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

SECOND PARICCHEDA 117
82. सप्तच्छद or सप्तपर्ण is a kind of tree whose bran-
ches abound in seven leaves and whose flowers are
said to be highly fragrant. The flowers of those trees
are white and in moonlight they become invisible,
their white colour being drowned in moonshine.
But the hum of bees hovering round them enables
a person to identify the trees. That the trees in
their full bloom could not be identified by an ob-
server is certainly an exaggeration. But it is based
on the poet’s desire to bring out the extreme white-
ness spread over the trees by their flowers. Cf. the
following illustration from Daṇḍin :—मल्लिकामालभारिण्यः
सर्वाङ्गीणार्द्रचन्दनाः । क्षौमवत्यो न लक्ष्यन्ते ज्योत्स्नायामभिसारिकाः ॥
अपां यदि त्वक्शिथिला च्युता स्यात्फणिनामिव ।
तदा शुक्लांशुकानि स्युरङ्गेष्वम्भसि योषिताम् ॥ ८३ ॥
83. If the loose skin of waters drops down
like the slough of serpents then it will become
white garments on the limbs of ladies (sporting) in
water.
83. Here is the description of ladies sporting
in water. If waters can be conceived of as shedding
their skin in the same way as snakes cast off their
slough, the skin thus shed will be extremely fine
and white. The fine garments of ladies engaged in
bathing are compared to such supposititious skins
cast off by the waters.

118 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
इत्येवमादिरुदिता गुणातिशययोगतः ।
सर्वैवातिशयोक्तिस्तु तर्कयेत्तां यथागमम् ॥ ८४ ॥
84. Thus the entire range of Atiśayokti pro-
ceeds from the description of an extraordinary qua-
lity. One should find it out in keeping with the
science of poetics.
84. The entire range of Atiśayokti is prompt-
ed by a desire to bring out a superior quality. That
is the fundamental basis of Atiśayokti. Though
Bhāmaha expressly refers to only one type the basic
principle applies equally to the six types of Atiśa-
yokti mentioned in Alaṁkārasarvasva and the se-
ven types mentioned in Chandrāloka and all other
types set out by other rhetoricians. The author
says तर्कयेत् तां यथागमम् The reader will find out for him-
self the further types of Atiśayokti in keeping with
the science of poetics. The author does not propose
to go into all those details.
सैषा सर्वैव वक्रोक्तिरनयार्थो विभाव्यते ।
यत्नोऽस्यां कविना कार्यः कोऽलंकारोऽनया विना ॥ ८५.
85. All this is only a clever twist of the
speech. By this an idea is well brought out. A
poet should direct his efforts this way. What is
literary embellishment without it?
85. The author apparently equates Atiśayokti
with Vakrokti. Vakrokti, a skilful utterance, is

SECOND PARICCHEDA 119
at the basis of all charming poetry. There is an
element of Atiśayokti in all figures of speech.
Daṇḍin endorses the same opinion as follows:—
अलंकारान्तराणामप्येकमाहुः परायणम् ।
वागीशमहितामुक्तिमिमामतिशयाह्वयाम् ॥
Kāvyādarśa II—220.
Dhvanyāloka at page 208 also states that Ati-
śayokti is at the root of all Alaṁkāras and contri-
butes to the eminence of poetry. See the following
extract therefrom at page 207. प्रथमं तावदतिशयोक्तिगर्भता
सर्वालंकारेषु शक्यक्रिया । कृतैव च सा महाकविभिः कामपि काव्यच्छायां पुष्य-
तीति । कथं ह्यतिशययोगिता स्वविषयौचित्येन क्रियमाणा सती काव्ये नोत्कर्षमावहेत् ।
भामहेनाप्यतिशय लक्षणे यदुक्तं—सैषा सर्वैति, तत्रातिशयोक्तिर्यमलंकारमधितिष्ठति
कविप्रतिभावशात् तस्य चारुत्वातिशययोगः अन्यस्यालंकारमात्रतैवेति सर्वालंकार-
शरीरस्वीकरणयोग्यत्वेनाभेदोपचारात् सैव सर्वालंकाररूपेत्ययमेवार्थोऽवगन्तव्यः ।
Kāvyaprakāśa in the 10th Ullāsa while dealing
with the Alaṁkāra विशेष, says—सर्वत्र, एवंविधविषयेऽतिशयोक्ति-
रेव प्राणत्वेनावतिष्ठते. तां विना प्रायेणालंकारत्वायोगात् । अत एवोक्तम्—सैषा
सर्वत्र वक्रोक्तिः...विना ॥ Verse cited also by Premachandra
in his commentary on Kāvyādarśa II-220 with सर्वत्र
for सर्वैव. Verse quoted also by Hemachandra in his
Ṭīkā on Kāvyānuśāsana, page 267 (सैषा सर्वैव).
हेतु-सूक्ष्म-लेशाः अनलंकाराः ।
हेतुश्च सूक्ष्मो लेशोऽथ नालंकारतया मतः ।
समुदायाभिधानस्य वक्रोक्त्यनभिधानतः ॥ ८६ ॥

120 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
86. Hetu, Sūkshma and Leśa are not accepted
by me as Alaṁkāras since the statement of matters
of routine does not involve cleverness of speech.
86. This verse refers to three figures of speech
recognised by some other Alaṁkārikas but rejected
by our author. Daṇḍin belonging to the opposite
school deals elaborately with the three—Hetu, Sū-
kshma and Leśa. Hetu is dealt with in Kāvyādarśa,
2nd Pariccheda, Verses 235 to 259, Sūkshma in
Verses 260 to 264 and Leśa in Verses 265 to 272.
In fact he says—हेतुश्च सूक्ष्मलेशौ च वाचामुत्तमभूषणम्. By
saying that these three Alaṁkāras are a superior
ornament of speech it is obvious that he directly
attacks Bhāmaha. समुदायाभिधानं A statement of ordi-
nary routine. It does not involve Vakrokti. There-
fore it is not to be considered an Alaṁkāra. Verse
cited by Premachandra on Kāvyādarśa II-265 (समु-
दायाभिधेयस्य).
गतोऽस्तमर्को भातीन्दुर्यान्ति वासाय पक्षिणः ।
इत्येवमादि किं काव्यं वार्तामेनां प्रचक्षते ॥ ८७ ॥
87. The Sun has set; the moon shines; birds
fly to their nests. Is all this poetry? They say
this is prosaic news.
87. It is not to be presumed simply because
this verse follows the mention of the rejected Alaṁ-
kāras that it will come in as an illustration of any

SECOND PARICCHEDA 121
of the said three Alaṁkāras. The author here gives
instances merely of prosaic statements or समुदायाभिधान.
The idea of the author is that the instances of the
said three Alaṁkāras are matter of fact statements
on a par with the three statements given here. Such
prosaic utterances do not deserve to be ranked as
figures of speech. For an opposite view see Daṇḍin
who cites this to illustrate Hetu. गतोऽस्तमर्को भातीन्दुर्या-
न्ति वासाय पक्षिणः । इतीदमपि साध्वेव कालावस्थानिवेदने ॥ Kāvyādarśa
II—244. Evidently Daṇḍin refers to Bhāmaha's
view and condemns it. Yet others like Hemachan-
-dra (in Kāvyānuśāsana) impute any number of sug-
gested meanings in this verse. For example, it
conduces to a tryst between lovers and so on. This
verse is cited in Kāvyaprakāśa, 7th Ullāsa, also to
indicate varieties of the व्यङ्ग्य according to the nature
of the वक्तृ and the बोद्धृ.
अपरौ द्वावलंकारौ ।
यथासंख्यमथोत्प्रेक्षामलंकारद्वयं विदुः ।
संख्यानमिति मेधाविनोत्प्रेक्षाभिहिता क्वचित् ॥ ८८ ॥
88. They recognise two more Alaṁkāras—
Yathāsaṅkhya and Utprekshā. Medhāvin some-
times calls Utprekshā as Saṅkhyāna.
88. This verse introduces two more Alaṁkā-
ras—Yathāsaṅkhya and Utprekshā. The latter is
called संख्यानं by Medhāvin, an ancient writer of

122 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
Poetics. This Medhāvin has been already referred
to as the propounder of the seven उपमादोषs in Verse
40 infra. This verse as given above represents the
reading based on manuscripts. It is adopted in
Trivedi's edition in the Appendix to Pratāparudra-
yaśobhūshaṇa, in the Chowkhamba edition and in
Mr. Naganatha Sastri's edition. Mr. D. T. Tata-
charya has changed the reading of the second half
of the verse into संख्यानमिति मेधावी नोत्प्रेक्षाभिहिता क्वचित्. He
bases his suggestion on the following extract from
Daṇḍin. यथासंख्यमिति प्रोक्तं संख्यानं क्रम इत्यपि. We have
however followed the reading based on manuscripts
and adopted by a majority of learned editors in
view of the fact that such an important Alaṁkāra
as Utprekshā is not likely to be ignored by any
writer in Poetics.
यथासंख्यालंकारः (10)
भूयसामुपदिष्टानांमर्थानामसधर्मणाम् ।
क्रमशो योऽनुनिर्देशो यथासंख्यं तदुच्यते ॥ ८९ ॥
89. Where several objects varying in quality
are mentioned at first, a subsequent treatment relat-
ing to them in the same order amounts to Yathā-
saṅkhya.
89. This verse defines Yathāsaṅkhya. In it
a number of objects are mentioned at first and in
the same order a different set of objects is subse-

SECOND PARICCHEDA 123.
quently mentioned with a view to predicating a
common attribute as in the illustration that follows
given by the author; or several predicates may be
enjoined in the same order as in the illustration
given in Chandrāloka—शत्रुं मित्रं द्विषत्पक्षं जय रञ्जय भञ्जय.
Note the antithesis between उपदेश, a first mention
and अनुनिर्देश, a second reference. Udbhaṭa's defini-
tion of यथासंख्य is the same as Bhāmaha's.
पद्मेन्दुभृङ्गमातङ्गपुंस्कोकिलकलापिनः ।
वक्त्रकान्तीक्षणगतिवाणीवालैस्त्वया जिताः ॥ ९० ॥
90. You have vanquished the lotus, the Moon,
the black bee, the elephant, the male cuckoo and
the peacock by your face, splendour, glances, gait,
voice and hair.
90. An illustration of Yathāsaṅkhya. The
lotus and others are conquered by the lady by means
of her face and others. Cf. Pāṇini :—यथासंख्यमनुदेशः
समानाम्.
उत्प्रेक्षालंकारः (11)
अविवक्षितसामान्या किंचिच्चोपमया सह ।
अतद्गुणक्रियायोगादुत्प्रेक्षाऽतिशयान्विता ॥ ९१ ॥
91. Without setting out the common charac-
teristic but slightly tinged with Upamā, the de-
scription of an excellence through association with

124 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
a quality or action which does not belong to itself
is Utprekshā.
91. This defines Utprekshā. In it the attri-
bute common to Upamāna and Upameya is not ex-
pressly mentioned. But there is an element of
simile. The quality or action not belonging to the
Upameya is ascribed to it and there is an element
of exaggeration. Later rhetoricians define Utpre-
kshā as meaning poetic fancy. The Upameya is
poetically fancied as Upamāna itself. Kuvalayā-
nanda defines thus :—अन्यधर्मसंबन्धनिमित्तेन अन्यस्य अन्यतादात्म्य-
संभावनं उत्प्रेक्षा. The example there given is धूमस्तोमं तमः
शङ्के कोकीविरहशुष्मणाम्. Certain expressions are considered
indicative of Utprekshā. मन्ये शङ्के ध्रुवं प्रायो नूनमित्येवमादयः ।
उत्प्रेक्षाव्यञ्जकाः शब्दा इवशब्दोऽपि तादृशः ॥
In Utprekshā an object is poetically conceived
of as identical with a different thing. The essential
requisite of Utprekshā is संभावना which means उत्कटैक-
तरकोटिकसंशयः. The real character is not totally lost
sight of, but at the same time it is made the sub-
ject of a doubt with special leaning towards one of
the alternatives. 1-In भ्रान्तिमदलंकार not mentioned by
our author, the identity of the relevant object is
completely mistaken. 2-In ससंदेहालंकार (III—43) the
two alternatives of a doubt are of equal weight.
In अपह्नुति (III—21) the real character of the rele-
vant object is expressly negatived. 4 In अतिशयोक्ति
(II-81) the fictitious assumption is absolutely taken

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 ॥

126 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
93. Some say that Svabhāvokti (natural de-
scription) is also a figure of speech. A natural de-
scription is to describe a thing as it is. Example
follows.
93. This verse introduces the Alaṁkāra known
as Svabhāvokti, a natural description. The descrip-
tion of a child and her movements, lions in a jump-
ing posture, horses galloping, birds flying, deer in
an attentive mood, in short, of anything doing an
action consistent with its nature comes under the
head of Svabhāvokti.
आक्रोशन्नाह्वयन्नन्यानाधावन्मण्डलै रुदन् ।
गो वारयेति दण्डेन डिम्भः सस्यावतारिणीः ॥ ९४ ॥
94. By crying out, by calling, by walking to-
wards in circles and by weeping the child prevents
the cows entering into the crops with his stick.
94. An illustration of Svabhāvokti. This re-
fers to the series of acts done by a boy engaged in
watching a field to safeguard the crops from moles-
tation by cows and bulls. In the place of रुदन् at the
end of the first half of the verse there is also the
reading नुदन्.
समासेनोदितमिदं धीखेदायैव विस्तरः ।
असंगृहीतमप्यन्यदभ्यूह्यमनया दिशा ॥ ९५ ॥
95. This has been expounded in brief. An
elaboration will only cause worry to the brain. That

SECOND PARICCHEDA 127
which has not been enumerated is also to be guessed
on similar lines.
95. The author states that his treatment of
Alaṁkāras is brief and further elaboration may be
worked out by the reader himself on the lines indi-
cated above.
स्वयं कृतैरेव निदर्शनैरियं
मया प्रकॢप्ता खलु वागलंकृतिः ।
अतः परं चारुरनेकधाऽपरो
गिरामलंकारविधिर्विधास्यते ॥ ९६ ॥
॥ इति भामहालंकारे द्वितीयः परिच्छेदः ॥
96. This treatment of figures of speech has
been done by me with examples of my own.
Hereafter another codification of Alaṁkāras, beau-
tiful in a variety of ways, is going to be made.
96. From this it is clear that the author’s
treatment of Alaṁkāras is not yet exhausted and in
fact a further treatment follows in the next chapter.
End of the Second Pariccheda.

तृतीयः परिच्छेदः ।
अपरे त्रयोविंशतिरलंकाराः ।
प्रेयो रसवदूर्जस्वि पर्यायोक्तं समाहितम् ।
द्विप्रकारमुदात्तं च भेदैः श्लिष्टमपि त्रिभिः ॥ १ ॥
अपह्नुतिं विशेषोक्तिं विरोधं तुल्ययोगिताम् ।
अप्रस्तुतप्रशंसां च व्याजस्तुतिनिदर्शने ॥ २ ॥
उपमारूपकं चान्यदुपमेयोपमामपि ।
सहोक्तिपरिवृत्ती च ससंदेहमनन्वयम् ॥ ३ ॥
उत्प्रेक्षावयवं चान्ये संसृष्टिमपि चापरे ।
भाविकत्वं च निजगुरलंकारं सुमेधसः ॥ ४ ॥
1 to 4. Wise men propound the following
Alaṁkāras also:—(1) Preyas, (2) Rasavat, (3) Ūr-
jasvin, (4) Paryāyokta, (5) Samāhita, (6) The two-
fold Udātta, (7) The threefold Ślishṭa, (8) Apahnuti,
(9) Viśeshokti, (10) Virodha, (11) Tulyayogitā, (12)
Aprastutapraśaṁsā, (13) Vyājastuti, (14) Nidar-
śanā, (15) Upamārūpaka, (16) Upameyopamā, (17)
Sahokti, (18) Parivṛtti, (19) Sasandeha, (20) Anan-
vaya, (21) Utprekshāvayava, (according to some)
(22) Saṁsrshṭi (according to others) and (23) Bhā-
vikatva.

THIRD PARICCHEDA 129
1 to 4. In the first four verses of this chapter
the author gives a list of 23 new Alaṁkāras. Of
these four of the Alaṁkāras mentioned in the first
half of Verse 1 deserve special mention as their
treatment here substantially differs from their
treatment in later works of Poetics. According to
our author रसवत् arises where there is a dramatic re-
velation of love or other emotions, प्रेयस् where there
is an exuberance of the display of affection or pleas-
ure, ऊर्जस्विन् where there is a dignified communica-
tion of valour or the like qualities and समाहितं where
providential help is described. As contrasted with
this, note the differences according to later Alaṁ-
kārikas. Where रस is introduced as an auxiliary to
another रस or भाव the figure of speech known as रसवत्
arises. Note the following example where शृङ्गाररस
plays a subordinate part to करुणरस.
अयं स रशनोत्कर्षी पीनस्तनमर्दनः ।
नाभ्यूरुजघनस्पर्शी नीवीविस्रंसनः करः ॥
Where भाव or devotion or a like sentiment plays
an auxiliary to रस the figure of speech is प्रेयस्. Where
रसाभास or भावाभास plays an adjunct to रस it is an in-
stance of ऊर्जस्विन्. Where भावशान्ति or a subsidence of
feeling is set out as subordinate to a Rasa it is an
instance of the figure of speech known as समाहित.
Vide Chandrāloka:—
रसेर्भावतदाभासभावशान्तिनिबन्धनाः ।
रसवत्प्रेयऊर्जस्विसमाहितमयाभिधाः ॥
9

130 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
For a clear idea of the said four figures of
speech according to later rhetoricians see our Notes
on Chandrāloka.
प्रेयोऽलंकारः (13)
प्रेयो गृहागतं कृष्णमवादीद्विदुरो यथा ।
अद्य या मम गोविन्द जाता त्वयि गृहागते ।
कालेनैषा भवेत्प्रीतिस्तवैवागमनात्पुनः ॥ ५॥
5. Preyas (Expression of pleasure) is illustrat-
ed by what Vidura said to Kṛṣṇa when he came to
his home. ‘O Govinda, the pleasure that I derive
to-day from your arrival at my home will arise in
course of time only when you come again.’
5. The author gives an illustration of Preyas
without giving its definition. Preyas is an exuber-
ant display of Prīti as exhibited by Vidura’s state-
ment to Kṛṣṇa when he came to his home. This
verse is cited by Daṇḍin in Kāvyādarśa II—276 to
illustrate प्रेयोऽलंकार and by Appayya Dīkṣita in
Chitramīmāṁsā to illustrate अनन्वयध्वनि. This verse
is not exactly found in the Mahābhārata where it
runs thus—या मे प्रीतिः पुष्कराक्ष त्वद्दर्शनसमुद्भवा । सा किमाख्यायते
तुभ्यमन्तरात्मासि देहिनाम् ॥ Udyoga Parva 88, Verse 24; also
repeated as the last verse of chapter 91, both in
P. C. Roy’s edition.

THIRD PARICCHEDA 131
रसवदलंकारः (14)
रसवद्दर्शितस्पष्टशृङ्गारादिरसं यथा ।
देवी समागमद्धर्ममस्करिण्यतिरोहिता ॥ ६ ॥
6. Rasavat is the dramatic disclosure of hidden
love or the like emotion. Example. The virtuous
nun came upon the scene revealed as the queen.
6. रसवत् arises when शृङ्गार or a like emotion is
suddenly displayed by a dramatic turn. The se-
cond half of the verse refers to a case where a queen
disguised as a nun suddenly disclosed her true form.
An apt illustration is given by Mr. D. T. Tatacharya
from Kumārasambhava where Śiva disguised as a
Brahmachārin suddenly discloses his true form
before Pārvatī. In this connection the following
Ślokas may be perused with advantage.
इतो गमिष्याम्यथवेति वादिनी
चचाल बाला स्तनभिन्नवल्कला ।
स्वरूपमास्थाय च तां कृतस्मितः
समाललम्बे वृषराजकेतनः ॥ V—84.
तं वीक्ष्य वेपथुमती सरसाङ्गयष्टि-
र्निक्षेपणाय पदमुद्धृतमुद्वहन्ती ।
मार्गाचलव्यतिकराकुलितेव सिन्धुः
शैलाधिराजतनया न ययौ न तस्थौ ॥ V—85.
Cf. Udbhaṭālaṅkārasārasaṅgraha—
रसवद्दर्शितस्पष्टशृङ्गारादिरसोदयम् ।
स्वशब्दस्थायिसंचारिविभावाभिनयास्पदम् ॥

132 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
ऊर्जस्व्यलंकारः (15)
ऊर्जस्वि कर्णेन यथा पार्थाय पुनरागतः ।
द्विः संदधाति किं कर्णः शल्येत्यहिरपाकृतः ॥ ७ ॥
7. Ūrjasvin (a proud statement) is like this—
The serpent discharged with the arrow by Karṇa
towards Arjuna, when it came back, was rejected
by Karṇa with the words, ‘O Śalya, does Karṇa aim
twice?’
7. Here again the author does not define Ūrja-
svin, but illustrates it. When Karṇa and Arjuna
were face to face in battle a snake which had been
waiting for an opportunity to wreak vengeance on
Arjuna for killing its mother at the conflagration
of the Khāṇḍava forest granted to Agni by Arjuna
entered the arrow which was discharged by Karṇa,
but was frustrated and came back to Karṇa, implor-
ing for a second discharge. Karṇa refuses to comply
with the snake’s request by means of words ad-
dressed to his charioteer Śalya thus—हे शल्य द्विः संदधाति
किं कर्णः. This statement of Karṇa exemplifies the
display of a lofty sentiment of valour and as such
illustrates the figure of speech—Ūrjasvin.
पर्यायोक्तालंकारः (16)
पर्यायोक्तं यदन्येन प्रकारेणाभिधीयते ।
उवाच रत्नाहरणे चैद्यं शार्ङ्गधनुर्यथा ॥ ८ ॥

THIRD PARICCHEDA 133
गृहेष्वध्वसु वा नान्नं भुञ्ज्महे यदधीतिनः ।
न³ भुञ्जते ²द्विजास्तच्च रसदाननिवृत्तये ॥ ९ ॥
8 & 9. Paryāyokta is the expression of an idea
in an other than straightforward manner. In Ratnā-
haraṇa the Śāṅga-bowed Kṛṣṇa said to Śiśupāla,
king of Chedis, 'We do not eat the food which the
learned Brahmins have not first eaten, either at
home or in our sojourns.' This is spoken in order
to avoid the administration of poison (in the food).
8 & 9. पर्यायोक्तं is a polite statement, for exam-
ple, where a person rejects the wish of another in
terms which do not expressly negative the request
but have the same effect. रत्नाहरणं is obviously an
ancient work. There Śiśupāla offers food to Kṛṣṇa.
Suspecting it to be mixed with poison, Kṛṣṇa re-
jects it in polite language. He says, 'It is our prin-
ciple to eat food only after offering it first to Brah-
mins and making them partake of it.' Śiśupāla
might retort that that is a principle to be observed
at home and not while halting at a distant place.
Kṛṣṇa's answer is that his rule applies both at
home and abroad. Accordingly he says अध्वसु वा after
गृहेषु. अधीतिनः Persons learned in Vedas. तच्च रसदाननिवृत्तये
is the observation of the author. रस means poison.
The author gives out the motive of Kṛṣṇa in reject-
ing the food offered by Śiśupāla. This verse with
its source as Bhāmaha is referred to in Dhvanyāloka

134 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
Lochana at page 40, N. S. P. Edn., where Abhina-
vagupta points out that the expressed idea of non-
participation of food not already partaken of by Śro-
triyas being happier than the suggested idea of the
suspicion of poison, this verse falls properly within
the province of Alaṁkāra and does not amount to
Dhvani. Cf. definition given in Kuvalayānanda—
पर्यायोक्तं तु गम्यस्य वचो भङ्ग्यन्तरेण चेत् ।
नमस्तस्मै कृतौ येन मुधा राहुवधूकुचौ ॥
समाहितालंकारः (17)
समाहितं राजमित्रे यथा क्षत्रिययोषिताम् ।
रामप्रसत्त्यै यान्तीनां पुरोऽदृश्यत नारदः ॥ १० ॥
10. Samāhita (providential help) is illustrated
in Rājamitra. When Kshatriya ladies were going
to appease Paraśurāma, Nārada appeared in their
front.
10. राजमित्र is apparently an ancient work in
vogue in the days of Bhāmaha. This has been al-
ready referred to in II-45. The appearance of Nā-
rada before Kshatriya ladies that went to appease
Paraśurāma is an illustration of this figure of
speech. Here also समाहित is not defined but illustra-
ted by the author. A providential help that comes
about unexpectedly amounts to Samāhita. The
idea is that Nārada will suggest how best to
please Paraśurāma. The treatment of Samāhita

THIRD PARICCHEDA 135
by Daṇḍin follows that of Bhāmaha. But by later
rhetoricians this समाहितं is called समाधिः whereas their
समाहितं is entirely different as explained in our Notes
under Verses 1 to 4 infra.
उदात्तालंकारः (18)
उदात्तं शक्तिमान् रामो गुरुवाक्यानुरोधकः ।
विहायोपनतं राज्यं यथा वनमुपागमत् ॥ ११ ॥
11. Udātta (a noble picture) is like this. The
powerful Rāma obeying his father's words gave up
the kingdom that came to him and went to the forest.
11. उदात्तं too is not defined. Perhaps the author's
idea is that the very mention of the name suggests
the definition. उदात्तं is nobility of sentiment as may
be deduced from the illustration given. The aban-
donment of his kingdom and exile into the forest by
Rāma in pursuance of his father's bidding though
he was himself possessed of strength to retain the
kingdom go to show an extraordinary noble senti-
ment on the part of Rāma. Another type of उदात्त
which is more in consonance with a different school
of rhetoricians is set out in the next verse.
एतदेवापरेऽन्येन व्याख्यानेनान्यथा विदुः ।
नानारत्नादियुक्तं यत्तत्किलोदात्तमुच्यते ॥ १२ ॥
12. Others construe this figure of speech it-
self in a different light. The picture of a thing

136 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
that contains a variety of precious features is
Udātta according to them.
12. According to a different school उदात्तं ऋद्धेश्चरितं,
उदात्त presents a picture of high prosperity. नानारत्नादियुक्तं.
It is coupled with different kinds of gems or riches,
in short, the zenith of prosperity or the height of
opulence. युक्तं used with reference to the Alaṁkāra
is perhaps not quite correct. In fact it is the sub-
ject matter of the speech that is possessed of नानारत्नs.
It is loosely extended to the speech as well. Daṇḍin
refers to two types of Udātta; that which sets out
आशयमहत्त्व Nobility of sentiment and that which sets
out विभूतिमहत्त्व a height of prosperity, riches or gems.
Verse 11 above exemplifies the first type. The se-
cond type is defined in this verse and illustrated in
the next. Cf. आशयस्य विभूतेर्वा यन्महत्त्वमनुत्तमम् । उदात्तं नाम तं
प्राहुर्लंकारं मनीषिणः ॥ Kāvyādarśa II—300.
चाणक्यो नक्तमुपयान्नन्दक्रीडागृहं यथा ।
शशिकान्तोपलैश्छन्नं विवेद पयसां कणैः ॥ १३ ॥
13. Example. Chāṇakya going to the pleas-
ure-house of Nanda found out it was pervaded by
moonstones from the drops of water.
13. The opulence of Nanda's pleasure-house
is brought out in this verse. His enemy Chāṇakya
who went to reconnoitre his house inferred from the
drops of water that the house was constructed of