English
'Word and meaning,' and 'obtaining co-existence,' and 'free from faults,' or 'free from faults by which,' and 'verse and prose mixed,' thus is the analysis. Here, poetry is fourfold: Muttaka, Kulaka, Kosaka, and Sanghāta, Composed of specific meters defined in prosody, A four-lined verse composition. Muttaka is a single verse, Complete in meaning and self-contained. Kulaka is multiple verses, Each incomplete in meaning, interdependent, Sharing a single action. Kosaka is a collection of verses, With diverse descriptions, Driven by distinct actions, Self-contained. Sanghāta is verses, Based on a single descriptive theme, Such as enumeration, Driven by a collection of distinct actions. Prose is twofold, Narrative and story, With unfixed words, A continuous flow of speech, Beginning to end, or end to beginning. Mixed is a combination of these two, Such as plays and farces, And Jātaka Māla Champu. 9. Bound and unbound, Again, it is discerned in two ways; That is, with beauty and adornment, A most delightful treasure. 9. Having spoken of the structure of composition in these three ways, he now says, to show it differently, "Bound and unbound, again, it is discerned in two ways." Again, further, the poetry composition as stated is discerned in two ways. How? Bound, that is, bound by the four, Muttaka, etc., which are part of it, in the manner of Saggabandha, and unbound, that is, only in the manner of Muttaka, thus it is discerned in two ways, this is the point. But, indeed, having stated the fivefold nature of this, as stated, Vātimaya, Sakkaṭa, Pākata, Apabhraṃsa, Pesācika, and Missa, "Sakkaṭa is the language of the gods. Pākata is fourfold, Tabbhava, derived from Sakkaṭa by a slight difference in sound, such as Mahinda Sindhu, etc.; Tassama, like Hiri Hara Kamala, etc.; Desīya, well-known in Mahāraṭṭha and other countries; Missa, mixed with Tabbhava, etc. Apabhraṃsa is the speech of the Ābhīras, etc., and it is fourfold like Pākata, threefold by the distinction of Nāgara, Upanāgara, and Vuddha. Pesācika is the language of the Pisācas. Missa is by way of all," thus the characteristics of Sakkaṭa, etc., were stated. Similarly, "Siṅgārappadhāna Nacca Sa It is said to be twofold: "Lāsyādika, which reveals dance and the like, is delightful because it emphasizes acting; the other, poetry, is for listening." Why is the fivefold division according to language, as stated by earlier teachers, and the twofold division according to application, not mentioned here? Truly, it should be understood that they are not mentioned here because they are not relevant. Thus, having first shown the structure of the composition as the basis for embellishment, he now says, "But that..." to show that the structure of the composition, like a man's body with necklaces and bracelets, becomes more delightful with sound and meaning embellishments. The word "but" is intended to specify. Indeed, embellishments adorn that structure of composition; qualities such as clarity, which are sound embellishments, and figures of speech such as natural description, which are meaning embellishments, bring that structure of composition to a state of being exceedingly delightful, enjoyable. The idea is that even though such a structure of composition, endowed with supreme beauty due to the harmonious combination of faultless sounds and meanings in mutual accordance, is delightful like a well-formed human body, it becomes exceedingly delightful when adorned with embellishments. 9. Again, to explain the divisions of that same composition, he says, "Bound and..." Again, that composition is determined to be twofold: bound, because it is continuous, being inseparable from the four, namely, the detached verse and the like, and having the nature of a great poem and the like; and unbound, because it is discontinuous, being merely detached and not having the nature of a great poem and the like. Again, that composition is fivefold, according to the difference in language: Sanskrit, Prakrit, Apabhraṃśa, Paiśācika, and mixed. Dance, which emphasizes love and is known as lāsyādika, is delightful because it emphasizes seeing; poetry other than that is for listening, and thus it is twofold according to the difference in function. All of that is not included here because it lacks relevance. Among those, Sanskrit is the language of the gods. Prakrit is different from that by some letters. But that... It is fourfold, mixed with Tabbhava and Desiya. Therein, that which arises from Sakkaṭa merely by a change of letters is called Tabbhava, such as Mahinda, Sindhava, etc. Tassama is like Hiri, Hara, Kamala, etc. That which is well-known in a country is Desiya. Missa is mixed with Tabbhava, etc. Apabbhaṃsa is the speech of cowherds, etc., and it is fourfold with Tabbhava, etc., and threefold as Nāgara, Upanāgara, and Vuddha. The speech of Pisācas is Pesācika. That which is mixed with Sakkaṭa, etc., is called Missa. Now, to say that a composition with such variations is beautiful due to figures of speech, he says "Taṃ tu," etc. That body of composition, of the kind mentioned, figures of speech, sound and sense figures, bring it to a state of greater delightfulness. "Nirantaraṃ bandho nibandhoti ca, na nibandho anibandhoti ca, atisayena vindanīyo vindanīyataro, tassa bhāvo vindanīyatarattananti ca" is the analysis. 10. A flawless lotus face, and flawless speech; adorned, they shine, but unadorned, do they? 10. He supports that very point with "Anavajja," etc. A flawless lotus face, unblemished by pimples, moles, or blemishes, with well-proportioned eyes, ears, and other limbs, and flawless speech, free from faults of words, beautiful and blameless, and the meaning conveyed by it, these, when adorned, the face with tilaka, earrings, etc., the words and meanings with sound and sense figures, are indeed embellished and adorned, but unadorned, unembellished, and unadorned, do they shine? I ponder, they do not shine at all. "Nu" is for pondering. 10. He supports that very point with "Anavajja," etc. A flawless lotus face, unblemished by pimples, moles, or blemishes, with well-proportioned limbs and form, and flawless speech, free from faults of words, sentences, and meanings, and blameless, Speech that is not beneficial, and language that is not distinct, and the meaning that does not convey the intended sense, are these adorned like earrings, forehead marks, and other ornaments, or embellished with sound and meaning figures of speech? Indeed, they are adorned and embellished. Without these, unadorned and unembellished, do they shine? I think they do not shine. "There is no fault in it," and "The face is like a lotus" are examples of figurative language. "Kimiti" implies prohibition, and "nuiti" suggests contemplation. 11. Without a teacher's guidance, A fool wishes to adorn it; How could he not become A laughingstock to the wise? 11. To show that without a teacher's guidance, one gains nothing but ridicule when trying to adorn, he states the figure of speech with double entendre, beginning with "without." Without the guidance of teachers, those who instruct in the means of adornment, or those who instruct in the means of creating figures of speech, saying, "Doing it this way would be beautiful," a fool, ignorant of the adornment of the face or composition, wishes, intends, to adorn that face or composition appropriately. How could such an ignorant person not become a laughingstock, a subject of ridicule, to the wise, those skilled in it, the learned? The meaning is that they would laugh, thinking, "What is this being done by an ignorant person?" "Nuiti" suggests contemplation. 11. Now, to show that adorning a body of composition free from faults of words and syllables with figures of speech is best only with a teacher's guidance, he states the figure of speech with double entendre, beginning with "without a teacher's guidance." A fool, unskilled in adorning the body or face, or in figures of speech, without the appropriate instruction in adorning the body or in creating figures of speech, if he wishes to adorn that body or composition with forehead marks, earrings, etc., or with sound and meaning figures of speech, how could he not become a laughingstock, a subject of ridicule, to the wise, those skilled in both? He certainly would. Therefore, one should learn diligently from teachers and then act, is the idea. 12. Even a composition, the speech of a poet, Revealing embellishment; It attains that which is to be expressed, through the usage of that term. 12. But are sound and meaning embellishments? How is a treatise an embellishment? He says, "Even a treatise," etc. A collection of poets' expressions, of poets' usages, and the meanings to be conveyed, the treatise that reveals embellishments, that illuminates the aforementioned embellishments, even a treatise, known as a work of art, attains that which is to be expressed, that which is to be denoted by the term "embellishment." How? He says, "Through the usage of that term." The application of that established usage, of the term "embellishment," to that particular adornment, the imputation of identity, "This is it," is the application. Why? Because the cause is treated as the effect, due to the non-difference between what is to be conveyed and what conveys it. 12. Now, how is a treatise on sound embellishments and meaning embellishments an embellishment? He says, "A treatise," etc. A treatise that reveals embellishments, that reveals sound and meaning embellishments, of the poets' expressions, which are collections of statements made by poets, and of the poets' usages, which are applications of meanings to be conveyed, even a treatise, known as a work of art, through the application of the established usage of that term "embellishment," treating the cause as the effect, attains that which is to be expressed, that which is to be denoted by the term "embellishment.