Text 5.9

[This illustrates the samāhita ornament (ended):]

देवेन्द्र-जित्सु पृथुकात् पृथुकोपमाद् भीर् अस्मासु सत्सु न तवेति गिरासुराणाम् |
कंसस्य यो हृदि मदः स तु तेषु सर्वेष्व् आप्तेषु तत्-पृथुकतां क्व गतो न जाने ||

devendra-jitsu pṛthukāt pṛthukopamād bhīr asmāsu satsu na taveti girāsurāṇām |
kaṃsasya yo hṛdi madaḥ sa tu teṣu sarveṣv āpteṣu tat-pṛthukatāṃ kva gato na jāne ||

deva-indra-jitsu—are the conquerers of the king of gods; pṛthukāt—from the boy; pṛthuka—to flat rice; upamāt—who is similar; bhīḥ—fear; asmāsu satsu—given the fact that we; na tava—you have no; iti—(end of citation); girā—by the speech; asurāṇām—of the demons; kaṃsasya—of Kaṃsa; yaḥ—which; hṛdi—in the heart; madaḥ—arrogant pride; saḥ—that [arrogant pride]; tu—however; teṣu sarveṣu āpteṣu—now that all of them attained; tat—of His; pṛthukatām—the state of being flat rice (they were trampled upon); kva—where; gataḥ—went; na—not; jāne—I know.

“We defeated the king of gods. Have no fear of the boy. He is as good as flat rice!” Overweening pride was generated in Kaṃsa’s heart upon hearing these words of the demons, but when all of them attained the condition of being flat rice that they had attributed to Him, I don’t know where it went. (Govinda-līlāmṛta 17.47)

atra mada-praśamo vīrasyeti samāhitam.

Here the cessation of the vyabhicāri-bhāva called mada (arrogant pride) is a subsidiary aspect of vīra-rasa. This is the samāhita ornament.

Commentary:

The samāhita ornament is simply the fact that bhāva-śānti, also called bhāva-praśama, is a subsidiary aspect of a rasādi.

Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa follows Mammaṭa up to this point. In this section, Mammaṭa also gives examples of bhāvodaya, bhāva-sandhi, and bhāva-śābalya which are a subsidiary aspect of another rasādi. Therefore these seven ornaments—rasavat, preyas, ūrjasvī, samāhita, bhāvodaya, bhāva-sandhi, bhāva-śābalya—should be added to the count of ornaments in chapters ten and eleven.

The following is Mammaṭa’s illustration of bhāva-sandhi (a mix of vyabhicāribhāvas) as a second-rate implied sense since it is a subsidiary aspect of another rasādi,

asoḍhā tat-kālollasad-asaha-bhāvasya tapasaḥ kathānāṃ viśrambheṣv atha ca rasikaḥ śaila-duhituḥ |
pramodaṃ vo diśyāt kapaṭa-baṭu-veṣāpanayane tvarā-śaithilyābhyāṃ yugapad abhiyuktaḥ smaraharaḥ ||

“Śiva could no longer bear to see Pārvatī undergo austerity. The intolerability of her austerity was becoming apparent at that time. Subsequently he delighted in the lightheartedness of her talk. When she removed the fake attire of a Brahmacārī that she was wearing, he was simultaneously assailed by a rush of energy and by a loosening of tension. May he, the terminator of Cupid, bestow excessive joy to you all” (Kāvya-prakāśa, verse 122).

Mammaṭa explains:

atrāvega-dhairyayoḥ sandhiḥ,

“There is a mix of āvega (mental flurry) and dhairya (steadfastness of the heart)” (Kāvya-prakāśa, verse 122 vṛtti).

Here the bhāva-sandhi is felt by Śiva, yet it is a subsidiary aspect of the statement, an utterance of good wishes by the speaker, who is expressing affection for Śiva (śiva-viṣaya-rati).^[1]

Furthermore, in Mammaṭa’s methodology of the category of second-rate poetry called aparasya aṅga (an aspect of another), a rasādi is not necessary. He defines this category as follows: aparasya rasāder vācyasya vā vākyārthī-bhūtasya aṅgaṃ rasādi anuraṇana-rūpaṃ vā, “It is a rasādi which is a subsidiary aspect of another rasādi, or a saṃlakṣya-krama-vyaṅgya (vastu or alaṅkāra) which is a subsidiary aspect of the literal sense of the text” (Kāvya-prakāśa, verse 115 vṛtti).

In this regard, the author of the Kṛṣṇānandinī writes: aparāṅgaṃ dvidhā, aparasya rasāder aṅgam alakṣya-kramo rasādiḥ, vācyasya pradhānasyāṅgaṃ lakṣya-kramā vastv-alaṅkārāḥ. tatrādyo vṛttau darśitaḥ, dvitīyas tu mṛgyaḥ, “The second-rate implied sense called aparasya aṅga has two varieties: The first kind is a rasa-ādi that is a subsidiary aspect of another rasa-ādi. The second kind consists of a lakṣya-krama-vyaṅgya, either a vastu or an alaṅkāra, that is a subsidiary aspect of the literal sense which is predominant. Of the two, the first one was shown in the elaborations, but the second one has to be researched” (Kṛṣṇānandinī 5.9).

This is Mammaṭa’s example of a dhvani which is merely second-rate because it is a subsidiary aspect of the overall sense, which is not a rasādi,

jana-sthāne bhrāntaṃ kanaka-mṛga-tṛṣṇāndhita-dhiyā vaco vai dehīti prati-padam ud-aśru pralapitam |
kṛtālaṃ kā bhartur vada na paripāṭīṣu ghaṭanā mayāptaṃ rāmatvaṃ kuśala-vasutā na tv adhigatā ||

“I wandered in a town (or in Janasthāna, a subforest of Daṇḍakāraṇya) with a mind blinded by the desire of looking for gold (kanaka-mṛga) (or the desire for a golden deer). In every place (prati-padam) (or at every step), with tearful eyes I said: “Indeed, give” (or O Sītā) (vai dehīti = vai dehi iti or vaidehi iti). Tell me which routine of a rich owner did I not profusely carry out (alaṃ kā bhartur vada na paripāṭīṣu ghaṭanā) (or I directed my arrows at the serial heads of Rāvaṇa) (laṅkā-bhartur vadana-paripāṭī-iṣu-ghaṭanā). I became charming (rāmatvam) (or I became Rāma), but I did not obtain lasting wealth (kuśala-vasutā) (or I did not obtain Sītā, whose sons are Lava and Kuśa) (kuśa-lava-sutā)” (Kāvya-prakāśa, verse 124).

Mammaṭa elaborates:

atra śabda-śakti-mūlānuraṇana-rūpo rāmeṇa sahopamānopameya-bhāvo vācyāṅgatāṃ nītaḥ,

“Here the similitude between the speaker and Rāma, which arises by the force of the words (śabda-śakti), is a saṃlakṣya-krama dhvani that turns out as a subsidiary aspect of the literal meaning of the text” (Kāvya-prakāśa, verse 124 vṛtti).

It is subsidiary because the double meanings are more charming than the implied similitude.

Nāgeśa Bhaṭṭa says there is no implied simile proper^[2] (since there is no paronomastic substantive) (Commentary 10.64). The implied similitude is simply a vastu-dhvani (the implied idea of similarity) which constitutes the samāsokti ornament (concise statement): There is a superimposition of Rāma’s behavior unto the speaker’s behavior by means of paronomastic modifiers without any paronomastic substantive (10.64-65). Often the implied sense inherently contained in an ornament falls in this category of second-rate poetry (aparasya aṅga, an aspect of another).

Nāgeśa Bhaṭṭa mentions a second school of thought: Some say the category of aparasya aṅga can include an instance where the aṅga is a rasādi and the aṅgī is not a rasādi.^[3] Rudraṭa gives an example:

sā siprā-nāma nadī yasyāṃ maṅkṣūrmayo viśīryate |
majjan-mālava-lalanākuca-kumbhāsphālana-vyasanāt ||

“That is the river named Siprā, where waves immediately lost their momentum because of the shock of the water-pot-like breasts of the Mālwa women who were immersing themselves” (Kāvyālaṅkāra 7.105).

Here the “śṛṅgāra-rasa” is merely collateral, since the subject of description is the river. The verse is not quite the second udātta ornament (exalted) (10.159-160) because Mālwa women are not classed as exalted personalities. Moreover, Rudraṭa’s verse features a unique style of alliteration: The sequential single alliteration of a consonant, shown in bold type, acts like waves.

This verse by Paṇḍita-rāja Jagannātha is another example of rasavat where the aṅgī is not a rasādi,

sābdhi-dvīpa-kulācalāṃ vasumatīm ākramya saptāntarāṃ sarvāṃ dyām api sa-smitena hariṇā mandaṃ samālokitaḥ |
prādurbhūta-para-pramoda-vidalad-romāñcitas tat-kṣaṇaṃ vyānamrī-kṛta-kandharo’sura-varo mauliṃ puro nyastavān ||

“Seen by Hari, who had a slight smile after stepping on the Earth and on the topmost heavenly planet, Bali at once experienced a thrill due to utter joy and lowered his head by placing it forward” (Rasa-gaṅgādhara).^[4]

Bali felt utter joy since he immediately understood that Vāmana is the Lord. Bali had offered Vāmana, disguised as a Brāhmaṇa, the boon of acquiring land to the extent of three steps. After seeing Vāmana’s feat, Bali offered his head as the place for the Lord’s third step. Vāmana placed His foot on Bali’s head. Here the dāna-vīrarasa of Bali is second-rate because it is not more astonishing than the description of Vāmana’s pastime as Trivikrama. The description denotes the old-school atiśayokti ornament (statement of superexcellence): That is the main element (the aṅgī). Although the aṅgī is not a rasādi, the verse is rasavat because the vīra-rasa is not more beautiful than the literal sense (the atiśayokti).

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

atra smarahara-gatayor āvega-dhairyayoḥ sandhiḥ śiva-viṣaya-rati-bhāvasyāṅgam (Kāvya-pradīpa).

[2]:

sahopameti, upamā sādṛśyam (Uddyota). Here Nāgeśa Bhaṭṭa corrects Govinda Ṭhakkura’s interpretation that the verse contains an implied simile: rāmeṇa sahopamā mayāptaṃ rāmatvam ity anena vācyatāṃ nītā (Kāvya-pradīpa).

[3]:

aparasya rasāder iti, rasāder alakṣya-kramo vācyasya lakṣya-krama iti yathā-saṅkhyenānvaya iti prāñcaḥ. anye tu dvayor dvayam apy aṅgam (Uddyota on Kāvya-prakāśa verse 115 vṛtti).

[4]:

[…] rāja-stuti-guṇībhūta iti na rasa-vyapadeśa-hetuḥ. ata evedam api nodāharaṇam, “sābdhi-dvīpa […].” iha ca bhagavad-vāmanālambanaḥ, tat-kartṛka-manda-nirīkṣaṇoddīpitaḥ, romāñcādibhir anubhāvitaḥ, harṣādibhiḥ poṣitaḥ, utsāho vyajyamāno’pi guṇaḥ (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM pp. 38-39).