Part 2 - Application of Alaṃkāra (figure of speech) in the Matsyapurāṇa

Alaṃkāra or figure of speech constitutes a very important part in a work with literary beauty which enhances the piece with ornamental elements. It means alaṃkāra is that by which a composition is decorated. The term alaṃkāra is constituted with the indeclinable alam and the root is kṛ which is attached with the suffix ghañ. The whole galaxy of Sanskrit rhetoricians pays much attention to the topic of alaṃkāra with difference to its perspectives. Bharata, the most ancient rhetorician in the field of Sanskrit poetics has defined figure of speech as the ornament which is used to embellish a poetical piece.^[1]

In the Sāhityadarpaṇa, Viśvanātha Kavirāja has said that figure of speech only intensify the sentiment of the work.^[2] Just as the ornaments like earrings, bracelets etc. increase the beauty of a person so also the figures of speech increase the beauty of poetry. In the words of Kavirāja these are the perturbing qualities of word and sense which as an auxiliary element help the sentiment, the soul of poetry for its enhancement just as ornaments beautify the human body.^[3]

Another famous rhetorician Bhāmaha has opined that being filled with other poetical elements if poetry does not use alaṃkāra it cannot attract the reader just like the face of a naturally beautiful woman does not fascinate if not decorated with ornaments.^[4] Therefore, it can be said that figure of speech is the tool used in a poetical work for enhancing its beauty as a whole.

Alaṃkāra is of two types viz.,

1. śabdālaṃkāra and
2. arthālaṃkāra.

The Matsyapurāṇa is embellished with both these types of figures of speech. Among śabdālaṃkāras the Anuprāsa and Yamaka have been used frequently.

Anuprāsa:

In Anuprāsa similar syllables are employed together one after another. In the Sāhityadarpaṇa Viśvanātha Kavirāja has said that this figure of speech is constituted with similar letters only without any resemblance in the sound.^[5]

The following is an example from the Matsyapurāṇa:

vṛttānanāyudhadharā nānākavacabhūṣaṇā/
vicitravāhanarūḍhā divyarūpā viyaccarā// ^[6]

Here in this verse there is the repetition of the syllables da, na, ma and ra. So it is an example of Vṛttyanuprāsa where similarity is found among a number of consonants in one way or that occurring more than once and in more than one way, or similarity is found in the same single consonant recurring even once.^[7]

In the [following verse]:

tataḥ sa kāṣṭhāni cakāra tasminvane tadā rājasutāsamakṣam/
tasyā hyadūre sarasastadānīṃ mene ca sā taṃ mṛtameva rājan// ^[8]

Similarity among consonants ta and sa constitute the Śrutyanuprāsa^[9] as they are uttered by the same organ of speech i.e. danta.

Again the example of Chekānuprāsa^[10] is found in the following verse:

tapanamaṇḍalamaṇḍitakandhare pṛthusuvarṇasuvarṇanagadyute/
viṣabhujaṅganiṣaṅgavibhūṣite girisute bhavatīmahamāśraye// ^[11]

Here, the consonants in maṇḍala and maṇḍita, suvarṇa and suvarṇa, bhujaṅga and niṣaṅga are repeated in same order of succession. Many other examples of Anuprāsa can be cited from the Matsyapurāṇa.^[12]

Yamaka:

This śabdālaṃkāra is also widely spread in the verses of the Matsyapurāṇa. It is the only śabdālaṃkāra accepted by Bharata along with other three arthālaṃkāras, i.e., Upamā, Dīpaka and Rūpaka. According to Bharata, in this figure of speech, repetition of words takes place at the beginning of the feet or in other places.^[13] Viśvanātha Kavirāja is of the opinion that a group of vowels or consonants when repeated in the same order having either different or same meaning then it is the case of Yamaka.^[14] Therefore, Yamaka is the repetition of words either following one another or with the intervention of some other words.

In the [following verse from the Matsyapurāṇa]:

namo’stu te bhīmagaṇānugāya namo’stu nānābhuvanādikartre/
namo’stu nānājagatāṃ vidhātre namo’stu te citraphalaprayoktre// ^[15]

namo’stu is repeated in the beginning of all the four feet. So this verse is an example of Yamaka.

Again the [following verse]:

sa eva paśupālo’bhūt kṣetrapālaḥ sa eva hi/
sa eva vṛṣṭyā parjanyo yogitvādarjjuno’bhavat// ^[16]

Is also an example of Yamaka as the word sa eva is repeated in the beginning of the first and the third foot and also in the middle of the second foot.

Upamā:

This arthālaṃkāra has gained much popularity compared to other figures of speech. Ample evidences are found in the verses of the Matsyapurāṇa also where Upamā or simile has been used. Simile generally denotes resemblance between two objects. Almost all the Sanskrit rhetoricians have given their expert comments on this alaṃkāra. According to Viśvanātha Kavirāja, simile is the comparison between two similar things expressed in a single sentence without the statement of any dissimilarity.^[17]

An example of Upamā is given here from the Matsyapurāṇa.

pūrve’pyatibalā ye ca daityendrāḥ suravidviṣaḥ//
vināśamāgatāḥ prāpya śalabhā iva pāvakam/ ^[18]

Lord Viṣṇu is praised as the one by whom the Asuras, the enemies of the Devas were killed like a swarm of locusts consumed in the fire. Here, the prowess of Viṣṇu is compared with that of fire. The power of fire is upamāna here, whereas the power of Viṣṇu is upameya. The common attribute is the quality of prowess and the word iva remains as the expressive word for similarity. So this verse is a case of Upamā in the Matsyapurāṇa.

Rūpaka:

The Matsyapurāṇa has exhibited some fine examples of Rūpaka in its verses. In this alaṃkāra due to the excessive similarity between the objects one is superimposed on the other. Viśvanātha Kavirāja has defined that this figure of speech consists in the representation of the subject of description, which is not concealed but as identified with another.^[19]

An example from the Matsyapurāṇa is:

yatroṣitaṃ viśālākṣi tvayā candranibhānane /
tatrāhamuṣito bhadre kukṣau kāvyasya bhāmini // ^[20]

In this verse Kaca, the son of Bṛhaspati tries to pacify Devayānī, daughter of Śukra when she asks him to marry her. He addresses Devayānī as moon-faced lady(candranibhānane). Here, the face of Devayānī is identified with the brightness of the moon due to the excessive similarity that exists between them for having the same brightness and beauty and thus beauty of the moon’s light is superimposed on the face of Devayānī which is not expressed by any expressive word.

Ullekha:

According to Viśvanātha Kavirāja, when an object of description is mentioned in different ways due to either the difference of the cogniser or due to the difference of the subject, it is called Ullekha.^[21] In Alaṃkārasarvasva, Ruyyaka has mentioned that it is called Ullekha alaṃkāra when one object is apprehended in many forms due to difference of reasons.^[22] Primarily, Ullekha is used in the Matsyapurāṇa to praise gods and goddesses as the main function of this figure of speech is to signify the nature of an object with the help of different descriptions.

In the 47^th chapter of this Purāṇa, the eulogies of Lord Śiva by Śukra after receiving desired boon from him are mentioned where Śiva is referred to with different names or forms.

For an example:

namo’stuśitikaṇṭhāya kaniṣṭhāyasuvarcase/
lelihānāya kāvyāya vatsarāyāndhasaḥpate//
kapardine karālāya haryakṣṇe varadāya ca/
saṃstutāya sutīrthāya devadevāya raṃhase// ^[23]

Here Lord Śiva is designated as blue-necked, short-statured, full of splendor, lelihāna, omniscient, vatsara, lord of Andhas etc. In the Matsyapurāṇa, there are ample verses where gods and goddesses are praised and in almost all those verses Ullekha alaṃkāra is employed.

Arthāntaranyāsa:

This figure of speech is defined by Viśvanātha Kavirāja as one where a general statement is supported by a particular one or a particular statement is supported by a general one and an effect is justified by a cause or vice versa either on similarity or dissimilarity.^[24] The Matsyapurāṇa bears verses with the application of this verse also.

For instance:

ātmadoṣairniyacchanti sarve duḥkhasukhe janā/
manye duścaritaṃ tasmin tasyeyaṃ niṣkṛtiḥ kṛtā// ^[25]

Śukra says to his daughter Devayānī that every being receives pain and pleasure according to deeds done by them. Consequently, he doubts, Devayānī is also getting the result of her evil deeds. Here, the general idea is that if one does good deeds then he will receive good result and if one does bad then it will result in pain only. And this general idea is established by showing the particular action of Devayānī by Śukra when he saw that Devayānī was abused and harmed by Śarmiṣṭhā and asked his daughter that it might have been the result of her ill manners towards Śarmiṣṭhā for which she got the pain. So, this is an example of arthāntaranyāsa where a general statement is confirmed by a particular statement.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

alaṃkārairguṇaiścaiva bahubhiḥ samalaṃkṛtam/ bhūṣaṇairivavinyastaistad bhūṣaṇamiti smṛtam// Nāṭyaśāstra, XVII.6

[2]:

utkarṣahetavaḥ proktā guṇālaṃkārarītayaḥ/ Sāhityadarpaṇa, I.3

[3]:

śabdārthayorasthirā ye dharmāḥ śobhātiśāyinaḥ/ rasādīnupakurvanto’paṅkārāste’ṅgadādivat// Ibid., X.1

[4]:

Kāvyalaṃkāra, I.13

[5]:

anuprāsaḥ śabdasāmyaṃ vaiṣamye’pi svarasya yat// Sāhityadarpaṇa, X.3

[6]:

Matsyapurāṇa, 154.536

[7]:

anekasyaikadhā sāmyamasakṛdbāṣyanekadhā/ ekasya sakṛdaṣyeṣa vṛttyanuprāsa ucyate// Sāhityadarpaṇa, X.4

[8]:

Matsyapurāṇa, 209.35

[9]:

uccāryatvādyadekatra sthāne tāluradādike/ sādṛśyaṃ vyañjanasyaiva śrutyanuprāsa ucyate// Sāhityadarpaṇa, X.5

[10]:

cheko vyanjanasanghasya sakrtsamyamanekadha// Ibid., X.2

[11]:

Matsyapurāṇa, 158.12

[12]:

Ibid., 154.538, 540

[13]:

śabdābhyāsastu yamakaṃ pādādiṣu vikalpitam/ Nāṭyaśāstra, XVII.60

[14]:

satyarthe pṛthagarthāyāḥ svaravyañjanasaṃhateḥ/ krameṇa tenaivāvṛttiryamakaṃ vinigadyate// Sāhityadarpaṇa, X.8

[15]:

Matsyapurāṇa, 154.266

[16]:

Ibid., 43.27

[17]:

sāmyaṃ vācyamavaidharmyaṃ vākyaikya upamādvayoḥ // Sāhityadarpaṇa, X.14

[18]:

Matsyapurāṇa, 153.7-8

[19]:

rūpakaṃ rūpitāropādviṣaye nirapahnave/ Sāhityadarpaṇa, X.28

[20]:

Matsyapurāṇa, 26.12

[21]:

kvacidbhedād grahītṛṇāṃ viṣayāṇāṃ tathā kvacit/ ekasyānekadhollekho yaḥ sa ullekha ucyate// Sāhityadarpaṇa, X.37

[22]:

ekasyāpi nimittavaśādanekadhā grahaṇamullekhaḥ// Alaṃkārasarvasva, verse 19

[23]:

Matsyapurāṇa, 47.125-126

[24]:

sāmānyaṃ vā viśeṣeṇa viśeṣastena vā yadi/ kāryaṃ ca kāraṇenedaṃ kāryeṇa ca samarthyate// sādharmyeṇetareṇārthāntaranyāso’ṣṭadhā tataḥ/ Sāhityadarpaṇa, X.61, 62

[25]:

Matsyapurāṇa, 27.30