Text 7.132

क्वचिद् अधिक-पदं च. यथा,

kvacid adhika-padaṃ ca. yathā,

Sometimes adhika-pada (superfluous word) (7.60) is a quality:

yad vañcanāhita-matir bahu-cāṭu-garbhaṃ kāryonmukhaḥ khala-janaḥ kṛtakaṃ bravīti |
tat sādhavo na na vidanti vidanti kintu kartuṃ vṛthā praṇayam asya na pārayanti ||

yat—which [words^[1] ]; vañcanā—in cheating; āhita—are placed; matiḥ—one whose thoughts; bahu—much; cāṭu—flattery; garbham—[words,] which contain; kārya—on [doing] business; unmukhaḥ—intent; khala-janaḥ—a bad person; kṛtakam—false; bravīti—says; tat—that; sādhavaḥ—righteous persons; na na vidanti—it is not that they do not know (na na vidanti = na vidanti iti na); vidanti—they know; kintu—however; kartum—to make; vṛthā—useless; praṇayam—affection; asya—of this person; na—not; pārayanti—are able.

Being intent on doing business, a dishonest person, who has a mind to cheat, speaks lies which involve flattery. It is not that good persons do not know it. They know, but they are unable to change the dishonest person’s amity. (Kāvya-prakāśa, verse 312)

atra na na vidantīty ayogasya punar vidantīty anya-yogasya vyavacchedaḥ.

Here the first vidanti, in na na vidanti (it is not that they do not know), serves to negate the possibility of not knowing, and the second vidanti (they know) excludes a connection with others (only they know).

Commentary:

Viśvanātha Kavirāja says the second “they know” signifies “only they know” and makes literary charm as such.^[2] Śrīvatsa-lāñchana Bhaṭṭācārya agrees with him.^[3] Nāgeśa Bhaṭṭa says the sense of “they know” is that they do not inform others about it, and therefore, he adds, that second vidanti makes a literary quality on account of this distinction.^[4] According to GovindaṬhakkura, adhika-pada is a quality when it adds a particularity: adhika-padaṃ kvacid guṇo yatra viśeṣa-pratipattiḥ (Kāvya-pradīpa). In truth, here the sequence of adhika-pada was inverted: The sentence “It is not that good persons do not know it” was inserted before to dispel the idea that although good persons are naive, not all good persons are naive in this situation. Without this insertion, saying “Good persons know it” would be contrary to what is well-known (prasiddhi-viruddha) (7.93). In addition, a passive nature, hinted at by the well-known naiveness which was the reason for making the insertion, is the reason good persons do not modify the dishonest person’s friendliness, otherwise the text would lack an explanation.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

The word vacanam (speech, words) is missing in the verse, according to Narahari Sarasvatī Tīrtha and Nāgeśa Bhaṭṭa (yad = yad vacanam). A noun for the adjective bahu-cāṭu-garbham has to be accounted for. Arguably, this is the fault called nyūna-pada (missing word) (7.60). In usage, the only nouns that can be left out are: strī (woman), pumān (man), jana (person), and vastu (thing).

[2]:

nañ-dvaya-yogenāpi vedanātiśaye’pi te punar vidantīti padaṃ ta eva jānantīti vicchitti-viśeṣa iti bhāvaḥ (Kāvya-prakāśa-darpaṇa).

[3]:

nañ-dvaya-prayogenāpi vedanātiśaye siddhe punar vidantīti padaṃ ta eva jānantīti viśeṣa-lābhāyety arthaḥ (Sāra-bodhinī).

[4]:

nañ-dvaya-yogena jñānātiśaye labdhe punar vidantīiti padam ata eva jānantīti na tv anyaṃ jñāpayantīti viśeṣakatvād guṇa iti bhāvaḥ (Uddyota).