Kalplata Vivek

SR No.: 032756
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Murari Lal Nagar, Harishankar Shastry
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1968
Total Pages: 550
Language: Hindi, Sanskrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari
File Size: 15 MB

Page 52

kala ca sa kantimali kalavatah tvam asya lokasya ca netra-kaumudi // Here 'ca' in the last quarter should come immediately after tvam'. The other ill. of Akrama is (P. 22, 1. 9): lagnam ragavytangya sudydham iha yayaivasi yastyarikanthe matanganam apihopari parapurusair ya сa dysta patanti / tatsakto 'yam na kincid ganayati viditam te 'stu tenasmi datta bhytyebhyah sriniyogad gaditum iva gatety ambudhim yasya kirtih //? Here there would be no dosa if it were.iti sriniyogat's. (21) Amata-parartha (P. 22, 1. 25): When the other meaning is antagonistic to the principal import, it is Amata-parartha. Thus here there is a contradictory other sense which does not help the chief Rasa develop. The il), is : (P. 22, 1. 25 ). Rama-manmatha-sarena tadita duhsahena hydaye nisacari | gandhavad rudhira-candanoksita jivitesa-vasatim jagama sa || Raghu. XI. 20. Here the other sense suggests Erotic sentiment which is contrary to the principal Rasa+ delineated here. 1. This verse is borrowed together with the comments thereon by Kalpalata (P. 22, 1. 4) as well as by Hemacandra (vide H. K. S.-P. 210 ) from the Kavya-prakasa (VII. P. 323). According to Hemacandra here the dosa is Asthanastha-pada; according to Mammata it is Akrama. The words in the K. P. are : RTEGICa at 7 TT JET: (K. P. P. 327). The remarks in the Viveka (P. 22, 1. 4 to l. 8) are borrowed from the Kavyanusasana Viveka of Hemacandra (vide H. K. S. V.-P. 210, I. 17 ff.). This verse is quoted by Mammata as an ill, of several dosas inter alia of Akrama. It seems that according to Kalpalata it is Akrama -as it is given after the other ill. of that dosa, According to Hemacandra this is the ill. of Asthanastha-pada, for he includes Akrama-vakya-dosa under that dosa (vide H. V. P. 22 1. 26). 3. The verse together with the comments is borrowed by the Kalpalata and Hema candra (H. K, S, P. 211) from the Kavya-prakasa (vide K. P. 324.). The verses (P. 22, 1. 10 to 1. 24 ) are borrowed from the Vyakti-viveka (V. V. II, P. 286 ), The first four of these are borrowed by Hemacandra (vide H. K.S.V. P. 211, 11. 6to14). The verse under discussion here (P. 22, 1. 25) is undoubtedly this; it is also quoted by Mammata (vide K. P. VII-P. 324). The words and are also borrowed from the K, P. : 377 95 te farget TAET TUTTET 145#SITS: (K. P.-P. 324). There seems to be some difference of opinion as regards the priccipal Rasa of this verse. According to Hemacandra, who quotes this verse as an ill. of a Rasa-dosa, it is Karuna (vide H. K. S. P. 168). According to Manikyacandra also it is Karuna (vide K. P. S-P. 156). According to Bhattagopala it is Vira (vide K. P. S. C-P. 90 ). According to Vidya-Cakravarti and the Viveka-kara it is Bibhatsa (vide K. P, Sampradaya-prakasini P. 99. and Viveka P. 22, 1. 25). 2.