L1definition
dūra-deśaṁ gate kānte bhavet proṣita-bhartṛkā |
dūra-deśaṁ gate kāntewhen the beloved has gone away to a far-off land locative absolute — sets the conditionजब प्रियतम दूर देश चला जाता है
bhavetshe comes to be [called] optative — the defining 'is reckoned'(तब वह) होती है / कहलाती है
proṣita-bhartṛkā'she whose husband has gone abroad' — proṣita-bhartṛkāप्रोषित-भर्तृका (जिसका भर्ता परदेश गया हो)
dūra-deśaṁ gate kānte — when the beloved has gone off to a distant land; proṣita-bhartṛkā bhavet — she is [called] the proṣita-bhartṛkā, 'she whose husband is away.'
जब प्रियतम दूर देश चला जाता है, तब वह प्रोषित-भर्तृका कहलाती है।
The verse defines a type of heroine. When her beloved has gone away to a far-off country, she becomes the proṣita-bhartṛkā — 'the woman whose husband/lover has gone abroad.' This is the lakṣaṇa (definition) that the two commentators will then fight over, because the word bhartṛ literally means 'husband.'
जिस नायिका का प्रियतम दूर देश चला जाता है, वह प्रोषित-भर्तृका है।
proṣita = 'gone abroad, away on a journey'; bhartṛ = 'the one who maintains,' i.e. husband/master. The very name plants the problem the commentaries take up: how can a 'husband' word be used of Kṛṣṇa, who in the parakīyā mood is the paramour, not the wedded husband?
L3definition
mālinyam anavasthānaṁ jāḍya-cintādayo matāḥ ||
mālinyamgoing grubby and unkemptमलिनता
anavasthānaṁunable to stay put in one place — restlessnessकहीं स्थिर न रह पाना (अस्थिरता)
jāḍya-cintā-ādayaḥnumb torpor, anxious brooding, and the restजड़ता, चिन्ता आदि
matāḥare held to be [her marks] past participle — 'are reckoned'माने गए हैं
mālinyam — grubbiness; anavasthānaṁ — restlessness; jāḍya-cintā-ādayaḥ — dullness, worry, and so on; matāḥ — are held [to be her signs].
मलिनता, कहीं स्थिर न रह पाना, तथा जड़ता, चिन्ता आदि (भी इसके लक्षण) माने गए हैं।
The list finishes: she lets herself go unwashed and unkempt, she cannot settle anywhere, she falls into a dull stupor, she broods anxiously — and so on. All these are reckoned the marks of the proṣita-bhartṛkā.
मलिनता, अस्थिरता, जड़ता और चिन्ता आदि भी इसके लक्षण माने गए हैं।
Commentary — decoded
Jīva Gosvāmī
s1reply
proṣita-bhartṛkādi-dvaye bhartṛ-śabda-prayogo dāmpatyasyaivāṅgini rase rasa-śāstra-kartṛbhiḥ svīkṛtatvād yukta eva |
proṣita-bhartṛkādi-dvayein the pair of terms proṣita-bhartṛkā and [svādhīna-bhartṛkā] locative; the two heroine-names built on bhartṛप्रोषित-भर्तृका आदि दो (नायिका-भेदों) में — जो भर्तृ शब्द पर बने हैं
bhartṛ-śabda-prayogaḥthe use of the word bhartṛ ('husband')"भर्तृ" शब्द का प्रयोग
dāmpatyasya eva aṅgini rasein the rasa whose principal element is precisely the wedded-couple bond (dāmpatya) eva restricts it to that rasa; aṅgin = the chief/limb-possessing elementजिस रस में दाम्पत्य ही अंगी (प्रधान) है, केवल उसी में
rasa-śāstra-kartṛbhiḥ svīkṛtatvātbecause the authors of the rasa treatises have adopted it ablative of reason — 'because it was accepted by...'क्योंकि रस-शास्त्र के रचयिताओं ने इसे स्वीकार किया है
yuktaḥ evais entirely proper eva — 'quite fitting, no fault in it'उचित ही है (इसमें कोई दोष नहीं)
proṣita-bhartṛkādi-dvaye — in the pair proṣita-bhartṛkā and svādhīna-bhartṛkā; bhartṛ-śabda-prayogaḥ — the use of the word bhartṛ; dāmpatyasya eva aṅgini rase rasa-śāstra-kartṛbhiḥ svīkṛtatvāt — because the makers of the rasa-śāstra adopted it in the rasa where the married-couple bond is the main element; yuktaḥ eva — is entirely proper.
प्रोषित-भर्तृका आदि दो (भेदों) में "भर्तृ" शब्द का प्रयोग — जिस रस में दाम्पत्य ही अंगी है उसी में — रस-शास्त्र के रचयिताओं द्वारा स्वीकृत होने के कारण उचित ही है।
Jīva meets the obvious doubt head-on. Why use 'bhartṛ' (husband) in names like proṣita-bhartṛkā and svādhīna-bhartṛkā? Because the authorities on rasa adopted that word for the rasa in which the wedded-couple relationship is the leading element. So the usage is perfectly proper — there is no slip in it.
प्रोषित-भर्तृका आदि दो नामों में "भर्तृ" शब्द का प्रयोग हुआ है। यह उसी रस में होता है जिसमें दाम्पत्य प्रधान है। रस-शास्त्र के आचार्यों ने इसे स्वीकार किया है, इसलिए यह उचित ही है, दोष नहीं।
aṅgin here is the principal member (opposite of aṅga, subordinate). In madhura-rasa the union is modeled on the husband-wife bond even in the parakīyā mood, so the treatises keep the 'bhartṛ' word by convention.
s2reply
ata eva vāsaka-sajjāyāṁ geha-śabdaḥ prayuktaḥ |
ata evafor this very reasonइसीलिए
vāsaka-sajjāyāmin [the definition of] the vāsaka-sajjā, the heroine who readies her bower for the tryst locative — 'in her case'वासक-सज्जा (नायिका) के प्रसंग में
geha-śabdaḥthe word geha ('home, house')"गेह" (घर) शब्द
prayuktaḥis employedप्रयुक्त हुआ है
ata eva — for this very reason; vāsaka-sajjāyām — in the case of the vāsaka-sajjā; geha-śabdaḥ prayuktaḥ — the word 'home' is used.
इसीलिए वासक-सज्जा के प्रसंग में "गेह" (घर) शब्द प्रयुक्त हुआ है।
Here is the corroborating evidence. It is for this same reason that, in defining the vāsaka-sajjā, the treatises speak of her 'home.' The vocabulary already assumes a household, wedded-style setting.
इसी कारण वासक-सज्जा नायिका के प्रसंग में "गेह" अर्थात् घर शब्द का प्रयोग किया गया है।
vāsaka-sajjā = the heroine who decorates herself and her bower, expecting her lover; naming a 'home' (geha) for her presupposes the dāmpatya framing Jīva just described.
s3reply
nahi bhartṛ-śabdena vācyate |
na hifor [he] is indeed not hi gives the ground; na negatesक्योंकि यह नहीं कि
bhartṛ-śabdenaby the word bhartṛ instrumental — the means of denoting"भर्तृ" शब्द के द्वारा
vācyateis [the paramour] denoted passive — 'is expressed by'(जार) कहा जाता है
na hi — for indeed not; bhartṛ-śabdena vācyate — is [the paramour] denoted by the word bhartṛ.
क्योंकि (जार) "भर्तृ" शब्द के द्वारा नहीं कहा जाता।
And note: the paramour is not, in fact, denoted by the word bhartṛ at all. The next sentence gives the reason.
क्योंकि जार को "भर्तृ" शब्द से नहीं कहा जा सकता।
Jīva is heading off the reading that 'bhartṛ' directly names the jāra (paramour). It doesn't — it is retained as a decorous convention, not as a literal label for the lover.
s4reply
caura-svāminor ekārthatvāsambhavāt |
caura-svāminoḥof the thief and the owner genitive dual; caura = the paramour ('love-thief'), svāmin = the master/husband, what bhartṛ meansचौर (जार, "प्रेम-चोर") और स्वामी (पति, जो भर्तृ का अर्थ है) — इन दोनों का
eka-arthatva-asambhavātbecause they cannot possibly be one and the same referent ablative of reason — 'since one-and-the-same-meaning is impossible'क्योंकि एक ही अर्थ होना असंभव है
caura-svāminoḥ — of thief and owner; eka-arthatva-asambhavāt — because being one referent is impossible [for them].
क्योंकि चौर (जार) और स्वामी (पति) — इन दोनों का एक ही अर्थ होना असंभव है।
Why can't bhartṛ name the paramour? Because a thief and an owner cannot be one and the same person. The paramour is a kind of thief — he sneaks in to steal love; the bhartṛ is the master, the owner. One word cannot mean both thief and owner at once, so 'bhartṛ' does not denote the paramour.
चौर अर्थात् जार, और स्वामी अर्थात् पति — जो "भर्तृ" का अर्थ है — ये दोनों एक ही अर्थ नहीं हो सकते।
This is the pivotal contrast: caura (thief) vs svāmin (owner/master). bhartṛ literally = 'the sustainer/master,' the very opposite of a thief — hence it cannot slide over to mean the jāra.
s5reply
anyathā svādhīna-patikādi-śabdavat kvacit svādhīna-jārety api prayujyate |
anyathāotherwise — [if bhartṛ could denote the paramour]अन्यथा (यदि ऐसा न होता)
svādhīna-patikādi-śabdavaton the model of words like svādhīna-patikā ('she whose husband is under her sway') -vat 'like'"स्वाधीन-पतिका" आदि शब्दों के समान
kvacitsomewhere, in some textकहीं
svādhīna-jārā iti apithe form 'svādhīna-jārā' ('she who controls her paramour') too api — 'even this' would then occur"स्वाधीन-जारा" — ऐसा भी
prayujyatewould come to be usedप्रयुक्त होता
anyathā — otherwise; svādhīna-patikādi-śabdavat — like the words svādhīna-patikā etc.; kvacit svādhīna-jārā iti api prayujyate — somewhere the form 'svādhīna-jārā' too would get used.
अन्यथा "स्वाधीन-पतिका" आदि शब्दों के समान कहीं "स्वाधीन-जारा" ऐसा भी प्रयुक्त होता।
Test it the other way. If bhartṛ could stand for the paramour, then, just as we have the word svādhīna-patikā ('she whose husband obeys her'), somewhere we would also find the honest form svādhīna-jārā ('she who controls her paramour'). But we don't. That silence shows bhartṛ is not a stand-in for jāra.
यदि ऐसा न होता, तो "स्वाधीन-पतिका" आदि शब्दों की तरह कहीं "स्वाधीन-जारा" ऐसा भी प्रयोग होता।
patikā (from pati, husband) and jārā (from jāra, paramour) are the parallel forms; the treatises coin the first but never the second.
s6reply
aślīlatvāj jāre’pi tac-chabdo na prayujyate |
aślīlatvātbecause of its indecency ablative of reasonअश्लील होने के कारण
jāre apieven where the paramour himself is meant api — 'even in that case'जार के विषय में भी
tac-chabdaḥthat word — 'jāra'वह ("जार") शब्द
na prayujyateis not usedप्रयुक्त नहीं होता
aślīlatvāt — because of its crudeness; jāre api — even for the paramour [himself]; tac-chabdaḥ na prayujyate — the word 'jāra' is not used.
अश्लील होने के कारण जार के विषय में भी वह ("जार") शब्द प्रयुक्त नहीं होता।
And here is why 'svādhīna-jārā' never appears: the word 'jāra' is crude, so the treatises avoid it even when they do mean the paramour. They reach for a decent word instead — which is why 'bhartṛ' shows up, not because bhartṛ actually means paramour.
अश्लील होने के कारण जार के विषय में भी "जार" शब्द का प्रयोग नहीं किया जाता।
s7reply
kiṁ tu bhartrādi-śabda it cet hanta hanta yasya śabda-prayogeṇāpy aślīlatāpadyate tad-artha-prayogasya sutarām eva virasatāpādakatvaṁ syāt |
kiṁ tu bhartṛ-ādi-śabdaḥ iti cetif you object — 'but then it is the word bhartṛ and the like [that gets pressed into service for the paramour]' iti cet marks the objection; tu 'but'"किन्तु 'भर्तृ' आदि शब्द (ही प्रयुक्त हों)" — यदि ऐसा कहो तो
hanta hantaalas, alas! — [an exclamation before the rebuttal]हाय हाय (खेद)
yasya śabda-prayogeṇa api aślīlatā āpadyatewhen the mere utterance of a thing's word already produces indecency api — 'even just the word'जिसके केवल शब्द-प्रयोग से भी अश्लीलता आ जाती है
tad-artha-prayogasyathen the deploying of that thing's actual reality genitive — subject of what followsउसके अर्थ के प्रयोग से (तो)
sutarām eva virasatā-āpādakatvaṁ syātwould all the more surely spoil the rasa (produce distaste) sutarām eva — 'far more so'; virasatā = tastelessness, ruined flavorकहीं अधिक ही विरसता (रस-हानि) लाने वाला होगा
kiṁ tu bhartṛ-ādi-śabdaḥ iti cet — if you say 'but rather the word bhartṛ etc. is used [to stand in decently for the paramour]'; hanta hanta — alas!; yasya śabda-prayogeṇa api aślīlatā āpadyate — if merely uttering a thing's word already brings indecency; tad-artha-prayogasya sutarām eva virasatā-āpādakatvaṁ syāt — then deploying that thing's very reality would all the more spoil the flavor.
"किन्तु 'भर्तृ' आदि शब्द (ही रहें)" — यदि ऐसा कहो तो — हाय हाय! जिसके केवल शब्द-प्रयोग से भी अश्लीलता आ जाती है, उसके अर्थ का प्रयोग तो कहीं अधिक ही विरसता लाने वाला होगा।
An objector cuts in: 'But surely the word bhartṛ and its kin are used precisely as decent cover for the paramour.' Jīva: alas, that only makes it worse! If just saying the word 'jāra' already sounds crude, then to make Kṛṣṇa actually be a paramour — to deploy the reality, not merely the word — would spoil the rasa far more. You cannot rescue it by swapping the label while keeping the adulterous fact.
यदि कहो कि "किन्तु 'भर्तृ' आदि शब्द ही प्रयुक्त हों" — तो हाय हाय! जिसके केवल शब्द बोलने से ही अश्लीलता आ जाती है, उसके अर्थ का प्रयोग तो और भी अधिक रस को बिगाड़ने वाला होगा।
virasatā is the ruin of rasa — 'taste gone flat.' The argument: a crude word is bad, but a crude reality is far worse; so the relationship must be read on the dāmpatya model, not as literal paramour-hood.
s8reply
na ca vaktavyaṁ dāmpatyo’py abhisāro na sambhavati gṛha eva mitho nitya-prāpter bahu-prabala-sapatnī-saṅkaṭatve dakṣiṇasya nāyakasya bahula-gurv-ādi-jana-saṅkaṭatvena lajjāloḥ kasyāś cid-anurāgiṇyā ekānte samāhvānaṁ tāṁ tāṁ prati gamanaṁ tu sambhavatīti |
na ca vaktavyamnor should it be objected that — sets up an objection Jīva will rejectऔर यह न कहना चाहिए (कि)
dāmpatye api abhisāraḥ na sambhavati'even within a wedded couple, a secret tryst-journey (abhisāra) cannot occur' api — 'even'; this is the objector's claim"दाम्पत्य में तो अभिसार संभव ही नहीं"
gṛhe eva mithaḥ nitya-prāpteḥ'since husband and wife constantly reach each other at home anyway' ablative — the objector's reason; mithaḥ 'mutually'क्योंकि घर में ही परस्पर नित्य मिलन हो जाता है
bahu-prabala-sapatnī-saṅkaṭatvewhen there is the pressure of many powerful co-wives locative — 'in the fix where...'जब अनेक प्रबल सपत्नियों का संकट हो
dakṣiṇasya nāyakasyaof an even-handed (dakṣiṇa) hero [devoted equally to many] genitiveदक्षिण नायक का (जो सबमें समान अनुराग रखे)
bahula-gurv-ādi-jana-saṅkaṭatvenabecause he is hemmed in by a crowd of elders and others instrumental of cause; guru = elders/superiorsक्योंकि बहुत से गुरुजन आदि का संकट रहता है
lajjāloḥ kasyāḥ cit anurāgiṇyāḥof some bashful woman who loves him genitive; lajjālu = shyकिसी लज्जालु अनुरागिणी को
ekānte samāhvānamthe summoning [of her] to a private spotएकान्त में बुलाना
tāṁ tāṁ prati gamanaṁ tuand his going to this one and that one — this does tu — 'this, by contrast, [is possible]'उस-उस के पास जाना तो
sambhavati itioccur — so [runs the rebuttal]संभव है — इति
na ca vaktavyam — nor should one say that; dāmpatye api abhisāraḥ na sambhavati — even in wedlock a tryst-journey is impossible; gṛhe eva mithaḥ nitya-prāpteḥ — since the two meet constantly at home; [for] bahu-prabala-sapatnī-saṅkaṭatve dakṣiṇasya nāyakasya — where a many-co-wived, even-handed hero; bahula-gurv-ādi-jana-saṅkaṭatvena — is boxed in by crowds of elders and others; lajjāloḥ kasyāḥ cit anurāgiṇyāḥ ekānte samāhvānam tāṁ tāṁ prati gamanaṁ tu sambhavati — the private summoning of some shy loving woman, and his going to her, does occur.
और यह न कहना चाहिए कि "दाम्पत्य में अभिसार संभव नहीं, क्योंकि घर में ही नित्य परस्पर मिलन हो जाता है" — क्योंकि जब अनेक प्रबल सपत्नियों का संकट हो, तब दक्षिण नायक का — बहुत से गुरुजन आदि के संकट के कारण — किसी लज्जालु अनुरागिणी को एकान्त में बुलाना और उस-उस के पास जाना तो संभव है।
Jīva blocks a further objection: 'A secret tryst (abhisāra) can't happen inside a marriage — husband and wife just meet at home all the time, so what is there to sneak toward?' Not so, he says. Picture a hero with many strong co-wives, boxed in by a household full of elders and onlookers. Even then he can quietly summon some bashful woman who loves him to a private place, and slip off to one lover and another. So a tryst-journey is perfectly possible even in a wedded setting.
यह भी न कहना चाहिए कि "दाम्पत्य में तो अभिसार संभव ही नहीं, क्योंकि घर में ही आपस में नित्य मिलन हो जाता है।" क्योंकि जब अनेक प्रबल सपत्नियों का संकट हो, तब सबमें समान अनुराग रखने वाले दक्षिण नायक के लिए, बहुत से गुरुजन आदि के संकट के कारण, किसी लज्जालु अनुरागिणी को एकान्त में बुलाना और एक-एक के पास जाना तो संभव है ही।
dakṣiṇa nāyaka = the 'even-handed' hero, equally attached to several women (a standard nāyaka-type); with many co-wives and watchful elders, secrecy and a tryst-journey become necessary even at home.
s9reply
na ca vaktavyaṁ, sva-gṛhāt samāhvānaṁ sarveṇaiva jñāsyata ity alaṁ tat prakriyayeti para-gṛhāt tadādhikyāpatteḥ |
na ca vaktavyamnor should it be objected that — a second objection to be rejectedऔर यह (भी) न कहना चाहिए (कि)
sva-gṛhāt samāhvānaṁ sarveṇa eva jñāsyate'summoning her from his own house would be noticed by absolutely everyone' eva — 'by one and all'; the objector's worry"अपने घर से बुलाना सबके-सब द्वारा जान लिया जाएगा"
iti alaṁ tat-prakriyayā'so enough of that whole procedure [of positing a tryst]' alaṁ + instrumental = 'have done with it'"इसलिए उस प्रक्रिया से बस, (कोई लाभ नहीं)"
iti— [thus the objection]— इति (ऐसी शंका)
para-gṛhāt tad-ādhikya-āpatteḥbecause summoning from another's house would only make that exposure even greater ablative of reason; tad-ādhikya = 'a worse degree of that [being noticed]'क्योंकि पराए घर से (बुलाने में तो) उसकी (जान लिए जाने की) और भी अधिकता की आपत्ति आएगी
na ca vaktavyam — nor should one say; sva-gṛhāt samāhvānaṁ sarveṇa eva jñāsyate — 'a summons from his own house will be known to everyone'; iti alaṁ tat-prakriyayā — 'so drop that whole scheme'; para-gṛhāt tad-ādhikya-āpatteḥ — because [summoning] from someone else's house would incur that [exposure] all the more.
और यह भी न कहना चाहिए कि "अपने घर से बुलाना सबके-सब जान लेंगे, इसलिए उस प्रक्रिया से बस" — क्योंकि पराए घर से (बुलाने में तो) उस (जान लिए जाने) की और भी अधिकता की आपत्ति आएगी।
A second objection: 'If he calls her from his own house, everybody will know — so give up this tryst idea altogether.' Jīva turns it around. If anything, calling her from someone else's house — which is what the parakīyā reading demands — would be even more exposed, not less. So the objection actually backfires against the paramour reading.
यह भी न कहना चाहिए कि "अपने घर से बुलाने पर तो सब-के-सब जान जाएँगे, इसलिए वह प्रक्रिया व्यर्थ है।" क्योंकि पराए घर से बुलाने में तो और भी अधिक लोगों के जान लेने की आपत्ति आएगी।
This quietly favors the wedded (svakīyā-style) framing: the parakīyā tryst 'from another's house' is riskier, not safer, than the household tryst.
s10reply
yayā cāturyā tatra gopanasyātairyavātra sambhavāc ca |
yayā cāturyāby the [woman's own] cleverness with which instrumental; cāturī = adroitness at hiding a trystजिस चातुरी से
tatra gopanasyathere [in the other-house case], of the concealment genitiveवहाँ (अभिसार को) छिपाने की
...atra sambhavāt ca— [that concealment] is possible here too ablative + ca; the intervening word is corrupt in the source...यहाँ संभावना होने से भी (बीच का शब्द स्रोत में विकृत है)
yayā cāturyā — by whatever cleverness; tatra gopanasya — the concealment there; atra sambhavāt ca — and because it is possible here too.
और जिस चातुरी से वहाँ (अभिसार को) छिपाने की ...यहाँ संभावना होने से भी।
And one more reason: whatever cleverness lets a woman keep a tryst hidden in that [other-house] case works just as well here [in the household setting]. So concealment is no obstacle to a tryst within the wedded frame either.
और जिस चातुरी से वहाँ अभिसार को छिपाना यहाँ संभव है, इस कारण से भी। (बीच का एक शब्द स्रोत में विकृत है।)
The source text of this sentence is garbled (reading 'gopanasyātairyavātra'); the reconstruction follows the drift of s9 — that a woman's cleverness (cāturī) makes concealment feasible in the home setting as much as anywhere. Treat the exact wording as uncertain.
s11conclusion
tāsmād vraja-yuvarājasya samṛddhimad-ākhya-sambhoga-līlāyām abhisāra-līlā sambhavaty eva |
tasmātthereforeइसलिए
vraja-yuvarājasyaof the young prince of Vraja — Kṛṣṇa genitive; yuvarāja = crown princeव्रज के युवराज (कृष्ण) की
samṛddhimad-ākhya-sambhoga-līlāyāmin the union-pastime called 'samṛddhimat' (the full, abounding kind of sambhoga) locative; ākhya = 'named'"समृद्धिमत्" नामक संभोग-लीला में
abhisāra-līlāthe tryst-journey pastime (abhisāra)अभिसार-लीला
sambhavati evadoes indeed occur eva — 'certainly'निश्चय ही संभव है
tasmāt — therefore; vraja-yuvarājasya samṛddhimad-ākhya-sambhoga-līlāyām — in the young Vraja-prince's union-play called 'samṛddhimat'; abhisāra-līlā sambhavati eva — the tryst-journey pastime does indeed occur.
इसलिए व्रज के युवराज (कृष्ण) की "समृद्धिमत्" नामक संभोग-लीला में अभिसार-लीला निश्चय ही संभव है।
So the conclusion: in Kṛṣṇa's union-pastimes of the 'samṛddhimat' (abounding) type, the tryst-journey pastime (abhisāra-līlā) genuinely does take place. The objections that it couldn't fit the wedded frame have all been answered.
इसलिए व्रज के युवराज कृष्ण की "समृद्धिमत्" नामक संभोग-लीला में अभिसार-लीला निश्चय ही संभव है।
samṛddhimat is a named sub-class of sambhoga (union) in rasa-śāstra — the 'flourishing, full' variety; Jīva locates the abhisāra-līlā within it.
s12citation
yathā lalita-mādhave candrāvalītaḥ śaṅkayā śrī-rādhāyāḥ śrī-kṛṣṇa-pārśvāya guptya muhur gamanaṁ tasmād bhartṛtve caupapatyābhāse cāsty eva sādṛśya-līleti nānyathā mantavyam ||
yathā lalita-mādhaveas [shown] in the Lalita-mādhava [Rūpa's play] yathā introduces the exampleजैसे ललित-माधव में
candrāvalītaḥ śaṅkayāout of fear of Candrāvalī ablative candrāvalī-taḥ 'from Candrāvalī'; śaṅkayā 'through apprehension'चन्द्रावली से आशंका के कारण
śrī-rādhāyāḥon Śrī Rādhā's part genitive — whose going it isश्री राधा का (जो जाना है)
śrī-kṛṣṇa-pārśvāyato Śrī Kṛṣṇa's side dative of goalश्री कृष्ण के पास (जाने के लिए)
guptyā muhuḥ gamanamher going again and again, in secret gupti = stealth; muhuḥ = repeatedlyगुप्त रूप से बार-बार जाना
tasmātthereforeइसलिए
bhartṛtve ca upapatya-ābhāse caboth in the husbandly mode and in the semblance of paramour-hood ca...ca = 'in both'; upapati = paramour, ābhāsa = semblanceभर्तृत्व (पति-भाव) और उपपति (जार) के आभास — दोनों में
asti evathere does exist eva — 'certainly'निश्चय ही है
sādṛśya-līlā itia pastime of resemblance — [a līlā that looks like both] sādṛśya = likenessसादृश्य (समानता) की लीला — इति
na anyathā mantavyamit must not be thought otherwiseअन्यथा नहीं मानना चाहिए
yathā lalita-mādhave — as in the Lalita-mādhava; candrāvalītaḥ śaṅkayā — from fear of Candrāvalī; śrī-rādhāyāḥ śrī-kṛṣṇa-pārśvāya guptyā muhuḥ gamanam — Śrī Rādhā's going again and again, in stealth, to Kṛṣṇa's side; tasmāt bhartṛtve ca upapatya-ābhāse ca sādṛśya-līlā asti eva — therefore in both husband-mode and the semblance of paramour-mode there is a līlā of resemblance; iti na anyathā mantavyam — so it is not to be thought otherwise.
जैसे ललित-माधव में चन्द्रावली से आशंका के कारण श्री राधा का श्री कृष्ण के पास गुप्त रूप से बार-बार जाना (वर्णित है) — इसलिए भर्तृत्व और उपपति के आभास दोनों में सादृश्य-लीला निश्चय ही है, अन्यथा नहीं मानना चाहिए।
For example: in the Lalita-mādhava, afraid of Candrāvalī, Śrī Rādhā slips off again and again in secret to Kṛṣṇa's side. So in both modes — the husbandly and the mere semblance of paramour-hood — there really is a 'līlā of resemblance,' a pastime that looks alike either way. One must not think otherwise. That closes Jīva's defense.
जैसे ललित-माधव में चन्द्रावली से आशंका के कारण श्री राधा का श्री कृष्ण के पास छिपकर बार-बार जाना वर्णित है। इसलिए पति-भाव और उपपति के आभास — दोनों में समानता की लीला निश्चय ही है। इसे अन्यथा नहीं मानना चाहिए।
Why cited: Rūpa's own Lalita-mādhava is adduced as a worked example: Rādhā's repeated secret tryst-journeys prove that abhisāra and its concealment operate even within the wedded (bhartṛ) framing, so the 'husband' terminology and the tryst-pastime are compatible — his concluding proof that the usage is sound.
क्यों उद्धृत: ललित-माधव का यह प्रसंग इसलिए उद्धृत किया गया है कि राधा का छिपकर बार-बार कृष्ण के पास जाना अभिसार-लीला को सिद्ध करता है, और पति-भाव तथा उपपति-आभास दोनों की सादृश्य-लीला दिखाता है।
Viśvanātha Cakravartī
s1gloss
dūra-deśaṁ mathurāṁ dvārakāṁ ca |
dūra-deśam[the verse's] 'the distant land'"दूर देश" (से अभिप्राय)
mathurāṁ dvārakāṁ cameans Mathurā and Dvārakā ca — 'and'; the two togetherमथुरा और द्वारका
dūra-deśam — 'the far-off land'; mathurāṁ dvārakāṁ ca — [is] Mathurā and Dvārakā.
"दूर देश" (से अभिप्राय है) मथुरा और द्वारका।
Viśvanātha first fixes the reference. The 'distant land' of the verse means Mathurā and Dvārakā — the places Kṛṣṇa went when he left Vraja.
"दूर देश" से अभिप्राय है मथुरा और द्वारका।
Naming the two cities anchors the proṣita-bhartṛkā situation in Kṛṣṇa's actual departure from Vraja, which matters for the parakīyā debate that follows.
s2objection
atra proṣita-bhartṛkā-svādhīna-bhartṛkayoḥ parakīyātvaṁ kecin na manyante bhartṛ-śabdena jārasya vācayitum aśakyatvāt tathaikatra tac-chabda-liṅgenāṣtāv apy avasthāḥ svakīyāyā evābhipretā iti vyācakṣate |
atrahere [in these two cases]यहाँ (इस प्रसंग में)
proṣita-bhartṛkā-svādhīna-bhartṛkayoḥof the proṣita-bhartṛkā and the svādhīna-bhartṛkā genitive dualप्रोषित-भर्तृका और स्वाधीन-भर्तृका — इन दोनों का
parakīyātvaṁtheir being parakīyā (another's woman)परकीयापन
kecit na manyantesome [scholars] do not acceptकुछ (आचार्य) नहीं मानते
bhartṛ-śabdena jārasya vācayitum aśakyatvātbecause the paramour cannot be denoted by the word bhartṛ ablative of reasonक्योंकि "भर्तृ" शब्द से जार को कहना अशक्य है
tathā ekatra tac-chabda-liṅgenaand so, on the strength of that word [bhartṛ] appearing in the set liṅga = 'indicator, mark'; ekatra = 'in the one [list]'तथा एक ही (सूची) में उस शब्द के चिह्न (लिंग) से
aṣṭau api avasthāḥall eight states [of the heroine] api — 'even all eight'आठों ही अवस्थाएँ
svakīyāyāḥ eva abhipretāḥ itiare intended for the wedded heroine (svakīyā) alone — so [they claim] eva — 'only the svakīyā'केवल स्वकीया की ही अभिप्रेत हैं — इति
vyācakṣatethey expoundऐसी व्याख्या करते हैं
atra proṣita-bhartṛkā-svādhīna-bhartṛkayoḥ parakīyātvaṁ kecit na manyante — here some do not accept that the proṣita-bhartṛkā and svādhīna-bhartṛkā are parakīyā; bhartṛ-śabdena jārasya vācayitum aśakyatvāt — because a paramour cannot be named by the word bhartṛ; tathā ekatra tac-chabda-liṅgena aṣṭau api avasthāḥ svakīyāyāḥ eva abhipretāḥ iti vyācakṣate — and so, on the mark of that word, they explain that all eight states are meant for the wedded heroine alone.
यहाँ प्रोषित-भर्तृका और स्वाधीन-भर्तृका — इन दोनों का परकीयापन कुछ (आचार्य) नहीं मानते, क्योंकि "भर्तृ" शब्द से जार को कहना अशक्य है; तथा एक ही सूची में उस शब्द के चिह्न से आठों ही अवस्थाएँ केवल स्वकीया की ही अभिप्रेत हैं — ऐसी व्याख्या करते हैं।
Viśvanātha lays out the opposing view. Some scholars refuse to count the proṣita-bhartṛkā and svādhīna-bhartṛkā as parakīyā (another man's woman), because a paramour, they say, can't be called by a 'husband' word. And since 'bhartṛ' shows up in these names, they conclude that all eight states of the heroine are meant for the wedded wife (svakīyā) alone.
यहाँ प्रोषित-भर्तृका और स्वाधीन-भर्तृका — इन दोनों को कुछ आचार्य परकीया नहीं मानते। उनका कारण यह है कि "भर्तृ" शब्द से जार को नहीं कहा जा सकता। और वे यह व्याख्या करते हैं कि एक ही सूची में इस शब्द के संकेत से आठों अवस्थाएँ केवल स्वकीया की ही अभिप्रेत हैं।
The eight avasthās (states) of the nāyikā are the standard set — proṣita-bhartṛkā, svādhīna-bhartṛkā, khaṇḍitā, kalahāntaritā, vipralabdhā, vāsaka-sajjā, virahotkaṇṭhitā (utkaṇṭhitā), and abhisārikā. The pūrvapakṣa restricts all eight to the svakīyā.
s3reply
tad asaṅgatam |
tatthat [view]वह (मत)
asaṅgatamdoes not hold together — it is untenableअसंगत है
tat asaṅgatam — that [view] is untenable.
वह (मत) असंगत है।
Viśvanātha's verdict, flat out: that view does not hold up. Now he refutes it.
वह मत असंगत है।
s4citation
pūrvaṁ yāḥ pañcadaśadhā proktās tāsāṁ śataṁ tathā | viṁśatiś cābhir atra syād avasthābhiḥ kilāṣṭabhiḥ ||
pūrvaṁ yāḥ pañcadaśadhā proktāḥthe heroines earlier stated as being of fifteen kinds relative — 'those who...'पहले जो (नायिकाएँ) पन्द्रह प्रकार से कही गई हैं
tāsāṁof them genitiveउनकी
śataṁ tathā viṁśatiḥ cabecome a hundred and twenty (100 + 20) ca joins the count; 15 × 8 = 120सौ तथा बीस (=एक सौ बीस); 15 × 8 = 120
ābhiḥ aṣṭabhiḥ avasthābhiḥ atra syāthere, by these eight states instrumental — 'multiplied by the 8'; kila 'indeed'इन आठ अवस्थाओं से (गुणा करने पर) यहाँ (इतनी) होती हैं — निश्चय ही
pūrvaṁ yāḥ pañcadaśadhā proktāḥ — those [heroines] earlier declared fifteenfold; tāsāṁ atra ābhiḥ aṣṭabhiḥ avasthābhiḥ — of them, here, by these eight states; śataṁ tathā viṁśatiḥ ca kila syāt — there come to be, indeed, one hundred and twenty.
पहले जो (नायिकाएँ) पन्द्रह प्रकार से कही गई हैं, उनकी (संख्या) इन आठ अवस्थाओं से (गुणा करने पर) यहाँ एक सौ बीस हो जाती है — निश्चय ही।
He quotes the text itself (UN 5.101): the heroines already classed as fifteenfold become, when multiplied by these eight states, one hundred and twenty in all. Fifteen times eight is a hundred and twenty.
पहले जो नायिकाएँ पन्द्रह प्रकार की बताई गई हैं, उन्हें इन आठ अवस्थाओं से गुणा करने पर यहाँ एक सौ बीस हो जाती हैं।
Why cited: UN 5.101 is adduced to show that the eight avasthās apply across all fifteen classes of heroine (15 × 8 = 120) — which includes the parakīyā and sāmānyā, not the svakīyā alone. This directly overturns the pūrvapakṣa's claim that the eight states belong only to the wedded wife.
क्यों उद्धृत: यह श्लोक इसलिए उद्धृत है कि ग्रन्थ स्वयं पन्द्रह नायिकाओं को आठ अवस्थाओं से गुणा करता है — अतः आठों अवस्थाएँ केवल स्वकीया की नहीं हो सकतीं।
s5citation
yarhy ambujākṣāpasasāra bho bhavān kurūn madhūn vātha suhṛd-didṛkṣayā kṛṣṇo’pi taṁ hatvā yamunām uttīrya gopa-nārībhir aniśaṁ krīḍayāmāsa mādhavaḥ
yarhi ambuja-akṣa apasasāra bho bhavān'whenever you, O lotus-eyed one, went away, sir' the Dvārakā people addressing Kṛṣṇa"हे कमल-नयन! जब आप (यहाँ से) चले गए" — (द्वारकावासी कृष्ण से)
kurūn madhūn vā athaoff to the Kurus or the Madhus accusative of destination — the 'distant land'कुरुओं (के देश) अथवा मधुओं (के देश) को — वही "दूर देश"
suhṛd-didṛkṣayāout of a wish to see [your] dear ones instrumental of purposeसुहृदों को देखने की इच्छा से
kṛṣṇaḥ api taṁ hatvāand Kṛṣṇa too, having slain him [the foe] api — 'also'कृष्ण ने भी उसे (शत्रु को) मारकर
yamunām uttīryahaving crossed the Yamunāयमुना पार करके
gopa-nārībhiḥ aniśaṁ krīḍayām āsa mādhavaḥMādhava sported ceaselessly with the cowherd women instrumental — 'with the gopīs'; aniśam = 'day and night'गोप-नारियों के साथ माधव ने रात-दिन क्रीड़ा की
yarhi ambuja-akṣa bho bhavān kurūn madhūn vā atha suhṛd-didṛkṣayā apasasāra — whenever you, O lotus-eyed sir, went off to the Kurus or Madhus to see your dear ones; kṛṣṇaḥ api taṁ hatvā yamunām uttīrya gopa-nārībhiḥ aniśaṁ krīḍayām āsa mādhavaḥ — Kṛṣṇa too, having killed [the foe] and crossed the Yamunā, Mādhava sported endlessly with the cowherd women.
"हे कमल-नयन! जब आप सुहृदों को देखने की इच्छा से कुरुओं अथवा मधुओं के देश को चले गए" — (और) कृष्ण ने भी उसे (शत्रु को) मारकर, यमुना पार करके, गोप-नारियों के साथ माधव ने रात-दिन क्रीड़ा की।
He backs it with scripture. One line has the Dvārakā people lamenting Kṛṣṇa's going away to the Kurus or Madhus to see friends — that is exactly the 'distant land' of a proṣita situation. The other shows Kṛṣṇa crossing the Yamunā and sporting endlessly with the cowherd women — the parakīyā setting. So both the departure and the paramour-play are attested for Kṛṣṇa.
"हे कमल-नयन! जब आप अपने सुहृदों को देखने की इच्छा से कुरु या मधु देश को चले गए" — और कृष्ण ने भी उस शत्रु को मारकर, यमुना पार करके, गोप-नारियों के साथ रात-दिन क्रीड़ा की।
Why cited: Scriptural attestation (the first line is Bhāgavatam 1.11.9, the Dvārakā citizens' lament) that Kṛṣṇa genuinely 'goes to a distant land' and genuinely sports with the gopa-nārīs — establishing that the proṣita and parakīyā situations really occur for him, against the view that these states are svakīyā-only.
क्यों उद्धृत: यह उद्धरण कृष्ण के "दूर देश" प्रस्थान और गोप-नारियों के प्रसंग को दिखाकर परकीया-गोपियों में उन अवस्थाओं की सत्ता सिद्ध करता है।
The two lines appear stitched together in the source and the passage has no source-tag; the first half is the well-known SB 1.11.9 verse. The gopī half establishes the parakīyā side of the point.
s6reply
tarhi svādhīna-bhartṛka-śabda-prayoge kiṁ bījam ? iti cet, ucyate—sarvatraivālaṁkāra-śāstre prācīne’rvācīne vā paty-upapatyor eva bhartṛ-śabda-prayogo dṛṣṭa eva |
tarhi svādhīna-bhartṛka-śabda-prayoge kiṁ bījam iti cetif you then ask, 'what is the ground for using the word svādhīna-bhartṛkā [of a non-wife]?' iti cet — the objection; bīja = 'seed, basis'"तो फिर 'स्वाधीन-भर्तृका' शब्द के प्रयोग में क्या बीज (आधार) है?" — यदि ऐसा पूछो
ucyatethe answer is given(तो) कहा जाता है
sarvatra eva alaṁkāra-śāstrethroughout every poetics treatise, without exception eva — 'in all of them'समस्त अलंकार-शास्त्र में ही
prācīne arvācīne vāwhether ancient or recent vā — 'either... or'प्राचीन अथवा अर्वाचीन (नवीन)
pati-upapatyoḥ evaof both the husband and the paramour alike genitive dual; eva — 'of both without distinction'पति और उपपति — दोनों के ही (बिना भेद के)
bhartṛ-śabda-prayogaḥ dṛṣṭaḥ evathe word bhartṛ is indeed found used eva — 'plainly attested'"भर्तृ" शब्द का प्रयोग देखा ही गया है
tarhi svādhīna-bhartṛka-śabda-prayoge kiṁ bījam iti cet — if you ask what the basis is for using 'svādhīna-bhartṛkā'; ucyate — the answer: sarvatra eva alaṁkāra-śāstre prācīne arvācīne vā — everywhere in poetics, old or new; pati-upapatyoḥ eva bhartṛ-śabda-prayogaḥ dṛṣṭaḥ eva — the word bhartṛ is plainly seen used of both husband and paramour.
"तो फिर 'स्वाधीन-भर्तृका' शब्द के प्रयोग में क्या आधार है?" — यदि ऐसा पूछो, तो कहा जाता है — समस्त अलंकार-शास्त्र में, चाहे प्राचीन हो या अर्वाचीन, पति और उपपति दोनों के ही लिए "भर्तृ" शब्द का प्रयोग देखा ही गया है।
Now the objector's own question: 'Then on what basis is the word bhartṛ used at all in svādhīna-bhartṛkā?' Viśvanātha answers: because in every treatise on poetics, ancient or modern, the word bhartṛ is in fact applied to the paramour (upapati) just as much as to the husband (pati). So the word is not reserved for the wedded husband — which knocks out the objector's whole premise.
यदि पूछो कि "तो फिर 'स्वाधीन-भर्तृका' शब्द के प्रयोग का क्या आधार है?" — तो उत्तर यह है। समस्त अलंकार-शास्त्र में, चाहे वह प्राचीन हो या नवीन, पति और उपपति — दोनों के लिए बिना भेद के "भर्तृ" शब्द का प्रयोग देखा गया है।
This is the direct counter to s2: the pūrvapakṣa said bhartṛ can't denote a jāra; Viśvanātha replies that the rhetoricians routinely use bhartṛ for the upapati too.
s7citation
yathā rasa-mañjaryāṁ iyaṁ parakīyā svādhīna-bhartṛketi iyaṁ veśyā svādhīna-bhartṛkety ādikaṁ bahutaram evāsti |
yathā rasa-mañjaryāmas, for instance, in the Rasa-mañjarī yathā introduces the proof-textजैसे रस-मंजरी में
iyaṁ parakīyā svādhīna-bhartṛkā iti'this parakīyā is a svādhīna-bhartṛkā'"यह परकीया स्वाधीन-भर्तृका है" — ऐसा
iyaṁ veśyā svādhīna-bhartṛkā iti'this courtesan (veśyā) is a svādhīna-bhartṛkā'"यह वेश्या स्वाधीन-भर्तृका है" — ऐसा
ādikam bahutaram eva astiand the like — there are a great many such [phrases] eva — 'plenty of them, in fact'इत्यादि बहुत-सा ही (कथन) है
yathā rasa-mañjaryām — as in the Rasa-mañjarī; iyaṁ parakīyā svādhīna-bhartṛkā iti — 'this parakīyā is a svādhīna-bhartṛkā'; iyaṁ veśyā svādhīna-bhartṛkā iti — 'this courtesan is a svādhīna-bhartṛkā'; ādikam bahutaram eva asti — and so on, there are very many such.
जैसे रस-मंजरी में "यह परकीया स्वाधीन-भर्तृका है", "यह वेश्या स्वाधीन-भर्तृका है" — इत्यादि बहुत-सा ही (कथन) है।
For instance, the Rasa-mañjarī openly says 'this parakīyā is a svādhīna-bhartṛkā' and 'this courtesan is a svādhīna-bhartṛkā,' and many more lines of that kind. So the 'bhartṛ' word is applied even to a parakīyā and to a courtesan — clear proof it is not confined to the wedded wife.
जैसे रस-मंजरी में "यह परकीया स्वाधीन-भर्तृका है", "यह वेश्या स्वाधीन-भर्तृका है" — इस प्रकार के बहुत-से कथन मिलते हैं।
Why cited: Bhānudatta's Rasa-mañjarī is cited to show the word svādhīna-bhartṛkā applied to a parakīyā and even a veśyā (courtesan) — concrete textual usage proving bhartṛ ranges beyond the svakīyā, sealing the refutation of the pūrvapakṣa.
क्यों उद्धृत: रस-मंजरी का यह प्रयोग इसलिए दिखाया गया है कि "स्वाधीन-भर्तृका" शब्द परकीया और वेश्या पर भी लगता है — अतः "भर्तृ" शब्द केवल स्वकीया तक सीमित नहीं।
s8reply
yuktis tu devopadeśeṣu pūjayitavyeṣu devebhyo nama itivad it pūrvam uktaiva |
yuktiḥ tuas for the underlying rationale, though tu — shifts from usage to the reason for itयुक्ति (कारण) तो
deva-upadeśeṣu pūjayitavyeṣuin the injunctions about the gods who are to be worshipped locativeपूजनीय देवताओं के उपदेशों (विधि-वाक्यों) में
devebhyaḥ namaḥ iti-vatlike the set phrase 'obeisance to the gods (devebhyo namaḥ)' -vat 'just as'; a fixed decorous formula"देवताओं को नमस्कार" — इसी के समान (एक नियत मर्यादित सूत्र)
pūrvam uktā evahas already been stated earlier eva — 'already given'पहले कही ही जा चुकी है
yuktiḥ tu — but the rationale; deva-upadeśeṣu pūjayitavyeṣu devebhyaḥ namaḥ iti-vat — like 'obeisance to the gods' in the injunctions on worshipping deities; pūrvam uktā eva — has already been given before.
युक्ति तो — पूजनीय देवताओं के उपदेश-वाक्यों में "देवताओं को नमस्कार" (कहा जाता है) उसी के समान — पहले कही ही जा चुकी है।
And the deeper reason for the usage, he notes, was already set out earlier. It works like the fixed reverential phrase 'obeisance to the gods' used in the rules for worship: an honorific, decorous term is applied by convention. The 'bhartṛ' word is used out of that same respectfulness.
इसकी युक्ति तो पहले ही बताई जा चुकी है — जैसे पूजनीय देवताओं के विधि-वाक्यों में "देवताओं को नमस्कार" ऐसा एक नियत मर्यादित सूत्र बोला जाता है, वैसे ही।
The analogy: just as 'devebhyo namaḥ' is a settled respectful formula for the worship-worthy gods, 'bhartṛ' is a respectful, decorous term — its use is a matter of decorum, not a literal claim that the lover is the wedded husband. Viśvanātha points back to where this was already argued.
s9conclusion
tathā loke prākṛtyo’pi nāyikā yo’yaṁ me gṛhe vartate sa eva mad-yauvana-rūpa-lāvaṇya-vaidagdhya-bhogānabhijño nāmnaiva bhartā tvayā tv āneṣyamāṇo me satya eva bhartā patiḥ svāmīty ādikaṁ dūtīṁ prati vadanti, tathopanāyakasya parokṣaṁ tasminn āryaputrādi-prayogam api kurvantīti dik ||
tathā loke prākṛtyaḥ api nāyikāḥlikewise, in the world, even ordinary women api — 'even the worldly ones'वैसे ही लोक में साधारण (प्राकृत) नायिकाएँ भी
yaḥ ayaṁ me gṛhe vartate'the one who lives here in my house' what she says to the messenger"जो यह मेरे घर में रहता है"
saḥ eva mad-yauvana-rūpa-lāvaṇya-vaidagdhya-bhoga-anabhijñaḥ'he, who has no eye for my youth, beauty, loveliness, wit, and their enjoyment' eva — 'that very one'; anabhijña = 'no connoisseur of'"वही मेरे यौवन, रूप, लावण्य, वैदग्ध्य और भोग का अनभिज्ञ (मर्मज्ञ नहीं)"
nāmnā eva bhartā'is a husband in name only' eva — 'in name alone'"नाम-मात्र से भर्ता (पति) है"
tvayā tu āneṣyamāṇaḥ'but the one you are to bring to me' tu — 'by contrast'"परन्तु तेरे द्वारा लाया जाने वाला (जो)"
me satyaḥ eva bhartā patiḥ svāmī iti ādikam'he is my true husband, my lord, my master' — and such things eva — 'the real one'; stacking pati, svāmin"वही मेरा सच्चा भर्ता, पति, स्वामी है" — इत्यादि
dūtīṁ prati vadantithey say to the messenger-woman (dūtī)दूती से कहती हैं
tathā upanāyakasya parokṣaṁand likewise, in [the husband's] absence, of the paramour (upanāyaka) parokṣa = 'behind his back'तथा उपनायक के परोक्ष में (पीठ पीछे)
tasmin ārya-putra-ādi-prayogam api kurvantithey even apply to him wifely terms like 'ārya-putra' api — 'even these honorifics'उसके विषय में "आर्यपुत्र" आदि (संबोधनों) का प्रयोग भी करती हैं
iti dikso much for a pointer — [this only indicates the wider usage] dik = 'a mere direction, one sample among many'इति दिक् (यह तो केवल एक दिशा-मात्र संकेत है)
tathā loke prākṛtyaḥ api nāyikāḥ dūtīṁ prati vadanti — likewise in the world even ordinary women say to the messenger; yaḥ ayaṁ me gṛhe vartate saḥ eva ... nāmnā eva bhartā — 'the man in my house is a husband in name only, no connoisseur of my youth and charm'; tvayā tu āneṣyamāṇaḥ me satyaḥ eva bhartā patiḥ svāmī — 'but the one you will bring is my true husband, lord, and master'; tathā upanāyakasya parokṣaṁ tasmin ārya-putra-ādi-prayogam api kurvanti — and behind his back they even use terms like 'ārya-putra' for the paramour; iti dik — this is but a hint.
वैसे ही लोक में साधारण नायिकाएँ भी दूती से कहती हैं — "जो यह मेरे घर में रहता है, वही मेरे यौवन, रूप, लावण्य, वैदग्ध्य और भोग का अनभिज्ञ है, नाम-मात्र से भर्ता है; परन्तु तेरे द्वारा लाया जाने वाला (जो) — वही मेरा सच्चा भर्ता, पति, स्वामी है" — इत्यादि; तथा उपनायक के परोक्ष में उसके विषय में "आर्यपुत्र" आदि का प्रयोग भी करती हैं — इति दिक्।
And a homely clincher. Even ordinary women in the world tell their go-between: 'The one who lives in my house — who cannot even appreciate my youth, my beauty, my charm, my wit — is a husband in name only. But the man you're to bring me — he is my real husband, my lord, my master.' And behind the husband's back they even address the paramour with wifely honorifics like 'ārya-putra.' So worldly usage itself puts the 'husband' words on the lover. This is just a sample of it. That closes the case.
वैसे ही लोक में साधारण नायिकाएँ भी दूती से कहती हैं — "जो यह मेरे घर में रहता है, वही मेरे यौवन, रूप, लावण्य, चतुरता और भोग को नहीं पहचानता, केवल नाम का पति है; परन्तु जिसे तू लाएगी, वही मेरा सच्चा भर्ता, पति और स्वामी है" — इत्यादि। और उपनायक की पीठ पीछे उसके लिए "आर्यपुत्र" आदि संबोधनों का भी प्रयोग करती हैं। यह तो केवल एक दिशा-संकेत है।
ārya-putra ('noble son / my lord') is the standard respectful term a wife uses for her husband in Sanskrit drama; here even worldly women turn it on the paramour. 'iti dik' ('so much for a pointer') is the ācārya's way of closing while signaling there is much more of the same.