________________
P. 271. A. 3. S. 7.)
158
Of course if reviving the statement adds to poetic beauty or heightens a sentiment, it is permissible, as in 414 the figure arte lengthened again heightens the sentiment of fagmxazETT.
In the verse the speaker raises a series of doubts: if the rays of the moon are full of nectar why should they burn me ? Again if they are besmeared with poison, why should they not kill me ? etc. As a rule,
(1) a word stated once has to be repeated when the sense is alluded again.
(2) Again if a statement has to be made vague it is wrong to make it expressly limited.
(3) It is wrong to turn a particular statement into a general one or vice versa.
(4) It is wrong to turn a subject into a predicate or vice versa.
All these rules if not observed lead to the faults stated at the end of the seventh sutra (such as fiyafazaisfera etc).
In the verse 415 which means:~" Before a genuine jewel the whole creation appears to be crude, to state that it can be compared to something is an insult of the jewel. Its excellence transcends imagination. Such a jewel, however in the midst of falsely glittering jewels is only a piece of stone and nothing more." The place of 783 here is wrong. It ought to go with मणि which is an अनुवाद्य.
Similarly in the verse 416 in which the words ham (1) a particular river (2) learning ATTO (1) red
(2) a particular river (1) ocean
(2) having lines Erfgant (1) river
(2) army
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
