Kavyadarsha 2
English (machine translation) 2
- Language
- English
Contents
- 2.368 — 1 part
2.1
The properties that produce the beauty of poetry are called ornaments;
and they are being differentiated even today: who can expound them in their entirety?
2.2
Yet the seed of these distinctions was shown by former masters;
this endeavor of ours is merely to refine that very [seed].
2.3
Some ornaments were indeed declared earlier to distinguish the poetic dictions;
now the remaining class of common ornaments is displayed.
2.4
Natural description, simile, metaphor, illuminator, and repetition;
paralipsis, corroboration, contrast, and peculiar causation;
2.5
condensed expression, hyperbole, poetic fancy, poetic causation, subtle indication, hint, orderly succession;
expression of affection, the impassioned, the spirited, periphrasis, and convenient resolution;
2.6
exaltation, concealment, cohesion, special distinction, equal pairing;
incongruity, praising the irrelevant, veiled praise, and illustration;
2.7
simultaneous expression, barter, benediction, combination, and the imaginative;
thus are the ornaments of speech shown by ancient sages.
2.8
Clearly disclosing the diverse states of the nature of things,
[the figure is called] natural description and generic description: this is the first ornament, as in:
2.9
"With beaks reddish and curved, with wings soft and green,
with necks bearing three-colored rings, here are the sweet-voiced parrots!"
2.10
"With eyes rolling and throat carrying a soft cooing murmur,
a pigeon circles round and, eager to mate, kisses his beloved."
2.11
"Causing hair on the limbs to bristle, creating delight in the heart,
and making the eyes close, this touch of my beloved takes effect."
2.12
"Dark at the throat, with a skull-cup in hand, crested with the moon,
with glossy, reddish-brown matted locks, the Bull-bannered Lord appeared."
2.13
Such is the natural description of genus, action, quality, and substance;
in the scientific treatises it holds absolute sovereignty, and in poetry too it is desired.
2.14
Where likeness in whatever manner is understood to be clearly manifested,
that is called simile; its elaborate varieties are now displayed.
2.15
"O charming girl, the palm of your hand is reddish like a lotus":
this is the simile of shared attribute, because of the direct showing of a common attribute.
2.16
"Your face is like a lotus; your two eyes are like two blue water lilies":
this, where the common attribute is merely implied, is the substantive simile.
2.17
"The lotus blossomed like your face":
because of the reversal of standard usage, this is held to be the inverted simile.
2.18
"The lotus is like your face; your face is like the lotus":
this is the reciprocal simile, proclaiming the mutual preeminence [of both].
2.19
"Your face is equal only to the lotus, and to nothing else":
because of the exclusion of equality with any other, this is the restrictive simile.
2.20
"The lotus indeed resembles your face, and if there is any other of that kind,
let it do so": this is the non-restrictive simile.
2.21
There is also the cumulative simile: "Your face resembles the moon
not only by its radiance, but also through the act called gladdening"—such is it.
2.22
"Your face is seen only in you; the moon is seen in the sky;
only this much is the difference, none other": this is the hyperbolic simile.
2.23
"Enough of the moon's boasting that 'the splendor of her face is in me alone',
since that [splendor] is also in the lotus": this is the imagined simile.
2.24
"If a lotus were to have restlessly rolling eyes, O fair-browed girl,
then let it take on the splendor of your face": this is the wondrous simile.
2.25
"Imagining your face to be the moon, O slender-limbed girl, in expectation of your face
I run after even the moon": this is recorded as the delusive simile.
2.26
"Is this a lotus with bees wandering inside, or your face with restless eyes?
My mind sways to and fro": this is the doubtful simile.
2.27
"The luster of a lotus, eclipseable by the moon, does not cause shame to the moon;
therefore this is your face alone": this is the decisive simile.
2.28
"Vying with the moon, radiant, and fragrant,
your face is like a lotus": this is recorded as the punned simile.
2.29
Because it is expressed by words of identical form, it is the homophonous simile, as in:
"This row of gardens, lovely with its curly foliage, is like a young girl adorned with lovely tresses of hair."
2.30
"The lotus has much pollen; the moon is waning; though equal to them,
your face is superior": this is recorded as the censure-simile.
2.31
"The lotus is the birthplace even of Brahmā; the moon is borne on Śiva's head;
these two are equal to your face": that is called the praise-simile.
2.32
"My mind desires to declare that your face is equal to the moon;
let that be a virtue or a fault": this they know as the desirous simile.
2.33
"The lotus, the autumn moon, and your face—this triad
is mutually opposed": that is considered the contradictory simile.
2.34
"The moon, stained and dull, never has the power
to roar in challenge against your face": that is indeed the prohibitive simile.
2.35
"Your face is marked with gazelle-like eyes; the moon is marked with a mere deer;
even so, he is only your equal, not superior": this is the flattering simile.
2.36
"This is not a lotus, it is a face; these are not two bees, they are two eyes"— / because of distinct resemblance, this is a simile of stating the truth.
2.37
"Surpassing the beauty of both moon and lotus, your face / has become comparable only to itself"—this is an extraordinary simile.
2.38
"As if the essence of all lotus-splendor were gathered together in one place, / your face shines forth"—this they know as an impossible simile.
2.39
"Like poison from the orb of the moon, or fire from sandalwood, / is harsh speech from this mouth"—this is an inconceivable simile.
2.40
"Cool like sandalwood water, moonbeams, moonstone, and the like / is your touch"—this multiple simile conveys an excess.
2.41
"As if carved from the orb of the moon, as if drawn up from the womb of a lotus, / slender-limbed lady, is your face"—this is a simile of transformation.
2.42
"As heat in the sun, as the sun in the day, as day in the sky, / valor has placed majesty in you"—this is considered a garlanding simile.
2.43
If some sentential meaning is compared strictly with another sentential meaning, / that simile of sentential meaning is of two kinds, through having one or multiple words for "like".
2.44
Your face with its trembling eyes, where the radiance of teeth appears, / shines like a lotus with wandering bees whose filaments are half-glimpsed.
2.45
Of that slender-limbed woman, as of a lotus-pond, the face, like a lotus, / was continually drunk and enjoyed by me as by a bee.
2.46
Because of introducing some object and then setting down something sharing its nature, / a sense of likeness arises; thus is the typical comparison illustrated:
2.47
"Not a single king is like you, even now, among those being born; / indeed, there is no second tree like the coral tree!"
2.48
When they speak of an inferior entity, making it equal to an superior one / in the performance of a single action, that is remembered as the simile of equal union, as:
2.49
"The enemy of Puloman stays awake to protect heaven, you for the earth; / demons are slain by him, proud kings by you."
2.50
"In beauty you imitate the moon, in brilliance the sun, and in firmness the ocean, / O king"—this is considered a causal simile.
2.51
Neither difference of grammatical gender and number, nor inferiority and superiority, / is sufficient to vitiate a simile, where it causes no distress to the discerning.
2.52
"This eunuch walks like a woman; this woman speaks like a man; / he is dear to me like life's breaths; learning has been acquired like wealth."
2.53
"Like you, O protector of the earth, the king of the gods shines; / the king is capable of ascending to the sun's reach by his brilliance."
2.54
In such cases, charm is never lost; / yet there certainly is distress in some usage of the masters of speech, as:
2.55
"The moon is white like a female swan; the clear sky is like lakes; / the soldier devoted to his master is like a dog; the firefly shines like the sun."
2.56
Such [usage] is avoided by the good. The reason for this should be considered / by the wise themselves, for the examination of poetic excellences and poetic defects.
2.57
The words iva, vat, vā, yathā, samāna, nibha, saṃnibha, / tulya, saṃkāśa, nīkāśa, prakāśa, pratirūpaka,
2.58
pratipakṣa, pratidvandvin, pratyanīka, virodhin, / sadṛś, sadṛśa, saṃvādin, sajātīya, anuvādin,
2.59
pratibimba, praticchanda, sarūpa, sama, saṃmita, / salakṣaṇa, sadṛkṣa, ābha, sapakṣa, upamita, upamā,
2.60
the suffixes -kalpa, -deśīya, -deśya, etc., and also prakhya and pratinidhi, / the words savarṇa and tulita, and whatever other words express the same meaning;
2.61
and the bahuvrīhi compound in words like "moon-faced"; / [the verbs] rivals, conquers, hates, harms, roars back against,
2.62
scolds, despises, torments, censures, / mocks, matches, laughs at, envies, begrudges,
2.63
steals its charm, plunders its beauty, / contends with it, mounts the scale with it,
2.64
sets foot in its path, enters its realm, / follows it, pursues it, shares its habit, excludes it,
2.65
and "imitates it"—these words indicating resemblance / have been proclaimed for simile, giving pleasure to the intellect of poets. // Thus ends the circle of similes.
2.66
Metaphor is said to be a simile itself with difference hidden, / as in: arm-vine, hand-lotus, foot-sprout.
2.67
"Fingers were sprouts, the rays of nails were flowers, / arms were vines; you are the beauty of spring walking visibly before us."
2.68
This is called uncompounded; the previous metaphor was compounded. / "A smile is the moonlight of the face-moon"—this is a compounded and uncompounded metaphor.
2.69
"With rows of copper-colored finger-petals, with nail-luster filaments, / the lotus of your feet is borne on their heads by kings."
2.70
By superimposing petallhood upon fingers and the like, and lotusness upon the foot, / through their arrangement in suitable places, this is a complete metaphor.
2.71
"All of a sudden, O fierce woman, your face with trembling lip-sprout / bears the pearl-bright flower-clusters of beads of sweat."
2.72
Having turned sweat-drops into flower-clusters and the lip into a sprout, / the face here is not transformed otherwise; hence this is a metaphor of parts.
2.73
"With dancing brow, with trickling sweat, with slightly reddened eyes, / this face-lotus reveals a state of intoxication."
2.74
Without modifying the parts of the face, the face alone is brought / to the status of a lotus here; hence this is a metaphor of the whole.
2.75
"With cheeks pale with intoxication, with red lotus-eyes, / that simple person also has been filled with passion by your face."
2.76
This is a metaphor of a single part; likewise they metaphorize two or more / parts here; appropriateness and inappropriateness produce its divisions.
2.77
"This face is radiant with smile-flowers, with darting bee-eyes"— / this is an appropriate metaphor, due to the coexistence of flowers and bees.
2.78
"This face has cool smile-moonlight, with moist lotus-eyes"— / this is called an inappropriate metaphor, because moonlight and lotuses do not coexist.
2.79
Because of identifying the whole, and through identifying or not identifying the parts, / a metaphor called uneven, charming in nature, arises, as:
2.80
"With cheeks flushed with intoxication, with the moon of your face / whose brow-vine is made to dance, the god of love is capable of crushing the three worlds."
2.81
"Hari's foot, which has the water-garment of the daughter of Jahnu clinging to its tip, / triumphs as the victory banner in the festival of rejoicing for the fearless gods."
2.82
Since such a form of a banner complete with qualifying attributes / is attributed to the foot, this is a metaphor with qualifications.
2.83
"It does not close lotuses, nor does it traverse the sky; / the moon of your face serves only to take away my life's breaths."
2.84
Because the non-performance of the moon's functions and the performance of another function / are shown here, this is called a contrary metaphor.
2.85
In depth you are the ocean; in dignity you are the mountain; / and because you fulfill the desires of all beings, you are the wish-granting tree.
2.86
Here, by means of reasons such as depth, [the subject] is made into the ocean, the mountain, / and the wish-granting tree; hence this is metaphor based on reason (heturūpaka).
2.87
“Worthy of enjoyment by royal swans, its fragrance longed for by bees, / this lotus-face of yours, my friend—” this is double-entendre metaphor (śliṣṭarūpaka).
2.88
From the observation of similarity and difference between the secondary and primary [subjects], / a pair of metaphors known as simile-[metaphor] and contrast-[metaphor] is approved, as follows:
2.89
“This face-moon, bearing a reddish glow from intoxication, / roars back at the moon whose rising red light has gathered.”
2.90
“The moon is drunk by the gods; your face-moon is drunk by me. / Though incomplete, that one [in the sky] always has a full disc.”
2.91
“The moon-nature of this face-moon that torments another in this way / does not correspond [to true moon-nature], O lovely woman”—this is refutation metaphor (ākṣeparūpaka).
2.92
“Even your face-moon, O passionate woman, burns me without pity; / but that is due only to the fault of my own fortune”—this is reconciliation metaphor (samādhānarūpaka).
2.93
“On this stage of your lotus-face, the dancer of your creeper-eyebrow / performs a playful dance”—this is the charming metaphor-metaphor (rūpakarūpaka).
2.94
“This is no face: this is a lotus. These are no eyes: these are two bees. / These are stamens alone: these are not the radiance of your teeth.”
2.95
Because it sets aside being a face and so forth and superimposes being a lotus and so forth, / manifesting an excellence of qualities, this is metaphor through concealment of reality (tattvāpahnavarūpaka).
2.96
There is no end to the varieties of metaphor and simile; therefore, / only a mere indication has been shown. Let the wise infer what is unsaid. // Thus ends the circle of metaphors.
2.97
If a single word denoting genus, action, quality, or substance, occurring in one place, / provides assistance to an entire sentence [or group of sentences], they call it the illuminator (dīpaka), as follows:
2.98
“The southern wind carries away the withered leaf of creepers; / that very wind suffices to break the wounded pride of slender-limbed women.”
2.99
“Elephants roam in the coastal groves of the four oceans, / and your virtues, shining like jasmine, [roam] in the bowers of the Cakravāla mountain.”
2.100
“The directions are darkened by rain-clouds of the monsoon, / and the earths by tender rows of fresh turf.”
2.101
“By Viṣṇu undertaking his strides, the fortunes of the demons / were carried somewhere away; from somewhere the prosperity of the gods was brought near.”
2.102
Such are the illuminators mentioned [at the beginning]; in this same way, we shall show / certain ones positioned in the middle and at the end of sentences, as follows:
2.103
“Peacocks dance in the lap of the nicula trees, and they sing, / and they fix upon the clouds glances filled with tears of joy.”
2.104
“The wind becomes slow, the fire becomes salty, and the moon [becomes fire], / and the application of sandalwood paste becomes the fall of a weapon to travelers abroad.”
2.105
“The water poured forth by clouds, the flock of domestic peacocks, / the flickering garland of lightning, and the army of the flower-bowed god [grow strong].”
2.106
“By you a blue lotus [is placed] on the ear, by Love an arrow on the bow, / and by me my mind on death: these three have been made equal.”
2.107
“The bright fortnight brings increase to the white-rayed moon; that [moon] to the five-arrowed god; / he to passion; and passion to the splendor of the festival of love for young men.”
2.108
Though it is an illuminator like the preceding ones, because a garland of sentences / depending each on the one before it is employed, it is considered the garland illuminator (mālādīpaka).
2.109
“Clouds increase the pride of the bodiless Love, / but they diminish that of summer heat with spray tossed up by the wind.”
2.110
Here, two opposed actions are connected with the word ‘pride’ / and the word ‘clouds’; that is opposed-sense illuminator (viruddhārthadīpaka).
2.111
“It robs the expanse of the directions, it seizes the host of heavenly bodies, / and today this line of clouds takes away my life-breaths.”
2.112
Because a single action is illuminated by the line of clouds / through the use of several synonymous words, this is single-sense illuminator (ekārthadīpaka).
2.113
“Carrying pleasing fragrances, towering, with a dark sheen like tamāla trees, / the clouds wander in the sky, and these elephants on the earth.”
2.114
Here, the clouds and the elephants, which are identical in their properties, / are connected by the single act of wandering; hence this is double-entendre illuminator (śliṣṭārthadīpaka).
2.115
In this very manner, the understanding of the remaining varieties / in illuminator also should be worked out by the discerning. // Thus ends the circle of illuminators.
2.116
Repetition of sense, repetition of word, and repetition of both— / this triad of ornaments is approved precisely in place of the illuminator, as follows:
2.117
“The kadamba flowers blossom, the kuṭaja trees open, / the kandalī plants unclose, and the kakubha blooms split apart.”
2.118
“The row of clouds fills the flock of peacocks with longing, / and this sea-monster-bannered Love fills the minds of youth with longing.”
2.119
“Having conquered the world, you sport here with the women of your inner quarters; / let the host of your enemies, gone to heaven, sport with apsarases.” // Thus ends the circle of repetitions.
2.120
Refutation (ākṣepa) is an expression of denial; it is threefold with respect to the three times; / furthermore, it is infinite owing to the infinity of divisions in the things to be refuted.
2.121
“The bodiless Love conquered the world with five flower-arrows— / this is impossible; or rather, manifold are the powers of things.”
2.122
Since here the notion of the impossibility of Love’s victory, / once arisen, is refuted by the force of a reason, such is refutation of the past (vṛttākṣepa).
2.123
“Why do you place a blue water-lily on your ear, sweet-spoken one? / Do you think your side-glance insufficient for this task?”
2.124
This is refutation of the present (vartamānākṣepa): as a woman is in the very act / of placing a blue lotus on her ear, she is stopped by her lover with such flattering words.
2.125
“I tell the truth: you will not be allowed to see me, beloved, / with an eye reddened by lac transferred from kissing another woman!”
2.126
This is refutation of the future (bhaviṣyad-ākṣepa), in that a very proud woman / checked him beforehand in this way, [thinking,] ‘Lest an offense by him should occur.’
2.127
“In vain, slender-limbed girl, has softness become famed in your limbs; / if they are truly soft, why do they unexpectedly cause me pain?”
2.128
This is refutation of a property (dharmākṣepa), because here the softness of the woman's body / is thus refuted by a lover by means of an action contrary to it.
2.129
“Is she beautiful or not?—by whom can this discrimination be made? / For only a trembling radiance is seen, not its substratum.”
2.130
This is refutation of the property-possessor (dharmyākṣepa), since the property-possessor is refuted / while admitting the property called radiance, by one wishing to express an exceedingly wondrous form.
2.131
“Your eyes grow red, your sprout-like lower lip quivers, / and your eyebrows are arched; nonetheless, I who am innocent feel no fear.”
2.132
This is the objection to a cause (kāraṇākṣepa), since here the primary cause of fear, / his own guilt, is denied by the clever lover.
2.133
“My dearest is far away, the arrival of the clouds has come, / and the blooming nicula trees have been seen; yet I have not died—what can this be?”
2.134
That is the objection to an effect (kāryākṣepa), because the effect, dying, is averted / by having adduced its dread cause, the arrival of the clouds.
2.135
“Your departure will not cause me distress for long; / if you will go, you must go; enough of your hesitation here.”
2.136
In this way, under the very guise of permission, the departure of the beloved is objected to / by intimating death itself; that is called the objection through permission (anujñākṣepa).
2.137
“Much wealth can be gained by you, and there is ease and safety on the road, / nor is there any danger to my life; nevertheless, beloved, do not go.”
2.138
When she thus states the grounds that warrant the lover's journey, / yet stops it through sheer authority, that is called the objection through authority (prabhutvākṣepa).
2.139
“My hope for life is strong; my hope for wealth is weak; / go or stay, beloved, but my state has been told.”
2.140
This is the objection through indifference (anādarākṣepa), because speech resembling indifference / is employed here by an impassioned woman while obstructing her lover's departure.
2.141
“Go, if you must go, beloved; may your roads be auspicious! / And may my next birth too be right there where you have gone.”
2.142
This is the objection through a benediction (āśīrvacanākṣepa), because by the path of a blessing, / intimating her own condition, the beloved's journey is forbidden.
2.143
“If your departure is indeed certain, seek another woman; / today itself I am seized by death, which watches for an opening.”
2.144
This is the harsh objection (paruṣākṣepa), because, preceded by harsh words, / the departure of the beloved is objected to by a woman subdued by love.
2.145
“If you intend to go, go quickly, before cries reach your ears, / uttered from the mouths of anguished kin, obstructing your departure.”
2.146
This is indeed the objection through assistance (sācivyākṣepa), because here the beloved's departure / is prohibited by a woman deeply in love even as she renders assistance.
2.147
“Desiring what pleases you, my beloved, I wish to say, ‘Go!’ / But the voice comes out of my mouth, ‘Do not go!’ What shall I do?”
2.148
That is the objection through effort (yatnākṣepa), because it shows the futility / of the effort made toward an undesirable thing, since the opposite result arises.
2.149
“Tell of your departure to love, which grows angry even at the blinking of an eye / that obstructs sight for an instant; what it desires is desired by me.”
2.150
This is the objection of being under another's power (paravaśākṣepa), because the journey is forbidden / by her who is dependent on love, through indicating the purpose of another.
2.151
“I will endure separation, lord; give me the ointment of invisibility, / so that Love the striker does not see me when my eyes are anointed with it.”
2.152
The husband's departure is obstructed by presenting a means of survival / that is difficult to perform; this they call the objection through a means (upāyākṣepa).
2.153
“The words, ‘I am setting out,’ have already issued from your mouth, beloved; / even if you do not go now, what is the use of you whose love has grown faint?”
2.154
This is the objection through anger (roṣākṣepa), because the departure commenced by the lover / is forbidden by an agitated woman whose self is governed by excessive passion.
2.155
Fainting at the mere sound of the mention of her beloved's departure, the simple woman, / regaining consciousness and seeing her beloved, says: “Did you arrive after a long time?”
2.156
Since the beloved's departure is thus objected to through a faint that arose at that moment / by the timid-eyed woman, such is the objection through fainting (mūrchākṣepa).
2.157
“It was not smelled; it was not placed on the ear; it was not dropped into wine by women; / the blue lotus withered right on the surface of your enemies' pond.”
2.158
This is the objection through pity (anukrośākṣepa), by turning away, as if with compassion, / the action suitable for the lotus through showing its pitiable condition.
2.159
“When there is this moon of your face, made of nectar, an enemy to lotuses, / and having glistening pupils, what is the need for the other moon?”
2.160
Because the primary moon is rejected here after showing qualities existing in the secondary moon / that are identical to its own, such is the objection through double-meaning (śliṣṭākṣepa).
2.161
“No wealth was amassed; no learning was honored; / no ascetic heat was gathered; and all of life has passed away.”
2.162
This is the objection through remorse (anuśayākṣepa), because here, followed by remorse, / turning away from the acquisition of wealth and the like is shown by one whose life is gone.
2.163
“Is this an autumn cloud, or is it a flock of geese? / A cry resembling anklets is heard; therefore it is not a cloud.”
2.164
This is the objection through doubt (saṃśayākṣepa), because a doubt is removed / by a characteristic common to geese and untouched by origin in clouds.
2.165
“Wonderful! Though you have overcome the world, your prowess is not satisfied. / Or when is satisfaction ever seen in a flared-up consumer of oblations?”
2.166
This is the objection through corroboration (arthāntarākṣepa), because the wonder that was underway / is set aside here through the presentation of another matter possessing the same nature.
2.167
“O lord of men, you are never praised with the thought, ‘He gives,’ / because supplicants take your wealth considering it their own.”
2.168
Such an objection as this is known as the objection through reason (hetvākṣepa). / By this direction other varieties too can be inferred. || Thus ends the circle of objections.
2.169
Corroboration (arthāntaranyāsa) is to be understood as that placement of another matter / capable of establishing that [first matter], having introduced some matter.
2.170
Universal, specific, joined with double meaning, having incongruity, / performing the inappropriate, having an appropriate nature, both appropriate and inappropriate, and the reverse—
2.171
these and other varieties have been observed in usages of this [figure]; / a garland of their examples is displayed to clarify their forms.
2.172
“Look, even the lordly sun and moon, the eyes of the universe, / indeed go to their setting; by whom is destiny transgressed?”
2.173
“The rain-clouds indeed remove the burning torment of embodied beings; / is not the acquisition of selfhood by the great meant for pacifying the sorrow of others?”
2.174
“The southern breeze generates delight for people; / indeed, one endowed with courtesy becomes dear to everyone.”
2.175
“Though dark-spotted, this night-maker delights the world; / indeed, even with faults, a lord of the twice-born favors others.”
2.176
“Though issuing from a throat indistinct from drinking honey, the sound of bees / becomes harsh to the ear of passionate lovers; such is misdeed.”
2.177
“This bed of lotus petals burns my body; / indeed, acting as a substitute for fire, it is natural for it to consist of burning.”
2.178
“Let the cool-rayed moon torment me at will; why does spring distress me? / An action performed by the dark-spotted [moon] is surely improper for the fragrant [spring].”
2.179
Even the night-lotuses burn me: is this a bed of day-lotuses?
For the sun’s partisan could never be sweet when the moon’s partisans are fierce.
Thus ends the cycle of corroboration (arthāntaranyāsa).
2.180
When the similarity between two things is either stated by word or implied,
and their difference is declared, that is called contrast (vyatireka).
2.181
You are equal to the ocean in qualities such as steadfastness, beauty, and depth;
but your distinction lies solely in such a body.
2.182
This is a contrast based on one side [ekavyatireka], where a difference residing in both
is brought into the scope of cognition by an attribute present in only one.
2.183
Unbroken in shores [and in restraint], deep are both the ocean and you;
[yet] that one resembles collyrium, whereas you possess the luster of gold.
2.184
This is a contrast based on both sides [ubhayavyatireka], because distinguishing qualities for both—
blackness and tawny-goldness—are separately exhibited here.
2.185
Both you and the ocean are irresistible, of great might [or great creatures], and full of fiery energy [or brilliance];
this, however, is the difference between you: he is water-natured [and dull-witted], while you are clever.
2.186
Let this be understood as involving cohesion [saśleṣa] owing to its punning nature.
Both the [contrast] with reproach and that with reason are also shown:
2.187
Though abiding within limits, though steadfast, though a repository of gems,
the foul abode of sea-monsters does not at all equal your position.
2.188
Even though carrying the entire earth together with its mountains, continents, and oceans,
Śeṣa is inferior to you because of his status as the lord of serpents [or vile scoundrels].
2.189
Such is the contrast where similarity is explicitly stated by words.
There is also that where similarity is [only] implied; that too is stated:
2.190
Between these two, your face and the lotus, there is indeed a distinction:
the lotus grows in water, while your face rests on you.
2.191
Without play of eyebrows, untouched by the intoxication of passion is the doe's eye;
this pair of eyes of yours, on the other hand, is adorned with those qualities.
2.192
In the former there is the mere statement of difference; in this one, the showing of superiority.
And yet another, a contrast through parallel [sadṛśavyatireka], is demonstrated:
2.193
Your face and the lotus are both blossomed, fragrantly scented;
[yet] the day-lotus has hovering bees, whereas your face has trembling eyes.
2.194
Here is the moon, the crest-jewel of the sky; here is the goose, the ornament of the waters.
This sky has a garland of stars; this water has blossomed white lotuses.
2.195
Between sky and water, whose similarity in whiteness and the like is implied,
and between the moon and the goose, whose purity is understood, a distinction is made in this verse.
2.196
In the previous verse, the similarity was expressed verbally; in both, the distinguishing feature
like bees and eyes is comparable: that is contrast through parallel.
2.197
Incapable of being dispelled by the light of gems, impossible to be removed by sunbeams,
obstructing the sight of youth is the darkness born of adolescence.
2.198
This is contrast within the same class [sajātīyavyatireka]: this darkness of the genus darkness,
similar in obstructing sight, is shown to be different by other qualities.
Thus ends the cycle of contrast (vyatireka).
2.199
Where, through the exclusion of a well-known cause, some other cause
or a natural spontaneity is to be conceived, that is unusual causation (vibhāvanā).
2.200
The geese were intoxicated without drinking, the sky was bright without being wiped,
the water was pure without being cleared: the world became enchanting.
First 200 of 370 passages. Read on
Other recensions (1)
- Text of S. K. Belvalkar (1924), partial — Sanskrit
Linked texts (1)
- Kāvyādarśa — Daṇḍin, Sanskrit