3.8 (b): Lexical figurativeness or padapūrvārdha-vakratā

[Full title: A brief sketch of the contents of Vakroktijīvita, (8): Six divisions of Vakratā, (b): Lexical figurativeness or padapūrvārdha-vakratā]

The second chapter also contains the detailed description of next two vakratās like lexical figurativeness and grammatical figurativeness. Lexical figurativeness makes vakratā using the root subantaḥ or nouns and tiṅantaḥ or verbs. It is divided into nine types as conventional word (rūḍhi). It is equal to the arthāntarasaṅkramitavācyadhvani of Ānandavardhana. Other varieties of lexical figurativeness are figurativeness related to synonym (paryāya), metaphorical figurativeness (upacāra), attributive words (viśeṣaṇa), figurativeness of concealment (samvṛti), figurativeness related to expressive techniques (vṛtti), figurativeness related to root or verb (bhāva), figurativeness related to gender (liṅga), and figurativeness related to verb (kriyā).

An example for rūḍhivaicitryavakratā is:-

tadā jāyante guṇā yadā te sahṛdayairgṛhyante/
ravikiraṇānugṛhītāni bhavanti kamalāni kamalāni//^[1]

The second line says that the lotuses become lotuses only when it is blessed by the rays of sun. According to Ānandavardhana there is arthāntarasaṅkramitavācyadhvani in the second word kamala, but according to Kuntaka the beauty of the second word kamala is due to rūḍhivaicitryavakratā. This is one of the varieties of rūḍhivaicitryavakratā. Through this Kuntaka suggests the unimaginable or an extraordinary quality to the second word kamala.

The paryāyavakratā is of different kinds namely selection of the most suitable synonym in a particular context, and the selection of a synonym which give extreme delights to a particular context because of its inherent beauty.

An example for showing the most suitable word for a context is as follows:-

nābhiyoktumanṛtam tvamiṣyase kastapasviviśikheṣu cādaraḥ /
santi bhūbhṛti hi na śarāḥ pare ye parākramavasūni vajriṇaḥ //^[2]

“I would not like to fight with you for nothing. And what regard do the arrows of hermits deserve? I have other arrows of mine in my mountain store and they from the wealth of the thunder-weilding god’s prowess.”^[3]

This is a verse from Kirātārjunīya of Bhāravi and is a conversation between the hunter and Arjuna, who disguised as an ascetic. They argue for the ownership of the arrow that killed a pig. Here though having thousands of words to denote the word Indra, Bhāravi uses the word Vajrin to increase the charm through paryāyavakratā. Here the hunter refers to Indra as the Lord of celestial who always keeps vajrāyudha with himself. His particular skill or expertise in using the arrows shows the extraordinary strength of arrows than vajrāyudha. Moreover the word ascetic is also beautiful, which also makes it obvious that everyone had respect towards the arrows of great warriors but none had any respect for the arrows of an ascetic.

In upacāravakratā, the poets superimpose the qualities of extremely different objects like concreteness and abstractness, liquidity and solidity, sentient and non-sentient etc. Superimposition of animate objects to inanimate objects is almost equal to the Ānandhavardhana’s atyantatiraskṛtavācya, the division of avivakṣitavācyadhvani.

One of the examples to show the upacāravakratā of Kuntaka is as follows:-

gacchantīnām ramaṇavasatim yoṣitām tatra naktam ruddhāloke narapatipathe sūcibhedhyaistamobhiḥ/
saudāminyā kanakanikaṣasnigdayā darśayorvīm toyotsarggastanitamukharo māsmabhūrviklavāstāḥ//^[4]

“There, when the sight will be obstructed by pitchy darkness on the high road, show the ground (path) by flashes of lightning charming like a streak of gold on a touch-stone, to the women going at night to the dwelling of their lovers; water but don’t you be resounding with thunder and the downpour for they are timid.”^[5]

In this verse the word sūcibhedhyaistamobhiḥ, which means the darkness that can be pierced with a needle, is really a beautiful expression used by Kālidāsa in his Meghadūta. Kuntaka cites this as an example of upacāravakratā, because through this the poet attributes the concrete nature to abstract darkness. According to Kuntaka proper uses of such vakratās always reveals the genius of poets and are plenty in the works of all great poets.

Beauty is added to a noun or a verb in a sentence through the epithets given to them is known as viśeṣanavakratā, for eg:-

śuciśītalacandrikāplutāściraniḥśabdamanoharā diśaḥ/
praśamasya manobhavasya vā hṛdi kasyāpyatha hetutām yayuḥ//^[6]

It means that the quarters of the sky is flooded in the bright and cool sunlight and is also beautiful for its long silence; such quarters create either quietude or love in everyone’s mind. This is an example of the epithet given to a noun, here the epithet given to the quarters really gives pleasure to the mind of all sahṛdaya’ s.

The concealment of the matters through pronouns or so forth in order to create vaicitrya or an extraordinary charm to a sentence is known as samvṛtivakratā, for e.g:-

tathā ruditam kṛṣṇa viśākhayā rodhagadgadagirā/
yathā kasyāpi janmaśate’ pi ko’ pi mā vallabho bhavatu//^[7]

This verse shows the depth of the pathos of Rādhā after the separation of Kṛṣṇa. Here Rādhā weeps so intensely that it makes everyone to think that nobody may become the beloved of anyone even once in a hundred births. In the first line of this verse, the reason of the sorrow of Rādhā is concealed through the word ‘tathā’ and later in the second line the poet makes it clear. This adds an unexplainable beauty to this verse.

The beauty of vṛtti where the adverbial compound or avyayībhāva samasas like kṛt, taddhita etc. shines forth is known as vṛttivaicitrya vakratā. For e.g: -‘madhye’ ṅkuram pallavāḥ’.^[8] Here the word aṅkuramadhyam is normally used, but Kuntaka has uses madhye’ ṅkuram as avyayībhāva for getting extra charm in the sentence. According to pāṇinīya sūtra ‘pāre madhye ṣaṣṭhyā vā’ (2.1.18) ‘pāramadhyaśabdauṣaṣṭhyantena saha vā samasyete’ , ‘pāre madhye iti na saptamyantayorgrahaṇam’. Here the word ‘vā’ denotes the ṣaṣṭhītatpuruṣaḥ.

Kuntaka quotes another example of this is ‘pāṇḍimni magnam vapuḥ^’[9], here Kuntaka uses the taddhita‘pāṇḍimni’ for getting extreme charm to the context. According to the Pāṇinīya sūtra ‘varṇadṛḍhādibhyaḥ shyañca’ (5.1.123) ‘ṣaṣṭhyantebhyo varṇavājibhyo dṛḍhādibhyaśca bhāve shyañca syādityarthaḥ’ eg:—śauklyam, śuklimā and dārḍyam, draḍhimā. Here the sutra named ‘pṛthvādibhyaḥ imanijvā’ (5.1.122) is also used, ‘pṛthvādibhyaḥ ṣaṣṭhyantebhyaḥ bhāve imanijvā syādityarthaḥ.

Another variety of padapūrvārdhavakratā is liṅgavaicitryavakratā or specialty in gender. Here the poet uses two different genders to denote a single idea in order to make the sentence more attractive for e.g.:-‘maithilī tasya dārāḥ’^[10], Here the word maithilī is in feminine gender and is singular also, but the word dārāḥ is in masculine gender and in plural. Another example of this is ‘etām paśya purastaṭīm’^[11], the word taṭī can be used in the three genders as taṭaḥ, taṭam and taṭī, but the poet deliberately uses the feminine gender in order to enhance the beauty of the sentence.

According to the poets, the feminine name itself is beautiful.

sati liṅgāntare yatra strīliṅgam ca prayujyate/
śobhāniṣpattaye yasmānnāmaiva strīti peśalam//^[12]

“Even when other genders could be used, if the feminine is preferred, it contributes to beauty; since even the name of a woman is pleasing.”^[13]

From the keen evaluation of these vakratas it will be clear that Kuntaka is well versed in grammar also. Moreover the next and the third vakratā named pratyayavakratā as the name itself suggests the power of the grammatical specialties to express beautiful meanings. Kuntaka clearly demonstrates how various grammatical aspects are incorporated in the kāvyas to produce charm and special meanings. It is doubtless that in his Vakroktijīvita the grammatical peculiarities and poetic charm seem to lie entangled with each other.

Other two varieties of padapūrvārdhavakratā are bhāva and kriyā. In bhāvavakratā, a process yet to be accomplished is described as it is already accomplished for getting an extreme charm to that particular verse. As the name itself indicates, kriyāvakratā means creating vaicitrya of verbs through the particular use of subject, epithet, object etc.

It is of five different types, one example of this is as follows:-

krīḍārasena rahasi smitapūrvamindorlehkām vikṛṣya vinibadhya ca mūrdhni gauryāḥ/
kiṃśobhitāhamanayeti pinākapāṇeḥ pṛṣṭasya pātu paricumbanamuttaraṃ vaḥ//^[14]

“Pulling out in a sportive mood the crescent of the moon-crested Śiva, Gaurī smiled and said, am I beautified by this, my dear? Śiva covered her with kisses in reply. May this scene protect us.”^[15]

The kiss of Śiva may protect everyone, which was given as an answer to the question of Pārvatī whether the crescent was beautiful for her. Here if Śiva says yes or something else as an answer to her question, there would not be any charm in this verse. Here the verb kiss of the subject Śiva adds an extreme beauty to this particular verse. Śiva did so because there is no word capable to explain the beauty of Pārvatī instead of a kiss.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

ibid,p.83.

[2]:

ibid,p.86.

[3]:

ibid,p.374.

[4]:

ibid,p.94.

[5]:

M.R.Kale, The Meghadūta of Kālidāsa, p.71

[6]:

K. Krishnamoorthy, op.cit,p.97.

[7]:

ibid,p.100.

[8]:

ibid,p.31.

[9]:

idem.

[10]:

idem.

[11]:

ibid,p.32.

[12]:

ibid,p.106.

[13]:

ibid,p.392.

[14]:

ibid,p.48.

[15]:

ibid,p.334.