Shringaraprakasha 8.p1.10

8.p1.10

It is replied: / Just as in ‘a month after birth’ (māso jātasya), how does the complex of actions called ‘a month’ delimit as a terminus the birth called the initial separation from the womb, or measure out by repetition the existence obtained at birth? And just as in ‘one who has resorted to hardship’ (kaṣṭaśritaḥ), the agent, delimited by the specific action taken up, having internalized the relation of means, when connected to the action, through connection with the action of resorting, has the status of an object in relation to hardship, and so experiences connection with hardship mediated by the action of resorting; and just as in ‘frightened of a wolf’ (vṛkādbhītaḥ), the agent, delimited by the action taken up, because of the connection to the action of fear, the wolf having the status of an ablative point of departure, is connected with the wolf mediated by the action of fear; so here too, the agent, delimited by the specific action taken up, such as cooking, having internalized the relation of end and means, when connected with the action, pra- and the rest having the status of prefixes, is connected to pra- and the rest mediated by the action. And all things related to a whole are connected with that whole possessing parts only through contact with a part. That has been said: / ‘Those whose connection is with a whole, such as a teacher's family, / are joined with that [whole] having parts by touching its parts.’ / Syntactic connection is the mutual interweaving of word-meanings taken up toward a single meaning through mutual expectancy and the like. That is threefold: based on semantic power (śākta), based on case inflection (vaibhakta), and consisting of both power and inflection (śaktivibhaktimaya). Among these, that which is accomplished by powers such as that of the object is based on semantic power; that which is accomplished by inflections such as that of the genitive relation is based on case inflection; and that which is accomplished by both consists of power and inflection. There, when the agent and the object are denoted by finite verbal and nominal endings, the one based on semantic power is as follows: / ‘The high golden seats that these [kings] sat upon, / by them was imagined a resemblance to the three peaks of Trikūṭa overcome by lions.’ / When the two powers of the agent existing at different times are denoted by a primary nominal suffix (kṛt) and a finite verb ending (ākhyāta), and when the object, instrument, and recipient are denoted by nominal case inflections, the one based on semantic power is as follows: / ‘Without conquering the earth bounded by the oceans, without sacrificing with diverse sacrifices, / and without giving wealth to petitioners, how could I be a king?’