Text 9.35

एष शब्द-श्लेषः सभङ्गाभङ्गतया द्वि-विधः. पूर्वोक्तलक्ष्याद् बोध्यः. ननु सभङ्गः शब्द-श्लेषः जतु-काष्ठन्यायेन शब्दयोस् तत्र श्लेषणात्. अभङ्गस् त्व् अर्थ-श्लेष एव, तत्र शब्द-भेदाभावाद् एक-वृन्त-गत-फल-द्वय-न्यायेनार्थयोर् एव श्लेषणात्, मैवम्, अर्थ-भेदे शब्द-भेद-स्वीकारात्, शब्दस्यैव वैचित्र्य-बोधोपायतायां प्राधान्यात्. अर्थ-मुखप्रेक्षितयार्थालङ्कारत्वे त्व् अनुप्रासादेर् अपि तत्-प्रसङ्गः, तस्यापि रसादि-परत्वे तत्-प्रेक्षित्वात्. तस्माद् अयम् अत्र भेदः. यत्र शब्द-परिवृत्तौ श्लेषत्वं भज्यते स शब्द-श्लेषः, यथा पूर्वोक्तः. एवं नव-विधः. यत्र तु न भज्यते स पुनर् अर्थ-श्लेषः.

eṣa śabda-śleṣaḥ sabhaṅgābhaṅgatayā dvi-vidhaḥ. pūrvoktalakṣyād bodhyaḥ. nanu sabhaṅgaḥ śabda-śleṣaḥ jatu-kāṣṭhanyāyena śabdayos tatra śleṣaṇāt. abhaṅgas tv artha-śleṣa eva, tatra śabda-bhedābhāvād eka-vṛnta-gata-phala-dvaya-nyāyenārthayor eva śleṣaṇāt, maivam, artha-bhede śabda-bheda-svīkārāt, śabdasyaiva vaicitrya-bodhopāyatāyāṃ prādhānyāt. artha-mukhaprekṣitayārthālaṅkāratve tv anuprāsāder api tat-prasaṅgaḥ, tasyāpi rasādi-paratve tat-prekṣitvāt. tasmād ayam atra bhedaḥ. yatra śabda-parivṛttau śleṣatvaṃ bhajyate sa śabda-śleṣaḥ, yathā pūrvoktaḥ. evaṃ nava-vidhaḥ. yatra tu na bhajyate sa punar artha-śleṣaḥ.

That was śabda-śleṣa, which has two varieties: sabhaṅga (the double meaning is achieved by separating the letters in a different way) and abhaṅga (the double meaning is achieved without separating the letters in a different way).

Someone (a follower of Udbhaṭa and Rudraṭa) might argue: “Sabhaṅga-śleṣa is śabda-śleṣa, because at that time there is a union of two words, by the model of resin and wood. And abhaṅga-śleṣa is only artha-śleṣa because, owing to an absence of a difference of words at that time, there is a union of two meanings, by the model that two eggplants come from the same plant.”

That is not true, by the axiom that words which sound the same are different when there is a difference in meaning (therefore abhaṅga-śleṣa as well is śabda-śleṣa), since only sound is the main thing in being a cause of the perception of amazingness (therefore śabda-śleṣa rightly is an ornament of sound). Given that an ornament of meaning is so called due to looking at it as an ornament in which the main element is the meaning, alliteration as well would have to be classed as an ornament of meaning because even an alliteration is looked upon in terms of being mostly for the purpose of a rasa and the like.

Consequently, the difference between them is as follows. When the wordplay would be lost by using a synonym, that is śabda-śleṣa (double use of one sound), just as it was exemplified earlier. That śleṣa has nine varieties. However, when the wordplay would not be lost by replacing the word with a synonym, that is called artha-śleṣa (double use of one meaning, i.e. one literal meaning applies to two things).