Text 7.44

पूर्व-वाक्य-स्थ-यच्-छब्द-वीप्सायाः पर-वाक्य-स्थ-तच्छब्द-वीप्सापेक्षेति न नियमः, पर-स्थैक-तच्-छब्देन वीप्सा-प्रतिपाद्यस्य समर्थनात्. यथा,

pūrva-vākya-stha-yac-chabda-vīpsāyāḥ para-vākya-stha-tacchabda-vīpsāpekṣeti na niyamaḥ, para-sthaika-tac-chabdena vīpsā-pratipādyasya samarthanāt. yathā,

There is no rule that the distributive sense (vīpsā) of the word tat in the second clause requires the same number of words tat as the number of words yat used in the distributive sense in the first clause, because one word tat in the second clause can convey the distributive sense. For example:

pāpiṣṭhena mayā yad yat pāpam ācaritaṃ śubhe |
tad vināśaya devi tvaṃ gaṅge bhuvana-pāvini ||

pāpiṣṭhena—who am the worst sinner; mayā—by me; yat yat pāpam—whatever sin; ācaritam—was committed; śubhe—O auspicious one; tat—that [sin]; vināśaya—destroy; devi—O goddess; tvam—you; gaṅge—O Ganges; bhuvana—of the worlds; pāvini—O purifier.

O Gaṅgā-devī, O auspicious one, O purifier of the worlds, kindly nullify whatever sin I, the worst sinner, committed.

atra yad yad iti yena kenacid rūpeṇa sthitaṃ sarvātmakaṃ vastu vivakṣitaṃ tathā-bhūtam eva tad ity anena parāmṛṣṭaṃ para-sthiti-sāmarthyāt.

In this verse, the idea which is meant to be expressed (sin); which consists of all of them (the category); and which is situated as a particular grammatical form: yad yat (whatever), is considered in the same way with the one word tat, simply by virtue of being positioned afterward. (Kāvya-prakāśa, verse 194 vṛtti)