Text 5.13

(6) [This illustrates tulya-prādhānya (the literal sense and the implied meaning are equally astonishing):]

स्मर-समर-समाप्तौ वक्रतां भ्रूर् अहार्षीद् अजनिषत मृगाक्ष्या वीत-लक्ष्याः कटाक्षाः |
धनुर् इव कुसुमेषोर् ज्या-विमुक्तं तदासीद् विविशुर् इव निषङ्गे मुक्त-शेषाः पृषत्काः ||

smara-samara-samāptau vakratāṃ bhrūr ahārṣīd ajaniṣata mṛgākṣyā vīta-lakṣyāḥ kaṭākṣāḥ |
dhanur iva kusumeṣor jyā-vimuktaṃ tadāsīd viviśur iva niṣaṅge mukta-śeṣāḥ pṛṣatkāḥ ||

smara—of Cupid; samara—of the battle; samāptau—at the end; vakratām—curvature; bhrūḥ—the eyebrow (the eyebrows); ahārṣīt—gave up; ajaniṣata—they became; mṛga-akṣyāḥ—of the doe-eyed woman; vīta—is gone; lakṣyāḥ—whose target; kaṭa-akṣāḥ—sidelong glances; dhanuḥ—the bow; iva—like; kusuma-iṣoḥ—of Cupid (“his arrows are flowers”); jyā—from the bowstring; vimuktam—[the bow,] released; tadā—then; āsīt—became; viviśuḥ—they entered; iva—as if; niṣaṅge—in the quiver; mukta-śeṣāḥ—remaining; pṛṣatkāḥ—arrows.

At the end of the battle of love, the doe-eyed woman’s eyebrows gave up their pronounced curvature, like Cupid’s bow slackens after its bowstring is released, and her crooked glances became devoid of a target like leftover arrows that return to the quiver. (Alaṅkārakaustubha 4.11)

atrotprekṣayopamā dhvanitā. tayoḥ sva-prādhānyena sthitatvāt tulya-prādhānyam.

Here the upamā ornament (simile) is implied by the utprekṣā ornament (fanciful assumption). Both are equally predominant (tulya-prādhānya) since each one has its own importance.

Commentary:

The utprekṣā ornament is literal and is twofold: “The doe-eyed lady’s eyebrows gave up their pronounced curvature like Cupid’s bow slackens after its bowstring is released,” and “Her crooked glances became devoid of a target like leftover arrows that return to the quiver.” The implied simile is twofold: “Each one of her eyebrows is like Cupid’s bow,” and “Her glances are like Cupid’s arrows.”

This verse also fits in the category of vācya-siddhi-aṅga (an aspect that accomplishes the literal sense) because the two implied similes justify the two utprekṣās. The difference is that here the similes and the utprekṣās are equally beautiful.

In Mammaṭa’s system, the difference between sandigdha-prādhānya and tulya-prādhānya is that in tulya-prādhānya, the astonishing implied sense originates from one portion of the text and the astonishing literal sense is the other portion. In Mammaṭa’s example of tulya-prādhānya, there is no overlap:

brāhmaṇātikrama-tyāgo bhavatām eva bhūtaye |
jāmadagnyas tathā mitram anyathā durmanāyate ||

“[A messenger of Paraśurāma speaks to Rāvaṇa:] Giving up disrespecting the Brāhmaṇas is only conducive to your well-being. The son of Jamadagni will remain your friend that way, otherwise he will become bullheaded” (Kāvya-prakāśa, verse 130).

Mammaṭa elaborates:

atra jāmadagnyaḥ sarveṣāṃ kṣatriyāṇām iva rakṣasāṃ kṣaṇāt kṣayaṃ kariṣyatīti vyaṅgyasya vācyasya ca samaṃ prādhānyam,

“There is an equal importance of the implied sense “Paraśurāma will instantly kill all the Rākṣasas like he put an end to the Kṣatriyas” and of the literal sense (he will become bullheaded)” (Kāvya-prakāśa, verse 130 vṛtti).

The implied sense arises from the first sentence whereas the literal sense which generates astonishment is the second sentence.

That implied idea is: “You should not be hostile to Paraśurāma.” Viśvanātha Kavirāja says the literal sense and the implied sense are equally predominant because both generate astonishment in terms of being in mutually different scopes, like in the aprastuta-praśaṃsā ornament (indirect expression), and because they culminate in the idea of the threat of showing enmity.^[1]

Nāgeśa Bhaṭṭa explains that the present tense in durmanāyate is used in the sense of nearness to the present. According to him, the implied sense of “bullheaded” is that the annihilation of Rāvaṇa’s Rākṣasas will be hard to counteract.^[2] That is an obvious implied sense (agūḍha): It acts like a literal meaning. It could be classed as agūḍha, yet here the literal sense partly constitutes the tulya-prādhānya.

Moreover, Hemacandra cites the verse as an example of the vyabhicāri-bhāva called garva (arrogant pride) (Kāvyānuśāsana).

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

atra vācya-vyaṅgyayoḥ sāma-daṇḍayos tulyatayaiva vairi-mocana-paryāptatvād aprastutā-praśaṃsā-vat parasparānapekṣayā camatkārāspadatvāt dvayor api sama-prādhānyam (Kāvya-prakāśa-darpaṇa).

[2]:

durmanāyate kṣubdhāntaḥkaraṇo bhavatīty arthaḥ, sāmīpyābhiprāyeṇa vartamāna-nirdeśaḥ. tathā ca tat-kṣobhe sakala-rākṣasa-kula-kṣaya-rūpo’nartho durvāraḥ syād iti vyaṅgyam (Uddyota). 339 triṣu śyāmau harit-kṛṣṇau, “In any gender, śyāma means either green or dark blue” (Amara-koṣa 3.3.143).