13: Definition of Vibhāvanā Alaṃkāra

Vibhāvanā is one of the most prominent arthālaṃkāras based on peculiar causation. Bhāmaha is the first rhetorician to define and illustrate the figure.

He defines it as—

kriyāyāḥ pratiṣedhe yātatphalasya vibhāvanā/
jñeyāvibhāvanaivāsau samādhau sulabhe sati//
  —Kāvyālaṃkāra (of Bhāmaha) 2.77.

—When the presence of a certain action is denied but the result of that action is displayed, the figure is called vibhāvanā.

In vibhāvanā, a certain satisfaction is easily obtained by the understanding of the process by which the result took place. Udbhaṭa furnishes the same definition of vibhāvanā (Kāvyālaṃkārasārasaṃgraha (of Udbhaṭā) 2.9.).

The law of causation (kāryakāraṇabhāva) has been regarded as the root of all practical matters. According to this law every cause has its own effect. Cause and effect are co-related and no effect is possible without its proper cause. Vibhāvanā displays a peculiar causation as the effect of a certain cause is mentioned here along with the denial or the absence of the familiar cause. This type of production of a certain effect without a cause is a clear violation of the natural law of causation. This is known as sṛṣṭikramavirodha. Thus rhetoricians like Ruyyaka, Jagannātha etc. have accepted vibhāvanā as a figure of speech based on virodha^[1] . The figure vibhāvanā is, however, quite different from the figure virodha. In virodha, the equipotent things brought in opposition to each other have no causal relationship between themselves. But in vibhāvanā, the virodha or contradiction represented is an apparent one. This contradiction can be resolved in no time by comprehending the unfamiliar cause for the mentioned effect.

Daṇḍin’s definition of vibhāvanā is somehow different from that of Bhāmaha and Udbhaṭa—

prasiddhahetuvyāvṛttyāyat kiñcit kāraṇāntaram/
yatra svābhāvikatvaṃ vāvibhāvyaṃ sāvibhāvanā//
  —Kāvyādarśa (of Daṇḍin) 2.199.

—In vibhāvanā, the generally accepted causes of a certain effect is denied and another natural or attributed cause is stated.

So, according to Daṇḍin, the solution for resolving the apparent contradiction present in vibhāvanā is either kāraṇāntaravibhāvana (comprehension of an unfamiliar or hidden cause) or svābhāvikatvavibhāvana (searching for some natural cause).

Bhoja furnishes almost the same definition of the figure^[2] while VāgbhaṭāI follows it^[3] .

Vāmana has defined the figure vibhāvanā as—

kriyāpratiṣedhe prasiddhatatphalavyaktirvibhāvanā/
  —Kāvyālaṃkārasūtravṛtti (of Vāmana) 4.3.13.

—When after denying the presence of a definite action the well-known effect of that action is stated, the figure is called vibhāvanā.

Vāmana illustrates the figure with a consequential verse—

apyasajjanasāṃgatye na vasatyeva vaikṛtam/
akṣālitaviśuddheṣu hṛdayeṣu manīṣiṇām//
  —Kāvyālaṃkārasūtravṛtti (of Vāmana) 4.3.13.

—Even in the company of the wicked the naturally pure hearts of wise men remain unaffected.

The well-known cause of purity is the process of purgation. But the hearts of wise men are naturally pure. So, they do not need any outer method of purgation for attaining their inner purity. The word ‘akṣālitaviśuddheṣu’ present in the verse denotes the figure vibhāvanā.

The Kāmadhenu commentator asserts—

akṣālitaviśuddheṣvityatra kāraṇarūpakṣālanakriyāpratiṣedhe'pi tatphalabhūtāyāviśuddheḥ prakāśanāt vibhāvanā/
  —Kāmadhenu, Kāvyālaṃkārasūtravṛtti (of Vāmana) 4.3.13.

Bhāmaha, Udbhaṭa, Vāmana and Mammaṭa^[4] have used the word ‘kriyā’ while defining the figure vibhāvanā. Other rhetoricians like Daṇḍin, Bhoja, Rudraṭa, Ruyyaka^[5] , Jayadeva^[6] , Vidyādhara^[7] , Vidyānātha^[8] , Viśvanātha^[9] , Jagannātha^[10] etc. have used the word ‘kāraṇa’ or ‘hetu’ instead of ‘kriyā’ in their definitions.

Ruyyaka has justified the use of the word ‘kāraṇa’ in his definition in the following way—

iha ca lakṣaṇeyadyapanyaiḥ kāraṇapadasthāne kriyāgrahaṇaṃ kṛtaṃ tathāpīha kāraṇapadameva vihitam / na hi sarvaiḥ kriyāphalameva kāryamabhyupagamyate/ vaiyākaraṇaireva tathābhyupagamāt / ato viśeṣamanapekṣya sāmānyena kāraṇapadameveha nirdiṣṭam/
  —Alaṃkārasarvasva (of Ruyyaka) p-125.

—According to Ruyyaka, the effect (kārya) is not always a result of an action (kriyā). This is the opinion of the grammarians also. So, the word ‘kāraṇa’ has been used in the definition to indicate all sorts of causes in general. It also seems that Udbhaṭā, Vāmana and Mammaṭa have used the word ‘kriyā’ in their definition in the sense of ‘kāraṇa’ or ‘hetu’^[11] .

Vibhāvanā has been variously sub -divided by Sanskrit rhetoricians.

First of such sub-division has been stated by Daṇḍin who gives a two-fold distinction of this figure as:

1. kāraṇāntaravibhāvanā and
2. svābhāvikatvavibhāvanā.

Bhoja has also followed this two-fold classification of the figure. He also adds a three-fold sub-division of the figure as:

1. śuddhā,
2. citrā and
3. vicitrā^[12] .

Rudraṭa has considered vibhāvanā as a figure based on atiśaya. He also puts forth a three-fold division of the figure^[13] . Appayya Dīkṣīta furnishes a six -fold classification of vibhāvanā^[14] but this division has been criticised by Jagannātha^[15] .

The most common sub-division of vibhāvanā is of two-fold—

1. uktanimittā (when a cause other than the familiar cause is noted) and
2. anuktanimittā (when a cause is not noted at all).

This division is admitted by most of the Sanskrit rhetoricians.

From the various definitions of the figure vibhāvanā put forth by the Sanskrit rhetoricians we can figure out its common characteristics. They are—

i) Vibhāvanā is created by peculiar causation. It is based on the contradiction of the natural law of causation.

ii) Vibhāvanā is generated when in the absence of a cause or through the denial of a cause, the effect is mentioned.

iii) The contradiction present in vibhāvanā can be easily resolved by the comprehension of an unfamiliar cause.

iv) The name of the figure can be explained as ‘vibhāvyate kāraṇāntarādi yasyām’ (in the absence of the well-known cause another natural or attributed cause is thought of) or ‘viśiṣṭatayākāryasya bhāvanāt’ (the effect is conceived in a peculiar manner).

Vāmana has furnished the common features of vibhāvanā in his definition. He has not put forth any sub-division of the figure. He has treated the figure after the figure virodha indicating the difference between these two figures. His definition is quite close to that of Bhāmaha but it seems to be more terse and compact.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

evaṃ virodhamuktva virodhamūlāalaṃkārāḥ pradarśyante /
tatrāpi kāraṇabhāvamūlatve vibhāvanāṃ tāvadāha/
  —Alaṃkārasarvasva (of Ruyyaka) p-123.

Also—

virodhamūla hi vibhāvanādyalaṃkārāḥ / virodhasyaiva vidyutprabhāvavadāpātataḥ pratibhāsamānasya camatkāravījatvāt/
  —Rasa-gaṅgādhara (of Jagannātha) Chapter-II, p-435.

[2]:

prasiddhahetuvyāvṛttyāyat kiñcit kāraṇāntaram/
yatra svābhāvikaṃ vāpi vibhāvyaṃ sāvibhāvanā//
  —Sarasvatī-kaṇṭhābharaṇa (of Bhoja) 3.9.

[3]:

vinākāraṇasadbhāvaṃ yatra kāryasya darśanam/
naisargikaguṇotkarṣabhāvanāt sāvibhāvanā//
  —Vāgbhaṭālaṃkāra (of Vāgbhaṭa I) 4.97.

[4]:

kriyāyāḥ pratiṣedhe'pi phalavyaktirvibhāvanā/
  —Kāvya-prakāśa (of Mammaṭa) 10. 161.

[5]:

kāraṇābhāve kāryasyotpattirvibhāvanā/
  —Alaṃkārasarvasva (of Ruyyaka) p-124.

[6]:

vibhāvanāvināpi syāt kāraṇaṃ kāryajanma cet/
  —Candrāloka (of Jayadeva) 5.77.

[7]:

asati prasiddhahetau kāryotpattirvibhāvanābhavati/
  —Ekāvalī (of Vidyādhara) 8.36.

[8]:

kāraṇena vinākāryasyotpattiḥ syādvibhāvanā/
  —Pratāparudrayaśobhūṣaṇa (of Vidyānātha) Chapter-VIII, p-423.

[9]:

vibhāvanāvināhetuṃ kāryotpattiryaducyate/
  —Sāhitya-darpaṇa (of Viśvanātha) 10.66.

[10]:

kāraṇavyatirekasāmānādhikaraṇyena pratipādyamānākāryotpattir-vibhāvanā/
  —Rasa-gaṅgādhara (of Jagannātha) chapter-II, p-431.

[11]:

kāranavigame kila kāryasya tatrotpattirūpavarṇyate ato vir uddhābhāṣā bhāvanāutpādanātena vibhāvanā/
  —Laghuvṛtti, Kāvyālaṃkārasārasaṃgraha (of Udbhaṭā) 2.9.

Also—

kriyāyāḥ kāraṇarūpāyāḥ pratiṣedhe prasiddhasya tasyāḥ kriyāyāḥ phalasya kāryabhūtasya vyaktiḥ prakāśanaṃ yat sāvibhāvaneti vākyārthaḥ/
  —Kāmadhenu, Kāvyālaṃkārasūtravṛtti (of Vāmana) 4.3.13.

Also—

heturūpakriyāyāniṣedhe'pi tatra prakāśanaṃ vibhāvanā/
  —Kāvya-prakāśa (of Mammaṭa) vṛtti. 10.161.

Also—

vaiyākaraṇamate kriyaiva heturiti kriyetyuktam /
vastutastu kāraṇapratiṣedhe kāryavacanaṃ vibhāvanā/
  —Pradīpa, Kāvya-prakāśa (of Mammaṭa) 10.161.

[12]:

śuddhācitrāvicitrāca vividhāsānigadyate/
śuddhāyataikamuddiśya hetureko nivartate//
aneko yatra sācitrāvicitrāyatra tāṃ prati/
tayānyayāvāgīrbhaṅgyāviśeṣaḥ kaściducyate//
  —Sarasvatī-kaṇṭhābharaṇa (of Bhoja) 3.10-11.

[13]:

seyaṃ vibhāvanākhyāyasyāmupalabhyamānamabhidheyam/
abhidhīyate yataḥ syāttatkāraṇamantareṇaiva//
yasyāṃ tathāvikārastatkāraṇamantareṇa suvyaktaḥ/
prabhavati vastuviśeṣevibhāvanāseyamanyātu//
yasya yathātvaṃ loke prasiddhamarthasya vidyate tasmāt/
anyasyāpi yathātvaṃ yasyāmucyeta sānyeyam//
  —Kāvyalaṃkāra (of Rudraṭā) 9.16/18/20.

[14]:

vibhāvanāvināpi syāt kāraṇaṃ kāryajanma cet/
hetunāmasamagratve kāryotpattiśca sāmatā/
kāryotpattistṛtiyāsyāt satyapi pratibandhake/
akāraṇāt kāryajanma caturthīsyādvibhāvanā/
viruddhāt kāryasaṃpattirdṛṣṭākācidvibhāvanā/
kāryāt kāraṇajanmāpi dṛṣṭākācidvibhāvanā/
  —Kuvalayānanda (of Appayyadīkṣīta) 77-82.

[15]:

tasmādādyena prakāreṇa prakārāntarāṇāmālīḍhatvāt ṣaṭprakārā
ityanupannameva/
  —Rasa-gaṅgādhara (of Jagannātha) Chapter-II, p-434.