Kavyalankara 4: caturthaḥ paricchedaḥ

Incoherent (apārtha), contradictory (vyartha), tautological (ekārtha), ambiguous (sasaṃśaya), disordered (apakrama),
ungrammatical (śabdahīna), defective in caesura (yatibhraṣṭa), defective in meter (bhinnavṛtta), and defective in euphony (visandhi);

and contradictory to place, time, arts, the world, logic, and authoritative tradition;
and devoid of thesis, reason, or example—[such a composition] is defective and is not approved.

By 'incoherent' is meant devoid of meaning; and that meaning belongs to word and sentence;
a collection of phonemes possessing meaning, ending in a nominal or verbal inflection, is a word;

a collection of words mutually expectant,
free from further syntactic need and composing a single subject, is a sentence.

In the case of phonemes that occur in succession, collection and the like are not applicable;
but this is possible in the intellect, even though [the phonemes are] different at every moment.

Others say that a sentence is the cognition whose object is the final word,
bearing the memory produced by the preceding phonemes, not the words which perish in a moment.

Here too much could be said, but it has not been stated;
what is the use of disputation with elders? The subject at hand is stated:

That which is devoid of aggregate meaning is regarded as incoherent (apārtha),
as it is stated: 'Pomegranates, ten cakes, six,' and so forth.

Contradictory (vyartha) is considered to have conflicting sense; conflict is taught
as producing contradiction due to a clash between the earlier and later meanings, as follows:

'Friend, maintain your pride toward your beloved; do not go to lightness with him;
for women who comply with their husband's will do not destroy love.'

'Since you have served your elders, among enemies who are conquered senses,
now adhere only to the instillation of discipline leading to the highest good.'

That which has no difference in meaning between parts, they call tautological (ekārtha);
others call this repetition (punarukta), differentiated by word and meaning.

Tautology of word, however, is not described here because of its coarseness;
how could someone, unless his mind is distracted, say the very thing already said?

In fear, grief, jealousy, and also in joy and astonishment,
as when one says: 'Go, go!'—they do not consider that a repetition.

Here, that which is repetition of meaning is alone accepted as tautological (ekārtha),
as when there is no purpose in restating what has already been expressed, for example:

'The sound of water released from clouds, falling from the spouts on mansions,
surely makes her mind anxious.'

From the hearing of common attributes and the non-mention of specific difference,
that cognition which is ungrounded regarding 'what is here' they know as doubt.

Hence they call speech that produces that [doubt] ambiguous (sasaṃśaya);
a sentence is desired for ascertainment, it should not oscillate, as follows:

'Possessing snakes / wicked men, difficult of ascent / approach, having jewels / excellence, endowed with fruits / rewards,
uneven / treacherous are the mountains / kings; from them danger quickly comes to the careless.'

The mention [of things] in succession according to instruction is considered order here;
departing from that through inversion is called disordered (apakrama).

'Wearing diadem and moon, having the hue of a dark cloud and of snow,
holding discus and trident—may Śambhu and the bearer of Śārṅga protect you!'

That which is contrary to the usage approved by the author of the Sūtras and the author of the Vārttikas,
they know as ungrammatical (śabdahīna), because it is not established by trustworthy authorities, as follows:

'Look at the clouds around the sky, circled by flashing lightning,
heavy with abundant water, concealing the solar brilliance.'

The pause (yati) is the resting of words mounted on a meter;
departing from that is designated defective in caesura (yatibhraṣṭa), as follows:

'Having lightning, with bodies dark like tamāla trees, these clouds rumble.'

The placing of a heavy or a light syllable in an improper position,
or the deficiency or excess thereof—this is defective in meter (bhinnavṛtta), as follows:

'This line of bees wanders intoxicatingly in the forests;
separated from your beloved, you should not go today.'

'The two beloved ones, wearing the moon as a crest-jewel, having rising rays—
may Śambhu and Śarvāṇī protect you'—this they call defective in euphony (visandhi).

The production of a substance which is not found in a country, or not taught [there],
should be known as contradictory to that [place], due to nature; as it is said:

"On the Malaya mountain, where black aloe trees grow near the caves, / the deodar trees shine, bowed down by fragrant flowers."

Time is divided into six kinds according to the distinction of the six seasons. / They call that which conflicts with it [a defect] due to inversion, as follows:

"These blossoming mango trees, beautifying the forest, perfume / the monsoon winds that carry showers of cool drops."

Art is calculation and understanding, and the crafts are its province; / they say that what is inverted in the same way is that which conflicts with it, as follows:

"From ṛṣabha comes pañcama, and from that dhaivata is remembered along with ṣaḍja; / for this is the madhyamagrāma scale, in which ṛṣabha is pressed down upon madhyama."

Thinking through confusion that this common practice is otherwise, / conflict is to be stated in other arts in the same way.

Those who know the truth understand the world through the division of stationary and moving things, / and that worldly usage is here [regarded]; that which conflicts with it is as follows:

"From the drops of rut fallen from the temples of those elephants / arose a terrible river carrying elephants, horses, and chariots."

"The foamy water fallen from the mouths of the running army-mounts / made the roads knee-deep in water towards every direction."

They know logical method to be science, the discourse on the three aims of life, and the science of statecraft; / therefore, what departs from that is held to be in conflict with logical method, as follows:

Having presented the ruler of the Vatsas as an ambitious conqueror who consulted the elders, / he then asserted that this capable man lacked spies:

"Crowded inside with a hundred warriors and led by Sālaṅkāyana, / such an artificial elephant he did not recognize when it entered his own territory."

Or if he was neglected by his ministers to accomplish their own ends, / oh, what dullness is theirs, or else they have no devotion to their master!

Arrows shot from sturdy bows by furious enemies— / what inference is there that they would fall avoiding his vital parts?

"He killed my brother, my son, my father, / my maternal uncle, and my nephew!"—their minds agitated with rage,

hurling diverse weapons in battle, why would the many / not kill the single transgressor in the deep forest?

Homage to those learned men, experts in policy, who interpret this intention / of the poet in this way, entirely setting aside science and worldly experience!

Even a child knows the difference between a living wild elephant / and one made of leather; alas, how and why could that be?

Sacred tradition consists of the law-books and the worldly bounds established by it; / that which conflicts with it arises from transgressing their established conduct, as follows:

"Of the kings who have drunk soma and abide on the righteous path, / wishing to adorn the lineage, while an elder was present, desiring to conquer,

without having married a wife, without the sacrament, the twice-born / was troubled by Naravāhanadatta at night like a courtesan."

This rule was not cited for the sake of fault-finding, nor out of pride; is it not for understanding? / What kind of person like me could discern the hidden intention of those who have perfected themselves and perceive the truth?

Thus ends the fourth chapter in the Kāvyālaṅkāra of Bhāmaha.