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 10.180
यथा,
अहो शैत्यस्य महिमा हिमानिल तवेदृशः |
शक्यते न च निह्नोतुं कृतो येनाधर-व्रणः ||
yathā,
aho śaityasya mahimā himānila tavedṛśaḥ |
śakyate na ca nihnotuṃ[1] kṛto yenādhara-vraṇaḥ ||
aho—what a wonder (or alas); śaityasya—of coldness; mahimā—the greatness; hima-anila—O cold wind; tava—your; īdṛśaḥ—like this; śakyate—can; na—not; nihnotum—be hidden; kṛtaḥ—is done; yena—because of which; adhara—on the lips; vraṇaḥ—a wound.
O frosty wind, how amazing is the greatness of your coldness! This kind of cold cannot be averted. It is because of your coldness that the lips are chapped. (Alaṅkāra-kaustubha 8.230)
atra kānta-saṅgama-hetuko’dhara-vraṇaḥ śaitya-hetukatva-cchadmanā gopyate. na ceyam apahnutiḥ, prakṛtāprakṛta-sādṛśyāsambhavāt.
In this verse, the cuts on the lips which were caused by meeting her lover is concealed by means of deceit which is the idea that the cuts were caused by cold weather. This is not apahnuti because in vyājokti a similarity between the contextual thing (cuts on the lips) and the noncontextual thing (chapped lips) is not possible (is not meant to be expressed).
Commentary:
The main difference between vyājokti and apahnuti (poetic denial) is that in vyājokti there is no denial nor any other kind of expressed negation.[2] According to Nāgeśa Bhaṭṭa, this is the real purport of Mammaṭa’s elaboration reiterated above by Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa.[3]
Kavikarṇapūra’s example is the form of a first-rate implied sense. Similarly, Pīyūṣa-varṣa Jayadeva gives an example of vyajokti which is a first-rate implied sense: sakhi paśya gṛhārāma-parāgair asmi dhūsarā, “[A young woman speaks to another:] Look, girlfriend, I am covered with dust because of the pollen from the courtyard of the house” (Candrāloka 5.110). With such a pretext, the speaker conceals that she is covered with dust as a result of going in the woods for a tryst. According to Nāgeśa Bhaṭṭa, however, vyājokti occurs only when it involves a second-rate implied sense.[4] Nonetheless, Mammaṭa says the sūkṣma ornament is characterized by a first-rate implied sense.[5]
This is Mammaṭa’s example of vyājokti,
śailendra-pratipādyamāna-girijā-hastopagūḍhollasad-
romāñcādi-visaṃṣṭhulākhila-vidhi-vyāsaṅga-bhaṅgākulaḥ |
hā śaityaṃ tuhinācalasya karayor ity ūcivān sa-smitaṃ
śailāntaḥ-pura-mātṛ-maṇḍala-gaṇair dṛṣṭo’vatād vaḥ śivaḥ ||“When the king of mountains joined Pārvatī’s hand and Śiva’s hand in matrimony, Śiva became perturbed by the appearance of tremor and horripilation due to Pārvatī’s thrilling touch, became concerned that he would interrupt the ceremonial, and exclaimed: “How cold are the two hands of the Mountain of Snow!” May He, who was seen by the Mothers within the mountain while he smilingly said this, protect you all.”
Mammaṭa explains:
atra pulaka-vepathū sāttvika-rūpatayā prasṛtau śaitya-kāraṇatayā prakāśitatvād apalapita-svarūpau vyājoktiṃ prayojayataḥ,
“Here the horripilation and the tremor are really two sāttvika-bhāvas of love for Pārvatī, yet their natures are explained away as being manifested due to the cold temperature. That pretense constitutes vyājokti” (Kāvya-prakāśa, verse 520 vṛtti).
Footnotes and references:
[2]:
[3]:
prakṛtāprakṛtayor iti. idam upalakṣaṇam. tatropameya-niṣedha-pūrvakam upamānavyavasthāpanam. atra tu kiñcid aniṣidhyaiva nimittāntara-prayuktatva-jñāpanam ity api bodhyam (Uddyota 10.118). Nāgeśa Bhaṭṭa is referring to this: na caiṣāpahnutiḥ prakṛtāprakṛtobhayaniṣṭhasya sāmyasyehāsambhavāt (Kāvya-prakāśa 10.118 vṛtti).