Sahitya-kaumudi by Baladeva Vidyabhushana

by Gaurapada Dāsa | 2015 | 234,703 words

Baladeva Vidyabhusana’s Sahitya-kaumudi covers all aspects of poetical theory except the topic of dramaturgy. All the definitions of poetical concepts are taken from Mammata’s Kavya-prakasha, the most authoritative work on Sanskrit poetical rhetoric. Baladeva Vidyabhushana added the eleventh chapter, where he expounds additional ornaments from Visv...

अथार्थालङ्कारान् आह,

athārthālaṅkārān āha,

Now he mentions the ornaments of meaning:

1. Upamā

sādharmyam upamā bhede ||10.87a||

sādharmyam—the similarity of attribute; upamā—the ornament called upamā (simile); bhede—when there is a difference.

Upamā (simile) is a similarity of attribute when there is a difference between the upamāna and the upameya.

vāstave bhede saty upamānopameyayoḥ kenacit samānena dharmeṇa sambandha upamā. bheda-grahaṇād ananvaye nātivyāptiḥ.

Upamā is the relationship, when the difference is substantial, between an upamāna (standard of comparison, also called the vehicle) and an upameya (subject of the comparison, also called the tenor) which occurs on account of some attribute in common. In the definition, the mention of “difference” serves to exclude the ananvaya ornament (self-comparison) (10.27).

Commentary:

Mammaṭa treats of sixty ornaments of meaning, not counting saṃsṛṣṭi and saṅkara (10.243). Govinda Ṭhakkura says Mammaṭa lists sixty-one ornaments of meaning,[1] but he counts saṃsṛṣṭi and saṅkara as ornaments and omits mālā-dīpaka, although Mammaṭa clearly meant to include it as an ornament proper because, unlike for mālopamā, raśanopamā and other subvarieties of ornaments, he made a sūtra to define mālā-dīpaka (10.98). Kavikarṇapūra does not count saṃsṛṣṭi and saṅkara as ornaments proper,[2] but Viśvanātha Kavirāja does.[3]

In their chapters on ornaments of meaning, most poetical theorists begin with upamā because similitude is the foundation of many ornaments. A similitude is directly expressed in several ornaments and is inherently implied in many others.

Regarding Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa’s elaboration, Mammaṭa himself does not specify whether the difference is “substantial”.[4] The gist is that a simile (upamā) is contrasted with a metaphor (rūpaka), which is characterized by a nondifference between the upamāna and the upameya (10.44): In a simile, such as “moon-like face”, the occurrence of a word of comparison (like) establishes a difference between the upamāna (the moon) and the upameya (the face), whereas in a metaphor, “Her face is a moon,” there is no such difference because a word of comparison is not used. In general, the similarity in a simile is stated whereas in a metaphor it is implied.

There are two broad kinds of figures of speech: ordinary and literary. Mammaṭa’s definition of upamā does not exclude an ordinary simile, yet such an exclusion is understood because later, in the context of the viśeṣa ornament, Mammaṭa cites Bhāmaha’s dictum that there is no ornament without poetic expression.[5]

Paṇḍita-rāja Jagannātha criticizes Mammaṭa’s definition: He says it is not too lovely because it can include the similarity in the vyatireka ornament (contrast).[6] However, Mammaṭa’s definitions of ornaments are so framed that only the most specific definition applies to a set of words whenever applicable. The universal axiom is that a special rule (apavāda) supersedes the general rule (utsarga).[7]

Viśvanātha Kavirāja states that in essence an ornament adds resplendence to sound (in the case of ornaments of sound) and to the meanings (in the case of ornaments of meaning) while embellishing the rasa.[8] To spell it out, Viśvanātha says that the purpose of a simile, such as: “Her face is resplendent like the moon,” is to exalt the upameya (the face), the subject of description.[9] That simile enhances śṛṅgāra-rasa by giving eminence to the face of the woman who is the viṣaya (the object of the sthāyi-bhāva) (Commentary 8.2). The beauty of her face is an uddīpana (stimulus).

Paṇḍita-rāja Jagannātha tones down Viśvanātha Kavirāja’s extremist viewpoint, originated by Ānandavardhana,[10] that by definition an ornament adorns the rasa. According to Jagannātha, a simile is an ornament in one of five ways. It adorns either: (1) a vastu-dhvani (an implied idea), (2) an alaṅkāra-dhvani (an implied ornament), (3) a rasa-dhvani, (4) a literally expressed vastu, or (5) a literally expressed alaṅkāra.[11] This verse is his example of a simile that adorns a vastu-dhvani,

avirata-paropakaraṇa-[12]
  vyagrī-bhavad-amala-cetasāṃ mahatām |
āpāta-kāṭavāni
  sphuranti vacanāni bheṣajānīva
||

“The words, which seem harsh on the occasion, of the greats whose pure hearts have become completely engrossed in assisting others are like medicine” (Rasa-gaṅgādhara).

Here the simile (their words are like medicine) adorns the implied idea that a person who undeviatingly implements those seemingly harsh words attains great happiness.[13] The following is Jagannātha’s example of a simile that adorns an implied ornament:

aṅkāyamānam alike mṛganābhi-paṅkaṃ
  paṅkeruhākṣi vadanaṃ tava vīkṣya bibhrat
|
ullāsa-pallavita-komala-pakṣa-mūlāś
  cañcū-puṭaṃ capalayanti cakora-potāḥ
||

Lotus-eyed sweetheart, upon seeing your face, which bears on the forehead a spot of musk that looks like a mark, the young cakoras, whose beginnings as birds are budding with joy, open their beaks” (Rasa-gaṅgādhara).

The bhrāntimān ornament (mistaken perception) (10.221) is implied here because the young cakora birds open their beaks due to mistaking her face for the moon. The simile is in the word aṅkāyamāna (it looks like a mark): It adorns that implied bhrāntimān.[14] The poetic convention is that cātaka birds subsist on rain, whereas cakora birds subsist on moonlight.

This is Jagannātha’s example of a simile that adorns the rasa,

guru-jana-bhaya-mad-vilokanāntaḥ-
  samudayad-ākula-bhāvam āvahantyāḥ
|
dalad-aravinda-sundaraṃ
  hā hariṇa-dṛśo nayanaṃ na vismarāmi
||

“Ah, I do not forget her eye, beautiful like a blown lotus, when she experienced an overwhelming emotion, out of fear of the elders, while glancing at me” (Rasa-gaṅgādhara).

Here the simile “her eye is beautiful like a blown lotus”[15] adorns vipralambha śṛṅgāra-rasa (the mood of separation) by embellishing the vyabhicāri-bhāva called smṛti (remembrance).[16]

This verse illustrates a simile that adorns a literally expressed idea:

amṛta-drava-mādhurī-bhṛtaḥ sukhayanti śravasī sakhe giraḥ |
nayane śiśirī-karotu me śarad-indu-pratimaṃ mukhaṃ tava ||

“Your words have a sweetness that flows like nectar and gladden my ears. Now let your face, an image of the autumnal moon, cool my eyes” (Rasa-gaṅgādhara).

Here the simile “your face is an image of the autumnal moon” adorns the literal sense: It cools the eyes.[17] This is an example of a simile that adorns a literally expressed ornament:

śiśireṇa yathā saroruhaṃ divasenāmṛtaraśmi-maṇḍalam |
na manāg api tanvi śobhate tava roṣeṇa tathedam ānanam ||

“Slender girl, as a lotus is not even slightly resplendent because of frost and the moon is not even slightly resplendent because of daytime, so is your face because of anger” (Rasa-gaṅgādhara).

The simile adorns the dīpaka ornament (lamp).[18] Dīpaka occurs here because the verb śobhate (is resplendent) is stated once and applies to three subjects.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

[…] saṃsṛṣṭi-saṅkarau caivam eka-ṣaṣṭhir udīritāḥ (Kāvya-pradīpa 10.87).

[2]:

upamādaya ete’mī vyāghātāntāḥ krameṇa hi dvi-ṣaṣṭi-saṅkhyā evaite’laṅkārā bahavaḥ punaḥ, saṃsṛṣṭyā saṅkareṇāpi bhūyaḥ (Alaṅkāra-kaustubha 8.297).

[3]:

yady eta evālaṅkārāḥ paraspara-vimiśritāḥ |
tadā pṛthag-alaṅkārau saṃsṛṣṭiḥ saṅkaras tathā || (Sāhitya-darpaṇa 10.97)

[4]:

Mammaṭa’s elaboration is: upamānopameyayor eva na tu kārya-kāraṇādikayoḥ sādharmyaṃ bhavatīti tayor eva samānena dharmeṇa sambandha upamā. bheda-grahaṇam ananvaya-vyavacchedāya (Kāvya-prakāśa 10.87).

[5]:

sarvatra evaṃ-vidha-viṣaye’tiśayoktir eva prāṇatvenāvatiṣṭhate tāṃ vinā prāyeṇālaṅkāratvāyogāt. ata evoktam “saiṣā sarvaiva vakroktir anayārtho vibhāvyate, yatno'syāṃ kavinā kāryaḥ ko’laṅkāro’nayā vinā” [Bhāmahālaṅkāra 2.85] iti (Kāvya-prakāśa verse 562 vṛtti).

[6]:

evaṃ kāvya-prakāśoktam api “sādharmyam upamā bhede” iti lakṣaṇaṃ nātīva-ramaṇīyam, vyatireke niṣedha-pratiyogini sādṛśye’tivyāpanāt (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM pp. 162-163).

[7]:

Jīva Gosvāmī writes: samasta-vyāpi sāmānyam, eka-deśa-vyāpī viśeṣaḥ; sāmānya-vidhir utsargo, viśeṣa-vidhir apavādaḥ iti sthite pūrva-parayoḥ para-vidhir balavān, nityānityayor nityaḥ, antaraṅga-bahiraṅgayor antaraṅgaḥ, utsargāpavādayor apavādaḥ. teṣu cottarottara iti. (Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyākaraṇa 50)

[8]:

śabdārthayor asthirā ye dharmāḥ śobhātiśāyinaḥ | rasādīn upakurvanto’laṅkārās te’ṅgadādi-vat || (Sāhitya-darpaṇa 10.1)

[9]:

upamānopameyayor iti, candra iva mukhaṃ śobhata ity ādau prakṛtasya mukhāder utkarṣādhāyakatvaṃ candrādy-upamānaṃ mukhādi copameyam (Kāvya-prakāśa-darpaṇa).

[10]:

alaṅkāro hi bāhyālaṅkāra-sāmyād aṅginaś cārutva-hetur ucyate (Dhvanyāloka 2.5); alaṅkāro hi bāhyālaṅkāra-sāmyād aṅginaś cārutva-hetur ucyate. vācyālaṅkāra-vargaś ca rūpakādir yāvān ukto vakṣyate ca kaiścit, alaṅkārāṇām anantatvāt. sa sarvo’pi yadi samīkṣya viniveśyate tad alakṣya-krama-vyaṅgyasya dhvaner aṅginaḥ sarvasyaiva cārutva-hetur niṣpadyate. (Dhvanyāloka 2.17).

[11]:

iyaṃ caivaṃ-bhedopamā vastv-alaṅkāra-rasa-rūpāṇāṃ pradhāna-vyaṅgyānāṃ vastv-alaṅkārayor vācyayoś copaskārakatayā pañcadhā (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM p. 172).

[12]:

anavarata-paropakaraṇa- (Kāvya-mālā edition). The above reading from the Caukhambā edition fits the meter.

[13]:

atra tādṛṃśi vacanāny artha-dvārā sevamānasya manāg apy akṣubhyataḥ pariṇāme paramaṃ sukhaṃ bhavatīti prādhānyena vyaṅgyasya vastuna upaskārikā bheṣajopamā (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM p. 172).

[14]:

atra prādhānyena vyaṅgye āropyamāṇa-candrake bhrāntimaty alaṅkāre upapādakasya bhāla-stha-mṛgamada-paṅka-viṣayakasyāṅkābhedāropasyāṅka-sādṛśya-rūpa-doṣa-mūlakatvād upamātrālaṅkāraḥ (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM pp. 172-173).

[15]:

The commentator Pandit Madana Mohana Jhā specifies that here the singular in nayanam (eye) implies that the speaker only saw one eye since she furtively glanced at him from the corner of one eye: nayanaṃ netram, eka-vacanenaika-nayana-karaṇaka-kaṭākṣa-vīksaṇaṃ vyajyate (Jhā, Madana Mohana (2008), Rasa-gaṅgādhara of Paṇḍita-rāja Jagannātha, Vol. II, p. 224).

[16]:

atra dalad-aravinda-śabdasyopamāna-vācakasya sundara-śabdena sāmānya-vacanena samāse pratīyamānopamā sakala-vākyārthasya vipralambha-śṛṅgārasya smṛty-upaskaraṇadvāropaskārakatayālaṅkāraḥ (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM p. 160).

[17]:

atra nayana-śiśirī-karaṇa-rūpe vastuni vācye mukhasya śarad-indūpamopaskārikā (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM p. 173).

[18]:

atra vācyasya dīpakasyopamopaskārikā (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM p. 173).

Help me keep this site Ad-Free

For over a decade, this site has never bothered you with ads. I want to keep it that way. But I humbly request your help to keep doing what I do best: provide the world with unbiased truth, wisdom and knowledge.

Let's make the world a better place together!

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: