Studies in the History of Sanskrit Poetics v2.c80.87

v2.c80.87

This would be equivalent to the figure pratīpa of later writers. But Vāmana adds another explanation which indicates that the figure can also occur when the standard of comparison is only hinted at (upamā-nasyākṣepataḥ pratipattir ityapi sūtrārthaḥ). This would be equivalent to the samāsokti of some writers. Daṇḍin's definition of ākṣepa, on the other hand, is very wide; for, according to him, the denial (pratiṣedha) need not be of what has been said (ukta) or of what is about to be said (vakṣyamāṇa), but it may be of anything whatever. Bhāmaha, Udbhaṭa and Mammaṭa limit the denial in so far as it concerns the ukta or the vakṣyamāṇa. They are followed by Ruyyaka, Vidyādhara and Viśvanātha, but a second kind is added, viz., the apparent permission of what is not wished for. Jagannātha refers (p. 421f) to both the views of Vāmana and Udbhaṭa, but adds that, according to a third view, which he takes to be the view of the Dhvanikāra, all suggestive negation or denial is the province of ākṣepa. This is supported by the fact that the viśeṣa or special meaning to be conveyed by the apparent denial is never expressed but always left to be understood. It would, therefore, be classed by the Dhvanikāra under "poetry of subordinate suggestion" (guṇībhūta-vyaṅgya), for the expressed sense itself is charming here and the suggested sense is subordinated to it. It is probably in reference to such views that the Agni-purāṇa lays down: sa ākṣepo dhvaniḥ syāc ca dhvaninā vyajyate yataḥ. The case of ākṣepa will exemplify, to some extent, the way in which each poetic figure is not only minutely analysed, but elaborately classified into subvarieties by taking into account the different cases of its occurrence. Thus *upamā* (simile) is classified into six complete and twenty-seven incomplete forms; the figure *utprekṣā* into thirty-two varieties, the *vyatireka* into forty-eight, the *virodha* into ten. The number of self-standing figures, together with their innumerable adjunct of subvarieties, goes on increasing as the study progresses, until it reaches to a number exceeding one hundred; and it is not surprising that in the later stages of its history, whole volumes like Ruyyaka’s *Alaṃkāra-sarvasva*, Jayadeva’s *Candrā-loka* or Appayya’s *Kuvalayānanda* are dedicated exclusively to the special purpose of analysing, defining and illustrating the various poetic figures.