Studies in the History of Sanskrit Poetics v1.c11.37

v1.c11.37

The special object of this particular canto in Bhaṭṭi being that of illustrating the various forms of poetic figures prevelant in his time, we may presume that it was probably based on a particular treatise on Alaṃkāra to which the poet faithfully adheres. He mentions in all 38 such independent figures, along with 39 sub-species of some individual figures. He does not himself give the names of these figures, but they are indicated by the Jayamaṅgalā, as well as in some MSS which apparently preserve the traditional nomenclature. These, with one trifling exception (udāra = udātta), correspond to the particular names given to them in Bhāmaha. As to the order or sequence of treatment, a comparative table will show that Bhāmaha gives the first 23 figures (up to viśeṣokti) in the same order as in Bhaṭṭi with the exception of the pairs, rūpaka and dīpaka, arthāntaranyāsa and ākṣepa, which are given in an inversed order. The rest of the figures appears with a slightly different arrangement, because Bhāmaha admits aprastuta-praśaṃsā omitted by Bhaṭṭi, and adopts a somewhat different order in mentioning the five figures here treated in common, until we come to virodha. From here, again, the order is the same, excepting that Bhāmaha mentions bhāvika (which is separately illustrated in another canto by Bhaṭṭi) and Bhaṭṭi admits an unknown figure nipuṇa, and adds *hetu* which is expressly rejected by Bhāmaha. As the exposition of Jayamaṅgla shows, Bhaṭṭi generally follows the definitions of Bhāmaha, where the figures are common (even in the cases of sub-species of these figures ¹), with only a few exceptions.