Shringaraprakasha 5.p1.11

5.p1.11

Or as in: “Let there be no fear in your mind, thinking, ‘I am a wrongdoer!’ / May no woman ever bear such a son! / And this moon of your face has again become intimate with a frown, / and the family of Vasudeva has gone to having only its name remaining.” / Now, why is there the usage of the past and future tenses—such as “The mountains stood [and] will stand,” “There was a well on the road, [and] there will be a well”—even when the present is obtained for an eternally persisting [entity]? / It is answered: As for those kings who existed in the kingdoms of the Haihayas and elsewhere, because their actions are past, an affix belonging to the domain of past tense is employed when intending the connection with them, as in: “By this [it is meant that] the mountains stood even during the reign of the Haihayas.” Likewise, as for those kings who will exist in future manvantaras, because their actions are future, an affix belonging to the domain of future tense is employed when intending the connection with them, as in: “When Bali will be Indra, even then the mountains will stand just so.” Thus, for a well too, because of its connection with the past and future actions of seeing, the connection with actions—such as “it was” [and] “it will be”—is not contradicted. / Conjugational disposition too is indeed an adjunct of the base-meaning. What, then, is this? It is a particular distinction in meaning that is the cause of the connection with the middle voice and active voice for [roots] that take the active voice, the middle voice, or both. That has been said: “The difference of meaning that is understood somewhere from the middle voice / or from the active voice, that they consider to be conjugational disposition.” [5.7.] As in: nāthati, nāthate; śapati, śapate; āhvayati, āhvayate; pratijānāti, pratijānīte. Here, [the root] nāth- in wishing, śap- in rebuking, hvā- with ā- in rivalry, and jñā- after sam- and prati- when not remembering take the middle voice; elsewhere they take the active voice—such are the distinctions of meaning. Likewise: a rogue terrifies [miṇḍo bhīṣayate]; he frightens him with an iron rod [kuñcikayainaṃ bhāyayati]; the ascetic amazes [jaṭilo vismapayate]; he causes him to wonder through intellect [matyainaṃ vismāpayati]; a falcon provokes the quail to cry out [śyeno vartikāmullāpayate]; who is causing you to cry out? [kastvāmullāpayati]; the villagers converse together [saṃpravadante grāmyāḥ]; the birds twitter together [saṃpravadanti śakunayaḥ].