Handbook of Classical Sanskrit Rhetoric /24

.
 
xii
 
A Handboothird group, recognised by others, is k of Classical Sanskrit Rhetoric
 
third nown as figroup, recoures of word and
meaningnised by others, is known as figures of word and
meaning or sound and sense (sśabda-artha-alamṃkāras). But Bhoja

recognises these so-called divisions of alamṃkāras by different names

such as external (baāhya), internal (aābhyantara) and external-internal

(baāhya-ābhyantara). Such classification shows that some figures lie

on the surface structure while others on the deep structure, and

still there are others which are inter-related by these two. This ana-
lytical approach towards alam
lytical approach towards alaṃkāras is basically related to three fun-

damental set-up of poetry as a whole. These are -- formalism,

structuralism and functionalism.
 

 
While most of the rhetoricians follow these common and popu-

lar divisions there are others like Daṇḍin and Kuntaka who want to

explain the entire figures from a different standpoint based on the

perspective of literary accomplishment. Their approach is purely

artistic since they rely mostly on the value of thought and poetic

diction and neglect the outward form and arrangement. Thus

Dandṇḍin thinks that entire vammaya or poetry should be classified
āṃmaya or poetry should be classified
into twofold varieties ie svabhāvokti and vakrokti which can be

roughly called simple or plain poetic statement and metaphoric

expression. He again makes two broad divisions of the figures of

thought:
 

(i)
 
svabhāvokti (any plain or simple poetic expression with-

out metaphor or irony) and
 

(ii)
 
jāti (a lot of figures which differ among themselves on

the basis of genus, action, attribute and object).

 
Vāmana considers that all these figures (tropes) are based on

metaphor in any form or other.
 
Digitized by
 

 
With these two fundamental divisions Bhoja adds one more

which is called rasokti (based on the suggestive sense which is

beyond the reach of the primary or the secondary sense ie abhidhā

or lakṣaṇā respectively). It is Kuntaka who has rejected the popular
trend of literary criticism and simultaneously formulated a new

trend of literary criticism and simultaneously formulated a new
approach. According to him, it is vakrokti under which all literary

qualities or poetic devices have to be included. He thinks that each

and every alamṃkāra or so-called rhetorical figure is simply a kind of

vakrokti or artful expression.
 
Google
 
Original from
 
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN