2023-02-15 09:59:31 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
Vyatirekaḥ: Dissimilitude
cally represented here. Therefore, we can say that Vyatireka is based
on the idea of non-resemblance of two similar objects and the idea
is brought through some special contrasting feature expressed in a
very charming way.
Here the poet gives prominence to the object of descripiton
(i) either by declaring its superiority,
(ii)
(iii) or by both the features,
(iv) or by suggesting any of the two.
or by declaring the inferiority of the standard of com-
parison,
165
Vyatireka expresses not only contrast between the two but signi-
fies some sort of similitude also, which is always implied. Now the
question remains whether the contrast is highlighted through the
idea of excellence of one or degradation of the other. Experts giv-
ing opinion in this respect may be divided in two groups : Vamana
finds here the superiority of the upameya and he is supported by
Mammața and others who characterise it as excess of the upameya,
while others like Udbhaṭa, Jagannatha, Appayya maintain the pre-
dominance of any of the two. Still there are others who try to estab-
lish here either superiority or inferiority of either the subject of
comparison or the standard of comparison.
Numerous varieties of this figure may be as follows:
(a) two main varities based on equal or unequal qualities,
(b) four varieties based on particular word/words,
sense, expressed by words denoting similitude (like
iva) and based on paronomasia.
-
eg 1. akalamkam mukham tasya na kalamki vidhur yathā.
अकलंकं मुखं तस्या न कलंकी विधुर्यथा ।
Spotless shines her face
Unlike the moon with black spot for disgrace.
2. kṣiṇaḥ kṣino 'pi śasi bhuyo bhūyo vivardhate satyam.
virama prasīda sundari yauvanam anivarti yātam tu.
क्षीणः क्षीणोऽपि शशी भूयो भूयो विवर्धते सत्यम् ।
विरम प्रसीद सुन्दरि यौवनमनिवर्ति यातं तु ॥
Google
Digitized by
-
Original from
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
cally represented here. Therefore, we can say that Vyatireka is based
on the idea of non-resemblance of two similar objects and the idea
is brought through some special contrasting feature expressed in a
very charming way.
Here the poet gives prominence to the object of descripiton
(i) either by declaring its superiority,
(ii)
(iii) or by both the features,
(iv) or by suggesting any of the two.
or by declaring the inferiority of the standard of com-
parison,
165
Vyatireka expresses not only contrast between the two but signi-
fies some sort of similitude also, which is always implied. Now the
question remains whether the contrast is highlighted through the
idea of excellence of one or degradation of the other. Experts giv-
ing opinion in this respect may be divided in two groups : Vamana
finds here the superiority of the upameya and he is supported by
Mammața and others who characterise it as excess of the upameya,
while others like Udbhaṭa, Jagannatha, Appayya maintain the pre-
dominance of any of the two. Still there are others who try to estab-
lish here either superiority or inferiority of either the subject of
comparison or the standard of comparison.
Numerous varieties of this figure may be as follows:
(a) two main varities based on equal or unequal qualities,
(b) four varieties based on particular word/words,
sense, expressed by words denoting similitude (like
iva) and based on paronomasia.
-
eg 1. akalamkam mukham tasya na kalamki vidhur yathā.
अकलंकं मुखं तस्या न कलंकी विधुर्यथा ।
Spotless shines her face
Unlike the moon with black spot for disgrace.
2. kṣiṇaḥ kṣino 'pi śasi bhuyo bhūyo vivardhate satyam.
virama prasīda sundari yauvanam anivarti yātam tu.
क्षीणः क्षीणोऽपि शशी भूयो भूयो विवर्धते सत्यम् ।
विरम प्रसीद सुन्दरि यौवनमनिवर्ति यातं तु ॥
Digitized by
-
Original from
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN