Sahitya-kaumudi by Baladeva Vidyabhushana
by Gaurapada Dāsa | 2015 | 234,703 words
Baladeva Vidyabhusana’s Sahitya-kaumudi covers all aspects of poetical theory except the topic of dramaturgy. All the definitions of poetical concepts are taken from Mammata’s Kavya-prakasha, the most authoritative work on Sanskrit poetical rhetoric. Baladeva Vidyabhushana added the eleventh chapter, where he expounds additional ornaments from Visv...
Go directly to: Footnotes.
Text 7.39
यथ� वा, तवानन्�-कर� यो'सौ कृष्णः सख� समागतः� अत्र सख� � दृश्यताम� इत� वाच्यम्। यत�-तदोर� नित्�-सम्बन्� इत� न्यायात्� प्रक्रान्त-यच�-छब्द-नैराकाङ्क्ष्या� तच�-छब्दस्यावश्योपादेयत्वाच् च। नन्व� अद�-शब्देनैव नैराकाङ्क्ष्यम�, इदम्-एतद्-अद�-शब्दानां तच�-छब्दसमानार्थकत्वात्। मैवम�, यच�-छब्द-सन्निहितानां तेषाम् अनुवाद्यत्�-प्रतीति-कृत्त्वात्� व्यवहितैस् तु तैर् नैराकाङ्क्ष्यं स्याद् एव� यथ�, तवानन्�-कर� कृष्णो योऽधुनास� समागतः�
तच�-छब्द-सन्निधाव� इदम्-आदयः प्रसिद्धिं परामृषन्ति, यच�-छब्द-सन्निध� तच�-छब्दश् च। क्रमेणोदाहरण�, “यस् त्वद�-आनन्दन� कृष्णः सोऽय� सख� समागतः, यत� तत� कृष्णस्य माहात्म्यं वक्तुं तत� के� पार्यते।� यत्र तु यत�-तदोर� एकतरस्यार्थत्व� सम्भवेत् तत्रैकतरोपादानेऽपि नैराकाङ्क्ष्यं स्यात्� तथ� हि, उत्त�-वाक्�-स्थो यच�-छब्द� सामर्थ्यात� पूर्�-वाक्ये तच�-छब्द� नाकाङ्क्षति। यथ�, जयति श्री-पतिर� यस्य किङ्कर� द्रुहिणादयः। पूर्�-वाक्�-स्थस� तु परत्� तम� आकाङ्क्षत्य् असामर्थ्यात्� यथ�, वाञ्छितं नि�-भक्तेभ्य� यो दत्त� सेव्यतां हरिः� अत्र � सेव्यताम� इत्य� उक्त� नैराकाङ्क्ष्यम्। प्रक्रान्त-प्रसिद्धानुभूतार्थ-विषयस् तच�-छब्द� यच�-छब्द� नाकाङ्क्षति। क्रमेणोदाहरणानि।
yathā vā, ٲԲԻ岹-karo yo'sau ṛṣṇa� sakhi 岵ٲ�. atra sakhi sa ṛśy峾 iti vācyam. yat-tador nitya-sambandha iti nyāyāt. Գٲ-yac-chabda-nairākāṅkṣyāya tac-chabdasyāvaśyopādeyatvāc ca. nanv ada�-śabdenaiva nairākāṅkṣyam, idam-etad-ada�-śabdānā� tac-chabdasamānārthakatvāt. maivam, yac-chabda-sannihitānā� teṣām anuvādyatva-pratīti-kṛttvāt. vyavahitais tu tair nairākāṅkṣya� syād eva. yathā, ٲԲԻ岹-첹� kṛṣṇo yo'dhunāsau 岵ٲ�.
tac-chabda-sannidhāv idam-ādaⲹ� prasiddhi� parāmṛṣanti, yac-chabda-sannidhau tac-chabdaś ca. krameṇodāharaṇe, “yas tvad-ānandana� ṛṣṇa� so'ya� sakhi 岵ٲ�, yat tat kṛṣṇasya ٳⲹ� vaktu� tat kena pāryate.� yatra tu yat-tador ekatarasyārthatva� sambhavet tatraikataropādāne'pi nairākāṅkṣya� syāt. tathā hi, uttara-vākya-stho yac-chabda� sāmarthyāt pūrva-vākye tac-chabda� nākāṅkṣati. yathā, jayati śrī-patir yasya kiṅkarā druhiṇādaⲹ�. pūrva-vākya-sthas tu paratra tam ākāṅkṣaty asāmarthyāt. yathā, vāñchita� nija-bhaktebhyo yo datte sevyatā� �. atra sa sevyatām ity uktau nairākāṅkṣyam. Գٲ-prasiddhānubhūtārtha-viṣayas tac-chabdo yac-chabda� nākāṅkṣati. krameṇodāharaṇāni.
This is yet another illustration of ṛṣṭa-ṃśa in a sentence: ٲԲԻ岹-karo yo'sau ṛṣṇa� sakhi 岵ٲ�, �ī, ṛṣṇa, who makes your bliss, has arrived.� Here it should have been stated: ٲԲԻ岹-karo ⲹ� sakhi sa ṛśy峾, �ī, ṛṣṇa, who makes your bliss, can be seen.�[1] This is because of the axiom: yat-tador nitya-Ի�, �Yat and tat have an eternal connection,� and because the word tat must be used for the sake of completing the sense of the word yat which has the sense of Գٲ (introducing).
Someone might think: “The correlativeness is fulfilled by the word asau (he), since the words idam (he/ she/ this) etat (he/ she/ this), and adas (he/ she/ that) have the same sense as the word tat (he/ she/ that).� That is not true because when those words are juxtaposed to the word yat (who, which), they look like a substantive.[2] A complete sense (a proper correlativeness) with them takes place only when they are separated from yat. For instance: ٲԲԻ岹-첹� kṛṣṇo yo'dhunāsau 岵ٲ�, �ī, now ṛṣṇa, who makes your bliss, has arrived.�
When idam is juxtaposed to tat, idam has the sense of ‘well-known�. The same is true when either etad or adas is juxtaposed to tat. Moreover, the word tat has the sense of ‘well-known� when it is juxtaposed to yat. These two sentences are respective examples: (1) yas tvad-ānandana� ṛṣṇa� so'ya� sakhi 岵ٲ�, �ī, well-known ṛṣṇa, who makes your bliss, has arrived.� and (2) yat tat kṛṣṇasya ٳⲹ� vaktu� tat kena pāryate, “Who is able to describe that well-known glory of ṛṣṇa’s?�[3]
However, when out of yat and tat one is meaningful, the sense is complete even without supplying the other pronoun. The explanation is as follows: (1) The word yat in the second clause does not require tat in the first, on account of suitability. For instance: jayati śrī-patir yasya kiṅkarā druhiṇādaⲹ�, “All glories to ṣmī’s Lord, whose servants are and others� (here yasya, “whose�, does not require a correlative form of tat because yasya, a form of yat, is in the second clause). Nonetheless, yat in the first clause requires tat in the second, otherwise there is no suitability. For instance: vāñchita� nija-bhaktebhyo yo datte sevyatā� �, �Hari, who fulfills His devotees� desires, should be served.� Here, the complete sense (the correlativeness) would take place by adding a form of the correlative tat as follows: sa sevyatām, “He should be served,� and (2) The word tat which has the sense of either Գٲ (introducing), prasiddha (well-known), or Գܲūٳ (something experienced before) does not require the word yat. Examples of those three are shown in order.
Footnotes and references:
[1]:
The point here is that the correlative � (he) is added as the correlative of ⲹ� (who),since asau (he),beingjuxtaposed to ⲹ�, is not a proper correlative of ⲹ�. Moreover, in the adjusted sentence, the verb ṛśy峾 is used instead of 岵ٲ� only because of the meter.
[2]:
This means the correlative pronoun seems to be part of the clause of the substantive. Of the two correlatives, yat makes the substantive clause and its correlative makes the predicate clause: yo’sāv ity etayo� padayo� pūrvam anuvādya� 屹īⲹ� tu vidheyam, sannikṛṣṭatamatvena dvitīyam evānuvādya-vat pratibhāsate (ṅk-첹ܲٳܲ 10.52).
[3]:
In the second example, the correlative of yat is tat in �tat kena,� whereas the tat in �yat tat� has the sense of ‘well-known�. However, sometimes the formula yat tat is used and there is no other tat in the sentence: In those instances, tat is the correlative of yat. Although tat is juxtaposed to yat, it does not have the sense of ‘well-known�.