Alamkara: The Alankara doctrine in Sanskrit Poetics is perhaps as old as the theory on 'poetry'
itself.The term Alankara has a broad as well as a narrow connotation. It stands for Kavyasaundarya
or poetic beauty itself in broad significance. In its narrow sense, it applies poetic figures like Upama,
Rupaka, etc. In this se Alankara is a means of beautifying poetry.
" A figure of speech is a deviation from the plain and ordinary mode of speaking, for the sake of
greater effect. It is an unusual form of speech." The expressionai deviation, the striking disposition of
words and ideas, Alankara. It constitutes the beautiful poetic form.
According to the famous lexicographer, Amarasimha, the word 'alam' (in Alankara) has three
different shades of meanings.
It can denote, (a) Bhusana i .e., to adorn; in this sense it is aJways associated as a nominal suffix with
root kr.
(b) Varana i.e., forbid; used as an adverb with instrumental case and
(c) Paryapti i.e., to be sufficient.
In everyday life Alahkara means ornament which decorates a person. In rhetorics, the word Alahkara
mears poetic embellishments which add charm to poetry, as necklaces, bangles, etc., add charm to
the beauty of a woman's body. As is well known, the word Alahkara in Sanskrit means ornament and
in poetry it is used as a technical term (synonym) for those factors which bring in beauty to poetry,
namely, the figures of speech. But if we go back to the beginnings of Sanskrit Poetics we find that the
wcrd Alahkara-sastra is used to denote the science of t re poetics itself, of which the figures of
speech form but a small part. It is common belief that the original meaning : the word Alahkara is
'ornament' . Alahkara- sastra or Kavyalahkara the same meaning is reflected with a slightly different
snacn meaning 'the science of that particular element which adorns poetry in some way or the
other' and as such the word Alankara in its broader sense comprises everything which forms part of
poetry. But the word Alankara in older expressions like ’Kavyalahkara' or Alankara-sastra has a
considerably different shade of meaning and it should not be confused with the word Alankara
meaning mere ornament or figure of speech. Alankara-sastra has been generally recognised A a
system of poetics which attaches importance to the embellishment of the poetic expression, and the
Alankaras signify the poetic figures.
The number of Alankaras has varied from time to time. Bharata mentioned only four Alankaras.35
Bhamaha, Dandin, Udbhata and Vamana speak of between 30 to 40 Alankaras. Mammata defines
61, Ruyyaka about 75, The 'Candraloka' 100 and the 'Kuvalayananda' 115.
It is Rudrata then to whom we can turn for an explicit classification of the poetic figure into two
classes of Sabdalahkaras and Arthalankaras according to the relative prominence, attaching to the
word or meaning (sense). A basis is also provided by him for the first time of arranging the figures in
accordance with their nature or characteristics. The verbal figures have been sub t divided into five
broad heads viz., Vakrokti Slesa, Cilia, Anuprasa and Yamaka. As for the semantic figures, they have
been arranged under four heads such as, Vastava, Aupamya, Atlsaya and Slesa. Thus Rudrata was
the first to attempt a scientific classification of figures as based upon certain definite principles.
Among the later rhetoricians Bhoja has classified , „ / the Alankaras into three fold categories :
Sabdalankara, 25 Arthalankara and Ubhayalankara. Interestingly enough, an equal number of figures
that is twenty four has been enumerated in each of these categories. The number of Arthalankaras is
thus quite limited. Semantic figures, such as, Upama, Rupaka, Utpreksa, Dipaka are other
wellrecognized Arthalankaras are enumerated in the category of the Ubhayalahkaras (that is, those
partaking the character of both verbal and semantic figures) . This three fold division has been
accepted later on by Mammata who, unlike Bhoja, however, admits a very small number in the
mixed category. Among the post Mammata canonists Ruyyaka occupies a position of supremacy and
his treatise, trie 'Alankarasarvasva', can claim the credit of defining the scope and nature of the
different poetic figures in a convincing manner such as was accepted by nearly all the posterior
teachers of poetics. Ruyyaka has evolved seven categories of Alankaras, e.g., Sadrsya, Virodha,
Srhkalhbandha, Tarka- nyaya, Kavya-nyaya, Lok a -nyaya and _ k — Gudartha-pratiti and has dealt
with nearly eighty independent kinds of the poetic figures. As has been lust suggested, his
enumeration of the different individual figures has been accepted by such major succeeding authors
as Visvanatha, Appayya Dixita and Jagannatha.
Along the lines of Ubhayalahkara two other similar classes of poetic figures are also found
enumerated by canonists like Visvanatha etc., known as Sankara and Samsristi, which signify
admixture of figures, not necessarily of the varieties of Sabdalahkara and Arthalankara. Sankara
matirialises where the figures are mixed together like milk and water while Samsristi takes place
where they are mingled together like Tila and Tandula. These are alternately known as Misralankaras
as well.
