काव्यप्रकाश (आचार्य मम्मट - सम्पूर्ण १० उल्लास सटीक)

198 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
इतीदंशब्दवददःशब्दस्तच्छब्दार्थमभिधत्ते इति उच्यते।
तर्ह्यत्रैव वाक्यान्तरे उपादानमर्हति न तत्रैव। यच्छब्दस्य हि
निकटे स्थितः प्रसिद्धिं परामृशति। यथा
यत्तदूर्जितमत्युग्रं क्षात्रं तेजोस्य भूपतेः।
दीव्यताक्षैस्तदानेन नूनं तदपि हारितम् ॥१९३॥
इत्यत्र तच्छब्दः।
ननु कथम्
कल्याणानां त्वमसि महसां भाजनं विश्वमूर्ते
धुर्यां लक्ष्मीमथ मयि भृशं धेहि देव प्रसीद।
यद्यत्पापं प्रतिजहि जगन्नाथ नम्रस्य तन्मे
भद्रं भद्रं वितर भगवन् भूयसे मङ्गलाय ॥१९४॥
and not in the same clause (as it does in the passage in
question, where we have the two pronouns appearing in
juxtaposition, ‘yosau’). In fact when pronouns like
‘tat’ and ‘adas’, appear in close juxtaposition to ‘yat’,
they signify the well-known character of the thing spoken
of [and they are not used predicatively];—e. g. in the
passage—‘yattadūrjita.......hāritam’—‘Even that well-
known virile and glorious warlike spirit of the king was
lost in the gambling,’—where the pronoun ‘tat’ signifies
the well-known character of the ‘spirit.’
It might be argued that, if such be the rule (that the
pronoun ‘yat’ in one clause must be followed by a corres-
ponding ‘tat’ in a subsequent clause), then how is it that
in the following passage, though the preceding clause
contains the pronoun ‘yat’ repeated twice—‘yat-yat’—
the corresponding ‘tat’ occurs only once in the subse-
quent clause—‘Kalyāṇāṁ.....yadyat pāpaṁ......tanme......
maṅgalāya’—‘Oh Thou of form universal! Thou art