Text 10.44 [Rūpaka]

6. Rūpaka

तद् रूपकम् अभेदो य उपमानोपमेययोः ॥ १०.९३ab ॥

tad rūpakam abhedo ya upamānopameyayoḥ || 10.93ab ||

A nondifference between the upamāna and the upameya is a rūpaka (metaphor).

vyakta-bhedayor apy atisāmyād abhedo rūpakam.

A rūpaka is a nondifference in terms of a high degree of similarity between two entities whose differences are manifest.

Commentary:

The purpose of the elaboration is to clarify that the definition does not encompass the apahnuti ornament (10.59).^[1] The gist of the term “nondifference” is that the mind superimposes a nondifference between two things upon the notion of difference between them.⁷⁴⁰ A classic example is: tasyā mukhaṃ candraḥ, “Her face is a moon.” The moon is superimposed on the face. The connection between the face and the moon takes place by qualitative figurative usage (gauṇī-vṛtti)^[2] since the literal meaning does not make sense and since they have a similarity. The sentence means: “Her face has an attribute which is similar to an attribute of the moon.” Daṇḍī’s definition of rūpaka is: upamaiva tirobhūta-bhedā rūpakam ucyate, “A simile in which a difference has disappeared is called a metaphor” (Kāvyādarśa 2.66). Kavikarṇapūra says a metaphor is an assertion of identity between two things: rūpakaṃ tu tat yat tādātmyaṃ dvayoḥ (Alaṅkāra-kaustubha 8.66). The difference between a poetical metaphor and an ordinary metaphor is that a poetical metaphor is founded upon a charming similarity. Paṇḍita-rāja Jagannātha points out that in a metaphor the types of relations between the respective similar attributes of each entity follow the same scheme as those in a simile. The two broad categories are “expressed” and “implied”.^[3] Most of the time the similarity is implied.

Jagannātha criticizes Mammaṭa’s definition of rūpaka (metaphor) for the same reason he criticizes Mammaṭa’s definition of upamā (simile): It is overinclusive. For instance, Jagannātha says that by Mammaṭa’s definition, a sentence such as: nūnaṃ mukhaṃ candraḥ, “Indeed, her face is a moon” would have to be classed as a rūpaka.^[4] In Kāvya-prakāśa, Mammaṭa never said which words are expressive of an utprekṣā.

Jagannātha defines rūpaka as follows: upameyatāvacchedaka-puraskāreṇopameye śabdān niścīyamānam upamāna-tādātmyaṃ rūpakam, tad evopaskārakatva-viśiṣṭam alaṅkāraḥ, “Rūpaka is the sameness of nature, ascertained from the words, of the upamāna in the upameya. This involves specifying the existence of an upameya. Only a rūpaka which makes an embellishment is an ornament” (Rasa-gaṅgādhara). According to Jagannātha, the modifier niścīyamānam (ascertained) excludes the utprekṣā ornament, which involves an assumption.

In English, metaphorical language is classed as a metaphor. The definition of a metaphor is: “A figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance” (Random House Webster’s Dictionary). In Sanskrit, however, a metaphor is a superimposition of identity between two things. English metaphors like “My brother was boiling mad. (This implies he was too angry.)”^[5] and “The skies of his future began to darken. (Darkness is a threat; therefore, this implies that the coming times are going to be hard for him.)”^[6] are classed as the virodha ornament (semblance of a contradiction) (10.127). Moreover, in rūpaka the standard of comparison must be well-known, otherwise the comparison is the utprekṣā ornament (fanciful assumption) (10.31). Further, some types of metaphorical usage, such as metonymy, are simply classed in the general category of ukti-vaicitrya (poetic expression).

There are three broad categories of metaphors: (1) sāṅga (one main metaphor with additional aspects), (2) niraṅga (one metaphor without additional aspects) (this is the metaphor everyone is familiar with), and (3) paramparita (consequential metaphors, i.e. one metaphor causes the other). All in all, there are eight basic subvarieties of rūpaka.

Next, Mammaṭa expounds the first category, which has two subvarieties: samasta-vastu-viṣaya (complete overall metaphor) and eka-deśa-vivarti (partial overall metaphor).

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

atisāmyād anapahnuta-bhedayor abhedaḥ. (Kāvya-prakāśa 10.93 vṛtti) 740 abhedo’bhedāropaḥ. tad-bījaṃ tu tatrātisāmyam (Kāvya-pradīpa).

[2]:

The ornaments based on the principle of a metaphor are founded upon gauṇī-vṛtti (qualitative figurative usage) (gauṇī sāropā and gauṇī sādhyavasānā) (2.16): bheda-pratīti puraḥ-sarasyaivāropasya gauṇī-mūla-rūpakādi-prayojakatvāt (Sāhitya-darpaṇa 10.87).

[3]:

sādharaṇa-dharmaś cātrāpy upamāyām iva kvacid anugāmī kvacid bimba-pratibimbabhāvāpannaḥ kvacid upacaritaḥ kvacic ca kevala-śabdātmā. so’pi kvacic chabdenopāttaḥ kvacit pratīyamānatayā nopāttaḥ (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM p. 243).

[4]:

yac ca “tad rūpakam abhedo ya upamānopameyayoḥ” ity ādi prācīnair uktam, tac cintyam, apahnuty-ādāv upamānopameyayor abhedasya pratīti-siddhatayā tatrātiprasaṅgāt. athopamānopameyayor ity uktyā upameyatāvacchedakaṃ puraskṛtyopamānatāvacchedakāvacchinnābheda ity artha-lābhād apahnutau copameyatāvacchedakasya puraskārābhāvān nātiprasaṅga iti cet, na, “nūnaṃ mukhaṃ candraḥ” ity ādy utprekṣāyāṃ tathāpy atiprasakteḥ (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM pp. 229-230).

[5]:

http://literarydevices.net/metaphor

[6]:

http://literarydevices.net/metaphor