2023-03-30 14:26:41 by ramamurthys
This page has been fully proofread once and needs a second look.
fanciful error or illusion by which one thing is mistakenly recog-
nised as another due to close similarity between the two, but
Bhāvika arouses no such false analogy regarding any past or future
event or character. In Atiśayokti (Hyperbole), one thing is completely
enveloped by another which is totally identical with it. One variety
of Utprekṣā implies a suggested sense in addition to the primary
one, but Bhāvika does not suggest any special implication. The fig-
ure Kāvyalinga (Poetical Cause) may seem somehow identical with
Bhāvika, but the difference between the two lies in the fact that the
conception of causal relation is absent in Bhāvika and moreover it
creates an atmosphere of pseudo-reality which is in no way con-
cerned with Kāvyalinga.
Viśvanātha raised another point by arguing that the present fig-
ure is different from what is known as adbhutarasa or the poetic
sentiment called wonder. In his opinion, the past or the future
appearing as real must be strikingly attractive to the reader and
therefore, Bhāvika may be confused with wonder. But he asserts that
the scope of this figure is limited in comparison to that of guṇa or
adbhuta rasa. Bhāmaha remarks that Bhāvika may appear to be
identical with Svabhāvokti which gives minute description of the
nature of things. But these two are quite different. According to
Mammaṭa Bhāvika is to be included in Sūkṣma.
eg 1. ahaṃ vilokayeʼdyāpi yudhyanteʼtra surāsurāḥ.
अहं विलोकयेऽद्यापि युध्यन्तेऽत्र सुरासुराः ।
I behold gods and demons here
Fighting even today in war.
2. āsīd añjanam atreti paśyāmi tava locane.
bhāvi-bhūṣaṇa-sambhārāṃ sākṣāt-kurve tavākṛtim.
आसीदञ्जनमत्रेति पश्यामि तव लोचने ।
भाविभूषणसम्भारां साक्षात्कुर्वे तवाकृतिम् ॥
I behold (even today) those eyes of thine,
Which bear collyrium marks therein.
I perceive thy handsome figure
With ornaments to be worn in future.
nised as another due to close similarity between the two, but
Bhāvika arouses no such false analogy regarding any past or future
event or character. In Atiśayokti (Hyperbole), one thing is completely
enveloped by another which is totally identical with it. One variety
of Utprekṣā implies a suggested sense in addition to the primary
one, but Bhāvika does not suggest any special implication. The fig-
ure Kāvyalinga (Poetical Cause) may seem somehow identical with
Bhāvika, but the difference between the two lies in the fact that the
conception of causal relation is absent in Bhāvika and moreover it
creates an atmosphere of pseudo-reality which is in no way con-
cerned with Kāvyalinga.
Viśvanātha raised another point by arguing that the present fig-
ure is different from what is known as adbhutarasa or the poetic
sentiment called wonder. In his opinion, the past or the future
appearing as real must be strikingly attractive to the reader and
therefore, Bhāvika may be confused with wonder. But he asserts that
the scope of this figure is limited in comparison to that of guṇa or
adbhuta rasa. Bhāmaha remarks that Bhāvika may appear to be
identical with Svabhāvokti which gives minute description of the
nature of things. But these two are quite different. According to
Mammaṭa Bhāvika is to be included in Sūkṣma.
eg 1. ahaṃ vilokayeʼdyāpi yudhyanteʼtra surāsurāḥ.
अहं विलोकयेऽद्यापि युध्यन्तेऽत्र सुरासुराः ।
Fighting even today in war.
2. āsīd añjanam atreti paśyāmi tava locane.
आसीदञ्जनमत्रेति पश्यामि तव लोचने ।
भाविभूषणसम्भारां साक्षात्कुर्वे तवाकृतिम् ॥
Which bear collyrium marks therein.
I perceive thy handsome figure
With ornaments to be worn in future.