काव्यालङ्कार (आचार्य भामह - भारतीय काव्यशास्त्र एवं अलङ्कार-सिद्धान्त मूल महाग्रन्थ सटीक)

FIRST PARICCHEDA 27
(4)' An Ākhyāyikā should be impressed with
certain favourite marks of the poet in ideas or
words. They are known as मुद्रा or अङ्क or कविसाहसाङ्क.
By way of illustration for मुद्रा may be cited the use
of the word लक्ष्मी in the concluding stanzas of all
sargas in Kirātārjunīya by Bhāravi, the word श्री
likewise in all the concluding stanzas of Śiśupāla-
vadha by Māgha and the phrase—नीलकण्ठमखिनिहितकारुण्य
in Nīlakaṇṭhavijaya by Nīlakaṇṭhadīkshita. This
distinguishing characteristic of Ākhyāyikā is thus
referred to by Bhāmaha:—कवेरभिप्रायकृतैः कथनैः कैश्चिदङ्किता.
(5) The next distinction relates to the topics in
Ākhyāyikā as contrasted with Kathā. कन्याहरणसंग्राम-
विप्रलम्भोदयान्विता. Ākhyāyikā deals with the kidnap-
ping of maidens, battles, separation of lovers, the
hero's material progress and so on.
(6) The next point of difference lies in the pre-
amble. An Ākhyāyikā should begin with a des-
cription of the author's heredity in prose and in ex-
tenso—कर्तृवंशप्रशंसा स्याद्यत्र गद्येन विस्तरात्; whereas Kathā
should begin with a description of the same in
verse and in brief, and further a preliminary story
should be introduced by way of preamble to the
principal narrative—
श्लोकैः स्ववंशं संक्षेपात्कविर्यत्र प्रशंसति ।
मुख्यार्थस्यावताराय भवेद्यत्र कथान्तरम् ॥

28 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
Daṇḍin's refutation of the said distinction is
set out in Kāvyādarśa thus :—
अपादः पदसंतानो गद्यमाख्यायिका कथा ।
इति तस्य प्रभेदौ द्वौ तयोराख्यायिका किल ॥
नायकेनैव वाच्याऽन्या नायकेनेतरेण वा ।
स्वगुणाविष्क्रियादोषो नात्र भूतार्थशंसिनः ॥
अपि त्वनियमो दृष्टस्तत्राप्यन्यैरुदीरणात् ।
अन्यो वक्ता स्वयं वेति कीदृग्वा भेदकारणम् ॥
वक्त्रं चापरवक्त्रं च सोच्छ्वासत्वं च भेदकम् ।
चिह्नमाख्यायिकायाश्चेत्प्रसङ्गेन कथास्वपि ॥
आर्यादिवत्प्रवेशः किं न वक्त्रापरवक्त्रयोः ।
भेदश्च दृष्टो लम्भादिरुच्छासो वास्तु किं ततः ॥
तत्कथाख्यायिकेत्येका जातिः संज्ञाद्वयाङ्किता ।
अत्रैवान्तर्भविष्यन्ति शेषाश्चाख्यानजातयः ॥
कन्याहरणसंग्रामविप्रलम्भोदयादयः ।
सर्गबन्धसमा एव न ते वैशेषिका गुणाः ॥
कविभावकृतं चिह्नमन्यत्रापि न दुष्यति ।
मुखमिष्टार्थसंसिद्धौ किं हि न स्यात्कृतात्मनाम् ॥ I—23 to 30.
Daṇḍin refers to all the said six points of dis-
tinction and attacks them on the ground that none
of them is a valid ground for distinction.
(1) Whether the story is related by the hero
himself or another, it makes little difference—अन्यो
वक्ता स्वयं वेति कीदृग्वा भेदकारणम् ।
(2) What does it matter if the narrative is
divided into Ucchvāsas or Lambakas or not divid-
ed at all ? भेदश्च दृष्टो लम्भादिरुच्छासो वास्तु किं ततः । Division is

a mere matter of convenience, and if divided into
chapters, Ucchvāsa and Lambaka are but different
nomenclatures.
(3) What is the rule that Vaktra and Apara-
vaktra metres alone should find a place in Ākhyā-
yikā, and Āryā and other metres in a Kathā? The
difference is extremely artificial. आर्यादिवत्प्रवेशः किं न
वक्त्रापरवक्त्रयोः.
(4) A poet is free to utilise his favourite ideas
and favourite expressions in any composition he
chooses Why should it be restricted to Ākhyā-
yikās? कविभावकृतं चिह्नमन्यत्रापि न दुष्यति.
(5) With regard to topics like कन्याहरण etc.,
Ākhyāyikā has obviously no monopoly. Are they
not found in Mahākāvyas which are classed under
poetry? If they be common to poetry and a species
of prose, why should the other species of prose
alone be deprived of those incidents? कन्याहरणसंग्राम-
विप्रलम्भोदयादयः । सर्गबन्धसमा एव न ते वैशेषिका गुणाः ॥
(6) How does a preamble alter the character
of a narrative? It is the genius of the author that
will decide the appropriate introduction to a story.
Men of genius will impart excellence into a work,
whichever way they begin. मुखमिष्टार्थसंसिद्धौ भवेत्किं न कृता-
त्मनाम्.
The distinction between Ākhyāyikā and Kathā
having thus been found to be baseless, there is no.

30 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
reason to divide prose into those two classes. Other
varieties of prose-composition seem to have been
recognised in the days of Daṇḍin and he says that
all of them can well be treated as representing one
species—अत्रैवान्तर्भविष्यन्ति शेषाश्चाख्यानजातयः.
However revolutionary might have been the
theory of Daṇḍin in his days, it should be admitted
that to the latter-day scholar and much more so to
the modern reader the whole controversy of Ākhyā-
yikā and Kathā is purely a matter of antiquarian
research. Viśvanātha in his Sāhityadarpaṇa makes
a feeble attempt to revive this distinction. But
we may take it that Daṇḍin's word is the last say
on the matter.
अनिबद्धं पुनर्गाथाश्लोकमात्रादि तत्पुनः ।
युक्तं वक्रस्वभावोक्त्या सर्वमेवैतदिष्यते ॥ ३० ॥
30. Sporadic poetry consists of songs, stray
verses and the like. It should contain a clever pre-
sentation and natural description. In fact this
feature applies to all the classes of poetry enume-
rated above.
30. अनिबद्धं Unconnected poetry—One or more
ślokas and the like. Bhāmaha takes care to point
out that a piece of poetry being sporadic does not
relieve it of the obligation to conform to the rules
of good poetry. युक्तं वक्रस्वभावोक्त्या Poetry, whether stray

FIRST PARICCHEDA 31
or connected must contain वक्रोक्ति and स्वभावोक्ति, A clever
presentation and a natural description. The refer-
ence here is not to the Alaṁkāras by that name.
But it may be pointed out that Alaṁkāras named
वक्रोक्ति and स्वभावोक्ति are also recognised by Bhāmaha.
Vide I—36 and II—93 and 94. युक्तं वक्रस्वभावोक्त्या has
to be repeated. The first one is to be taken along
with तत्पुनः in the first half where तत् refers to अनिबद्धं.
The second one is to be taken along with सर्वमेवैतदिष्यते
which refers to all the types of poetry enumerated
above. Thus the general characteristic of good
poetry is that it should contain वक्रोक्ति and स्वभावोक्ति
elucidated above.
वैदर्भमन्यदस्तीति मन्यन्ते सुधियोऽपरे ।
तदेव च किल ज्यायः सदर्थमपि नापरम् ॥ ३१ ॥
31. Other learned men hold,—There is a differ-
ent one, viz., the Vaidarbha or the poetry of Vidar-
bhas. Perhaps as they think, that alone is superior,
not any other poetry though possessed of good sense.
31. In this and the succeeding verses Bhāmaha
attacks the twofold classification of poetry into वैदर्भ
and गौडीय, which seems to have been in vogue in his
times. वैदर्भ is the type of poetry prevalent in the
Vidarbha Deśa, and Gauḍīya is that prevalent in
the Gauḍa Deśa. Vaidarbhas are described as दाक्षि-
णात्याs or the southern school to which Daṇḍin belongs
and to which evidently Bhāmaha did not belong.

32 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
Gauḍas represent the प्राच्यs, the eastern school. Bhā-
maha's attack is directed only against the twofold
classification of poetry. वैदर्भी and गौडी as the opposite-
types of रीति or style are recognised in later works
of rhetoric. रीति as a distinct entity in poetry seems
to be of later origin and perhaps it owes its origin
to Vāmana who says that रीति is the soul of poetry.
रीतिरात्मा काव्यस्य. Vāmana supplements the two types
of वैदर्भी and गौडी by a third one named पाञ्चाली Viśva-
nātha adds one more, लाटी. Sarasvatī Kaṇṭhābharaṇa
gives two more—आवन्ती and मागधी. Of these the वैदर्भी
and गौडी styles represent two opposite extremes.
Simplicity and elegance are the essence of the वैदर्भी
style whereas verbal pomposity is of the गौडी style.
रीति is nowhere mentioned by Bhāmaha. If we bear
this in mind and note that his attack is directed
only against a division of poetry into Vaidarbha
and Gauḍa, all his discussion relating to the two
will become intelligible. मन्यन्ते सुधियोऽपरे betrays the
author's aversion to recognise Vaidarbha as a dis-
tinct type of poetry. तदेव च किल ज्यायः Vaidarbha
alone is superior. Is it not? This is said in ridi-
cule of the idea. सदर्थं अपि नापरम् Not anything else
though conveying good sense. Simply because it
does not bear the name of Vaidarbha.
गौडीयमिदमेतत्तु वैदर्भमिति किं पृथक् ।
गतानुगतिकन्यायान्नानाख्येयममेधसाम् ॥ ३२ ॥

FIRST PARICCHEDA 33
32. That this is the poetry of Gauḍas and this
the poetry of Vidarbhas—is there any such distinc-
tion? It need not be told that fools walk the trodden
path, blindly following the lead of the blind.
32. 'Gauḍīya and Vaidarbha' is a distinction
made by ignorant persons—अमेधसां. न अनाख्येयं There
is nothing to prevent them from making such a dis-
tinction; so they are free to say so. But why do
they at all say? गतानुगतिकन्यायात् Just as one follows
another blindly—अन्धेनेव नीयमाना यथान्धाः.
ननु चाश्मकवंशादि वैदर्भमिति कथ्यते ।
कामं तथास्तु प्रायेण संज्ञेच्छातो विधीयते ॥ ३३ ॥
33. (The objector says) Indeed Aśmakavaṁśa
and the like represent the Vaidarbha. (Answer) Be
it so. Generally a nomenclature is given at one's
own will.
33. The objector retorts. Why say the blind
following the blind? Are there not poems like अश्म-
कवंश which belongs to Vaidarbha type? Aśmaka
seems to be the name of a country whose king was
also called अश्मक, and अश्मकवंश deals with the history
of his dynasty just as Raghuvaṁśa deals with the
dynasty of Raghu. It should be confessed that a
work of that name is not available to us. The
answer is कामं तथास्तु Alright; let it be so. This is
3

34 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
said on the principle of तुष्यतु दुर्जनः. If you dub it with
the name of Vaidarbha we have no quarrel. Our
only contention is that we cannot recognise a poetry
as is referred to in the next verse and as such insipid.
अपुष्टार्थमवक्रोक्ति प्रसन्नमृजु कोमलम् ।
भिन्नं गेयमिवेदं तु केवलं श्रुतिपेशलम् ॥ ३४ ॥
34. If meagre in meaning and bereft of clever
expressions, though clear, straightforward and soft,
a ,composition is different from poetry, something
like music and merely appeals to the ear.
34. अपुष्टार्थं and अवक्रोक्ति refer to two defective fea-
tures of poetry. प्रसन्नं, ऋजु and कोमलं refer to its good
qualities. If a composition is possessed of these
three good features it will not amount to poetry if
it is tainted with the two defects mentioned first.
भिन्नं It is different from poetry. गेयमिव Simply like
music. केवलं श्रुतिपेशलं Appeals only to the ear. The dif-
ference between music and poetry is thus set out by
Nīlakaṇṭha Dīkshita—कर्णे गतं शुष्यति कर्ण एव संगीतकं सैकत-
वारिरीत्या । आनन्दयत्यन्तरनुप्रविश्य सूक्तिः कवेरेव सुधासगन्धा ॥
अलंकारवदग्राम्यमर्थ्यं न्याय्यमनाकुलम् ।
गौडीयमपि साधीयो वैदर्भमिति नान्यथा ॥ ३५ ॥
35. If endowed with Alaṁkāras, decent, preg-
nant with meaning, cogent and coherent, poetry,

FIRST PARICCHEDA 35
though it be of the Gauḍīya type, is preferable, not
the one which is called Vaidarbha but represents
the reverse of the said qualities.
35. A different type of poetry differing from
the one mentioned in the previous Verse No. 34 is
described in this verse. You may call it Gauḍīya as
you like; even then it is preferable. If you call it
Vaidarbha it is not going to alter its nature. Call
it what you may, it is good poetry. अलंकारवत् En-
dowed with figures of speech or simply literary em-
bellishments. अग्राम्यं Non-vulgar; decent. अर्थ्यं In
keeping with good sense. न्याय्यं Logical. अनाकुलं Un-
diffused.
न नितान्तादिमात्रेण जायते चारुता गिराम् ।
वक्राभिधेयशब्दोक्तिरिष्टा वाचामलंकृतिः ॥ ३६ ॥
36. Merely by the use of soft words like Ni-
tānta and others, the beauty of speech does not arise.
A language composed of words embodying clever
ideas is preferable as an adornment of speech.
36. The mere use of soft words like नितान्त does
not contribute to the beauty of speech. नितान्त con-
tains nasals and unaspirated letters of the dental
class. But what is required to enhance the merit of
speech? वक्राभिधेयशब्दोक्तिः. It may be recalled that the
same feature has been referred to by the author in

36 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
—युक्तं वक्रस्वभावोक्त्या in Verse 30. We may conclude by
saying that Bhāmaha is justified in attacking Vai-
darbha and Gauḍīya as two different types of poetry.
But if they are to be treated as two different types
of style or diction as recognised in later days we do
not know what he would say. In fact Daṇḍin who
belongs to the Vaidarbha school elaborately esta-
blishes the distinction and it is whole-heartedly fol-
lowed by all later rhetoricians. This verse is cited
in Lochana, page 208.
षट् काव्यदोषाः ।
नेयार्थं क्लिष्टमन्यार्थमवाचकमयुक्तिमत् ।
गूढशब्दाभिधानं च कवयो न प्रयुञ्जते ॥ ३७ ॥
37. Poets avoid the use of language vitiated
by the faults—Neyārtha, Klishṭa, Anyārtha, Avā-
chaka, Ayuktimat and Gūḍhaśabdābhidhāna.
37. Bhāmaha gives a list of six Doshas or
literary defects in this verse, and in Verse 47 later
on gives another list of 4 Doshas. Apart from these
he devotes the entire 4th chapter of this work to the
treatment of other faults, 15 in number. Later
rhetoricians add many more Doshas. Kāvyaprakāśa,
the standard work in poetics in the 7th Ullāsa which
is exclusively devoted to Doshas gives 4 kinds of
literary faults—पददोष, वाक्यदोष, अर्थदोष and रसदोष and

FIRST PARICCHEDA 37
under each head gives a number of Doshas. Daṇḍin
enumerates 10 Doshas in Kāvyādarśa, 3rd Paricchhe-
da, Verses 125 & 126 and further on down to the end
of the work. The definitions of the several Doshas
given by Bhāmaha differ from those given by other
Ālaṁkārikas. Naturally the illustrations will also
differ. It is no use trying to understand Bhāmaha
in the light of the definitions of Doshas given by
later rhetoricians. From the next verse onwards
the author proceeds to deal with the said six Do-
shas separately in order with illustrations.
नेयार्थ दोषः (1)
नेयार्थं नीयते युक्तो यस्यार्थः कृतिभिर्बलात् ।
शब्दन्यायानुपारूढः कथंचित्स्वाभिसन्धिना ॥ ३८ ॥
38. Neyārtha occurs where the proper mean-
ing has to be squeezed out by clever persons accord-
ing to their own will with difficulty without any
basis on the rules of speech.
38. In a passage tainted with Neyārtha a
proper meaning does not appear on the face of the
expression. But it is somehow squeezed out by
importing an extraneous expression. It is शब्दन्यायानु-
पारूढः Not based on the rules relating to expressions.
स्वाभिसन्धिना According to one's own will; according to
the will of interpreters which may be supposed to

38 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
tally with that of the poet. युक्तः अर्थः नीयते A proper
meaning is forcibly dragged out. In the place of
युक्तः Mr. D. T. Tatacharya suggests that अयुक्तः will be
a better reading. In the next verse an example of
Neyārtha is given.
मायेव भद्रेति यथा सा चासाध्वी प्रकल्पना ।
वेणुदाकेरिति च तां नयन्ति वचनाद्विना ॥ ३९ ॥
39. Example :—‘Auspicious like jugglery.’
This is a wrong conception. By importing ‘Veṇu-
dāki’s’ they spell out a different sense without the
warrant of expression.
39. The meaning of this verse is shrouded in
mystery. We give in extenso the views of two com-
mentators. Mr. Naganatha Sastri says—
“Tr. For example (take the statement) ‘De-
ceit is auspicious.” This is an improper supposi-
tion. But (people) lead these words to some sense
by introducing the meaning Venudareh without
using the word.
“Note :—If we take वेणुदाकेः as वेणुदारेः then we can
guess a meaning. A Venudari is mentioned as the
son of Banasura. Being an Asura he must excel in
Maya (deceit). Deceit is never auspicious (=भद्रा).
So the statement ‘मायेव भद्रा’ = ‘auspicious as deceit’ is
an improper supposition. If however you introduce

the sense of वेणुदारेः (of Venudari) and understand the
Maya as belonging to Venudari, then there is some
sense. Because probably his deceit was useful for
some good purpose. No such story however is
available.”
Mr. D. T. Tatacharya says—मायेव भद्रेति यथा यादृशं
तादृशं नेयार्थमिति योजना। एवं सर्वत्र। सैषा वाक्यरचनाऽसाध्वी। न हि का
भद्रा कस्य सा मायेवेति किञ्चिदत्र प्रतीयते। तथा सति शब्दत उपादानमन्तरेणैव
वेणुदाकेर्भद्रा मायेवेति तां प्रकल्पनामुपपादयन्ति। वेणुदाकिः कस्यचित् प्रबन्धस्य
नायकः। भद्रा नायिका। सा तस्य मायेवाभूत्। तथाऽमूमुहदिति। तत्र कथा-
नायकस्योपादानं विना भद्रा मायेवेत्येतावन्मात्राभिधाने नार्थो बुध्यते। तत्र वेणु-
दाकेरित्‍ययमर्थ उन्नेतव्य इति नेयार्थमिदम्। तद्यथा खुरक्षुण्णनागासृग्लोहितादिति
वक्तव्ये लोहितादित्येतावन्मात्राभिधाने नेयार्थमिति दण्डिनोक्तं तादृगिदं द्रष्टव्यम्।
सोऽयमस्मदुपज्ञमर्थः।
We are inclined to observe that the first
commentary presumes that वेणुदाकेः is a scribe's mis-
take for वेणुदारेः. Perhaps so, for in Telugu manu-
script there is not much difference between रे and
के. According to the second commentary भद्रा वेणुदाकेः
मायेव would mean ‘Bhadrā was like an enchantress to
Veṇudāki.’ Then where is the need for importing
the words ‘to Veṇudāki?’ Without that addition the
sense is complete. Bhadrā was like an enchantress
in general. How will Neyārtha arise?
We may add one more suggestion. वेणुं दाकयतीति
वेणुदाकिः कृष्णः. दक is an onomotapoetic verb suggest-
ing the sound of a flute. Kṛṣṇa's deceitful tactics

40 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
contributed to the weal of the people. Or generally
Vishṇu's elusive role contributes to the people's
good.
क्लिष्टं अन्यार्थं च दोषौ (2 & 3)
क्लिष्टं व्यवहितं विद्यादन्यार्थं विगमे यथा ।
विजहुस्तस्य ताः शोकं क्रीडायां विकृतं च तत् ॥ ४० ॥
40. Klishṭa (strained) is what is intercepted
or remote. Anyārtha occurs where the intended
meaning appears by the omission of a part of an
expression. Example—Those ladies dispelled (sport-
ed) his grief by sports, and this was done by the
preposition Vi.
40. क्लिष्टं is defined as व्यवहितं Remote or obstruct-
ed. The author gives no example. Vāmana gives
an example of क्लिष्ट thus :—दक्षात्मजादयितवल्लभवेदिकानाम् mean-
ing चन्द्रकान्तवेदिकानाम्. But this will come under अवाचक
according to Bhāmaha. This verse also gives the
definition and illustration of the next Dosha—An-
yārtha. This Dosha arises where in order to make
sense some portion of the speech has to be dropped.
विगमः Dropping (of a part of an expression) e.g., ताः
तस्य शोकं क्रीडायां विजहुः. विजहुः would mean sported, which
does not fit in with the context. If you drop the
preposition वि, जहुः yields an agreeable meaning.

FIRST PARICCHEDA 41
It means removed. तद् विकृतं The Dosha is due to the
particle वि. This will come under अवाचक according
to Mammaṭa.
अवाचकं दोषः (4)
हिमापहामित्रधरैर्व्याप्तं व्योमेत्यवाचकम् ।
साक्षादरूढं वाच्येऽर्थे नाभिधानं प्रतीयते ॥ ४१ ॥
41. Avāchaka is illustrated by the state-
ment, ‘The sky was covered with the bearers of the
enemy of the destroyer of snow (clouds).’ A word
which does not directly denote an object fails to
yield the intended meaning.
41. अवाचक is the employment of round-about
expressions to denote an object which is not their
meaning by direct denotation. An example is—हिमा-
पहामित्रधरैः. हिमं Snow. हिमापहः The destroyer of snow;
fire. तस्य अमित्रं Its foe; water. तस्य धराः Its bearers;
clouds. This expression is tainted with the fault
of Avāchaka. This example is cited in Sarasvatī
Kaṇṭhābharaṇa to illustrate क्लिष्ट. This will come
under क्लिष्ट according to Mammaṭa also.
अयुक्तिमत् दोषः (5)
अयुक्तिमद्यथा दूता जलभृन्मारुतेन्दवः ।
तथा अमरहारीतचक्रवाकशुकादयः ॥ ४२ ॥

42 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
42. Ayuktimat (lacking in propriety) occurs
where for the conveyance of messages are used a
cloud, the wind, the moon, a bee, a dove, a ruddy
goose, a parrot and the like.
42. अयुक्तिमत् (Improper) arises where inanimate
objects and unintelligent beings are employed as
messengers.
अवाचोऽव्यक्तवाचश्च दूरदेशविचारिणः ।
कथं दूत्यं प्रपद्येरन्निति युक्त्या न युज्यते ॥ ४३ ॥
43. How can creatures without speech or with
indistinct speech roam over distant countries and be
made to undertake the task of messengers? This
does not stand to reason.
43. न विद्यते वाक् येषां ते अवाचः Dumb creatures. अव्य-
क्ता वाक् येषां ते अव्यक्तवाचः Beings with inarticulate expres-
sions. How will such beings play the role of a
messenger ?
यदि चोत्कण्ठया यत्तदुन्मत्त इव भाषते ।
तथा भवतु भूम्नेदं सुमेधोभिः प्रयुज्यते ॥ ४४ ॥
( कालिदासादिभिः ? )
44. But if through inordinate zeal or infatu-
ation one speaks thus like a lunatic, then be it so.
It is also largely used by intellectual persons.

FIRST PARICCHEDA 43
44. In the face of Kālidāsa's Meghasandeśa
how can the objection of Bhāmaha stand? He jus-
tifies such Kāvyas on the ground that the employer
of messages is labouring under a great tension and
as such speaks like a lunatic. In that view a Kā-
vya of the संदेश type is permissible according to Bhā-
maha. In fact he declares that such method is em-
ployed by men of genius, of course having Megha-
sandeśa in view.
गूढशब्दाभिधानं दोषः (6)
गूढशब्दाभिधानं च न प्रयोज्यं कथंचन ।
सुधियामपि नैवेदमुपकाराय कल्पते ॥ ४५ ॥
45. Gūḍhaśabdābhidhāna (a statement whose
words are hidden in meaning) should not be used on
any account. It is unhelpful even to intelligent
persons.
45. गूढशब्दानां अभिधानं An expression consisting of
words whose meanings are hidden. This is the 6th
and the last fault referred to in the above list.
असितर्त्तितुगद्रिच्छित् खःक्षितां पतिरद्विद्वक् ।
अमिद्भिः शुभ्रदृग्विष्टैर्द्विषो जेघ्नीयिषीष्ट वः ॥ ४६ ॥
46. May the Lord of the occupants of Heaven,
son of the one who leaves a black track (Fire), who

44 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
pierced the mountain and who is possessed of eyes
numbering not two (but twelve) slaughter your ene-
mies by means of his fiery white glances.
46. गूढशब्दाभिधान is illustrated by this verse.
असितर्ति etc. It would be difficult to construe this verse
without the clues given by Ratneśvara Sūri in his
commentary on Sarasvatī Kaṇṭhābharaṇa where it
is cited as an illustration. (1) असिता ऋतिः गतिः (ऋ
गताविति धातोः निष्पन्नः) यस्य सः असितर्तिः = कृष्णवर्त्मा One whose
path behind is black ; तस्य तुक् (तोकं) असितर्तितुक् The
child of fire; Lord Subrahmaṇya. Vide Amara :—
पार्वतीनन्दनः स्कन्दः सेनानीः अग्निभूर्गुहः. Vide Meghasandeśa :—
अत्यादित्यं हुतवहमुखे संभृतं तद्धि तेजः। I—43. (2) छिनत्तीति छित्. अद्रेः
छित् अद्रिच्छित्. The allusion is to the piercing of Mount
Krauñcha by the Lord. Vide Amara :—कुमारः क्रौञ्चदारणः.
(3) खः (स्वर्गे) क्षियन्ति (निवसन्ति) इति खःक्षितः तेषां खःक्षितां पतिः
The lord of the residents of heaven, for he is the
commander of the divine troops. (4) अद्विदृक् One pos-
sessed of more than two eyes. Subrahmaṇya has
six faces and therefore twelve eyes. न मिन्दतीति अमिद्
derived from मिदि स्नेहने. अमिद्भिः अस्निग्धैः or रूक्षैः Fierce, ad-
jectival to शुभ्रदृग्दृष्टैः शुभ्राणां दृशां दृष्टैः By his glances ema-
nating from white eyes When one looks in anger
the pupils will go up leaving the remaining ex-
panse of eyes white. वः द्विषः Accusative. जेघ्नीयिषीष्ट
Benedictive 3rd person singular of the frequenta-
tive of हन्.

FIRST PARICCHEDA 45
अपरे चत्वारो दोषाः।
श्रुतिदुष्टार्थदुष्टे च कल्पनादुष्टमित्यपि।
श्रुतिकष्टं तथैवाहुर्वाचां दोषं चतुर्विधम् ॥ ४७ ॥
47. They declare faults of speech as fourfold,
viz., Śrutidushṭa, Arthadushṭa, Kalpanādushṭa and
Śrutikashṭa.
47. This verse gives another list of 4 Doshas.
श्रुतिदुष्टं दोषः (7)
विड्वर्चोविष्ठितक्लिन्नच्छिन्नवान्तप्रवृत्तयः।
प्रचारधर्षितोद्गारविसर्गहदयन्त्रिताः ॥ ४८ ॥
हिरण्यरेताः संबाधः पेलवोपस्थिताण्डजाः।
वाक्काटवादयश्चेति श्रुतिदुष्टा मता गिरः ॥ ४९ ॥
48. Viṭ, Varchas and Vishṭhita (meaning ex-
crement), Klinna (drenched), Chhinna (cut), Vānta
(vomiting), Pravṛtti (discharge), Prachāra (motion).
Dharshita (outrage), Udgāra (belching), Visarga
(evacuating), Hada (discharging) and Yantrita
(lock-up);
49. Hiraṇyaretas (Fire), Sambādha (vulva),
Pelava (delicate), Upasthita (arrived), Aṇḍaja (bird),
Vākkāṭava (harshness of sound) and such words are
said to be faulty in the hearing.

46 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
48 & 49. विट् and the succeeding words given
in these two verses exemplify श्रुतिदुष्ट. Though pos-
sessed of good meaning they are tabooed in poetry
since they have other indecent meanings. विट्
Vaiśya; people; excrement. वर्चः Valour; semen.
विष्ठितः Established; discharged, excrement. क्लिन्नं Wet;
drenched in blood etc. छिन्नं Cut; also suggests the
breaking of Maṅgala sūtra. वान्तं Vomited; given
out. प्रवृत्तिः Engagement; discharge. प्रचारः Broadcast-
ing; motion. धर्षितं Insult; outrage on a woman.
उद्गारः An outflow; belching. विसर्गः Release; eva-
cuating. हद पुरीषोत्सर्गे. यन्त्रितं Locked up in intercourse;
fixed up. हिरण्यरेताः Fire; one whose semen is gold.
संबाधः Congestion; vagina. पेलवः Delicate; its ob-
scene meaning in Tamil is known. Mr. Naganatha
Sastri says that पेल in the Lāṭa dialect means the
scrotum. उपस्थितः Arrived; also suggests उपस्थ. अण्डजः
A bird; suggests वृषण. वाक्काटवं Harshness of speech.
With regard to the other meaning see the following
extract from Kāmadhenu, commentary on Vāmanā-
laṅkāra II—i—19. अत्र काट इत्येकदेशेन लिङ्गप्रतीतिः व्रीडादायी,
काटश्शार्णवश्च इत्यत्र मन्त्रभाष्ये तथा दर्शनात्. According to this
काट means the male organ. Mr. D. T. Tatacharya
says—अत्र कांटेत्यंशः क्वचित् प्रेतवाहनं अवगमयतीत्याहुः (A corpse-
carrier.)
२ अर्थदुष्टं दोषः (8)
अर्थदुष्टं पुनर्ज्ञेयं यत्रोक्ते जायते मतिः ।
असभ्यवस्तुविषया शब्दैस्तद्वाचिभिर्यथा ॥ ५० ॥