Adhyaya 343

Verse 1

इत्य् आग्नेये महापुराणे अलङ्कारे शब्दालङ्कारनिरूपणं नाम द्विचत्वारिंशदधिकत्रिशततमो ऽध्यायः अथ त्रिचत्वारिंशदधिकत्रिशततमो ऽध्यायः अर्थालङ्काराः अग्निर् उवाच अलङ्करणमर्थानामर्थालङ्कार इष्यते तं विना शब्दसौन्दर्यमपि नास्ति मनोहरम्

Thus, in the Agni Mahāpurāṇa, the chapter entitled “Explanation of Verbal Ornaments (Śabdālaṅkāras)”—the 342nd chapter—concludes. Now begins the 343rd chapter, “Ornaments of Meaning (Arthālaṅkāras).” Agni said: “The embellishment of meanings is held to be ‘ornament of meaning’; without it, even the beauty of words is not charming.”

Verse 2

अर्थालङ्काररहिता विधवेव सरस्वती स्वरूपमथ सादृश्यमुत्प्रेक्षातिशयावपि

Speech (Sarasvatī), when devoid of ornaments of meaning (arthālaṅkāras), is like a widow. Now are described their intrinsic nature (svarūpa), as well as resemblance (sādṛśya), poetic fancy (utprekṣā), and hyperbole (atiśaya) too.

Verse 3

विभावना विरोधश् च हेतुश् च सममष्टधा स्वभाव एव भावानां स्वरूपमभिधीयते

Apprehension (vibhāvanā), opposition (virodha), and cause (hetu)—thus, in an eightfold manner—indeed svabhāva, the intrinsic nature, is declared to be svarūpa, the defining essence of existing things (bhāvas).

Verse 4

निजमागन्तुकञ्चेति द्विविधं तदुदाहृतम् सांसिद्धिकं नियं नैमित्तिकमागन्तुकं तथा

It is declared to be of two kinds: intrinsic (nija) and incidental/acquired (āgantuka). The intrinsic is the natural or inborn observance (sāṃsiddhika), while the incidental (āgantuka) is that which is undertaken for a specific occasion (naimittika).

Verse 5

विधुरेवेति ख , ट च सादृश्यं धर्मसामान्यमुपमा रूपकं तथा महोक्त्यर्थान्तरन्यासाविति स्यात्तु चतुर्विधम्

‘Simile’ (upamā) is fourfold: (1) similarity (sādṛśya), (2) generality of a shared attribute (dharma-sāmānya), (3) metaphor (rūpaka), and (4) the pair—hyperbolic expression (mahokti) and substantiation by a different statement (arthāntaranyāsa).

Verse 6

उपमा नाम सा यस्यामुपमानोपमेययोः सत्ता चान्तरसामान्ययोगित्वेपि विवक्षितं

Upamā (simile) is that figure of speech in which, with respect to the upamāna (standard of comparison) and the upameya (thing compared), their mutual relation is intended—namely, the presence of an internal common property (a shared attribute), even though such commonality may in general be possible between them.

Verse 7

किञ्चिदादाय सारूप्यं लोकयात्रा प्रवर्तते समासेनासमासेन सा द्विधा प्रतियोगिनः

By adopting a certain degree of similarity, common linguistic usage (lokayātrā, the course of ordinary speech) proceeds—either by means of compounds (samāsa) or without compounds; thus, with respect to the correlated terms (pratiyogins), it is of two kinds.

Verse 8

विग्रहादभिधानस्य ससमासान्यथोत्तरा उपमाद्योतकपदेनोपमेयपदेनच

From the analytical expansion (vigraha) one should determine the expression (abhidhāna); and, in compounds (samāsa), the subsequent members are to be understood accordingly. In a simile (upamā), the relation is indicated by the word that signals the comparison (upamā-dyotaka) and by the word denoting the object compared (upameya).

Verse 9

ताभ्याञ्च विग्रहात्त्रेधा ससमासान्तिमात् त्रिधा विशिष्यमाणा उपमा भवन्त्यष्टादश स्फुटाः

And from those two kinds, by analysis (vigraha) it becomes threefold; and from the final member of a compound (samāsānta) it becomes threefold. Thus, in their differentiated forms, the similes (upamā) are clearly eighteen.

Verse 10

यत्र साधारणो धर्मः कथ्यते गम्यते ऽपि वा ते धर्मवस्तुप्राधान्याद्धर्मवस्तूपमे उभे

Where a common attribute (dharma) is explicitly stated—or even merely understood—those two cases are, because the entity/subject (vastu) is primary there, instances of ‘dharmavastu-upamā’: a simile in which both the attribute and the entity are taken into account.

Verse 11

तुल्यमेवोपमीयेते यत्रान्योन्येन धर्मिणौ परस्परोपमा सा स्यात् प्रसिद्धेरन्यथा तयोः

Where two substrata possessing comparable attributes are each described as similar to the other—each being mutually compared—this is called a “reciprocal simile” (parasparopamā). Otherwise, the comparison is determined according to which of the two is more commonly established as the standard of comparison.

Verse 12

विपरीतोपमा सा स्याद्व्यावृत्तेर् नियमोपमा अन्यत्राप्यनुवृत्तेस्तु भवेदनियमोपमा

That is called an inverted simile (viparītā-upamā). When the comparison is restricted by exclusion (vyāvṛtti), it is a restricted simile (niyama-upamā); but when the stated similarity also extends elsewhere, it becomes an unrestricted simile (aniyama-upamā).

Verse 13

समुच्चयोपमातो ऽन्यधर्मवाहुल्यकीर्तनात् वहोर्धम्मस्य साम्येपि वैलक्ष्ण्यं विवक्षितं

Distinctiveness is intended here, even though there is similarity in the two shared properties, because—unlike the “collective simile” (samuccayopamā)—it states an abundance of other, additional attributes.

Verse 14

यदुच्यते ऽतिरिक्तत्वं व्यतिरेकोपमा तु सा यत्रोपमा स्याद्वहुभिः सदृशैः सा बहूपमा

That figure in which “superiority/excess” is expressed is called the simile by contrast (vyatirekopamā). And where a simile is made by means of many similar comparands, that is called the multiple simile (bahūpamā).

Verse 15

धर्माः प्रत्युपमानञ्चेदन्ये मालोपमैव साअप्_३४३०१५अबुपमानविकारेण तुलना विक्रियोपमा

When the comparative features (dharmas), together with the counter-standard (pratyupamāna), are presented in other arrangements, that becomes the “garland-simile” (mālopamā). A comparison produced by modifying the standard of comparison (upamāna) is called tulanā; and the “transformation-simile” is vikriyopamā.

Verse 16

त्रिलोक्यासम्भवि किमप्यारोप्य प्रतियोगिनि कविनोपमीयते या प्रथते साद्भुतोपमा

That simile which becomes current when a poet superimposes something—though not found in the three worlds—upon the object compared (upameya) and thereby likens it, is called the “marvellous simile” (adbhutopamā).

Verse 17

प्रतियोगिनमारोप्य तदभेदेन कीर्तनम् उपमेयस्य सा मोहोपमासौ भ्रान्तिमद्वचः

Superimposing the standard of comparison (pratiyogin) and describing the object compared (upameya) as non-different from it—this is called mohopamā; it is an utterance involving (deliberate) illusion or mistaken cognition.

Verse 18

उभयोर्धर्मिणोस्तथ्यानिश् चयात् संशयोपमा उपमेयस्य संशय्य निश् चयान्निश् चयोपमा

When, on the basis of a real ascertainment of the common attribute in both the object compared (upameya) and the standard of comparison, the likeness is still presented as doubtful, it is called the “simile of doubt” (saṃśayopamā). But when the object compared itself is doubtful and yet the likeness is stated with ascertainment, it is called the “simile of certainty” (niścayopamā).

Verse 19

वाक्यार्थनैव वाक्यार्थोपमा स्यादुपमानतः आत्मनोपमानादुपमा साधारण्यतिशायिनी

When the sense of an entire sentence is compared, it is called a sentence-sense simile (vākyārthopamā), on account of the standard of comparison (upamāna). From comparing a thing with itself arises a simile that is ‘common/shared’ (sādhāraṇī) or ‘exceeding/superlative’ (atiśāyinī).

Verse 20

उपमेयं यद्न्यस्य तद्न्यस्योपमा मता यद्युत्तरोत्तरं याति तदासौ गगनोपमा

When something serves as the object compared for one thing, and that object in turn becomes the object compared for another, such a simile is recognized; and when the comparison proceeds in successive, ascending steps, it is called the “gagana-upamā” (the ‘sky-like’/progressive simile).

Verse 21

प्रशंसा चैव निन्दा च कल्पिता सदृशी तथा किञ्चिच्च सदृशी ज्ञेया उपमा पञ्चधा पुरः

Here, upamā (simile) is taught as fivefold: (1) laudatory, (2) censorious, (3) imagined or poetic, (4) grounded in an actual similarity, and (5) grounded in a partial or limited similarity.

Verse 22

उपमानेन यत्तत्वमुपमेयस्य रूप्यते गुणानां समतां दृष्ट्वा रूपकं नाम तद्विदुः

When, upon perceiving an equality of qualities, the very nature of the upamāna (standard of comparison) is superimposed upon the upameya (the object compared), the learned call that figure of speech rūpaka (metaphor).

Verse 23

उपमैव तिरोभूतभेदा रूपकमेव वा सहोक्तिः सहभावेन कथनं तुल्यधर्मिणां

Sahokti is, in essence, an upamā in which the distinction between the compared entities becomes obscured, or it may also take the form of a rūpaka; it is the conjoint statement, in a mode of simultaneous co-presence, of things sharing similar attributes.

Verse 24

भवेदर्थान्तरन्यासः सादृश्येनोत्तरेण सः अन्यथोपस्थिता वृत्तिश्चेतनस्येतरस्य च

Arthāntaranyāsa (“the introduction of another meaning”) occurs when the sense is supported and reinforced by a similar subsequent statement; it is also the altered attribution of a function or behavior, whether to a sentient being or to an insentient thing.

Verse 25

अन्यथा मन्यते यत्र तामुत्प्रेक्षां प्रचक्षते लोकसीमान्वृत्तस्य वस्तुधर्मस्य कीर्तनम्

Where something is conceived as otherwise than it truly is, that is called utprekṣā (poetic supposition); it is the expression of a property of a thing that nonetheless remains within the bounds of common experience.

Verse 26

भवेदतिशयो नाम सम्भवासम्भवाद्द्विधा गुणजातिक्रियादीनां यत्र वैकल्यर्दर्शनं

‘Atiśaya’ (hyperbolic intensification) is of two kinds—possible and impossible—where one displays an apparent deficiency (vaikalya) regarding qualities, class/nature, actions, and the like, in order to heighten the effect.

Verse 27

विशेषदर्शनायैव सा विशेषोक्तिरुच्यते पवनोपमेति ख गमनोपमेति क , ट च प्रसिद्धहेतुव्यावृत्या यत् किञ्चित् कारणान्तरम्

That mode of expression is called Viśeṣokti (“distinctive statement”) for the very purpose of making a special point evident—when, setting aside the commonly accepted cause, some other (unexpected) cause is advanced; as in phrases such as “like the wind” (kha), “like movement/going” (ka), and (ṭa).

Verse 28

यत्र स्वाभाविकत्वं वा विभाव्यं सा विभावना सङ्गतीकरणं युक्त्या यदसंगच्छमानयोः

When, in expression, naturalness is to be inferred or imaginatively established, it is called Vibhāvanā; and Saṅgatīkaraṇa is the rational reconciliation (linking) of two things that otherwise do not fit together.

Verse 29

विरोधपूर्वकत्वेन तद्विरोध इति स्मृतं सिसाधयिषितार्थस्य हेतुर्भवति साधकः

This is remembered as ‘Virodha’ (contradiction) when, being preceded by opposition, it becomes an opposing reason: it functions as a (purported) reason for the intended conclusion, yet in fact obstructs its establishment.

Verse 30

कारको ज्ञापक इति द्विधा सो ऽप्युपजायते प्रवर्तते कारकाख्यः प्राक् पश्चात् कार्यजन्मनः

That cause too is of two kinds: (1) kāraka and (2) jñāpaka. The one called kāraka arises and operates either before or after the arising of the effect.

Verse 31

पूर्वशेष इति ख्यातस्तयोरेव विशेषयोः कार्यकारणभावाद्वा स्वमावाद्वा नियामकात्

That relation is known as “pūrva-śeṣa,” specifically with respect to those two particulars—either because of the effect–cause relation, or due to intrinsic nature (svabhāva), or on account of a governing, regulative factor (niyāmaka).

Verse 32

ज्ञापकाख्यस्य भेदो ऽस्ति नदीपूरादिदर्शनात् अविनाभावनियमो ह्य् अविनाभावदर्शनात्

There is a distinct kind of inferential mark called the “jñāpaka” (indicator), as is seen from cases such as a river in flood and the like. Indeed, the fixing of invariable concomitance (avinābhāva/vyāpti) arises from the observation of such invariable concomitance.