Alankara, also referred to as palta or alankaram, is a concept in Indian classical music and —Natya Shastra Bharata Muni ( BCE CE). Here are . Search found 2 books and stories containing Alamkarashastra, Alaṃkāraśāstra, Alaṃkāra-śāstra, Alankarashastra or Alankara-shastra. You can also click to the. Alankara Sastra Parichiti. Mishra, Bhabagrahi and Mishra, Santilata () Alankara Sastra Parichiti. Friends Publishers, Cuttack.
|Published (Last):||10 September 2008|
|PDF File Size:||19.70 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||2.74 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
This element of agreeable surprise falls under intellectual appeal.
Alankara Sastra Parichiti
The poet begins a figure and alankaa it in such a detailed manner that it outgrows its proper limit. X, 42 or 43 is an illustration of Svabhavokti for Mallinatha and of Atis’ayokti what a difference!
We find the Locana saying while stating the Purvapaksa: But, if on the score of this Vakrata, one would call a Svabhavakhyana as Svabhavokti Alahkara, Kuntaka would seem to yield a little that there is after all only a dispute in names.
Things repellent and terrible by [themselves must never be conceived in images of charm and love. As Tauta says in the well-known passage quoted by Hemacandra K. The idea in defining in the S’r. He treats of the Anuprasa here and keeps over the Yamaka for the third chapter. From the three Ritis in Vamana, we pass to the four in Rudrata. The last says in his comrpentary on the Das’arupaka Mad. It must be noted here that Abhinava compares the Sus’lista Alahkara to Kumkumalahkarana, and raises it above the level of the altogether external jewel worn, the Kataka.
This ornament or Alahkara is a certain striking deviation in expression for Bhamaha. As observed above, though Bhamaha does not definitely give in so many words the relation of Gunas and Riti, we can clearly see that his verses imply the theory of Riti as based on the Gunas. This is all the more inappropriate since it is not Kavivakya but a Patravakya, words of the dying Das’aratha.
This attitude is very logical, since many of the Laksapas are either Alahkaras or Bhavas. But his opponents point out that, as for instance, the Kavya lost called the As’viakavams’a is VaidarbhI.
Plainness stood against elevation. We can see the value of Bhatta Tauta’s suggestion in such cases. Again, if we go through the 5th Mayukha and its list of Alankaras, numbering hundred, we find there, besides and other names, associated in Bharata with Laksanas, which must have very early passed into the fold of Alankara, some of the above given ten themselves are counted as Alankaras.
Like national characteristics, there are also provincial characteristics in manners. Bhoja means to say that just as the first Laksana involves Gunas and Alahkaras, so also the others and it is this that differentiates Laksanas from Sandh- yahgas which do not involve Guna or Alahkara.
In these two verses, Bana has spoken of four different styles, each definite and distinct, with its own emphasis on one particular feature, but has voted for casting away an over-emphasis on each of these four characteristics and for moderately and appropriately combining them into one good style which looks like the Nisyanda of the four.
S’ihgabhupala also says that Varta is a welfare-enquiry: Abhinava opines that Laksana is sometimes natural grace and sometimes it adds beauty to Alahkara also. Very speed and fine. By this time, the names had not yet become non-geograph ical ; for Dandin often refers only to the people of the east and the south, while referring to the two styles and not, like later writers, to the stereotyped modes of style without any geographical significance.
The Das’arupaka mentions the Laksanas at the end and does not treat of them since it includes them in Alahkaras and Bhavas.
This Laksana is twofold — natural, Siddha- rupa, such as the quality of having broad eyes, and artificial, Sadhyarupa, such as the occasional grace while adopting a beautiful gait. For him the whole Kavyaprapanca is Alahkara-Brahman. We have other clear evidences on this point, a Laksana of the Upajati list, is an Alahkara in Bhatti and we can see it in its transition from Laksana to Alahkara. Vanivilas Press, Sri- rangam S’. Mammata says under Anuprasa jatis: In the verse etc.
Taking Laksana as a feature of drama only is a view narrower than the one attached to that word. As a matter of fact, Dandin treats of the S’abdalahkaras only here. He realises the logic of the attitude of the Das’arupaka but is more loyal to Bharata, for the sake of whose words he takes that there should be 36 Laksanas in dramas.
While doing so, he defines each of these three as expression dominated respectively by Guna, Upama and other Alankaras, and Rasa. The first writer who is now known to have introduced new Laksanas is Bhoja. We see it mentioned in his definition of Nataka, as also the Laksana under the name Vibhusana, as quoted by Raghavabhatta in his commentary on the Sakuntala. If the Artha is entirely Apusta, Avakra and Prasanna, it is insipid as ordinary talk.
Alankara Sastra Parichiti – OaOb
This is just hinted in the fifth ch. In effect this view also comes to be the same as the third view, Laksana being held to be such beauty of the body of poetry as is present even in the absence of any Alahkara. The evolution of Alahkaras from three in Bharata to what we have in Bhamaha is an interesting study but the gap is all darkness.
He quotes the authority of the Abhinava bharati for proving the difference of Laksana from these and promises to indicate the Laksanas in the S’akuntala in the course of his commentary.
This lost Paddhati of Laksana has a history of its own which is the subject sastrra this chapter. Sahityasara of Sarves’vara, a work Madras MS. For the later writers, the Bhavika was what Bha- maha gave them through Udbhata. These are the Laksanas he points out — srfvraiq;, and sqgqq: The canonists permit the Yamaka-mad and Duskara- mad poets to satisfy themselves in situations of Rasabhasa.
RiTI these good features are present, it is acceptable, no matter if it is Gaudl.
Of the Vai- darbhi also we glean that and were considered by those writers as the distinguishing features. In these and the other studies in this book, I have, on the basis of a detailed, historical survey of the concepts as dev’eloped by the several Sanskrit Alahkarikas, en- deavoured to understand and interpret their underlying ideas and the value of sastrra for the art and appreciation of literature.
Divisions are not exhaustive 55 2. Similarly a thought that is too simple, too ordinary or too small to impress or get admiration by itself, needs figurative embellishment.