2023-03-29 18:09:53 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
METHOD OF THE GLOSSARY
for making this distinction (samsă means both 'praise' and 'mention"),
we are obliged to do so because of a significant variation in the pattern
of examples. Moreover Dandin's example contrasts with that offered
for the figure vyajastuti (blame of something apparently irrelevant, with
a view to praisi the actual subject),184 while Udbhața intends a contrast
with the figure samāsokti, in which certain attributes of the (unmentioned)
subject are mentioned, insofar as they are identical with those of the
explicitly mentioned object.18
185 Because of this contrastive variation, the
two versions of aprastutaprasamsă must be judged different, since
otherwise the distinction between the parallel figures, vyājastuti and
samāsokti, would be obscured.
87
189
c) In the third case, different names have been applied to the same
figure. Usually this variation is purely nominal, involving no significant
contrasts within the system. For example, a reciprocal comparison is
termed variably anyonya ('each other"),188 upameyopamā ('comparison of
the subject compared"),¹87 paraspara ("mutual"), 188 and ubhaya ('both").¹
These terms are not met with elsewhere in the discussion of simile; all
mean approximately the same thing and all are based upon exactly the
same contrast within the universe of similes (statement plus inversion),
contrasting with the standard upamā (statement only) on the one hand,
and, if it is mentioned at all, with viparyaya (inversion without statement)
on the other.
184 Dandin, 2.343.
185 Udbhata, 2.10.
106 Dandin, 2.18.
But in other situations this case requires argument, in that the defini-
tions suggest a distinction which cannot be substantiated in the examples.
Å striking instance of such an intersection we find in the definitions of
the terms sambhāvyamāṇārtha (a type of atiśayokti, defined by Vāmana
as the exaggeration of an imagined quality),190 and utpadya, a type of
upamā defined by Rudrata, in which the object of comparison is hypoth-
esized in order to manifest a property of the subject for the purpose of
expressing the actual incomparability of the subject.191 But the examples
offered are parallel, and both express conditional similes of exactly the
type referred to more precisely by Rudrata. It would seem a matter of
187 Bhämaha, 3.36-7. Note that this term will appear as upameyopama in the Glossary.
We have used the carat there to indicate vowel fusions by samdhi.
188 Agni Purana, 344.11.
189 Rudrata, Kävyālamkāra, 8.9.
190 Vāmana, 4.3.10.
101 Rudrata, 8.15.
for making this distinction (samsă means both 'praise' and 'mention"),
we are obliged to do so because of a significant variation in the pattern
of examples. Moreover Dandin's example contrasts with that offered
for the figure vyajastuti (blame of something apparently irrelevant, with
a view to praisi the actual subject),184 while Udbhața intends a contrast
with the figure samāsokti, in which certain attributes of the (unmentioned)
subject are mentioned, insofar as they are identical with those of the
explicitly mentioned object.18
185 Because of this contrastive variation, the
two versions of aprastutaprasamsă must be judged different, since
otherwise the distinction between the parallel figures, vyājastuti and
samāsokti, would be obscured.
87
189
c) In the third case, different names have been applied to the same
figure. Usually this variation is purely nominal, involving no significant
contrasts within the system. For example, a reciprocal comparison is
termed variably anyonya ('each other"),188 upameyopamā ('comparison of
the subject compared"),¹87 paraspara ("mutual"), 188 and ubhaya ('both").¹
These terms are not met with elsewhere in the discussion of simile; all
mean approximately the same thing and all are based upon exactly the
same contrast within the universe of similes (statement plus inversion),
contrasting with the standard upamā (statement only) on the one hand,
and, if it is mentioned at all, with viparyaya (inversion without statement)
on the other.
184 Dandin, 2.343.
185 Udbhata, 2.10.
106 Dandin, 2.18.
But in other situations this case requires argument, in that the defini-
tions suggest a distinction which cannot be substantiated in the examples.
Å striking instance of such an intersection we find in the definitions of
the terms sambhāvyamāṇārtha (a type of atiśayokti, defined by Vāmana
as the exaggeration of an imagined quality),190 and utpadya, a type of
upamā defined by Rudrata, in which the object of comparison is hypoth-
esized in order to manifest a property of the subject for the purpose of
expressing the actual incomparability of the subject.191 But the examples
offered are parallel, and both express conditional similes of exactly the
type referred to more precisely by Rudrata. It would seem a matter of
187 Bhämaha, 3.36-7. Note that this term will appear as upameyopama in the Glossary.
We have used the carat there to indicate vowel fusions by samdhi.
188 Agni Purana, 344.11.
189 Rudrata, Kävyālamkāra, 8.9.
190 Vāmana, 4.3.10.
101 Rudrata, 8.15.