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...

व्याज-स्तुति-पर्यवसायित्वे सन्दिग्धत्वं गुणः.
यथा,

vyāja-stuti-paryavasāyitve sandigdhatvaṃ guṇaḥ.
yathā
,

When the statement amounts to the vyāja-stuti ornament (artful praise), the fault called sandeha (ambiguous) is a quality. For example:

vibhūṣita-parīvārā pṛthukārtasvarākulāḥ |
parājitāś ca rājendra gṛhās tava mamāpi ca ||

vibhūṣita-parīvārāḥ—in which the retinue is adorned (or in which the family members are sitting on the ground: bhū-uṣita[1]); pṛthu-kārtasvara-ākulāḥfilled with much gold (pṛthuka-ārtasvara-ākulāḥ—filled with sounds of pain of children; para-ajitāḥ—undefeated by another (or parājitāḥ—defeated); ca—and; rāja-indra—O king of kings; gṛhāḥ—inhabitants of the household; tava—your; mama—mine; api—even; ca—and.

O king, the inhabitants of your household are vibhūṣita-parīvāra (an adorned retinue), and so are mine (family members sitting on the ground). Yours are pṛthukārtasvarākula (filled with much gold), and so are mine (filled with sounds of pain of children). Moreover, yours are parājita (undefeated by another), and so are mine (subjugated). (adapted from Kāvya-prakāśa verse 306)

atra saṃśaya-sphūrtāv api mahimnā prakṛtārtha-niścayād vyāja-stutiḥ paryavasiteti guṇatvam.

Although it looks like there is an ambiguity here, the text culminates in the vyāja-stuti ornament because of the ascertainment of the real meaning, by the weight of it. A literary quality occurs in that way.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Mammaṭa uses the word bhūṣita. Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa’s double meaning with vi-bhū (“a particular place”) is the fault called aprayukta (not in usage), although he would argue it is not faulty in this context (7.123).

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: