Kavyanushasana Critical Study

SR No.: 001713
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: A N Upadhye
Publisher: A N Upadhye
Publication Year: 1987
Total Pages: 558
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Literature, & Kavya
File Size: 10 MB

Page 423

Prativastupamā and the two types of Nidarśanā separately; for they are taken care of by our definition of Nidarśanā. Not only that, even Drstānta of Mammața 176 comes under our Nidarśanā. Hemachandra speaks of Nidarśanā by common attributes as also by opposite attributes.
Dipaka (VI. 6) occurs where Praksta and Aprakrta are mentioned together by one characteristic, which acts like a lamp (197). Here the fact that so many subjects come together by means of one common characteristic causes charm or strikingness. Hemachandra's interpretation of the definition extends to Mammața's Tulyayogitā which involves a string of Prakrta things (K.P. X. 104) and Hemachandra cites here Mammața's illustrative verse (559). Mammața's Dipaka (X. 103) is not different from Hemachandra's, since the gloss of Hemachandra is nothing but a paraphrase of Mammața's gloss.
Hemachandra includes Tulyayogitā as well as Anyonya under Dipaka. So far as Kārakadipaka (admitted by Mammața) is concerned, Hemachandra cites a verse (560) with many Kriyās connected with a single Kāraka or subject; but Hemachandra does not admit it as a variety of Dipaka and dismisses it is a naturalistic pen-picture (Jāti) only. In regard to the verb Gurukikriyate in the verse 555, there is a controversy. As a verb it performs a necessary function but it cannot be an Alamkāra, says the opponent. Hemachandra replies that the common verb is not the point of beauty in this figure, but the fact that so many subjects are connected by a one verb or quality creates the charm here. Again there is an element of Upamā in Dipaka but it is not so pronounced as in Upamā and that constitutes the difference between the two figures.
Anyokti of Hemachandra (VI. 8) corresponds to Aprastataprašamsā of Mammata and has five varieties (Pāncadhã-K.P. X. 98-99). It consists in the suggestion of the relevant by a statement of the irrelevant and is widely used in the Sanskrit literature. Hemachandra distinguishes it from Nidarśanã and
398