Text 10.251

यथा वा,
निरस्य कर-लीलया तिमिर-नील-चेलाञ्चलीं
  रथाङ्ग-मिथुन-स्तनाव् अपि निपीड्य जात-स्मितः ।
ह्रियेव निमिषत्-कुशेशय-दृशं स-रागां प्रियः
  प्रियाम् इव सुधाकरो हरि-हरिद्-वधूं चुम्बति ॥

yathā vā,
nirasya kara-līlayā timira-nīla-celāñcalīṃ
  rathāṅga-mithuna-stanāv api nipīḍya jāta-smitaḥ |
hriyeva nimiṣat-kuśeśaya-dṛśaṃ sa-rāgāṃ priyaḥ
  priyām iva sudhākaro hari-harid-vadhūṃ cumbati ||

nirasya—after removing; kara—of the rays (or of the hand); līlayā—by the play (the charm); timira—in the form of darkness; nīla-cela—of the blue cloth; añcalīm—the edge; rathāṅga—of cakravāka birds; mithuna—in the form of a pair; stanau—the two breasts; api—even; nipīḍya—after squeezing; jāta-smitaḥ—whose smile has occurred; hriyā—due to bashfulness; iva—as if; nimiṣat—are closing; kuśe-śaya—which are lotuses (“lying on water”); dṛśam—whose eyes; sa-rāgām—passionate (or red); priyaḥ—the male lover; priyām—[kisses] his sweetheart; iva—like; sudhā-ākaraḥ—the moon (“a storehouse of nectar”); hari—of Indra (the east); harit—in the form of the direction; vadhūm—the woman; cumbati—kisses.

Like a lover does to his beloved, the moon, with the charm of his rays (kara) (or hands), lifts the dark blue veil which is the darkness, squeezes, with a smile, the breasts in the form of a pair of cakravāka birds, and kisses the woman who is the eastern direction: She becomes passionate (sa-rāga), and closes her eyes in the form of night lotuses as if out of bashfulness. (Alaṅkāra-kaustubha 8.302)

atra rūpakotprekṣā-śleṣopamā-samuccayā mitho’ṅgāṅgi-bhāvena pratīyante. tatra timireti rūpakam. hriyevety utprekṣā. kara-līlayeti śleṣaḥ. priyaḥ priyām ivety upamā. nirasya nipīḍyeti samuccayaḥ. yathā vā, smarāghanāśīty ādi. atrānuprāsādayaḥ śabdālaṅkārāḥ saṅkīryante.

In this verse, these five ornaments: rūpaka, utprekṣā, śleṣa, upamā, and samuccaya, are in a mutual relation of aṅga and aṅgī. The explanation is as follows: (1) A metaphor (rūpaka) is timira-nīla-cela (dark blue veil in the form of darkness), (2) An utprekṣā is: hriyā iva (as if out of bashfulness), (3) A śleṣa is kara-līlayā (with the charm of his rays, or with the charm of his hands), (4) A simile (upamā) is priyaḥ priyām iva (like a lover does to his beloved), and (5) A samuccaya is nirasya (after lifting) and nipīḍya (after squeezing) (this is a conjunction of actions occurring at the same time).

Another instance of aṅgāṅgi-bhāva saṅkara is in the verse that begins smarāgha-nāśi (9.44), where alliteration and other ornaments of sound combine.

Commentary:

Kavikarṇapūra as well does not specify which ornament is the aṅgī. The verse as a whole is a fancy (utprekṣā) and features an eka-deśa-vivarti rūpaka (partial overall metaphor) (10.48): The eastern direction is a woman (hari-harid-vadhū); darkness is her blue veil (timira-nīla-cela); a pair of cakravāka birds is her breasts (rathāṅga-mithuna-stanau); and lotuses are her eyes (kuśeśayadṛk): All those metaphors and the simile “like a lover does to his beloved” suggest the metaphor “The moon is a lover.” This gives rise to a paronomastic paramparita rūpaka: The moon’s rays (kara) are hands (kara). Thus the compound kara-līlayā means “with the charm of his rays which are hands.” And that implied one-word metaphor accomplishes the action of “squeezing” (nipīḍya), thus it is a second-rate implied sense of the vācya-siddhi-aṅga variety.

In this context, the phrase “The moon squeezes” is a virodha that culminates as an utprekṣā (fanciful imagination). That phrase facilitates the analysis of the compound rathāṅga-mithuna-stanau as a metaphor (breasts which are a pair of cakravāka birds) and not as a simile (cakravāka birds which are like breasts): This causes a domino effect on the other compounds. The phrase “The moon kisses” is another utprekṣā for that reason. The moon’s smile is moonlight: This is an atiśayokti (introsusception).

The metaphor hari-harid-vadhū (the woman who is the eastern direction) gives rise to the implied meanings of sa-rāgām (passionate) as “reddish” and of kuśeśaya-dṛśam (her eyes are lotuses) as “Its lotuses are eyes.” Thus the implied sense of “hriyeva nimiṣatkuśeśaya-dṛśaṃ sa-rāgāṃ” is: [At dawn,] the eastern direction becomes reddish, and its night lotuses in the form of eyes close as if out of bashfulness.^[1] The adjective sa-rāgām involves a one-word metaphor: “She has passion in the form of redness.”

Moreover, the sound hari-hari is a yamaka, and since hari-harid-vadhū is a rūpaka (the woman in the form of the eastern direction), that whole compound is an example of ekatra viṣaye saṅkara (two ornaments in the same word) (10.257).

In the verse that begins smarāgha-nāśi (9.44), there is an antya anuprāsa of raṃ at the end of the first and third lines and an antya anuprāsa of anam at the end of the second and fourth lines. Antya anuprāsa (rhyme) is expounded by Viśvanātha Kavirāja. Those two alliterations constitute a saṃsṛṣṭi, and they make an aṅgāṅgi-bhāva saṅkara with the type of citra-kāvya called go-mūtrikā (zigzag) because the alliterations facilitate the accomplishment of the diagram. That is a saṅkara between ornaments of sound. The verse fits in other diagrams as well (9.44 vṛtti), thus the saṅkara consists of alliteration and multiple citra-kāvya diagrams. Kavikarṇapūra gives a similar explanation.^{[2] [3]} Viśvanātha Kavirāja does not bother making a saṅkara with citra-kāvya. Mammaṭa makes a saṅkara between yamaka (word rhyme) and pratilomānuloma (palindrome).^[4]

Furthermore, sometimes the ornament that acts as the facilitator is implied. Abhinavagupta gives an example:

pravāta-nīlotpala-nirviśeṣam adhīra-viprekṣitam āyatākṣyā |
tayā gṛhītaṃ nu mṛgāṅganābhyas tato gṛhītaṃ nu mṛgāṅganābhiḥ ||

“Was furtive glancing, nondifferent from the motions of blue lotuses in the wind, taken by that wide-eyed woman from the does, or did the does take it from her?” (Kumāra-sambhava 1.46)

Abhinavagupta explains:

atra mṛgāṅganāvalokanena tad-avalokasyopamā yadyapi vyaṅgyā tathāpi vācyasya sandehālaṅkārasyābhyutthāna-kāriṇītvenānugrāhakatvād guṇī-bhūtā, anugrāhyatvena hi sandehe paryavasānam,

“Although a simile between the glancing of does and Pārvatī’s glancing is implied, it is second-rate because it is a facilitator in terms of being the cause of the rise of the sandeha ornament (doubt), which is expressed. This is because the ultimate significance of the verse is the sandeha, since it is facilitated” (Locana 1.13).

In other words, here the facilitator partly constitutes a dhvani-saṅkara, and the facilitated partly constitutes an alaṅkāra-saṅkara. Mammaṭa, however, might only say that the verse is in the category of vācya-siddhi-aṅga (an aspect in the accomplishment of the literal sense of the statement) (5.10). Moreover, the comparison between furtive glancing and the motions of lotuses is a metaphor (Commentary 10.52).

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

In the straightforward meaning (with regard to “the woman who is the eastern direction”), the compound kuśeśaya-dṛś is analyzed as “eyes in the form of lotuses,” but the implied meaning, only with regard to the eastern direction, is: “lotuses in the form of eyes.” In both instances, the analysis of the compound kuśeśaya-dṛśam is the same: kuśeśayāni eva dṛśaḥ yasyāḥ tām. Thus a metaphor in a compound can go either way, depending on the context. Out of an upameya and an upamāna, the contextual thing is the upameya. In the context of the woman, the eyes are contextual, but in the context of the eastern direction the lotuses are contextual.

[2]:

evaṃ śabdālaṅkāra-pakṣe’pi, yathā “sasāra sā” ity-ādau yamakānuprāsa-dvy-akṣaramuraja-bandha-go-mūtrikā-bandha-kavāṭa-mukta-kavāṭa-śṛṅkhalādayaḥ. (Alaṅkāra-kaustubha

[3]:

.302)

[4]:

atra yamakam anuloma-pratilomaś ca citra-bhedaḥ pāda-dvaya-gate parasparāpekṣe (Kāvya-prakāśa verse 572 vṛtti).