________________
P. 207. A. 3. S. 5.)
130
In the verse 226 again, one of the two words fast or what is necessary. But both used together mar the beauty of the उपमा or समासोक्ति.
___In the रूपक that follows शोक is identified with अनल, but the word om does not give rise to any such metaphor and hence is superfluous.
In the following instance ( 228 ), by the words TOTTI it is quite plain that the author intends to use the figure 597. gatherefore, in this sentence, is quite out of place.
In the following verse ( 229 ) ferata is quite superfluous, for even without it, we find that the figure समासोक्ति renders the verse charming. दयितयेव, on the other hand, spoils the charm of Faretth.
The same is the fault in the following verse (230). The beauty of the figure BHETARIAT is marred by the words sucha in the verse. The sense of sy ought to have been inferred not expressed. In fact the fourth line of the verse is quite unnecessary. The firstt hree lines containing the illustrations of HRTA ( mosquito ) quafot (amber) and wala (glow-worm) prove the truth: “ All common things are senseless” and suggest the senselessness of men of authority or power.
In the following verse, exactly the same fault occurs; for the whole trend of the figure BITTNERIAT therein is to show the प्रस्तुत 'your honour'. भवानिव therefore, is redundunt.
But where a word is used or repeated to convey emphasis or to exclude other things, ( 397437167228 ) there is no fault.
For instance, in the verse 232 "7 facra fagfoca fery" repetition of facraat is quite necessary in order to show:
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
