Chapter 2 - Use and abuse of Alankara

POETRY is not mere thought. While great poetry must necessarily embody it, very genuine poetry, at times, may do no more than give to the merest airy nothings a local habitation and a name.' Poetry does not reveal truth in logic but in light." Mere thoughts and emotions are proper subjects for the science of psychology etc. Facts, by themselves, are unattractive; sometimes reality appals us; but poets teach us as they charm: 1 sastresu durgo'pyarthah svadate kavisuktisu | hrdyam karagatam ratnam darunam phanimurdhani || | -Nilakanthadiksita, Sabharanjanasataka. 2 Darsana has to wait for Varnana. It is wrong to regard poetry as merely truth or noble emotion. validity of the statement--- 1 gorapatyam balirvadah trnanyatti mukhena sah ! ' Who can deny the Quotations of this nature occurring in this chapter are chiefly from five works: Raymond, Poetry as a Representative Art', Lamborn, The Essentials of Criticism', Bain, Rhetoric and Composition,' and Tagore 'Creative Unity' and 'Personality'. 2 ' ' tatha hi darsane svacche nitye'pyadikavermuneh | nodita kavita loke yavajjata na varnana || --- Bhatta Tauta.

Yet, is it poetry? Are there not hunger and suffering in the poor Brahmanas' plea to the king- bhojanam dehi rajendra, ghrtasupasamanvitam ? Yet, the king refused to help them and the story goes on to say that the king gave them presents only on hearing the other half filled, the story says, by Kalidasa, with the extravagant plumes of figurative language. mahisam ca saraccandracandrikaghavalam dadhi || True, as Leigh Hunt says, 'there are simplest truths often so beautiful and impressive that one of the greatest proofs of the poet's genius consists in leaving them to stand alone, illustrated by nothing but the light of their own tears or smiles, their own wonder, might or playfulness'. But, as he himself points out elsewhere, 'in poetry, feeling and imagination are necessary to the perception and presentation even of matters of fact'. The so-called figure of natural description, the Svabhavokti, is a plain statement only in a comparative degree. Plain fact or feeling is always embellished in some manner and given some catching power. Who can refuse to recognise the difference between a proposition like "nas' and this Svabhavokti of Kalidasa: niskampavrksam nibhrtadvirepham mukandajam santamrgapracaram ? -Kumarasambhava, III. Even the natural description of a poet has its strikingness; Bana says that Jati must be Agramya, navo'rtho amtirapramya (Harsacarita). Bald statements are thus excluded. Bhamaha also excludes ordinariness in expression in his description of poetry: . agramyasabdamarthyam ca salankaram sadasrayam | K. A. I. 19. alankaravadagramyam arthyam nyayyamanakulam | | 35. " "

So poetry requires not only fact and feeling but a beautiful form also; it has not only to be useful, but primarily attractive. That all poetic expression involves some kind of expressional deviation of beauty,' some out-of-the-way-ness, is well brought out by the following verse of Nilakantha diksita: yaneva sabdanvayamalapamah yaneva carthanvayamullikhamah | taireva vinyasavisesabhavyaih sammohayante kavayo jaganti || - Sivalilarnava, I. 13. This expressional deviation, this striking disposition of words and ideas, is Alamkara; this constitutes the beautiful poetic form. It will be easier to dissociate love from its physical aspect than to keep the concept of poetry aloof from its form. If we try to arrive at a clear definition of poetry with an objective differentia, certainly the definition will revolve round the concept of Alankara, the word Alankara being taken here in the widest sense of that term in which Bhamaha, Dandin and Vamana understood it. Alamkara is the beautiful in poetry, the beautiful form,: (Vamana). Examining the field of poetic expression, Bhamaha found Alankara omnipresent in it. When we reach the stage of Appayya diksita, who has given as many as one hundred and twenty-five Alankaras, we see that the whole range of poetry is almost 'Vyapta' with Alankara in general, is 'Avinabhuta' with Alankara. And to this numberlessness of Alankara, Ananda refers to; 'vacyalankaravargasca rupakadiryavanuktah vaksyate ca kaiscit, alankara- namanantatvat (The Locana adds here, pratibhanantyaditi ) | Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhana, I Cf. Bain: A figure of speech is a deviation from the plain and ordinary mode of speaking, for the sake of greater effect: it is an unusual form of speech'. Rhetoric and Composition, I.

p. 88. Mahimabhatta says: alankaranam ca abhidhatmatvam upagatam, tesam bhangibhanitirupatvat | ' V. V., I, p. 3, T.S.S. 'bhangibhanitibhedanameva alankaratvopagamat | ' Ibid., II, p. 87. ' carutvam hi vaicitryaparaparyayam prakasamanamalankarah | ' ' carutvamalankarah | ' Commentary on the Vyaktiviveka of Mahimabhatta, p. 4, T.S.S.: 'tatha ca sabdarthayorvicchittiralankarah | Ibid, p. 44. ' Namisadhu also says ' tato yavanto hrdayavarjaka arthaprakarastavanto- 'lankarah | ' Vya. on Rudrata, p. 149. Ananda has this further remark-'tat (rasa ) prakasino vacyavisesa eva rupakadayo'lankarah | ' p. 87. If Alankara is understood in this large sense as emphasising the need for a beautiful form in poetry, it is not very improper for the subject of poetics to be called Alankarasastra. ' Thus, Alankara, properly understood and properly employed, can hardly be a subject for wholesale condemnation. This is said not only in view of the large sense in which we have tried to explain it above. Taking the figures as such, the best definition we can give of them is that, in a great poet, they form the inevitable incarnations in which ideas embody themselves. Says Ananda : alankarantarani hi nirupyamanadurghatanyapi rasasamahitacetasah pratibhaऩvatah kaveh ahampurvikaya parapatanti | * * * yuktam caitat | yato rasa vacyavisesaireva akseptavyah, tatpratipadakaisca sabdaih, tatpratipa- dino vacyavisesa eva rupakadayo'lankarah |- Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhana, p. 87. Such figures can hardly be considered 'Bahiranga', in Kavya, and comparable only to the Kataka' and ' Keyura', the removable ornament. Therefore ananda continues : " tasmanna tesam bahirangatvam rasabhivyaktau | ' p. 87. They should properly "On the names of the Alankarasastra, see below.

be compared to the Alamkaras of damsels which Bharata speaks of under Samanyabhinaya, Bhava, Hava etc. and not to the Kataka and Keyura. (N.S'., XXII, [Kavyamala, N. S. Press, Bombay] edn.)' Ananda says in Udyota II that, though Alamkaras are only the Sarira, the outer body, they can be made the Saririn, the soul, sometimes, i.e., when Alankaras are not expressed but suggested; when simile, contrast etc. are richly imbedded in an utterance and in the clash of words in an expression, Alankaras shoot out. saririkaranam yesam vacyatvena vyavasthitam | Ischri: qci 31 ui qnifa eqzugai yat: 11 2 -II, 29, p. 117. Here Abhinava says: As a matter of fact, Alankaras are external ornaments on the body but can sometimes be like the Kunkuma smeared for beauty on the body, when they are organic and structural, when they are rasaksipta, aprthagyatnanirvartya and Far, far away is the hope to make this Alankara the very soul. But even this is possible in a way, says Ananda just as in the mere play of children, there is some temporary greatness for the child which plays the role of the king, so also, when this Alankara is suggested, it attains great beauty and partakes of the nature of the soul. etaduktam bhavati - sukavih vidagdhapurandhrivat bhusanam yadyapi slistam yojayati, tathapi sariratapattirevasya kastasampadya, kumkumapitikaya iva | 1 There is the 'Alankara' in Music also, with which profitable comparison can be made here but for the obscurity of the concept in early music literature and the changes in meaning the concept underwent in its later history. (Natyasastra of Bharata, [Kavyamala, N. S. Press, Bombay] edn., XXIX, 22-31.) On the greater beauty of the implied or suggested figure as compared to the expressed figure, see further Ananda, III, 37, p. 207 and Mahima, Vyaktiviveka of Mahimabhatta, p. 73:

atmatayastu ka sambhavana | evambhuta ceyam vyamgyata, yadapradhanabhutapi vacyamatralamkarebhyah utkarsamalamkaranam vitarati | balakridayamapi rajatva- mivetyamumartham manasi krtvaha- tatreti | - Locana, pp. 117 118. It must be noted here that Abhinava compares the Suslista Alankara to Kumkumalamkarana, and raises it above the level of the altogether external jewel worn, the Kataka. Bhoja realised the insufficiency of the comparison with Kataka. Alamkara as ornament of a woman also was understood by Bhoja in a large sense. Bhoja classified Alankaras into those of Sabda, Bahya, those of Artha, Abhyantara and those of both Sabda and Artha, Bahyabhyantara. The first, the most external, the verbal figure of Sabdalamkara, Bhoja compared to dressing, garlanding and wearing Kataka etc. The third, he compared to bath, treating the hair to fragrant smoke, smearing the body with Kumkuma, Candana etc. Beginning from outside, these are more intimate with the body. The second, the purely abhyantara Alankaras, the Arthalan karas, Bhoja compared to cleaning the teeth, manicuring, dressing the hair itself etc. These last are most intimate; nothing not forming part at all of the body is here superimposed.' | alankarasca tridha - bahyah, abhyantarah, bahyabhyantarasca | tesu bahyah -- vastra - malya-vibhusanadayah | abhyantarah - - dantaparikarma - nakhaccheda- alakakalpanadayah | bahyabhyantarah -- snana - dhupa- (vilepanadayah ) etc. - Srngaraprakasa. 1 Cf. Abhinava : ' yesamalamkaranam vacyatvena saririkaranam sarirabhutat prastutadarthat arthantarabhutataya asariranam katakadisthaniyanam sarirasthana- padanam • 1'- Locana, p. 117.

Albeit the importance of form, one should not misunderstand rhetoric as poetry. It is possible to sacrifice poetry at the altar of figure. There is such a thing as Aucitya, appropriateness, harmony and proportion, which is the ultimate beauty in poetry. The final ground of reference for this Aucitya, the thing with reference to which we shall speak of other things as being appropriate, is the soul of poetry, Rasa. The body becomes a carcass when there is no soul there, when life is absent from it. Of what use are ornaments on a carcass? Nilakantha diksita says: anyonyasamsargavisesaramyapyalamkrtih pratyuta socaniya | nirvyagyasare kavisuktibandhe niskrantajive vapusiva datta || --Sivalilarnava, I, 36. Ksemendra, the systematiser of Aucitya, says : ' Enough with Alamkaras; of what use are the Gunas if there is no life there? Ornaments are ornaments; excellences are excellences; but Aucitya is the life of the Rasa-ensouled Kavya': kavyasyalamalamkaraih kim mithyaganitairgunaih | yasya jivitamaucityam vicintyapi na drsyate || alankarastvalamkarah guna eva gunassada | aucityam rasasiddhasya sthiram kavyasya jivitam || -Au. v. c., 4 and 5. See also the Vrtti on these ; also my Ph. D. thesis, chaper on History of Gunas, vol. I, Pt. 2, pp. 334-5. Here Ksemendra has only amplified Abhinava and Ananda who say : tatha hi acetanam savasariram kundaladyupetamapi na bhati, alam- karyasyabhavat | yatisariram katakadiyuktam hasyavaham bhavati alamkaryasya anaucityat | - Locana, p. 75. |

anaucityahate nanyat rasabhangasya karanam | - prasiddhaucityabandhastu rasasyopanisatpara || - Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhana, p. 145. What is this Aucitya? It is the clear statement of the proper place and function of Alankara, as of other elements. ucitam prahuracaryah sadrsam kila yasya yat | ucitasthana vinyasadalamkrtiralamkrtih | alamkrtih ucitasthanavinyasadalamkartum ksama bhavati | anyatha tu alamkrtivyapadesameva na labhate | kanthe mekhalaya nitambaphalake tarena harena va nayanti ke hasyatam yadaha- aucityena vina ruci pratanute nalamkrtina gunah || ' - Au v. C. Thus Alankaras have their meaning only if they keep to their places : dhvanyatmabhute srngare samiksya vinivesitah | rupakadiralamkaravarga eti yatharthatam || -- Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhana, II, 18. Just as a pearl-garland can beautify only a full bosom, and otherwise cannot be a beautifying factor, only an Alamkara 1 Vide below chapter on Aucitya. aucityamekamekatra gunanam rasirekatah | visayate gunagramah aucityaparivarjitah || || - Quoted by Municandracarya in his Vrtti on the Dharma binduprakarana, Agamodaya Series Edition, p. 11 a.

appropriate to Artha and through it, to Rasa, can be of any beauty. arthaucityavata suktiralankarena sobhate | || pinastanasthiteneva harena harineksana || Au v. c. Ksemendra. Cf. Bhoja, Sarasvatikanthabharana of Bhoja I. 160 : dirghapangam nayanayugalam bhusayatyanjanasrih - tungabhogau prabhavati kucavacitum harayastih | etc. Ksemendra proceeds to show how some poets have observed this rule of Aucitya of Alamkara and how some have not. He points out the conceptual flaws in the latter, going against the main subject and sentiment. The Pratyudaharanas are cases of abuses in so far as the authors of those verses have written those figures with an effort, merely because they desired to add figures. When the great poet is concentrating on Rasa, when he is a ' rasasamahitacetah ', the sense of harmony and appropriateness attends on him, innate in him like instinct; there is hardly any room for impropriety. But when concentration is on figure, error creeps in. We shall consider two examples: The broken minister of the Nandas, stealing into the enemy's city over which he had once ruled like a king, looking like a serpent stilled by incantation (bhogiva mantrausadhiruddhaviryah ) and consumed by his own inner fire, sees a dilapidated garden and describes it: viparyastam saudham kulamiva maharambharacanam sarah suskam sadhorhadayamiva nasena suhrdam | phalaihimna vrksa vigunanrpayogadiva nayah trnaischanna bhumirmatiriva kunitairavidusah || -Mudraraksasa, VI, 11.

The plight of the garden resembles his own pitiable state and with great appropriateness in the conceiving of the similes, Visakhadatta has drawn a mere description nearer to the context, harnessed it for Rasa and heightened the effect of the situation. On the contrary, we shall now cite a verse from the Bhoja Campu where the poet has created a figure not only not in harmony with the main idea and the context but also so inappropriate as to make, as Ksemendra says, the hearts of the Sahrdayas shrink. vanivilasamaparatra krtopalambham ambhojabhurasahamana ivavirasit | There is Hetu-Utpreksa here: the poet imagines that Brahma presented himself before the Adikavi, as if jealous of the appearance of (his spouse) Vani (speech or poesy) in another person. As a matter of fact, it is to bless and give Valmiki his favour to sing the whole Ramayana that the god descended. One can make Alamkara render the help its name means if he introduces it in such a manner as it will be conducive to the realisation of the chief object, namely Bhava and Rasa; that is, Alankara must be Rasabhavapara. That which is adorned by an Alamkara is the Rasa. Even as the ordinary ornament, the jewels, putting them on or laying them down, suggest to us the mental state of the person, so also does figure suggest the Bhava. rasabhavaditatparyamasritya vinivesanam | alamkrtinam sarvasamalamkaratvasadhanam || - Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhana, II, 6. 'A similar instance of appropriateness of figurative description is Bana's description of the red evening and the approach of the night in which the king goes to help Bhairavacarya's Sadhana in the Smasana.

upamaya yadyapi vacyo'rtho'lam kriyate, tathapi tasya tadevalamkaranam, yad vyamgyarthabhivyanjanasamarthyadhanamiti | vastuto dhvanyatmaiva alamkaryah | katakakeyuradibhirapi hi sarirasamavayibhih atmaiva tattaccittavrttivisesau - cityasucanatmataya alankriyate | ' -Locana, 74-75. Thus whatever, remaining in a functionary place, aids to embellish and add to the main theme's beauty is Alamkara. Rasa also can thus be employed as a decorative, as an Alankara, to adorn a Vastu (idea) or Rasa.' Raymond expresses a similar opinion on Alamkara : 'The one truth underlying all the rules laid down for the employment of figures is that nothing is gained by any use of those which does not add to the effect of the thought to which they give expression. Language is to express our thoughts to others and in ordinary conversation, we use both plain and figurative language but when a man wants to give another the description of a scene he has seen, he does not catalogue one and all of the details of that sight, but brings only his own idea of the landscape by adding to such of the details as have struck him many more ideas and emotions that have been aroused in him.' Thus he transports his mental image to the hearer and if the representation is comparatively plain, we have Svabhavokti. 'On the other hand, if he realises that it is hard for the hearer to understand him fully, he gains his end by repeating the statement, or by adding illustrative images to the mere enumeration of facts.' [Compare Rudrata, VIII, 1. 1 2 samyak pratipadayitum svarupato vastu tatsamanamiti | vastvantaramabhidadhyat vakta yasmimstadaupamyam ||] Rasavad alankara. Locana, pp. 72, 73, 74. Poetry as a Representative Art.

*Thus the poet puts extra force into his language and in order to do so, inasmuch as the force of language consists in its representative character, he will augment the representation by multiplying his comparisons: his language becomes figurative."' From the verse of Rudrata quoted above, we see that a complex situation or an anxiety for clearer or more effective expression necessitates figures. Similarly a thought that is too simple, too ordinary or too small to impress or get admiration by itself, needs figurative embellishment. We shall consider this view of Anandavardhana with his rules for the employment of these figures in such secondary and ordinary moods and thoughts. Even as he grants high flights in supreme moments, he grants even the bare Sabdacitra ample provision in Rasabhasa. Heroic deeds, unselfish love, sacrifice-things great in themselves appeal to us even when directly expressed with minimum figure. But ordinary things must have purple patches. All these facts about decoration by figure in poetry are realised by Ananda who has formulated rules for the proper employment of Alankara. Western writers also have laid similar conditions regarding ornament. Pater says: 'And above all, there will be no uncharacteristic or tarnished or vulgar decoration, permissible ornament being for the most part structural or necessary'.' He continues: 'The artist, says Schiller, may be known by rather what he omits and in literature too, the true artist may be best recognised by his tact of omission. For, to the grave reader, words too are grave; and the ornamental word, the figure, the accessory form or colour or reference is rarely content to die to thought precisely at the right moment, but will inevitably be stirring a Style by W. Pater. I

long "brain-wave" behind it of perhaps quite alien associations'. 'As the very word ornament indicates what is in itself non-essential, so the "one beauty" of all literary style is of its very essence and independent of all removable decoration; that it may exist in its fullest lustre in a composition utterly unadorned, with hardly a single suggestion of visibly beautiful things.' 'The ornaments are "diversions "-a narcotic spell on the pedestrian intelligence. We cannot attend to that figure that flower there-just then-surplusage! For, in truth, all art consists in the removal of surplusage.' Such strictures had to be passed by Ananda also; for when he was thinking out the essence of poetry, Sanskrit poetry had deteriorated into an artificial stage. A blind tribe-Gaddarikas-was following a beaten path and was hardly proof to errors of taste. Not poetry, but the imitation thereof, was being assiduously produced. (7, na tanmukhyam kavyam, a. Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhana, p. 220.) To guide such poets, not gifted with Sakti enough to possess an innate sense of Aucitya, Ananda lays down his rules for the employment of Alankara. As has already been pointed out, Alamkara is subordinate to Rasa; it has to aid the realisation of Rasa. It shall suit the Bhava and be such as comes off to the poet along with the tide of the Rasa. It shall not monopolise the poet's energy nor shall it be so prominent or continued as to monopolise the reader's mind. Says Ananda : rasaksiptataya yasya bandhah sakyakriyo bhavet | aprthagyannanirvartyah so'lamkaro dhvanau matah || 2 -Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhana, II, 17. 'As if translating Ananda, Tolstoy calls bad Art 'Imitations of Art'. 'What is Art ? Ch. XI. 2 Bhoja also speaks of this Rasaksipta and Aprthagyatnanirvartya Alamkara in his Sarasvatikanthabharana of Bhoja (Ch. V) and Sr. Pra. (Ch. XI).

(i) Alankara shall be intended to suggest Rasa. (ii) It shall be born along with the poet's delineation of Rasa. (iii) It shall be naturally and easily introduceable. (iv) The poet shall not stop to take a fresh and extra effort to effect it. Such a figure is allowed as proper in Dhvani. This is the 'permissible' 'structural' figure that Pater speaks of. Such Alamkara is born almost of itself. Such is the poet's genius. that when the figure is actually found there, it is a wonder. (nispattavascaryabhutah - ananda, p. 86. pratibhanugrahavasat svayameva sampattau fasqalada-Abhinava, p. 86, Locana.) This Alankara properly functions to heighten Rasa. For instance, in the verse : 'kapole patrali karatalanirodhena mrdita etc. the Satha Nayaka who entreats the Khandita Nayika describes her Anger as another lover who is dearer to her than himself, though he may even fall at her feet. In the last line here, there are Slesa, Rupaka and Vyatireka Alankaras, which, far from hindering the realisation of the Rasa of Irsyavipralambha, intensify it. 1 Though a perusal of an Alamkara text-book gives the impression that the Alankaras are artificial, elaborate and intellectual exercises requiring great effort in turning them out precisely, things that must rather be avoided than handled with all their 'chidras', they are not really so difficult of effecting for a masterpoet. With him, as emotion increases,. expression swells and figures foam forth. See my Ph.D. Thesis "Bhoja's Srngara Prakasa ", Vol. I, Pt. 2, chapter on Alankara. Such Alamkaras, Bhoja says, cannot be even spoken of as having been introduced or added. ' See Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhana, p. 86.

alamkarantarani hi nirupyamanadurghatanyapi rasasamahitacetasah pratibhanavatah kaveh ahampurvikaya parapatanti | yatha kadambaryo kadambari- darsanavasare | ' -Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhana, pp. 86-87. We have many instances in the Ramayana where we clearly see this connection between emotion and figure, though not as a rule. There is at least a strong tendency to wax figurative in forceful situations. The description of lamenting Ayodhya on Bharata's return from the forest and Sita's condemnation of Ravana on seeing him out of his guise are two of the striking examples. There is, further, a tendency in the Ramayana to employ figures profusely in descriptions. The opening canto of the Sundarakanda contains a figure in almost every verse, surcharged as the canto is with Adbhutarasa. To quote only one instance, we shall pick out this description of the broken Visvamitra from the Balakanda: 1 drstva vinasitanputran balam ca sumahayasah | savridascintayavistah visvamitro'bhavattada || samudra iva nirvegah bhagnadamstra ivoragah | uparakta ivadityah sadyo nisprabhatam gatah || Cf. 'The more emotions grow upon a man, the more his speech; if he makes any effort to express his emotion, abounds in figures-exclamation, interrogation, anacoluthon, apostrophe, hyperbole (yes, certainly hyperbole !) simile, metaphor. His language is what we sometimes euphemistically describe as picturesque'. Feelings swamp ideas and language is used to express not the reality of things but the state of one's emotions.' J. S. Brown, World of Imagery". Quoted by K. A. Subrahmanya Ayyar in his 'Imagery of the Ramayana ', J.OR., Madras, Vol. III, pt. 4.

hataputrabalo dinah lunapaksa iva dvijah | hatadarpo hatotsahah nirvedam samapadyata || - RA BA., 55.8-10.' But there are also places in the epic of high strung emotion where figures are not employed at all and the sublimity or pathos of the situation (e.g. Rama weeping on the loss of Sita in the closing cantos of the Aranyakanda) is left to itself to appeal to us with its own grandeur and beauty. In Kalidasa, we have many instances of figures rushing to the poet's pen in moments of overflowing Rasa. Every line is a figure in Pururavass description of Urvasi who has captivated his heart, as he sees her slowly recovering from stupor : avirbhute sasini tamasa mucyamaneva ratrih naisasyarcirhutabhuja iva cchinnabhuyisthadhuma | mohenantarvaratanuriyam drsyate muktakalpa ganga rodhah patanakalusa grhnativa prasadam || - V. U., I. And in the Mudraraksasa, we have a similar situation with abundant figures. In the glee of his success, Canakya exclaims as he hears that Raksasa has come: kenottunga sikhakalapa kapilo baddhah patante sikhi pasaih kena sadagateragatita sadyasmamasadita | kenanekapadanavasitasatah simho'rpitah panjare bhimah kena ca naikanakramakaro dorbhyam pratirno'rnavah || - M. R., VII, 6. But to write such figures, the poet must be lost in Rasa and must have infinite Pratibha. Those who do not naturally get 1 Kumbhakonam Edition

these figures in such an appropriate manner can employ figures effectively if they do so with discrimination, Samiksa. dhvanyatmabhute srmgare samiksya vinivesitah | rupakadiralamkaravarga eti yatharthatam || What is this Samiksa ? -Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhana, p. 88, II, 18. vivaksa tatparatvena nangitvena kadacana | kale ca grahanatyagau natinirvahanaisita || nirvyudhavapi cangatve yatnena pratyaveksanam | rupakaderalamkaravargasyangatvasadhanam || | - Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhana, p. 88, II, 19-20. (i) Alankaras must be ancillary, Angabhuta. (ii) They must never become main, Pradhana or Angin. (iii) The main theme shall always be kept in view and the figure in consequence must be taken and thrown away in accordance with the requirements of the main idea. (iv) They must not be too much elaborated or overworked. (v) Even if they are worked out, a good poet must take care to give them, on the whole, the position of Anga only. (i) In the verse from the Sakuntala ' ' calapangam drsti sprsasi bahuso etc., the description of the natural acts of the bee, is introduced as Anga to intensify the chief Rasa of Srngara. (ii) There are instances in which we see poets drifting along in the world of imagery itself without returning to the point on hand. The poet begins a figure and does it in such a detailed manner that it outgrows its proper limit. I See Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhana, pp. 89-94 for the illustration and discussion of these canons.

' nangitveneti, pradhanyena kadacid ; rasaditatparyena vivaksito'pi hyalamkarah kascidangitvena vivaksito drsyate | - Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhana, p. 89. posaniyasya svarupatiraskarako'pyangabhuto'lamkarah sampadyate | tatasca kvacidanaucityamagacchatiti | ' -Locana, p. 90. yatprakrtasya 1 " The illustration for this given by Ananda is the verse ' etc.', where the main idea intended to be adorned by the figure is lost in the elaborate reaches of the Prayayokta, which has overgrown and hid the main idea. (iii) Opportune introduction is illustrated by the verse etc.' where Slesa finds timely introduction; as Abhinava says, this description paves the way for the coming Irsyavipralambha. (iv) In the verse etc.', for the sake ཞ་ fshi of the main Rasa, Vipralambha, and for the sake of another Alankara, namely Vyatireka which is to heighten the Vipralambha, the figure of Slesa worked out in the first three lines is abandoned in the last line. This illustrates 'kale tyaga '. (v) There are instances where Alamkaras are merely touched upon and left there; lesser artists sit to work them out. In the verse kopatkomalalolabahulatikapasena nitva vasaniketanam etc. baddha drdham the Rupaka of Bahupasalatika and Bandha is not worked out in any artificial and tiresome manner. If the poet had worked it out, Abhinava says, it would have been very improper- anaucityam syat . This verse illustrates 'natinirvahanaisita .' (vi) Such a genius like Kalidasa can work out a figure in full and can see that the main Rasa is not only not hindered by it, but is actually intensified by it. E.g., Meghaduta of Kalidasa The 5

Vipralambha Srngara of the theme is again brought to the forefront in the last line to be nourished by the Utpreksa. When used thus with appropriateness, Alamkaras go to enrich the ideas of the poet and add charm to the diction. Of these Alankaras, we shall here speak in particular about a few select ones. Figures can be classified into three main classes : (i) those based on Similarity, Upama and all other figures involving Upama; (ii) those based on Difference, Virodha, and (iii) those based on other mental activities like association, contiguity etc. In the third class can be brought all the figures other than those based on Aupamya and Virodha. Of these, figures involving similarity are the most abundant in poetry. 'The intellectual power called similarity or feeling of agreement is our chief instrument of invention.' 'Applied literally in the sciences, it leads to unity through induction'. In metaphysics, sadharmya vaidharmyapariksa is mentioned as means to Tattvajnana and Nissreyasa by Kanada. The greatness of Upama is thus put by Appayya diksita in his Citramimamsa : tadidam citram visvam brahmajnanadivopamajnanat | | jnatam bhavatityadau nirupyate nikhilabhedasahita sa || upamaika sailusi samprapta citrabhumikabhedan | ranjayati kavyarange nrtyanti tadvidam cetah || Abhinavagupta also said: "upamaprapancasca sarvo'lankara iti vidvadbhih pratipannameva " (Abhi. Bha. p. 321. Gaek edn II), referring evidently to Vamana, IV. iii. 1, prativastuprabhrtirupamaprapancah |

Great artists are said to express an idea; great poets are explained as inculcating a lesson to the times through their work. It is impossible to conceive of such idea and lesson except through the principle of imagery; the great poem being something like a big, deep-laid Anyapadesa. In philosophical teachings, simile plays a very large part. Simile, Metaphor, Allegory, Parable-these are often employed to inculcate the profound truths of the incomprehensible. As Rudrata points out in his verse, ff etc., the Simile is for clearer understanding. But poetic imagery, like the variety of life, involves similarity in difference. - ' sadharmya- mupama bhede | ' *The things compared in a figure though differing in kind possess an amount of similarity, rendering the one illustrative of the other.' Though ultimately, Simile, like any other figure, must heighten the Rasa, there are, comparatively speaking, two kinds of this figure, the intellectual and the emotional. The former appeals to our intellect and is designed for that and the latter is used to heighten the sentiment. The intellectual simile must have maximum catching power; it must be very striking and at the same time, the point of similarity must be relevant; it must not be accompanied by any further details that may distract or mislead. erfaqenani anarquit anfafarad 1 amargenagatam laksmim prapyevanvayavarjitah || - Ramayana, Aranya, 8, 8. ga fe agardan fagli amanku: samupasina vihaga jalacarinah | navagahanti salilam apragalbha ivahavam || - Ramayana, Aranya, 16, 22.

These beautiful instances from the Ramayana have the required novelty and strikingness. As J. S. Brown' says, the pleasure we derive from a comparison-to which we stick, however much we may call it odious-is in the sudden bringing together of two notions which were a moment before unconnected and remote from one another. This element of agreeable surprise falls under intellectual appeal. The following are two more instances: nidra kapyavamaniteva dayita santyajya duram gata | satpatrapratipaditeva vasudha na ksiyate sarvari || paramateva nissnehah parakaryaniva sitalah ( 2 ) | saktavo bhaksita rajan suddhah kulavadhuriva || 'The matters compared here are so different; we are startled by the ingenuity displayed in bringing them together and the effect is an agreeable fillip of the mind.' In this respect, the danger of abuse lies in the lack of caution in the poet, in obscurity and far-fetchedness and the dwindling down of the similarity to a single and mere matter of fact point. There was a Christmas sales' advertisement in a card with a dog whose tail had been cut; the dog was looking at its shortened tail and underneath was printed 'It will not be long now before Christmas, as the dog said about its tail!' Such instances are effective means for comedy and humour and typical instances can be gathered from Dickenss Sam Weller in his Pickwick Papers. Coming to the other kind of Upama: Later poets, wherever they might have been, however little their knowledge "World of Imagery.' Quoted by K. A. Subrahmanya Ayyar in his contributions on Imagery of Ramayana', J.O.R., Madras, Vol. III, pt. 4.

of things or imagination might have been, had a Kavisiksa to supply them with as many moons and lotuses as they wanted. Though one had not seen the Himalayas, he devoted a canto to its description with all the stock-in-trade and trite figures, mistaken informations filling verse after verse. The absurdity is seen clearly in the capricious geography of India which Vamanabhattabana teaches us in his Vemabhupala carita. In Upama, the necessity for novelty is overlooked and the anxiety to abide by the qualification 'Sammata' has been the cause of monotony. Anybody could write out a hundred verses any day on the sunrise, with the red sun, the lotus and the bee and the waning moon, their one single feature of looking like lovers being done to exhaustion, Appayya diksita defines Upama thus: upamanopameyatvayogyayorarthayordvayoh | hrdyam sadharmyamupametyucyate kavyavedibhih || Others also have pointed out the defects in the form and content of Simile. Even as it is not poetic figure to be comparing things by their Padarthatva, it is not poetic figure if it is too trite or too often repeated. Emotional intensity and intellectual delights are derived only from such figures as are Ascaryabhuta', and when there is not enough 'Viadagdhya' in the poet's Vak, the repetition is intolerable. As a matter of fact, many Alankaras have lost their force and charm by the one reason of repetition. We do not simply say, even in talks, one is named so, but only 'aiz qida'; so much so, there is almost no effect produced when a poet says mukhambuja, mukurakapola etc. The inferior poets had ample Vyutpatti, unlit by imagination. As they were great scholars, we can rarely find a

technical flaw in their figures as figures. But the place where they abused is the same.' It is their scholarship that bound them to the rule. When they got an imagery on their mind, they settled down to turn it into one of the Upamagarbhalamkaras of the texts; they chose one that they had not used up to that time; in their construction, they adopted the same manner of expression of that figure as given in the text-book and when there was no 'Lingavacana samya' for the Upama, they artificially worked out by redistributions with the great control over lexicon and grammar they had, the conforming form of the figure. Things that are in pairs were often brought into singular number as occasion needed, and to coincide with a feminine stem, 'Padadvaya' would. become Padadvayi.' Even Kalidasa strains to achieve this formal correspondence. He takes the bees in a group in feminine gender to bear comparison with a lady, a single and feminine Upameya. tam prapya sarvavayavanavadyam vyavartatanyopagamatkumari | na hi praphullam sahakarametya vrksantaram kamksati satpadali | 2 -R. V., VI, 69. Let us turn to Ramayana where this weight of Lingavacana samya does not hang on the poet : aham tu hrtadarasca rajyacca mahatascyutah | nadikulamiva klinnamavasidami laksmana || 1 fazia a vi, p. 77. [Gaekwar Oriental Series, Baroda] edn. 2 - Ramayana, Kiskindha, 28, 58. :'-Ramacandra, Nalavilasa nataka, Act ' See also mahibhrtah putravato'pi drstih tasminnapatye na jagama trptim | anantapuspasya madhorhi cute dvirephamala savisesasanga || - Kumara sambhava, I.

pasya rupani saumitre vananam puspasalinam | srjatam puspavarsani toyam toyamucamiva || - Kis, I, 10. nalinani prakasante jale tarunasuryavat || " 61. " A latter-day poet would have certainly stopped to abide by an Alankarika dictum and by some 'Pistapesana' and 'Klista Kalpana' spoil the simple beauty of the idea presented by Valmiki. Dandin says that there are cases where neither Linga-disagreement nor Vacana-disagreement can spoil the beauty of an Upama; the Sahrdaya's sense is the judge ; if it is not disturbed, all is right with the figure: na limgavacane bhinne na hinadhikatapi va | upamadusanayalam yatrodvego na dhimatam || striva gacchati sando'yam vaktyesa stri pumaniva | prana iva priyo'yam me vidya dhanamivarjita || ☑ - Dandin, K. A., II, 51-3. The following verse also is beautiful, despite linga-vacanavyatyasa: paramateva nissnehah parakaryaniva sitalah ( ? ) | saktavo bhaksita rajan sudvah kulavadhuriva || Coming to the manner of expressing the similarity: Dandin and others have given some words expressing similarity, Sadrsyavacaka sabdas. But ingenuity and eccentricity have invented other expressions to convey similarity. Sriharsa employs these words of comparison - sprsati tatkadanam kadalitaruh | Naisadhiyacarita of Sriharsa, IV, 8. We have other new and original words to suggest similarity-sabrahmacari, satirthya, vaitandika, sayuthya, pratidvandva,

etc.' These words are in themselves condensed metaphors and it is only after long Rudhi that they mean simply 'similarity'. Till then the reader has to pass through another metaphor to understand the main imagery. While it must be accepted that it is highly diverting to have ever such novel words of comparison, one cannot blind oneself to the growing Aprasiddhi, involvedness and obscurity. Considering the way in which figures are expressed: Even very appropriate images are abused by strained expression, resorted to with special effort, for the sake of variety as well as metrical needs. If the poet gets a simile and gives it natural expression which is in harmony with Rasa, there is really effect and beauty in its employment. Poetry is after all not an argument to be somehow read and understood; it is something like a Manjari, as Bana says. It has to leap to our heart on even the mere hearing of it. ideas, their expression also has to be beautiful. 1 athava mrduvastu himsitum mrdunaivarabhate prajantakah | himaseka vipattiratra me nalini purvanidarsanam mata || Even as their -Raghuvamsa of Kalidasa, VIII, 45. The second half here containing the figure is expressed in a way that it is fit only to be in Tarka book. Like certain words, only certain constructions are poetic. Such expressions of Kalidasa himself - 'atisthadekonasatakratutve ' (R.V, III ) and 'tava kusumasaratvam sitarasmitvamindordvayamidamayathartha drsyate madvidhesu (Sak.) are not happy at all. Sriharsa often lapses into such wooden 'The Lalitastavaratna of Durvasas and the Mukapancasati use such expressions profusely but one does not dislike them in these two masterly hymns. See also Aryastavaraja of a Tanjore Jagannatha (Vani Vilas edn.), another production in imitation of Durvasass Lalitastavaratna.

expressions and his Kavya contains many sentences not more poetic than his 'hridhrtavanmukhatvaih ' Nai, II, 105. Next in importance to the simile are Rupaka and Atisayokti. 'Simile is used when there is a moderate degree of excitation. When this is great, the mind naturally flies to the metaphor as a more concentrated form of expression, representing many thoughts in a few words.' When the emotion is still greater, we resort to Atisayokti and even Atyukti. 'These metaphors play an important part in the economy of language, the coining of metaphors being a means to our stock of names.' Poets create the language of a people. The element of representation, creation on the basis of similarity, is an essential principle of all art and it is a factor in the construction of language itself.' Thus is language a book of faded metaphors. $ 'Just as in the preponderance of the didactic and explanatory tendency, considerations of thought overbalance those of form, those of form overbalance those of thought in the preponderance of the ornate tendency in which there is failure because of an excess of representation. It is simply natural for one who has obtained facility in illustrating his ideas to overdo the matter at times and to carry his art so far as to illustrate that which has been sufficiently illustrated or is itself illustrative.' As Ananda and Abhinava say, 'Atinirvaha' is bad. It is not proper to work out in the following manner Rupakas fully and often, especially in a situation like this full of Karunarasa: avagadhah sudusparam sokasagaramabravit | ramasoka mahabhogah sitavirahaparagah || svasitormimahavata baspaphenajalavilah | bahuviksepaminaughah vikranditamahasvanah ||

prakirnakesasaivalah kaikeyibadavamukhah | mamasruvegaprabhavah kubjabakya mahagrahah || varavelo nrsamsaya ramapratrajanayatah | yasminta nimagno'ham kausalye raghavam vina | dustaro jivata devi mamayam sokasagarah || -- Ram., Ayo., 59. This is all the more inappropriate since it is not Kavivakya but a Patravakya, words of the dying Dasaratha.' A similar artificial verse is found in Sugriva's lament over the fallen body of his elder brother: saudaryaghataparagatravalah santapahastaksisirovisanah | enomayo mamabhihanti hasti drpto nadikulamiva pravrddhah || - Kis., 24, 17. The passion for figures makes a poet introduce them in such irrelevant places. Asvathaman, in deep grief at his father's death, is made to utter such a complicated expression of his sentiment : tattvarate me tavat tataparibhavanaladahyamanamidam cetah pratikarajalavagaya | And in Act I, Bhatta Narayana makes Bhima say: yusmacchasanalamghanambhasi maya manena nama sthitam | Poetry, being intended for the delight of the imagination, must be effective only through hint and suggestion; and when 'The author of the Imagery of Ramayana (J.O.R., Madras, referred to above) characterises such instances as Symmetryfigures', those worked out for symmetry alone. The giving of a name to them does not take away their artificiality.

one makes it a bit of grammar or logic, it ceases to be poetry. It is really surprising how there can be any beauty of figure in such an unpoetic expression as Parisamkhya which can never be a spontaneous utterance. The following Parisamkhya is a description of the rain season in the Ramayana: vahanti varsanti nadanti bhanti dhyayanti nrtyanti samasvasanti | nadyo ghana mattagaja vanantah priyavihinah sikhinah plavamgah || - Kis., 18. 27. It is proper that Kuntaka should reject this 'Alankara'. From mere Rupaka, the poet's first move in the world of the image itself produces the Parinamalamkara, which is Rupaka with Prakrtopayogitva. This figure has been abused very much. The poet moves on only in the world of imagery, carried away by suggestions of further images from the details of the first imagery. He does not beautify or illustrate the main idea which he has now forgotten. dordandadarpastapano yadiyastamo nirasyannapi lokavrtti | pratyarthiprthvipatimandalasya nimilayamasa mukhambujani || - Sahrdayananda, I. The first figure Rupaka suggests a Parinama and that is further taken up to a Virodha and the last metaphor here - mukhambu- jani - is wholly inappropriate as applied to the faces of enemies. Such verses often become ununderstandable like puzzles, three or four ideas intervening between the understanding and the Rasa. Mahima says: ' tribhirantarita yatha tadidamupayaparamparopa rohanissaha na rasasvadantikamupagantumalamiti prahelikaprayam kavyametat " -V. V., I, T.S.S., pp. 17-18.

The same is the case with Paryayokta,' Preyan and Rasavadalamkaras. The king or God is to be praised; Priti for them is the main Rasa of the subject, but a minor Rasa is employed to adorn the main one. A far-fetched idea suggesting some great quality of the king or God (which quality is left to hide itself in one small word) is elaborated and the whole verse is burdened with a new picture which is a world by itself. The verse ballalaksonipala tvadarinagare sancaranti kirati etc. quoted by Appayya diksita in his Citramimamsa as an illustration of Uttarottarapallavitabhranti aptly shows how poets stray away from the main idea. This tendency is the main feature of the vast mass of court eulogies like the Prataparudriya (the Alamkara work), Pranabharana, Rajendrakarnapura etc. When Kalidasa writes thus : kriyaprabandhesvayamadhvaranam ajasramahutasahasranetrah | sacyasciram pandukapolalamban mandarasunyanalakamscakara || we have the main idea of the king incessantly doing sacrifices given adequate expression, but if we take a verse from the Prataparudriya praising the king, we can see the poet rolling in the world of images themselves with little reference to the king's qualities. Sometimes it seems that court-poetry will praise and pun and work conceits upon Ganga, Ksirodadhi and Candra themselves to the exclusion of what they are taken to represent, viz. the king's white fame. Coming to Utpreksa, we already saw one instance of a bad Utpreksa from the Ramayana Campu, vanivilasapamaratra etc., where the poet has gone contrary to the main theme. This figure especially shall always be closely connected with the main theme and Rasa. I Vide above, criticism of a etc.

gurorniyogadvanitam vanante sadhvim sumitratanayo jihasyan | avaryatevotthitavicihastaih jahorduhitra sthitaya purastat || 77 -R. V., XIV, 51. Here is an appropriate Utpreksa, one in perfect consonance with the sentiment; Kalidasa has heightened the Rasa by it. But ingenuity and eccentricity formed the endowments of many poets who made conceits far-fetched and irrelevant. Not to mention pleasure, even intellectual satisfaction is not produced by many Utpreksas of Sriharsa. The Rasa is obscured to a single word. As with hyperbole, so with conceits the departure from truth must not be shocking. Bain says: * Tiresome to us at least is the straining of this figure in Eastern Poetry'. He says this of hyperbole and it is true also of conceit. It is mistaken taste and scholarship that revels in these far-fetched figures. lokatita ivatyarthamadhyaropya vivaksitah | | yo'rthastenatitusyanti vidagdha netare janah || - Dandin, K. A., 1. Another figure with which Sanskrit composition is cheaply associated is Slesa. As Keith points out, the lexicons and the Nanarthavargas did a very bad service in this connection. It became impossible for a latter-day scholar to write except in double entendre and if we take a work like Vedantadesika's Subhasitanivi, we can rarely find there a verse which has not got two meanings. Sometimes we are able to set up similarity between both the ideas and sometimes we are left to satisfy ourselves with the mere pleasure of originality and admire the author's command over the language. Often the puns revolve round silly and trivial

attributes. There are also cases of discord of varying nature between the two ideas: the idea on hand, the Prakaranika, is Adhika, the other, Nyuna; the former noble, the latter, base. The author of the Sahrdayananda makes a pun upon such a trifle of an attribute as the owl having wings. It was the boast of authors that they could pun at every step; it was the banner of their talents. Subandhu beats his own Pataha thus: pratyaksara slesamaya prapanca vinyasavaidagdhyanidhim prabandham | artadizdazquiz: an yazy: yadsizy: || So much so that it became not only a possibility or accomplished fact but a practice of great fancy to produce double, triple, and quadruple poems.' But what exactly is the place of this figure? Has it any charm to impart to the diction? It does help Alankara, all Alankaras except Svabhavokti ; slesah pusnati sarvasu prayo vakroktisu sriyam | - Dandin. Abhinava also points out that it helps Upamagarbha figures. Used with restraint, it can be charming and effective. The two meanings must be well known; the figure must have come off easily. Bana says: Harsacarita.. The following are two instances of simple and beautiful Slesa, used with an eye to increase the effect of the situation : 1 baspena pihitam dinam ramassaumitrina saha | cakarseva gunairbaddha janam puranivasinam || - Ram., Ayo., 41. 12. See my article 'Anekasandhana kavyas' in the Annals of the Oriental Research Institute, University of Madras, Vol. III. pt. 1.

saratkalam pratiksisye sthito'smi vacane tava | sugrivasya nadinam ca prasadamanupalayan || - Ram., Kis., 27. 42. Kalidasa, who rarely resorts to this figure, gives a similar simple Slesa in his R. V., III : na samyatastasya babhuva raksituh visarjayedyam sutajanmaharsitah | rnabhidhanatsvayameva kevalam tada pitrnam mumuce sa bandhanat || In Bana, we meet with both uses and abuses of this figure. As in his life, so in his writings, Bana was exuberant and was responsible for excess. He often forgot proportion and in Utpreksa, he became endless sometimes, as in that long and tiring description of the king's elephant, Darpasata, in Ucchvasa II of the Harsacarita. He could deal in pointless. Slesas like vainateya iva gurupaksapati . He was a master of Sabda bhangaslesa, in which the words have to be differently split for the two meanings. This Bhangaslesa is denounced by foreigners; but those who have complete acquaintance and are familiar with all the nooks and corners of a language can understand a Bhangaslesa very easily. Slesa in general is very effective in gnomic utterances where they help to nail the maxim into our head; they are equally catching in Catus or eulogies. In Catus, the Bhangaslesa also is freely employed and in the following Catu, Bhangaslesa is certainly very striking: bhavan hi bhagavaneva gato bhedah parasparam | mahatya gadaya yuktah satyabhamavirajitah || When overdone or when handled by lesser artists, the Padabhangaslesa can become one of the obstacles to

understanding and realization of Rasa. Anandavardhana classes it along with the Duskaras, the Yamaka, the Bandhas etc. which have to be avoided during the delineation of Rasas like Srigara, Vipralambha and Karuna. - yamakaprakaranam nibandhanam duskarasabdabhamgaslesadinam saktavapi pramaditvamiti | - Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhana, p. 85. As compared with this Bhangaslesa of Sabda, Arthaslesa is less of an impediment to Rasa; used discriminately, it can help Rasa even. Says Abhinava : sabdabhamga sleseti | arthasleso na dosaya, yatha raktastvamityadi | sabdabhamgo'pi klista eva dustah, na tu asoka-sasokadau | Locana, p. 85. The next prominent figure which had found a place in the Ramayana and had become monotonous in later poets is the Samasokti. Poets see the world shaped in beauty. To them there is music in the spheres. Words in the feminine gender fascinates them. tatha hi ' tati taram tamyati ' ityatra tatasabdasya pumstvanapumsakatve anadrtya stritvameva ahatam sahrdayaih 'strinamapi madhuram ' iti krtva | sati limgantare yatra strilimgam ca prayujyate | sobhanispattaye yasmin namaiva striti pesalam || -Locana, p. 160. -Vakroktijivita, 93. This employment of Samadhiguna' with which poets, as with magic, give life and motion (emotion ? ) to every inanimate part of nature' is praised by Dandin as 'Kavya sarvasva.'

tadetat kavya sarvasvam samadhirnama yo gunah | kavisarthassamagro'pi tamenamanugacchati || - K. A., I. Samadhiguna produces the Samasokti figure. Valmiki has two beautiful verses of this class, in the former of which elements of Samasokti go to beautify the main figure of Upama. sevamane drdham surye disamantakasevitam | vihinatilakeva stri nottara dik prakasate || - Aranya, 16. 8. cancaccandrakarasparsasamunmilitataraka | aho ragavati sandhya jahati svayambaram | --- - Kiskindha, 30. 46. There are some very fine verses of this type in Canto XI of the Sisupalavadha where Magha gives us a description of dawn. But soon, poets with neither originality nor restraint, began to repeat images; the same three or four objects, the sun, the moon, the Padmini, the Kairavini, the Praci and the Pratici diks were exploited for many verses together, the points of attraction dwindling to trifles, and with variety almost non-existent. Gradually this figure became intellectual and no wonder, it begot the new subvariety called Sastrasamasokti. In Sanskrit Literature, there are some strange metaphors at which some English critics evince surprise. As for instance, we never have simple Asi (sword), but have only asilata . Among our own critics, Ksemendra has said-in his Aucityavicaracarca-that such a delightful object as moon ought not to be conceived as Citacakra. Things repellent and terrible by themselves must never be conceived in images of charm and love. But while describing the death

of enemies, their sufferings etc., the poet does employ such imagery, sometimes in callousness and sometimes in the light vein. The falling warriors are said to embrace Earth; and Kalidasa describes Tataka passing away into Death's abode as going to her lover. Sastrasamasokti has given rise to sheer pedantry. In an age of poetry when poets were scholars with Vyutpatti in all the Darsanas and branches of learning, nothing could satisfy the writer or reader but high-flown rapprochement with Sastraic ideas. Visakhadatta's claim for dramatic genius will hardly become less if he had not written sadhye niscitamanvayena ghatitam bibhratsapakse sthiti etc. The Naisadhakara's own Dindima is on this point-geunfafe kacitkacidapi nyasi prayatnanmaya . All the Darsanas and the subtleties thereof find a place in his poem. place in his poem. See the Tarka here: ' anumito'pi sa baspaniriksanat vyabhicacara na tapakaro'nalah ' IV. Naisadha. Surely, poetry must give Upadesa; the sublime thoughts, the deep philosophies-all these the poet must give expression to ; but this Sastrasamasokti is harldly that. The last Alankara that we shall consider here specially is that variety of Aprastutaprasamsa or Anyokti called Anyapadesa. If poetry is a criticism of life, Anyapadesa is poetry above all other types. In it, the poet points out the flaws and failings of men, praises their nobility, bitingly remarks about men's meanness, and makes fun of and satirises every aspect of human character. Bhatta Bhallata's century of Anyapadesa has some very fine verses. Nilakantha diksita's Anyapadesa is unequalled in this branch. In the anthologies, there are some brilliant Anyapadesa verses. Most of the other Anyapadesa centuries are trash. A few objects like the sea, the sun, the moon, the lotus, the Kokila and the mango in contrast with the crow and the Margosa, the rains and the frogs-these

trite things in some stale ideas were exploited for a hundred and more verses. The poet did not pick out any particular, subtle or prominent defect of humanity to criticize, or good quality to praise. Not feeling anything to write a verse with life, these poets dashed off verse after verse, retailing one triviality after another. Anyapadesa is a type of literature that can never be written at a sitting, by Asukavis, but must be written on occasions, must be made to accumulate into a collection in the course of the varied life of a poet, full with experience. If Bhallata wrote the verse on the ignoble Dust, which, by the kicking up of the fickle wind, got on the very tops of the mountains -ye jatya laghavah sadaiva gananam yata na ye etc., we know Bhallata felt the poignant grief; we know from the Rajatarangini that in the reign of the mean and wicked Sankaravarman (A.D. 882-902), great men like poet Bhallata had to earn their livelihood by doing all sorts of services, that poets were not given gifts and that peons drew fabulous salaries, holding high authority.' But small minds- mandah kaviyasah prarthinah - n hlaq 3i:qifga: -never thought themselves 'krtartha' if they had not finished off in their literary career a century of Anyapadesa and immediately they made a 'Parikarabandha' and began exploiting the sun and the moon, the H etc. 1 Kalhana, Rajatarangini of Kalhana, V, 204, etc. tyagabhirutaya tasmin gunisamgaparanmukhe | asevantavara vrttih kavayo bhalatadayah || nirvetanassukavayo, bhariko lavatastvabhut | prasadattasya dinarasahasradvayavetanah || See also my article on the Bhallata Sataka in the Annals of the Venkatesvara Oriental Institute, Tirupati, Vol. I. No. 1.

We have thus far considered figures of sense. Poetry, as it is required to be sensuous, must be pleasing to the ear also. The form of the form itself must be beautiful, must have a music and flow. The poet must look to harmony, balance, and climax in his sentences. Metre itself owes its origin to this requirement as also to the emotional outburst. Keith grants that the Sanskrit poets have 'certainly a better ear than themselves (foreigners) to the music of the words',-the appropriateness of sound to suggest the meaning and sentiWhat a verse did Bhavabhuti write! vajradapi kathorani mrduni kusumadapi | lokottaranam cetamsi ko hi vijnatumarhati || It is really a marvel of sound effect that Bana produces with utmost ease : ' aparahnapracarapracalite camarini camikaratatatadanaranitaradhane radati surasravantirodhamsi svairamairavate | ' ' kramena adho'dhodhavamanadhavalapayodharam ' " grahagravagramaskhalanamukharitasrotasam ' - Harsacarita, I. ' viralibhavati varatanam vesantasayininam manjuni manjirasinji- tajade jalpite | ' - Ibid., III. One cannot pick out in Bana; the reader with keen sensibility hears the metallic sound of Airavata striking its tusk on a golden pavement, sees the rolling clouds, sees the current stumbling and rushing out of each of the three blocking words, Grava, Graha, Grama; and in the stillness of his mind, he feels the long-drawn silvery voice of female swans, in the ponds on the outskirts of the city, slowly dying. Colour,

smell, sound and touch we are able to directly realize in Kalidasa's verse : dirghikurvanpatumadakalam kujitam sarasanam pratyusesu sphutitakamalamodamaitrikasayah | yatra strinam harati surataglanimamganukula- risapravatah priyatama iva prarthanacatukarah || Note especially the onomatopoeic effect of the sibilant ' S' ', doubled by the Sandhi, in the expression ' Sipravatah'. When Kalidasa said of Aja, 'talpamujjhamcakara ', we see how Aja briskly rose up from his bed, unlike the slothful and sleepy; and the sternness of Nandin's command to the Ganas not to give way to Capala, rings in our own ears when we read- tacchasanatkananameva sarva citrarpitarambhamivavatasthe | - Kumarasambhava of Kalidasa, III. Bhavabhuti was as great a master with the words; surely the delicate and charming effects are easy of achievement for him when they are needed; but he discovered the sound effects required for the Raudra and Bibhatsa Rasas; what he created, others still live upon. In the Smasananka of the Malatimadhava, he makes one's flesh creep, hairs stand on end, and feet step back in fright. The owl, the jackal, the water of the river rushing through skeletons,-eeriness gathers round when we read gunjatkunjakutirakausikaghataghutkarasamvellita- krandatpheravacandadhatkrtibhrtapragbharabhimaistataih | antahkirnakarankakarparataratsamrodhikulamkasa- sroto nirgamaghoragharghara rava paresmasanam sarit || -Malatimadhava of Bhavabhuti

Take that verse again in his Mahaviracarita which brings on Tataka, the demoness- antraprotabrhatkapalanalakakrurakvanatkamkana etc. ' The concepts of Riti and Vrtti in poetics owe their formulation to a study of these sound-effects. These also count for Rasa. It is said that the first gait of the actor on the stage interprets him and his character to the audience; that first impression stands to the last. So also the first effect a verse on its mere reading or hearing produces, holds the mind to the end. For the Rasa to be suggested, even the jingle in the sounds or the clash of words is welcome and appropriate means. A further carrying out of these ideas gives rise to the Sabdalankara of Anuprasa of different varieties. But Yamakas, as Dandin says, are not good. They have least to do with Rasa. Anandavardhana lays down the following rules for the use of Anuprasa and Yamaka: srngarasyangino yatnadekarupanubandhanat | sarvesveva prabhedesu nanuprasah prakasakah || dhvanyatmabhute srngare yamakadinibandhanam | saktavapi pramaditvam vipralambhe visesatah || -Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhana, p. 85; Kar. 15-16. In such Rasas as Srngara and Karuna, the elaborate and artificial figures of sound have no place. Valmiki has shown that in a mere description, rhymes find a proper place. The famous description of the moonlight night in the Sundarakanda sa tatra madhyamgatamamsumantam etc.' is an example. There is a particular ¹ Vide below chapter on Aucitya. Also Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhana, III.

tendency in the Ramayana, which is seen even in the Rgveda, to juxtapose similar sound groups, an effect which Kalidasa and Asvaghosa adopted from the master. Valmiki writes--' padbhayam padavatam varah ', ' daksino daksinam disam ', 'ravano lokaravanah ' etc. These do not do violence to the sense and at the same time add to the charm of the diction. Kalidasa in his Raghuvamsa especially delights in such innocent assonances : " tasmai sabhyah sabharyaya goptre guptatamendriyah | arhanamarhate cakruh munayo nayacaksuse || - R. V. 1. ittham dvijena dvijarajakantih avedito vedavidam varena | enonivrttendriyavrttirenam jagada bhuyo jagadekanathah || tato mrgendrasya mrgendragami etc. R. V. II. Cf. Sriharsa, Naisadha, VI, 1. -Raghuvamsa of Kalidasa, V. dutyaya daityaripateh pravrttah dvisam niseddha nisadhapradhanah | sa bhimabhumipatirajadhana laksicakaratha rathasyadasya || Yamaka differs in that it needs special effort and drags the poet away from his Samadhi in Rasa. Not only that : However much, like a latter-day adept at this Yamaka-craft, a poet may get it easily, it is bad and improper in so far as it distracts and stops our minds from proceeding beyond itself, our minds which must reach the 'Rasa' obscured in the inner sanctum. (See Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhana, p. 85 ). In the ninth canto of the Raghuvamsa however, the theme is only a description of summer and the hunt of the king. In such places, Ananda allows option in using the Yamaka. tions both by Valmiki and Kalidasa But there are descripwhich do not employ

sound-figures and link every descriptive detail with the context. For example, the Vasanta-description opening the Kiskindhakanda and the Sarad-description in Canto IV of the Raghuvamsa. The canonists permit the Yamaka-mad and Duskaramad poets to satisfy themselves in situations of Rasabhasa. The Bandhas of various types, Ekaksara, Nirosthya-these have nothing to do with poetry. It is regrettable that after Bharavi and Magha, these became part of the definition of Mahakavya. A bad ideal for prose was deduced by the latter-day poets from Bana and from such remarks as gadyam kavinam nikasam vadanti, ojasmamasa bhuyastvametadgadyasya jivitam etc. Without endless compounds and jingle of sounds, no prose was possible after a time. So much so that as time passed, certain word groups were effected, one word in which would not occur without the other. He would not come out without and the sound of nupura will always be introduced as 'manjumanjirasinja '. All the rivers looked d'. In ideas and words, a stock 'tvangattungatarangaranga diction had grown and poesy became a mechanical craft. In his book on Poetic Diction. Thomas Quayle says of the 18 th century poetry in England: 'And the same lack of direct observation and individual expression is obvious whenever the classicists have to mention birds or animals. • • • And it has been well remarked that if we are to judge from their verse, most of the poets of the first quarter of the eighteenth century knew no bird except the gold finch or nightingale and even these probably only by hearsay. For the same generalised diction is usually called upon and birds are merely a "feathered ", " tuneful", plumy" or "warbling" choir How true these remarks are of our Sanskrit poets who produced Mahakavyas at the shortest notice, who could describe the Himalayas and the Ganges and the •

ocean without seeing them and at whose command there were Kosas and stock expressions and stock ideas, white fame of the king like the autumnal moonlight, the blazing sun of his prowess, the Vasanta, the Malaya maruta, the sa and SO on. To this race of poets apply these lines of Keats: Beauty was awake! But ye were dead Why were ye not awake? To things ye knew not of,-were closely wed To musty laws lined out with wretched rule And compass vile; so that ye taught a school Of dolts to smooth, inlay, and clip, and fit, Till, like the certain wands of Jacob's wit, Their verses tallied. Easy was the task: A thousand handicraftsmen wore the mask Of Poesy. -Sleep and Poetry. To conclude, poetry is neither pure emotion and thought nor mere manner. A beautiful idea must appropriately incarnate itself in a beautiful expression. This defines Alankara and its place and function. The function of Alamkara is to heighten the effect; it is to aid the poet to say more pointedly. Whether the poet exalts or does the opposite, Alankara is to help him. Says Mahimabhatta : vinotkarsapakarsabhyam svadante'rtha na jatucit | tadarthameva kavayo'lamkaranparyupasate || - Vyaktiviveka of Mahimabhatta, T.S.S., p. 53. As such, these Alankaras should flow out of Rasa. Even as emotion is depicted, these must come off, without the poet consciously striving after them. They must be 'irremovable',

structural, organic : Rasaksipta, Aprthag yatna nirvartya. These words of Mahimabhatta are pertinent here: kinca saundaryatirekanispattaye'rthasya kavyakriyarambhah kaveh, na tu alamkaranispattaye, tesam nantariyakatayaiva tatsiddheh, bhangibhanitibhedanameva alamkaratvopagamat | na calamkaranispattyai rasabandhodyatah kavih | yatate, te hi tatsiddhinantariyakasiddhayah || 1 Vyaktiviveka of Mahimabhatta, II., T.S.S., p. 87. Figures are thus legitimate, though a proper use of them is a gift which only the greater among the poets are endowed with. Be it a Sabda-alankara or an Artha-alankara, be it a sound-effect or a striking turn of the idea, it is not ' Bahi ranga for Rasa, so long as it is useful for Rasa. Effective expression, the embodiment of the poet's idea, is Alamkara. It is not as if it were in some separate place, like jewels in a box, to be taken and added. As has been explained in the opening part of this chapter, it is the several ways of expressing ideas which are to convey the Rasa that are called Alankaras. - yuktam caitat | yato rasa vacyavisesaireva akseptavyah, tatprati- padakaisca sabdaih, tatprakasino vacyavisesa eva rupakadayo'lamkarah | tasmanna tesam bahiramgatvam rasabhivyaktau | - ananda, p. 87. rasasyangam vibhavadyah saksannispadakatvatah | tadvaicitryoktivapuso'lamkarastu tadasrayah || - - Mahima, p. 87. Vide also the Antara Slokas 76-77 on p. 87, Vyaktiviveka of Mahimabhatta There are very valuable ideas on Alamkara-aucitya in Vimarsa Two of the Vyaktiviveka.

From Rasa to the musical sound which aids its realisation, poetry is one unity, one complex of rich experience. , 1 The purposiveness of Alamkara is inevitable like the purposiveness of poetry. But this does not mean that one should judge Alamkara and poetry from a purely utilitarian point of view. There is simply beautiful poetry, which is nothing but the poet's desire to express taken shape. 'These very decorations carry the emotional motive of the poet which says "I find joy in my creations; it is good 'When in some pure moments of ecstasy we realise this in the world around us, we see the world not as merely existing but as decorated in its forms, sounds, colours, and lines, we feel in our hearts that there is one who through all things proclaims "I have joy in my creation "."" Nature is the creation of God's Lila, Poetry, of the poet's Lila. .¹ Tagore.