काव्यालङ्कार (आचार्य भामह - भारतीय काव्यशास्त्र एवं अलङ्कार-सिद्धान्त मूल महाग्रन्थ सटीक)

SECOND PARICCHHEDA 125
for granted. Whereas in उत्प्रेक्षा there is no illusion
as in भ्रान्तिमान्, and the real character also makes
itself felt. As in संसंदेह, so also in उत्प्रेक्षा there is a
peculiar doubt about the identity of an object. But
of the two alternatives in a doubt there is more a
leaning towards the fictitious character in Utprek-
shā, whereas in संदेह, both the alternatives are of
equal force. Further in उत्प्रेक्षा the real character is
not expressly negatived as in अपह्नुति. Again in उत्प्रेक्षा
the fictitious character that is attributed is not
wholly taken for granted, and hence its distinc-
tion from अतिशयोक्ति.
किंशुकव्यपदेशेन तरुमारुह्य सर्वतः ।
दग्धादग्धमरण्यान्याः पश्यतीव विभावसुः ॥ ९२ ॥
92. Under the guise of Kiṁśuka flowers, fire
after ascending the tree surveys all round the forest
to see which portions are burnt and which unburnt.
92. This verse illustrates Utprekṣā. Here
the Kiṁśuka bloom on the trees is conceived of as
fire. This is cited also in Bhoja's Sarasvatī Kaṇṭhā-
bharaṇa to illustrate उत्प्रेक्षोपमा.
स्वभावोक्त्यलंकारः (12)
स्वभावोक्तिरलंकार इति केचित् प्रचक्षते ।
अर्थस्य तदवस्थत्वं स्वभावोऽभिहितो यथा ॥ ९३ ॥