2023-03-29 18:11:00 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
284
GLOSSARY
bhujañgānām šeṣas tvatto nikṛṣyate (Daṇḍin: "Although you both
support the whole world with its islands and mountains and seas,
you surpass the great Serpent who is only the first among snakes").
(4) "In Germany the Reformation was due to the passionate convic-
tion of Luther. In England it was due to a palace intrigue" (E. M.
Forster). (5) Cf. nimittâdrsti.
vyatireka (II): (1) a vyatireka in which the expression of difference focuses
upon the pre-eminence of the object of comparison. (2) R 7.89 (90).
(3) kṣiṇaḥ kṣiṇo'pi śaśī bhūyo bhūyo vivardhate satyam । virama
prasīda sundari yauvanam anivarti yātam (Rudrața: "The waning
moon grows less and less, but will become again complete. Be kind,
O lovely, and leave off anger; youth once gone does not return").
(4) "Still do the stars impart their light / To those that travel in the
night; Still time runs on, nor doth the hand / Or shadow on the
dial stand; / The streams still glide and constant are:
e: / Only my mind /
Untrue I find / Which carelessly / Neglects to be / Like stream or
shadow, hand or star" (William Cartwright). (5) Though this could
easily be included in the first variety of vyatireka, it is worthy of
note that of the thirty or forty examples offered in the different texts,
only this one of Rudraţa fails to exhibit the usual exaggeration and
consequent flattery of the subject of comparison (in the present
case, the mind). Of course, in English poetry, such instances are if
anything more frequent than the flattery, and several have been
included as examples of subtypes of vyatireka I where the point at
issue is formal and does not contest with the intention of the speaker
(cf. hetu, śabda). Rudrața's late arrival does, however, pose one
interesting problem of interpretation. If the intention of the speaker
is flattery, the vyatireka amounts to an elliptical simile, for the differ-
ential qualifications all operate to the disadvantage of the object or
the advantage of the subject, and thus reinforce their basic similitude
by cancelling the natural relation of the subject (which shares the
property of comparison to a lesser degree) and the object (to a
greater). However, once the discrimination of the two terms is
divested of this function, the character of the figure assumes only
secondary importance, for it then acquiesces in the natural mode of
expression of its own terms and becomes either a matter of fact
distinction or an anti-simile, as above. It cannot be said that the
intention of the poet is to compare mind and stream, etc., in the
same sense as that in which moon and face are habitually compared;
his intention is rather to express the peculiarity of the subject, not
GLOSSARY
bhujañgānām šeṣas tvatto nikṛṣyate (Daṇḍin: "Although you both
support the whole world with its islands and mountains and seas,
you surpass the great Serpent who is only the first among snakes").
(4) "In Germany the Reformation was due to the passionate convic-
tion of Luther. In England it was due to a palace intrigue" (E. M.
Forster). (5) Cf. nimittâdrsti.
vyatireka (II): (1) a vyatireka in which the expression of difference focuses
upon the pre-eminence of the object of comparison. (2) R 7.89 (90).
(3) kṣiṇaḥ kṣiṇo'pi śaśī bhūyo bhūyo vivardhate satyam । virama
prasīda sundari yauvanam anivarti yātam (Rudrața: "The waning
moon grows less and less, but will become again complete. Be kind,
O lovely, and leave off anger; youth once gone does not return").
(4) "Still do the stars impart their light / To those that travel in the
night; Still time runs on, nor doth the hand / Or shadow on the
dial stand; / The streams still glide and constant are:
e: / Only my mind /
Untrue I find / Which carelessly / Neglects to be / Like stream or
shadow, hand or star" (William Cartwright). (5) Though this could
easily be included in the first variety of vyatireka, it is worthy of
note that of the thirty or forty examples offered in the different texts,
only this one of Rudraţa fails to exhibit the usual exaggeration and
consequent flattery of the subject of comparison (in the present
case, the mind). Of course, in English poetry, such instances are if
anything more frequent than the flattery, and several have been
included as examples of subtypes of vyatireka I where the point at
issue is formal and does not contest with the intention of the speaker
(cf. hetu, śabda). Rudrața's late arrival does, however, pose one
interesting problem of interpretation. If the intention of the speaker
is flattery, the vyatireka amounts to an elliptical simile, for the differ-
ential qualifications all operate to the disadvantage of the object or
the advantage of the subject, and thus reinforce their basic similitude
by cancelling the natural relation of the subject (which shares the
property of comparison to a lesser degree) and the object (to a
greater). However, once the discrimination of the two terms is
divested of this function, the character of the figure assumes only
secondary importance, for it then acquiesces in the natural mode of
expression of its own terms and becomes either a matter of fact
distinction or an anti-simile, as above. It cannot be said that the
intention of the poet is to compare mind and stream, etc., in the
same sense as that in which moon and face are habitually compared;
his intention is rather to express the peculiarity of the subject, not