Text 10.6

[Now Mammaṭa begins to expound the nineteen varieties of elliptical similes:]

तद्-वद् धर्मस्य लोपे स्यान् न श्रौती-तद्धिते पुनः ॥ १०.८८ab ॥

tad-vad dharmasya lope syān na śrautī-taddhite punaḥ ||10.88ab||

tad-vat—like that (like in the complete simile); dharmasya—of the attribute; lope—when there is a deletion; syāt—is; na—not; śrautī—of the direct simile; taddhite—when there is a taddhita suffix; punaḥ—also.

The elliptical simile is like the complete simile, except that when there is an ellipsis of the common attribute, there is no direct simile involving the suffix vat[i].

sādhāraṇa-dharmasya lope pūrva-vad eva ṣoḍhā syāt, kintv atra taddhita-gā śrautī na sambhavatīti pañcadhā luptā. vākya-gā samāsa-gā ca śrautī luptā, ārthī luptā tu taddhita-gā ceti.

When there is an ellipsis of the common attribute, there are six kinds of similes as before, except that the taddhita-gā śrautī is not possible. Therefore the elliptical simile characterized by the ellipsis of the common attribute has five varieties: (1) direct simile in a sentence, (2) direct simile in a compound, (3) indirect simile in a sentence, (4) indirect simile in a compound, and (5) indirect simile in a taddhita suffix.

Commentary:

A direct simile in a taddhita suffix (vati) when there is a deletion of the common attribute is impossible. In that regard, Jīva Gosvāmī exemplifies Pāṇini’s rule of tatra tasyeva as follows: mathurā-vad dvārakāyāṃ prācīrāḥ, “The walls in Dvārakā are like the walls in Mathurā,” and kṛṣṇa-vat pradyumnasya rūpam, “Pradyumna’s form is like Kṛṣṇa’s form” (HNV 1198 vṛtti). In the first example, Dvārakā is the upameya, Mathurā is in the upamāna, and the ground of comparison, “the walls”, have the role of being the attribute in common.^[1]

Moreover, in his elaboration, Mammaṭa indicates that when there is an ellipsis of the common attribute, an indirect simile in a taddhita suffix cannot possibly occur if the taddhita suffix is vat[i].^[2] This is because when vat[i] is used in an indirect simile, an action (or a quality) is required in the sentence in order to carry it forward into the meaning of the compound.^[3] However, Viśvanātha Kavirāja does not reiterate it. Nāgeśa Bhaṭṭa says Mammaṭa is wrong.^[4] He explains that candra-vat mukham (moon-like face), for example, grammatically means: “The existence of the face is like the existence of the moon” (because the verb bhavati, “is”, is necessarily added to any sentence without a verb). Nāgeśa Bhaṭṭa says existence is not a proper common attribute, therefore the similarity between the face and the moon is understood by implication.^[5] This means the simile can occur, yet the attribute in common is implied. Thus an ellipsis of the common attribute in an indirect simile with the taddhita suffix vat[i] is possible. This topic is revisited in the section on the vyatireka ornament (10.106 etc.).

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

“The reason is as follows:—the taddhita-gā śrautī upamā is possible only when the taddhita affix is used in the sense of iva. Such an affix is vat only, when it is used according to the sūtra ‘tatra tasyeva’. When vat is used it always requires the express mention of the ground of comparison, as in caitra-van maitrasya gāvaḥ [“Maitra’s cows are like Caitra’s cows”]or in mathurā-vat srughne prākāraḥ [“The ramparts in Srughna are like the ramparts in Mathurā”],where gāvaḥ and prākāraḥ are the ground of comparison. We cannot simply say caitra-van maitrasya; we must mention the common attribute if we are to have any complete sense out of the words.” (Kane, P.V. (1995), The Sāhitya-darpaṇa, p. 94). The words in brackets are added to a citation.

[2]:

dharmaḥ sādhāraṇaḥ. taddhite kalpab-ādau tv ārthy eva (Kāvya-prakāśa 10.88).

[3]:

Govinda Ṭhakkura explains: sa ca “tatra tasyeva” ity arthakatayā nityaṃ dharma-sākāṅkṣa iti dharmānupādāne śrautī taddhite na bhavaty eva. ārthī tu yadyapi vati-rūpe taddhite na sambhavati “tena tulyam” ity artha ukta-nyāyena nityaṃ tulya-kriyākāṅkṣatvena dharma-lope tad-asambhavāt, tathāpi kalpap-deśya-deśīyara-bahuc-rūpe sambhavaty eveti paṅcadhā dharmalopopamety arthaḥ (Kāvya-pradīpa).

[4]:

dharma-lope tad-asambhavād iti, idam api vyaṅgyopamām ādāyaiva (Uddyota 10.88).

[5]:

candra-van mukham ity-ādau bhavati-kriyām adhyāhṛtya candra-bhavana-sadṛśaṃ mukha-bhavanam ity eva vācyo’rthaḥ. candra-mukhayoḥ sādṛśyaṃ tu vyañjanayaiveti bodhyam (Uddyota on Kāvya-prakāśa verse 396).