काव्यप्रकाश (आचार्य मम्मट - सम्पूर्ण १० उल्लास सटीक)

काव्यप्रकाशः
अथ अष्टम उल्लासः
एवं दोषानुक्त्वा गुणालंकारविवेकमाह-
ये रसस्याङ्गिनो धर्माः शौर्यादय इवात्मनः ।
उत्कर्षहेतवस्ते स्युरचलस्थितयो गुणाः ॥ ६६ ॥
आत्मन एव हि यथा शौर्यादयो नाकारस्य तथा रसस्यैव
माधुर्यादयो गुणा न वर्णानाम् ॥
क्वचित्तु शौर्यादिसमुचितस्याकारमहत्त्वादेर्दर्शनात् 'आकार
एवास्य शूरः' इत्यादेर्व्यवहारादन्यत्राशूरेपि वितताकृतित्वमात्रेण
'शूरः' इति क्वापि शूरेपि मूर्तिलाघवमात्रेण 'अशूरः' इति अवि-
CHAPTER VIII
OF EXCELLENCES
Having described the Defects, the Author next pro-
ceeds to describe the difference between 'Excellences'
and 'Ornaments' or 'Figures of speech'—
Those properties that belong to the Passion, the principal
factor,—conducive to its maturity and having an unceasing
existence,—are called 'Guṇas', 'Excellences', in the same
manner as Bravery and such qualities belong to the Soul. 66.
Just as Bravery and such qualities belong to the Soul,
not to the body,—so Sweetness and the other Excellences
belong to the Passion, not to the letter.
In some cases it so happens that people find bravery
co-existing with the large-sized body, and come to speak
of the body itself as 'brave'; and hence in another case
also, on seeing a large body, they are led to believe, from
II-

300 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
श्रान्तप्रतीतयो यथा व्यवहरन्ति तद्वन्मधुरादिव्यञ्जकसुकुमारादि-
वर्णानां मधुरादिव्यवहारप्रवृत्तेरमधुरादिरसाङ्गानां वर्णानां
सौकुमार्यादिमात्रेण माधुर्यादि मधुरादिरसोपकरणानां तेषामसौ-
कुमार्यादिरमाधुर्यादि रसपर्यन्तविश्रान्तप्रतीतिबन्ध्या व्यवहरन्ति ।
अत एव माधुर्यादयो रसधर्माः समुचितैर्वर्णैर्व्यज्यन्ते न तु
वर्णमात्राश्रयाः । यथैषां व्यञ्जकत्वम् तथोदाहरिष्यते ॥६६॥
the analogy of the former case, that this other man also
must be brave ;—and thus, even a really brave man comes
to be believed to be not brave on the ground of the smallness
of his body ; and such beliefs are very common ;—in the
same manner people (like Vāmana and others) have come
to speak (a) of the soft—sounding letters as ‘sweet’,
though in reality they are only suggestive of sweetness ;—
and they come to speak of such passion and its accessories
as are not really ‘sweet’, as ‘sweet’, simply by reason of
the softness of the letters (expressing them) ; in the same
manner, they also speak of the really ‘sweet’ passions
and accessories as ‘not sweet’, when they are expressed
in such words as are not soft-sounding ;—and in all
this, they do not take into account the Passion at all (attri-
buting as they do, the sweetness to the letters).
It is in view of all this divergent usage that it has been
asserted (in the text) that sweetness and other excellences
are properties really belonging to the Passion, and what
the properly selected letters do is only to render such
qualities perceptible ; and those qualities do not subsist
in the letters entirely. In what manner the letters serve
to manifest the qualities is going to be shown by means of
examples. 66.

CHAPTER VIII 301
उपकुर्वन्ति तं सन्तं येऽङ्गद्वारेण जातुचित् ।
हारादिवदलंकारास्तेऽनुप्रासोपमादयः ॥ ६७ ॥
ये वाचकवाच्यलक्षणाङ्गातिशयमुखेन मुख्यं रसं संभविन-
मुपकुर्वन्ति ते कण्ठाद्यङ्गानामुत्कर्षाधानद्वारेण शरीरिणोपि
उपकारका हारादय इवालंकाराः । यत्र तु नास्ति रसस्तत्रोक्ति-
वैचित्र्यमात्रपर्यवसायिनः । क्वचित्तु सन्तमपि नोपकुर्वन्ति ।
यथाक्रममुदाहरणानि--
अपसारय घनसारं कुरु हारं दूर एव किं कमलैः ।
अलमलमालि मृणालैरिति वदति दिवानिशं बाला ॥ ३४१॥
Those dualities which sometimes adorn the existing Passion,
through its components,—just as the necklace and the like (do
for the Soul, through the body),—are the ornaments (figures
of speech), Alliteration, Simile and the rest. 67.
Those qualities that adorn the principal factor,—
i. e. the Passion—where it exists,—by imparting
excellence to its components, in the shape of the expres-
sive words and their expressed meaning, are called ‘or-
naments’, because they resemble the necklace and other
things which, by imparting beauty to the neck and other
parts of the body, come to adorn the soul also. Where,
however, the Passion does not exist, the said ornaments
tend to become merely fanciful expressions. In certian
cases, even when the Passion is present, they do not serve
to adorn it.
Examples in order :—
(1) In the following verse [and others] the ornament
(Alliteration) adorns the Passion through the expressive
words—
Apasāraya ghanasāraṁ kuru hāraṁ dūra eva kiṁ kamalaiḥ
Alamalamāli mṛṇālairiti vadati divāniśaṁ bālā.

302 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
इत्यादौ वाचकमुखेन
मनोरागस्तीव्रं विषमिव विसर्पत्यविरतं
प्रमाथी निर्धूमं ज्वलति विधुतः पावक इव ।
हिनस्ति प्रत्यङ्गं ज्वर इव गरीयानित इतो
न मां त्रातुं तातः प्रभवति न चाम्बा न भवती ॥३४२॥
इत्यादौ वाच्यमुखेनालंकारौ रसमुपकुरुतः ॥
चित्ते चिहुट्टदि ण तुट्टदि सा गुणेसुं
सेज्जासु लोट्टदि विसप्पदि दिंमुहेसुं ।
बोलम्मि वट्टदि पवट्टदि कव्वबन्धे
झाणेण तुट्टदि चिरं तरुणी तरट्टी ॥३४३॥
“ Remove the camphor ; throw away the garland ;
what is the use of lotus-flowers ? O Friend, enough,
enough of these lotus-stalks !”—Thus does the young
girl go on speaking day and night.’
(2) In the following verse the Figure (Stringed Simile)
adorns the Passion through the expressed meaning—
‘ The galling all-conquering love is freely circulating like
poison ; it burns fiercely (smokelessly) like fire fanned by
the wind ; it afflicts every limb, like high fever; neither father
nor mother nor your ladyship is able to save me from this.
In the following verse, the ornament (Alliteration)
adorns only the words (and not the Passion depicted)—
‘ Chitte cihuṭṭadi ṇa tuṭṭadi sā guṇesuṁ
Sejjāsu loṭṭadi visappadi diṁmuhesuṁ
Bolammi vaṭṭadi pavaṭṭadi kavvabandhe
Jhāṇeṇa tuṭṭadi chiraṁ taruṇī taraṭṭī.’
‘ The young woman acts sensibly ; she is not devoid
of excellences ; she rolls about on the bed, moves all round
and talks freely ; she engages in poetical composition, and

CHAPTER VIII 303
इत्यादौ वाचकमेव ।
मित्रे क्वापि गते सरोरुहवने बद्धानने ताम्यति
क्रन्दत्सु भ्रमरेषु वीक्ष्य दयितासन्नं पुरः सारसम् ।
चक्राह्वेन वियोगिना बिसलता नास्वादिता नोज्झिता
कण्ठे केवलमर्गलेव निहिता जीवस्य निर्गच्छतः ॥३४४॥
इत्यादौ वाच्यमेव न तु रसम् । अत्र बिसलता न जीवं रोद्धुं
क्षमेति प्रकृताननुगुणोपमा ॥
एष एव च गुणालंकारप्रविभागः । एवं च “समवायवृत्त्या .
शौर्यादयः संयोगवृत्त्या तु हारादय इत्यस्तु गुणालंकाराणां भेदः ।
for long periods of time she does not break off her con-
templation!’
(4) In the following verse, the Figure (Simile) adorns
only the expressed meaning—and not the Passion depicted.
‘When the sun had gone away, the lotus had closed
its mouth in anger, and the bees had begun to cry (in grief),
the forlorn Chakravāka bird, seeing the Crane seated closed
to his beloved, did not either eat or give up the lotus-
fibre; it was only retained in the throat, like a bar, as it
were, to the outgoing life-breath.’
As a matter of fact, under the sorrowful circumstances
depicted, a lotus-fibre cannot serve to keep back the
breath; so that the Simile, as it stands, only mars the effect
of the Passion (Erotic—Privative) depicted (and does not
help it).
Such is the actual difference between ‘Excellence’
and ‘Ornament’. And this puts out of court all such
assertions as the following (in the Bhāmahavṛtti, by Bhaṭṭod-
bhaṭa)—“The difference between such Excellences as
Bravery and the rest, and such Ornaments, as necklace and

304 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
ओजःप्रभृतीनामनुप्रासोपमादीनां चोभयेषामपि समवायवृत्त्या
स्थितिरिति गड्डलिकाप्रवाहेणैवैषां भेदः” इत्यभिधानमसत् ॥
यदप्युक्तम् “काव्यशोभायाः कर्तारो धर्मा गुणास्तदतिशय-
हेतवस्त्वलंकाराः” इति तदपि न युक्तम् । यतः किं समस्तैर्गुणैः
काव्यव्यवहारः उत कतिपयैः । यदि समस्तैः तत्कथमसमस्त-
गुणा गौडी पाञ्चाली च रीतिः काव्यस्यात्मा ।
अथ कतिपयैः ततः
the rest, may be that while the former subsists by in-
herence, the latter is present only by conjunction; [this may be
true in the case of the Body and its excellences and orna-
ments but (in the case of Passion and its delineation) we
find that both,—excellences like Floridity and the rest, as
well as ornaments, like Simile, Alliteration and the rest—
subsist by inherence only; consequently any distinction
drawn between these two must be regarded as merely
based upon a blind tradition—a case of sheep blindly
following another.”
Then again, some people (Vāmana and his followers),
have stated the distinction in the form that “while Ex-
cellences serve to produce charm in poetry, Ornaments serve
to heighten the charm already produced.”—This also is
not right. Because the questions would arise—Is poetry
to be regarded as such only through the presence of all
the excellences, or through that of a few of these only?
If the former, how could the Gauḍī and Pāñchālī dictions,
which are not possessed of all the excellences, constitute
the ‘soul of Poetry’ (as has been held by Vāmana)?—If,
on the other hand, it is only the presence of a few of the
Excellences that renders Poetry capable of being so re-
garded,—then, it would be permissible to regard as ‘poetry’,

CHAPTER VIII 305
अद्रावत्र प्रज्वलत्यग्निरुच्चैः प्राज्यः प्रोद्यन्नुल्लसत्येष धूमः ॥३४५॥
इत्यादावोजः प्रभृतिषु गुणेषु सत्सु काव्यव्यवहारप्राप्तिः ।
स्वर्गप्राप्तिरनेनैव देहेन वरवर्णिनी ।
अस्या रदच्छदरसो न्यक्करोतितरां सुधाम् ॥३४६॥
इत्यादौ विशेषोक्तिव्यतिरेकौ गुणनिरपेक्षौ काव्यव्यवहारस्य
प्रवर्तकौ ॥६७॥
इदानीं गुणानां भेदमाह
माधुर्यौजःप्रसादाख्यास्त्रयस्ते न पुनर्दश ।
एषां क्रमेण लक्षणमाह
आह्लादकत्वं माधुर्यं शृङ्गारे द्रुतिकारणम् ॥६८॥
even such statements as—
‘ adrāvatra prajvalatyagniruchchaiḥ
prājyaḥ prodyannul lasatyeṣa dhūmaḥ.’
[‘In this hill fire burns high, because there arises
thence a dense volume of smoke’],
where some of the Excellences, Floridity and the rest,
are present.—
Further, in such verses as the following—
‘This handsome woman represents the acquisition of
the Heaven in this human form, and the loveliness of her
lips puts nectar itself into the shade’,—
we find that it is regarded as ‘poetry’, through the
presence of the two Ornaments or Figures ‘Peculiar
Allegation’ and ‘Dissimilitude’, independently of the
presence of any excellences. 67.
The Author next proceeds to describe the varieties of
Excellences.—
Sweetness, Floridity and Lucidity—they are these three,
and not ten.
He states [one by one] the definition of each of these
three—
‘Sweetness’ is a source of delectability; it is what leads to
mollification in the case of the Erotic Passion. 68.

306 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
शृङ्गारे अर्थात् संभोगे । द्रुतिर्गलितत्वमिव । श्रव्यत्वं पुनरोजः
प्रसादयोरपि ॥ ६८ ॥
करुणे विप्रलम्भे तच्छान्ते चातिशयान्वितम् ।
[अतिशयान्वितमिति] अत्यन्तद्रुतिहेतुत्वात् ॥
दीप्त्यात्मविस्तृतेर्हेतुरोजो वीररसस्थिति ॥ ६९ ॥
चित्तस्य विस्ताररूपदीप्तत्वजनकमोजः ॥ ६९ ॥
बीभत्सरौद्ररसयोस्तस्याधिक्यं क्रमेण च ।
वीराद्बीभत्से ततो रौद्रे सातिशयमोजः ॥
शुष्केन्धनाग्निवत् स्वच्छजलवत्सहसैव यः ॥ ७० ॥
व्याप्नोत्यन्यत् प्रसादोऽसौ सर्वत्र विहितस्थितिः ।

It leads to 'mollification',—i.e., soft flow or melting
as it were,—in the case of the 'Erotic', i.e., of the
agreeable kind.
As for mere melodiousness, it belongs to Floridity and
Lucidity also (and as such cannot form the differentia of
sweetness, as has been held by Bhāskara). 68.
In the case of the Pathetic, the Privative—Erotic and
the Quietistic, it (Sweetness) is present in an excessive degree.
'Present in an excessive degree'—because it leads
to excessive mollification.
Floridity, the source of the lustrous expanding of the
heart, resides in the Heroic Passion. 69.
[For the variant reading आत्मविस्मृतिः —Floridity the source of self-
forgetfulness through illumination.]
Floridity brings about that glow of the heart which
appears in the form of its expansion. 69.
It is present in an excessive degree in the Disgustful
and Furious Passions, in order.
In the Disgustful, Floridity is present, in a greater
degree than in the Heroic; and in a still greater degree
in the Furious.

CHAPTER VIII 307
अन्यदिति । व्याप्यमिह चित्तम् । सर्वत्रेति । सर्वेषु रसेषु सर्वासु
रचनासु च ॥
गुणवृत्त्या पुनस्तेषां वृत्तिः शब्दार्थयोर्मता ॥ ७१ ॥
गुणवृत्त्या उपचारेण । तेषांगुणानाम् । आकारे शौर्यस्येव ।। ७०-७१ ।।
कुतस्त्रय एव न दश इत्याह
केचिदन्तर्भवन्त्येषु दोषत्यागात्परे श्रिताः ।
अन्ये भजन्ति दोषत्वं कुत्रचिन्न ततो दश ॥ ७२ ॥
That which quickly pervades the other like fire among
dry fuel, or like a clean stream of water, is Lucidity, whose
presence is proper everywhere.
'The other'—i. e., the heart. 'Every where'—i.e., in all
Passions and in all forms of composition.
These (excellences) are held to subsist in words and their
meanings only indirectly. 70-71.
'Indirectly'—i. e., figuratively.
'These'—Excellences.
These excellences (really subsisting in Passion) are
figuratively spoken of (even in Mammaṭa's own definition
of Poetry) as subsisting in words and their meanings, in the
same manner as Bravery and such qualities are attributed
to the body (though really belonging to the soul). 70-71.
"Why should the number of these excellences be three
only, and not ten (as described by Vāmana)?"
The author answers this question—
(a) Some (of the ten) are included under these (three) ; (b)
others are resolved into the mere negation of certain defects;
(c) the rest, in certain cases, have the character of Defects;—
for this reason they are not ten. 72.

बहूनामपि पदानामेकपद्वद्भासनात्मा यः श्लेषःयश्चारोहा-
वरोहक्रमरूपः समाधिः या च विकटत्वलक्षणा उदारता यश्चौजो-
मिश्रितशैथिल्यात्मा प्रसादः तेषामोजस्यन्तर्भावः । पृथक्पदत्वरूपं
माधुर्यं भङ्ग्या साक्षादुपात्तम् । प्रसादेनार्थव्यक्तिर्गृहीता ।
मार्गाभेदरूपा समता क्वचिद्दोषः । तथाहि ‘मातङ्गाः किमु
वल्गितैः’ इत्यादौ सिंहाभिधाने मसृणमार्गत्यागो गुणः ।
कष्टत्वग्राम्यत्वयोर्दुष्टताभिधानात्तन्निराकरणेनापारुष्यरूपं सौकु-
मार्यम् औज्ज्वलरूपा कान्तिश्च स्वीकृता ॥

(Among the ten enumerated by Vāmana) are—(1) Śhleṣa,
Coalescence, defined as that property whereby several words
have the appearance of a single word,—(2) Samādhi,
Smoothness, defined as consisting in the proper adjustment
of ascent (high-flown language) and descent (simple langu-
age),—(3) Udārartā, Magnificence, consisting in the fanciful
grouping of words,—(4) Prasāda, Simplicity, consisting in
dullness mixed with floridity ;—and all these are included
in ‘Floridity’ (as defined by ourselves) ;—(5) Mādhurya,
Sweetness, consisting in the distinctness of words, has,
in a way, been admitted by us also under the same name ;—
(6) Arthavyakti, Clearness of Meaning, is included under
‘Lucidity ’,—(7) Samatā, Uniformity, consisting in the
sameness of style, is, in some cases, a defect ; e. g., in
such verses, ‘mātaṅgāiḥ kimu &c.’ (see above stanza No.
229.), where too, the abandoning of the softer diction,
in the description of the Lion (in the fourth line), is a posi-
tive excellence,—(8) Saukumārya, Softness, consisting in
the absence of harshness, and (9) Kānti, Polish, consisting
in the brightness of style, are admitted as the negations
respectively of ‘harshness’ and ‘vulgarity’, which have
been mentioned as defects.

CHAPTER VIII 309
एवं न दश शब्दगुणाः ॥
‘पदार्थे वाक्यरचनं वाक्यार्थे च पदाभिधा ।
प्रौढिर्व्याससमासौ च साभिप्रायत्वमस्य च ॥’
इति या प्रौढिः ओज इत्युक्तं तद् वैचित्र्यमात्रम् न गुणः ।
तदभावेपि काव्यव्यवहारप्रवृत्तेः । अपुष्टार्थत्वाधिकपदत्वानवी-
कृतत्वामङ्गल रूपाश्लील ग्राम्याणां निराकरणेन च साभि-
प्रायत्वरूपमोजः अर्थवैमल्यात्मा प्रसादः उक्तवैचित्र्यरूपं
माधुर्यम् अपारुष्यरूपं सौकुमार्यम् अग्राम्यत्वरूपा उदारता च
Thus it follows that the number of excellences pertain-
ing to words is not ten.
As regards those same Excellences as pertaining to
the meaning, (1) the first (mentioned by Vāmana) is
Prauḍhi, Boldness, also called (the first kind of ‘ojas’
‘strength’), which has been defined as consisting (a) in
the use of a sentence for the expressing of what can
be expressed by a single word, (b) in using a single word
for the expressing of what would be expressed by a sen-
tence, (c) in expansion, (d) in brevity and (e) in the effective-
ness of epithets. But this is merely a flourish of style,
and not an ‘excellence’; since expressions are regarded
as ‘poetical’ even in the absence of the said (five kinds of)
Boldness.—(1a) the second kind of ‘ojas’, ‘strength’,
which has been defined as consisting in significance (a preg-
nancy of meaning), is only the negation of the defect of
Irrelevancy;—(2) ‘Prasāda’, consisting in clearness of
meaning, is the negation of the defect of ‘redundancy’;
—(3) ‘Mādhurya’, consisting of fanciful expression, is the
negation of the defect of ‘monotony’;—(4) Saukumārya,
consisting of freedom from ruggedness, is the negation
of the defect of ‘Indecorous Inauspiciousness’;—(5)
Udāratā, consisting in the absence of vulgarity, is the

310 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
स्वीकृतानि । अभिधास्यमानस्वभावोक्त्यलंकारेण रसध्वनि-
गुणीभूतव्यङ्ग्याभ्यां च वस्तुस्वभावस्फुटत्वरूपा अर्थव्यक्तिः,
दीप्तरसत्वरूपा कान्तिश्च स्वीकृता । क्रमकौटिल्यानुल्बणत्वोप-
पत्तियोगरूपघटनात्मा श्लेषोपि विचित्रत्वमात्रम् । अवैषम्य-
स्वरूपा समता दोषाभावमात्रं न पुनर्गुणः । कः खल्वनुन्मत्तो-
न्यस्य प्रस्तावेन्यदभिदध्यात् । अर्थस्यायोनेरन्यच्छायायोनेर्वा
यदि न भवति दर्शनं तत्कथं काव्यम् इत्यर्थदृष्टिरूपः समाधिरपि
न गुणः ॥७२॥
negation of the defect of ‘ vulgarity.’—(6) Arthavyakti,
consisting in the distinctness of the character of things,
is included under the Figure of Svabhāvokti, ‘ natural
description,’—going to be described later on ; (7) Kānti,
consisting in the brilliance of Passion, is included under
the ‘ Suggestion of Passion ’, either as the predominant
or the subordinated factor.—(8) Shleṣa,—consisting of a
combination of several circumstances, such as (a) sequence
of several actions, (b) deceit (c) well-known character,
and (d) statement of, reasons,—is only a flourish of the
poetic fancy.—(9) Samatā, consisting in the non-relinquish-
ment of continuity, is only the negation of a defect (of
‘ Broken Uniformity ’), and not a positive excellence ; what
man, unless he were mad, would ever begin with one thing
and then speak of a totally different thing ?—(10) Samādhi,
consisting in the true appreciation of the meaning (as
being original or imitated), is not an excellence ; because
unless one comprehends the true meaning of a poem,
and recognises whether it is an original idea of the poet
concerned, or has its source in the idea of some other
poet,—how can the composition be regarded as ‘ poetry ’
at all ? 72.

CHAPTER VIII 311
तेन नार्थगुणा वाच्याः
न वाच्याः न वक्तव्याः ॥
प्रोक्ताः शब्दगुणाश्च ये ।
वर्णाः समासो रचना तेषां व्यञ्जकतामिताः ॥ ७३ ॥
के कस्य इत्याह
मूर्ध्नि वर्गान्त्यगाः स्पर्शा अटवर्गा रणौ लघू ।
अवृत्तिर्मध्यवृत्तिर्वा माधुर्ये घटना तथा ॥ ७४ ॥
टठडढवर्जिताः कादयो मान्ताः शिरसि निजवर्गान्त्ययुक्ताः
तथा रेफणकारौ ह्रस्वान्तरिताविति वर्णाः समासाभावो मध्यमः
For these reasons, the excellences (held by others) as pertaining
to the meaning should not be mentioned sep arately).
‘Should not be mentioned’—do not deserve to be
mentioned.
Those excellences that have been spoken of as pertaining
(indirectly) to words, (though really belonging to Passion depicted)—
these are suggested by Letters, compounds and diction. 73.
The text proceeds to describe what is suggestive of
what excellence.—
(a) The ‘sparsha’ [mute] consonants, with the exception of
those of the ‘ṭa’-group, combined with the last consonant of
their group,—(b) the consonants ‘r’ and ṇ’ when short,—(c)
expressions free compounds,—(d) compounds of medium length,—
and (e) harmonious diction—are (suggestive) of Sweetness. 74.
(a) All the consonants from k to m—except ṭ, ṭh, ḍ
and ḍh—combined with the last letter of their res-
pective groups, (b) r and ṇ combined with short vowels ;
—these are the ‘letters’ (suggestive of Sweetness).
As for ‘compounds’—(e) ‘expressions free from com-
pounds’ or (d) ‘compounds of medium length’ (are suggestive
of Sweetness).

312 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA.
समासो वेति समासः तथा माधुर्यवती पदान्तरयोगेन रचना
माधुर्यस्य व्यञ्जिका ।। उदाहरणम्
अनङ्गरङ्गप्रतिमं तदङ्गं
भङ्गीभिरङ्गीकृतमानताङ्ग्याः ।
कुर्वन्ति यूनां सहसा यथैताः
स्वान्तानि शान्तापरचिन्तनानि ॥३४७॥७४।।
योग आद्यतृतीयाभ्यामन्त्ययो रेण तुल्ययोः ।
टादिः शषौ वृत्तिदैर्घ्यं गुम्फ उद्भट ओजसि ॥ ७५ ॥
वर्गप्रथमतृतीयाभ्यामन्त्ययोः द्वितीयचतुर्थयोः रेफेण
अध उपरि उभयत्र वा यस्य कस्यचित् तुल्ययोः तेन तस्यैव
(e) ‘Harmonious diction’—i. e., such diction in which
the words are so combined as to make it soft—is also
suggestive of Sweetness.
Example—
‘Anaṅgaraṅgapratimaṁ tadaṅgaṁ
Bhaṅgībhirāṅgīkṛtamānatāṅgyāḥ
Kurvanti yūnāṁ sahasā yathaitāḥ
Svāntāni shāntāparachintanāni.’
‘The exquisite body of the slender-bodied one, re-
sembling the sportive altar of the Love-god, accompanied
by graceful motions makes the innermost hearts of young-
men think of things other than the quietistic.’ 74.
(A) The combination—(a) of the first and of the third
consonants of a group with the consonant following them,—(b)
of any consonant with r,—and (c) of any two similar
consonants;—(B) the consonants beginning with ṭ—(C) the
consonants sh and ṣ—(D) long compounds,—and (E) the
bombastic diction,—these are suggestive of Floridity. 75.
(a) The combination of the first and third letters
of a group with those following them—i.e., with the
second and the fourth respectively;—(b) any consonant

CHAPTER VIII 313
संबन्धः टवर्गोर्थात् णकारवर्जः शकारषकारौ दीर्घसमासः
विकटा संघटना ओजसः ।
उदाहरणम्—मूर्ध्नामुद्वृत्तकृत्तइत्यादि ।।३४८।।७५।।
श्रुतिमात्रेण शब्दात्तु येनार्थप्रत्ययो भवेत् ।
साधारणः समग्राणां स प्रसादो गुणो मतः ॥ ७६ ॥
समग्राणां रसानां संघटनानां च । उदाहरणम्
परिम्लानं पीनस्तनजघनभंगादुभयतस्-
तनोर्मध्यस्यान्तः परिमिलनमप्राप्य हरितम् ।
इदं व्यस्तन्यासं श्लथभुजलताक्षेपवलनैः
कृशाङ्ग्याः संतापं वदति बिसिनीपत्रशयनम् ।।३४९।।७६।।
having r either above or below it ;—(c) the combination
of ‘similar consonants’ i.e., that of a consonant with
itself—(d) the entire ṭ-group with the exception of ṇ—
(e) the consonants śh and ṣ—(f) long compounds—and
(g) bombastic dictive ;—all these are suggestive of Flori-
dity.
As an example we have the verse ‘Mūrdhnāmudvṛtta
&c.’ (see above stanza No. 285.)
Lucidity has been held to be that excellence, common to
all, by virtue of which the comprehension of meaning of words
follows on the mere hearing of it. 76.
‘All’—i. e., all Passions and all styles or diction.
Example.—
‘Parimlānaṁ pīnastanajaghanasaṅgādubhayatas
Tanor madhyasyāntaḥ parimīlanamaprāpya haritam
Idaṁ vyastanyāsaṁ śhlathabhujalatākṣepabalanaiḥ
Kṛśhāṅgyāḥ santāpaṁ vadati bisinīpatrashayanam.’
‘This bedding of lotus-leaves shows the distress of
the slender-bodied one,—being as it is withered at its

314 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
यद्यपि गुणपरतन्त्राः संघटनादयस्तथापि
वक्तृवाच्यप्रबन्धानामौचित्येन क्वचित्क्वचित् ।
रचनावृत्तिवर्णानामन्यथात्वमपीष्यते ॥ ७७ ॥
क्वचिद्वाच्यप्रबन्धानपेक्षया वक्त्रौचित्यादेव रचनादयः । यथा
मन्थायस्तार्णवाम्भःप्लुतकुहरचलन्मन्दरध्वानधीरः
कोणाघातेषु गर्जत्प्रलयघनघटान्योऽन्यसंघट्टचण्डः ।
कृष्णाक्रोधाग्रदूतः कुरुकुलनिधनोत्पातनिर्घातवातः
केनास्मत्सिंहनादप्रतिरसितसखो दुन्दुभिस्ताडितोऽसौ ॥ ३५० ॥
two ends where it has come into contact with the plump
breasts and thighs —green in the middle where it did
not come into contact with her slender waist —and ruffled
by the throwing about of her unnerved arms.’ 76.
[Although Construction, etc. are subservient to Excellence—]
The diction, the compounds and the letters are sometimes
altered, in accordance with the nature of (a) the speaker, (b)
the subject and (c) the form (of the composition). 77.
(a) In some cases the Diction &c., are made to
accord with the nature of the speaker, irrespective of
the subject or of the composition ; as an example of which
we have the following—
Manthāyastārṇavāmbhaḥplutakuhara-chalanmandaradhvānadhīraḥ
Koṇāghāteṣu garjatpralayaghanaghaṭā-nyonyasaṅghaṭṭacaṇḍaḥ
Kṛṣṇākrodhāgradūtaḥ kurukulanidhanotpātanirghātavātaḥ
Kenāsmatsiṁhanādapratirasitasakho dundubhistāḍitosau.
‘By whom has this trumpet been blown,—appearing
as it does like the echo of my lion-roar, the forward
messenger of Draupadī’s wrath, the cyclone presaging the
annihilation of the Kuru-race, resembling, at each stroke
of the beating-stick, the terrible clash of the thundering

CHAPTER VIII 315
अत्र हि न वाच्यं क्रोधादिव्यञ्जकम् । अभिनेयार्थं च
च काव्यमिति तत्प्रतिकूला उद्धता रचनदयः । वक्ता चात्र
भीमसेनः ॥
क्वचिद्वक्तृप्रबन्धानपेक्षया वाच्यौचित्यादेव रचनादयः ॥
यथा
प्रौढच्छेदानुरूपोच्छलनरयभवत्सैंहिकेयोपघात-
त्रासाकृष्टश्वतिर्यग्वलितरविरथेनारुणेनेक्ष्यमाणम् ।
कुर्वत् काकुत्स्थवीर्यस्तुतिमिव मरुतां कन्धरारन्ध्रभाजां
झांकारैर्भीममेतन्निपतति वियतः कुम्भकर्णोत्तमाङ्गम् ॥ ३५१॥
clouds at the time of universal dissolution, being as deep
as the rumbling of the Mandara mountain tossed about
and having its caves overflowing with the water of the sea
thrown about, as it were, by the churning rod.’
Here the subject described , is not one suggestive of
anger, or any such violent emotion ; the form of the work
also is one to be staged ; so that the bombastic diction is
not compatible with either of these two conditions ; and yet,
since the speaker is Bhīmasena (well-known as a ‘ Furious ’
character) [the bombastic diction is quite suitable.]
In other cases the diction and other things are altered
in accordance with the character of the subject portrayed,
irrespective of the speaker or the form. For instance, in the
following :—
‘ Prauḍhachchhedānurūpochchhalanarayabhavatsaiṁhikeyopaghāta-
Trāsākṛṣṭāśvatiryagvalitaravirathenāruṇenekṣyamāṇam
Kurvat kākutsthavīryastutimiva marutāṁ kandharārandhrabhājāṁ
Bhāṅkārairbhīmametannipatati viyataḥ kumbhakarṇottamāṅgam.’
‘Here falls from the sky the head of Kumbhakarṇa,
terrible on account of the curious humming of winds
contained in the holes in his shoulders, and hence appearing
II–2

316 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
क्वचिद्वक्तृवाच्यानपेक्षाः प्रबन्धोचिता एव ते ॥
तथाहि—
आख्यायिकायां शृङ्गारेऽपि न मसृणवर्णादयः । कथायां रौद्रेऽपि
नात्यन्तमुद्धताः । नाटकादौ रौद्रेऽपि न दीर्घसमासादयः ॥
एवमन्यदप्यौचित्यमनुसर्तव्यम् ॥७७॥
इति काव्यप्रकाशे गुणालंकारभेदनियतगुणनिर्णयो नाम
अष्टम उल्लासः ॥ ८ ॥
as it were, singing the praises of Rāma,—and being looked
at by Aruṇa (the Sun’s charioteer) wheeling about the
sun’s chariot and pulling up the horses on one side,
fearing it to be Rāhu, on account of the force with which
it has shot forth under the impact of the powerful stroke
(of the sword).’
In other cases, the Diction &c. are altered in accordance
with the nature of the form, irrespective of the speaker
and the subject.—For instance in an Ākhyāyikā soft letters
are not admissible even in the delineation of the Erotic
Passion ;—in a Kathā, even in the delineation of the
‘Furious’, bombastic words are not used ;—and in dramas
and works of that kind, long compounds are not used even
in the depicting of the ‘Furious’. Similarly in other cases,
the proprieties are to vary with the circumstances. 77.
[ Thus ends Chapter VIII dealing with the determination of
Excellences as different from Ornaments (Figures of Speech).]

अथ नवम उल्लासः
गुणविवेचने कृतेलंकाराः प्राप्तावसराः इति संप्रति शब्दा-
लङ्कारानाह--
यदुक्तमन्यथा वाक्यमन्यथान्येन योज्यते ।
श्लेषेण काक्वा वा ज्ञेया सा वक्रोक्तिस्तथा द्विधा ॥ ७८ ॥
तथेति श्लेषवक्रोक्तिः काकुवक्रोक्तिश्च । तत्र पदभङ्गश्लेषेण यथा
नारीणामनुकूलमाचरसि चेज्जानासि कश्चेतनो
वामानां प्रियमदधाति हितकृन्नैवाबलानां भवान् ।
युक्तं किं हितकर्तनं ननु बलाभावप्रसिद्धात्मनः
सामर्थ्यं भवतः पुरन्दरमतच्छेदं विधातुं कुतः ॥३५२॥
CHAPTER IX
THE VERBAL FIGURES OF SPEECH.
The Excellences having been examined, the author now
describes the Verbal Figures of Speech.
(1)—When what is said by one person in one sense is construed
by another person in a different sense—either through punning
or through intonation,—it is Equivoque (Vakrokti) : and
thus it is of two kinds. 78.
'Thus'—i.e., (1) Equivoque based on Punning and (2)
Equivoque based upon Intonation.
The following is an example of Equiyoque based upon
pun due to the breaking up of words :—
'Nārīṇāmanukūlamācharasi chejjānāsi kashchetano
Vāmānāṁ priyamādadhāti hitakṛnnaivābalānāṁ bhavān
Yuktaṁ kiṁ hitakartanaṁ nanu balābhāvaprasiddhātmanaḥ,—
Sāmarthyaṁ bhavataḥ purandaramatachchhedaṁ vidhātuṁ kutaḥ.'

318 KĀVYAPRAKĀŚA
अभङ्गश्लेषेण यथा
अहो केनेदृशी बुद्धिर्दारुणा तव निर्मिता ।
त्रिगुणा श्रूयते बुद्धिर्न तु दारुमयी क्वचित् ॥३५३॥
“If you behave satisfactorily towards women, then
you are wise”.—“What intelligent person does what is
agreeable to his enemies?” [This reply being based upon
the pun involved in breaking up the term ‘nārīṇāṁ’,
spoken by the first speaker in the sense of ‘towards women’,
into two terms ‘na-arīṇāṁ’, ‘not to enemies’]—“Then you
are not a benefactor of the weaker sex.” [This rejoinder
takes the term ‘vāmānāṁ’, used by the second speaker in
the sense ‘of enemies’, in the sense ‘of the weaker sex’.]—
“Would it be proper to destroy the good of a person known
to be weak?” [This answer is based upon the term
‘hitakṛt’, used by the former speaker in the sense of hitaṁ
karoti ‘benefactor, one who does good’, being taken in
the sense of hitaṁ kṛntati’, ‘one who destroys the good’].
—“Whence can there be any power in you to bring about
the destruction of what is desired by Indra?” [This reply
is based on the expression ‘balābhāvaprasiddhātmanaḥ’, used
by the former speaker in the sense of ‘one known to
be weak’, being taken by the latter in the sense of ‘one
who is known by his killing of the demon Bala, i.e.,
Indra’.]
The following is an example of Equivoque based upon
Paronomasia, not involving the breaking up of words.
‘Aho kenedṛśī buddhirdāruṇā tava nirmitā·
Triguṇā śrūyate buddhirna tu dārumayī kvachit’.
“Oh! By whom has this Intelligence of yours been
made so cruel?”—“Intelligence is known to consist of
the three attributes, and never of wood”. [The reply