________________
119
(P. 164. A. 3. S. 2.
Sometimes, the indicators of a contrary te are brought near the predominant me, but because these indicators (of the rival 7 ) are not powerful enough to develop the rival 78, they are subordinated to the main रस.
Sometimes, two contrary tus are brought under and subordinated to a third 27 ( which in that verse cccupies a prominent place ). In this case, the two rival as though brought together do not give rise to this poetic fault (of fagfam.)
For instance, in the verse 194 the fire of the cities burnt by Shankar is described as clinging to the bodies of the wives of demons (living in those cities ). Now this fire is compared to a repentant lover who is being spurned by his beloved on account of his grave offence in playing false to her.
The description of the terrible fire of the three cities gives rise to time. The description of a prostrate lover gives rise to it. These two are rival 185 and as such cannot be brought together. But because both these tas are subordinated to the feeling of wonder and reverence for God Shankar, there is no fault in this verse.
Now here a question arises as to how two rival TAS can possibly be brought together without commiting the fault of anfaat.
The answer as given by an is as follows:---
The fault lies in introducing a rival TH newly i. e. in a new statement. If the rival te is brought in a sentence merely by way of repeating a statement already made elsewhere then there is no fault. eg.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
