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...
Text 7.138
तत्र व्यभिचारिणः स्व-शब्द-वाच्यता यथा, लज्जां दधार कृष्णस्य चुम्बने वृषभानुजा. अत्र लज्जा-शब्दः.
tatra vyabhicāriṇaḥ sva-śabda-vācyatā yathā, lajjāṃ dadhāra kṛṣṇasya cumbane vṛṣabhānujā. atra lajjā-śabdaḥ.
(1) Among them, this is an example of mentioning a vyabhicāribhāva by name: lajjāṃ dadhāra kṛṣṇasya cumbane vṛṣabhānujā, “Rādhā had bashfulness in kissing Kṛṣṇa.” Here the word lajjā (bashfulness) is faulty.
Commentary:
Even the usage of a synonym of lajjā would be faulty. Kavikarṇapūra says the word hrī is an instance of this fault (Alaṅkāra-kaustubha 10.130). Those terms are synonymous, by the definition: mandākṣaṃ hrīs trapā vrīḍā lajjā, “The words mandākṣam, hrī, trapā, vrīḍā, and lajjā [are synonymous and mean: bashfulness, shame]” (Amara-koṣa 1.7.23).
Viśvanātha Kavirāja specifies that the fault is corrected by replacing the name of the vyabhicāri-bhāva with a term that expresses an effect (an anubhāva) of that vyabhicāri-bhāva.[1] However, if the mention of an effect would not bring about the perception of that vyabhicāri-bhāva, then that fault is actually not faulty (7.148-149). The author of Kṛṣṇānandinī corrects the above example as follows: natāsyājani kṛṣṇasya cumbane vṛṣabhānujā, “Upon kissing Kṛṣṇa, Rādhā lowered Her face.” He specifies that a bhāva-dhvani occurs when a vyabhicāri-bhāva is brought to light by means of an anubhāva.