3: The classification of poetic figures

The popular division of poetic figures into śabdālaṃkāras and arthālaṃkāras can be of ancient origin. Bharata uses the word ‘śabdābhyāsa’ with reference to yamaka. Abhinavagupta asserts that Bharata was aware of the popular division of poetic figures^[1] . Bhāmaha also appears to have supported the distinction between figures based on words and sense. Daṇḍin is the first rhetorician to mention this division clearly. He devotes two separate chapters to treat these two broad divisions of poetic figures. Vāmana also does the same though he follows the more conventional way—mentioning śabdālaṃkāras before arthālaṃkāras. The mention of śabdārthālaṃkāras as an independent division of poetic figures appears in Agnipurāṇa and Bhoja. Bhoja enumerates the maximum number of such figures including in it some popular arthālaṃkāras like upamā, rūpaka etc.

Bhoja also suggests three new names for the three major divisions of figures—

1. bāhyāḥ (śabdālaṃkāras),
2. ābhyantarāḥ (arthālaṃkāras) and
3. bāhyābhyantarāḥ (śabdārthālaṃkāras)^[2] .

The most predominant śabdārthālaṃkāra seems to be punaruktavadābhāsa as almost all the later rhetoricians have admitted it.

Apart from this traditional division of poetic figures some of the Sanskrit rhetoricians have tried to furnish unique classifications of figures. Bhāmaha is the first rhetorician who groups the poetic figures in a peculiar way. He has neither suggested any principle for such classification nor has he endowed names to these groups. His first group contains five figures which includes in it the four figures mentioned by Bharata. Anuprāsa, the additional figure included in this group, can be regarded as a variety of yamaka as enumerated by Bharata.

In the second group six figures are included. They are—

1. ākṣepa,
2. arthāntaranyāsa,
3. vyatireka,
4. vibhāvanā,
5. samāsokti and
6. atiśayokti.

The third group contains only two figures—

1. yathāsaṃkhya and
2. utprekṣā.

The fourth and the last group contain twenty -four figures. This four -fold division of figures probably indicates the different stages of development and multiplication of figures on or before Bhāmaha’s time.

Udbhaṭa has enumerated poetic figures almost i n the same order as they appear in Bhāmaha’s work. However, he mentions a substantial amount of sub-varieties of certain figures which seem to be unknown to Bhāmaha.

He devotes six chapters (vargas) in his treatment of poetic figures.

1) The first chapter contains śabdālaṃkāras (punaruktavadābhāsa and three varieties of anuprāsa) and three major arthālaṃkāras-upamā, rūpaka and dīpaka which were mentioned by Bharata along with another arthālaṃkāra prativastūpamā.

2) The second chapter has six (ākṣepa, arthāntaranyāsa, vyatireka, vibhāvana, samāsokti, atiśayokti),

3) The third chapter has three (yathāsaṃkhya, utprekṣā, svabhāvokti),

4) The fourth chapter has seven (preyasvat, rasavat, ūrjasvi, paryāyokta, samāhita, udātta, śliṣṭa),

5) The fifth chapter has eleven (apahnuti, viśeṣokti, virodha, tulyayogitā, aprastutapraśaṃsā, vyājastuti, vidarśanā, saṃkara, upameyopamā, sahokti, parivṛtti) and

6) The sixth and the final chapter has six (sasandeha, ananvaya, saṃsṛṣṭi, bhāvika, kāvyahetu or kāvyaliṅga and kāvyadṛṣṭānta) figures of sense treated.

The peculiar scheme of dividing figures into six chapters seems to be in line with the vision of Bhāmaha. This may be an indication to the gradual development of figures from time to time.

The next unique scheme of figures comes from Rudraṭā. He first classifies the figures the figures into śabdālaṃkāra and arthālaṃkāra generally.

Again, he puts arthālaṃkāras under four-fold division—figures based on:

1. vāstava (reality),
2. aupamya (comparision),
3. atiśaya (elevatedness) and
4. śleṣa (coalescence).

This type of classification has raised many questions as some of the figures appear under different groups. So this scheme of figures advocated by Rudraṭāis not widely accepted by the later rhetoricians.

Vidyānātha adopts several principles for the classification of figures.

They are as follows—

i) Based on abhedapradhāna sādharmya—rūpaka, pariṇāma, saṃdeha, bhrāntimat, ullekha and apahnuti.

ii) Based on bhedapradhāna sādharmya—dīpaka, tulyayogitā, nidarśanā, dṛṣṭānta, prativastūpamā, sahokti, pratīpa and vyatireka.

iii) Based on bhedābhedapradhāna sādharmya—upamā, ananvaya, upameyopamā and smaraṇa.

iv) Based on adhyavasāya—utprekṣā and atiśayokti.

v) Based on virodha—vibhāvanā, viśeṣokti, viṣama, citra, asaṅgati, anyonya, vyāghāta, atadguṇa, bhāvika and viśeṣa.

vi) Based on vākyanyāya—yathāsaṃkhya, parisaṃkhyā, arthāpatti, vikalpa and samuccaya.

vii) Based on lokavyavahara—parivṛtti, pratyanīka, tadguṇa, samādhi, sama, svabhāvoki, udātta, and vinokti.

viii) Based on tarkanyāya—kāvyaliṅga, anumāna and arthāntaranyāsa.

ix) Based on śṛṅkhalāvaicitrya—kāraṇamālā, ekāvalī, mālādīpaka and sāra.

x) Based on apahnava—vyājokti, vakrokti and mīlana.

xi) Based on viśeṣaṇavaicitrya—samāsokti and parikara^[3] .

Some of the Sanskrit rhetoricians have followed some principles on which they have moduled their scheme of figures. Bhāmaha has regarded vakrokti or atiśayokti as the basic essence of poetic figures. Kuntaka follows this vakrokti-theory even more rigidly and rejects figures like svabhāvokti which are devoid of vakratā. Jagannātha puts forth ramaṇīyatā occurring from varied imagination of the poet as the nucleus of poetic figures. Vāmana has also emphasised on similarity in reckoning poetic figures and thus rejects a large number of conventional poetic figures which are devoid of similarity.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

ciraṃtanairhi bharatamuniprabhṛtibhiryamakopame śabdārthālaṃkāratveneṣṭe/
  —Dhvanyāloka (of Ānandavardhana) 1.1. Locana, p-5.

[2]:

śabdārthobhayasaṃjñābhiralaṃkārāṅkavīśvarāḥ/
bāhyānābhyantarānbāhyābhyantarāṃścānuśāsati//s K. 2.1.

[3]:

sādharmyaṃ trividham—bhedapradhānamabhedapradhānaṃ bhedābhedapradhānaṃ ceti / upamānopameyayoḥ svato bhinnatvācchābdametanna vāstavam/ rūpakapariṇāmasaṃdehabhrāntimadullekhāpahnavānāmabhedapravānasādharmyanibandhanatva m/ dīpakatulyayogitānidarśanādṛṣṭāntaprativastūpamāsahoktipratīpavyatirekāḥ bhedapradhānasādhargyanibandhanāḥ/ upamānanvayopameyopamāsmaraṇānāṃ bhedābhedasādhāraṇasādharmyamūlatā/ utprekṣātiśayoktīadhyavasāyamūle/ vibhāvanāviśeṣoktiviṣamacitrāsaṅgatyanyonyavyāghātātadguṇabhāvikaviśeṣāṇāṃ virodhamūlatā/ yathāsaṃkhyaparisaṃkhyārthāpattivikalpasamuccayānāṃ vākyanyāyamūlatā/ parivṛttipratyanīkatadguṇasamādhisamasvabhāvoktyudāttavinoktayo lokavyavahāramūlāḥ/ kāvyaliṅgānumānārthāntaranyāsānāṃ tarkanyāyamūlatā/ kāraṇamālaikāvalīmālādīpakasārāḥ śṛṅkhalāvaicitryamūlāḥ/ vyājoktivakroktimīlanānyapahnavamūlāni/ samāsoktiparikarau viśeṣaṇavaicitryamūlau /
  —Pratāparudrayaśobhūṣaṇa (of Vidyānātha) Chapter-VII, p-336.