Cloud, if at that hour she has come by the ease of sleep, sit down behind her, turn your face from thunder, and hold out for one watch and no longer. Let the knot her arms have made round my neck — when I have somehow been come by, in a dream, I who am her lover — not slip from it that very instant.
**The stanza asks the cloud for the one thing the poem has not asked: silence.** Everything until now has been *go*, *look*, *say*. Here it is स्तनितविमुखः, *with your face turned from thundering*, which Mallinātha glosses निःशब्दः सन् and explains in four words — अन्यथा निद्राभङ्गः स्यादिति भावः, otherwise her sleep would break. And the whole instruction sits inside a यदि with no *then* after it: nothing here is asserted to happen.
**The wait is measured out of a manual.** याममात्रम् is a watch, three hours, which Mallinātha checks against Amara and then justifies out of the Ratisarvasva — एकवारावधिर्यामो रतस्य परमो मतः, a watch is the outside limit of a single bout for a vigorous young pair — with the argument that a dream of one must take as long as one. **So the cloud's silence is timed by a book of erotics**, which is the fifth handbook produced since 2.22.
**And this is the answer to 2.31.** There she asked for sleep so that a dream might bring him — मत्संभोगः कथमुपनमेत् स्वप्नजोऽपि — and Mallinātha glossed the कथम् केनापि प्रकारेण, by any means at all. Here the means has been found and the word comes back as कथंचित्, which he glosses कृच्छ्रेण, with difficulty. Six stanzas apart, the request and its granting, in the same particle.
**Then he defends the poem against itself.** न चात्र निद्रोक्तिः “तामुन्निद्राम्” इति पूर्वोक्तेन निद्राच्छेदेन विरुध्यते — the mention of sleep here does not contradict the sleeplessness spoken of earlier in *tām unnidrām*, which is 2.28. His answer uses the scheme he set out at 2.33: पुनः सप्तम्याद्यवस्थासु पाक्षिकनिद्रासम्भवात्, because in the seventh and later of the ten states sleep does come and go — with the Rasaratnākara quoted, that clinging, weeping, **sleep**, shamelessness, meaningless speech and delusion arise in those states. **The ten-state scheme is not decoration**: it is doing work here, resolving an inconsistency between two stanzas six apart, and it is the sixth checkable cross-reference in the commentary and the first raised as an objection to the poet.
**Three points of grammar carry the rest.** अन्वास्य takes an object, and √आस् has none of its own: उपसर्गवशात्सकर्मकत्वम्, it is transitive by force of the preverb. सहस्व is प्रार्थनायां लोट्, the imperative used for asking — the same category he named at 2.31 for the optative. And गाढोपगूढम् is नपुंसके भावे क्तः, Pāṇini 3.3.114: a क्त in the neuter naming the action itself, so the word is not *embraced* but *an embrace*. No figure is named.
uncheckedthe reader's reading, following Mallinātha, Sañjīvinī's gloss. His are: त्वदुपसर्पणकाले for तस्मिन्काले, मत्प्रिया for सा, the vigraha of लब्धनिद्रासुखा, पश्चादासित्वा with उपसर्गवशात्सकर्मकत्वम्, निद्राणाम् for एनाम्, गर्जितपराङ्मुखो निःशब्दः सन् with अन्यथा निद्राभङ्गः स्यादिति भावः, प्रहरमात्रम् with the Amara line and the Ratisarvasva verse, प्रतीक्षस्व with प्रार्थनायां लोट्, प्रेयसि for प्रणयिनि, कृच्छ्रेण for कथंचित्, गाढालिङ्गनम् with नपुंसके भावे क्तः, the vigraha of the last compound, and the defence against the निद्रा of 2.28 with the Rasaratnākara verse. That कथंचित् answers the कथम् of 2.31, that the two locative absolutes of 2.35 and 2.37 are the poem's two halves, and that this is the only prohibition in the message, are the reader's; “तामुन्निद्राम्” as the opening of 2.28's fourth pāda is checked against `text.md`, and the ten-state list against the quotation at 2.33. Neither the Ratisarvasva nor the Rasaratnākara is in this repository and neither citation can be checked“na cātra nidroktiḥ “tām unnidrām” iti pūrvoktena nidrācchedena virudhyate punaḥ saptamyādyavasthāsu pākṣikanidrāsambhavāt”
Then Mallinātha defends the poem against itself. न चात्र निद्रोक्तिः “तामुन्निद्राम्” इति पूर्वोक्तेन निद्राच्छेदेन विरुध्यते — the mention of sleep here does not contradict the sleeplessness spoken of earlier in tām unnidrām, which is 2.28. His answer uses the scheme he set out at 2.33: पुनः सप्तम्याद्यवस्थासु पाक्षिकनिद्रासम्भवात्, because in the seventh and later of the ten states sleep does come and go — with the Rasaratnākara quoted, that clinging, weeping, sleep, shamelessness and delusion arise in those states. So the ten-state scheme is not decoration: it is doing work here, resolving an inconsistency between two stanzas nine apart, and it is the first of his cross-references raised as an objection to the poet.
- Mallinātha, Sañjīvinī — 2.37: na cātra nidroktiḥ “tām unnidrām” iti pūrvoktena nidrācchedena virudhyate | punaḥ saptamyādyavasthāsu pākṣikanidrāsambhavāt
Cloud, if at that hour she has come by the ease of sleep, sit down behind her, turn your face from thunder, and hold out for one watch and no longer. Let the knot her arms have made round my neck — when I have somehow been come by, in a dream, I who am her lover — not slip from it that very instant. The stanza is the poem's one plea for stillness: the whole errand has been to reach her, and here, on the edge of reaching her, the cloud is asked to do nothing — to sit behind a sleeping woman, keep its thunder turned away, and give a dream its full watch before it wakes her.
- Mallinātha, Sañjīvinī — 2.37, whole-verse gloss