Handbook of Classical Sanskrit Rhetoric /113

Upamă:to the upamāna (ie the standard of comparison) or reversely the
upamāna is less qualified than the upameya. Simile
 
to the upamāno Bhāmaha says that
poetic similitude between two things is based on guṇaleśa (ie the standard of comparison) or reversely the
upamāna is less qualified than the upameya. So Bhāmaha says that
poetic similitude between two things is based on gunaleśa (ie inferi-

ority of one and superiority of the other). In his aphorism on the

form of nominal compounds between an adjective and a noun,

Pāṇini refers to the words of common standard of comparison with

objects like tiger, lion, bull etc.
 
57
 

 
Sanskrit rhetoricians have unanimously recognised Upamā as

the most powerful rhetorical device of language and given it the

supreme position among the figures of thought. The Naātyaśāstra of

Bharata, the oldest extant work on Indian dramaturgy, records
only four alam
only four alaṃkāras and upamā tops the list. While commenting on

Bharata's theory Abhinavagupa, the famous commentator and
ta, the famous commentator and
critic of Sanskrit literature, opines that the variety of the figures of

thought is nothing but different shades of Simile. Keśavamiśra, in

his Alamṃkāra-sśekhara quotes Rajasśekhara who, according to him,

eulogises Upamā as the guiding principle of the poets as well as the

finest of all the figures of language. In Citra-mīṇānmāṃsā, Appayya

compares Upamā to an expert dancing girl captivating the hearts of

all by attractive expressions.
 

 
Resemblance (ie sādṛśya ofr sādharmya), according to Sanskrit

logicians, is a kind of relation existing between two or more things

and based on common attributes like jāti (genus), gunṇa (attribute)

or kriyaā (action). The older logicians maintain that this sādṛśya is a

separate entity (padārtha) while the later ones include it under the

seven universal categories. Each and every comparison may be
called an upama
called an upamā in general, but undoubtedly not a rhetorical sim-

ile. Any kind of figurative similitude should be artistically designed

and poetically beautiful. Logical or factual likeness based on exis-

tentiality (ie sattva), cognizableness (ie jñeyatva) and logical asser-
tion (ie prameyatva) bears no poetic charm whatsoever.
 
In Upamā, similitude between the objatects can be expressed in
language in different linguistic patterns in the form of indeclin-
ables, nominal or adjectiva) and logical asser-
tion (ie prameyate phrases, va) bears no poetic charm whatsoevererbs, suffixes etc.
 
In Upamā, similitude between the objects can be expressed in
language in different linguistic patterns in the form of indeclin-
ables, nominal or adjective phrases, verbs, suffixes etc. A list of

such words or endings is given below:
 

 
words or phrases: iva (like), vā (or), yathā (as if), tulya (equal),
 
Google
 
Digitized by
 
Original from
 
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN