवं यत्तत्रैव पतन्ति सन्ततममी मर्मस्पृशो मार्गणाः । तच्चक्रीकृतचापमञ्चित्रप्रेङ्गत्करः क्रोधनो धावत्यग्रत एव शासनधरः सत्यं सदासां स्मरः॥' It should be noted that in the first example, the Hre was first mentioned and then the araa; while in the second example the साधन is mentioned first and the साध्य last. In the formal syllogism, the साध्य is stated first (in the प्रतिज्ञा) and then the साधन. In the poetical अनुमान, this order need not be strictly adhered to. It should be remembered that the word अनुमान is loosely employed in Rhetoric. The technical meaning of अनुमान is 'अनुमितिकरण' According to the Naiyayikas, the करण of अनुमिति (i. e. the अनुमान ) is परामर्श ( otherwise called तृतीयलिङ्गपरामर्श); others say that लिङ्गज्ञान or व्याप्तिज्ञान is the करण of अनुमिति. The rhetoricians define अनुमान as the knowledge of the साध्य from the साधन; i. e. they apply the word अनुमान to the resulting judgment (the अनुमिति) and not to the करण of that judgment. The word अनुमान, in the strict sense, is to be explained as अनुमीयते अनेन इति अनुमानम् (करणे ल्युट् ); while the word अनुमान as employed by the rhetoricians is to be explained as अनुमीयते इति अनुमानम् (भावे ल्युट). "अनुमितिरेवानुमानम्। तस्याश्च वाच्यत्वलक्ष्यत्वप्रतीयमानत्वध्वन्य- मानत्वानां साम्राज्यम्। ल्युटश्र करणे इव भावेऽपीति।" R. G. p. 467.

228 NOTES .ON X. 63 अनुमानम्.

उत्पेक्षाया ...... उमयोभेंद: (p. 47, l1. 27-28). In the examples of अनुमान the words जानीमहे and मन्ये* were used. It has been said above that in Utpreksha such words as मन्ये, शङ्के, ध्रुवभ् etc. are employed. A question arises :- what is the distinction between उत्प्रेक्षा and अनुमान? The answer is :- In उत्प्रेक्षा, the knowledge is not certain; while here it is attended with certainty. We have seen above that in उत्प्रेक्षा, one thing is represented as probably identical with another; there is उत्कटैककोटिक: सन्देहः; while in अनुमान, there is no trace of doubt; अनुमान must be clearly distinguished from कान्यलिङ्ग. The author has already told us that a झपकहेतु is the province of अनुमान; while a निष्पादकहेतु is that of काव्यलिङ्ग. In काव्यलिङ्ग, the cause is an efficient one ( कारक) i. e. it actually produces something else; while in अनुमान, the हेतु is only indicatory, as smoke. It cannot be said that smoke is the cause of fire; smoke only indicates the existence of fire. In त्वदवाजिराजि etc., the presence of mud would be a cause of not bearing the Ganges on the head. Some dis- tinguish between काव्यलिङ् and अनुमान in another way. The subject of the figure अनुमान is that reason [लिङ्ग ] which the poet wishes the reader to know as employed by him (by the poet) to arrive at the inference; while in काव्यलिङ्ग, the inference is not drawn by the poet, but is left to be drawn by the reader. In other words, in अनुमान, 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 person, while in aafr the poet intends to leave the inference to the reader. "तस्मात्साक्षात्परम्परया वा यत्र कारकहेतुरर्थतोऽवगम्यते तत्काव्यलिङ्गम्। उक्तार्थदृढप्रत्ययाय यत्रार्थान्तर- न्यसनं तत्रार्थान्तरन्यासः। किञ्चिदर्थज्ञापकतया हेतुकथनमनुमानमित्येव व्यवस्था कृता । ...... अनुमाने तु ज्ञापकहेतूपन्यासः । अस्मादिदं गम्यते इति। तेन यत्र ज्ञापकहेतुनाऽनुमितिः कवितात्पर्यविषया तत्रानुमानालद्कार इति दिक्।" प्रभा p. 425. "श्रोतुर्यल्लिङ्गकानुमितिबुबोधयिषया कविः काव्यं निर्भिमीते तल्लिङ्गकमनुमानालङ्गतेर्विषयः काव्यव्यापारगोचरीभूतानुमितिकरणमिति निष्कर्षः । काव्यलिङ्गजानुमितिस्तु कविना न श्रोतुर्वुबोधयिषिता। अत एवासौ न काव्यव्यापारगोचरः। श्रीतुः केवलं कारणवशाज्जायत इति नास्त्येवात्र जायमानायामप्यनुमितावनुमानालक्कतेर्विषयः । .. अपि च कवि- निबद्धप्रमात्रन्तरनिष्ठा ह्यनुमितिरनुमानालक्कति प्रयोजयति। श्रोतृनिष्ठा महावाक्यार्धनि- श्वयानुकूला तु काव्यलिङ्गमिति महान्विशेष: ।" R. G. p. 469. * Vide the remark of R. G. "इह यत्र लिङ्गलिग्विनो: सत्त्वं तत्र मन्ये शङ्के अवैमि जाने इत्यादिपदानामनुमितिबोधकत्वम्, यत्र तु सादृश्यादिनि- मित्तसन्द्रावस्तत्रोत्प्रेक्षाबोधकतेति विवेक: मन्ये इत्यादिवाचकपदोपादाने वाच्यम- नुमानम्। वक्ति इत्यादिलक्षकपदोपादाने लक्ष्यम्।"

X. 63 अनुमानम्. SAHITYADARPAŅA. 229

Examples of the figure अनुमान are :- मधु तिष्ठति वाचि योषितां हृदि हालाहलमेव केवलम्। अत एव निपीयतेऽधरो हृदयं सुष्टिभिरेव ताड्यते॥; तस्मिन्मणिव्रातहतान्धकारे पुरे निशालोपविधानदक्षे। सदो वियुक्ता दिवसावसानं कोका: सश्ोका: कथयन्ति नित्यम् ।। (from R.G. p. 475); तव सुचरितमङ्गुलीय नूनं प्रतनु ममेव विभाव्यते फलेन। अरुणनखमनोहरासु तस्याश्ष्युतमसि लब्धपदं यदङ्गुलीषु॥ शा० VI. 31 हेतु: (Cause). हेतोहेतुमता (कार्येण) सह अमेदेन अभिषा हेतु :- When a cause is expressed as identical with the effect, there is the figure aa. An example is "तारुण्यस्य विलासः समधिकलावण्यसम्पदो हासः। धरणि- तलस्याभरणं युवजनमनसो वशीकरणम्।". This verse is the author's own and is cited by him in the 3rd Parichchheda. Here, from the context, we understand that it is the heroine that is being described. Here, the heroine, who is the cause of the subjuga- tion of the minds of youths, is described as the subjugation itself of the minds of young men. विलासहासयो ... अलङ्कार :- अध्यवसाय has been explained above in our notes on लक्षणा and अतिशयोक्ति. The author says here that the figure हेतु occurs by itself in the 4th pada viz. in युवजनमनसो वशीकरणम्; while in तारुण्यस्य विलास: and लावण्यसम्पदो हास:, the figure is based upon अध्यवसाय. It cannot be said that the woman is the cause of तारुण्यविलास or of सम्पद्धास; while the woman is really the cause of युवजनमनोवशीकरण. Soin तारुण्यस्य विलास:, the charm lies in the woman's being swallowed up as it were by विलास, as is the case in the first kind of अतिशयोक्ति. In युवजनमनसो वशीकरणम्, 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 aa. Dandin speaks of हेतु as an अलङ्कार हेतुश्च सूक्ष्मलेशौ च वाचामुत्तम- gor l' K. D. II. 235. But from his treatment of the figure and the illustrations it appears that under aa he included both काव्यलिङ्ग (कारकहेतु of Dandin ) and अनुमान (ज्ञापकहेतु). Bhamaha positively declares that हेतु is not an Alankara, 'हेतुश्च सूक्ष्मलेशोऽथ नालङ्कारतया मत:' II. 86 ( This appears to be a reflection upon Dandin's words quoted above ). Udbhata does not speak of हेतु at all; he treats of काव्यलिङ्ग. It is Rudrata who first defines हेतु as our author does "हेतुमता सह हेतोरभिधानमभेदकृन्द्वेद्यत्र। सोडल्कारो हेतु: स्यादन्येभ्यः पृथग्भूतः ॥।" रुद्रट VII. 82. Mammata cri- ticizes this definition of Hetu; he says that aa does not deserve to be a figure, because it has no strikingness in it; and

230 NOTES ON X, 64 हेतु.

that if the identification of the cause with the effect were to constitute the figure हेतु, the words 'आयुर्धृतम्' (an example of सारोपा लक्षणा ) will have to be called an example of हेतु (which is absurd ); " 'हेतुमता सह हेतोरभिधानममेदतो हेतुः*' इति हेत्वलङ्कारोऽत्र न लक्षितः । आयुर्घृतमित्यादिरूपो ह्वेष न भूषणतां कदाच्िदईति, वैचित्र्याभावात्। 'अविरलकमलविकास: सकलालिमदश्च कोकिलानन्दः । रम्योऽयमेति संप्रति लोकोत्कण्ठाकर: काल: ॥' (रुद्रट VII. 83) इत्यत्र काव्यरूपतां कोमलानुप्रासमहिम्रैव समाम्नासिषुन तु हेत्वलक्कारकल्पनयेति पूर्वोक्तं काव्यलिङ्गमेव हेतु:।" K.P.X. under कारणमाला p. 706 (Va). The चंद्रालोक (as well as कुवलयानन्द) gives two varieties of aa; one is the same as our author's 'हेतुहेतुमतोरैक्यं हेतुं केचित्प्रचक्षते । लक्ष्मीविलासा विदुषां कटाक्षा वेङ्कटप्रभोः॥'; the 2nd variety is defined as follows :- 'हेतोहैतुमता सार्ध वर्णनं हेतुरुच्यते। असावुदेति शीतांशुर्मानच्छेदाय सुभ्रवाम् ॥' It has been seen above that ag is regarded by Mammata and others as nothing else but काव्यलिङ्ग. In certain cases what is called हेतु by our author will be the first kind of अतिशयोक्ति (भेदेडमेद:) according to the Uddyota "एवं हेतुफलयोरमेदाध्यव- सायेऽप्येषा (अतिशयोक्तिः)। यथा-'वित्रासनं समरसीमनि शात्रवाणामाजीवनं विबुधपर्षदि कोविदानाम्। संमोहनं सुरतसंसदि कामिनीनां रूपं तदीयमवलोकयतोऽद्तं मे।।' इत्यादौ वित्रासनादिपदस्य तद्वेतौ शुद्धसाध्यवसाना। एतेन 'हेतोहेतुमता सार्धममेदो हेतुरुच्यते' इति हेत्वलक्कारोडयं पृथगित्यपास्तमित्याहुः ।" उद्योत p. 58.

32 अनुकूलम् ( Favourable). The figure is called अनुकूल, when unfavourableness turns out favourable. An example is कुपितासि etc. (हे) तन्वि, यदा कुपिता असि तदा करजक्षतं (नखक्षतं) निधाय अस्य कण्ठं भुजपाशाभ्यां (भुजौ एव पाशी ताभ्यां) दृढं बधान. 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 out in anger ) would be something most desirable to him. अस्य च विच्छित्ति ...... न्याय्यम् ( p. 48, ll. 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. * Pradīpa seems to be wrong in ascribing this definition of ta to Udbhata, who does not speak of Hetu at all. The definition is found almost verbatim in Rudrata and the example which Mammata cites is also from Rudrata. The Alankara- chandrika ( Kuval. p. 168 ) falls into the same error.

X. 64 अनुकूलम्. SAHITYADARPANA. 231

It should be noted that this is a figure defined by Vis'va- natha alone. No well-known writer on Rhetoric mentions it. We think that अनुकूल is somewhat like विषम 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 "काव्यशोभाकरान्वर्मानलक्कारान्प्रचक्षते। ते चाद्यापि विकल्प्यन्ते कस्तान्कात्स्येंन वक्ष्यति ॥ किं तु बीजं विकल्पानां पूर्वाचार्यैः प्रदर्शितम्। तदेव परिसंस्कर्तुमयमस्मत्परिश्रमः ॥" K. D.II. 1-2. 33 आक्षेप: (Paralepsis). वक्तमिष्टस्य वस्तुन: विशेषप्रतिपत्तये निषेधाभासः आक्षेपः वक्ष्यमाणोक्तगः (वक्ष्यमाणगः वक्ष्यमाणविषयः, उक्तगः उक्तविषयः ) द्विधा. 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 aTay, which is two-fold as pertaining to what is about to be said and what has been said. In आक्षेप, there is a verbal denial or suppression of what is intended to be said; but this denial is not really meant to be so. The purpose for which this fay is resorted to is to convey something special about the matter in hand. So the fiy not being intended to be so, becomes only an apparent one (निषेधाभास). Vide अलं.स. "इह प्राकरणिकोरऽर्थः प्राकरणिकत्वादेव वक्तमिष्यते तथाविधस्य विधानार्हस्य निषेध: कर्तु न युज्यते। स कृतो बाधितस्वरूपत्वान्निषेधायते इति निषेधाभासः सम्पन्नः । तस्यैतस्य करणं प्रकृतगतत्वेन विशेषप्रतिपत्त्यर्थम्। अन्यथा गजस्रानतुल्यं स्यात्।" p. 114. The elements that constitute आक्षेप 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. 'एवं च क्षिपे इष्टार्थस्तस्य (आक्षेपे इष्टोर्थस्तस्य?) निषेधः निषेधस्यानुपपद्यमानत्वादसत्यत्व विशेषप्रतिपादनं चेति चतुष्टयमुपयुज्यते।' अलं. स. p.117. Where, however, what is really enjoined is निषेध or where what was said is merely negatived and this negation is real and not apparent, there is no आक्षेप. For example, "साहित्यपाथोनिधिमन्थनोत्थं काव्यामृतं रक्षत हे कवीन्द्राः । यत्तस्य दैत्या इव लुण्ठनाय काव्यार्थचौराः प्रगुणीभवन्ति॥ गृज्न्तु सर्वें यदि वा यथेच्छं नास्ति क्षतिः कापि कवीश्वराणाम्। रतनेषु लुप्तेषु बहुष्वम्त्यैरद्यापि रलाकर एव सिन्धुः॥" बिल्हण'S विक्रमाङ्कदेवचरित I. 11-12. 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 आक्षेप.

and they are called upon to allow others to take seir treasures. Here as the negation is really meant to be conveyed and not apparent, there is no आक्षेप. "तेन न निषेधविधिः न विहितनिषेध। किं तु निषेधेन विधेराक्षेपः । निषेधस्यासत्त्वात् विधिपर्यवसानात्।" अलं. स. p.117. "यत्र विधिपर्यवसायी निषेध आभासो भवति स आक्षेपस्य विषयः । यत्र तु निषेधस्य स्वार्थे एव विश्रान्तिर्न तत्राक्षेप इति।" तरल. 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 (37) may be denied (a), or what is negatived may be the mentioning of what is spoken (b). As regards the fdy of that which is yet to be said (वक्ष्यमाण), we can only negative the कथन, because the atg being yet not mentioned, we cannot negative its nature (स्वरूप). As regards the निषेध of the कथन of the वक्ष्यमाण, 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 आक्षेप is fourfold. In this division of आक्षप our author closely follows the अलं. स. "तत्रोक्तविषये आक्षपे क्वचिद्वस्तु निषिध्यते क्वचिद्वस्तुकथनमिति द्वौ भेदौ। वक्ष्यमाणविषये तु वस्तुकथनमेव निषिध्यते। तच्च सामान्यप्रतिज्ञायां क्वचिद्विशेषनिष्ठत्वेन निषिध्यते क्वचित्पुनरंशोक्तावंशान्तरगतत्वेनेत्यत्रापि al Aat " p. 115. It should be well remembered that the विशेष ( to be conveyed by the apparent निषेध) is never expressed in words, but is left to be understood 'विशेषस्य चात्र शब्दानुपात्तत्वाद्गम्यत्वम्।' स्मरशत ...... किं वदाम्यथवा (p. 48, ll. 13-14). विधुर Helpless. क्षणमिह विश्राम्य stay here for a moment. This verse is an example of II c., i.e. वक्ष्यमाणविषय आक्षेप, where the whole is negatived. Here by the expression 'Huf,' the pangs of separation felt by the friend of the speaker are suggested in general. But the words 'किं वदामि' negative in toto the mentioning of what was about to be said and convey a special meaning ( by so nega- tiving) with reference to what was to be said (वक्ष्यमाणविशेषे निषेध:). What that special meaning is we shall know later on. तव विरहे ...... हतजल्पितैरथवा (p. 48, ll. 16-17). नवमालिकांJas- mine. दलिताम्-blooming, expanded. नितान्तम्-certainly. This is an example of II d, i.e. of वक्ष्यमाणविषय आक्षेप, where a part being expressed, another part is suppressed. Here 'हन्त नितान्तम्' is a part of what is intended to be said, but the part 'nffa'

X.65 आक्षेप. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 233

is not uttered. The special meaning that results from this suppression is that it is impossible for the speaker to give expression to the idea of the death of the friend. बालअ ...... भणिमो (p. 48, l1. 19-20). This verse is cited in the अलं. स. in the same connection. बललक नाहं दूती तस्याः प्रियोऽसीति न मम व्यापारः । सा म्रियते तवायश एतं धर्माक्षरं भणामः ॥'. तस्याः .. व्यापार: It is not my business to say that thou art loved by her. तवायश: Thine will be the disgrace. धर्माक्षरं 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 उक्तविषय आक्षेप, where the वस्तुस्वरूप 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 दूती (while दूतीs generally are not very particular about truth ). विरहे ...... किम् (P. 48, l. 22-23). दारुण: व्यवसाय: यस्य 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 उक्तविषय आक्षेप where वस्तुकथन is negatived. The particular meaning that results from this mcde of speech is the excess of the sorrow felt by the speaker. प्रथमोदाहरणे ...... दुःखस्यातिशय :. 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. न चायं ...... आभासत्वात् (p. 48, 11. 26-27). It cannot be said that in all these examples the negation of what is said or 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 आक्षेप is the fact that the निषेध is purely apparent. We have shewn above that if negation of what is said be really intended there is no आक्षेप- अनिष्टस्य ...... मतः (p. 48, 1. 28). Another figure, also called ETTay, is held to be the apparent permission or enjoining of something, which is really not desired. The word aur means 'for the purpose of apprehending some particular meaning' as

234 NOTES ON X. 06 आक्षेप.

in the first आक्षेप described above. In this second आक्षेप, there are four constituent elements; there must be something arfre ( not desired ); there must be a permission or enjoining of that afag thing, this permission must be only apparent and not really intended and lastly some particular meaning must be conveyed by this mode of speech. These two kinds of anrery 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 the verbal permission, being inapplicable, terminates in indi- cating the निषेध of what is not wished. Vide अलं. स. "यथेष्टस्येष्टत्वादेव निषेधोऽनुपपन्न एवमनिष्टस्यापि अनिष्टत्वादेव विधानं नोपपद्ते। तत्क्रियमाणं प्रस्खलद्रपत्वान्निषेधे पर्यवस्यति। ततश्च विधेरुपसर्जनीभूतो निषेध इति विधिनाडयं निषेधोऽनिष्टविशेषपर्यवसायी।" p. 120. An example of this second आक्षेप is 'गच्छ गच्छसि' ete. This is K. D. II. 141. This verse is cited by the अलं. स. p. 120 and by the सुभाषितावलि No. 1040. Here the departure of the lover is अनिष्ट; it is permitted in the words 'गच्छ' 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.' अत्र ...... प्रतीयते Here, as the departure of the husband is not desired, the permission ( contained in the words "e etc.) is inapplicable literally and terminates in prohibition and the special meaning conveyed is that the husband must entirely abstain from going. Dandin remarks upon this verse as follows "इत्याशीर्वचनाक्षेपो यदाशीर्वादवर्त्मना। स्वावस्थां सूचयन्त्यैव कान्तयात्रा निषि- ध्यते ।" K.D.II. 142. Vide अलं स. "अत्र कयाचित्कान्तस्य प्रस्थानमा- त्मनोऽनिष्टमप्यनिराकरणमुखेन विधीयते। न चास्य विधिर्युक्तः । अनिष्टत्वाद। सोडयं प्रस्खलद्रपत्वेन निषेधमागूरयति (लक्षयति)। फलं चात्रानिष्टसय प्रस्थानस्यासंविज्ञानपद्निबन्धनमत्यन्तपरिहार्यत्वप्रतिपादनम्। एतच्च ममापि तत्रैवेत्याशी:प्रतिपादनेनानिष्टपर्यवसायिना व्यञ्जितम्।" pp. 120-121. The figure nay has been differently defined by different writers. Vamana defines it as follows 'उपमानाक्षेपश्च आक्षेपः' काव्या- सू. IV.3.27. The वृत्ति on this is 'उपमानस्य आक्षेपः प्रतिषेध उपमानाक्षेपः तुल्यकार्यार्थस्य नैरर्थक्यविवक्षायाम्।'. This is nothing but the प्रतीप of later writers. According to another interpretation of the sulra, what Vamana calls आक्षेप would be समासोक्ति 'उपमानस्याक्षे

X.66 आक्षेप. SÂHITYADARPANA. 235

पतः प्रतिपत्तिरित्यपि सूत्रार्थः ।'. Dandin's definition of आक्षप is very wide. 'प्रतिषेधोक्तिराक्षेपस्त्रेकाल्यापेक्षया त्रिया। वथास्य पुनराक्षेप्यमेदानन्त्ा दनन्तता I'K. D. II. 120. According to him the प्रतिषेध need not be of वक्ष्यमाण or उत्त, but may be of anything. Thus the following he regards as examples of आक्षेप :- "तव तन्वङ्गि मिथ्यैव रूढमङ्गेषु मार्दवम् । यदि सत्यं मृदून्येव किमकाण्डे रुजन्ति माम्॥ 127 दूरे प्रियतमः सोयमागतो जलदागमः । दृष्टाश्च फुल्ला निचुला न मृत्रा चास्मि किं न्विदम् ॥" 133. Bhamaha, Udbhata and Mammata define in the same way. Their definiton is practically the same as our author's definition of the first आक्षेप. 'प्रतिषेध इवेष्टस्य यो विशेषाभिधित्सया। आक्षेप इति तं सन्तं शंसन्ति कवयः सदा ॥ वक्ष्यमाणोक्तविषयः सच द्विविध इष्यते। निषेधेनेव तद्वन्धो विधेयस्य च कीर्तितः ॥' उद्गट II. 2-3. The Alankarasarvasva, our author and Ekavali speak of the anay as defined by Udbhata 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 anaq there is a suggested sense (faa). But this suggested sense is not prominent; it is subordinate to the expressed sense. The mode of speech itself is charming. Therefore, although there is a suggested sense, this is not ध्वनि, but गुणीभूतव्यंग्य काव्य. Vide ध्वन्यालोक 'आक्षेपेऽपि व्यंग्यविशेषाक्षेपिणो वाच्यस्यैव चारुत्वम्। प्राधान्येन वाक्यार्थ आक्षेपोक्तिसामर्थ्यादेव ज्ञायते। तत्र शब्दोपारूढरूपो विशेषाभिधानेच्छया प्रतिषेधरूपो य आक्षपः स एव व्यङ्गथविशेषमाक्षिपन्मुख्यं काव्यशरीरम्। चारुत्वोत्कर्षनिबन्धना हि वाच्यव्यंग्ययोः प्राधान्यविवक्षा।" pp. 36-37. Examples of आक्षेप are :- त्वं जीवितं त्वमसि मे हृदयं द्वितीयं त्वं कौमुदी नयनयोरमृतं त्वमक्गे। इत्यादिभि: प्रियशतैरनुरुध्य मुग्धां तामेव शान्तमथवा किमिहोत्तरेण।। उत्तरराम० III .; अहं त्वा यदि नेक्षेय क्षणमप्युत्सुका ततः । इयदेवास्त्वतोऽन्येन किमुक्तेनाप्रियेण तु।। भामह II. 69 .; रे खल तव खल चरितं विदुषामग्रे विविच्य वभ्यामि। अलमथवा पापात्मन्कृतया कथयापि ते हतया॥ R. G. p. 423. 34 विभावना (Peculiar Causation). When an effect is said to arise without a cause, it is विभावना, 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 modo of speech, it is stated that the effect does come into existence in the absence of its well-known cause there is विभावना. The effect in such a case is due to some other cause which is not well-known (अप्रसिद्ध). 'इह कारणान्वयव्यतिरेकविधानात्कार्यस्य कारणमन्तरेणासम्भवः । अन्यथा विरोधो दुष्परिहार: स्यात्। यदि तु कयाचिद्गंग्या तथाभाव उपनिबध्यते तदा

236 NOTES ON X. 66-67 विभावना.

विभावनाख्योऽलद्कारः। विशिष्टंतया कार्यस्य भावनात। सा च मदिर्विशिष्टकारणा- भावोपनिबन्धः । अप्रस्तुतं कारणं वस्तुतोऽस्तीति विरोधपरिहारः ।" अलं. स. p.124. वच्च ...... द्विधा this distinct cause ( which is not well-known) is sometimes mentioned and sometimes not.

अनायास ...... सुभ्रव: (p. 49, 11. 9-10). अनायासकृशम् slender without toil ( the waist of a man becomes slender by exercise through the decrease of fat). अशङ्गतरले-Tremulous without fright (when a person is frightened his eyes become tremulous). वयसि In youth. Here the effect, viz. कृशत्व, तरलत्व, मनोहरत्व are represented as happening even in the absence of the well-known causes, viz. आयास, शङ्का, and भूषण respectively. But there is an अप्रसिद्ध कारण that produces these effects. It is youth; and as it is mentioned in the verse, this is an example of उ्तनिमित्ता- If we read वपुर्भाति मृगीदृशः for वपुर्वयसि सुभ्रव, it will be an example of अनुक्तनिमित्ता.

The name विभावना is significant. विभावना etymologically means 'that in which some cause ( other than the well-known one ) is to be guessed'. 'विभाव्यते कारणान्तरं यस्याम्' अलङ्गारचंद्रिका p. 98. We may also explain the term in another manner. विभावना is that in which the effect is represented in a peculiar manner i. e. as not produced by its well-known cause, as said by अलं. स. 'विशिष्टतया कार्यस्य भावनात्' or by Ekavali 'विशिष्टतया अस्थां कार्यस्य विभावनाव अन्वर्थाभिधाना विभावना।' p. 279. It should be noticed that in विभावना a conscious identifica- tion is at the bottom. For example, the Frq due to youth is not the same as the कृशत्व due to exercise, but they are spoken of as identical. It is therefore that the अलं. स. says that अतिशयोक्ति is at the root of this figure. 'सा (अतिशयोक्तिः) च अस्या- मव्यमिचारिणीति न तद्वाधेनास्या उत्थानम्, अपि तु तदनुप्राणितत्वेन।' p.125. Jagannatha demurs to this statement and says that अतिशयोक्ति is not everywhere at the root of this figure; it is आहार्यामेदबुद्धि that is at the root everywhere. 'मा स्म भूत्सर्वत्र विभावनायामतिशयोक्ति- रनुप्राणिका। आहार्याभेदबुद्धिमात्रमेवानुप्राणकम्। तच्च कचिदतिशयोक्त्या क्वच्विच्च रूपकेणेति न दोष: ।' R. G. p. 433. Dandin's definition of विभावना is very clear 'प्रसिद्धहेतुव्यावृत्त्या न्यत्किंचित्कारणान्तरम्। यत्र स्वाभाविकत्वं वा विभाव्यं सा विभावना।' K.D. II. 199. Examples of विभावना are :- महाभाग: कामं नरपतिरभिन्नस्थितिरहो न कश्षिदूर्णानामपथमपकृष्टोऽपि भजते। तथापीदं शश्वत्परिच्वितविविक्तेन मनसा जनाकीर्ण

X. 66-67 विभावना. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 237

मन्ये हुतवहपरीतं गृहमिव ॥ शा० V; अङ्गलेखामकाश्मीरसमालम्भनपिज्जराम् । अनलक्तकताम्राभामोष्ठमुद्रां च बिभ्रतीम् ।I' उन्भट II. 21; निरुपादानसम्भारमभित्तावेव तन्वते। जगच्चित्रं नमस्तस्मै कलाश्राध्याय शूलिने।।

35 विशेषोक्ति: ( Peculiar Allegation). Where, in spite of the existence of a cause, the effect is absent, there is विशेषोक्ति 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 विशेषोक्ति, 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. 'इह समग्राणि कारणानि नियमेन कार्यमुत्पादयन्तीति प्रसिद्धम्। अन्यथा समग्रत्वस्यैवाभावप्रसङ्गात्। यत्त सत्यपि सामय्ये न जनयन्ति कार्य सा कश्विद्वि- शेषमभिव्यंक्तुं प्रयुज्यमाना विशेषोक्ति: ।' अलं. स. p.126. An example of उक्तनिमित्ता is धनिनोऽपि 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 'कियन्तः सन्ति भूतले' we shall have an example of अनुक्तनिमित्ता विशेषोक्ति. अचिन्त्यनिमित्तत्वं .. अचिन्त्यम् (p. 49, 11. 18-22). It is Mammata who gives three divisions of विशेषोक्ति, viz. अनुक्तनिमित्ता, उक्तनिमित्ता and अचिन्त्यनिमित्ता. Almost all writers, including Udbhata, give two. Our author following the सर्वस्व says that what is . called अचिन्त्यनिमित्ता ( the reason of which is inconceivable ) is really अनुक्तनिमित्ता. The reason that is not mentioned may be easily conceivable or not conceivable. It is to be understood that by अचिन्त्य is meant that it is inconceivable to ordinary intellects ( and not to all ). Otherwise the contradiction involved in saying that the offect does not follow though the cause is present cannot be removed. 'अचिन्त्यनिमित्ता त्वनुक्तनिमित्तेव अनुकस्य च चिन्त्ाचिन्त्यतेन दैविध्यात्।' अलं. स. p. 127. An example र्of अचिन्त्यनिमित्ता cited by Mammata is 'स एक:' etc. This is given y. Bhamaha (III) as an example of विशेषोक्ति. Here it is said that his body was destroyed, yet his strength is not destroyed. २६

238 NOTES ON X. 67 विशेषोक्ति.

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 विशवोक्ति is significant. The अलक्कारचंद्रिका explains as 'विशेषस्यानुत्पत्तिनिमित्तस्योक्तिरवगतियत्रेति व्युत्पत्तेः। p. 101. The उद्योत explains as 'statement of something in order to intimate something in particular;' विशेषं कञ्चित्प्रतिपादयितुमुक्तिरित्यर्थः ।' p. 78. Similarly एका० 'अथ कमपि विशेषं प्रकाशयितुं सत्यामप्येतस्यां (कारणसामडर्यां) कार्यानुत्पत्तिरुपनिबध्यते तदा विशेषप्रतिपादनायोक्तिरिति यौगिकत्वमप्यसावाश्रयति ॥ p. 281. इह च कार्याभाव: सन्भावमुखेन (p. 49, ll. 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 विभावना, a cause is intimated as being absent by means of representing something, which is opposed to it, as present. What our author means is as follows :- Fagffir was defined as "the absence of the effect even though the cause is present.' Our author declares that विशेषोक्ति 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 अभाव of the फल is stated, but also when the भाव ofwhat is opposed to the फल is stated. Similarly विभावना 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. it ocours not only when the अभाव of the कारण is stated, but also when the भाव of what is opposed to the कारण is stated. Vide अलं.स. "कार्यानुत्पत्तिश्चात्र कच्वित्कार्यविरोधोत्पत्त्या निबध्यते। एवं विभावनायामपि कारणाभावः कारणविरुद्धमुखेन कचित्प्रतिषाद्यते।" p. 127. एवं च य:सङ्कर: (p. 49, 1l. 24-27). यः कौमारहर :- 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 विभावना 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 विभावना as strictly construed is 'the heart hasa longing ( 43), though the cause, absence of the lover eto. is absent (कारणस्य अभाव:)'. In the verse, the अभाव of the कारण is not stated in so many words (i. e. we ought to have ą:

X. 67 विशेषोक्ति. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 239

कौमारहरो वरः स न इति न); what is stated is the भाव (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 विशेषोक्ति. The statement, strictly in accordance with the defini- tion of विशेषोक्ति, should have been 'though the lover etc. are present (सति हेतौ), there is an absence of अनुत्कण्ठा (the फल)'. In the verse the enna of the effect is not directly stated ( i. e. we ought to have चेतः न समुत्कण्ठते इति न). What is stated is the भाव of what is opposed to the effect (i. e. उत्कण्ठा is stated to exist). Compare "उत्कण्ठायाः कारणं कौमारहरवरादसंनिधानम्। तस विरुद्धं तत्संनिधानम्। तेन कौमारहरवराद्यसंनिधानरूपं कारणं विनाप्युत्कण्ठाया उत्पाद इति विभावना। तथा कौमारहरवरादिसंनिधानरूपस्य कारणस्य कार्यमनुत्कण्ठा तस्याश्च विरुद्धोत्कण्ठा। तेन सत्यपि कौमारहरवरादिसंनिधानरूपे कारणे समग्रे कार्यस्क अनुत्कण्ठारूपस्याभाव इति विशेषोक्तिः" विमर्शिनी p.127. एवं चात्र ...... सङ्कर: We have explained in our notes on the verse how there is HT.

Jagannatha says that विभावना and विशेषोक्ति are शाब्द ( express ), when the absence of the cause or of the effect is directly expressed; otherwise, they are ana ( indirect or implied ). ' It was with reference to this distinction that Mammata remarked on the verse 'य: कोमारहरः' etc. that there was no distinct figure in it. Mammata appears to hold that विभावना 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. विभावना, according to him, is not distinct, when the existence of the opposite of the cause is stated. Similarly in the case of विशेषोक्ति. Vide R. G. p. 439 "कारणाभावकार्याभावयोयत्र प्रतियोगितावच्छेदकविशिष्टवैशिष्टयेन श्रुत्या प्रतिपादनं तत्र विभावनाविशेषोत्तयो: शाब्दत्वम्। अन्यत्रार्थत्वम्। यथा-'भगवद्वदनाम्भोजं पश्यन्त्या अप्महर्निशम्। तृष्णाधिकमुदेति स्म गोपसीमन्तिनीदृशः ॥'लोके ह्यसंनिकर्षस्तृष्णा- कारणम्। तदभावे संनिकर्षेऽपि तृष्णोपनिबद्धा। तथा संनिकर्षस्तृप्तिकारणम्। सस्मिन्सत्यपि तृध्यभावो बोधित: । परं तु कारणाभावकार्याभावयोरन प्रागुक्तप्रकारेण प्रतिपादनमित्यार्थत्वमेव तदुभयसंशयसक्करस्य। अमुमेव चार्थ मनसिकृत्य मम्मटभट्टैः 'यः कौमारहरः' इति पद्यमुदाहृत्योक्तम् 'अत्र स्फुटो न कश्षिदलङ्कारः' इति।"

Vamana defines विशेषोक्ति quite differently. His definition is 'एक गुणहानिकल्पनायां साम्यदाढ्य विशेषोक्तिः' काव्या० सू० IV. 3.23. The confirmation of similarity resulting from the represention of the absence of only one quality ( in one of the things ) is called विशेषोक्ति. His examples are 'भवन्ति यत्रौषधयो रजन्यामतैलपूराः

240 NOTES ON X. 67 विशेषोक्ि

सुरतप्रदीपा:' Kumara, I. 10; 'वतं हि नाम पुरुषस्य असिंहासनं राज्यम्।' मृच्छकटिक II. The अलं. स. says that this is nothing but Rupaka. Jagannatha and Nagoji call it दृढारोपरूपक "या तु 'एकगुणह्ानिकल्प· नायां साम्यदाढ्ये विशेषोक्ति:' इति विशेषोकतिर्लक्षिता सास्मिन्दर्शने रूपकमेद एवेति न पृथग्वाच्या।" अलं. स. p. 128. Jagannatha remarks "तथा गुणाधिक्य- कल्पनायामपि तदेव (दृढारोपरूपकमेव)। यथा 'धमों वपुष्मान्भुवि कार्तवीर्यः' इत्यादौ। एतेन 'एकगुणहान्युपचयादिकल्पनायां साम्यदार्ढ्य विशेषणम्' इति विशेषालक्कारं लक्षयन्तोऽपि प्रत्युक्ताः।" R. G. p. 439. Examples of विशेषोक्ति are :- चूतानां चिरनिर्गतापि कलिका बभ्नाति न स्वं रंजः संनद्धं यदपि स्थितं कुरनकं तत्कोरकावस्थया। कण्ठेषु र्खलितं गतेऽपि शिशषिरे पुंस्कोकिलानां रुतं शक्के संहरति स्मरोऽपि चकितस्तूणार्धकृष्टं शरम्॥ शा० VI; कर्पूर इव दग्धोऽपि शक्तिमान्यो जने जने। नमोऽस्त्ववार्यवीर्याय तस्मे मकरकेतवे॥; आहूतोऽपि सहायैरेमीत्युक्त्वा विमुक्तनिद्रोऽपि। गन्तुमना अपि पथिक: सङ्कोचं नैव शिथिलयंति।। (quoted in ध्वन्यालोक p. 38 as an example of अनुक्तनिमित्ता; लोचन remarks 'शीतकृता खत्वार्तिरत्र निमित्तमिति भट्टोन्ट्रटः)' 36 विरोध: (Contradiction). जातिश्चतुर्मि ...... दशाकृति: (p. 49, ll. 28-30). When there is an apparent incongruity between a genus and any of the four beginning with genus (जाति, गुण, क्रिया and द्रव्य), 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 विरोध, which has thus ten varieties (lit. forms ). We have seen in the 2nd Parichchheda that the attributes of an individual are four, viz, जाति, गुण, क्रिया and द्रव्य. जाति may be apparently incongruous with four, गुण may be so with three, क्रिया with two and द्रन्य with another द्रव्य only; So there are ten varieties. It may be asked 'why should we not regard the विरोध of गुण with जाति as a separate variety? The reply is-the विरोध of गुण with जाति is the same as the विरोध of जाति with गुण, which has been reckoned in the first four varieties, where जाति is opposed to जाति or गुण or क्रिया or द्रव्य. The sa ne remark holds good in the case of the विरोध of क्रिया with जाति or गुण and the विरोध of द्रव्य with जाति, गुण or क्रिया. Compare "जातेर्गुणेन सह विरोधे उक्ते 'विरोधोऽन्योन्यबाधनम्' इति दृशा तेनैव गुणस्यापि जात्या सह विरोधः सिद्धः । अत एव गुणस्य जातिवर्जे त्रयो भेदा:।" विम० p. 122. तव विरहे ...... हृदयं दुनोति च मे (p. 50, ll.2-11). शशषिरुचोऽ़पि सोष्माण: 'the beams of the moon are impregnated with heat." अलिरुतमपि हृदयं भिन्ते. Even the hum of bees breaks the heart. In 'तव विरहे etc.' the विरोध of जाति with जाति, गुण, क्रिया and द्रव्य

X.68-69 विरोध. SAHITYADARPAŅA. 241

is exemplified in the four padas of the verse. सन्तत ...... सरोजसुकुमारा :- This verse is cited by Mammata. We read there 'सततं मुसलासक्ता, which is perhaps better. Here there is a con- tradiction in saying that the rough palms are soft. कठिनत्व and कोमलत्व 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 ). अजस्य ...... कस्तव-This is Raghu. X.24. निरीहस्य-though devoid of desires. TTEs reality. This is addressed to the Deity. Here there is contradiction between the गुण अजत्व (being unborn) and the action 'being born'. This contradiction is only apparent; it is removed by the fact that God's greatness is transeendental. वल्भोत्सङ्ग ...... अभवत्. वल्लभस्य (दयितस्य) उत्सक्कस्य (अङ्कस्य) सङ्गेन विना हरिणचक्षुषः (हरिणस्येव चक्षुषी यस्याः तस्याः ललनायाः) राकाविभावरीजानि: (राकाविभावरी पौर्णमासी निशा; 'पूर्णे राका निशाकरे' इति अमर० I.4.8 .; राकाविभावरी जाया यस्य स राकाविभावरीजानि: पूर्णचन्द्र: 'जायाया निद्' पा० 5.4.134 जायान्तस्य बहुव्रीहेनिडादेशः स्यात्) विषज्वाला कुलोडभवत्. Here there is a contradiction between पूर्णचन्द्र (which being a single thing is द्रव्य and not a जाति) and ज्वालाकुलत्व (which is a गुण ). This contradiction is removed by the fact that to one in separation the moon may appear to be full of heat. नयनयुगा ...... दुनोति च मे-नयनयुगस्य असेचनकम् (or आसेचनकम् also; 'तदासेचनकं तृप्तेर्नास्त्यन्तो यस्य दर्शनात् ।' अमर० III. 1. 53). मानसवृत्त्यापि दुष्प्रापम Difficult to be found even in imagination. मद्यति gladdens. Here there is a contradiction between two actions मदयति and दुनोति. This can be removed by the fact that in separation both of them are possible. त्वद्वाजि इत्यादि-This verse occurs above under काव्यलिङ्ग. Here there is a contradiction between क्रिया and द्रव्य i e. between 'not bearing on the head' and Hara (who being one is द्रव्य and not जाति). 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 वल्भोत्सङ् etc., the words 'मध्यन्दिनदिनाधिपः' (the midday sun), then the verse will be an example of the विरोध of द्रव्य with another द्रव्य. The moon cannot be the sun. This is explained by the state of separation. To constitute विरोध, the following is essential. There must be an opposition or contradiction between two things; but this contradiction must be explicable, i. e. apparent merely. If the विरोध cannot be explained and is final, it is a fault (दोष); but if the opposition can be reconciled in some way and

242 NOTES ON X, 68-69 fraw.

thus shewn to be merely apparent, there is the figure called विरोध. Because the विरोध is merely apparent, the figure is also named विरोधामास by some. Jagannatha defines विरोध as "एकाधिकरणसम्बद्धत्वेन प्रतिपादितयोरर्थयोभांसमानैकाधिकरणासम्बद्धत्वमेकाधि- करणासम्बद्धत्वभानं वा विरोधः । यद्ा। एकाधिकरणासम्बद्धत्वेन प्रतिपादनं सः।"; he then remarks "स च प्ररूढोडपरूढश्च। प्ररोदश्च वाधबुद्धयनभिभूतत्वम्। तद्ैपरीत्यमप्ररोहः । तत्राद्यो दोषस्य विषयः । द्वितीयश्चालङ्कारस्य। अत एवेमं विरोधाभासमाचक्षते। आ ईषद्भासते इति आभासः। विरोधश्चासावाभासश्चेति। आमुख एव प्रतीयमानो झगिति जायमानाविरोधबुद्धितिरस्कृत इति यावद्।" R. G. p. 427. अत्र 'तव विरह' ...... स्पष्टमन्यत् (p. 50, 11. 13-19). In such ex- amples as 'तव विरहे' etc., the wind etc., which as denoting many individuals, are generic terms seem, at first sight, to be opposed to 'confiagration,' '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. मत्र 'अजस्य' ..... gn-ya. This has been explained in connection with each of the verses above. विभावनायां ...... मेद: (p.50, 11. 19-21). The author now pro- ceeds to distinguish between विरोध, विभावना and विशेषोक्ति What is common to all these figures is apparent contradiction. fat is the widest of the three and corresponds to an srr ( general rule ); while विभावना and विशेषोक्ति are narrow and correspond to अपवाद (exception). The contradiction involved in both विभावना and विशेषोक्ति is the violation of the law of causation. The contradiction in fady has nothing to do with the relation of causation. The general rule is 'अपवादविषयंपरिहारेण उत्सर्गस्य व्यवस्थितिः'. 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 विभावना and विशेषोक्ति respectively and not विरोध. Our author draws another distinction. In fama, 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 कारणाभाव is बाधक and कार्य is eT, because the absence of the cause is a matter of fact (स्वभावसिद्ध ) while the कार्य is only poetically fancied. What is merely fancied is opposed by the real, but what is real cannot be opposed by what is fancied. विशेषोक्ति is the converse of विभावना. कार्याभावेन (उपनिवध्यमानत्वात्) कारणमेव (बाध्यत्वेन प्रतीयते).

X .. 68-69 विरोधं. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 243

In विशेषोक्ति 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 विशेषोक्ति, कार्याभाव is बाधक and कारणभाव is बाध्य. But in विरोध, both the objects are equally powerful and are both बाध्य and बाधक, as e. g. कठिनत्व and सुकुमारत्व in 'सन्तत- मुसला० etc. Compare "कारणाभावेन चोपक्रान्तत्वाद्वलवता कार्यमेव बाध्यमानत्वेन प्रतीयते, नतु तेन (कार्येण) कारणाभाव इत्यन्योन्यबाधकत्वानु- प्राणिताद्विरोधालक्कारान्ेदः। एवं विशेषोक्तौ कार्याभावेन कारणसत्ताया एव बाध्य- मानत्वमुन्नेयम् । येन साडपि विरोधाद्भिन्ना स्यात् ।" अलं. स. p. 124. The following कारिका (quoted by जयरथ p. 124 and Jagannatha in R. G. p. 432) clearly explains the difference between विभावना and विरोध 'कारणस्य निषेधेन बाध्यमान: फलोदयः । विभावनायामाभाति विरोधोऽन्योन्यबाधनम्॥ अतो दूरविमेदोऽस्या विरोधेन व्यवस्थितः ।'. Vide R. G. p.432 "तत्र (विभावनायां) च कार्याश: कारणाभावरूपविरोधिनो बाध्यतयैव स्थितः न बाधकतया। कार्याशस्य कल्पितत्वात्कारणाभावस्य च स्वभावसिद्धत्वात्। अत एव कार्याशो रूपान्तरेण पर्यवस्यति। अत एव च समबलविरोधिद्वयघटिताद्विरोघालङ्कारा- दस्य वैलक्षण्यम्।".

It should be noted that our author says above that in विशेषोक्ति, कार्याभाव is बाधक and कारणभाव is बाध्य. This is opposed to the view of Jayaratha ( who says that the words quoted by us above from Sarvasva as regards विशेषोक्ति are spurious and supports his remark by a quotation from तिलक whom * Sarvasva generally follows ) and Jagannatha. They say that in विशेषोक्ति, the कार्याभाव is really बाध्य and कारणसत्ता is बाधक. To us the view of Jayaratha and Jagannatha appears to be sounder. "अन्र (विशेषोक्तौ) कारणसमवधानं कार्यानुत्पत्तेर्बाध्यमिति बहवः। चस्तुतस्तु कार्यानुत्पत्तिरेवास्मिन्नलङ्कारे बाध्या । ..... 'स एकस्त्रीणि जयति जमन्ति कुसुमायुधः। हरतापि तनुं यस्य शम्भुना न हृतं बलम्'॥ इति प्राचीनप्रसिद्धोदाहरणेपु कारणसमवधानस्य कामशरीरनाशरूपस्य प्रमाणसिद्धत्वेन बाध्यत्वायोगात् । यतः कामेस्य शरीरनाशेऽपि शक्तिबलयोर्नाशः कुतो न जात इत्येव सर्वजनीनः प्रत्यय:, न तु शक्तिबलयोः सतोः कथ शरीरनाश इति।" R, G. p. 438; "लेखक- कल्पितश्रायमपपाठः (एवं विशेषोक्तौ कार्याभावेन कारणसत्ताया एव बाध्यमानत्व- मुन्नेयम्' इत्येष:)। तथा हि-'हरताऽपि तनुं यस्य' इत्यादौ बलाहरणेन कार्यांभावेन तनुहरणरूपं कारणं न बाध्यते, अपि तु सत्यपि तनुहरणास्ये सामग्र्ये कथं न बलं हतमिति कार्याभावस्यैव बाध्यत्वेन प्रतीतिः । तस्मात् 'एवं विशेषोक्ती कारणसत्तया कार्याभावस्यैव बाध्यमानत्वमुन्नेयम्' इति पाठो ग्राह्यः। एतदेव राजानकतिलकेना- प्युक्तम्-'कारणसाम्र्यमिह बाधकत्वेनैव प्रतीयते कार्यानुत्पत्तिस्तु बाध्यत्वेन' इति। अ्रन्थकृच्च (सर्वस्वकारः) प्रायस्तन्मतानुवर्त्येव। तदुक्तसमानन्यायोऽस्ामिः पाठो लक्षितः ।" विमर्शिनी p. 124.

244 NOTES ON X. 68-69 विरोध.

A question arises as regards certain cases of fatrr. What difference is there between Rupaka and विरोध (of जाति with जाति or of द्रव्य with द्रव्य) as exemplified in मलयमरुत दवानल:, राकाविभावरीजानि: मध्यन्दिनदिनाधिप: These last appear to be quite on a par with the stock example of Rupaka, i :. As in Rupaka the identity of two objects is predicated, so in the above examples of farry also there is araz. Hence the above two exam- ples should be regarded as cases of Rūpaka, or otherwise all examples of Rupaka will fall under fatr 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 fadry and Rūpaka briefly stated is :- In fada, the strikingness lies in the con- tradiction and not in non-difference; while in Rūpaka, the charm lies in the non-difference and not in the contradiction. Vide 'अथ जात्योर्द्रव्ययोश्च विरोधालक्कारो न भवितुमीषे' on p. 429, of R. G. of which the following quotation from the Uddyota is a summary "नन्वेवमन्नारोपमूलं रूपकमेव न विरोधः। अन्यथा मुखं चन्द्र इत्यत्रापि विरोध एव स्यादिति चेन्न। अत्र विरोधोत्थापनार्थममेदस्य विवक्षितत्वेऽपि तस्यान्यार्थ- मुपादानेनाचमत्कारित्वात। विरहिण्यवस्थायामत्यद्भतत्वस्यात्र प्रतिपिपादयिषितत्वेन तद्नुगुणतयान्तर्गर्भितोडप्यथों (ताप्यर्थो १) विरोध एव चमत्कारितया समुल्सवीति तस्यैवालङ्कारत्वात्। मुखं चन्द्र इत्यादी तु चंद्रनिष्ठाल्ह्ादकत्वादिसकलगुणानां मुखे प्ंतिपत्त्यर्थ चंद्रामेद एव चमत्कारी न तु सन्नपि विरोध:, विवक्षितार्थाननुगुणत्वात्, इति रूपकमेव न तु विरोधोडलङ्कारः । यदि तु विरहिण्यवस्थाया अत्यद्धतत्वं न

X. 68-69 विरोध. SAHITYADARPAŅA 245

किवक्षितमप्यर्थश्च न गर्भाकृत:, किं तु पीडाजनकत्वाद्यतिशयमात्रं तदाSत्र रूपकमेव। यदि वा नगरविशेषस्थितेरत्यद्भतत्वविवक्षयाऽप्यर्थगरभोकारेण च 'यत्र नारीणां मुखं चंद्र:' इत्युच्यते तदा तत्र विरोध एवेति दिक्।" pp. 83-84 Jagannatha remarks that the division into ten varieties is not a charming one. fatty should be divided into two varieties :- (I) pure, (II) based upon Paronomasia. 'वस्तुतो जात्यादिभेदानामहद्यत्वाच्छुद्धत्वश्रेषमूलत्वाभ्यां द्विविधो ज्ञेयः ।' R. G. p. 428. The works of Bana abound in example of Virodha based upon Paronomasia.

37 असङ्गतिः (Disconnection). When a cause and its effect are represented as having different l ocations, there is arsia. 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 occupying different places on account of some specialty (of the cause), there is असङ्गति. 'यदेशमेव कारणं तदेशमेव कार्य दृष्टम् । न हि महानसस्थो वहिः पर्वतदेशस्यं धूमं जनयति। यदा त्वन्यदेशस्थं कारणमन्यदेशस्थं च कार्यमुपनिबध्यते तदोचितसङ्गतिनिवृत्तेरसनत्या- ख्योऽलद्कारः।' अलं. स. p. 129. सा वाला ...... इत्यद्भतम् (p. 50, ll. 24-27). This verse occurs in the Amarus'atake (No. 34) and is cited by the अलं. स. a8 an example of arasfa. 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. अर्जुनवर्मदेव comments upon it as follows कस्याञ्चिदनुरक्तः कश्चित्स्वयं सवितर्कमनुसन्घत्ते। विस्नम्भपात्रस्य वा प्रतिविधानप्रत्याशया कस्याप्यग्रे निवेदयति। सा बालेति। सा अनिर्वचनीया मुग्धा, वयं च तदप्राप्तिपर्याकुलतया अप्रगल्भमनसः । अथ च यत्रेव ्यं तत्रैवाप्रगल्भमनस्कत्वं युज्यते। सा स्त्री, वयं च तां विना स्थातुं न शक्ुम इति गतपैर्याः । अथ च यत्रैव स्त्रीत्वं तत्रैव कातरत्वमुचितं भवति। सा पीनं चोन्नतिमच्च एवंविध स्तनयुगलं विभर्ति, वयं च तद्गाढालिङ्गनमप्राप्तवन्तः सखेदाः। अथ च य एव गुरुपदार्थभारं वहति स एव सखेदो दृश्यते। ......... सा महतः नितम्बभरेणाक्रान्ता, वयं च तां तत्राग्भारलीलालसगामिनीं स्रन्तो जडिम्रा गन्तुं न क्षमाः । अथ चय एव महता भारेणाक्रान्तो भवति स एव गन्तुं न शकोति। एवं सति अन्यजनावलम्बिभिर्दोषैर्वयमसौष्ठवाः संवृत्ता इत्याश्चर्यमेतत्।". The अलं. स. reads पयोधरभरं, which is noticed by अर्जुनवर्म also. The अलं. स. reads अप्रगत्भवचस: for अप्रगल्भमनसः and दोषैरन्यसमाश्रितैः (अन्यान्

246 NOTES ON X. 69 असङ्गति.

समाश्रितैः) for दोषैरन्यजनाश्रयैः (अन्यजनः आश्रयः येषाम्). वयमप्रगल्भ- H: Our minds lack maturity of judgment, 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. सखेदा वयम्-We are oppressed or worried. Here the causes, बालत्व, स्त्रील etc., belong to the woman, but the effects अप्रगल्भत्व, कातरत्व etc. are represented as belonging to the hero. Thus कारण and कार्य exist in different places (i. e. there is वैयधिकरण्य of कार्यकारण) and therefore the figure is असङ्गति. It should be noticed here that the अप्रगल्भमनस्कत्व due to childhood is different from that due to love; similarly the natural timidity of women is different from the fluttering of heart due to love. But both of them are here regarded as non- different (i. e. there is अमेदाध्यवसाय between कातरत्व due to womanhood and कातरत्व due to love). It is therefore that the अलं.स. remarks "अत्र वाल्यनिमित्तमप्रगल्भवचनत्वमन्यदन्यच्च स्मरनिमित्तक मित्यनयोरभेदाध्यवसायः । एवमन्यत्र झञेयम्।" p. 130. The विमर्शिनी remarka upon this that, according to the views of अलं. स., अतिशयोक्ति is always at the root of this figure. "अमेदाध्यवसाय इति। अनेनातिशयोक्तिरस्या अप्यनुप्राणनकत्वेन कटाक्षिता। अन्यथा हि विरोधो दुष्परिहरः स्यात् ।" विम० p. 130. Jagannatha says that the figure अतिश- affi is not everywhere at the root of this figure; what is necesssary everywhere is the अमेदाध्यवसाय as regards the effect (as that of कातरत्व explained above) 'अस्यां च विभावनायामिक कार्याशेऽतिशयोक्त्यनुप्राणनमावश्यकम् । अन्यथा विरोधी दुष्परिहर एव स्यात्, इत्यलक्कारसर्वस्वकारादीनां मतम् । तच्च 'दृष्टिर्मृगीदृशोऽत्यन्तं श्रुत्यन्तपरिशीलिनी। मुच्यन्ते बन्धनात्केशा विचित्रा वैधसी गतिः ॥' इत्यस्मन्निमितोदाहरणे व्यभिचारादस- अतम् । न हि 'मुच्यन्ते बन्धनात्केशाः' इत्यत्र केशबन्धनमुत्तयंशेऽतिशयोक्तिरस्ति। किं तु श्रेषभित्तिकामेदाध्यवसानमात्रम्। तस्मादयेन केनापि प्रकारेण कार्याशेडमेदा- व्यवसानमावश्यकमिति तु सङ्गतम् ।" R. G. pp. 440-441. The name arasfa is significant, because in it there is absence of the natural co-existence of cause and effect, as said by Mammata "सा तयोः स्वभावोत्पन्नपरस्परसङ्गतित्यागात् असङ्गतिः' अस्याश्चाप ...... विरोधालक्कार: (p.50, 1. 28). In असङ्गति, there is apparent contradiction in saying that the cause remains in one

X. 69 असङ्गति. SÂRITYADARPAŅA, 247

place and that the effect is produced in another. So it may be thought that असङ्गति is nothing but विरोध. The author therefore proceeds to distinguish between असङगति and विरोध. As said above with reference to विभावना and विशेषोक्ति, असङ्गति corresponds to an अपवाद, while विरोध is something like a rule (उत्सर्ग). An arana is always more powerful than a rule. So where the conditions of असङ्गति are satisfied, there can be no विरोध. विरोध occurs when two things, well known to reside in different places are represented as residing in the same substratum; e. g. कठिनत्व and सुकुमारत्व, which reside in different objects, but are represented as residing in the same object, viz., the palm; असङ्गति, on the other hand, occurs when two objects, related as cause and effect and generally known to reside in the same place, are represented as residing in different substrata. Compare K. P. X. "एषा च विरोधबाधिनी न विरोधः। भिन्नाधारतयैव द्वयोरिह विरोधितायां: प्रतिभासात्। विरोधे तु विरोधित्वमेकाश्रयनिष्ठमनुक्तमपि पर्यवसितम्। अपवादविषयपरिहारेणोत्सर्गस्य व्यवस्थितेः ।"; "व्यधिकरणत्वेन प्रसिद्धयोः समानाधिकरणत्वेनोपनिबन्धने विरोधालङ्कारः । समानाधिकरणत्वेन प्रसिद्धयोई्वयोवैय- धिकरण्येनोपनिबन्धनेSसङ्गतिः।" R. G. p. 441. In विभावना, the effect is represented as following even in the absence of the well-known cause; in arusfa both the cause and effect exist, but in different places i. e. in विभावना the charm lies in कार्योत्पत्ति even without the well-known cause, while in aaafa the charm lies in the वैयधिकरण्य of कार्य and कारण. Similarly विशेषोक्ति should be distinguisned from असङ्गति. Jagannatha remarks that in aasfa 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. "प्रागुक्तासङ्गतिलक्षणे हेतुकार्ययोरिति च समानाधिकरण- मात्रोपलक्षणम्। तेन 'नेत्रं निरजनं तस्याः शून्यास्तु वयमद्भतम्' इत्यत्र निरज्ञनत्वशून्य- त्वयोरुत्पाद्योत्पादकभाव लक्षणसम्वन्धा नन्तर्भावेण शुद्धसमानाधिकरणत्वेन प्रसिद्धयोरप्य- सङ्गतिः सङ्गच्छते। यथाश्रुते तु सा न स्यात्।" R. G. p. 441. The following are some examples of असङ्गति. 'अहो खलभुजङ्गस्य विचित्रोयं वधक्मः । अन्यस्य दशति श्रोत्रमन्यः प्राणैविमुच्यते ॥'; 'यस्यैव व्रणस्तस्यैव वेदना भणति जनस्तदलीकम् । दन्तक्षतं कपोले वध्वा वेदना सपलीनाम् I।' ( quoted in K. P. X. ) 38 विषमम् ( 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 विषमम्

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 fagn.

It is a general maxim that the qualities of a cause produce in the effect similar qualities, 'कारणगुणा हि कायगुणानारभन्ते' Vide 'कारणगुणपूर्वकः कार्यगुणो दृष्टः' वैशेषिकसूत्र II. I. 24. Where the poet represents the qualities of the cause as opposed to those of the effect, there is faqw ( 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 विषम; e. g. in "द्राक्षाफलानि शिखरेषु शिलोच्चयानां पीयूषसाररसनिर्भरगर्भवन्ति । विष्वग्टृषत्कठिनकायनिगूढ- ऋङ्शृङ्गाटकानि पुनरम्भसि सम्भवन्ति ॥" there is no विषम, 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.

सद्: प्रसूते (p. 58, 11. 25-26). This occurs in Padmagupta's Navasahasankacharita ( I. 62 ). It is cited by Mammata and Sarvasva as an example of विषम 'तमालवन्नीला कृपाणलेखा यस्य (तस्य राज्ः) करस्पर्शमवाप्य सद्यस्तत्कालं रणे रणे प्रतिसंग्रामं शरदिन्दुवत् पाण्डु शुभ्रं यशः प्रसूते एतच्चित्रमित्यन्वयः ।' उ० चo 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' (नीलत्व) of the cause, the sword, is opposed to the quality 'whiteness' residing in the effect, viz., fame. आनन्दममन्द ...... मे. This is Rudrata IX. 47. अमन्दम्-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 'आनन्दं ददासि; but the effect, viz. separation, caused by the heroine, has the action 'burning' expressed by the verb 'तापयतितराम्.' Therefore the actions of the cause and its effect are opposed.

अयं ...... क्षारवारिभि: (p. 51, 1l. 11-12). This is an example of II. अयं अम्भोधि: रलाकरः (रल्ानां आकरः खनिः) इति धनाशया असेवि (सेवितः)। धनं दूरेऽस्तु वदनं क्षारवारिभि: अपूरि (पूरितम्). Here not only was the object ( viz. attainment of wealth ) not obtained, but, on the contrary, the mouth was filled with salt water (अनर्थस्य सम्भव:).

X. 70-71 विषम. SAHITYADARPAŅA. 249

क्क वनं .... सुदुःसहम् (p. 51, ll. 14-15). तरुवल्कभूषणं (वृक्षवल्कं वृक्षत्वक 'त्वक स्त्री वल्कं वल्कलमस्त्रियाम्' इत्यमर II. 4.12. भूषणं यस्मिन्) वनं क, महेन्द्रवन्दिता (देवेशपूजिता) नृपलक्ष्मीः क। नियतं (ध्रुवं) बत (बत इति निपातः खेदे) प्रतिकूलवर्तिनो धातुः (विधेः) चरितं (चेष्टितं) सुदुःसहम् Here we have an association of woods and royal glory (in the person of Rama ), which are incongruous. The commentator Ramacharana 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 Dasaratha's attempt 'to crown Rama as gana 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. विपुलेन ...... दृशा (p. 51, 11. 18-19). The author cites another example of the third variety (विरूपयो: सङ्टना). The verse is S'is'u. XIII. 40. "सागरे शेते इति सागरशयस्तादृशस्य यस्य विष्णोः विपुलेन विस्तृतेन कुक्षिणा युगक्षये भुवनानि पपिरे पीतानि। स पुनः । सोऽपीत्यर्थः । एकतमया कया- चिन्नगरकामिन्या मदेन विभ्रमो विलासो यस्यां सा चासौ असकला असम्पूर्णा च तथाभूतया एकया दृशा पपे सादरमचलोकित एव। पीत इत्यमेदाध्यवसानम्।" 3. a. p. 444. Here in Vishnu, there is the association of two incongruous things, viz., a part of Vishnu is represented as swallowing all the worlds; but Vishnu himself ( the aqat ) is spoken of as drunk by a woman with a single eye. 'eT कुक्षिरेव सकलभुवनपानसमर्था तस्य सम्पूर्णस्य अवयविनः स्त्रिया एकटृशा पानं चापरं विषमम्।' उद्योत. p.123. Our author gives no general definition of fuH. He only mentions three varieties of faqy. In this he follows Mammata and Ruyyaka. Jagannatha defines विषम as 'अननुरूपसंसर्गों विषमम्' ( an incongruous relation ). It should be noticed that the treatment of faun given in the text is not exhaustive. Jagannatha remarks that in the second variety, we shall have to speak of a number of subvarieties; e. g. (a) There may be the frustration of the 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 arfag may be threefold. Vide R. G. pp. 444-447. In the third variety (विरूपयो: सङ्टना) also there are many subdivisions. We do not refer to them, as for our purpose it is not necessary to do so. २७

250 NOTES ON X. 70-71 विषम.

We should clearly distinguish between विरोध, असङ्गति and विषम ( variety I). It may be said that the verse 'आनन्दममन्दं' etc. is an example of fatry, because there is an apparent contra- diction between the two actions आनन्दं ददासि and तापयतितराम् But this is not so. Here the charm does not 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 faa what is charming is the residence in one place of two things that are known to reside in different places; in arsfa 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 faqy the charm lies in this that qualities or actions pertaining to the effect are opposed to the qualities or actions belonging to the cause. "विरोधे विरोधिनोः सामानाधिकरण्यस्य, असङ्गतौ कार्यकारणयोवैयधिकरण्यस्य चमत्कारप्रयोजकता, अत्र तु कार्यकारणवृत्ति- विजातीयत्रियागुणयोगस्य चमत्कारितेति विशेषात्॥" उद्योत p.123. The Kuvalayananda and R. G. speak of a figure called विषादन, which is defined by the latter as 'अभीष्टार्थविरुद्धलाभो विषादनम्'. Where one makes no effort to obtain what is desired, but only desires it and something exactly the opposite happens, there is विषादन. An example is "रात्रिर्गमिष्यति भविष्यति सुप्रभातं भासवानुदेष्यति हसिष्यति चक्रवालम् । इत्थं विचिन्तयति कोशगते द्विरेफे हा हन्त हन्त नलिनीं गज उज्जहार I'. We think that this should be regarded as faqn, for there will be no end of figures if we go on with this hair-splitting. Examples of विषम are :- (I) अरिकरि कुम्भविदारणरुधिरारुणदारुणादतः खंड्गात्। वसुधाधिपते धवलं कान्तं च यशो बभूव तव।। रु० IX. 46. ; (II.) यो हठं प्रतिनिषेद्धमुदस्तः सुभ्रवा प्रियतमस्य कटाक्षः।स प्रतोद इव तस्य विशेषात्प्रेरकः किमपि हन्त बभूव ॥ (quoted by Jayaratha); (III) क सूर्यप्रभवो वंशः कव चाल्पविषया मतिः। रघु I. 2; क्व वयं क्व परोक्षमन्मथो मृगशावैः सममेधितो जनः । शा० II. 39 समम् ( Equal). aw is the commendation of an object as worthy of another on account of the fitness of both for one another. आनुरूप्येण refers to the reason why praise is bestowed. An example of सम is शशिनमुपगतेयं etc. (p. 51,1l. 22-23). This is Raghu. VI. 85. इयं (इन्दुमती) मेघमुक्तं शशिनं उपगता कौमुदी, अनुरूपं जलनिधि अवतीर्णा जहकन्या (गङ्गा) इति समगुणयोगप्रीतयः (समौ

X. 71 सम. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 251

गुणौ ययोः तयोः योगेन प्रीतिर्येषाम्) पौराः नृपाणां श्रवणकट्ठ एकवाक्यं तत्र विवञ्ु: (उदीरयामासु:). Here there is a commendation of the union of Aja and Indumati, which commendation is due to their fitness for one another. Mammata speaks of two varieties of TH; (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 चित्रं चित्रं बत बत महच्चित्रमेतद्विचित्रं जातो दैवादुच्ितरच- नासंविधाता विधाता। यन्निम्बानां परिणतफलस्फीतिरास्वादनीया यच्चतस्या: कवल- नकलाकोविद: काकलोकः।। सम is the converse of the third variety of विषम (विरूपयोः सङ्गटना). A question may be asked :- 'why should we not regard the converse of the other two varieties of विषम as सम?' 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. "यद्यपि विषमस्य भेदत्रयमुक्तं तथापि तच्छब्देन (in the definition of सम given by अलं. स. 'तद्विपर्ययः समम्') सम्भवादन्त्यो भेद: परामृश्यते। पूर्वभेदद्वयविपर्य- यस्यानलङ्कारत्वात्। अन्त्यभेदविपर्ययस्तु चारुत्वात्समाख्योडलङ्कारः।" अलं. स. p.132. Jagannatha, however, condemns this remark of the अलं. स. and says that सम also has the same three varieties as विषम. The examples of the first two varieties are कुवलयलक्ष्मीं हरते तव कीर्तिस्तत्र किं चित्रम्। यस्मान्निदानमस्या लोकनमस्याध्रिपङ्गजस्तु भवान्। नितरां धनमाप्तमर्थिभि: क्षितिप त्वां समुपास्य यततः । निधनं समलम्भि तावकी खलु सेवा जनवाञ्छितप्रदा ॥. In the last example, there is a pun on the word निधन (नितरां धनम्; निधनं मृत्युः). 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 y etc. as possessing the same qualities, or in describing the attainment of what is desired, although it (the object attained) is really अनिष्ट, by the same process (by शेष etc). 'वस्तुतोऽननुरूप- योरपि कार्यकारणयोः श्रेषादिना धर्मैक्यसम्पादनद्वाराSनुरूपतावर्णने, वस्तुतोऽनिष्टस्यापि तेनैवोपाये ने ष्टैक्यसम्पत्तानिष्टपरा प्तिवर्णने च चारुताया अनुपदमेव दर्शितत्वात्। तस्मात्सममपि त्रिविधमेव।" R. G. p. 452. Examples of सम are :- त्वमर्हतां प्राग्रसरः स्मृतोऽसि नः शकुन्तला मूर्तिमती च सक्क्रिया। समानयंस्तुल्यगुणं वधूवरं चिरस्य वाच्यं न गतः प्रजापतिः॥ शा० V; दिष्टया शकुन्तला साध्वी सदपत्यमिदं भवान्। श्रद्धा वित्तं विधिश्चेति त्रितयं तत्समागतम् । शा० VII.

252 NOTES ON X. 72 विचित्र.

40 विचित्रम् (Strange). When, for the attainment of the desired object, one does something contrary to it, there is विचित्र. An example is प्रणमत्यु afa etc. (p. 51, 1l. 26-27 ). This occurs in the Hitopades'a 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 safa (elevation, here used both literally and metaphorically ) should go up; but the servant, wishing for aa, goes down on his knees before his master. The servant takes service with the object of leading a comfort- able life; but he has often to lose his life in the service of his master. He thinks that by service he will cbtain happiness, but what he really gets is worry and toil. So for obtaining what is desired, viz., उन्नति, जीवित and सुख, he employs means, viz., प्रणाम, प्राणविमोक्ष and दुःख, which are exactly the reverse of what he wants. Jayaratha informs us that the figure fafar was first defined by अलं. स. 'एतद्धि ग्रन्थकृतैवाभिनवत्वेनोक्तम्।' अलं. स. वि. P. 134. "यस्य हेतोर्यत्फलं (कार्य) तस्य (हेतोः) यदा तत् (कार्य) विपरीतं भवति तदा तद्विपरीतफलनिष्पत्त्यर्थ कस्यचित्प्रयलः उत्साहो विचित्रालङ्कारः।" अलं. सं. p. 133. fafar ordinarily means 'wonderful.' The figure is called fafaa, 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 विचित्र and that विषम, where an effect opposed to the cause in its qualities is produced? The reply is :- In fafar, when we say 'he bows down to become elevated' what we first understand is that bowing down cannot be the cause of becom- ing elevated ( i. e. there is first aRufra) and then we under- stand that elevation cannot be the effect of bowing down, being opposed to it (i. e. there is कार्यवैपरीत्यप्रतीति); while in विषम (in which an effect opposed to the cause is already produced, while in fafa an effort is made to produce an effect opposed to the cause ), 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. thers is कार्यवैपरीत्यप्रतीति first) and then we apprehend that the blue sword cannot be the cause of bright fame ( i. e. there is Rufaa). This difference is set

X. 72 विचिन्न. SAHITYADARPANA. 253

forth very conoisely by the अलं. स. as follows :- "न चायं प्रथमो विषमालद्वारः। स्वनिषेधमुखेन (कारणनिषेधमुखेन) वैपरीत्यप्रतीतेः । विपरीत- प्रतीत्या तु स्वनिषेधस्तस्य (विषमस्य) विषयः । यथा 'तमालनीला शरदिन्दुपाण्ड- यशस्त्रिलोकाभरणं प्रसूते' इत्यादि। इह त्वन्यथा प्रतीतिः ।" p. 133. Another difference is pointed out by Jayaratha and Jagannatha. In विषम, an opposite effect results of its own accord; while in विचित्र, an effort is made by some person to produce an opposite effect. 'यद्यपि विषमे विरूपस्य कार्षस्य स्वयमेवोत्पत्तिरिह च तन्निष्पत्तये प्रयत इति स्फुटोप्यनयो: भेदस्तथापि ग्रन्थकृता विशेषपरिपोषायैव सूक्ष्मेक्षिकागम्यो मेदोऽय- मुक्तः।" विम० pp. 133-34; "न च कारणाननुरूपं कार्यमिति विषममेदोडयं वाच्यः। विषमे पुरुषकृतेरनपेक्षणात्। कार्यकारणगुणवैलक्षण्येनैव तन्म्ेदनिरूपणाच्च" R. G. p. 453. It should be noticed that Dandin, Bhamaha, Udbhata, Mammata and others do not regard fafa as a distinct figure. Uddyota regards विचित्र as not different from विषम. "एवमिष्टसि- द्धयर्थमिष्टैषिणा क्रियमाणमिष्टविपरीतयलाचरणमपि विषममेव। यथा 'नमन्ति सन्तस्त्रै- लोक्यादपि लब्धुं समुन्नतिम्।' वाच्यप्रतीतिवेलायां योगवैषम्यप्रतीतेः । एतेनात्र विचित्रालङ्कारः पृथगित्यपास्तम् ।" p. 124. Examples of विचित्र are :- उन्नत्यै नमति प्रभुं प्रभुगृद्दान्द्रष्टं बहिस्तिष्ठति स्वद्रव्यव्ययमातनोति जडधीरागामिवित्ताशया। प्राणान्प्राणितुमेव मुञ्नति रणे क्विश्नाति भोगेच्छ्या सर्वे तद्विपरीतमेव कुरुते तृष्णान्धदृक्सेवकः॥ quoted in अलं. स .; मलिनयितुं खलवदनं विमलयति जगन्ति देव कीर्तिस्ते। मित्राह्लादं कर्तु मित्राय द्रुह्यति प्रतापोऽपि ॥ एकावली.

41 अधिकम् (Exceeding). When, of the container and the contained, one is repre- sented as vaster than the other, there is अधिक. एकस्य=आश्रयस्य आश्रयिणो वा. An example, where the आश्रय is vaster than the भाश्रित, is किमधिक etc. (p. 51, 11. 30-31). अज्ञात एव not known (by all the animals in the sea, because Hari lies in only a part of the sea ). The greatness of Hari is apprehended from the fact that all the worlds are contained in Hari's side. The excessive greatness of the sea (the आश्रय of हरि) is understood from the faot that the great Hari covers only a part of the sea. An example of अधिक, where the आश्रित (the thing contained) is represented as being vaster than the आश्रय is 'युगान्त' etc. ( p. 52, 11. 2-3 ), This is शिशु० I. 23, and is cited by मम्मट as an example of अधिक. It is a description of the great pleasure which Krshna felt at the approach of the sage Narada. "युगान्तकाले प्रतिसंहृतः आत्मा स्वात्मभूतः प्रपञ्चो येन तस्य कैटभद्विषः श्रीविष्णोः,

254 NOTES ON X. 72 अधिक.

यस्यां तनौ (मूर्तौ) जगन्ति भुवनानि सविकाशं सावकाशं आसत उपविशन्ति स्म, तत्र तस्यां तनौ तपोधनस्य नारदस्य अभ्यागमः आगमनं तत्सम्भवाः तज्जन्या: मुदः प्रीतयः न ममुः न अवकाश प्रापुः।" उद्योत p.125. Here, the body of Krshna, in which all the worlds lie without jostling one another, and which is therefore the आश्रय, is intended to be great. The pleasure due to Narada's arrival, which must be smaller than the body, is here spoken of as not contained in the body (आश्रय) and therefore there is the figure called अधिक. प्रदीप remarks 'अत्रावेयभूताया मुदो महीयस्त्वं विवक्षितम्' It should be well borne in mind that the figure occurs only when the अधिकत्व of the आश्रय or आश्रयिन् is not true in the nature of things, but is due solely to the poet's imagination. 'त्चाश्रयाश्रयिणोः कविप्रतिभाकल्पितमेव ग्राह्यं न पुनर्वास्तवम् । तेन चारुत्वप्रतीतेः।' विम• P.134; 'लक्षणे कल्पनमित्यनेन यत्राधाराधेययोरन्यतरस्य न्यूनत्वमधिकत्वं च वास्तवं तत्र नातिप्रसङ्ग: ।' R. G. p. 454. For this reason the following verse, though it is cited by the अलं. स. as an example of अधिक, is not a proper example of it. 'दौरत्र कवचिदाश्रिता प्रविततं पातालमत्र क्वचित्काप्यत्रैव धरा धराधरजलाधारावधिर्वतते। स्फीतस्फीतमहो नभः कियदिदं यस्येत्थमेवंविधेर्दूरे पूरणमस्तु शून्यमिति यन्नामापि नास्तं गतम्।' Here the vastness of nabhas and the limited extent of the Heaven etc., that are described, are well known. Compare 'नभसो दुप्रभृतीनां चान्योन्यापेक्षया वैपुल्यं पारिमित्यं च वास्तवमेवेत्यनुदाहरणमेतत्।' विम० p.135. It may be said that अधिक is nothing but the third kind of विषम (विरूपयो: सङ्गटना), since in the former also there is an as- sociation of two incongruous things (i.e. the आश्रय is vast, while आश्रयिन is very small or vice versa). But this is not proper. In fary two things that are independent ( i. e. not related as आधार and आधेय) and are incongruous with each other are brought together, while in अधिक two things are related as आश्रय and आश्रयिन् and one of them is vast while the other is limited. The charm lies not in the incongruity of the two things, but rather in the fact that the आश्रय or आश्रयिन् is vaster than the आश्रयिन् or आश्रय respectively. 'एवं च परि- मितत्वापरिमितत्वयोः सापेक्षत्वात्तथाविधवस्तुद्वयसङ्गटनयैव तदवगमनसिद्धिरित्यत्राधा- राधेययोः सङ्गटनेनैवाननुरूपत्वमवगम्यते। विषमे चानन्यापेक्षत्वेन स्वत एवाननुरूपयोः सङ्गटनमित्यनयोर्म हान्मेदः ।' विम० p. 134. Other examples of अधिक are :- अहो विशालं भूपाल भुवनत्रितयोदरम्। माति मातुमशक्योऽपि यशोराशिर्यदत्र ते।। K. P. X; गिरामविषयो राजन् विस्तारस्तव चेतसः। सावकाशतया यत्र शेते विश्वाश्रयो हरिः॥ R. G; जगद्विशाले हृदि तस्य तन्त्री प्रविश्य सास्ते स्म तथा यथा तत्। पर्याप्तमासीदखिलं न तस्यास्तत्रावकाशस्तु कुतोऽपरस्या:॥ Ru. IX. 29.

X. 73 अन्योन्य. SÂHITYADARPANA. 255

42 अन्योन्यम् ( Reciprocal). उभयोः (वस्तुनोः) मिथः (परस्परं) एकक्रियायाः करणं (चेत्) (तदा) अन्योन्यम्. When two things do the same act to each other, there is अन्योन्य. अन्योन्य occurs when two things are represented as causing a specialty in each other. The essentials of अन्योन्य are two :- I. Two things must act on each other; II. The effect produced in each other must be the same. 'सिंहः प्रसेनमवधीत्सिहो जाम्बवता हतः' is not an example of अन्योन्य, because there is no reciprocal action; we are told that the lion killed प्रसेन, but we are not told what प्रसेन did to the lion. 'कृष्णद्वैपायनं पार्थः सिषेवे शिष्यवत्ततः । असावध्यापयेत्तं तु विर्द्या योगसमन्विताम्॥।' is not an example of अन्योन्य. Here कृष्णद्वैपायन and पार्थ act on each other; but the action is not the same.

An example of अन्योन्य is त्वया सा etc. (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 (गुण). An example is 'प्रकाशः कोऽपि कैलासशैल- पूर्णेन्दुबिम्बयोः । उदियाय तदन्योन्यपटत्वजननक्मात्।' Examples of अन्योन्य are :- कण्ठस्य तस्या: स्तनबन्धुरस्य मुक्ताकलापस्य च निस्तलस्य। अन्योन्यशोभाजननाद्वभूव साधारणो भूषणभूष्यभावः। कुमारसम्भव I. 42; हंसानां सरोभिः श्रीः सार्यतेऽथ सरसां हंसैः। अन्योन्यमेवैते आत्मानं केवलं गुरुकुर्वन्ति॥ K.P. X .; परपूरुषदृष्टिपातवज्राहतिभीता हृदयं प्रियस्य सीता। अविशत्परकामिनीभुजङ्गीभयतः सत्वरमेव सोऽपि तस्याः॥ R. G.

43 विशेष: ( 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, which is impossible; there is विशेष which is thus threefold. We construe the last two lines of the definition as किंचित्कार्य वा प्रकुर्वतः इतरस्य अशक्यस्य कार्यस्य दैवात्करणम्. We think that वा connects the third kind of विशेष with the other two. Pramadadasa connects वा with इतरस्य; and takes इतरस्य as equal to शक्यस्य (i. e. अशक्यस्य कार्यस्य इतरस्य शक्यस्य वा कार्यस्य). राम० also does the same. We think that both are wrong for two reasons :- I. All weighty authority is in favour of our

256 NOTES ON X. 73-74 विशेष.

interpretation (i. e. in taking इतरस्य as अन्यस्य कार्यस्य) and against that of Pramadadasa. No one speaks of the effecting of a शक्य कार्य. Carefully note the following words 'अन्यत्प्रकुर्वतः कार्यमशक्यस्यान्यवस्तुनः । तथैव करणं चेति विशेषस्त्रिविधः स्मृतः॥" K.P.X .; 'यञ्च किंचिदारभमाणस्यासम्भाव्यवस्त्वन्तरकरणं स तृतीयो विशेषः ।' अलं. स. p. 136. II. Our author, supposing राम to be right, does note cite any example of another ar are being produced at the same time. Pramadadasa translates as 'unconnected with the subject.' This appears to be wrong, as will be clear from the word असम्भाव्य used by the अलं. स. 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 विशेष. 'विशेषाश्चात्र त्रयो न पुनरेकस्त्रिविधः । लक्षणस्य भिन्नत्वात् !' विम p. 136. An example of the 1st variety is दिवमप्युप etc. (p. 52, ll. 11-12 ). This is Rudrata IX. 6; the verse is cited by Mammata and the अलं.स. also. दिवमपि (स्वर्गमपि) उपयातानाम् (गतानाम्) येषां (कवीना) अनल्पगुणगणा: (अनल्पः अलघुः गुणगण: यासाम्) गिर: आकल्पं (कल्पपर्यन्तं) जमन्ति (त्रिभुवनं) रमयन्ति ते कवयः कथमिव न वन्धाः Here the आधेय is speech, the well-known support (आधार) of 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 aTeTT of speech ). Therefore this is an example of the 1st विशेष. 'अत्र गिर आधेयाः। प्राण्याश्रितत्वात्। अथ च विनाऽपि कविभिराधार रमयन्तीत्युपलब्ध्या कथितम्।' नमिसाधु. 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 अलं. स. 'यच्चैक वस्तु परिमितं चुगपद्नेकधा वर्तमानं क्रियते स द्वितीयो विशेष: ।' p. 136. An example is कानने etc. (p. 52, 1l. 13-14). अन्तकसक्काशं=मृत्युसदृशं. 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. An example of the 3rd variety is गृहिणी etc. (p.52, Il. 15-16). This is Raghu. VIIL 66, and is cited by K. P. Aja, bewailing the loss of his wife, sums it up in this fine verse. My := tfr. Here Death is represented as depriving Aja of everything such as & minister, friond, disciple ete. in depriving him of rgudt. 'अत्र सच्चिवादिसर्वहरणरूपकार्यान्तरकरणं व्यंग्यम्।' प्रभा.

X. 73-74 विशेष. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 257

Examples of विशष are :- I. युक्तं तु याते दिवमासफेन्दौ तदाश्रितानां यदभूद्विनाशः । इदं तु चित्रं भुवनावकाशे निराश्रया खेलति तस्य कीर्तिः n R. G .; II. हृदये चक्षुषि वाचि च तव सैवाभिनवयौवना वसति। वयमत्र निरवकाशा विरम कृतं पादपतनेन॥। रुद्रट IX.8 .; III. माघः शिशुपालवधं विदधत्कविमदवधं विदधे। रलाकर: स्वविजयं इरविजयं वर्णयन् व्यवृणोत्॥l quoted by जयरथ with the remark 'अत्र न केवलं माघः शिशुपालवधं चकार यावदसम्भाव्यं चिकीर्षितं कविमदवधमपीत्यशक्यवस्त्वन्तरकरणात्मायं विशेषः।' 44 व्याघातः (Frustration). येन (उपायेन) यथा येन प्रकारेण वस्तु केनापि (पुरुषेण) कृतम् तेनैव उपायेन चेत् अन्यः तदन्यथा (ततोऽन्यथा) कुरुते (तदा) व्याघातः. If a certain thing, which is done by one man by a certain means, is undone by another by the same means, there is arara. An example is दृशा दग्धं मनसिजं जीवयन्ति दृशैव याः । विरूपाक्षस्य जयिनीस्ता: स्तुवे वामलोचना: Il. This verse occurs in Rajas'ekhara's Viddhas'a- labhañjika ( I Act ). Our author cites it as an example of श्रुत्यनुप्रास also. दृशा (शिवस्य तृतीयेन नेत्रेण) दग्धं मनसिजं (कामं) या: दृशा एव जीवयन्ति (कटाक्षेण मदनं जनयन्ति) ताः विरूपाक्षस्व (लोचनाना त्रित्वात् विरूपाक्ष: शिवः) जयिनीः (शिवमपि प्रत्यादिशन्तीः) वामलोचना: (वामे सुन्दरे लोचने वासां) स्तुबे. Cupid was burnt by S'iva with his eye; but here, women are represented as re-vivifying Cupid by that very means ( i. e. by the eye ). Therefore there is aera. 'अत्र दृष्टिलक्षणेनोपायेन स्मरस्य हरेण दाहविषयत्वं निष्पादितम्। मृगनयनाभि: पुनस्तेनैवोपायेन तस्य जीवनीयत्वं क्रियते। तच्च दाहविषयत्वस्य प्रतिपक्षभूतम्।।' अलं. स. p. 138. It should be noted that the poet represents the eye of S'iva and the eye of the women as non-different; while in reality the two are different. The following are the essentials of arera :- I. Something must have been accomplished by a certain person with a certain means; II. What has been accomplished must be frustrated by another with the same means; III, The representation 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 व्याघात; e. g. "कुलममलिनं भद्रा मूर्तिर्भतिः श्रुतिशालिनी भुजबलमलं स्फीता लक्ष्मीः प्रभुत्वमखण्डितम्। प्रकृतिसुभगा ह्वेते भावा अमीमिरयं जनो व्रजति सुतरां दर्प राजंस्त एव तवाङ्कुशाः।।". Here there is no व्याघात, because the state of things can be explained by the fact that great men are quite different from ordinary men. The figure is called anara, because it is the cause of the frustration of a thing already accomplished, as said by Mam- mata 'स साधितवस्तुव्याहतिहे तुत्वाव् व्याघातः'.

258 NOTES ON X. 76 व्याघात.

सौकर्येण ...... क्रियते यदि. When the contrary of a certain act is justified by the same reason with facility, that is also arara. The essentials of this sarara 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 sarara, because in it there is a frustration of the effect that was represented as probable. 'किश्चित्कार्य निष्पादयितुं सम्भाव्यमान: कारणविशेषस्तत्कार्यविरुद्ध- निष्पादकत्वेन यत्समर्थ्यते सोऽपि सम्भाव्यमानकार्यव्याहतिनिबन्धनत्वाद्याघातः कार्यवि- रुद्निष्पत्तिश्च कार्यापेक्षया सुकरा। तस्य कारणस्यात्यन्तं तदानुगुण्यात्।' अलं. स. p. 139. An example of this व्याघात is इहैव etc. (p.52, 11. 22-25). The first half of the verse is spoken by the husband and the second by the wife. त्वं इहैव तिष्ठ (मया सह नागन्तव्यम्), अहं कतिपयैः अहोभिः द्रुतं (शीघ्रं) समागन्ता (Nom. Sing. of समागन्तृ 1.), कान्ते (प्रिये) मृदुः असि न च आयाससहना (क्लेशान् सोदुं न क्षमा)। सुभग (सुन्दर) मे (मम) मृदुत्वं भवता (सह) गन्तुं अधिकं हेतु: यत् (यतः) (अहूं) मृद्वी (सती) विरहकृतं (तव विरहेण कृतं) असमम् (अतुलं) आयासं दुःखं न सोढा (सहिष्ये). Here the husband mentions the tenderness of the heroine as a reason against her accompanying him ( on a journey ); but the heroine on the other hand represents it ( tenderness ) with still greater force as a reason for accompanying him. The difference between the first and the second kind of nara 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, & 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. 'अत एवास्य प्रथमाद्याघातान्वेदः। तत्र हि येन केनचिदुपायेन निष्पादितं सद्स्तु तथवा- न्येनान्यथीक्रियत इत्युक्तम्। इह तु किञ्चिन्निष्पादयितुं सम्भाव्यमानस्य कारणस्य तद्विरुद्धनिष्पादकत्वेन समर्थनम्।' विम० p. 139. It may be said that in the example aea, etc., the husband not only failed to persuade his wife to stay at home (er aarfa ) but the wife represented the excuse brought forward by him as a stronger reason for her accompanying him (i. e. there is अनर्थस्य सम्भद:); and therefore the 2nd variety of व्याघात is nothing but the second variety of faqu. To this objection

X. 76 व्याघात. SÂHITYADARPANA. 259

we reply :- In fayy, the desired effect does not follow and moreover there is some evil resulting; while in व्याघात, 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. अभिमतेतरस्य पुनरिह कार्यस्य सुकरतयोपपद्यमानत्वात, अभिमतकार्यानुत्पत्ती अनभिमतप्रादुर्भावे च भवतो विषमालक्काराद्विन्नविषयत्वेन स्थितः। एकावली p. 296. It will have been noticed by the careful reader that in दृशा दग्घं etc., there is व्यतिरेक, as made clear by the words जयिनीः, वामलोचना: and विरूपाक्षस्य. Jayaratha says that व्याघात is not possible without व्यतिरेक. 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. 'सोऽफि ्् व्याघातः) व्यतिरेकनिमित्तत्वेनात्रोक्तः । विरूपाक्षस्य चारुलोचना (the reading of सर्वस्व) इति व्यतिरेकगर्भावेव वाचकौ। जयिनीरिति व्यतिरेकोक्ति: ।' अलं. स. p. 138; 'अनेनास्य व्यतिरेकं विनोत्थानमेव न स्यादिति सूच्चितम्। तथाहि-येन केनचिद्यर्तिकचित्साधितं तदप्यन्येनान्यथा क्रियते तदा तस्य ततोऽन्यथा करणानुपपत्त्या वैलक्षण्यमवश्याभ्युपगन्तव्यम् ।' विम० p. 138. Ancient writers like Dandin and Bhamaha do not define anara at all. Mammata speaks of the first variety only. Our author follows the अलं. स. Jagannatha says that in दशा दग्धं etc. the figure is nothing but व्यतिरेक. Vide his remarks, R. G. p. 460. Examples of व्याघात are :- I. दीनद्रुमान् वचोभि: खलनिकरैरनुदिनं दलितान्। पल्लवयन्त्युल्लसिता नित्यं तैरेव सज्जनघुरीणाः। R.G .; II. विमुञ्नसि यदि प्रिय प्रियतमेति मां मन्दिरे तदा सह नयस्व मां प्रणययत्रणायत्रिंतः । अथ प्रकृतिभीरुरित्यखिलभीतिभङ्गक्षमान्न जातु भुजमण्डलादवहितो बहिर्भावय॥ R. G .; 'यदि बाल इति सुतरामपरित्याज्योऽस्मि। रक्षणीय इति भवङ्गजपज्जरमेव रक्षास्थानम्' हर्षचरित VI. para 10 (our edition) quoted in the अलं. स. with the remark "अत्र राज्यवर्धनेन श्रीहर्षाप्रस्थापने कार्ये बाल्यरक्षणी- यत्वादि कारणत्वेन यत्सम्भावितं तत्प्रत्युत प्रस्थापनकारणत्वेन सुकरतया श्रीहर्षेण 4- राज्यवर्धनस्य समर्थितमिति व्याघाताख्योलङ्कारः।" 45 कारणमाला (Garland of Causes). When each preceding object is spoken of as the cause of each succeeding one, there is कारणमाला. An example is श्रुतं etc. (p.53, 11. 3-4). शुतम्-knowledge of the S'astras (श्रुतं शास्त्रवधृतयोः' इत्यमर० III. 3. 77.). कृतधियाम of learned men.

260 NOTES ON X. 76-77 कारणमाला.

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 कारणमाला 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. ga which is the effect of कृतधीसङ्ग becomes the cause of विनय and so on. The charm here lies in the peculiar sequence of causes and effects. 'कार्यकारणक्म एवात्र चारुत्वहेतुः।'अलं. स. 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). 'तन्र पूर्व पूर्वे कारणं परं परं कार्यमित्येका, पूर्व पूर्व कार्य परं परं कारणमित्यपरा।'. An example of this is 'स्वर्गापवगौं खलु दानलक्ष्मीर्दानं प्रसूते विपुला समृद्धि:। समृद्धिमल्पेतर- भागघेयं भाग्यं च शम्भो तव पादभकि: ।।' Jagannatha remarks that the repetition of the same word in tho 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 "अत्र च कथितपदत्वं न दोषः। प्रत्युत पदान्तरेण तस्वार्थस्योक्ती रूपान्तरेण स्थितस्य नटस्येव प्रत्यभिज्ञाप्रतिरोधकत्वाद्विवक्षितार्थसिद्धेरकुण्ठितत्वविरहा ददोष: स्याद् ।' 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. "इह च यद्यादौ कारणोक्तिरेव प्रस्तूयते तदा पुनस्तस् कारणं तस्यापि कारणमिति, तत्कस्वच्चिदिति तदपि कस्यचिदिति वा कारणमाला युक्ता। यदा तु कार्योक्तिस्तदा तस्य कार्य तस्यापि कार्यमिति, तत्कस्यच्ित्कार्य तदपि कस्यचिदितति या युक्ता। सर्वथेव यः शब्द: कार्यकारणतोपस्थापक आदौ प्रयुक्त: स एव निर्वासः। एवं क्रमेण निबन्धनमाकांक्षानुरूपत्वाद्रमणीयम् । अन्यथा तु भग्नपक्रमं स्याद। यथा प्रचीनानां पद्यम् 'जिवेन्द्रियत्वं विनयस्य कारणं गुणप्रकर्षों विनयादवाप्यते। गुणाधिके पुसि जनोडनुरज्यते जनानुरागप्रभव हि सम्पदः ॥' अत्र जिवेन्द्रियत्वं विनयस् कारणं

X. 76-77 कारणमाला. SAHITYADARPANA. 261

झुत्वा जितेन्द्रियत्वस्यापि कि कारणमिति, विनयः कस्य कारणमिति वा आकांक्षोदेति। कारणस्यैव श्रुतिवशात् प्रथममुपस्थितेः । ... एवं च विनयः कस्य कारणमित्याकांक्षाया गुणप्रकर्षो विनयादवाप्यते इति वाक्यं यद्यपि फलतः परिपूरकं भवति तथापि न साक्षादित्यहृदयङ्गममेव ।" R. G. p. 462.

46 मालादीपकम् ( Serial Illuminator). When several objects are, in succession, connected with the same attribute, there is मालादीपक. Our author's definition is not quite clear. According to Mammata and Ruyyaka the essentials of मालादीपक are :- I. Many objects are connected with the same attribute; II. Each preceding object serves as a quali- fication of each succeeding one 'पूर्वपूर्व स्यो त्तरोत्तरगुणावहत्वे मालादी- पकम्।' अलं.स .; 'मालादीपकमाधं चेद्यथोत्तरगुणावह्म्' K.P. An example of मालादीपक is त्वयि etc. (p. 53, 11. 8-9). शरैः अरिशिरः (आसादितम्), तेन (अरिशिरसा) भू: (आसादिता), तया (भुवा ) त्वं (आसादित:), त्वया यशः (आसादितम्). Here, the bow, the arrows, the head of the enemy, the earth etc. are all con- nected with the single action आसादन (obtaining or reaching), as in the figure दीपक, where some प्रकृत and some अप्रकृत things are connected with the same q. Moreover each preceding object serves as a qualification of each succeeding one; the bow serves as a qualifioation 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 "आसादितमिति (in the text आसादिताः) नपुंसकानपुंसकयोरेकशेषः एकवत्त्वं च। अत्र कोदण्डे- नारिशिरः प्रापयता शरा उपक्रियन्ते शरैरपि भूमण्डलं प्रापयन्द्िररिशिरः, शिरसाऽपि सन्नायकं त्वां लम्भयता भूमण्डलं भूमण्डलेन च कीर्तिमासादयता नृपतिः ... इति पूर्वपूर्वेभ्यः परस्योपकारः।" p. 67. The reason why the figure is called मालादीपक is :- As in aqs, 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 मालादीपक after दीपक, intimating thereby that it is a kind of aue or very similar to it. Our author, following the अलं. स., defines it after कारणमाला and before एकावली, because here the charm really lies in the linking together, as it were, of certain objects. The as. H. says that it is not proper to define it after aoa. Jayaratha says that the word ATeT is not used in the same sense in which it is used २८

262 NOTES ON X. 77 मालादीपक.

in the word मालोपमा ( where many उपमानs are mentioned one after another in connection with a single उपमेय). In मालोपमा, TTET means a simple collection of things ( which are, as it were, huddled up together without one being linked with the other ); while in मालादीपक माला 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. मालादीपक cannot be a variety of दीपक, as in it there is no औपम्य intended between कोदण्ड and शर etc .; in दीपक, मौपम्य is admitted by all to be implied. The reason why writers like Mammata defined मालादीपक after दीपक is that there is illumination (of many objects by a single attribute ) here also, as in दीपक. 'मालाेन चारुत्वविशेषमाश्रित्य दीपकप्रस्तावोल्ङ्नेनेह लक्षणं कृतम्।' अलं. स. p.141; 'मालाशब्देनात्र शह्वला लक्ष्यते। तस्या एवोपकान्तत्वाद्। न चात्र मालोप- मावन्मालाशब्दो ज्ञेयः। एकस्योपमेयस्य बहूपमानोपादानाभावात्। अत्र औौपम्यमेव नास्ति। कोदण्डशरादीनां तस्याविवक्षणात्। अत एवास्य दीपकमेदत्वं न वाच्यम्। औपम्यजीवितं हि तत्। प्राच्यैः पुनरेतद्दीपनमात्रानुगुण्यात्तदनन्तरं लक्षितम्।' विम० p. 142. The difference between कारणमाला and मालादीपक is as follows :- In कारणमाला and in मालादीपक also, each preceding thing is connected with each succeeding one; but in the former, each preceding object is the cause of each succeeding one, while in the latter, each preceding object only qualifies each succeeding one. Examples of मालादीपक are :- शुक्ठः श्रेतार्चिषो वृद्धयै पक्ष: पञ्चशरस्य सः । सच रागस्य रागोऽपि यूनां रत्युत्सवश्रियः॥ K. D. II. 107; यस् च समरभुवि भुजदण्डेन कोदण्डं कोदण्डेन शरा: शरैररिशिरस्तेनापि भूमण्डलं तेन चाननुभूतपूवों नायको नायकेन कीर्तिः कीत्या च सप्त सागराः सागरैः कृतयुगादि- राजचरितस्मरणमनेन च स्थैर्यममुना च प्रतिक्षणमाश्चरयं समासादितम्। (वासवदत्ता" p. 23. Jiv .; p. 41 of Hall's ed. ).

47 एकावली (Necklace). If each succeeding thing is affirmed or denied as an attribute of each preceding thing, there is एकावली, which is thus two-fold. An example of the first variety where each succeeding thing is affirmed as an attribute of each preceding one is सरो etc. (p. 53, 11. 14-15). यत्र सरः विकसिताम्भोजम् (विकसि- तानि अम्भोजानि पङ्कजानि यस्मिन्), अम्भोजं भृङ्गसङ्गतम् (मङ्गेः भ्रमरः सङ्गतम् युक्तम्), भृज्ञा: ससज्ञीता: (सङ्गीतेन सह वर्तमाना:) सङ्गीतं सस्मरोदयम् (स्मरस्य उदय: उद्गमः तेन सहितम्). विशेषण does not simply mean 'adjective'

X 78 एकावली. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 263

in Sanskrit. faaror is anything ( whether a noun or adjective) which serves to distinguish one thing with which it is connected from other things or which gives a special character to a thing known in a general way. 'स्वरूपमात्रेणावगतस्य वस्तुनो यत्सम्बन्धयळेन वैशिष्टयमवगम्यते तद्विशेषणम् ।' विम० p. 141. In the above example, अम्भोज is affirmed as a qualification of the lake, bees are introduced as a qualification of lotuses, singing 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. अपो्यते-निषिष्यते. An example of the second variety is न तज्जलं etc. (p. 53, 1l. 16-17). This is Bhatti. II. 19. It is a deseription of autumn. न तज्जलं ...... पड्ूजं There was no water that was not graced with fair lotuses. (शरदि) न तव् जलं (आसीत) यत् न सुचारुपङ्कजम् (सुचारुणि अतिशोभनानि पङ्कजानि यस्मिन्) न तत् पक्कजं यत् अलीनषद्पदम् (न लीनाः षद्पदाः अमरा यस्मिन्), न असौ षट्पदः यः कलं (मधुरं) न जुगुअ, न तत् गुथ्ितं यत मनः न जहार. Here u stands as a qualification of water in a negative form, निलीनषट्पद appears negatively as a qualification of the lotus, कलगुज्ित 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. एकावली is a kind of हार, having only one string of pearls. 'अर्षहारो माणवक पकावल्येकयष्टिका। सव नक्षत्रमाला स्यात्सप्तविशतिमैौक्तिकैः ॥' अमर० II. 6. 106. The रामाश्रमी remarks 'एकसरा। एका चासौ आवली च।'. The figure is called एकावली, because here the pre- ceding thing and succeeding thing present one connected. chain ( as two pearls in a chain do ) .. कच्विद्विशेष्यमपि .... एवमपोहनेऽपि (p. 53, 11. 18-22). Sometimes each preceding faa is affirmed or negatived as a qualification with reference to each suceeeding thing. An example is apff etc. Here in the first sentence the विशेषण is विमला: and the विशेष्य is वाय्यः; this विशेष्य is affirmed as a qualification (विशेषण) of कमलानि in the next sentence; the विशेष्य 'lotuses' is affirmed as a qualification of the bees and so on. The same holds good in the case of negativing the विशेष्य in one sentence as a विशेषण in the next. रामo gives as an example the following :- 'पुण्यक्षेत्रं न सर्वत्र पुण्यक्षेत्रे न नास्तिकाः। नास्तिकेषु न धमोस्ति न धमें दुःखहेतुता ।' It should be remembered that Mammata and Ruyyaka speak

264 NOTES ON X. 78 एकावली.

of only that एकावली, where each succeeding thing is affirmed or negatived as a faaqu of each preceding thing. Jagannatha's treatment is the same as our author's.

The distinction between मालादीपक and एकावली (of the first sort) is :- In the former, each preceding thing lends some charm to each succeeding thing, as in 'शरैररिशिरस्तेन भूस्तया etc.'; while in the latter, each succeeding thing enhances the charm of each preceding one, as in सरो विकसिताम्भोजम् etc. 'उत्तरोत्तरस्य पूर्व पूर्व प्रति उत्कर्षहेतुत्वे एकावली। पूर्वस्य पूर्वस्योत्तरोत्तरोत्कर्षनिबन्धनत्वे तु मालादी- पकम्।' अलं. स. p. 141. The difference between मालादीपक and एकाचली (of the 2nd sort, where each preceding विशेष्य is affirmed or denied as a विशेषण 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 कारणमाला and एकावली is that in the former the relation between the two things is that of कारयकारणभाव; while in the latter it is विशेषणविशेष्यभाव.

Jagannatha remarks that मालादीपक does not deserve to be a separate figure, but should be regarded as a sub-variety of the second kind of एकावली ( where each preceding विशेष्य is affirmed or negatived as a विशेषण of each succeeding thing). The only condition is that the obligation conferred on each succeeding thing by each preceding विशेष्य should be the same (पकरूप). He further observes that मालादीपक cannot be a variety of iga for reasons which we have already mentioned in our notes on मालादीपक. 'वस्तुतस्तु मतद (मालादीपकं) दीपकमेव न शक्यं वक्तम्। सादृश्यसम्पकांभावास। किं तु एकावलीप्रमेद इति वक्ष्यते ।' R.G. p. 328. "'धर्मेंण बुद्धिस्तव देव शुद्धा बुद्धा निबद्धा सइसैव लक्ष्मीः । लक्ष्म्या च तुषा भुवि सर्वलोका लोकैश्च नीता भुवनेपु कीर्तिः ।' इह पूर्वेण पूर्वेण स्वाव्यवहितमु- त्तरोत्तरं विशेष्यते। असिगिंश्च एकावल्या द्वितीये मेदे पूर्वपूर्वैः परस्य परस्योपकार: क्रियमाणो यधेकरूप: स्यात्तदायमेव मालादीपकशब्देन व्यवहियते प्राचीनैः । .. एवं च दीपकालक्कारप्रकरणे प्राचीनैरस्य लक्षणोद्दीपकविशेषोऽ्यमिति न भ्रमितव्यम्। तस्य (दीपकस्य) सादृश्यगर्भतायाः सकलालङ्कारिकसिद्धत्वात्। इह च शृद्गलावयवानां पदार्थानां साटृश्यमेव नास्तीति कथंकारं दीपकतावाचं श्रद्दधीमहि। तेषां प्रकृताप्रकृता- त्मकत्वविरहाच्।" R. G. p. 464.

Examples of एकावली are :- देशः समृद्धनगरो नगराणि च सप्तभूमि- निलयानि। निलया: सलीलललना ललनाश्चात्यन्तकमनीयाः॥ वाभटालं. IV. 137; नाकुसुमस्तरुरस्मिभ्नघाने नामधूनि कुसुमानि। नालीनालिकुलं मधु नामपुरकाणमलि- वलयम्।। रुद्रट VII. 111.

X. 79 सार. SÂHITYADARPAŅA, 265

48 सार: (Climax.) When the things to be described gradually rise in excelle- nce, there is सार. An example is राज्ये सारं etc. (p. 53, 11.25-26). This is Rudrata VII. 97. राज्ये ['स्वाम्यमात्यश्च राष्ट्र च दुर्ग कोषो बलं सुहद्। एतावदुच्यते राज्यं' इति कामन्दकोक्त (I.16.) सप्ताङ्गयुक्ते राज्ये ] सारम् (श्रष्ठं, 'सारो बले स्थिरांशे च न्याय्ये कीबं वरे त्रिषु' अमर० III. 3. 171) (वस्तु) वसुधा, वसुधायामपि पुरं (सारं वस्तु), पुरे सौधम् (राजसदनम्, सुंधालेपोऽस्यास्तीति), सौधे तल्पं (श्रेष्ठम्), तल्पे (तल्पवर्तिषु सर्वेषु वस्तुषु) वराङना अनङ्गसर्वस्वम् (कामस्य सर्वस्वं सर्वस्वरूपा) (श्रेष्ठा). Here each 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 HR (which corresponds here to 'Anti-climax') is "तृणालघुतरस्तूलस्तूलादपि च याचकः। वायुना कि न नीतोऽसौ मामयं प्रार्थयेदिति ॥" कुव p. 119. The figure is properly called HRT, because in it we have excellence rising by steps. The अलं. स. calls it उदार. 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 'जम्बीरश्रियमतिलंध्य लीलयेव व्यानग्रीकृतकमनीयहेमकुम्भौ। नीलाम्भोरुहनयनेऽधुना कुचौ ते स्परपेंते खल् कनकाचलेन सार्थम्॥। अत्र पूर्वपूर्वावस्थाविशिष्टाभ्यां कुचाभ्यामुत्तरोत्तरावस्था- विशिष्टयोस्तयोरेवोत्कर्ष इत्येकविषयत्वम् ।'R. G. p. 465. The four figures, कारणमाला, मालादीपक, एकावली and सार are based upon agur (chain ). A question is raised by Jayaratha and Jagannatha whether the four should be separately defined or whether we should have only one figure called asr 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 विरोष and मौपम्य, by a parity of reasoning, and need not define विभावना, विभेषोक्ति, etc. o रूपक, अनन्वय etc. Vide the अलं. स. वि. p. 140 and R. G. p. 461 and p. 466.

266 NOTES ON X. 79 सार.

Examples of सार are :- जये धरित्र्याः पुरमेव सारं पुरे गृहं सदनि चैकदेशः । तत्रापि शय्या शयने वरस्त्नी रलोज्ज्वला राज्यसुखस्य सारम्॥ (बृहत्संहिता 73.1.); संसारे मानुष्यं सारं मानुष्यके च कौलीन्यम्। कौलीन्ये धर्मित्वं धर्मित्वे चापि सदयत्वम्। वाग्भटालं० IV. 127.

49 यथासंख्यम् (Relative Order). यत् उद्दिष्टानां (पदार्थानां) क्रमेण अनूद्देशः (प्रतिनिर्देशः) (तत्) यथासंख्यम् When a reference is made to objects in the same order in which they have been already mentioned, there is यथासंख्य. An example is उन्मीलन्ति etc. (p. 53, 1. 29-p. 54 1. 2). उन्मीलन्ति (विकसन्ति, वञ्जुला इति गम्यते) नखैर्लुनीहि (वन्जुलमुकुलानीति कर्म अध्याहार्यम्), वहृति (वाति, दक्षिणानिलः इति संयोज्यम्) क्षौमान्नलेन आवृणु (दुकूलस्य अञ्नलेन आ्ावृणु वारय दक्षिणानिलम्), क्रीडाकाननमाविशन्ति (कुहूकण्ठाः इति योज्यम्) वलयक्काणैः (वलयानां काणैः निनादैः) (कुहूकण्ठान्) समुत्रासय (भीतियुक्क्तान् कुरु), इत्थं सुभग त्वदीयविरहे तस्या: सखीनां मिथः (अन्योन्यं) वञ्जलदक्षिणा निलकुहूकण्ठेषु (वञ्जल: अशोक:, कुहूकण्ठः कोकिल:) साक्केतिकव्याहाराः (भवन्ति). These words are addressed by some woman to a person who is away from his beloved respecting the latter's condition. Here वज्जल, दक्षिणानिल and कोकिल are connected as agents with उन्मीलन्ति, वदति, आविशन्ति respectively and as objects with लनीहि, आवृणु, and समुत्रासय respectively. The अलं. स. defines and explains as follows :- उद्दष्टानामर्थानां क्मेणानूद्देशो यथासंख्यम् । ऊध्वं निर्दिष्टाः उदिषाः । पक्षान्निर्देशोऽनूदेशः।स च अथांत् अर्थान्तरगतः सम्बन्धश्चात्र सामर्थ्याद (वाक्यपर्यालोचनबलाद्) प्रतीयते। ऊर्ध्व निर्दिष्टानामर्थानां पश्चान्निर्दिष्टैरयैः क्रमेण सम्बन्धो यथासख्यमिति वाक्यार्थः।" pp. 148-149. Some writers like Vamana call this figure क्रम. यथासंख्य is one of those figures that occur even in the most ancient writers on rhetoric. Dandin says 'उदिष्टानां पदार्थानामनूद्देशो यथाक्रमम्। यथासंख्यमिति प्रोक्तं संख्यानं क्रम इत्यपि ॥' K. D. II. 273. Bhamaha tells us that संख्यान was the name given to this figure by the rhetorician मेधावि (रुद्र?) "यथासंख्यमथोत्प्रेक्षामलङ्कारद्वयं विदुः। संख्यानमिति मेधाविनोत्प्रेक्षाभिहिता क्वचित्॥I" II. 88. Jayaratha and Jagannatha question the propriety of calling यथासंख्य a figure of speech. What is called यथासंख्य is merely the absence of the fault called अपक्रम. The fault अपक्रम 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 रथाजशूले विभ्राणौ

xX. 79 यथासंख्य. SÂHITYADARPANA, 267

पातां व: शम्भुशार्ङ्गिणौ, S'iva being mentioned first should naturally be connected with {aT5 ( the wheel ); but it is not S'iva who bears the wheel. Therefore there is अपक्रमदोष. 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. "न चास्यालक्कारत्वं युक्तम्। दोषाभावमात्ररूपत्वात्। उद्दिष्टानां क्रमेणानुनिर्देशे ह्यक्रियमाणेऽपक्रमाख्यो दोषः प्रसज्यते । यदुक्तम् ... 'करमहीनार्थमपक्रमम्' इत्यादि। तच्च यथा 'कीर्तिप्रतापौ भवतः सूर्याचंद्रमसाविव।' दोषाभावमात्रं च नालक्कारत्वम्। तस्य कविप्रतिभात्मकविच्छित्तिविशेषत्वेनोक्तत्वात्।" अलं. स. वि. pp. 149-150. Vide R. G. p. 478. The Uddyota, while admitting the force of the above remarks, says that यथासंख्य 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. 'यद्यपि कविप्रतिभानिर्मि- तत्वस्यालङ्कारताजीवातोर्लेशतोऽपि अभावादस्य नालक्कारत्वम्। तथापि एकत्र पदे बहूना क्रमान्वये वैचित्रयादलक्कारत्वेनोक्त: ।' p. 80. Examples of यथासंख्य are :- मृगमीनसज्जनानां तृणजलसन्तोषविहितवृ- त्तीनाम्। लुब्धकधीवरपिशुना निष्कारणवैरिणो जगति ॥; करकमलवितीर्णैरम्बुनी- वारश ्पैस्तरुशकुनिकुरक्कान्मैथिली यानपुष्यत्। उत्तरराम० III; सफुरदद्जतरूप- मुत्प्रतापज्वलनं त्वां सृजतानवद्यविद्यम् । विधिना ससजे नवो मनोभूर्ुवि सत्यं सविता बृहस्पतिश्च ॥ (In the last there is विशेष also.); पञ्चेन्दुभृङ्गमातङ्- पुंस्कोकिलकलापिनः । वक्रकान्तीक्षणगतिवाणीबालैस्त्वया जिताः॥ भामह II. 90 ( quoted in the वक्रोक्तिजीवितटीका).

50 पर्याय: ( 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 पर्याय. An example of I a is स्थिता: क्षणं etc. (p. 54, ll. 6-7). This is Kumara-sam. V. 24. The verse is spoken of with reference to Parvati, who was practising austerities in order to secure S'iva as her husband. तस्याः (पार्वत्याः) पक्ष्मसु (अक्षिलोमस) क्षणं स्थिताः, (पश्चात्) ताडिताघराः (ताडितः अधरः यैः), (अनन्तरं) पयोधरो- त्सेधनिपातचूर्णिताः (पयोधरयोः स्तनयोः उत्सेधः उन्नतिः उत्सेधे निपातः तेन चूर्णिता: स्तनकाठिन्यादिति भाव:), (पश्चात्) वलीषु (उदररेखासु) स्खलिताः प्रथमोदबिन्दवः क्रमेण नार्भि प्रपेदिरे (प्राप्ताः). Here, one object, viz. first rain-drops, is represented as occupying in succession, Par- vati's eyelashes, lower lip, breasts, the dimples on the skin and the navel.

268 NOTES ON X. 80 पर्याय.

An example of II c is विचरन्ति etc. (p. 54, 1l. 8-9). यत्र तव अरिपुरे श्रोणिभरालसाः (नितम्बभरेण अलसाः अलसगमनाः) विलासिन्यः विचरन्ति तत्र वृककाकशिवा: धावन्ति. 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 ( fha ) in many places is faqg etc. ( p. 54, ll. 10-11 ). It is Kumāra- sam. V. 11. It speaks of the change that came over Parvati as regards her occupations when she began to practise penance. तया (पार्वत्या) विसष्टरागात् (विसृष्टः रागः लाक्षारसादिराग: यस्य) अधरात् निवर्तित: स्तनाङ्गरागात् (स्तनयोर्निहितानि अनुलेपनादीनि तैः) अरुणात् (रक्तीकृतात्) कन्दुकात (निवर्तित: इति योज्यम्), कुशाङ्करादानपरिक्षताङ्कुलि: (कुशाङ्कराणाम् आदानेन परिक्षता: अङ्गुलय: यस्य) करः अक्षसूत्रप्रणयी (रुद्राक्षमालायाः मित्रं) ad :. 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 kus'a grass and in telling the beads of the rosary. An example of II d is ययोरारोपित: etc. (p. 54, ll. 12-13). ते (तव) अरिवधूजनैः ययोः (स्तनयोः) तारो ('मुक्ताशुद्धौ च तारः स्यात' इत्यमरः III. 3. 166, शुद्धमुक्ताफलघटितः) ह्वारः आरोपितः तयोः स्तनयोः स्थूला अभुविन्दवः निधीयन्ते. 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 ware living, large drops of tears when they were dead. The name पर्याय given to this figure is quite significant. The word पर्याय according to the sutra of Panini 'परावनुपात्यय इन: (पा० III. 3.38; 'क्रमप्राप्तस्य अनतिपातः अनुपात्ययः । तव पर्यायः । अनुपात्यये किम्। कालस्य पर्ययः। अतिपातः इत्यर्थः । सि. कौ.) means sequence (क्रम), as the affix धन is applied to the root s with qft only when sequence is to be conveyed. In the figure, there is a sequence ( पर्याय ); i. e. the figure is पर्यायवत् and hence the figure itself is called पर्याय. Compare 'अत एव क्रमाश्रयणात्पर्याय अत्यन्वर्घमभिधानम्।' अलं. स. p. 150; 'तदूति तच्छब्दोपचारात अशांदित्वाव (अर्शभादित्वात् 1) पर्यायवान् पर्याय इत्यर्थ: ।' तरल p.305. It was said above that one thing is ( "afa ) or is made to be ( faad ) in many places or many things are or are made to be in one place. What is meant by yafa is not 'natural existence' and by 'adfa' what is meant is not 'artificial existence.' These words simply indicate that in one no causal

X. 80 पर्याय. SÂHITYADARPANA. 269

agency is mentioned, while in the other it is mentioned; e. g. in fear: au etc., no one is mentioned as making the drops of rain exist in many places, while in 'विसृष्टरागाव' etc. the hand is made to be in many places by an agent who is expressly mentioned (in the word तया). Compare प्रदीप 'प्रयोजकानिर्देश्वतन्निर्देशी भवतिकरोत्यथों। न तु स्वाभाविकत्वास्वाभाविकत्वे।'. एषु च ...... एवमन्यत् (p. 54, 1l. 14-17). In these varieties (पषु), the place (माधार) is either a collection (hence looked upon as one) or not (i. e. there are several distinct places ). संइतरूप: means संघातरूप :. For example, in the verse 'स्थिताः क्षण etc. the rain drops successively exist in the eyelashes etc., which are several distinct things (and not a collection or aggregate ). In the example विचरन्ति etc. the several objects that are to be placed somewhere ( arraq ), viz. wolves etc. (आदि includes विलासिन्य: also) exist in succession in the enemy's city, which is an aggregate (संहतरूप). क्वच्वित् आषेयमपि (संहृतरूपम् असंहृतरूपं च). In the verse 'विचरन्ति' etc. the आधेय (viz विळासिन्य: and वृकादयः) are असंहतरूप because they cannot form an aggregate, belonging, as they do, respectively to the past and the present. In the verse 'faqr' etc. the hand successively exists in many places, which form an aggregate (i.e. अधर and कन्दुक form one group and कुशाङुर and अक्षसूत्र form another ). Our author here borrows .the words of the अलं. स. 'तत्रानेकोऽसंतरूप: संवतरूपश्चेति द्विविधः । तच्च द्वैविध्यमाधाराधेयगतमिति चत्वारोस्य मेदा: ।' p. 151. अत्र च ...... परिवृत्तेः (p. 54, 1l. 17-18). The distinction between faae ( 2nd variety, where one thing exists in many places ) and qui4 ( of the first sort, viz. where one thing exists in many places ) is that in the former one thing exists in many places simultansously, while in the latter one thing exists in many places in succession. For example in 'कानने सरिदुददेशे' the king is seen in many places at the same time, while in 'ferat: g', the drops of rain exist in many places in succession and not at one and the same time. We shall deal with the di- stinction between पर्याय and परिवृत्ति in 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 successively reside in the same place must be poetical in order to constitute the figure qujq. Where one

270 NOTES ON X. 80 पर्याय.

thing naturally resides in many places in succession or many reside in one place as a matter of fact, there is no Alankara. 'यत्राधाराधेयतत्सम्बन्धक्रमेषु क्वच्िदपि कविकल्पनापेक्षा तत्रैवायमलङ्कारः। यत्र तु सर्वाशे लोकसिद्धत्वं न तत्र कश्िदलक्कार: ।' R. G. p. 481. If this were not so, the words 'यत्र पूर्व घटस्तत्राधुना पटः would constitute an example of पर्याय. Examples of पर्याय are :- नन्वाश्रयस्थितिरियं तव कालकूट केनोत्तरोत्तर- विशिष्टपदोपदिष्टा। प्रागर्णवस्य हृदये वृषलक्ष्मणोऽय कण्ठेऽधुना वससि वाचि पुनः खळानाम् II (भल्टशतक 4); निशासु भास्वत्कलनूपुराणां यः सञ्नरोऽभूदमिसारि- काणाम्। नदन्मुखोरकाविचितामिषाभिः स वाह्यते राजपथ: शिवामिः ॥ (रघु० XVI.); मकरालयस्य कुक्षौ स्थित्वा सदनेऽमृताशिनां च चिरम्। संप्रति निर्दोषे ते राजन्वदनाम्बुजे सुधा वसति॥ R. G. 51 परिवृत्तिः (Barter).

The exchange of a thing for what is (1) equal, (2) lesser or (3) greater is परिवृत्ति. सम means 'of equal value.' दख्तवा ...... मदनज्वर: (p.54, 1l. 21-22). एणाक्षी (मृगलोचना) कटाक्षं दत्त्वा मम हृदयं जगाह etc. 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 and receives the fever of love. He exchanges the heart for fever, which being dangerous, is 4 ( a thing of less value than what he gave ) ( 2 ). तस्य च ...... यश: (P. 54, ll. 24-25). This verse is cited as an example of परिवृत्ति by the अलं. स. तस्य प्रवयस: (वृद्धस्य) जटायुषः स्वर्गिणः (स्वर्ग गतस्य ) अधुना किमिव शोच्यते (किमिव शोचनीयं, न किमपीत्यथः), येन जर्जरकलेवरव्ययात् (जर्जरं जीर्णतरं कलेवरं शरीरं तस्य व्ययेन, सीतां हरता रावणेन सह युद्धे प्राणव्ययः तेन) इन्दुकिरणोज्वलं (चंद्रकिरणवच्छरुभ्रं) यशः करीतम् Here Jatayus gave up a thing of small value, viz. his shattered body, and received in return spotless fame, a thing of great value ( 3 ). परिवृत्ति is defined as विनिमय 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. Let 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 परिवृ त्त. SÂHITYADARPAŅA, 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 fafaa by our author? 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! The reply is :- Our author seems to have purposely left the word fafay undefined. We have shown above that in the first verse the strict meaning of faf is taken, but not in the second. There is a sharp conflict of opinion as regards the essentials of qfafd among writers on Rhetoric. There are two schools, one represented by Mammata and Jagannatha and the other by the Alankarasarvasva and Vamana. Our author, without following any particular school, seems to have made a compromise by accepting 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 anothor thing belonging to that person. प्रदीप says 'विनिमयो हि केनचिद्वस्तुना दत्तेन कस्यचिदादानम्', on which the Uddyota remarks 'परकीयस्य कस्यचिदादानमित्यर्थः । विनिमयपदस्य तत्रेव शक्तेः । एवमादाय दानमपि सा।' pp. 91-92. According to this view, the verse 'तस्य च प्रवयसः' etc. cited by our author, would not be an example of ufafa. The अलं. स. on the other hand says that in परिवृत्ति one 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 case cannot be dist- inguished from that variety of Paryaya where many things are successively referred to as occupying one place. That is, ac- cording to the अलं. स. there need not be two persons in परिवृत्ति. One of the examples cited by अलं. स. is 'किमित्यपास्याभरणानि यौवने धुतं त्वया वार्धकशोभि वल्कलम्। वद प्रदोषे स्फुटचन्द्रतारका विभावरी यद्यरुणाय aeud Il' aHR. V. 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 bark garments. This verse

272 NOTES ON X. 81 परिवृत्ति.

would not be an example of barter according to Mammata, as there is no real barter in it. Jagannātha sides with Mammata. Vide his remarks "अत्र परस्मै स्वकीयय्त्किचिद्वस्तुसमर्पणमिले- तावत्पर्यन्तं कक्षणे विवक्षितम, न तु स्वकीययत्किंचिद्वस्तुत्यागमात्रम्। 'किशोरभावं परिहाय रामा बभार कामानुगुणां प्रणालीम्' इत्यत्रातिव्याप्त्यापत्तेः । न चेदं लक्ष्यमेवेति वाच्यम्। पूर्वावस्थात्यागपूर्वकमुत्तरावस्थाग्रहणस्य वास्तवत्वेनानलक्कारत्वात्। एवं स्थिते 'विनिमयोऽत्र किंचित् त्यक्त्वा कस्यचिदादानम्' इत्यलक्कारसर्वस्वकृता यल्लक्षणं परिवृरे: कृतम्, यच्च 'किमित्यपास्याभरणानि यौवने धृतं त्वया वार्धकशोभि वल्कलम् इत्युदाहृतम्, तदुभयमप्यसदेव।" 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 'क्रीणन्ति प्रविकचलोचना: समन्तान्मुक्ताभिर्बदरफलानि यत्र बालाः' are not an example of परिवृत्ति; एषु दानादानव्यवहार: कविक्पित एव न तु वास्तवः । यत्र वास्तवस्तत्र नालक्कारः।' R. G. p. 482.

The distinction between पर्याय and परिवृत्ति is as follows :- In the former there is no bartar, while in the latter there is. To explain :- when, in पर्याय, 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 'ferar: ai' etc. the eyelashes, from which the drops travel on to the lip, receive nothing in return for the drops; similarly in the other examples of quiy, there is no barter intended or expressed. In uftafa, on the other hand, whether we follow the view of Mammata or of Ruyyaka, there is giving up and taking. Jatayus gave up his body in return for fame. It is for this reason that the following verse is an example of पर्याय and not of परिवृत्ति, although the word विनिमय occurs in it :- शणीबन्धस्त्यजति तनुतां सेवते मध्यभाग: पदभ्यां मुक्तास्तरलगतयः संश्रिता लोचनाभ्याम्। धत्ते वक्ष: कुचस चिवतामद्वितीयं च वक्त्रं तद्गात्राणां गुणविनिमयः कल्पितो यौवनेन ।।' बालभारत p. 7. Here शणीबन्ध is said to have given up तनुत्व 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 of a thing i. e. he intends पर्याय and not परिवृत्ति. Examples of परिवृत्ति are :- दत्त्वा दर्शनमेते मत्प्राणा वरतनु त्वया कीताः। कें तवपहरसि मनो यददासि रणरणकमेसदसत्।। रुद्रट VII. 78; नानाविषप्रह- रणैनृप संप्रहारे स्वीकृत्य दारुणनिनादवतः प्रहारान्। दृप्तारिवीरविसरेण वसुन्धरेयं निर्विप्रलम्भपरिरम्भविधिर्वितीर्णा ।I (quoted by K.P.); उरो दत्त्वामरारीणां ्येन युद्धेष्वगृह्यत। हिरण्याक्षवधाधेषु यशः साकं जयश्रिया॥ उद्ट V.32.

X 81-82 परिसंख्या. SÂHITYADARPAŅA, 273

52 परिसंख्या (Special Mention). प्रश्नात अप्रश्नतो वा अपि चेद (यदि) कथितात वस्तुनः ताटृगन्यव्यपोह: (कथितसदृशस्य अन्यस्य वस्तुनः व्यपोहः व्यवच्छेद:) शाब्द: अथवा आर्धः (भवेत) तदा परिसंख्या. 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 परिसंख्या. uftrian is one of three technical terms often met with in writings on the पूर्वमीमांसा and धर्मशाखत्र. The three terms aro विधि, नियम and परिसंख्या. They are concisely defined in the following कारिका 'विधिरत्यन्तमप्राप्ते नियमः पाक्षिके सति। तत्र चान्यत्र च प्रात्े परिसंख्येति कीत्यते ।I' तन्नवार्तिक p. 59. विधि is that which enjoins something which is not at all known from any other source; e.g. the Vedic sentence 'स्वगकामो ज्योतिष्टोमेन यजेत' is a विधि, because it enjoins something, viz. ATT, as a means of going to heaven, which. is not known from any other source. A नियम is an injunction which restricts something to one out of several possible alternatives and hence excludes the other alternatives. An exaiple is समे देशे यजेत. 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 the 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 पाक्षिकीप्राप्ति). The injunction 'समे देशे यजेत' 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 विधि and नियम? In विधि there is merely an injunction as to something not known from any other source; in नियम, one of two alternatives being possible, we are restricted to one, to the exclusion of the other. In fafa there is pure injunction of something otherwise unknown and nothing more; in fH, we are ordered to follow a special course in doing a thing known from another source. fafa performs a single function; Aqw performs two, it restricts us to one out of two possible alternatives and also excludes the other. Another example of नियम is व्रीहीन् अवहन्ति. We can separate the chaff from the grains of rice in two ways, either by peeling off with our nails, or by pounding with a pestle and mortar. The sentence वीहीन् अवहन्ति restricts us to the mortar and pestle, to the exclusion of separating the chaff with the nails. It lays down that frguaru (freeing from the chaff) 35

874 NOTES ON X. 81-82 परिसंख्या

must be brought about by अवहनन and forbids the use of nails. Vide 'नियमार्था वा श्रुतिः' पू. मी. सू. IV. 2. 24 (शबरभाष्य 'सर्वे देशाः प्राप्नुवन्ति न तु समुचयेन। यदा समः, न तदा विषमः, यदा विषमः न तदा समः । स एष सम: प्राप्तश्चापाप्तश्च। यदा न प्राप्तः स पक्षो विधि प्रयोजयति अतो विषमच्िकीर्षायामपि समो विधीयते।) and 'संस्कारे च तत्प्रधानत्वात्' पू. मी. सू. IV. 2. 26. A uftd@nT is that which restricts us to one of the many things which may be possible simultaneously and all of which accrue independently of the injunction and hence it merely serves to exclude the others. The import of परिसंख्या is therefore not injunctive at all but merely prohibitive. An example of परिसंख्या is पञ्च पञ्चनखा भक्ष्या: Hunger can be allayed by eating the flesh of hares or dogs or of any other animal ( i. e. there is युगपरप्राप्ति ). 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 etc: ). The distinction between विधि and परिसंख्या is :- A fafa enjoins upon us something otherwise unknown as in अहरह: खात्वा संध्यामुपासीत. If we do not obey this injunction we shall incur sin. In परिसंख्या 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-nailed animals. The above परिसंख्या does not lay down पञ्चपञ्चनखभक्षण just in the manner of a fafa, 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 eating of the flesh of the five and to forbid the eating of the flesh of other animals. In विधि the purpose is अत्यन्ताप्राप्तार्थप्रापणमात्र, while in परिसंख्या the purpose is purely अर्थान्तरनिषेधमात्र. The distinction between नियम and परिसंख्या is :- In the former, there is the enjoining of something and also the Aay of something else; in the latter there is merely the fa of something else. For example, in समे देशे यजेत, 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 पञ्च पञ्चनखा भक्ष्या: 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 further information the fraratr On याश्वल्क्यस्मृति I.81; the चिमर्शिनी p. 155; P. L. M. p. 28 and B.G.p.483. "अत्यन्ताप्रा/पप्रापणं विधिः। यथागिहोत्रं जुदुयात्. अष्टकाः कर्तव्या इति। पक्षे प्राप्तस्याप्राप्तपक्षान्तरप्रापण नियम: यथा समे देशे यजेतेति। ... एकस्यानेकत

X. 81-82 परिसंख्या. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 275

प्रात्तस्यान्यतो निवृत्त्यर्थमेकत्र पुनर्वचनं परिसंख्या। तथा 'पञ्च पञ्चनखा भक्ष्याः' शत्वत्र हि यदृच्छया श्वादिषु शशादिषु च भक्षणं प्राप्तं पुनः शशादिषु श्रूयमाणं नादिभ्यो निवर्तयति।' मिताक्षरा; "इह कस्यचिदर्थस्य नियमेनाज्ञातस्य विधिः क्रियमाणो यदार्थान्तरनिषेधार्थमपि पर्यवस्यति तदा नियमविधिः (नियमः । विधिः?) पुनरज्ञातज्ञापनमात्रपर्यवसित एव भवति। तेन नियमे 'ब्रीहीनवहन्ति' इत्यादावव- धातमात्रपर्यवसायित्वमेव। दलनादेरपि निषेध्यतवेन पर्यवसानात्। नापि निषेधमात्र एव तात्पर्यम्। अवघातामावे विध्यनिष्पत्तेः। सर्वप्रकारप्राप्तेर प्राप्तांशपरिपूरणस्याप्यभावे विधि: क्रियमाणोरऽर्थान्तरनिषेधमात्रार्थमेव यत्र पर्यवस्यति सा घरिसंख्या। तेन 'पञ्न पञ्चनखा भक्ष्या:' इत्यादावन्यपञ्चनखभक्षणनिषेधमात्रतात्पर्यमेव। न पुनरेतत्पञ्चनखम- क्षणकर्तव्यताऽपि। तथात्वे हि पञ्चानां पञ्चनखानामभक्षणे प्रत्यवायप्रसङ्गो नियमादस्या भेदो वा न स्याद्।" वि० p. 155. It will have been noticed from the foregoing remarks on नियम and परिसंख्या that they have one thing in common, viz., अर्थान्तरनिषेध, e. g. in 'समे देशे यजेत' 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 va araT WeT: the words are really intended to forbid the eating of other five-nailed animals ( and are not intended to lay down anything ). It is for this reason that Grammarians include परिसंख्या under नियम, as said by P.L. M. "'पञ्च पञ्चनखा भक्ष्याः' इत्यस्य नियमत्वेन भाष्ये व्यवहृतत्वात्। अन्यनिवृत्तिरूपफलेनैक्याच्च नियमषदेन परिसंख्याऽपि व्याकरणे गृह्यते इति संक्षेप: ।" p. 28. For the same reason Rhetoricians include नियम under परिसंख्या as remarked by the अलं.स. 'अत्र च नियमपरिसंख्ययोर्वाक्यवित्प्रसिद्धं लक्षणं नादरणीयमिति ख्यापनाय नियमनं परिसंख्येति सामानाधिकरण्येनोक्ति: (in the definition 'एकस्यानेकत्र प्राप्तावेकत्र नियमनं परिसंख्या')। अत एव पाक्षिक्यपि प्राप्तिरत्र स्वीक्रियते इति युगपत्सम्भावनं प्रायिकम् ।' p. 155. We shall see later on how नियम and परिसंख्या (strictly so called ) are both included under परिसंख्या by the आलक्कारिकs. When a thing, which is known from other sources ( sATOIT- ATH ), is yet 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 परिसंख्या. The special mention of a thing may by preceded by a question (I), 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 "आलक्कारिका अपि परिसंख्यालङ्कारप्रकरणे प्रमाणान्तरेण प्राप्तस्यैव वस्तुनः पुनः शब्देन प्रतिपादनं प्रयोजनान्तराभावात्स्वतुल्यान्यव्यवच्छेदं गमयतीति" P. L M. p.27; 'सा चैषा प्रश्नपूर्विका तदन्यथा वेति प्रथमं द्विधा। प्रत्येकं च चर्जनीयत्वस्य शाब्दत्वार्थत्वाभ्यां द्वैविध्यमिति चतुःप्रमेदा।' अलं. स. p.153.

276 NOTES ON X. 81-82 परिसंख्या.

An example of I a is ff aquj etc. (p. 54, 1l. 31-32). This Oocurs in K, P. and Subba. (No. 2537). आर्यचरितं सुकृतं (आयें: शिष्टैः चरितम् आचरितम् सुकृतं पुण्यकर्म), दोष:सुरापानादिः अप्रतिहतं अकुण्ठितं (सर्वगामि); धिषणा बुद्धि: 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 excluding 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 किमाराध्यं etc. सदागम :- सतामागम: the oompany of the good. Here the things to be excluded, viz. पाप, असत्समागम, इतरदेवता, धनादि respectively, are not mentioned, but left to be understood. An example of II a is भक्तिर्भवे etc. (p. 55, 1l. 6-7). भक्ति: आसक्ति: भवे शिवे न विभवे न धनादौ, व्यसनं रुचि: शास्त्रे न युवतिकामास्त्रे (युवतिरेव कामस्यास्त्रं तस्मिन्) चिन्ता (आस्था) यशसि न वपुषि (शरीरे). Here there is no question. We know from ancient writings that we should devote ourselves to the worship of God and not to that of Mammon. The express assertion भक्तिरभवे serves to ex- clude the worship of lucre, which is expressly mentioned (3-a). An example of II b is बलमार्त etc. (p. 55, 11. 8-9). This is Raghu. VIII. 31. बलं आर्तभयोपशान्तये (आर्तांनां पीडितानां भयस्य दुरीकरणाय, न तु परपीडनाय), बहु श्ुतम् (ज्ञानम्) विदुषां संमतये (संमानाय, न तु विवादाय) तस्य (दशरथस्य) विभो: (प्रभोः) न केवलं वसु (धनं) परप्रयोजनम् (परेषां प्रयोजनं यस्य परोपयोगि इत्यर्थः ) अपि (तु) गुणवत्ता (गुणगणमण्डितत्वम्) परप्रयोजना इत्यध्याहार्यम्। किमुच्यते तस्य धनं परोपयोगीति बलश्रुतादयोऽपि गुणाः परोपयोगिन: इत्यर्थः ।. 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 faw. We have seen that, in नियम, any one of two things is possible (प्राप्त ) 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 सम or विषम ground, but not सम and विषम ground at the same time; we are restrioted by the text समे देशे यजेत to level ground alone to the exclusion of विषम ground. Similarly in किमाराध्यं सदा पुण्यं, any one of the two things

X. 81-82 परिसंख्या. SAHITYADARPANA. 277

(पुण्यसेवा or पापसेवा) is possible; but it is not possible to have both of them at the same time. We are restricted to पुण्यसेवा to the exclusion of पापसेवा. For these reasons there is नियम strictly so called in this verse. The reason why this figure is called परिसंख्या is :- The two prepositions ary and uf have the sense of 'giving up, excluding' according to the sutra "अपपरी वर्जने' पा. I. 4. 88. संख्या means बुद्धि or विचार, 'चर्चा संख्या विचारणा' अमर. Therefore the word परिसंख्या means '(the mention of one thing with ) the idea of excluding another.' Compare 'कस्यच्वित्परिवर्जनेन कुत्रतित्संख्यानं वर्णनीयत्वेन गणनं परिसंख्या।' अलं. स. 153; 'परिशब्दो वर्जनार्थः। संख्या बुद्धि:। तेन वर्जनबुद्धिरिति अन्वर्था संज्ञा'। प्रभा p. 435. There is a special charm when this figure is based upon Paronomasia. An example is 'यरमिंश्च राजनि' etc. This is taken from the Kadambari (para 2) of Bana. There was mixture of qufs ( colours ) in painting ( there was no mixture of वर्णs, castes, in the community ), there was छेद (cutting) of गुणs ( strings ) in bows (but there was no lack of गुणs, merits, among the people ). It need not be said that to constitute the figure परिसंख्या, there must be some poetic charm (कविप्रतिभानिर्वर्तितत्व); or else even such expressions as पञ्च पञ्चनखा भक्ष्या, ऋतौ भार्यामुपेयात् will be examples of the figure परिसंख्या. "अन्र यत्र कविप्रतिभानिरमिता इतर- व्यावृत्तिस्तत्रालङ्कारता। यथा-'कौटिल्यं कचनिचये' इत्यत्र कौटिल्यं कविप्रतिभया एकीकृतमिति तद्द्वारा तत्प्रतियोगिक(व्या!) वृत्तिस्तन्निर्मितेति बोध्यम्।" उद्योत p.112. Examples of परिसंख्या are :- कौटिल्यं कचनिचये करचरणाधरदलेषु रागस्ते। काठिन्यं कुचयुगले तरलत्वं नयनयोर्वसति॥ रुद्रट VII. 81; किं सुखमपारतञ््यं कि धनमविनाशि निर्मला विद्या। किं कार्य सन्तोषो विप्रस्य महेच्छता राज्ञाम्। रुद्रट VII.80; यत्र वायुः परं चौरः पौरसौरभसम्पदाम्। युवानश्च कृतकोधादेव विभ्युर्वधूजनात्॥। वाग्भटालं० IV. 143. .53 उत्तरम् (Reply). यदि प्रश्नस्य उत्तरात् उन्नयः, यच्च सत्यपि (असकृत) प्रश्ने असकृत् असम्भाव्यं (अप्रसिद्धं) उत्तरम् (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 उत्तर. An example of (I) is वीक्षितुं etc. (p. 55, Il. 16-17). वीक्षितुं न क्षमा is not able to see (i. e. is blind). स्वामी 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 ?'

278 . NOTES ON' ? X. 82-83 उत्तर:

An example of (II) is का विषमा et. There are many different readings. Most editions of K. P. and the ars. H. ypad कि लद्धं जं, while the एकावली and Uddyota have कि दुल्हं Similarly many read किं दुक्खं जं for कि दुग्गेज्झं. 'का विषमा दैवगतिः, ककि लब्धव्यं जनो गुणग्राही। किं सांख्यं सुकलत्रं, किं दुर्याह्यं खलो लोकः॥' What is most hard ?- 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 असम्भाव्य (i. e. not ordinarily occurring to men ). In the first kind of J, 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 aut 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. 'sidya सकृदुत्तरस्य चारुत्वम, निबद्धप्रश्ने तु प्रश्नोत्तरयोरसकृदुपन्यासे तदिति प्राश्नः ।' R.G. p. 520. अत्र ...... परिसंख्यातो मेद: (p. 55, 11. 21). This figure must be distinguished from परिसंख्या. In परिसंख्या the express mention of a thing, which is (प्रमाणान्तरप्राप्त ) well-known from some source, serves to exclude another thing like it; while in UH, there is no idea of excluding another thing, but there is simple assertion of a thing, which is not well-known. 'aa a प्रश्नपरिसंख्यातो भेदः । तत्र हि लोकप्रसिद्धविषयस्योत्तरस्य प्रयोजनान्तराभावेनान्य- व्यपोहे तात्पर्यम्। अत्र तु निगूढविषयतया वाच्य एव तात्पर्यविश्रामः।' प्रदीप; 'न चेयं परिसंख्या व्यवच्छेद्यव्यवच्छेदकपरत्वाभावात्।' अलं. स. p.172. न चेदम् ... अङ्गीकारात् (p.55, 11. 21-22). It may be said that the first kind of उत्तर is nothing but-अनुमान, because a question is inferred from a reply. Our author replies that this is not so. There is a difference between अनुमान and उत्तर (of the first kind ). In अनुमान, both the साध्य (thing to be inferred) and the साधन (the ground of inference) are expressly mentioned; in उत्तर, the प्रश्न and उत्तर are not both mentioned; only the answer is mentioned. 'नापीदमनुमानम्। एकधार्मनिष्ठतया साध्यसाधनयोरनिर्देशात्।' K.P. X 'न चेदमनुमानं पक्षधर्मतादेरनुद्देशावः।' अलं. स. p. 172. न च ...... अजनकत्वात् (p. 53, 11. 22-23). उत्तर must be distin- guished from काव्यलिङ्. In काव्यलिङ्, a word, elause or sentence

X. 82-83 उत्तरम्. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 279

is the reason of an assertion. Here the answer does not produce the question (i.e. the answer is not a कारकहेतु of the question); it at the most suggests the question. In काव्यलिङ्, a word or sentence contains the कारकहेतु of an assertion. 'न चैतत्काव्यलिङ्गम्। उत्तरस्य ताद्रप्यानुपपत्तेः । न हि प्रश्नस्य प्रतिवचनं जनको हेतुः ।' K. P. X. Jagannatha remarks that when either the yar or sa or both the question and answer are significant, it is not necessary that there should be a number of them. 'प्रश्नोत्तरयोराकृतगर्भत्वे तावतैव चमत्कारान्नासकृदुपादानापेक्षा' R. G. p. 522. An example is किमिति कृशाऽसि कृशोदरि किं तव परकीयवृत्तान्तैः (अत्र प्रश्नेन प्रतीकारसामर्थ्य व्यंग्यम्, उत्तरेण स्वस्य पातिव्रत्यं व्यंग्यम्). The Uddyota remarks that the figure occurs also when the question is one and the answers many, as in 'किं स्वर्गादधिकसुखं बन्धुसुहत्पण्डितैः समं गोष्ठी। सौराज्यशुद्धवृत्ति सत्काव्यरसामृतं स्वादु I'; also when the question and answer are expressed in the same words ( owing to श्रेष) as in केदारपोषणरताः काशीतलवाहिनी गङ्गा। कंसं जघान कृष्णः कम्बलवन्तं न बाधते शीतम् ॥ (दाराणां पोषणे रताः के इति प्रश्नः, केदारपोषणरताः इत्युत्तरम्). Examples of उत्तर are :- एकाकिनी यदबला तरुणी तथाहमस्मद्गहे गृहपतिश्च गतो विदेशम्। कं याचसे तदिह वासमियं वराकी श्वश्र्ममान्धबधिरा ननु मूढ पान्थ ।। रुद्रट VII. 41 (quoted in अलं.स.); 'वाणिजक हस्तिदन्ताः कुतोऽस्माक व्याघ्रकृत्तयश्च। यावल्ललितालकमुखी गृहे परिसंक्रामति सुपा ।' (quoted in the K. P. X. ). 54 अर्थापत्ति: (Presumption or Necessary Conclusion ). When according to the maxim of the stick and the cake, a fact is concluded from another, there is अर्थापत्ति. अन्यार्थागम := अन्यस्य अर्थस्य आगमः आपतनं प्रतीतिरिति यावत्. The दण्डापूपिकान्याय is 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 दण्डापूपिकान्याय 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.

280 NOTES ON X. 83 अर्थापत्ति.

राम०explains 'नियतसमानन्यायात' as नियतस्य तद्वत्त्वेन निश्चितस्य समानन्यायाव तुल्यसामर्थ्यात'. Pramadadasa translates 'through a necessary connection.' What is meant by नियतसमानन्यायात् 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 eircumstances, there is अर्थापत्ति. The deriva- tion of the word दण्डापूपिका must now be explained. अपूप is a cake or a preparation of flour and ghee 'पूपोऽपूपः पिष्टकः स्यात' अमर. II. 9.48. दण्डश्च अपूपश्च दण्डापूपौ (द्वन्द्व). The affix वुन् is applied to this Dvandva compound according to the sūtra 'द्वन्द्वमनोज्ञादिभ्यश्च' पा० V. 1.133 (शैष्योपाध्यायिका, मानोजञिकम्। सि० कौ०). The affix aor causes afe, but it does not do so here. The mean- ing will be दण्डापूपयोर्भाव: Or we may explain the word in another manner. दण्डापूपौ विद्येते यस्यां नीतो सा दण्डापूपिका नीति: The possessive affix ठन् is applied to the word दण्डापूप in accor- dance with the sutra 'अत इनिठनौ' पा० V. 2. 115. Or दण्डापूपिका may be derived from दण्डापूप by the addition of the affix कन् according to the sutra 'इवे प्रतिकृतौ' पा. V. 3.96 (अश्व इव प्रतिकृतिः अश्वकः). The meaning then would be दण्डापूपौ इव प्रतिकृतिः दण्डापूपिका ( an image resembling ave and argu ). Compare the following from the अलं. स. (which is here very badly printed) :- दण्डापूपयोर्भावो दण्डापूपिका। 'दण्डमनोश्ादिभ्यश्च' (दूंद्१) इति वुञ्। पृषोदरा दित्वाच्च वृद्धयभावः। यथा अहमहमित्यादाविति केचित्। अन्ये तु 'दण्डपूपौ विद्येते यस्यां नीतौ सा दण्डापूपिका नीतिः । एवं 'अहं शक्तोऽहं शक्तोऽस्यामिति' अह्महमिकेतिवन्मत्वर्थी यष्टन्नित्याङु: (मत्वर्थीयष्ठन्नित्याङ्डुः?)"। अपरे दण्डापूपै इव दण्डापूपिकेति इवे प्रकृताविति (प्रतिकृताविति?) कनं वर्णयन्ति। p. 156. Vide the very lucid and valuable remarks of Jayaratha on this passage for further information. Jayaratha says that the first explanation of the word दण्डापूपिका is to be preferred. For मूषिकेण दण्डो ...... दण्डापूषिका, compare अलं. स. "अत्र हि मूषककर्तृकेण दण्डभक्षणेन तत्सदभाव्य- पूपभक्षणमर्थात्सिद्धम्। एवं न्यायो दण्डापूपिकाशब्देनोच्यते। ततश्च यथा दण्डभक्षणाद- पूपभक्षणमर्थायातं तद्दत्कस्यचिदर्थस्य निष्पत्तौ सामर्थ्यात्समानन्यायत्वलक्षणादर्थान्तरमा- पतति साथांपति: ।" p. 156. There are two varieties :- (1) From a fact which is प्राकरणिक there comes in one that is अप्राकरणिक ; or (II) from a fact that is अप्राकरणिक, there comes in one that is प्राकरणिक. An example of the first is हारोडयं etc. (p. 55, 1l. 29-30). मुक्तानामप्य ......... किङ्करा: When this is the condition of even those who are yar: (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 embraeing women. If even

X. 83 अर्थापत्ति. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 281

they are seen yielding to the influence of love, then nothing need be said about ordinary men. The similarity (समानन्याय) between muktas and the speakers consists in the fact that both are men. An example of the second variety is विललाप etc. (p. 55, ll. 31-32). This is Raghu. VIII. 43. अभितप्त ...... शरीरिणाम् Evon iron, when strongly heated, becomes soft, what of men ( who have no iron-like bodies) ? Here the description of iron is अप्रस्तुत. The समानन्यायत्व 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. अत्र .-. इत्यादो (p. 55, 1. 33). When the existence of similar circumstances is due to Paronomasia, there is a special charm as in the verse 'हारोयं' etc. instanced above ( where the word ymrar is Paronomastic ). न चेदमनुमानम् ...... भावात् (p56.l.1). This figure is not Anumana because the existence of similar circumstances is not of the nature of an (invariable) relation ( which is required in अनुमान). In अनुमान, there is an invariable concomitance between one thing and another (between ae and anqa ) so that where the first exists, the second is invari- ably found. In अर्थापत्ति, 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 be reached by the mouse ). Jagannatha further points out that in अनुमान, the साध्य and हेतु reside in the same thing; but this is not possible in argiqfa; the fact that follows from another does not reside in the same place as the latter. Compare अलं.स. "न चेदमनुमानम्। समन्याय्य (य!) स्य सम्बन्धरूपत्वाभावात्। असम्बन्धे चानुमानानुत्थानात्" । p. 175; "दण्डभक्षणे अपूपभक्षणं समानन्यायत्वादुचितमपि न निश्चितमेव दण्डभक्षणेडपि पृथकप्रवेशावस्था नादिना केनापि निमित्तेनापूपानामभक्षणस्यापि भावाद। अनुमानं पुनानयतमेवार्थाद-

282 .NOTES ON X. 83 अर्थापति.

थान्तरस्यापतनमित्यस्याः पृथग्भावः।" विम० p. 157; "नाप्यनुमाने (अर्थापत्तिर्नि- विशते)। आपाततोऽ (आपततोऽ?) थस्यापादकासमानाधिकरणत्वेन व्याप्यत्वपक्षधर्मत्व- योर्दू रापास्तत्वात्।" R. G. p. 486. It should be well borne in mind that the figure अर्थापत्ति is not the same as the अर्थापत्ति of the Mimansakas. अर्थापत्ति is defined by them as 'उपपाद्यज्ञानेनोपपादककल्पनमर्थापत्तिः' (अर्थापत्ति 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 qure ( the thing which has to be accounted for ) and रात्रिभोजन is the उपपादक ( the thing that accounts for fatness). The word अर्थापत्ति is applied both to the करण and the फल (the resulting knowledge). Here, the करण is उपपाधज्ञान (i e. the knowledge. of fatness ), as it leads on to the surmise. The is the उपपादकज्ञान (the surmisal of रात्रिभोजन ). Vide शाबरभाष्य vol. I p. p. 10 (B.I. edition) 'अर्थापत्तिरपि दृष्टः श्रुतो वार्थोन्यथा नोपपद्यत इत्यर्थक- रपना। यथा जीवति देवदत्ते गृहाभावदर्शनेन बहिर्भावस्यादृष्टस्य कल्पना ।'; th श्रोकवार्तिक (अर्थापत्तिपरिच्छेद 1st verse) 'प्रमाणषट्कविज्ञातो यत्रार्थो नान्यथा भवेत्। अदृष्टं कल्पयेदन्यं सार्थापत्तिरुदाहृता ॥I'. The word अर्थापत्ति, when used to denote the करण, has to be explained as a बहुव्रीहि com- pound ( अर्थस्यापत्तिर्यस्मात that from which follows another thing); when used to denote the resulting knowledge it is to be explained as a तत्पुरुष (अर्थस्य आपत्ति: the resulting of a thing). Vide for further information the V. P. pp. 315-325 (5th परिच्छेद ); the T. B. p. 51 and the T. D. It should be observed that the Naiyayikas do not regard अर्थापत्ति as a separate प्रमाण, but include it under केवलव्यतिरेकि अनुमान. Compare "नन्वर्थापत्तिरषि प्रमाणान्तरमस्ति पीनो देवदत्तो दिवा न भुंक्ते इति दृष्टे श्रुते वा पीनत्वान्यथानुपपत्त्या रात्रिभोजनमर्थापत्त्या कल्प्यत इति चेन्न देवदत्तो रात्रौ भुंक्ते दिवाऽभुजानत्वे सति पीनत्वादित्यनुमानेनैव रात्रिभोजनस्य सिद्धत्वात्" T. D. The question may be asked :- What is the point of similarity between the अर्थापत्ति of the rhetoricians and the araiufd of the Mimansakas? The answer is :- in the अर्थापत्ति 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 other things when heated ( i. e. afflicted) should melt. In the अर्थापत्ति of the मीमांसकs also, when the truth or existence

X. 83 अर्थापत्ति. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 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 रात्रिभोजन in order to account for the fatness of देवदत्त who takes no food by day. The difference between the aruiqfa of the Alankarikas and that of the Mimansakas is as follows :- In. the ariufa 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 अर्थापत्ति of the Alankarikas. The पीनत्व of aaaw taking no food by day cannot be explained without supposing रात्रिभोजन on his part; but the melting of iron does not require the melting of ( the hearts of ) men to explain itself. 'नेयं वाक्यवित्संमतायामर्थापत्तौ निविशते। आपादकस्यार्थस्यापतितमर्थ विनाऽनुपपत्तेरत्राभावात्।' R. G. p. 486. Dandin, Bhamaha, other ancient writers and Mammata do not admit अर्थापत्ति as a separate figure. Uddyota says that it is included under अनुमान or अतिशयोक्ति Examples of अर्थापत्ति are :- पशुपतिरपि तान्यहानि कृच्छादगमयदद्रिसु- तासमागमोत्कः। कमपरवशं न विप्रकुर्युर्विभुमपि तं यदमी स्पृशन्ति भावाः ॥ कुमारसं० VI. 95; स्त्रीणामशिक्षितपटत्वममानुषीषु सन्दृश्यते किमुत या: प्रतिबोधवत्यः। शा० V; अलङ्कारः शङ्काकरनरकपालं परिकरो विशीर्णांङ्को भृङ्गी वसु च वृष एको गतवयाः । अवस्थेयं स्थाणोरपि भवति सर्वामरगुरोविधौ वक्रे मूर्ि प्रभवति वयं के पुनरमी॥ (quoted in the अलं. स. with the remark अत्र 'विधौ वक्रे इति श्रिष्टम्.' The word विधा is the loc. sing of विधि 'fate' or विधु 'moon').

55 विकल्प: (Alternative). When there is an ingenious or striking opposition of two things of equal force, there is विकल्प. An example is नमयन्तु etc. ( p. 56, 1. 3 ). This is borrowed from the अलं. स. p. 158. 'Let them ( i. e. the enemies ) bend their heads or their bows; let them make ( our ) commands or their bow-strings their ear-ornaments'. अत्र ...... सम्भाव्यमानत्वात् (p. 56, ll. 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 impossible to resort to both peace and war at the same time ( for the same enemy ). This opposition ( : ) terminates in leading one to resort to one of the alternatives (एकपक्षाश्रयणे पर्यवसानं यस्य). शिरोनमन and धनुर्नमन are here of equal force, beeause they are represented (by the speaker ) as alike through a pride of his own excellence. राम explains स्पर्धया सम्भाव्यमानत्वात

284 NOTES ON X. 84 विकल्प.

as 'वक्तः स्पर्धाजन्यसम्भावनाविषयत्वादित्यर्थः' and we translate above accordingly. We think it is possible to put another construc- tion upon the words. तुल्यबलत्वं ...... सम्भाव्यमानत्वात 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.

चातुर्ये च ...... इत्यत्रापि (p. 56, l1. 6-7). The ingenuity of the speech consists in its implying a comparison. rao seems to have read the definition as विरोधश्चारुतार्थतः He notices two other readings 'विरोधश्चान्तरा यतः' and विरोधश्चातुरी यतः. The esse- ntials of विकल्प 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. The text 'यवैव्रीहिभिर्वा यजेत' lays down an option; but it is not an example of the figure, for there is no arq implied in it. In the above example of the figure विकल्प there is resemblance between the two, based upon the property H4 ( which is common both to the head and the bow ), and a special charm in the representation that both alternatives are equally acceptable. Similarly in 'a नीतिनिपुणा यदि वा स्तुवन्तु लक्ष्मीः समाविशतु गच्छतु वा यथेष्टम्। अद्यैव वा मरणमस्तु युगान्तरे वा न्याय्यात्पथः प्रविचलन्ति पदं न धीराः ॥' there is no विकल्प, as there is no implied resemblance. Vide the अलं. स. "विरुद्धयो स्तुल्यप्रमाणविशिष्टत्वाच्तुल्यबलयोरेकत्र युगपत्प्राप्तौ विरुद्धत्वादेव यौगपद्यासम्भवे विकल्पः । औपम्यगर्भत्वाच्चात्र चारुत्वम्। यथा 'नमन्तु शिरांसि धनूंषि वा' ... इत्यादि। अत्र प्रतिराजकार्ये नमने शिरसां धनुषां च तुल्यप्रमाणशिष्टत्वम्। सन्धिविग्रहौ चात्र क्रमेण तुल्यप्रमाणे। प्रतिराजविषयत्वेन स्पर्धया द्वयोरपि सम्भाव्यमानत्वाद। द्वौ चेमौ रिर्द्धाविति तयोरयुगपत्प्रवृत्ति प्राप्नतश्चात्र (विरुद्धाविति नास्ति तयोर्युगपत्प्रवृत्ति: प्राप्नवतश्च युगपत्प्रवृत्ति प्रकारा०?) युगपत्प्रकारान्तरस्यानाशंक्यत्वात् ततश्च न्यायप्राप्तो विकल्प:।" अलं. स. p. 158.

एवं ...... चारुत्वम् (p. 56, 1l. 7-8). युष्माकं ...... तनुर्वा हरे :- This is the last pada of a verse cited by the ars. a., the first three padas being "भक्तिप्रहविलोकनप्रणयिनी नीलोत्पलस्पर्धिनी ध्यानालम्बनता समाधिनिरतैनीते हितप्राप्तये। लावण्यस्य महानिधी रसिकतां लक्ष्मीदृशोस्तन्वती". 'युष्माकं ...... तनुर्वा हरेः' may the eyes of Vishnu effect the oure of your worldly distresses, or may the body of Vishnu do so. It should be noted that here the verb कुरुतामू is 3rd per. dual of कृ (Parasmaipada, when agreeing with a) and also the 3rd person ing. ( Atmanepada, when agreeing with ag:). The adjectives

X. 84 विकल्प. SÂHİTYADARPANA. 285:

प्रणयिनी, स्पर्धिनी, तन्वती are capable of two constructions; they are neuter duals (प्रणयिनी of प्रणयिन् etc.) or feminine singulars. Therefore there is श्ेष of लिङ्ग and वचन. Wehave to explain how there is विकल्प. 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 भंक्तिप्रह्वविलोकनप्रणयिनी etc. are common to both नेत्र and तनु and therefore there is implied resemblance. All the conditions of विकल्प being satisfied, the figure is विकल्प. The figure विकलप was first defined by the author of the अलं. स. as he himself and Jayaratha inform us. 'पूर्वैरकृत विवेकोत दर्शित इत्यवगन्तव्यम्।' अलं. स. p. 159, on which जयरथ remarks 'अनेनास्य अ्न्थकृदुपज्ञत्वमेव दर्शितम् "'. 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 'उपकुर्वन्ति तं सन्तं येऽअ्द्वारेण जातुचित्। हारादिवदलङ्कारास्तेऽनुप्रासोपमादयः।' is not applicable to it. Vide उद्योत p. 29.

56 समुच्चय: (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 समुच्चय. The खले कपोतिकान्याय 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 खलेकपोतिका may be explained as follows :- खलेकपोताः is an Aluk compound according to the sutra 'इलदन्तात्सप्तम्याः संज्ञायाम्' पा० VI. 3. 9 (इलन्ताददन्ताच्च सप्तम्या अलुकू संज्ञायाम्। त्वचिसारः । सि० कौ०). The word खलेकपोतिका is formed from खलेकपोत by the affix कनू in accordance with the sutra 'इवे प्रतिकृतौ' पा० V. 3.96 खलेकपोताः इव प्रतिकृति: खलेकपोतिका). ३०

286 NOTES ON X. 84-85 समुचय.

An example of (I) is ver etc. ( p. 56, 1l. 15-18 ). These words are uttered by some one who is separated from his be- loved. धीर समीर (वायो) ते (तव) जननं (जन्म) चन्दनक्ष्माभृतः (चन्दन- पर्वतात् मलयाचलात्) (तव) दाक्षिण्यं (दक्षिणदिग्भवत्वम्; ऋज्वाशयत्वम्) जगदुत्तरम् (जगति उत्तरं श्रेष्ठम्), (तव) गोदावरीवारिमि: परिचयः, त्वमपि (एवंगुणविशिष्टोऽपि) चेत मे (मम) प्रत्यङ्गं उद्दामदावाभ्निवत् (प्रचण्डारण्यव- ह्िवत्) इह दहसि (तर्हि) अयं मत्तः मलिनात्मकः (मलिनः आत्मा यस्य) बनचरः कोकिल: किं वक्ष्यते (किमुक्तो भविष्यति मया). मच्तोऽयं ...... कोकिल: What shall be said by me to this black cuckoo, wild and intoxicated as he is? When the wind, which comes from the Malaya mountain, which is pre-eminently af&rr ( southern, gentle ) and which is intimately associated with the holy and cool waters of the Godavari, causes burning, what of the cuckoo who is मत्त, वनचर aud मलिन (it need not be said that the कोकिल will cause aIE )? To a lover in separation, the southern wind, sandal wood etc. appear hot; to all others they are delightful. मत्र ...... मुपादानम् (p. 56, 11. 19-20). Here, although there exists 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. अत्र सर्वेषामपि ...... दसदयोग: (p.56, ll. 20-21 ). 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 मत्त, वनचर and मलिन are combined, we have a combination of bad things. It should be noted that many divide the first kind of agaq into three varieties, सदोग: असदोग: and सदसदयोग :; s अलं.स. p. 161. In the verse 'et' etc. our author exemplifies the first two of the three sub-varieties. In that verse, there is argivfa also.

An example of सदसद्योग is 'शशी' etc. This occurs in the नीतिशतक of भर्नृहरि. स्वाकृते :- शोभना आकृतिर्यस्य तस्य. दुर्गत.दरिद्रः. 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 समुच्चय. The word सदसद्योग may be explained in two ways :- I सन्तश्च असन्तश्च (द्वंद्व); तेषां योग: a combination of good things with other things that are bad; or II सन्तश्च ते असन्तश्च (कर्मधारय) तेषां योग: 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 समुच्चय. SAHITYADARPAŅA. 287

इह कच्विदाड :......... इति (p. 56, ll. 27-28). The first explan- ation of सदसद्योग is resorted to by some who say that in 'सशी 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 ete. with the as. II. The concluding words of the stanza are against the above construc- tion. All the seven objects are declared to be es; so the moon etc. cannot be said to be शोभन. III. If we take this in- terpretation of the word सदसद्योग, we shall commit the fault of सहचरभिन्नता. A combination of good things with bad things, instead of being an ornament, is a fault. An example of सहचरभिन्नता given by मम्मट is 'श्रुतेन बुद्धिर्व्यसनेन मूर्खता मदेन नारी सलिलेन निम्नगा। निशा शशाङ्केन धृतिः समाधिना नयेन चालइक्रियंते ar I' K. P. VII p. 401 (Va). In this verse, excellent things such as ga are combined with things quite dissimilar, viz., व्यसन (vice) etc.

अन्ये तु ...... प्रक्रमादिति (p. 56, 1. 28-p. 57, 1.3). Others again take the second explanation of सदसद्योग (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 शशी, कामिनी, सरो, मुखम्, प्रभु: and सज्जन: are good in themselves, but become bad as they are associated with घूसरत्व, गलितयावनत्व etc. We may say the same about नृपाङ्गणगतः खल :; a wicked man is bad in himself, but नृपाङ्गण is good. But as there is सहचरमिन्नता, this last may not be taken and the figure may be constituted by the first six only. अत्र हि ..... विधायित्वम्. The special strikingness consisting in pointing out that such states as dimness etc. are extremely improper when they come upon 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 'wafar ug ete.'. This furnishes a reply to those who hold the first view. The clause 'नृपाङ्गणगतः खलः' bears a fault, on account of its violating the uniformity of description. Everywhere, the object qualified ( such as शशी, कामिनी etc.) is good in itself ( the qualification, such as दिवसधूसरः, being bad ), while here the विशेष्य, खल, is bad and the विशेषण is good. Thus

288 NOTES ON X. 84-85 समुचय,

there is the fault called ayca". Therefore according to this second view the proper example of uyay is furnished by the first six instances, the seventh नृपाङ्गणगतः खलः 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 better of the two. Vide अलं. स. p. 162. इह च ...... इति मेद: (p. 57, ll. 4-5). The figure समाधि 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 समुच्चय and समाधि. 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 HHrfa, 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 difference may be put thus :- I. In aay all the causes begin to operate at once, just as th pigeons all alight at the same time; while in समाघि, when one cause has begun to operate, another comes in by chance and not at the same time as the first; II. In समुच्चय, although there are many causes operating to produce the same effect, there is no specialty as regards the effect ; while in समाधि, the operation of another cause by chance facilitates the production of the effect. "समाधौ हि एकेन कार्ये निष्पाद्यमानेऽप्यन्येनाकस्मिकमापतता कारणेन सौकर्यादिरूपोऽतिशयो यत्र सम्पाधते स विषयः । अर्सिमिंस्तु समुच्चयप्रभेदे यत्रैककार्य सम्पादयितुं युगपदने के खले कपोता इवाहमहमिकया सम्पतन्ति कार्यस्य च न कोऽप्यतिशयः सः।" R. G. p. 490. The काकतालीयन्याय 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

*uytha is a fault and means 'a breach of the unifor- mity or regularity of expression'. भग्न: प्रक्रमः प्रस्तावः यस्य तत् भग्नपकमं तस्य भाव: 'उद्देश्यप्रतिनिर्देश्यभावः प्रक्रमस्य विषयः' एका० p. 168. 3ET means 'mention or statement of a word, affix, pre- position, tense etc. for the first time' and प्रतिनिर्देश is the repetition of these for some purpose. An example is arecai महिषा निपानसलिलं शडर्मुद्दुस्ताडितं छायाबद्धकदम्बकं मृगकुलं रोमन्थमम्यस्यतु। विश्रब्धं क्रियतां वराहततिभिर्मुस्ताक्षतिः पल्वले विश्रामं लभतामिदं च शिथिलज्याबन्ध- मसद्नुः॥ श्ा. II. Here गाहन्ता and अभ्यस्यतु are in the Active voice, but क्रियता is in the Passive. Therefore there is भग्नप्रक्रमत्व.

x. 84-85 समुच्चय. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 289

killed it. The maxim is therefore used to illustrate any thing that occurs purely by chance. This maxim is a very old one, as it is explained even by Patañjali. Vide f. zft. p. 22 for a lucid grammatical explanation of the word. The चि. मी. quotes the Mahabhashya and कैयट's gloss on it. "यदाह भगवान्भा व्यकार: 'एवं तर्हि द्वाविमाव्थो काकागमनमिव तालपतनमिव काकतालं काकतालमिव काकतालीयमिति'। तच्च विवृतं कैयटेन 'तत्र काकागमनं देवदत्तागमनस्योपमानम् (in the sentence यद्देवदत्तस्य चौरः समागमः, यच्चास्य तैर्वधः कृतः तदेतत्सर्व काकतालीयम्)। तालपतनं दस्यूपनिपातस्य। तालेन तु काकस्य यो वधः स देवदत्तस्य दस्युना वधस्योपमानमिति।" चि. मी. p. 22. Vide महाभाष्य On पा० V.3. 106 ( Vol. II, p. 429 Kielhorn ).

अरुणे च ... ... क्रिययोः (p. 57, 11. 6-7). These words are addressed by a friend to the heroine. तरुणि, तव नयने अरुणे (आरक्ते) जाते इत्याध्याहार्यम्, प्रियस्य मुखं च मलिनम् ; सखि, तव मुखं आनतं अस्य अन्तरे (हृदि) स्मरज्वलनः ज्वलित :. In the first half there is the simultaneity of two qualities (viz. अरुणत्व and मलिनत्व) 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 bashfulness), 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 'कलुषं च' (p. 57, 11. 9-10). तव चक्षुः (प्रकृत्या) सितपङ्केरुहसोदरत्रि (श्वेतकमलसदृशकान्ति) अहितेषु शत्रुषु अकस्मात् कलुष (कोपेन रक्ततं) च । महीपतीन्द्र, तेषां (शत्रूणां) वपुषि आपदां कटाक्षैः पतितं च. Here there is यौगपद्य of the quality (कलुषत्व) and the action viz. falling. The meaning is :- No sooner do the eyes of the king grow red through anger, than his enemies incur misfortunes.

धुनोति ...... दृश्यते (p.57, 1l. 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 समुच्य, गुणs, क्रियाs or गुणक्रियाs must be seen simultaneously in different places; but this is not so. Although the figure occurs more frequently when there is वैयधिकरण्य, still, the

290 NOTES ON X. 84-85 समुचय.

यौगपद् of 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 यौगपद्य of two actions (धुनोति and aga) in the same person ( viz., the king). These words are directed against Rudrata, who says that this variety of समुच्चय (i. e. the यौगपद्य of गुणक्रिया:) occurs only when a number of things occur in different places. 'वयधिकरणे वा यस्मिन्गुणक्रिये चैककालमेकस्मिन्। उपजायेते देशे समुच्चयः स्यात्तदन्योऽसौ ॥' Rudrata VII. 27. न चात्र दीपकम् ...... मूलत्वाभाव: (p.57, 1l. 12-14). It may be said that in some examples of समुच्चय there is really दीपक; as for example in ुनोति etc. where two actions are connected with one agent (thus there is कारकदीपक). Our author replies :- All these examples of aa due to the simultaneity of qualities and actions are invariably founded upon अतिशयोक्ति consisting in the inversion of the sequence of cause and effect; while दीपक is not founded upon अतिशयोक्ति. In the verse 'कलुषं a,' it is represented that calamities befall the enemies the moment the king's eye grows red. Here the cause ( कलुषत्व) and the effect (आपत्पतन) are spoken of as taking place at the same time, against the general rule that an effect follows its cause. Similarly in 'धुनोति etc.' We must distinguish between समुच्चय and पर्याय. In समुचय there is यौगपद्य, while in पर्याय, many things reside in one place in succession (and not at the same time). समुच्चय must also be distinguished from w4. In the former, there is a combina- tion of causes ( whether good or bad ), while in HH, two things, not represented as the causes of anything, are spoken of as being quite suitable to one another. 'समुच्चये सतोरसतोर्वा कारणयोः समुच्चयः, अत्र त्वकारणयोरपि तयोर्योगस्यौचित्याभिधानमिति विशेषः ।' उद्योत p. 120. Examples of समुच्चय are :- I. उमा वघूर्भवान् दाता याचितार इमे वयम्। वरः शम्भुरलं ह्वेष त्वत्कुलोद्भूतये विधिः॥ कुमारसं० VI.82; समुत्पत्तिः पझारमणपदपझ्मामलनखान्निवास: कन्दर्पप्रतिभटजटाजूटभवने। अथायं व्यासङ्ग: पतित- जननिस्तारणविधेन कस्मादुत्कर्षस्तव जननि जागर्ति जगतः ॥। R. G. p. 491. II. प्रादुर्भवति पयोदे कज्जलमलिनं बभूव नभः।रक्तं च पथिकहृदयं कपोलपाली मृगीटृशः पाण्डुः॥ R.G. p. 490; अयमेकपदे तया वियोग: प्रियया चोपनतः सुदुःसहो मे। नववारिधरोदयादहोभिर्भवितव्यं च निरातपत्वरम्यैः॥ विक्रमोर्वशीय IV. 57 समाधि: (Facilitation). When what is to be accomplished becomes easy through the accidental operation of another thing, there is समाधि.

X. 86 समाधि. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 291

An example is मानमस्या: etc. (p. 57, 11. 17-18). This is K.D. II. 299. अस्याः (मानिन्याः) मानं निराकर्तु (दूरीकर्तु) पादयोः पतिष्यतो मे उपकाराय धनगर्जितम् दिष्ट्या (भाग्येन) उदीर्णम् (उद्गतम्). Here the ars 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 समाधि given to the figure is significant. समाधि is equivalent to सम्यग् आधि: (आधानं करणम्) 'accomplishing a thing well.' 'केनचित्कर्तुमुपक्रान्तस्य कारणान्तरव्यतिकरतः सौकर्य सम्यगाधीयते इति यथार्थाभिधान: समाधिनामायमलक्कारः।' एका p. 315. समाधि has been above distinguished from समुच्चय. भोज defines समाधि differently 'समाधिमन्यधर्माणामन्यत्रारोपणं विदुः। निरुद्भेदोथ सोन्नेद: स द्विधा परिपठ्यते ॥' सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण 4.32; Dandin speaks of समाधि as a गुण 'अन्यधर्मस्ततोन्यत्र लोकसीमानुरोघिना। सम्यगाधीयते यत्र स समाधि: स्मृतो यथा ॥ कुमुदानि निमीलन्ति कमलान्युन्मिषन्ति च।। काव्या I. 93-94.

58 प्रत्यनीकम् (Rivalry). यदि रिपोः प्रतीकारे अशक्तेन तदीयस्य (रिपुसम्बन्धिनः कस्यत्विद् दुर्बलख् वस्तुनः ) तिरस्कार: तस्यैव (रिपोरेव) उत्कर्षसाधक: (क्रियते) तदा प्रत्यनीकम्. When somebody unable to avenge himself on his enemy is represented as doing harm to somebody else connected with the enemy, which simply results in proving the enemy's superiority, there is प्रत्यनीक. An example of प्रत्यनीक is 'मध्येन ete.' (p.57,ll. 22-23). तनुमध्या (ललना) (स्व)मध्येन मे मध्यं जितवती इति (हेतोः) अयं हरि: (सिंहः) अस्या: कुचकुम्भनिमौ (कुचकुम्भसदृशौ) इभकुम्भौ (करिकुम्भौ) भिनत्ति. 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 (तदीय) indirectly, because they are connected with the breasts ( by the relation of similarity ), which are themselves connected with the woman by अवयवावयविभावसम्बन्ध. 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 पत्यनीक.

The name प्रत्यनीक may be explained as follows :- अनीक means an army. प्रत्यनीक means a representative or deputy of an army. Just 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 प्रत्यनीक is applied by लक्षणा to the figure. The gataa is the conveying of the superiority of the antagonist. 'अनीकं सैन्यं तस्य प्रतिनिघिः प्रत्यनीकम्। तत्सादृश्यादलङ्कारोपि प्रत्यनीकमिति व्यपदेशमलभत। यथा अनीकमभिभवितुमनीश्वरेण केनापि तत्प्रतिनिधिभू- तमन्यद्वयामोहादमिभूयते तथात्र बलवति परिपन्थिनि तदीयमल्पबलं कोपि परिपन्थय- तीत्यर्थः । अत्र च प्रत्यर्थिप्रकर्षः प्रयोजनम्।" एका० 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 'त्वं विनिर्जितमनोभवरूपः सा च सुन्दर भवत्यनुरक्ता। पश्चभिर्युगपदेव शरैस्तां तापयत्यनुशयादिव काम: ॥'. 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 प्रत्यनीक is the same as हेतूत्प्रेक्षा. In the verse 'ned' 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 हेतूत्प्रेक्षा here. Uddyota replies to this by saying that, although there is cdanr, 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 प्रत्यनीक are :- रे रे मनो मम मनोभवशासनस्य पादाम्वुजद्द- यमनारतमामनन्तम्। किं मा निपातयसि संसृतिगर्तमध्ये नैतावता तव गमिष्यति पुत्रशोक:॥ R.G. p. 494; यस्य किञ्चिदपकर्तुमक्षमः कायनिग्रद्गृहीतविग्रह्यः। कान्तवक्त्रसदृशाकृति कृती राहुरिन्दुमधुनापि बाधते॥ शिशु० XIV. 78. 59 प्रतीपम् ( The Converse). प्रसिद्धस्य उपमानस्य उपमेयत्वप्रकल्पनम्, उपमानस्य निष्फलत्वामिधानं वा प्रंतीपमिति कथ्यते. (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 ydlv.

X. S7-88 प्रतीप. SÂHITYADARPAŅA, 293

An example of (I) is 'यत्त्वन्नेन्र' etc., which was cited above as an example of काव्यलिङ्ग. इन्दीवर ( blue lotus) is well-known as an उपमान of the eyes of women, as in नेत्रे इन्दीवरेण सदृशे. But here इन्दीवर is made an उपमेय by being compared to the eyes in the words 'त्वन्नेत्रसमानकान्ति (त्वन्नेत्रेण समाना कान्तिर्यस्य) इन्दीवरम्'. 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 thing that is well-known as an 3ywra. It is a general rule that the squra is superior in excellence, while the उपमेय is inferior. But sometimes a well-known उपमान is turned into an उपमेय to convey the idea that it is really inferior to what is generally regarded as the उपमेय (and therefore as inferior). Similarly in 'यत्त्वन्नेत्र etc.,' the moon and राजहंस (well- 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 प्रदीप 'यच्चोपमानतया प्रसिद्धस्योपमेये तस्माद्विशेषविवक्षया अनादरार्थमुपमेयभावः कल्प्यते, तदुभयरूपं प्रतीपम्।' An example of (II) is 'तद्वक्त्रं' etc. (p. 57, 1.28-p.58, 1. 2). This is बालरामायण II. 17. यदि तत् वक्त्रं (वर्तते) (तहि) शशिकथा (शशिनः कथा प्रशंसा, अथवा शशिविषयकः आलापः) मुद्रिता (समाप्तिं गता), सा धुतिः चेत् हा हेम (कनकं शोचनीयं जातमित्यर्थः), यदि तत् चक्षु: कुवलयैः हा रितम् (गतम्, रि गतौ तुदादि:, अथवा हारितमिति एकं पदं), तत् स्मितं चेत् का सुधा (अमृतम्), यदि ते भ्रवौ धिकू कन्दर्पधनुः, किं वा बडु ब्रमहे, यत्सत्यं वेधसः (ब्रह्मणः) सर्गक्रमः (सृष्टिविधिः, सृष्टिसरणिः) पुनरुक्तवस्तुविमुखः. तद्वक्त्रं ... कथा-When there is that face, all talk about the moon is stopped ( closed ). हा रितं कुवलयैः The lotuses are gone, or (if we take arfta as one word) 'the lotuses are lost'. राम० explains the last line as 'वेधसः सर्गक्मः पुनरुक्त्तवस्तुहीनः इति यद्गीयते तत्सत्यम्. We think that राम० has missed the spirit of the verse and that we need not take mua as undertsood. The last line must be regarded as ironical. यत्सत्यं etc. to tell the truth, Brahma's method of creation is such that it avoids superfluities. Here it is represented that the face etc. ( the syys ) 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. Compare ar. स.'उपमेयस्यैवोपमानभारोद्वहनसामर्थ्यादुपमानस्य कैमर्थक्येन (तव्यापारस्योपमेयेनैव कृतत्वादनुपयोगेनेत्यर्थः । विम०) आक्षेप आलोचनं क्रियते तदेकं प्रतीपम्।' p. 165.

294 NOTES ON X. 87-88 प्रतीप.

It should be noticed that both these varieties of ydty are based upon resemblance. If something is condemned as superfluous on account of the existence of another, and there is no resemblance between the two things, there is no ydty. It may be asked :- what is the difference between syar and sdty? The reply is :- in both there is no doubt resemblance; but in प्रतीप there is either the condemnation of the उपमान as superfiuous 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 उपमा. 'उपमाप्रकारत्वं चानयोन वाच्यम्। उपमानस्याक्षेपादुपमेयकल्पनाच्च। न हि तत्र (उपमायां) तदस्तीति ततोऽनयोः सुप्रत्यय एव भेदः । ..... एवमौपम्यमन्तरेण नैतदलङ्कारद्वयं (प्रतीपमेदौ) भवतीत्यवगन्तव्यम्।" विम० p. 165. The reason why the figure is called ydty is as follows :- udty means 'against'. It literally means 'against the current.' The word is formed according to the sutra 'धन्तरुपसर्गेभ्योऽप ईत्' पा० IV. 3.97. The name प्रतीप is given to this figure because in it the उपमेय becomes opposed to i.e. is an antagonist.(a rival) of the Upamana. 'उपमानप्रतिकूलत्वादुपमेयस्य प्रतीपमिति व्यपदेशः ।' अलं. स. p. 165.

This figure must be distinguished from व्यतिरेक. In प्रतीप as well as in व्यतिरेक, the उपमेय is seen to be superior; but in the former the superiority of the उपमेय 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 व्यतिरेक, the उपमेय is not turned into the उपमान or vice versa and the charm lies in the conveying of the super- iority of the उपमेय over the Upamana by the mention of the possession of certain qualities by the Upameya, which are not possessed by the Upamana ( i. e. ayra also is intended in व्यतिरेक, while in प्रतीप only साधर्म्य). "उपमानादुपमेयस्य गुण- विशेषवत्वेन उत्कर्षो व्यतिरेकः । प्रतीपादिवारणाय तृतीयान्तं वैधर्म्यपरम्। तत्र (प्रतीपे) चोपमानतामात्रकृत एवोत्कर्षः, न वैधर्म्यकृतः । साधर्म्यस्यैव प्रत्ययाद। अधिकगुणवत्त्वमात्रम्, उपमानगतापकर्षमात्रं वा न व्यतिरेकस्वरूपम्। तयोरुपमेयो- त्कर्षाक्षेपमन्तरेणासुन्दरत्वात्।" R. G. p. 347. उक्त्वा ·..... दूच्चिरे (p. 58, ll. 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 sunr of another ), it also is termed by some ydly. This is a reference to the views of Mammata and Ruyyaka. When an object,

X. 88-89 प्रतीप. SÂHITYADARPANA. 295

which did not before experience the state of being an Upamana on account of the possession of such pre-eminent qualities that nothing approaches it, is yet made to assume the state of an Upamana, there is प्रतीप. Compare 'यत् असामान्य गुणयोगान्नोपमानभावमपि अनुभूतपूर्वि, तस्य तत्कल्पनायामपि भवति प्रतीपमिति प्रत्येतव्यम्।' K.P.X .; "उत्कृष्टगुणत्वाद्यदुपमानभावमपि न सहते तस्योपमाभाव. वत्कल्पितं (मानभावकल्पने?) प्रतीपमेव।" अलं. स. p. 167, on which जयरथ remarks 'यद्यपि प्रकृष्टगुणेनोपमानेन भाव्यं न्यूनगुणेन चोपमेयेन, तथापीदृशप्रकृष्ट- गुणत्वं विवक्षितं यदपेक्षया न्यूनगुणमपि उपमेयं न सम्भवीत्यत्र पिण्डार्थः ।' An example of this is 'अहमेव' etc. तात (इति सानुकम्पसम्बोधनम्) हालाइल, अहमेव सुदारुणानां गुरुः (श्रेष्ठः) इति मा स्म दृप्यः (मा गर्व कृथा:); ननु सन्ति (यतः सन्त्येव) अस्मिन्भुवने भूय: (पुनः) भवादृशानि (भवत्सदृशानि ) दुर्जनानां वचनानि. Here हालाइल 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. हालाहल is turned into an उपमान). The result is that, although the words of wicked men are not equal to हालाहल in their deadliness, they approach हालाइल, 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 गुरु: सुदारुणानाम्). If the pre-eminence be not declared, then there is no प्रतीप, as in 'ब्रह्मेव' etc. Vide the interesting remarks of Jagannātha on this figure, R. G. pp. 496-497. Examples of प्रतीप are :- तस्याश्चेन्मुखमस्ति सौम्यसुभगं किं पार्वणेनेन्दुना सौन्दर्यस्य पदं दृशौ यदि च ते कि नाम नीलोत्पलैः । कि वा कोमल- कान्तिभि: किसलयैः सत्येव तत्राधरे ही धातुः पुनरुक्तवस्तुरचनारम्मेष्वपूर्वो ग्रहः।।' (This bears a close resemblance to the verse तद्क्त्रं etc. This is quoted by जयरथ) ; गर्वमसंवाह्यमिमं लोचनयुगलेन वहसि किं भद्रे। सन्तीदृशानि दिशि दिशि सरःसु ननु नीलनलिनानि॥ रुद्रट VIII. 78. 60 मीलितम् ( Lost). केनचित तुल्यलक्ष्मणा (तुल्यं लक्ष्म चिह्नरूपो धर्मः यस्य) (वस्तुना) वस्तुन: गुप्ति: (निगूहनम् ) मीलितम्. When something is concealed ( covered up ) by another possessing a similar characteristic, there is मीलित. The thing having a common characteristic ( or rather the characteristic itself, the चिह्रूप धर्म ) may be inherent (a), or adventitious (b). An example of (a) is 'लक्ष्मी etc.' (p. 58, 1l. 13-14). इरे: वक्षःस्थले नीलोत्पलाभया (नीलोत्पलसदृश्या) भासा (कान्त्या) ग्रस्तं (तिरोहितं)

296 NOTES ON X. 89 मीलित.

लक्ष्मीवक्षोजकस्तूरीलक्ष्म (लक्ष्म्याः वक्षोजौ स्तनौ तयोः कस्तूरी तस्ाः लक्ष्म चिह्नं) भारत्या (देव्या सरस्वत्या लक्ष्म्या: सपल्या) न अलक्षि (न निरूपितम्). गस्तं etc. lost as it was in the lustre ( of Vishnu's body ) that shone like the dark-blue lotus. Here the dark-blue lustre of the God Vishnu is inherent in him. Musk (atet ) is dark and the spot, left on the chest of Vishnu when he embraced Lakshmi whose breasts were smeared with musk, was not observed because it was concealed by another thing ( which is char- mingly darker ), viz. the lustre of Vishnu's body. An example of (b) is 'सदैव' etc. (p. 58, 11. 16-17). यस्यां (नगर्यी) शोणोपलकुण्डलस्य (शोण: लोहितः उपलः रल्नं यस्मिन् तत् शोणोपलं पझ्मरागमणियुक्तं कुण्डलं कर्णवेष्टनं तस्य) मयूखैः (किरणैः) सदैव अरुणीकृतानि (रक्तीकृतानि) कामिनीनां कोपोपरक्तानि अपि (क्ोधेन आरक्तानि अपि) मुखानि यूनां शङ्कां (भयं) न विदधु: (जनयामासुः). 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 mfa is as follows :-- I. 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 ( or not observed ) 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 pro- minent lustre (of Vishnu's body) and the redness of the ruby respectively. This figure is appropriately called sftfa, as in it one thing is concealed by another. The root ate (1st conj. P. ) means 'to shut, contract, cover'. Compare अलं. स. 'तिरोधायकत्वादेव च मीलितव्यपदेशः ।'. This figure must be distinguished from भ्रान्तिमान्. In faHTT, on seeing one thing, another resembling it, is re- membered and mistaken for it e.g. in 'मुग्धा दुग्धधिया' etc. above, the moon's rays cause the milkmen to remember milk, which is not present then, and to mistake them for milk. While in ffa, both the things are present; one is not perceived because it is overshadowed by another; moreover there is no mistake.

X.89 मीलित. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 297

Examples of मीलित are :- अपाङ्गतरले दृशा मधुरवक्रवर्णा गिरो विलासभरमन्थरा गतिरतीव कान्तं मुखम्। इति स्फुरितमङ्गके मृगदृशां स्वतो लीलया तदत्र न मदोदय: कृतपदोऽपि संलक्ष्यते ॥ ( quoted by K. P. X.); मदिरा- मदभरपाटलकपोलतललोचनेषु वदनेषु। कोपो मनस्विनीनां न लक्ष्यते कामिभि: प्रभवन्॥ रुद्रट VII. 108.

61 सामान्यम् (Sameness).

(यत्र) सदृशैर्गुणैः साधारणगुणयोगात् प्रकृतस्य उपमेयस्य अन्यतादात्म्यं (अन्येन अप्रकृतेन उपमानेन तादात्म्य ऐकात्म्यं) प्रतिपाद्यते (तत्र) सामान्यम् When something in question is spoken of as having become undistinguishable from something else on account of similar qualities, there is सामान्य. An example is 'मल्लिका etc.' (p. 58, 1l. 21-22). मल्लिकाचित" थम्मिल्लाः (मलिकापुष्पैः आचिताः पूर्णा: धम्मिलाः संयताः केशाः यासां) चारुचन्दन- चार्चेताः (अत एव) चन्द्रिकासु (ज्योत्सायां चन्द्रकिरणेषु वा) अविभाव्याः (अलक्ष्याः) अभिसारिका: ('कान्तार्थिनी तु या याति सङ्केतं साडभिसारिका' इति अमर० II. 6.10) सुखं यान्ति. Here the subject of description ("aa ) is women going out to meet their lovers at an appoint- ed place. Women are represented as not distinguishable from the moonlight, which is aga, 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 HTHF4 is that here there is connection of two things with the same property ( which renders them undistinguishable ). Compare THE 'तत्समानगुणनिबन्धनात्सामान्यम्' or अलं. स. 'तत्समानगुणयोगात्सामान्यम्' p. 169. What constitutes सामान्य 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.

मीलिते ...... मेदाग्रहः (p. 58, ll. 23-24). The author now proceeds to distinguish between मीलित and सामान्य. In 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 निकृष्टगुण is not perceived; while in HIH-4 both the objects are perceived, but they are apprehended ३१

298 NOTES ON X. 90 सामान्य.

as undistinguishable on account of both the objects possessing like properties. Compare अलं.स. वि. 'स्वरूपेणावगतस्यापि मेदानध्यवसायः सामान्यं, बलवता तिरोहितत्वात्स्वरूपानवगमो मीलितमिति स्थितम्।' p. 168; "प्रत्यक्षविषय स्यापि वस्तुनो बलवत्सजातीयग्रहणकृतं तद्भिन्नत्वेनाग्रहणं सामान्यम्। मीलिते तु निगूह्यमानवस्तु न प्रत्यक्षविषय:।" R.G. p. 516. This figure must also be distinguished from अपह्ृति. As there is no denial of anything and as nothing else is asserted in the place of the former, this is not अपह्वति 'नेयमपह्वतिः । किञ्रिदपह्वत्य कस्याप्यनारोप्यमाणत्वात्।' एका० p. 320. Similarly this is not ्रान्तिमान्. 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 सामान्य both the things are directly perceived. 'न च भ्रान्तिमता सङ्करः । तत्र स्मर्यमाणस्यारोपोऽन्ानुभूयमानस्येति विशेषात्।' उद्योत p. 134. Examples of सामान्य are :- यस्मिन्हिमानीनिकरावदाते चंद्रांशुकवल्यमिव प्रयाते। पुच्छाश्रयाभ्यां विकला इवाद्रौ चरन्ति राकासु चिरं चमर्यः ॥; सुसितवसना- लङ्कारायां कदाचन कौमुदी-महसि सुदृशि स्वैरं यान्त्यां गतोऽस्तमभूद्विधुः। तदनु भवतः कीर्तिः केनाप्यगीयत येन सा प्रियगृहमगान्मुक्ताशाङ्का के नासि शुभप्रदः॥ K. P. X.

62 तद्गुण: (Borrower). स्वगुणत्यागात् अत्युत्कृष्टगुणग्रहः तदुण: 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 तद्गुण. An example is 'जगाद etc.' (p. 58 ll. 27-28). This is S'is'u. II. 21. वदनछझ्यपझ्मपर्यन्तपातिनः (वदनरूपं यत्पझ्म तस्य पर्यन्ते समीपे पतन्ति इति तान्) मघुलिहः (भ्रमरान्) उदग्रदशनांशुभि: (उद्गताभिः शुभ्रदन्तप्र- भाभि:) श्वैत्यं (श्रेततां) नयन् (आपादयन्) जगाद (बलदेव:). Here, the bees, which are blue, are represented as giviug up their blueness and assuming the whiteness of the shining teeth of Baladeva. The reason why this figure is called तदुण is that in this the object of description ( yaa) assumes the properties of that (aa) i. e. of a thing not in question or of a thing that possesses some quality in an eminent degree. Compare K. P. X. 'तस्य अप्रकृतस्य गुणोSत्रास्तीति' or अलं. स. 'तस्योत्कृष्टगुणस्य गुणा अस्मिन्निति कृत्वा l' p. 170. The essentials of तहुण are :- I. One object (the प्रकृत) has another object near it; II. the thing that is प्रकृत gives up its own qualities and assumes the quality of the thing that

X.90 तद्गुण. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 299

is near. It should be, however, noticed that our author does not speak anything about प्रकृत or अप्रकृत. His example also is noteworthy. The bees are not प्रकृत, but rather अप्रकृत. According to our author, agu occurs when one object ( whether प्रकृत Or अप्रकृत) assumes the qualities of another. In giving the essentials of aau above we follow the authority of Mammața.

मीलिते ...... इति मेद: (p. 58, 11. 29-30). An objection may be raised :- in agu, the quality of one thing is concealed by another and so there is no difference between तहुण and मीलित. Our author replies to this as follows :- In मीलित, the thing itself is concealed by another, so that the former is not perceived at all; while in agu, both the things are perceived ( and not only one, as in faa), but the qualities of one are transferred to another; besides in fa, the thing that is covered up (or over-shadowed ) does not give up its own qualities and assume another's ( as in agu), but is only over-shadowed by another possessing the same quality in an eminent degree; while in ago, the thing loses its own quality and assumes a different one. Compare 'न चेदं मीलितम्। तत्र हि प्रकृतं वस्तु वस्त्वन्तरेण आच्छादित- लवेन प्रतीयते, इह तु अनुपह्वतस्वरूपमेव प्रकृतं वस्त्वन्तरगुणोपरक्ततया प्रतीयते इत्यस्त्यनयोर्भेंद:।' अलं. स. p. 170. तहुण must be distinguished from H- 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 agu, both the things are seen distinctly, but one gives up its quality and assumes the quality of another ( which is dissimilar ). In yifeamra 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 "मीलिते धर्मिण एवाग्रहः, सामान्येपरित्यक्तगुणस्यैव अपृथवप्र- तिभास:, इह तु गुणमात्रस्यैवाभिभवः धर्मिणः पृथग्भासश्चेति मेद इत्यर्थः । भ्रान्तिमति स्मर्यमाणस्यारोपोडतर ग्रृह्यमाणस्यति मेदः । भ्रान्तेर्निवद्धत्वाभावाच्च।" pp.137-138.

An objection may be raised as follows :- What is common to the three figures मीलित, सामान्य and तदुण is 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 con- stitute a distinct figure, then garynr will have to be defined as a figure distinct from qonfynr. Jagannatha replies to this that

300 NOTES ON X. 90 तद्गुण.

this is not proper. He says that following the above reasoning, रूपक, परिणाम, अतिशयोक्ति etc. cannot be separately defined and will form varieties of one figure, called अभेद. Besides, in each of the three figures there is a distinct charm, as in रूपक, परिणाम etc. ( which have been separately defined by all Alankārikas ). Vide R. G. pp. 516-517. Examples of तदुण are :- विभिन्नवर्णा गरुडाग्रजेन सूर्यस्य रथ्याः परितः सफुरन्त्या। रतैः पुनर्यंत्र रुचं रुचा स्वामानिन्यिरे वंशकरीरनीलैः॥ शिशु. IV. 14; नीतो नासान्तिकं तन्व्या मालत्या: कुसुमोत्करः। बन्धूकभावमानिन्ये रागेणाधरवर्तिना। R. G. p. 513.

63 अतह्ुणः ( Non=borrower).

हेतौ सत्यपि (उत्कृष्टगुणपदार्थसंनिधानाख्ये हेतौ सत्यपि) तद्रूपाननुहार: (तद्रूपस्य उत्कृष्टगुणस्य अननुद्दरणं न्यूनगुणेन अननुवर्तनं) तु अतद्रुणः. When one thing does not assume the quality of another, though there is a reason for it, there is aragu. This definition is word for word the same as that of the अलं. स. 'सति हेतौ तद्रुणाननुहारोऽतद्रुणः।' It should be noticed that the figure eaguT would occur in two ways :- I When something not in question ( agaa), which is न्यूनगुण, does not assume the quality of the thing in question, which is उत्कृष्टगुण (although it comes in contact with the latter), there is अतहुण; II when the thing in question (प्रकृत) does not assume the quality of another which is not in question (amaa), although the अप्रकृत is quite near the प्रकृत, there is अतद्ुण. The aa referred to in the definition means here 'the presence of a thing possessing excellent qualities'. इन्त ...... रज्यसि (p. 59, 11. 3-4). गुणगौर (गुणैः गौर धवल), सान्द्रेण (घनेन) रागेण (प्रेम्णा, रक्तवर्णेन) भृतेऽपि (पूर्णेडपि ) मम हृदये निषण्णोऽपि (स्थिर्ति लब्धवानपि ) (त्वं) हन्त कथं नाम न रज्यसि (रक्तो भवसि, अनुरक्तो भवसि). The words रागेण and रज्यसि are Paronomastic. Here the ya object is the hero, who is called 'white with qualities' ( i. e. famous ). Although the hero ( who is धवल ) is enshrined in the heart of the heroine, which is ₹ ( red or glowing with ardent love ), he does not himself assume <tcq ( redness or love for the heroine ).

गाङ्गमम्बु ...... चापचीयते (p. 59, 1l. 6-7). गाङ्गम् (गङ्गायाः इदम् इति गाङ्गं गङ्गासम्बन्धि) अम्बु (जलं) सितम् (शुभ्रम् ), यामुनं अम्बु (यमुनाया: जलं) कज्जलाभं (कज्जलसदृशम्), राजहंस, उभयत्र मज्जतः तव शुभ्रता सा एव (एकैव, न न्यूनातिरिक्ता वा), न चीयते (गङ्गाजलसम्बन्वेन न अधिका भवति) न च अपचीयते

X. 91 अतद्रुण. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 301

(यमुनाजलमालिन्येन मलिना न भवति). This verse is an example of the second variety of अतद्रुण. Here राजहंस (प्रकृत) does not assume the qualities of the Ganges or the Jumna ( the araa ), although they are in contact with him ( हेतौ सति अपि). पूर्वत्र ...... न तद्रूपता (p. 59, 1l. 8-10). पूर्वत्र ...... निष्पन्नम्. This has been explained above. प्राप्तवत् अपि although it is proper that it should follow. उत्तरत्र ...... न तद्रूपता. It may be contended that in 'गाङ्गमम्बु etc.' the figure is अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा (4th variety तुल्ये प्रस्तुते तुल्याभिधानम् ); the description of राजहंस 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 atga, still in comparison to the Ganges and the Jumna, the swan is a thing in question, as the Ganges and Jumna are still more removed from the real subject of decription, viz. a good person. As the swan, who is thus relatively qaa, does not assume the qualities of the rivers, though in contact with them, there is अतह्ुण.

अत्र च .. ... शेषोक्तेर्भेद: (p. 59, 11. 10-11). It may be conte- nded that in the above examples of अतह्ुण, there is विशेषोक्ति, because, though the hero is placed in the heart which is full of राग (i. e. हेतौ सत्यपि), he does not become रक्त (i. e. there is कार्याभाव), 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 araau should not be separately defined. Our author replies that aagui 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 विशेषोक्ति, the charm consists in the representa- tion that the effect does not follow, although its well-known causes are present; while in aagu, 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 intend (in aragu) to empha- size it; what he (poet ) insists upon as charming is ueU. We are informed by Jayaratha that araauT was included under विशेषोक्ति by the author of अलङ्गारसार (p. 171 of विमर्शिनी). वर्णान्तरोत्य ...... विषमात् (p. 59,1. 11). अतद्ुण must be dis- tinguished from the first variety of fyH, where the properties or actions of an effect are opposed to those of the cause. In सद: करस्पर्श etc. (example of विषम), the sword which is

302 NOTES ON X. 91 अतद्गुण.

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 अतहुण, a distinct (and opposed) colour is not produced ; e. g. in 'हन्त सान्द्रेण' etc. the राग of the 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 yas as before and does not assume रक्त्तत्व. The reason why this figure is called अतद्रुण is तस्य प्रकृतस्य गुणा अस्मिन् अप्रकृते न सन्तीति अतद्रुणः, अथवा तस्य अप्रकृतस्य गुणा अस्मिन् प्रकृते न सन्तीति अतहुण: Compare Mammata's words 'किं च तदिति अप्रकृतं अस्येति च प्रकृतमत्र निर्दिश्यते'. Examples of अतह्ुण are :- धवलो सि जह वि सुन्दर तह वि तुए मज्झ रंजिअं हिअअम्। राअभरिए वि हिअए सुहअ णिहित्तो ण रत्तो सि॥ (quoted in K.P.); कुचान्यामालीढं सहजकठिनाभ्यामपि रमे न काठिन्यं धत्ते तव हृदयमत्यन्तमृदुलम्। मृगाङ्गानामन्तर्जननि निवसन्ती खलु चिरं न करतूरी दूरीभवति निजसौरभ्यविभवात् ॥ R. G. p. 514.

64 सूक्ष्मम् (Subtle). यत्र आकारेण (अवयवसंस्थानविशेषेण) इङ्गितेन (चेष्टविशेषेण) वा संलक्षितः सूक्ष्म: अर्धः (तीक्ष्णमतिसंवेद्ः अर्थः) कयाऽपि भंग्या (वैदग्ध्यप्रकारेण) सूच्यते तत् सूक्ष्मं उच्यते. When a delicate circumstance gathered from some appearance (a) or from gesture (b) is intimated to another by means of a clever hint, it is सूक्ष्म. It should be observed that Amara gives आकार and इङ्रित as snnngms 'आकारस्त्विङ्ग दद्वितम्' III. 2. 15; in another place, he says 'आकार विद्विताकृती' III. 3. 162. The commentator Bhanuji explains 'इङ्गितं चेष्टा। आकृतिरवयवसंस्थानम् "'. Mammata and our author seemto have taken आकार in the sense of आकृति (posture or appearance ) and इङ्गित in the sense of चेष्टा (gesture). चक्रवर्ती, author of the अलङ्कारसर्वस्वस्ञीविनी, says 'आकृतिव्यजजिताश्चेष्टा इङ्गित वुद्धि- कारिताः । आकारः पुनरास्नानस्ता एवावुद्विकारिताः ॥ तारापुटभ्रदृष्टयादेर्विकारानिङ्गितं विदुः। आकारा: सत्त्वजा भावा आदा बुद्यापरेन्यथा।' (quoted in the रत्नापण p. 465 ). T& means 'not to be apprehended by men of dull under- standing.' An example of (a ) is 'a etc. (p. 59, Il. 15-16 ). कापि वयस्या (सखी) तन्व्याः (नायिकायाः) कण्ठे वक्रस्यन्दिस्वेदबिन्दुप्रबन्धैः (वकूत्रात् स्यन्दिभिर्गलद्धिः स्वदबिन्दूनां प्रबन्धैःपंक्तिभिः) भिन्नं (संभिन्नं) कुङ्कमं दृष्टा स्मित्वा तन्व्याः पुंस्त्वं (पुरुषायितत्वं रात्रौ विपरीतरते) व्यअ्यन्ती (सूचयन्ती) पाणौ (तन्व्याः हस्ते) खङ्गलेखां) खङ्गाकृतिरूपलेखां लिलेख (लिखितवती).

X. 91-92 सूक्ष्म. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 303

Here, the masculine action of a woman, concluded from the mixture of the drops of perspiration with the saffron on 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 आकार (appearance) is कुङ्कमभेद on the throat, which leads to the guessing of पुरुषायित (the सूक्ष्म अर्थ). 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 कुङ्गममेद on the throat leads to the inference of पुरुषायितत्व is explained by commentators as follows :- 'प्रसिद्धरता उत्तानायाः नायिकाया: वक्त्रात गलितस्य स्वेदस्य पृष्ठभागे एव गमनम्, कण्ठे तद्गमनं तु विपरी- तरतावेवेति वकूत्रस्यन्दीत्यादेरभिप्रायः'. An example of (b) is सङ्केतकालमनसं etc. (p. 59, ll. 19-20). This has been explained above in the 2nd Pari. Here the curiosity of the lover to know the time of meeting, which ( curiosity ) was guessed from the movements of his eyebrows etc. is intimated to him by the closing of a lotus, which ( closing ) takes place at the approach of night. Here the y& ae is the desire of the lover to know the time of meeting. This सूक्ष्मार्ध is guessed by इङ्गित, viz. the movements of the eyebrows etc. The fact that the woman understands the meaning of the look of the lover is conveyed in a clever manner ( भंग्या) by the closing of a lotus. It should be observed that in सूक्ष्म, there exists अनुमिति also. But the figure is not 34, because it is subordinate, "urse charm liee -: + in the inference of a delicate circumstance freim appearance or gesture, but in devising a clever mark wl ich would easily intimate to another that the delicate ci cumstance has been discovered 'अत्र विद्यमानमपि अनुमानं सूक्ष्माङ्गम्। स्व दग्ध्यप्रकाशनद्वारा सूक्ष्मस्यैव चमत्कारित्वात्।' उद्योत p. 116. An example of सूक्ष्म is :- कदा नौ सङ्गमो भावीत्याकीणे वक्तमक्षमम्। अवेक्ष्य कान्तमवला लीलापद्यं न्यमीलयत्।। K. D. II. 216 (on this Dandin remarks पद्मसंमीलनादत्र सूचितो निशि सङ्गमः। आश्वासयितुमिच्छन्त्या प्रियमङ्गजपीडितम् ॥)

65 व्याजोक्ति: (Dissembler). उद्धिन्नस्यापि (प्रकाशं गतस्यापि ) वस्तुनः व्याजात् (छझ्मना, कपटेन) गोपनं व्याजोलि: The artful concealment of a thing, though dis- covered, is व्याजोक्ति

304 NOTES ON X. 92 व्याजोकि.

An example is 'शैलेन्द्र etc.' (p. 59, 11. 25-28). शिवः वः (युष्मान्) अवतात (रक्षतु)। कीदृशः । शैलेन्द्रेण हिमालयेन प्रतिपाद्यमाना दीयमाना गिरिजा पार्वती तस्याः हस्तः तस्य उपगूढं आश्र्ेषः (भावे क्त:) तेन उल्लसद्भिः आविर्भवद्धिः रोमाञ्चादिभि: विसंस्थुल: व्यग्रः स चासौ अखिलविधिव्यासङ्गभङ्गाकुलः सकलवैवाहिकक्रियाभङ्गाकुल: (शिवः)। आः इति पीडायाम्। (ततश्च सात्विकभाव- गोपनाय) तुहिनाचलस्य (हिमालयस्य) करयोः आः शैत्यमित्यूच्चिवान्। शैलस्य (हिमालयस्य) अन्तःपुरं (स्रीजनः) मातृमण्डलं (ब्राह्मयादयः 'ब्राह्मीत्याद्यास्तु मातरः' अमर० I.1.35) गणाः (प्रमथाः शिवानुचराः) च तैः सस्मित दृष्टः (शिवः रक्षतु). शैलेन्द्र ... भङ्गाकुल: 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 cere- monies of marriage (because his mind was distracted). Here, the love for Parvati that was hidden is manifested (sfaa) by the indications of love (अनुभाव of रति, viz. रोमाञ्ज, वेपथु, etc.); it is then concealed under the pretence (व्याजात्) that these indi- cations, viz. पुलक and वेपथु, are due to cold (as cold also causes tremor and makes the hair stand erect ). Compare प्रदीप 'पुल- कवेपथुभ्यां सात्त्विकाम्यां प्रकाशिता गूढा रतिः तयोः शैत्यकारणताप्रकाशनेनापह्वतेति व्याजोक्तिरियम् ।'; 'अत्र रोमाञ्जादिनोद्विन्नो रतिभावः शैत्यप्रक्षेपणेनापलपितः ।' अलं. स. p. 174. What constitutes व्याजोक्ति is :- I. something is at first hid- den; II. then it is manifested somehow ( involuntarily ); 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 ्याजोक्ति is that here there is a putting forward (उक्ति) of a pretext (व्याज), NTZ. representing a thing as due to something else. Complare 'वस्त्वन्तरप्रक्षेपरूपस्य व्याजस्य वचनाद्याजोक्ति:।' अलं. स. p. 174. नेयं ...... दर्शितः (p. 59, l1. 29-30). Udbhata and his foldo- wers do not define ्याजोकि separately, but include itunder अपह्वाति. Our author distinguishes between the two figures. व्याजोक्ति is not the first kind of अपह्वति, because in the former, the विषय ( the subject on which something else is superimposed ) is not expressly mentioned by the person who conceals ( the real state of things). In शैलेन्द्र etc., the विषय is the love of S'iva for Parvati. It is not directly expressed, but left to be undeg stood from the sense of the verse. In the first kind of arygia, the aqay is denied and something else is established in its stead. But both of them are directly expressed, as in नेदं नभो

X. 92 व्याजाक्ति. SÂHITYADARPANA. 305

मण्डल etc .; while in व्याजोक्ति, only one is expressed and the other ( the विषय, which is concealed under a pretext ) is only sug- gested. Mammata draws another distinction between वयाजोक्ति and अपह्ृति. In अपह्ृति, there is resemblance between प्रकृत and अप्रकृत (the उपमेय and the उपमान); but this is not possible in व्याजोक्ति. There is really no charming resemblance between रतिभाव and शैत्य. Besides in अपह्ृति, the उपमेय is denied and the उनमान is established in its stead; but in व्याजोक्ति nothing is denied, but something is represented as due to a cause other than that to which it is really due. 'न चैषाऽपह्नतिः; प्रकृताप्रकृ- तोभयनिष्ठस्य साम्यस्येहासम्भवाद्।' K.P.X .; 'तत्र ( अपद्वती ) उपमेय निषेधपू- वैंकमुपमानव्यवस्थापनम् । अत्र तु किञ्िदनिषिध्यैव निमित्ताम्तरप्रयुक्तत्वज्ञापनमित्यपि बोध्यम्।' उद्योत p. 108. The difference between ्याजोक्ति and the 2nd kind of अपह्ृति has been explained in our notes on the latter ( p. 138 ).

66 स्वभावोक्ति: ( Natural Description). दुरूह्ार्थस्वत्रियारूपवर्णनम्-Dissolve क्रिया च रूपं च क्रियारूपे, स्वे (स्वकीरो) च से क्रियारूपे च स्वक्रियारूपे, अर्थस्य स्वक्रियारूपे अर्थस्वक्रियारूपे दुरूहे (सूक्ष्मे स्थूलमतिमिरसंवेद्ये) अर्थस्वक्रियारूपे तयोः वर्णनम्. The description of such aetions and characteristics of an object as are peculiar to it and are not easily perceived by all, is स्वभावोक्ति. दुरूइयो: means 'to be apprehended by the poet alone'. are means 'a child and the like'. स्वयो: means 'of such as belong solely to that object' (स एव एक: आश्रयः ययोः). An example is लाङ्गलेन etc. (p. 60, 1l. 4-7). लाड्गलेन क्षितितलं (भूमितलं) अभिहृत्य, अग्रपन्धाम् (अग्रे वर्तिभ्याम् पादाभ्याम्) असकृत (वारंवारं) दारयन् (क्षितितलमिति योज्यम्), आत्मनि एव (स्वदेहे एव) अवलीय (प्रविश्य, अतिखर्वीभूयेति अर्धः), अथ (पश्चात्) गगनं विक्रमेण (अतिशक्तितया) द्रुतं प्रोत्पतन्, स्फूर्जद्धंकारघोषः (स्फूर्जन् हूम् इति घोषः यस्य), अखिलान् जन्तून् प्रतिदिशं द्रावयन् एषः कोपाविष्टः (कोपेन आविष्टः) अरुणोच्छूनचक्षुः (अरुणे रक्ते उच्छूने च चक्षुषी यस्य) तरक्षुः (मृगादनः) प्रतिवनं (वने वने) प्रविष्टः अरुणो ...... तरक्षु: the hyena, with red and swollen eyes. आत्मन्येवावलीय shrinking into himself for a moment. क्षिति ... पञ्याम्-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 स्वभावोक्ति Otherwise, even

306 NOTES ON X. 93 स्वभावोक्ति.

such a sentence as 'पशय बलीवर्दोयं घासमत्ति मुखेन' will be an example of स्वभावोक्ति. What constitutes स्वभावोक्ति is :- The description must be charming; II The description must be in reference to the क्रिया and स्वरूप of an objeot, such as a child, lower animals eto. 'आदिना युवतिमुग्धकातरतिर्यग्भ्रांतहीनपात्रा दिसंग्रहः' उद्योत p. 88; III The actions and characteristics desoribed 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 स्वभावोक्ति was also called जाति* by ancient writers; e. g. दण्डिन्, रुद्रट and भोज. See K. D. II. 8-13. Rudrata defines आति as 'संस्थानावस्थानक्रियादि यदस्य यादशं भवति। लोके चिरप्रसिद्धं तत्कथनमनन्यथा जातिः॥ शिशुमुग्धयुवतिकातर तिर्यक्संभ्रान्तहीनपात्राणाम्। सा काला- वस्थोचितचेष्टासु विशेषतो रम्या ॥' VII. 30-31. Examples of स्वभावोक्ति are :- क्षणं नष्टार्धवलितः शङ्गेणाग्रे क्षणं नुदन्। कोलीकरोति प्रणयादिमामेष मृगार्भकः ॥ उद्ट III. 9; धूलीघूसरतनवो राज्यस्थि- तिरचनकल्पितैकनृपाः । कृतमुखवाद्यविकाराः क्रीडन्ति सुनिर्भरं डिम्भाः॥ रुद्रट VII. 32.

67 भाविकम् ( Vision).

यत अद्भतस्य पदार्थस्य भूतस्य अथ भविष्यतः (पदार्थस्य) प्रत्यक्षायमाणत्वं (प्रत्यक्षवत्प्रतिभासमानता) तत् भाविकम् उदाहृतम्. When a wonderful object, whether past or future, is so represented as to strike the mind as if it were present, it is termed भाविक. An example is yf: etc. (p. 60, ll. 11-12). This is cited in the ध्वन्यालोक 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. 'अत एव च रसानुगुणार्थविशेषोपनिबन्धनमुलक्कारान्तरविरहेऽपि च्छाया- तिशययोगि लक्ष्ये दृश्यते। यथा-मुनिर्जयति०। अत्र हन्गतरसानुगुणमेकचुलके मत्स्य कच्छपदर्शनं छायातिशयं पुष्णाति। तत्र ह्येकचुलुके जलसंनिधानादपि दिव्यमत्स्य- कच्छपदर्शनमक्षुण्णत्वादन्भुतरसानुगुणतरम्। क्षुण्णं हि वस्तु लोकप्रसिद्धाद्भुतमपि माश्चर्यकारि भवति।' ध्व. P. 239. कुम्भसम्भवः (कुम्भात् सम्भवः यस्य) महात्मा मोगीन्द्रः (योगिनां इन्द्रः श्रेष्ठः) मुनिः (अगस्त्यः) जयति, येन तौ (अतिप्रसिद्धौ) दिव्यौ मत्स्यकच्छपौ (मत्स्यकूर्मौ विष्णोरवतारौ) एकचुलुके दृष्टौ. एकचुलुके दृष्टौ saw in the hollow of one of his hands the fish and the tortoise ( the two incarnations of Vishnu ), when he ( Agastya ) drank

• Compare बाण's verse 'हरन्ति कं नो ज्वलदीपकोपमैर्नवैः पदार्थैरुपपादिताः कथाः । निरन्तरश्रेषनाः सुजातयो महास्त्रजश्चम्पककुड्मलैरिव॥' कादम्बरी.

X.93-94 भाविक. SAHITYADARPANA. 307

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 readers on account of the vividness and strikingness of the description. Another example is 'आसीदअन eto.' भाविभूषणसम्भाराम्=भावी भूषणानां सम्भार: समूहः यस्याम् ( thy form) with the profusion of ornaments that is to adorn it hereafter. Here in the first half, a past object ( a ), 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, we widely differ from the interpretation of Ramacharana. THo takes भाविक to be of two sorts :- I अद्भतस्य पदार्थस्य प्रत्यक्षायमाणत्वम् and II भूतस्याथ भविष्यतः प्रत्यक्षायमाणत्वम्. He instance 'मुनिजयति' etc. as an example of the first and आसीदजन etc. as an example of the 2nd. We, on the other hand, think that {THo is wrong, that there are no such two varieties, and that the two verses are examples of one and the same thing, viz. पदार्थस्य (whether भूत or भविष्यत्) प्रत्यक्षायमाणत्वम्. Our reasons are :- I If Ramacharana's interpretation be accepted, then we shall be obliged to suppose that our author sets at naught all ancient and respectable authority. Bhamaha, Udbhata and Ruyyaka all define Bhavika as the representation of something past or future as if it were present. None of them speaks of अद्भतस्य प्रत्यक्षायमाणतवं asa distinct variety of भाविक. On the other hand, Bhamaha, Udbhata and Ruyyaka in the clearest terms say that agara is one of the conditions (or causes ) of the figure Bhavika. Note carefully the following 'भाविकत्वमिति प्राहुः प्रबन्धविषयं गुणम्। प्रत्यक्षा इव दृश्यन्ते यत्रार्था भूतभाविनः॥ चित्रोदात्ताद्जुतार्थत्वं कथायां स्वभिनीनता। शब्दानाकुलता चेति तस्य हेतुं प्रचक्षते॥' भामह III.52-53; 'प्रत्यक्षा इव यत्रार्था दृश्यन्ते भूतभाविनः। अत्यङ्धताः स्यात्तद्वाचामनाकुल्येन भाविकम् ॥' उद्भट VI. 12; 'अतीतानागतयोः प्रत्यक्षा- यमाणत्वं भाविकम्। सूत्र। अतीतानागनयोर्भूतभाविनोरर्थयोरलौकिकत्वेनात्यन्भुतत्वाद् व्यस्तसम्बन्धरहितशब्दसन्दर्भसमर्पितत्वाच्च प्रत्यक्षायमाणत्वं भाविकम्।' अलं. स. p. 178. II. Ramacharana's interpretation is opposed to the words of the author himself. If there were two varieties of HTfaa, we expect some such particle as and some reference to the two-fold division (as द्विधा) in the definition of भाविक. There is nothing of the sort. Moreover, our author introduces

308 NOTES ON X. 93-94 भाविक.

the second example (आसीदञ्जन etc.) with the words 'यथा वा', which clearly show that the second example illustrates the same thing as the first, and preclude the idea that there are two varieties. We therefore think that Ramacharana should not be followed, even though Pramadadasa follows him in his translation. What constitutes raa is :- I There is a decription of something past or future; II The description is of something which is strikingly wonderful or extraordinary ( faa or arga); III The description is put in 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 as. H. pp. 178-180. It should be borne in mind that the figure भाविक is spoken of as प्रबन्धविषय (having the whole work for its province, and not a verse ) by Dandin and Bhamaha. Bhatți, in his Bhatti-kavya (canto 12), follows the same view. According to them, the figure permeates the whole composition and not a single verse. It is for this reason that Dandin and Bhamaha do not give an example of wIfan. See K. D. II. 364-366. The reason why this figure is called ara is :- ma means 'the intention of the poet' ( कवेराशयः or अभिप्रायः) and the figure is called arfaa, 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 wa means 'revolving in the mind,' and the figure is called arfaa, because in it there is this revolving in the mind of the readers. Compare K. P. X. 'भावः कवेरभिप्रायोSत्रास्तीति भाविकम्।'; 'कविगतो भावः आशयः श्रोतरि प्रतिबिम्बत्वेनास्तीति, भावो भावना वा पुनः पुनश्चेतसि निवेशनं सोऽन्रास्तीति।' अलं. स. p. 178.

न चायं प्रसादाख्यो गुणः ...... अहेतुत्वात् (p. 60, l1. 16-17). It was said above in dealing with the essentials of wida 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 भाविक is nothing but the guna प्रसाद. It was said in the first pari. that rasa is the soul of poetry and that, just as bravery etc. ( JJurs ) are possessed by the soul, there are certain properties of the soul of Poetry which are manifested

X. 93-94 भाविक. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 309

by words. The number of these aors is given differently by different writers. Mammata and our author speak of only three Gunas, माधुर्य, ओजस् and प्रसाद. See K. P. VIII. UI.and S.D. VIII Pari. प्रसाद ( Lucidity, Perspicuity ) is defined by K. P. as 'शुष्केन्धनाग्निवत्स्वच्छजलवत्सहसैव यः। व्याप्नोत्यन्यत्प्रसादोऽसौ सर्वत्र विहितस्थितिः ॥।' and again 'श्रुतिमात्रेण शब्दात्त येनार्थप्रत्ययो भवेत्। साधारणः समग्राणां स प्रसादो गुणो मतः ॥' K. P. VIII p. 476 and p. 486 (Va.). 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 instru- mental in evolving at once the Rasas in the mind ), in the case of ar or aia like fire pervading dry fuel and in the case of शृङ्गार or करुण like water permeating a clean sheet of cloth. An example of प्रसादगुण is 'परिम्लानं पीनस्तनजघनसङ्गादुभयतस्तनोर्मध्यस्यान्तः परिमिलनमप्राप्य हरितम्। इदं व्यस्तन्यासं श्रथभुजलताक्षेपवलनैः कृशांग्याः सन्तापं वदति बिसिनीपत्रशयनम् ।' रलावली II. Our author replies that प्रसाद is not the same as भाविक, because the former is not a (necessary) cause of a past or future thing appearing as if it were present. Our author means that sarT ( 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. न चाद्भतो ...... हेतुत्वात् (p. 60, 1. 17). The past or future thing must be अद्भत in भाविक. So it may be said that भाविक is not a figure at all, but merely अद्भतरस. The Rasas are 8 or 9. शङ्गारहास्यकरुणा रौद्रवीरभयानकाः । बीभत्सान्भुतसंज्ञाश्चेत्यष्टौ नाट्ये रसाः स्मृताः ॥' भरत'S नाट्यशास्त्र VI. 15 (the 9th is शान्त). विस्मय is the स्थायिभाव of अन्भूतरस, the विभावs are seeing something that is extraordin- ary, accomplishment of what is desired, इन्द्रजाल etc. The अनुभावs (indications) are नयनविस्तार, रोमाञ्र etc. The terms स्थायिभाव etc. have been explained in the notes on the Ist परिच्छेद. The स्थायिभाव विस्मय, in conjunction with the appropriate विभावs, अनुभावs and व्यभिचारिभावs, evolves in the mind of the spectator or reader the अद्भतरस. An example of अद्भत is 'चराचरजगज्जालसदनं वदनं तव। गलदूगनगाम्भीर्य वीक्ष्यास्ि हृतचेतना ॥' कदाचिद्भगवतो. वासुदेवस्य वदनमालोकितवत्या यशोदाया इयमुक्तिः। अत्र वदनमालम्बनम्। अन्तर्गतचराचर- जगज्जालदर्शनमुद्दीपनम्। हृतचेतनत्वं तेन गम्यं रोमाश्ननेत्रस्फारणादि चानुभाव: । त्रासादयो व्यभिचारिण: ।' R. G. p. 42. Our author replies that भाविक is not अद्भतरस, because the former is what causes विस्मय ( the ३२

310 NOTES ON X. 93-94 भाविक.

स्थायिभाव of अद्भतरस). What the author means seems to us to be as follows :- the स्थायिभाव विस्मय, in conjunction with the विभावs and अनुभावs etc. causes the development of अन्भतरस ; while in भाविक there is no विस्मय, but only what would cause विस्मय ; e. g. in आसीदअन etc. there is no reference to the sentiment of wonder in the speaker or reader i. e. the speaker or reader is not represented as engrossed in relishing अद्धतरस but rather as perceiving as it were what is past or future. This state of his may cause विस्मय to others. But as regards him, there is no विस्मय and hence no अद्धतरस. Pramadadasa asks us to read अहेतुत्वात् for हेतुत्वात्. 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 विस्मयं प्रति तस्याहेतुत्वात, which seems to have been due to the copyist transcribing again the words in the preceding line 'तस्याहेतुत्वात्'.

न चाति ...... भावात् (p. 60, 11. 17-18). भाविक is not अतिशयोक्ति, because there is no introsusception in the former ( while it exists in the latter ). In अतिशयोक्ति, one thing is completely swallowed up by another and is spoken of in terms of the latter. In wrfae also, a thing which is past or future is spoken of as being present; and so there is अभेदाध्यवसाय. This objection our author meets with a flat denial. In भाविक there is no अभेदाध्य- aHTT 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. Compare अलं. स. 'नापीयमतिशयोक्तिः । अन्यस्यान्यतयाध्यवसायाभावात् ।' p. 179. It should be observed that the Uddyota says that भाविक is the same as that अतिशयोक्ति in which there is असम्बन्धे सम्बन्ध: 'असम्बन्धे सम्बन्धरूपातिशयोत्तयैव गतार्थोयम्। प्रत्यक्षासम्बन्धेऽपि तत्सम्बन्धवर्णनात्। भूतादिवस्त्वसम्बन्धेऽपि तत्सम्बन्धवर्णनाच्चेति।' उद्योत p. 93. न च ...... प्रकाशनात् (p. 60, 11. 18-19). Our author copies the very words of the अलं. स. In भ्रान्तिमान, 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 आसीदजन etc.

न च स्वभावोक्ति :.... स्तीति (p. 60, 11. 19-21). It was said above that in arfas there is a description of an extraordinarily striking object ( whether past or future). In स्वभावोक्ति also

X. 93-94 भाविक. SAHITYADARPANA. 311

there is a description of an object with regard to its क्रिया or रूप. What difference is there between the two? The reply is :- In स्वभावोक्ति, there is a faithful description of the nice (सूक्ष्म) characteristics of an objet of everyday experience; while in भाविक, 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 स्वभावोत्ति there is a description of the peculiar धर्मs of a लौकिक वस्तु, such as a child, a beast, a frightened person ete .; in भाविक there is a description of an अलौकिकवस्तु as in 'मुनिः' etc .; II in स्वभावोक्ति 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 भाविक, a past or future object does appear as if it were present. 'नापीयं सुन्दरवस्तु- स्वभाववर्णनात स्वभावोक्तिः। तस्यां लौकिकवस्तुगतसूक्ष्मधर्मवर्णने साधारण्येन हृदय- संवादसम्भवात्, इह च लोकोत्तराणां वस्तूनां स्फुटतया (पुरःरफुरद्रपतया) ताटस्थ्येन प्रतीतौ (तेः?)' अलं. स. p. 181.

यदि पुन ..... सङ्कर: 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 (भाविक and स्वभावोक्ति). If while describing the peculiar धर्मs of a लौकिकवस्तु, it so happens that the thing, being past or future, vividly appears before the mind as if it were present, then there is सङ्कर of भाविक and स्वभावोत्ति. An example of such a सङ्कर is given by जयरथ. "हेरम्भोडत हरीश्वरे नखमुखैः कण्डूयमाने गलं कुर्वन्पुच्छविवर्तनां निविरतो रोमन्थली लायितात्। संमीलन्नयने विसंस्थुललसत्सासतं नतोन्नामितग्रीवं निश्चलकर्णमीश्वरबलीवर्द: सुखं मन्यते ।।' अत्र वृषभस्य पुच्छविवर्तनादिसूक्ष्मधर्मवर्णनेन स्वभावोक्ति:, प्रत्यक्षायभा- णत्वेन भाविकमित्यनयोः समावेशः ।" अ. स. वि. p. 181.

अनात ...... इत्यादौ (p 60,1l.23-27). अनातपत्रः अपि (अविद्य- मानं आतपत्रं छत्रं यस्य) अयं सितातपत्रैः (सितच्छत्रैः सार्वभौमत्वसूचकैः) सर्वतः वृत इव अत्र लक्ष्यते। एषः अचामरोऽपि (अविद्यमानं चामरं यस्य) कोऽपि अयं सदैव विलासबालव्यजनेन ( विलासा एव बालव्यजनं चामरं तेन विलासयुक्तेन बालव्यजनेन वा, 'चामरा चामरं बालव्यजनं रोमगुच्छकम्' इति रभसः) वीज्यते. अचामरोऽप्येष etc. who is he that, without a chamara, is ever fanned with a graceful chamara or with a chamara of graceful movements? alfo may also mean 'some wonderful or indescribable 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 here also the figure is भाविक. Our author replies that there is no भाविक in the verse, because the

312 NOTES ON X. 93-94 भाविक.

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 chämara as being present is due to a sort of reasoning ( viz. as he is possessed of kingly lustre, he must be surrounded by umbrellas). वर्णना ...... स्वरूपत्वात् And because this figure has for its essence the circumstance of appearing as present solely through the force of the description. Compare अलं.स. "इह कचिद्वर्णनीयस्य वर्णनावशादेव प्रत्यक्षायमाणत्वम्। क्वचित्प्रत्यक्षायमाणस्येव वर्णनम्। आद्यो यथोदाहृतं प्राक् (मुनिर्जयतीत्यादि)। द्वितीयो यथा-'अनातपत्रो' इत्यादि .. तस्माद्वास्तवमेव महत्त्वमुत्तरत्र प्रकारविषये वर्णितमिति नायमलङ्गारः।" pp. 182-83, यत्पुनरप्र ...... इत्यादौ where something, though not actually present appears as if present on account of the description, there this figure oocurs as in 'आसीदअन' etc. An example of a future वस्तु is "क्षिप्तोति्क्षिप्ताखिलखुर पुटाहन्यमानाद्रि- रौद्रध्वानत्रस्यत्सुरवरनमस्कारवाग्दत्तकर्णः । पाष्णिसपर्शताद्वहनतुरगं प्रेरयन्म्लेच्छजाति जेष्यत्येष त्रिभुवनविभु: कर्किरूपेण विष्णुः ॥" अ. स. वि. p. 182. Jayaratha gives the following as an example of भाविक 'दर्भाङ्करेण चरणः क्षत इत्यकाण्डे तन्वी स्थिता कतिच्चिदेव पदानि गत्वा। आसीद्विवृत्तवदना च विमोचयन्ती शाखासु वल्कलमसक्तमपि द्रुमाणाम् ॥।' शा० II. ('अत्र पादयोः शकुन्तलायाश्च शुद्धैव प्रत्यक्षत्वेन प्रतीतिः ।'). 68 उदात्तम् (The Exalted). लोकातिशयसम्पत्तिवर्णना (लोकातिक्रान्ता सम्पत्तिः समृद्धि: तस्याः वर्णना) उदात्तम् उच्यते, यत् वा अपि महतां चरितं प्रस्तुतस्य (वर्णनीयत्वेन अङ्गिनः) अङ्गं aaa. The description of prosperity exceeding all ordinary experience is उदात्त (I); so also it is उदात्त when the actions of the great become ( are represented as ) subordinate or collateral . to the subject in hand ( II ). An example of (I) is अधःकृता etc. (61,1l. 1-2). यस्वां (नगर्या) अधःकृताम्भोघरमण्डलानां (अधःकृतं अम्भोधराणां पयोधराणां मण्डलं यैः) ज्योत्सानिपातात क्षरतां (स्यन्दमानानां) शशांकोपलकुट्टिमानां (चन्द्रकान्तमणिभिः निबद्धानां कुट्टिमानां 'कुट्टिमोऽस्री निबद्धा भूः') पयोभि: (जलैः) केलीवनं (क्रीडाकाननं) वृद्धिं (पुष्टिं) उरीकरोति (स्वीकारोति, पुष्टि गच्छतीत्यर्थः). अध-कृताम्भोघरमण्डलानां शशां ... मानाम of 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 उदात्त. SAHITYADARPANA. 313

An example of (II) is नाभि etc. (61, 1l. 3-4). This ocours in रघु XIII. 6. नाभिप्रभिन्नाम्बुरुहासनेन (नामेः प्रभिन्नं उद्गतं अम्बुरुहं पझ्म आसनं यस्य) प्रथमेन धात्रा (वेघसा, दक्षादीनामपि स्नष्रा) संस्तूयमान:, युगान्तोचितयोगनिद्रः (युगान्ते उचिता परिचिता योगनिद्रा यस्य) पुरुषः (परमात्मा विष्णुः) लोकान् संहृत्य (विलयं नीत्वा) अमुं (समुद्रं) अधिशेते. Here the subject of description is the ocean and it is therefore the principal topic (arfsr). The actions of the lord Vishnu are here subordinate or collateral ( 15 ) 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 sara are really two distinct figures but they have been treated together because the same name is given to both. The first is called eara, because there is a des- cription of the possession of enormous prosperity; the second variety is called sard, because in it the subject of description is connected with the actions of a truly noble personage. Compare 'एतेन उदात्तैश्वर्ययोगादुदात्तः प्रागुक्त, अयं तूदात्तपुरुषचरितयोगादुदात्त इति पूर्वस्मादन्य एवायमलङ्कारोऽर्थभेदाद। परं तु शब्दसाम्यादस्यैव(त्रैव?) निरूपणम्।" तरल p.331. भटि called this figure उदार and रुद्रट speaks of it as अवसर. What disinguishes उदात्त from भाविक and स्वभावोक्ति is that in the two latter, things are described as they are, while in sar ( 1st variety ) the poet gives an imaginative description of an object as possessed of prosperity beyond the experience of man. 'स्वभावोक्तौ भाविके च यथावद्वस्तुवर्णनम्। तद्विपक्षत्वेनारोपितवस्त्वात्मन उदात्तस्यावसरः । तत्रासम्भाव्यमानविभूतियुक्तस्य वस्तुनो वर्णनं कविप्रतिभोत्थापित- मैश्वर्यलक्षणसुदात्तम्। अलं. स. pp. 183-184. Examples of उदात्त are :- उवाच च यतः क्रोडे वेणुकुजरजन्ममिः। मुक्ताफलैरलङ्कार: शबरीणामपीच्छया। पुष्टयेन्द्रनीलवैदर्यपझ्मरागमयैवियत्। शिरोभिरु- हिखदत्र शिखरं गन्वमादनम्।। उद्भट IV. 19 and 20; चाणक्यो नक्तमुपयान्नन्द- क्रीडागृहं यथा। शशिकान्तोपलच्छन्नं विवेद पयसां गणैः ॥ भामह III. 13; II. तदिदमरण्यं यस्मिन्दशरथवचनानुपालनव्यसनी। निवसन्बाडुसहायश्चकार रक्ष:क्षयं राम:॥ रुद्रट VII. 104. 69, 70, 71, 72 रसवत्, प्रेयस्, ऊर्जसव, समाहितम् ( Impassioned, Devoted, Impetuous and Allayment ). (1) When रस or (2) भाव, or (3) the semblance of रस and भाव,

314 NOTES ON X. 95-96 रसवत्.

or (4) the quelling of a wra ( sentiment), are reduced to a subordinate condition, they become ornaments and are respectively termed रसवत्, प्रेयः, ऊर्जस्वि, and समाहित. Rasas are Love etc. which are particular states of the mind of the spectator or reader, and are evolved by appropriate विभावs, अनुभावs and व्यभिचारिभावs. All these terms have been ex- plained in the notes on the 1st Pari. It sometimes 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 qwaa, which is so called because in it there is association of a Rasa. Compare "प्रधानतां यत्र रसादय गता रसो रसादिध्वनिगोचरो भवेत्। भवन्ति ते यत्र रसादिपोषका रसाघलङ्कारदशा हि सा पृथक ।" quoted by Jayaratha, p. 186; 'यस्मिन्काव्ये प्रधानतयाऽ न्योऽथों वाक्यार्थीभूतस्तस्य चाङ्गभूता ये रसादयस्ते रसादेरलङ्कारस्य विषय इति मामकीन: पक्षः ।' ध्वन्यालोक p. 71. An example of रसवद् is 'अयं स रसनोत्कर्षी पीनस्तनविमर्दनः । नाभ्यूरुजघनस्पशी नीवीविस्रंसनः करः ॥' महाभारत स्त्रीपर्व अ. 24. 19. This verse was cited by Vis'vanatha in the 4th Pari. These are the words of the wives of Bhuris'ravas, who fell in battle, at the sight of his hand. 'अयं दृश्यमानावस्थ: कर इत्यन्वयः। पूर्वावस्थामेवाह-रसनेत्यादि। रसनां काञ्चीमुत्कर्षतीति। तथा पीनयो: स्तनयोर्विमर्दकारी। नाभिश्च ऊरू च जघनं चैतानि स्टृशतीति तच्छीलः । ('नीवी संग्रथनं नार्या जघनस्थस्य वाससः' नाममाला) वसनग्रन्थेर्विस्रंसनः मोचकः इति। एवं चैवंविधशङ्गारलीलापात्रभूतस्य ईदृशदुरवस्थाप्राप्तिरिति करुणपरिपोष: ।' उ. चं. P. 159. This verse forms part of the lamentations of the women. The principal Rasa is auT (Pathos). In the present verse the Rasa is AIFIT ( Love ). The description of the amorous move- ments of the hand, that are remembered by the women, heightens the main Rasa ( viz. aor ), because the recollection of those movements is an excitant (उद्दीपनविभाव) of करुण ( 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 रसवद्. एवमन्यत्रापि-Similarly in the case of other Rasas. An example of रसवद्, where करुण is an अङ्ग is 'कि हास्यन न मे प्रयास्यसि पुनः प्राप्तश्चिराददर्शनं केयं निष्करुण प्रवासरुच्चिता केनासि दूरीकृतः। स्वप्नान्तेष्विति ते वदन्प्रियतमव्यासक्तकण्ठग्रह्ो बुद्धा रोदिति रिक्तबाहुवलयस्तारं रिपुस्त्रीजन।।' स्व० p. 72 (इत्यत्र करुणरसस्य शुद्धसाङ्गभावा- र्स्पष्टमेव रसवद्लक्कारत्वम्). Another example, where हास् is an अङ्ग of शृङ्गार is 'का त्वं रक्तपटावगुण्ठितमुखी मुग्धे तवाहं सखी कि शून्यौकसि केवला निवससि ल्वामागतान्व्रेषितुम्। एतद्वक्रमुदञ्चयेति कथयन्त्यालोक्य कूर्च ततः पत्यु: सेरमुखाम्वुजस्य तरुणी जाता विलक्षस्िता॥I' विम० p. 188.

X 95-96 रसवत्. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 315

प्रेय :- The figure is so called, because of its being a favourite of the best ( of critics ), or because of its causing great pleasure (प्रकृष्टानां प्रियं तस्य भाव:, or प्रकृष्ट प्रियं यस्मिन् तस्य भावः प्रकृष्टप्रियत्वं तस्मात् ). The figure प्रय: occurs when what is called भाव ( Incomplete ₹ ) becomes subordinate to something else. भाव is defined by Mammata as 'रतिर्देवादिविषया व्यभिचारी तथाजितः । भाव: प्रोक्त, which is explained by प्रदीप as follows :- "रतिरिति स्थायिभावोपलक्षणम्। देवादिविषयेत्यप्राप्तरसावस्थोपलक्षकम्। तेन देवादिविषया सवां, कान्ता दिविषयाप्यपुष्टा रतिः, हासादयश्श्ाप्राप्तरसावस्थाः, प्राधान्येन व्यज्जितो व्यभिचारी च भाव इत्यवधातव्यम्।" p. 106 ( Nir.). भाव occurs when (I) ( the स्थायिभाव) 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 स्थायिभावs, such as हास etc. are so described as not to reach the condition of Rasa, or when ( IV ) a Vyabhi- chari-bhava is developed as the principal sentiment. An example of भाव, where a व्यमिचारिभाव (this term has been explained already ) is developed as the principal sentiment is 'तिष्ठेत्कोपवशात्प्रभावपिहिता दीर्घे न सा कुप्यति स्वर्गायोत्पतिता भवेन्मयि पुनर्भा- वार्द्रमस्या मनः। तां हर्तुं विबुधद्विषोऽपि न च मे शक्ताः पुरोवर्तिनीं सा चात्यन्तमगोचरं नयनयोर्यातेति कोडयं विधिः ॥' अन्र हि विप्रलम्भरससद्भावेऽपीयति वितर्काख्यव्यमि- चारिचमत्कियाप्रयुक्त आस्वादातिशयः । लोचन p. 65. An example of प्रेयः is आमीलितालस etc. (p. 61, 1. 11-12). आमीलिते ईषन्मुकुलिते अलसविवर्तिततारके (रसोद्रमेन अलसं यथा स्यात् तथा विवर्तिते घूर्णिते तारके, 'तारकाऽक्ष्णः कनीनिका' ययोः) अक्षिणी यस्या: (ताम्), मत्कण्ठबन्धे (मत्कण्ठाक्षेषे) दरक्रथा (ईषच्छथा शिथिला) बाहुवली बाडुलता यस्या: (ताम्), प्रस्वेदवारिकणि- काचितगण्डबिम्बां (सुरतश्रमेण जनितैः) प्रभूतस्वेदजलविन्दुभि: आचितं पूर्ण गण्डबिम्बं कपोलपाली यस्या: ताम्, अनिशं (अविरतं) संस्मृत्य अन्तः (अन्त:करणं) शान्ति न एति. आमीलिता ...... क्षीं-With eyes half closed, in which the eyeballs were languidly moved. Here the first three lines describe the characteristics of सम्भोगशङ्गार (Love in union ), which is subordinate to the mood (व्यभिचारिभाव) called स्मरण (Reminiscence). The व्यभिचारिभाव itself is subordinate to विपलम्भशङ्गार (Love in separation), because the topic of desri- ption is the state of the separated lover who remembers his past experiences of love. Another example of प्रेय: is "त्वद्वक्त्रामृत- पानदुर्लेलितया दृष्टया क विश्रम्यतां त्वद्वाक्यश्रवणाभियोगपरयोः श्राव्यं कुतः कर्णयोः। एभिस्तत्परिरम्भनिर्भरतरैरङगैः कथं स्थीयतां कष्ट तद्विरहेण संप्रति वयं कृच्छ्रामवस्थां गताः॥ अत्र चिन्ताख्यो व्यभिचारिभावः (विप्रलम्भश्नङ्गारस्याङ्गम्)" अलं. स. p. 189. Both भामह and दण्डिन् quote the same verse as an .example of प्रेय: 'प्रेयो गृहागसं कृष्णमवादीद्विदुरो यथा। अद्य या मम गोविन्द

316: NOTES ON X, 95-96 रसवत्.

जाता त्वयि गृहागते। कालेनैषा भवेत्प्रीतिस्तवैवागमनात्पुनः ॥ भामह III. 5;the same is काव्यादर्श II. 276 on which दण्डी says 'इत्याह युक्तं विदुरो नान्यतस्तादृशी धृतिः । भक्तिमात्रसमाराध्यः सुप्रीतश्च ततो हरिः॥'. But the प्रेय: of भामह and दण्डी is not such a complicated affair as that of later writers. ऊर्जस्वि-When रसाभास and भावाभास become subordinate to something else, there is ऊर्जस्वि. We have explained in our notes on the 1st Pari. the meaning of रसाभास. When रस and भाव are described in connection with improper ( or unworthy ) objects, there occur respectively रसाभास and भावाभास. 'आभासत्वमविषय- प्रवृत्त्याडनौचित्यम्।' अलं. स. p. 185. The figure is called ऊर्जस्वि, because in it there is 'ūrjas,' i. e. impetuosity or force, in so for as there is improper procedure. An example of ऊर्जस्वि (due to रसाभास) is 'वने etc.' (p. 61, I1. 15-16). निजस्त्रियः परिहृत्य अखिलकलासक्ताः (नृत्यगीतादिकलासु आसक्ताः) पुलिन्दाः (किराताः ) वने तह्वैरियनितावृन्दे (तव वैरिणां या: वनिताः तासां समूहे) रति कुर्वते. Here the principal sentiment is that of love having for its object the king (राजविषया रति is a भाव and not रस according to the definition quoted above 'रति्देवादिविषया etc.'). This sentiment is helped by the description of the love of the savages for the royal ladies. This is शृङ्गाराभास (and not शुद्धार), because there is impropriety (अनौचित्य) in the love as it is adulterous. As RRDITH is here subordinate to something else, the figure is ऊजस्वि. The same bolds good in the case of ऊर्जस्वि based upon भावाभास. An example of it is "द्विषां तवारण्यनिवासमीयुषां नितम्बिनीनां निक्कुरम्बकं नृप । मुद्दमुद्गरूयश्रवलद्विलोचनं न केन पह्लीपतिना निरीक्षित: (तम्?)।" ( quoted by Jayaratha, p. 190). Here the (व्यमिचारिभाव) औत्सुक्य ( eagerness ) of the S'abaras, having for its object the wives of others, is a भावाभास. This भावाभास is subordinate to the main sentiment of Love for the king. समाहित-समाहित means 'giving up or quelling' (of a senti- ment). The figure समाहित occurs when भावप्रशम (or भावशान्ति) becomes subordinate to something else. An example is अविरल etc. This is quoted by Mammata (K.P. V, Va, p.198). अविरलकर- वालकम्पनैः (अविरलानि निरन्तराणि करवालानां खड्गानां कम्पनानि तैः) भ्रुकुटीत- र्जनगर्जनै: (भ्रकुटीतर्जनं च गर्जनं च) मुद्ठः (वारंवारं) तव वैरिणां मदः (दर्पः) ददृशे (दृष्टः ), तव ईक्षणे क्षणात् स क्वापि गत :. 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 समाहित is 'अत्युच्चा: परितः स्फुरन्ति गिरयः स्फारास्तथाम्भोवयस्ताने-

X. 95-96 रसवत्. SAHITYADARPANA. 317

तानपि बिभ्रती किमपि न क्वान्तासि तुभ्यं नमः । आश्चर्येण मुदुर्मुद्दः स्तुतिमिति प्रस्तौमि यावङ्भवस्तावद्विभ्रदिमां स्मृतस्तव भुजो वाचस्ततो मुद्रिताः ॥ अत्र राजविषयाय रतेरङ्गभूतस्य भूविषयस्य रत्याख्यभावस्य प्रशाम्यत्वम् ।' विमर्शिनी p. 190. The समाहित of भामह and दण्डी is nearly the same as the figure समाधि of विश्वनाथ. 73,74, 75 भावोदयः, भावसन्धिः, भावशबलः. ( 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 भावोदय, भावसन्धि and भावशबल respectively. Our author does not expressly say that भावोदय etc must be subordi- nate in order to constitute the figure भावोदय etc. But that qua- lification necessarily follows from the treatment of the four figures रसवद् etc. What is meant by भावोदय is :- The word भाव has been already explained. ay means 'the condition of being in process of evolution.' भावोदय occurs when a भाव is described as occurring or as being in process of evolution, and not when the aa is completely evolved, The latter is the province of the figure प्रेय :. When भावोदय becomes subordinate to some thing else the figure is भावोदय. An example is मधु* etc. (p.61, 1. 25-26). ते (तव) वैरिणः (शत्रवः) सुहृद्धिः सह मधुपानप्रवृत्ताः (मधुपा- नाय प्रवृत्ता:) कुतोऽपि त्वन्नाम श्रुत्वा विषमां दृशां लेमिरे. Here the principal sentiment is love for the king. The sentiment of terror that is described as arising is subordinate to this main sentiment. भावसन्धि-भावसन्धि occurs when two भावs (that are opposed to each other ) are described as competing with each other. प्रदीप explains it as 'experience of two equally strong sonti- ments at the same time' (सन्धिरेककाळमेव तुल्यकक्षयोरास्वादः। प्र० P. 110). भावसन्धि (the figure ) occurs when भावसन्धि is subordinate to something else. An example is जन्मान्तरीण etc. (p. 61, 11.

• This bears a very close resemblance to the example of भावोदय given by जयरथ "साकं कुरङ्गकदृशा मधुपानलीलां कर्तु सुहृद्धिरपि वैरिणि च प्रवृत्ते। अन्याभिधायि तव नाम विभो गृहीतं केनापि तत्र विषमामकरोदवस्थाम्।।" p. 191.

318 NOTES ON X. 97 भावोदय.

28-29). जन्मान्तरीणस्य (अन्यस्मिन् जन्मनि भूतस्य) रमणस्य प्रियस्य अङ्ञसङ्गेन समुत्सुका सख्या: अन्तिके (समीपे) च सलज्जा पार्वती सदा नः पातु. Here the sentiment of love having for its object a divinity, viz. Parvatī, 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 भावसन्धि is "परिचुम्बनीयचलकाकपक्षकं. तनयं कथं वितरतु क्षिते: पतिः । अभिवन्दनीयतमपादपङ्कजं सहसा प्रतीपयतु वा कथं मुनिम्।। अत्र सुतमुनिविषययो रत्याख्यभावयोः सन्धिः रते रामचरितं प्रत्यङ्गत्वमित्यलङ्कारत्वम्।" विम० p. 192.

भावशबल-When many Bhavas are represented as succes- sively taking the place of each preceding one, there is भावशबल शबलता तु कालभेदेन निरन्तरतया पूर्वपूर्वोपमर्दिनाम् (आस्वाद:) ।' प्रदीप p.110 (Nir ). The figure भावशबल occurs when भावशबल is represented as subordinate. An example of the figure भावशबल is 'पश्येत etc'. This is found in K. P. V. (Va. p. 200). कश्चित पश्येद (आवां इति अध्याहार्यम्), चपल (चञ्चलस्वभाव), चल (दूरमपसर), रे का त्वरा (किमर्थमेवं लरसे), अहं कुमारी (त्वया सह एकाकिन्या नैव गन्तुं युक्तम्), इस्तालम्बं (हस्तस्य अवलम्बं) वितर (देहि), हृद्दहा व्युत्क्रम: (हह्ृहा इति खेदे, व्युत्क्रमः विपरीताचार, यदहं कुमारी सती त्वामवलम्बे अननुरूपमेवैतत् कुमारीभावस्य) क असि (क्क) यासि, यद्ा 'असि' इति 'त्वम्' इत्यर्थे तिडन्तप्रतिरूपकमव्ययम्, (पृथ्वीपरिवृढ) (पृथ्व्याः प्रभो), अरण्यवृत्ते: (अरण्ये वृत्तिर्वर्तनं यस्य तस्य) भवद्विद्विषः (भवतः शत्रोः) कन्या फलकिसलयानि आददाना इत्थम् कञ्नित् (पुरुषं) अभिधत्ते. पश्येत ...... कुमारी O, we may be seen together. Go away, thou fickle man. Why this haste? I am a maiden. इस्तालम्ं ...... व्युत्क्रम: '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 subordinate to this main sentiment. The Bhavas are Apprehension (शंका in 'पश्येत्कश्चित'), Resentment (असूया in 'चल चपल रे'), Equanimity (धृति in 'का त्वरा'), Recollec- tion (स्मृति in 'अहं कुमारी'), Weariness (श्रम in 'हस्तालम्बं वितर'), Wretchedness (दैन्य in 'हहहा'), Awakening (विबोध in 'व्युत्क्मः'), Longing (औत्सुक्य in 'क्वासि यासि'). Another exemple of भावशबल is 'त्याज्यो नैष शिशुः सुतो रघुकुले याति प्रतीपो गुरुस्ताम्यन्त्यस्य सहोदरा विजयते क्षत्रस्य शस्त्रग्रहः। यात्यस्मिन्नवसादमेति हृदयं स्वार्धः परार्थेन मे व्यामुह्यन्त्यमुना बिना प्रकृतयो मान्यो मुनिः प्रीयताम्।। अत्र पुत्रादिविषयाणां' गतीनां पूर्वपूर्वोमपर्देनोपनिबद्धानां शबलत्वम्।' विम० p. 192.

इह केचिदाङ :...... युक्ता इति (p. 62, ll. 46). Some say :- orna- ments are those alone which heighten the Rasa etc. by embel-

X. 97 भावोदय. SAHITYADARPANA, 319

lishing the form of words (वाचक ) and senses (वाच्य). But Rasa etc., being such as to be helped ( synT ) by words and senses ( and not 344Rn ), should not properly be called orna- ments. What is meant is :- It was said in the first Pari. that Rasa is the soul of Poetry, words and senses the body and Alankaras ( figures ) are ornaments which heighten the soul of Poetry through the body ( viz. word and sense ). Hence it follows that Rasa is always उपकार्य (to be helped or embellished) and not 3qaR4 ( 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 Tu, wTa, etc. when they are subordinate to something else, become the figures रसवद्, प्रेय: etc. These persons assert that in this there is a contradiction. If they are T# etc. they cannot be Alankaras, because Rasa and Alankāra are by their very nature distinct ( as Rasa is syard being the soul and Alankara is 34nR4 being merely an ornament ). If you say they are Alankaras, you cannot call them Rasa. Thus these objectors are not ready to admit uag etc. as ornaments. It should be observed that Mammata also does not regard <ua< etc. as Alankaras; he includes them under the 2nd variety of काव्य, viz. गुणीभूतव्यंग्य ( see K. P. V Ul. p. 201 Va.) 'एते च रसवदादयलङ्काराः । यद्यपि भावोदयभावसन्धिभावशबलत्वानि नालक्कारतयोक्तानि तथापि कश्चिद्ब्यादित्येवमुक्तम्।'. The वक्रोक्तिजीवित also denies that रसवत्, प्रेयसू, उदात्त are अलङ्कारs e. g. 'ऊर्जस्व्युदात्ताभिधयोः पौर्वापर्यप्रणीतयोः। अलङ्करणयोस्तद्व द्द्रूषणत्वं न विद्यते ।I' (3rd उन्मेष). Its position is that these are not अलक्वारs but अलक्कार्य. अन्ये तु ..... एव इति (p. 62, 11. 6-7). Others again say :- The designation of ornament given to quaz ete. merely because they help ( the development of ) Rasa ete. is purely secondary (am) and must be accepted in compliance with the practice of the ancients. What these people mean is :- Alankaras are those which heighten the body of Poetry. We have seen above that in रसवद etc. रस, भाव etc. are subordinate to (i.e. heighten) another Rasa etc. There is a difference between Alankaras and raqg etc. The former heighten Rasa ete. 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 रसवदू etc., रस etc. directly enhance another Rasa etc. In spite of this difference, there is one thing in

320 NOTES ON X. 97 भावोदय.

common between Alankaras properly so called and ruaa 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 xHaa etc. by lakshana. We have seen above (p. 54) that सादृश्य is one of the circumstances which are at the root of lakshana. Tuqa etc. do not, properly speaking, deserve to be called Alankāras. The application of the word Alankara to them is secondary and has the sanction of ancient and respectable authority, before which we must bow. "I is derived from the word भक्ति and means the same thing as लाक्षणिक. The Lochana, while commenting upon the words 'भाक्तमाहुस्तमन्ये', has the follo- wing note on the word भाक्त :- "भज्यते सेव्यते प्राज्ञेन प्रसिद्धतयोद्घोष्यते इति भक्तिर्धमोऽभिधेयेन सारूप्यादिः । तन आगतो भाक्तो लाक्षणिकोऽर्यः। यदाङु: 'अभिधेयेन सारुप्यात् सामीप्यात् समवायतः। वैपरीत्यात्क्रियायोगालक्षणा पञ्चधा मता।' इति*। गुणसमुदायवृत्ते: शब्दस्यार्थभागस्तैक्ष्ण्यादिर्भक्ति: तत आगतो गौणोड्थो भाक्तः। भक्तिः प्रतिपाद्यो सामीप्यतैक्ष्ण्यादौ श्रद्धातिशयः। तां प्रयोजनत्वेनोद्दिश्य तत आगतो भाक्त इति गौणो लाक्षणिकश्च। मुख्यस्य वा अर्थस्य भङ्गो भक्तिरित्येवं मुख्यार्थवाधननिमित्तप्रयोजनमिति त्रयसन्भ्ाव उपचारवीजमित्युक्तं भवति।" p. 9. Vide शाबरभाष्य vol. II. p. 49 'भत्तया भविष्यति यथा यजमानो वै यूप इति।' The ancient authority alluded to is that of Bhamaha, Udbhata, and others who define रसवद etc. as figures of speech. Compare Udbhata 'प्रेयो रसवदूर्जस्वी पर्यायोकं समाहितम्। द्विधोदात्तं तथा क्रिष्टमलङ्कारान्परे fag: Il' IV. 1. It must be remarked that ancient authority is not unanimous in defining these figures. The समाहित of Dandin is quite different from that of Udbhata, moreover. भावोदय, भावसन्धि and भावशबल are not defined by Udbhata and Bhamaha and 4 is the the first great writer to define these three. Still, THaa etc. have generally been defined in the same way by many. अपरे च ...... न्यायेन इति (p. 62, 11. 7-9). Others say :- Strictly speaking, an ornament becomes so merely by subserv- ing Rasa etc. (रसादयुपकारमात्रेणालङ्कारत्वं मुख्यत:); the circumstance that such figures as Rūpaka etc. embellish the sense ete. (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 अभिधावृत्तिमातृका on कारिकाs 9-10 and the काव्यप्रकाशसङ्केत (p.17. आनन्दाश्रम ed.) read this verse as 'अभिधेयेन सम्बन्धात सादृश्या- त्समवायतः' and ascribe it to भतृंमित्र

X. 97 भावोदय. SÂHITYADARPANA. 321

these people mean is :- Alankara is that which heightens Rasa ete. In THaz etc. as well as in Rupaka etc. Rasa, the soul of poetry, is embellished. Therefore the application of the desig- nation of Alankara to Rasaved etc. is not secondary ( I, 88 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 ete. are properly called Alankaras. The view is opposed to those who hold that the application of the word Alankara to raa etc. is भाक. We have explained वाच्यासपधानं as वाच्याद्यलङ्करणम् in ac- cordance with Ramacharana's explanation. The word 3y41, however, generally means 'a pillow.' Taking this meaning of the word, we may translate 'रूपकादी तु ... न्यायेन' 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."

अभियुक्तास्तु.इति मन्यन्ते. स्वव्यञ्ञक=अङ्गभूतरसादिव्यञ्ञक. अद्विन := qu-fraw. But those who have deeply considered the matter say :- Rasa etc. which have become subordinate ( to something else ) and which are themselves helped ( avaa ) by words and senses that manifest them, quite properly obtain the deno- mination of ornament, because they help (other ) Rasas etc, which are principal, by embellishing the words and senses that suggest the latter. In arafe, 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 etc. 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 mae otc. certain words and senses manifest a particular Rasa or Bhava; this latter again is subordinate to another Rasa and

322 NOTES ON X. 97 भावोदय.

assists it through words and senses which manifest the principal Rasa. It is therefore quite proper that rHa etc. are called Alankaras. In uueife, the ascription of the behavionr of one to another constitutes the Alankāra. But Samāsokti does not possess the characteristics of Rasavad etc. There is no आस्वाद ( Aesthetic enjoyment or flavour ) of one Rasa which assists another through words and senses, as in THaz. What is charming is simply the aeR, which is not Rasa etc. So, although there is a difference between Haz etc. and समासोक्ति etc. (because in the former there is रसास्वाद, while in the latter there is none ), still both of them are very properly ealled Alnkaras, because to both of them the definition of Alankara (viz. what heightens the Rasa through words and 'senses is a figure ) is applicable. The amefa of a subordinate Rasa etc. in Rasavad etc. heightens the principal Rasa through word and sense; the syqER also heightens the Rasa through word and sense. The words arera. व्यपदेशो लभ्यते' are an answer to the objection contained in the first view propounded in the text 'रसादयस्तु ... उपकार्या एव.' According to the siddhanta ( the view of our author ) रस etc. are not always उपकार्य (to be helped ); they can also be उपकारक, as in Rasavad. अत एव ...... मतिः (p. 62, 1l. 13-14). Our author supports his position by quoting the words of a highly respectable authority ( perhaps the highest authority ) on such matters. Construe अन्यत्र (रसस्वरूपे वस्तुमा्रेऽलङ्गारतायोग्ये वा) प्रधाने वाक्यार्थे यत्र (यस्मिन्काव्ये) रसादय: अङ्गं तस्मिन् काव्ये रसादि: अलङ्कारः इति मे मतिः The verse is explained by Lochana as follows :- "यस्मिन् काव्ये ते पूर्वोक्ता रसादयोडङ्गभूता वाक्यार्थीभूतश्चान्यः। ..... तस्य काव्यस्य सम्बन्धिनो ये रसादयोऽङ- गभूतास्ते रसादेरलङ्कारस्य रसवदाघलङ्कारशब्दस्य विषयाः। स एव अलङ्कारशब्दवाच्यो भवति योऽङ्गभूतः, न त्वन्य इति यावत्।" p. 71. The meaning is :- In that piece of poetry, where Rasa etc. are subordinate to the main purport of the passage ( whether another Rasa or a sense that is principal ), the former ( Rasa etc. ) constitute in my opinion the province of an ornament. यदि च ...... प्रसज्येत (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 circumstance of assisting a Rasa etc. constitutes an Alankara, 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 ar- etc, is of no importance, being like

X. 97 भावोदय. SAHITYADARPANA. 323

अजागलस्तन and that mere रसादपकार 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 रसादपकारक inasmuch as they manifest Rasa ); but this is absurd.

एवं च ...... परास्तम् (p. 62, ll. 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, अङ्गभूतमहाषुरुषचरितवर्णनम्) is wrong. Some writers on Rhetoric denied the existence of ध्वनि (suggested sense ) in Poetry. They said that wherever रस etc. are principal, there is रसवद् अलङ्गार; where रस 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 Udātta Alankāra, 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 अलं.स. 'तत्र यस्िन्दर्शने (ध्वन्यभाववादिनां मते इत्यर्थः । वि०) वाक्यारथींभूता रसादयो रसवदाद्य- लङ्काराः तत्राङ्गभूतरसादिविषये रसवदाद्यलङ्गारः। द्वितीये उदात्तालङ्कारः।" (रसवदा- घलङ्कारास्तत्राङ्गभूतरसादिविषये द्वितीय उदात्तालङ्कारः । ? p. 186.

76 संसृष्टिः (Conjunction).

यदि एते एव अलङ्काराः परस्परविमिश्रिता तदा संसृष्टिः तथा सङ्करः (इति) पृथक् अलक्कारौ. If any of the ornaments that are treated of here are combined together, then there arise two distinct figures, संसृष्टि and सङ्कर.

यथापृथगलङ्कारत्वं (p. 62, . 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 'यथा बाह्यालङ्काराणां सौवर्णमणिमयप्रभृतीनां पृथक्चारुत्वहेतुत्वेऽपि सङ्गटनाकृतं चारुत्वान्तरं जायते तद्वत्प्रकृतालक्काराणामपि संयोजने चारुत्वान्तरमुपलभ्यते।" अलं. स. p.193.

मिथो ...... च्यते (p. 62,1. 23). एतेषां (अलक्काराणाम्) मिथः (परस्परम्) अनपेक्षतया (निरपेक्षतया) स्थितिः संसृष्टिः उच्यते. The existence of these independently of each other is riufe. This mixture

324 NOTES ON X. 97-98 संसृष्टि

of figures is like the mixture of sesame and rice. There may be a mixture of शुब्दालद्कारs only (I), or of अर्थालङ्कारs only (II), or (III) of a शब्दालङ्कार and an अर्थालक्कार. An example is देव: etc. (p. 62, ll. 25-26). सेरेन्दीवरलोचन: (समेरे विकसिते इन्दीवरे इव लोचने यस्य सः ) संसारध्वान्तविध्वंसहंस: (संसार: एव ध्वान्तं तम: तस्य विध्वंस: तस्मिन् हंस: रविः 'रविश्वेतच्छदौ हंसौ' अमर० III 3. 223) कंसनिषूदन: (कंसस्य हन्ता) देव: (कृष्णः) नः (अस्मान् ) अपायात पायाव (रक्षतु). Here we have a यमक (Rhyme) in पायादपायात् and अनुप्ास (Alliteration) in 'संसारध्वान्तविध्वंसहंस:'. Thus there is a riafe of two Alankaras of s'abda (I). There is an Upama in सेरेन्दीवरलोचन: and a Rupaka in 'संसारध्वान्तविध्वंसहंस: कंसनिषूदनः' ( Krishna is identified with the sun and samsara with darkness ). Therefore there is a aufe of two figures of sense (II). As both these conjunctions reside in the same verse, there is a संसृष्टि of शब्दालङ्गार and अर्थालक्कार (III). यमक and अनुपास deserve a passing notice. अनुप्रास is defined as 'वर्णसाम्यमनुप्रासः' The repetition of the same letters ( consonants ) constitutes अनुपास. It is possible in various ways :- e. g. (I) the same consonant may be repeated twice; (II) many consonants ( aa- THT) may be repeated only once and in the same order; or (III) the same consonant may be repeated a number of times. Ex- amples of the three sorts (the second called छेकानुप्रास and the first and third वृत्त्यनुप्रास) are 'ततोऽरुणपरिस्पन्दमन्दीकृतवपुः शशी। दधे कामपरिक्षा- मकामिनीगण्डपाण्डुताम्।।'; 'आदाय बकुलगन्धानन्धीकुर्वन् पदे पदे भ्रमरान् । अयमेति मन्दमन्दं कावेरीवारिपावनः पवनः॥'; 'अनक्गरङ्गप्रतिमं तदह्ं भङ्गीमिरङ्रीकृतमान- तांग्याः । कुर्वन्ति यूनां सहसा ययैताः सवान्तानि सान्तापरचिन्तितानि ॥'. यमक (Rhyme ) is defined as 'स्वरव्यअ्ञनसमुदायपौनरुत्तयं यमकम्' or 'आवृत्ति वर्णसङ्गातगोचरां यमकं विदुः' 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 aue. Examples are 'दशरथोऽनुशशास महारथो यमवतामवतां च धुरि स्थितः।' रघुः IX. 1 .; 'यो यः पश्यति तन्नेत्रे रुचिरे वनजायते। तस्य तस्यान्यनेत्रेषु रुचिरेव न जायते।। (रुचिरे मनोरमे, वनं जलं वनजं पङ्कजं तदिव आयते दीरघे, रुचिः प्रीतिः). There are other kinds of अनुप्रास called श्रुत्यनुप्रास, लाटानुप्रास etc. The verse क सूर्य etc. is an example of संसृष्टि, where the two अलङ्कारs of sense, विषम and निदर्शना, are combined.

77 संङ्कर (Commixture). (I) When two or more ornaments stand in the relation of principal and subordinate, ( II ) when they reside in the

X. 97-98 सङ्कर. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 325

same place, or ( III ) when there is a doubt about them, there is HET, which is thus three-fold. It is said that the mixture of figures in ua is like the mixture of milk and water. An example of (I) is आकृष्टि etc. (p.63, 11. 4-5). This occurs in अलं. स. p. 93. यस्य अम्बुराशे: (जलनिधेः) पादमूले (एकदेशे, पक्षे चरणमूले 'पादा रशम्यंध्रितुर्याशाः' अमर० III. 3.89.) मन्दाकिनी (गङ्गा) आकृष्टिवेगेन* (समुद्रमन्थनकाले देवैः यत् आकर्षणं तस्य वेगेन) विगलन् प्रभ्रश्यन् यः भुजगेन्द्रस्य वासुके: भोगस्य देहस्य फणाया वा निर्मोक: कक्षकः (त्वक्), निर्मोक: पट्ट इव 'पट्टः पेषणपाषाणे व्रणादीनां च बन्धने' तद्वेष्टनया तद्वेष्टनच्छलेन (मन्थव्यथाव्युपशमार्थमिव) आशु ( शीघ्रं ) चिरम् अवेष्टत. Long did Mandakini 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 encircled 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 पादमूल, 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. अत्र ... समासोक्तेरङ्गम् ( p. 63, 11. 6-10). Here Mandakini is superimposed upon the slough, the real nature of which is denied; so we have the figure अपह्ृति (प्रकृतं निषिध्यान्यस्थापनं अपब्ुतिः). अपहृृति is subordinate to शेष, inasmuch as it gives rise to Paronomasia, because the actual पादमूलवेष्टन (clinging to a portion of the sea ) of the Ganges ( under the disguise of the alough ) is the same as चरणमूलवेष्टन ( clinging to the feet), as the word qre is capable of two senses. Sy is subordinate to अतिशयोक्ति, because पादमूल in one sense is identified (मेदेडभेद:) with पादमूल in another sonse. अतिशयोक्ति is subordinate to उत्प्रेक्षा contained in 'मन्थ ...... र्थमिव'. The natural पादमूलवेष्टन of the Ganges ( disguised as slough ) being identified with पादमूलवेष्टन ( clinging to the feet), 'मन्थ ...... धमिव' is fancied as the हेतु of पादमूलवेष्टन (clinging to the feet in order to knead them!). उत्प्रेक्षा is subordinate to समासोक्ति, inasmuch as it conveys the idea of

• See विष्णुपुराण I. 9. 75-76 'आानीय सहिता दैत्यैः क्षीराब्धौ सकलौषीः। मन्धानं मन्दरं कृत्वा नेत्रं कृत्वा तु वासुकिम्।। मथ्यताममृतं देवा: साहाय्ये मय्यवस्थिते।-

329 NOTES ON X. 99 सङ्कर.

the ocean and the Mandakini behaving like a husband and his loving wife ( who tries to remove her husband's fatigue and pain by kneading his feet etc.). अनुरागवती .... समागमः (p. 63, ll. 12-13). This verse is cited in the स्वo p. 37. We read there दवगतिः कीटृकू. अनुरागवती (अनुराग: रक्तिमा, पक्षे प्रेम तद्यक्ता ) संध्या, दिवसः तत्पुरःसरः (तस्याः पुरःसरः पुरोवर्ती, पक्षे संमुखः आज्ञाकरः) अहो दैवगतिः चित्रा (आश्चर्यावह्ा), तथापि न समागम: (मिलनं, पक्षे स्त्रीपुंससङ्गमश्च). Here the meaning of the words as they stand is The Evening glows with TTT ( 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 संध्या; when the संध्या comes, there is no day )'. The words संध्या and दिवस, on account of their gender, and the words अनुरागवती and तत्पुरःसर (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 समासोक्ति. This समासोक्ति is subordinate to विशेषोक्ति. Although the causes of समागम, viz. अनुराग (in the woman ) and तत्पुरःसरत्व (in the lover) are present, the fruit of them does not follow. Therefore there is विशेषोक्ति. An example of सन्देहसक्कर (III ) is 'इदमाभाति' eto. (p. 63, Il. 15-16 ). The verse can be construed in many ways. 'y' may be construed with ऐन्दवं मण्डलम or separately (as referring to face eto.). सन्ततं (सर्वत्र प्रसृतं) तमः (अन्धकारं, पक्षे अज्ञानं ) भिन्दानं (निरस्यत्) अमन्दं अनल्पं नयनानन्दं करोतीति अमन्दनयनानन्दकरं ऐन्दवं मण्डलं (चन्द्रस्य बिम्बम्) गगने आभाति. Here doubts arise as to the figure as follows :- It may be अतिशयोक्ति 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 'कथमुपरि कलापिनः aofy"' above; the figure may be Rupaka consisting in the super-imposition of the moon upon a face pointed out by the pronoun 'this' ( as if we were to say इदं मुखं इन्दुमण्डलम्); the figure may be तुल्ययोगिता (defined as 'पदार्थानां प्रस्तुताना' etc), if we suppose that a face ( pointed out by the pronoun 'this' ) and the lunar orb are both subjeets of discussion (ara) and are connected with the same attribute of destroying darkness { whether internal or external does not matter ); the figure

X.99 सङ्कर. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 327

may be दीपक (अप्रस्तुतप्रस्तुतयोरेकधर्माभिसम्बन्धः दीपकम्), if we suppose that the moon is not प्रकृत (and that the face is प्रकृत ); the figure may be anelfer, if we suppose that the face is अप्रस्तुत (and the moon in 'इदं ऐन्दवं मण्डलम्' is प्रस्तुत ) and that it is suggested by the sameness of attributes ( viz. तमः भिन्दानं and अमन्दनयनानन्दकरं); it may be अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा (5th variety तुल्ये प्रस्तुते तुल्यस्य अप्रस्तुतस्य अभिधानम्), the face being in question and under- stood through the description of the moon which is not in question ( on account of the similarity between them ); or it may be पर्यायोक्त, 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 Alankāras, there is सन्देहसङ्कर. यथा वा ...... सन्देहः (p. 63, ll. 24-25). In the sentence 'मुखचन्द्रं पश्यामि' it is doubtful whether the figure is उपमा, as the com- pound may mean 'the moon-like face' ( मुखं चन्द्र इव) or whether it is Rupaka, as the compound may mean 'the moon in the form of the face' (मुखमेव चन्द्रः). There is nothing here to determine the figure with certainty.

साधकबाधक ... रूपकसमास एव (p. 63, l. 25-p. 64, 1. 6). साधक ... H-ag :. When there is some circumstance favourable to one orna- ment and some other circumstance unfavourable to another, or when even one of these exists, then there is no doubt (and no सङ्कर). For example in 'He kisses the मुखचन्द्र,' 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 मुखचन्द्र as मुखं चन्द्र इव, मुख becomes pro- minent and can be well construed with the action of kissing; but if we dissolve it as मुखमेव चन्द्रः, चन्द्र becomes more prominent and cannot be well construed with the action of kissing. Therefore the figure is Upama and not Rupaka. Here there exist bosh साधक and बाधक circumstances. मुखचन्द्र.उपमाबाधक: In this example, the attribute of shiningness is a circumstance favourable to the recognition of Rūpaka. ( 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 सङ्कर.

meaning should not be resorted to. So in 'मुखचन्द्रः प्रकाशते' there is रूपक only. Here there is a साधक circumstance but nothing वाधक ( i e. nothing that forbids the recognition of उपमा). TH ... FT. Here, the circumstance of a woman embracing on- like her lord being improper, the embrace of the king as such, on the part of Lakshmi, is impossible and so the recognition of Upama is forbidden ( if we dissolve as on नारायण इव, राजा becomes prominent and is likened to Vishnu); but the embrace of Narayana by Lakshmi being possible, there is a रूपक (i we must dissolve the compound as राजा एव नारायण:, where नारायण hecomes pruminent and the king is identified with Narayana ). Thus here there is a ary4 of simile and therefore the figure is रूपक. एवम् ...... बाधकता. In 'the 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 वदनाम्बुज as 'वदनं अम्बुजमिव' where वदन becomes prominent and is well construed with चञ्नललोचनम्) and as the eye is impossible in lotus, the recognition of Rupaka is prevented ( we cannot dissolve वदनाम्बुज as 'वदनमेव अम्बुजम्' because then अम्बुजम् will be prominent and cannot be well-construed with 'चञ्नललोचनम्'). एव ...... रूपकसमास एव. In such a sentence as 'सुन्दरं वदनाम्बुजम्', where the common property (सुन्दरत्व) is mentioned, the compound वदनाम्बुज cannot be so dissolved as to bring out an Upama, according to the sūtra of Panini (II. 1. 56) 'उपमितं व्याघ्रादिभि: सामान्याप्रयोगे' (an object of comparison, उपमेय, is compounded with वयात 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 54 and as belonging to the class which begins with मयूरव्यंसक ('मयूरव्यंसकादयश्च' पा० II. 1. 72. मयूरो व्यंसकः मथूरव्यंसक: व्यंसक: धूर्तः । सि० कौ०). एकाश्रयानुप्रवेशो ...... लङ्कारयो: (p. 64, 11. 7-14). An example of the residence of figures in the same place ( the 2nd variety of सक्कर) is कटाक्षेण etc. यदि सा क्षणमपि कटाक्षेण अपि ईषत् (मां) निरीक्षेत तदा सान्द्र: (घनः) पिहिताशेषविषयः (पिहिताः संवृताः अशेषाः अखिलाः षिषयाः विषयसाक्षात्काराः येन) आनन्दः (हृदये) स्फुरति, अम्भोरुहद्दशः (कमलाक्ष्याः) सरोमाओ्जोदअ्वत्कुचकलशनिर्भिन्नवसनः (सरोमान्नौ प्रियस्पर्शेन उद्भिन्नपुलकौ उदञ्रन्तौ उन्नतिभाजौ यौ कुचकलशौ स्तनकुम्भौ ताम्यां निर्मिन्नं प्रभ्रषटं वसनं वसत्रं यस्मिन्) परीरम्भारम्भ: (परीरम्भ: आलिङ्नं तस्य आरम्भ: उपक्रमः) क स(कइस) नविता (भकिन्वति). पिहिताशेषनिषय: which shuts out the consciousness of all external objects. अत्र ...... अनुप्रवेश :.

x. 99 सङ्कर SAHITYADARPAŅA. 329

Here the छेकानुप्रास contained in 'कटाक्षेणापीषतक्षणमपि' and the वृत्त्यनुपास consisting in the occurrence of the compound letter घू twice in 'कटाक्षेणापीषत्क्षणमपि' and once in निरीक्षेत have the same position. We explained above what is meant by अनुप्रास. ळेकानुपास occurs when a number of consonants are repeated again in the same order. Here a, u and q are repeated again in the same order in 'कटा ...... पि.' प्रतीहारेन्दुराज on उद्दट (I.) explains "ळेकशद्वेन कुलायाभिरतानां पक्षिणामभिधानम्। तदुक्तम्-'छेकान्गृहेष्वभिरतानुशन्ति मृगपक्षिणः इति। तेषां च कुलाया भिरतत्वादन्येन केनचिदनाया स्यमानानामनेनानुप्रासेन सद्ृशी मधुरा वागुच्चरति। अतोयमनुप्रासश्छेकैर्व्यपदिश्यते छेकानुप्रास इति। अथवा छेका विदग्धाः। तद्वंल्लभत्वादस्य छेकानुप्रासता।". वृत्त्यनुप्रास 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 क oocurs thrice in 'कटाक्षेण ... निरीक्षेत' and there is therefore वृत्त्यनुप्रास. एवं च ...... लङ्कारयोः So also there is एकवाचका नुप्रवेश of अनुप्रास and अर्थापत्ति. If at the mere glance of the woman, all consciousness of external objects is lost ( as in महानन्द) then what would happen at the time of embracing her? This is argiufd. The same words which cause this figure also present अनुप्रास and therefore there is एकवाचकानुप्रवेश. यथा वा ...... यमकयोः (p. 64, Il. 14-16). In 'संसारव्वान्तविध्वंसहंसः' which is part of a verse quoted above, there is सङ्कर by एक्रवाचका- नुप्रवेश of रूपक and अनुप्रास. 'संसार ...... इंसः' is a single (compound) word. ध्वान्त and संसार are identified. The letters सू, ध्वू are repeated ; therefore there is सङ्कर of अनुप्रास and रूपक. Another example of the ast of two figures ( here, of word ) is 'कुरवका रवकारणतां ययुः which is the last pada of Raghu. IX. 29, the first three being 'विरच्िता मधुनोपवनश्रियाममिनवा इव पत्रवि- शेषकाः । मधुलिहां मधुदानविशारदाः Here there is a सङ्कर of two यमकs occurring in the same place; रबका and रवका form one यमक and बकार and वकार from another. We have explained Yamaka above. It may be said that रबका and रवका do not form a यमक, because in रबका there is ब and in रवका there is व. Against this the following reply is given. It is the general convention of poets to regard a and a, z and & as non-different in यमक, श्रेष and such चित्रबन्धs aS मुरजबन्ध etc. 'यमकश्ेषचित्रेषु नवयोर्डलयोरन भित्। नानुस्वारविसगौं च चित्रभङ्काय संमतौ।' वाग्भटालङ्कार 1.20. यथा वा. प्रविष्टमिति (p. 64, ll. 17-21). 'अभिनवपयोदरसितेषु पथि- कश्यामायितेषु दिवसेषु। शोभते प्रसारितग्रीवाणां नृत्यं मयूरवृन्दानाम् ।।'. This is

330 NOTES ON X. 99 संङ्कर.

गाथासप्तशती IV. 59. The readings in the printed edition of that work are 'अभिनवप्रावृड्रसितेषु' for 'भभिनवपयोदरसितेषु', 'रभसप्रसारित०' for 'शोमते प्रसारितo', 'शोभते श्यामायितेषु' for पथिकश्यामायितेषु.' The read- ings adopted in the text are sanctioned by the high authority of the ध्वन्यालोक and लोचन (see p. 230 व0). राम appears ta have read मदति for शोभते. "अभिनवं हृदं पयोदानां मेघानां रसितं (गर्जितं) येषु दिवसेषु। तथाविधपथिकान् प्रति श्यामायितेषु मोहजनकत्वाद्रात्रिरूपतामाचरितवत्सु। यदि वा पथिकानां इ्यामायितं दुःखवशेन येभ्यः। शोभते प्रसारितग्रीवाणां मयूरवृन्दानां नृत्तम्"। लोचन p. 230. The expression 'पहिअसामाइएसु' may stand for पथिकसामाजिकेषु as well as for पथिकश्यामायितेषु. The meaning र्of पथिकसामाजिकेषु is पथिका एव सामाजिका: (सभासद:) तेषु (the specta- tors 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 मेघदूत 'मेघालोके भवति सुखिनोऽप्यन्यथावृत्ति चेतः कण्ठाश्लेषप्रणयिनि जने कि पुनर्दूरसंस्थे).' If we read 'पथिकसामाजिकेषु', the meaning will be 'charming is the dance of the peacocks etc. in these days with travellers as spectators'. The readings of the printed गाथासप्तशती also yield a good meaning. 'अभिनवप्रावृडरसितेषु शोभते श्यामायितेषु (or सामाजिकेषु) दिवसेपु। रभसप्रसारितग्रीवाणां नृत्यं मयूरवृन्दानाम् ॥।'. Charming is the dance of the peacocks whose necks are stretched out through joy (or quickly 'रभसो वेगहर्षयोः' विश्व०) in these days, with the first roars of the rainy season and appearing dark as night ( or in these days that are spectators). अत्र ...... रूपकं प्रविष्टमिति. Here in the same place, viz the Prakrit expression 'पहिअसामा- इएसु', there is a simile in पथिकश्यामायितेषु and a Rupaka in पथिकसामाजिकेषु. The word श्यामायित is the past passive participle of a denominative verb श्यामायते which is explained as श्यामा: इव आचरन्ति. Therefore in श्यामायित, there is उपमा (धर्मलुप्ता according to our author). In पथिकसामाजिकेषु (पथिका एव सामाजिका:) there is रूपक. Therefore there is सङ्कर of उपमा and रूपक by एकवाचकानुप्रवेश. 'पथिकान् प्रति श्यामा इवाचरन्तीति प्रत्ययेन लुप्तोपमा निर्दिष्टा। पथिकसमाजेष्विति कर्मधारयस्य स्पष्टत्वादूपकम्। लोचन p. 233. राम justly contends that this is not a proper example of सङ्कर by एकवाचकानुप्रवेश; but that it is an example of सन्देहसङ्कर, as 'मुखचन्द्रं पशयामि is. The Prakrit oxpression पहिअसामाइएसु does not simultaneously admit two figures, as in संसारध्वान्त etc. but alternately and therefore there is a doubt. The difference between सन्देहसङ्कर and सक्कर by एकवाचकानुप्रवेश

X. 99 सङ्कर. SÂHITYADARPAŅA. 331

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 संङ्कर by एकवाचकानुप्रवेश occurs only when one figure of word and another of sense reside together inj the same place (स्फुटमेकत्र विषये शब्दार्थालक्कतिद्वयं व्यवस्थितं च K. P. X.). Our author, following the अलं. स., holds that संङ्कर by एकवाचकानुप्रवेश occurs not only when one figure of word and another of sense reside together, but also when two figures of word as in 'arcar etc. or two figures of sense reside in the same place. The प्रदीप also says "शब्दार्थालङ्गतीति प्रायोवादः । शब्दालङ्गारयोरप्येतद्दर्शनात्."

332

Classification of Alankaras according to the Alankarasarvasva, which is followed in the main by Vis'vanatha. अर्थालद्वारा:

१ । २ ४ 1५ ७

सादृश्यगर्भ विरोधगर्भ शुङ्खलाबन्ध सर्कम्यायमूल वाक्यन्यायमूल लोकन्यायमूरु गूठार्थप्रतीतिमूल / ६

१ साबृरयगभें

मेदामेदप्रधान अभेदप्रधान गम्योपम्याश्रय NOTES ON

उपमा उपमेयोपमा अनन्वय स्मरण आरोपमूल अध्यवसायमूल पदार्थगत वाक्यार्थगत मेदप्रधान 1

रुपक परिणाम सन्देह भ्रम्तिमत् उल्लेख अपकृति उत्प्रेक्षा अतिशयोक्ति तुस्ययोगिता दीपक प्रति- वृष्टान्त निदर्शना व्यतिरेक सहोक्ति विनोक्ति- वस्तूपमा (the opposite of सहोक्ति)

1- 1

विशेषणविच्छित्याश्रय विशेषणविशेष्यविच्छित्त्याभय अप्रस्तुतप्शंसा अर्थान्तरन्यास पर्यायोक्त व्याजस्तुति आक्षेप

(the opposite (cognate with (गम्यमान (गम्यत्वविच्छि(classed here for

of समासोक्ति) अप्रस्तुत०) प्रस्तावागत) सिप्रस्तानात्) गम्यस्व)

समासोक्ति परिकर २ विरोधगर्भ

विरोप विभावना विशेषोक्ति अतिशयोक्ति (कार्यकारणपौर्यापर्यविपर्यय) असकृति विषम सम विचिन्न अधिक अन्योन्य विशेष व्याघात

१् शाहलपन्यमूल ४ तर्कन्यायमूल 1

फारणमाला एकावली मालादीपक उदार (सार of विश्र०) काव्यलिस अनुमान

५ काव्यन्यायमूल 1 1

यथासख्य. पयाय परिवृत्ति परिसंख्या अर्थापत्ति विकलप समुचय समाधि

६ लोकन्यायमूल SÂHITYADARPAŅA.

प्रत्यनीक प्रतीप मीलित सामान्य तहण अतहुण उत्तर

७ गूढार्थप्रतीतिमूल -

लूक्ष्म व्याजोकति वक्रोफि (cognate to ्याजोक्ति, उत्तिव्यपदेशसाम्यात्) स्वभावोक्ति भाविक उदास्त रसवद् प्रेय: ऊर्जस्वि भावोदय भावसन्धि

(as opposed to समाहित (all are भावशबलता

स्वभावोक्ति and भाविक) cognate to उदात्त) सं्लेषमूल -

संसृष्टि सक्कर विश्वनाथ adds निश्चय after अपकृति, defines व्याजस्तुति, पर्यायोक्त, अर्थान्तरन्यास, काव्यलिङ्, अनुमान in the order in which they are mentioned here, adds हेतु and अनुकूल before आक्षेप; puts विभावना and विशेषोक्ति before विरोध, defines मालादीपक first 333

and thon. एकावली; puts उद्तर before अर्थापचि.

Appendix A. ( The references are to the pages and the lines of the text). P. 1, 1. 9 'काव्यफलेनैवं' क-ख-ग; 1.12. ०'दिवद्वर्तितव्यं' क-ख-ग; 1. 17 'नारायणस्तवादिना' क-ख-ग; 1. 18 'इत्यादिवाक्येभ्यश्र' क-ख-ग; 1.19 ·'प्राप्तिश्च प्रत्यक्ष' क-ख-ग; 1. 20. 'तज्जन्यफलाननु०' क-ख-ग; 1. 21 'वेदादि- शास्त्रेभ्यः' क-ख-ग; 1. 24 'काव्ये किमिति' क-ख-ग. P.2,1. 3 'आेयपुराणेप्युक्तम्' क-ख-ग; 1. 6. 'विष्णुपुराणे च' क-ख-ग; 1. 9 'हेतुना काव्यस्य स्वरूपं' क-ख-ग; 1. 10 'पेक्षायां कश्चित तददोषौ' क-ख-ग; 1. 11: 'क्वापीत्याह' क-ग; 'कापीत्येतदाइ' ख; 1. 14 'राक्षसभटान्' क-ख; 1.18 'तेना- च्यापिः' क-ख-ग; 1. 21 ०'देवांशं दूषयन्तः' ख;1.29 'नञप्रयोग इति' क-ख-ग. P. 3, 1. 2 '·लक्षणे न वाच्यम्' क-ख-गः 'वेधपरीहारादिवत्' क-ख-ग; 1. 4 'तद्ूदत्रापि श्रुतिदुष्टादयः काव्यस्य' क-ख-ग; 1. 10 'काव्यत्वेनाभिमतयोः' क- ख-ग; 1, 19 oवयवसंस्थानवत्' क-ख-ग; 'अलङ्गाराः कुण्डलादि०'क-ख-ग;1. 22 'काव्यमिति सालङ्कार०' क-ख-ग; 1. 25 'यच्च क्वचि०' क-ख-ग; 1. 30 'अत्र विभावना०' ग; 1. 31 'स्फुटत्वात्' ग. P. 4, 1. 4 '०लक्षणास्त्रिविधों' क-खर-ग; 1. 5 'रसादिमात्रो वा' क-ग; 1.6 'रसादिमात्ररूपध्वनि०' क-ख-ग; 1. 8 'दिवसए' क-ख-ग; 1. 9 'मह सेज्जाए णिम- ज्जिहिसि' क-ख-ग; 1. 11 'रसाभासवत्तयैवेति ूमः' ख-ग; 'रसाभासतयैवेति' क; 1. 13 'काव्यप्रयोजनं' क-ख-ग; 'रसास्वादसुखपिण्ड' क-ख-ग; 1. 14 'पुत्रप्रभृ- तीनां' क-ख-ग; 1. 16 'पुराणे वाग्वैदग्ध्य०' क-ख-ग; 1. 18 'संज्विनि' क-ग; 1. 19. 'आत्मपदलाभः' क-ख-ग; 'इतिहासादेव' ग; 1. 20 'केषामपि पद्यानां नीर- सानां काव्यत्वं' क-ख-ग. P. 5, 1. 1 'ध्वनिरित्यादिस्वव०' क-स-ग; 1.12 'अत्र सम्भोग०' क-ख; 'अत्र शङ्गारसम्भोगाख्यो' ग; 1. 21 'शङ्गेण संस्पर्श०' क-ख-ग; 1. 22 'अत्र हि सम्भोग०' क-ख-ग; 1. 23 'स्वरूपा इत्युच्यते' ख; 1. 25 'खअ्नत्वादय इव देहद्वारेण शब्दार्थद्वारेण' ख-ग; 'खअ्त्वादय इंव देहद्वारेण व्यभि'o क. i. P. 6, 1. 1 'किस्वरूपा इत्युच्यते' ख; 1. 4 'द्वारेणैतस्यैव काव्यात्मभूतं' कं ग; 'द्वारेण तस्यैव काव्यस्यात्मभूत' ख. P. 7, 1. 6 'इस्तीत्याद्यपि वाक्यं' क-ख-ग; 1. 8 'तत्राकांक्षा०' क-ख-ग;़ 1. 11 '०युक्त इत्येव' क-ख-ग; 1. 13 'इत्थमिति वाक्यमहावाक्यत्वेन' क-ख-ग; 1: 14 'अङ्गाङ्गित्वाद्यपेक्षया' क-ख-ग; 1. 18 'लक्षणमित्यपेक्षायामाह' कख-म; I. 20'eपदिकव्यवच्छेदः' क-ग; 1. 22 'विवक्षितं तत्र अर्थो' क-ख-ग. P. 8 1. 1 'ता अमिधाद्याः' इति नास्ति क-पुस्तके; 1.5 'आवापोद्धाराभ्यां' क-ग; 1. 6 'भानयशब्दस्य' ख, 'आनयेतिशब्दस्य' क-ग; 1. 15 'अधिश्रयणावश्रयणान्तादि: पूर्वापरीभूतः' क-ग; 'अधिश्रयणादिरवश्रयणान्तादि: पूर्वापरीभूतः' ख; 1. 16 'पाका- दिवाच्यः' क-ख-ग; 1. 17 'अनन्तव्यभि०' क-ख-ग; 'व्यमिचाररूपदोषा०' खः 1. 22 'यया शकत्या' क-ख; 'यया वृत्त्या' ग; 1. 26 'प्रतिपादनालम्यस्य' क-ख-ग; 1. 28 'स्वादित्यत उक्तम्' क-ख-गं.

SAHITYADARPAŅA. 335-

P. 9, 1. 1 'तेषामयमाशयः' क-ख-ग; 1.2 'कुशं लातीति' क-ख-ग; 1. 3 'विवेचकत्वसाधर्म्य०' क-ख-ग; 'बोधयतीति' कख-ग; 1.6 'गमेधातोः' क-ख- ग; 1. 7. 'शयनकारिणि प्रयोगात्' क-ख-ग; 1.13 'प्रवेशनक्रिययान्वय०! क-ग; '०क्रिययोरन्वय०' ख; 1. 14 'उत्तरत्र कुन्ता०' क-ख-ग; 1. 25 'अत्रापकारकादीनां' क-ख; 'वाक्यार्थान्वय०' क; 1. 27 'पकाराद्यतिशयः' क-ख-ग; 1. 29 'भेंदा लक्षणा: क-ख-ग. P. 10, 1. 3 '- समवेतगुण' क-ख-ग; 1. 6 'युध्यति' क-ख-ग; 'आधार्या- घेयः' स; 1. 8'वैलक्षण्येनाव्य भिचारेणायुष्करत्वं' क-ख-ग; 1. 11 'यथाग्र०' ख; 'यथा चाग्र०' क-ग; 1. 12 'ब्राह्मणोपि तक्षा' क-ख-ग; 1. 13 'अत्र तादर्थ्य ... सम्बन्धः' इति नास्ति क-पुस्तके; 1. 21 'स्नेहरूपमुख्यार्थ' क-ख-ग; 1. 22 'राज- कुमा ... गच्छत्सु' इति नास्ति क-पुस्तके. P.11, 1.3 'गोशब्दमात्रबोध०' क; 1. 6 'वाहीकगता गुणाः' क-ख-ग; 1.8 'वाहीकार्थ स्यास०' क-ग; 'वाहीकस्यार्थस्यास०' र; 1. 9 'प्रवेशाभावात' क- ग; 1. 10 'शब्देनैव पूर्यंते' क-ख-ग; 'यदि गोशब्दात' क-ख-ग; 1. 11 'तदास्य गोशब्दस्य च'क-ख-ग; 1.12 'असमजसं' क-ख-ग; 1. 15 उपचारेणामिश्रणात्' क-ख-ग; 1. 16 'अत्यन्तविशक०' क-ख-ग; 1. 18 'नात्यन्तमेद०' क-ख-गढ़ 1. 21 'गूढो वाक्यार्थभावना०' क-ख-ग; 1.23 'अतिस्पष्टतया' क-ख-ग; 'जनवेद्यः' क-ख-ग. P. 12, 1. 3 'दिङ्मात्रं यथा' इत्यस्य स्थाने 'करमेणोदाहरति' क-ख-ग; 1. 9. 'घोषः अत्र तटादिषु लक्ष्येषु' क-ख-ग; 'पावनत्वाद्यतिशयस्य धर्मस्यातिशयः' कग; 1. 14 'चत्वारिंश्देदाः' एतन्नास्ति क-ख-ग-पुस्तकेधु; 'पदगतत्वे यथा' क ख-ग; 1.15 'वाक्यगतत्वे' क-ख-ग; 1. 22 'प्रत्ययादेश्च शक्तिः' क-ख-ग. P.13, 1. 7 'चक्नसंयोगेन' क-ख-ग; 1. 11 'पुरारातिरिति पुरासंतिः' क-ख-ग; 1. 13 'भाति गगने' क-ख-ग; 1.14 'भानुरगनिः' क-ख-ग; 1. 15 'तस्य विशेषो नोदाहृतः क-ख-ग; 1. 17 'भरतस्य मुनेः' ग; 1. 18 'प्रतीतिकृदे- वेति तद्विषये' क-ख-ग; 'तथाहि' एतन्नास्ति क-ग-पुस्तकयोः; 1. 21 'नियश्रित- योरर्थयोरनुरूपवशेन' क; 'नियत्रितयोरनुरूप०' ग; 1. 24 'मान्याना' इति नास्ति ख-पुस्तकें; 'गण्यत इत्यलमुपजीव्यानां व्याख्यानेषु' क; 'नय इत्युफंजीव्यानां व्याख्या- नेष्वलं कटाक्ष०' ग; 1. 27 'शक्तिः' इति नास्ति क-ग-पुस्तकयों :; 1. 29 'चतुर्दश- भाषामहाकषीश्वर०' क-ख-ग. P. 14, 1. 5 'प्रकरणेनाभिधया' ग; 'भिघाया' क; 'भिघे या' ख; 1 1i पावनत्वातिश्ञयादि०' क-स. ग; 1. 18 'ममैव' क-ख-ग; 1. 28 'लक्षणया लक्षितस्य रन्तुमिति' क. :P:15, 1. 2 'उव' क; 'णिप्फन्दा' क-ख; 1. 4 'विश्रब्धत्वं' क-ख-ग; 1.11 'नैष्यतीत्यपि' क-ख-ग; 1. 21'Oप्रत्यय।दिव्यङ्ग्यत्वं प्रपञ्न०' क-ख-ग. P. 16 1. 4 'oविरद्वात्' ग; 'पदार्थानामन्वयस्य' क. खं; ( In the tenth qfo only ms. was available ). P. 17, 1. 13 इवार्थे, 1. 14 तुल्यार्थें; 1. 16 ०पमेयगतं सादृश्य०; 1. 21 'वतेरप्युपादाने'

336 APPENDIX A

P. 18, 1. 2 पूर्णा :; 1. 6 तद्गेदानाह; 1. 17 क्षितीन्द्र; 1. 20 यथातुल्यादि; . 21 ०प्रतिपादकस्य वतेलोंपे; 1. 23 प्रत्ययत्वेनास्वत०. P. 19 1. 5 नास्ते रम्यं; 1. 9 प्राचीनैर्द्विप्रकार०; 1. 26 ०विक्रमालोके. P. 20 1. 8 त्रिलोपे तु; 1. 11 लोचने इव लोचने; 1. 12 •धर्मोंपमेयानां लोप :; 1. 18 तत्र एकरूपो यथा. P 21,1. 3 अत्र नेत्रादीनामुत्पलसादृश्यं;1. 21 प्रतिनिदशोपमा. P. 22, 1. 3 ०दुपमानोपमेयता; 1. 8 नान्यदस्तीति भाव; 1.11 ०खजजन: गञ्जनम् ; 1. 13 इत्यादौ तु स्मृते :- P. 23, 1. 1 राजमण्डलो नृप०; 1. 2 मालारूपकं; 1. 15 भुजादीनां राहुत्वा- रोपो; 1. 24 अमृतत्वाद्यारोपितम्; 1. 29 मधुत्वाद्यारोप :; पद्मत्वाद्यारोप :. .P: 24, 1. 12 यद्भिद्यते; 1. 16 सौविदलत्वारोपे हेतुः; 1. 20 करमुदयमहीधर- स्तनाये इत्यादि; 1. 24 पर्वतत्वादिरूपणं विना; 1. 28 प्रकृते तद्विवक्षितम् P. 25, 1. 11 अत्र च केषां; 1. 12 ०कारेष्वेवंविधेषु बोद्धव्यम्; 1, 14 वैशिष्ट्यसंज्ञ रूपकम्; 1. 25 हृतपणस्तया; 1. 26 अत्रोपायनपणौ; 1. 28 आरोप्य; चन्द्रादेः P. 26, 1. 1 इदं तूपायनादेः; 1.5 तत्कस्यच्विदप्रस्तुत; 1. 15 मअ्जरी; 1. 12 मध्ये च निश्चयः; 1. 23 महिषबहलोसाविति तिरः; 1. 25 द्वितीयसंशयस्योत्थाना० P.27 1. 4 प्रतिभोत्थिता; 1.11०विरहवितर्के; 1. 12 सङ्गे सा पुनरेका; 1.1.9 अयोजिका: यथाह P. 28, 1. 1 उल्लेखाख्यमिन्नालङ्कारत्वप्रयोजक:, I. 2 अम्बरविवर०; 1. 4 आन्तिमेवे०;1.6 श्रीमद्वाच०; 1.8 •श्रीकण्ठादिजनपदे भ्रान्तिकृत एवाम्बरविवरत्वाद्या०; 1. 17 चानेकोललेखे; 1. 22 इदं पद्यं मम; 1. 30 पतनाभावेनेत्यन्यया. P. 29, 1. 2 'इह पुरोनिल०' इत्यस्माच्छोकादनन्तरं 'एवम् । सीत्कारं क्षयति (शिक्षयति ?) न्रणयत्यवरं तनोति रोमाञ्चम्। नागरिक: किमु मिलितो नहि नहि सखिं हैमनः पवनः ॥' इत्यधिकम् ; 1. 3 इह सवोक्तेरिति; 1. 9 ०दृशो मघुकर न मुधां परिभ्राम्य; 1. 19 किं च विवक्षितेपि; 1. 20 सम्भवत्येव; 1. 21 प्रस्तुतानिषेधाद. P. 30, 1. 3 उदाहरणदिग्यथा; 1. 27 'महिलासहस्स' इति निखिलं पद्यं पठ्चते; उत्प्रेक्षां विनापि. P. 31, 1. 1 ०हेतुगतत्वेन; 1. 16 •सौन्दर्यातिशयो; 1. 24 धर्मान्तरतादात्म्य० 1. 29 प्रतिदिगन्तर०. * P. 32 1. 3 अत्राअनघटितत्वादे :; विषयोव्याप्तत्वं; 1. 10 वहेत; 1. 14 श्ेषहे तुकं यथा; 1. 23 पर्यवसानेपि जलधितीरे शैवलस्थितेः सम्भवोपपत्ते: P.33, 1. 6 अन्ये त्वनिर्धारणरूपविच्छित्त्याश्रयत्वेनैककोस्चधिकोपि; 1.16 न सापहवोत्प्रेक्षा; 1. 18 तस्य चोत्प्े०;1. 31 चेतनगतं मौनि०. P. 34, 1. 15 ०ह्ृतेन सम्भवेन; 1. 25 तथाझ्यत्रान्यदेव 1. 26 साध्यत्वमित्युत्प्रे- क्षाङ्ी०;

.

SAHITYADARPANA. >387

P.35,1.3 रुच्विरं; 1. 4 तमोवर्णनस्य प्रस्तुतशाद; 1. 6 तदङ्गमार्दवं; 1.11 सारमुद्धरेद; 1.19 निश्चरुप्रकृते :; 1. 25 इदं पद्यं मम. P. 36, 1.9 चन्द्रिकाचामकर्मणि; 1. 10 रतकर्मणि. P. 37 1. 2 ०प्राप्तिरूपकर्मवत्त्वाद; परतापिनां; 1. 3 ०सम्बन्धनिबन्धना त्वेक०; 1. 4 ०द्विया; 1. 8 कलनमसम्भवल्ललिता दिकमवगमयत्; 1. 13 चासम्भवन्हंसगतिमिव; 1. 15 इदं ... व पुरित्यादि; 1 17 अमेदान्वयः; 1. 18 तप:साधनक्षम०; 1. 21 जन्मव व्यर्थतां; ०भोगप्रलोभिना. P. 38 1. 2 मालारूपकेपि; 1. 11 उक्ते नोक्ते पुनस्त्रिधा; 1. 26 जयन्तीन्दुं; त्विवादितुल्यादि०. P. 39 1. 4 ०वर्षते सत्यम् ; 1. 6 यौवनस्पैर्य०; 1. 11 दूत्यपथ :; 1. 16 ·ध्यवसायमूला च; 1. 23 तनुदीपार्चिc; 1. 24 मालयापि भवति; 1. 26 •योक्तिमूल- त्वाभावा०; 1. 29 शोभनत्ववचन०. P. 40, 10 ०प्रयोगाभावे सहार्थविवक्षायां; 1. 16 •मशेषमस्माद्धन्य०; 1.17 गन्धवाहे कामुकत्व०; 1. 20 न सन्ध्यां ; 1. 24 रागावेगाव. P. 41 1. 1 व्यपहन्तुमीशः; 1.3 •मार्थमपेक्ष्यत एवेति; 1. 10 ०सापेक्षं मुखचन्द्रादेः; 1. 14 नायिकाया व्यवहार०; 1. 22 ०रिणेक्षणाया लता०; 1. 23 यथा दन्तप्रभापुष्पेत्यादौ सुवेशेत्यस्य स्थाने परीतेति; 1. 31 शरदो नायिका०; 1. 32 नन्वत्रार्द्रनखक्षताभमित्यत्रास्थित०. P. 42 1. 3 एवंविधानिर्वाह्यकष्ट०; 1. 6 तदुपजीविताया :; 1. 8 तत्त्वमौषम्ये यत्प्र०; 1. 10 •देशवर्तित्वाङ्गी०; 1. 14 सर्वत्र चात्र; 1.15 शास्त्रीयव्यवहार०; 1. 16 लौकिके शास्त्रीयव्यव०; 1. 24 मात्मरूपसंनि०; 1. 25 तत्पूर्वावस्थातः; 1. 26 न तु रूपसमा०; 1. 28 उक्तर्विशेषणैः. P.43, 1. 1 शब्दक्रेषस्य व्यवच्छेद :; 1. 20 ०विषीभावस्याप्रसिद्धल्वेन तस्याभाव :; 1. 24 शिथिला बर्हा :; 1. 25 'अनलुप्तत्वादिभ्यः; 1. 28 मुक्त्वा तिर्य०; 1. 31 कार्ये प्रस्तुते कारण०; 1. 32 सादृश्यमूला च. P. 44, 1. 1 विश्ञेषणमान्रे श्रेषवद्विशेष्यस्यापि भवतीति; 1. 2 श्रीसमाश्रितः; 1. 4 मात्रस्य ऋरषवशात्प्रस्तुतात् सहकारात ; 1. 6 प्रणमने; 1. 8 प्रचुरप्रयोगप्रसिद्धया; 1 12 शून्यं परमिह शरणं; 1. 22०ध्यारोपं विना; 1. 26 कस्यचिदारोपं विना. P. 45, 1. 4 प्रागिव विश्वस्ता अपि कुपितेपि त्वयि रिपु०; 1. 12 कारणरूपं; 1. 20 ०ऋन्दनजननत्वमपि; 1.25 भवन्तमाकर्ण्य. P. 46, 1. 5 सामान्यरूपोर्थ :; 1. 12 राम: करोति; 1. 14 सम्पत्करणं; 1. 20 आपत्प्रदत्वं; 1. 25 तवद्गमनानुकारि०; 1. 6 न नः क्षम्यते. P. 47, 1. 3 वाच्यार्थगतेन; 1. 9 त्वेनापेक्षते. P. 48 l. 1 ० कूल्यमानुकूल्यानुबन्धि; 1. 9 सूचितस्य विशेषे निषेध :; 1. 11 वस्तु- रूपस्य निषेध :; 1. 14 विश्रम्यं; 1. 25 ०द्विवीयेऽवश्यवक्तव्यादि. P. 49 1. 11 वयोरूपं निमित्त०; 1. 21 हरेण न हतं; 1. 22 तनुहरणेपि; L 24 •मुखेनापि.

i338 APPENDIX A.

P. 50, 1. 2 ·मरुद्ररानल :; 1.14 मरुदादीनां बहुं०; 1. 15 विरदहेतुत्वाच्च समाधानम् ; 1. 17 •शयान्तु समाधि :; L.18 विरोध: कविप्रौढो०; 1. 20 कार्यस्या- भावेन कारणमेव; 1. 27 •जनाश्रितै०. P. 51, 1. 19 स पुनस्त्ियैक; 1. 31 कुक्षौ भुवनानि विक्षिप्य. .P.52, 1.4 ·रेकक्रिययो: करणं; 1. 14 रिपवः पुरः; 1. 26 सहागमनहेतुरुक्त; 1. 27 प्रत्युत गमने ततोपि. P.53, 1. 18 यथोत्तरविशेषणतया; 1. 22 एवमपोहनमपि. P. 54, 1. 2 व्यापारा :; 1. 3 चैकसंक्रमात्; 1. 16 संहतरूपा अरिपुरे; 1. 26 अंत्राधिकेन; 1. 32 सदसद्विचारम्. P. 55, 1. 2 क: सेव्यः सत्समागम :; 1.8 संनतये; 1. 9 तस्य विभोरन केवलं; 1. 22 साध्यसाधकयोनिर्देशे; 1. 25 अर्थायातं भवतीत्येष न्यायो. P.56,1.3 नमन्तु; 1. 4 अत्र धनुषां शिरसां नमनयो :; 1. 5 ०कदैव कर्तव्यता- सम्भवात् ; 1. 6 स्पर्धायाः सम्भा०; 1. 7 •पम्यगर्भत्वे एवं; 1. 21 मत्तत्वादीनाम- शोभ०; 1. 27 ०शोभनत्वमिति सद०. P. 57, 1. 3 प्रत्युत क्रमभङ्गात्; I. 4 सांहत्येनावतार :; 1. 5 त्वेकस्य कार्य प्रति; 1.13 ०कारण नियमविपर्यया० P. 58, 1. 3 शोभादिवहनात; 1. 17 कोपेपि रक्तान्यपि; 1. 21 मल्िकाचय- धम्मिल्लाः; 1. 23 मीलितेऽनुत्कृष्टगुणेन; 1. 28 उदंशुदशनांशु०. P. 59, 1. 7 न च न चोपचीयते; 1. 10 यमुनयो: सङ्गेपि; 1. 13 सूक्ष्मं यत्र त०. 1. 16 पुंस्त्वं तस्या :; 1.17 संलक्षितं पुरुषायितं; 1. 18 ०लिखनेनासूचि; 1. 23 ०द्विंन्नस्य च वस्तुन :; 1. 26 रोमाव्वाप्ति०; 1. 28 मण्डलमुखैः. P. 60 1. 6 स्फूर्जद्घूत्कारघोर: 1. 7 प्रतिबलमथनोच्छून०. 1. 17 विस्मयं प्रति तस्याहेतुत्वात ; 1. 19 तस्या लौकिक०; 1. 21 यदि पुनः स्वभावोक्तावप्य०; 1. 26 प्रत्यक्षायमाणत्वस्येव स्वरूपत्वात्. P.61 1. 1 · मण्डलायां; 1. 22 मिश्रितत्वे तदाख्यका :; 1. 23 तदाख्यका इति; भावोदय०; 1. 30 •लज्जयो: सन्धि .... विषयरत्यङ्गम् P. 62 1. 6 अन्ये च रसाद्यपकारकत्वमात्रे०; 1. 7 ङ्गीकार्य इति; .11 मात्र- स्यैवालङ्कारता; 1. 15 तदा वाक्यादिष्वपि तथा; 1. 16 रसवदाद्यलङ्कारस्तदपिपरास्तं; 1. 27 तृतीयेर्षें च; 1. 29 ०रयोरुभयोः स्थितत्वाच्छब्दार्थालङ्गारसंसृष्टिः एवं शब्दा- लङ्कारसंसष्टेश्च स्थितत्वात्संसृष्टिः P. 63 1. 4 आकृष्टवेग; 1. 5 चिरमचेष्टत; 1. 7 पादमूलचेष्टन०; तच्चरणमूल- चेष्टन०; 1. 18 चन्द्रारोपात्; 1. 19 चंद्रस्य प्रकृतत्वात्; 1. 20 अप्रस्तुतस्यार्थस्य गम्यत्वात् ; 1. 29 रितत्वेन प्रतीयते. P.64 1. 19 सहइ पसारिअगीभण; मोरविल्लाणं; 1. 20 ·इ्यामायितेष्वित्यु- पमा पथिका सामाजिका येष्विति;1. 24 •दर्पणमिमं; 1. 25•खिलं स्वयमेव.

Appendix B.

( The Kârikâs occurring in the text. )

प्रथम: परिच्छेद: शरदिन्दुसुन्दर रुचिश्चेतसि सा मे गिरां देवी। अपहृत्य तमः सन्ततमर्थानखिलान्प्रकाशयतु।। चतुर्वर्गफलप्राप्तिः सुस्ादल्पघियामपि। काव्यादेव यतस्तेन तत्स्वरूपं निरूप्यते॥ वाक्यं रसात्मकं काव्यं दोषास्तस्यापकर्षकाः । उत्कर्षहेतवः प्रोक्ता गुणालङ्काररीतयः॥ द्वितीय: परिच्छेद: वाक्यं स्याद्योग्यताकांक्षासत्तियुक्त: पदोच्चयः। वाक्योच्चयो महावाक्यमित्थं वाक्यं द्विया मतम्।। चर्णा: प्रदं प्रयोगार्हानन्वितैकार्थबोधकाः । अथो वोच्यश्च लक्ष्यश्च व्यंग्यश्चेति त्रिधा मतः॥ वाच्योऽर्थोंऽमिधया बोध्यो लक्ष्यो लक्षणया मतः । व्यंग्यो व्यञ्ञनया ताः स्युस्तिस: शब्दस्य शक्तय:।। तत्र सक्केतितार्थस्य बोधनादग्रिमाभिधा। सङ्केतो गृह्यते जातौ गुणद्रव्यक्रियासु च।। मुख्यार्थबाधे तद्युक्तो ययाऽन्योऽर्थः प्रतीयते। रूढेः प्रयोजनाद्वासौ लक्षणा शक्तिरर्पिता।। मुख्यार्थस्येतराक्षेपो वाक्यार्थेऽन्वयसिद्धये। स्यादात्मनोऽप्युपादानादेषोपादानलक्षणा॥। अर्पणं स्वस्य वाक्यार्थे परस्यान्वयसिद्धये। उपलक्षणहेतुत्वादेषा लक्षणलक्षणा॥। आरोपाध्यवसानाभ्यां प्रत्येकं ता अपि द्विया। विषयस्यानिगीर्णस्यान्यतादात्म्यप्रतीतिकृत्॥। सारोपा स्यान्निगीर्णस्य मता साध्यवसानिका।सादृश्येतरसम्बन्धाः शुद्धास्ता: सकला अपि॥। सादृश्यात्तु मता गौण्यस्तेन षोडश मेदिताः ।व्यंग्यस्य गूढागूढत्वाद्द्विधा स्यु: फललक्षणाः।। धर्मिधर्मगतत्वेन फलस्यैता अपि द्विधा। तदेवं लक्षणामेदाश्चत्वारिंशन्मता बुधैः॥ पदवाक्यगतत्वेन प्रत्येकं ता अपि द्विधा। विरतास्वभिधाधासु ययार्थों बोध्यते परः ॥ सा वृत्तिर्व्यञ्जना नाम शब्दस्यार्थादिकस्य च। अभिधालक्षणामूला शब्दस्य व्यञ्ञना दविधा।॥। अनेकार्थस्य शब्दस्य संयोगाद्यैनियत्रिते। एकत्रार्थेऽन्यधीहेतुव्यज्जना साभिधाश्रया॥ लक्षणोपास्यते यस्य कृते तत्तु प्रयोजनम्। यया प्रत्याय्यते सा स्याद्व्यञ्ञना लक्षणाश्रया। वक्तुबोद्धव्यवाक्यानामन्यसंनिधिवाच्ययोः । प्रस्तावदेशकालानां काकोश्चेष्टादिकस्य च॥ वैशिष्टयादन्यमर्थ या बोधयेत्सार्थसम्भवा। त्रैविध्यादियमर्थानां प्रत्येकं त्रिविधा मता। शब्दबोध्यो व्यनत्तयर्थः शब्दोप्यर्थान्तराश्रयः । एकस्य व्यअ्ञकत्वे तदन्यस्य सहकारिता॥ अभिधादित्रयोपाधिवैशिष्टयात्रिविधो मतः । शब्दोऽपि वाचकस्तद्वल्वक्षको व्यअ्ञकस्तथा॥ तात्पर्याख्यां वृत्तिमाडु: पदार्थान्वयबोधने। तात्पर्यार्थ तदर्थ च वाक्यं तद्बोधकं परे॥ दशम: परिच्छेद: (अर्थालङ्काराः) साम्यं वाच्यमवैधर्म्य वाक्यैक्य उपमा दयोः॥। सा पूर्णा यदि सामान्यधर्म औपम्यवाचि च । उपमेयं चोपमानं भवेद्ाच्यमियं पुनः॥ श्रौती यथेववाशब्दा इवार्थो वा वतिर्यदि। आर्थी तुल्यसमानाद्यास्तुल्यार्थो यत्र वा वतिः॥ द्वे तद्धिते समासेऽथ वाक्ये पूर्णा षडेव तत्। लुप्ा सामान्यधर्मादेरेकस्य यदि वा दयोः॥ त्रयाणां वानुपादाने श्रीत्यार्थीं सापि पूर्ववत्। पूर्णावद्धर्मलोपे सा बिना श्रौतीं तु तद्धिते॥ आधारकर्मविहिते द्विविधे च क्यच्ि क्यडि। कर्मकत्रोर्णमुलि च स्यादेवं पञ्ना पुनः॥ उपमानानुपादाने द्विधा वाक्यसमासयोः। मौपम्यवाच्नो लोपे समासे किपि च द्विया।।

340 APPENDIX B.

द्विषा समासे वाक्ये च लोपे धर्मोपमानयोः । किपसमासगता देवा धर्मेवादिविलोपने।। उपमेयस्य लोपे तु स्यादेका प्रत्यये क्यच्चि। धर्मोपमेयलोपेऽन्या त्रिलोपे च समासगा ।। वेनोपमाया मेदा: स्युः सप्तविशतिसंख्यकाः। एकरूप: कचित्कापि भिन्नः साधारणो गुणः।। मिन्ने विम्बानुनिम्बत्वं शब्दमात्रेण वा मिदा। एकदेशविवर्तिन्युपमा वाच्यत्वगम्यते।। भवेतां यत्र साम्यस्य कथिता रसनोपमा। यथोर्ध्वमुपमेयस्य यदि स्यादुपमानता।। मालोपमा यदेकस्योपमानं बद्ु दृश्यते। उपमानोपमेयत्वमेकस्यैव त्वनन्वयः।। पर्यायेण द्योरेतदुपमेयोपमा मता। सदृशानुभवाद्वस्तुस्मृतिः स्मरणमुच्यते॥ रूपकं रूपितारोपाद्विषये निरपह्वे। तत्परम्परितं साङं निरङ्गमिति च त्रिया॥। यत्र कस्यच्िदारोप: परारोपणकारणम्। तत्परम्परितं फिष्टाष्रिष्टशब्दनिबन्धनम्॥। प्रत्येकं केवलं मालारूपं चेति चतुविधम्। अद्विनो यदि साङ्गस्य रूपणं साङ्गमेव तत्।। समस्तवस्तुविषयमेकदेशविवर्ति च। आरोप्याणामशेषाणां शाब्दत्वे प्रथमं मतम्।। यत्र कस्यचिदार्थत्वमेकदेशविवर्ति तत्। निरङ्गं केवलस्यैव रूपणं तदपि दविया॥। मालाकेवलरूपत्वाद, तेनाष्टौ रूपके मिदाः । दृश्यन्ते कच्विदारोप्याः छिष्टाः साङ्गेपि रूपके।। अधिकारूढवैशिष्ट्यं रूपकं यत्तदेव तत्ं। विषयात्मतयारोप्ये प्रकृताथोंपयोगिनि॥ परिणामो भवेत्तल्यातुल्याधिकरणो दविया। सन्देहः प्रकृतेन्यस्य संशयः प्रतिभोत्थितः॥ शुद्धो निश्चयगभोऽसौ निश्चयान्त इति त्रिया। साम्यादतरिंमिस्तहद्धिभ्रांन्तिमान्प्रतिभोत्थिसः॥ कत्विद्वेदाद्गहीतृणां विषयाणां तथा कच्वित्। एकस्यानेक्रधोललेखो यः स उल्लेख उच्यते॥। प्रकृतं प्रतिषिध्यान्यस्थापनं स्ादपह्कतिः। गोपनीयं कमप्यर्थ धोतयित्वा कथंचन।। यदि श्ेषेणान्यथा वान्यथयेत्साप्यपह्तिः । अन्यन्निषिष्य प्रकृतस्थापनं निश्चयः पुनः॥ भवेत्सम्भावनोत्प्रेक्षा प्रकृतस्य परात्मना। वाच्या प्रतीयमाना सा प्रथमं द्विविधा मता॥ वाच्येवाद्प्रयोगे स्यादप्रयोगे परा पुनः। जातिर्गुण: किया द्रव्यं यदुत्प्रेक्ष्यं दरयोरपि। तदष्टघाऽपि प्रत्येकं भावाभावाभिमानतः । गुणक्रियास्वरूपत्वान्निमित्तस्य पुनश्च ताः॥ दात्रिशदधतां यान्ति, तत्र वाच्याभिदा:पुनः। बिना द्रव्यं त्रिषा सर्वाः स्वरूपफलहेतुगाः॥ उक्त्यनुक्त्योनिमित्तस्य द्विया तत्र स्वरूपगाः । प्रतीयमानामेदाश्च प्रत्येकं फळहेतुगा:॥ उक्त्यनुक्त्यो: प्रस्तुतस्य प्रत्येकं ता अपि दिया। अलक्कारान्तरोत्या सा वैन्विन्यमधिकं भजेव्॥ मन्ये शक्े झुवं प्रयो नूनमिलेवमादयः। सिद्धत्वेऽव्यवसायस्यातिशयोक्तिर्निगधते॥ मेदेऽप्यमेद: सम्बन्घेऽसम्बन्धस्तदिपर्ययौ। पौर्वापर्यात्यय: कार्यहेत्वोः सा पञ्चधा ततः॥ पदार्थानां प्रस्तुतानामन्येषां वा यदा भनेत्। एकधर्माभिसम्बन्ध: स्यात्तदा तुल्ययोगिता॥। अप्रस्तुतप्रस्तुतयोदींपकं तु निगधते। अथ कारकमेकं स्यादनेकास क्रियास चेतू।। प्रतिवस्तूपमा सा स्याद्वाक्ययोर्गम्यसाम्ययोः । एकोऽपि धर्मःसामान्यो यत्र निर्दिश्यते पृथक्। दृष्टान्तस्तु सधर्मस्य वस्तुनः प्रतिबिम्बनम्। सम्भवन्वस्तुसम्बन्धोऽसम्भवन्वापि कुत्रच्ित्।। यत्र बिम्बानुबिम्बत्वं बोधयेत्सा निदर्शना। आधिक्यमुपमेयस्योपमानान्न्यूनताथवा।। व्यतिरेक, एक उक्तेऽनुक्ते हेतौ पुनस्त्रिधा। चतुर्विधोपि साम्यस बोधनाच्छन्दतोरऽर्थतः। आक्षेपाच् द्वादशधा श्रेषेडपीति त्रिरष्टवा। प्रत्येकं स्यान्मिलित्वाष्टचत्वारिंशद्विधः पुनः॥ सहार्थस्य बलादेकं यत्र स्याद्ाचकं दयोः । सा सहोक्तिर्मूलभूतातिशयोक्तिर्यदा भवेत्॥ विनोक्तिरयंद्विनान्येन नासाध्वन्यदसाधु वा। समासोक्ति: समैर्यत्र कार्यलिङ्गविशेषणैः॥ व्यवहारसमारोप: प्रस्तुतेऽन्यस्य वस्तुनः । उक्तिर्विश्नेषणैः सामिप्रायैः परिकरो मतः॥ शब्दे:स्वमावादेकार्थ: श्ेषोऽनेकार्थवाचनम्। कत्विद्विश्ेष: सामान्यात्सामान्यं ना विशेषत:। कार्यान्निमिचं कार्य च हेतोरथ समात्समम्। अप्रस्तुतात्पस्तुतं चेद्रम्यते पञ्चषा ततः ।। अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसा स्यादू, उच्रा व्याजस्तुतिः पुनः। निन्दास्तुतिभ्यां वाच्याभ्यां मम्वले खुतिनिन्दयोः।।

SÅHITYADARPAŅA. 341

पर्यायोकं यदा भंग्या गम्यमेवाभिंधीयते। सामान्यं वा विशेषेण विज्ञेषस्तेन वा यदि॥ कार्य च कारणेनेदं कार्येण च समर्थ्यंते। साधर्म्येणेतरेणार्थान्तरन्यासोऽटवा ततः॥ हेतोर्वाक्यपदार्थत्वे काव्यलिङ्गं निगद्यते। अनुमानं तु विच्छित्या ज्ञानं साध्यस्य साधनाव।। अमेदेनामिधा हेतुर्हेतोहेंतुमता सह। अनुकूलं प्रातिकूल्यमनुकूलानुबन्धि चेत्।। वस्तुनो वक्मिष्टस्य विशेषप्रतिपत्तये। निषेधाभास आक्षेपो वक्ष्यमाणोक्तगो द्विधा।। अनिष्टस्य तथार्थस्य विध्याभासः परो मतः । विभावना विना हेतुं कार्योत्पत्तिर्यदुच्यते। उक्तानुक्तनिमित्तत्वाद्विया सा परिकीर्तिता। संति हेतौ फलाभावो विशेषोक्तिस्तथा दिषा। जातिश्चतुर्भिजा त्यावैर्गुणो गुणादिमिस्त्रिभिः। क्रिया क्रियाद्रव्याभ्यां यद्द्रव्यं द्रव्येण वा मिथ: विरुद्धमिव भासेत विरोधोऽसौ दशाकृतिः । कार्यकारणयोरमिन्नदेशतायामसङ्गतिः॥ गुणौ क्रिये वा यत्स्यातां विरुद्धे हेतुकार्ययोः । यद्वारब्धस्य वैकल्यमनर्थस्य च सम्भदः ॥. विरूपयो: सङ्घटना या च तद्विषमं मतम्। समं स्वादानुरूप्येण श्राघायोगस्य वस्तुनः विचित्रं तदिरुद्धस्य कृतिरिष्टफलय चेत। आश्रयाश्रयिणोरेकस्वाधिक्येऽधिकमुच्यते। अन्योन्यमुभयोरेकक्रियायाः करणं मिथः । यदाधेयमनाधारमेकं चानेकगोचरम्॥ किश्चित्प्रकुर्वतः कार्यमशक्यस्येतरस्य वा। कार्यस्य करणं दैवाद्विशेषस्त्रिविधस्ततः॥ व्याघातः स तु केनापि वस्तु येन यथा कृतम् । तेनैव चेदुपायेन कुरुतेऽन्यस्तदन्यथा॥ सौकयेंण च कार्यस्य विरुद्धं कियते यदि। परं परं प्रति यदा पूर्वपूर्वस्य हेतुता॥ तदा कारणमाला स्यात, तन्मालादीपकं पुनः । धर्मिणामेकधर्मेण सम्बन्धो यद्यथोत्तरम्।। पूर्व पूर्व प्रति विशेषणत्वेन परं परम्। स्थाप्यतेऽपोद्यते वा चेत्स्यात्तदैकावली दविया॥। स्रोत्तरमुत्कषों वस्तुनः सार उच्यते। यथासंख्यमनूददेश उद्दिष्टानां क्रमेण यत्॥ क्वचिदेकमनेकस्मिन्ननेकं चैकगं क्रमात्। भवति क्रियते वा चेत्तदा पर्याय इष्यते।। परिवृत्तिर्विनिमय: समन्यूनाधिकर्मवेत्। प्रश्नादप्रश्नतो वापि कथिताद्वस्तुनो भवेत्॥। ताटृगन्यव्यपोषश्रेच्छान्द आर्थोऽयवा तदा। परिसंख्या, उत्तरं प्रश्नस्योत्तरादुननयो यदि॥ बच्चासकृदसम्भाव्यं सत्यपि प्रश्न उत्तरम्। दण्डापूपिकयान्यार्थागमोरऽर्यापत्तिरिष्यते ॥ .: विकल्पस्तुल्यवलयोर्विरोधश्चातुरीयुतः । समुच्चयोऽयमेकस्मिन्सति कार्यस्य साधके। खलेकपोतिकान्यायातत्कर: स्यात्परोऽपि चेत्।गुणौ किये वा युगपत्स्यातां यद्वा गुणक्रियें।। समाधि: सुकरे कार्ये दैवाद्वस्त्वन्तरागमात्। प्रत्यनीकमशक्तेन प्रतीकारे रिपोर्यदि॥ तदीयस्य तिरस्कारस्तस्यवोत्कर्षसाधकः । प्रसिद्धस्योपमानस्योपमेयत्वप्रकल्पनम्।। निष्फलत्वाभिधानं वा प्रतीपमिति कथ्यते। उकत्वा चात्यन्तमुत्कर्षमत्युत्कृष्टस्य वंस्तुनः॥ कल्पितेऽप्युपमानत्वे प्रतीपं केचिदूचचिरे। मीलितं वस्तुनो गुप्तिः केनचित्तल्यलक्ष्मणा॥ सामान्यं प्रकृत स्वान्यतादात्म्यं सवृशैर्गुणैः। तद्ुणः स्वगुणत्यागादत्युत्कृष्टगुणग्रह्यः।। तद्रपाननुहारस्तु हेतौ सत्यप्यतदुणः । संलक्षितस्तु सूक्ष्मोडर्य आकारेणेङ्वितेन वा ॥ कयाऽपि सूच्यते भंग्या यत्र सूक्ष्मं तदुच्यते। व्याजोक्तिगोंपनं व्याजादुद्भित्रस्ापि वस्तुनः।। स्वभावोक्तिर्दुरूहार्थस्वक्रियारूपवर्णनम्। अन्भुतस्य पदार्थस्य भूतस्याथ भविष्यतः॥ वतपत्यक्षायमाणत्वं तद्राविकमुदाहतम्। लोकातिशयसम्पत्तिवर्णनोदात्तमुच्यते।। यद्ापि प्रस्तुतस्याऊं महतां चरितं भवेत्। रसभावी तदाभासी भावस्य प्रशमस्तथा ॥ गुणीभूतसवमायान्ति यदालङ्कतयस्तदा। रसवत्प्रेय ऊजेसवि समाहितमिति क्रमाद।। भावस्य चोदये सन्धौ मिश्रत्वे च तदाख्यकाः । यद्येत एवालक्कारा: परस्परविमिश्रिता:॥- तदा पृथगलङ्कारो संसृष्टिः सङ्करस्तथा। मिथोऽनपेक्षयतेषां स्थिति: संसृष्टिरुच्यते। अग्ञाद्ित्वेडलङ्गतीनां तद्वदेकाश्रयस्थितौ। सन्दिग्धत्वे च भवति सक्करस्त्रिविध: पुनः।

Appendix C.

Index of verses and half-verses cited as illustrations,

Verse. Page. | Verse. Page. | Verse. Page. अकलङ्कं मुखं ३८ इदं किलान्याज ३७ क्षीणः क्षीणोऽपि ३८ अजस्य गृह्णतो * ५० इदं वक्त्रं २५ खङ्ग: क्ष्मा २४ अतिगाढ ३८। इन्दुर्लिप्त ४३ गङ्गाम्भसि ३० अत्ता पत्थ ४ इह पुरो २९ गच्छ गच्छसि ४९ अधःकृता ६१ इहैव त्वं तिष्ठ ५२ गच्छामीति ४३ अनातपत्रो ६० उअ णिच्चल १५ गर्दभति १९ अनायास ४९ उन्मीलन्ति ५३ गाङ्गमम्बु ५९ अनुयान्त्या ४० उपकृतं ९ गाम्भीर्येण २८ अनुराग ६३ उपदिशति ११ गुरुपर १५ अनुलेपनानि ३५ ऊरुः कुरङ् ३० गृहिणी सच्चिव: ५२ अनेन पर्यास ४५ एक: कपोत ४४ घटितमिवाजन ३२ अन्त:पुरीयसि १८ एतद्विभाति चरमाचल २८ चकोर्य एव ३६ अन्तरिछद्राणि ४४ ऐन्द्रं धनु: ४१ चन्द्रायते २१ अन्यदेवाङ्ग ३४ कटाक्षणापीषत ६४ जगाद वदन ५८ अयं मार्तण्ड: २६ कथमुपरि ३३ जन्मान्तरीण ६१ अयं रलाकरो ५१ कपोलफलका ३० जन्मेदं वन्ध्यतां ३७ अयं स रस ६१ कमलेव मति २२/ जस्स रणन्ते .४१ अरविन्दमिदं २२ करमुदय २४ जानीमहेडस्या ४७ अरातिविक्रमा १९ कलयति ३७ ज्ञाने मौनं ३० अरुणे च तरुणि ५७ कलषं च ५७ तद्दक्त्रं यदि ५७ अविदितगुणा ३६ कानने सरि ५२ तन्वडग्या: स्तन ३० अविरल ६१ काले वारि २८ तव विरहे ४८ अश्ुच्छलेन ३२ कालो मधु: १४ तव विरहे हरिणाक्षी ४6 असमाप्त ४० का विसमा ५५ तस्य च प्रवयसो ५४ अस्य राज्ञो २१ किं तावत्सरसि २६ तस्या मुखेन १९ अस्या: सर्गविधौ ३४ किं तारुण्य २६ त्वदङ्गमार्दवं ३५ अहमेव गुरु: ५८ कि भूषणं ५४ त्वद्वाजिराजि अहिणअ ६४ किमधिक ५१ त्वया सा शोभते ५२ आकृष्टिवेग ६३ किमाराध्यं ५५ त्वयि दृष्टे ३६ आनन्दममन्द ५१ कुपितासि यदा ४८ त्वयि सङ्गर ५३ आमीलिताल ६१ कोडन्र भूमि ३६ दत्वा कटाक्ष ५४ आसीदअन ६० कोकिलोऽह ४४ दन्तप्रभा ४१ आहवे जग : २२क वनं तरु ५१ दानं विचादृतं ३५ इत्यमाराध्य ४६ क सूर्य ३७ ६३ क्षिपसि शुकं दासे कृतागसि २४ इदमाभाति ३८' दिवमप्युप ५२

SAHITYADARPAŅA. 343

Verse. Page. | Verse. Page. | Verse. Page.

दीयतामर्जितं ५६ मधु द्विरेफ: ५ वदनाम्बुंज ६४

दुगालङ्वित १४ मधुपान ६१ वदनं मृग १९

दूरं समागत ३५ मधुरः सुधा १७ वनेडखिल ६१

दृशा दग्ध ५२ मध्य तव २७ वनेचराणां २६

देव: पायाद ६२ मध्येन तनु ५७ वलभोत्सङ्ग ५०

धनिनोऽपि ४९ मनोजराज २३ वसन्तलेखक ३६

धन्यासि वैदर्भि ३६ मलिकाच्चित ५८ वाप्यो भवन्ति ५३

धन्या: खलु वने ४४ मानमस्या ५७ वारिजेनेव २१

धुनोति चासिं ५७ मुक्तोत्कर: ३२ विकसितमुखी ४०

न तज्जलं ५३ मुखमिन्दुयंथा १८ विकासिनीलो ३२

न धत्ते शिरसा ४७ मुखमेणी ३० विचरन्ति ५४

नयनयुगा ५० . मुखं तव २५ विदधे मधुप २५

नाभिप्रभिन्नाम्बु ६१ मुग्धा दुग्धधिया २७ विना जलद ४०

निरर्थकं जन्म गत ४५ मुनिर्जयति ६० विपुलेन ५१

निर्माणकौशलं २४ यः कौमार ३ विमल एव ३६

निःशेष १४ यत्त्वन्नेत्र ४६ विरहे तव ४८

निसर्गसारभो ४१ यत्र पतत्य ४७ विराजति व्योम २८

नेदं नभोमण्डलं २८ यदि स्यान्मण्डले ३४ विललाप स ५५

नेत्रैरिवोत्पलै: २१ यदेतच्चन्द्रान्त ३३ विसृष्टरागा ५४

न्यक्कारो हयमेव २ ययोरारो ५४ वीक्षितुं न क्षमा ५५

पद्मोदय २३ यशसि प्रसरति २० व्याजस्तुतिस्तव ४५

परापकार ४७ यस्यालीयत ५ व्याधूय यद्रसन ४२

पश्यन्त्यसंख्य ४७ यावदर्थपदां ४६ शशिनमुप ५१

पश्येत्कश्रिचल ६१ युगान्तकाल ५२ शशी दिवस ५६

पादाहतं ४३ यैरेकरूप ४२ शिरीषमृद्दी २२

पान्तु वो २३ योऽनुभूत: ३७ शून्यं वास ५

पारेजलं ३२ रञ्चिता नु ३३ शैलेन्द्र ५९

पुंस्त्वादपि ४४ राजनारायण ६३ श्रुतं कृत ५३

पृथ्वि स्थिरा ४६ राजन्राजसुता ४५ स एकस्त्रीणि ५७

प्रणमत्यु ५१ राजीवमिव २१ सङ्केतकाल १५,५९

प्रयाणे तव ३७ राज्ये सारं ५३ सदैव शोणो ५८

प्रवर्तयन् क्रिया: ४३ रावणस्यापि ३१ सङ्गमविरह २७

प्रागेव हरिणा ३४ रावणाव २३ सदः करस्पर्श ५१

प्रिय इति २७ लक्ष्मणेन समं ३९ सन्ततमुसला ५०

बलमार्त ५५ लक्ष्मीवक्षोज ५८ सममेव ३९

चलावलेपा ३५ लाङलेनाभि ६० सममेव समाक्रान्तं ३४

बालअ णाहं ४८ लावण्यमधुभि: २३ सरोविक ५३

बृहत्सहाय: ४६ लिम्पतीव ३२ सहकार: ४४

मक्तिर्भवे न ५५ वक्रस्यन्दि ५९ सह कुमुद ३९

मलापवर्जितैः २०वदनमिदं न २९ . सहसा विद ४६

344 APPENDIX C.

Verse. Page. | Verse. Page. | Verse. Page.

सहांधरदले ३४,३९ स्निग्धश्यामल १२ इन्त सान्द्रेण ५९

सी बाला ५० स्पृष्टास्ता नन्दने ४५ हारोऽयं ५५ सैषा स्थली ३१ स्मरशर ४८ हृदि बिसलता २९

सौजन्याम्तु २५ स्मितेनोपायनं २५ हंसश्चन्द २१ सौरभमम्भो १७ सेर विधाय २० हंहो धीर ५६

स्तनयुग ४५ स्रगियं यदि ४३ स्थिता: क्षणं ५४। हमूमदाद्य ३८/

Appendix D.

( The pages refer to the Notes )

General Index.

Abhidha, definition of 38 Alankārasārasangraha 105, Abhidhā-vritti-mātrikā 107 54, 59, 60, 61, 88, 320 Alankāras'ekhara 15, 40, 89 Abhihitanvaya-vādin 65,86 Amarus'ataka 30, 78, 118, explanation of the term 87 245 summary of the views of 86 Anandavardhana 8,24 Abhinavagupta 1,59 Ãnantya, explanation of 45 Action, definition of 44 Ananvaya 109, 111 Adhika 253-255 Annambhatta 41 distinguished from Vishama Anubandhas, four, 5 254 Anubhāva 30 Adhyavasāya, distinguished Anukūla 230-31 from Aropa 155 Anumana 225-229 divisions of 155 distinguished from Kāvya- Affix, whether it has a linga 228 meaning 98 Ut- Agnipurāņa 5, 26, 222 prekshā 228 Ãhārya 131 Anuprāsa 324 Ajahat-svārtha, definition of Anvitābhidhāna-vādin, expla- 49,50 88 Ākānkshā nation of the term 34 Ākara, meaning of summary of the views of 87 83 Ãkshepa Anyonya 255 232-235 Alankāras, classification of 89 Apahnuti 135-138

Alankārabhāshyakāra 179 distinguished from Rūpaka

Alankāra;chandrikā 137

230, 236, 238 Vakrokti

Alankara-dhvani, definition 138

of 22, 140 Vyajokti

: Alnkarasarvasva 19, 21, 73, 138

89, 107, 109, 126, 157 ff Appayadīkshita 68, 105, 150 copied by Vis'vanātha Aprastuta-pras'amsā 201, 207 187, 216, 209, 310 distinguished from -vimars'ini 83, 106, 155 Samāsokti sañjivinī 150, 30 2

APPENDIX D.

distinguished from Bhäkta, meaning of 320 ›, S'lesha Bhallatas'ataka 203, 205, 270 207 Bhāmaha 2, 18, 19, 25, 28, „ Upamā- 90,92 dhvani 206 Vastu- Bhāmati 134 Bharata 71,83 dhvani 205 Bhartrihari 215, 219, 286 Aprayukta, a dosha 10 Āpta Bhatța-chintāmaņi 12,88 40 Bhațtikāvya 263, 313 Arjunavarmadeva 71, 118, 245 Āropa, meaning of Bhāva, definition of 31 51 Bhava-s'abala 318 Artha ( purpose ) 68 Bhava-sandhi 317-318 Artha, divisions of 38 Bhāvodaya 317 Arthantaranyāsa 214-219 Bhāvika 306-312 distinguished from Aprastu- tapras'amsā 218 distinguished from Adbhu- tarasa 309 from Drishtanta 218 „ from Atis'ayokti 310

Arthapatti 279-283 , from Bhrantiman 310

distinguished from ,, from Prasāda-guņa

Anumāna 281 309

explanation of the term 282 „ from Svabhāvokti

Āsatti 35 310, 11

Asangati 245-247 Bhrantimān 129-131

distinguished from Virodha distinguished from Rūpaka 247 131 „ from Vibhāvanā Bilhaņa 179,231 247 Bimba-pratibimba-bhāva „ from Vis'eshokti 106, 107 247 Bhoja 28, 205, 291 Atadguņa 300~2 Brihatkathā-mañjarī 95 Atis'ayokti 154-161 Brihatsamhitā 13,216 divisions of 157 Chakravartin 150, 302 Auchiti 69 Chandraloka 90, 135, 214, 218 Avimrishța-vidheyāms'a 6 Chhekānuprāsa 329 Bāla-bhārata 272 Chitramimānsā 78, 79, 105, Bāla-rāmāyaņa 293 102, 125, 150, 289 ff Bāņa 81, 277, 306 Chyutasamskriti 10 Baudhayanadharmasutra 136 Damodaragupta -159 Bhāgavata-purāņa 32 Daņdāpūpika-nyāya 279 Bhagna-prakramatva, Daņdin 18, 138, 201, 221 a fault 288 Das'arāpaka 30

SAHITYADARPANA. 842

Des'a 70 Hetu ( reason ), definition of Dhvani, definition of 22 222 divisions of 22,23 divisions of 220-221 Dhvanyāloka 8, 9, 15, 22, Hetu ( figure of speech) 229, 61, 84, 235 ff 230 Đīpak& 162-165 41 distinguished from Tulyayo- Import, of a word, theories about 41-43 gitā 164 Incarnations, of Vishnu 31, 32 „ from Upamā 164 Indioation 46 divisions of 163 Itivritta-defined 26 Dosha, definition of 9,10 Jacob, Col. 98 divisions of 10 Jagannātha 5, 29, 69, 107, Drift 64 113, ff Drishțānta 164-168 Jahat-svārthā 49 distinguished from Prativa- Jāti ( genus ), distinguished stūpamā 167, 168 from Guna 44 explanation of the term 167 explanation of 43 Durgasimha 95 Jayaratha 83, 106, 109, Ekāvali ( a work ) 7, 50, 65, 139, 243, ff 107, 110, 126 Ekāvali ( figure of speech ) Jñāpaka-hetu 221, 222

262-264 Kādambarī 23, 277, 306

distinguished from Malā- Kaiyata 3, 41, 104 Kākatālīya-nyāya 288 dīpaka 264 Etymology, relation of, to Kāku, modulation of voice, 71,83 primary power of words 48 Kāla 71 Fruits of Poetry 2 Gatha-sapta-s'atī 24, 81, 144 Kālāpa, a system of Grammar 95 Gauņi, views about 55 ff Genus, distinguished from Kāmandaka 3

quality 44 Kāraka-dīpaka 164

Gita-govinda 31, 139 Kārąka-hetu, defined

Guna, (quality ), distinguished and explained 321-22

from Kriyā 43, 44 Kāraņamālā 259-261

Gunas ( of Kāvya ) definition Kātantra 95

of 27-28 Kathāsaritsagara 95

enumeration of 27, 28, 309 Kāvyādars'a 3, 23, 28, 121, ff Hāla 24,81 Kāvyālankārasūtra 109

Hanuman-nāțaka 215 Kāvyālankārą-kāmadhenu 4

Harshacharita 134, 259 Kāvyaliniga 219, 225

Hemachandra 7, 11, 22, distinguished from 48,66 Arthāntaranyāsa 225

348 APPENDIX D.

distinguished from criticism of the views of 6, Parikara 224 17, 47, 96, 175, 220 Kāvyaprakās'a-sanketa 41, 64, Mangala 1 320 Medhatithi 1 Kāvyanus'asana of Hema- Medini 12, 31 chandra 11, 48 Mīlita 295-297 Kāvyaprakās'a 2, 15, 17 ff distinguished from Bhranti- Khalekapotikā, a nyāya 245 mān 296 Kirātārjunīya 152, 215 Mimabsakas, on the import or Kriyā, definition of 44 words 39,42 Kshemendra 219 Mitaksharā 274 Kullūka 1 Moksha 3

Kumārasambhava 32, 74, Mundakopanishad 3

114, 127, 196, 216, 219, 240 Mrichchhakatika 147,240

Kumārilabhațța 36,87 Nāges'a or Nagojibhatta 43

Kuțțanīmata 159 55, 138, 193

Kuvalayānanda 164, 207, Naishadhiya-charita 165, 176

210, 218, 224 Namisādhu 15,23

Lakshana, definition of 8, 12 Nāțyas'āstra 71,90

Lakshana, definition of 46 Navasāhasānka-charita 248

divisions of 49 ff, 63 Negative particle, meanings of

principles at the root of 54 11 Nidars'ana 168-172 Latanuprāsa, definition of 109 distinguished from Anan- distinguished from Artha-

vaya 110 patti 171

Lińga 68, 220 „ from Drishtanta 171 Lochana 11, 22, 61, 64 ff divisions of 171 Lollața 64 Nipata, views about 97 Mādhurya 27 Nirukta 90 Mahābhashya 1, 42, 54, 104 138-141 Mahābhārata Nis'chaya 314 Mahimabhatta, date of distinguished from 26 Apahnuti 141 views of 26 , from Sandeha 139 Mālādīpaka 261-262 Nītis'ataka 286 distinguished from Kārana- Niyama, defined 273 mālã 262 Mallinatha 50, 59, 61, 157 distinguished from Vidhi 273 Malopamā 108 1, 2, 5, 17, 43, Nyāyabhashya 54 Mammata Nyayaratna-mala 87,98 49, 51, 59. 73 ff | Nyāyasūtra 41,54

SÂHITYADARPANA. 349

Nyāyavārtika 59 | Prakaraņa 68 Pada, definition of 37 Prasāda, a guņa 309 Padmagupta 248 Pratāparudrīya 4

Pāņinī 104, 186 Pratibhā 5 Paramalaghu-mañjūshā 34, 36, Pratihārendurāja 220 40, 54, 65, 98, 275 Pratīpa 292-295 Paramparita 116 distinguished from Upama Parikara 194-196 294 Parikarānkura 195 , from Vyatireka 294 Parisamkhyā 273, 277 Prātipadika, explained 37 distinguished from Niyama Prativastūpamā 165-166 274 distinguished from Upamã „ from Vidhi 274 166 Pariņāma 123-128 explanation of the term 166 distinguished from Rūpaka Pratyabhijñā ( a work ) 132 125 Pratyanīka 291-292 Parivritti 270-272 Predicate, definition of 7 distinguished from Paryaya Preyas 315-316 272 Puņyarāja 66,67,97 views about 271 Purport 65,86 Parthasarathimis'ra 87,98 Pūrva-mīmāusā-sūtra 42, 87, Paryāya 267-270 98, 274 distinguished from Vis'esha Raghavānanda 113 269 Raghuvains'a 1, 106, 116, ff Paryāyokta 210-214 Rājas'ekhara 89, 257

distinguished from Apra- Rāja-tarangiņī 180

stuta-pras'amsā 210-211 Ramacharana, criticized 139, divergence of opinion about 255, 293, 307 212 ff quoted 40, 49,78 Patañjali 1 183, 185 Poet, function of 26 Rasa, definition of 30 Poetry, divisions of 8 divisions of · 30 fruits of 2,25 Rāsābhāsa 32

soul of 15 Rasadhvani, defini- superior to the Vedas 4 tion of 23 Powers, of a word 38 examples of 23

Prabha 16, 31, 56, 59, Rasagangadhara 63, 67, 148, 228 148 ff Pradīpa 4, 6, 7, 31, 42, 67, 104 Rasanopamā 108 Prahelika, definition of 23 Rasavād 19, 313-14 illustrations of 23 Ratnakaņțha 72

350 APPENDIX D.

Ratnāpaņa 302 divisions of 179-180 Ratnāvali 309 Samuchchaya 285-290 Rītis ( styles of composi- distinguished from tion ), definition of 15, 28 Samādhi 288 divisions of 15,28 Dīpaka 290 Ruchidatta 58 „ from from Paryaya 290 Rudrața 1, 2, 4, 5, 15, 92

18, 23, 30, 174, 229 ff „ from Sama 290 67 Rūpaka 114-123 Samyoga Sandeha 128, 129 distinguished from Sarkara 324-331 Apahnuti 114 S'ankarāchārya 134 „ from Parinama 114, 125 Sanketa 38 divisions of 114 ff Sansrishti 323-24 explanation of the term 114 Sāra 265-266 Ruyyaka 73, 107 Sarasamuchchaya 72 S'abara 87, 274, 282, 320 Sarasvatīkaņthābharaņa 22, 23,

S'abda-vyapāra-vichāra 43, 50, 205, 225, 291

54 Saropā, Lakshaņa 50,51

Sādhyavasānā, lakshaņā 51 Sarvadars'anasangraha 3, 48

Sahacharabhinnata, a S'arvavarman 95

fault 287 S'atapatha-brāhmaņa 70

Sahacharya 66,67 S'āstradīpikā 42

Sahokti 176-178 S'auddhodani 10

S'akti 5,38 Sentence, definitionss of 34 S'ākuntala 152, 159 166, S'is'upalavadha 129, 150, 168, 178, 219, 229 ff 158, 161, 163, 215, 249 ff Sama 250-251 S'lesha, distinguished from Samadhi 290-291 Dhvani 199 a guna 291 „ from Samāsokti Samāhita 316-317 200 Sāmānya 297-298 divisions of 121-122, 196 distinguished from views about 198-199 Apahnuti 298 S'loka-vārtika 87,282 „ from Bhrantiman 298 Smaraņa 112-114 „ from Milita 207 S'ringara, definition and kinds Samarthya 69 of 30 Samāsokti 179-193 S'ruti-dushta, a dosha 9,32 distinguished from Sthāyibhāva 30 Aprastuta-pras'amsa 193 Subhāshitāvali 128; 139, Rūpaka 192 179, 185 Upamā 188 Subject, defined 7

SARITYADARPAŅA, 351

Suggestion 75 „ from Bopaka 89 Sukshma 302-303 distinguished from Anu- „ from Upameyopama 90 mana 303 Suvritta-tilaka „ from Vyatireka 219 89-90 Svabhāvokti 305-306 divisions of 90, ff, 104 Svara, Vedic accent 70 Upama-dhvani 193 Tadguņa 298-300 distinguished from Sama- distinguished from Bhrānti- sokti 193 mãn 299 Upameyopamā 10-111 „ from Milita 299 distinguished from Anan- „ from Samanya 299 Tantravārtika 3, 36, 42, 60, vaya 110

98, 273 „ from Rasanopama 110 Tarala 59, 89, 91, 110, 157 Tarkabhāshā 34, 36, 40 „ from Upamā 110

Tarkadīpikā 1, 12, 31, 39, 50, explanation of the term 110 Upanishads 3 65,282 Tarkasangraha 34, 40, 147 Ūrjasvī 316

Tatpary& 65,86 Utpala 132

Tatvabodhini Utprekshā 83 141-154

Tauta 5 distinguished from Atis'a-

Tilaka 243 yokti 151-152

Tulyayogitā 161-162 „ from Bhrantiman

Udāharaņa-a figure 141, 151 218 Udāharaņa-chandrikā 20, 24, „ from Sandeha 157

30, 50, 74, 206 ff „ from Upamā 150

Udātta divisions of 312, 313 142, 144

Udayana explanation of the term 141 58 19, 90, 92, 105, Uttara Udbhata 277,279

107, 109, 110 ff distinguished from Anu-

Uddyota 17, 39, 56, 80 ff mana 278

Ullekha 131-135 „ from Kāvyalinga 279

distinguished from Bhrānti- „ from Parisankhya 278 man 132 Uttararāma charita 110, 114, „ from Malarupaka 132 165, 235, 267 ff Upachara, meanings of 59 Vāchaspatimis'ra 134 Upādānalakshaņā 49 Vāgbhațālankāra 264, 266, 277 Upādhi, kinds of 43 -- 44 Vāhīka, derivation of 55 Upamā 89-109 Vākovākya, defined 205 distinguished from Anan- Vākpatirāja 118 vaya 90 Vakrokti 18

352 APPENDIX D.

Vakrokti-jīvitakāra, date of 4 | Vishadana, a figure of views of 18-19, 319 speech 250 Vākyapadīya 50, 66,97,98 Vishaya, explained 114 Vamana 2, 19, 28, 5, 3, 109, 31 158, 234, 239, 266 Vishņupurāņa

Varāhamihira Vis'vanätha, criticized, 100, 13 Vāsavadattā 167 122, 125, 141, 213, 216,

Vasishthadharmasūtra 136 233, 243

Vastudhvani, definition of 22 Vritti, meaning of, 38

example of 22 Vrittivārtika 63, 68, 69, 74

Vastuprativastubhāva 106-107 Vrittyanuprāsa 28, 329

Vātsyāyana-bhāshya 54 Vyabhichara, explanation

Vedāntaparibhāshā 34,50 of the term 45

Veņīsamhāra 194, 205 Vyabhichāri-bhava 30

Vedāntasāra 50 Vyaghāta 257-259

Vibhāva 30 two kinds of and their

Vibhāvanā 20, 235-237 differences 258

Vichitra 252-253 distinguished from

distinguished from Vishama 259

Vishama 252-253 V yājastuti 207-210

Vidhi 187, 273 distinguished from Apra-

Viddhas'āla-bhañjikā 257 stutapras'amsā 209

Vikalpa 283-285 „ from Dhvani 209

Vikasvara, a figure of Vyājokti 303-305

speech 219 distinguished from Apa-

Vikramānka-devacharita 231 hnuti 304

Vikramorvas'īya 158, 290 Vyakti ( gender ) 70

Vinokti 178-179 Vyaktivivekakāra 25, 26, 64

Viprayoga 67 Vyañjana 65

Virodha 240-245 Ārthī 77,78

distinguished from based upon Abhidha 66 ff Rūpaka 244 Lakshana 75-76 Vibhāvanā 242 S'ābdī 76-77

Vis'eshokti 243 theories about 65-66 Virodhitā 68 Vyatireka 172-176 Vis'esha 255-257 difference of views as to 175 Vis'eshokti 237-240 divisions of 172, 173 Vishama 247-250 Word, powers of 38 distinguished from Yamaka 324 Vibhāvanā 250 Yas'ovarman 219 Virodha 250 Yathāsankhya 266-267 Vis'eshokti 250 Yogyatā 34

Appendix E. तृतीयः परिच्छेदः। अथ कोडयं रस इति। उच्यते- विभावेनानुभावेन व्यक्त: सञ्चारिणा तथा। रसतामेति रत्यादि: स्थायिभावः सचेतसाम्॥।:॥ विभावादयो वक्ष्यन्ते। सात्त्विकाश्चानुभावरूपत्वान्न पृथगुक्ताः । व्यक्तो दध्या- दिन्यायेन रूपान्तरपरिणतो व्यक्तीकृत एव रसः । न तु दीपेन घट इव पूर्वसिद्धो व्यज्यते। तदुक्तं लोचनकारैः (ध्व.पत्र ६९)-'रसाः प्रतीयन्त इति त्वोदनं पचतीतिव- द्थवहारः' इति। अत्र च रत्यादिपदोपादानादेव स्वायित्वे प्राप्ते पुनः स्ायिपदोपादानं रत्यादीनामपि रसान्तरेष्वस्थायित्वप्रतिपादनार्थम्। ततश्च हासकोषादयः रद्गारवी- रादौ व्यभिचारिण एव । तदुक्तम्-'रसावस्थः परं भावः स्वायितां प्रतिपयते' इति। अस्य स्वरूपकथनगर्भ आस्वादनप्रकार: कथ्यते- सस्ोद्रेकादखण्डसव प्रकाशानन्दचिन्मयः। वेद्यान्तरस्पर्शशून्यो ब्रह्मास्वादसहोदुरः ॥२॥ लोकोत्तरचमत्कारप्राण: कैश्चित्पमातृमिः । स्वाकारवद्भिन्नत्वेनायमास्वाद्यते रसः ॥३ ।। रजसमोभ्यामस्पृष्टं मनः सत्त्वमिहोच्यते। इत्युक्तप्रकारो बाह्यमेयविमुखतापादकः कश्चनान्तरो धर्मः सत्त्वं तस्योद्रेको रज- स्तमसी अभिभूयाविर्भावः । तत्र हेतुस्तथाविधालौकिककाव्यार्थपरिशीलनम्। अखण्ड इत्येक एवायं विभावादिरत्यादिप्रकाशसुखचमत्कारात्मकः। अत्र हेतुं वक्ष्यामः । स्वप्रकाशत्वाद्यपि वक्ष्यमाणरीत्या। चिन्मय इति स्वरूपायें मयट्। चम- त्कारश्चित्तविस्ताररूपो विस्मयापरपर्यायः। तत्प्राणत्वं चासमदुद्धप्रपितामहसहृद- यगोष्ठीगरिष्ठकविषण्डितमुख्यश्रीमन्नारायणपादैरुक्तम्। तदाह धर्मदचः स्ग्रन्ये- 'रसे सारश्चमत्कारः सर्वत्राप्यनुभूयते । तच्चमत्कारसारत्वे सर्वत्राप्यद्भुतो रसः । तस्माँदद्भुतमेवाइ कृती नारायणो रसम् ।।' इति। कैश्चिदिति प्राक्तनपुण्यशालिमिः। यदुक्तम्-'पुण्यवन्तः प्रमिण्वन्ति योगिवद्रस- सन्ततिम् ।' इति। यद्यपि 'स्वादः काव्यार्थसम्मेदादात्मानन्दसमुद्भवः' (दशरू- पक ४.३) इत्युक्तदिशा रसस्यास्वादानतिरिक्तत्वम्, तथापि 'रसः स्वाद्यते' इति काल्पनिकं मेदमुररीकृत्य कर्मकर्तरि वा प्रयोगः । तदुक्त्म्-'रस्यमानतामात्रसारत्वा- तप्रकाशशरीरादनन्य एव हि रसः' इति। एवमन्यत्राप्येवंविधस्थलेषूपचारेण प्रयोगो ज्ञेर्यः । नन्वेतावता रसस्याज्ञेयत्वमुक्तं भवति। व्यअ्नायाश्र ज्ञानविशेषत्वाद् दयो- रैक्यमापतितम्। ततश्र-

१ 'स्थायी भावः' क-ग-ब. २ "णतो व्यक्तो व्यक्तीकृत एवं' क-ग. ३ 'माप्ते स्थायित्वे' व-क-ग. : "स्थायित्वव्यपदेशार्थम्' क. ५ 'प्रकाशमुस"' क-ब. १ 'धर्मसग्रन्थे' क. 'अतस्वद्भुत०'क-ग. ८ 'प्रयोगा जयाः' ब. ९ 'भवतीति' ब. १० 'ज्वानरूपत्वात्' क-ग. क

साहित्यदर्पणे [३.४

'स्वज्ञानेनान्यधीहेतुः सिद्धेऽथें व्यअ्को मतः । यथा दीपोऽन्यथाभावे को विशेषोऽस्य कारकात् ।' इत्युक्तदिशा घटप्रदीपवद् व्यङ्गथव्यअ्जकयोः पार्थक्यमेवेति कभं रसस्य व्यङ्रयतेति चेत, सत्यमुक्तम्। अत एवाहु :- 'विलक्षण एवायं कृतिज्ञप्तिमेदेभ्यः स्वादनाख्यः कश्चिद्यापारः' इति । अत एवं हि रसनास्वादनचमत्करणादयो विलक्षणा एव व्यपदेशा इति। अभिधादिविलक्षणव्यापारमात्रप्रसाधनग्रहिलैरस्माभी रसादीनां व्यङ्गयत्वमुक्तं भवतीति। ननु तहि करुणादीनां रसानां दुःखमयत्वाद्रसत्वं न स्यादिति, उच्यते- करुणादावपि रसे जायते यत्परं सुखम्॥ ४ ॥ सचेतसामनुभवः प्रमाणं तत्र केचलम्। आदिशब्दाद्वीभत्समयानकादयः। तथाप्यसहृदयानां मुखमुद्रणाय पक्षान्तर- भुच्यते- कि च तेषु यदा दुःखं न कोऽपि स्वात्तदुन्मुखः॥५॥ नहि कश्चित्सचेतन आत्मनो दुःखाय प्रवर्वते। करुणादिषु च सकलस्यापि सामि- निवेशप्रवृत्तिदर्शनात्सुखमयत्वमेव। अनुपपत्त्यन्तरमाह- तथा रामायणादीनां भविता दुःखहेतुता। करुणरसस्य दुःखहेतुत्वे करुणरसप्रधानरामायणादिप्रबन्धानामपि दुःखहेतुताप्र- सङ्ग: स्यात्। ननु कथ दुःखकारणेभ्यः सुखोत्पत्तिरित्याह- हेतुत्वं शोकहर्षादेर्गतेभ्यो लोकसंश्रयात् ॥६॥। शोकहर्षादयो लोके जायन्तां नाम लौकिकाः । अलौकिकविभावत्वं प्राप्तेभ्यः काव्यसंश्रयात्॥।७॥ सुखं सज्जायते तेभ्यः सर्वेभ्योऽपीति का क्षतिः। ये खलु रामवर्नेवासादयो लोके दुःखकारणानि इत्युच्यन्ते त एव ि काव्यना- स्यसमर्पिता अलोकिकविभावनव्यापारवत्तया कारणशब्दवाच्यतां विद्यायालौकिकवि- भावशब्दवाच्यत्वं भजन्ते। तेभ्यः सुरते दन्तघातादिभ्य इव सुखमेव जायते। अतश्च 'लौकिकशोकहर्षांदिकारणेभ्यो लौकिकशोकहर्षादयो जायन्ते' इति लोक एव प्रेतिनियमः । काव्ये पुनः सर्वेभ्योऽपि विभावादिभ्यः सुखमेव जायते इति नियमान्न कश्चिद्दोषः । कथं तर्हि हरिश्चन्द्रादिचरितस्य काव्यनाट्ययोरपि दर्शनश्रवणा- भ्यामश्रुपातादयो जायन्त इति। उच्यते- अश्रुपाताद्यसतद्वद्गतत्वाच्चेतसो मताः ॥८ ॥। तहिं कथ काव्यतः सर्वेषामीदृशी रसाभिव्यक्तिर्न जायत इंत्याह-

१ 'व्यापारतात्र प्रसाधन०' ब; 'मात्रमसाधन नि. २ 'करुणादीनां दुःखत्वात्' क-ग. ६ 'सचेताः' ब. ४ 'सुखमयत्वमेव' इति नास्ति ब-पुस्तके. ५ 'उपपत्यन्तर' नि. ६ 'दुःसहे- सुत्वात्' ब. " 'हेतुत्वं स्यात्' क-ग. ८ 'ये सल वनवा०' नि. ९ 'एव नियमः' क-ग. 7० 'इत्यत आह' नि.

₹.s] तृतीयः परिच्छेदः ।

न जायते तदास्वादो बिना रत्यादिवासनाम्। वासना चेदानींतनी प्राक्तनी च रसास्वादहेतुः । तत्र यदाधा न स्यात्तदा श्रोत्रि- यजरन्मीमांसकादीनामपि सा स्यात्। यदि द्वितीया न स्यात्तदा यद्रागिणामपि केषां- चिद्रसोद्वोधो न दृश्यते तन्न स्यात्। उक्त च धर्मदत्तेन-'सवासनानां सभ्यानां रसस्यास्वादनं भवेत। निर्वासनास्तु रजान्तः काछ्ठकुड्याश्मसंनभाः ॥' इति। ननु कर्थ रामादिरत्याद्युद्वोधकारणैः सामाजिकरत्याद्युद्वोध इत्युच्यते- व्यापारोस्ति विभावादेनांन्ना साधारणी कृतिः ॥ ९॥ तत्प्रभावेण यस्यासन्पाथोधिप्रवनादयः। प्रमाता तदभेदेन स्वात्मानं प्रतिपद्यते ॥ १० ॥ ननु कथं मनुष्यमात्रस्य समुद्रलब्गनादावुत्साहोद्वोध इत्युच्ते- उत्साहादिसमुद्दोध: साधारण्याभिमानतः । नृणामपि समुद्रादिलङ्गनादौ न दुष्यति॥११ ॥ रत्यादयोऽपि सार्धारण्येनैव प्रतीयन्त इत्याह- साधारण्येन रत्यादिरपि तद्वत्प्रतीयते। रत्यादेरपि स्वात्मगतत्वेन प्रतीतौ सभ्यानां ्ीडातङ्गादिर्भवेव। परगतल्वेन त्वरस्यतापांतः। विभावादयोपि प्रथमं साधारण्येन प्रतीयन्त इत्याह- परस्य न परस्येति मँमेति न ममेति च ॥ १२॥ तदास्वादे विभावादेः परिच्छेदो न विद्यते। ननु तथापि कर्थमलौकिकत्वमेतेषां विभावादीनामिति। उच्यते- विभावनादिव्यापारमलौकिकमुपेयुषाम् ॥१३॥ अलौकिकत्वमेतेषां भूषणं न तु दूषणम्। आदिशब्दादनुभावनसञ्चारणे। तत्र विभावनं रत्यादेविशेषेणास्वादाक्करणयोग्य- तानयनम्। अनुभावनमेवंभूतस्य रत्यादेः समनन्तरमेव रसादिरूपतया भावनम् । सञ्जारणं तथाभूतस्यैवें तस्य सम्यक्चारणम्। विभावादीनां यथासंख्यं कारणकार्यसहकारित्वे कथं त्रयाणामपि रसोद्ोधे कार- णत्वमित्युच्यते- कार्यकारणसज्जारिरूपा अपि हि लोकतः ॥। १४ ॥ रसोद्वोधे विभावाद्याः कारणान्येव ते मताः। ननु तर्हि कथं रसास्वादे तेषामेकः प्रतिभास इति। उच्यते- प्रतीयमान: प्रथमं प्रत्येकं हेतुरुच्यते॥ १५ ॥ ततः संवलित: सर्वो विभावादि: सचेतसाम् । प्रपानकरसन्यायाञ्चर्व्यंमाणो रसो भवेत्॥। १६ ॥। १ 'वासना चेत्तदानीन्तनी' क. २ 'तदा' इति नासित ब-पुस्तके. ३ 'यथाब्धिप्तव०' क. ४ 'साधारण्येन प्रतीयन्ते' क-ग. ५ 'ह्मात्मगतत्वेन' ब-पुस्तके. ६ "रस्यतापत्तिः' क-ग. • 'न ममेति ममेति च' क-ग. ८ 'कथमेवमलौकिकत्वं तेषाम्' क-ग. ९ 'भूतस्यैतस्य ब- 1० 'त्रयाणामेव' नि. ११ 'कारणं कार्यसच्चारिरूपा' ब.

साहित्यदर्पणे [ ३.१७

यथा खण्डमरिचादीनां संमेलनादपूर्व इव कश्चिदास्वादः प्रपाणकरसे सजायते। विभावादिसंमेलनादिहापि तथैवेत्यर्थः । ननु यदि विभावानुभावव्यमिचारिभिमिंलितैरेव रसस्तत्कथं तेषामेकस्य द्वयोवां सन्भावेपि स स्यादिति। उच्यते-

सटित्यन्यसमाक्षेपे तदा दोषो न विद्यते॥। १७ ॥ अन्यसमाक्षेपश्च प्रकरणादिवशात्। यथा- 'दीर्घाक्षं शरदिन्दुकान्तिवदनं बाहू नतावंसयो: संक्षिप्त निबिडोन्नतस्तनमुरः पा्श्रे प्रमृष्ट इव। मध्यः पाणिमितो नितम्बि जघनं पादावुदग्राङ्गुली छन्दो नर्तयितुर्यथैव मनसः सृष्टं तथास्या वपुः ॥' (मालवि. २-३) अत्र मालविकामभिलषतोऽभिमित्रस्य मालविकारूपविभावमात्रवर्णनेऽपि सञ्चारि- णामौत्सुक्यादीनामनुभावानां च नयनविस्फारादीनामौचित्यादेवाक्षेपः । एवमन्या- क्षेपेडप्यूझ्यम्। अनुकार्यगतो रस इति वदतः प्रत्याह- पारिमिस्याल्लाकिकत्वात्सान्तरायतया तथा। अनुकार्यस्य रत्यादेरुंद्वोघो न रसीभवेत् ॥ १८ ॥ सीतादिदर्शनादिजो रामादिरत्याघद्रोधो हि परिमितो लौकिको नाट्यकाव्यदर्श- नादे: सान्तरायश्च, तस्मात्कथं रसरूपतामियात्। रसस्यैतद्धर्मत्रयविलक्षणधर्मकत्वात्। अनुकर्तृगतत्वं चास्य निरस्यति- शिक्षाम्यासादिमाश्रेण राघवादे: संरूपताम्। दर्शयन्नर्तको नैव रसस्यांस्वादको भवेत् ॥ १९ ॥ किं च। काव्यार्थभावनेनायमपि सभ्यपदास्पदम्। यदि पुनर्नटोऽपि काव्यार्थभावनया रामादिरूँपतामात्मनो दर्शयेत्तदा सोडपि सभ्यमध्य एव गण्यते। नायं ज्ञाप्य: सवसत्तायां प्रतीत्यव्यभिचारतः॥२० ॥ यो हि ज्ञाप्यो घटादिः स सन्नपि कदाचिदज्ञातो भवति न ह्ययं तथा प्रतीतिमन्त- रेणाभावात्। यस्मादेष विभावादिसमूहालम्बनात्मक:। तस्मान्न कार्यः यदि रसः कार्यः स्यात्तदा विभावादिज्ञानकारणक एव स्यात। ततश्च रसप्रती- तिकाले विभावादयो न प्रतीयेरन्। कारणज्ञानतत्कार्यज्ञानयोर्युंगपददर्शनात्। नहि 'सन्ावे रसः स्यादेव' इति क-ग. २ 'तथा' नि. ६ 'अपि' इति नासित ब-पुस्तके. * 'रत्यादेस्तद्वोधो न रसो भवेत्' नि. ५ 'स्वरूपताम्' ब. ६ 'रसस्य खादको' क-ग. • 'रामादिरूपता०' नि. ८ 'यसमादेव' क-ग. ९ 'जानादीनां युग०' नि.

३.२१] तृतीयः परिच्छेदः ।

चन्दनस्पर्शज्ञानं तज्जन्यसुखज्ञानं चैकदा सम्भवति। रसस्य च विभावादिसमूहालम्ब- नात्मकतयैव प्रतीतेन विभावादिज्ञानकारणकत्वमित्यभिप्रायः । नो नित्यः पूर्वसंवेदनोज्झितः । असंवेदनकाले हि न भावोऽप्यस्य विद्यते॥ २१ ॥ न खलु नित्यस्य वस्तुनोऽसंवेदनकालेऽसम्भवः । नापि भविष्यन्साक्षादानन्दम्य प्रकाशरूपत्वात्। कार्यज्ञाप्यविलक्षणभावान्नो वर्तमानोऽपि॥ २२॥ विभावादिपरामर्शविषयत्वात्सचेतसाम्। परानन्दमयत्वेन संवेद्यत्वारदपि स्फुटम् ॥ २३ ॥ न निर्विकल्पकं ज्ञानं तस्य ग्राहकमिष्यते।

सविकल्पकसंवेदयः सविकल्पकज्ञानसंवेद्यानां हि वचनप्रयोगयोग्यता। न तु रसस्य तथा। साक्षात्कारतया न च। परोक्षस्तत्प्रकाशो नापरोक्ष: शब्दसम्भवात् ॥२५ ॥ तत्कथय कीदृगस्य तत्त्वमश्रुतादृष्टनिरूपणप्रकार स्येत्याह- तस्मादलौकिक: सत्यं वेद्यः सहृद्यैरयम्। तत्क पुनः प्रमाणं तस्य सद्भाव इत्याह- प्रमाणं चर्वणैवात्र स्वाभिन्ने विदुषां मतम् ॥ २६॥ चर्वणा आस्वादनम्। तच्च 'स्वादः काव्यार्थसम्मेदादात्मानन्दसमुद्भवः' इत्युक्त प्रकारम्। ननु यदि रसो न कार्यस्तत्कयं महर्षिणा 'विभावानुभावव्यभिचारिसं- योगाद्रसनिष्पत्तिः' (नाट्य. अ. ६) इति लक्षणं कृतमिति। उच्यते- निष्पत्या चर्वणस्यास्य निष्पत्तिरुपचारतः । यद्यपि रसाभिन्नतया चर्वणस्यापि न कार्यत्वं तथापि तस्य कादाचित्कतया उपच- रितेन कार्यत्वेन कार्यत्वमुपचर्यते। अवाच्यस्वादिकं तस्य वक्ष्ये व्यञ्ञनरूपणे ॥ २७ ॥ तस्य रसस्य । आदि शब्दादलक्ष्यत्वादि। ननु यदि मिलिता रत्यादयो रसस्तत्कथमस्य स्वप्रकाशत्वं कथं वाखण्डत्वमित्याह- रत्यादिज्ञानतादात्यादेव यस्माद्रसो भवेत्।

१ 'इयं कारिका वृत्तित्वेन सुद्रिता' ब-पुस्तके. २ "मयस्वप्रकाशः' ब. ३ 'भावाच न वर्त- मानोपि' क-ग; रामचरणेनापि कटाक्षीकृतोयं पाठः. ४ "वेद्यत्वादविस्फुटम्' क-ग. ५ "मिला- घसंसर्ग०' क.६ 'सविकल्पक ... तथा न च' इत्येतन्नास्ति क-पुरके. ७ 'तत्वम् । एवमश्रुतादृष्ट०' व; 'हष्टपूर्वनिरु०' नि-ग. ८ 'संवेदादात्मा०' क. ग. ९'चर्वणस्यैव' क-ग. १ 'उपचरितेन कार्यत्वेन' इत्येतन्नास्ति क-ग-पुस्तकयो :. 1१ 'शब्दालक््यत्वादि' क-ग. १२ 'प्रकाशत्वं' ब.

साहित्यदर्पणे [ ३.२८

ततोऽस्ये स्वप्रकाशत्वमखण्डत्वं च सिध्यति ॥२८॥ यदि रत्यादिकं प्रकाशशरीरादतिरिक्तं स्यात्तदैवास्य स्वप्रकाशत्वं न सिध्येत्। न च तथा। तादात्म्याङ्गीकारात्। यदुक्तम्-'यद्यपि रसानन्यतया चर्वणापि न कार्या तथापि कादाचित्कतया कार्यत्वमुपकल्प्य तदेकात्मन्यनादिवासनापरिणतिरूपे रत्यादि- भौवेऽपि व्यवहार इति भावः' इति। सुखादितादात्म्याङ्गीकारे चास्माकीं सिद्धान्तश- य्यामधिशय्य दिव्यं वर्षसहस्रं प्रमोदनिद्रामुपेया इति च । 'अभिन्नोऽपि स प्रमात्रा वासनोपनीतरत्यादितादात्म्येन गोचरीकृतः' इति च । ज्ञानस्य स्वप्रकाशत्वमनज्गीकु- वतामुपरि वेदान्तिभिरेव पातनीयो दण्डः । तादात्म्यादेव चास्याखण्डत्वम्। रत्यादयो हि प्रथममेकैकशः प्रतीयमाना: सर्वेडप्येकीभूताः स्फुरन्त एव रसता- मापद्यन्ते । तदुक्तम्- 'विभावा अनुभावाश्च सात्त्विका व्यभिचारिणः । प्रतीयमाना: प्रथमं खण्डशो यान्त्यखण्डताम् ।।' इति। 'परमार्थतस्त्वखण्ड एवायं वेदान्तप्रसिद्धब्रह्मतत्त्ववद्वेदितव्यः' इति च। अथ के ते विभावानुभावव्यभिचारिण इत्यपेक्षायां विभावमाह- रत्याद्युद्वोधका लोके विभावा: काव्यनाठ्ययोः । ये हि लोके रामादिगतरतिहासादीनामुद्ोधकारणानि सीतादयस्त एव काव्ये नाट्ये च निवेशिता: सन्तः 'विभाव्यन्ते आस्वादाङ्करणप्रादुर्भावयोग्याः क्रियन्ते सामाजिकरत्यादिभावा एभिः' इति विभावा उच्यन्ते। तदुक्ततं भर्तृहरिणा- 'शब्दोपहित रूपांस्तान्बुद्धेविषयतां गतान्। प्रत्यक्षानिव कंसादीन्साधनत्वेन मन्यते ।।' (वाक्यपदीय ३.७.५.) तद्मेदावाह- आलम्बनोद्दीपनाख्यौ तस्य भेदावुभौ स्मृतौ। स्पष्टम्। तत्र- आलम्बनो नायकादिस्तमालम््य रसोर्द्रमात्॥। २९॥ आदिशब्दान्नायिकाप्रतिनायिकादयः। अत्र यस्य रसस्य यो विभावः स तत्स्वरू- पवर्णने वक्ष्यते। तत्र नायक :- त्यागी कृती कुलीनः सुश्रीको रूपयौवनोत्साही। दक्षोऽनुरक्तलोकस्तेजोवैदग्ध्यशीलवान्नेता॥ ३० ॥ दक्ष: क्षिप्रकारी। शीलं सद्वत्तम् । एवमादिगुणसम्पन्नो नेता नायको भवति। तन्जेदानाह- · 'अतोस्य च प्रकाश०' क-ग. २ 'चर्वणा न' ब. ३ 'रत्यादिभागेपि' व; 'रत्यादिमागे' क-ग. ४ 'भाव इति' नासि ब-क-पुस्तकयोः. ५ 'तादात्म्यगोचरी०' ब. ६ 'रत्यायुद्दोघ" क-ग. • 'रूपांश्' इति मुद्रितपुस्तकपाठः. ८ 'प्रत्यक्षमिव' इति मुद्रितपुस्तकपाठः (वाक्यपदीये) ९ 'भावाचुभी' क-ग. १० 'रसोदयात्' क-ग. ११ 'यो यस्य रसस्य विभावः सः' क-ग. १२ "नुकूळलोकः' क-ग.

३.३१ ] तृतीयः परिच्छेद: ।

धीरोदात्तो धीरोद्धतस्तथा घीरललितश्र। धीरप्रशान्त इत्ययमुक्तः प्रथमश्चतुर्भेद्ः ॥३१॥ स्पष्टम्। तत्र धीरोदात्त :- अविकत्थनः क्षमावानतिगम्भीरो महासत्वः । स्थेयान्निगूढमानो धीरोदात्तो दढव्रतः कथितः ॥ ३२॥ अविकत्थनोऽनात्मश्राघाकरः । महासत्त्वो हर्षशोकादयनभिभूतस्वभावः । निगूढ- मानो विनयच्छन्नगर्वः । दृढव्रतोऽङ्गीकृतनिर्वाहकः । यथा-रामयुघिष्ठिरादिः । अथ धीरोद्वतः-

आत्मश्राघानिरतो धीरैर्धीरोद्धत: कथितः ॥ ३३ ॥ यथा-भीमसेनादिः। अभ धीरललित: - निश्चिन्तो मृदुरनिशं कलापरो धीरललित: स्ात्। कला नृत्यादिका। यथा-रलावल्यादौ वत्सराजादिः। अथ धीरप्रशान्त: - सामान्यगुणैर्भूयान्द्विजादिको धीरशान्तः स्ात् ॥३४॥ यथा-मालतीमाधवादौ माधवादिः। एषां च रङ्गारिरूपत्वे भेदानाह-

तत्र तेषां धीरोदात्तादीनां प्रत्येकं दक्षिणधृष्टानुकूलशठत्वेन षोडशप्रकारो नायकः। एषु त्वनेकमहिलासमरागो दक्षिण: कथितः ॥। ३५॥ द्वयोस्तिरिचतुःप्रभृतिषु वा नायिकासु तुल्यानुरागो दक्षिणनायकः । यथा- 'स्ननाता तिष्ठति कुन्तलेश्वरसुता वारोऽङ्गराजस्वसु- र्द्यूतै रात्रिरियं जिता कमलया देवी प्रसादयाद च। इत्यन्तःपुरसुन्देरी: प्रति मया विज्ञाय विज्ञापिते देवेनाप्रतिपत्तिमूढमनसा द्वित्राः स्थितं नाडिकाः ॥' कृतागा अपि निःशङ्कसतर्जितोऽपि न लज्जितः । दृष्टदोषोऽपि मिथ्यावाक्कथितो घृष्टनायक: ॥ ३६॥ यथा मम- शोणं वीक्ष्य मुखं विचुम्बितुमहं यातः समीपं, ततः पादेन प्रहृतं तया, सपदि तं धृत्वा सहासे मयि। किञ्चित्तत्र विधातुमक्षमतया बाष्पं त्यजन्त्या: सखे ध्यातश्चेतसि कौतुकं वितनुते कोपोऽपि वामभ्नुवः ।।' अनुकूल एकनिरत: एकस्यामेव नायिकायामासक्तोडनुकूलनायकः । यथा- 'अस्माकं सखि वाससी न रुचिरे ग्रैवेयकं नोज्ज्वलं नो वक्रा गतिरुद्धतं न हसितं नैवास्ति कश्चिन्मदः ।

' 'शङ्गारादिरूपत्वे' नि. २ 'सुन्दरी' ग. ३ दशरूपके (२.७ इत्यत्र) उदाहृतमिदम्.

साहित्यदर्पणे [३.३७

किं त्वन्येऽपि जना वदन्ति सुभगोऽप्यस्याः प्रियो नान्यतो दृष्टि निक्षिपतीति विश्वमियता मन्यामहे दुःस्थितम्।' (शङ्गार. १.२५) शठोऽयमेकत्र बद्भावो थः। दर्शितबहिरनुरागो विप्रियमन्यत्र गूढमाचरति ॥३७ ॥ यः पुनरेकस्यामेव नायिकायां बद्धभावो द्वयोरपि नायिकयोर्बहिर्दर्शितानुरा- गोऽन्यस्यां नायिकायां गूढं विप्रियमाचरति स शठनायकः । यथा- 'शठान्यस्याः काञ्चीमणिरणितमाकर्ण्य सहसा यदाश्रिष्यन्नेव प्रशिथिलभुजग्रन्थिरभवः । तदेतत्काचक्षे घृतमधुमयत्वाद्वडुवचो विषेणाघूर्णन्ती किमपि न सखी मे गणयति॥' (अमरु० १०९) एषां च त्रैविध्यादुत्तममध्याधमत्वेन। उक्का नायकभेदाश्चत्वारिंशत्तथाष्टौ च।।३८॥ एषामुक्तषोडशभेदानाम्। अथ प्रसङ्गादेतेषां सहायानाह- दूरानुवर्तिनि स्यात्तस्य प्रासङ्गिकेतिवृत्ते च। किञ्चित्तहुणहीनः सहाय एवास्य पीठमर्दाख्यः।।३९॥ तस्य नायकस्य बहुव्यापिनि प्रस्ङ्गगतेतिवृ त्तेऽनन्तरोक्तैर्नायकसामान्यगुणैः किञ्रि- दून: पीठमर्दनामा सहायो भवति। यथा-रामादीनां सुग्रीवादयः । अथ शृङ्गारविषये सहाया :- शृङ्रारेऽस्य सहाया विटचेटविदूषकाद्याः स्युः । भक्ता नर्मसु निपुणा: कुपितवधूमानभजञना: शुद्धाः॥४० ॥ आदिशब्दान्मालाकाररजकताम्बूलिकगान्धिकादयः । तत्र विटः- सम्भोगही नसम्पद्विटस्तु धूर्त: कलैकदेशज्ञः । वेशोपचार कुशलो वागग्मी मधुरोऽथ बहुमतो गोछठयाम्॥।४१॥ चेटः प्रसिद्ध एव। कुसुमवसन्ताद्यभिध: कर्मवपुर्वेषेभाषाघैः। हास्यकर: कलहरतिर्विदूषकः स्यात्सकर्मज्ञः ॥ ४२ ॥ स्वकर्म भोजनादि। अर्थचिन्तनसहायमाह- मत्री स्यादर्थानां चिन्तायां अर्थास्तन्ावापादयः । यत्त्वत्र सहायकथनप्रस्तावे 'मत्री स्वं चोभयं चापि सखा तस्यार्थचिन्तने' इति (दश० २.४२) केनचिल्वक्षणं कृतम्, तदपि राज्ञोऽर्थचिन्तनो- पायलक्षणप्रकरणे लक्षयितव्यम्। न तु सहायकथनप्रस्तावे। 'नायकस्यार्थचिन्तने मत्री सहायः' इत्युक्तेऽपि नायकस्यार्थत एव सिद्धत्वात्। यदप्युक्तम् 'मत्रिणा ललितः

• १ 'पतिः' ग. २ 'शठोन्यस्याः' ब. ३ "वृत्ते तु' नि-ब. : "सङसङ्गते इतिवृत्ते' नि-ब. ५ 'वपुर्देश" गः 'वपुर्वेश" नि-ब.

३.४३] तृतीय: परिच्छेदः ।

शेषा मत्रिस्वायत्तसिद्धयः' (दश० २.४३) इति, तदपि स्वलक्षणकथनेनैव लक्षितस्य धीरललितस्य मश्रिमात्रायत्तार्थचिन्तनोपपत्तर्गतार्थम्। न चार्थचिन्तने तस्य मश्री सहायः । कि तु स्वयमेव निष्पादकः। तस्यार्थचिन्तनाद्यभावात्। अथान्तःपुरसहाया :- तद्वद्वरोधे। वामनषण्ढािरातम्लेच्छाभीरा: शकारकुब्जाद्याः।।४३ ॥ मदमूर्खताभिमानी दुष्कुलतैश्वर्यसम्पन्नः। सोडयमनूढाआाता राज्: श्याल: शकार इत्युक्तः॥ ४४ ॥ आदशब्दान्मूकादयः। तत्र षण्ढवामनकिरातकुब्जादयो यथा रलावल्याम्- 'नष्टं वर्षधरैमनुष्यगणनाभावादपास्य त्रपा- मन्तःकञ्चुकिकञ्जुकस्य विशति त्रासादयं वामनः । पर्यन्ताश्रयिभिनिजस्य सदृशं नाम्न: किरातैः कृतं कुब्जा नीचतयैव यान्ति शनकैरात्मेक्षणाशक्किनः ॥' (रला० २.२९) शकारो मृच्छकटिकादिषु प्रसिद्धः । अन्येऽपि यथादर्शनं ज्ञेयाः । अथ दण्डसद्दाया :- दण्डे सुहृत्कुमाराटविका: सामन्तसैनिकाद्याक्च। दुष्टनिग्रहो दण्डः । स्पष्टम्। अर्थ धर्मसहाया :- ऋत्विवपुरोधसः स्युर्ग्रह्मविद्स्तापसास्तथा धर्मे ॥ ४५ ॥ ब्रह्मविदो वेदविदः, आत्मविदो वा। अत्र च उत्तमा: पीठमदाथाः

मध्यौ विटविदूषकौ। तथा शकारचटाद्या अधमा: परिकीर्तिताः॥४६॥। आदयशब्दात्ताम्बूलिकगान्धिकादयः । अथ प्रसङ्गाद्दूतानां विभागगर्भरुक्षणमाह- निसृष्टार्थो मितार्थश्च तथा सन्देशहारकः। कार्यप्रेष्यस्त्रिधा दूतो दूत्यश्चापि तथाविधाः॥ ४७ ॥ अत्र कार्यप्रेष्यो दूत इति लक्षणम्। तत्र- उभयोर्भावमुन्जीय स्वयं वदति चोत्तरम्। सुश्िष्टं कुरुते कार्ये निसृष्टार्थस्तु स स्मृतः ॥४८॥ उभयोरिति येन प्रेषितो यदन्तिकं च प्रहितः । मितार्थभाषी कार्यस्य सिद्धकारी मितार्थकः। यावन्भाषितसन्देशहारी सन्देशहारक: ॥ ४९ ॥ अथ सात्विका नायकगुणा :-

१ 'मत्रिष्वायत्त"' नि-ब. २ 'लक्षितस्य इत्येतन्रास्ति ग-ब-पुस्तकयोः. ३ 'संयुक्तः' नि-ब. * 'अथ ... या:' इत्येत न्रास्ति नि-पुस्तके.

१० साहित्यदर्पणे [३.५०

शोभा विलासो माधुये गाम्भीये धैर्यंतेजसी। ललितौदार्यमित्यष्टौ सात्विकाः पौरुषा गुणाः ।। ५० ॥ तत्र शूरता दक्षता सत्यं महोत्साहोऽनुरागिता। नीचे घृणाधिके स्पर्धा यतः शोभेति तां विदुः ॥५१॥ तत्रानुरागिता यथा- 'अहमेव मतो महीपतेरिति सर्वः प्रकृतिष्वचिन्तयत्। उदघेरिष निम्नगाशतेष्वभवन्नास्य विमानना कचित् ।I' (रघु ८.८ ) एवमन्यदपि। अथ विलास :- धीरा दृष्टिर्गतिश्चित्रा विलासे सस्मितं वच: । यथा- 'दृष्टिस्तृणी कृतजगत्रयसत्त्वसारा धीरोद्धता नमयतीव गतिर्धरित्रीम्। कौमारकेऽपि गिरिवद्ुरुतां दधानो वीरो रसः किमयमेत्युत दर्प एव।।' (उत्तरराम० ६.१९) संक्षोभेष्वप्यनुद्देगो माधुर्ये परिकीर्तितम् ॥५२। ऊह्यमुदाहरणम्। भीशोककोचहषांयैर्गाम्भीर्य निर्विकारता। यथा- 'आहूतस्याभिषेकाय विसष्टस्य वनाय च। न मया लक्षितस्तस्य स्वल्पोऽप्याकारविभ्रमैः ।।' व्यवसायादचलनं धैय विस्ने महत्यपि ॥५३ ॥ यथा- 'श्रुताप्सरोगीतिरपि क्षणेऽस्मिन्हर: प्रसंख्यानपरो बभूव। आत्मेश्वराणां नहि जातु विभ्नाः समाधिमेदप्रभवो भवन्ति ॥' (कुमार० ३.४०) अधिक्षेपापमानादे: प्रयुकतस्य परेण यत्। प्राणात्ययेऽप्यसहनं तत्तेज: समुदाहतम् ॥।५४ ॥ वाग्वेषयोर्मधुरता तद्वच्छङ्गारचेष्टितं ललितम्। दानं सप्रियभाषणमौदार्य शत्रुमित्रयोः समता ॥५५॥ एषामप्युदाहरणान्यूह्यानि। अथ नायिका त्रिभेदा स्वान्या साधारणी स्त्रीति। नायकसामान्यगुणैर्भवति यथासम्भवैर्युक्ता ॥५६॥ नायिका पुनर्नायकसामान्यगुणैस्त्यागादिभिर्यथासम्भवैर्युक्ता भवति। सा च स्वस्त्री अन्यस्त्री साधारणस्त्रीति त्रिविधा। तत्र स्वस्त्री- विनयार्जवादियुक्ता गृहकर्मपरा पतिव्रता खवीया।

1 'भीशोक ... विभ्रमः' इत्येतत् खव-ग-पुस्तकयोः 'व्यव ... भवन्ति' इत्यसात्परं विन्यस्तम्. २ दश रूपके (२.५) उदाहृतमिदम्.

३-५७] तृतीय: परिच्छेदः । ११

यथा-

अविणभदुम्मेडाइँ धण्णाण घरे कलचाहँ।।' (लज्जापर्याप्प्रसाधनानि पर- असृंनिष्पिपासानि। अविनयदुमेंधानि धन्यानां गृहे कलत्राणि।) सापि कथिता त्रिभेदा मुग्धा मध्या प्रगल्मेति॥ ५७॥ तत्र- प्रथमावतीर्णयावनमदनविकारा रतौ वामा। कथिता मृदुश्च माने समविकलजावती सुग्धा ॥५८ ॥ तत्र प्रथमावतीर्णयौवना यथा मम तातपादानाम्- 'मध्यस्य प्रथिमानमेति जघनं वक्षोजयोर्मन्दता दूरं यात्युदरं च रोमलतिका नेत्रार्जवं धावति। कन्दर्प परिवीक्ष्य नूतनमनोराज्याभिषिक्तं क्षणा- दव्वानीव परस्परं विदधते निर्लुण्ठनं सुभ्रुवः ।।' प्रथमावतीर्णमदनविकारा यथा मम प्रभावतीपरिणये- 'दत्ते सालसमन्थरं भुवि पदं, निर्याति नान्तःपुरात्, नोद्दामं हसति, क्षणात्कलयते ह्ीयत्रणां कामपि। कि्रिद्भावगभीरवक्रिमलवस्पृष्ट मनाग्भाषते सभ्रूभङ्गमुदीक्षते प्रियकथामुल्लासयन्तीं सखीम् ।।' रते बामा यथा- 'दृष्टा दृष्टिमषो ददाति, कुरुते नालापमाभाषिता, शय्यायां परिवृत्य तिष्ठति, बलादालिङ्गिता वेपते। निर्यान्तीषु सखीषु वासभवनान्निर्गन्तुमेवेहते जाता वामतयैव संप्रति मम प्रीत्यै नवोढा प्रिया ॥' (नागा. ३.४) माने मृदुर्यथा- 'सा पत्युः प्रथमापराधसमये सख्योपदेशं विना नो जानाति सविभ्रमाङ्गवलनावक्रोक्तिसंसूचनम्। स्वच्छैरच्छकपोलमूलगलितैः पर्यस्तनेत्रोत्पला बाला केवलमेव रोदिति लुठलोलालकैरश्रुभिः॥' (अमरु० २९) समधिकलज्जावती यथा-'दत्ते सालसमन्थरं-' इत्यत्र श्रोके। अत्र समधिकलज्जा- वत्त्वेनापि लब्धाया रतिवामताया विच्छित्तिविशेषवत्तया पुनः कथनम्। अथ मध्या- मध्या विचित्रसुरता परूढस्मरयावना। ईषत्प्रगल्भवचना मध्यमव्रीडिता मता ॥ ५९ ॥ विचित्रसुरता यथा-

१ 'परतत्रणिप्पि० ब; 'परतन्ति' ग; 'परचित्तासत्तिणि०' स. २ दशरूपके (२.१५ इत्यत्र) समुपन्यस्तम्. ३ "मुल्ापयन्तीम्' नि-ब. ४ 'कपोलपालि०' ग. ५ 'गलल्लोलोदकैरशुभिःः ख-ग. ६ 'यथा' ग.

१२ साहित्यदर्पणे [२.५s

'काम्ते तथा कथमपि प्रथितं मृगाक्ष्या चातुर्यमुद्धतमनोभवया रतेपु। तत्कूनितान्यनुवदद्धिरनेकवारं शिष्यायितं गृहकपोतशतैर्यथास्या: ।'

प्ररूटस्मरा यथात्रैवोदाहरणे। प्ररूढयौवना यथा भम- (सुज्ञारतिलक १.३९)

'नेत्रे खजजनगअने सरसिजप्रत्यर्थि पाणिदयं मक्षोजी करिकुम्भविभ्रमकरीमभ्युन्नति गच्छतः । कान्तिः काञ्चनचम्पकप्रतिनिधिर्वाणी सुधास्पषिनी स्मेरेन्दीवरदामसोदरवपुस्तस्या: कटाक्षच्छटा !।' एवमन्यत्नापि। अथ प्रगल्भा- सरान्धा गाढतारुण्या समस्तरतकोविदा। . भावोन्रता दरवीडा प्रगल्भाक्रान्तनायका ।। ६० ॥ सरान्धा यथा- 'धन्यासि या कथयसि प्रियसङ्गमेऽपि विश्रण्धचाङकशतानि रतान्तरेपु। नीवीं प्रति प्रणिहिते तु करे प्रियेण सख्यः शपामि यदि किञ्चिदपि सरामि॥' गाढतारुण्या यथा- 'अभ्युन्नतस्तनमुरो नयने सुदीघें वक्रे भ्रुवावतितरां वचनं ततोडपि। मच्योऽिकं तनुरनूनगुरुनितम्बो मन्दा गतिः किमपि चाङ्गुतयौवनायाः ।।' (धनिकस्य दश० २.१८) समस्तरतकोविदा यथा- 'कचित्ताम्बूलाक्ः कचिदगरुप क्वाङ्डमलिनः कचिच्चणोंद्गारी कवचिदपि च सालक्कपदः । वलीभङ्गाभोगैरलकपतितैः शीर्णकुसुमैः स्त्रियाः सर्वावस्थं कथयति रतं प्रच्छदपटः ।' (अमरु. १०७) भावोघ्नता यथा- 'मधुरबचनैः सभ्रूभङैः कृताङगलितर्जनै रभसरचचितैरङ्गन्यासैर्महोत्सवबन्धुमिः। असकृदसकृत्स्फारस्फारैरपाङ्गविलोकितैस्त्रिभुवनजये सा पञ्चेषोः करोति सहायताम्।।' (शङ्गार. १.४२) अल्पन्रीडा यथा- 'धन्यासि या कथयसि-' इत्यत्रैव। आक्रान्तनायका यथा- 'स्वामिन्भज्गरयालकं, सतिलकं भालं विलासिन्कुरु, प्राणेश त्रुटितं पयोधरतटे हारं पुनर्योजय। इत्युक्त्वा सुरतावसानसमये सम्पूर्णचन्द्रानना स्पृष्टा तेन तथव जातपुलका प्राप्ता पुनर्मोहनम् ॥।' (शद्वार. १.४२) मध्याप्रगल्भयोर्भेदान्तराण्याह- ते घीरा चाप्यधीरा च धीराधीरेति षड्डिधे। से मध्याप्रगल्मे। तत्र- 1 'स्पन्दिनी' नि. २ शार्नघरपद्धतौ श्रोकोयं 'विज्जकायाः' इति दश्यते (३७४६); सुभ- षितावलावपि श्रोकोयमुपन्यस्तः (२१४२). ३ 'तत्र सोलास' ख-ग.

३.६१] तृतीय: परिच्छेदः । १३

प्रियं सोत्प्रासवक्रोक्तया मध्या धीरा दहेद्रुषा॥ ६१ ॥ धीराधीरा तु रुदितैरधीरा परुषोक्तिभिः । तत्र मध्या धीरा यथा- 'तदवितथमवादीर्यन्मम त्वं प्रियेति प्रियजनपरिभुक्तं यद्ुकूलं दधानः । मदधिवसतिमागा: कामिनां मण्डनश्रीरव्रजति हि सफलत्वं वलभालोकनेन ।।' (शिशु० ११.३३ ) मध्यैव धीराधीरा यथा- 'बाले, नाथ, विमुञ्च मानिनि रुषं, रोषान्मया किं कृतं, खेदोऽसमासु, न मेऽपराध्यत भवान्, सर्वेडपराधा मयि। तर्रिक रोदिषि गद्गदेन वचसा, कस्याग्रतो रुद्यते, नन्वेतन्मम, का तवास्मि, दयिता, नास्मीत्यतो रुदते।।' (अमरु० ५७) इयमेवाधीरा यथा- 'सार्ध मनोरथशतैस्तव धूर्त कान्ता सैव स्थिता मनसि कृत्रिमभावरम्या। अस्माकमस्ति नहि कश्चिदिद्दावकाशस्तस्मात्कृतं चरणपातविडम्बनाभिः।।' (शङ्गार० १.४१) प्रगल्भा यदि धीरा स्वाच्छन्नकोपाकृतिस्तदा ॥ ६२॥ उदास्ते सुरते तत्र दर्शयन्त्यादरान्बहिः। तत्र प्रिये। यथा- 'एकत्रासनसंस्थितिः परिहता प्रत्युद्गमाद्ूरत- स्ताम्बूलाहरणच्छलेन रभसाक्केषोऽपि संविघ्नितः । आलापोऽपि न मिश्रितः परिजनं व्यापारयन्त्यान्तिके कान्तं प्रत्युपचारतश्चतुरया कोपः कृतार्थीकृतः ।' (अमरु० १८) धीराधीरा तु सोलुण्ठभाषितैः खेदयेदमुम्॥६३॥ अमुं नायकम्। यथा मम - 'अनलङ्कतोऽपि सुन्दर हरसि यतो मे मनः प्रसभम्। किं पुनरलङ्कतरत्वं संप्रति नखरक्षतैस्तस्याः ॥' तजयेत्ताडयेदन्या अन्या अधीरा। यथा-'शोणं वीक्ष्य मुखं-' इत्यत्रैव (साहित्य० ३.३६)। अत्र च सर्वत्र 'रुषा' इत्यनुवर्तते। प्रत्येकं ता अपि द्विधा। कनिष्टज्येष्टरूपत्वान्नायकप्रणयं प्रति ॥ ६४ ॥ ता अनन्तरोक्ताः षड्मेदा नायिकाः । यथा-

१ 'वदेदुषा ख-ग. २ शार्ङ्धरपद्धतौ श्रोकोयमवतारितः (३५६३). १ 'प्रत्युद्वता दूरतः' ख. ४ 'लानयन० नि-ब. ५ 'सेदयत्यमुम्' नि. ६ 'हरसि मनो मे यतः मसभम् नि-ब. ख

१४ साहित्यदर्पणे [३.६४

'दृष्टैकासनसंस्थिते प्रियतमे पश्चादुपेत्यादरा- देकस्या नयने पिधाय विहितक्रीडानुबन्धच्छलः । ईषद्वक्रितकन्धरः सपुलकः प्रेमोलसन्मानसा- *

मन्तर्हासलसत्कपोलफलकां धूतोऽपरां चुम्बति ॥' (अमरु० १९) मध्याप्रगल्भयोर्भेदास्तेन द्वादश कीर्तिता:। मुग्धा त्वेकैव तेन स्युः स्वीयाभेदास्त्रयोदश ॥। ६५ ॥ परकीया द्विधा प्रोक्ता परोढा कन्यका तथा। तत्र यात्रादिनिरतान्योढा कुलटा गलितत्रपा ॥ ६६ ॥ यथा- 'स्वामी निःश्वसितेऽप्यसूयति, मनोजिघ्रः सपलीजनः, श्वश्ररिङ्गितदैवतं, नयनयोरीहालिहो यातरः । तद्दूरादयमअ्जलि:, किमधुना दृग्भङ्गिभावेन ते, वैदग्धीमधुरप्रबन्धरसिक, व्यर्थोऽयमत्र श्रमेः ।।' अत्र हि मम परिणेतान्नाच्छादनादिदातृतया स्वाम्येव। न तु वलभः । त्वं तु वैदग्धीमधुरप्रबन्धरसिकतया मम वल्लभोऽसीत्यादिव्यक्गथार्थवशादस्या: परकामुक- विषया रतिः प्रतीयते। कन्या त्वजातोपयमा सलज्जा नवयौवना। अस्याः पित्राद्यायत्तत्वात्परकीयात्वम् । यथा मालतीमाधवादौ मालत्यादिः । घीरा कलाप्रगल्भा स्याद्वेश्या सामान्यनायिका ॥ ६७ ॥ निर्गुणानपि न द्वेष्टि न रज्यति गुणिष्वपि। वित्तमान्नं समालोक्य सा रागं दर्शयेद्वहिः ॥ ६८ ॥ काममङ्गीकृतमपि परिक्षीणधनं नरम्। मात्रा निष्कासयेदेषा पुनः सन्धानकाङ्गया। ६९।। तस्करा: पण्डका मूर्खाः सुखप्राप्तधनास्तथा। लिङ्रिनश्छन्नकामाद्या आसां प्रायेण वल्लभा: ।। ७० ॥ एषापि मदनायत्ता क्कापि सत्यानुरागिणी। रक्तायां वा विरक्तायां रतमस्यां सुदुर्लभम् ॥७१॥ पण्डेको वातपाण्डादिः । छन्रं प्रच्छन्नं ये कामयन्ते ते छन्नकामाः। तत्र राग- हीना यथा लटकमेलकादौ मदनमजर्यादिः। रक्ता यथा मृच्छकटिकादौ वसन्त- सेनादिः। पुनश्च- अवस्थाभिर्भवन्त्यष्टावेताः षोडशभेदिताः । स्वाधीनभर्तृका तद्वत्खण्डिताथामिसारिका ॥ ७२॥

१ 'नयने निमील्य' ख-ग. २ अयं श्रोक: शार्ङ्घरपद्धतौ दृश्यते (३७७६) तत्र तु 'वैदग्धी- मदनप्रपश्चचतुर' इति पाठः. ३ 'पुण्डूकाः' ख-ग. ४ 'मच्छन्न ये कामयन्ते ते प्रच्छन्नकामाः पुण्ड्रको वातपुण्डूकादि:' ख-ग.

३.७३] तृतीय: परिच्छेद: । १५

कलहान्तरिता विप्रलब्धा प्रोषितभर्तृका। अन्या वासकसज्ा स्याद्विरहोत्कण्ठिता तथा॥ ७३ ॥ तत्र- कान्तो रतिगुणाकृष्टो न जहाति यदन्तिकम्। विचित्रविभ्रमासक्ता सा स्यात्स्वाघीनभर्तृका॥७४ ॥ यथा-'अस्माकं सखि वाससी-' इत्यादि (शङ्ार० १.२५)। पार्श्वमेति प्रियो यस्या अन्यसम्भोगचिह्नितः । सा खण्डितेति कथिता धीरैरीरष्यांकषायिता॥ ७५॥ यथा-'तदवितथमवादीः-' इत्यादि (शिशु० १.३३)। अभिसारयते कान्तं या मन्मथवशंवदा। स्वयं वाभिसरत्येषा धीरेरुक्तामिसारिका ॥ ७६ ॥ क्रमाद्यथा- 'न च मेडवगच्छति यथा लघुतां करुणां यथा च कुरुते स मयि। निपुणं तथैनमभिगम्य वदेरभिदूति काचिदिति सन्दिदिशे ॥' (शिशु० १.५६) 'उत्क्षिप्तं करकङ्कणद्वयमिदं बद्धा दृढ मेखला यलेन प्रतिपादिता मुखरयोर्मजीरयोमूकता। आरब्धे रभसान्मया प्रियसखि क्रीडाभिसारोत्सवे चण्डालस्तिमिरावगुण्ठनपटक्षेपं विधत्ते विधुः ॥' संलीना सवेषु गात्रेषु मूकीकृत विभूषण। अवगुण्ठनसंवीता कुलजाभिसरेद्यदि॥ ७७॥ विचित्रोज्वलवेषा तु रणन्पुरकङ्कणा। प्रमोदस्मेरवदना स्याद्वेश्याभिसरेद्यदि॥ ७८॥ मदस्खलितसंलापा विभ्रमो फुललोचना। आविद्धगतिसव्वारा स्यात्प्रेष्याभिसरेद्यदि ॥। ७९॥ तत्राध्े 'उत्क्षप्तं-' इत्यादि। अन्ययोरूह्यमुदाहरणम्। प्रसङ्गादभिसारस्थानानि कथ्यन्ते- क्षेत्रं वाटी भगदेवालयो दूतीगृहं वनम्। मालामज्चाः इ्मशानानि नद्यादीनां तटी तथा॥ ८० ॥ एवं कृताभिसाराणां पुंश्रलीनां विनोदने। स्थानान्यष्टी तथा ध्वान्तच्छन्ने कुत्रचिदाश्रयेः ।।८१॥ चाटुकारमपि प्राणना्थं रोषादपास्य या। पश्चात्तापमवापोति कलहान्तरिता तु सा ॥ ८२ ॥ यथा मम तातपादानाम्- 'नो चाङ श्रवणे कृतं न च दृशा हारोऽन्तिके वीक्षितः कान्तस्य प्रियहेतवे निजसखीवाचोऽपि दूरीकृताः ।

2 'मालापञ्चः' नि; 'माळयं च' ब. २ 'दाश्रये नि. ३ 'चाटुश्रवण' नि-ब.

१६ साहित्यदर्पणे [३.८२

पादान्ते विनिपत्य तत्क्षणमसौ गच्छन्मया मूढया पाणिभ्यामवरुध्य हन्त सहसा कण्ठे कथं नापिंत: ।।' प्रियः कृत्वापि सङ्गेतं यस्या नायाति संनिधिम्। विप्रलब्धा तु सा ज्ञेया नितान्तमवमानिता ॥ ८३ ॥ यथा- 'उत्तिष्ठ दूति यामो यामो यातस्तथापि नायातः । यात: परमपि जीवेज्जीवितनाथो भवेत्तस्याः ॥' (दशरू० २.२६) नानाकार्यवशादस्या दूरदेशं गतः पतिः। सा मनोभवदुःखार्ता भवेत्प्रोषितभर्तृका ॥८४ ॥ यथा- 'तां जानीयाः परिमितकथां जीवितं मे द्वितीयं दूर्राभूते मयि सहचरे चक्रवाकीमिवैकाम्। गाढोत्कण्ठां गुरुषु दिवसेष्वेषु गच्छत्सु बालां जातां मन्ये शिशिरमथितां पद्मिनीं वान्यरूपाम् ।' (मेघ० उत्तर. १६) कुरुते मण्डनं यस्या: सज्जिते वासवेश्मनि। सा तु वासकसज्जा स्याद्विदितप्रियसङ्गमा ॥ ८५ ॥ यथा राघवानन्दानां- 'विदूरे केयूरं कुरु, करयुगे रत्नवलयैरलं, गुर्वी श्रीवाभरणलतिकेयं, किमनया। नवामेकामेकावलिमयि मयि त्वं विरचयेन पथ्यं नेपथ्यं बहुतरमनङ्गोत्सवविधौ।।' ागन्तुं कृतचित्तोऽपि दैवान्नायाति चेल्प्रियः । तदनागमदुःखार्ता विरहोत्कण्ठिता तु सा ।। ८६ ।। यथा- 'किं रुद्ध: प्रियया कयाचिदथवा सख्या ममोद्वेजितः किं वा कारणगौरवं किमपि यन्नाद्यागतो वल्लमः । इत्यालोच्य मृगीदृशा करतले विन्यस्य वक्राम्बुजं दीर्घ निःश्वसितं चिरं च रुदितं क्षिप्ताश्च पुष्पस्रजः ॥' (शृद्गार, १.७५) इति साष्टाविंशतिशतमुत्तममध्यमाधमस्वरूपतः । चतुरधिकाशीतियुतं शतत्रयं नायिकाभिदानां स्यात् ॥८७ ।। 'इह च परस्त्रियौ कन्यकान्योढे सङ्केतात्पूर्व विरहोत्कण्ठिते। पश्चाद्विदूषकादिना सहाभिसरन्त्यावभिसारिके। कुतोऽपि सक्केतमप्राप्ते नायके विप्रलब्धे। इति अवस्थै- वानयोः । अस्वाधीनप्रिययोरवस्थान्तरायोगात्।' इति कश्चित्। क्वचिदन्योन्यसाङ्कर्यमासां लक्ष्येषु दृश्यते। यथा-

2 'वासकशय्या' ग. २ 'राघवानन्दानां नाटके' नि-ब. ३ 'न नेपथ्यं पथ्यम्' नि. "मुत्तननध्याधमस्वरूपेण' नि. ५ 'नायिकामेदाः' नि. ६ 'सङ्केतस्थानमपापे' नि-ब

३,८८] तृतीय: परिच्छेद: । १७

'न खलु वयममुष्य दानयोग्याः पिबति च पाति च यासकौ रहस्त्वाम्। विट विटपममुं ददस्व तस्यै भवतु यतः सदृशोश्चिराय योगः ॥' 'तव कितव किमाहितैवृथा नः क्षितिरुहपल्लवपुष्पकर्णपूरैः । ननु जनविदितैर्भवद्यलीकैश्चिरपरिपूरितमेव कर्णयुग्मम् ।।' 'मुडुरुपद्दसितामिवालिना दैवितरसि नः कलिकां किमर्थमेनाम्। वसतिमुपगतेन धाम्नि तस्याः शठ कलिरेष महांस्त्वयाद्य दत्तः ॥' 'इति गदितवती रुषा जघान स्फुरितमनोरमपक्ष्मकेसरेण। श्रवणनियमितेन कान्तमन्या सममसिताम्बुरुहेण चक्षुषा च।' (शिशु० ७.५३-५६) इयं हि वक्रोत्त्या परुषवचनेन कणोत्पलताडनेन च धीरमध्यताधीरमध्यताधीर- प्रगल्भतामि: सङ्कीर्यते। अन्यत्राप्येवमूह्यमुक्तम्। इतरा अप्यसंख्यास्ता नोक्ता विस्तरशङ्कया।। ८८।। ता नायिकाः । अथासामलङ्कारा :- यावने सत्वजास्तासामष्टाविंशतिसंख्यकाः । अलङ्गारास्तन्न भावहावहेलास्रयोडङ्गजाः ॥। ८९ ॥ शोभा कान्तिश्च दीप्िश्च माधुर्ये च प्रगल्भता। औदार्य धैर्यमित्येते सस्तैव स्युरयत्नजाः ॥ ९० ॥ लीला विलासो विच्छित्तिर्विव्वोक: किलकिञ्ञचितम्। मोटायितं कुट्टमितं विभ्रमो ललितं मदः ॥९१ ॥ विहृसं तपनं मौग्ध्यं विक्षेपश्र कुतूहलम्। हसितं चकितं केलिरित्यष्टादृशसंख्यका: ॥ ९२ ॥ स्वभावजा: स्युर्भावाद्या दश पुंसां भवन्त्यपि। पूर्वे भावादयो धैर्यान्ता दश नायकानामपि सम्भवन्ति। कि तु सर्वेडप्यमी नायि- काश्रया एव विच्छित्तिविशेषं पुष्णन्ति। तत्र भाव :- निर्विकारात्मके चित्ते भावः प्रथमविक्रिया॥ ९३॥ जन्मतः प्रभृति निर्विकारे मनसि उद्धुद्धमात्रो विकारो भावः। यथा- 'स एव सुरभि: काल: स एव मलयानिलः । सैवेयमबला किं तु मनोऽन्यदिव दृश्यते।।' अथ हाव :- अनेत्रादिविकारैस्तु सम्भोगेच्छाप्रकाशक: । भाव एवाल्पसंलक्ष्यविकारो हाव उच्यते ॥। ९४ ॥ यथा- 'विवृण्वती शलसुतापि भावमङ्गैः स्फुटद्वालकदम्बकल्पैः। साचीकृता चारुतरेण तस्था मुखेन पर्यस्तविलोचनेन ॥' (कुमार०३.६८) अथ हेला-

· 'भवति' नि-ब. २ अय श्रोक: ख-ग-ब-पुस्तकेषु नास्ति. ३ 'सङ्कीर्णा' नि-ब ४ 'एवमन्यत्राप्यूह्यम्' नि-ब.

१८ साहित्यदर्पणे [३.९५

हेलात्यन्तसमालक्ष्यविकार: स्यात्स एव तु ।- स एव भाव एव। यथा- 'तह से झत्ति पउत्ता वडुए सव्वङ्गविब्भमा सअला। संसइअमुद्धभावा होइ चिरं जह सहीणं पि॥' (तथा तस्या झटिति प्रवृत्ता वध्वाः सर्वाङ्गविभ्रमाः सकलाः । संशयितमुग्धभावा भवति चिरं यथा सखीनामपि ॥) अथ शोभा-

शोभा प्रोक्ता तत्र यौवनशोभा यथा- 'असम्भृतं मण्डनमङ्गयष्टेरनासवाख्यं करणं मदस्य। कामस्य पुष्पव्यतिरिक्तमस्त्रं बाल्यात्परं साथ वयः प्रपेदे॥' (कुमार० १.३१) एवमन्यत्रापि। अथ कान्ति :- सैव कान्तिर्मन्मथाप्यायितदुतिः। मन्मथोन्मेषेणातिविस्तीर्णा शोभैव कान्तिरुच्यते। यथा-'नेत्रे खज्नगजने-' इत्यादि। अथ दीप्ि :- कान्तिरेवातिविस्तीर्णा दीसषिरित्यमिधीयते॥ ९६॥ यथा मम चन्द्रकलानामनाटिकायां चन्द्रकलावर्णनम्- 'तारुण्यस्य विलासः समधिकलावण्यसम्पदो हासः । धरणितलस्याभरणं युवजनमनसो वशीकरणम् ।' अथ माधुर्यम्- सर्वावस्थाविशेषेषु माधुर्य रमणीयता। यथा- 'सरसिजमनुविद्धं शैवलेनापि रम्यं मलिनमपि हिमांशोर्लक्ष्म लक्ष्मीं तनोति। इयमधिकमनोज्ञा वल्कलेनापि तन्वी किमिव हि मधुराणां मण्डनं नाकृतीनाम्।।' (शाकु. १.१७) अथ प्रगल्भता- निःसाध्वसत्व प्रागल्भ्यम् यथा- .

दष्टाश्च दशनैः कान्तं दासीकुर्वन्ति योषितः ।' अथौदार्यम्- औदार्य विनयः सदा ॥ ९७॥ यथा-

१ इदं पद्यं धनिकस्यैवेति तेन दशरू पकव्याख्याने (२.३४) उक्तम्.

३.९७] तृतीय: परिच्छेद:। १९

'न ब्रूते परुषां गिरं, वितनुते न भ्रूयुगं भह्गुरं, नोत्तंसं क्षिपति क्षितौ श्रवणतः सा मे स्फुटेऽप्यागसि। कान्ता गर्भगृहे गवाक्षविवरव्यापारिताक्ष्या बहिः सख्या वक्रममि प्रयच्छति परं पर्यश्रुणी लोचने॥।' अथ धैर्यम्- मुक्तात्म श्राघना धैये मनोवृत्तिरचज्जला। यथा- 'ज्वलतु गगने रात्रौ रात्रावखण्डकलः शशी दहतु मदनः किं वा मृत्यो: परेण विधास्याते। मम तु दयितः श्राध्यस्तातो जनन्यमलान्वया कुलममलिनं न. त्वेवायं जनो न च जीवितम् ।।' (मालती० २.२) अथ लीला- अद्वैर्वषैरलङ्कारैः प्रेमभिर्वचनैरपि॥। ९८॥ प्रीतिप्रयोजितैर्लीलां प्रियस्यानुकृतिं विदुः। यथा- 'मृणालव्यालवलया वेणीबन्धकपर्दिनी। हरानुकारिणी पातु लीलया पार्वती जगत् ।।' अथ विलास :- यानस्थानासनादीनां मुखनेत्रादिकर्मणाम् ॥ ९९॥ विशेषस्तु विलास: स्यादिष्टसन्दर्शनादिना। यथा- 'अन्रान्तरे किमपि वाग्विभवातिवृत्तवैचित्र्यमुल्लसितविभ्रममायताक्ष्याः। तद्भरिसात्विकविकारमपास्तवैर्यमाचार्यकं विजयि मान्मथमाविरासीत्।।' (मालती० १.२९) अथ विच्छित्ति :- स्तोकाप्याकल्परचना विच्छित्ति: कान्तिपोषकृत्। यथा- 'स्वच्छाम्भ: स्त्पनविधौतमङ्गमोष्ठस्ताम्बूलद्युतिविशदो विलासिनीनाम्। वासस्तु प्रतनु विविक्तमरित्वितीयानाकल्पो यदि कुसुमेषुणा न शून्यः ।।' (शिशु० ८.७० ) अथ विव्वोक :- विव्वोकस्त्वतिगर्वेण वस्तुनीष्टेऽप्यनादरः॥ १०० ॥ यथा-

• 'विविक्०' ग,

२० साहित्यदर्पणे [ ३.१.०

'यासां सत्यपि सद्गुणानुसरणे दोषानुवृत्तिः परा या प्राणान्परमर्पयन्ति न पुनः सम्पूर्णदृष्टि प्रिये। अत्यन्ताभिमतेऽपि वस्तुनि विधिर्यासां निषेधात्मक- स्तास्त्रैलोक्यविलक्षणप्रकृतयो वामाः प्रसीदेन्तु ते3 ॥' अथ किलकिञ्चितम्- स्मितशुष्करुदितह सितत्रासकरोधश्रमादीनाम्। साङ्कयं किलकिञ्ितमभीष्टतमसङ्गमादिजाद्र्षात्॥ १०१॥ यथा- 'पाणिरोधमविरोितवाञ्छं भर्त्सनाश्च मधुरस्मितगर्भाः । कामिन: स्म कुरुते करभोरूर्हारि शुष्करुदितं च सुखेडपि ॥' (शिशु० १०.६९) अथ मोट्टायितम्- सन्वावभाविते चित्ते वल्लभस्य कथादिषु। मोट्टायितमिति प्राहुः कर्णकण्डूयनादिकम्॥१०२ ॥ यथा- 'सुभग त्वत्कथारम्मे कर्णकण्डूतिलालसा। उज्जम्भवदनाम्भोजा भिनत्त्यङ्गानि साङ़गना ।।' अथ कुट्टमितम्- केशस्तनाधरादीनां ग्रहे हर्षेडपि सं्रमात्। प्राहुः कुट्टमितं नेति शिरःकरविधूननम्॥।१०३ ॥ यथा-

पर्यकूजि सरुजेव तरुण्यास्तारलोलवलयेन करेण ।।' (शिशु० १०.५३) अथ विभ्रम :- त्वरया हर्षरागादेदयितागमनादिपु। अस्थाने भूषणादीनां विन्यासो विश्रमो मतः ॥। १०४ ॥ यथा- 'श्रुत्वायान्तं बहिः कान्तमसमाप्तविभूषया। भालेऽअनं दृशोलांक्षा कपोले तिलकः कृतैंः ॥' अथ ललितम्- सुकुमारतयाङ्गानां विन्यासो ललितं भवेत्। यथा- 'गुरुतर कलनूपूरानुनादं सुललितनर्तितवामपादपझ्मा। इतरदनतिलोलमादधाना पदमथ मन्मथमन्थरं जगाम।।' (सिशु०७.१८)

' 'प्राणान्वरम्' ग. २ 'प्रसिध्यन्तु' खव-ग. २ शार्ङ्गधरपद्धतौ श्रोकोयं दृश्यते (३०७९). ४ 'मुखेपि' ग. " 'तन्ाव०' नि-ब. ६ 'नाम' नि- ब. • धनिकस्यैतदिति दशरूपकादू विज्ञायते (२.३९). ८ 'सललित•' नि-ब.

३.१०५] तृतीय: परिच्छेदः । २१

अथ मद :- मदो विकार: सौभाग्ययौवनाद्यवलेपज: ॥। १०५ ॥ यथा- 'मा गर्वमुद्दह कपोलतले चकास्ति कान्तस्वहस्तलिखिता मम मज्जरीति। अन्यापि किं न सखि भाजनमीदृशीनां वैरी न चेन्न्वति वेपथुरन्तरायः ॥' अथ विहृतम्ँ- वक्तव्यकालेऽप्यवचो वीडया विहृतं मतम्। यथा- 'दूरागतेन कुशलं पृष्टा नोवाच सा मया किञ्चित्। पर्यश्रुणी तु नयने तस्याः कथयांबभूवतुः सर्वम् ॥' अथ तपनम्- तपनं प्रियविच्छेदे समरावेगोत्थचेष्टितम्॥ १०६॥ यथा मम- 'श्वासान्मुञ्जति, भूतले विलुठति, त्वन्मार्गमालोकते, दीनं रोदिति, विक्षिपत्यत इतः क्षामां भुजावल्लरीम्। किं च, प्राणसमान, काछितवती स्वप्नेऽपि ते सङ्गमं निद्रां वाञ्छति, न प्रयच्छति पुनर्दग्धो विधिस्तामपि ॥' अथ मौग्ध्यम्- अज्ञानादिव या पृच्छा प्रतीतस्यापि वस्तुनः । वल्लभस्य पुरः प्रोक्तं मौगध्यं तत्तत्ववेदिभिः ॥१०७ ॥ यथा- 'के द्रुमास्ते क वा आ्रामे सन्ति केन प्ररोपिताः। नाथ मत्कङ्कणन्यस्तं येषां मुक्ताफलं फलम्।' अथ विक्षेप :- भूषाणामर्धरचना मिथ्या विष्वगवेक्षणम्। रहस्याख्यानमीषच्च विक्षेपो दयितान्तिके ॥। १०८॥ यथा- 'धम्मिल्मर्धमुक्तं कलयति तिलकं तथासकलम्। किश्चिद्दति रहस्यं चकितं विष्वग्विलोकते तन्वी।।' अथ कुतूहलम्- रम्यवस्तुसमालोके लोलता स्यात्कुतूहलम्। यथा- 'प्रसाधिकालम्बितमग्रपादमाक्षिप्य काचि ङवरागमेव। उत्सृष्टलीलागतिरा गवाक्षादलक्तकाड्कां पदवीं ततान ॥' (कुमार. ७.'८;रघु. ७.७)

१ 'खलु' नि-ब. २ दशरूपके (२.२४ इत्यत्र) उपन्यस्तमिदम्. ३ 'विकृतन्' ख-ग. ४ 'विकृत' ख-ग. ५ 'दीर्घ' नि-ब.

२२ साहित्यदर्पणे [ ३.१०९

अथ हसितम्- हसितं तु वृथाहासो यावनोज्ेदसम्भवः॥१०९।। यथा- 'अकस्मादेव तन्वङ्गी जहास यदियं पुनः । नूनं प्रसूनबाणोऽस्यां स्वाराज्यमधितिष्ठति।।' अथ चकितम्- कुतोऽपि दयितस्याग्रे चकितं भयसंभ्रमः । यथा- 'त्रस्यन्ती चलशफरीविघट्टितोरु्वामोरुरतिशयमाप विभ्रमस्य। क्षुभ्यन्ति प्रसभमहो विनापि हेतोलीलाभिः किमु सति कारणे तरुण्यः ॥' (शिशु० ८.२४) अध केलि :- विलासे सह कान्तेन कीडितं केलिरुच्यते॥ ११० ॥ यथा- 'व्यपोहितुं लोचनतो मुखानिलैरपारयन्तं किल पुष्पजं रजः । पयोधरेणोरसि काचिदुन्मना: प्रियं जघानोन्नतपीवरस्तनी ।।' (किराता० ८.१९)

दृष्टा दर्शयति व्रीडां संमुखं नैव पश्यति। पच्छन्नं वा भ्रमन्तं वातिक्रान्तं पश्यति भ्रियम्॥ १११॥ बहुधा पृच्छयमानापि मन्दमन्दमधोमुखी। सगद्गद्स्वरं किञ्चित्पिरियं प्रायेण भाषते ॥ ११२ ॥ अन्यैः प्रवर्तितां शश्चत्सावधाना च तस्कथाम्। शृणोत्यन्यत्र दत्ताक्षी प्रिये बालानुरागिणी ॥ ११३ ॥ अथ सकलानामपि नायिकानामनुरागेभ्वितानि- चिराय सविधे स्थानं प्रियस्य बहु मन्यते। विलोचनपथं चास्य न गच्छत्यनलङ्गता ॥ ११४॥ कापि कुन्तलसंच्यानसंयमव्यपदेशतः । बाहुमूलं स्तनौ नाभिपट्टजं दर्शयेत्स्फुटम्॥११५॥ आनन्दयति वागाैः प्रियस्य परिचारकान्। विश्वसित्यस्य मित्रेषु बहु मानं करोति च ॥ ११६॥ सखीमध्ये गुणान्ब्रूते स्वधनं प्रददाति च। सुप्े स्व्रपिति दुःखेऽस्य दुःखं धत्ते सुखे सुखम्॥ ११७ ॥ स्थिता दृष्टिपथे शश्वत्प्रिये पश्यति दूरतः । आभाषते परिजनं संसुखं स्मरविक्रियम्॥ ११८॥

'विहारे' नि-ब. २ 'आच्छादयति' नि-ब.

३.११९] तृतीय: परिच्छेदः । २२

यत्किञ्चिदृपि संवीक्ष्य कुरुते हसितं सुधा। कर्णकण्डूयनं तद्वत्कबरीमोक्षसंयमौ ॥। ११९ ॥ जृम्भते स्फोटयत्यङ्गं बालमाश्िष्य चुम्बति। भाले तथा वयस्याया रचयेत्तिलकक्रियाम्॥ १२० ॥ अङुष्ठाग्रेण लिखति सकटाक्षं निरीक्षते। दशति स्वाधरं चापि बूते प्रियमधोमुखी॥१२१॥ न सुज्जति च तं देश नायको यत्र दश्यते। आगच्छति गृहं तस्य कार्यव्याजेन केनचित् ॥ १२२ ॥। दत्तं किमपि कान्तेन उत्वाङ्गे मुहुरीक्षते। नित्यं हृष्यति तद्योगे वियोगे मलिना कृशा ।। १२३॥ मन्यते बहु तच्छीलं तत्प्रियं मन्यते प्रियम्। प्रार्थयत्यल्पमूल्यानि सुप्ता न परिवर्तते॥ १२४ ॥ विकारान्सात्विकानस्य संमुखी नाधिगच्छति। भाषते सूनृतं स्त्निग्धमनुरक्ता नितम्बिनी॥ १२५ ॥ एतेष्वधिकलज्ानि चेष्टितानि नवस्तिरया: । मध्यव्रीडानि मध्याया: स्रंसमानत्रपाणि तु।। १२६॥ अन्यस्त्रिया: प्रगल्भायास्तथा स्युर्वारयोषित:। दिद्मात्रं यथा मम- 'अन्तिकगतमपि मामियमलोकयन्तीव हन्त दृष्टापि। सरसनखक्षतलक्षितमाविष्कुरुते भुजामूलम् ।।' तथा- लेखप्रस्थापनैः स्तििग्धैर्वीक्षितैमृंदुभाषितैः ॥ १२७ ॥ दूतीसंप्रेषितैनार्या भावाभिव्यक्तिरिष्यते। दूत्यश्र- दूत्यः सखी नटी दासी धात्रेयी प्रतिवेशिनी ॥ १२८ ॥ बाला प्रवजिता कोरुशिल्पिन्याद्या: स्वयं तथा। कारू रजकी प्रभृतिः। शिल्पिनी चित्रकारादिस्त्री। आदिशब्दात्ताम्बूलिकगान्थि- कस्त्रीप्रभृतयः । तत्र सखी यथा-'श्वासान्मुञ्नति-' इत्यादि। स्वयंदूती यथा मम- 'पन्थिअ पिभासिओ विभ लच्छीअसि जासि ता किमण्णत्तो। ण मणंपि वारओ इह अत्थि घरे घणरसं पिअन्ताणम्।।' (पथिक पिपासित इव लक्ष्यसे यासि तत् किमन्यतः । न मनागपि वारक इह अस्ति गृहे घनरसं पिबताम् ॥) एताश्च नायिकाविषये नायकानामपि दूत्यो भवन्ति। दूतीगुणानाह- कलाकौशलमुत्साहो भक्तिश्चितज्ञता स्मृतिः॥१२९॥

१ 'आरमेत्तिलक०' ख-ग. २ 'कारू:' नि-ब.

२४ साहित्यदर्पणे [३.१३०

माधुयं नर्मविज्ञानं वाग्मिता चेति तहुणाः । एता अपि यथौचित्यादुत्तमाधममध्यमाः ॥ १३०॥ एता दूत्यः । अथ प्रतिनायक :- धीरोद्धतः पापकारी व्यसनी प्रतिनायकः । यथा-रामस्य रावणः । अथोद्दीपनविभावा :- उद्दीपनविभावास्ते रसमुद्दीपयन्ति ये॥ १३१॥ ते च- आलम्बनस्य चेष्टाद्या देशकालादयस्तथा। चेष्टाया इत्याद्यशब्दाद्रपभूषणादयः। कालादीत्यादिशब्दाच्चन्द्रचन्दनकोकिलाला- पभ्रमरझङ्गारादयः । तत्र चन्द्रोदयो यथा मम- करमुदयमहीधरस्तनाग्रे गलिततमःपटलांशुके निवेश्य। विकसितकुमुदेक्षणं विचुम्बत्ययममरेशदिशो मुखं सुधांशुः ॥' यो यस्य रसस्योद्दीपनविभावः स तत्स्वरूपनिरूपणे वक्ष्यते। अथानुभावा :- उह्ुद्धः कारणैः स्वैः स्वैर्बहिर्भावं प्रकाशयन् ॥ १३२॥ लोके यः कार्यरूप: सोडनुभावः काव्यनाव्ययोः । यः खलु लोके सीतादिचन्द्रादिभि: स्वैः स्वैरालम्बनोद्दीपनकारणै रामादेरुद्वुद्धं रत्यादिकं बहिः प्रकाशयन्कार्यमित्युच्यते, स काव्यनाट्ययोः पुनरनुभावः । क: पुनरसावित्याह- उक्ता: स्त्रीणामलङ्कारा अङ्गजाश्र स्वभावजा: ॥। १३३ ॥ तद्रूपा: सात्विका भावास्तथा चेष्टाः परा भपि। तद्रपा अनुभावरूपाः । तत्र यो यस्य रसस्यानुभावः स तत्स्वरूपवर्णने वक्ष्यते। नत्र सात्विका :- विकारा: सत्त्वसम्भूता: सार्विका: परिकीर्तिताः ॥१३४॥ सत्वं नाम स्वात्मविश्रामप्रकाशकारी कश्चनान्तरो धर्मः । सत्वमात्रोद्द्वत्वात्ते भिन्ना अप्यनुभावतः । 'गोबलीवर्दन्यायेन' इति शेषः । के त इत्याह- स्तम्भ: स्वेदोऽथ रोमाञ्नः स्वरभङ्गोऽथ वेपथुः ॥१३५॥ वैवर्ण्यमश्रु प्रलय इत्यष्टौ सात्विका: स्मृताः । तत्र स्तम्भश्चेष्टाप्रतीघातो भयहर्षामयादिभिः ॥१३६॥ वपुर्जलोदयः स्वेदो रतिघर्मश्रमादिभिः । हर्षाद्भुतभयादिभ्यो रोमाज्जो रोमविक्रिया॥१३७ ॥

: 'देशादीत्यादिशब्दात्' ग; 'चेष्टादीत्यादिशव्दात्' ख-ब. २ 'उद्दुद्धं' नि. ३ 'सीतावि रामचन्द्रा9' ग. ४ 'रामादेरन्तरुद्वुद्धं' नि-ब.

३.१३८] तृतीय: परिच्छेद: । २५

मद्संमदपीडाद्यैवैं स्वयें गद्गदं विदुः। रागद्वेषश्रमादिभ्यः कम्पो गात्रस्य वेपथु: ॥ १३८॥ विषादमदरोषाघयैर्वर्णान्यत्वं विवर्णता। अश्रु नेत्रोन्भवं वारि क्रोधदुःखप्रहषजम्। पलय: सुखदुःखाभ्यां चेष्टाज्ञाननिराकृतिः ।।१३९॥ यथा मम- 'तनुस्पर्शादस्या दरमुकुलिते हन्त नयने उदञ्वद्रोमाञ्चं व्रजति जडतामङ्गमखिलम्। कपोलौ धर्माद्रों ध्रुवमुपरताशेषविषयं मनः सान्द्रानन्दं स्पृशति झटिति बह्म परमम्।' एवमन्यत्। अथ व्यभिचारिण :- विशेषादाभिमुख्येन चरणाद्यभिचारिण: ।

स्थिरतया वर्तमाने हि रत्यादौ निर्वेदादयः प्रादुर्भावतिरोभावाभ्यामाभिसुख्येन चरणाद् व्यभिचारिण उच्यन्ते। के त इत्याह- निर्वेदा वेगदैन्यश्रममद्जडता औधयमोहौ विबोध:

औत्सुक्योन्मादशङ्गा: स्मृतिमतिसहिता व्याधिसंत्रासलज्जा हर्षासूयाविषादा: सटतिचपलता ग्लानिचिन्तावितर्काः ।१४१॥ तत्र निर्वेद :- तत्वज्ञानापदीष्यादेनिर्वेद: खावमावनम्।

तत्त्वज्ञानान्निर्वेदो यथा-

दक्षिणावर्तशङ्कोऽयं हन्त चूर्णीकृतो मया ॥' अथावेग :- आवेगः संभ्रमस्तत्र हर्षजे पिण्डिताङ्गता। उत्पातजे स्रस्तताङे, धूमाद्याकुलताभिजे॥। १४३ ॥ राजविद्रवजादेस्तु शखनागाभियोजनम्। गजादे: स्तम्भकम्पादि, पांस्वाद्याकुलतानिलात्॥ १४४ ॥ इष्टादर्षाः, शुचोऽनिष्टाज्ज्ञेयाश्चान्ये यथायथम्। तत्र शत्रुजी यथा- 'अर्ध्यमर्ध्यमिति वादिनं नृपं सोऽनवेक्ष्य भरताग्रजो यतः। क्षत्रकोपदहनार्चिषं ततः सन्दधे दृशमुदग्रतारकाम् ॥' (रघु० ११.६९)

'संमदहर्षाचैः' ग. २ 'रागदोष०' ख-ग. 'तद्िदाः' नि-ब.१ 'नामादियोजनम्' नि-ब ग

२६ साहित्यदर्पणे, [३.१४५

एवमन्यदूह्यम्। अथ दैन्यम् -- दौगत्याधैरनौजसं दैन्यं मलिनताहिकृद् । १४५। यथा- 'वृद्धोऽन्ध: पतिरेष मन्नकगतः, स्थूणावश्ञैनं गृहं, कालोऽम्यर्णजलागमः, कुशलिनी वत्सस्य वार्त्ोपि नो। यलात्सञ्चिततैलबिन्दुघटिका भम्नति पर्याककला i दृष् गर्भभरालंसां निजवधूं श्वश्रश्चिर रोदिति।।' · अथ श्रम :- खेदो रत्यध्वगत्यादेः श्वासनिद्वादिकृच्छ्रमः। यथा- 'सदः पुरीपरिसरेऽपि शिरीषमृद्दी सीता जवात्रिचतुराणि पदानि गत्वा। गन्तव्यमस्ति कियदित्यसकृद्गवाणा रामाश्रुणः कृतवती प्रथमावतारम् ।' (बालरामा० ६.३४ ) अथ मद :- संमोहानन्दसंभेदो मंदो मद्योपयोगज: ।। १४६॥ अमुना; चोत्तम: शेते, मध्यो हसति गायति। अधमप्रकृतिश्चापि परुषं वक्ति रोदिति ॥ १४७ ॥ "यंथा- 'प्रातिभं त्रिसरकेण गतानां वक्रवाक्यरचनारमणीयः । .1 गूढसूचितरहस्यसहास: सुभ्रुवां प्रववृते परिद्दासः ।।' (शिशु० १०.१२) अथ जडता- अप्रतिपत्तिरजडता स्वादिष्टा निष्टदर्शनश्रुतिमि:। अनिमिषनयन निरीक्षणतू्ष्णीभावादयसन्न ॥ १४८ ॥ यथा मम कुवलयाश्वचरिते प्राकृतकाव्ये- 'णवरिअ तं जुअजुअलं अण्णोण्णं णिहिदसजलमन्थरदिट्ठिम्। आलेक्खओपिअं विअ खणमेततं तत्थ संट्ठिअं मुअसण्णम् ।।' (केवलं तद् युवयुगलं अन्योन्यं निहितिसजलमन्थरदृष्टिम्। आलेख्यार्पितमिव क्षणमात्रं तत्र संस्थितं मुक्तसङ्गम् ।।) अथोग्रता- शौर्यापराधादिभवं भवेचण्डत्वमुग्नता.।

सथा- 'प्रणयिसखीसलीलपरिहासरसाधिगत- र्ललितशिरीषपुष्पहननैरिव ताम्यति यत्।

शांर्झधरपद्धतौ पवमिद (११:) दशरूपकेपि (8-18 इत्यत्र). २ 'तत्र' नि-ब.

१.१४९ ] तृतीय: परिच्छेद:। २७

वपुषि वधाय तत्र तव शंस्त्रमुपक्षिपतः पततु शिरस्यकाण्डयमदण्ड इवैष भुजः ॥' (मालती० ५.३१) अथ मोह :- मोहो विचित्तताभीतिदुःखावेगार्थचिन्तनैः।

थमा- 'तीव्राभिषङ्गप्रभवेण वृत्ति मोहेन संस्तम्भयतेन्द्रियाणाम्। अज्ञातभर्तृव्यसना मुहूर्त कृतोपकारेव रतिर्बभूव ॥।' (कुमार० ३.७३) अय विवोध :- निद्रापगमहेतुभ्यो विबोधश्चेतनागमः । जृम्भाङ्गभङ्गनयनमीलनाङ्गावलोककृत् ॥ १५३॥ यथां- 'च्िररतिपरिखेदप्राप्तनिद्रासुखानां चरममपि शयित्वा पूर्वमेव प्रबुद्धाः । अपरिचलितगात्राः कुर्वते न प्रियाणामशिथिलमुजचक्राश्लेषमेदं तरुण्यः ।' (झिशु० ११.१३) अथ स्वप्र :- खन्नो निद्रामुपेतस विषयानुभवस्तु यः । कोपावेगभयग्लानिसुखदुःखादिकारकः ॥१५२.॥. वथा- 'मामाकाशप्रणिहितभुजं निर्दयाश्रेषहेतो- र्लब्धायास्ते कथमपि मया खवप्नसंदर्शनेषु। पश्यन्तीनां न खलु बहुशो न स्थलीदेवतानां मुक्तास्थूलास्तरुकिसलयेष्वश्रुलेखा: पतन्ति ॥' (उत्तरमेव० ३९) अथापसार :- मनःक्षेपस्त्वपस्मारो अ्रहाद्यावेशनादिजः । भूपातकम्पप्रस्वेदफेनलाला दिकारक: ।। १५३ ॥

फेनायमानं पतिमापगानामसावपस्मारिणमाश शङ्के।।' (शिशु० ३.७२) अथ गर्व :- गर्षो मद: प्रभावश्रीविद्यासत्कुलतादिजः ।

यैथा

· "वेगानुचिन्तनैः' नि-ब. २ 'मूर्छनाज्ञानपतन' नि. ३ 'सन्दर्शनेन' नि-ब.४ "भुलेग:' नि-ब. ५ 'तत्र शौर्यगर्वो यथा' नि.

२८ साहित्यदर्पणे [ ३१५४

'धृतायुधो यावदहं तावदन्यैः किमायुवैः। यद्वा न सिद्धमस्त्रेण मम तत्केन सेत्स्ति ॥' (वेणी० ३.४६) अथ मरणम्- शरादैर्मरणं जीवत्यागोऽङपतनादिकृत्। यथा- 'राममन्मथशरेण ताडिता दुःसद्देन हृदये निशाचरी। गन्धवदुधिरचन्दनोक्षिता जीवितेशवसति जगाम सा ॥' (रघु० ११.२०) अथालखम्- आलसं श्रमगर्भादयैर्जांड्यं जृम्भासितादिकृत् ॥१५५॥ यथा- 'न तथा भूषयत्यङ्गं न तथा भाषते सखीम्। जृम्भते मुड्डुरासीना बाला गर्भभरालसा ।।' अथामर्ष :- निन्दाक्षेपापमानादेरमर्षोऽभिनिविष्टता। नेन्ररागशिर:कम्पभ्रूभङ्गोत्तर्जनादिकृत्।। १५६ ।। यथा- 'प्रायश्चित्तं चरिष्यामि पूज्यानां वो व्यतिक्रमात्। न त्वेवं दूषयिष्यामि शस्त्रग्रहमहावतम् ।।' (मह्ावीर० ३.८) अथ निद्रा- चेतःसंमीलनं निद्रा श्रमक्कममदादिजा। जुम्भाक्षिमीलनोच्द्ासगात्रभङ्गादिकारणम् ॥।१५७।। यथा- 'सार्थकानर्थकपदं ज्रुवती मन्थराक्षरम्। निद्रार्थमीलिताक्षी सा लिखितेवास्ति मे हृदि ॥' अथावहित्या- भयगौरवलजादेर्हर्षाद्याका रगुप्तिरवहित्था।

यथा- 'एवंवादिनि देवषौं पाश्रें पितुरधोमुखी। लीलाकमलपत्राणि गणयामास पार्वती॥' (कुमार० ६.८४) अथौत्सुक्यम्- इष्टानवासेरौत्सुक्यं कालक्षेपासहिष्णुता। चित्ततापत्वरास्वेददीर्घनिःश्वसितादिकृत्॥ १५९॥ १ 'साध्यताम्' नि-ब. २ "हर्षादेर्वज्ाद्याकार" स-ग. ३'सक्त्न्यभाभाषणावलो- कनादि' ख-ग.

तृतीय: परिच्छेद:।

यथा-'यः कौमारहरः स एव हि वर :- ' इत्यादि। अत्र यत् काव्यप्रकाश- कारेण (का० प्र० १) रसस्य प्राधान्यमुक्तं तद्रसनधर्मत्वाद्यभिचारिभावस्यापि रसशब्दवाच्यत्वेन गतार्थ मन्तव्यम्। अथोन्माद :- चित्तस्य भ्रम उन्माद: कामशोकभयादिभिः। अस्थानहासरुदितगीतप्रलपनादिकृत्॥ १६० ॥ यथा मम- 'भ्रातद्विरेफ भवता भ्रमता समन्तात्प्राणाधिका प्रियतमा मम वीक्षिता किम्। (झंकारमनुभूय सानन्दम् ।) ब्रुषे किमोमिति सखे कथयाशु तन्मे किं किं व्यवस्यति कुतोऽस्ति च कीदृशीयम्।' अथ शङ्का- परकरौर्यात्मदोषादैः शङ्कानर्थस्य चिन्तनम्।

यथा मम- 'प्राणेशेन प्रहितनखरेष्वङ्गकेषु क्षपान्ते जातातङ्का रचयति चिरं चन्दनालेपनानि। धत्ते लाक्षामसकृदधरे दत्तदन्तावघाते क्षामोङ्गीयं चकितममितश्चक्षुषी विक्षिपन्ती।।' अथ स्मृति :-

स्मृतिः पूर्वानुभूतार्थविषयं ज्ञानमुच्यते ॥। १६२॥ यथा मम- 'मयि सकपटं किंचित्कापि प्रणीतविलोचने किमपि नैयनं प्राप्ते तिर्यग्विजम्भिततारकम्। स्मितमुपगतामालीं दृष्टा सलज्जमवाश्चित कुवलयदृशः स्मरं स्मेरं स्मरामि तदाननम्।' अथ मति :- नीतिमार्गानुसृत्यादेरर्थ निर्धारणं सतिः। सेरता धृतिसन्तोषौ बहुमानश्र तन्बवाः ॥ १६३॥ यथा- 'असंशयं क्षत्रपरिग्रदक्षमा यदार्यमस्यामभिलाि मे मनः । सतां हि सन्देहपदेषु वस्तुषु प्रमाणमन्तःकरणप्रवृत्तयः ॥'(शाकु. १.१९) अथ व्याघि :-

१ 'प्राधान्यमित्युक्त' नि-ब. २ "धर्मयोगित्वात्' नि-ब. ३ 'चिच्समोह उन्मादः' नि-ब. 2. 'तर्कणम्' नि-ब. " 'क्षामक्षामम्' स. ६ 'समुन्नयना' निः 'समुन्नमनादि' म. · 'नयनप्रान्ते' ख-ग.

साहित्यदर्पणे [१.१६४

तत्र दाहमयत्वे भूमीच्छादयः । शैत्मयत्वे उत्कम्पनादयः । र्पष्टमुदाहरणम्। अथ त्रास :- निर्घातविद्युदुल्काघ्यैस्नास: कम्पादिकारक: ॥१६४ ॥ यथा- 'परिस्फुरन्मीनविघट्टितोरवः सुराज्गनास्त्रासविलोलदृष्टयः । उपाययुः कग्पितपाणिपल्लवाः सखीजनस्यापि विलोकनीयताम्।।' (किराता. ८.४५) अथ ब्रीडा- धाष्ट्याभावो व्रीडा वदनानमनादिकृद्दुराचारात्। यथा-'मयि सकपटं-' इत्यादि। अंथ हर्ष :-

यथा- 'समीक्ष्य पुत्रस्य पिता चिरान्मुखं निधानकुम्भस्य यथैव दुर्गतः । मुदा शरीरे प्रबभूव नात्मनः पयोधिरिन्दूदयमूर्च्छितो यथा।' अथासूया-

यथा- 'अथ तत्र पाण्डुतनयेन सदसि विहितं मधुद्विषः । मानमसहृत न चेदिपतिः परवृद्धिमत्सरि मनो हि मानिनाम् ।' (शिशु० १५.१) अथ विषाद :- उपायाभावजन्मा तु विषाद: सत्त्वसंक्षयः । निःश्वासोच्छ्रासहत्तापसहायान्वेषणादिकृत् ।१६७ ॥ यथा मम- 'एसा कुडिलघणेण चिउरकडप्पेण गठिभा बेणी। मह सहि हिअअं दंसइ आअसजट्टिव्व कालउरइव्व ।।' (एषा कुटिलघनेन चिकुरकलापेन ग्रथिता वेणी। मम सखि हृदयं दशति आयसयष्टिरिव कालोरगीव ।।) अथ धृति :- ज्ञानाभीष्टागमाद्यैस्तु संपूर्णस्पृहता धृतिः। सौहित्यवचनोल्लाससहासप्रतिभादिकृत् ॥।१६८ ॥ यँथा- 'कृत्वा दीननिपीडनां निजजने बद्धा वचोविग्रहं नैवालोच्य गरीयसीरपि चिरादामुष्मिकीर्यातनाः । 'दोषोद्ोष' नि-ब.२ 'तुह जिबद्धा वेणी' ख-नि-ब. ३ 'सदि दारइ डंसइ ... व्व हिअभं' नि-ब; 'सहि दाव डसइ ... हिभअं' ख. 8 'यथा मम' नि-ब. ५ 'वचो निशुरम' ग; 'वचोनिग्रहम्' ख.

३,१६८ ] तृतीय: परिच्छेदः । ३१

द्रव्याघाः परिसञ्चिताः खलु मया यस्याः कृते सांप्रतं नीवाराञ्जलिनापि केवलमहो सेयं कृतार्था तनुः ॥' अथ चपलता- मात्सर्यद्वेषरागादेश्वापलं त्वनवस्थितिः । तत्र भर्त्सनपारुष्यस्वच्छन्दाचरणाद्य: ॥१६९॥- यथा- 'अन्यासु तावदुंपमर्दसद्दासु भृङ्ग लोलं विनोदय मनः सुमनोलतासु। मुग्धामजातरजसं कलिकामकाले व्यर्थ कदर्थयसि किं नवमालिकाया: ॥' अथ ग्लानि :- रंत्यायासमनस्तापक्षुत्पिपासादिसम्भवा। ग्लानिर्निष्प्राणताकम्पकारश्यानुत्साहतादिकृत्॥ १७० ॥ यथा- 'किसलयमिव मुग्धं बन्धनाद्विप्रलूनं हृदयकुसुमशोषी दारुणो दीर्घशोकः । ग्लपयति परिपाण्डु क्षाममस्याः शरीरं शरदिज इव धर्मः केतकीगर्भपत्रम्।।' (उत्तरराम० ३.५) अथ चिन्ता- ध्यानं चिन्ता हितानाप्ते: शून्यताश्वासतांपकृत्। यथा मम- 'कमलेन विह्सिषण संजोपन्ती विरोहिणं ससिणं। करअलपलत्थमुही किं चिन्तसि सुमुहि अन्तराहिददइआ॥' (कमलेन विहसितेन संयोजयन्ती विरोधिनं शशिनम्। करतलपर्यस्तमुखी कि चिन्तयसि सुमुखि अन्तराहितदयिता॥) अथ वितर्क :- तर्कों विचार: सन्देहाड्रशिरोक्कुलिनर्तकः ॥। १७१ ॥ यथा-'किं रुद्ध: प्रियया-' इत्यादि (शद्ार. १.७५ इत्यत्र)। एते. च त्रयखित्रिंशद्मेदा इति यदुक्क तदुपलक्षणमित्याह- रत्याद्योऽप्यनियते रसे स्युर्व्यभिचारिणः । तथाहि शङ्गारेऽनुच्छिद्यमानतयावस्थानाद् रतिरेव स्थायिशब्दवाच्या। हासः पुनरुत्पद्यमानो व्यभिचार्येव। व्यभिचारिलक्षणयोगात। तदुक्तम्-'रसांवस्थः परं भावः स्थायितां प्रतिपदते।' इति। तत्कस्य स्थायिनः कुत्र रसे सञ्चारित्वमित्याह- शङ्गारवीरयोहांसो वीरे क्रोधस्था मतः॥ १७२ ॥ शान्ते जुगुप्सा कथिता व्यभिचारितया पुनः।

१ विकटनितम्बायाः पद्यमिदमिति शार्ङ्वरपद्धतौ (८२३) सुभापितावळै च (७३५) दशरूपकेपि (४.३३) उदाहृतमिदम्. २ 'कम्पकार्यानु०' नि-ब. ३ 'विभसिएग' ('विकसितेन.) नि-ब. 'ससिबिम्बम्' नि-ब. ५ 'अन्तराहिअहिअभा' (अन्तसाहितहृदया) नि-ब. ६ 'त्रयख्रिशदू व्यभिचारिमेदाः' नि-ब.

साहित्यंदर्पणे [३.१७३

इत्याद्यन्यत्समुन्नेयं तथा भावितबुद्धिमि: ॥ १७३ ॥ अथ स्थायिभाव :- अविरुद्धा विरुद्धा वा यं तिरोधातुमक्षमाः। आास्वादाक्कुरकन्दोऽसौ भावः स्थायीति संमतः ॥१॥४ ॥ तदुक्तम्- 'स्नक्सूत्रवृत्त्या भावानामन्येषामनुगामुकः। न तिरोघीयते स्थायी तैरसौ पुष्यते परम् ॥' इति। तन्ट्रेदानाइ- रतिहासश्न शोकश्च करोधोत्साहौ भयं तथा। जुगुप्सा विस्मयश्चेत्थमष्टौ प्रोक्ताः शमोऽपि च॥ १७५॥ तत्र रतिर्मनोनुकूलेऽर्थे मनसः प्रवणायितम्। वागादिवैकृतैश्चेतोविकासो हास इृष्यते ॥ १७६ ॥ इष्टनाशादिभिश्नेतोवैक्कव्यं शोकशब्दभाक। प्रतिकूलेषु तैक्ष्ण्यस्यावबोधः क्रोध इष्यते ॥ १७७ ॥ कार्यारम्भेषु संरम्भ: स्थेयानुत्साह उच्यते। रौद्रं शक्त्या तु जनितं चित्तवैक्कृव्यजं भयम्।। १७८ ।। दोषेक्षणादिभिर्गर्हा जुगुप्सा विस्मयोन्भवा। विविधेषु पदार्थेषु लोकसीमातिवर्तिषु॥ १७९ ॥ विस्फारश्वेतसो यस्तु स विस्य उदाहृतः । शमो निरीहावस्थायां स्वात्मविश्रामजं सुखम् ॥ १८० ॥ यथा मालतीमाधवे रतिः । लटकमेलके हासः । रामायप्पे शोकः । महाभारते शमः । एवमन्येपि। एते ह्येतेष्वन्तरा उत्पद्यमानैस्तैस्तैविरुद्वैरविरुद्वैश्व भवरनुच्छित्ाः प्रत्युत परिपुष्टा एव सहृदयानुभवसिद्धाः । किं च । नानाभिनर्यसम्बद्धान्भावयन्ति रसान्यतः । तसमान्भावा अमी प्रोक्ता: स्थायिसज्जारिसात्विकाः ॥। १८१॥

अथ रसस्य मेदानाह-

बीभत्सोऽद्द्ुत इत्यष्टौ रसा: शान्तस्तथा मतः ॥१८२॥ तत्र शङ्गार :-

उत्तमप्रकृतिप्रायो रसः शद्ार इृष्यते ॥ १८३ ॥ * परोढां वर्जयित्वात्र वेश्यां चाननुरागिणीम्।

१ '.गामकः' नि. २ 'रौद्रशक्ता' ख-नि-ब. ३ 'वैक्व्यदं' नि-ब. : 'नयसम्बन्धान्' नि-ब.५ °हेतुजः' ख-ग. ६ 'वर्जयित्वा तु' नि०

३.१८४ ] तृतीयः परिच्छेदः ।

आलम्बनं नायिका: स्युर्दक्षिणाद्याश्र नायकाः ॥। १८४ ॥ चन्द्र चन्दनरोलम्बस्ताद्युद्दीपनं मतम्। भ्रविक्षेपकटाक्षादिरनुभाव: प्रकीर्तितः ॥ १८५॥ त्यकवौड यमरणालस्य जुगुप्साव्यभिचारिणः। स्थायिभावो रतिः इयामवर्णोडयं विष्णुदैवतः ॥ यथा-'शून्यं वासगृहम्-' इत्यादि। अत्रोक्तस्वरूपः पतिः, उक्तरूपा च बाला आलम्बनविभावौ। शून्यं वासगृहमुद्दीपनविभावः । चुम्बनमनुभावः । लज्जा- दासौ व्यभिचारिणौ। पतैरभिव्यक्त: सहृदेयरतिभावः शङ्गाररसरूपतां भजते। त्मेदानाह- विप्रलम्भोऽ्य सम्भोग इतयेष द्विविधो मतः॥ १८६॥ तत्र यत्र तु रति: प्रकृष्टा नाभीष्टमुपैति विप्रलम्भोडसौ। अभीष्टं नायकं नायिकां वा। स च पूर्वरागमानप्रवासकरुणात्मकश्चतुर्धा स्यात्॥ १८७ ॥ तत्र श्रवणाददर्शनाद्वापि मिथः संरूढरागयोः । दशाविशेषोऽप्राप्ती यः पूर्वरागः स उच्यते ॥ १८८॥ श्रवणं तु भवेत्तत्र दूतबन्दिसखीमुखात्। इन्द्रजाले च चित्रे च साक्षात्स्मे च दर्शनम् ॥ १८९॥ अभिलाषश्चिन्तास्मृतिगुणकथनोद्वेगसंप्रलापाश्च। उन्मादोऽथ व्याधिजंडता मृतिरिति दशान् कामदुशाः ॥ १९० ॥ अमिलाष: स्पृहा चिन्ता प्राह्युपायादिचिन्तनम्।

अलक्ष्यवाक्प्रलापः स्वाच्चेतसो भ्रमणान्जृशम्। व्याधिस्तु दीर्घनिःश्वासपाण्डुताकृशताद्यः।। १९२॥ जटता हीनचेष्टत्वमङ्गानां मनसस्तथा। शेषं स्पष्टम्। क्रमेणोदाहरणानि- 'प्रेमार्द्रा: प्रणयस्पृशः परिचयादुद्गाढरागोदया- स्वास्ता मुग्धदृशो निसर्गमधुराश्चेष्टा भवेयुरमयि। याख्वन्तःकरणस्य बाह्यकरणव्यापाररोवी क्षणा- दाशंसापरिकल्पितास्वपि भवत्यानन्दसान्द्रो लयः ॥' (मालती० ५.७) अत्र मालतीसाक्षादर्शनप्ररूढरागस्य माधवस्याभिलाषः । 'कथमीक्षे कुरद्गाक्षी साक्षाल्लक्ष्मी मनोभुवः । इति चिन्ताकुल: कान्तो निद्रां नैति निशीथिनीम्।' अत्र कस्याश्षिन्नायिकाया इन्द्रजालदर्शनेन प्ररूढरागस्य नायकस्य चिन्ता। इदं

' 'सहृदयविषयो रतिभावः' नि०

३३ साहित्यदर्पणे [३.१९३

मम। 'मयि सकपटम्-' इत्यादौ नायकस्य स्मृतिः । 'नेत्रे खञ्जनगजने-' इत्यादौ गुणकथनम्। 'श्वासान्मुञ्नति-' इत्यादौ उद्देगः । 'त्रिभागशेषासु निशासु च क्षणं निमील्य नेत्रे सहसा व्यबुध्यत। क नीलकण्ठ व्रजसीत्यलक्ष्यवागसत्यकण्ठार्पिंतबाडुबन्धना ।।' (कुमार० ५.५७) अन्र प्रलाप: । 'भ्रातद्विरेफ-' इत्यादावुन्मादः । 'पाण्डु क्षामं वदनं हृदयं सरसं तवालसं च वपुः । आवेदयति नितान्तं क्षेत्रियरोगं सखि हृदन्तः ।।' अत्र व्याधि: । 'मिसिणी अलसअणीए णिहिअं सव्वं विणिच्चलं अङ्गम्।. दीहो णीसासहरो एसो साहेह जीअइ चिं परम्।' (बिसिनीदलशयनीये निहितं सर्व विनिश्चलमङ्गम्। दीर्घों विश्वासभर एष साधयति जीवतीति परम् ॥) अत्र जडता। इदं मम। रसविच्छेद्हेतुत्वान्मरणं नैव वर्ण्यंते।। १९३ ॥ जातप्रायं तु तद्वाच्यं चेतसाकाङ्कितं तथा। वर्ण्यंतेऽपि यदि प्रत्युंजीवनं स्याददूरंतः ॥१९४ । तत्राद्यं यथा- 'शेफालिकां विदलितामवलोक्य तन्व्री प्राणान्कथञ्चिदपि धारयितुं प्रभूता। आकर्ण्य संग्रति रुतं चरणायुधानां किं वा भविष्यति न वेद्वि तपस्विनी सा ।।' द्वितीयं यथा- 'रोलम्बाः परिपूरयन्तु हेरितो झंकारकोलाइलै- मन्दं मन्दमुपैतु चन्दनवनीजातो नभखानपि। माधन्त: कलयन्तु चूतशिखरे केलीपिका: पञ्चमं प्राणा: सत्वरमशमसारकठिना गच्छन्तु गच्छन्त्वमी ।I' ममैतौ। तृतीयं यथा-कादम्बय! महाश्रेतापुण्डरीकवत्तान्ते। एव च प्रकार: करुण- विप्रलम्भविषय इति वक्ष्यामः । केचित्तु- 'नयनप्रीतिः प्रथमं चित्तासङ्गस्ततोऽथ सङ्कल्पः । निद्राच्छेदस्तनुता विषयनिवृत्तिस्त्रपानाशः। उन्मादो मूर्च्छा मृतिरित्येताः स्मरदशा दशैव स्युः ॥ इत्याहुः । तत्र च आदौ वाच्य: स्रत्रिया रागः पश्चात् पुंससतदिब्गितैः । इज्वितान्युक्तानि यथा रलावल्यां सागरिकावत्सराजयोः। आदौ पुरुषानुरागे सम्भवत्यपि एवमधिकं हृदयंगमता भवाे। नीली कुसुम्भं मजिष्ठा पूर्वरागोऽपि च त्रिधा ॥ १९५॥ : तत्र

१ काव्यप्रकाशे सपमे दशमे चोल्ासे उदाहृतम्. २ 'परिंतः ख-ग.

तृतीय: परिच्छेदः ।

न चातिशोभते यन्नापैति प्रेम मनोगतम्ं। तन्नीलीरागमाख्यातं यथा श्रीरामसीतयोः ॥ १९६॥ . . कुसुम्भरागं तत्प्राहुर्यदपैति च सोभते। मजिष्ठारागमाहुस्तं यत्रापैत्यतिशोभते॥। १९७ ॥ * अर्थ मान :- मान: कोप: स तु द्वेधा प्रणयेर्ष्यासमुन्नवः। द्वयोः प्रणयमान: स्यात्प्रमोदे सुमहत्यपि॥ १९८ ॥ प्रेम्णः कुटिलगामित्वात्कोपो यः कारणं विना। द्वयोरिति नायकस्य नाथिकायाश्च। द्योः प्रणयमानो वर्णनीयः । उदाहरणम्। तन्र नायकस्य यथा- 'अलिअपसुत्तअ णिमीलिअच्छ देसु सुहअ मज्झ ओआसम् : गण्डपरिउम्बणपुलइअक्ग ण उणो चिराइस्सम् ।।' (गाथासप्त. १-२०) (अलीकप्रसुपतक निमीलिताक्ष देहि सुभग ममावकाशम्। गण्डपरिचुम्बनपुलकिताक्क न पुनश्चिरयिष्यामि ।।) नायिकाया यथा कुमारसम्भवे संध्यावर्णनावसरे। उभयोयंथां- 'पणअकुविआणँ दोण्णं वि अलिअसुत्ताण्णँ माणइण्णाणम्। णिच्चलणिरुद्धणी सासदिण्णअण्णाणँ को मलो।।' (गाथासप्त० १.२७) (प्रणयकुष्तियोरद्वयोरपि अलीकसुप्तयोर्मानविज्ञयोः । निश्चलनिरुद्धनिश्वासदत्तकर्णयोः को मंलः ॥) अनुनयपर्यन्तासहत्वे त्वस्य न विप्रलम्भभेदता, कि तु सम्भोगसज्जारीर्ष्याख्ये भावत्वम्। यथा -: 'भ्रभङ्गे रचितेऽपि दृष्टिरधिकं सोत्कण्ठमुद्दीक्षते रुद्धायामपि वाचि सस्मितमिदं दग्धाननं जायते। कार्कश्यं गमितेऽपिचितसि तनू रोमाञ्नमालम्बते दृष्टे निर्वद्णं भविष्यति कथं मानस्य तस्मिज्ने ॥' (अमरु० २८) यथा वा- 'एकस्मिन्शयने पराखुखतया वीतोत्तरं ताम्यतो- रन्योन्यस्य हृद्धि स्थितेऽप्यनुनये संरक्षतोमौरवम्। दम्पत्योः शनकैरपाङ्गवलनान्मिश्रीभवच्चक्षुषो- र्भग्नों मानकलि: सहासरभसव्यासक्तकण्ठग्रहः ॥' (अमरु० २३) पत्युरन्यप्रियासङ्के दष्टेऽथानुमिते श्रुते॥१९९ ॥ ईष्यांमानो भवेत्स्रीणां तत्र त्वंनुमितिस्त्रिंधा।

तत्र दृष्ट यथां-

१ 'अस्मात्परं श्रोकत्रयं ग - पुस्तके नास्ति, २ 'सचार्याख्यभावत्वम्' नि.

३६ साहित्यदर्पणे [३.२००

'विनयति सुदृशो दृशोः परागं प्रणयिनि कौसुममाननानिलेन। तदहितयुवतेरभीक्ष्णमक्ष्णोर्वयमपि रोषरजोभिरापुपूरे ।।' (शिशु० ७.५७) सम्भोगचिह्वेनानुमिते यथा- 'नवनखपदमङ्गं गोपयस्यंशुकेन स्थगयसि पुनरोष्ठं पाणिना दन्तदष्टम्। प्रतिदिशमपरस्त्रीसङ्गशंसी विसर्पन्नवपरिमलगन्धः केन शक्यो वरीतुम्।' (शिशु० ११.३४) एवमन्यत्र। साम भेदोऽथ दानं च नत्युपेक्षे रसान्तरम्। तज्मङ्गाय पतिः कुर्यात्षडुपायानिति क्रमात् ॥ २०१ ॥ तन्र प्रियवच: साम, भेदस्तत्सख्युपार्जनम्। दानं व्याजेन भूषादेः, पादयोः पतनं नतिः॥२०२ ॥ सामादौ तु परिक्षीणे स्यादुपेक्षावधीरणम्। रभसत्रासहर्षादेः कोपभ्रंशो रसान्तरम् ॥ २०३॥ यथा-'नो चाड श्रवणे कृतम्-' इत्यादि (३.८०-८२ इत्यत्रोदाहतं)। अत्र सामादयः पञ्च सूचिताः । रसान्तरमूह्यम्। अथ प्रवास :- प्रवासो भिन्नदेशत्वं कार्याच्छापाच्च संभ्रमात्। तत्राङ्गचेलमालिन्यमेकवेणीधरं शिरः।। २०४॥। निःश्वासोच्द्वासरुदितभूमिपातादि जायते। रकिं च । अङ्गेष्वसौष्ठवं तापः पाण्डुता कृशतारुचिः ॥ २०५॥ अष्टतिः स्यादनालम्बस्तन्मयोन्मादमूर्च्छना:। मृतिश्चेति क्रमाज्ज्ञेया दश सरदशा इह॥ २०६॥। अङ्गासौष्ठवमापत्तिस्तापस्तु विरहज्वर:। अरुचिर्वस्तुवैराग्यं सर्वत्रारागिता छतिः ।। २०७।। अनालम्बनता चापि शून्यता मनसः स्मृता। तन्मयस्तत्प्रकाशो हि बाह्याभ्यन्तरतस्तथा। शेषं स्पष्टम्। एकदेशतो यथा मम तातपादानाम्- 'चिन्ताभि: स्तिमितं मनः, करतले लीना कपोलस्थली, प्रत्यूषक्षणदेशपाण्डु वदनं, श्वासैकखिन्नोऽघरः ।

कोऽस्या: प्रार्थिंतदुर्लभोडस्ति सहते दीनां दशामीदृशीम्।।' भावी भवन्भूत इति त्रिधा स्यात्तत्र कार्यज: ॥ २०८ ।।

१ 'धारणम्' ब. २ 'असौष्ठवं मलापतिः' नि-ब. रामचरणसंमतश्वानं पाठ: ३ 'अम्म: शीकर०' नि-ब.

३.२०८] तृतीय: परिच्छेदः । ३७

कार्यजस्य बुद्धिपूर्वकत्वात्रैविध्यम्। तत्र भावी यथा मम- 'याम: सुन्दरि, याहि पान्थ, दयिते शोकं वृथा मा कृथा:, शोकस्त्वद्गमने कुतो मम, ततो बाष्पं कथं मुञ्चसि। शीघ्रं न व्रजसीति, मां गमयितुं कस्मादियं ते त्वरा, भूयानस्य सह त्वया जिगमिषोर्जीवस्य मे संभ्रम: ।।' भवन्यथा- 'प्रस्थानं वलयै. कृतं, प्रियसखैरस्नैरजस्ं गतं, धृत्या न क्षणमासितं, व्यवसितं चित्तेन गन्तुं पुरः। यातुं निश्चितचेतसि प्रियतमे सर्वे समं प्रस्थिता गन्तव्ये सति जीवित प्रियसुहृत्सार्थ: किमु त्यज्यते॥' (अमरु० ३६) भूतो यथा-'चिन्ताभिः स्तिमितम्-' इत्यादि। शापाद्था-'तां जानीया :- ' इत्यादि। संभ्रमो दिव्यमानुषनिर्घातोत्पातादिजः । यथा-विक्रमोर्वश्यामुर्वशीपुरूर-

नामुभयेषामप्युभयत्र सम्भवेऽपि चिरन्तनप्रसिद्धया विविच्य प्रतिपादनम्। अथ करुणविप्रलम्भ :- यूनोरेकतरस्मिन्गतवत लोकान्तरं पुनर्लभ्ये। विमनायते यदैकस्तदा भवेत्करुणविप्रलम्भाख्यः । २०९ ॥ यथा कादम्बर्या पुण्डरीकमहाश्चेतावृत्तान्ते। पुनरलभ्ये शरीरान्तरेण वा लभ्ये तु करुणाख्य एव रसः । किं चात्रा का शसरस्वतीभाषानन्तरमेव शरृङ्गारः, सङ्गमप्रत्याशया रतेरुद्भवात्। प्रथमं त्तु 'करुणरस एव' इत्यमियुक्ता मन्यन्ते । यच्चात्र 'सङ्गमप्रत्याशानन्तरमेव भवतो विप्रलम्भशङ्गारस्य प्रवासाख्यो भेद एव' इति केचिदाड्डः, तदन्ये 'मरणरूपविशेष- सम्भवात्तद्भिन्नमपि मन्यन्ते। अथ सम्भोग :- दर्शनस्पर्शनादीनि निषेवेते विलासिनौ।। यत्रानुरक्तावन्योन्यं सम्भोगोयमुदाहृतः ॥ २१० ॥ आदिशब्दादन्योन्याधरपानचुम्बनादयः। यथा-'शून्यं वासगृहम्-' इत्यादि। संख्या तुमशक्यतया चुम्बनपरिरम्भणादिबहुभेदाद्। अयमेक एव धीरैः कथितः सम्भोगशृङ्गारः।। २११॥ तत्र स्याहतुषङ्ं चन्द्रादित्यौ तथोदयास्तमयः । जलके लिवनविहारप्रभातमधुपानयामिनीप्रभृतिः॥ २१२॥ अनुलेपनभूषाद्या वाच्यं शुचिमेध्यमन्यच्च। तथा च भरत :- 'यत्किंचिल्लोके शुचि मेध्यमुज्ज्वलं दर्शनीयं वा तत्सर्वं शङ्गारे- णोपनीर्यते' (नाट्य० ६.४५ इत्यस्यानन्तरं) इति। उपनीयते उपयुज्यते।

१ 'करिं च कादम्बर्यामाकाश' ग. २ 'प्रत्याशायां' स्. ३ "नन्तरमपि' नि-ब. * 'त्िन्नमेवेति मन्यन्ते' नि. ५ 'उपमीयने उपयुज्यते' नि-ब; 'उपमीयते' ग. घ

३८ साहित्यदर्पणे [३.२१३

किं च । कथितश्चतुर्विधोऽसावानन्तर्यात्तु पूर्वरागादेः ॥ २१३ ॥ यदुक्तम्- 'न विना विप्रलम्भेन सम्भोग: पुष्टिमश्रुते। कषायिते हि वस्त्रादौ भूयान्रागो विवर्धते ॥' इति। तत्र पूर्वरागानन्तरं सम्भोगो यथा कुमारसम्भवे पार्वतीपरमेश्वरयोः । प्रवासान- न्तरं सम्भोगो यथा मम तातपादानाम्- 'क्षेमं ते ननु पक्ष्मलाक्षि-किसअं खेमं महङ्गं दिढं, एतादृक्कशता कुतः-तुह पुणो पुट्ठं सरीरं जदो। केनाहं पृथुल: प्रिये-पणइणीदेहस्स संमीलणात्, त्वत्तः सुभ्रु न कापि मे-जइ इदं खेमं कुदो पुच्छसि।' (कृशकं क्षेमं ममाङ्गं दृढम्, तव पुनः पुष्ट शरीरं यतः । प्रणयिनीदेहस्य संमी- लनात्, यदि इदं क्षेमं कुतः पृच्छसि)। एवमन्यत्राप्यूह्यम्। अथ ह्ास्य :- विकृताकारवाग्वेषचेष्टादे: कुहकान्नवेत्। हास्यो हासस्थायिभावः श्वेतः प्रमथदैवतः ॥२१४॥ विकृताकारवाक्वेष्टं यमालोक्य हसेजनः । तदन्रालम्बनं प्राहुस्तच्चेष्टोद्दीपनं मतमू॥ २१५॥ अनुभावोऽक्षिसङ्गोचवदन सेरतादयः। निद्रालस्यावहित्थाद्या अत्र स्युर्व्यमिचारिणः ॥ २१६।। ज्येष्ठानां सिमितहसिते मध्यानां विहसितावहसिते च। नीचानामपहसितं तथातिहससितं तदेष षहभेदः ॥ २१७ ॥ ईषद्विकासिनयनं स्मितं स्यात्स्पन्दिताघरम्। किंचिल्लक्ष्गद्विजं तन्न हसितं कथितं बुधैः ॥ २१८ ॥ मधुरस्वरं विहसितं सांसशिर:कम्पमवहसितम्। अपहसितं सास्त्राक्षं विक्षिप्ाङ्गं [च] भवत्यतिहसितम् ॥ २१९॥ यथा- 'गुरोगिरः पञ्च दिनान्यधीत्य वेदान्तशास्त्राणि दिनत्रयं च । अमी समाघ्रातवितर्कवादाः समागताः कुक्कुटमिश्रपादाः ॥' (लटकमेलक) अस्य लटकमेलकप्रभृतिषु परिपोषो द्रष्टव्यः । अत्र च- यस्य हास: स चेत्क्वापि साक्षान्नैव निबध्यते। तथाप्येष विभावादिसामर्थ्यादुपलभ्यते॥ २२०॥ अभेदेन विभावादिसाधारण्यात्प्रतीयते। सामाजिकैस्ततो हास्यरसोऽयमनुभूयते॥ २२१॥ एवमन्येष्वपि रसेषु बोद्धव्यम्। अथ करुण :-

· 'विभावादिः' ब; 'विभावादेः' ग.

३.२२२ ] तृतीय: परिच्छेदः । ३९

इष्टनाशादनिष्टाप्तेः करुणाख्यो रसो भवेत्। धी रैः कपोतवर्णोऽयं कथितो यमदैवतः । २२२ ॥ शोकोऽत्र स्थायिभावः स्याच्छोच्यमालम्बनं मतम्। तस्य दाहादिकावस्था भवेदुद्दीपनं पुनः ॥ २२३॥ अनुभावा दैवनिन्दाभूपातक्रन्दितादयः। वैवर्ण्योच्छ्ासनिःश्वासस्तम्भप्रलयनानि च ॥ २२४ ॥ निर्वेदमोहापस्मारव्याधिग्लानिस्मृतिश्रमाः । विषाद्ज डतोन्मादचिन्ताद्या व्यभिचारिणः ॥। २२५।। शोच्यं विनष्टबन्धुप्रभृति। यथा मम राघवविलासे- 'विपिने क्व जटानिबन्धनं तव चेदं क मनोहरं वपुः । अनयोर्घटना विधे: स्फुटं ननु खङ्गेन शिराषकर्तनम् ।।' अत्र हि रामवनवासजनितशोकार्तस्य दशरथस्य दैवनिन्दा। एवं बन्धुवियोग- विभवनाशादावप्युदाहार्यम्। परिपोषस्तु महाभारते स्त्रीपर्वणि बोद्धव्यः ।

शोकस्थायितया भिन्नो विप्रलम्भादयं रसः । विप्रलम्भे रतिः स्थायी पुनः सम्भोगहेतुकः ॥ २२६॥ अथ रौद्र :- रौद्रः क्रोधस्थायिभावो रक्तो रुद्राघिदैवतः। आलम्बनमरिसतत्र तच्चेष्टोद्दीपनं मतमू ॥ २२७ ॥ सुष्टिप्रहारपा तनविकृतच्छेदाव दारणैश्चैव।

भ्रविभङ्गौष्ठनिर्देशबाहुस्फोटनतर्जनाः। आत्मावदानकथनमायुघोत्क्षेपणानि च।। २२९॥ अनुभावास्तथाक्षेपकरसंदर्शनादयः ॥ २३०॥ उभ्रतावेगरोमाञ्ज स्वेदवेपथवो मदः। मोहामर्षाद्यश्चात्र भावा: स्युर्व्यमिचारिणः । यथा- 'कृतमनुकृतं दृष्टं वा यैरिदं गुरुपातकं मनुजपशुभिनिर्मर्यादैर्भवद्भ्रिरुदायुवैः । नरकरिपुणा सार्ध तेषां सभीमकिरीटिनामयमहमसओोदोमांसैः करोमि दिशां बलिम्।" (वेणी० ३.२४) अस्य युद्धवीराद्वेदमाह- रक्तासनेत्रता चात्र भेदिनी युद्धवीरतः ॥। २३१॥ अथ वीर :- उत्तमप्रकृतिर्वीर उत्साहस्थायिभावक: ।

१ 'द्रष्टव्यः' नि-ब. २ 'अनुभावा ...... मदः' इदं व्यत्यस्तं नि-पुस्तके.

80 साहित्यदर्पणे [ ३.२३२

महेन्द्रदैवतो हेमवर्णोडयं समुदाहतः ॥ २३२॥ आालम्बनविभावास्तु विजेतत्र्यादयो मताः । विजेतव्यादिचेष्टाद्यास्तस्योद्दीपनरूपिणः । अनुभावास्तु तत्र स्युः सहायान्वेषणादयः ।।२३३ ॥ सज्जारिणस्तु धतिमतिगर्वस्मृतितर्करोमान्जाः । स च दानधर्मयुद्धैर्दयया च समन्वितश्चतुर्धा स्यात् ॥ २३४॥ स च वीरो दानवीरो धर्मवीरो युद्धवीरो दयावीरश्चेति चतुविंधः। तत्र दानवीरो यथा परशुराम :- 'त्यागः सप्तसमुद्रमुद्रितमहीनिर्व्याजदानावधिः' इति (महावीर. २.३६)। अत्र परशुरामस्य त्यागे उत्साहः स्थायिभावः संप्रदानभूतजाह्मणैरालम्बनवि- भावैः सत्त्वाध्यवसायादिभिश्चोद्दीपनविभावैविभावितः सर्वस्वत्यागादिभिरनुभावैरनु- भावितो हर्षधृत्यादिभि: सञ्चारिभिः पुष्टि नीतो दानवीरतां भजते। धर्मवीरो यथा युविष्ठिर :- 'राज्यं च वसु देहश्च भार्या भ्रातृसुता इमे। यच्च लोके ममायत्तं तद्धर्माय सदोदतम्।।' युद्धवीरो यथा श्रीरामचन्द्र :- 'भो लङ्केश्वर दीयतां जनकजा रामः स्वयं याचते कोडयं ते मतिविभ्रमः स्मर नयं नाद्यापि किश्निद्गतम्। नैवं चेत्खरदूषणत्रिशिरसां कण्ठासृजा पक्किल: पत्री नैष सहिष्यते मम धनुर्ज्याबन्धबन्धूकृतः ॥' (बालरा. ९.१९) दयावीरो यथा जीमूतवाहन :- 'शिरामुखैः स्यन्दत एव रक्तमद्यापि देहे मम मांसमस्ति। तृप्तिं न पश्यामि तवापि तावत्किं भक्षणात्त्वं विरतो गरुत्मन् ।' (नागा० ५.१६) एष्वपि विभावादय: पूर्वोदाहरणवदूह्याः । अथ भयानक :- भयानको भयस्थायिभावः कालाविदैवतः । स्ीनीचप्रकृतिः कृष्णो मतस्तत्वविशारदैः ॥२३५॥ यस्मादुत्पद्यते भीतिस्तदत्रालम्बनं मतम्। चेष्टा घोरतरास्तस्य भवेदुद्दीपनं पुनः॥ २३६॥ अनुभावोऽत्र वैवर्ण्यगदद स्वरभाषणम्। प्रलयसवेदरोमाञ्जकम्पदिवप्रेक्षणादयः ॥ २३७॥ जुगुप्सावेगसंमोहसंन्नासग्लानिदीनताः । शङ्गापसमारसंभ्रान्तिमृत्याद्या व्यभिचारिण: ॥। २३८।। यथा-'नष्टं वर्षवरैः-' इत्यादि। अथ बीभत्स :-

2 'पात्रपाप्तिसाम्राज्यादिभिरुद्दीपन' ख-ग. २ 'सत्त्वाध्यवसायादिमिरनु' ख-ग. अयं पाठो भरतविरुद्धः ३ 'सुताश्च ये' नि-ब; 'सुताश्च मे' ख. 'पुलकसेद"' ख-ग.

३.२३९ J तृतीय: परिच्छेदः ।

जुगुप्सास्थायिभावस्तु बीभत्सः कथ्यते रसः । नीलवर्णो महाकालदैवतोऽयमुदाहृतः ॥ २३९॥ दुर्गन्धिमांसरुधिरमेदांस्यालम्बनं मतम्। तत्रैव कृमिपाताद्यमुद्दीपनमुदाहतम्॥ २४० ॥ - अनुभावास्तत्र मत्तास्तथा स्युर्व्यमिचारिणः ।। २४१ ।। मोहोऽपस्मार आवेगो व्याधिश्च मरणादयः । यथा- 'उत्कृत्योत्कृत्य कृत्ति प्रथममथ पृथूच्छोथभूयांसि मांसा- न्यंसस्फिक्पृष्ठपिण्डाद्यवयव सुलभान्युग्रपूतीनि जग्ध्वा । अन्तः पर्यस्तनेत्रः प्रकटितदशनः प्रेतरङ्ग: करक्का- दङ्क स्थादस्थिसंस्थं स्थपुटगतमपि क्रव्यमव्यग्रमत्ति ॥' (मालती० ५.१६) अथाद्भुत :- अन्भुतो विस्मयस्थायिभावो गन्धर्वदैवतः ॥। २४२॥ पीतवर्णो वस्तु लोकातिगमालम्बनं मतम्। गुणानां तस्य महिमा भवेदुद्दीपनं पुनः ॥। २४३॥ सम्भ: स्वेदोऽथ रोमाज्जगद्गदस्वरसंभ्रमा: । तथा नेत्रविकासाद्या अनुभावा: प्रकीर्तिताः। २४४॥ वितर्कांवेगसंभ्रान्तिहर्षाद्या व्यभिचारिणः । यथा- 'दोर्दण्डाञ्चित चन्द्रशेखरधनुर्दण्डावभङ्गोद्यत-

भ्राम्यत्पिण्डितचण्डिमा कथमहो नाद्यापि विश्राम्यति ।' (महावी. १.५४) अथ शान्त :- शान्त: शमस्थायिभाव उत्तमप्रकृतिर्मतः ॥२४५॥ कुन्देन्दुघवलच्छाय: श्रीनारायणदैवतः। अनित्यत्वादिनाशेषवस्तुनिःसारता तु या ॥ २४६।। परमात्मस्वरूपं वा तसयालम्बनमिष्यते। पुण्याश्रमहरिक्षेत्रतीर्थरम्यवनादयः ।। २४७।।

रोमाज्जाद्याश्रानुभावास्तथा स्युर्व्यभिचारिणः ।। २४८ ।। निर्वेदहर्षंसरणमतिभूतद्यादयः। यथा-

१ 'मन्मथदैवतः' ख-ग. २ 'कुन्देन्दुसुन्दर०' नि-ब.

४२ साहित्यदर्पणे [३.२४

'सथ्यान्तश्चरतस्तथा धृतजरत्कन्थालवस्याध्वगैः सत्रासं च सकौतुकं च सदयं दृष्टस्य तैर्नागरैः । निर्व्याजीकृतचित्सुवारसमुदा निद्रायमाणस्य मे निःशेङ्कं करटः कदा करपुटीमिक्षां विलुण्ठिष्यति ॥' पुष्टिश्च महाभारतादौ द्रष्टव्या। निरहङ्कार रूपत्वाद्दयावीरादिरेष नो ॥। २४९ ॥ दयावीरादौ हि जीमूतवाहनादावन्तरा मलयवत्याध्यनुरागादेरन्ते च विद्याधरचक्र- वर्तित्वाद्याप्तर्दशनादहङ्कारोपशमो न दृश्यते। शान्तश्र सर्वाकारेणाहङ्कारप्रशमनैक- रूपत्वान्न तत्रान्तैर्भवति। अतश्च नागानन्दादेः शान्तरसप्रधानत्वमपास्तम्। ननु 'न यत्र दुःखं न सुखं न चिन्ता न द्वेषरागौ न च काचिदिच्छा। रसः स शान्त: कथितो मुनीन्द्रैः सर्वेषु भावेषु समप्रमाणः ।।' इत्येवंरूपस्य शान्तस्य मोक्षावस्थायामेवात्मस्वरूपापत्तिलक्षणायां प्रादुर्भावात्तत्र सञ्चार्यादीनामभावात्कथ रसत्वमिति। उच्यते- युक्तवियुक्त्दशायामवस्थितो यः शमः स एव यतः। रसतामेति तदस्मिन्सज्जार्यादे: स्थितिश्च न विरुद्धा ॥ २५० ॥ यश्चास्मिन्सुखाभावोऽप्युक्तस्तस्य वैषयिकसुखपरत्वान्न विरोध: । उक्त हि- 'यच्च कामसुखं लोके यच्च दिव्यं महासुखम्। तृष्णाक्षयसुखस्यैते नार्हतः षोडशी कलामूँ।।' 'सर्वाकारमहङ्गाररहितत्वं ्रजन्ति चेद्। अन्रान्तर्भावमर्हन्ति दयावीरादयस्तथा।' आदिशब्दाद्धर्मवीर देवताविषयरतिप्रभृतयः । तत्र देवताविषया रतिर्यथा- 'कदा वाराणस्याममरतटिनीरोधसि वस- न्वसान: कौपीनं शिरसि निदधानोडअ्जलिपुटम्। अये गौरीनाथ त्रिपुरह्दर शम्भो त्रिनयन प्रसीदेति क्रोशन्निमिषमिव नेष्यामि दिवसान्।' (भर्तृहरे: वैराग्यशतके) अर्थ मुनीन्द्रसंमतो वत्सल :- स्फुटं चमत्कारितया वत्सलं च रसं विदुः। स्थायी वत्सलतास्नेहः पुत्राद्यालम्बनं मतम् ।। २५१ ।। उद्दीपनानि तच्चेष्टा विद्याशौर्यदयादयः। आलिङ्गनाङ्गसंस्पर्शशिरश्रुम्बनमीक्षणम्।। २५२।। - पुलकानन्दबाष्पाद्या अनुभावा: प्रकीर्तिताः ।

१ 'नि:शङ्क:' नि-ब. २ 'हि नागानन्दादौ जीमूतवाहनादेरन्तरा' नि. ३ 'तत्रान्तर्मावमर्हृति' नि-ब.४ 'शमप्रमाणः' ब. ५ दशरूपके (४.४५) उदाहृनमिदं तत्र तु 'शमप्रधानः' इति पाठ: ६ ध्वन्यालोके (३.२६) उदाहृतमिदम्. ७ 'धर्मवीरदानवीरदेवता' नि-ब. ८ 'वाराणस्यामिह सुरधुनीरोधसि' ग-नि-ब.९ 'अथ.'वत्सलः' इत्येतनासित स-ग-पुस्तकमो :.

३.२५३ ] तृतीय: परिच्छेदः ।

सज्जारिणोऽनिष्टशङ्गाहर्षगर्वादयो मताः ॥।२५३ ॥ पद्मगर्भच्छविर्वर्णो दैवतं लोकमातरः। उदाहरणम्- 'यदाहै धात्र्या प्रथमोदितं बचो ययौ तदीयामवलम्ब्य चान्गुलीम्। अभूच्च नम्रः प्रणिपातशिक्षया पितुर्मुदं तेन ततान सोडर्भकः ॥' (रघु० ३.२५) एतेषां च रसानां परस्परविरोधमाह-

भयानकेन करुणेनापि हास्यो विरोधभाक। करुणो हास्यशङ्गाररसाभ्यामपि ताहशः ॥ २५५॥ रौद्रस्तु हास्य शङ्गारभयानकरसैरपि। भयानकेन शान्तेन तथा वीररस: स्मृतः ॥ २५६ ॥

शान्तस्तु वीरशृङ्गाररौद्रहास्यभयानकै: ॥ २५७ । शद्गारेण तु बीभत्स इत्याख्याता विरोधिता। आद्यः शङ्गारः। एषां च समावेशप्रकारा वक्ष्यन्ते। कुतोऽपि कारणात्क्वापि स्थिरतामुपयन्नपि॥ २५८॥ उन्मादादिन तु स्थायी न पात्रे स्थैर्यमेति यद्। यथा विक्रमोर्वश्यां चतुर्थेडक्के पुरूरवस उन्मादः । रसभावौ तदाभासौ भावस्य प्रशमोदयौ ॥ २५९ ॥ सन्धिः शबलता चेति सर्वेऽपि रसनाद्रसाः। रसनधर्मयोगित्वान्भावादिष्वपि रसत्वेमौपचारिकमित्यभिप्रायः। भावादय उच्यन्ते- .

सज्जारिणः प्रधानानि देवादिविषया रतिः ।। २६० ।। उहुद्धमात्र: स्थायी च भाव इत्यभिधीयते। 'न भावहीनोऽस्ति रसो न भावो रसवर्जितः । परस्परकृता सिद्धिरनयो रसभावयोः ॥' (नाव्य. ६.३५) इत्युक्तदिशा परमालोचनया परमविश्रान्तिस्थानेन रसेन सहैव वर्वमाना अपि राजानुगतविवाहप्रवृत्तभृत्यवदापाततो यत्र प्राधान्येनाभिव्यक्ता व्यभिचारिणो देव- मुंनिगुरुनृपादिविषया च रतिरुद्धुद्धमात्रा विभावादिभिरपरिपुष्टतया रसरूपतामनापघ- मानाश्च स्थायिभावा भावशब्दवाच्याः । तत्र व्यभिचारी यथा-'एवंवादिनि देवषौं-' इत्यादि। अत्रावहित्था। देवविषया रतिर्यथा- 'दिवि वा भुवि वा ममास्तु वासो नरके वा नरकान्तक प्रकामम्। अवधीरितशारदारविन्दौ चरणौ ते मरणेऽपि चिन्तयामि ॥'

१ 'उवाच धात्या' ग. २ 'रसत्वमुपचारात्' नि-ब. १ 'स्थायिनो भावाः' नि-व. ४ 'यथा. मुकुन्दमालायाम्' निः 'यथा कुन्दमालायाम्' ब.

साहित्यदर्पणे

मुनिविषया रतियंया- 'विलोकनेनैव तवामुना मुने कृतः कृतार्थोऽस्मि निबर्हितांइसा। तथापि शुश्रपुरहं गरीयसीर्गिरोथवा श्रेयसि केन तृप्यते ॥' (शिशु० १.२९) राजविषया रतिर्यथा मम-

न धच्ते शिरसा गङ्गां भूरिभारभिया हरः ।।' एवमन्यत्। उद्धुद्धमात्रस्थायिभावो यथा- 'इरस्तु किश्चित्परिवृत्तधैर्यश्चन्द्रोदयारम्भ इवाम्बुराशिः । उमामुखे बिम्बफलाधरौष्ठे व्यापारयामास विलोचनानि ॥' (कुमार० ३.६७) अत्र पार्वतीविषया भगवतो रतिः । ननूक्तं प्रपानकरसवद्विभावादीनामेकोऽवभासो रस इति तत्र सक्चारिण: पार्थक्या- भावात्कथं प्राधान्येनाभिव्यक्तिरिति, उच्यते- यथा मरिचखण्डादेरेकीभावे प्रेपाणके ।। २६१ ॥ उद्रेक: कस्यचित्कापि तथा सज्जारिणो रसे। अथ रसाभासभावाभासौ- अनौचित्यप्रवृत्तत्व आभासो रसभावयोः ॥ २६२॥ अनौचित्यं चात्र रसानां भरतादिप्रणीतलक्षणानां सामग्रीरहितत्वे त्वेकदेशयोगि- त्वोपलक्षणपरं बोध्यम्। तच्च बालव्युत्पत्तये एकदेशतो दर्श्यते- उपनायकसंस्थायां मुनिगुरुपलीगतायां च। बहुनायकविषयायां रतौ तथानुभयनिष्ठायाम्॥। २६३॥ प्रतिनायकनिष्ठत्वे तद्वद्धमपात्रतिर्यगादिगते। शुद्धारेऽनौचित्यं रौद्रे गुर्वादिगतकोपे ॥। २६४॥ शान्ते च हीननिष्ठे गुर्वाद्यालम्बने हासये। ब्रह्मवधाद्युत्साहेऽधमपात्रगते तथा वीरे ॥ २६५ ॥ उत्तमपान्रगतत्वे भयानके ज्ञेयमेवमन्यत्र। तत्र रतेरुपनायकनिष्ठत्वे यथा मम- 'स्वामी मुग्धतरो वनं धनमिदं बालाइमेकाकिनी क्षोणीमावृणुते तमालमलिनच्छाया तमःसंततिः । तन्मे सुन्दर सुश्र कृष्ण सहसा वत्मेति गोप्या गिरः श्चुत्वा तां परिरभ्य मन्मथकलासक्तो हरिः पातु वः ॥' बहुनायकनिष्ठत्वे यथा- 'कान्तास्त एव भुवनत्रितयेऽपि मन्ये येषां कृते सुतनु पाण्डुरयं कपोलः ।' अनुभयनिष्ठत्वे यथा-मालतीमाधवे नन्दनस्य मालत्याम्।

१ 'स्थायी यथा' ख-ग. २ 'भावेपि पानके' ख-ग.

३.२६६ ] तृतीय: परिच्छेदः ।

'पश्चादुभयनिष्ठत्वेऽपि प्रथममेकनिष्ठत्वे रतेराभासत्वम्' इति श्रीमलोचनकाराः । तत्रोदाहरणं यथा-रलावल्यां, सागरिकाया अन्योन्यसंदर्शनात्प्राग्वत्सराजे रतिः। प्रतिनायकनिष्ठत्वे यथा-हृयग्रीववधे हयग्रीवस्य जलक्रीडावर्णने। अधमपात्रगतत्वे यथा- 'जघन स्थलनद्धपत्रवल्ली गिरिमल्ली कुसुमानि कापि भिल्ली। अवचित्य गिरौ पुरो निषण्णा स्वकचानुत्कचयाञ्चकार मर्त्रा।।' तिर्यग्गतत्वे यथा- 'मल्लीमतलीषु पेदं दधाना वह्यन्तरे वल्लभमाह्रयन्ती।

आदिशब्दात्तापसादयः। रौद्राभासो यथा- 'रक्तोत्फुल्लविशाललोलनयन: कम्पोत्तरंङ्ो मुड्ड- मुक्त्वा कर्णमपेतभीर्धृतधनुर्बाणो हरे: पश्यतः । आध्मातः कटकोक्तिभिः सवमसकृद्दोरविक्रमं कीर्तय- न्नंसास्फोटपडर्युधिष्ठिरमसौ हन्तुं प्रविष्टोडर्जुनः ।।' भयानकाभासो यथा- 'अशक्ुवन्सोदुमधीरलोचनः सहस्ररशमेरिव यस्य दर्शनम्। प्रविश्य हेमाद्रिगुद्दागृहान्तरं निनाय बिभ्यद्दिवसानि कौशिकः ॥' (शिशु. १.५३) स्त्रीनीचविषयमेव हि भयं रसप्रकृतिः । एवमन्यत्र । भावाभासो लजादिके तु वेश्यादिविषये स्यात् ॥ २६६ ॥ स्पष्टम्। भावस्य शान्तावुदये सन्धिमिश्रितयोः करमात्। भावस्य शान्तिरुद्य: सन्धिः शबलता मता ॥ २६७ ॥ क्रमेण यथा- 'सुतनु जहिहि कोपं पश्य पादानतं मां न खलु तव कदाचित्कोप एवंविधोऽभूद। इति निगदति नाथे तिर्यगामीलिताक्ष्या नयनजलमनल्पं मुक्तमुक्तं न किश्चित् ।' (अमरु० ३९)

'चरणपतनप्रत्याख्यानात्प्रसादपराखुखे निभृतकितवाचारेत्युक्त्वा रुषा परुषीकृते। व्रजति रमणे निःश्वस्वोच्चैः स्तनाहितहस्तया नयनसलिलच्छन्ना दृष्टिः सखीषु निपातिता।।' (अमरु० २०) अत्र विषादस्योदयः । 'नयनयुगासेचनकं मानसवृत्त्यापि दुष्प्रापम्। रूपमिदं मदिराधया मदयति हृदयं दुनोति च मे।।' अत्र हर्षविषादयोः सन्धिः ।

"मतल्लीषु वनान्तरेषु' नि-ब. २ 'कम्पोत्तराङ्गो' नि-ब. ३ 'ध्यास्यस्य भावस्य' ख-ग.

साहित्यदर्पणे [३२६७

'काकार्यें शशलक्ष्मणः क्व च कुलं भूयोडपि दृश्येत सा, दोषाणां प्रशमाय मे श्रुतमहो, कोपेपि कान्तं मुखम्। किं वक्ष्यन्त्यपकल्मषाः कृतधियः, स्वप्नेऽपि सा दुर्लभा चेतः स्वास्थ्यमुपैहि, कः खलु युवा धन्योऽधरं पास्यति ॥' अत्र वितर्कौत्सुक्यमतिस्मरणशक्कादैन्यधृतिचिन्तानां शबलता।। इति साहित्यदर्पणे रसादिनिरूपणो नाम तृतीय: परिच्छेदः ।

चतुर्थः परिच्छेदः। अथ काव्यमेदमाह- काव्यं ध्वनिर्गुणीभूतव्यङ्गयं चेति द्विधा मतम्। तत्र वाच्यातिशयिनि व्यङ्ञे ध्वनिस्त काव्यमुत्तमम्॥१॥ वाच्यादधिकचमत्कारिणि व्यङ्गयेर्थे ध्वन्यतेऽस्मिन्निति व्युत्पत्त्या ध्वनिर्नामोत्तमं काव्यम्। मेदौ ध्वनेरपि द्वावुदीरिता लक्षणाभिधामूलौ। अविवक्षितवाच्योऽन्यो विवक्षितान्यपरवाच्यश्र ॥२॥ तत्राविवक्षितवाच्यो नाम लक्षणामूलो ध्वनिः। लक्षणामूलत्वादेवात्र वाच्यमविव- क्षित वाधितस्वरूपम्। विवक्षितान्यपरवाच्यस्त्वभिधामूलः । अत एवात्र वाच्यं विवक्षितम्। अन्यपरं व्यक्षनिष्ठम्। अत्र हि वाच्योऽर्थः स्वरूपं प्रकाशयन्नेव व्यङ्गवार्थस्य प्रकाशकः । यथा-दीपो घटस्य। अभिधामूलस्य बहुविषयतया पश्चान्निर्देशः । अविवक्षितवाच्यस्य भेदावाह- अर्थान्तरं संक्रमिते वाच्येSत्यन्तं तिरस्कृते। अविवक्षितवाच्यो हि ध्वनिद्वैविध्यमृच्छति ॥ ३॥ अविवक्षितवाच्यो नाम ध्वनिरर्थान्तरसंक्रमितवाच्योऽत्यन्ततिरस्कृतवाच्यश्चेति द्विविधः । यत्र स्वयमनुपयुज्यमानो मुख्योऽर्थः स्वविशेषरूपेऽर्थान्तरे परिणमति तत्र मुख्यार्थस्य स्वविशेषरूपार्थान्तरसंक्रमितत्वादर्थान्तरसंत्रमितवाच्यत्वम्। यथा- 'कदली कदली करमः करभः करिराजकरः करिराजकरः । भुवनत्रितयेऽपि बिभति तुलामिदमूरुयुगं न चमूरुटशः ॥' (प्रसन्नराघव १.३७) अत्र द्वितीयकदल्यादिशब्दाः पौनरुत्त्यभिया सामान्यकदल्यादिरूपे मुख्याथें बाधिता जाड्यादिरूपेगुणविशिष्टकदल्यादिरूपमर्थ बोधयन्ति। जाड्याद्यतिशयश्र व्यङ्गयः। यत्र पुनः स्वार्थ सर्वथा परित्यजन्नर्थान्तरे परिणमति तत्र मुख्यार्थस्यात्यन्ततिर-

काव्यप्रकाशे चतुर्थोल्लास उदाहृतमिदं ध्वन्यालोके तृतीयोदूदयोते च विक्रमोर्वशीयस्य चतुर्थेड्के २३-२४ श्रीकयोर्मध्ये केषुचित्पुस्तकेषु दृश्यते सुभाषितावलौ कालिदासनाम्रोद्ृत (१३४३). २ 'विस्मरण' नि. ३ 'सवं प्रकाशयन्नेव' ख-ग. १ 'पौनरुक्तमिया' इत्येन्नासि ग-पुस्तके. ५ 'जाड्यादिगुण"' नि-ब.

*. ३ ] चतुर्थंः परिच्छैदः।

स्कृतत्वादत्यन्ततिरस्कृतवाच्यत्वम्। यथा- 'निःश्वासान्ध इवादर्शश्चन्द्रमा न प्रकाशते।' (रामायणे अरण्य. २२.१३) अत्रान्धशब्दो मुख्यार्ये बाधितेऽप्रकाशरूपमर्थ बोधयति। अप्रकाशातिशयश्च व्यङ्गयः। अन्धत्वाप्रकाशत्वयोः सामान्यविशेषभावाभावाच्चार्थान्तरसंक्रमितवाच्य- त्वभ्। यथा- 'भम धम्मिअ वीसत्थो सो सुणओ अज्ज मारिओ तेण। गोलाणइकच्छकुडङ्गवासिणा दरिअसीहेण ।।' (गाथासप्त० २.७५) (भ्रम धार्मिक विश्वस्तः सः श्वाद मारिवस्तन। गोदानदीकच्छकुञ्जवासिना दप्तसिंहेन ॥) इत्यत्र 'भ्रम धार्मिक-' इत्यतो भ्रमणस्य विधिः प्रकृतेऽनुपयुज्यमानतया भ्रमण- निषेधे पर्यवस्यतीति विपरीतलक्षणाशङ्का न कार्या। यत्र खलु विधिनिषेधाघुत्पत्स्य- मानावेव निषेधविध्योः पर्यवस्यतस्तत्रैव तदवसरः । यत्र पुनः प्रकरणादिपर्यालो- चनेन विधिनिषेधयोनिषेधविधी अवगम्येते तत्र ध्वनित्वमेव । तदुक्तम्- 'कचिद्वाध्यतया ख्यातिः क्वचित्ख्यातस्य बाधनम्। पूर्वत्र लक्षणैव स्यादुत्तरत्राभिैव तु ।' अत्राधे मुख्यार्थस्यार्थान्तरे संक्रमणं प्रवेशः, न तु तत्तिरोभावः। अत रवात्रा- जहत्स्वार्था लक्षणा। द्वितीये तु स्वार्थस्यात्यन्ततिरस्कृतत्वाज्जहत्सार्था । विवक्षिताभिधेयोऽपि द्विभेद: प्रथमं मतः । असंलक्ष्यत्रमो यत्र व्यक्रयो लक्ष्यत्रमस्तथा ॥४ ॥ विवक्षितान्यपरवाच्योऽपि ध्वनिरसंलक्ष्यत्रमव्यङ्गयः संलक्ष्यक्रमव्यङ्गयश्चति द्विविधः। तत्राद्यो रसभावादिरेक एवात्र गण्यते। एकोऽपि भेदोऽनन्तत्वात्संख्येयस्तस्य नैव यत् ॥५॥ उक्तस्वरूपो रसभावादिरसंलक्ष्यक्रमव्यङ्गयः । अत्र व्यङ्गयप्रतीतेर्विभावादिप्रतीति- कारणकत्वात्क्रमोऽवश्यमस्ति, किं तूत्पलपत्रशतव्यतिभेदवल्लाघवान्न संलक्ष्यते। एषुं रसादिषु च एकस्यापि भेदस्यानन्तत्वात्संख्यातुमशक्यत्वादसंलक्ष्यक्रमव्यङ्गयध्व- निर्नाम काव्यमेकमेदमेवोक्तम्। तथाहि-एकस्वैव शङ्गारस्यैकोऽपि सम्भोगरूपो भेद: परस्परालिङ्गनाधरपानचुम्बनादिभेदात्प्रत्येकं च विभावादिवैचित्र्यात्संख्यातुमशक्यः का गणना सर्वेषाम्। शब्दार्थोभयशक्त्युत्थे व्यङ्गथेऽनुखानसंनिभे। ध्वनिर्लक्ष्यत्रमव्यङ्गयस्त्रिविध: कथितो बुधैः ॥ ६ ॥ क्रमलंक्ष्यत्वा देवानुरणरूपो यो व्यङ्गयस्तस्य शब्दशत्तयुद्धवत्वेन, अर्थशक्त्युद्धवत्वे- नोभयशक्त्युद्धवत्वेन च त्रैविध्यात् संलक्ष्यक्रमव्यङ्गयनाम्नो ध्वनेः काव्यस्यापि त्रैविध्यम्। तत्र

१ 'एषु च एक०' ख-ग. २ 'शब्दार्थशक्त्युद्धवत्वेन' नि-ब.

साहित्यदर्पणे [ ४.७

अलङ्कारशब्दस्य पृथगुपादानादनलङ्कारं वस्तुमात्रं गृह्यते। तत्र वस्तुरूपशब्द- शक्त्युद्धवो व्यङ्गयो यथा- 'पन्थिअ ण एत्व सत्थरमत्थि मणं पत्थरत्थले गामे। उण्णअपओहरं पेक्खिअ उण जइ वससि ता वससु ।।' (पथिक नात्र स्रस्तरमस्ति मनाक् प्रस्तरस्थले ग्रामे। उन्नतपयोधरं प्रेक्ष्य पुनः यदि वससि तद्दस ।I ) अत्र सत्थरादिशब्दशक्त्या यद्युपभोगे क्षमोऽसि तदास्वेति वस्तु व्यज्यते। अल- क्काररूपो यथा-'दुर्गालङ्गितविग्रहः-' इत्यादि। अत्र प्राकरणिकस्योमानाममद्दा- देवीवल्लभस्य भानुदेवनामनृपतेवर्णने द्वितीयार्थसूचितमप्राकरणिकस्य पार्वतीवल्लभस्य वर्णनमसम्बद्धं मा प्रसाह्ीदितीश्वरभानुदेवयोरुपमानोपमेयभावः कल्प्यते। तदत्र 'उमावल्लभ उमावल्भ इव' इत्युपमालङ्कारो व्यङ्गयः। यथा वा- 'अमितः समितः प्राप्तैरुत्कर्षैहर्षद प्रभो। अहितः सहितः साधुयशोभिरसतामसि ॥' अत्रामित इत्यादावपिशब्दाभावाद्विरोधाभासो व्यङ्गयः। व्यङ्गयस्यालङ्कारस्यालक्का- र्यत्वेऽपि ब्राह्मणश्रमणन्यायेनालङ्गारत्वमुप्रचर्यते। वस्तु वालङ्गतिर्वेति द्विधार्थः सम्भवी ख्वतः।। ७। कवे: प्रौढोक्तिसिद्धो वा तवनिबद्धस्य चेति पद। षड्भिस्तैर्व्यज्यमानस्तु वस्त्वलङ्काररूपकः ॥८॥ अर्थशक्युद्भवो व्यञ्ञयो याति द्वादशभेदताम्। स्वतःसम्मवी, औचित्याद्वहिरपि सम्भाव्यमानः। प्रौढोक्त्या सिद्धः, न त्वाचित्येन। तत्र क्रमेण यथा- 'दृष्टि हे प्रतिवेशिनि क्षणमिद्दाप्यस्मङ्गहे दास्यसि प्रायेणास्य शिशो; पिता न विरसाः कौपीरपः पास्यति। एकाकिन्यपि यामि सत्वरमित: स्रोतस्तमालाकुलं नीरन्ध्रास्तनुमालिखन्तु जरठच्छेदा नलग्रन्थयः ।।' अनेन स्वतःसम्भविना वस्तुमात्रेण तत्प्रतिपादिकाया भाविपरपुरुषोपभोगजन. खक्षतादिगोपनरूपं वस्तुमात्रं व्यज्यते। 'दिशि मन्दायते तेजो दक्षिणस्यां रवेरपि। तस्यामेव रघोः पाण्ड्याः प्रतापं न विषेहिरे ॥' (रघु० ४.४९) अनेन स्वतःसम्भविना वस्तुना रवितेजसो रघुप्रतापोऽधिक इति व्यतिरेकालङ्कारो व्यज्यते। 'आपतन्तममुं दूरादूरीकृतपराक्रमः । बलोऽवलोकयामास मातङ्गमिव केसरी॥' (शिशु० १९.२) १ 'पेक्सिऊण' नि. २ काव्यप्रकाशे चतुर्थोल्लास उदाहृतमिदम्. २ द्वितीय प्ररिष्छेदे पद्यमि- दम्.१ काव्यप्रकाशे चतुर्थ उल्लास उदाहृतमिदम्. ५ 'व्यङ्षयस्यालङ्गायत्वे' नि-ब. ६विज्जाकायाः पद्यमिदमिति दशरूपके (२.२१) उदाहृतमिदम.

*. s] चतुर्थ: परिच्छेद:।

अन्नोपमालक्वाररूपेण स्वतःसम्भविनार्थेन बलदेवः क्षणेन वेणुदारिण: क्षयं करिष्यतीति वस्तु व्यज्यते। 'गाढकान्तदशनक्षतव्यथासङ्कटादरिवधूजनस्य यः । ओष्ठविद्रुमदलान्यमोचयन्निर्दशन्युधि रुषा निजाधरम्।' अत्र स्वतःसम्भविना विरोधालङ्कारेणाधरो निर्दष््श्र शत्रवो व्यापादिवाश्रेति समु- चयालक्कारो व्यङ्रयः । 'सज्जेइ सुरहिमासो ण दाव अप्पेइ जुवइजणलक्खसहे। अहिणवसह्आरमुहे णवपल्लवपत्तले अणङ्गसरे' ॥ (सज्जयति सुरभिमासो न ततावदर्पयति युवतिजनलक्ष्यसहान् । अभिनवसहकारमुखान् नवपल्लवपत्रलान् अन- अशराब् ।।) अन्र वसन्तः शरकारः, कामो धन्वी, युवतयो लक्ष्यम्, पुष्पाणि शरा इति कविश्रौढोकिसिद्धं वस्तु प्रकाशीभवन्मदनविजम्भणरूपं वस्तु व्यनक्ति। 'रजनीषु विमलभानो: करजालेन प्रकाशितं वीर। धवलयाते भुवनमण्डलमखिलं तव कीर्तिसन्ततिः सततम्'॥ अत्र कविप्रौढोक्तिसिद्धेन वस्तुना कीतिसन्ततेश्चन्द्रकरजालादविककालप्रकाशक- लेन व्यतिरेकालङ्कारो व्यङ्गथः । 'दशाननकिरीटेभ्यस्तत्क्षणं राक्षसश्रियः । मणिव्याजेन पर्यस्ता: पृथिव्यामश्रुबिन्दवः' ॥ (रघु० १०.७५) अत्र कविप्रौढोक्तिसिद्धेनापहुत्यलङ्कारेण भविष्यद्राक्षसश्रीविनाशरूपं वस्तु व्यज्यते। 'धम्मिले नवमल्लिकासमुदयो इस्ते सिताम्भोरुहं हार: कण्ठतटे पयोधरयुगे श्रीखण्डलेपो घनः । एकोडपि त्रिकलिङ्गभूमितिलक त्वकीर्तिराशिर्यया नानामण्डनतां पुरन्दरपुरीवामभ्रुवां विग्रहे'। अत्र कविप्रौढोक्तिसिद्धेन रूपकालक्कारेण भूमिष्ठोऽपि स्वर्गस्थानामुपकारं कैरोषीति विभावनालक्कारो व्यज्यते। शिखरिणि क नु नाम कियच्चिरं किमभिधानमसावकरोत्तपः। सुमुखि येन तवाधरपाटलं दशति बिम्बफलं शुकसावकः' । (ध्वन्यालोके १.१६ उदाहतमिदम्). अन्रानेन कविनिबद्धस्थ कस्यचित्कामिन: प्रौढोक्तिसिद्धेने वस्तुना तवाधरः पुण्या- तिशयलभ्य इति वस्तु प्रतीयते। 'सुभगे कोटिसंख्यत्वमुपेत्य मदनाशुगै: । वसन्वे पञ्चता त्यक्तका पश्चतासीद्वियोगिनाम्'।

1 "मालङ्ारेण नि. २ "विना व्यक्जकार्थेन बलदेवः क्षणेनैव' नि-ब्र. ३ काव्यप्रकाशे चुर्थोलास उदाइतमिदम्. 'ण आपणेइ' ख-ग. ५ इदं ध्वन्यालोके (२.२७) उदाहतम्. 'करोतीति' ख-ग. ७ 'मरौठोकिरुपेण' ख-ग.८ "मुपेवम्' ख ्ग्य्र.

५० साहित्यदर्पणे [Y.s

अत्र कविनिबद्धवक्तप्रौढोक्तिसिद्धेन शराणां कोटिसंख्यत्वप्राह्या निखिलवियोगि- मरणेन वस्तुना शराणां पञ्चता शरान्विमुच्य वियोगिन: श्रितेवेत्युत्प्रेक्षा व्यज्यते। 'मल्लिकामुकुले चण्डि भाति गुज्न्मधुव्रतः । प्रयाणे पञ्चबाणस्य शक्ञमापूरयन्निव' ॥ (शार्ङ्ग० ३७८६) अत्र कविनिबद्धवक्तप्रौढोक्तिसिद्धेनोत्प्रेक्षालङ्कारेण कामस्यायमुन्मादक: काल: प्राप्तस्तत्कथं मानिनि मानं न सुञ्जसीति वस्तु व्यज्यते। 'महिलासइस्सभरिए तुह हिअए सुहअ सा अमाअन्ती। अणुदिणमणण्णकम्मा अङ्गं तणुअं पि तणुएइ' ॥I (गाथासप्त. २.८२) (महिलासहस्रभरिते तव हृदये सुभग सा अमान्ती। अनुदिनमनन्यकर्मा अञं तन्वपि तनयति ॥) अत्रामाअन्तीति कविनिबद्धवत्तप्रौढोक्तिसिद्धेन काव्यलिङ्गालङ्कारेण तनोस्तनूकर- णेडपि तव हृदये न वर्तत इति विशेषोक्त्यलक्कारो व्यज्यते। न खलु कवेः कवि- निबद्धस्येव रागाद्याविष्टता। अतः कविनिबद्धवक्तप्रोढोक्ति: कविप्रौढोक्तेरधिकं सहृदय- चमत्कारकारिणीति पृथक्प्रतिपादिता । एषु चालक्कतिव्यअ्ञनस्थले रूपणोत्प्रेक्षणव्यतिरेचनादिमात्रस्य प्राधान्यं सहृदय- संवेद्यम्, न तु रूप्यादीनामित्यलङ्कतेरेव मुख्यत्वम्। एक: शब्दार्थशक्तयुत्थ उभय शक्त्युद्भवे व्यङ्गये एको ध्वनेभेंदः । यथा- 'हिममुक्तचन्द्ररुचिरः सपझको मदयन्द्विजाञ्जनितमीनकेतनः । अभवत्प्रसादितसुरो महोत्सवः प्रमदाजनस्य स चिराय माधवः' ॥ (शिशु० १३.३८) अत्र माधवः कृष्णो माधवो वसन्त इवेत्युपमालक्कारो व्यङ्ञयः। एवं च व्यङ्ञय- भेदादेव व्यञ्ञकानां काव्यानां भेदः । तदष्टादशधा ध्वनिः॥९॥

क्षितान्यपरवाच्यस्तु असंलक्ष्यक्रमव्यङ्गयत्वेनेकः । संलक्ष्यक्रमव्यङ्गयत्वेन च शब्दा- र्थोंभयशक्तिमूलतया पञ्चदशेत्यष्ादशमेदो ध्वनिः । एषु च- वाक्ये शब्दार्थशक्त्युत्थस्तद्न्ये पदवाक्ययोः। तत्रार्थान्तरसंक्रमितवाच्यो ध्वनिः पदगतो यथा- 'धन्यः स एव तरुणो नयने तस्यैव नयने च। • युवजनमोइनविद्या भवितेयं यस्य संमुखे सुमुखी'। अत्र द्वितीयनयनशब्दो भाग्यवत्तादिगुणविशिष्टनयनपरः । वाक्यगतो यथा --

१ 'कामशराणाम्' नि-ब. २ 'माति मज्जु गुजन्' ख-गं. १ 'उन्माभककालः' ख-ग. : 'अमान्तीति' ग. ५ 'इत्युलेश्षाळङ्कारः' ग. १ "कमव्यंग्यवाध्यत्वेन न' ग-ब.

चतुर्थः परिच्छेदः।

'त्वामस्मि वच्मि विदुषां संमुदायोऽ्र तिष्ठति। आत्मीयां मतिमादार्यं स्थितिमत्र विषेहि तैत् ॥ अत्र प्रतिपाद्यस्य संमुखीनत्वादेव लैब्धे प्रतिपादत्वे त्वामिति पुनर्वचनमन्यव्या वृत्तिविशिष्टं त्वदर्थ लक्षयति। एवं वच्मीत्यनेनैव कर्तरि लब्घेऽस्मीति पुनर्वचनम्। तथा विदुषां समुदायें इत्यनेनैव वक्तु: प्रतिपादने सिद्धे पुनर्वच्मीतिवचनमुपदिशा- मीति वचनविशेषरूपमर्थ लैक्षयति। एतानि च लक्षितानि स्वातिशयं व्यअ्ञयन्ति। एतेन मम वचनं तवात्यन्तं हितं तदवश्यमेतत्कर्तव्यमित्यभिप्रायः । तदेवमयं वाक्य- गतोऽर्थान्तरसंक्रमितवाच्यो ध्वनिः । अत्यन्ततिरस्कृतवाच्यः पदगतो यथा-'निःश्वासान्ध :- ' इत्यादि। वाक्यगतो यथा-'उपकृतं बद्ु तत्र' इत्यादि। अन्येषां वाक्यगतत्वे उदाहृतम्। पदगतत्वे यथा- 'लावण्यं तदसौ कान्तिस्तद्रूपं स वचःक्रमः । तदा सुधास्पदमभूदधुना तु ज्वरो महान्'॥ अत्र लावण्यादीनां तादृगनुभवैकगोचर ताव्यअकानां तदादिपदानामेव प्रांधान्यम्। अन्येषां तु तदुपकारकत्वमेवेति तन्मूलक एव ध्वनिव्यपदेशः। तदुक्तं ध्वनिकृता 'एकावयवसंस्थन भूषणेनेव कामिनी। पदद्योत्येन सुकवेर्ध्वनिना भाति भारती' ॥ (ध्वन्यालोके ३.१ इत्यत्र) एवं भावादिष्वप्यूह्यम्। 'भुक्तिमुंक्तिकृदेकान्तसमादेशनतत्परः । कस्य नानन्द्सन्दोहं विदधाति सदागमेः'॥ तत्र सदागमशब्दः संनिहितमुपनायकं प्रति सच्छास्त्रार्थमभिधाय सतः पुरुषस्या- गम इति वस्तु व्यनक्ति। ननु सदागमः सदागम इवेति न कथमुपमाध्वनिः १ सदा- गमशब्दयोरुपमानोपमेयभावाविवक्षणात्। रहस्यसङ्गोपनार्थमेव हि अ्र्थपदोपादानं प्रकरणादिपर्यालोचनेन च सच्छास्त्रस्योपि सम्बद्धत्वात्। 'अनन्यसाधारणधीर्धृताखिलवसुन्धरः । राजते कोऽपि जगति स राजा पुरुषोत्तमः' ॥। अत्र पुरुषश्रेष्ठः पुरुषोत्तम इवेत्युपमाध्वनिः। अनयोः शब्दशक्तिमूलौ संलक्ष्य- क्रमभेदौ। 'सायं खनानमुपासितं मलयजेनाङं समालेपितं

1 'समवायः' नि. २ 'मतिमास्थाय' नि. ३ काव्यप्रकाशे चतुर्थोल्लास 'उदाहृतमिदम्. * 'उभ्ये' ख-ग. ५ 'समवायः' नि. ६ 'कर्तुः' नि-ब. 'बोधयति' ख-ग. ८ लक्षिता- नीति नास्ति नि-पुस्तके. ९ 'सुधास्यन्दम०' नि. १० 'उरोपमम्' ग. काव्यप्रकाशे चतुर्भोल्लास उदाहृतमिदम्. १२ 'ताहश समावैकगोचर०'ख-ग. 1३ 'तदुपकारित्वमे०' नि-ब. १४ 'निस्यन्दं' नि-ब. १५ काव्यप्रकाशे चतुर्थोल्लास उदाहृतमिदम्. १६ 'प्रति शासत्रा०' ग. '-पदप्रतिपादनं' नि-ब. १८ 'प्रकरणादिपदपर्या ख्-ग. १९ 'सच्छाखामिधानस्यासम्- न्धत्वात्' नि-ब. र० 'पुरुषोत्तम: पुरु०' नि-

साहित्यदर्पणे

आश्चर्य तव सौकुमार्यममित: क्रान्तासि येनापुना नेत्रद्वन्द्वममीलनव्यतिकरं शक्कोति तेनासितुन्'। अंत्र स्वतःसम्भविना वस्तुना कृतपरपुरुषपरिचया सातासीति वस्तु व्यज्बवे। तथ्वाचुना क्ान्तासि, न तु पूर्व कदाचिदपि तवैवंविध: कमो दृष्ट इति बोधयतोडसुना- पदस्येवेसरपदार्थोत्कर्षादयुनापदस्यैव पदान्तरापेक्षया वैशिध्यम्। 'तदप्राप्तिमहादुःखविलीनाशेषपातका। तच्चिन्ताविपुलाह्ादक्षीणपुण्यचया तर्था'। 'च्िन्तयन्ती जगत्सूति परं बह्मस्वरूपिणम्। निरुच्छासतया मुक्ति गतान्या गोपकन्यका।।" (विष्णुपुराण० ५.१३.२१-२२)

ततया भगवद्विरहदुःखचिन्ताह्वादयोः प्रत्यायनमित्वति शयोक्तिद्यप्रतीतिरश्ञेषचयपद- द्वयद्योत्या। अत्र च व्यञ्ञकस्य प्रौढोक्तिमन्तरेणापि सम्भवात्स्वतःसम्भविता। 'पशयन्त्यसंख्यपथमां त्वद्दानजलवाहिनीम्। देव त्रिपथगात्मानं गोपयत्युग्रमूर्धनि।।' इदं मेमे। अत्र पश्यन्तीति कविप्रौढोक्तिसिद्धेन काव्यलिङ्गालद्टारेण न केऽप्यन्ये दातारस्तव सद्ृशा इति व्यतिरेकालक्कारोऽसंख्यपदव्यहयः । एवमन्येष्वप्यर्थशक्ति- मूलसंलक्ष्यक्रममेदेषूदाहार्यभ्। तदेवं ध्वने: पूर्वोक्तेष्वष्टादशस मेदेषु मध्ये शब्दार्थशत्तयुत्थो व्यक्यो वाक्यमात्रे भवन्रेकः । अन्ये पुनः सप्तदश वाक्ये पदे चेति चतुस्त्रिंशदिति पञ्चत्रिशद्ेदाः। प्रबन्धेऽपि मतो बीरैरर्थशक्तयुद्धवो ध्वनिः।१०॥ प्रबन्धे महावाक्ये। अनन्तरोक्तदादशमेदोऽर्थश्कयुत्थः। यथा महाभारते गृथगोमायुसंवादे- 'अलं स्थित्वा इमशानेऽस्मिन्गृभ्रमोमायुसक्कले। कदालेबडुले घोरे सर्वप्राणिभयङ्करे। न चेह जीवितः कश्चित्कालधर्ममुपागतः । 93प्रियो वा यदि वा द्वेष्यः प्राणिनां गतिरीदृसी ॥' (शान्तिपर्व १५३.११-१२) इति दिवसे शक्तस्व गृधस्य इमशाने मृतं बालमुपादाय तिष्ठतां दिवसे तं परित्यज्य १४ १५

गमनमिष्टम्।

१ 'शाकोसि स्व. २ काव्यप्रकाशे चतुर्थोल्लासे उदाहृतमिंदम्. ३ 'स्त्रातासोति व्वज्यते' ख-ग. : विष्णुपुराणे 'तद्भाप्ति' इत्यादिक द्वितीयमर्धम्. ५ 'जगदयोनिम' ग. ६ काव्यप्रकाशे चतु नोल्ासे पदद्वयमुदाहृतमिदम्. • 'अनेकजन्ममोग्य" ख-ग.८कविम्ाठो नि.६ सम्भों- वितत्वाप ख-ग. १· 'इदं मम' इत्येतआस्ति सन्म-पुसतकमो: ""वोन नि- 1२ कड्ाठ "'करे' इसेतनास्त ग-पुसतके. १३ 'तिंनो" 'हजी' इत्येतनाखि मं पुस्तके. १४ 'इति दिवामभवतो गृभ्नस्य' नि. १५ 'दिक्से इति नौसि नि-पुखतने ...

चतुर्थ: परच्छेद:।

'आदित्योडमं स्थितो मूढाः सनेहं कुरुत सांप्रतम्: बहुविओ्नो मुहूतोंऽयं जीवेदपि कदाचन॥ अमुं कनकवर्णाभं वालमप्राप्तयौवनम्। गृधवाक्यात्कथं मूढास्त्यजध्वमविशङ्किता: ॥' (शान्ति० १५३.१९,६५) इति निशि समर्थस्य, गोमायोदिवसे परित्यागोऽनभिलषित इति वाक्यसमूहेन द्योत्यते। अत्र स्वतःसम्भवी व्यक्षकः । एवमन्येष्वेकादशमेदेूदाहार्यम्। एवं वाच्यार्थव्यञ्जकत्वे उदाहृतम्। लक्ष्यार्थस्य यथा-'निःशेषच्युतचन्दनम्-' इत्यादि। व्यञ्यार्थस्य यथा-'उभ णिच्चल-' इत्यादि। अनयोः स्वतःसम्मविनोर्लक्ष्यव्यङ्गयार्थौं व्यज्जकौ। एवमन्येष्वेका- दशमेदेषूदाहार्यम्।

असंलक्ष्यक्रमव्यङ्गयो ध्वनिः। तत्र षदांशः प्रकृतिप्रत्ययोपसर्गनिपातादिभेदादनेक विधः। यथा- 'चलापाङ्ां दृष्टि स्पृशसि बडुशो वेपथुमतीं रहस्याख्यायीव स्वनसि मृदु कर्णान्तिकचरः । करं व्याधुन्वत्याः मिबसि रतिसर्वस्वमवरं वयं तत्वान्वेषान्मधुकर इतास्त्वं खलु कृती ।' (झा० १२०) अत्र 'इताः' इति न पुनः 'दुःखं प्राप्तवन्तः' इति हन्प्रकृतेः। 'मुडुरङ्गुलिसंवृताधरौष्ठं प्रतिषेधाक्षरविक्कवाभिरामम्। मुखमंसविवर्ति पक्ष्मलाक्ष्याः कथमप्युन्नमितं न चुम्बितं तु ।' (शा० ३.२२) अत्र 'तु' इति नियातस्थानुतापव्यअ्जकत्वम्। 'न्यक्कारो ह्ययमेव मे यदरय :- ' इत्यादौ 'अरयः' इति बहुवचनस्, 'तापसः' इत्येकवचनस्य, 'अत्रैव' इति सर्वनाम्रः, 'निहन्ति' इति 'जीवति' इति च तिङः, 'अह्दो' इत्यव्ययस्य, 'ग्रमटिका' इति करूपतद्धितस्य, 'विलुण्ठन' इति व्युपसर्गस्म, भुजैः' इति बङुवचनस्य व्यअ्जकत्वम्। 'आहारे विरतिः समस्तविषयग्रामे निवृत्तिः परा नासाग्रे नयनं तदेतदपरं यच्चैकतानं भनः । मौनं चेदमिदं च शून्यमधुना यदिश्रमायाति ते तद्नूया: सखि योगिनी किमसि भो: किंबा वियोगिन्यसि ।' अत्र 'आहारे' इति विषयसप्नम्याः, 'समस्त' इति 'परा' इति च विश्वेषसस्य, 'मौनं चेदम्' इति प्रत्यक्षपरामर्शिनः सर्वनाम्रः, 'आभाति' इत्युपसर्गस्य, 'सखि' इति प्रणयसंस्मारणस्य, 'असि भीः' इति सोपहासोत्प्रासस्य, कि वा' इत्युत्तरपक्ष-

सुद्धितमहाभारते बहवः पाठमेदा. २ 'असंलक्ष्य"ध्वनिसतत्र पदांशकः' इति कारिकार्षे -पुसतके. 'पदांभम्रकृतिप्रत्यम" नि. १ इदं सुभाषितावल (३४८५) शाईपरपद्धतौ (२1) चोहटृतम्. शाईधरपद्धतौ राजशेसरस्ेदमिति वर्णितम् ५ 'अतर तु आहारे रवि' नि-बं. ६ 'प्रत्ययपरा" नि.

:साहित्यदर्पणे

दाढ्यसूचकस्य वाशब्दस्य, 'असि' इति वर्तमानोपदेशस्य तत्तद्विषयव्यअ्जकत्वं सहृदयसंवेदम्। वर्णरचनयोरुदाहरिष्यते। प्रबन्धे यथा-महाभारते शान्तः । रामायणे करुषः। मालतीमाधवरत्नावल्यादो शद्गारः। एवमन्यत्र। तदेवमेकपञ्ञाशज्जेदास्तस्य ध्वनेर्मताः ॥। ११ ॥ सक्करेण त्रिरूपेण संसृथ्या चैकरूपया। वेदखामिशरा: (५३०४) शुद्धेरिषुबाणाझिसायका: (५३५५) ॥१२॥ शुद्धैः शुद्धमेदैरेकपञ्चाशता योजनेत्यर्थः । दि्ात्रमुदाहियते- 'अत्युन्नतस्तनयुगा तरलायताक्षी द्वारि स्थिता तदुपयानमह्दोत्सवाय। सा पूर्णकुम्भनवनीरजतोरणसरक्सम्भारमङ्गलमयलकृतं विधत्ते।।' अत्र स्तनावेव पूर्णकुम्भौ, दृष्टय एव नीरजतोरणस्ज इति रूपकध्वनिरसध्वन्यो- रेकाश्रयानुप्रवेशः सङ्करः । 'धिन्वन्त्यमूनि मदमूर्च्छदलिध्वनीनि धूताध्वनीनहृदयानि मधोर्दिबानि।

अत्र निस्तन्द्रेत्यादिलक्षणामूलध्वनीनां संसृषटिः। अथ गुणीभूतव्यङ्गयम्- अपरं तु गुणी भूतव्यञ्ञयं वाच्यादनुत्तमे व्यङ्गये। अपरं काव्यम्। अनुत्तमत्वं न्यूनतया साम्येन च सम्भवति। .. तत्र स्यादितराङं काक्काक्षिसं च वाच्यसिच्ङ्गम् ।।१३॥ सन्दिग्धप्राधान्यं तुत्यप्राधान्यमस्फुटमगूढम्। व्यङ्गयमसुन्दरमेवं भेदास्तसयोदिता अष्टौ ॥। १४ ॥ इतरस्य रसादेरङ्ं रसादिव्यङ्गयम्। यथा- 'अयं स रसनोत्कर्षी पीनस्तनविमर्दनः । नाभ्यूरुजधनस्पर्शी नीवीविस्रंसनः करः ॥' (महाभारते स्त्रीपर्वणि २४.१९) अत्र शुङ्गार: करुणस्याङ्गम्। 'मानोन्नतां प्रणयिनीमनुनेतु कामस्त्वत्सन्यसागररवोद्गतकर्णतापः । हा हां कर्थ नु भवतो रियुराजधानीप्रासादसन्ततिषु तिष्ठाते कामिलोकः।।' अत्रौत्सुक्यत्राससन्धिसंस्कृतस्य करुणस्य राजविषयरतावङ्गभावः । 'जनस्थाने भ्रान्तं कनकमृगतृष्णान्धितचिया वंचो वैदेहीति प्रतिपदमुदश्रु प्रलपितम्।.

'चाप्यनेकघीं' ख-ग. २ 'वेदखाि"योषनेत्यर्थः' इति नाखि ख-ग-पुस्तकयो: ३तोरम श्सम्मार" खन्ना; 'तोरणसक्सम्मार" इत्यपि पाठ प्रदर्शित: ख-पुस्तके. ४ 'दृष्टय एव नवनीरनस्रनः' नि-ब.

चतुर्थ: परिच्छेद:।

कृतालङ्काभर्तुर्वदनपरिंपाटीषुघंटना मयापं रामत्वं कुशलवसुता न त्वघिगता ।" अत्र रामेत्वं मया प्राप्तमित्यवचनेऽपि शब्दशक्तेरेव रामत्वमेवगम्यते। वचनेन तु सादृश्यहेतुकतादात्म्मारोपणमाविष्कुर्वता तद्रोपनमपाकृतम्। तेने वाच्यं सादृश्यं वाक्यार्थान्वयोपपादकतयाङतां नीतम्। काकाक्षिप्तं यथा- 'मशामि कौरवशतं समरे न कोपाहुःशासनस्य रुधिरं न पिबाम्युरंस्तः । सञ्जूर्णयामि गदया न सुयोधनोरू सन्धि करोतु भवतां नृपतिः पणेन ॥' (वेणी० १.१५) अत्र मन्ाम्येवेत्यादिव्यङ्गयं वाच्यस्य निषेधस्य सहभावेनव स्वितम्। 'दीपयनरोदसीरन्ध्रमेष ज्वलति सर्वतः । प्रतापस्तव राजेन्द्र वैरिवंशदवानलः ।।' अत्रान्वयस्य वेणुत्वारोपणरूपो व्यङ्कयः प्रतापस्य दवानलत्वारोपसिद्धयङ्गम्। 'हरस्तु किंञ्नित्परिवृत्त-' (कुमार०३-६७) इत्यादा विलोचनव्यापारचुम्बनाभिला- चयोः प्राधान्ये सन्देहः । 'ब्राह्मणातिक्रमत्यागो भवतामेव भूतये। जामदसयश्च वो मित्रमन्यथा दुर्मनायते॥' (महावीर० २.१०) अत्र परशुरामो रक्षःकुलक्षयं करिष्यतीति व्यङ्गयस्य वाच्यस्य च समं प्राधान्यम्। 'सन्धौ सर्वस्वहरणं विग्रहे प्राणनिग्रद्दः । अल्लावदीननृपतौ न सन्धिर्न च विग्रहः ।l' अत्राल्लावदीनाख्ये नृपतौ दानसामादिमन्तरेण नान्यः प्रशमोपाय इति व्यङ्गयं व्युत्पन्नानामपि झटित्यस्फुटम्। 'अनेन लोकगुरुणा सतां धर्मोपदेशिना। अहं व्रतवती स्वैरमुक्तेन किमतः परम् ॥' ?

अत्र प्रतीयमानोऽपि शाक्यमुनेस्तियग्योषिति बलात्कारोपभोग: स्फुटतया वाच्यायमान इत्यगूढम्। 'वाणीरकुडङ्गुड्डीणसउणिकोलाहलं सुणन्तीए। घरकम्मवावडाए बहुए सीअन्ति महाईं।।' (वानीरकुओड्डीनशकुनिकोलाइलं ऋण्वन्त्याः। गृहकर्मव्यापृताया वध्वाः सौदन्तङ्गानि) अत्र दत्तसङ्केत: कश्चिलतागृहं प्रविष्ट इति व्यङ्गयात् 'सीदन्त्यङ्गानि' इति वाच्यस्य चमत्कार: सहृदयसंवेध इत्यसुन्दरम्। किं च। यो दीपकतुल्ययोगितादिषूपमाद्यलङ्कारो व्यङ्गयः स गुणीभूतव्यङ्गय एव। काव्यस्य दीपकादिमुखेनैव चमत्कारविधायित्वात्। तदुकं ध्वनिकृता- क्षेभेद्द्रकृते कविकण्ठाभरणे (पश्चमे सन्धी) भट्टवाचस्पतेः पद्यमिदभिति प्रदशशतम. २ 'रामत्वं प्राप्त०' नि-ब. ३ 'रामसदशत्वमव०' ख. 20 'तादात्म्यारोपिता०' ख. ५ 'तेनावाच्य' ग. 4 'दानमानादि" ग .• ध्वन्यालो के द्वितीबोद्दोते (२.१४) उदाहृतमिदं काव्यप्रकाशे पश्चमोल्लासे च.

'अलङ्कारान्तरस्यापि प्रतीती यत्र भासवे। तत्परत्वं न काल्यस नासौ मार्गो ध्वनेमत:।I' :(घ्व०. २.३०) यत्र च शम्दान्तरादिना ग्रोपनकृतचारुत्वस् विपयासः। यवा 'दृष्टया केशव थोपरागहतया किचिन्न टुषं मया तेनात्र स्खलितास्मि नाथ पतितां किं नाम नालम्बसे। एकसत्वं विष्रमेषुखिन्नमनसां सर्वानलानां गति- ्गोप्यैवं मदित: सलेश्मवताद्गोष्ठे हरिर्वश्चिरम्ँ।' मत्र गोपरागादिश्ञव्दानां गोपे राग इत्यादिव्याथार्थानां सलेशमिति पदेन सफुट- तयावभासः । सलेशमिति पदस्य परित्यागे पुनर्ध्वनिरेव। कि च यत्र वस्त्वलक्र- रसादिरूपव्यङ्गयानां रसाभ्यन्तरे गुणीभावस्तत्र प्रधानकृत एव काव्यव्यवहारः। तदुक्क तेनैव- 'प्रकारोडयं गुणीभूतव्यज्थोऽपि व्वनिरूपताम्। घत्ते रसादितात्यर्यपर्यालोचनया पुनः #' इति (ध्व० ३.४) यत्र तु- 'यत्रोन्मदानां प्रमदाजनानामभ्रंलिह: शोणमणीमयूखः। संध्याभ्रमं प्रामवतामकाण्डेऽप्यनङ्गनेपथ्यविधि विधचे ॥' इत्यादौ रसादीनां नगरीवृत्तान्तादिवस्तुमान्ेऽङ्गत्वम्, तत्र वेषामतात्पर्यविषय- त्वेपि तैरेव गुणीभूतैः काव्यव्यनहारः। तदुकमसत्सगोत्रकविपण्डितमुख्य- श्रीचण्डीदासपाद :- 'कार्व्यारथस्याखण्डवुद्धिवेद्यस्य तन्मगीभावेनास्वाददशायां गुण- प्रधानभावावभासस्तावन्नानुभूयते, कालान्तरे तु प्रकरणादिपर्यालोचनया अवन्नप्यसौ न काव्यव्यपदेशं व्याहन्तुमीशः, तस्यास्वादमात्रायत्तत्वात्' इति। केचिचित्राख्यं तृतीयं काव्यमेदमिच्छन्ति। तदाह्ु :- 'शब्दचित्रं वाच्यचित्रमव्यडयं त्ववरं स्मृतम्।' (काव्यप्र० १.५) इति। तक। यदि हि अव्यङ््यत्ेय व्यवयामानसदा तस्य काव्यत्वमपि नाखीति प्रागेवोक्तम्। ईषद्ङ्यत्वमिति चेत, किं नामेषद्व्यङ्गयत्वम्। आस्ाधव्यक्कात्वय्, अनास्वाधव्यङ्गयत्वं वा। आधे प्राचीनमेदयोरेवान्त:पातः । द्वितीये त्वकाव्यत्वम्। यदि चास्वाद्यत्वं तदाक्षुद्रत्वमेव। क्षुद्रतायामनासादयत्वाव। वदुकं ध्वनिकृता- प्रधानगुणभावाभ्यां व्यक्ष्यस्यैवं व्यवस्पितेः । उभे काव्ये ततोऽन्यव्त्तच्ित्रमभिघीयते ।' इति। (ध्व० ३.४२) इति श्रीसाहित्यदर्पणे ध्वनिगुणी भूतव्यज्यास्यकाव्यभेदनिरूपणो नाम चतुर्थः परिच्छेद:।

अन्न "सोपि गुणीभूतव्यंग्य:' इत्यधिकं सा-पुसतके. र-सुखके लिसितमघस्तात् 'सोपि गुणी- मृतव्साकषय इति वप:'. २ध्वन्यालोके (२.२५) उदाइतमिदम, २ 'मापुवता" निन्प सखण्दं नि-ब. 'ख्र-प .• 'व्यवस्थिते' ८ 'तदन्यद्यत्' ख-ग.

पञ्चम: परिच्छेद: ।

पञ्चम: परिच्छदः । अथ केयममिनवा व्यज्ञना नाम वृत्तिरिति, उच्यते- वृत्तीनां विश्रान्तेरमिघातात्पर्यलक्षणाल्यानाम्। अग्गीकार्या सुर्या बृसिर्वोे रसादीनाम् ॥१।। अमिधायाः सक्केतितार्थमात्रबोधनविरताया न वस्त्वलक्गाररसादिव्या्यबोधने क्षमत्वम्। न च सङ्केतितो रसादिः। न हि विभावाद्यभिधानमेव तदभिधानम्, तस्य तदेकरूप्यानङ्गीकारात। यत्र च स्वश्देनाभिधानं तत्र प्रत्युत दोष एवेति वक्ष्यामः । कचिच्च 'शकारादिरसोऽयम्' इत्यादौ स्वशब्दामिघानेऽपि न तत्प्रतीतिः, तस्य स्वप्रं- काशानन्दरूपत्वात् । अभिहितान्वयवादिभिरङ्गीकृता तात्पर्याख्या वृत्तिरपि ससग- मात्रबोधने परिक्षीणा नैव व्यङयस्य बोधिनी । यच्च केचिदाङु :- 'सोडयमिषोरिव दीर्घंदीर्घतरोऽभिधाव्यापारः' इति, यच्च धनिकेनोक्तम्- 'तात्पर्याव्यतिरेकाच्च व्यञञकत्वस्य न ध्वनिः । यावत्कार्यप्रसारित्वात्तात्पर्य न तुलाधृतम्ँ ।।' इति तयोरुपरि 'शब्दबुद्धिकर्मणां विरम्य व्यापाराभावः' इति विरम्यव्यापाराभाव- वादिभिरेव पातनीयो दण्डः । एवं च किमिति लक्षणाप्युपास्या। दीर्घदीर्घतैराभिधाव्यापारेणापि तदर्थबोधसिद्धेः। किमिति च 'ब्राह्मण, पुत्रस्ते जातः कन्या ते गुर्विणी' इत्ादावर्षि इषंशोंकादीनामपि न वाच्यत्वम्। यतपुनरुकं "पौरषेयमपौरुषेयं च सर्वमेव वाक्त कार्यपरम्, अतत्परत्वेऽनुपादेयत्वादुन्मंत्तवाक्यवत्, ततश्च काव्यशन्दानां निरतिशयसुसा- सवादव्यतिरेकेण प्रतिपाद्यप्रतिपादकयोः प्रवृत्त्यौपयिकप्रयोजनानुपलब्धेनिरतिशयसुख- स्वाद एव कार्यत्वेनावधार्यते। 'यत्परः शब्दः स शब्दार्थः' इति न्यायाल" इति। तन्र प्रष्टव्यम्-किमिदं यत्परत्वं नाम, तदर्थत्वं वा, तात्पर्यवृत्त्या नोधकत्वं वा। आबे न विवाद: । व्यङ्गयत्वेऽपि तदर्थतानपायाद। द्विवीये तु-केयं सात्पर्याख्या वृद्ति: । अभिहितान्ययवादिभिरद्गीकृता वा तदन्या वा। आधे दस्तमेवोत्तरम्। द्वितीये तु-नाममात्रे विवादः। तन्मतेऽपि तुरीयवृत्तिसिद्धेः। नन्वस्तु युगपदेव तात्पर्यशत्तया विभावादिसंसर्गस्य रसाहेअ प्रकाशनम्-इति चेद, न । तयोहेंतुफलभावाङ्गीकाराव। यदाह मुनि :- 'विमानानुभावव्यमिचारि- संयोगाद्रसनिष्पत्तिः' इति। सहभावे च कुतः सव्येतरविषाणवोहीय कार्यकारणभावः।

'संसर्गमानरे परिक्षीणा न व्वंग्यबोधिनी' नि-ब. २ केचिलोल्लटादकं ३ 'दीर्घदीर्घों व्यापार इति' ख-ग. 'ध्वनिनोळ' ग; 'ध्वनिकेनोकतं' ब. ५ धनिकेन : दयरूपकव्याख्याने (१.३७) सकृतात्काव्यनिर्णवात् सप्त कारिका उदाहृता :; नेयमेका कारिका किन्तु भिन्ने एव कारिकार्ये. ६ 'इति वादिभिरेव' नि-ब. • "दीर्घामिया' स-ग. ८ 'गार्मणी' नि-ब. १. 'काव्यशब्दानां विरतिशयमुसालाद एव कार्यत्वेनावधार्यते' ख-म. १० 'तत्परत्वं' नि-ब. " 'तद्वोघकत्वं' नि-ब. १२ 'पौर्वापर्यविपर्वयात्' इत्पेतन्रास् मापुसतके. .**

साहित्यदर्पण ६५.३

'गङ्गायां घोषः' इत्यादौ तटाबर्थमात्रबोधनविरतायाश्च लक्षणायाः कुतः शीतल- त्वपावनत्वादिव्यङ्गयबोधकता। तेन तुरीया वृत्तिरुपास्यैवेति निर्विवादमेतत्। कि च- बोद्धस्वरूपसंख्या निमित्तकार्यप्रतीतिकालानाम्। आश्रयविषयांदीनां भेदाद्िबोऽमिधेयतो व्यङ्ञय:। २।। वाच्यार्थव्यङ्गयार्थयोर्हि पदतदर्थमात्रज्ञाननिपुणैरपि वैयाकरणैः सहृदयैरेव संवेघतया बोड्मेदः । 'भम धम्मिअ-' इत्यादौ कचिद्वाच्ये विधिरूपे निषेधरूपतया, कचित् 'निःशेषच्युतचन्दनम्-' इत्यादौ निषेधरूपे विधिरूपतया च स्वरूपभेदः । 'गतोस्त- मर्कः' इत्यादौ च वाच्योऽर्थ एक एव प्रतीयते। व्यङ्रयस्तु तत्तदवोद्गादिमेदात् क्चित 'कान्तमभिसर' इति, 'गावो निबध्यन्ताम्' इति, 'नायकस्यायमागमनावसरः' इति, 'सन्तापोडयुना नास्ति' इत्यादिरूपेणानेक इति संख्यामेदः । वाच्योर्थः शब्दोच्चारण- मात्रेण वेद्ः । एष तु तथाविधप्रतिभानैर्मल्यादिनेति निमित्तमेदः । प्रतीतिमात्र- करणाच्चमत्कारकरणाच्च कार्यभेद: । केवलरूपतया चमत्कारितया च प्रतीतिभेदः । पूर्वपश्चाद्द्ावेन च कालभेदः। शब्दाश्रयत्वेन शब्दतदेकदेशतदर्थवर्णसंङ्टनाश्रयत्वेन चाश्रयभेद: । 'कस्स व ण होइ रोसो दठ्ठण पिआइ सव्वणं अहरम्। सभमरपउमेग्घाइरि वारिभवामे सहसु एण्हिम् ।।' (कस्य वा न भवति रोषो दृष्टा प्रियायाः सत्रणमधरम्। सभ्रमरपद्माप्रायिणि वारितवामे सदस्वेदानीम् ॥) इति सखीतत्कान्तगतसवेन विषयभेदः । तस्मान्नामिघेय एव व्यङ्गयः । तथा प्रागसत्वाद्रसादेनों बोविके लक्षणाभिये। किं.च मुख्यार्थबाधस्य विरहादृपि लक्षणा ।। ३ । 'न बोधिका' इति शेषः । नहि कोऽपि रसनात्मकव्यापारा्जित्रो रसादिपदप्रि पाच: पदार्थ: प्रमाणसिद्धोडस्तिं यमिमे लक्षणाभिधे बोधयेयाताम् । कि च यत्र 'गङ्गायां घोषः' इत्यादावुपात्तशब्दार्थानां बुभूषन्नेवान्वयोनुपपत्त्या बाध्यते तत्रैव हि लक्षणायाः प्रवेशः । यदुक्त न्यायकुसुमाअलावुदयनाचार्ये :- 'श्तान्वयादनाकाहं न वाक्यं ह्यन्यदिच्छति। पदार्थान्वयवैधुर्यात्तदाक्षिसेन सङ्कतिः ॥' (तृवीये स्तबके १२) न पुनः 'शून्यं वासगृहम्-' इत्यादौ मुख्यार्थबाधः । यदि च 'गङ्गायां घोषः" इत्यादौ प्रयोजनं लक्ष्यं स्यात, तीरस्य मुख्यार्थत्वं बाधितत्वं च स्यात्, तस्यापि च लक्ष्यतया प्रयोजनान्तरं तस्यापि प्रयोजनान्तरमित्वनवस्थापातः।

2. "निपुणैवैथाकरणैरपि सहृदयैरेव च संवेद्यतया' नि-ब; 'निपुनै: सहदवैरे २ 'पउमग्घाइणि' नि. : ध्वन्यालोके प्रथमोद्द्योते उदाहृतमिदं कान्बप्रव च. : "कान्तविषमत्वेन' नि-ब. " 'वाच्यं' ख-म.

५.३ ] पञ्चम: परिच्छेदः ।

न चापि प्रयोजनविशिष्ट एव तीरे लक्षणा। विषयतत्प्रयोजनयोर्युगपत्प्रतीत्यनभ्यु- पगमात्। नीलादिसंवेदनानन्तरमेव हि ज्ञातताया अनुव्यवसायस्य वा सम्भवः । नानुमानं रसादीनां व्यङ्गयानां बोधनक्षमम्। आभासत्वेन हेतूनां स्मृतिनं च रसादिघीः ।।४ ।। व्यक्तिविवेककारेण (पत्र ११९) हि-"यापि विभावादिभ्यो रसादीनां प्रतीतिः सानु- मान रवान्तर्भवितुमईति । विभावानुभावव्यभिचारिप्रतीतिहिं रसादिप्रतीतेः साधन- मिष्यते, ते हि रत्यादीनां भावानां कारणकार्यसहकारिभूतास्ताननुमापयन्त एव रसादी- त्निष्पादयन्ति, त एव प्रतीयमाना आस्वादपदवीं गताः सन्तो रसा उच्यन्त इति अवश्यं- भावी तत्प्रतीतिक्रमः केवलमाशुभावितयासौ न लक्ष्यते, यतोऽयमद्याप्यभिव्यक्तिक्रमः" इति यदुक्तम्, तत्र प्रष्टव्यम्-किं शब्दाभिनयसमर्पितविभावादिप्रत्ययानुमितरामादि- रागादिज्ञानमेव रसत्वेनाभिमतं भवतः, तद्द्रावनया भावकैर्भाव्यमानः स्वप्रकासा- नन्दो वा। आधे न विवादः । किं तु रामादिरागादिज्ञानं रससंज्ञया नोच्यतेडस्ाभि- रित्येव विशेष: । द्वितीयस्तु व्याप्तिग्रहणाभावाद्धेतोराभासतयासिद्ध एव। यच्चोकं तेनैव-'यत्र यत्रवंविधानां विभावानुभावसात्त्विकसञ्चारिणामभिधानमभिनयो वा तत्र तत्र शङ्गारादिरसाविर्भाव इति सुग्रहैव व्याप्तिः पक्षधर्मता च। तथा- 'यार्थान्तराभिव्यक्तौ वः सामग्रीष्ा निबन्धनम्। सैवानुमितिपक्षे नो गमकत्वेन संमता ॥I' इति। (व्यक्तिविवेके तृतीये विमर्शे ३०-३१) इदमपि न नो विरुद्धम्। न ह्येवंविधा प्रतीतिरास्वादत्वेनास्माकमभिमता। किं तु स्वप्रकाशमात्रविश्रान्तः सान्द्रानन्दनिर्भरः । तेनात्र सिषाधयिषितादर्थादर्थान्तरस्य साधनाद्धितोराभासता । यच्च "भम धम्मिअ-" (गाथासप्त० २-७५) इत्यादौ प्रतीयमानं वस्तु, 'जलकेलितरलकरतलमुक्तपुनः पिहितराघिकावदनः । जगदवतु कोकयूनोविघटनसङ्गटनकौतुकी कृष्णः ।।' इत्यादौ च रूपकालक्कारादयोऽनुमेया एव। तथाहि-अनुमानं नाम पक्षसत्त्व- सपक्षसत्त्वविपक्षव्यावृत्तत्वविशिष्टाल्लिङ्गालिक्गिनो ज्ञानम्। ततश्च वाच्यादसम्बद्धोडर्थ- स्वावन्न प्रतीयते. । अन्यथातिप्रसङ्गः स्यात्। इति बोध्यबोधकयोरर्थयोः कश्चित्स- म्बन्धोऽस्त्येव। ततश्च बोधकोडथों लिङ्गम्, बोध्यश्च लिङ्गी, बोधकस्य चार्थस्य पक्षसत्त्वं निबद्धमेव। सपक्षसत्त्वविपक्षव्यावृत्तत्वेऽनिबद्धऽपि सामर्थ्यांदवसेये। तस्मादत्र यद्ा- च्यादर्थालिङ्गरूपाल्लिद्विनो व्यङ्गयार्थस्यावगमस्तदनुमान एव पर्यवस्यति" इति, तन्न तथा छ्यन्र "भम धम्मिअ-' इत्यादौ गृहे श्वनिवृत्त्या विहितं भ्रमणं गोदावरीतीरे सिंहोपलब्धेरभ्रमणमनुमापयति" इति यद्वक्तव्यं तत्रानैकान्तिको हेतुः । भीरोरपि 'विषयग्रयो नि-ब. २ 'एवान्तर्भवति' ख-ग. ३ "व्यक्तिकः' नि. ४ 'रामादि- अतरागादि' नि-ब.५ 'रामादिगतरागा निब. ६ 'प्रतीतिरास्वाद्यत्वे" नि-ब. •"धान्ति- रसाधना" ख-ग. ८ "ह्विङ्गिनि' ख-ग.

६० साहित्यदर्पणे [%४

गुरो: प्रभोवां निदेश्षेन प्रियानुरागेण वा गमनस्य सम्भवाद्। षुंश्ल्या वचनं प्रामा- णिकं न वेति सन्दिग्धासिद्धश्च। 'जलकेलि- इत्यन्न 'य आत्मदर्शनादर्शनाभ्यां चक्रवाकविघटनसङ्घटनकारी स चन्द्र एवं' इत्यनुमितिरेवेयमिति न वाच्यम्। उत्रा- सकादावनैकान्तिकत्वाव । 'एवंविधोऽर्थ एवंविधार्थबोधक एवंविधार्थत्वात्, यत्नैवं तन्नैवम्' इत्यनुमानेऽप्याभासमानयोगक्षेमो हेतुः । 'एवंविधार्थत्वात्' इति हेतुना एवंविधानिष्टसाैनस्वाप्युपपचेः । तथा यत् 'दृष्टि हे प्रतिवेशिनि क्षणमिहाप्यसमद्गहे-' इत्यादौ नलग्रन्बीनां सन- लिर्खनम्, एकाकितया च स्रोतोगमनम्, तस्याः परकासुकोपभोगस्य लिजिनो लिङ्क मित्युच्यते। तच्चात्रैवाभिहितेनं स्वकान्तस््ेहेनापि सम्भवतीत्यनैकान्तिको हेतुः । यच्च 'निःशेषच्युतचन्दनभ्-' इत्यादौ दूत्यास्तत्कामुकोपभोगोऽनुमीयते तत्कि प्रतिपाधया दूत्या, तत्कालसंनिहितैर्वान्यैः, तत्काव्यार्थभावनया वा सहृदवैः । आद्ययोन विवादः । तृतीये तु तथाविधाभिप्रायविरहस्थले व्यभिचारः। ननु वक्रा- द्यवस्थासहकृतत्वेन विशेष्यो हेतुरिति न वाच्यम्। एवंविधव्यास्याधनुसंधानस्या- भावात्। कि चैवंविधानां काव्यानां कविप्रतिभामात्रजन्मनां प्रामाण्यानावश्यकत्वेन सन्दि- ग्यासिद्धत्वं हेतोः । व्यक्तिवादिना चाधमपदसद्दायानामेवैषीं व्यअ्ञकत्वमुक्तम्। तेन च तत्कान्तस्याधमत्वं प्रामाणिकं न वेत्यपि कथमनुमानम्। एतेनार्थापत्तिवेधत्वमपि व्यङ्गथानामपास्तम् । अर्थापचेरपि पूर्वप्रसिद्धव्याप्िच्छा- यामुपजीव्यैव प्रवृत्तेः । यथा-'यो जीवति स कुत्राप्यवतिष्ठते, जीवति चात्र गोष्ठयामविद्यमानश्चैत्रः' इत्यादि। कि च वस्त्रविक्रयादौ तर्जनीतोलनेन दशसंख्यादि वत्सूचनबुद्धिवेद्योऽप्ययं न भवति। सूचनबुद्धेरपि सक्केतादिलोकिकप्रमाणसापेक्षत्वे- नानुमानप्रकारताङ्गीकारात्। यच्च 'संस्कारजन्यत्वाद्रसादिबुद्धि: स्मृत्तिः' इति केचिव्, तत्रापि प्रत्यभिज्ञायामनैकान्तिकतया हेतोरामासता। 'दुर्गालद्वित- इत्यादौ च द्वितीयाथों नास्त्येव इति यदुक्तं महिमभट्टेन, तदनुभवसिद्धमपलपतो गजनि- मीलिकैव। तदेवमनुभवसिद्धस्य तत्तद्रसादिलक्षणार्थस्याशक्यापलापतया तत्तच्छव्दादन्वयव्य- तिरेकानुविधायितया चानुमानादिप्रमाणावेद्यतया चाभिधादिवृचित्रंयाबोध्यतया च तुरीया वृत्तिरुपास्थवेति सिद्धम्। इयं च व्याप्त्याद्यनुसन्धानं विनापि भवतीत्यखिलं निर्मलम्। तत्किनामिकेयं वृत्तिरिति, उच्यते-

१ 'चन्द्र इव' ख-ग. २ 'इत्यसमानयोगक्षेमो हेतु' ग. ३ "विधानिष्टार्थत्वस्याप्युपपत्तेः' ख-ग. ४ 'तनूल्िखनं' नि-ब. "'प्रतिपाद्यतया' नि. ६ 'व्यास्यनु" नि-ब. • 'ध्यकि- वाचिना ख-ग. "मेवैषां पदार्थानां' नि-ब. 'पूर्वसिद्धव्याप्ीच्छासुप" नि. 1 'ता- स्थितमेतदथा शब्दस्यार्थभिधानमन्तरेण न व्यापारान्तरं सम्मवतीति'( व्वंकिविवेके पत्र १ ११ "मवसिद्धिमप" नि.

पञ्चमः परिच्छेदः।

सा चेयं व्यअ्ञना नाम वृत्तिरित्युच्यते बुधैः। रसव्यक्ता पुनर्वृत्ति रसनाख्यां परे विदुः ॥५॥ एतच्च विविच्योक्तं रसनिरूपणप्रस्ताव इति सर्वमवदातम् ।। इति साहित्यदर्पणे व्यअ्ञनास्थापनो नाम पञ्चमः परिच्छेदः ।

षष्ठः परिच्छेद:। एवं ध्वनिगुणीभूवव्यङ्गयत्वेन काव्यस्य भेदद्वयमुक्त्वा पुनर्दृश्यश्रव्यत्वेन भेद- द्दयमाइ्- दश्यश्रव्यत्वमेदेन पुनः काव्यं द्विधा मतम्। दृशयं तत्रामिनेयं तस्य रूपकसंश्ञाहेतुमाह- तद्रूपारोपानु रूपकम् ॥१॥ तदृश्यं काव्यं नटे रामादिस्वरूपारोपाद्रूपकमित्युच्यते। कोऽसावभिनय इत्याह- भवेदभिनयोऽवस्थानुकारः स चतुर्विधः। आङ्गिको वाचिकश्रैवमाहार्यः सात्विकसतथा ॥२॥ नटैरवागङ्गादिभी रामयुधिष्ठिरादीनामवस्थानुकरणमभिनयः । रूपकभेदानाह- नाटकमथ प्रकरणं भाणव्यायोगसमवकारठिमा: । ईहामृगाङ्कवीथ्यः प्रहसनमिति रूपकाणि दश ॥ ३ ॥ किं च । नाटिका त्रोटकं गोष्ठी सट्टकं नाव्यरासकम्। प्रस्थानोल्लाप्यकाव्यानि प्रेङ्गणं रासकं तथा ।। ४ ॥। संलापकं श्रीगदितं शिल्पकं च विलासिका। दुर्मल्लिका प्रकरणी हल्लीशो भाणिकेति च । ५। अष्टादश प्राहुरुपरूपकाणि मनीषिणः । विना विशेषं सर्वेषां लक्ष्म नाटकवन्मतम् ॥६।। सर्वेषां प्रकरणादिरूपकार्णां नाटिकाधुपरूपकार्णा च। तत्र नाटकं ख्यातवृत्तं स्वात्पज्जसन्धिसमन्वितम्। विलासद्ुर्थादिगुणवद्युकं नानाविभूतिमिः॥७॥ सुखदुःखसमुद्भति नानारसनिरन्तरम्। पज्ञादिकों दशपरास्तत्राङ्माः परिकीर्तिताः ॥।८ । प्रख्यातवंशो राजर्षिर्धीरोदान्त: प्रतापवान्। दिव्योऽथ दिव्यादिव्यो वा गुणवान्नायको मतः ॥ ९॥ एक एव भवेदड्की शुङ्ारो वीर एव वा। अङ्रमन्ये रसा: सर्वे कार्यो निर्वहणेऽहुतः ॥ १० ॥

१ 'नटैरकादि" नि-ब. २ 'पच्चाधिकाः' ग. च

६२ साहित्यदर्पणे [६.११

चत्वारः पञ्ञ वा मुख्याः कार्यव्यापृतपूरुषाः। गोपुच्छाअ्समाङ्कं तु बन्धनं तस्य कीर्तितम्।११ ॥ ख्यातं रामायणादिप्रसिद्धं वृत्तम् । यथा-रामचरितादि। सन्धयो वक्ष्यन्ते। नानाविभूतिभिर्युक्तमिति महासहायम्। सुखदुःखसमुद्भूतत्वं रामयुधिष्ठिरादिवृत्तान्ते- व्वभिव्यक्तम् । राजर्षयो दुष्यन्तादयः । दिव्याः श्रीकृष्णादयः । दिव्यादिव्यः, यो दिव्योऽप्यात्मनि नराभिमानी। यथा-श्रीरामचन्द्रः । 'गोपुच्छाग्रसमाङ्कमिति क्रमेणाङ्का: सूक्ष्माः कर्तव्याः' इति केचित्। अन्ये त्वाहु :- 'यथा गोपुच्छे केचिद्वाला हस्वा: केचिद्दीर्घास्तथेह कानिचित्कार्याणि मुखसन्धौ समाप्तानि कानि- चित्प्रतिमुखे। एवमन्येष्वपि कानिचित्कानिचित्' इति। प्रत्यक्षनेतृचरितो रसभावसमुख्वलः । भवेदगूढशब्दार्थः श्ुद्रचूर्णकसंयुतः ॥१२॥ विच्छिन्नावान्तरैकार्थः किञ्चित्संलझबिन्दुक:। युक्तो न बहुभि: कार्येर्बीजसंहृतिमान्न च ॥।१३॥ नानाविधानसंयुक्तो नातिप्रचुरपद्यवान्। आवश्यकानां कार्याणाभविरोधाद्विनिर्मित: ।। १४॥। नानेकदिन निर्वर्त्यकथया संप्रयोजित: । आसच्ननायक: पात्रैर्युतखिचतुरैस्तथा ॥ १५॥ दूराह्वानं वधो युद्धं राज्यदेशादिविप्ववः । विवाहो भोजनं शापोत्सर्गो मृत्यू रतं तथा ॥ १६ ॥ दन्तच्छेद्यं नखच्छेद्यमन्यद्गीडाकरं च यत्। शयनाधरपानादि नगराद्युपरोचैनम्।। १७॥ स्नानानुलेपने चैभिर्वर्जितो नातिविस्तरः। देवीपरिजनादीनाममात्यवणिजामपि॥ १८॥ प्रत्यक्षचिन्रंचरितैर्युक्तो भावरसोन्नवैः । अन्तनिष्क्रान्तनिखिलपात्रोऽङ्क इति कीर्तितः ॥१९ ॥ बिन्द्वादयो वक्ष्यन्ते। आवश्यकं संध्यावन्दनादि। अङ्कप्रस्तावाद्गभांङ्कमाह- अङ्कोदरप्रविष्टो यो रङ्गद्वारामुखादिमान्। अङ्कोऽपरः स गर्भाङ्कः सबीज: फलवानपि॥ २० ॥ यथा बालरामायणे-रावणं प्रति (कभ्रुकी)। 'श्रवणैः पेयमनेकैर्दृश्यं दीर्घैश्च लोचनैर्बडुभिः । भवदर्थमिव निबद्धं नाट्यं सीतास्वयंवरणम्।।' (३.१२) इत्यादिना विरचितः सीतास्वयंवरो नाम गभाङ्क: । तन्र पूर्व पूर्वरङ्गः सभापूजा ततः परम्। कथनं कविसंज्ञादेरनाटकस्याध्यथामुखस् ।२१॥

१ "समायं तु' नि-ब. १ 'शापोत्सगौं' नि=ब. ३ 'नगराद्यवरोधनम्' नि. :"रमेजरै2' म .. ५ द्वारासुखादिमान' ग.

६.२] षष्ठः परिच्छेद: । ६३

तत्रेति नाटकें। यब्राव्यवस्तुन: पूर्वे रङ्गविप्नोपशान्तये। कुशीलवाः प्रकुर्वन्ति पूर्वरङ्गः स उच्यते ॥ २२ ॥ प्रत्याहारादिकान्यङ्गान्यस्य भूयांसि यद्यपि। तथाप्यवश्यं कर्तव्या नान्दी विभ्नोपशान्तये ।। २३ ॥। तस्या: स्वरूपमाह- आशीर्वचनसंयुक्ता स्तुतिर्यस्मात्प्रयुज्यते। देवद्विजनृपादीनां तस्पान्नान्दीति संज्ञिता॥२४॥ (नाठ्य०५.२५)

पदैर्युक्त्ता द्वादशभिरष्टाभिर्वा पदैरुत ॥ २५ ॥ अष्टपंदा यथा अनर्घराघवे-'निष्प्रत्यूदृम्-' इत्यादि (१.१)। द्वादशपदा यथा मम तातपादानां पुष्पमालायाम्- 'शिरसि धृतसुरापगे स्मरारावरुणमुखेन्दुरुचिर्गिरीन्द्रपुत्री। अथ चरणयुगानते स्वकान्ते स्मितसरसा भवतोऽस्तु भूतिहेतुः ॥' एवमन्यत्र। एतन्नान्दीति कस्यचिन्मतानुसारेणोक्तम् । वस्तुतस्तु 'पूर्वरङ्गस्य रङ्गद्वाराभिधानमङ्गम्' इत्यपरे। यदुक्तम्- 'यस्मादभिनयो हत्र प्राथम्यादवतार्यते। रद्द्वारमतो ज्ञेयं वागङ्गाभिनयात्मकम् ।' इति। (नाट्य० ५.२७) उत्तप्रकारायाश्च नान्धा रहद्वारत्वात्प्रथमं नटैरेव कर्तव्यतया न महर्षिणा निर्देश: कृतः । कालिदासादिमहाँकविप्रबन्धेषु च- 'वेदान्तेषु यमाद्डुरेकपुरुषं व्याप्य स्थितं रोदसी यस्मिन्नीश्वर इत्यनन्यविषयः शब्दो यथार्थाक्षरः । अन्तर्यश्च मुमुक्षुभिनियमितप्राणादिभिर्मृग्यते स स्थाणुः स्थिरभक्तियोगसुलभो निःश्रेयसायास्तु वः ॥'(विक्रमो०१.१) एवमादिषु नान्दीलक्षणायोगात्। उक्तं च-'रङ्गद्वारमारभ्य कविः कुर्यात्-' इति। अत एव प्राक्तनपुस्तकेषु 'नान्धन्ते सूत्रधारः' इत्यनन्तरमेव 'वेदान्तेषु-' इत्यादिक्रोकलिखनं दृश्यते। यच्च पश्चात् 'नान्धन्ते सूत्रधारः' इति लिखनं तस्यायम- भिप्राय :- नान्दन्ते सूत्रधार इदं प्रयोजितवान्, इतःप्रभृति नाटकमुपादीयत इति कवेरभिप्रायः सूचित इति। पूर्वरङ्गं विधायवं सूत्रधारो निवर्तते। प्रविश्य स्थापकस्तद्वत्काव्यमास्थापयेत्ततः ॥२६॥ दिव्यमंत्यें स तद्रूपो मिश्रमन्यतरस्तयोः।

· "संयुक्ता नितयं यसमात्' ग. २ 'शङ्गचक्राब्ज" ग. ३ 'पादैर्युक्ता' ग. ४ 'अष्टपादा' ग. ५ 'हत्यन्ये' नि; 'इत्युच्यते' ब. ६ 'रङ्द्वारात्' नि-ब. • 'महाप्रवन्धेषु' ग. ८ 'इतः्प्रभृति मया नाटक नि-ब.९ 'विघायैव' नि-ब. १० 'दिव्यैर्मतयैः सः' ग; 'दिव्यमर्त्येषु तद्रपो' ब.

६४ साहित्यदर्पणे [.१७

सूचयेद्वस्तु बीजं वा मुखं पात्रमथापि वां ।। २७ ।। काव्यार्थस्य स्थापनात्स्थापकः । तद्ददिति सूत्रधारसदृशगुणाकारः । इदानी पूर्वरञ्जस्य सम्यकप्रयोगाभावादेक एव सूत्रधारः सर्व प्रयोजयतीति व्यवहारः । स स्थापको दिव्यं वस्तु दिव्यो भूत्वा, मर्त्ये वस्तु मत्यो भूत्वा, मिश्रं च दिव्यमर्त्ययोर- न्यतरो भूत्वा सूचयेत्। वस्तु इतिवृत्तम्। यथोदात्तराघवे- 'रामो मू्ति निधाय काननमगान्मालामिवाज्ां गुरो- स्तन्दक्तया भरतेन राज्यमखिलं मात्रा सहैवोज्झितम्। तौ सुग्रीवबिभीषणावनुगतौ नीतौ परां सम्पद प्रोत्खाता दशकन्धरप्रभृतयो ध्वस्ताः समस्ता द्विषः ॥।' वीजं यथा रलावल्याम्- 'द्वीपादन्यस्मादपि मध्यादपि जलनिधेर्दिशोऽप्यन्तात्। आनीय झटिति घटयति विधिरभिमतमभिमुखीभूतः ॥' (१.७) अत्र हि समुद्रे वहनभङ्गमन्नोत्थिताया रतावल्या अनुकूलदैवलालितो वत्सराज- गृदप्रवेशो यौगन्धरायणव्यापारमारभ्य रलावलीप्राप्ती बीजम्। मुखं श्लेषादिना प्रस्तुतवृत्तान्तप्रतिपादको वाग्विशेषः । यथा- आसादितप्रकटनिर्मलचन्द्रहास: प्राप्तः शरत्समय पष विशुद्धकान्तेः। उत्खाय गाढतमसं घनकालमुग्रं रामो दशास्यमिव सम्भृतबन्धुजीवेः॥' पात्रं यथाभिज्ञानशाकुन्तले- 'तवास्मि गीतरागेण हारिणा प्रसभ हृतः । एष राजेव दुष्यन्तः सारङ्वेणातिरंहसा ।' (१.५) रं प्रसाद मधुरैः शलोकः काव्यार्थसूचकैः। रूपकस्य कवेराख्यां गोत्राध्यैपि स कीर्तयेद॥ २८॥ ऋतुं च कज्ञित्प्रायेण भारतीं वृत्िमाश्रितः। स स्थापकः । प्रायेणेति क्वचिदृतोरकीर्वनमपि। यथा-रलावल्याम्। भारती- वृत्तिस्तु- भारती संस्कृतप्रायो वाग्व्यापारो नराश्रयः ।।२९। संस्कृतबहलो वाक्प्रधानो व्यापारो भारती। तस्या: प्ररोचना वीथी तथा प्रहसनामुखे। अङ्गान्यत्रोन्मुखीकारः प्रशंसातः प्ररोचना ॥३०॥ प्रस्तुतामिनयेषु प्रशंसातः श्रोतणां प्रवृत्त्युन्मुखीकरणं प्ररोचना। यथा रलावल्याम्- 'श्रीहषो निपुणः कविः, परिषदप्येषा गुणग्राहिणी, लोके हारि च वत्सराजचरितं, नाय्ये च दक्षा वयम्।

१ अयं श्रोको दशरूपके (३.३) दृश्यते. २ ६'परामुन्नति' नि. ३ 'प्रोत्सिक्ता' नि-ब. "कान्तिः' नि. ५ दशरूपके (३.३,१० इत्यत्र) उदाहृतमिदम्. ६ 'मोताद्यमपि कीर्तयेत्' ग.

६.३० ] षष्ठः परिच्छेद: । ६५

वस्त्वेकैकमपीह वान्छितफलप्राप्तेः पदं, किं पुन- मेद्दाग्योपचयादयं समुदित: सर्वो गुणानां गण: ।।' (रला० १.६) वीथीप्रइसने वक्ष्येते। नटी विदूषको वापि पारिपाश्वंक एव वा। सूत्रधारेण सहिता: संलापं यत्र कुर्वते ॥३१ ॥ चित्रैवाक्यैः स्वकार्योत्थः प्रस्तुताक्षेपिभिर्मिथः । आमुखं तत्तु विज्ञेयं नान्ना प्रस्तावनापि सा ।। ३२॥ सूत्रधारसद्ृशत्वात्स्थापकोऽपि सूत्रधार उच्यते। तस्यानुचरः पारिपार्श्वक: तस्मात्किश्चिदूनो नटः । उद्धात्यक: कथोद्भातः प्रयोगातिशयख्तथा। प्रवर्तकावलगिते पञ्च प्रस्तावनाभिदा: ॥३३ ॥ तत्र पदानि स्वगतार्थानि तदर्थगतये नराः । योजयन्ति पदरन्यैः स उद्धात्यक उच्यते ॥ ३४ ॥ यथा सुद्राराक्षसे सूत्रधार :- 'क्रूरग्रहः स केतुश्चन्द्रमसं पूर्णमण्डलमिदानीम्। अभिभवितुमिच्छति बलात्-' इत्यनन्तरम्-'( नेपथ्ये।) आः, क एष मयि जीवति चन्द्रगुप्तमभियोक्तुमि- च्छति ।' इति । अ्रान्यार्थवन्त्यपि पदानि हृदिस्थार्थगत्या अर्थान्तरे संक्रमय्य पात्रप्रवेशः । सूत्रधारस्य वाक्यं वा समादायार्थमस्य वा। भवेत्पात्रप्रवेशश्चेत्कथोद्भातः स उच्यते ॥ ३५॥ वाक्यं यथा रलावल्याम्-'द्वीपादन्यस्ादपि-' इत्यादि सूत्रधारेण पठिते- '(नेपथ्ये।) एवमेतत्। क: सन्देहः । द्वीपादन्यस्मादपि-' इत्यादि पठित्वा यौगन्ध- रायणस्य प्रवेशः । वाक्यार्थ यथा वेण्याम्- 'निर्वाणवैरदहना: प्रशमादरीणां नन्दन्तु पाण्डुतनयाः सह माधवेन। रक्तप्रसाधितभुवः क्षतविग्रहाश्च स्वस्था भवन्तु कुरुराजसुताः समृत्याः ॥'(१.७) इति सूत्रधारेण पठितस्य वाक्यस्यार्थ गृहीत्वा-'(नेपथ्ये।) आः दुरात्मन्, वृथा मङ्गलपाठक, कथं स्वस्था भवन्तु मयि जीवति धार्तराष्ट्राः ।' ततः सूत्रधारो निष्क्रान्तो भीमसेनस्य प्रवेशः। यदि प्रयोग एकस्मिन्प्रयोगोऽन्यः प्रयुज्यते ।

यथा कुन्दमालायाम्-'(नेपथ्ये ।) इत इतोऽवतरत्वायां। सूत्रधार :- कोऽयं खल्वार्याह्वानेन साहायकमपि मे सम्पादयति। (विलोक्य ।) कष्टमतिकरुणं वर्तते।

१ 'प्रस्तुतापेक्षितैमिथः' ग. २ "गुतमभिभवितु" नि-ब. ३ 'वाक्यार्थो यथा' नि. ४ 'सूत्रधारनिष्कान्तौ' नि.

O

६६ साहित्यदर्पणे [६.३६

लङ्केश्वरस्य भवने सुच्िरं स्थितेति रामेण लोकपरिवादभयाकुलेन। निर्वासितां जनपदादपि गर्भगुवी सीतां वनाय परिकर्षति लक्ष्मणोऽयम् ।' अत्र नृत्यप्रयोगार्थ स्वभार्याह्वानमिच्छता सूत्रधारेण 'सीतां वनाय परिकर्षति लक्ष्मणोऽयम्' इति सीतालक्ष्मणयोः प्रवेशं सूचयित्वा निष्क्ान्तेन स्वप्रयोगमति- शयान एव प्रयोग: प्रयोजितः । कालं प्रवृत्तमाश्रित्य सूत्रधुग्यत्र वर्णयेत्। तदाश्रयश्च पात्रस्य प्रवेशस्तत्प्रवर्तकम् ॥३७॥ यथा-'आसादितप्रकट-' इत्यादि। '(ततः प्रविशति यथानिर्दिष्टो रामः।)' यत्रैकत्र समावेशात्कार्यमन्यत्प्रसाध्यते। प्रयोगे खलु तज्ज्ञेयं नाम्नावलगितं बुधैः ॥ ३८ ॥ यथा शाकुन्तले-सूत्रधारो नटीं प्रति। 'तवास्मि गीतरागेण-' इत्यादि। ततो राज्ञ: प्रवेशः । योज्यान्यत्र यथालाभं वीथ्यङ्गानीतराण्यपि। अत्र आमुखे। उद्धात्य(त)कावलगितयोरितराणि वीथ्यङ्गानि वक्ष्यमाणानि। नखकुट्टस्तु नेपथ्योक्तं श्रुतं यत्र त्वाकाशवचनं तथा ॥ ३९ ॥ समाश्रित्यापि कर्तव्यमामुखं नाटकादिषु। एषामामुखभेदानामेकं कञ्वित्प्रयोजयेत्॥ ४० ॥ तेनार्थमथ पात्रं वा समाक्षिप्यैव सूत्रधटक्। .

प्रस्तावनान्ते निर्गच्छेत्ततो वस्तु प्रयोजयेत् ॥ ४१ ॥ वस्त्वितिवृत्तम् । इदं पुनर्वस्तु बुधैर्द्विविधं परिकल्प्यते। आधिकारिकमेकं स्यात्प्रासङ्िकमथापरम्॥। ४२॥ अधिकारः फले स्वाम्यमधिकारी च तत्प्रभुः । तस्येतिवृत्तं कविभिराधिकारिकमुच्यते ॥४३ ॥ फले प्रधानफले। यथा बालरामायणे रामचरितम्। अस्योपकरणार्थ तु प्रासङ्गिकमितीष्यते। अस्याधिकारिकेतिवृत्तस्य उपकारनिमितं यच्चरितं तत्पासङ्ञिकम्। यथा सुग्रीवादिचरितम्। पताकास्थानकं योज्यं सुविचार्येह वस्तुनि॥ ४४ ॥ इह नाय्ये। यन्रार्थे चिन्तितेऽन्यस्मिंस्तल्लिङ्कोऽन्यः प्रयुज्यते। आगन्तुकेन भावेन पताकास्थानकंतु तत्॥। ४५॥ (नाव्य० १९.२९) तन्मेदानाइ-

६.४६] षछ्ठः परिच्छेद: । ६७

सहसैवार्थसम्पत्तिगुंणवत्युपचारतः । पताकास्थानकमिदं प्रथमं परिकीर्तितम्॥ ४६॥ (नाव्य० १९.३०) यथा रल्नावल्याम्-'वासवदत्तयम्' इति राजा यदा तत्कण्ठपाशं मोचयति तदा तदुत्त्या 'सागरिकेयम्' इति प्रत्यमिज्ञाय 'कथम्। प्रिया मे सागरिका। अलमलमतिमात्रं साइसेनामुना ते, त्वरितमयि विमुञ्च त्वं लतापाशमेतम्। चलितमपि निरोड्ं जीवितं जीवितेशे क्षणमिह मम कण्ठे बाहुपाशं निधेहि ॥' (३.१७) इति फलरूपार्थसम्पत्ति: पूर्वापेक्षयोपचाराति शयाद्गुणवत्युत्कृष्टा। वचः सातिशयक्किष्ट नानाबन्धसमाश्रयम्। पताकास्थानकामिदं द्वितीयं परिकीर्तितम् ॥४७।।(नाव्य०१९.३१) यथा वेण्यां भीम :- 'रक्तम्रसाधितभुवः क्षतविग्रहाश्च स्वस्था भवन्तु कुरुराजसुताः सभृत्याः ।।' अत्र रक्तादीनां रुधिरशरीरार्थहेतुकक्रेषवशेन बीजार्थप्रतिपादनान्नेतृमङ्गलप्रतिपत्तौ सत्यां द्वितीयं पताकास्थानम्। अर्थोपक्षेपकं यत्तु लीनं सविनयं भवेत्। छ्िष्टप्रत्युत्तरोपेतं तृतीयमिदसुच्यते॥ ४८ ॥ (नाव्य०१९.३२) लीनमव्यक्तार्थम्। क्रिष्टेन सम्बन्धयोग्येनाभिप्रायान्तरप्रयुक्तेन प्रत्युत्तरेणोपेतम्, सविनयं विशेषनिश्चयप्राह्या सहितं सम्पाद्यते यत्तत्तृतीयं पताकास्थानम्। यथा वेण्यां द्वितीयेडड्गे-'कज्जुकी-देव, भझं भझं। राजा-केन। कज्जुकी- भीमेन । राजा-कस्य। कञ्जुकी-भवतः । राजा-आः, किं प्रलपसि। कज्जुकी- (सभयम् ।) देव, ननु ब्रवीमि। भसं भीमेन भवतः । राजा-धिग् वृद्धापसद, कोऽयमद्य ते व्यामोहः । कञ्जुकी-देव, न व्यामोहः । सत्यमेवं ब्रवीमि। भझं भीमेन भवतो मरुता रथकेतनम्। पतितं किङ्गिणीकाणबद्धाकन्दमिव क्षितौ ।।' (वेणी० २.२४)

द्वयर्थो वचनविन्यास: सुश्िष्टः काव्ययोजितः। प्रधानार्थान्तराक्षेपी पताकास्थानकं परम् ॥ ४९ ॥। यथा रलावल्याम्- 'उद्दामोत्कलिकां विपाण्डुररुचं प्रारब्धजुम्भां क्षणा- दायासं श्वसनोद्गमैरविरलैरातन्वतीमात्मनः । अद्योद्यानलतामिमां समदनां नारीमिवान्यां ध्ुवं पश्यन्कोपविपाटलद्युति मुखं देव्या: करिष्याम्यह्म् ॥' (२.३) अत्र भाव्यर्थः सूचितः । मतानि चत्वारि पताकास्थानानि क्वच्िन्मङ्गलार्थ क्कचिदमङ्गलार्थ सर्वसन्धिषु भवन्ति । काव्यकर्तुरिच्छावशान्द्यो भूयोडपि भवन्ति।

· 'जीवार्थप्रतिपादनादमङ्गल" ग. २ 'किङ्गिणीनाल" ग. ३ "रापक्षी' ग-च्.

६८ साहित्यदर्पणे [ A.४s

यत्पुम: केनचिदुक्तम्-'मुखसन्धिमारभ्य सन्धिचतुष्टये क्रमेण भवन्ति' इति, तदन्ये न मन्यन्ते। एषामत्यन्तमुपादेयानामनियमेन सर्वत्रापि सर्वेषामपि भवितुं युक्तत्वात्। यत्स्यादनुचितं वस्तु नायकस्य रसस्य वा। विरुद्धं तत्परित्याज्यमन्यथा वा प्रकल्पयेत् ॥। ५० ॥ अनुचितमितिवृतं यथा-रामस्य च्छदना वालिवधः। तच्चोदात्तराघवे नोक्तमेव। वीरचरिते तु वाली रामवधार्थमागतो रामेण हत इत्यन्यथा कृतः । अङ्केष्वदर्शनीया या वक्तव्यैव च संमता। या च स्याद्वर्षपर्यन्तं कथा दिनद्वयादिजा ॥५१॥ अन्या च विस्तरात्सूच्या सार्थोपक्षेपकर्युधैः। अङ्टेषु अदर्शनीया कथा युद्धादिकथा। वर्षादूध्वें तु यद्दस्तु तत्स्याद्वर्षादधोभवम् ।। ५२। उक्त हि सुनिना- 'अङ्कच्छेदे कार्य मासकृतं वर्षसव्नितं वापि। तत्सर्वं कर्तव्यं वर्षादूर्ध्व न तु कदाचित्।।' (नाट्य० १८.३१) एवं च चतुर्दशवर्षव्यापिन्यपि रामवनवासे ये ये विराधवधादयः कथांशास्ते ते वर्षवर्षावयवदिनयुग्मादीनामेकतमेन सूचनीया न विरुद्धाः । दिनावसाने कार्य यदिने नैवोपपद्यते। अर्थोपक्षेपकैर्वाच्यमङ्कच्छेदं विधाय तत् ।। ५३ ।। के तेडथोपक्षेपका इत्याह- अर्थोपक्षेपका: पञ्च विष्कम्भकप्रवेशकौ। चूलिकाङ्कावतारोऽथ स्यादक्कमुखमित्यपि॥ ५४॥ वृत्तवर्तिष्यमाणानां कथांशानां निदर्शकः । संक्षिप्तार्थस्तु विष्कम्भ आदावक्कस्य दर्शितः ॥ ५५॥ मध्येन मध्यमाभ्यां वा पात्राभ्यां संप्रयोजित:। शुद्ध: स्यात्स तु सङ्कीणों नीचमध्यमकल्पितः ॥५६॥ तत्र शुद्धो यथा-मालतीमाधवे इमशाने कपालकुण्डला। सक्कीणों यथा - रामाभिनन्दे क्षपणककापालिकौ। अथ प्रवेशक :- प्रवेशकोऽनुदात्तोक्तया नीचपात्रप्रयोजितः । अङ्गद्वयान्तर्विज्ञेय: शेषं विष्क्रम्भके यथा ॥ ५७ ॥ अङ्कद्दयस्यान्तरिति प्रथमाङ्कडस्य प्रतिषेधः । यथा-वेण्यामश्वत्थामाक्के राक्षस- मिथुनम्। अथ चूलिका- अन्तर्जवनिकासंस्थः सूचनार्थस्य चूलिका। यथा वीरचरिते चतुर्थाङ्कस्यादौ-'(नेपथ्ये।) भो भो वैमानिकाः, प्रवर्तन्तां रक्षमङ्गलानि।' इत्यादि । अनेन 'रामेण परशुरामो जितः ।' इति नेपथ्ये पात्रैः सूचितम्। अथाङ्कावतार :-

. ६,4८] ष8्ठः परिच्छेद: । ६९

अङ्गान्ते सूचितः पात्रैस्तद्ङ्कस्याविभागतः ॥।५८ ॥। यत्रा्कोऽवतरत्येषोऽङ्गावतार इति स्मृतः । यथा-अभिज्ञाने पञ्चमाङ्क पात्रैः सूचितः षछ्ाङ्कस्तदङ्कस्याङ्ञविशेष इवावतीणः। अथाङ्कमुखम्- यत्र स्यादड्क एकस्मिन्नक्कानां सूचनाखिला।। ५९ ।। तद्ङमुखमित्याहुर्बीजार्थख्यापकं च तत्। यथा-मालतीमाधवे प्रथमाङ्कादौ कामन्दक्यवलोकिते भूरिवसुप्रभृतीनां भावि- भूमिकानां परिक्षिप्तकथाप्रबन्धस्य च प्रसङ्गात्संनिवेशं सूचितवत्यौ। अङ्कान्तपात्रै्वांङ्कासं छिन्नाङ्कस्यार्थसूचनातू॥ ६० ॥ (दश०१.६२) अङ्कान्तपात्रैरक्कान्ते प्रविष्टैः पात्रैः। यथा वीरचरिते द्वितीयाङ्कान्ते-(प्रविश्य।) सुमन् :- भगवन्तौ वसिष्ठविश्वामित्रौ भवतः सभार्गवानाह्यतः। इतरे-क भगवन्तौ। सुमन्रः-महाराजदशरथस्यान्तिके। इतरे-तत्तत्रैव गच्छामः ।' इत्यङ्क- परिसमाप्तौ । 'ततः प्रविशन्त्युपविष्टा वसिष्ठविश्वामित्रपरशुरामाः ।' इत्यत्र पूर्वाङ्कान्त एव प्रविष्टन सुमन्रपात्रेण शतानन्दजनककथाविच्छेदे उत्तराङ्कमुखसूचना- दङ्कास्यम्, इति। एतच्च धनिकमतानुसारेणोक्तम्। अन्ये तु-'अङ्गावतरणेनैवेदं गतार्थम्' इत्याडुः । अपेक्षितं परित्यज्य नीरसं वस्तुविस्तरम्। यदा सन्दर्शयेच्छेषमामुखानन्तरं तदा ॥ ६१ ॥ कार्यो विष्कम्भको नाव्य आमुखाक्षिप्तपात्रक: । यथा-रत्नावल्यां यौगन्धरायणप्रयोजितः । यदा तु सरसं वस्तु मूलादेव प्रेवर्तते॥ ६२॥ आदावेव तदाङ्के स्यादामुखाक्षेपसंश्रयः । यथा शाकुन्तले। विष्कम्भकादयैरपि नो वधो वाच्योऽधिकारिण: ।। ६३।। अन्योन्येन तिरोधानं न कुर्याद्रसवस्तुनोः। रसः शङ्गारादिः। यदुक्तं धनिकेन- 'न चातिरसतो वस्तु दूरं विच्छिन्नतां नयेत्। रसं वा न तिरोदध्याद्वस्त्वलङ्कारलक्षणैः ॥' इति (दश० ३.३२ ) बीजं बिन्दुः पताका च प्रकरी कार्यमेव च॥। ६४ ॥ अर्थप्रकृतयः पञ्च ज्ञात्वा योज्या यथाविधि। अर्थप्रकृतयः प्रयोजनसिद्धिहेतवः । तत्र बीजम्- अल्पमात्रं समुद्दिष्ट बहुधा यद्विसर्पति ॥ ६५ ॥ फलस्य प्रथमो हेतुर्बीजं तद्मिघीयते।

१ 'ध्वनिकृन्मता°' ग. २ 'प्रतीयते' ग.

साहित्यदर्पणे [६.६६

यथा-रलावल्यां वत्सराजस्य रलावलीप्राप्तिहेतुर्दैवानुकूल्यलालितो यौगन्धरायण- व्यापारः। यथा वा-वेण्यां द्रौपदीकेशसंयमनहेतुर्भीमसेनक्रोधोपचितो युधिष्ठिरोत्साहः। अवान्तरार्थविच्छेदे बिन्दुरच्छेदकारणम् ॥ ६६ ॥ यथा-रतावल्यामनङ्गपूजापरिसमाप्तौ कथार्थविच्छेदे सति 'उदयनस्येन्दोरिवो- द्वीक्षते' इति सागरिका श्रत्वा ('सहर्षम्।) कथं एसो सो उदअणणरिन्दो' इत्यादि- रवान्तरार्थहेतुः । व्यापि प्रासङ्गिकं वृत्तं पताकेत्यभिधीयते। यथा-रामचरिते सुग्रीवादेः, वेण्यां भीमादेः, शाकुन्तले विदूषकस्य चरितम्। पताकानायकस्य स्यान्न स्वकीयंफलान्तरम्॥ ६७ ॥ गर्भे सन्धौ विमर्शे वा निर्वाहस्तस्य जायते। यथा-सुग्रीवादे राज्यप्रात्त्यादि। यत्तु मुनिनोक्तम्- 'आ गर्भादा विमर्शाद्वा पताका विनिवर्तते।' इति (नाट्य० १९.२८) तत्र 'पताकेति पताकानायकफलं निर्वहणपर्यन्तमपि पताकायाः प्रवृत्तिदर्शनात' इति व्याख्यातमभिनवगुप्तपादैः । प्रासङ्गिकं प्रदेशस्थं चरितं प्रकरी मता ॥ ६८ ॥ यथा-कुलपत्यक्के रावणजटायुसंवादः । प्रकरीनायकस्य स्यान्र स्वकीयं फलान्तरम्। अपेक्षितं तु यत्साध्यमारम्भो यन्निबन्धनः ॥ ६९ ॥ समापनं तु यत्सिद्धयै तत्कार्यमिति संमतम्। यथा-रामचरिते रावणवधः । अवस्था: पञ्ञ कार्यस्य प्रारब्धस्य फलार्थिभि: ॥ ७०॥ आरम्भयतप्राह्याशानियताप्तिफलागमाः । तत्र भवेदारम्भ औत्सुक्यं यन्मुख्यफलसिद्धये।।७१॥ यथा-रलावल्यां रलावल्यन्तःपुरनिवेशार्थ यौगन्धरायणस्यौत्सुक्यम्। एवं नाय- कनायिकादीनामप्यौत्सुक्यमाकरेषु बोद्धव्यम्। प्रयत्नस्तु फलावासा व्यापारोऽतित्वरान्वितः । यथा रलनावल्याम्-'तह वि ण अत्थि अण्णो दंसणोवाओ त्ति जवा तथा भालि- A हिभ जधासमीहिदं करइस्सम्।' इत्यादिना प्रतिपादितो रलावल्याश्चित्रलेखनादिर्व- त्सराजसङ्गमोपायः । यथा च-रामचरिते समुद्रबन्धनादि: । उपायापायशङ्काभ्यां प्राह्याशा प्राप्िसम्भवः ॥ ७२॥ यथा-रत्नावल्यां तृतीयेऽक्के वेषपरिवर्तनाभिसरणादेः सङ्गमोपायाद्वासवदत्ता- लक्षणापायशङ्गया चानिर्धारितैकान्तसन्गमरूपफलप्राप्तिः प्रत्याशा। एवमन्यत्र । १ "रनन्तरार्थे' ग. २ 'सकीयं फलान्त" ग. ३ 'संमितम्' ग. ४ 'फलप्रात्तौ' ग. ५ 'तथापि नास्त्यन्यो दर्शनोपाय इति यथा तथालिख्य यथासमीहितं करिष्यामि' (इति संस्कृतम्). ६ 'सङ्गमफळ" ग.

६.७३ ] षछ्ठः परिच्छेद: । ७१

अपायाभावतः प्राप्तिर्नियताप्तिस्तु निश्चिता। अपायाभावान्निर्धारितैकान्तफलप्राप्तिः । यथा रतावल्याम्-'राजा-देवीप्रसादनं त्यक्त्वा नान्यमत्रोपायं पश्यामि ।' इति द्वितीयस्याङ्कस्यान्ते देवीलक्षणापायस्य प्रसादनेन निराकरणान्नियतफलप्राप्ति: सूचिता। सावस्था फलयोग: स्याद्यः समग्रफलोदयः॥ ७३ ॥ यथा-रलावल्यां रलावलीलाभश्चक्रवर्तित्वलक्षणफलान्तरलाभसहितः। एवमन्यत्र। यथासंख्यमवस्थाभिराभिर्योगाच्च पञ्चभि:। पञ्चधैवेतिवृत्तस्य भागा: स्युः, पञ्च सम्धय: ।। ७४॥ तल्लक्षणमाह- अम्तरैकार्थसम्बन्धः सन्धिरेकान्वये सति। एकेन प्रयोजनेनान्वितानां कथांशानामेवान्तरैकप्रयोजनसम्बन्धः सन्धिः। तन्टेदानाह- मुखं प्रतिमुखं गर्भो विमर्श उपसंहृतिः ।।७५।। . इति पञ्चास्य भेदा: स्यु: कमाल्लक्षणमुच्यते। यैथोद्देशं लक्षणमाह- यत्र बीजसमुत्पत्तिर्नानार्थरससम्भवा॥ ७६॥ प्रारम्भेण समायुक्कता तन्मुखं परिकीर्तितम्। यथा-रत्नावल्यां प्रथमेड्ङ्क। फलप्रधानोपायस्य मुखसन्धिनिवेशिन: ॥। ७७ ॥ लक्ष्यालक्ष्य इवोन्जेदो यत्र प्रतिमुखं च तत्। यथा-रत्नावल्यां द्वितीयेडक्के वत्सराजसागरिकासमागमहेतोरनुरागबीजस्य प्रथ- माङ्कोपक्षिप्तस्य सुसङ्गता-विदूषकाभ्यां ज्ञायमानतया किश्चिल्क्ष्यस्य वासवदत्तया चित्रफलकवृत्तान्तेन किञ्चिदुन्नीयमानस्योद्वेशरूप उद्भेदः । फलप्रधानोपायस्य प्रागुन्धित्स्य किञ्जन ॥। ७८ ॥। गर्भो यत्र समुद्जेदो हासान्वेषणवान्मुड्टः। फलस्य गर्भीकरणाद्गर्भः । यथा रतनावल्यां द्वितीयेडङ्गे-'सुसङ्गता-सहि, अदक्खिणा दाणि सि तुमं जा एवं भट्टिणा हत्थेण महिदा वि कोवं ण मुञ्जसि।' इत्यादौ समुद्भेदः । पुनर्वासवदत्ताप्रवेशे ह्रासः । तृतीयेडक्गे-'तद्वार्तान्वेष्रणाय गतः कथं चिरयति वसन्तकः ।' इत्यन्वेषणम्। 'विदूषकः-ही ही भोः, कोसम्बीरज्जल- म्मेणावि ण तारिसो पिअवअस्सस्स परितोसो जारिसो मम सआसादो पियवअणं सुणिभ भविस्सदि।' इत्यादावुद्वेदः । पुनरपि वासवदत्ताप्रत्यभिज्ञानाद् ह्ासः सागरिकाया: सङ्केतस्थानगमनेडन्वेषणम्। पुनर्लतापाशकरणे उद्धेदः । अथ विमर्श :- यत्र मुख्यंफलोपाय उद्ित्रो गर्भतोऽधिक: ॥। ७९॥ शापाहैः सान्तसायश्र सविमर्स इन स्मृतः।

· 'अन्तराम्तरैक" ग. २ 'यथानिर्देशं' ग.

७२ साहित्यदर्पणे

यथा शाकुन्तले चतुर्थाङ्कादौ-'अनसूया-पिअंवदे, जइ वि गन्धव्वेण विवाहेण णिव्वुत्तकल्लाणा पिअसही सउन्तला अणुरूअभत्तुभाइणी संवुत्तेति णिव्वुदं मे हिअगम्' इत्यत आरभ्य सप्तमाङ्कोपक्षिप्ताच्छकुन्तलाप्रत्यभिज्ञानात्प्रागर्थसञ्चयः शकुन्तलाविस्म- रणरूपविभालिङ्गितः । अथ निर्वहणम्- बीजवन्तो मुखाचर्थां विप्रकीर्णा यथायथम्।।८० ।। ऐकार्थ्यसुपनीयन्ते यत्र निर्वहणं हि तद्। (दश० १.४८-४९) यथा वेण्याम् (६.३८ इत्यस्ानन्तरम्)-'कन्नुकी-(उपसृत्य । सहर्षम् ।) महाराज, दिष्टथा वर्धसे। अयं खलु भीमसेनो दुर्योधनक्षतजारुणीकृतसर्वशरीरो दुर्लक्ष्यव्यक्तिः ।' इत्यादिना द्रौपदीकेशसंयमनादिमुखसन्ध्यादिबीजानां निजनिजस्था- नोपक्षिप्तानामेकार्थयोजनम्। यथा वा-शाकुन्तले सप्तमा्के शकुन्तलाभिज्ञानादु- त्तरोऽर्थराशिः। एषामङ्गान्याह- उपक्षेप: परिकरः परिन्यासो विलोभनम् ॥८१॥ युक्ति: प्राप्ति: समाधानं विधानं परिभावना। उन्देद: करणं भेद एतान्यज्वानि वे मुखे ॥८२॥ यथोद्देशं लक्षणमाह- काव्यार्थस्य समुत्पत्तिरुपक्षेप इति स्मृतः । काव्यार्थ इतिवृत्तलक्षणप्रस्तुताभिधेयः । यथा वेण्याम्-'भीमः- 'लाक्षागृद्ानल-विषान्न-सभाप्रवेशैः प्राणेषु वित्तनिचयेषु च नः प्रहृत्। आकृष्य पाण्डववधूपरिधानके शान्स्वस्था भवन्ति मयि जीवति धार्तराष्ट्राः ।।' (वेणी० १.८) समुर्पन्नार्थबाहुल्यं ज्ञेय: परिकर: पुनः॥८३ ।। यथा तत्रेव- 'प्रवृद्धं यद्वैरं मम खलु शिशोरेव कुरुमि- ने तत्रायों हेतुन भवति किरीटी न च युवाम्। जरासन्धस्योरःस्थलमिव विरूढं पुनरपि क्रुधा भीमः सन्धि विधटयति यूयं धटयत।।' (वेणी० १.१०) तब्िष्पत्ति: परिन्यास: यथा तत्रैव-

स्त्यानावनद्धघनशोणित शोणपाणिरुत्तंसयिष्यति कचांस्तव देवि भीमः ।।' (वेणी० १.२१) अन्रोपक्षेपो नामेतिवृत्तलक्षणस्य काव्याभिधेयस्य संक्षेपेणोपक्षेपणमात्रम्। परिकर- स्तस्यैव बहुलीकरणम्। परिन्यासस्ततोऽपि निश्चयापत्तिरूपतया परितो हृदये न्यसनम्।

१ 'हिनअं तह वि पच्िअं चिन्तणिज्जम्' इति नि-पुस्तके २ 'पफार्थमप"' मि-्म ३ 'महाराज वर्घसे' नि-ब .-

६.८४] षष्ठः परिच्छेदः । ५३

इत्येषां मेदः । एतानि चाङ्गानि उक्तेनैव पौर्वापर्येण भवन्ति। अङ्गान्तराणि त्वन्यथापि। गुणाख्यानं विलोभनम्। यथा तत्रव-'दौपदी-णाध, कि दुकरं तए परिकुविदेण।' यथा वा मम चन्द्रकलायां चन्द्रकलावर्णने-'सेयम्, तारुण्यस्य विलास :- इत्यादि । यत्तु शाकुन्तलादिषु (१.७) 'ग्रीवाभङ्गाभिरामं-' इत्यादि मृगादिवर्णनं तह्वीजार्थ- सम्बन्धाभावान्न संध्यङ्गम्। एवमङ्गान्तराणामप्यूह्यम्। संप्रधारणमथानां युक्ति: यथा-वेण्यां सहदेवो भीमं प्रति-'आर्य, कि महाराजसन्देशोऽयमव्युत्पन्न एवार्येण गृहीतः ।' इत्यक्षः प्रभृति यावङ्गीमवचनम्- 'युष्मान्हेपयति क्रोधालोके शत्रुकुलक्षयः । न लब्जयति दाराणां सभायां के शकर्षणम् ।' इति (वेणी० १.१७). प्राप्ति: सुखागम: ॥। ८४। यथा तत्रैव (वेणी. १.१५)-'मभनामि कौरवशतं समरे न कोपात्-' इत्यादि। 'द्रौपदी-(श्रुत्वा । सहर्षम् ।) णाध, अरसुदपुव्वं क्खु एदं वअणम्। ता पुणो युो भण।' बीजस्यागमनं यन्तु तत्समाधानसुच्यते। यथा तत्रैव-(नेपथ्ये।) भो भो विराटद्ुपदप्रभृतयः, श्रयताम्- यत्सत्यव्रतभङ्गनीरुमनसा यलेन मन्दीकृतं यद्विस्मर्तुमपीहितं शमवता शान्ति कुलस्येच्छता। तद्दयुतारणिसम्भृतं नृपसुताके शाम्बराकर्षणैः क्रोधज्योतिरिदं महत्कुरुवने यौधिष्ठिरं जम्भते ॥' (वेणी० १.२४) अन्न 'स्वस्था भवन्ति मयि जीवति-' इत्यादि बीजस्य प्रधाननायकाभिमतत्वेन सम्यगाहितत्वात्समाधानम् । सुखदुःखककृतो योऽर्थस्तद्विधानमिति स्मृतम् ॥ ८५ ॥ यथा बालचरिते- 'उत्साहातिशयं वत्स तव वाल्यं च पश्यतः । मम हर्षविषादाभ्यामाक्रान्तं युगपन्मनः ।।' यथा वा मम प्रभावत्याम्-'नयनयुगासेचनकम्-' इत्यादि। कुतूहलोत्तरा वाच: प्रोक्ता तु परिभावना। यथा-वेण्यां (१.२४ श्रोकादनन्तरं) द्रौपदी युद्धं स्यान्न वेति संशयाना तूर्य- शब्दानन्तरम् 'णाध, किं दाणि एसो पलअजलहरत्थणिदमत्थरो खणे खणे समर- दुन्दुही ताडीअदि।' बीजार्थस्य प्ररोहः स्यादुद्वेदः

१ अयं समग्रोपि श्रोक उदाहृतो ग-पुस्तके. २ 'मृगादिगुणदर्णनं' नि-ब. ३ 'कुतूहलोन्नवा' ग. छ

७४ साहित्यदर्पणे [६.८६

यथा तत्रैव-'द्रौपदी-णाध, पुणो वि तए समासासइदव्वा। भीम :- भूयः परिभवक्कान्तिलज्जाविधुरिताननम्। अनिःशेषितकौरव्यं न पश्यसि वृकोदरम् ।।' (वेणी० १.२६) करेणं पुनः॥। ८६।। प्रकृतार्थसमारम्भ: यथा तत्रव-'देवि, गच्छामो वयमिदानी कुरुकुलक्षयाय।' इति। भेद: संहतभेदनम्। यथा तत्रैव (वेणी0 १.२५ श्रोकस्याधस्तात्)-'अत एवाद्यप्रभृति मिन्नोऽहं भवद्दयः' । केच्वित्तु (दश० १.२९) 'भेदः प्रोत्साहना' इति वदन्ति। अथ प्रतिमुखाङ्गानि- विलास: परिसर्पश्र विर्धुतं तार्पेनं तथा॥८७ ॥ नर्म नर्मद्युतिश्चैव तथा प्रगमनं पुनः। विरोधश्र प्रतिमुखे तथा स्यात्पर्युंपासनम् ॥।८८ ॥। पुष्पं चज्रमुपन्यासो वर्णसंहार इत्यपि। तन्र समीहा रतिभोगार्था विलास इति कथ्यते।। ८९॥ रतिलक्षणस्य भावस्य यो हेतुभूतो भोगो विषयः प्रमदा पुरुषो वा तदर्था समीहा कि्लिास:। यथा शाकुन्तले- 'कामं प्रिया न सुलभा मनस्तु तद्भावदर्शनाश्वासि। अकृतार्थेऽपि मनसिजे रतिमुभयप्रार्थना कुरुते'।l (२.१) दृष्टनैष्टानुसरणं परिसर्पश्र कथ्यते। यथा शाकुन्तले-'राजा-भवितव्यमत्र तया। तथा हि। अभ्युन्नता पुरस्तादवगाढा जघनगौरवात्पश्चास। द्वारेऽस्य पाण्डुसिकते पदपङ्किर्दश्यतेऽरभिनवा ।।' (३.५) कृतस्यानुनयस्यादौ विधुतं त्वपरिग्रहः॥ ९० ॥ यथा तत्रैव (३.१६ इत्यस्मात् प्राक-'अलं वो अन्तेउरविरहपज्रसुएण राएसिणा उवरुद्धेण।' केचित्तु (दश० १.३३) 'विधूतं स्यादरतिः' इति वदन्ति। उपायादर्शनं यत्तु तापेनं नाम तद्वेत्। यथा रल्नावल्याम्-'सागरिका- दुलद्दजणाणुराओ लज्जा गुरुई परअसो अप्पा। पियसहि विसमं पेम्मं मरणं सरणं णवरि एक्कम्।।' (२.१) (दुलेभजनानुरागो लज्जा गु्वी परवश आत्मा। प्रियसखि विषमं प्रेम मरणं शरणं केदलमेकम् ॥)

१ 'परिमवाक्षान्तिलज्जाबन्धुरिता" ब. २ 'कारणं' ब. ३ 'मत्तम् ग. : 'विधृतं' ब. ५'तपनं' ग. ६ "नायासि' नि .• 'इष्टनष्टा" नि. ८ 'विधृतं' ब. ९ 'तपनं' ग.

६.९१] षष्ठः परिच्छेदः ।

परिहासवचो नर्म यथा रलावल्याम्-'सुसङ्गता-सहि, जस्स किदे तुमं आअदा सो अअं दे पुरदो चिट्ठदि। सागरिका-(साभ्यसूयम् ।) कस्स किदे अहं आअदा। सुसङ्गता-अलं अण्णेसंकिदेण। णं चित्तफलअस्स ।' धतिस्तु परिहासजा ॥ ९१ ॥ नर्मद्युतिः यथा तत्रव (२.१७ इत्यस्यानन्तरं) 'सुसङ्गता-सहि, अदक्खिणा दाणि सि तुमं जा एव्वं भट्टिणा हत्थावलम्बिदावि कोवं ण मुन्जसि। सागरिका-( सभ्रू- भङ्गमीषद्विइस्य ।) सुसंगदे, दाणिं वि कीलिदं न विरमसि ।' केचित्त-'दोषस्या- च्छादनं हास्यं नर्मद्युतिः' इति वदन्ति (नाव्य० १९.७३) प्रगमनं वाक्यं स्यादुत्तरोत्तरम्। यथा विक्रमोर्वश्याम्-'उर्वशी-जअदु जअदु महाराओो। राजा-मया नाम जितं यस्य त्वया जय उदीर्यते।' (२.१७) इत्यादि। विरोधो व्यसनप्राप्ति: यथा चण्डकोशिके-'राजा-नूनमसमीक्ष्यकारिणा मया अन्धेनेव स्फुरच्छिखा- कलापो ज्वलनः पन्द्रयां समाक्रान्तः ।' कृतस्यानुनयः पुनः ॥ ९२ ॥ स्यास्पर्युपासनं यथा रलावल्याम्-'विदूषक :- भो, मा कुप्य। मसा हि कदलीघेरं गदा।' इत्यादि। पुष्पं विशेषवचनं मतम्। यथा तत्रैक-'(राजा हस्ते गृहीत्वा स्पर्श नाटयति।) विदूषकः-भो वअस्स, एसा अपुव्वा सिरी तए समासादिदा। राजा-वयस्य, सत्यम्। श्रीरेषा, पाणिरप्यस्याः पारिजातस्य पल्ठवः । कुतोऽन्यथा स्रवत्येष स्वेदच्छद्यामृतद्रवः ॥' (२.१७) प्रत्यक्षनिष्ठुरं वज्रम् यथा तत्रैव (२.४ अस्यानन्तरं)-'राजा-कथमिहस्थोऽहं त्वया ज्ञातः। सुरुङ्गता-ण केव्वलं तुमं समं चित्तफलएण। ता जाव गदुभ देवीए णिवेदइस्सम्।' उपन्यासः प्रसादनम् ॥ ९३॥ यथा तत्रैव-'सुसङ्गता-भट्टा, अळं सङ्काए। मए वि भट्टिणीए पसादेण कीलिदं ज्जेव एदिहिं। ता कि कण्णाभरणेण। अदो वि मे गरुअरो पसादो एसो, जं

१ 'अथि अप्पसंकिदे चित्त" ग. २ 'धुति" नि. ३ 'कीलिदुं' ब; 'इदानी ण विरमसि' ग. ४ 'त्वयायं समुर्दर्यते। नयशब्दः सहस्राक्षादागतः पुरुषान्तरम्' ग.५ 'घरन्तरं गदा' नि-ब. ६ 'पतत्येष' ग.

७६ साहित्यदर्पणे [ ६.९३

तए अहं एत्थ आलिहिदत्ति कुविदा मे पिअसही साअरिआ। एसा ज्जेव पसादी- अदु ।' केचिन्तु-'उपपत्तिकृतो हर्थ उपन्यासः स कीर्सितः ।' इति वदन्ति (नाव्य• १९.७६)। उदाइरन्ति च तत्रव-'अदिमुहरा क्खु सा गब्भदासी' इति। चातुर्षर्ण्योपगमनं वर्णसंहार इष्यते। यथा महावीरचरिते तृतीयेडङ्क- 'परिषदियमृषीणाभेष वीरो युधाजित्सममृषिभिरमात्यैलोंमपादश्च वृद्धः। अयमविरतयशो ब्रह्मवादी पुराण: प्रभुरपि जनकानामद्रुहो याजकास्ते ॥' (३.५) इत्यत्र ऋषिक्षत्रादीनां वर्णानां मेलनम्। अभिनवगुप्तपादास्तु-'वर्णशब्देन पात्राण्युपलक्ष्यन्ते । संहारो मेलनम्' इति व्याचक्षते। उदाहरन्ति च रलावल्यां द्वितीयेडक्के-'अदो वि मे अअं गुरुअरो पसादो-' इत्यादेरारभ्य 'णं हत्थे गेण्हिअ पसादेहि णम्। राजा-कासौ क्वासौ।' इत्यादि। अथ गर्भाङ्गानि- अभूताहरणं मार्गो रूपोदाहरणे क्रमः ।। ९४ ॥ संग्रहश्चानुमानं च प्रार्थना क्षिप्तिरेव च। त्रोटकाधिबलोद्वेगा गर्भे स्युर्विद्रवस्तथा॥९५॥ तत्र व्याजाश्रयं वाक्यमभूताहरणं मतम्। यथा अश्वत्थामाङ्क- 'अश्वत्थामा इत इति पृथासूनुना स्पष्टमुक्त्वा स्वैरं शेषे गेज इति पुनर्व्याहृतं सत्यवाचा। (वेणी० ३.११) तस्वार्थकथनं मार्ग: यथा चण्डकौशिके-'राजा-भगवन्, गृह्यतामरजिंतमिदं भार्यातनयविक्रयात्। शेषस्याथें करिष्यामि चण्डालेऽप्यात्मविक्रयम् ।।' रूपं वाक्यं वित्केवस् ॥ ९६॥ यथा रलावल्याम्-'राजा- मनः प्रकृत्यैव चलं दुर्लक्ष्यं च तथापि मे। कामेनैतत्कथं विद्धं समं सवैंः शिलीमुखैः ॥' (३.२) उदाहरणमुत्कषंयुक्तं वचनमुच्यते। यथा अश्वत्थामाक्के- 'यो यः शखं बिभर्ति स्वभुजगुरुमदः पाण्डवीनां चमूनां, यो यः पाश्जालगोत्रे शिशुरधिकवया गर्भशय्यां गतो वा। यो यस्तत्क्मसाक्षी, चरति मयि रणे यश्च यश्च प्रतीपः क्रोधान्धस्तस्य तस्य स्वयमिह जगतामन्तकस्यान्तकोऽह्म् ॥' (वेणी. ३.३२)

· 'सहनृपतिरमा"' नि.२ "नामङ भो याचकसते' नि. ३ 'गरुओ' ग-ब ४ 'तोटक' इति दशरूपके (१-३७) ५ 'गेते गजः' ग. ६ असात्परं श्रोकार्धे 'तच्छु-वासौ' इत्यादिकं नि-पुस्तके.

षष्ठः परिच्छेद: । ७७

भावतरवोपलब्धिस्तु क्रमः स्यात् यथा शाकुन्तले-'राजा-स्थाने खलु विस्मृतनिमेषेण चक्षुषा प्रियामवली- कयामि। तथाहि। उन्नमितकभ्रलतमाननमस्या: पदानि रचयन्त्याः । पुलकाञ्वितेन कथयति मय्यनुरागं कपोलेन ।I' (३.१२) संग्रहः पुनः ॥९७ ।। सामदानार्थसम्पन्न: यथा रलावल्याम्-'राजा-साधु वयस्य, इदं ते पारितोषिकम् । (इति कटकं ददाति।)'

यथा जानकीराघवे नाटके-'राम :- लीलागतैरपि तरङयतो धरित्रीमालोकनैर्नमयतो जगतां शिरांसि। तस्यानुमापयातति काव्नकान्तिगौरकायस्य सूर्यतनयत्वमधृष्यता च।। रतिहर्षोत्सवानां तु प्रार्थनं प्रार्थना भवेत् ॥ ९८ ॥ यथा रल्नावल्याम्-'प्रिये सागरिके, शीतांशुर्मुखमुत्पले तव दृशौ पद्मानुकारौ करौ रम्भास्तम्भनिभं तथोरुयुगलं बाहू मृणालोपमौ।

मङ्गानि त्वमनङ्गतापविधुराण्येह्येहि निर्वापय ॥' (३.११) इदं च प्रार्थनाख्यमङ्गम् । यन्मते निर्वहणे भूतावसरत्वात्प्रशस्तिनामाङ्गं नास्ति तन्मतानुसारेणोक्तम्। अन्यथा पञ्चषष्टिसंस्यत्वप्रसङ्गात्। रहस्यार्थस्य तूद्ेद: क्षिप्ि: स्यात् यथाश्रत्थामाक्क- 'एकस्यैव विपाकोडयं दारुणो भुवि वर्तते। केशग्रहे द्वितीयेऽस्मिन्नूनं निःशेषिता: प्रजाः ॥' (वेणी० ३.१४) त्रोटकं पुनः। संरब्धषाकू यथा चण्डकौशिके-'कोशिक :- आः, पुनः कथमद्यापि न सम्मतानि दक्षिणास्वर्णानि। अधिबलममिसन्विच्छलेन य:॥९९॥ यथा रत्नावल्याम्-'काञ्जनमाला-भट्टिणि, इयं सा चित्तसालिआ। बसन्त- अस्स सण्णं करोमि।' इत्यादि (भत्रि, इयं सा चित्रशालिका। वसन्तकस्य संज्ञां करोमि।) नृपादिजनिता भीतिरुद्वेग: परिकीर्तितः । यथा वेण्याम्-

१ 'भूतावसरत्वाभावात्' ग. २ 'पशान्तिनामा' ग. ३ 'सम्भूताः स्वर्णदक्षिणाः' नि-ब.

७८ साहित्यदर्पणे [६.१००

'प्राप्तावेकरथारूढौ पृच्छन्तौ त्वामितस्ततः । स कर्णारिः स च क्ूरो वृककर्मा वृकोदरः ॥I' (५.२५) शङ्काभयत्रासकृतः संभ्रमो विद्रवो मतः ॥ १०० ॥ 'कालान्तककरालास्यं क्रोधोडूतं दशाननम् । विलोक्य वानरानीके संभ्रम: कोऽप्यजायत ॥' अथ विमर्शाङ्गानि- अपवादोऽथ सम्फेटो व्यवसायो द्रवो द्युतिः । शक्ति: प्रसङ्ग: खेदृश्र प्रतिषेधो विरोधनम् ॥ १०३॥ प्ररोचना विमशे स्यादादानं छादनं तथा। दोषप्रख्यापवाद: स्यात् चथा वेण्याम्-'युधिष्ठिरः-पाञ्नालक, क्वचिदासादिता तस्य दुरात्मनः कौरव्यापसदस्य पदवी। पाञ्चालक :- न केवलं पदवी, स एव दुरात्मा देवीकेश- पाशस्पर्शपातकप्रधानहेतुरुपलब्धः ।' (६.३ इति श्लोकस्यानन्तरम्) सम्फेटो रोषभाषणम्॥ १०२॥ यथा तत्रैव-'राजा-अरे रे मरुत्तनय, वृद्धस्य राज्ञः पुरतो निन्दितमप्यात्म- कर्म शघसे। शृणु रे, कृष्टा केशेषु भार्या तव तव च पशोस्तस्य राजस्तयोवा प्रत्यक्षं भूपतीनां मम भुवनपतेराजया द्यूतदासी। तस्मिन्वैरानुबन्धे वद किमपकृतं तैर्हता ये नरेन्द्रा बाह्वोवीर्या तिभारद्रविणगुरुमदं मामजित्यैव दर्पः ॥ (वेणी० ५.३०) भीम :- (सक्ोधम् ।) आः पाप । राजा-आः पाप ।' इत्यादि। व्यवसायश्च विज्ञेय: प्रतिज्ञाहेतुसम्भवः । यथा तत्रेव-'भीम :- निहताशेषकौरव्यः क्षीबो दुःशासनासजा। भङ्क्ता दुर्योधनस्योवोर्भीमोडयं शिरसानतः ॥।' (वेणी० ५.२८) द्रवो गुरुव्यतिकरान्तिः शोकावेगादिसम्भवा।१०३॥ यथा तत्रैव-'युधिष्ठिरः-भगवन् कृष्णाग्रज सुभद्राभ्रातः, ज्ञातिप्रीतिर्मनसि न कृता, क्षत्रियाणां न धमों रूढं सख्यं तदपि गणितं नानुजस्यार्जुनेन। तुल्यः कामं भवतु भवतः शिष्ययोः स्नेहबन्धः कोऽयं पन्था यदसि विमुखो मन्दभाग्ये मयि त्वम् ।।' (वेणी० ६.२०) तर्जनोद्वेजने प्रोक्ता द्युतिः यथा तत्रैव दुर्योधनं प्रति भीमेनोक्तन्-

1 'यदपि' ग. २ 'मयीत्थम्' ग.

६.१०४ ] षष्ठः परिच्छेदः ।

'जन्मेन्दोविमले कुले व्यपदिशस्यद्यापि धत्से गदां मां दुःशासनकोष्णशोणितमधुक्षीबं रिपुं मन्यसे। दर्पान्धो मधुकैटभद्विषि इरावप्युद्धतं चेष्टसे त्रासान्मे नृपशो विहाय समरं पङ्केऽधुना लीयसे ॥।' (वेणी० ६.७)

विरोधस्य प्रशमनं शक्ति: पुनर्भवेत्।

यथा तत्रव- 'कुर्वन्त्वाप्ता हतानां रणशिरसि जना वहिसाद्देहभारा- नश्रन्मिश्रं कथंचिद्ददतु जलममी बान्धवा बान्धवेभ्यः । मार्गन्तां ज्ञातिदेहान्हतनरगहने खण्डितान्गृधरकक्कै- रस्तं भास्वान्प्रयातः सह रिपुभिरयं संहियन्तां बलानि ॥'(वेणी० ५.३६) प्रसङ्गो गुरुकीर्तनम् ॥ १०४॥ यथा मृच्छकटिकायाम्-'चाण्डाल :- एसो क्खु सागलदत्तस्स सुओ अज्ज- विण्हुदत्तस्स णत्तिओ चालुदत्तो वावादितुं वज्झट्टाणं णिज्जइ। एदेण किल गणिआ वसन्तसेणा सुअण्णलोहेण वावादिदत्ति। चारुदृत्त :- मखशतपरिपूतं गोत्रमुद्भासितं यत्सदसि निबिडचैत्यब्रह्मघोषैः पुरस्तात्। मम निधनदशायां वर्वमानस्य पापैस्तदसद्शमनुष्यैघुष्यते घोषणायाम्।' (१०.१२) इत्यनेन चारुदत्तवधाभ्युदयानुकूलप्रसङ्गादुरुकीर्तनमिति प्रसङ्गः । मनश्रेष्टासमुत्पन्नः श्रमः खेद इति स्मृतः । मनःसमुत्पन्नो यथा मालतीमाधवे- 'दलति हृदयं गाढोदवेगो, द्विधा न तु भिद्यते वहति विकल: कायो मोहं, न मुञ्चति चेतनाम्। ज्वलयति तनूमन्तर्दाहः, करोति न भस्मसा- त्प्रहरति विधिर्मर्मच्छेदी, न कृन्तति जीवितम् ।।' (९.१२) एवं चेष्टासमुत्पन्नोऽपि। ईप्सितार्थप्रतीघातः प्रतिषेध इतीष्यते॥ १०५॥ यथा मंम प्रभावत्यां विदूषकं प्रति प्रघम्न :- 'सखे, कथमिह त्वमेकाकी वर्तसे। क नु पुनः प्रियसखीजनानुगम्यमाना प्रियतमा मे प्रभावती। विदूषकः-असुर- वइणा आआरिअ कहिं वि णीदा (असुरपतिना आकार्य कुत्रापि नीता)। प्रद्युम्न :- (दीव निश्वस्य । ) हा पूर्णचन्द्रमुखि मत्तचकोरनेत्रे मामानताकि परिहाय कुतो गतासि। गच्छ त्वमद्य ननु जीवित तूर्णमेव दैवं कदर्थनपरं कृतकृत्यमस्तु ।।'

१ 'भाषसे' ग. २ 'नरा मससा" ग. 2 'अज्जविस्सदत्त" नि-ब. ४ "मुद्धाषितं' ग-ब. ५ 'गाढोत्कण्ट' ग.

साहित्यदर्पणे [ ६.१०६

कार्यात्ययोपगमनं विरोधनमिति स्मृतम्। यथा वेण्याम्-'युविष्ठिर :- तीणे भीष्ममहोदधौ, कथमपि द्रोणानले निर्वृते कर्णाशीविषभोगिनि प्रशमिते, शल्ये च याते दिवम्। भीमेन प्रियसाइसेन रभसादल्पावशेषे जये सवें जीवितसंशयं वयममी वाचा समारोपिताः ॥' (६.१) परोचना तु विज्ञेया संहारार्थप्रदर्शिनी॥ १०६॥ यथा वेण्याम्-'पाञ्चालकः-हं देवेन चक्रपाणिना । (इत्युपक्रम्य।) कृतं सन्देहेन। पूर्यन्तां सलिलेन रलकलश्ञा राज्याभिषेकाय ते, कृष्णात्यन्तचिरोज्झिते तु कबरीबन्धे करोतु क्षणम्। रामे शातकुठारभास्वरकरे क्षत्रद्ुमोच्छेदिनि, क्रोधान्धे च वृकोदरे परिपतत्याजौ कुतः संशयः ॥' (वेणी० ६.१२) कार्यसंग्रह आदानं यथा वेण्याम्-'भो भोः समन्तपन्नकसश्चारिणः, नाहं रक्षो, न भूतो, रिपुरुधिरजलाह्ादिताङ्ग: प्रकाम निस्तीर्णोरुप्रतिज्ञाजलनिधिगहनः क्रोधनः क्षत्रियोऽस्म। भो मो राजन्यवीराः समरशिखिशिखाभुक्तशेषाः, कृतं व- स्त्रासेनानेन, कीनैदतकरितुरगान्तहितैरास्यते यत् ।।'(६.३७) अत्र समस्तरिपुवधकार्यस्य संगृहीतत्वादादानम्। तदाहुश्छादनं पुनः। कार्यार्थमपमानादे: सहनं खल यद्दवेद्।१०७ ॥। यथा तत्रैव-'अर्जुन :- आर्य, अप्रियाणि करोत्येष वाचा शक्तो न कर्मणा। हतभ्रातृशतो दुःखी प्रलापरस्य का व्यथा।' (वेणी० ५.३१) अथ निर्वहणाङ्गानि- सन्धिर्विबोधो अ्रथनं निर्णयः परिभाषणम्। कृतिः प्रसाद आानन्दः समयोऽप्युपगूहनम्॥ १०८ ॥ भाषणं पूर्ववाक्यं च काव्यसंहार एव च। प्रशस्तिरिति संहारे ज्ञेयान्यङ्गानि नामतः ॥।१०९॥

तत्र बीजोपगमनं सन्धिर यथा वेण्याम् (६-४१ इत्यस्मादनन्तरं)-'भीमः-भवति यश्ञवेदिसम्भवे,

१" पाणिना सहितः' नि-व. २ 'करोत्वेष' नि-ब.

६.११० ] षष्ठः परिच्छेद: । ८१

स्मरति भवती यन्मयोक्तम्-'च्र्ुज-' (१.२१) इत्यादि । अनेन मुखे क्षिप्त- बीजस्य पुनरुपगमनमिति सन्धिः । विबोध: कार्यमार्गणम्। यथा तत्रव (६.४० इत्यस्यानन्तरं)-'भीमः-मुन्जतु मामार्यः क्षणमेकम्। युधिष्ठिरः-किमपरमवशिष्टम्। भीमः-सुमहदवशिष्टम्। संयमयामि तावदनेन सुयोधेनशोणितोक्षितेन पाणिना पाञ्चाल्या दुःशासनावकृष्टं केशहस्तम्। युविष्ठिरः- गच्छतु भवान्, अनुभवतु तपस्विनी वेणीसंहारम्।' इति। अनेन केशसंयमनकार्य- स्यान्वेषणाद्विबोधः । उपम्यासस्तु कार्याणं अ्रथनं यथा तत्रैव-'भीमः-पाञ्नालि, न खलु मयि जीवति संहर्वव्या दुःशासन- विलुलिता वेणिरात्मपाणिभ्याम्। तिष्ठ, स्वयमेवाहं संहरामि।' इति। अनेन कार्य- स्योपक्षेपाङ्र्रथनम्। निर्णयः पुनः॥ ११० ॥ अनुभूतार्थकथनं यथा तत्रैव-'भीमः-देव अजातशत्रो, अद्यापि दुर्योधनहृतकः। मया हि तस्य दुरात्मनः । भूमौ क्षिप्तं शरीरं, निहितमिदमसृक्चन्दनाभं निजाङ्गे, लक्ष्मीराये निषिक्ता चतुरुदधिपयःसीमया सार्धमुर्व्या। भृत्या मित्राणि योधा: कुरुकुलमनुजा दग्धमेतद्रणानौ, नामैकं यद्गवीषि क्षितिप तदधुना धार्तराष्ट्रस्य शेषम् ।।' (वेणी० ६.३९) वदन्ति परिभाषणम्। परिवादकृतं वाक्यं यथा शाकुन्तळे (७.२० इत्यस्मादनन्तरं)-'राजा-आ्ये, अथ सा तत्रभवती किमाख्यस्य राजर्षे: पलनी। तापसी-को तस्स धम्मदारपरिच्चाइणो णामं गेण्हि- ससदि।' (कस्तस्व धर्मदारपरित्यागिनो नाम ग्रहीष्यति।) लब्धार्थशमनं कृतिः॥।१११ ॥ यथा वेण्याम्-'कृष्णः-एते भगवन्तो व्यासवाल्मीकीत्यादिना अभिषेकं धार- यन्तस्तिष्ठन्तीत्यनेन (६.४४) प्राप्तराज्याभिषेकमङ्गलैः स्थिरीकरणं कृतिः । छुश्रूषादि: प्रसाद: स्याद् यथा तत्रैव मीमेन द्रौपद्याः केशसंयमनम्। आनन्दो वाञ्छितागम: । यथा तत्रव-'द्रौपदी-विसुमरिदं एदं वावारं णाहस्स पसादेण पुणो बि सिक्खिस्सम्।' (विस्मृतमेतं व्यापारं नाथस्य प्रसादेन पुनरपि शिक्षिष्ये।)

·'दुम्शासनयो" ग. २ 'निषक्ता' ग. ३ "वाल्मीकिशभृतयोऽभिषेकं धारयन्तस्ति- षन्तीतनेन' नि-व.

८२ साहित्यदर्पणे [६.११२

समयो दुःखनिर्याणं यथा रलावल्याम्-'वासवदत्ता-(रत्नावलीमालिङ्गय ।) समस्सस बहिणीए, समस्सस।' तद्दवेदुपगूहनस् ॥११२॥ यत्स्यादद्भुत संप्रापि: यथा मम प्रभावत्यां नारददर्शनात्प्रद्युम्न ऊर्ध्वभवलोक्य- 'दधद्विद्युल्लेखामिव कुसुममालां परिमळ- भ्रमद्भङ्गश्रेणीध्वनिभिरुपगीतां तत इतः । दिगन्तं ज्योतिर्भिस्तुहिनकरगौरैर्धवलय- न्नितः कैलासाद्रि: पतति वियतः किं पुनरिदम् ॥' सामदानादि भाषणम्। यथा चण्डकौशिके-'धर्मः-तदेहि। धर्मलोकमधितिष्ठ।' पूर्ववाक्यं तु विज्ञेयं यथोक्तार्थोपदर्शनम्॥ ११३॥ यथा वेण्याम्-'भीमः-बुद्धिमतिके, क सा भानुमती। परिभवरतु संप्रति पाण्डवदारान्।' (६.४१ इत्यस्यानन्तरम्) वरप्रदानसंप्राप्ति: काव्यसंहार इष्यते। यथा सर्वत्र-'किं ते भूयः प्रियमुपकरोमि।' इति। नृपदेशादिशान्तिस्तु प्रशस्तिरभिधीयते॥ ११४॥ यथा प्रभावत्याम्- 'राजानः सुतनिर्विशेषमधुना पश्यन्तु नित्यं प्रजा जीयासुः सदसद्विवेकपटवः सन्तो गुणग्राहिणः । सस्यस्वर्णसमृद्धयः समधिकाः सन्तु क्षमामण्डले भूयादव्यभिचारिणी त्रिजगतो भक्तिश्च नारायणे ॥।' अत्र चोपसंहारप्रशस्त्योरन्त एकेन क्रमेणैव स्थितिः । 'इह च मुखसन्धौ उपक्षेप- परिकरपरिन्यासयुक्त्युद्वेदसमाधानानां, प्रतिमुखे च परिसर्पणप्रगमनवज्रोपन्यास-

4 चनादानानां प्राधान्यम्। अन्येषां च यथासम्भवं स्थितिः ।' इति केचित्। चतुःषष्टिविधं ह्येतदङ्गं प्रोक्तं मनीषिभिः। कुर्यादनियते तस्य सन्धावपि निवेशनम्॥११५ ॥ रसानुगुणतां वीक्ष्य रसस्यैव हि मुख्यता। यथा वेणीसंदारे तृतीयाक्के दुर्योधनकर्णयोर्भहत्संप्रधारणम्। एवमन्यदपि। यत्त रुद्रटादिभि: 'नियम एव' इत्युक्तं तल्क्ष्यविरुद्धम्।

१ 'गौरैः शवलयन्' ग. २ 'पाण्डवान्' ग. ६ 'सम्यकूसस्य' ग. ४ 'बलाक्षेपाणां' ग; त्रोटकावक्षेपाणां' ब. ५इद धनिकमतं दशरूपकव्यास्याने ( १.२९, ३५, १२, १०) दृश्यते.

६.११६] षष्ठः परिच्छेदः । ८३

इष्टार्थरचनाश्चर्यलाभो वृत्तान्तविस्तरः ॥ ११६ ॥ रागप्राप्तिः प्रयोगस्य गोप्यानां गोपनं तथा। प्रकाशनं प्रकाश्यानामङ्गानां षड़डिधं फलम् ॥ ११७ ।। अङ्गहीनो नरो यद्वभैवारम्भक्षमो भवेद्। अङ्गहीनं तथा काव्यं न प्रयोगाय युज्यते ।। ११८ ॥ सम्पादयेतां संध्यङ्गं नायकप्रतिनायका। तदभावे पताकाद्यास्तदृभावे तथेतरत्॥ ११९ ॥ प्रायेण प्रधानपुरुषप्रयोज्यानि संध्यद्गानि भवन्ति। कि तूपक्षेपादङ्त्रेयं बीजस्या- ्पमात्रसमुद्दिष्टत्वादप्रधानपुरुषप्रयोजितमेव साधु। रसव्यक्तिमपेक्ष्यैषामङ्गानां संनिवेशनम्। न तु केवलया शास्त्रस्थितिसम्पादनेच्छया॥ १२० ॥ तथा च यद्वेण्यां दुर्योधनस्य भानुमत्या सह विप्रलम्भो दर्शितः, तत्तादृशेऽव- सरेऽत्यन्तमनुचितम्। अविरुद्धं तु यद्त्तं रसादिव्यक्तयेऽधिकम्। तदप्यन्यथयेद्धीमान्न वदेद्ा कदाचम ।। १२१ ॥ अनयोरुदाहरणं सत्प्रबन्धेष्वभिव्यक्तमेव। अथ वृत्तय :- शृङ्गारे कैशिकी, वीरे सात्त्वत्यारभटी पुनः। रसे रौद्रे च बीभत्से, वृत्तिः सर्वत्र भारती ॥ १२२ ॥ चतस्रो वृत्तयो होता: सर्वनाव्यस्य मातृकाः । स्युर्नायकादिव्यापारविशेषा नाटकादिषु ॥ १२३ ॥ तत्र कैशिकी- या शर्क्षणनेपथ्यविशेषचित्रा स्त्रीसक्कुला पुष्कलनृत्यगीता। कामोपभोगप्रभवोपेचारा सा कैशिकी चारुविलासयुक्ता ।। १२४ ॥। (नाट्य० २०. ४७) नर्म च नर्मस्फूर्जो नर्मस्फोटोऽथ नर्मगर्भश्र। चत्वार्यङ्गान्यस्या तत्र वैदग्ध्यकरीडितं नर्म ॥। १२५ ॥ इष्टजनावर्जनकृत्तच्वापि त्रिविधं मतम्। विहितं शुद्धहास्येन सशुङ्गारभयेन च॥ १२६॥

१ 'किं तु प्रक्षेपादि" नि. २ "दिन्रयं' नि-ब. ३ दृश्यतां' रसादिव्यअ्जकत्वे प्रबन्धस्य चेद- मन्यन्मुख्यं निबन्धनं यत्सन्धीनां मुखप्रतिमुखगर्मावमर्शनिर्वहणाख्यानां तदङ्वानां चोपक्षेपादीनां घटनं रसाभिव्यवत्यपेक्षया, यथा रक्षावल्याम्। न तु केवलं शास्त्रत्थितिसम्पादनेच्छया। यथा ्ेणीसंहारे विलासाख्यस्य प्रतिमुखसन्ध्यङ्गस्य प्रकृतरसनि ब्न्धाननुगुणमपि द्वितीयेक्के भरतमतानु- सरणमात्रेच्छया घटनम्' (६्व० ३.१४). ४ 'सूक्ष्मनेपथ्यविधानचित्रा' ग. ५ 'प्रचुरोपचारा' ग.

८४ साहित्यदर्पणे [६.१२६

तत्र केवलहास्येन विहितं यथा रलावल्याम्-'वासवदत्ता-फळकमुद्दिश्य। सहासम् ।) एसा वि अवरा तव समीवे जं लिहिदा एदं कि अब्जवसन्तस्स विण्णा- णम्।' (एषापि अपरा तव समीपे या लिखिता एतत् किमार्यवसन्तस्य विज्ञानम्)। सशद्गारहास्येन यथा शाकुन्तले-राजानं प्रति 'शकुन्तला-असंतुट्ठो उण कि करिस्ससि। राजा-इदम्। (इति व्यवसितः । शकुन्तला वक्रं ढोकते)'। सभय- हास्येन यथा रलावल्याम्-आलेख्यदर्शनावसरे 'सुसङ्गता-जाणिदो मए एसो वुत्तन्तो समं चित्तफलएण। ता देवीए गदुअ निवेदइस्सम्।' (ज्ञातो मयेष वृत्तान्तः समं चित्रफलकेन। तत् देव्य गत्वा निवेदयिष्यामि)। एतद्वाक्यसम्बन्वि नमोदाहृतम्। एवं वेषचेष्टासम्बन्ध्यपि। नर्मस्फूर्ज: सुखारम्भो भयान्तो नवसङ्गमः । यथा मालविकायाम्-सङ्केतनायकमभिसटतायां नायिकायां 'नायक :- विसृज सुन्दरि सङ्गमसाध्वसं ननु चिरात्प्रभृति प्रणयोन्मुखे। परिगृद्दाण गते सहकारतां त्वमतिमुक्तलताचरितं मयि॥ (४.१३) मालविका-भट्टा, देवीए भएण अप्पणो वि पिअं काउं ण पारेमि।' इत्यादि (भर्तः, देव्या भयेन आत्मनोपि प्रियं कतुं न पारयामि)। अथ नर्मस्फोट :- नर्मस्फोटो भावलेशः सूचिताल्परसो मतः ॥१२७ ॥ यथा मालतीमाधवे- 'गमनमलसं शून्या दृष्टिः शरीरमसौष्ठवं श्वसितमधिकं कि न्वेतत्स्यात्किमन्यदितोऽथवा। भ्रमति भुवने कन्दर्पाज्ञा विकारि च यौवनं ललितमधुरास्ते ते भावाः क्षिपन्ति च धीरताम् ॥' (१.२०) अलसगमनादिभिर्भावलेशैर्माधवस्य मालत्यामनुरागः स्तोक: प्रकाशितः । नर्मगर्भो व्यवहृतिर्नेतुः प्रच्छन्नवर्तिनः। • यथा तत्रव सखीरूपधारिणा माधवेन मालत्या मरणव्यवसायवारणम्। अथ सात्वती- सात्वती बहुला सत्त्वशौर्यत्योगदयार्जवैः ॥१२८॥ सहषां क्षुद्रशङ्गारा विशोका साद्भुता तथा। उत्थापकोऽथ साङ्गार्त्यः संलाप: परिवर्तक: । १२९ ॥। विशेषा इति चत्वारः सात्त्वत्याः परिकीर्तिताः। उत्तेजनकरी शत्रोर्वागुत्थापक उच्यते ॥ १३० ॥ यथा वीरचरिते- आनन्दाय च विस्मयाय च मया दृष्टोऽसि दुःखाय वा वैतृष्ण्यं तु कुतोध संप्रति मम त्वदर्शने चक्षुषः ।

,'नायिकायां' इति नासि्ति नि-ब .- पुस्तकयोः २ 'त्रास' ग. ३ 'साङ्भता मता' ग. ४ 'संहात्य:' ग-ब. ५ 'महावीर" नि.

-६.१३१] षष्ठः परिच्छेद: । ८५

यन्माङ्गल्यसुखस्य नास्मि विषयः किं वा बडुव्याहतै- रस्मिन्विस्मृतजामदभ्यविजये बाहा धनुर्जम्भताम्।' (५.४९) मत्रार्थदेवशक्यादे: साङ्वातय: सङ्मेदनम्। मत्रशत्त्या यथा मुद्राराक्षसे राक्षससद्दायानां चाणक्येन स्वबुच्या भेदनम्। अर्थशत्त्यापि तत्रैव। दैवशक्त्या यथा रामायणे रावणाद्विमीषणस्य भेद: । यथा वीरचरिते-'राम :- अयं स यः किल सपरिवारकार्तिकेयविजयावर्जितेन भगवता नीललोहितेन परिवत्सरसहस्रान्तेवासिने तुभ्यं प्रसादीकृतः परशुः । परशुराम :- आम दाशरथे, स एवायमार्यपादानां प्रियः परशुः ।'इत्यादि।

यथा वेण्याम् (प्रथमेङ्के)-'भीम :- सहदेव, गच्छ त्वं गुरुमनुवर्तस्व। अह- मध्यस्त्रागारं प्रविश्यायुधसहायो भवामीति यावत्। अथवा आमब्रयितव्यैव मया पाञ्चाली।' इति। अथारभटी- प्रारब्धादन्यकार्याणां कारणं परिवर्तक: ।

संयुक्ता वघबन्धाद्यैरुद्धतारभटी मता। वस्तूत्थापनसम्फे टौ संक्षितिरवपातनम् ।। १३३ ॥ इति भेदास्तु चत्वार आरभव्या: प्रकीर्तिताः । मायाद्युत्थापितं वस्तु वस्तूत्थापनमुच्यते ।। १३४ ॥ यथोदात्तराघवे- 'जीयन्ते जयिनो निशान्ततिमिरज्रातैवियद्यापिभि- र्भासवन्तः सकला रवेरपि करा: कस्मादकस्मादमी। एते चोग्रकबन्धकण्ठरुधिरैराध्मायमानोदरा

सम्फेटस्तु समाघातः कुद्धसत्वरयोई्वयो:। यथा मालत्यां माधवाघोरघण्टयोः । संक्षिप्ता वस्तुरचना शिल्पैरितरथापि वा ॥ १३५ ॥। संक्षिप्तिः स्यान्निवृत्तौ च नेतुर्नेत्रन्तरग्रहः। यथोदयनचरिते कलिङ्गहैस्तिप्रयोगः । द्वितीयं यथा वालिनिवृत्त्या सुगीवः। यथा वा परशुरामस्यौद्धत्यनिवृत्त्या शान्तत्वापादानम्-'पुण्या ब्राह्मणजातिः-' इति। प्रचेशत्रास निष्क्रान्तिहषंविद्रवसम्भवम् ॥ १३६॥ अवपातनमित्युक्तं

'नास्य' ग-ब. २ 'संहात्य'' ग-ब. ३ 'सहमेदनम्' ग. ४"समाश्रया' नि. ५ 'जयिनोवि सान्द्रतिमिर" नि. ६ 'एताश्चोग्र" ग. 'कलिज्जहस्ति' नि; 'किलिज्ज' ब. ज

८६ साहित्यदर्पणे [६.१३७

यथा कृत्यारावणे षष्ठेडक्े-'प्रविश््य खङ्गहस्तः पुरुषः ॥)' इत्यतः प्रभृति निष्क्र- मणपर्यन्तम्। पूर्वमुक्तव भारती। अथ नाय्योक्तय :- अश्राव्यं खलु यद्दस्तु तदिह स्वगतं मतम् ॥१३७ ।। सर्वश्राव्यं प्रकाशं स्वात्तन्रवेदपवारितम्। रहस्यं तु यदन्यस्य परावृत्य प्रकाश्यते ॥ १३८ ॥ त्रिपताककरेणान्यानपवार्यान्तरा कथाम्। अन्योन्यामन्नणं यरस्तात्तजनान्ते जनान्तिकम् ॥। १३९॥ कि ब्रवीपीति यब्नाव्ये विना पात्रं प्रयुज्यते। श्रुत्वेवानुक्तमप्यर्थ तत्सयादाकाशभाषितम् ॥१४० ॥ यः कश्चिदथों यस्माद्वोपनीयस्तस्यान्तरत ऊर्ध्वाङ्गुलिनतानामिकं त्रिपताकलक्षणं करं कृत्वान्येन सह यन्मन्न्यते तज्जनान्तिकम् । परावृत्यान्यस्य रहस्यकथनमपवारितम्। शेषं स्पष्टम्। दत्तां सिद्धां च सेनां च वेश्यानां नाम दर्शयेद। दृत्तप्रायाणि वणिजां चेटचेट्योसथा पुनः॥।१४१॥ वसन्तादिषु वर्ण्यस्य वस्तुनो नाम यद्नवेत्। वेश्या यथा वसन्तसेनादिः। वणिग्विष्णुदत्तादिः । चेटः कलहंसादि:। चेटी मन्दारिकादिः । नाम कार्य नाटकस्य गर्भितार्थप्रकाशकम्॥१४२॥ यथा रामाभ्युदयादि: । नायिकानायकाख्यानात्संज्ञा प्रकरणादिषु। यथा मालतीमाधवादि: । नाटिकासटकादीनां नायिकाभिविशेषणम् ।१४३॥। यथा रलावली-कर्पूरमअ्जर्यादिः । प्रायेण ण्यन्तक: साधिर्गमे: स्थाने प्रयुज्यते। यथा शाकुन्तले (प्रथमेक्के)-ऋषी 'गच्छावः' इत्यर्थे 'साधयावस्तावत्' राजा स्वामीति देवेति भृत्यैर्भैट्टेति चाघमैः ॥१४४॥ राजर्षिभिर्वयस्येति तथा विदूषकेण च। राजन्नित्युषिभिर्वाच्यः सोऽपत्यप्रत्ययेन च ॥ १४५॥ स्वेच्छया नामभिर्विप्रर्विप्र भार्येति चेतरैः। वयस्येत्यथवा नाम्ना वाच्यो राज्ञा विदूषकः ॥१४६ ॥। वाच्यौ नटीसूत्रधारावार्यनाम्ना परस्परम्।

१ 'कृत्यरावणे' नि; 'कृत्यावारणे' ग. २ (२९) कारिकायाम्. ३ "मान्यमप"' ग. ४ 'श्रुत्वैवा" नि. ५ 'ऊर्ध्वसवांङ्गुलिनामितानामिक' नि; 'उर्ध्वाङ्कलिनतानामिकं' ब. ६ पताक- त्रिपनाक-लक्षण नाव्यशासे (९.१७,२६) द्रष्टव्यम्.

६.१४७ ] षष्ठः परिच्छेदः । ८७

सूत्रधारं वदेद्दाव इति वै पारिपार्धिकः ॥ १४७॥ वं सूंत्रधारो मार्षेति हण्डे इत्यधमः समाः। वयस्येत्युत्तमैहैहो मध्यैरार्येति चाग्रज: ॥ १४८ ॥ भगवन्निति वक्तव्याः सवैदेवपिलिङ्गिनः। वदेद्ाज्ञीं च चेटीं च भवतीति विदूषकः ॥ १४९ ॥ आयुष्मन्रथिनं सूतो वृद्धं तातेति चेतरः। वत्सपुत्रकेजातेति नान्ना गोत्रेण वा सुतः ॥ १५० ॥ सिष्योऽनुजश्च वक्तव्योऽमात्य आर्येति चाघमैः। चित्रैरयममात्येति सचिवेति च भण्यते ॥ १५१ ॥ साधो इति तपस्वी च प्रशान्तश्रोच्यते बुघैः। सुगृहीतामिघ: पूज्य: शिष्यादैर्विनिगद्यते॥ १५२॥ उपाध्यायेति चाचार्यो महाराजेति भूपतिः। स्वामीति, युवराजस्तु कुमारो भर्तृदारकः ॥। १५३ ॥

वाच्या प्रकृतिभी राज्ञः कुमारी भर्तृदारिका ॥ १५४॥ पतिर्यथा तथा वाच्या ज्येष्ठमध्याधमैः स्तिरयः। हलेति सदशी, प्रेष्या हअे, वेश्याज्ुका तथा.॥ १५५ ॥ कुट्टिन्यम्बेतनुगतैः पूज्या च जरती जनैः। आमन्रणैश्च पाषण्डा वाच्या: खवसमयागतैः ॥१५६॥ शकाद्यश्र संभाष्या भद्रदत्तादिनामभि:। यस्य यत्कर्म शिल्पं वा विद्या वा जातिरेव वा॥ १५७॥ तेनव नान्ना वाच्योऽसौ ज्ञेयाश्रान्ये यथोचितम्। अथ भाषाविभाग :- पुरुषाणामनीचानां संस्कृतं संस्कृतात्मेनाम्।। १५८ ॥ सौरसेनी प्रयोक्तव्या तादशीनां च योषिताम्। आसामेव तु गाथासु महाराष्ट्रीं प्रयोजयेत् ॥। ६५९ ॥ अत्रोक्ता मागधी भाषा राजान्तःपुरचारिणाम्। चेटानां राजपुत्राणां श्ष्ठिनां चार्धमागघी॥ १६० ॥ प्राच्या विदूषकादीनां, धूर्तानां स्यादवन्तिँजा। योधनागरिकादीनां दाक्षिणात्या हि दीव्यताम्॥ १६१ ॥ शर्काराणां शकादीनां शाकोरी संप्रयोजयेव्। बाल्हीकभाषोदीच्यानां द्राविडी द्रविडादिषु ॥ १६२॥ आभीरेषु तथाभीरी चाण्डाली पुक्कसादिषु।

''सूत्रधारो मारिषेति' नि-ब; 'तं' इति रामचरणसंमतः पाठः. २ "पुत्रकतातेति' नि-ब. ३ 'सगृहीतामिधः' निः 'अगृहीता" ब. १ 'भद्रसौम्यमु" नि. ५ 'संस्कृतं स्यात्कृतानि. 'श्रेष्ठानां' नि. ""वन्तिका' ग .- ब. ८ 'शबराणां' नि. ९ 'शाबरी' नि.

८८ साहित्यदर्पणे [६.१६३

आमीरी शाबरी चापि काछ्ठपंत्रोपजीविधु-। १६३।। तथैवाङ्गारकारादौ पैशाची स्यात्पिशाचवाक्। चेटीनामप्यनीचानामपि स्यात्सौरसेनिका ॥ १६४ ॥ बालानां षण्डकानां च नीचग्रहविचारिणाम्। उन्मत्तानामातुराणां सैव स्वात्संस्कृतं क्चित्॥। १६५ ।। ऐश्वर्थेण प्रमत्तस्य दारिद्योपहृतस्य च। मिक्षुवल्कधरादीनां प्राकृतं संप्रयोजयेत् ॥ १६६ ॥ संस्कृतं संप्रयोक्तव्यं लिङ्विनीघूत्तमासु च। देवीमध्रिसुतावेश्यास्पि कैश्ञित्तथोदितम् ॥१६७ ॥ यद्देशं नीचपात्रं तु तद्देशं तसय भाषितम्। कार्यतश्रोत्तमादीनां कार्यो भाषाविपर्यय: ॥।१६८॥। योषित्सखीबालचेश्या कितवाप्सरसां तथा। वैदग्ध्यार्थ प्रदातव्यं संस्कृतं चौन्तरान्तरा ॥। १६९ ।। एषामुदाहरणान्याकरेषु बोद्धव्यानि। भाषालक्षणानि मम तातपादानां भाषाणवे। पदन्रिंशलक्षणान्यत्र, नाव्यालडृतयसथा। त्रयखिशत्प्रयोज्यानि वीष्यक्ञानि त्रयोदश ॥ १७० ॥ लासान्गानि दश यथालाभं रसव्यपेक्षया। यथालाभं प्रयोज्यानीति सम्बन्धः । अत्र नाटके। तत्र लक्षणानि- भूषणाक्षरसङ्वाता शोभोदाहरणं तथा॥। १७१ ॥ हेतुसंशयदष्टान्तास्तुस्यतर्कः पदोच्चयः । निदर्शनाभिप्रायो च प्राप्तिर्विचार एव च ।। १७२ ॥ दिष्टोपदिष्टे च गुणातिपातातिशयौ तथा। विशेषणनिरुक्ती च सिद्धिरअंशविपर्यया॥ १७३ ॥। दाक्षिण्यानुनयौ मालोर्थापत्तिर्गर्हणं तथा। पृच्छा प्रसिद्धि: सारूप्यं संक्षेपो गुणकीर्तनम्।।१७४॥ लेशो मनोरथोऽनुक्तसिद्धि: प्रियवचस्तथा। तत्र- लक्षणानि गुणैः सालक्करैरयोगस्तु भूषणम्॥। १७५ ।। यथा- 'आक्षिपन्त्यरविन्दानि मुग्धे तव मुखश्रियम्। कोषदण्डसमग्राणां किर्मेषामस्ति दुष्करम् ।।' वर्णनाक्षरसङ्गातश्चित्राथेरक्षरैमितैः । यथा शाकुन्तले-'राजा-कच्ित्सखीं वो नातिबाधते शरीरसन्तापः ।

१ 'काछ्ठपात्रो" नि. २ 'चेटाना" म. १ 'च तथान्तरा' ग. ५ 'मानार्था" म. ६ 'ग्रहण' ग. ४ 'भाषामहार्णवे' ग.

६.१७६] षठ्ठः परिच्छेद:।

प्रियंवदा-संपद लड्ोसहो उअसम गमिस्सदि।' (सांप्रतं लब्ौषध उपशमं & गमिष्यति) सिद्धैरयेः समं यत्राप्रसिद्धोऽर्थः प्रकाशते ।। १०६॥। छिष्टलूक्षणचित्रार्था सा शोमेलमिषीयते। यथा- 'सद्वंशसम्भवः शुद्धः कोटिदोऽपि गुणान्वितः ।. कामं धनुरिव करो वर्जनीयः सतां प्रसुः ॥' यत्र तुल्याथयुक्केन वाक्येनाभिप्रदर्शनात्।।१७७ ॥ साध्यतेऽभिमतः सवार्थसतदुदाहरणं मतम्। थथा- 'अनुयान्त्या जनातीतं कान्तं साधु त्वया कृतम् । का दिनश्रीविनार्केण का निशा शशिना विना॥' हेतुर्वाक्यं समासोक्तमिष्टकृद्धेतुदर्शनात् । १७८ ॥ यथा वेण्यां (प्रथमेड्ड) भीमं प्रति 'चेटी-एवं मए भणिदं भाणुमदि, तुझ्याणं अमुक्केसु केसेसु कहं देवीए केसा संजमिअन्तित्ति।' (एवं मया भणितं भानुमति, युष्माकममु्तेषु केशेषु कथं देव्याः केशाः संयम्यन्त इति) संशयोऽज्ञाततत्त्वस्य वाक्ये स्यायदुनिश्रयः। यथा ययातिविजये- 'इयं स्वर्गाधिनाथस्य लक्ष्मीः, किं यक्षकन्यका। किं चास्य विषयस्यैव देवता, किमु पार्वती।' दष्टान्तो यस्तु पक्षार्थसाघनाय निदर्शंनम्॥१७९ ॥ यथा वेण्याम् (प्रथमेङ्गे)-'सहदेव :- आर्य, उचितमेवैतत्तस्या यतो दुर्योधन- कलत्रं हि सा' इत्यादि। तुल्यतर्कों यर्द्र्थेन तर्कः प्रक्कतिगामिना। यथा तत्रेव- 'प्रायेणैव हि दृश्यन्ते कामं स्वप्नाः शुभाशुभाः । शतसंख्या पुनरियं सानुजं स्पृशवीव माम् ।।' (वेणी० २.१४) सन्जयोऽर्थानुरूपो यः पदानां स पदोच्चय: ॥ १८० ॥ यथा शाकुन्तले- 'अधरः किसलैयरागः कोमलविटपानुकारिणौ बाहू। कुसुममिव लोभनीयं यौवनमङ्गेषु संनद्धम् ।I' (१-१८) अत्र पदपदार्थयोः सौकुमार्य सदृशमेव। यत्रार्थानां प्रसिद्धानां क्रियते परिकीर्तनम्।

1"मतश्चार्थ" नि-ब. २ 'यमर्थेन' ग. ३ 'पल्लवरागः' ग.

९० साहिलदर्पणे :

परपक्षव्युदासार्थ तब्निदर्शनमुन्यते ॥ १८।॥ यथा- 'क्षात्रवर्मोन्वितैर्पमैरलं शञ्ुवधे नृपाः। किं तु वालिनि रामेण मुक्तो बाण: पराजुखे।।' अभिप्रायस्तु साहश्यादभूतार्थस्य कल्पना। यथा शाकुन्तले- 'इदं किलाव्याजमनोहरं वपुस्तपःक्षमं साधयितुं य इच्छति। धुवं स नीलोत्पलपत्रधारया समिल्तां छेत्तुमृबिर्व्यवस्पति ।' (१.१६) प्राप्ति: केनचिदंशेन किञ्िचन्रानुमीयते ।१८२ ॥ यथा मम प्रभावत्याम्-'भनेन खलु सर्वतश्चरता चञ्चरीकेणावश्यं वििता भविष्यति प्रियतमा मे प्रभावती।' विचारो युक्तिवाक्यैरयेदप्रत्यक्षार्थसाधनम्। यथा मम चन्द्रकलायाम्-'राजा-नूनमियमन्तःपिहितमदनविकारा वर्वते। यत: । हसति परितोषरहितं निरीक्ष्यमाणापि नेक्षते किश्रित्। सख्यामुदाहरन्त्ामसमअससुत्तरं दचे॥' देशकालस्वरूपेण वर्णना दिष्टमुच्यते ॥१८३॥ यथा वेण्याम्-'सहदेव :- यद्वैद्युतमिव ज्योतिरायें क्रुद्धेडब सम्मृतम्। तत्प्रावृडिव कृष्णेयं नूनं संवर्धयिष्यति ।।' (१.१४) उपदिष्टं मनोहारि वाक्यं शाखानुसारतः । यथा शाकुन्तले- 'शुश्रूषस्व गुरून्कुरु प्रियसखीवृत्ति सपलीजने भर्तुर्विप्रकृतापि रोषणतया मा स्म प्रवीपं गमः । भूयिष्ठं भव दक्षिणा परिजने भाग्येष्वनुत्सेकिनी यान्त्येवं गृहिणीपदं युवतयो वामा: कुलस्याधयः ।' (४,१७) गुणातिपातः कार्ये यद्विपरीतं गुणान्प्रति ॥१८४॥ यथा मम चन्द्रकलायां चन्द्रं प्रति- 'जई संहरिज्जइ तमो घेय्यइ सभलेहि ते पाओ। वससि सिरे पसुवइणो तहवि हुँ इत्थीअ जीअणं हरसि ।' (यदि सं्हियते तमो गृह्यते सकलस्ते पादः । वससि शिरसि पशुपतेः तथापि खलु ख्िया जीवनं हरसि॥) यः सामान्यगुणोद्रेक: स गुणातिशयो मतः । १ 'बुधाः' ग. २ 'आर्यक्रोधेन सम्भृतम्' ग. ३ 'तह' ग. 8 'ह' नि; 'दु' नासिति ब-पुस्तके.

६.१८५] षष्ठः परिच्छेदः । ९१

यंथा तत्रैव-'राजा-( चन्द्रकलाया मुखं निर्दिश्य।)

विना दोषासङ्गं सततपरिपूर्णाखिलकलः कुतः प्राप्तश्रन्द्रो विगलितकलङ्कः समुखि ते॥' सिद्धानर्थान्यहूनुक्त्वा विशेषोक्तिर्विशेषणमू ।।१८५।। यथा-'तृष्णापहारी विमलो द्विजावासो जनप्रियः । हदः पझ्माकर: किं तु बुधर्त्वं स जलाशयः ।' पूर्वसिद्धार्थकथनं निरुक्िरिति कीर्तितम्। यथा वेण्याम्- 'निहताशेषकौरव्यः क्षीबो दुःशासनासजा। भन्गा दुर्योधनस्योवोर्भीमोडयं शिरसानतः ।।' (५.२८) बहूनां कीर्तनं सिद्धिरभिप्रेतार्थसिद्धये ॥ १८६।। यथा-'यद्वीर्य कूर्मराजस्य यश् शेषस्य विक्रमः । पृथिव्या रक्षणे राजन्नेकत्र त्वयि तत्स्थितम् ।।' इसादीनां भवेङ्नंशो वाच्यादन्यतरद्दच:। वेण्याम्-कञ्रुकिनं प्रति 'दुर्योधन :- सहभृत्यगणं सबान्धवं सहमित्रं सस्ुतं सहानुजम्। स्वबलेन निहन्ति संयुगे न चिरात्पाण्डुसुतः सुयोधनम् ॥' (२.५) विचारस्यान्यथाभावः सन्देहान्तु विपर्ययः ॥१८७ ॥ यथा-'मत्वा लोकमदातारं सन्तोषे यैः कृता मतिः । त्वयि राजनि ते राजन्न तथा व्यवसायिनः ।।' दाक्षिण्यं चेष्टया वाचा परचित्तानुवर्तनम्। वाचा यथा-'प्रसाधय पुरी लक्कां राजा त्वं हि विभीषण। आर्येणानुगृहीतस्य न विम्नंः सिद्धिमन्तरा ।।' एवं चेष्टयापि। वाक्यैः स्तिग्धैरेनुनयो भवेदर्थस्य साधनम् ॥९८८ ॥। यथा वेण्याम्- (तृतीयेक्के)-अश्वत्थामानं प्रति 'कृप :- दिव्यास्त्रग्रामकोविदे भारद्वाजतुल्यपराक्रमे किं न सम्भाव्यते त्वयि।' माला स्वायदभीष्टार्थ नैकार्थप्रतिपादनम्। यथा शाकुन्तले-'राजा- किं शीतलैः क्ुमविरोधिभिरार्द्रवातं सञ्चारयामि नलिनीदलतालवृनतैः । अक्के निवेश्य चरणावुत पद्मतात्रौ संवाहयामि करभोरु सुखं यैथा ते।' (३-१८) अर्थापत्तिर्यदन्यार्थोऽर्थान्तरोके: प्रतीयते ॥ १८९॥

१ 'सिद्धैः' ग. २ 'शीकरैः कुमविमर्दिभिः' नि. १ "वृन्तम्' नि. ४ 'यथासुखं' नि-ब.

९२ सांहि

यथा वेण्याम्-'द्रोणोऽवत्थामानं राज्येऽ्रमिषेकुमिच्छवीति कथयन्तं कर्ण प्रति राजा-सापु अनराज, साई । दतवाभयं सोडतिरथो वध्यमानं किरीटिना। सिम्धुराजमुपेक्षेत नैवं चेत्कथमन्यवा ।' (१.२८) दूषणोद्भोचणायां तु भर्त्सना गईणं दु तद्। यथा तत्रैव-कर्ण प्रति 'अश्त्थामा- निर्वीर्य गुरुशापमावितवञ्ञात्कि मे तवेवायुव संप्रत्येव भयाद्विहाय समर प्राप्तोऽस्मि कि त्वं यथा। जातोऽहं स्तुतिवंशकीर्वनविदां कि सारबीनां कुले शुद्रारातिकृताप्रियं प्रतिकरोम्यस्रेणे नास्त्ेण यद् ।।' (वेणी० ३.३५) अभ्यर्थनापरैर्वाक्यैः पृच्छार्थान्येषणं सतम् । १९०॥ यथा तत्रैव (वेण्यां चतुर्येङ्गे)-'सुन्दरक :- अज्जा, अवि णाम सारधिदुदिओ दिट्ठो तुह्लेहिं महाराओ दुज्जोहणो ण वेचि ।' (आर्या अपि नाम सारथिद्वितीयः दृष्टः युष्माभि: महाराजो दुर्योधनो न वेति)

यथा विक्रमोर्वश्याम्-'राजा- सूर्याचन्द्रमसौ यस्य मातामहपितामहौ। स्वयं कृतः पतिर्द्वाभ्यामुर्वश्या च भुवा च यः ॥'(४.१९) सारूप्यमनुरूपस्य सारुप्यात्क्षोमवर्धनम्॥१९१॥ यथा वेण्याम्-दुर्योधनभ्रान्त्या भीमं प्रति 'युविष्ठिरः-दुरात्मन्, दुर्योधन- हतक-' इत्यादि (६.३५ इत्यस्मात्परम्)। संक्षेपो येत्तु संक्षेपादात्मान्यार्ये प्रयुज्यते। यथा मम चन्द्रकलायाम्-'राजा-प्रिये, 'अङ्गानि खेदयसि कि शिरीषकुसुमपरिपेलवानि मुधा। (आत्मानं निर्दिश्य ।) अयमीहित कुसुमानां सम्पादयिता तवास्ति दासजनः ।।' गुणानां कीर्तनं यन्तु तदेव गुणकीर्तनम् ॥ १९२॥ यथा तत्रैव- 'नेत्रे खज्जनगज्जने सरसिजप्रत्यर्ि-' इत्यादि। सलेशो भण्यते वाक्यं यत्साइश्यपुरःसरम्। यथा वेण्याभ्-'राजा- 'हते जरति गाङ्गेये पुरस्कृत्य शिखण्डिनम्। या श्राघा पाण्डुपुत्राणां सैवास्माकं भविष्यति ।।' (२.४) 1 'साधु, कथमन्यथा दत्वा" नि-ब. २ "म्यस्नेण शस्त्रेण यत्' ग. ३ "नुमूतस्य' ग; 'भभिभूतस्य' ब. ४ 'प्रतिसंक्षेपाद्यत्त्वन्यार्थे' ग.

षष्ठः परिच्छेद:। ९३

यथा-'रतिकेलिकल: किञ्िदेष मन्मथमन्थरः। पश्य सुभ्रु समालम्भात्कादम्बश्चुम्बति प्रियाम्।।' विशेषार्थोहविसारोऽनुकतसिद्धि रुदीर्यते। यथा-गृदवृक्षवाटिकायाम् दृश्येते तन्वि यावेतौ चारुचन्द्रमसं प्रति। प्राज्ञे कल्याणनामानावुभौ तिष्यपुनर्वसू ।।' स्यास्प्रमाणयितुं पूज्यं प्रियोक्तिहर्षभाषणम्॥१९४॥ यथा शाकुन्तले- 'उदेति पूर्व कुसुमं ततः फलं धनोदयः प्राक्तदनन्तरं पयः। निमित्तनैमित्तिकयोरयं विधिस्तव प्रसादस्य पुरस्तु सम्पदः ।' (७.३०) अथ नाव्यालङ्कारा :- आशीराक्रन्दकपटाक्षमागर्वोद्यमाश्रयाः। उत्प्रासनस्पृहाक्षोभपश्चात्तापोपपत्तयः ॥ १९५।। आशंसाध्यवसायौ च विसर्पोललेखसंजिता। उत्तेजनं परीवादो नीतिरर्थविशेषणम्॥१९६ ॥ प्रोत्साहनं च साहाउग्रमभिमानोऽनुवर्तनम्। उत्कीर्तनं तथा याच्मा परिहारो निवेदनम् । १९७ ॥ प्रवर्तनाख्यानयुक्तिप्रहर्षाश्चोपदेशनम्। इति नाव्यालमृतयो नाव्यभूषणहेतवः ॥ १९८॥ आशीरिष्टजनाशंसा यथा शाकुन्तले-'ययातेरिव शर्मिष्ठा पत्युर्बडुमता भव। पुत्रं त्वमपि सम्राजं सेव पूरुमवामुहि ॥'(४.६) आक्रन्द: प्रलपित ुचा। यथा वेण्याम् (६.२६ इत्यस्मात्परं) 'कञ्जुकी-हा देवि कुन्ति, राजभवन- पताके-' इत्यादि । कपट मायया यत्र रूपमन्यद्विभाव्यते॥। १९९ ॥ यथा कुलपत्यक्क- 'मृगरूपं परित्यज्य विधाय कपटं वपुः । नीयते रक्षसा तेन लक्ष्मणो युधि संभ्यम्।' अक्षमा सा परिभव: स्वल्पोऽपि न विषस्ते। यथा शाकुन्तले (पञ्चमेक्के)-'राजा-भोः सत्यवादिन्, अभ्युपगतं तावद- स्माभि:। कि पुनरिमामतिसन्धाय लभ्यते । शार्ङरव :- विनिपातः-' इत्यादि। गर्वोडवलेपजं वाक्यं

-, 'विशेषार्थोहपरस्तावो गः 'विशेषार्योतिमस्तावो' ब.

साहित्यदर्पणे [६.२०० 8.

यथा तत्रैव (शाकुन्तले पष्ठेक्के)-'राजा-ममापि नाम सत्त्वैरमिभूयन्ते गृद्याः।' कार्यस्यारम्भ उद्यम: ॥। २०० ॥ ..

यथा कुम्भाङ-'रावण :- पश्यामि शोकविवशोऽन्तकमेव तावत्'। अ्हणं गुणवत्कार्यहेतोराश्रय उच्यते। यथा बिभीषणनिर्भत्सनाक्के-'बिभीषण :- राममेवाश्रयिष्यामि' इति। उत्पासनं तूपहासो योऽसाधौ साधुमानिनि ॥२०१॥ यथा शाकुन्तले (५.२९ इत्यस्मात् प्राक्)-'शार्झरव :- राजन्, अथ पुनः पूर्ववृत्तान्तमन्यसङ्गाद्विस्मृतो भवान्। तत्कथमधर्मभीरोदार परित्याग :- ' इत्यादि। आकाङ्का रमणीयत्वाद्वस्तुनो या स्पृहा तु सा। यथा तत्रैव-'राजा- चारुणा स्फुरितेनायमपरिक्षतकोमलः । पिपासतो ममानुज्ञां ददातीव प्रियाधरः ॥' अधिक्षेपवच:कारी क्षोभ: प्रोक्तः स एव तु । २०२॥ यथा-'त्वया तपस्विचाण्डाल प्च्छन्नवधवर्तिना। न केवलं इतो वाली स्वात्मा च परलोकतः ।' मोहावचीरितार्थस्य पश्चात्तापः स एव तु। यथानुतापा्ङ्के-'राम :- किं देव्या न विचुम्बितोऽस्मि बडुशो मिथ्याभिशप्तस्तदा' इति। उपपत्तिर्मता हेतोरुपन्यासोऽर्थसिद्धये॥। २०३॥ यथा वध्यशिलायाम्- 'त्रियते ग्रियमाणे या त्वयि जीवति जीवति। तां यदीच्छसि जीवन्तीं रक्षात्मानं ममासुभि: ॥' (नागा० ४.१६) आशंसनं स्यादाशंसा यथा रमशाने-'माधव :- तत्पश्येयमनङ्गमन्गलगृहं भूयोऽपि तस्या मुखम्' इति (मालती० ५.९)। प्रतिज्ञाध्यवसायक: । यथा मम प्रभावत्याम्-'वज्रनाभ :- अस्य वक्ष: क्षणेनैव निमथ्य गदयानया। लीलयोन्मूलयाम्येष भुवनद्दयमद्य वः ॥' विसर्पो यत्समारब्यं कर्मानिष्टफलप्रद्म् ॥। २०४।। यथा वेण्याम्-'एकस्य तावत्पाकोऽयम्-' इत्यादि (३.१४)। कार्यदर्शनमुलेख

1 'तवाधर" ग.

-६.२०५ ] षष्ठः परिच्छेदः । ९५

यथा शाकुन्तले (प्रथमेक्के)-राजानं प्रति 'तापसौ-समिदाहरणाय प्रस्थि- तावावाभ्। इह चासमद्ुरोः साधिदैवत इव शकुन्तलयानुमालिनीतीरमाश्रमो दृश्यते। न चेदन्य: कार्यातिपातः, प्रविश्य गृद्यतामतिथिसत्कारः' इति। उत्तेजनमितीष्यते। स्वकार्यसिद्धयेऽन्यस्य प्रेरणाय कठोरवाक्॥ २०५॥ यथा-'इन्द्रजिच्चण्डवीयोऽसि नान्नैव बलवानसि। विग्धिक्प्रच्छन्नरूपेण युध्यसेऽसद्भयाकुलः ।।' भर्त्सना तु परीवादो यथा सुन्दराङे-'दुर्योधन :- विग्धिकू सूत, किं कृतवानसि। वत्सस्य मे प्रकृतिदुललितस्म पाप: पापं विधास्यति-' इत्यादि (वेणी० ४.५)। नीति: शास्त्ेण वर्तनम्। यथा शाकुन्तले-'दुष्यन्तः-विनीतवेषप्रवेश्यानि तपोवनानि।' (प्रथमाङ्के) इति। उक्तस्यार्थस्य यत्तु स्यादुरकीर्तनमनेकधा॥ २०६॥ उपालम्भखवरूपेण तत्स्यादर्थविशेषणम्। यथा शाकुन्तले राजानं प्रति 'शार्ङरव :- आः, कथमिदं नाम। किमुपन्यस्त- मिति। ननु भवानेव नितरां लोकवृत्तान्तनिष्णातः । सतीमपि ज्ञातिकुलैकसंश्रयां जनोऽन्यथा भर्तृमतीं विशङ्कते। अतः समीपे परिणेतुरिष्यते प्रियाप्रिया वा प्रमदा स्वबन्धुभिः ॥' (५.१७) प्रोत्साहनं स्यादुत्साहगिरा कस्यापि योजनम्॥। २०७ ॥ यथा बालरामायणे- 'कालरात्रिकरालेयं स्त्रीति कि विच्चिकित्ससि। तज्जगत्रितयं त्रातुं तात ताडय ताडकाम्।।' साहाय्यं सङ्कटे यत्स्यात्सानुकूल्यं परस्य च। यथा वेण्याम्-कृपं प्रति 'अश्वत्थामा-त्वमपि तावद्राज्ञः पार्श्ववर्ती भव। कृप :- वाञ्छाम्यद्दमद्य प्रतिकर्तुम्-' इत्यादि (तृतीयस्याङ्कस्यान्ते)। अभिमान: स एव स्याद यथा तत्रैव-'दुर्योधन :- मातः किमप्यसदृशं कृपणं वचस्ते' इत्यादि (वेणी0 ५.३) प्रश्रयाद्नुवर्तनम्॥ २०८॥ अनुवृत्तिर यथा शाकुन्तले (१.२० इत्यस्यानन्तरं)-'राजा-शकुन्तलां प्रति ।) अयि, तपो वर्धते। अनुसूया-दाणि अदिषिविसेसलाहेण' इत्यादि।

१ 'उपालम्भविशेषण' नि. २ 'सतीमिमां ज्ञातकुलै" ग. ३ 'स्यादानुगुण्यं' ग.

९६ साहित्यदर्पणे

भूतकार्याख्यानमुस्कीर्तनं मतमू। यथा बालरामायणे- 'अन्नासीत्फणिपाशबन्धनविधि: शक्तया भवदेवरे गाढं वक्षसि ताडिते इनुमता द्रोणाद्रिरत्राहतः ।' इत्यादि (१०.२०) याच्जा तु क्ापि याच्जा या स्वयं दूतमुखेन वा।। २०९ ॥। यथा- 4 'अद्यापि देहि वैदेहीं दयालुस्त्वयि राघवः । शिरोभि: कन्दुकक्रीडां किं कारयसि वानरान् ।।' परिहार इति प्रोक्त: कृतानुचितमार्जनम्। यथा- 'प्राणप्रयाणदुःखाते उक्तवानस्म्यनक्षरम्। तत्क्षमस्व विभो, किं च सुग्रीवस्ते समर्पितः ।।' अवधीरितकर्तव्यकथनं तु निवेदनम् ॥ २१० ॥ यथा राघवाभ्युदये-'लक्ष्मण :- 'आये, समुद्राभ्यर्थनया गन्तुमुदतोऽसि। तत्किमेतत्।' प्रवर्तनं तु कार्यस्य यत्स्यात्साधुप्रवर्तनम्। यथा वेण्याम्-'राजा-कञ्जुकिन्, देवस्य देवकीनन्दनस्य बडुमानाद्वत्सस्य भीमसेनस्य विजयमङ्गलाय प्रवर्त्यन्तां तत्रोचिता: समारम्भाः।' (६.१२ इत्यस्मात्परं) आख्यानं पूर्ववृत्तोकिद यथा तत्रैव- 'देशः सोऽयमरा तिशोणितजलैर्यस्मिन्हदाः पूरिताः' इत्यादि (वेणी० ३.३३)

यथा तत्रैव- 'यदि समरमपास्य नास्ति मृत्योभथमिति युक्तमितोऽन्यतः प्रयातुम्। अथ मरणमवश्यमेव जन्तोः किमिति मुधा मलिनं यशः कुरुध्वम्॥' (वेणी० ३.६) प्रहर्ष: प्रमदाधिक्यं यथा शाकुन्तले-'राजा-तत्किमिदानीमात्मानं पूर्णमनोरथं नाभिनन्दामि।' शिक्षा स्यादुपदेशनम्। यथा तत्रैव (शा० १) 'सहि, ण जुत्तं अरसमवासिणो जणस्स अकिदसक्कारं अदिधिविसेसं उज्झिअ सच्छन्ददो गमणम्।' (सखि न युक्तमाश्रमवासिनो जनस्या- कृतसत्कारमतिथिविशेषमुज्झित्वा स्वच्छन्दतो गमनम्) एषां च लक्षणं नाट्यालङ्काराणां सामान्यत एकरूपत्वेऽपि भेदेन व्यपदेशो गड्डलिकाप्रवाहेण। एषु च केषांचिद्गुणालङ्कारभावसध्यङ्गविशेषान्तर्भावेऽपि नाटके प्रयत्नतः कर्तव्यत्वात्तद्विशेषोक्तिः । क्तानि च-

'प्रमदाद्वाक्यं' ग.

६.२१२ ] षष्ठः परिच्छेदः । ९७

'पञ्जसन्धि चतुर्वृत्ति चतुःषष्टयङ्गसंयुतम्। षट्त्रिंशलक्षणोपेतमलक्कारोपशोभितम् ॥ महारसं महाभोगमुदात्तरचनान्वितम्। महापुरुषसव्चारं साध्वाचारं जनप्रियम् ।। सुश्लिष्टसन्धियोगं च सुप्रयोगं सुखाश्रयम् । मृदुशब्दाभिधानं च कविः कुर्यान्त नाटकम् ।' (नाट्य० १९.१११-११५) इति मुनिनोक्तत्वान्नाटकेऽवश्यं कर्तव्यान्येव। वीथ्यङ्गानि वक्ष्यन्ते। लास्याङ्गान्या- गेयपदं स्थितपाठ्यमासीनं पुष्पगण्डिका ।। २१२। प्रच्छेदकख्त्रिंगूढं च सैन्धवाख्यं द्विगूढकम्। उत्तमोत्तमकं चान्यदुक्तप्रत्युक्तमेव च ।। २१३।। लास्ये दशविधं ह्येतदङ्गमुक्तं मनीषिभिः । (नाट्य० १८.१७०-१७१) तत्र- तत्रीभाण्डं पुरस्कृत्योपविष्टस्यासने पुरः॥ २१४ ॥ शुष्कं गानं गेयपदं यथा-गौरीगृहे वीणां वादयन्ती 'मलयवती- उत्फुल्लकमलकेसरपरागगौरद्युते मम हि गौरि। अभिवान्छितं प्रसिध्यतु भगवति युष्मत्प्रसादेन ।' (नागा. १.१४) स्थितपाठ्यं तदुच्यते। मदनोत्तापिता यत्र पठति प्राकृतं स्थिता॥ २१५॥ प्राकृतपठनं स्थितपाठ्यम्' इति। निखिलातोद्यरहितं शोकचिन्तान्धिताबला। अप्रसाधितगात्रं यदासीनासीनमेव तत् ॥ २१६ ।। आतोद्यमिश्रितं गेयं छन्दांसि विविधानि च। स्त्रीपुंसयोरविपर्यासचेष्टितं पुष्पगण्डिका ॥ २१७ ॥। अन्यासक्तं पतिं मत्वा प्रेमविच्छेषमन्युना। वीणापुरःसरं गानं ख्ति्रिया: प्रच्छेदको मतः ॥२१८॥ स्त्रीवेषधारिणां पुंसां नाट्यं शक्ष्णं त्रिगूढकम्। यथा मालत्याम् (षष्ठङ्गे) 'मकरन्दः-एषोऽस्मि मालती संवृत्तः ।' कश्चन भ्रष्टसङ्केतः सुव्यक्तकरणान्वितः ॥२१९।। प्राकृतं वचनं वक्ति यत्र तत्सैन्धवं विदुः। करणं वीणादिक्रिया।

"पुरुषसत्कारं' नि. २ 'त्रिमूढ' इति नाट्यशास्त्रे. ३ 'संसकृतमपठनमपि' ग. झ

९८ साहित्यदर्पणे [६.२२०

चतुरस्रपदं गीतं मुखग्रतिमुखान्वितम्॥। २२०॥ द्विगूढं रसभावाढ्यमुत्तमोत्तमक पुनः । कोपप्रसादजमधिक्षेपयुक्तं रसोत्तरम् ॥। २२१ ॥। हावहेलान्वितं चित्रश्लोकबन्धमनोहरम्। उक्तिप्रत्युक्तिसंयुक्तं सोपालम्भमलीकवत् ।। २२२ ॥। विलासान्वितगीतार्थमुक्तप्रत्युक्तमुच्यते। स्पष्टान्युदाहरणानि। 4 एतदेव यदा सवैंः पताकास्थानकैर्युतम् । २२३॥ अङ्गैश्च दशभिर्धीरा महानाटकमूचिरे। एतदेव नाटकम्। यथा-बालरामायणम्। अथ प्रकरणम्- भवेत्प्रकरणे वृत्तं लौकिकं कविकल्पितम् ॥। २२४ ॥ शङ्गारोडड्गी नायकस्तु विप्रोऽमात्योऽथवा वणिक। सापायधर्मकामार्थपरो धीरप्रशान्तक: ॥। २२५॥। विप्रनायकं यथा मृच्छकटिकम्। अमात्यनायकं मालतीमाधव्रभ् । वणिङ्नायकं पुष्पभूषितम्। नायिका कुलजा क्वापि वेश्या क्वापि दयं क्चित्। A तेन भेदाख्रयस्तस्य तत्र भेदस्तृतीयकः ॥ २२६॥ कितवद्यूतकारादिविट चेटकसक्कुलः । कुलस्त्री पुष्पभूषिते। वेश्या तु रङदत्ते। द्वे अपि मृच्छकटिके। अस्य नाटक- प्रकृतित्वाच्छेषं नाटकवत्। अथ भाण :- भाण: स्यादूर्तचरितो नानावस्थान्तरात्मक: ॥ २२७ ॥ एकाङ्क एक एवात्र निपुणः पण्डितो विटः। रङ्े प्रकाशयेत्खवेनानुभूतमितरेण वा ॥ २२८॥ सम्बोधनोक्तिप्रत्युक्त्ती कुर्यादाकाशभाषितैः । सूचयेद्दीरशङ्गारौ शौर्यसौभाग्यवर्णनैः ॥२२९ ॥ तत्रेतिवृत्तमुत्पाद्यं वृत्ति: प्रायेण भारती। मुखनिर्वहणे सन्घी लास्याङ्गानि दशापि च ॥ २३० ॥ अत्राका शभाषितरूपं परवचनमपि स्वयमेवानुषद्षत्रुत्तरप्रत्युत्तरे कुर्यात्। शङ्गार- वीररसौ च सौभाग्यशौर्यवर्णनया सूचयेत्। प्रायेण भारती क्वापि कैशिक्यपि वृत्ति- रभवति। लास्याङ्गानि गेयपदादीनि। उदाहरणं लीलामधुकरः। अथ व्यायोग :- ख्यातेतिवृत्तो व्यायोग: स्वल्पस्त्रीजनसंयुतः। हीनो गर्भविमर्शाभ्यां नरैबेहुभिराश्रितः ॥ २३१॥ एकाङ्कश्च भवेदसत्रीनिमित्तसमरोद्यः । 1

१ 'रङवृत्ते' नि.

६.२३२ ] षष्ठः परिच्छेद:ः । ९९

कैशिकीवृत्तिरहित: प्रख्यातस्तत्र नायक: ॥ २३२ ॥ राजर्षिरथ दिव्यो वा भवेद्दीरोद्धतश्च सः । हास्य शङ्गारशान्तेभ्य इतरेऽन्राङ्िनो रसाः ॥। २३३ ॥ यथा सौगन्धिकाहरणम्। अथ समवकार :- वृत्तं समवकारे तु ख्यातं देवासुराश्रयम्। सन्धयो निर्विमर्शास्तु त्रयोऽङ्कास्तत्र चादिमे॥ २३४॥ सन्धी द्वावन्त्ययोसतद्वदेक एको भवेतपुनः । नायका द्वादशोदात्ता: प्रख्याता देवमानवाः ॥ २३५॥ फलं पृथक्पृथक्तेषां वीरमुख्योऽखिलो रसः। वृत्तयो मन्दकैशिक्यो नात्र बिन्दुप्रवेशकौ ॥। २३६॥ वीथ्यङ्गानि च तत्र स्युर्यथालाभं त्रयोदश। गायत्र्युष्णि्ुखान्यत्र च्छन्दांसि विविधानि च ॥ २३७ ॥ त्रिशृङ्गारखििकपटः कार्यश्रायं त्रिविद्रवः । वस्तु द्वादशनालीभिर्निष्पाद्यं प्रथमाङ्कगम्॥ २३८॥ द्वितीयेऽक्के चतसृभिर्द्धाभ्यामङ्के तृतीयके। नालिका घटिकाद्वयमुच्यते। बिन्दुप्रवेशकौ च नाटकोक्तावपि नेह विधातव्यौ। तत्र- धर्मार्थकामैख्रिविध: शुद्गारः, कपटः पुनः ॥ २३९॥ स्वाभाविक: कृत्रिमश्र दैवजो, विद्रवः पुनः । अचेतनैश्चेतनैश्च चेतनाचेतनैः केतः॥ २४० ॥ तत्र शास्त्राविरोधन कृतो धर्मशङ्गारः । अर्थलाभाय कल्पितोडर्थशृङ्गारः । प्रहसन- शङ्गारः कामशङ्गारः । तत्र कामशृङ्गारः प्रथमाङ्क एव। अन्ययोस्तु न नियम इत्याहुः। चेतनाचेतना गजादयः! समवकीर्यन्ते बहवोडर्था अस्मिन्निति समवकारः। यथा-समुद्रमथनम्। अथ डिम :-

उपरागैश्च भूयिष्टो डिमः ख्यातेतिवृत्तकः ॥ २४१ ॥ भङ्गी रौद्ररसस्तत्र सर्वेऽक्गानि रसा: पुनः। चत्वारोडङ्गा मता नेह विष्कम्भकप्रवेशकौ ॥ २४२ ॥ नायका देवगन्धर्वयक्षरक्षोमहोरगा: । भूतप्रेतपिशाचाद्याः षोडशात्यन्तमुद्धताः॥२४३॥ वृत्तय: कैशिकीहीना निर्विमर्शाश्च सन्धयः । दीप्ता: स्युः षड्सा: शान्तहास्यशङ्गारवर्जिताः॥। २४४।। अत्रोदाहरणं च 'त्रिपुरदाहः' इति महैषिः । अथेहामृग :-

1 'पुनः' ग. २ "लाभार्थकल्पितः' नि-ब. ३ धनिकेन दशरूपकव्याख्याने (६५७-६०) उत्त 'इदं त्रिपुरदाहे तु लक्षणं ब्रह्मणोदितम् । ततस्त्रिपुरदाहृश्च डिमसंज्ञः प्रयोजितः॥ इति भरतमुनिना सवयमेव त्रिपुरदाहेतिवृत्तस्य तुल्यत्वं दर्शितम्।'

१०० साहित्यदर्पणे [६.२४५

ई हायृगो मिश्रवृत्तश्रतुरङ्कः प्रकीर्तितः । मुखप्रतिमुखे सन्घी तत्र निर्वहणं तथा॥ २४५॥ --

नरदिव्यावनियमौ नायकप्रतिनायकौ। रूयातौ धीरोद्धतावन्यो गूढभावाद्युक्तकृत् ॥ २४६ ॥ दिव्यस्तियमनिच्छन्तीमपहारादिनेच्छतः । शुङ्गाराभासमप्यस्य किञ्चित्किञ्ञित्प्रदर्शयेत् ॥ २४७॥। पताकानायका दिव्या मर्त्या वापि दशोद्धताः । युद्धमानीय संरम्भं परं व्याजान्निवर्तयेत्।। २४८ ।। महात्मानो वधप्राप्ता अपि वध्या: स्युरत्र नो। एकाङ्को देव एवात्र नेतेत्याहु: परे पुनः ॥ २४९ ॥ 1 दिव्यस्त्रीहेतुकं युद्धं नायका: षडितीतरे। मिश्रं ख्याताख्यातम्। अन्यः प्रतिनायकः । पताकानायकास्तु नायकप्रतिनाय- कयोमिंलिता दश। नायको मृगवदलभ्यां नायिकामत्र ईहते वाञ्छतीतीहामृगः । यथा-कुसुमशेखरविजयादिः। अथाङ्ग :- उत्सृष्टिकाङ्क एकाङ्गो नेतारः प्राकृता नराः ॥२५० ॥ रसोऽत्र करुण: स्थायी बहुस्त्रीपरिदेवितम्। प्रख्यातमितिवृतं च कविर्बुद्या प्रपञ्चयेत् ॥ २५१ ॥

युद्धं च वाचा कर्तव्यं निर्वेदवचनं बहु॥ २५२ ॥

तु-'उत्क्रान्ता विलोमरूपा सृष्टिर्यत्रेत्युत्सष्टिकाङ्कः।' यथा-शर्मिष्ठाययातिः । अथ वीथी- वीथ्यामेको भवेदङ्क: कश्चिदेकोऽत्र.कल्प्यते। आकाश भाषितरुक्तश्चित्रां प्रत्युक्तिमाश्रितः ॥२५३ ॥ सूचयेन्द्ररिशङ्गारं किञ्विदन्यात्रसानति । मुखनिर्वहणे सन्धी अर्थप्रकृतयोऽखिलाः ।।२५४॥ कैश्चिदित्युत्तमो मध्यमोऽधमो वा। शृङ्गारबहुलत्वाच्चास्या: कैशिकीवृत्तिबडडलत्वम्। - अस्यास्त्रयोदशाङ्गानि निर्दिशन्ति मनीषिणः । उद्धात्यकावलगिते प्रपञ्चस्तिगतं छलम्॥२५५ ॥। वाक्केल्यधिबले गण्डमवस्यन्दितनालिके। असत्प्रलापव्याहारमृद(माद!)वानि च तानि तु ॥२५६॥ तत्रोद्धात्यकावलगिते प्रस्तावनाप्रस्तावे सोदाहरणं लक्षिते। मिथो वाक्यमसन्भूतं प्रपञ्चो हास्यकृन्मतः ।

१"वर्तते' नि-ब. २ तथा धनिकेनोत्तं (दश० ३.७०-७२) 'उत्सृष्टिकाङ्क इति नाटकान्तर्ग- ताङ्कव्यवच्छेदार्थम्।'. ३ 'कश्चिदुत्मो' नि.

६.२५७] षष्ठः परिच्छेदः । १०१

यथा विक्रमोर्वश्याम्-वलभीस्थविदूषक चेट्योरन्योन्यवचनम्। त्रिगतं स्यादनेकार्थयोजनं श्रुतिसाम्यतः ॥ २५७॥ यथा तत्रेव-'राजा- सर्वक्षितिभृतां नाथ, दृष्टा सर्वाङ्गसुन्दरी। रामा रम्ये वनान्तेऽस्मिन्मया विरहिता त्वया॥ (विक्रमो० ४.२७) (नेपथ्ये तथैव प्रतिशब्दः) राजा-कथं दृष्टेत्याह।' अत्र प्रश्नवाक्यमेवोत्तरवाक्यत्वेन योजितम् । 'नटादित्रितयविषयमेवेदम्' इति कश्चित्। प्रियाभैर प्रियैवाक्यैर्विलोभ्य च्छलनाच्छलम्। (दश. ३.१७) यथा वेण्याम्-'भीमार्जुनौ- कर्ता ूतच्छलानां, जतुमयशरणोद्दीपनः, सोडमिमानी राजा दुःशासनादेर्गुरुरनुजशतस्याङ्गराजस्य मित्रम्। कृष्णाकेशोत्तरीयव्यपनयनपट्टः, पाण्डवा यस्य दासा: क्कास्ते दुर्योधनोऽसौ कथयत, न रुषा द्रष्ुमभ्यागतौ स्वैः ॥' (५.२३) अन्ये त्वाहुश्छलं किञ्चित्कार्यसुददिश्य कस्यचित् ॥ २५८ ॥ उदीर्यंते यद्दचनं वञ्चनाहास्यरोषकृत्। वाक्केलिर्हास्यसम्बन्धो द्विन्निप्रत्युक्तितो भवेत् ॥ २५९ ॥ द्वित्रीत्युपलक्षणम्। यथा- 'भिक्षो मांसनिषेवणं प्रकुरुषे, किं तेन मद्ं विना मैद्यं चापि तव प्रियं, प्रियमहो वेश्याङ्गनाभि: सह। वेश्याप्यर्थरुचिः कुतस्तव धनं, धूतेन चौर्येण वा चौर्यद्यूतपरिग्रहोऽपि भवतो, नष्टस्य कान्या गतिः ।।' केचित्-'प्रक्रान्तवाक्यस्य साकाहस्यैव निवृत्तिर्वाकेलिः' इत्याड्ड: (दश० ३.१७) अन्ये च 'अनेकस्य प्रश्नस्यैकमुत्तरम्।' अन्योन्यवाक्याधिक्योक्ति: स्पर्धयाधिबलं मतम्। (दश. ३.१८) यथा मम प्रभावत्याम्-'वज्रनाभ :- अस्य वक्षः क्षणेनैव निर्मथ्य गदयानया। लीलयोन्मूलेयाम्येष भुवनद्वयमद्य वः ॥ प्रदयुम्न :- अरेरे असुरापसद, अलममुना बहुप्रलापेन। मम खलु अद्य प्रचण्डभुजदण्डसमर्पितोरुकोदण्डनिर्गलितकाण्डसमूहपातैः । आस्तां समस्तदितिजक्षतजोक्षितेयं क्षोणिः क्षणेन पिशिताशनलोभनीया।'

· "त्तरत्वेन' नि-ब. २ दशरूनक उक्तं 'श्रुतिसाम्यादनेकार्थयोजनं, त्रिगतं तिविह। नटा- दित्रितयालापः पूर्वरक्के तदिष्यते ॥।' (३.१६ ) ३ 'छझ्मना छलम्' ग. ४ 'वः' ग. ५ 'सम्ब- द्ात्' ग. ६ 'किं ते मद्यमपि प्रियं' ग. ७ 'वाराङ" नि-ब. ८ दशरूपके (४.७५ इत्यत्र) उदाहृतमिदम्. ९ 'लयिष्यामि' ब; "योन्मीलयाग्येव भुवनक्षयः ग.

१०२ साहित्यदर्पणे [६.२६०

गण्डं प्रस्तुतसम्बन्धि भिन्नार्थ सत्वरं वचः ॥ २६० ॥ यथा वेण्याम्-'राजा- अध्यासितुं तव चिराज्जवनस्थलस्य पर्याप्तमेव करभोरु ममोरुयुग्मम् ।' (२.२३) अनन्तरम् '(प्रविश्य) कञ्जकी-देव, भमनं भझं-' इत्यादि। अत्र रथकेतनभङ्गार्थ वचनमूरुभङ्गार्थसम्बन्धे सम्बद्धम्। व्याख्यानं स्वरसोक्तस्यान्यथावस्यन्दितं भवेत्। यथा छलितरामे-'सीता-जाद, कहं क्खु अओज्झाए गन्तव्वम्, तहि सो राआ विणएण पणइदव्वो (जात कल्यं खलु अयोध्यायै गन्तव्यं तईि स राजा विनयेन पणायितव्यः) । लव :- अथ किमावाभ्यां राजोपजीविभ्यां भवितव्यम्। सीता-जाद, सो क्खु तुम्हाणं पिदा। लवः-किमावयो रघुपतिः पिता। सीता-(साशङ्कम् ।) मा अण्णधा संकद्धम्। ण कखु तुम्हाणम्, सअलाए ज्जेव पुहृवीएत्ति।' (मा अन्यथा शङ्गध्वम्। न खलु युवयोः सकलाया एव पृथिव्या इति।) प्रहेलिकेव हास्येन युक्ता भवति नालिका ॥ २६१॥ संवरणकार्युत्तरं प्रहेलिका। यथा रलावल्याम्-'सुसङ्गता-सहि, जस्स किदे तुमं आअदा सो इध ज्जेव चिद्ठदि। सागरिका-कर्स किदे अहं आअदा। सुसङ्गता-णं चित्तफलअस्स ।' अत्र त्वं राज्ञः कृते आगतेत्यर्थः संवृत्तः । असत्प्रलापो यद्वाक्यमसम्बद्धं तथोत्तरम्। अगृह्लतोऽपि मूर्खस्य पुरो यञ्च हितं वचः ॥ २६२॥ तत्रादं यथा मम प्रभावत्याम्-'प्रद्युन्नः-(सहकारवल्लीमवलोक्य सानन्दम्।) अहो, कथमिहेव अलिकुलमस्जुलकेशी परिमलबहला रसावह्दा तन्वी। किसळयपेशलपाणिः कोकिलकलभाषिणी प्रियतमा मे ॥' एवमसम्बद्धोत्तरेडपि। तृतीयं यथा वेण्यां दुर्योधनं प्रति गान्धारीवाक्यम् (पञ्चमेङ्के)। व्याहारो यत्परस्यार्थे हास्यलोभकरं वचः । यथा मालविकानिमित्रे (द्वितीयेक्के)-'(लास्यप्रयोगावसाने मालविका निर्गन्तुमि- च्छति ।) विदूषक :- मा दाव उवदेसमुद्धा गमिस्ससि (मा तावत् उपदेशमुग्धा गमिष्यसि)। (इत्युपक्रमेण ।) दास :- (विदूषकं प्रति।) आर्य, उच्यतां यस्त्वया क्रमभेदो लक्षितः । विदूषक :- पढमं बम्भणपूआ भोदि। सा इमाए लङ्िदा (प्रथमं ब्राह्मणपूजा भवति साडनया लङ्विता)। (मालविका स्मयते।)' इत्यादिना नायकस्य विशुद्धनायिकादर्शनप्रयुक्तेन हासलोभकारिणा वचसा व्याहारः। दोषा गुणा गुणा दोषा यत्र स्युर्मदवं हि तत् ॥। २६३ ॥ क्रमेण यथा- 'प्रियजीवितता कौर्य निःस्ेहत्वं कृतप्नता।

१ "भङ्गार्थे सम्बन्धे' ब; "थे सम्बद्धे' नि. २ 'यत्पकाश्यार्थे' ग. ३ 'हास्यक्षोम" नि. ४ 'उवदेससुद्धा' ग.

६.२६३ ] षछ्ठः परिच्छेद: । १०३

भूयस्त्वद्दर्शनाद्देव मैमैते गुणतां गताः ।।' 'तस्यास्तद्रपसौन्दर्य भूषितं यौवनश्रिया। सुखैकायतनं जातं दुःखायैव ममाधुना।' एतानि चाङ्गानि नाटकादिषु सम्भवन्त्यपि वीथ्यामवश्यं विधेयानि स्पष्टतया नाट- कादिषु विनिविष्टान्यपीहोदाहृतानि वीथीव नानारसानां चात्र मालारूपतया स्थित- त्वाद्वीथीयम्। यथा-मालविका। अथ प्रहसनम्-

भवेत्प्रहसने वृत्तं निन्धानां कविकल्पितम् ॥ २६४॥ अत्र नारभटी, नापि विष्कम्भकप्रवेशकौ। भङ्गी हास्यरसस्तत्र वीथ्यङ्गानां स्थितिर्न वा। तत्र तपस्विभगवद्विप्रप्रभृतिस्तवत्र नायक: ॥ २६५ ॥ एको यत्र भवेद्ृष्टो हास्यं तच्छुद्धमुच्यते। यथा-कन्दर्पेकेलिः । आश्रित्य कञ्चन जनं सङ्कीर्णमिति तद्विदुः ॥२६६॥ यथा-धूर्तचरितम्। वृत्तं बहूनां भ्रष्टानां सङ्गीण केचिदूचिरे। तत्पुनर्भवति द्वङ्कमथवैकाङ्कनिर्मितम् ॥ २६७॥ यथा-लटकमेलकादिः। मुनिस्त्वाह- 'वेश्याचेटनपुंसकविटधूर्ता बन्धकी च यत्र स्युः । अविकृतवेषपरिच्छदचेष्टितकरणं तु सङ्गीर्णम् ॥' इति। (नाट्य० १८.१४२) विकृतं तु विदुयत्र षण्ढकञ्चुकितापसाः । भुजङ्गचारणभटप्रभृतेवेषवारयुताः ॥ २६८॥ इदं तु सक्कीरणेनैव गतार्थमिति मुनिना पृथङ्डोक्तम्। अथोपरूपकाणि। तत्र- नाटिका कृपवृत्ता स्यात्स्रीपराया चतुरङ्किका। प्रख्यातो धीरललितस्तत्र स्यान्नायको नृपः ॥ २६९॥। स्याद्न्तःपुरसम्बद्धा सङ्गीतव्यापृताथवा। नवानुरागा कन्यात्र नायिका नृपवंशजा ॥। २७० ॥ संप्रवर्तेत नेतास्यां देव्यास्रासेन शङ्गितः। देवी पुनर्भवेज्ज्येष्ठा प्रगल्भा नृपवंशजा ॥ २७१ ॥ पदे पदे मानवती तद्वशः सङ्गमो द्वयोः । वृत्ति: स्यात्कैशिकी स्वल्पविमर्शाः सन्यः पुनः ॥ २७२॥ द्वयोर्नायिकानायकयोः।यथा-रलावली-विद्धशालभजिकादिः। अथ त्रोटकम्-

१ 'भूयस्तद्दर्श"' ब. २ "र्शनादेव' नि-ब. ३ 'मरहसनं वृत्तं' नि-ब. ४"प्रभृति- 'वत्र' नि-ब. ५ 'धृष्टानां' नि.

१०४ साहित्यदर्पणे [६.२७३

सप्ताष्टनवपञ्जाङ्कं दिव्यमानुषसंश्रयम्। त्रोटकं नाम तत्प्राहुः प्रत्यह्ं सविदूषकम् ॥ २७३॥ प्रत्यङ्कसविदूषकत्वादत्र शरृङ्गारोडड्गी। सप्ताङ्कं यथा-स्तम्भिततरम्भम्। पञ्चाक्क यथा-विक्रमोर्वशी। अथ गोष्ठी- प्राकृतैरनवभि: पुम्भिर्दशभिर्वाप्यलङ्गता। नोदातेवचना गोष्ठी कैशिकी वृत्तिशालिनी ॥। २७४ ॥ हीना गर्भविमर्शाभ्यां पञ्चषड्योषिदन्विता। कामशृङ्गारसंयुक्ता स्यादेकाङ्कविनिर्मिता॥ २७५॥ यथा-रैवतमदनिका। अथ सट्टकम्- सट्टकं प्राकृताशेषपाठ्यं स्यादप्रवेशकम्। न च विष्कम्भकोऽप्यत्र प्रचुरश्रान्भुतो रसः ॥।२७६॥ अङ्का जवनिकाख्या: स्युः स्यादन्यन्नाटिकासमम्। यथा-कपूरमञ्जरी। अथ नाट्यरासकम्- नाट्यरासकमेकाड्कं बहुताललयस्थिति॥। २७७ ॥ उदा्तनायकं तद्दत्पीठमर्दोपनायकम्। हास्योऽङ्गयत्र सशुद्गारो नारी वासकसज्का ॥ २७८ ॥ मुखनिर्वहणे सन्घी लास्याङ्गानि दशापि च। केचित्प्रतिमुखं सन्धिमिह नेच्छन्ति केवलम्॥ २७९॥ तत्र सन्धिदयवती यथा-नर्मवती। सन्धिचतुष्टयवती यथा-विलासवती। अथ प्रस्थानकम्- प्रस्थाने नायको दासो हीन: स्यादुपनायकः। दासी च नायिका वृत्ति: केशिकी भारती तथा॥। २८० ॥ सुरापानसमायोगादुद्दिष्टार्थस्य संहृतिः । अङ्कौ ह्वौ लयतालादिर्विलासो बहुलस्तथा॥ २८१॥ यथा-शृङ्गारतिलकम्। अथोल्लाप्यम्- उदात्तनायकं दिव्यवृत्तमेकाङ्कभूषितम्। शिल्पकाङ्गैर्युतं हास्यशङ्गारकरुणै रसैः ॥२८२॥ उल्लाप्यं बहुसंग्रामं पसगीतमनोहरम्। चतस्रो नायिकासतत्र त्रयोडङ्का इति केचन ॥ २८३ ॥ शिल्पकाङ्गानि वक्ष्यमाणानि। यथा-देवीमहादेवम्। अथ काव्यम्- काव्यमारभटीहीनमेकाङ्क हासस्कुलम्।

वर्णमात्राच्छड्डेलिकायुतं शुङ्गारभाषितम्।

१ 'स्तम्मितारम्भम्' ग. २ 'नोदात्तरचना' ग. २ 'सज्जिता' ग. ४ "आ्ममस्नगीत"' नि. ५ "मात्राङ्कुलिका' निः 'मात्राछ्ठगणिका' ग.

६.२८५] षष्ठः परिच्छेद: । १०५

नेता स्त्री चाप्युदात्तान्न सन्धी आद्यौ तथान्तिमः ॥ २८५॥ यथा-यादवोदयः । अथ प्रेङ्गणम्- गर्भावमर्शरहितं प्रेङ्गणं हीननायकम्। असूत्रधार मेकाङ्कमविष्कम्भप्रवेशकम् ॥ २८६॥ नियुद्ध सम्फेटयुतं सर्ववृत्तिसमाश्रितम्। नेपथ्ये गीयते नान्दी तथा तन्र परोचना ॥ २८७ ॥ यथा-वालिवधः । अथ रासकम्- रासकं पञ्ञपात्रं स्यान्मुखनिर्वहणान्वितम्। भाषाविभाषाभूयिष्ठं भारतीकैशिकीयुतम् ॥। २८८ ॥ असूत्रधारमेकाङ्कं सवीथ्यङ्ग कलान्वितम्। श्िष्टनान्दीयुतं ख्यातनायिकं मूर्खनायकम् ॥। १८९ ॥ उदात्तभावविन्याससंश्रितं चोत्तरोत्तरम्। इह प्रतिमुखं सन्धिमपि केचित्प्रचक्षते ॥ २९० ॥ यथा-मेनकाहितम्। अथ संलापकम्- संलापकेऽङ्काश्चत्वारख्यो वा नायक: पुनः। पाषण्डः स्याद्रससतत्र शृङ्गारकरुणेतरः ॥ २९१ ॥ भवेयुः पुरसंरोधच्छलसंग्रामविद्रवाः। न तत्र वृत्तिर्भवति भारती न च कैशिकी ।। २९२ ।। यथा-मायाकापालिकम्। अथ श्रीगदितम्- प्रख्यातवृत्तमेकाङ्कं प्रख्यातोदात्तनायकम्। . प्रसिद्धनायिकं गर्भविमर्शाभ्यां विवर्जितम् ॥ २९३॥ भारतीवृत्तिबहुलं श्रीतिशब्देन सङ्कुलम्। मतं श्रीगदितं नाम विद्वन्िरुपरूपकम् ॥ २९४ ॥ यथा-क्रीडारसातलम्। श्रीरासीना श्रीगदिते गायेत्किञ्चित्पठेदृपि। एकाङ्को भारतीप्राय इति केचित्प्रचक्षते ॥ २९५॥ ऊह्यमुदाहरणम्। अथ शिल्पकम्- चत्वारः शिल्पकेङ्काः स्युश्चतस्रो वृत्तयस्तथा। अशान्तहास्याश्च रसा नायको ब्राह्मणो मतः ॥ २९६॥ वर्णनाव्र इमशानादेर्हीनः स्यादुपनायकः । सप्षविंशतिरङ्गानि भवन्त्येतस्य तानि तु ॥ २९७॥

प्रयत्नग्रथनोत्कृण्ठावहित्थाप्रतिपत्तयः ॥ २९८ ॥ विलासालस्यबाष्पाणि प्रहर्षाश्वोसमूढताः।

· "समाश्रयम्' ग. २ 'यथा कलान्वितम्' ग. ३ 'श्रीरासीना' इत्यारभ्य 'ऊह्यमुदाहरणम्' इत्यन्तं ग-पुस्तके नास्ति, ४ "लस्यवाम्यानि' ग-ब. ५ 'हर्षाश्रील ब.

१०६ साहित्यदर्पणे [ ६.२९९

साधनानुगमोच्छ्ासविस्मय प्राप्तयस्तथा॥२९९॥ 1 लाभविस्मृतिसम्फेटा वैशारय्यं प्रबोधनम्। चमत्कृतिश्वेत्यमीषां स्पष्टत्वाल्लक्ष्म नोच्यते ॥ ३०० ॥ •सम्फेटग्रथनयो: पूर्वमुक्तत्वादेव लक्ष्म सिद्धम्। यथा-कनकावतीमाधवः । अथ विलासिका- शुङ्गारबहुलेकाङ्का दशलास्ाङ्गसंयुता। विदूषकविटाभ्यां च पीठमर्देन भूषिता ॥ ३०१ ॥ हीना गर्भविमर्शाभ्यां सन्विभ्यां हीननायका। स्वल्पवृत्ता सुनेपथ्या विख्याता सा विलासिका ॥ ३०२॥ केचित्त्वत्र विलासिकास्थाने विनायिकेति पठन्ति। तस्यास्तु 'दुर्मलिकायामन्त- र्भावः' इत्यन्ये। अथ दुर्मल्लिका- दुर्मेल्ली चतुरङ्का स्यात्कैशिकीभारतीयुता। अगर्भा नागरनरा न्यूननायकभूषिता ॥ ३०३ ॥ त्रिनालि: प्रथमोऽङ्कोऽस्यां विटक्रीडामयो भवेत्। पञ्जनालिर्द्वितीयोडङ्को विदूषकविलासवान्॥। ३०४॥ षण्णालिकस्तृतीयस्तु पीठमर्देविलासवान्। .

चतुर्थों दशनालि: स्यादङ्क: क्रीडितनागरः॥ ३०५ ॥ यथा-बिन्दुमती। अथ प्रकरणिका- नाटिकैव ग्रकरणी सार्थवाहादिनायका। समानवंशजा नेतुर्भवेद्यत्र च नायिका ।। ३०६ ॥ मृग्यमुदाहरणम्। अथ हल्ीश :- हलीश एक एवाङ्क: सप्ताष्टी दश वा स्तिरियः। वागुदात्तैकपुरुष: कैशिकीवृत्तिसड्कुलः । मुखान्तिमौ तथा सन्घी बहुताललयस्थितिः ॥। ३०७ ॥। यथा-केलिरवतकम्। अथ भाणिका- भाणिका शक्ष्णनेपथ्या मुखनिर्वहणान्विता। कैशिकीभारतीवृत्तियुक्तकाङ्कविनिर्मिता॥३०८ ॥ उदात्तनायिका मन्दपुरुषात्राङ्गसपकम्। उपन्यासोऽथ विन्यासो विबोधः साध्वसं तथा॥३०९॥ समर्पणं निवृत्तिश्च संहार इति सप्तमः । उपन्यासः प्रसङ्गेन भवेत्कार्यस्य कीर्तनम् ॥ ३१०॥ निर्वेदवाक्यव्युत्पत्तिर्विन्यास इति स स्मृतः । भ्रान्तिनाशो विबोध: स्ान्मिथ्याख्यानं तु साध्वसम् ॥ ३११॥

१ 'सचिन्ता' ग. २ 'वीथ्याभासा विला ग. ३ 'लासिकेति' ब. ४ 'भवेयुस्तत्र नायिकाः' ग. ५'वृत्तिरुज्ज्वला' नि.

६.३१२ ] षष्ठः परिच्छेदः । १०७

सोपालम्भंवचः कोपपीडयेह समर्पणम्। निदर्शनस्योपन्यासो निवृत्तिरिति कथ्यते ॥ ३१२॥ संहार इति च प्राहुर्यत्कार्यस्य समापनम्। स्पष्टान्युदाहरणानि। यथा-कामदत्ता। एतेषां सर्वेषां नाटकप्रकृतिकत्वेऽपि यथौचित्यं यथालाभं नाटकोक्तविशेषपरिग्रहः । यत्र च नाटकोक्तस्यापि पुनरुपादानं तत्र तत्सद्भावस्य नियमः। अथ श्रव्यकाव्यानि- श्रव्यं श्रोतव्यमात्रं तत्पद्यगद्यमयं द्विधा॥३१३ ॥ तत्र पद्यमयान्याह- छन्दोबद्धपदं पद्यं तेनैकेन च मुक्तकम्। द्वाभ्यां तु युग्मकं सन्दानितकं त्रिभिरिष्यते ॥ ३१४॥ कलापक चतुर्मिश्र पञ्चभि: कुलकं मतम्। तत्र सुक्तकं यथा मम- 'सान्द्रानन्दमनन्तमव्ययमजं यद्योगिनोऽपि क्षणं साक्षात्कर्तुमुपासते प्रतिमुद्दुर्ध्यानैकतानाः परभ्। धन्यास्ता मधुरापुरीयुवतयस्तद्रह्म याः कौतुका- दालिङगन्ति समालपग्ति शतधाकर्षन्ति चुम्बन्ति च।' युग्मकं यथा मम- किं करोषि करोपान्ते कान्ते गण्डस्थलीमिमाम्। प्रणयप्रवणे कान्तेऽनैकान्ते नोचिता: कुधः ॥ इति यावत्कुरङ्गाक्षीं वक्तमीहामहे वयम्। तावदाविरभूच्ूते मधुरो मधुपध्वनिः ॥' एवमन्यान्यपि। सर्गब्रन्धो महाकाव्यं तत्रैको नायक: सुरः ॥ ३१५॥ सद्वंश: क्षत्रियो वापि धीरोदात्तगुणान्वितः। एकवंशभवा भूपा: कुलजा बहवोडपि वा॥ ३१६ ॥ शङ्गारवीरशान्तानामेकोड़ड्गी रस इष्यते। अङ्गानि सर्वेऽपि रसाः सर्वे नाटकसन्घयः ॥ ३१७॥ इतिहासोन्नवं वृत्तमन्यद्वा सज्जनाश्रयम्। चत्वारस्तस्य वर्गाः स्युस्तेष्वेकं च फलं भवेत् ॥। ३१८ ।। आदौ नमस्क्रियाशीर्वा वस्तुनिर्देश एव वा। क्वचिन्निन्दा खलादीनां सतां च गुणकीर्तनम् ॥ ३१९॥ एकवृत्तमयैः पद्यैरवसानेऽन्यवृत्तकै: । नातिस्वल्पा नातिदीर्घा: सर्गा अष्टाविका इह॥ ३२० ॥

१ 'उपालम्भवचः कोपं पीडये' ग. २ 'तेन मुक्तेन मुक्तकम्' नि. ३ 'रूपा' ग. ४ 'चत्वारस्तत्र' ग.

१०८ साहित्यदर्पणे [ ६.३२१

नानावृत्तमयः क्वापि सर्गः कक्चन हशयते। सर्गान्ते भाविसर्गस्य कथाया: सूचनं भवेत् ॥ ३२१॥

सम्भोग चिप्रलम्भी च मुनिस्वर्गपुराध्वराः । रणप्रयाणोपयममन्नपुत्रोद्यादय: ॥३२३॥ वर्णनीया यथायोगं साङ्गोपाङ्गा भमी इह। कवेर्व्ृत्तस्य वा नाम्ना नायकस्येतरस्य वा ॥ ३२४ ॥ नामास्य सर्गोपादेयकथया सर्गनाम तु। सन््यङ्गानि यथालाभमत्र विधेयानि। 'अवसानेऽन्यवृत्तकैः' इति बहुवचनमविव- क्षितम्। साङ्गोपाङ्गा इति जलकेलिमधुपानादयः। यथा-रघुवेश-शिशुपालवध- नैषधादयः । यथा वा मम-राघवविलासादिः । अस्मिन्नार्षे पुनः सर्गा भवन्त्याख्यानसंज्ञकाः ॥ ३२५॥ अस्मिन्महाकाव्ये। यथा-महाभारतम्। प्राक्कृतैनिर्मिते तस्मिन्सर्गा आश्वाससंज्ञकाः । छन्दसा स्कन्धकेनैतत्क्चिद्गलितकैरपि॥ ३२६॥ यथा-सेतुबन्धः। यथा वा मम-कुवलयाश्वचरितम्। अपभ्रंश निबेद्धेऽसिमिन्सर्गा: कडवकामिघाः। तथापभ्रंशयोग्यानि च्छम्दांसि विविधान्यपि।। ३२७॥ यथा-कर्णपराक्रमः । भाषाविभाषानियमात्काव्यं सर्गसमुज्स्षितम्। एकार्थप्रवणः पद्यैः सन्धिसामकयवर्जितम् ॥ ३२८॥ यथा-भिक्षाटनम्, आर्याविलासश्च। खण्डकाव्यं भवेत्काव्यस्यैकदेशानुसारि च । यथा-मेधदूतादिः। कोष: श्रोकसमूहस्तु स्यादन्योन्यानपेक्षक: ॥ ३२९॥ व्रज्याक्रमेण रचितः स एवातिमनोरमः । सजातीयानामेकत्र संनिवेशो न्रज्या। यथा-मुक्तावल्यादि। अथ गद्यकाव्यानि। तत्र गद्यम्- वृत्तगन्धोज्झितं गद्यं मुक्तकं वृत्तगन्धि च ॥। ३३०॥ भवेदुत्कलिकाप्रायं चूर्णकं च चतुर्विधम्। आद्यं समासरहितं वृत्तभागयुतं परम् ॥३३१॥

१ 'स्कन्धे केनैव' ग. २ 'निबद्धेन' ग. ३ 'कुडवका' नि; 'कडरका' ग. ४ 'समुत्थि- तम्' नि. ५"मवण' ग. ६ 'वृत्तबन्धो' ग-ब. ७ 'कुलकं' ग.

६.३३२] षष्ठः परिच्छेदः । १०९

अन्यद्दीर्घसमासाळ्यं तुर्य चालपसमासकम्। मुक्तकं यथा-'गुरुर्वचसि पृथुरुरसि-' (हर्षचरित ३.१६) इत्यादि। वृत्तगन्धि यथा मम-'समरकण्डूलनिबिडमुजदण्डकुण्डेलीकृतकोदण्डशिजिनी- टङ्कारोज्जागरितवैरिनगर-' इत्यादि। अत्र 'कुण्डेलीकृतकोदण्ड-' इत्यनुष्टुव्वृत्तस्य पाद:, 'समरकण्डूल' इति च प्रथमाक्षरद्वयरहितस्तस्यैव पादः । उत्कलिकाप्रायं यथा ममैव-'अणिसवि सुमरणिसिदसरविसरविदलिदसमरपरिगद- पवरपरबल-' इत्यादि (अनि शविसमरनिशितशरविसरविदलित-समरपरिगतप्रवर- परबल)। चूर्णकं यथा मम-'गुणरलसागर जगदेकनागर कामिनीमदन जैन- रजन' इत्यादि। कथायां सरसं वस्तु पद्यैरेवें विनिर्मितम् ॥३३२ ॥ क्कचिदत्र भवेदार्या कचिद्वक्रापवक्रके। आदौ पद्यैर्नमस्कार: खलादेरवृत्तकीर्तनम् ॥३३३ ॥ यथा-कादम्बर्यादिः । आख्यायिका कथावत्स्यात्कवेर्वशानुकीर्तनम्। अस्यामन्यकवीनां च वृत्तं पद्यं क्चित्क्चित्॥। ३३४। कथांशानां व्यवच्छेद आश्वास इति बध्यते। आर्यावक्रापवक्राणां छन्दसा येन केनचित्॥ ३३५॥ अन्यापदेशेनाश्वासमुखे भाव्यर्थसूचनम्। यथा-हर्षचरितादिः । 'अपि त्वनियमो दृष्टस्तत्राप्यन्यैरुदीरणात् ।' इति (काव्यादर्शे १.२५) दण्ड्याचार्यवचनात्केचित् 'आख्यायिका नायकेनैव निबद्धव्या' इत्याहुँः, तदयुक्तम्। आख्यानादयश्च कथाख्यायिकयोरेवान्तर्भावान्न पृथगुक्ताः । यदुक्ततं दण्डिनैव-'अत्रैवान्तर्भविष्यन्ति शेषाश्चाख्यानजातयः ।' इति (काव्यादर्शे १.२८)। एषामुदाहरणम्-पञ्चतत्रादि। अथ गद्यपद्यमयानि- गद्यपद्यमयं काव्यं चम्पूरित्यभिधीयते ॥ ३३६॥ यथा-देशराजचरितम्। . गद्यपद्यमयी राजस्तुतिर्बिरुदमुच्यते। यथा-बिरुदमणिमाला। करम्भकं तु भाषाभिर्विविधाभिर्विनिर्मितम्॥ ३३७॥ यथा मम-षोडशभाषामयी प्रशस्तिरलावली। एवमन्येडपि भेदा उद्देशमात्र- प्रसिद्धत्वादुक्तमेदानतिक्रमाच्च न पृथग्लक्षिताः ॥ इति श्रीमत्साहित्यदर्पणे दृश्यश्रव्यकाव्यनिरूपणो नाम षष्ठः परिच्छेदः ।

१ 'मण्डलीकृत' ग. २ 'मण्डलीकृन' ग. ३ 'कुलकं' ग. ४ 'जनचित्तरञ्जन' ग. ५ 'गद्यैरेव' नि. ६ 'चोच्यते' ग. ७ भामहादयः 'गद्येन युक्तोदात्तार्था सोच्छासास्यायिका मता। वृत्तमाख्यायते तस्यां नायकेन स्वचेष्टितम् ...... संस्कृतं संस्कृता चेष्टा कथापभ्रंशभाक्तथा। अयैः खचरितं तस्यां नायकेन तु नोच्यते ॥' भामह १.२५-२९.

११० साहित्यदर्पणे [७.१

सप्तम: परिच्छेदः। इह प्रथमतः काव्ये दोषगुणरीत्यलङ्काराणामवस्थितिक्रमो दशितः । संप्रति के त इत्यपेक्षायामुद्देशक्रमप्राप्तानां दोषाणां स्वरूपमाह- रसापकर्षका दोषास् अस्यार्थ: प्रागेव स्फुटीकृतः । तद्विशेषानाह- ते पुनः पञ्चधा मताः। पदे तदंशे वाक्येऽर्थे सम्भवन्ति रसेऽपि यत् ॥१॥ स्पष्टम्। तत्र

ग्राम्याप्रतीतसन्दिग्धनेयार्थनिहतार्थता:।२। अवाचकत्वं क्विष्टत्वं विरुद्धमतिकारिता। अविमृष्टविधेयांशभावश्च पद्वाक्ययोः ॥३॥ दोषा:, केचिद्वन्त्येषु पदांशेऽपि, पदे पेरम्। निरर्थकासमर्थत्वे ध्युतसंस्कारता तथा ॥४ ॥ परुषवर्णतया श्रुतिदुःखावहत्वं दुःश्रवत्वम् । यथा-'कार्ताथ्य यातु तन्वङ्गी कदानङ्गवशंवदा।' अश्लीलत्वं व्रीडाजुगुप्सामङ्गलव्यअ्कत्वाञ्रिविधम्। क्रमेणोदा- हरणम्- 'दृप्तारिविजये राजन्साधनं सुमहत्तव।' 'प्रससार शनैर्वायुर्विनाशे तन्वि ते तदा।' अत्र साधन-वायु-विनाशशब्दा अश्रीलाः । 'शूरा अमरतां यान्ति पशुभूता रणाध्वरे' अत्र पशुपदं कातर्यमभिव्यनक्तीत्यनुचितार्थत्वम्। अप्रयुक्तत्वं तथा- प्रसिद्धावपि कविभिरनादृतत्वम् । यथा-'भाति पद्मः सरोवरे ।' अत्र पद्मशब्दः पुंलिङ्गः । ग्राम्यत्वं यथा-'कटिस्ते हरते मनः ।' अत्र कटिशब्दो ग्म्यः । अप्रतीतत्वमेकदेशमात्रप्रसिद्धत्वम् । यथा-'योगेन दलिताशयः ।' अत्र योगशास्त्र एव वासनार्थ आशयशब्दः । 'आशीःपरम्परां वन्धां कर्णे कृत्वा कृपां कुरु।' अत्र वन्दामिति किं बन्दीभूतायामुत वन्दनीयायामिति सन्देहः । नेयार्थत्वं रूढिप्रयो- जनाभावादशक्तिकृतं लक्ष्यार्थप्रकाशनम्। यथा-'कमले चरणाघातं मुखं सुमुखि तेडकरोत्।' अत्र चरणघातेन निर्जितत्वं लक्ष्यम्। निहतार्थत्वमुभयार्थस्य शब्दस्या- प्रसिद्धेडथें प्रयोगः। यथा- 'यमुनाशम्बरमम्बरं व्यतानीत्।' शम्बरशब्दो दैत्ये प्रसिद्धः । इह तु जले निहृतार्थः । 'गीतेषु कर्णमादत्ते' अत्राङ्-पू्वों दाञ-धातुर्दानार्थेऽवाचकः। यथा वा- 'दिनं मे त्वयि संप्राप्त ध्वान्तच्छन्नापि यामिनी।' अन्र दिनमिति प्रकाशमयार्थेऽवाचकम्। क्विष्टत्वमर्थप्रतीतेर्व्यवहितत्वम्। यथा-

१ 'छिष्टत्वं' ग. २ 'परे' नि. ३ 'हरति' स. ४ 'केशकर्मविपाकाशयैरपरामृष्टः पुरुष- विशेष ईश्वरः' (योगसूत्र १·२४ इत्यत्र) ५ 'दाधातुः' ग-स्. ६ 'वाचकः' ख.

७.२-४] सप्तम: परिच्छेदः । १११

'क्षीरोद जावसतिजन्मभुवः प्रसन्नाः ।' अत्र क्षीरोदजा लक्ष्मीस्तस्या वसतिः पझम तस्य जन्मभुवो जलानि। 'भूतयेऽस्तु भवानीशः'। अत्र भवानीशशब्दो भवान्याः पत्यन्तर- प्रतीतिकारित्वाद्विरुद्धमतिकृत् । अविमृष्टविधेयांशत्वं यथा-'स्वर्गग्रामटिकावि- लुण्ठनवृथोच्छूनैः किमेभिर्भुजैः ।' अत्र वृथात्वं विधेयम्, तच्च समासे गुणीभावाद- नुवाद्यत्वप्रतीतिकृत । यथा वा-'रक्षांस्यपि पुरः स्थातुमलं रामानुजस्य मे।' अत्र रामस्येति वाच्यम्। यथा वा- 'आसमुद्रक्षितीशानाम्' (रघु० १०५) अत्रासमुद्रमिति वाच्यम्। यथा वा- 'यत्र ते पतति सुभ्रु कटाक्षः षष्ठबाण इव पञ्चशरस्य।' अत्र षष्ठ इवेत्युत्प्रेक्ष्यम्। यथा वा-'अमुक्ता भवता नाथ मुहूर्तमपि सा पुरा।' अत्रामुक्तत्यत्र नञः प्रसज्यप्रतिषेधत्वमिति विधेयत्वमेवोचितम्। यदाहु :- 'अप्राधान्यं विधेर्यत्र प्रतिषेधे प्रधानता। प्रसज्यप्रतिषेधोडसौ क्रियया सह यत्र नञू।।' यथा-'नवजलधरः संनद्धोऽयं न दृप्तनिशाचरः ।' (विक्रमो० ४.१) उक्तोदाहरणे तु तत्पुरुषसमासे गुणीभावेन नञः पर्युंदासतया निषेधस्य विधेय- तयानवगमः । यदाहु :- 'प्रधानत्वं विधेयत्र प्रतिषेधेSप्रधानता। पर्युदास: स विज्ञेयो यत्रोत्तरपदेन नञ् ।' तेन 'जुगोपात्मानमत्रस्तो भेजे धर्ममनातुरः। अगृभुराददे सोऽर्थानसक्तः सुखमन्वभूत् ॥।' (रघु० १.२१) अन्रात्रस्तताद्यनूद्यात्मगोपनाद्येव विधेयमिति नञः पर्युदासतया गुणभावो युक्तः । ननु 'अश्राद्धभोजी ब्राह्मणः' 'असूर्यम्पश्या राजदाराः' इत्यादिवत् 'अमुक्ता' इत्यत्रापि प्रसज्यप्रतिषेधो भविष्यतीति चेत, न । तेत्रापि यदि भोजनादिरूपक्रियांशेन नञः सम्बन्धः स्यात्तदैव तत्र प्रसज्यप्रतिषेधत्वं वक्तुं शक्यम् । न च तथा। विशेष्यतया प्रधानेन तद्भरोज्यार्थेन कर्त्रशेनैव नञः सम्बन्धात्। यदाहु :- 'श्राद्धभोजनशीलो हि यतः कर्ता प्रवीयते। न त्दोजनमात्रं तु कर्तरीनेविधानतः ॥।' इति। 'अमुक्ता' इत्यत्र तु क्रिययैव सह सम्बन्ध इति दोष एव। एते च क्िष्टत्वादयः समासगता एव पददोषाः। वाक्ये दुःश्रवत्वं यथा- 'स्मरार्त्यन्धः कदा लप्स्ये कार्तार्थ्य विरहे तव।' 'कृतप्रवृत्तिरन्यायें कविर्वान्तं समश्रुते ॥' अत्र जुगुप्साव्यजिकाशीलता।

'अत्रोदाहरणे' ब. २ "गुणीभावे' नि-ब.३ 'अश्राद्धमोज्यसूर्य'ख-ग. ४ 'भवतीति' नि. ५ 'अत्रापि' नि-ब. ६ 'सम्बद्धत्वात्' ग-स. ७ 'मात्रं कर्तरि णिनेविधानादिति' ग-ख.

११२ साहित्यदर्पणे [ ७.२-४

'उदत्कमललौहित्यैर्वक्राभि र्भूषिता तनुः । ' अत्र कमललौहित्यं पद्मरागः । वक्राभिर्वामाभि:। इति नेयार्थता। 'धम्मिल्स्य न कस्य प्रेक्ष्य निकामं कुरङ्गशावाक्ष्याः। रज्यत्यपूर्वबन्धव्युत्पचेर्मानसं शोभाम्।I' अत्र धम्मिल्स्य शोभां प्रेक्ष्य कस्य मानसं न रज्यतीति सम्बन्धः क्विष्टः। 'न्यकारो ह्ययमेव मे यत्' इति। अत्र चायमेव न्यकार इति न्यक्वारस्य विधेयत्वं विवक्षितम्। तच्च शब्दरचनावैपरीत्येन गुणीभूतम्। रचना च पदद्वयस्य विपरीतेति वाक्यदोषः । 'आनन्दयति ते नेत्रे योऽसौ सुभ्रु समागतः ।' इत्यादिषु 'यत्तदोर्नित्यः सम्बन्धः' इति न्यायादुपकान्तस्य यच्छब्दस्य निराकाहृत्वप्रतिपत्तये तच्छब्दसमा- नार्थतया प्रतिपाद्यमाना इदमेतददःशब्दा विधेया एव भवितुं युक्ताः। अत्र तु यच्छब्दनिकटस्थतया अनुवाद्यत्वप्रतीतिकृत्। तच्छब्दस्यापि यच्छब्दनिकटस्थितस्य असिद्धपरामशित्वमात्रम्। यथा- 'यः स ते नयनानन्दकरः सुभ्रु स आगतः ।' यच्छब्दव्यवधानेन स्थितास्तु निराकाइकत्वमवगमयन्ति । यथा-'आनन्दयति ते नेत्रे योऽधुनासौ समागतः ।।' एवमिदमादिशब्दोपादानेऽपि। यत्र च यत्तदोरेकस्यार्थत्वं सम्भवति, तत्रैकस्योपा- दानेऽपि निराकाइृत्वप्रतीतिरिति न क्षतिः । तथाहि यच्छव्दस्योत्तरवाक्यगतत्व्ेनो- पादाने सामर्थ्यांत् पूर्ववाक्ये तच्छब्दस्यार्थत्वम्। यथा-'आात्मा जानाति यत्पा- पम्'। एवम्-'यं सर्वशैलाः परिकल्प्य वत्सं मेरौ स्थिते दोग्धरि दोहदक्षे। भास्वन्ति रलनानि महौषधीश्च-' (कुमार० १.२) इत्यादावपि। तच्छब्दस्य प्रक्रान्तप्रसिद्धानु- भूतार्थत्वे यच्छब्दस्यार्थत्वम्। क्रमेण यथा- 'स हत्वा वालिनं वीरं तत्पदे चिरकाहिते। धातोः स्थान इवादेशं सुगरीवं संन्यवेशयत' ॥ (रघु० १२.५८) 'स वः शशिकलामौलिस्वादात्म्यायोपकल्प्यताम्।' 'तामिन्दुसुन्दरमुखी हृदि चिन्तयामि।' यत्र च यच्छब्दनिकटस्थितानामपीदमादिशब्दानां भिन्नलिङ्गविभक्तित्वं तत्रापि निराकाहृत्वमेव। क्रमेण यथा- 'विभाति मृगशावाक्षी येदं भुवनभूषणम्।' 'इन्दुर्विभाति यस्तेन दग्धाः पथिकयोषितः ।' कचिदनुपात्तयोई्वयोरपि सामर्थ्यादवगमः । यथा- 'न मे शमयिता कोऽपि भारस्येत्युर्वि मा शुचः ।

१ 'असूर्यम्पश्या इत्यत्र तु दशे: सूर्योपपदात् खज्विधा नात्सूर्यपदेन नओकिसमर्थसमासज्ञापनम्। प्रसज्यप्रतिषेधार्थकत्वेपि समाधानं दर्शनक्रियान्वस्यैव प्रतीयमानत्वात्' इत्यधिकं ख-पुस्तके. २ काव्यप्रकाशे सप्तमोल्ास उदाहृतमिदं वामनीयकाव्यालङ्कारसूत्रवृत्तौ च (२.१.२२). ३ प्रथमे परिच्छेद उदाहृतमिदम्. ४ 'नित्यसम्बन्धः ख-ग. ५ 'तदैकत्यो" ग. ६ 'वीरः' नि.

७.२-४] सप्तम: परिच्छेद: । ११३

नन्दस्य भवने कोऽपि बालोऽस्त्य द्भुतपौरुषः ।।' अत्र योऽस्ति, स ते भारस्य शमयितेति बुध्यते। 'यद्यद्विरहदुःखं मे तत्को वापहरिष्यति।' इत्यत्रैको यच्छब्दः साकाह इति न वाच्यम्। तथाहि- यद्यदित्यनेन येन केनचिद्रूपेण स्थितं सर्वात्मकं वस्तु विवक्षितम्। तथाभूतस्य तस्य तच्छब्देन परामर्शः । एवमन्येषामपि वाक्यगतत्वेनोदाहरणं बोच्यम्। पदांशे श्रुतिकट यथा-'तद्गच्छ सिद्धयै कुरु देवकार्यम् (कुमार० १.१८)।' 'धातुमत्तां गिरिर्धत्ते।' अत्र मत्ताशब्दः क्षीबार्थे निदतार्थः। 'वर्ण्यते किं मह्ासेनो विजेयो यस्य तारकः ।' अत्र विजेय इति कृत्यप्रत्ययः कप्रत्ययार्थेऽवाचकः। 'पाणिः पल्लवपेलवः ।' अत्र पेलवशव्दस्याद्याक्षरे अश्लीले। 'संग्रामे निहताः शूरा वचोबाणत्व- मागताः ।' अत्र वचःशब्दस्य गीःशब्दवाचकत्वे नेयार्थत्वम्। तथा तत्रैव बाणस्थाने शरेति पाठे। अत्र पदद्वयमपि न परिवृत्तिसहम्। जलध्यादौ तूत्तरपदं वैडवान- लादौ पूर्वपदम्। एवमन्येऽपि यथासम्भवं पदांशदोषा ज्ञेयाः। निरर्थकत्वादीनां त्रयाणां च पदमात्रगतत्वेनैव लक्ष्ये सम्भवः । क्रमेण यथा-'मुन्न मानं हि मानिनि।' अत्र हिशब्दो वृत्तपूरणमात्रप्रयोजनः । 'कुअं इन्ति कृशोदरी ।' अत्र इन्तीति गमनार्थे पठितमपि न तत्र समर्थम् । 'गाण्डीवी कनकशिलानिभं भुजाभ्यामाजन्न विषमविलोचनस्य वक्षः (किराता० १७.६३) ।' 'आडो यमहनः' (पो० १.३.२८), 'स्वाङ्गकर्मकाच्च' इत्यनुशासनबलादाङ्पूर्वस्य हनः स्वाङ्गकर्मकस्यैवात्मनेपदं नियमितम्। इह तु तलङ्गितमिति व्याकरण- लक्षणहीनत्वात् च्युतसंस्कारत्वम्। नन्वत्र 'आजप्न' इति पदस्य स्वतो न दुष्टता, अपि तु पदान्तरापेक्षयैवेत्यस्य वाक्यदोषता। मैवम्। तथाहि गुणदोषालङ्काराणा शब्दार्थगतत्वेन व्यवस्थितेस्तदन्वयव्यतिरेकानुविधायित्वं हेतुः । इह तु दोषस्य 'आजम्ने' इति पदमात्रस्यैवान्वयव्यतिरेकानुविधायित्वम्। पदान्तराणां परिवर्तनेऽपि तस्य तादवस्थ्यादेव इति पददोष एव। तथा यथेहात्मनेपदस्य परिवृत्तावपि न पददोष:, तथा हन्प्रकृतेरपीति न पदांशे दोषः । एवं 'पदमः' इत्यत्राप्रयुक्तस्य पद- गतत्वं बोध्यभ्। एवं प्राकृतादिव्याकरणलक्षणहानावपि च्युतसंस्कारत्वमूत्यम्। इह तु शब्दानां सर्वथा प्रयोगाभावेऽसमर्थत्वम्। विरलप्रयोगे निहृतार्थत्वम्। निहतार्थत्वमनेकार्थशब्दविषयम्। अप्रतीतत्वं त्वेकार्थस्यापि शब्दस्य सार्वत्रिकप्रयोग- विरहः। अप्रयुक्तत्वमेकार्थशब्दविषयम्। असमर्थत्वमनेकार्थशब्दविषयम्। असमर्थत्वे इन्त्यादयो ग्मनार्थे पठिताः । अवाचकत्वे दिनादयः प्रकाशमयाद्यर्थे न तथेति परस्परमेदः। एवं पददोषसजातीया वाक्यदोषा उक्ताः। संप्रति तद्विजातीया उच्यन्ते। वर्णानां प्रतिकूलत्वं, लुस्ताहतविसर्गते। अधिकन्यूनकथितपद्ताहतवृत्तताः॥५॥ पतत्प्रकर्षता, सन्धौ विश्रलेषाश्रीलकष्टताः ।

१ 'निहतः' नि. २ 'पेल' इत्यस्य लाटभाषायां वृषणार्थत्वात्. ३ 'वाडवा" नि-ब. * वार्तिकमिदं 'उद्विभ्यां तपः' 'आाडो यमहनः' इति द्वयोरपि सूत्रयोरनुबर्तते. ५ 'गमनार्थेपि' ग.

११४. साहित्यदर्पणे [७.५-6

अर्धान्तरैकपदता समाप्तपुनरात्तता ॥। ६ ।। अभवन्मतसम्बन्धाक्रमामतपरार्थताः । वाच्यस्यानभिधानं च भग्नप्रक्रमता तथा ॥।७॥ त्याग: प्रसिद्धेरस्थाने न्यास: पदसमासयोः । सङ्कीर्णता गर्मितता दोषा: स्युर्वाक्यमान्नगाः॥८॥ वर्णानां रसानुगुण्यविपरी तत्वं प्रतिकूत्वम्। यथा मम- 'ओवट्टइ उल्लदृइ्द सभणे कहिंपि मोटाअइ णो परिहृट्टइ्द। हिअएण फिट्टइ लज्जाइ खुटृइ दिहीए सा ।।' (उद्धर्वयति उलोटयति शयने कहि अपि मोट्टयति नो परिघट्ट्यति। हृदयेन स्फिटयति लज्जया खुटटयति धृतेः सा) अत्र टकाराः शङ्गाररसपरिपन्थिनः केवलं शक्तिप्रदर्शनाय निबद्धाः। एवां चैक- द्वित्रिचतुःप्रयोगे न तादृग्रसभङ्ग इति न दोषः । 'गता निशा इमा बाले।' अत्र विसर्गा लुप्ताः । आइता ओत्वं प्राप्ता विसर्गा यत्र। यथा-'धीरो वरो नरो याति' इति। 'पलवाकृतिरक्तोष्ठी ।' अत्राकृतिपदमधिकम्। एवम्-'सदाशिवं नौमि पिनाकपाणिम् ।' अत्र पिनाकपाणिमिति विशेषणमधिकम्। 'कुर्या हरस्यापि पिनाकपाणेः' (कुमार० ३.१०) इत्यत्र तु पिनाकपाणिपदं विशेषप्रतिपत्त्यर्थमुपात्तमिति युक्तमेव। यथा-'वाचमु- वाच कौत्स:' (रघु. ५.३२) अत्र वाचमित्यधिकम् । उवाचेत्यनेनैव गतार्थत्वात्। कचित्तु विशेषणदानार्थ तत्प्रयोगो युज्यतेपि। यथा-'उवाच मधुरां वाचम्' इति। केचित्वाहु :- यत्र विशेषणस्यापि क्रियाविशेषणत्वं सम्भवति तत्रापि तत्प्रयोगो न घटते। यथा-'उवाच मधुरं धीमान्' इति। 'यदि मय्यर्पिता दृष्टिः कि ममेन्द्रतया तदा।' अत्र प्रथमे त्वयेति पदं न्यूनम् । 'रतिलीलाश्रमं भिन्ते सलीलमनिलो वहन्।' अत्र लीलाशब्दः पुनरुकः । एवम्-'जक्षुर्बिसं धृतविकासिबिसप्रसूनाः' । अत्र बिसशब्दस्य धृतपरिस्फुटतत्प्रसूना इति सर्वनाम्नैव परामर्शो युक्तः। हतवृतं लक्षणानुसरणेऽप्यश्रव्यं रसाननुगुणमप्राप्तगुरुभावान्तलघु च। क्रमेण यथा- 'हन्त सत तमेतस्या हृदयं भिन्ते मनोभवः कुपितः ।' 'अयि मयि मानिनि मा कुरु मानम्।' इदं वृत्तं हास्यरसस्यैवानुकूलम्। 'विकसितसहकारभारहारिपरिमल एष समागतो वसन्तः ।' यत्पादान्ते लघोरपि गुरुभाव उक्तस्तत्सर्वत्र द्वितीयचतुर्थपादविषयम् । प्रथमतृतीयपादविषयं तु वसन्त- तिलकादेरेव। अत्र 'प्रमुदितसौरभ आगतो वसन्तः' इति पाठो युक्तः। यथा वा- 'अन्यास्ता गुणरत्नरोद्दणभुवो धन्या मृदन्यैव सा सम्भारा: खलु तेऽन्य एव विधिना यैरेष सृष्टो युवा। 48

· 'लुप्तविसर्गाः नि-बं. २ "मुपात्तत्वाद्यु" ग-ख. ३ 'सानुसवारश्च दीर्घश्च विसर्गी च गुरुर्भवेत्। वर्णः संयोगपूर्वश्च तथा पादान्तगोपि वा ।' इत्युक्तम्.

6.4-61 सप्तम: परिच्छेदः । ११५

श्रीमत्कान्तिजुषां द्विषां करतलात्स्त्रीणां नितम्बस्थला- दृष्टे यत्र पतन्ति मूढमनसामस्राणि वस्त्राणि चे।।' अत्र वस्राणि चेति बन्धस्य श्रथत्वश्रुतिः । 'वस्त्राण्यपि' इति पाठे तु दार्ढ्यमिति न दोषः । 'इदमप्राप्तगुरुभावान्तलघु' इति काव्यप्रकाशकरिः । वस्तुतस्तु 'लक्षणानु- सरणेऽप्यश्रव्यम्' इत्यन्ये। प्रज्ज्वलज्ज्वलनज्वालाविकटोरुसटाछटः । इ्वासक्षिप्तकुलक्ष्माभृत्पातु वो नरकेसरी ।।' अत्र क्रमेणानुप्रासप्रकर्षः पतितः । 'दलिते उत्पले एते अक्षिणी अमलाङ्गि ते।' एवंविधसन्धिविश्रलेषस्यासकृत्प्रयोग एव दोषः । अनुशासनमुलङ्क्य वृत्तभक्गभय- मात्रेण सन्धिविश्रेषस्य तु सकृदपि। यथा-'वासवाशामुखे भाति इन्दुश्चन्दनबिन्दुवत्।' 'चलण्डामरचेष्टितः' इति। अत्र सन्धौ जुगुप्साव्यजकमश्रीलत्वम्। 'उर्व्यसावत्र तर्वाली मर्वन्ते चार्ववस्थितिः ।' अत्र सन्धौ कष्टत्वम्। 'इन्दुर्विभाति कर्पूरगौरैधवलयन्करैः । जगन्मा कुरु तन्वङ्गि मानं पादानवे प्रिये॥' अत्र जगदिति प्रथमार्थे पठितुमुचितम्। 'नाशयन्तो धनध्वान्तं तापयन्तो वियोगिनः । पतन्ति शशिनः पादा भासयन्तः क्षमातलम् ।।' अत्र चतुर्थपादो वाक्यसमाप्तावपि पुनरात्तः। अभवन्मतसम्बन्धो यथा- 'या जयश्रीर्मनोजस्य यया जगदलङ्गतम्। यामेणाक्षीं विना प्राणा विफला मे कुतोऽद सा ।' अत्र यच्छब्दनिर्दिष्टानां वाक्यानां परस्परनिरपेक्षत्वात्तदेकान्त:पातिनैणाक्षीशब्दे- नान्येषां सम्बन्धः कवेरेभिमतो नोपपद्यत एव। 'यां विनामी वृथा प्राणा एणाक्षी सा कुतोऽद मे।' इति तच्छब्दनिर्दिष्टवाक्यान्तःपातित्वे तु सर्वैरपि यच्छब्दनिर्दिष्ट- वाक्यान्त:पातित्वे वाक्यैः सम्बन्धो घटते। यथा वा- 'ईक्षसे यत्कटाक्षेण तदा धन्वी मनोभवः ।' अत्र यदित्यस्य तदेत्यनेन सम्बन्धो न घटते। 'ईक्षसे चेत्' इति तु युक्त: पाठः । यथा वा- 'ज्योत्साचयः पयःपूरस्तारकाः कैरवाणि च। राजति व्योमकासारराजइंस: सुधाकरः ।' अत्र कासारशब्दस्य समासे गुणीभावात्तदर्थस्य न सवैंः संयोगः । विधेयावि- मर्शे यदेवाविमृष्टं तदेव दुष्टम्। इह तु प्रधानस्य कासारपदार्थस्य प्राधान्येनाप्रतीते:

१ काव्यप्रकाशे सप्तमोल्लास उदाहृतमिदम्. २ 'अनुप्रासः प्रकर्षः पतितः' ग. ३ 'चलण्डामर इत्यत्र 'चलन्' इति 'डामर' इत्येतयो: सन्धौ 'लण्डा' शब्दः प्रतिभाति स च पुरीषार्थक इति जुगुप्सा. ४ काव्यप्रकाशे सपतमोल्लास उदाहृतमिदम्. ५इदमर्थान्तरैकपदताया उदाहरणम् ६ 'कविभिरभिमतोपि नोपपद्यत इति' ग-ख. ७ "कासारे राज" नि. ८ 'अत्र व्योम- कासार' नि.

११६ साहित्यदर्पणे [७.५-८

सर्वोऽपि पयःपूरादिपदार्यस्तदङ्गतया न प्रतीयते, इति सर्ववाक्यार्थविरोषावमास इत्युभयोर्भेदः । 'अनेन च्छिन्दता मातुः कण्ठं परशुना तव। बद्धस्पर्द्ध: कृपाणीडयं लज्जते मम भार्गव ।।' अत्र भार्गवनिन्दायां प्रयुक्तस्य मातृकण्ठच्छेदनस्य परशुना सह सम्बन्धो न युकत इति प्राच्याः। परशुनिन्दामुखेन भार्गवनिन्दाधिकमेव वैदग्ध्यं द्योतयतीत्याधुनिकाः । अक्मता यथा- 'समय एव करोति बलाबलं प्रणिगदन्त इतीव शरीरिणाम्। शरदि हंसरवाः परुषीकृतस्वरमयूरमयू रमणीयताम्॥' (शिशु. ६.४४.) अत्र परामृश्यमानवाक्यानन्तरमेवेतिशब्दो युक्तः, न तु प्रणिगदन्त इत्यनन्तरम्। एवम्- 'द्वयं गतं संप्रति शोचनीयतां समागमप्रार्थनया कपालिनः । कला च सा कान्तिमती कलावतस्त्वमस्य लोकस्य च नेत्रकौमुदी॥' (कुमा.५.७१) अत्र त्वमित्यनन्तरमेव चकारो युक्तः । अमतपरार्थता यथा-'राममन्मथशरेण ताडिता-' (रघु. ११.२०) इत्यादि। अत्र शङ्गाररसस्य व्य्जको द्वितीयोऽर्थ: प्रकृतरसविरोधित्वादनिष्टः । वाच्यस्यानभिधानं यथा-'व्यतिक्रमलवं कं मे वीक्ष्य वामाक्षि कुप्यसि।' अत्र व्यतिक्रमलवमपीत्यपिरवश्यं वक्तव्यो नोक्तः । न्यूनपदत्वे चाचकपदस्यैव न्यूनता विवक्षिता। अपेस्तु न तथात्वमित्यनयोर्भेदः । एवमन्यत्रापि। यथा वा-'चरणानतकान्तायास्तन्वि कोपस्तथापि ते।' अत्र चरणानतका- न्तासीति वाच्यम्। भग्नप्रक्रमता यथा-'एवमुक्तो मत्रिमुख्यै रावणः प्रत्य- भाषत।' अत्र वचधातुना प्रक्रान्तं प्रतिवचनमपि तेनैव वक्तुमुचितम्। तेन 'रावणः प्रत्यवोचत' इति पाठो युक्तः । एवं च सति न कथितपदत्वदोषः तस्योद्देश्यप्रतिनि- देश्यव्यतिरिक्तविषयत्वात्। इह हि वचनप्रतिवचनयोरुद्देश्यप्रतिनिर्देशत्वम्। यथा- 'उदेति सविता ताम्रस्ताम्र एवास्तमेति चे।' इत्यत्र यदि रक्त एवेति पर्दोन्तरेण स एवार्थ: प्रतिपाद्यते तदान्योऽर्थ इव प्रतिभासमानः प्रतीति स्थगयति। यथा वा- 'ते हिमालयमामच्न्य पुनः प्रेक्ष्य च शूलिनम्। सिद्धूं चास्मै निवेद्यार्थ तद्विसष्टाः खमुद्युः ॥' (कुमार० ६.९४) अत्र 'अस्मै' इतीदमा प्रक्रान्तस्य तेनैव तत्समानाभ्यामेतददःशब्दाभ्यां वा परा -. मशों युक्तो न तच्छब्देन। यथा वा-'उदन्यच्छिन्ना भूः स च पतिरपां योजन- शतम् ।' (नीतिश०) अत्र 'मिता भूः पत्यापा स च पतिरपाम्' इति युक्त: पाठः । एवम्-

· "निन्दाधिक्यमेव' नि-ब. २ 'परामृश्यवाक्या" ग. ३ 'शब्दप्रयोगो युक्त:' ब; 'शब्द- प्रयोगो युज्यते' नि. ४ 'सम्पत्तौ च विपत्तौ च महतामेकरूपता' इत्यधिकं ग-पुस्तके. ५ 'इत्यत्र हि यदि पदान्तरेण' नि; 'इत्यत्र यदि पदा' ब.

9.4-6] सप्तम: परिच्छेद: । ११७

'यशोऽधिगन्तुं सुखलिप्सया वा मनुष्यसंख्यामतिवरतितुं वा। निरुत्सुकानामभियोगभाजां समुत्सुकेवाङ्कमुपैति सिद्धिः ॥' (किराता० ३.४०) अत्र 'सुखमीहितुम्' इत्युच्चितम्। अत्राद्ययोः प्रकृतिविषयः प्रक्रमभेदः । तृतीये पर्यायविषयः, चतुर्थे प्रत्ययविषयः । एवमन्यत्रापि। असिद्धित्यागो यथा-'घोरो वारिमुचां रवः ।' अत्र मेघानां गजिंतमेव प्रसि- द्रम्। यदाहु :- 'मज्जीरादिषु रणितप्रायं पक्षिषु च कूजितप्रभृति। स्तनितमणितादि सुरवे मेधादिषु गजितप्रमुखम्।' (रुद्रट० ६.२५) इत्यादि। अस्थानस्थपदता यथा- 'वीथे वदीये गजसेतुबन्धात्प्रतीपगामुत्तरतोऽस्य गङ्गाम्। अयलबालव्यजनीबभूवुहेसा नमोलङ्गनलोलपक्षा: ।।' (रघु० १६.३३) अत्र तदीयेपदात्पूर्व गङ्गामित्यस्य पाठो युक्तः । एवम्-'हितान्न यः संश्णुते स किंप्रभु:' (किराता० १.५।) अत्र संशृणुत इत्यतः पूर्व नञः स्थितिरुचिता। अत्र च पदमात्रस्यास्थाने निवेशेऽपि सर्वमेव वाक्यं विवक्षितार्थप्रत्यायने मन्थरमिति वाक्यदोषता। एवमन्यत्रापि। इह केडप्याडु :- 'पदशब्देन वाचकमेव प्रायो निग- बते, न च नञो वाचकता निर्विवादात्स्वातव्रयेणार्थबोधनविरहात' इति। यथा- 'द्वयं गतम्-' इत्यादौ त्वमित्यनन्तरं चकारानुपादानादक्रमता तथात्रापीति। अस्थानस्थसमासता यथा- 'अद्यापि स्तनशैलदुर्गविषमे सीमन्तिनीनां हृदि स्थातुं वाञ्छाते मान एष घिगिति क्रोधादिवालोहितः । प्रोघद्दरतरप्रसारितकर: कर्षत्यसौ तत्क्षणा-

अन्र कोपिन उक्ती समासो न कृतः । कवेरुक्तौ तु कृतः। वाक्यान्तरपदानां वाक्यान्तरेऽनुप्रवेशः सङ्कीर्णत्वम् । यथा-'चन्द्रं मुञ्च कुरङ्गाक्षि पश्य मानं नभोङ्गने।' अत्र नभोङ़ने चन्द्रं पश्य मानं सुञ्जेति युक्त्तम्। 'क्विष्टत्वमेकवाक्यविषयम्' इत्य- स्माद्विन्नम्। वाक्यान्तरे वाक्यान्तरानुप्रवेशो गर्भितता। यथा- 'रमणे चरणप्रान्ते प्रणतिप्रवणेडधुना। वदामि सखि ते तत्त्वं कदाचिन्नोचिता: क्रुधः ॥' अर्थदोषानाह-

अनवीकृतनिहेतुप्रकाशितविरुद्धताः ॥ ९।। सन्दिग्धपुनरुक्त्तत्वे ख्यातिविद्याविरुद्धते। १ 'तदीयमिति पदात्' ग. २ "स्थानविनिवेशेपि' ग-स. 'अत्र तदीय इति पदात्' ख. ३ 'कृपाणी' ग-स. १ काव्यप्रकाशे सप्तमोल्लास उदाहृतमिदम्. ५ 'चरणपाप्ते' ग.

११८ साहित्यदर्पणे [७.१0

साकाङ्कता सहचरभिन्नतास्थानयुक्तता॥ १० ॥ अविशेषे विशेषश्चानियमे नियमस्तथा। तयोर्विपर्यया विध्यनुवादायुक्त्तते तथा॥। ११ ॥ निर्मुक्तपुनरुक्तत्वमर्थदोषाः प्रकीर्तिताः । तद्विपर्ययो विशेषेऽविशेषो नियमेऽनियमः । अन्नापुष्टत्वं मुख्यानुपकारित्वम्। यथा-'विलोक्य वितते व्योम्नि विधुं सुञ्च रुषं प्रिये।' अत्र विततशब्दो मानत्यागं प्रति न किंच्चिदुपकुरुते। अधिकपदत्वे पदार्थान्वयप्रवीतेः समकालमेव बाधप्रतिभासः, हह तु पश्चादिति विशेष: । दुष्क्रमता यथा- 'देहि मे वाजिनं राजन्गजेन्द्रं वा मदालसम्।' अत्र गजेन्द्रस्य प्रथमं याचनमु- च्वितम्। 'स्वपिहि त्वं समीपे मे स्वपिम्येवाधुना प्रिये।' अत्रार्थों आ्रम्यः। कस्यचि- त्प्रागुत्कर्षमपकर्षे वाभिधाय पश्चात्तदन्यत्वप्रतिपादनं व्याहतत्वम्। यथा- 'हरन्ति हृदयं यूनां न नवेन्दुकलादयः । वीक्ष्यते यैरियं तन्वी लोकलोचनचन्द्रिका ॥।' अत्र येषामिन्दुकला नानन्दहेतुस्तेषामेवानन्दाय तन्व्याश्चन्द्रिकात्वारोपः । 'इन्तुमेव प्रवृत्तस्य स्तब्धस्य विवरैषिणः । यथाशु जायते पातो न तथा पुनरुन्नंतिः ॥' (भामह १.५१)

'वर्षत्येतदहर्पतिर्न तु धनो धामस्थमच्छं पयः सत्यं सा सवितुः सुता सुरसरित्पूरो यया प्ावितः । व्यासस्योक्तिषु विश्वसित्यपि न कः श्रद्धा न कस्य श्रुतौ न प्रत्येति तथापि मुग्धहरिणी भासवन्मरीचिष्वपः ।।' अत्र यस्मात्सूर्याद्वृष्टर्यमुनायाश्च प्रभवस्तस्मात्तयोर्जलमपि सूर्यप्रमवम्। ततश्च सूर्यमरीचीनां जलप्रत्ययहेतुत्वमुचितम्। तथापि सृगी भ्रान्तत्वात्तत्र जलप्रत्ययं न करोति। अयमप्रस्तुतोऽप्यर्थों दुबोधः दूरे चास्मत्प्रस्तुतार्थबोध इति कष्टार्थत्वम्। 'सदा चरति खे भानु: सदा वहति मारुतः । सदा धत्ते भुवं शेषः सदा धीरोऽविकत्थनः ॥' अत्र सदेत्यनवीकृतत्वम्। अत्रास्य पदस्य पर्यायान्तरेणोपादानेऽरपि यदि नान्य- द्विच्छित्त्यन्तरं तदास्य दोषस्य सद्भाव इति कथितपदत्वाद्वेदः। नवीकृतत्वं यथा- 'भानु: सकृद्युक्ततुरङ्ग एव रात्रिदिवं गन्धवहः प्रयाति। विभ्ति शेष: सततं धरित्रीं षष्ठांशवृत्तेरपि धर्म एषः ।' (शाकु० ५.४)

१ 'स्थानमुक्तता' ग-स. २ 'नियुक्त' ग-स. ३ 'तदन्यपति" नि-ब. १ काव्यग्रकाशे सतमोल्लास उदाहृतमिदम्. ५ 'यभा' नि. ६ 'सूर्यो वृष्टर्यमुनायाश् प्रमवतः' ग-ख(प्रभवः) • 'जलप्रयोजनहेतुत्व.' ब. ८ करोतीत्ययमप्रस्तु" ग-ख.

७.S-१२ ] सप्तम: परिच्छेद: । ११९

'गृहीतं येनासी: परिभवभयान्नोचितमपि प्रभावाद्यस्याभून्न खलु तव कश्षिन्न विषयः । परित्यक्तं तेन त्वमपि सुतशोकान्न तु भया- द्विमोक्ष्ये शस्त्र त्वामहमपि यतः स्वस्ति भवते ॥' (वेणी० ३.१९) अत्र द्वितीये शस्त्रमोचने हेतुनोंक्त इति निर्हेतुत्वम्। 'कुमारस्ते नराधीश श्रियं समधिगच्छतु।' अत्र 'त्वं त्रियस्व' इति विरुद्धार्थप्रकाशनात्प्रकाशितविरुद्धत्वम् । 'अचला अवला वा स्युः सेव्या ब्रूत मनीषिणः ।' अत्र प्रकरणाभावाच्छान्तर्ङ्गारिणोः को वक्तेति निश्चयाभावात्सन्दिग्वत्वम्। 'सहसा विदधीत न क्रियामविवेकः परमापदां पदम्। वृणते हि विमृश्यकारिणं गुणलुब्धा: स्यमेव सम्पदः ॥' (किराता० २.३०) अन्न द्वितीयार्धव्यतिरेकेण द्वितीयपादस्यैवार्थ इति पुनरुक्ता। प्रसिद्धिविरुद्धता यथा- 'ततश्चचार समरे शितशूलधरो हरिः ।' अत्र हरे: शूलं लोकेऽप्रसिद्धम्। यथा वा- 'पादाधातादशोकस्ते सञ्जाताङ्करकण्टकः ।' अत्र पादाघातादशोकेषु पुष्पमेव जायत इति प्रसिद्धं न त्वङ्कुर इति कविसमयख्यातिविरुद्धता। 'अधरे करजक्षतं मृगाक्ष्याः' अत्र शङ्गारशास्त्रविरुद्धत्वाद्विद्याविरुद्धता। एवमन्यशास्त्रविरुद्धत्वमपि। 'ऐशस्य धनुषो भङ्गं क्षत्रस्य च समुन्नतिम् । स्त्रीरतं च कथं नाम मृष्यते भार्गवोडधुना ।।'

'सज्जनो दुर्गतौ मन्नः कामिनी गलितस्तनी। खल: पूज्यः समज्यायां तापाय मम चेतसः ॥' अत्र सज्जन: कामिनी च शोभनौ तत्सहचरः खलोऽशोभन इति सहचरभिन्नत्वम्। 'आाज्ञा शक्रशिखामणिप्रणयिनी शास्त्राणि चक्षुर्नवं भक्तिर्भूतपतौ पिनाकिनि पदं लङ्केति दिव्या पुरी। उत्पत्तिर्द्रुहिणान्वये च तदहो नेदृग्वरो लभ्यते 7 स्याच्चेदेष न रावणः क्व नु पुनः सर्वत्र सर्वे गुणाः ॥।' (बालरा. १.३६) अत्र न रावण इत्येतावतैव समाप्यम्। 'हीरकाणां निधेरस्य सिन्धोः कि वर्णया- महे।' अत्र रत्नानां निधेरित्यविशेष एव वाच्यः। 'आवर्त एव नाभिस्ते नेत्रे नीलसरोरुहे। भङ्गाश्च वलयस्तेन त्वं लावण्याम्बुवापिका ।।' अन्नावर्त एवेति नियमो न वाच्य: । 'यान्ति नीलनिचोलिन्यो रजनीष्वभिसारिकाः ।'

१ 'अत्र शस्रमोचनहेतु" ग. २ °गच्छति' ग-ख. ३ 'द्वितीयार्ध व्यति" ख. ४ 'इति प्रसिद्धम्' इति नास्ति ख-पुस्तके. ५" रत्नमुपेक्षितुमित्याकांक्षता' नि-ब. ६ 'दुर्गतो' नि.

१२० साहित्यदर्पणे [ ७.९-१२

अत्र तमिस्रास्विति रजनीविशेषो वाच्य: । 'आपातेसुरसे भोगे निमम्राः कि न कुर्वते।' अत्र आपात एवेति नियमो वाच्यः। ननु वाच्यस्यानभिधाने 'व्यतिक्रमलवम्' इत्यादावपेरभावः, इह चैवकारस्वेति कोऽनयोरभेंदः । अत्राह-'नियमस्यावचनमेव पृथग्भूतं नियमपरिवृत्तेविषयः' इति, तन्न। तथा सत्यपि द्वयोः शब्दार्थदोषतायां नियामकाभावाद्। तत्का गतिरिति चेत्, 'व्यतिकमरवम्' इत्यादौ शब्दोच्चारणानन्तरमेव दोषप्रतिभासः। इह त्वर्थ- प्रत्ययानन्सरमिति भेदः । एवं च शब्दपरिवृत्तिसहत्वासहत्वाभ्यां पूर्वैरादृतोऽपि' शब्दार्थदोषविभाग एवं पर्यवस्यति-यो दोषः शब्दपरिवृत्त्यसहः स शब्ददोष एवं। यश्च पदार्थान्वयप्रतीतिपूर्वबोध्यः सोऽपि शब्ददोषः । यश्चार्थप्रतीत्यनन्तरं बोध्यः सोऽर्थाश्रय इति। एवं चानियमपरिवृत्यादेरप्यघिकपदत्वादेर्भेदो बोद्धव्यः। अमतप- रार्थत्वे तु 'राममन्मथशरेण-' इत्यादौ नियमेन वाक्यव्यापित्वाभिप्रायाद्वाक्यदो- षता। अश्रीलत्वादौ तु न नियमेन वाक्यव्यापित्वम्। 'मानन्दितस्वपक्षोऽसौ परपक्षान्हनिष्यति।' अत्र परपक्षं इत्वा स्वपक्षमानन्दयिष्यतीति विधेयम्। 'चण्डीशचूडाभरण चन्द्र लोकतमोपह। विरहिप्राणहरण कदर्थय न मां वृथा ।' अत्र विरहिण उक्तौ तृतीयपादस्यार्थो नानुवादयः। 'लयनं रागावृताक्गया सुदृढमिह ययैवासियष्टयारिकण्ठे मातङ्गानामपीहोपरि परपुरुषैर्या च दृष्टा पतन्ती। तत्सक्तोडयं न किश्निद्रणयति विदितं तेऽस्तु तेनासि दत्ता भृत्येभ्यः श्रीनियोगाद्गदितुमिति गतेवाम्बुधि यस्य 'कीर्तिः ॥' अत्र विदितं तेऽस्त्वत्यनेन समापितमपि वचनं तेनेत्यादि पुनरुपात्तम्। अथ रसदोषानाह- रसस्योक्ति: स्वशब्देन स्थायिसज्जारिणोरपि॥ १२॥ परिपन्थिरसाङ्गस्य विभावादे: परिग्रहः। आक्षेपः कल्पितः कृच्छ्रादनुभावविभावयोः ॥१३॥ अकाण्डे प्रथनच्छेदौ तथा दीप्षि: पुनः पुनः। अङ्गिनोऽननुसन्धानमनङ्गस्य च कीर्तनम् ॥१४॥ अतिविस्तृतिरङ्गस्य प्रकृतीनां विपर्ययः । अर्थानौचित्यमन्यच्च दोषा रसगता मताः। रसस्य स्वशब्दो रसशब्दः शरङ्गारादिशब्दश्च। क्रमेण यथा-

१ 'आपातखवरसे' ग. २ 'अत्र नियमस्य' ग; 'अत्र हि' ख. ३ 'नियमस्य वचन"' नि. ४ "परिवृत्तत्वादे' ब; 'परित्ृत्तित्वादे" नि. ५ 'सुदृढमथ' ख. ६ 'गदितुमिव गतेत्यम्वु' ग. ७ काव्यप्रकाशे सतमोल्लास उदाहनमिदम् ८ 'अथानौचित्य" ख.

७.१२-१५] सप्तम: परिच्छेद:। १२१

'तामुद्दीक्ष्य कुरश़ाक्षीं रसो नः कोऽप्यजायत। चन्द्रमण्डलमालोक्य शृद्गारे मगमन्तरम् ।।' स्थायिभावस्य स्वशब्दवाच्यत्वं यथा-'अजायत रतिस्तस्यास्त्वयि लोचनगो- चरे।' व्यभिचारिणः स्वशब्दवाच्यत्वं यथा-'जाता लज्जाववी मुग्धा प्रियस् परिचुम्बने।' अत्र प्रथमे पादे 'आसीन्मुकलिताक्षी सा' इति लजजाया अनुभावमुखेन कथने युक्त: पाठः । 'मानं मा कुरु तन्वक्ि ज्ञात्वा यौवनमस्थिरम्।' अन्न यौवनासैर्य- निवेदनं शङ्गाररसस्य परिपन्थिनः शान्तरसस्याङं शान्तस्यैव च विभाव इति शवारे तत्परिग्रद्दो न युक्तः । 'घवलयति शिशिररोचिषि भुवनतळं लोकलोचनानन्दे। ईषत्क्षिप्तकटाक्षा सेरमुखी सा निरीक्ष्यतां तन्वी'॥ अन्र रेसस्योद्दीपनाळम्बनविभावावनुभावपर्यवसायिनौ स्थिताविति कछकरपना। 'परिहरति रति मति लुनीते रखलतितरां परिवर्तते च भूयः । इति बत विषमा दशास् देहं परिभवति प्रसभ किमत्र कुमः ।' अत्र रतिपरिहाराद्वीनां करुणादावपि सम्भवात्कामिनीरूपो विभाव: कृच्छ्रादाझे- ्यः। अकाण्डे प्रथनं यथा-वेणीसंहारे द्वितीयेडक्के प्रवर्तमानानेकवीरसंक्षये काले दुर्योघनस्य भातुमत्या सह शुङ्गारप्रथनम्। छेदो यथा-वीरचरिते राघवभार्गवयोर्षाराधिरूढेऽन्योन्यसंरम्भे कङ्कणमोचनाय गच्छामीति राघवस्योक्तिः। पुनः पुनर्दीप्तियेथा-कुमारसम्भवे रतिविलापे। अङ्विनोऽननुसन्धानं यथा-रलावल्यां चतुर्थेडक्के वाभ्रव्यागमने सागरिकाया विस्मृतिः। अनङ्गस्य कीर्तनं यथा-कर्पूरमअजर्या राजनायिकयोः स्वयं कृतं वसन्तस्य वर्णनमनादृत्य बन्दिवर्णितस्य प्रशंसनम्। अङ्गस्यातिविस्तृतियंथा-किराते सुराङ़गनाविलासादि: । प्रकृतयो दिव्या अदिव्या दिव्यादिव्याश्रेति। तेषां धीरोदात्तादिता। तेषाम- प्युत्तमाधममध्यमत्वम्। तेधु च यो यथाभूतस्तस्यायथावर्णने प्रकृतिविपर्ययो दोषः । यथा-धीरोदात्तस्य रामस्य धीरोद्वतवच्छझना वालिवधः । यथा वा-कुमार- सम्भवे उत्तमदेवैतयोः पार्वतीपरमेश्वरयोः सम्भोगळ्मारवर्णनम्। 'इदं पित्रो: सम्भोगवर्णनमिवात्यन्तमनुचितम्' इत्याहुः। अन्यदनौत्चित्यं देशकालादीनामन्यथा यद्वर्णनम्। तथा सति हि काव्यस्यासत्यताप्रतिभासेन विनेयानामुन्मुखीकारासम्भवः । एभ्यः पृथगलक्कारदोषाणां नैव सम्भवः ।। १५ ।। एभ्य उक्तदोषेभ्यः। तथा हि-उपमायामसादृश्यासम्भवयोरुपमानस्य जातिप्र-

१ 'अत्र शहारस्य' ग-ख. २ काव्यपरकाशे सपतमोलास उदाहृतमिदम्. २ 'उत्तमदेवयोः' ख-ग. * ध्वनिकारादय: 'तसपादभिनेयार्थे च काव्ये यदुतमप्रकृते राजादेरुत्तममकृतिभिनाविकामिः मह ग्राम्यसम्भोगवर्णनं तत्पित्रोः सम्भोगवर्णनमिव सुनरामसह्यम्। तथैवोत्तमदेवताबिषयम्' (ध्वन्यालोके ₹.18 इत्यत्र). ५ 'अप्रभ्य" ख. ट

१२२ साहित्यदर्पणे [ ७.१५

माणगतन्यूनत्वाधिकत्वयोरर्थान्तरन्यासे उत्प्रेक्षितार्थसमर्थने चानुचितार्थत्वम्। क्रमेण यथा- 'ग्रभामि काव्यशशिनं विततार्थरश्मिम्। 'प्रज्वलज्जलधारावभ्निपतन्ति शरास्तव।' 'चण्डाल इव राजासौ संग्रामेऽधिकसाइसः।' 'कर्पूरखण्ड इव राजति चन्द्रनिम्बस्।' 'हरवन्नीलकण्ठोऽयं विराजति शिखावलः।' 'खनावद्रिसमानौ ते।' 'दिवाकराद्रक्षति यो गुहासु लीनं दिवाभीतमिवान्धकारभ्। क्षुद्रेऽपि नूनं शरणं प्रपन्ने ममत्वमुच्चैःशिरसामतीव ।।' (कुमार० १.१२) एवमादिषूत्प्ेक्षितार्थस्यासम्भूततयैव प्रतिभासनं स्वरूपमित्यनुचचितमेन तत्समर्थ- नम्। यमकस्य पादत्रयगतस्थाप्रयुक्तत्वं दोषः । यथा- 'सहसोभिजनैः सितिग्धेः सह सा कुञ्जमन्दिरम्। उदिते रजनीनाथे सइसा याति सुन्दरी ।।' उत्प्रेक्षारयां यथाशब्दस्योत्प्रेक्षाघोतकत्वेऽवाचकत्वम्। यथा- 'एष मूतों यथा धर्मः क्षितिपो रक्षति क्षितिम्। एवमनुप्रासे वृत्तिविरुद्धस्य प्रतिकूलवर्णत्वम्। यथा-'ओवटर रलटृष-' इत्यादौ। उपमायां च साधारणधर्मस्याधिकन्यूनत्वयोरधिकपदत्वं न्यूनपदत्वं च । क्रमेणो- दाहरणम्- 'नयनज्योतिषा भाति शम्भुभूृंतिसितध्ुतिः । विद्युतेव शरन्मेघो नीलवारिदखण्डधृक।।' अत्र भगवतो नीलकण्ठत्वस्याप्रतिपादनाच्चतुर्थपादोऽिकः । 'कमलालिभितस्तारहारहारी सुरं द्विपन्। विधुद्धिभूषितो नीळजीमूत इव राजते ।।' अन्नोपमानस्य सबलाकत्वं वाच्येम्। अस्यामेवोपमानोपमेययो्किंङ्गवचनमेदस्य कालपुरुषविध्यादिभेदस्य च भग्नप्रक्रमत्वम्। क्रमेणोदाहरणम्- 'सुघेच विमलश्न्द्रः ।' 'ज्योत्सा इव सिता कीर्तिः ।' 'काप्यभिख्या तयोरासीङ्जतोः शुद्धवेशयोः । हिमनिमुक्तयोयोंगे चित्राचन्द्रमसोरिव ॥' (रघु. १.४६) अत्र तथाभूतचित्राचन्द्रमसोः शोभा न खल्वासीद। अपि त सर्वदापि भवति। 'लतेव राजसे तम्वि।' अत्र लता राजते, त्वं तु राजसे। 'चिरं जीवतु ते सूनुर्मा- र्केण्डेयो मुनियथा।' अन्र मार्कण्डेयो जीवत्येव। न खल्वेतदस्य जीवत्वित्यनेन विधेयम्।

१ "ळिजनैः ग-ब. २ 'वाच्यं तेन न्यूनम्' ख.

७.१५ ] सप्तम: परिच्छेद: । १२३

'* इह तु यत्र लिङ्गवचनभेदेऽपि न साधारणधर्मस्यान्यथाभावस्तत्र न दोषः । क्रमेणोदाहरणम्- 'मुखं चन्द्र इवाभाति।'

दधते स्म परां शोभां तदीया विभ्रमा इव ॥' पूर्वोदाहरणेधूपमानोपमेययोरेकस्यैव साधारणधर्मेणान्वयसिद्धेः प्रक्रान्तस्यार्थस्य स्फुटोऽनिर्वाहः। एवमनुप्रासे वैकल्यस्यार्थत्वम्। यथा-

परिसरणमरुणचरणे रणरणकमकारणं कुरुते ।।' (रुद्रट. २.२३) एवं समासोक्तौ साधारणविशेषणवश्ञात्परार्थस्य प्रतीतावपि पुनस्तस्य शब्देनोपा- दानस्याप्रस्तुतप्रशंसायां व्यज्जनयेव प्रस्तुतार्थावगतेः शब्देन तदभिधानस्य च पुनरु- कत्वम्। क्रमेणोदाहरणम्- 'अनुरागवन्तमपि लोचनयोर्दधतं वपुः सुखमतापकरम्। निरकासयद्रविभपेतवसुं वियदालयादपरदिग्गणिका ॥' (शिशु० ९.१०) अन्रापरदिगित्येतावतैव तस्या गणिकात्वं प्रतीयते। 'आाहूतेषु विद्दङ्गमेषु मशको नायान्पुरो वार्यते मध्ये वा धुरि वा वसंस्तृणमणिर्धत्ते मणीनां धुरम्। खद्योतोऽपि न कम्पते प्रचलितुं मध्येऽपि तेजस्विनां विक्सामान्यमचेतसं प्रभुमिवानामृष्टतत्त्वान्तरम् ।।' (भल्लटशतके ६९) अत्राचेतसः प्रभोरभिधानमनुचितम्। एवमनुप्रासे प्रसिध्भावस्य ख्यातविरुद्ध त्म्। यथा- 'चक्राधिष्ठिततां चक्री गोत्रं गोत्रभिदुच्छितम्। वृषं वृषभकेतुश्च प्रायच्छन्नस्य भूभुजः ॥' उक्तदोषाणां च कचिददोषत्वं कचिद्गुणत्वमित्याह- वक्तरि क्रोघसंयुक्ते तथा वाच्ये समुद्धते। रौद्धादौ तु रसेऽत्यन्तं दुःश्रवतवं गुणो भवेत् ॥। १६॥ एषु चास्वादसवरूपविशेषात्मकतया मुख्यगुणप्रकर्षोंपकारित्वाङ्गुण इति व्यपदेशो भाक्त: । क्रमेण यथा- 'तद्विच्छेदकृशस्य कण्ठलुठितप्राणस्य मे निर्दयं क्रूरः पञ्चशरः शरैरतिशितैभिन्दन्मनो निर्भरभ्। शम्भोभूंतकृपाविधेयमनसः प्रोद्दामनेत्रानल-

1 ज्वालाजालकरालित: पुनरसावास्तां समस्तात्मना।।'

1 "धर्मेणैवान्वयसिदेः पकान्तस्य स्फुटमनिर्वाहः ग-स. २ "ल्यस्यापुष्टार्थत्वम्' ख. ३ 'रुचम्' इति मुद्रितमल्लटशतके. ४ 'चेतनं' इति मुद्रितभल्लटशतकें. ५ "खादरूप" ग-ख. १ 'युर्त:' ग; 'गुण इति भात्तव्यपदेशो युक्त:' ख.

१२४ साहित्यदर्पणे

अत्र सज्ारे कुपितो वक्त्ता।

आ्रान्तज्रझ्माण्डखण्डं प्रवितरतु शिव शाम्भवं ताण्डवं वः ।।' अत्रोद्धतैताण्डवं वाच्यम्। इमे पद्े मम। रौद्रादिरसत्वे तह्वितयापेक्षापि दुःश्रव- त्वमत्यन्तं गुणः। यथा-'उत्कृत्योत्कृत्य कृत्तिम्-' इत्यादि (मालती० ५.१६)। अत्र वीभत्सो रसः । सुरतारम्भगोष्ठयादाव्लीलत्वं तथा पुनः। तथा पुनरिति गुण एव। यथा- 'करिदस्तेन सम्बाधे प्रविश्यान्तर्विलोडिवे। उपसर्पन्ध्वजः पुंसः साधनान्तर्विराजते ।।' अत्र हि सुरतारम्भगोष्ठयां 'दर्थेः पदैः पिशुनयेच्च रहस्यवस्तु' इति कामशार्त्र स्थितिः । आदि शब्दाच्छमकथाप्रभृतिषु बोद्धव्यम्। स्यातामदोषो श्रेषादौ निहृतार्थाप्रयुक्कते ॥ १७ ।। यथा- 'पर्वतभेदि पवित्रं जैत्रं नरकस्य बहुमतं गहनम्। इरिमिव हरिमिव हरिमिव सुरसरिदम्भ: पतन्नमत' ॥ (दमयन्तीकथा) अत्रेन्द्रपक्षे पवित्रशब्दो निहतार्थः । सिंहपक्षे मतङशन्दो मातङ्ार्थेऽपयुक्तः। गुण: स्यादप्रतीतत्वं जञत्वं चेद्टककृवाच्ययो: । यथा- 'त्वामामनन्ति प्रकृति पुरुषार्थप्रवर्तिनीम्। र्लदर्शनमुदासीनं त्वामेव पुरुषं विदुः ॥ (कुमार० २.१३) स्वयं वापि परामर्शे अप्रतीवत्वं गुण इत्यनुषज्यते । यथा- 'युक्तः कलाभिस्तमसां विवृखै क्षीणश्च ताभि: क्षतये य एषाम्। शुद्धं निरालम्बपदावलम्ं तमात्मचन्द्रं परिशीलयामि'॥ कथितं च पदं पुनः ॥।१८॥ चिहितस्यानुवाद्यत्वे विषादे विस्मये कुि। दैन्येऽथ लाटानुप्रासेनुकम्पायां प्रसादने ॥ १९ ॥ अर्थान्तरसंक्रमितवाच्ये हर्षेऽवधारणे। * गुण इत्येव । यथा-'उदेति सविता ताम्र :- ' इत्यादि। अत्र विहितानुवादः ।

१. 'धुभ' ग. २ 'त्रोद्धतं वाच्यम्' ग; 'अत्रोदधतं ताण्डव' स. १ काव्यपकाशे सप्तमो- ल्वाये पद्यमिदम. 'तदर्शिनं" स.

.७.२० ] सप्तम: परिच्छेदः। १२५

'हन्त इन्त गतः कान्तो वसन्ते सखि नागनः' । अत्र विषादः। 'चित्रं चित्रमना- काशे कथं सुमुखि चन्द्रमाः' । अत्र विस्मयः । 'सुनयने नयने निषेहि-' इति। अत्र लाटानुप्रासः । 'नयने तस्यैव नयने च'। इत्यादावर्थान्तरसंक्रमितवाच्यो ध्वनिः । एवमन्यत्र। सन्दिग्धत्वं तथा व्याजस्तुतिपर्यवसायि चेतू ॥ २० ॥ गुण इत्येव। यथा- 'पृथुकार्तस्वरपात्रं भूषितनिःशेषपरिजनं देव। विलसत्करेणुगहनं संप्रति सममावयो: सदनम्'॥ वैयाकरणमुख्ये तु प्रतिपाधेऽथ वक्तरि। कष्टत्वं दुःश्रवत्वं वा गुण इत्येव। यथा- 'दीधीवेवीड्सम: कश्चिद्गुणवृज्ोरभाजनम्। किप्प्रत्ययनिभ: कश्चिदत्र संनिहिते न ते ॥' अत्रार्थ: कष्टः । वैयाकरणश्च वक्ता। एवमस्य प्रतिपाद्यत्वेऽपि। 'अन्रास्मार्षमुपाध्याय त्वामहं न कदाचन'। अत्र दुःश्रवत्वम्। वैयाकरणो वाच्यः । एवमस्य वक्तृत्वेऽपि।

गुण इत्येव। यथा मम- 'एसो ससहरबिम्बो दीसह हेअङ्गवीणपिण्डो व्व। ऐदे अस्ससमोहा पडन्ति आसासु दुद्धधार व्व'।। (एष शशधरबिम्बो वृश्यते हैयङ्गवीनपिण्ड इव। एते अंशुसमूद्दाः पतन्ति आशास दुग्धधारा इव ॥) इयं विदूषकोक्ति: । निर्हेतुता तु ख्यातेऽर्थे दोषतां नैव गच्छति। यथा-

1 'सम्प्रति संध्यासमयश्चऋद्वन्द्वानि विघटयति।' कवीनां समये ख्याते गुणः ख्यातविरुद्धता । २२॥ कविसमयख्यातानि च- मालिन्यं व्योम्नि पापे, यशसि धवलता वर्ण्यंते हांसकीतयों रक्तौ च कोधरागौ, सरिदुद्धिगतं पङ्कजेन्दीवरादि। तोयाधारेऽखिलेऽपि प्रसरति च मरालादिक: पक्षिसक्को ज्योत्खा पेया चकोरैर्जलघरसमये मानसं यान्ति हंसाः ।। २३ ।।

१ काव्यप्रकाशे सपमे नवमे चोल्लास उदाहत मिदम्. २ 'दीघीङपेवीङ्समः' ख. "वेवीसम:' ब. ३ काव्यप्रकाशे सक्षमोल्ास उदाहृतमिदम्. १ 'अत्रातार्प्सम्' ख-ग-व 'असार्षम्' इति तु रामचरणसंमतम्. ५ 'एए अभस्स मोहा' ख-ग.

१२६ साहित्यदर्पणे [७.२४

पादाघातादशोको विकसति बकुलं योषितामास्यमय्यै- यूंनामङ्गेषु हारा:, स्फुटति च हृदयं विप्रयोगस्य तापैः। मौर्वी रोलम्बमाला धनुरथ विशिखाः कौसुमा: पुष्पकेतो- र्भिन्नं स्यादृस्य वाणैर्युंवजनहृदयं स्रीकटाक्षेण तददू ॥ २४॥ अह्यम्भोजं, निशायां विकसति कुमुदं, चन्द्रिका सुक्कपक्षे मेवध्वानेषु नृत्यं भवति च शिखिनां नाप्यशोके फलं स्ाद्। न स्याज्जाती वसन्ते, न च कुसुमफले गन्धसारद्रुमाणा- मित्याद्युन्नेयमन्यत्कविसमयगतं सस्कवीनां प्रबन्धे।। २५।। एषामुदाहरणान्याकरेषु स्पष्टानि। धनुर्ज्यादिषु शब्देषु शब्दास्तु धनुरादयः । आारूढत्वादिबोधाय यथा-'पूरिते रोदसी ध्वानैर्धनुर्ज्यास्फालनोद्भवैः'। अत्र ज्याशब्देनापि गतार्थत्वे धनुःशब्देन ज्याया धनुष्यातैतीकरणं बोध्यते। आदिशब्दात 'भाति कर्णावतंसस्ते'। अत्र कर्णस्थितत्वबोधनाय कर्णशब्दः। एवं श्रवणकुण्डलशिरःशेखरप्रभृतिः । एवं निरुप- पदो मालाशब्दः पुष्पस्रजमेवाभिधत्त इति स्थितावपि 'पुष्पमाला विभाति ते'। अत्र पुष्पशब्द उत्कृष्टपुष्पवुद्धयै। एवं मुक्ताहार इत्यत्र मुक्त्ताशन्देनान्यरलामिश्रितत्वम्। प्रयोक्तव्या: स्थिता अमी ॥२६॥ धनुर्ज्यादयः सत्काव्यस्थिता एव निबद्धव्याः, न त्वस्थिता जघनकाञ्चीकरकङ्क- णादयः । उक्त्ावानन्दमप्नादेः स्यान्यूनपदता गुणः । यथा- 'गाढालिङ्गनवामनीकृत कुचप्रोद्विन्नरोमोद्गमा

मा मा मानद माति मामलमिति क्षामाक्षरोल्लापिनी सुप्ता किं नु मृता नु किं मनसि मे लीना विलीना नु किम्॥

अत्र पीडयेति न्यूनम्। (अमरु० ४० )

क्कचिन्न दोषो न गुण: न्यूनपदत्वमित्येव । यथा- 'तिष्ठेत्कोपवशात्प्रभावपिहिता दीर्घ न सा कुप्यति स्वर्गायोत्पतिता भवेन्मयि पुनर्भावार्द्रमस्या मनः । तां हर्तु विवुधद्विषोऽपि न च मे शक्ता: पुरोवर्तिनीं सा चातयन्तमगोचरं नयनयोर्यातेति कोडयं विधिः'॥ (विक्रमो० ४.२) १ 'पूरिता' स्. २ 'धतुष्यायत्तीकरणं' निः '्यतीकरणं' ख. १ "पुष्पतृङ्धै'नि; 'उत्कृष्बुद्धै' ग-ख. ४ 'अत्र ... न्यूनम्' इति नाखि ग-मुसतके.

v.२७] सप्तम: परिच्छेदः। १२७

अन्न प्रभावपिहितेति भवेदिति चेत्नन्तरं नैतबत इति पदानि न्यूनानि। एषां पदानां न्यूनतायामप्येतद्वाक्यव्यङ्गयस्य वितर्काख्यव्यभिचारिभावस्योत्कर्षाकरणान्न गुणः । दीर्घ न सेत्यादिवाक्यजन्यया च प्रतिपत्त्या तिष्ठेदित्यादिवाक्यप्रतिपचनीथ: स्फुटमेवावभासत इति न दोष: । गुणः क्ाप्यधिकं पदम् ॥ २७ ॥ यथा- 'आचरति दुर्जनो यत्सहसा मनसोऽप्यगोचरानर्थान्। तन्न न जाने जाने स्पृशति मनः किं तु नैव निष्ठुरताम्'। अत्रे न न जाने इत्यन्ययोगव्यवच्छेदाद्विच्छित्तिविशेष:। समासपुनरात्तत्वं न दोषो न गुणः क्कचित्। यथा-'अन्यास्ता गुणरत्-' इत्यादि। अत्र प्रथमार्धेन वाक्यसमाप्तावपि द्विती- यार्थवाक्यं पुनरुपात्तम्। एवं च विशेषणमात्रस्य पुनरुपादाने समाप्पुनरात्तत्वं न वाक्यान्तरस्येति विज्ञेयम्। गर्भितत्वं गुणः क्रापि यथा- 'दिक्ात न्घटाविभक्तचतुराघाटा मही साध्यते सिद्धा सापि वदन्त एव हि वयं रोमाञ्चिता: पश्यत। विप्राय प्रतिपादते किमपरं रामाय तस्मै नमो यस्मात्प्रादुरभूत्कथान्भुतमिदं यत्रैव चास्तं गतम्'॥। अत्र वदन्त एवेत्यादि वाक्यं वाक्यान्तरप्रवेशात् चमत्कारातिशयं पुष्णाति। पतत्प्रकषता तथा ॥२८ ॥ तथेति क्कचित् गुणः । यथा-'चन्न्भुज-' इत्यादि। अन्र चतुर्थपादे सुकुमारा- र्थंतया शब्दाडम्बरत्यागो गुणः । क्चिदुक्तौ स्वशब्देन न दोषो व्यमिचारिणः। अनुभावविभावाभ्यां रचना यत्र नोचिता। २९।। यत्रानुभावविभावमुखेन प्रतिपादने विशेद प्रतीतिर्नास्ति, यत्र च विभावानुभाव- कृतपुष्टिराहित्य मेवानुगुणं तत्र व्यभिचारिणः स्वशब्देनोक्तौ न दोषः । यथा- 'औत्सुक्येन कृतत्वरा सदभुवा व्यावर्तमाना हिया तैस्तैर्बन्धुवधूजनस्य वचनैनीताभिमुख्यं पुनः । दृष्टाग्रे वरमात्तसाध्वसरसा गौरी नवे सङ्गमे संरोहत्पुलका हरेण हसता क्िष्टा शिवायास्तु वः' ॥ (रला. १.२)

१ "पत्तेर्बोधः' नि. २ 'जान इत्ययोगव्यवच्छेदे द्वितीयजान इत्यनेनाहमेव जान इत्यन्ययो- गव्यव°' ग; 'जान इत्यनेनायोग" ब-ख (त्िष्ट ग-पुस्तकवत्). ३ 'विशेषप्रतीतिः' ख- पुस्तके पाठान्तरं निर्दिष्टम.

१२८ साहित्यदर्पणे

अत्रौत्सुक्यस्य त्वरारूपानुभावमुखेन प्रतिपादने न झटिति प्रवीतिः । त्वराया मेंयादिनापि सम्भवात्। हियोऽनुभावस्य च व्यावर्तनेस्य कोपादिनापि सम्भवः । साध्वसहासयोस्तु विभावादिपरिपोषस्य प्रकृतरसप्रतिकूलप्रायत्वादित्येषां स्वश्दा- मिधानमेव न्याय्यम्। सञ्चार्यादेविरुद्धस्य वाध्यत्वेन वचो गुणः । यथा-'काकार्य शशलक्ष्मणः क च कुलं-' इत्यादि।

स्तिरस्कार: पर्यन्ते चिन्तामधानमास्वादप्रकर्षमाविर्भावयति। विरोधिनोऽपि स्मरणे साम्येन वचनेऽपि वा ॥३०॥ भवेद्विरोधो नान्योन्यमङ्विन्यङ्गत्वमासयोः । क्रमेण यथा-'अयं स रसनोत्कषी-' इत्यादि। अन्नालम्बनविच्छेदेन रेररसा- त्मतया स्मर्यमाणानां वदङ्गानां शोकोद्दीपकतया करुणानुकूलता। 'सरागया स्रतघनघर्मतोयया कराहतिध्वनितपृथूरुपीठया। मुङ्डमुंहुर्दशनविलद्वितोष्ठया रुषा नृपाः प्रियतमयेव मेजिरे'॥ (शिशु०१७.२) अत्र सम्भोगश्रुङ्गारो वर्णनीयस्य वीरव्यभिचारिण: क्रोधस्यानुभावसाम्येन विवक्षितः। 'एकं ध्याननिमीलनान्मुकुलितप्रायं द्वितीयं पुनः पार्वत्या वदनाम्बुजस्तनभरे सम्भोगभावालसम्। अन्य दूर विकृष्टचापमदनकोधानलोह्ीपितं शम्भोमिंन्नरसं समाधिसमये नेत्रत्रयं पातु वै:' ॥ अन्न शान्तश्रृङ्गाररौद्ररसपरिपुष्टा भगवद्विषया रतिः। यथा वा- 'क्षिप्तो हस्तावलन्नः प्रसभमभिद्दतोऽप्याददानोंऽशुकान्तं गृहन्केशेष्वपास्तश्चरणनिपतितो नेक्षित: संभ्रमेण।

कामीवार्द्रापराष: स दहतु दुरितं शाम्भवो वः शराभिः' ॥ (अमरु० २) अत्र कविगता भगवद्विषया रतिः प्रधानम्। तस्याः परिपोषकतया भगवतसतिपु- रध्वंसं प्रत्युत्साइस्यापरिपुष्टतया रसपदवीमप्राप्ततया भावमात्रस्य करुणोडङ्गम् । तस्य च कामीवेति साम्यबलादायातः शङ्ारः। एवं चाविश्रान्तिषामतया करुणस्याप्यङ्गतैनेति द्वयोरपि करुणशृङ्गारयोर्भगवदुत्ता- ह परिपुष्टतद्विषयरतिभावास्वादप्रकर्षकतया यौगपद्यसन्भ्ावादङ्गल्वेन न विरोष: । ननु समूहालम्बनात्मकपूर्णघनानन्दरूपस्य रसस्य तादृशेनेतररसेन कथ विरोध: सम्भावनीयः । एकवाक्ये निवेशप्रादुर्भावयौगपद्यविरहेण परस्परोपमर्दकत्वानुपपचेः। नाप्यज्गाद्िभावः । द्योरपि पूर्णतया स्वातश््येण विश्रान्तेः । सत्यमुक्तम्। अत पवात्र

१ "घादने सद्गमे न' नि. २ 'व्यावर्तमानस्य' नि. २ 'सुत' नि. १ 'विख्वण्डितोष्ठवा' ग. * दशरूपक उदाहृतमिनं (१.३१ इत्यत्र)

v.३१ ] सप्तम: परिच्छेद: । १२९

प्रधानेतरेषु रसेषुं स्वातत्र्यविश्रमराहित्यात्पूर्णरसभावभात्राच्च विलक्षणतया सक्चारिर- सनासना व्यपदेशः प्राच्यानाम्। अस्मत्पितामहानुजकविपण्डितमुख्य-श्रीचण्डीदास- पादानां तु खण्डरसनाम्ना। यदाङु :- 'अजं वाष्योऽथ संसगी यद्ज्गी स्याद्रसान्तरे। नास्वाते समग्रं यत्ततः खण्डरसः स्मृतः ॥' इति। ननु 'आघः करुणबीभत्सरौद्रवीरभयानकैः' (तृतीये परिच्छेदे) इत्युक्नयेन विरोधिनोवीरशज्वारयो: कथमेकत्र .

'कपोले जानक्याः करिकलभदन्तद्युतिमुषि स्मरस्मेरस्फारोड्डमरपुलकं वक्रकमलम्। मुड्डः पश्यञ्ऋण्वम्रजनिचरसेनाकलकलं जटाजूटग्रन्थि द्रढयति रघूणां परिवुर्ढे: ।' (दशरूपके २.१२ इत्यत्र महानाटके १.१९ इत्यत्र च) इत्यादौ सर्मावेशः । अन्ोच्यते-इह खलु रसानां विरोधिताया अविरोषितायाश्च त्रिधा व्यवस्था। कयोश्चिदालम्बनैक्येन, कयोश्चिदाश्रयैक्येन, कयोश्चिन्नैरन्तयेंणेति। तत्र वीरश्गारयोरालम्बनैक्येन विरोधः। तथा हास्यरौद्रबीभत्सः सम्भोगसय वीरकरुणरौद्रा- दिभिर्विप्रलम्भस्य। आलम्बनैक्येन आश्रयैक्येन च वीरभयानकयोः । नैरन्तर्यवि- भावैक्याभ्यां शान्तशङ्गारयोः। त्रिधाप्यविरोधो वीरस्यान्भुतरौद्राभ्यां शृद्गारस्याङ्कुवेन भयानकस्य बीभत्सेनेति। तेनात्र वीरशृङ्गारयोभिन्नालम्बनत्वान्न विरोधः । एवं च वीरस् नायकनिष्ठत्वेन मयानकस्य प्रतिनायकनिष्ठत्वेन निबन्धे भिन्नाश्र- यत्वेनें न विरोधः । यश्च नागानन्दे प्रशमाश्रंयस्यापि जीमूतवाद्दनस्य मलयवत्यनु- रागो दर्शितः, तत्र 'अहो गीतमह्दो वादित्रम्' इत्यद्धतस्यान्तरा निवेशनान्नैरन्तर्या- भावान्न शान्तशाङ्गारयोविरोधः । एवमन्यदपि घ्ेयम्। 'पाण्ड क्षामं वदनं-' इत्यादौ च पाण्डुतादीनामन्जभाव: करुर्णवद्विप्लम्मेऽपीति न विरोध:। .

अनुकारे च सर्वेषां दोषाणां नैव दोषेता॥ ३१॥ सर्वेषां दुःश्रवत्वप्रभृतीनाम्। यथा- 'एष दुश्यवनं नौमीत्यादि जल्पति कश्चन।' अत्र दुक्ष्यवनशब्दोडप्रयुक्तः । अभ्येषामपि दोषाणामित्याचित्यान्मनीषिभि:। अदोषता च गुणता शेया चानुभयात्मता । ३२ ॥। अनुभयात्मता अदोषगुणात्मता।। इति श्रीमद्विश्वराजकविराजविरचिते साहित्यदर्पणे दोषनिरूपणो नाम सप्तम: परिच्छेदः।

१ 'रसेपु' इति नासि ग-पुस्तके. २ 'वाच्योथ' ग ३ 'यद्यदं ग-स. १ शार्ईपरपद्धतौ (१९९०) महानाटकस्थमेतत्. ५ 'सन्निवेशः' ग-स्. ६ 'मयानक ... निष्ठत्वेन' इति नाखि ग- पुस्तके. • "अयत्ेन विरोः' नि-ब-ग. ८ 'करुणविमकम्मेपि' नि-ब. ९ 'सम्मवः' ग.

१३० साहित्यदर्पणे [८.9

अष्टमः परिच्छेद:। गुणानाह- रसस्याद्वित्वमाप्तसय धर्माः शौर्यादयो बथा। गुणा: यथा खत्वद्गित्वमाप्तस्यात्मन उत्कर्षहेतुत्वाच्छौर्यादयो गुणशब्दवाच्याः, तथा काव्येऽद्वित्वमाप्तस्य रसस्य धर्माः स्वरूपविशेषा माधुर्यादयोऽपि स्वसमर्पकपदसन्दर्भस्य काव्यव्यपदेशस्यौपयिकानुगुण्यभाज इत्यर्थः । यथा चैषां रसमात्रस्य धर्मत्वं तथा दर्शितमेव। माधुर्यमोजोऽथ प्रसाद इति ते त्रिधा॥१॥ ते गुणा:। तत्र- चित्तद्रवीभावमयो ह्वादो माधुर्यमुच्यते। यत्तु केनचिदुक्तम्-'माधुर्य द्रुतिकारणम्' इति, तन्न। द्रवीभावस्यास्वादरूपा- हादाभिन्नत्वेन तैत्कार्यत्वाभावाद। द्रवीभावश्च स्वाभाविकानाविष्टत्वात्मककाठिन्य- मन्युक्रोवादिकृतदीप्त्व विस्मय हासाद्युपहितविक्षेपपरित्यागेन रत्याद्याकारानुविद्धानन्दो- द्वोधेन सहृदयचित्तस्यार्द्रप्रायत्वम्। तच्च- सम्भोगे करुणे विप्रलम्भे शान्तेऽधिकं क्रमात् ॥२॥ सम्भोगादिशब्दा उपलक्षणानि। तेन सम्भोगाभासादिष्वप्येतस्य स्थितिर्शेया। मूर्मि वर्गान्त्यवर्णेन युक्ताष्टठडढान्विना। रणौ लघू च तथ्यक्ता वर्णाः कारणतां गताः ॥ ३ ॥ अवृत्तिरल्पवृत्तिवां मधुरा रचना तथा। यथा-'अनङ्गमङ्गलभुवस्तदपाङस्य भङ्गयः।

यथा वा मम- 'लताकुअजं गुअन्मदवदलिपुअं चपलय- न्समालिङ्गन्रङ्ं द्रुततरमनअं प्रबलयन्। मरुन्मन्दं मन्दं दलितमरविन्दं तरलय- 4 न्रजोवृन्दं विन्दन्किरति मकरन्दं दिशि दिशि'।। ओजश्ित्तस्य विस्ताररूपं दीस्त्वमुच्यते॥४ ॥ वीरबीभत्सरौद्रेषु क्मेणाविक्यमस्य तु। अस्यौजसः । अत्रापि वीरादिशब्दा उपलक्षणानि। तेन वीराभासादावप्यस्या- वस्थितिः । वर्गस्याद्यतृतीयाभ्यां युक्तौ वर्णौं तदन्तिमौ ॥५॥ उपयंधो दयोवां सरेफौ टठडढै: सह।

· मटमम्मटेन काव्यप्रकाशेऽषमोल्लासे 'आह्लादकत्वं माधुर्ये शक्कारे द्रुतिकारणम्'. २ 'आास्त्रादख- रूपा"' नि-घ. ३ "मिन्नत्वेन कार्य" नि. : "चित्तार्द्रप्ा" नि-ब.५ 'प्रचटमन्'ग.

2.६ ] अष्टमः परिच्छेदः । १३१

शकारश्र पकारश्न तस्य व्यक्षकतां गता: ॥ ६ ॥ तथा समासो बहुलो घटनौद्धतयशालिनी। यथा-'चञ्चन्ुज-' इत्यादि। चिततं व्याभ्ोति यः क्षिप्रं शुष्केन्धनमिवानल:।।७।। स प्रसाद: समसेषु रसेषु रचनासु च। व्याप्नोति आविष्करोति। शब्दासव्अका अर्थंबोधका: श्रुतिमात्रतः॥८॥ यथा- 'सूचीमुखेन सकृदेव कृतव्रणस्त्वं मुक्ताकलाप लुठसि स्तनयोः प्रियायाः । बाणैः स्मरस्य शतशो विनिकृत्तमर्मा स्वप्नेऽपि ता कथमहं न विलोकयामि ॥' (सहृदयानन्द ३.५२) एषां शब्द्गुणतं च गुणवृत्त्योच्यते दुधैः। 'शरीरस्य शौरयादिगुणयोग इव' इति शेषः । श्रेषः समाधिरौदार्ये पसाद इति ये पुनः ॥९॥ गुणाश्चिरन्तनैरुकता भोजस्यन्तर्भवन्ति ते। ओजसि भक्त्या ओज:शब्दवाच्ये शब्दार्थधर्मविशेषे। तत्र श्रेषो बहूनामपि पदा- नामेकपदवन्भासनात्मा। यथा-

सर्वा: पर्वतकन्दरोदरभुवः कुर्वन्प्रतिध्वानिनीः । उच्चरुच्चरति ध्वनिः श्रुतिपथोन्माथी यथायं तथा प्रायः प्रेङ्वदसंख्यशङ्ञधवला वेलेयमुद्रच्छति ।'

उत्कर्ष:, अवरोषोऽपकर्षः, तयोः क्रमो वैरस्यतानावहो विन्यासः । यथा-'चञ्न- द्रुज-' इत्यादि। अत्र पादत्रये क्रमेण बन्धस्य गाढता। चतुर्थपादे त्वपकर्षश्र। तस्यापि च तीन्रप्रयलोच्चार्यतया भोजस्विता। उदारता विकटत्वलक्षणा । विकटत्वं पदानां नृत्यत्प्रायत्वम्। यथा- 'सुचरणविनिविष्टैनूं पुरैनवकीनां झणिति रणितमासीततत्र चित्रं कलं च।' (वामनीयकाव्यालङ्कारसूत्रवृत्तौ ३.१.२२ इत्यत्र) अत्र च तन्मतानुसारेण रसानुसन्धानमन्तरेणैव शब्दप्रौढोक्तिमात्रेणौजः। प्रसाद ओजोमिश्रितशैथिल्यात्मा। यथा- 'यो यः शखं विभातें खवभुजगुरुमदः पाण्डवीनां चमूमाम्' इति। (वेणी. ३.३२) माधुर्येव्यअ्जकत्वं यद्समासस्य वर्णितम्॥। १० ॥ पृथक्पदत्वं माधुर्ये तेनैवाङ्गीकृतं पुनः ।

'प्रायमेङ्गद" नि. २ सर्वोप्ययं श्रोक उद्ृतः ख-ग-पुस्तकमोः.

१३२ साहित्यदर्पणे [.19

यथा-'श्वासान्मुव्नति-' इत्यादि। अर्थष्यके: प्रसादाल्यगुणेनैव परिभ्रहटः ।११ ॥ अर्थव्यक्ति: पदानां हि झटित्यर्थसमर्पणम्। स्पष्टमुदाहरणम्। आम्यदुःश्रवतात्यागात्कान्विंश्र सुकुमारता ॥ १२ ॥ अङ्गीकृतेति सम्बन्धः । कान्तिरौज्ज्वल्यम्। तच्च हालिकादिपदविन्यासवेपरीलेन लौकिकशोमाशालित्वम्। सकुमारता अपारुष्यम्। अनयोरुदाहरणे स्पट्टे। कचिदोषस्तु समता मार्गामेदस्वरूपिणी । अन्यथोकगुणेश्वस्या अन्त:पातो यथाययम्।। १३।। मसुणेन विकटेन वा मार्गेणोपकान्तस्य सन्दर्भस्य तेनैव परिनिष्ठानं भार्गामेद: । स च कचिदोष: । तथाहि- 'अव्यूढाङ्गमरूढपाणिजठराभोगं च विभ्रद्धपु: पारीन्द्रः शिशुरेष पाणिपुटके संमातु किं ताववा। उददुर्वरगन्थसिन्धुर शवप्रोद्दामदाना्णव- स्रोतःशोषणरोषणात्युनरितः कल्पाभिरल्पायते।' अत्रोजसेडयें वाच्ये सुकुमारबन्धत्यागो गुण एव। अनेवंविधे खथाने माधुर्यादावे- वान्त:पातः । यथा-'लताकुअं गुअत्-' इत्यादि। भोज: प्रसादो माधुर्ये सौकुमार्यमुदारता। सद्भावस्व दोषत्वाहस्वीकृता भर्थमा गुणा: ।। १४ । ओन: साभिप्रायत्वरूपम्। प्रसादोऽर्थवैमल्यम्। माधुर्यमुक्तिवैचिव्यम्। सौकु- मार्यमपारुष्यम्। उदारता अग्राम्यत्वम्। परषां पञ्चानामप्यर्थगुणानां यथाक्रममपुष्टा- र्थाधिकपदानवीकृतामन्गलरूपाछ्वीलग्राम्यतानां निराकरणेनैवाजीकार: । स्पछठान्युदा- हरणानि। अर्थव्यक्ति: खभावोत्तपालङ्गारेण तथा पुनः। रसध्व निगुणी भूतव्यञ्याभ्यां कान्तिनामकः ॥। १५ ॥। अज्गीकृत इति सम्बन्धः । अर्थव्यक्तिर्वस्तुस्वभावरफुटत्वम्। कान्तिदीप्रसत्वम्। सपष्टे उदाहरणे। क्षेषो विचिन्रतामात्रमदोष: समता परम्। श्ेषः क्रमकौटिल्यानुल्बणत्वोपपत्तियोगरूपघटनात्मा। तत्र क्रमः क्रियासन्ततिः, विदग्घचेष्टितं कौठिल्यम्, अप्रसिद्धवर्णनाविरद्दोऽनुल्वणत्वम्, उपपादकयुक्तिविन्यास उपपत्तिः, एषां योग: समेलनं स एव रूपं यस्या घटनायास्तद्रूप: डेषो वैचित्र्यमा- त्रम्। अनन्यसाधारणरसोपकारित्वातिशयविरदवादिति भाव: । यथा-'दृह्टेकासन- संस्पिते प्रियतमे-' इत्यादि। अत्र दर्शनादयः क्रियाः, उभयसमर्थनरूपं कौटिशम्, लोकसंग्यवह्दाररूपमनुल्बणत्वम्, 'मकासनसंस्थिते' 'पश्चादुपेत्य' 'नयने निमील्य'

८.१६ ] नवमः परिच्छेद: । १३३

₹''ईषद्वक्रितकन्वरः' इति चोपपादकानि, एषां योगः। अनेन च वाक्योपपत्तिग्रहणव्यय्र- तया रसास्वादो व्यवहितप्राय इत्यस्यागुणता। समता च प्रक्रान्तप्रकृतिप्रत्ययाविपर्या- सेनार्थस्य विसंवादिताविरहः। स च प्रक्रमभङ्गरूपदोषविरह्द एव। स्पष्टमुदाहरणम्। न गुणत्वं समाधेश्र समाधिश्चायोन्यन्यच्छायायोनिरूपद्विविधार्थदृष्टिरूपः । तत्रायोनिरथों यथा- 'सधोमुण्डितमत्तहूणचिवुकप्रस्पर्षि नारजकम्।' (वामनीयकाव्यालक्कारसूत्रवृत्तौ ४.२.२ इत्यत्र) अन्यच्छायायोनिर्यथा- 'निजनयनप्रतिबिम्बैरम्बुनि बडुशः प्रतारिता कापि। नीलोत्पलेऽपि विमृझ्ति करमर्पयितुं कुसुमलावी।।' अत्र नीलोत्पलनयनयोरतिप्रसिद्धं सादृश्यं विच्छित्तिविशेषेण निबद्धम् । अस्य चासाधारणशोभानाधायकत्वान्न गुणत्वम्, किं तु काव्यशरीरमात्रनिवर्कत्वम्। कच्वित् 'चन्द्रम्' इत्येकसिमिन्पदार्थे वक्तव्ये 'अत्रेर्नयनसमुत्यं ज्योतिः' इति रघु- वाक्यवचनम्। क्वचित् 'निदाघशीतलहिमकालोष्णसुकुमारशेरीरा वरयोषित' इति वाक्यार्थे वक्तव्ये 'वरवर्णिनी' इति पदाभिधानम्। क्वचिदेकस्य वाक्यार्थस्य किश्चिद्वि- शेषनिवेशादनेकैवांक्यैरभिधानमित्येवंरूपो व्यासः । कचिद्वहुवाक्यप्रतिपाद्यस्यैकवाक्ये- नाभिधानमित्येवंरूपः समासक्च। इत्येवमादीनामन्यैरुक्त्तानां न गुणत्वमुचितम्, अपि तु वैचित्र्यमात्रावद्दत्वम्। तेन नार्थगुणा: पृथक् ॥१६॥ तेनोक्तप्रकारेण। अर्थगुणा ओजःप्रभृतयः परोक्ताँः ॥ इति साहित्यदर्पणे गुणविवेचनो नामाष्टमः परिच्छेदः।

नवम: परिच्छेद: । अथोद्दे शक्रमप्राप्तमप्यलङ्कारनिरूपणं बड्ुवक्तव्यत्वेनोल्ङ्क्य रीतिमाह- पद्सङ्कटना रीतिरङ्गसंस्थाविशेषवत्। उपकर्त्री रसादीनां रसादीनामर्थाच्छव्दार्थ शरीरस्य काव्यस्यात्मभूतानाम्। सा पुनः स्याच्चतुर्विधा॥१॥ वैदर्भी चाथ गौडी च पाज्जाली लाटिका तथा। सा रीतिः । तत्र- माधुर्यव्यअ्जकैर्वणे रचना ललितात्मिका ॥२ ॥

१ 'वाच्योप" नि-ब. २ "विच्छेदः' नि. १ 'रूपविरह' नि. ४ इदं धोयीककवे: (JASB 1906 part II. p. 21) ५"शरीरावयवा योषित्' नि-ब. ६ 'कचि- द्व कृमति" ग. • 'प्रोक्ताः' नि-ब. to

१३४ साहित्यदर्पणे [९.३.

अवृत्तिरल्पवृत्तिर्वा वैदर्भी रीतिरिष्यते। यथा-'अनङ्गमङ्गलमुवः-' इत्यादि। रुद्रटस्त्वाइ- 'असमस्तैकसमस्ता युक्त्ता दशभिर्गुणैश्च वैदभैं। वर्गद्वितीयबडडुला स्वल्पप्राणाक्षरा च सुविधेया।।' अत्र दशगुणास्तन्मतोक्ता: श्रेषादयः । ओज: प्रकाशकैर्वणैर्बन्ध आडम्बर: पुनः ॥३॥ समासबहुला गाठी 4 यथा-'चन्नह्ुज-' इत्यादि। पुरुषोत्तमस्त्वाह- 'बहुतरसमासयुक्ता सुमहाप्राणाक्षरा च गौडीया। रीतिरनुप्रासमहिमपरतत्रा स्तोकवाक्या च।।' वर्णैः शेषैः पुन्द्वयोः । समस्तपञ्ञषपदो बन्घ: पाज्जालिका मता॥४ ॥

यथा- 'मधुरया मधुबोधितमाधवीमधुसमृद्धिसमेचितमेधया। मधुकराङ्गनया मुद्दुरुन्मदध्वनिभृता निभृताक्षरमुज्जगे ॥' (शिशु० ६.२०) भोजस्त्वाइ- 'समस्तपञ्चषपदामोज: कान्तिसमन्विताम्। मधुरां सुकुमारां च पाव्नालीं कवयो विदुः ॥' (सरस्वती० २) लाटी तु रीतिवेदर्भीपाज्चाल्योरन्तरे स्थिता। यथा- 'अयमुदयति मुद्राभज्तनः पझ्मिनीनामुदयगिरिवनालीबालमन्दारपुष्पम्। विर दविधुरकोकद्वन्द्वबन्धुर्विभिन्दन्कुपितकपि कपोल्लक्रो ड ता ्रा स्तमासि ।।' कश्चिदाह- 'मृदुपदसमाससुभगा युक्तवर्णैन चातिभूयिष्ठा। उचितविशेषणसूचितवस्तुन्यासा भवेलाटी।।' अन्ये त्वाङु :- 'गौडी डम्बरेबन्धा स्याद्वैदर्भी ललितक्रमा। पाञ्चाली मिश्रभावेन लाटी तु मृदुभि: पदैः॥' क्वचित्तु वक्रादयौचित्यादन्यथा रचनाद्यः ॥५॥। वक्रादी त्यादिशब्दाद्वाच्यप्रबन्धौ। रचनादीत्यादिशब्दाद्वत्तिवणौं। तत्रं वक्रौ- चित्यादथा-

१ 'सतोम" ख-ग. २ शार्जधरपद्धतौ पद्यमिदम्, १ "पूरित' नि-ब. १ 'बद्धा' नि०

९.५ J दशम: परिच्छेद: । १३५

कोणाघातेषु गर्जत्प्रलयघनघटान्योन्यसङ्गटटचण्डः । कृष्णाक्रोधाग्दूतः कुरुकुलनिधनोत्पातनिर्घातवातः केनास्मत्सिंहनादप्रतिरसितसखो दुन्दुभिस्ताडितोऽयम्'॥(वेणी० १.२२) अन्र वाच्यस्य क्रोधाद्यव्यअ्कत्वेऽपि भीमसेनवक्तृत्वेनोद्धता रचनादयः । वाच्यौ- चित्याघथोदाहृते 'मूर्धव्याधूयमान-' इत्यादौ। प्रबन्धौचित्यादयथा नाटकादौ रौद्रेड- प्यभिनयप्रतिकूलत्वेन न दीर्घसमासादयः । एवमाख्यायिकायां शृङ्गारेऽपि न मसृ- णवर्णादयः । कथायां रौद्रेऽपि नात्यन्तमुद्धताः । एवमन्यदपि ज्ञेयम् ॥ इति साहित्यदर्पणे रीतिविवेचनो नाम नवमः परिच्छेदः।

दशमः परिच्छेद: । अथावसरप्राप्तान लङ्कारानाह- शब्दार्थयोरस्थिरा ये धर्माः शोभातिशायिनः ।

यथा अङ्गदादयः शरीरशोभातिशायिनः शरीरिणमुपकुर्वन्ति, तथानुप्रासोपमा- दय: शब्दार्थशोभातिशायिनो रसादेरुपकारका अलङ्गाराः । अस्थिरा इति नैषां गुणवदावश्यकी स्थितिः । शब्दार्थयोः प्रथमं शब्दस्य बुद्धिविषयत्वाच्छब्दालङ्गारेषु वक्तव्येषु शब्दार्थालङ्कारस्ापि पुनरुक्त्तवदाभासस्य चिरन्तनैः शब्दालङ्कारमध्ये लक्षितत्वात्प्रथमं तमेवाह- आपाततो यदर्थस्य पौनरुक्त्यावभासनम्। पुनरुकवदाभास: स भिन्नाकारशब्दगः ॥ २ ॥। उदाहरणम्- 'भुजङ्कुण्डली व्यक्तशशिशुभ्रांशुशीतगुः । जगन्त्यपि सदापायादव्याच्चेतोहरः शिवः' ॥ (श्रीकण्ठस्तव) अत्र भुजङ्गकुण्डल्यादिशब्दानामापातमात्रेण सर्पाद्यर्थतया पौनरुच्तयप्रतिभासनम्। पर्यवसाने तु भुजङ्गरूपं कुण्डलं विद्यते यस्येत्यादयन्यार्थत्वम् । 'पायादव्यात्' इत्यत्र क्रियागतोऽयमलङ्कारः, 'पायात' इत्यस्य 'अपायात्' इत्यत्र पर्यवसानाव। 'भुजङ्ग- कुण्डली' इति शब्दयोः प्रथमस्यैव परिवृत्तिसहत्वम्। 'हरः शिवः' इति द्वितीय- स्यैव। 'शशिशुभ्रांशु' इति द्योरपि। 'भाति सदानत्यागः' इति न द्वयोरपि। इति

अनुप्रासः शब्दसाम्यं वैषम्येऽपि स्वरस्य यत्। स्वरमान्रसादृश्यं तु वैचित्र्याभावान्न गणितम्। रसादयनुगतत्वेन प्रकर्षेण न्यासोऽनुप्रास:।

१ 'प्रुति' ग. २ 'दीघेः ख-ग. ३ 'वाच्यक्रोधाद्यमिव्य" नि; 'कोधाव्यक्ष" ख. ४ "विधायिनः' ख-ग. ५मळङुर्वन्ति' ख-ग. ६ 'पौनरुक्त्येन भासनम्' नि.

१२६ साहित्य दर्पणे [ १.३

छेव े व्यज्ञनसङ्गस्य सकृत्साम्यमनेकधा ।। ३॥ छेकश्छेकानुप्रासः । अनेकघेति स्वरूपतः क्रमतश्च। रसः सर इत्यादेः क्रमभे- देन सादृश्यं नास्यालक्कारस्य विषयः । उदाहरणं मम तातपादानाम्- 'आदाय बकुलगन्धानन्धीकुर्वन्पदे पदे भ्रमरान्। अयमेति मन्दमन्दं कावेरीवारिपावनः पवनः ॥' अत्र गन्धानन्वीति संयुक्तयोः, कावेरीवारीत्यसंयुक्तयोः, पावनः पवन इति व्यञ्ञ- नानां बहूनां सकृदावृत्तिः। छेको विदग्धस्तत्प्रयोज्यत्वादेष छेकानुप्रासः। अनेकसयैकधा साम्यमसकृद्दाप्यनेकधा । एकस्य सककृदप्येष वृत्त्यनुप्रास उच्यते ॥। ४ ॥ J1 एकधा स्वरूपत एव, न तु क्रमतोऽपि। अनेकधा स्वरूपतः क्रमतश्च। सकृदपी- त्यपिशब्दादसकृदपि। उदाहरणम्-

कीडत्कोकिलकाकलीकलक लैरुद्रीर्णकर्णज्वराः। नीयन्ते पथिकै: कथंकथमपि ध्यानावधानक्षण- प्राप्तप्राणसमासमागमरसोल्लासैरमी वासरा: ।।' अत्र 'रसोलासैरमी' इति रसयोरेकधव साम्यम्, न तु तेनैव क्रमेणापि, द्वितीये पादे कलयोरसकृत्तेनैव क्रमेण, प्रथमे एकस्य तकारस्य सकृत्, धकारस्य चासकृत्। रसविषयव्यापारवती वर्णरचना वृत्तिः, तदनुगतत्वेन प्रकर्षेण न्यसनाद्ृत्त्यनुप्रासः । उच्चार्यत्वाददैकत्र स्थाने तालुरदादिके। सादृश्यं व्यञ्षनस्यैव श्रुत्यनुप्रास उच्यते ॥।५॥ उदाहरणम्- 'दृशा दग्धं मनसिजं जीवयन्ति दृशैव याः । विरूपाक्षस्य जयिनीस्ता: स्तुँवे वामलोचनाः ॥।' (विद्धशाल० १) अत्र 'जीवेयन्ति' इति, 'याः' इति, 'जगिनीः' इत्यत्र जकारयकारयोरेकस्थाने तालावुच्चार्यत्वात्सादृश्यम्। एवं दन्त्यकण्ठयानामप्युदाहार्यम्। एष सहृदयानामतीव श्रुतिसुखावहत्वाच्रुत्यनुप्रासः । व्यञ्ञनं चेद्यथावस्थं सहाद्येन स्वरेण तु। आवत्यतेऽन्त्ययोज्यत्वादन्त्यानुप्रास एव तत् ॥ ६ ॥ यथावस्थमिति यथासम्भवमनुस्वारविसर्गस्वरसंयुक्ताक्षरविशिष्टम्। एष च प्रायेण पादस्य पदस्य चान्ते प्रयोज्यः । पादान्तगो यथा मम-

असमात्यूर्च 'अनुप्रासस्य पञ्च मेदानाह' इत्यधिकं खव-पुस्तके. २ 'सरूपतः क्रमतश्व' एतनास् ख-ग्-पुस्तकयोः ३ 'तत्मयोजकत्वात्' स. ४ शर्ङ्गधरपद्धती (३८२०) जयदे- वनाम्ना पद्यमिद्मुज्धृतम् ५'रमी वासरा इति' ख-ग. ६ 'मकारस्य' नि. • 'उनार्वते यदेकत्र' ग. ८ 'व्यञ्जनस्थैतच्छ्रुल" ख-ग. ९ 'स्तुमः' नि-ब. १० 'जीवयन्ति जमिनीरित्यत्र' ख-ग. "१ 'सहान्त्येन सरेण' ग. १२ 'आरव्तते' ख-ग.

१ .. ६]; दशम: परिच्छेदः । १३७

'केशः का शस्तबकविकासः कायः प्रकटितकरभविलासः। चक्षुर्दग्धवराटककल्पं त्यजति न चेतः काममनल्पम् ।।' पदान्तगो यथा- 'मन्दं हसन्तः पुलकं वहन्तः' इत्यादि। शब्दार्थयोः पौनरुत्तयं भेदे तात्पर्यमात्रतः । लाटानुप्रास इत्युक्क्ो उदाहरणम्- 'स्मेरराजीवनयने नयने किं निमीलिते। पश्य निर्जितकन्दर्प कन्दर्पवशगं प्रियम् ।।' अत्र विभत्तयर्थस्यापौनरुत्तयेऽपि मुख्यतरस्य प्रातिपदिकांशदोत्यधर्मिरूपस्य भिन्ना- र्थत्वाल्ाटानुप्रासत्वमेव। 'नयने तस्यैव नयने च।' अत्र द्वितीयनयनशब्दो भाग्य- वत्तादिगुणविशिष्टत्वरूपतात्पर्यमात्रेण भिन्नार्थः । 'यस्य न सविधे दथिता दवदहनस्तुहिनदीधितिस्तस्य। यस्य च सविधे दयिता दवदहनस्तुहिनदीधितिस्तेस्य ।।' अन्रानेकपदानां पौनरुत्तयम्। एष च प्रायेण लाटजनप्रियत्वाल्लाटानुप्रासः। डनुप्रासः पञ्चधा ततः।।७॥ स्पष्टभ् । सत्यर्थे पृथगर्थाया: स्वरव्यज्ञनसंहते: । क्मेण तेनैवावृत्तिर्यमकं विनिगद्यते ॥८॥ अत्र द्योरपि पदयोः क्वचित्सार्थकत्वं कचित्निरर्थकत्वम्। क्वचिदेकस्य सार्थ- कत्वमपरस्य निरर्थकत्वम्। अत उक्तम्-'सत्यर्थे' इति। वेनैव क्रमेण दमो इत्या- देविविक्तविषयत्वं सूचितम्। एतच्च पदपादार्धक्रोकावृत्तित्वेन पादाद्यावृत्तेश्वानेकविध- तया प्रभूततमभेदम्। दिद्ान्रं तूदाह्ियते- 'नवपलाश-पलाशवनं पुरः स्फुटपरागपरागत-पङ्कजम्। मृदुल-तान्त-लतान्तमलोकयत्स सुरभि सुरभि सुमनोभरैः ॥' (शिशु० ६.२) अत्र पदावृत्तिः 'पलाशपलाश' इति 'सुरभि सुरभि' इत्यत्र च द्वयोः सार्थक- त्म्। 'लतान्तलतान्त' इत्यत्र प्रथमस्य निरर्थकत्वम्। 'परागपराग' इत्यत्र द्विती- यस्य। एवमन्यदप्युदाहार्यम्। 'यमकादौ भवेदैक्यं डलोर्बवोर्लरोस्तया।' इत्युक्तनयात् 'भुजलतां जडतामबलाजनः' (रघु.९.४६) इत्यत्र न यमकत्वहानिः। अन्यस्यान्यार्थकं वाक्यमन्यथा योजयेद्यदि। अन्यः श्रेषेण काक्का वा सा वक्रोकिसततो द्विधा॥९॥

१'पदिकद्योत्यधार्म०' ख-ग. २ काव्यप्रकाशे नवमोल्लास उदाहृतमिदम्. ३ 'निरर्थकत्वं कचिद् दयोनिंरर्थकत्व्मित्यत उत्त' ग. ४ '्विभक्त०' ग. ५ 'पादपदार्ष०' नि. ६ वाग्भटाल- शारेप्युक्तं (१.२०) 'यमक श्रेषचित्रेषु बवयोर्डलयोर्न मित्। नानुसारविसगौं च चित्रमङ्गाय संमितौ।'

१३८ साहित्यंदर्पणे [१०.९

द्विधेति श्रेषवक्रोकि: काकुवक्रोक्तिश्च। क्रमेणोदाहरणम्- 'के यूयं स्थल एव संप्रति वय प्रश्नो विशेषाश्रयः कि ब्रते विहगः स वा फणिपतिर्यत्रास्ति सुप्तो हरिः। वामा यूयमह्ो विडम्बरसिक: कीदृक्सरो वर्तते येनास्मासु विवेकशून्यमनसः पुंस्वेव योषिन्भमः ।।' अत्र विशेषपदस्य 'वि: पक्षी' 'शेषो नागः' इत्यर्थद्वययोगात्सभङ्गश्रेषः । अन्यत्र लभङ्ग: । 'काले कोकिलवाचाले सहकारमनोहरे। कृतागस: परित्यागात्तस्याश्वतो न दूयते।।' अत्रैकैया सख्या निषेधार्थे नियुक्तो नञू अन्यया काका दूयत रवेति विध्ययें घटितः। शब्दैरेकविधैरेव भाषासु विविधास्वपि। वाक्यं यत्र भवेत्सोऽयं भाषासम इतीष्यते॥ १० ॥ यथा मम- 'मञ्जुलमणिमजीरे कलगम्मीरे विहारसरसीतीरे। विरसासि केलिकीरे किमालि धीरे च गन्धसारसमीरे॥' एष श्लोक: संस्कृतप्राकृतसौरसेनी प्राच्यावन्तीनागरापभ्रंशेष्वेकविध एव। 'सरसं कइण कव्वं' इत्यादौ तु 'सरसं' इत्यत्र संस्कृतप्राकृतयोः साम्येऽपि वाक्यगतत्वाभावरे वैचित्र्याभावान्नायमलङ्गारः । छिष्टैः पदैरनेकार्थामिधाने श्रेष इष्यते। वर्णप्रत्ययलिङ्गानां प्रकृत्योः पदयोरपि। १९॥

क्रमेणोदाहरणम्- 'प्रतिकूलतामुपगते हि विधौ विफलत्वमेति बडुसाधनता। अवलम्बनाय दिनभर्तुरभूत्र पतिष्यतः करसहस्रमपि ॥' (शिशु० ९.६) अत्र 'विधौ' इति विधु-विधि-शब्दयोरुकारेकारयोर्वर्णयोरौकाररूपत्वाच्छेषः। 'किरणा हरिणाङ्कस्य दक्षिणश्च समीरणः । कान्तोत्सङ्गजुषां नूनं सर्व एव सुधाकिरः ।।' अत्र 'सुधाकिरः' इति क्विपूप्रत्यय-क-प्रत्यययोः । कि चात्र बहुवचनैकवचनयो- रैकरूप्याद्वचन श्रेषोऽपि। 'विकसन्नत्रनीलाब्जे ा्ा्ी तव दत्तां सदामोदं लसच्तरलहारिणी ।।' अत्रे नपुंसकस्त्रीलिङ्गयो: श्रेषो वचनश्रेषोऽपि।

१ 'वामाभ्रमः' ख-ग.१ '.योगत्वात्' ख-ग. ३ 'अत्र कमाचित् सख्या' नि-व.१ 'तन्व्याः' नि-ब. ५ 'अत्र वचनश्रेषोपि' ख-ग.

१०.१२ ] दशमः परिच्छेद: । १३९

'अयं सर्वाणि शास्त्राणि हृदि व्षेषु च वक्ष्यति। सामर्थ्यकृदमित्राणां मित्राणां च नृपात्मजेः ।' अन्र 'वक्ष्यति' इति वहि-वच्योः, 'सामर्थ्यकृत' इति कृन्तति-करोत्योः प्रकृत्योः। 'पृथुकार्तस्वरपात्रं-' इत्यादि। अत्र पदभङ्गे विभक्तिसमासयोरपि वैलक्षण्यात्पदश्रेषः, न तु प्रकृतिश्रेषः । एवं च- 'नीतानामाकुलीभावं लुब्धैभूरिशिलीमुखैः । सदृशे वनवृद्धानां कमलानां तदीक्षणे।।' अत्र लुब्धशिलीमुखादिशब्दानां श्लिष्टत्वेऽपि विभक्तेरमेदात्प्रकृतिश्रेषः । अन्यथा सर्वत्र पदश्रेषप्रसङ्गः । 'सर्वस्वं हर सर्वस्य त्वं भवच्छेदतत्परः । नयोपकारसांमुख्यमायासि तनुवर्तनम्।।' अत्र 'हर' इति पक्षे शिवसम्बोधनमिति सुप्। पक्षे हृधातोस्तिडिति विभक्तोः। एवं 'भव' इत्यादौ। अस्य च मेदस्य प्रत्ययश्रेषेणापि गतार्थत्वे प्रत्ययान्तरासाध्य- सुबन्ततिङ्ुन्तगतत्वेन विच्छित्तिविशेषाश्रयणात्पृथगुक्तिः । 'महदे सुरसंधं मे तमव समासङ्गमागमाहरणे। हर बहुसरणं तं चित्तमोहमवसर उमे सहसा॥' (देवीशतक ७६) अत्र संस्कृतमहाराष्ट्रयोः। 4

पुनस्िधा सभङ्गोडथाभङ्गस्तदुभयात्मकः॥१२॥ मतन्द्रेदत्रयं चोक्तमेदाष्टके यथासम्भवं ज्ञेयम्। यथा वा- 'येन ध्वस्तमनोभवेन बलिजित्कायः पुरास्त्रीकृतो यश्रोद्दत्तभुजङ्गहारवलयोगङ्गां च योऽधारयत्। यस्याहुः शशिमच्छिरो हर इति स्तुत्यं च नामामराः पायात्स स्वयमन्धकक्षयकरस्त्वां सर्वदोमाधवैः ॥' अत्र 'येन-' इत्यादौ सभङ्गश्रेषः । 'अन्धक- इत्यादावभङ्गः। अनयोश्रैकत्र सन्भवात्सभङ्गाभङ्गात्मको ग्रन्थगौरवभयात्पृथडेदाहतः । इह केचिदाहुः-'सभङ्गश्रेष एव शब्दक्रेषविषयः । यत्रोदात्तादिस्वरमेदाद्विन्न- १ काव्यप्रकाशे नवमोल्ास उदाहृतभिदं पद्यम्. २ 'लुब्धैर्मुवि' ग. ३ 'पदश्रेषः स्यात्' ख-ग. ४ काव्यप्रकाशे नवमोलास उदाहृतोडयं श्रोक :. ५ 'विभक्े: नि-ब. ६ संस्कृते पद्यस्यान्वयो यथा-महदे (उत्सवदे) उमे ( गौरि) आगमाहरणे (विद्याग्रहणे) मे (मम) तं सुरसन्धं समासङ़ं अव (रक्ष) अवसरे तं बहुसरणं (इतश्चेतश्च प्सरन्तं) चित्तमोहं सहसा हर (दूरीकुरु); प्राकृते-मह देसु रस धंमे तमबसं आतं गमागमा हर णे। हरवहु सरणं तं चित्तमोहं अचसरउ मे सहसा (मम देहि रसं धर्मे तमोवशामाशां गमागमात् हर नः। हरवधूः शरग त्वं चित्तमोहः अपसरतु मे सहसा). काव्यप्रकाशे सप्तमोल्ासे ध्वन्यालोकेच द्वितायोद्द्योते उदाहृतं सूक्तिमुक्तावलौ चन्दकनाम्ना समुद्ृतम्. ८ उन्नटादय:, 'एकम्रयत्नोच्चार्याणां' (उन्ट्ट १.२४-२५) इत्यादि कारिकादूयं दशमे परिच्छेदे श्रेषटिप्पन्यामुद्धृतं द्रष्टव्यम्.

१४० साहित्यदर्पणे [१०.१२

प्रयल्नोच्चार्यत्वेन मिन्नयोः शब्दयोर्जतुकाध्ठन्यायेन श्ेषः। अभङ्गस्त्वर्थश्रेष एव यत्र स्वराभेदादभिन्नप्रयलोच्चार्यतया शब्दामेदादर्थयोरेकवृन्तगतफलद्वयन्यायेन श्रेषः। यो हि यदाश्रितः स तदलङ्गार एव। अलक्कायोलङ्गरणभावस्य लोकवदाश्रयाश्रयिभावे- नोंपपत्तिः' इति। तदन्ये न क्षमन्ते। तथाहि-अत्र ध्वनिगुणीभूतव्यञ्चयदोषगुणालङ्गाराणां शब्दार्थगतत्वेन व्यवस्थि- तेरन्वयव्यतिरेकानुविधायित्वेन नियमे इति। न च 'अन्धकक्षय-'इत्यादौ शब्दाभेद:, 'अर्थभेदेन शब्दभेदः' इति दर्शनात। कि चात्र शब्दस्यैव मुख्यतया वैचित्र्यबोधो- पायत्वेन कविप्रतिभयोद्टङ्कनाच्छव्दालक्कारत्वमेव। विसदृशशब्दद्वयस्य बन्धे चैवंवि- धस्य वैचित्यस्याभावाद् वैचित्र्यस्यैव चालक्कारत्वात्। अर्थमुखप्रेक्षितया चाथालङ्गार- त्वेऽनुप्रासादीनामपि रसादिपरत्वेनार्थमुखप्रेक्षितयार्थालङ्कारत्वप्रसङ्गः। शब्दस्या- भिन्नप्रयलोच्चार्यत्वेनार्थालद्वारत्वे 'प्रतिकूलतामुपगते हि विधौ' इत्यादौ शब्दभेदेऽप्य- र्थालक्कारत्वं तवापि प्रसज्जतीत्युभयत्राप्ति शब्दालङ्कारत्वमेव। यत्र तु शब्दपरिवर्त- नेऽपि न श्रलेषत्वखण्डना, तत्र- 'स्तोकेनोन्नतिमायाति स्तोकेनायात्यधोगतिम्। अह्दो सुसदृशी वृत्तिस्तुलाकोटे: खलस्य चे।।' इत्यादावर्थश्रेषः ॥ अस्य चालक्कारान्तरविविक्तविषयताया असम्भवाद्विद्यमानेष्व- लक्कारान्तरेष्वपवादत्वेन तद्वाधकतया तत्प्रतिभोत्पत्तिहेतुत्वमिति केचिद। इत्थमत्र विचार्यते-समासोत्त्यप्रस्तुतप्रशंसादौ द्वितीयार्थस्यानभिघेयतया नास्य गन्धोऽपि। 'विद्वन्मानसहंस-'इत्यादौ श्रेषगमें रूपकेऽपि मानसशब्दस्य चिच्तसरोरूपोभयार्थ- त्वेऽपि रूपकेण श्रेषो बाध्यते। सरोरूपस्यैवार्थस्य विश्रान्तिधामतया प्राधान्याच्छेषे ह्यर्थद्वयस्यापि समकक्षत्वम्। 'संनिहितबालान्धकारा भारन्मूर्तिश्च' इत्यादौ विरोधा- भासेऽपि विरुद्धार्थस्य प्रतिभातमात्रस्य प्ररोहाभावान्न र्रेषः । एवं पुनरुकवदाभा- सेऽपि । तेन 'येन ध्वस्त-' इत्यादौ प्राकरणिकयोः 'नीतानाम्-' इत्यादावप्राकर-

'स्वेच्छोपजातविषयोऽपि न याति वत्तुं देहीति मार्गणशतैश्च ददाति दुःखम्। मोहात्समुत्क्षिपति जीवनमप्यकाण्डे कष्टं प्रसूनविशिखः प्रमुरल्पवुद्धिः ॥।' इत्यादौ च प्राकरणिकाप्राकरणिकयोरेकधर्माभिसम्बन्धाद्दीपके, 'सकलकलं पुरमेतज्जातं संप्रति सुधांशुबिम्बमिव।' इत्यादौ चोपमायां विद्यमानायामपि श्रेषस्यैतद्विषयपरिह्यारेणासम्भवाद् एषां च श्रेषविषयपरिहारेणापि स्थितेरेतद्विषये ऋ्रेषस्य प्राधान्येन चमत्कारित्वप्रतीतेश्च रेषे- १ 'नियमात्' ग. २ 'अर्थमदेन तावच्छव्दा मिद्यन्ते इति मटोन्नटस्य सिद्धान्तः' प्रतोहारे- न्दुराजस्य लघुवृत्ता (उन्दट ४.२४-२५). ३ 'वैचित्यामावात्' नि. ४ काव्यप्रकाशे नवमोलास उदाहृतमिदम्. "उद्ददादयः दशमे परिच्छेदे शरेषस्योपरि दत्ताङ्ग्लमाषाटिप्पनी द्रष्टव्या, ६ 'बहलान्ध' ग. • 'प्राबल्येन' ग.

१०.१२ ] दशम: परिच्छेदः । १४१

णैव व्यपदेशो भवितुं युक्तः । अन्यथा तद्यपदेशस्य सर्वथाभावप्रसङ्गाच्ेति। अत्रोच्यते-न तावत्परमार्थतः श्रेषस्यालङ्कारान्तराविविक्तविषयता 'येन ध्वस्त-' इत्यादिना विविक्तविषयत्वात्। न चात्र तुल्ययोगिता, तस्याश्च द्वयोरप्यर्थयोर्वाच्य- त्वनेयमाभावात्। अत्र च माधवोमाधवयोरेकस्य वाच्यत्वनियमेऽपरस्य व्यङ्ग्यत्वं स्वात्। किं च तुल्ययोगितायामप्येकस्यैव धर्मस्यानेकधार्मेसम्बद्धतया प्रतीतिः । इह तवने- केषां धर्मिणां पृथक्पृथग्धर्मसम्बद्धतया। 'सकलकलम्-' इत्यादौ च नोपमाप्रतिभो- त्पत्तिहेतुः श्रेष: । पूणोपमाया निर्विषयत्वापत्तेः । 'कमलमिव मुखं मनोज्ञमेतत्' इत्याद्यस्ति पूरणोपमाविषय इति चेत्, न । यदि 'सकल-' इत्यादौ शब्दरेषतया नोपमा, तत्किमपराद्धं 'मनोज्म्' इत्यादावर्थक्र्ेषेण। 'स्कुटमर्था लक्काराचेतावुपमासमुच्चयौ, किं तु । आश्रित्य शब्दमात्रं सामान्यमिहापि सम्भवतः ।।' इति रुद्रटोक्तदिशा (४.३२) गुणक्रियासाम्यवच्छव्दसाम्यस्याप्युपमाप्रयोजक- तवात्। ननु गुणक्रियासाम्यस्यैवोपमाप्रयोजकता युक्ता, तत्र साधर्म्यस्य वास्तवत्वात्। शब्दसाम्यस्य तु न तथा, तत्र साधर्म्यस्यावास्तवत्वात्। ततश्च पूणोंपमाया अन्य- थानुपपत्या गुणक्रियासाम्यस्यैवार्थश्रेषविषयता परित्यागे पूणोपमाविषयता युक्ता, न तु 'सकल-' इत्यादौ शब्दसाम्यस्यैवेति चेत्, न। 'साधर्म्यमुपमा' इत्येवाविशिष्टस्यो- पमालक्षणस्य शब्दसाम्याद्यावृत्तेरभावात्। यदि च शब्दसाम्ये साधर्म्यमवास्तव- त्वान्नोपमाप्रयोजकम्, तदा कथं 'विद्वन्मानस-' इत्यादावाधारभूते चित्तादौ सरो- वराद्यारोपो राजादेईसाद्यारोपप्रयोजकः । किं च यदि वास्तवसाम्य एवोपमाज्गीकार्या, कथ त्वयापि 'सकलकल-' इत्यादौ वाध्यभूतोपमान्गीक्रियते। कि चात्र ऋरेषस्यैव साम्यनिर्वाहकता, न तु साम्यस्य श्ेषनिर्वाहकता। श्रेषबन्धतः प्रथमं साम्यस्थासम्भवात्। इत्युपमाया एवाङ्गित्वेन व्यपदेशो ज्यायान् 'प्रधानेन व्यपदेशा भवन्ति' इत्युक्तन्यायात्। ननु शब्दालक्कारविषयेऽङ्गाङ्गिभावसक्करो नाङ्गीक्रियते तत्कथमत्र श्रषोपमयोरङ्गा- द्विमावः सङ्कर इति. चेत्, न। अर्थानुसन्धानविरहिण्यप्रासादावेव तथानङ्गीकारात्। एवं दीपकादावपि ब्ेयम्। 'सत्पक्षा मधुरगिरः प्रसाधिताशा मदोद्धतारम्भाः । निपतन्ति धार्तराष्ट्राः कालवशान्मेदिनीपृष्ठे ॥' (वेणी० १.६) मत्र शरद्वर्णनया प्रकरणेन धार्वराष्ट्रादिशब्दानां हंसादर्थाभिधाने नियमनादुयों- धनादिरूपोडर्यः शब्दशक्तिमूलो वस्तुध्वनिः । इह च प्रकृतप्रबन्धाभिधेयस्य द्वितीया- र्थस्य सूच्यतयैव विवक्षितत्वादुपमानोपमेयभावो न विवक्षित इति नोपमाध्वनिर्न च ऋ्रेष इति सर्वमवदातम्।

१ 'तस्यां द्व'-ग. २ 'श्ेषविषयतया परित्यागे' नि. ३ 'हैसत्वाद्यारोपरुपकम यो ज क ः ' म 'हैसाद्यारोपरूपरूपकप्रयोजकः' ब. ४ 'साम्यस्य सम्भवात्' नि.

१४२ साहित्यदर्पणे [१०.१३

पद्माद्याकारहेतुत्वे वर्णानां चित्रमुच्यते। आदिशब्दात्खङ्ग-मुरज-चक्र-गोमूत्रिकादयः । अस्य च तथाविधलिपिसंनिवरेशविशे- षवशेन चमत्कारविधायिनामपि वर्णानां तथाविधश्रोत्राकाशसमवायविशेषवशेन चम- त्कारविधायिभिर्वर्णैरमेदेनोपचाराच्छव्दालङ्गारत्वम्। तत्र पद्मबन्धो यथा मम- 'मारमासुषमा चारुरुचा मारवधूत्तमा। मात्तंधूर्ततमावासा सा वामा मेडस्तु मा रमा॥' एषोऽधदलपझ्मबन्धो दिग्दलेषु निर्गमप्रवेशाभ्यां किष्टवर्णः, किं तु विदिग्दलेष्वन्यथा, क्णिकाक्षरं तु क्िष्टमेव। एवं खङ्गबन्धादिकमप्यूह्यम्। काव्यान्तर्गडुभूततया तु नेह प्रपञ्न्यते। रसस्य परिपन्थित्वाभ्नालङ्कार: प्रहेलिका ॥। १३॥ उक्तिवैचित्र्यमात्रं सा च्युतदत्ताक्षरादिका। च्युताक्षरा-दत्ताक्षरा-च्युतदत्ताक्षरा च। उदाहरणम्- 'कूजन्ति कोकिल्म: साले यौवने फुल्मम्बुजम्। किं करोतु कुरआ्गाक्षी वदनेन निपीडिता ।।' तत्र 'रसाले इति वक्तव्ये 'साले' इति 'रः' च्युतः । 'वने' इत्यत्र 'यौवने' इते 'यौः' दत्तः । 'वदनेन' इत्यत्र 'मदनेन' इति 'मः' च्युतः 'वः' दत्तः । आदिशब्दा- त्क्रियाकारकगुप्तादयः। तत्र क्रियागुप्तिर्यथा- 'पाण्डवानां सभामध्ये दुयोधन उपागतः । तस्ै गां च सुवर्ण च सर्वाण्याभरणानि च ।' अत्र 'दुर्योषनः' इत्यत्र 'अदुर्योऽधनः' इति। 'अदुः' इति क्रियागुप्तिः। एवमन्यत्रापि। अथावसरप्राप्तेष्वर्थालङ्कारेषु सादृश्यमूलेषु लक्षितव्येषु तेषामप्युपजीव्यत्वेन प्राधा- न्यात्प्रथममुपमामाह-

2 'मातुर्धूततमारासा' ग.

.

D.G.A. 80. CENTRAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL LIBRARY NEW DELHI Issue record

Call No .- Sa4A/Vis/Kan - 8527

hor- Vis'vanatha.

"A book that is shut is but a block" EO LOGICA RCF LLIBRARY GOVT. OF INDIA Department of Archaeology NEW DELHI. CENTRAL

Please help us to keep the book clean and moving.

S. B., 148. N. DELHI.