Dear Prof. Karp

Apologies for the delayed response. I agree with you that the intensity of the desire in case of both ‘lipsā’ and ‘bubhukṣā’ depends on the context, and the use of the desiderative affix ‘san’ per se. This had been my assertion all along. However, I have some comments to make on your observations

[A] “And these emotions/feelings are - not necessarily distinctly - expressed by the poet's choice of a desiderative derivate form.”

[B] “bubhukSAjaya (bubhukSA with its load of feelings/emotions - put in there in the process of its formation as a desiderative derivate)”

If the implication is that the word ‘bubhukṣā’ (with the desiderative affix) in the line 14.093.066a (“bubhukṣāṃ jayate yastu …”) conveys something that the word ‘kṣudhā’ (without the desiderative affix) in the lines 14.093.065a (“kṣudhā nirṇudati prajñāṃ ...”) and 14.093.065c (“kṣudhāparigatajñāno ...”) does not, then I would disagree.

The reason is as per the Dhātupāṭha, the root ‘kṣudh’ is used in the very meaning of ‘bubhukṣā’: “kṣudha bubhukṣāyām” (DP 1190). Pushpa Dikshit comments on this “bubhukṣā bhoktumicchā” (Pāṇinīyadhātupāṭhaḥ Sārthaḥ, Puṣpādīkṣitaviracitaḥ, January 2011, Mahādevaśāstrigranthamālā 19, Samskrita Bharati: New Delhi, ISBN 978-93-81160-12-1, p. 37)

Therefore, the root ‘kṣudh’ without the desiderative affix `san’ conveys exactly what the root ‘bhuj’ conveys with the desiderative affix ‘san’. As a result,

[1] ‘kṣudhyati’ = ‘bubhukṣate’

Both mean exactly the same, ‘wants to eat’ or ‘feels hungry’. The ‘ātmanepada’ in ‘bubhukṣate’ is by “bhujo’navane” (A 1.3.66) and “pūrvavatsanaḥ” (A 1.3.62).

Examples of the root ‘kṣudh’ in ‘Bhaṭṭikāvyam’ and their explanations by Mallinātha would confirm this. In the verse 5.66, Mallinātha explains the ‘kṣudhyantaḥ’ (a ‘śatranta’ form) as

[2] ‘kṣudhyantaḥ’ = ‘bubhukṣamāṇāḥ’

Both mean `those who want to eat’ (adjective for serpents). In the verse 6.45, Mallinātha explains ‘kṣudhyatā’  (also a ‘śatranta’ form) as

[3] ‘kṣudhyatā’ = ‘bubhukṣamāṇena’

Both mean `by one who wants to eat’ (adjective for the demon Kabandha). In the verse 9.39, Mallinātha explains ‘kṣudhitvā’ (a ‘ktvānta’ form) as

[3] ‘kṣudhitvā’ = ‘bubhukṣitvā’

Both mean `after wanting to eat’ (describing Hanumān after slaying of Akṣa and before the destruction of the forest). The ‘Amarakoṣa’ (‘aśanāyā bubhukṣā kṣut’, 2.9.54) also confirms that

[4] `kṣut’ = ‘bubhukṣā’

Both mean `desire to eat’. The word `kṣudhā’ is simply the Bhāguri version of `kṣut’ (nominative singular from the lemma `kṣudh’) as per “vaṣṭi bhāgurirallopamavāpyorupasargayoḥ, āpaṃ caiva halantānāṃ yathā vācā diśā niśā” (‘Kārikā’ #2 at the end of ‘Avyayaprakaraṇa’ in ‘Vaiyākaraṇasiddhāntakaumudī’). The ‘Vyākhyāsudhā’ commentary on ‘Amarakoṣa’ 2.9.54 confirms this by explaining `kṣut’: “kṣodhanam, kṣudha bubhukṣāyām (di pa a), kvip (3.2.178), bhāgurimate ṭāpi ‘kṣudhā’ ca.” This proves that

[5] `kṣudhā’ = ‘bubhukṣā’

Therefore whatever the word ‘bubhukṣā’ (with the desiderative affix) conveys in the line 14.093.066a (“bubhukṣāṃ jayate yastu …”), exactly the same sense is conveyed by the word ‘kṣudhā’ (without the desiderative affix) in the lines 14.093.065a (“kṣudhā nirṇudati prajñāṃ ...”) and 14.093.065c (“kṣudhāparigatajñāno ...”).

PS: There are also desiderative forms of `kṣudh.’ The ‘Dhāturūpanandinī’(Janardana Hegde, 2013, New Delhi: Samskrita Bharati, ISBN 978-81-87276-67-3, p. 259) lists the ‘san’ conjugation as ‘cukṣutsati’. Now this form cannot be expressed by taking `san’ from the `sannanta’ root ` bubhukṣ’ since “śaiṣikānmatubarthīyācchaiṣiko matubarthakaḥ, sarūpaḥ pratyayo neṣṭaḥ sannantānna saniṣyate” (Kārikā in `Mahābhāṣya’ 3.1.7). So we simply say

[6] `cukṣutsati’ = ‘bubhukṣitum icchati’

means ‘wants to wants to eat’ (खाना चाहना चाहता/चाहती है) or `wants to be hungry’ (भूखा होना चाहता/चाहती है). It sounds odd in English or Hindi, but it is difficult to translate the language of the gods in the world of men.