3. AMARAKOŚA Lucidity is another characteristic of the explanation of those words which Malli. deems worthy of his special notice. Amara distinguishes koraka from kuḍmala, taking the former to be a bud in general and the latter as a 'half-opened bud'. Malli. points out that Halāyudha is for non-distinction between the two: lvi केषांचित् कुड्मलकोरकावेकार्थौ । कोरक कुड्मलमुकुलानि तुल्यानि इति हलायुधः । (p. 225) Ahibhaya is the apprehension of treachery and the danger arising from one's own allies and is explained by Amara as svapakṣaprabhavam bhayam' (p. 501). Malli. elucidates that it is fear of one's own rebellious sons, kinsmen and others allied to him: < पुत्रदायादप्रभृतिस्वपक्षैः कृतं भयमहिभयं स्यात् । (p. 502) The word tita-u (sieve) is as peculiar in formation as it is confusing in its declension. Hence Malli. quotes the relevant Unādi-sutra, taroter da uḥ sanvac ca' in its derivation and shows the way for its declension as tita-u, titavaḥ, etc. lexicons like the Ratnakośa take this word as neuter in gender he says: As some 'चालनं तितउ प्रोक्तम्' इति रत्नकोशमते तितउनी, तितऊनि । (p. 569) Where misconceptions are likely to arise Malli. gives clear elucidations. Amara correctly gives the general direc- tion 'pumsi klibe ca' to certain words denoting poisons such as kākola (p. 152). To avoid the possibility of interpreting this direction as applicable to all the poisons mentioned there, पुंसि क्लीबे च काकोल . . . सौराष्ट्रिक दारदो विषभेदा अमी नव, ... . Malli. says that the option of being mas. and neuter is confined to the first three words kākola, kālakūṭa and halāhala: समानसामर्थ्यात् पुंसि क्लीबे चेति विशेषविधिः काकोलादिषु त्रिष्वेव । (p. 152 )
