Sahitya-kaumudi by Baladeva Vidyabhushana
by Gaurapada Dāsa | 2015 | 234,703 words
Baladeva Vidyabhusana’s Sahitya-kaumudi covers all aspects of poetical theory except the topic of dramaturgy. All the definitions of poetical concepts are taken from Mammata’s Kavya-prakasha, the most authoritative work on Sanskrit poetical rhetoric. Baladeva Vidyabhushana added the eleventh chapter, where he expounds additional ornaments from Visv...
Text 7.30
कृत-प्रवृत्तिर् अन्यार्थैः कविर् वान्तं समश्नुते. अत्र प्रवृत्तिवान्त-शब्दौ विड्-उत्सर्गादि-प्रतीतेर् जुगुप्सा-बोधिनौ. न चैवं
kṛta-pravṛttir anyārthaiḥ kavir vāntaṃ samaśnute. atra pravṛttivānta-śabdau viḍ-utsargādi-pratīter jugupsā-bodhinau. na caivaṃ “mādhuryam udvamati mūrtir iyaṃ murāreḥ” ity-ādau doṣaḥ, gauṇa-vṛttitāyāṃ tad-anaṅgīkārāt.
[This illustrates jugupsā-dāyī aślīla (disgusting and unpleasant) in a sentence:] kṛta-pravṛttir anyārthaiḥ kavir vāntaṃ samaśnute, “With other meanings, a poet who makes progress brings about words ending in va” (Sāhitya-darpaṇa 7.4). Here the words pravṛtti and vānta generate disgust because of the perception of the meanings of ‘excrement’ and ‘vomit’.
However, there is no fault in a sentence such as: mādhuryam udvamati mūrtir iyaṃ murāreḥ, “Murāri’s form emits sweetness,” because the meaning of the verbal root vam (to vomit, i.e. throw out) is taken in a figurative sense.
Commentary:
The word pravṛtti is not improper because it does not have the sense attributed to it by Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa. In his example, Mammaṭa used the word pravartanam.[1] Nāgeśa Bhaṭṭa indicates that the proper replacement is pravṛtti.[2] Similarly, in his commentary on Sāhitya-darpaṇa, Śeṣarāja Śarmā says only the combined words vāntaṃ samaśnute are improper.[3]
Footnotes and references:
[1]:
[2]:
pravartanaṃ pravṛttiḥ purīṣotsargaś ca (Uddyota).