काव्यप्रकाश (आचार्य मम्मट - सम्पूर्ण १० उल्लास सटीक)

186 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
अत्र सायकादयः शब्दाः खड्गाब्धिभूचन्द्रयशःपर्यायाः शराद्यर्थतया
प्रसिद्धाः ।।
कुविन्दस्त्वं तावत्पटयसि गुणग्राममभितो
यशो गायन्त्येते दिशि दिशि च नग्नास्तव विभो ।
शरज्ज्योत्स्नागौरस्फुटविकटसर्वाङ्गसुभगा
तथापि त्वत्कीर्तिर्भ्रमति विगताच्छादनमिह ॥१७३॥
अत्र कुविन्दादिशब्दोऽर्थान्तरं प्रतिपादयन्नुपश्लोक्यमानस्य
तिरस्कारं व्यनक्तीत्यनुचितार्थः ।
tively, of sword, ocean, earth, moon, and fame,—while they
are better known as having the sense of arrow, love-god,
forgiveness, lotus and verse, respectively [and hence the desired
signification of all these words is ‘suppressed’].
(4) [‘Improper signification’]
Kuvindastvaṁ tāvat paṭayasi guṇagrāmamabhito
Yasho gāyantyete dishi dishi cha nagnāstava vibho
Sharajjyotsnāgaurasphuṭavikaṭasarvāṅgasubhagā
Tathāpi tvatkīrtirbhramati vigatāchchhādanamiha’.
‘As Lord of the Earth, you are spreading on all sides
hosts of good qualities ; these bards are singing your fame
on all sides ; and yet thy renown, beautiful and resplen-
dent as the autumnal moon, wanders about unfurled.’
Here there is an ‘improper signification,’ inasmuch
as some of the words—e. g. ‘kuvinda’ [‘paṭayasi’, ‘nagna’,
‘yasha’] have a second meaning which indicates disrespect
towards the person described.
[‘Kuvinda’ means a weaver, ‘guṇam paṭayasi’ means ‘weave yarn,
‘nagna’ means naked, ‘yashaḥ is capable of being read or construed as
‘ayaśaḥ,’ so that the person addressed comes to be described as a
weaver weaving cloth and so forth.]

CHAPTER VII 187
प्राभ्रभ्राड्विष्णुधामाप्य विषमाश्र्वः करोत्ययम् ।
निद्रां सहस्रपर्णानां पलायनपरायणाम् ।।१७४।।
अत्र प्राभ्रभ्राड्विष्णुधामविषमाश्र्वनिद्रापर्णशब्दाः प्रकृष्टजलद-
गगनसप्ताश्र्वसंकोचदलानामवाचकाः ।।
भूपतेरुपसर्पन्ती कम्पना वामलोचना ।
तत्तत्प्रहरणोत्साहवती मोहनमादधौ ।।१७५।।
अत्रोपसर्पणप्रहरणमोहनशब्दा व्रीडादायित्वादश्लीलाः ।
तेन्यैर्वान्तं समश्नन्ति परोत्सर्गं च भुञ्जते ।
इतरार्थग्रहे येषां कवीनां स्यात्प्रवर्तनम् ।।१७६।।
(5) [The ‘ Inexpressive ’]—
‘ Prābhrabhrāḍ viṣṇudhāmāpya viṣamāshvaḥ karotyayam
Nidrāṁ sahasraparṇānāṁ palāyanaparāyaṇām.
‘ Having reached the beautifully clouded sky, the sun
puts to flight the sleep of the lotuses.’
Here the words ‘ prābhrabhrāṭ,’ viṣṇudhāma,’ ‘viṣamāshva ’,
‘ nidrā ’ and ‘ parṇa ’ have been used in the sense, res-
pectively, of ‘ beautiful cloud ’, ‘ sky ’ ‘ sun ’, ‘ closing ’
and ‘ petal ’,—while, as a matter of fact they do not ex-
press or denote these things.
(6) [Indecorous—shameful]—
‘ Bhūpaterupasarpantī kampanā vāmalochanā
Tattatpraharaṇotsāhavatī mohanamādadhau ’.
‘The angry army of the king brought about the stupefac-
tion (of the enemy) by marching and energetically striking’.
Here the words ‘ upasarpantī ’, ‘ praharaṇa ’ and ‘ moha-
na ’ give rise to feelings of shame by reason of their second
meanings (women in love, embraces and passionate love,
respectively), and are ‘ therefore ’ ‘ indecorous ’.
[Indecorous—Disgusting]—
Tenyairvāntam samashnanti···parotsargaṁcha bhuñjate.

188 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
अत्र वान्तोत्सर्गप्रवर्तनशब्दा जुगुप्सादायिनः ।
पितृवसतिमहं व्रजामि तां सह परिवारजनेन यत्र मे ।
भवति सपदि पावकान्वये हृदयमशेषितशोकशल्यकम् ॥१७७॥
अत्र पितृगृहमित्यादौ विवक्षिते श्मशानादिप्रतीतावमङ्गलार्थत्वम् ।
सुरालयोल्लासपरः प्राप्तपर्याप्तकम्पनः ।
मार्गणप्रवणो भास्वद्भूतिरेष विलोक्यताम् ॥१७८॥
‘Those who are prone to making use of the ideas of
other poets eat out of other people’s vomitings and slutt-
ings.’
Here the words ‘vomiting’, ‘slutting’ and ‘excret-
ing’ (which is another meaning of pravartana) are produc-
tive of disgust.
[Indecorous—Inauspicious]—
‘Pitṛvasatimahaṁ vrajāmi tāṁ saha parivārajanena yatra me
‘Bhavati sapadi pāvakānvaye hṛdayamaśeṣitaśokaśalyakam’.
‘With all my family I shall repair to my father’s house,
where in the purifying family, my heart shall have all its
darts of grief removed.’
Here the words ‘pitṛvasati’ (and ‘pāvaka’) intended
to convey the meaning of ‘father’s house’ (and ‘purify-
ing’), signify also the crematorium (and fire), and are for
that reason ‘inauspicious.’
(7) [The ‘Ambiguous’]—
‘Surālayollāsaparaḥ prāptaparyāptakampanaḥ
Mārgaṇapravaṇo bhāsvadbhūtireṣa vilokyatām.’
It is doubtful whether (a) the words ‘surālaya’,
‘kampana’, ‘mārgaṇa’ and ‘bhūti’ are meant to signify
‘abode of the gods’, ‘army’, ‘arrow’ and ‘glory’ [in
which case the passage would mean—‘Look at this king,
who is bent upon Heaven, is equipped with sufficient

CHAPTER VII 189
अत्र किं सुरादिशब्दा देवसेनाशरविभूत्यर्थाः किं मदिराद्यर्थाः
इति संदेहः ॥
तस्याधिमात्रोपायस्य तीव्रसंवेगताजुषः ।
दृढभूमिः प्रियप्राप्तौ यत्नः स फलितः सखे ॥१७९॥
अत्राधिमात्रोपायादयः शब्दा योगशास्त्रमात्रप्रयुक्तत्वादप्रतीताः ॥
ताम्बूलभृतगल्लोयं भल्लं जल्पति मानुषः ।
करोति खादनं पानं सदैव तु यथा तथा ॥१८०॥
army, clever in the use of arrows and of resplendent
glory '], or (b) ' wine-shop ', ' trembling ', ' begging '
and ' destruction ' [in which case the meaning would be—
' Look at this man, ever bent upon wine-shops, constantly
trembling, efficient in begging and with destruction facing
him '].
(8) [The ' Unintelligible ']—
' Tasyādhimātropāyasya
Tīvrasaṁvegatajuṣaḥ
Dṛḍhabhūmiḥ priyaprāptau
Yatnaḥ sa phalitaḥ sakhe '.
' The powerful efforts of the man have succeeded in
helping him to attain what he desired,—he having em-
ployed the methods (of self-control and the rest) conducive
to true wisdom, and practising intense renunciation '.
Here the words ' adhimātra ' (' tīvrasaṁvega ' and
' dṛḍhabhūmi ') are used in their technical sense found in
Yoga literature only, and as such they are not intelligible '.
(9) [' The Vulgar ']—
' Tāmbūlabhṛtagalloyaṁ bhallaṁ jalpati mānuṣaḥ '
' Karoti khādanaṁ pānaṁ sadaiva tu yathā tathā '.
' Having his cheeks filled with betel-leaves, and eating
and drinking always, he goes on talking rapidly'.

190 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
अत्र गल्लादयः शब्दाः ग्राम्याः ॥
वस्त्रवैदूर्यचरणैः क्षतसत्त्वरजःपरा ।
निष्कम्पा रचिता नेत्रयुद्धं वेदय सांप्रतम् ॥१८४॥
अत्राम्बररत्नपादैः क्षततमा अचला भूः कृता नेत्रद्वन्द्वं बोधयेति
नेयार्थता ॥
The words ‘galla’ (and ‘bhalla’) are ‘vulgar’.
(10) [‘Whose meaning is to be guessed’]
‘Vastravaiḍūryacharaṇaiḥ
Kṣatasattvarajaḥparāḥ
Niṣkampā rachitā netra—
Yuddhaṁ vedaya sāmpratam’.
‘This unshaking thing (i. e. the earth) has its third besides
Harmony and Energy (i. e. Darkness) dispelled by the feet
(i. e. rays) of the emerald (i. e. gem) of the vastra (i. e.
‘ambara’, viz : sky) [i. e. the sun] ; so open now the
battle (i. e. pair) of your eyes’.
The meaning intended to be conveyed here is that
‘the sun having dispelled darkness from the earth, the
eyes should be opened’; and this can only be guessed
out of the words used.
[(a) ‘Vastra’ has another synonym in ‘ambara’, which means the
sky,—‘vaidūrya’ denotes the emerald, which is one kind of gem,—
‘charaṇa’ is synonymous with ‘pada’, which also means ‘rays’,—
hence the compound ‘vastravaiḍūryacharaṇa’ the rays of the gem of
the sky i.e. the sun;—‘Sattva’, Rajas and Tamas are the three cosmic
attributes,—so that the third besides Rajas and Sattva is Tamas, which
denotes darkness,—so that the compound ‘kṣatasattvarajaḥparāḥ’
means ‘whose darkness has been dispelled;’—‘niṣkampā’ meaning
unshaking, is used for the immovable Earth ;—‘yuddha’ is synony-
mous with ‘dvandva’, which also means ‘pair’,—hence the compound
‘netrayuddham’ means ‘pair of eyes’.]

CHAPTER VII 191
धम्मिल्लस्य न कस्य प्रेक्ष्य निकामं कुरङ्गशावाक्ष्याः ।
रज्यत्यपूर्वबन्धव्युत्पत्तेर्मानसं शोभाम् ।।१८२।।
अत्र धम्मिल्लस्य शोभां प्रेक्ष्य कस्य मानसं न रज्यतीति संबन्धे
क्लिष्टत्वम् ।।
न्यक्कारो ह्ययमेव मे यदरयस्तत्राप्यसौ तापसः
सोऽप्यत्रैव निहन्ति राक्षसकुलं जीवत्यहो रावणः ।
धिग्धिकू शक्रजितं प्रबोधितवता किं कुम्भकर्णेन वा
स्वर्गग्रामटिकाविलुण्ठनवृथोच्छूनैः किमेभिर्भुजैः ।।१८३।।
(11) [The ‘obscure’.]—
‘Dhammillasya na kasya prekṣya nikāmaṁ kuraṅgashāvakṣyāḥ
Rajyatyapūrvabandhavyutpattermānasaṁ shobhām’.
‘Whose heart does not become enamoured on seeing
the loveliness of the beautifully-braided locks of the fawn-
eyed one?’
The syntactical connection intended here—
‘Dhammillasya shobhāṁ prekṣya kasya mānasaṁ na rajyati’,—is difficult to get at, ‘obscure [by reason of the
order in which the words are placed].
(12) [‘The predicative factor not discriminated’]—
‘Nyakkārohyayameva me yadarayastatrāpyasau tāpasaḥ
............................................................................
Svargagrāmaṭikāviluṇṭhanavṛthochchhūnaiḥ kimebhirbhujaiḥ’.
‘It is a disgrace that I have enemies; and even that
an ascetic, who is slaughtering the host of demons; and
that at this very place; and yet Rāvaṇa is living; woe,
woe, to Meghanāda! What has come out of Kumbhakarṇa
having been awakened. What too has been the use of
these my arms that have become uselessly fattened by
plundering the tiny hamlet of heaven?’

192 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
अत्र 'अयमेव न्यक्कारः' इति वाच्यम् । उच्छूनत्वमात्रं
चानुवाद्यम्, न वृथात्वविशेषितम् । अत्र च शब्दरचना
विपरीता कृतेति वाक्यस्यैव दोषो न वाक्यार्थस्य ।
यथा वा
अपाङ्गसंसर्गि तरङ्गितं दृशोर्भ्रुवोररालान्तविलासि वेल्लितम् ।
विसारि रोमाञ्चनकञ्चुकं तनोस्तनोति यो सौ सुभगे तवागतः॥
॥१८४॥
What is intended is that 'that I have enemies is itself
a disgrace', and the proper order of words would be
'ayameva nyakkāraḥ'; and secondly, what should have
been merely referred to, is the mere fattening of the arms,
for the purpose of predicating its uselessness, which should
not have been made a mere qualifying adjunct in the com-
pound.
[The meaning intended is that the fattening of my arms has been
of no use; being of no use, therefore, being the predicated factor, should
have stood by itself, while it has been made a subordinate adjunct
by being placed in the middle of a compound.]
Inasmuch as the fault here lies in the order of the
words being reversed, the defect is attributed to the sen-
tence, not to the meaning of the sentence.
Another example (of 'non-discrimination of the pre-
dicative factor')—
'Apāṅgasaṁsargi taraṅgitaṁ dṛśorbhruvorarālāntavilāsi-
vellitam
Visāri romāñchanakañchukaṁ tanostanoti yosau subhage .
tavāgataḥ'
'Here has come—one who brings a tremor to your
eyes, an elegant curvature to your eye-brows and a bodice
of thrilling hairs to your body'.

CHAPTER VII 193
अत्र योसाविति पदद्वयमनुवाद्यमात्रप्रतीतिकृत् ।
तथाहि—प्रक्रान्तप्रसिद्धानुभूतार्थविषयस्तच्छब्दो यच्छब्दो-
पादानं नापेक्षते ।
क्रमेणोदाहरणम् ।
कातर्यं केवला नीतिः शौर्यं श्वापदचेष्टितम् ।
अतः सिद्धिं समेताभ्यामुभाभ्यामन्वियेष सः ॥१८५॥
द्वयं गतं संप्रति शोचनीयतां समागमप्रार्थनया कपालिनः ।
कला च सा कान्तिमती कलावतस्त्वमस्य लोकस्य च नेत्रकौमुदी
॥१८६॥
Here the two pronouns ‘yaḥ and asau’ only serve to
point out the person as merely referred to [and the
predicative pronoun ‘he’, ‘saḥ’, is wanting].
It is the pronoun ‘tat’, ‘that’, which, standing as it
does for (a) what has been spoken of before, or (b) what
is well-known, or (c) what has been already seen or heard
of, does not require the corresponding pronoun ‘yat’,
‘which’ or ‘what’; as for example—
(a) ‘Kātaryaṁ..................saḥ’.—‘Regarding pure
statesmanship as a weakness, and sheer valour to be beast-
like, he always sought to attain success by both these
means’;—[Here the pronoun ‘saḥ’, ‘he’, stands for the
king spoken of before, and hence the corresponding ‘who’
is not required] ;—
(b) ‘Dvayaṁ......kalā cha sā......kaumudī—‘By seeking
to be associated with the God of the Begging Bowl, two
things have become objects of concern—that resplendent
digit of the moon and thyself, who art like moonlight to
the eyes of this world ;’—[Here the pronoun ‘sā’ re-
ferring to the well-known digit of the moon on Śiva’s
forehead, does not require the corresponding ‘yā’] ;—
13

194 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
उत्कम्पिनी भयपरिस्खलितांशुकान्ता
ते लोचने प्रतिदिशं विधुरे क्षिपन्ती ।
क्रूरेण दारुणतया सहसैव दग्धा
धूमान्धितेन दहनेन न वीक्षितासि ॥१८७॥
यच्छब्दस्तूत्तरवाक्यानुगतत्वेनोपात्तः सामर्थ्यात्पूर्ववाक्यानु-
गतस्य तच्छब्दस्योपादानं नापेक्षते । यथा
साधु चन्द्रमसि पुष्करैः कृतं मीलितं यदभिरामताधिके ।
उद्यता जयिनि कामिनीमुखे तेन साहसममुष्ठितं पुनः ॥१८८॥
प्रागुपात्तस्तु यच्छब्दस्तच्छब्दोपादानं विना साकाङ्क्षः ।
(c) ‘Utkampinī……te lochane……..vīkṣitāsi’ ;—‘Tremb-
ling and having the clothing gliding off through fear,
and casting those timid glances all round, thou wert burnt
by the cruel fire blinded by smoke, and wert no longer
seen’ ;—[Here the pronoun ‘te’, ‘those’, standing for the
glances that the speaker has seen before, does not stand
in need of the corresponding ‘ye’].
The pronoun ‘yat’, (who or which) also, when occurring
in the latter of two correlated clauses, does not require
the corresponding ‘tat’ in the preceding clause, because
by reason of its inherent power (it always implies a pre-
ceding ‘tat’) ; as we find in the following example—
‘Sādhu…yadabhirāmatādhike…punaḥ ;’—‘On the rising of
the lovelier moon the lotuses did well that they closed
themselves ; but this moon has behaved most arrogantly
when he has risen even on the appearance of the face of the
lovely woman, which is far superior to her’. [Here ‘yat
mīlitam’ implies the corresponding ‘tat sādhu kṛtam’, and
hence the actual presence of this latter pronoun is not
necessary in the preceding clause].
But in cases when the pronoun ‘yat’ occurs in the

CHAPTER VII 195
यथा अत्रैव श्लोके आद्यपादयोर्व्यत्यासे । द्वयोरुपादाने तु निरा-
काङ्क्षत्वं प्रसिद्धम् । अनुपादानेऽपि सामर्थ्यात्क्वचिद्द्वयमपि
गम्यते । यथा
ये नाम केचिदिह नः प्रथयन्त्यवज्ञां
जानन्ति ते किमपि तान् प्रति नैष यत्नः ।
उत्पत्स्यतेस्ति मम कोपि समानधर्मा
कालो ह्ययं निरवधिर्विपुला च पृथ्वी ॥१८९॥
preceding clause, it is always deficient (wanting in essen-
tials), if the corresponding ‘tat’ is not actually present ;
as for example in the verse just quoted, if we reverse the
order of the two clauses [reading ‘militam yadabhirāmatā-
dhike sādhu chandramasi puṣkaraiḥ kṛtam’] we find that it
gives no sense.
(a) In cases where both the pronouns are used, of
course, there is nothing wanting, as every one knows ;
and (b) in certain cases, even when neither is present,
both are implied by the force of the sentence. e. g.
(a) ‘Ye nāma kechidiha naḥ prathayantyavajñāṁ
Jānanti te kimapi tān prati naiṣa yatnaḥ ;
(b) Utpatsyatesti mama kopi samānadharmā
Kālo hyayaṁ niravadhirvipulā cha pṛthvī’.
‘Who would deride me in this attempt, know some-
thing perhaps ,—for them this effort of mine is not inten-
ded ; some one possessed of qualities similar to mine
may yet be born,—or he may even be living now,—time
is interminable and the earth immense’.
Here in the second half both ‘yat’ and ‘tat’ are under-
stood, the meaning intended being ‘the person who will
be born, for him is this mark of mine meant ’.

196 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
अत्र य उत्पत्स्यते तं प्रतीति ।
एवं च तच्छब्दानुपादानेत्र साकाङ्क्षत्वम् । न चासाविति
तच्छब्दार्थमाह ।
असौ मरुच्चुम्बितचारुकेसरः प्रसन्नताराधिपमण्डलाग्रणीः ।
वियुक्तरामातुरदृष्टिवीक्षितो वसन्तकालो हनुमानिवागतः॥१९०॥
अत्र हि न तच्छब्दार्थप्रतीतिः ।
[The first half of the verse is an example of this correct use of both
‘yat’ and ‘tat’ and the second half that of the correct suppression
of both.]
[Having thus discussed the correct use of the relative
pronouns ‘yat’ and ‘tat’, the author takes up the thread
of his remarks on the verse ‘apāṅgasaṁsargi’ &c.’, see
above]. Thus in the above-mentioned verse, the ab-
sence of the pronoun ‘tat’ causes a deficiency, and leaves
something wanting to complete the sentence.—It cannot
be said that the pronoun ‘asau’ has the same sense at
‘tat’; because in such sentences as the following we do not
find the word ‘asau’ conveying the sense of ‘tat’—
‘Asau maruchchumbita ......āgataḥ’
‘Like Hanumān, (a) having his beautiful locks kissed
by the Wind-god (his father), (b) the leader of the army
of the Lord of Tārā (Sugrīva), and (c) eagerly looked up
to by Rāma, separated from his wife,—has this spring-
time season arrived, (a) having its flower-pollen wafted
by the breeze, (b) beautified by the bright moon, and (c)
eagerly looked upon by women separated from their
lovers.’
In fact if the pronoun ‘asau’ conveyed the same sense
as ‘tat’, then the use of the pronoun ‘sa’ (the masculine

CHAPTER VII 197
प्रतीतौ वा
करवालकरालदोः सहायो युधि योऽसौ विजयार्जुनैकमल्लः ।
यदि भूपतिना स तत्र कार्ये विनियुज्येत ततः कृतं कृतं स्यात् ॥१९१॥
अत्र स इत्यस्यानर्थक्यं स्यात् ।
अथ
योविकल्पमिदमर्थमण्डलं पश्यतीश निखिलं भवद्वपुः ।
आत्मपक्षपरिपूरिते जगत्यस्य नित्यसुखिनः कुतो भयम् ॥१९२॥
nominative form of ‘tat’) in the following example would
be entirely superfluous :—
‘Karabāla......yosau......
‘Yadi........sa tatra......syāt’
‘If this person, who is the only equal of Arjuna, atten-
ded by his sword, were employed by the King in this
work, then would it be perfectly accomplished’.
It might be argued that the pronoun ‘asau’ in the
passage in question may be taken in the sense of ‘tat’
(even though it may not be quite synonymous with it) ;
just as we find, in the following passage the pronoun
‘asya’ (the genitive form of ‘idam’) used in the sense of
‘tat’ (‘that’, though its ordinary meaning is ‘this’]—
‘yovikalpa...........asya.........bhayam’—‘For one who
perceives, without any doubt, your body in all this world,
where is there any fear in this universe, filled as it is with
his own self ?’
Our answer to this is that if in the passage in question
the pronoun ‘asau’ were really intended to convey the
sense of ‘tat’, (as ‘idam’ is in the passage just quoted),
then it would have been used in a clause other than the
one in which the pronoun ‘yat’ (‘yaḥ’) occurs,—as in
the passage just quoted, ‘asya’ occurs in a separate clause,—

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

CHAPTER VII 199
अत्र यद्यदित्युक्त्वा तन्मे इत्युक्तम्। उच्यते--यद्यदिति येन
केनचिद्रूपेण स्थितं सर्वात्मकं वस्वाक्षिप्तं तथाभूतमेव तच्छब्देन
परामृश्यते।
यथा वा
किं लोभेन विलङ्घितः स भरतो येनतदेवं कृतं
मात्रा स्त्रीलघुतां गता किमथ वा मातैव मे मध्यमा।
मिथ्यैतन्मम चिन्तितं द्वितयमप्यार्यानुजोसौ गुरु-
र्माता तातकलत्रमित्यनुचितं मन्ये विधात्रा कृतम् ।।१९५।।
the receptacle of the most auspicious effulgence ! Be
pleased to ordain for me the highest prosperity ! O Lord
of the world ! destroy whatever sin there is in me,—I
bow down to thee ! O Blessed Lord ! bestow upon me
for my welfare, everything that is good !'
Our answer to this is that 'yad—yat' stands for any-
thing and everything that exists, that is the entire world
regarded as a single entity, and it is this single entity that
is referred to in the subsequent clause by the pronoun
'tat' [so that there is perfect co-ordination].
[Finding that the example of the defect cited by him above has
given rise to difficulties, the author cites another example of the
defect, whereby the predicative factor is not discriminated.]
Kiṁ lobhena...āryānujosau......tātakalatram...kṛtam'.
‘ Was Bharata beset with greed that he got this done
through his mother ? Or , did my second mother herself
succumb to the meanness common among women ?—
Both these ideas of mine are wrong ; as he (Bharata) is
the younger brother of my noble brother, and she, my
revered mother, is my father’s wife. So I think that this
improper deed is the work of Providence itself.’
Here stress is meant to be laid upon the terms ‘ ārya ’
and ‘ tāta ’ [the idea being that ‘ it is of my noble brother

200 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
अत्रार्यस्येति तातस्येति च वाच्यम् । न त्वनयोः समासे
गुणीभावः कार्यः । एवं समासान्तरेष्वप्युदाहार्यम् ।।
विरुद्धमतिकृद्यथा
श्रितक्षमा रक्तभुवः शिवालिङ्गितमूर्तयः ।
विग्रहक्षपणेनाद्य शेरते ते गतासुखाः ।।१९६।।
अत्र क्षमादिगुणयुक्ताः सुखमासते इति विवक्षिते हता इति
विरुद्धा प्रतीतिः ।।
Rāma, that Bharata is the younger brother ;’ and ‘it is of
my father that Kaikeyī is the wife,’ and ‘it is not possible
for a brother of Rāma or for the wife of my father to do
anything wrong’], [and hence these two being the pre-
dicative factors] the proper expressions should have been
‘āryasyānujosau’ ‘tātasya kalatram’; and it was not right
to make both these the subordinate factors of compounds.
Similar examples may be cited of this defect occurring
in other compounds.
(13) The following is an example of ‘repugnant im-
plication.’—
‘Shritakṣamā raktabhuvaḥ
‘Shivāliṅgitamūrtayaḥ
‘Vigrahakṣapaṇenādya
‘Sherate te gatāsukhāḥ’
‘They, having recourse to forgiveness, with the world
attached to them, and their bodies embraced by all that
is good, lie down, with all their troubles gone through the
removal of all quarrels.’
Here the meaning intended is that ‘persons of forgiving
nature remain happy’ (as translated above), but the words
chosen have another signification, which is entirely repug-
nant to this [‘Lying down on the ground (shṛtakṣamāḥ),

CHAPTER VII 201
पदैकदेशे यथासंभवं क्रमेणोदाहरणम्
अलमतिचपलत्वात्स्वप्नमायोपमत्वात्
परिणतिविरसत्वात्संगमेनाङ्गनायाः ।
इति यदि शतकृत्वस्तत्त्वमालोचयाम-
स्तदपि न हरिणाक्षीं विस्मरत्यन्तरात्मा ॥१९७॥
अत्र त्वादिति । यथा वा
तद्गच्छ सिद्धयै कुरु देवकार्यमर्थोयमर्थान्तरलभ्य एव ।
अपेक्षते प्रत्ययमङ्गलब्ध्यै बीजाङ्कुरः प्रागुदयादिवाम्भः ॥१९८॥
having reddened the earth with their blood (raktabhūvaḥ),
their bodies tossed about by jackals (śivāliṅgitamūrtayaḥ),
they lie down with their life and organs all gone (gatāsukhāḥ),
through the destruction of their body (vigrahakṣapaṇena)'.]
The text has said that ‘ some of those defects occur in
parts of words also ;’ the following are the examples—
(1) [ The ‘ Disagreeable to the ear ’]
‘ Alamatichapalatvāt
Svapnamāyopamatvāt
Pariṇativirasatvāt
...............ātmā ’
“ Have done with this association with women, which
is extremely fickle, resembling dreamy illusion, and leads
to unpleasant consequences ;”—even though this truth
I ponder over hundreds of times, yet my inner soul for-
gets not the fawn-eyed one ’.
Here the repetition of the syllable ‘ tvāt ’ is ‘ unpleasant
to the ear ’.
Another example of the same—
‘ Tad gachchha siddhyai.........labdhyai.........vāmbhaḥ ’.
‘ Thus you go forward to success, do the work of
the gods ; this end in view, which can be attained only

202 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
अत्र द्धयै ब्ध्यै, इति कटु ॥
यश्चाप्सरोविभ्रममण्डनानां संपादयित्रीं शिखरैर्बिभर्ति ।
बलाहकच्छेदविभक्तरागामकालसंध्यामिव धातुमत्ताम् ॥१९९॥
अत्र मत्ताशब्दः क्षीबार्थे निहतार्थः ॥
आदावञ्जनपुञ्जलिप्तवपुषां श्वासानिल्लोल्लासित-
प्रोत्सर्पद्विरहानलेन च ततः संतापितानां दृशाम् ।
संप्रत्येव निषेकमश्रुपयसा देवस्य चेतोभुवो
भल्लीनामिव पानकर्म कुरुते कामं कुरङ्गेक्षणा ॥२००॥
through something else, stands in need of an operative
agent, just as the sprouting of the seed, before it appears,
needs water’.
Here the repetition of ‘ddhyai’ and bdhai is ‘unpleasant
to the ear’.
(2) [The ‘suppressed meaning’]—
‘Yashchāpsaro..................dhātumattām’.
‘Who bears on his (snowy) summits a supply of (red)
minerals which help in making up the coquettish toilet of
celestial women,—as if it were the red hue of the suddenly
falling evening, interspersed with pieces of (white clouds)’.
The term ‘mattā’ (which forms part of the word
‘dhātumattā’) is better known in the sense of ‘intoxica-
ted,’ (which suppresses the sense of the possessive, which
is intended).
(3) [‘The useless’.]—
Ādāvañjana...................dṛśāṁ :
............kurute kāmaṁ kuraṅgekṣaṇā’
‘Her eyes having been painted with collyrium, and
then heated by the fire of the pangs of separation formed
by the hot sighs, the fawn-eyed one is now sprinkling
her tears, and thereby is doing, as it were,the sharpening
of the arrows of the Love-god’.

CHAPTER VII 203
अत्र दृशामिति बहुवचनं निरर्थकम् कुरङ्गेक्षणाया एकस्या
एवोपादानात् । न चालसवलितैरित्यादिवत् व्यापारभेदाद्-
बहुत्वम् व्यापाराणामनुपात्तत्वात् । न च व्यापारेऽत्र दृक्शब्दो
वर्तते । अत्रैव 'कुरुते' इत्यात्मनेपदमप्यनर्थकम् । प्रधानक्रिया-
फलस्य कर्त्रसंबन्धे कर्त्रभिप्रायक्रियाफलाभावात् ॥
चापाचार्यस्त्रिपुरविजयी कार्तिकेयो विजेयः
शस्त्रव्यस्तः सदनमुदधिर्भूरियं हन्तकारः ।

[In sharpening a weapon, the mechanic smears it with acid and
ashes, then heats it and then sprinkles water over it ;—the eyes
being the love-god's arrows these arrows are sharpened in the
manner described.]
Here the plural number in ‘dṛśām’ is ‘useless’ or
meaningless, as only one ‘fawn-eyed girl’ is spoken of.
It is true that in certain cases,—e. g., in the verse ‘alasava-
litaiḥ etc.,’—the plural number is used in view of the multi-
plicity or manifoldness of functions ; but in the present
instance it cannot be due to any such manifoldness ; as no
such manifold functions are mentioned ; nor does the
term ‘dṛk’ (‘eye’) denote any functions.
Then again, in this same verse the Ātmanepada ending
in ‘kurute’ is also ‘useless’, because the effect of the
action connoted does not belong to the subject (‘woman’),
and hence the condition necessary for the use of the Ātma-
nepada ending—that the result of the action should pertain
to the subject—is not fulfilled.
(4) [The ‘Inexpressive’]
‘Chāpāchāryas....’
............................chandrahāsaḥ.’
‘Your preceptor in archery is the victor of the three
cities (Śhiva), Kārtikeya is your subduable, the ocean,

204 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
अस्त्येवैतत् किमु कृतवता रेणुकाकण्ठबाधां
बद्धस्पर्धस्तव परशुना लज्जते चन्द्रहासः ॥२०१॥
अत्र विजेय इति कृत्यप्रत्ययः क्तप्रत्ययार्थवाचकः ॥
अतिपेलवमतिपरिमितवर्णं लघुतरमुदाहरति शठः ।
परमार्थतः स हृदयं वहति पुनः कालकूटघटितमिव ॥२०२॥
अत्र पेलवशब्दः ॥
यः पूयते सुरसरिन्मुखतीर्थसार्थ-
स्नानेन शास्त्रपरिशीलनकीलनेन ।
सौजन्यमान्यजनिनिरूजितमूर्जितानां
सोयं दृशोः पतति कस्यचिदेव पुंसः ॥२०३॥
forced back by your weapons, is your abode, and the
earth is for you an object to be given away ; though all
this is so, yet my sword Chandrahāsa is ashamed at being
pitted against your axe which cut off Reṇukā’s head !’
The verbal potential affix (‘yat ’) in ‘vijeya ’ has been
used in the sense of the past participle affix ‘kta ’, which
sense it can never have.
[What is meant is that Kartikeya has been subdued by you, while
the word used is ‘vijeya’ which means ‘subduable’.]
(5) [The ‘ Indecorous ’]—
(a) ‘ Atipelava........ghaṭitamiva ’
‘ A rogue always speaks very little, and that softly
and gently; in reality ‘however’ he has his heart full of
poison.’
Here the term ‘ pelava ’ is ‘ indecorous ’ (being the
name in the Lāṭa language of a secret part of the human
body).
(b) ‘ Yaḥ pūyate........puṁsaḥ ’
‘ Rare is the person before whose eyes comes a great
man like this, who is sanctified by bathing in the Gaṅgā
and other sacred places, and also by the consolidation of

CHAPTER VII 205
अत्र पूयशब्दः ॥
विनयप्रणयैककेतनं सततं योभवदङ्ग तादृशः ।
कथमद्य स तद्वदीक्ष्यतां तदभिप्रेतपदं समागतः ॥२०४॥
अथ प्रेतशब्दः ॥
कस्मिन् कर्मणि सामर्थ्यमस्य नोत्तपतेतराम् ।
अयं साधुचरस्तस्मादञ्जलिर्बध्यतामिह ॥२०५॥
अत्र किं पूर्वं साधुः उत साधुषु चरतीति संदेहः ॥
this knowledge of the scriptures,—of noble and respectable
birth, the personified spirit of all that is spirited.’
The term ‘pūyā’ is ‘indecorous’ (as it denotes pus).
(c) ‘Vinaya......tadabhipretapadaṁ samāgataḥ’.
‘O friend! he who used to be the one receptacle of
humility and love,—how can be looked upon as the same,
when he has attained the position he desired (of becoming
the lover of another woman)?’
Here the term ‘preta’ is ‘indecorous’ (as it denotes
the ‘departed dead’).
(6) [The ‘Ambiguous’]—
‘Kasmin karmaṇi sāmarthyam...ayam sādhucharaḥ...iha’.
‘In what action does his capacity not shine?—And
he is of virtuous character; so salute him.’
The exact meaning of the part (‘chara’) of the word
‘Sādhucharaḥ’ is ‘ambiguous’;—‘chara’ is an affix
denoting ‘something that is past’, and in that sense
‘Sādhucharaḥ’ means ‘who was good in the past’; on
the other hand, ‘chara’ may be a noun derived from the
root ‘chara’ (to behave), in which case the compound
‘Sādhucharaḥ’ would mean ‘he who behaves virtuously’