s1avataranika
tad evam upaniṣad-ādīnāṁ tad-eka-patitve sambhāvye nitya-priyāṇāṁ māyāṁ vinā sa katham upapatiḥ syāt ? nahi yā anādita eva yasya priyā, sā tasya parakīyā bhavatīty abhipretyāha—atha nitya-priyā iti ||
tad evamso then, with all of that now settled transition picking up the preceding discussionइस प्रकार (पूर्व-प्रसंग को लेकर)
upaniṣad-ādīnāṁ tad-eka-patitve sambhāvyegranting that, for the personified Upaniṣads and their like, his being their one and only husband can be admitted locative absolute ('when/granting that…'); tad-eka-pati-tve = the state of Kṛṣṇa being their sole husband; sambhāvye = being conceivableउपनिषदों आदि का [कृष्ण को] ही एकमात्र पति मानना जब सम्भव हो
nitya-priyāṇāṁ māyāṁ vinā sa katham upapatiḥ syāthow, in the case of the eternal beloveds, could he be a mere paramour (upapati) at all without some māyā at work? genitive nitya-priyāṇāṁ = with respect to the eternal beloveds; māyāṁ vinā = apart from māyā; rhetorical question expecting 'he could not'नित्य-प्रियाओं के विषय में, माया के बिना वह कैसे उपपति (परकीय प्रेमी) हो सकता है? (नहीं हो सकता)
nahifor surely it is not the case that — nahi gives the ground for the question just raisedक्योंकि ऐसा नहीं होता (अब इसका कारण)
yā anāditaḥ eva yasya priyāshe who is someone's beloved from beginningless time itself anāditaḥ eva = 'from beginninglessness precisely'; eva stresses the 'from the very start'जो [स्त्री] अनादि काल से ही जिसकी प्रिया है
sā tasya parakīyā bhavaticould ever become his parakīyā — a woman who belongs to another man carries the negation from nahi: she does NOT become thatवह उसकी परकीया नहीं होती (नहि से निषेध चलता है)
iti abhipretya āhakeeping this in mind, he (Rūpa) speaks — iti closes the intended reasoning; āha introduces the verseयह अभिप्राय करके (ग्रन्थकार श्लोक) कहते हैं
atha nitya-priyā itithe verse beginning 'now, the eternal beloveds…'अब 'नित्य-प्रिया' इत्यादि [श्लोक]
tad evam — so then; upaniṣad-ādīnāṁ tad-eka-patitve sambhāvye — granting that Kṛṣṇa's being the sole husband of the personified Upaniṣads and the rest is admissible; nitya-priyāṇāṁ sa māyāṁ vinā katham upapatiḥ syāt — how, without māyā, could he be a paramour of the eternal beloveds?; nahi yā anāditaḥ eva yasya priyā sā tasya parakīyā bhavati — for she who is someone's beloved from beginningless time cannot become his parakīyā, another's woman; iti abhipretya āha — with this in view he says; atha nitya-priyā iti — 'now, the eternal beloveds…'.
इस प्रकार, उपनिषदों आदि का [कृष्ण को] ही एकमात्र पति मानना जब सम्भव हो, तो नित्य-प्रियाओं के विषय में माया के बिना वह कैसे उपपति हो सकता है? क्योंकि जो अनादि काल से ही जिसकी प्रिया है, वह उसकी परकीया नहीं होती — यह अभिप्राय करके [ग्रन्थकार] 'अथ नित्य-प्रिया' इत्यादि कहते हैं।
Jīva sets up why Rūpa turns to the nitya-priyās now. For the personified Upaniṣads and their kind, he says, we can allow that Kṛṣṇa is their one and only husband. But the eternal beloveds are a harder case. How could he be their upapati — a paramour, the lover of another man's wife — at all, unless māyā were arranging it? Here is the reason. A woman who has been his beloved from beginningless time can never be 'another's woman.' Parakīyā means belonging to someone else; but she was never someone else's — she was always his. With that in mind, Rūpa speaks the verse 'now, the eternal beloveds.'
शंका यह है — उपनिषद् आदि श्रुतियाँ कृष्ण को ही अपना एकमात्र पति मानती हैं, यह यदि सम्भव हो। तब जो नित्य-प्रिया हैं, उनके विषय में कृष्ण माया के बिना उपपति (परकीय प्रेमी) कैसे हो सकते हैं? क्योंकि जो स्त्री अनादि काल से ही जिसकी प्रिया है, वह उसकी परकीया नहीं हो सकती। इसी अभिप्राय से ग्रन्थकार 'अथ नित्य-प्रिया' इत्यादि श्लोक कहते हैं।
upapati is the rhetorician's term for the paramour — the man who loves another's wife — the role Kṛṣṇa plays in the parakīyā mood. parakīyā means 'belonging to another (para).' Jīva's point turns on that word: what is loved beginninglessly was never another's, so the paramour-relation for these eternal beloveds is only an appearance that māyā supplies. (Stated, not resolved here.)