The Sāhityakaṇṭakoddhāra /40

साहित्य कण्टकोद्धारः
 
अथ कथम्--

अत्यर्थमुद्वेजयिता परेषां[^50] नाम्नापि तस्यैव स नन्दकोऽभूत् (३-१६)
 

इति माघः ।
 

 
अत्नर परशब्दस्य कोशादिषु शत्रौ प्रसिद्धत्वात् (अधरशब्दे इव व्यवस्थायाः

अभावे) कथं सर्वनामकार्यम् इति चेत् --
 

 
अनात्राहुः । देशवाचितया व्यवस्थाविषयत्वात् (सर्वनामसंज्ञकस्य ) तस्यैव

परशब्दस्योपचाराच्च शत्रौ प्रयोगः । न च ( एवं सति) उपसर्जनतया (संज्ञोप-

सर्जनीभूतास्तु न सर्वादय इत्यनेन सर्वनामसंज्ञायाः) निषेध: ( स्यात् ) इति

वाच्यम् । न हि लाक्षणिकत्वमुपसर्जनत्वम् । किं तु स्वार्थविशिष्टार्थान्तरवत्त्वम् ।
 
11
 

 
comparative terms, such as uttara=upper; adhara = lower (than the other

etc.). This is the meaning of the rider vyavasthāyām, (which is explained as svābhi-

dheyāpekṣāvadhiniyamo vyavasthäā). The word adhara is not strictly a relative

term, in the sense of lower lip, because it is regarded as a synonym of "lip"

in general. The lexicographer Halāyudha notes thus :
 

adharo radanacchada oştṣṭha ucyate,
 

dantavāsaś ca (II.369).
 

 
Consequently when the word dakşṣina is used in the sense of a skilled

person in general, it is not counted as a Pronoun. Similarly adhara is a

synonym of oştṣṭha in general, as is held by some, whom Bhattṭṭoji and our

author seem to follow. As a result the word adhara is not a Pronoun, and

therefore is not eligible for the pronominal termination. In the examples

such as adhare tāmbūlarāgahḥ (given by Bhattṭṭoji in P.M., p. 439) and adhare
navavit
navavīṭikanuraānurāgaḥ, the word adhara need not mean lower lip alone, as the

tāmbūlarāga is seen on the upper lip also. This is the answer to the question

raised in this context. See the previous Note also. Bhaṭṭoji mentions

the counter example uttare pratyuttare ca śaktaḥ too.
 

 
[^50]. Bhattṭṭoji gives two more usages of para and apara thus :
 
tathā paresām
tathā pareṣāṃ yudhi ceti pārthivahḥ (Raghu-III. 21)
 
and apare pratyavatişt
and apare pratyavatiṣṭhante. The second one is a common expression met

with in many works, where it is used to introduce the opinion of some who are

opposed to the view previously noted in the context. Para in the first usage

means "enemy", and apara means an opponent. These are not, here, in

the sense of next or subsequent etc. and so are not relative terms.

when there is no vyavasthaā (see previous Note), the pronominal terminations

are not applicable. The puūrvapakşṣin means that the forms should be parāṇām

(not pareşṣām) and aparāh (not apare ). For similar uses having apare see the

following :
 
Thus
 

tasyābhāvamṃ jagadur apare (Dhvanyāloka, I.2) and
 

tad apare na kşṣamante (Khandṇḍanakhandṇḍakhādya, p. 13).