2023-03-29 18:11:07 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
308
GLOSSARY
ktâmśa, seem to refer to the same distinction as Dandin intended by
samakakṣatā and añgâñgi, but his definitions of them are analogical
and do not permit precise rendering. The former is said to resemble
a mixture of rice and sesame, where the components remain discrete,
the latter to resemble a mixture of milk and curds, where the com-
ponents fuse in an indissoluble agglutinate.
Whatever use is made of this terminology, all the writers agree on
regarding śleșa or pun as the compoundable figure par excellence.
Dandin's remark to this effect (2.363) probably to be taken in
context with his previous discussion of samkirna. Most of the ex-
amples offered by the various writers involve śleșa as one of the
figures.
añgâñgi (-tva; -bhāvāvasthāna), 'related as whole and part': (1) a type of
complex alamkāra (samkara) in which the several constituent figures
are mutually interrelated in the sense that the figurativeness of some
cannot be understood apart from the others. (2) D 2.360 (361),
U 5.13, M 208. (3) ākṣipanty aravindani mugdhe tava mukhaśriyam /
kośadaṇḍasamagrāṇām kim eşām asti duşkaram (Dandin; the slesa of
the second half verse depends on the upamā of the first: if the lotuses
were not "disputing" the beauty of her face, then their "buds" and
"stalks" would not be taken as weapons: "treasury" and "army":
"The lotuses are attacking the beauty of your face! Is this difficult
for them, whose means are buds [treasury] and stalks [army]?").
(4) "He[the biographer] will row out over that great ocean of material,
and lower down into it, here and there, a little bucket, which will
bring up to the light of day some characteristic specimen, from those
far depths, to be examined with a careful curiosity" (Lytton Strachey;
the samāsôkti of "bucket", "specimen", and "depths" cannot be
understood apart from the rūpaka "ocean of material"). (5) A
subordination of implication only is to be understood by this term;
the two figures concerned are formally distinguishable (cf. samdeha)
and occupy different places in the total phrase (cf. avyaktāmśa,
ekaśabdábhidhāna). They are not, however, entirely independent-a
mere concomitance of figures as in samakakşată: should one of
the figures (the angin) be deleted, the other (the anga) no longer
makes any sense as a figure. The terms samkara and samsrsti are
used by Udbhata and Mammața in the sense of this distinction, but
Dandin, who does not use the term samkara, views both as types of
samsrsti. For the use of the terminology, see samsrsti. The figure
is called anugrahyânugrāhaka by Udbhața.
GLOSSARY
ktâmśa, seem to refer to the same distinction as Dandin intended by
samakakṣatā and añgâñgi, but his definitions of them are analogical
and do not permit precise rendering. The former is said to resemble
a mixture of rice and sesame, where the components remain discrete,
the latter to resemble a mixture of milk and curds, where the com-
ponents fuse in an indissoluble agglutinate.
Whatever use is made of this terminology, all the writers agree on
regarding śleșa or pun as the compoundable figure par excellence.
Dandin's remark to this effect (2.363) probably to be taken in
context with his previous discussion of samkirna. Most of the ex-
amples offered by the various writers involve śleșa as one of the
figures.
añgâñgi (-tva; -bhāvāvasthāna), 'related as whole and part': (1) a type of
complex alamkāra (samkara) in which the several constituent figures
are mutually interrelated in the sense that the figurativeness of some
cannot be understood apart from the others. (2) D 2.360 (361),
U 5.13, M 208. (3) ākṣipanty aravindani mugdhe tava mukhaśriyam /
kośadaṇḍasamagrāṇām kim eşām asti duşkaram (Dandin; the slesa of
the second half verse depends on the upamā of the first: if the lotuses
were not "disputing" the beauty of her face, then their "buds" and
"stalks" would not be taken as weapons: "treasury" and "army":
"The lotuses are attacking the beauty of your face! Is this difficult
for them, whose means are buds [treasury] and stalks [army]?").
(4) "He[the biographer] will row out over that great ocean of material,
and lower down into it, here and there, a little bucket, which will
bring up to the light of day some characteristic specimen, from those
far depths, to be examined with a careful curiosity" (Lytton Strachey;
the samāsôkti of "bucket", "specimen", and "depths" cannot be
understood apart from the rūpaka "ocean of material"). (5) A
subordination of implication only is to be understood by this term;
the two figures concerned are formally distinguishable (cf. samdeha)
and occupy different places in the total phrase (cf. avyaktāmśa,
ekaśabdábhidhāna). They are not, however, entirely independent-a
mere concomitance of figures as in samakakşată: should one of
the figures (the angin) be deleted, the other (the anga) no longer
makes any sense as a figure. The terms samkara and samsrsti are
used by Udbhata and Mammața in the sense of this distinction, but
Dandin, who does not use the term samkara, views both as types of
samsrsti. For the use of the terminology, see samsrsti. The figure
is called anugrahyânugrāhaka by Udbhața.