365bet娱乐

314 ALAMKARAS Like Bharata, Bhamaha, Dandin, Udbhata, Rudrata and other rhetoricians the Agni Purana gives an elaborate description of the Alankaras (Embellishments or Ornaments). This Alankara portion of the Agni Purana is influenced by Dandin's Kavyadarsa and Bhamaha's Kavyalankara. The definitions of many Alankaras are similar. Not only that, some definitions agree verbatim with the definitions in these two works. The Agni Purana draws upon Bhoja also. Alankaras are defined as the attributes which heighten or enhance the beauty of the Kavya sarira.72 It corresponds 73 literally with the definition in the Kavyadarsa. Generally, the Alamkaras are classified into the Sabdalankaras and the Arthalamkaras. The Agni Purana accepts Bhoja's three classes of Alamkaras, Sabda, Artha and Ubhaya. Bhoja has discussed 24 Sabdala karas. The Purana takes only nine of them. 74 Chaya, Mudra, Ukti, Yukti, Gumphana, Vakovakya, Anuprasa, 75 Citra and Duskara. Four varieties are given of the alamkara Chaya, Loka, Cheka, Arbhaka, and Matta-ukti. Following Bhoja, the Purana gives six varieties of Ukti and Yukti. The Natya sastra and the Kavyadarsa do not include Anuprasa in the list of the Sabdalamkaras. The Agni Purana has classified the alankara Anupra sa into five varieties which are dependent on the five Vrttis called Madhura, Lalita, Praudha, Bhadra and Parusa. Bhamaha mentions only two types viz. Chekanuprasa and Latanuprasa. Udbhata admits three more, based on the three

- 315 Vrttis, Parusa, Upanagarika and Gramya. The Sabdala kara Citra is explained in detail by the Purana and is divided into seven sub-varieties. We do not find these in the 76 Natyasastra. Only the 'Prahelika', a variety of the Citralamkara, is found in the Kavyadarsa. Prahelikas are discussed in other works also. The Agni Purana says that the effect of such a composition is to stir up curiocity in the mind of hearer and to fill it with a sense of wonder and joy. Prahelika is divided by the Agni Purana into three classes, according as a letter is added to or omitted from the intended answer, or one in which a letter is both added and omitted (Chyutaksara, Dattakara and Chyutadat taksara). It is either Sabdi (pertaining to the sound) or Arthi (related to the sense). The Agni Purana has discussed sixteen Prahelikas which are similar to the Kavyadarsa and the Visnudharmottara. The sixteen Prahelikas are - Samagata, Vancana, Vyutkranta, Pramusita, Samanarupa, Parusa, Sahkhana, Prakalpita, Namantarita, Nibhrta, Samana sabda, Sammudha, Pariharika, Ekachanna, Ubhayachanna, and Sankirna. The Sabdalankara Duskara is divided into three types - Niyama, Vidarbha, and Bandha. Eight varieties of the Bandha Duskara viz. Gomutrika etc. are mentioned. Some of them are described by the Kavyadarsa with illustrations. We do not find such a detailed discussion of the Sabdalankaras elsewhere. Unaided by the Arthalankaras the Sabdalankaras in themselves do not become charming. The Agni Purana glorifies

- - 316 the Arthala karas and says that without them Sarasvati, the 78 goddess of speech, is like a widow. The Agni Purana has discussed only twelve Arthala karas- Svarupa, Upama, Rupaka, Sahokti, Arthantaranyasa, Utpreksa, Ati saya, Visesa, Vibhavana, Virodha, Hetu, and Sama. Other rhetoricians have given a long list of the arthalamkaras. Bharata gives only four arthala karas. After Bharata this number went on increasing Bhamaha 33, Dandin 35, Udbhata 37, Vamana 30, Rudrata 60, Mammata 62, Visvanatha 70, and Jagannatha 68. The Agni Purana has grouped these Arthala kuras into eight categories. The eight groups are (1) Svarupa - The natural state of an object (This is regarded as the Svabhavokti alankara by the other rhetoricians). (2) Sadrsya - The alamkaras based on the similitude are Upama, kupaka, Sahokti, and Arthantaranyasa. (3) Utpreksa (4) Atisaya (5) Vibhavana (Visesa is included in it) (6) Virodha (7) Hetu (8) Sama The Each one of these is explained in detail. definitions of Rupaka, Utpreksa, Vise sokti, Vibhavana, Apahnuti and Samadhi are similar to the definitions given by the Kavyadarsa. Even the wording is same. Even the wording is same. The definitions of Rupaka, Aksepa, Aprastutaprasansa, Samasokti, Paryayokta agree with those Bhamaha. Following Dandin, the Agni Purana has given sixteen sub-divisions of Upama. But the Purana has not even mentioned the Alankaras Urjasvi and Rasavat. 79 The discussion of the third variety Sabdarthalamkara is an innovation of the Agni Purana. The Sabdarthala kara or

- 鈥� 317- 80 the Ubhayala kara decorates both Sabda and Artha. The Purana has given here an appropriate similie. A necklace adorns both the neck and the breasts of a woman simultaneously. The Agni Purana mentions six varieties of this Sabdarthala kara, viz. Prasasti, Kanti, Aucitya, Saksepa, Yavadarthata, and Abhivyakti. There is a similarity between these Sabdarth alankaras and the Gunas mentioned by Bharata, Dandin and Vamana. Bharata mentions ten Gunas. Among these Gunas, Kanti may agree with the Sabdarthalankara Kanti, and Arthavyakti with the Abhivyakti alahkara. There is a similarity between the Guna Udarata and the alankara Prasasti, Samadhi Guna and Sahksepalankara, Ojas and Aucitya alamkara, and Prasada and Yavadarthata - a Sabdarthala kara. 80 The Agni Purana does not make a clear distinction between the Gunas and Alankaras. But he follows Vamana and contends that both the Gunas and Alankaras jointly produce poetic beauty singly they are unable to achieve this aim. In Chapter 14 of the Visnud harmottara there is a brief account about the alankaras. In fifteen verses the Vismudharmottara has given the definitions of only eighteen alamkaras without any illustrations. The Visnudharmottara does not give general definition of Alankara as such, nor does it make any classification of alamkaras like Sabda lankara and Arthalamkara. The eighteen alankaras defined are Anuprasa, Yamaka, Rupaka, Vyatireka, Slesa, Utpreksa, Arthantaranyasa, Upanyasa, Vibhavana, Atisayokti, Svabhavokti,

318 Yathasamkhya, Visesokti, Virodha, Nindastuti, Nidarsana, Upama, and Ananvaya. Anuprasa and Yamaka are known as Sabdalamkaras. Two varieties of Yamaka are mentioned Samdastaka and Samudga. If Yamaka is maintained all over the Pada, it is called as 'Duskara'. The definitions of many of these alankaras are similar to those of Bhamaha and Dandin. Dr. Priyabala Shah has given the Dandin. corresponding definitions of Bhamaha and Some definitions have the same words. With a survey of all these definitions, she opines that the Vismudharmottara has not directly borrowed the material from Bhamaha and Dandin but it has before it a different tradition, since we find the words 'Puratanaih Sankhyatam' in the definition of Anuprasa and 'Puratanaih Kathitam' in the definition of 1. 83 Utpreksa. The distinctive feature of the Visnudharmottara is that the Purana has not given importance to the Upama alamkara. It has not even defined Upama. Only the distinction between Upama and Nidarsana is mentioned. The alankara Upanyasa is not found in the Kavyadarsa or the Bhamahalankara. 84 The Visnudharmottara has not discussed Riti, Guna and But at the end of the 15 th Adhyaya, after giving the characteristics of the Mahakavya, the Purana mentions some Dosa. defects which the poet should avoid in his Kavya.85 The Visnudharmottara has specifically emphasized the point that

319 poetry must be 'Kalakausala samprayukta'. That is to say poetry should contain beauty and artistic skill. 86 The sixteenth Chapter is wholly devoted to the discussion of 'Prahelikas' (riddles of conundrums). The Visnudharmottara mentions twenty four Prahelikas. Some of these are nothing but the Kavyadosas. The rest of the Prahelikas are independent. In the Aavyadarsa, Dandin made the same statement. He says that there are many Kavyadosas. Some of them are good. The fourteen Prahelikas, made from such Kavyadosas are discussed by Dandin. The Purana says that a Prahelika should be expressed in not more than one or two verses. The Purana especially states that the concealed meaning of the Prahelikas should not be indecent or obscene. 88 87 89 It seems that at the time of the compilation of the Visnudharmottara, much attraction was felt for this type of Kavya, The earlier rhetoricians discussed these Prahelikas. Bhamaha says in his Kavyalankara that this type of literary activity can only be understood with the help of commentaries. It is a source of pleasure to the brilliant but that of humiliation to the dull-witted.90 Out of the twenty-four Prahelikas of the Visnudhar mottara, fifteen are practically the same as those of Dandin's. There are also a few variations in the definitions of some Prahelikas and some are added by the Purana. The Prahelikas called Vandita (Vancita), Vikrantagopita

320- (Vyutkranta), Musita (Pramusita), Paruga, Kalpita (Prakalpita) Namantarita, Nibarta, Samanasabda, Vyamudha (Sammudha), Ekacchanna, Ubhayacchana, Sankirna are the same in both these works. The definitions of the Prahelikas which are different from those of Dandin are Samatrate (Samahita), Samanarupa, and Sankhyata. And eight Prahelikas which are not found in the Kavyadarsa are discussed in the Visandharmottara, namely, Gudha, Arthakari, Vyabhicarini, Nastartha, Anyarthata, Nastaksara, Arthada, and Lesa. From this it is evident that both the Purana and the Kavyadarse must have borrowed their material from some common source. 91 The later rhetoricians do not give much importance to these Prahelikas. Mammata describes Citrakavya and its varieties like Khadgabandha and Murajadi bandha, but does not mention Prahelika.92 Bhoja in his Sarasvatikanthabharana mentions only six Prahelikas. Visvanatha refers to three such Prahelikas namely Cyutaksara, Dattaksara, and Cyutadattaksara. According to Visvanatha, this type of literary activity is destructive of Rasa. This is only a mode of 93 expression or Uktivaicitrya.