Shringaraprakasha 7.p1.11

7.p1.11

) sakaladvīpanāthānuyātaḥ tvayyāyāte vitarkāniti dadhata ivanābhāti kampaḥ payodheḥ || 7.2. atrādyodāharaṇayo rāmahanūmantau nāmaśabdābhyāmatiniṣkaruṇe paribhavāsahiṣṇau ca svamūrtibhede saṃjñāviseṣaṇatvena rūḍhau, tadvyavadhānena tadviparītayorupacaritasvamūrtibhedāntarayopāropitāvaupacārikaṃ viśeṣaṇabhāvaṃ bhajete iti gauṇavyavahitārthopacāranimittopatacāramitteyaṃ gauṇī | yatra tu na bhedopacārastatra vyavadhānābhāvadruṇanimittaiva gauṇī bhavati, yathā--rāmo'smi sarvaṃsahe, tārkṣyaḥ so'pi samaṃ nijeta vibhinā jānāti māṃ rāvaṇaṃ || iti | kathaṃ punaḥ śabdārthayorabhede'pi bhedavyapadeśaḥ | sahi rāhoḥ śiraḥ gaurgauḥ kāmadaddetyādau śabdārthabeda eva dṛśyate | ucyate, astitāvadenmukhyābhāve sati prayojane nimitte ca satyupacāraḥ pravartate | sa cābhinnānāṃ bhedavyāpadeśahetuḥ, bhinnānāṃ caibhedavyapadeśaheturbhavati | tatrābhinnānāṃ bhedo yathā--- ātmānamātmānā vetsi sṛjasyātmānamātmanā | ātmanā kṛtinā ca tvamātmanyeva pralīyase || atra paramātmavyatiriktavastvantarābhāvātkarmādikārakavyatirekeṇa ca jñānādikriyānupapattereka eva kratṛkarmakaraṇādikaraṇīpacāreṇa bhidyate | siddhe ca bhede sādṛśyanibandhane mukhyānāminopacaritānāmapyupamānopameyavyavahāraḥ pravartate | tadyathā--- tvanmukhaṃ tvanmukhamiva tvaddṛśau tvaddṛśāviva | tvanmīrtiriva mūrtiste tvamiva tvaṃ kṛśodari || vaisāddṛśyanibandhanastu vyatireko bhavati | yathā --- nāma yasyābhinandanti dviṣo'pi sa pumānpumān | raikiraṇāṇuggāgahiāihoeti kamalāikamalāiṃ |

Here, in the first two examples, Rāma and Hanūmān, through the name-words, are conventionally established as specific designative attributes of their own forms that are extremely pitiless and intolerant of insult; mediated by that, being superimposed upon another differentiated form of theirs figuratively transferred as opposite to that, they assume the status of a figurative attribute: thus this is a qualitative secondary usage caused by figurative transference whose meaning is mediated by a quality. Where, however, there is no figurative transference of difference, there, because of the absence of mediation, the qualitative secondary usage is caused purely by a quality, as in: 'I am Rāma, I endure everything,' and 'Even that Garuda knows me to be Rāvaṇa along with his own master.' But how can there be a designation of difference when word and meaning are non-different? For such a difference of word and meaning is seen only in 'the head of Rāhu,' 'an ox is an ox,' 'she gives desires,' and so forth. It is replied: Indeed, when the primary meaning is absent, figurative transference operates when there is a purpose and a motivating condition. And it becomes the cause of the designation of difference among non-different things, and the cause of the designation of non-difference among different things. There, the difference among non-different things is as follows: 'You know yourself through yourself, you create yourself through yourself, and through yourself, as an agent, you dissolve into your very self.' Here, because there is no other entity apart from the Supreme Self, and because actions such as knowing are not possible without syntactic roles such as the object, the one alone is differentiated through the figurative transference of agent, object, instrument, and so on. And once difference is established, on the basis of similarity, the convention of standard of comparison and object of comparison operates even for figuratively transferred things just as for primary ones. As follows: 'Your face is like your face, your eyes are like your eyes, your form is like your form, you are like yourself, O slender-waisted woman!' But difference on the basis of dissimilarity is contrast. As in: 'He whose name even his enemies praise, that man is indeed a man! Only those lotuses favored by the sun's rays are true lotuses!'