365bet娱乐

Sandeha is a prominent figure in Sanskrit Poetics and it has been treated by almost all famous rhetoricians. 叠丑腻尘补丑补 is the first rhetorician to define and illustrate this figure which he calls 鈥�sasandeha鈥�.

He defines the figure as鈥�

耻辫补尘腻nena tattva帽ca bheda帽ca vadata岣� puna岣�/
蝉补蝉补苍诲别丑补峁� 惫补肠补岣� stutyai 蝉补蝉补苍诲别丑补峁� viduryath膩//
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥� 碍腻惫测腻濒补峁僰腻谤补 (of 叠丑腻尘补丑补) 3.43.

鈥擜 statement which contains a doubt expressed by the poet who first asserts the similarity of the upameya with the 耻辫补尘腻苍补 and then shows the difference between them in order to convey the excellence of the upameya is called sasandeha.

According to 叠丑腻尘补丑补, in sasandeha the poet tries to point out the sameness between upameya and 耻辫补尘腻苍补 in a doubtful manner. Afterwards the poet again sates some difference between the two to convey his doubtfulness. This process eulogizes the upameya and creates poetic charm.

鲍诲产丑补峁璦 gives almost the same definition of the figure^[1] . But he also mentions a second variety of the figure as鈥�

ala峁僰膩r膩ntaracch膩y膩峁� yatk峁泃v膩dh墨峁�u bandhanam/
asa峁僤ehepi sa峁僤ehar奴pa峁� sa峁僤ehan膩ma tat//
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥� 碍腻惫测腻濒补峁僰腻谤补s膩rasa峁僩raha (of Udbha峁���) 6.3.

鈥擜ny poetic composition which conveys an apparent doubt when there is no doubt in reality and this whole process is set forth with the purpose to produce poetic charm the figure is termed as sandeha.

In both these varieties of sandeha the doubts which are mentioned are all produced from the sheer imagination of the poet. There is no doubt in the poet鈥檚 mind regarding the reality of the things mentioned. 惭补尘尘补峁璦, in his 碍腻惫测补辫谤补办腻艣补, remarks that 苍颈艣肠补测腻苍迟补 sandeha is rejected by Udbha峁�膩as a va riety of the figure^[2] . The charm in sandeha originates from either pure doubt or an implied surety which does not overshadow the doubt. But in 苍颈艣肠补测腻苍迟补 sandeha a final and sure decision is made after the doubts are raised. According to Mamma峁���, because of the fact that the surety in 苍颈艣肠补测腻苍迟补 sandeha is expressed and not suggested Udbha峁��� has rejected it. The predecessors and contemporaries of Udbha峁�膩like 叠丑腻尘补丑补, 顿补峁囜笉颈苍 and 痴腻尘补苍补 have also rejected this variety of the figure as they have not defined or illustrated it.

顿补峁囜笉颈苍 has not admitted sandeha or sasandeha as an independent figure. He includes it as a sub-variety of 耻辫补尘腻 and terms it as 鈥�蝉补峁兣沘测辞辫补尘腻鈥�.

He illustrates the figure as鈥�

ki峁� padmama峁囜笉arbhr膩nt膩li ki峁� te lolek峁�a峁嘺峁� mukham/
mama dol膩yate cittamit墨ya峁� 蝉补峁兣沘测辞辫补尘腻//
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥� K膩vy膩dar艣a (of 顿补峁囜笉颈苍) 2.26.

鈥�(Which is the lotus with bees swaying inside and which your face with roaming eyes is? My mind is very much indecisive about the two.)

鈥擧ere the doubt created by the speaker conveys the similarity between the face of his beloved and the lotus. The purpose of the statement is to show the excellence of the face of his beloved or the upameya.

The reason of including this figure under the broad division of 耻辫补尘腻 has been clarified by the commentator J墨v膩nanda 痴颈诲测腻蝉腻驳补谤补鈥�

iya峁� 蝉补峁兣沘测辞辫补尘腻蝉补峁兣沘测补sya aupamyaparyavas膩yitv膩t/
  鈥擪膩vy膩dar艣aviv峁泃i, K膩vy膩dar艣a (of 顿补峁囜笉颈苍) 2.26.

痴腻尘补苍补 follows the path of his predecessors in treating the figure but his definition is relatively concise鈥�

耻辫补尘腻nopameya蝉补峁兣沘测补岣� 蝉补苍诲别丑补岣�/
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥� 碍腻惫测腻濒补峁僰腻谤补s奴tra惫峁泃迟颈 (of 痴腻尘补苍补) 4.3.11.

鈥擶here there is doubt on the upameya and the 耻辫补尘腻苍补 the figure is called sandeha.

In the 惫峁泃迟颈 痴腻尘补苍补 further explains that in sandeha the doubt is set forth for the specific purpose of implying excellence in the objects compared鈥�

耻辫补尘腻nopameyayorati艣ay膩rtha峁� ya岣� kriyate 蝉补峁兣沘测补岣� sa 蝉补苍诲别丑补岣�/
  鈥�碍腻惫测腻濒补峁僰腻谤补s奴tra惫峁泃迟颈 (of 痴腻尘补苍补) 4.3.11.

鈥擳丑别 碍腻尘补诲丑别苍耻 commentator also supports 痴腻尘补苍补 and adds鈥�

upameyeati艣ayam膩dh膩tu峁� 蝉补苍诲别丑补岣� samp膩dyate na tu vi艣e峁Ｄ乨ar艣an膩dityartha岣�/
  鈥�碍腻尘补诲丑别苍耻, 碍腻惫测腻濒补峁僰腻谤补s奴tra惫峁泃迟颈 (of 痴腻尘补苍补) 4.3.11.

痴腻尘补苍补 illustrates the figure as鈥�

颈诲补峁� 办补谤峁噊迟辫补濒补峁� cak峁�ur颈诲补峁� veti 惫颈濒腻蝉颈苍颈/
na ni艣cinoti 丑峁沝补测补峁� kintu dol膩yate 尘补苍补岣�//
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥敯�腻惫测腻濒补峁僰腻谤补s奴tra惫峁泃迟颈 (of 痴腻尘补苍补) 4.3.11.

鈥�(Oh beautiful lady! My heart cannot determine whether this is a lotus at your ear or is it your eye? My mind is wavering in doubts.)

鈥擧ere the speaker is expressing his doubts to indicate the excellence of the upameya (the eye of the beautiful lady). A sense of comparison between the lotus and the eye is also implied. The doubt raised here clearly originates from the imagination of the speaker and it creates excellent poetic charm. This illustration of the figure is quite similar to that of 顿补峁囜笉颈苍 which he furnishes while illustrating 蝉补峁兣沘测辞辫补尘腻.

搁耻诲谤补峁璦 includes the figure in the 鈥�aupamya-varga鈥� and deals with it elaborately. He delineates the figure as鈥�

vastuni yatraikasminnan别办补惫颈峁�a测补stu bhavati 蝉补峁僤别丑补岣�/
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥敯�腻惫测补la峁僰膩ra (of Rudra峁���) 8.59.

鈥擧e has shown three primary varieties of the figure as:

1. 补苍颈艣肠补测补,
2. 苍颈艣肠补测补驳补谤产丑补 and
3. 苍颈艣肠补测腻苍迟补^[3] .

A special variety of the figure has also been mentioned which is based on doubt relating to case-endings of the upameya and the 耻辫补尘腻苍补^[4] .

Kuntaka鈥檚 definition of the figure is鈥�

yasminnutprek峁�ita峁� r奴pamutprek峁Ｄ乶tarasambhav膩t/
sandehameti vicchityeti 蝉补蝉补苍诲别丑补峁� vadanti tat//
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥�Vakrokti-箩墨惫颈迟补 (of Kuntaka) 3.58.

鈥擶hen a feature fancied as something helps in the rise of other fancies or doubts too in such a way as to result in poetic charm, the figure is designated as sasandeha.

It is clear that Kuntaka gives emphasis on the imagination and innovativeness of the poet in order to create aesthetic beauty in this poetic doubt.

Bhoja follows Rudra峁�膩to some extent in the treatment of the figure. He defines it as鈥�

迟补迟谤补颈办补惫颈峁�a测辞' neko yasminnekatra 艣a峁卥yate/
yasminnekamanekatra so'n别办补惫颈峁�a测补岣� sm峁泃a岣�//
  鈥�厂补谤补蝉惫补迟墨-办补峁囜弓丑腻产丑补谤补峁嘺 (of Bhoja) 4.42.

鈥擧e divides the figure into two basic varieties鈥�

1. 别办补惫颈峁�a测补 and
2. an别办补惫颈峁�a测补.

The first type is sub-divided into two varieties鈥�

1. 补产丑颈诲丑墨测补尘腻苍补 蝉腻诲峁浥泍补 and
2. prat墨yam膩na 蝉腻诲峁浥泍补;

While the second type is also categorised into two varieties鈥�

1. 艣耻诲诲丑补 and
2. 尘颈艣谤补.

惭补尘尘补峁璦 asserts that the figure sandeha is created when the upameya is doubted as 耻辫补尘腻苍补 based on their characteristic similarity鈥�

sasa峁僤ehastu bhedoktau tadanuktau ca 蝉补峁兣沘测补岣�/
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥�碍腻惫测补-辫谤补办腻艣补 (of 惭补尘尘补峁璦) 10.92.

鈥擧e classifies the figure into two initial varieties鈥�

1. bhedoktau and
2. bhedanuktau.

The first type can be of two kinds鈥�

1. 苍颈艣肠补测补驳补谤产丑补 and
2. 苍颈艣肠补测腻苍迟补^[5] .

The second type is to be regarded as the 艣耻诲诲丑补 variety of the figure.

Ruyyaka follows Mamma峁�膩closely in his treatment of the figure. He defines it as鈥�

惫颈峁�a测补sya sandihyam膩natve 蝉补峁僤别丑补岣�/
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥敶”舨贯箖k腻谤补sarvasva (of Ruyyaka) p-42.

鈥擨苍 sandeha the 惫颈峁�a测补 or upameya is doubtfully presumed as 惫颈峁�a测墨 or 耻辫补尘腻苍补.

According to him the figure has to bear the taint of poetic genius^[6] .

He clearly divides the figure in three-folds鈥�

1. 艣耻诲诲丑补 or where a doubt is only conveyed,
2. 苍颈艣肠补测补驳补谤产丑补 or where a sense of certainty appears in the middle and
3. 苍颈艣肠补测腻苍迟补 or where a sense of certitude prevails at the end^[7] .

Hemcandra鈥檚 definition of the figure is also concise鈥�

stutyai sa峁兣沘yokti岣� sa蝉补苍诲别丑补岣�/
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥擪膩vy膩nu艣膩sana (of Hemacandra) 6.20.

鈥擜ccording to him in the figure sasandeha some doubt is expressed on the basis of similarity about a thing in hand.

He states that the figure very often stands on the basis of another figure鈥�

stuty膩ala峁僰膩r膩ntaragarbh墨k膩re峁嘺 prastutavastuvar峁嘺n膩rtha峁� sa峁兣沘yokti岣�/
  鈥擪膩vy膩nu艣膩sana (of Hemacandra) 6.20. (惫峁泃迟颈).

鈥擳丑别 figure according to him is of two kinds鈥�

1. 苍颈谤峁嘺测腻苍迟补 (when the doubt is dispelled in the end) and
2. a苍颈谤峁嘺测腻苍迟补 (when the doubt prevails even to the end).

The poet can give reason for the removal of his doubt or he can stay silent in this matter.

痴腻驳产丑补峁璦 I terms the figure as 蝉补峁兣沘测补 and defines it as鈥�

idametad颈诲补峁� veti s膩my膩dbuddhirhi 蝉补峁兣沘测补岣�/
hetubhir苍颈艣肠补测补岣� so'pi 苍颈艣肠补测腻苍迟补岣� sm峁泃o yath膩//
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥擵KL. 4.79.

鈥擳丑别 蝉补峁兣沘测补 occurs when a thing is presumed as another on the basis of similarity between the two. This figure becomes 苍颈艣肠补测腻苍迟补 when the doubt is removed at the end.

So, 痴腻驳产丑补峁璦 I puts forth two varieties of the figure鈥�

1. 蝉补峁兣沘测补 or 艣耻诲诲丑补 蝉补峁兣沘测补 and
2. 苍颈艣肠补测腻苍迟补 蝉补峁兣沘测补 or 蝉补峁兣沘测补-苍颈艣肠补测补.

痴腻驳产丑补峁璦 II terms the figure as sasandeha like Mamma峁���, Hemcandra etc. He delineates the figure in accordance with Rudra峁�膩as鈥�

s膩d峁泂y膩tpratipattu岣� 蝉补峁兣沘测补岣� sa蝉补峁僤别丑补岣�/
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥擵 KNA. Ch-III, p-39.

鈥擧e gives two primary divisions of the figure鈥�

1. kevala and
2. 苍颈谤峁嘺测腻苍迟补;

Though he accepts 苍颈谤峁嘺测补驳补谤产丑补 as a variety of the figure in his 惫峁泃迟颈.

The 苍颈谤峁嘺测腻苍迟补 variety is again sub-divided into two types鈥�

1. hetouktau (when reason is given for the removal of doubt) and
2. hetoranuktau (where no reason is given for the removal of doubt).

痴颈诲测腻诲丑补谤补 gives an elaborate definition of the figure as鈥�

kisalayati 办补惫颈岣� pratibh膩va艣ata岣� 辫谤补办峁泃腻谤迟丑补bhittika峁� yatra/
蝉补峁兣沘测补maprak峁泃earthe sa峁僤eho'ya峁� 蝉补尘腻办丑测腻迟补岣�//
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥�贰办腻惫补濒墨 (of 痴颈诲测腻诲丑补谤补) 8.8.

鈥擶hen originated from the genius of the poet, the 鈥�辫谤补办峁泃腻谤迟丑补鈥� or the object of description is doubted as 鈥�a辫谤补办峁泃腻谤迟丑补鈥� or another object based upon the similarity between the two, the figure is called sandeha.

He clarifies that an ordinary expression of doubt like 鈥�sth膩峁噓rv膩puru峁�o v膩鈥� is not to be considered as an instance of the figure sandeha because it is not originated from poetic genius.

痴颈诲测腻苍腻迟丑补 also treats the figure in a similar way鈥�

vi峁�ayo 惫颈峁�a测墨yatra s膩d峁浥泍膩t kavisa峁僲at膩t/
sa峁僤ehagocarau sy膩t膩峁� sa峁僤eh膩la峁僰峁泃i艣ca s膩//
  鈥擯rat膩parudraya艣obh奴峁�a峁嘺 (of 痴颈诲测腻苍腻迟丑补) Chapter-VIII, p-378.

鈥擧e too puts forth a three-fold division of the figure as:

1. 艣耻诲诲丑补,
2. 苍颈艣肠补测补驳补谤产丑补 and
3. 苍颈艣肠补测腻苍迟补.

痴颈艣惫补苍腻迟丑补鈥檚 definition is similar to that of his predecessors鈥�

蝉补苍诲别丑补岣� prak峁泃eanyasya 蝉补峁兣沘测补岣� pratibhotthita岣�/
  鈥�厂腻丑颈迟测补-诲补谤辫补峁嘺 (of Vis蛠van膩tha) 10.57.

鈥擧e also advocates the same three -fold division of the figure as that of 痴颈诲测腻苍腻迟丑补 and gives separate definitions of these divisions in his 惫峁泃迟颈^[8] .

Appayya D墨k峁Ｄ玹a has differentiated from 蝉尘峁泃颈 and 产丑谤腻苍迟颈鈥�

sy膩t 蝉尘峁泃颈bhr膩tisa峁僤ehaistada峁僰膩la峁僰峁泃itrayam/
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥擪uvalay膩nanda (of Appayyad墨k峁Ｄ玹a) 24.

鈥擜ccording to him, in 蝉尘峁泃颈 a recollection of an object that arises from the sight of some other object similar to it is mentioned. In 产丑谤腻苍迟颈 a deliberate mistake is made about a certain object to be something else similar to it. But in sandeha the certainty of an object is doubted through poetical skill.

碍补惫颈办补谤峁嘺辫奴谤补 delineates the figure in close proximity to 惭补尘尘补峁璦鈥�

sa 蝉补峁兣沘测补岣�/bhed膩nuktau taduktau tu 蝉补苍诲别丑补岣�/
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥�础濒补峁僰腻谤补-kaustubha (of Kavikar峁嚹乸奴ra) 8.238.

闯补驳补苍苍腻迟丑补 defines the figure in his own unique way鈥�

蝉腻诲峁浥泍补m奴l膩bh膩sam膩navirodhak膩samabal膩n膩n膩ko峁瓂avag膩hin墨dh墨rama峁噄y膩 sasa峁僤eh膩la峁僰峁泃i岣�/
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥�Rasa-驳补峁単腻诲丑补谤补 (of 闯补驳补苍苍腻迟丑补) Chapter-II, p-256.

鈥擧e also admits the same three-fold division of the figure like 痴颈诲测腻苍腻迟丑补, 痴颈艣惫补苍腻迟丑补 etc. In his detailed treatment of the figure 闯补驳补苍苍腻迟丑补 firmly establishes 鈥�蝉腻诲峁浥泍补鈥� or similarity as the base of sandeha.

The common property on which this similarity is based on may be expressed or implied, the same or different, 鈥�补苍耻驳腻尘颈苍鈥� (one and the same property found in both objects of comparison) or 鈥�bimba-辫谤补迟颈产颈尘产补产丑腻惫腻辫补苍苍补鈥� (two properties are similar in both objects of comparison)鈥�

asmi峁兣沜a sa峁兣沘ye n膩n膩ko峁璱峁�u kvacideka eva sam膩no 诲丑补谤尘补岣� / kvacit 辫峁泃丑补办 / soapi kvacidanugam墨, kvacidbimbapratibimbabh膩v膩panna岣�, kvacidanirdi峁ａ弓a岣�, kvacinnirdi峁ａ弓a岣� /
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥擱asa-驳补峁単腻诲丑补谤补 (of 闯补驳补苍苍腻迟丑补) Chapter-II, p-263.

鈥擳丑别 doubt expressed in the figure can be 鈥�补苍腻丑腻谤测补鈥� or 鈥�腻丑腻谤测补鈥欌赌�

补测补峁� ca kvacid补苍腻丑腻谤测补岣�, kvacid腻丑腻谤测补岣�/ yatra hi kavin膩parani峁ａ弓ha岣� sa峁兣沘yo nibadhyate pr膩ya艣astatr膩n腻丑腻谤测补岣� /... yatra ca svagata eva tatr腻丑腻谤测补岣�/
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥擱asa-驳补峁単腻诲丑补谤补 (of 闯补驳补苍苍腻迟丑补) Chapter-II, p-264.

From the varied doctrines of the Sanskrit rhetoricians regarding the characteristics of the figure we can form some basic ideas about the figure like鈥�

i) Sandeha is a doubt raised by the imagination of the poet for the specific purpose of creating poetic charm.

ii) Ordinary day to day doubts are not considered as a part of this figure of speech.

iii) Sandeha is based on the similarity of the objects mentioned in it.

iv) The reason of the doubt raised in the figure can be expressed or be kept secret.

v) Sandeha or poetic doubt can be of three popular types鈥�艣耻诲诲丑补, 苍颈艣肠补测补驳补谤产丑补 and 苍颈艣肠补测腻苍迟补.

The definition and illustration put forth by 痴腻尘补苍补 of this figure is concise yet compact as it covers the basic traits of the figure with admirable clarity.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

耻辫补尘腻nena tattva帽ca bheda帽ca vadata岣� puna岣�/
蝉补蝉补苍诲别丑补峁� 惫补肠补岣� stutyai 蝉补蝉补苍诲别丑补峁� vidurvudh膩岣�//
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥� 碍腻惫测腻濒补峁僰腻谤补s膩rasa峁僩raha (of Udbha峁���) 6.2.

[2]:

kintu 苍颈艣肠补测补驳补谤产丑补 iva n膩tra 苍颈艣肠补测补岣� prat墨yam膩na iti upek峁�ito
产丑补峁�峁�辞诲产丑补峁璭苍补/
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥� 碍腻惫测补-辫谤补办腻艣补 (of 惭补尘尘补峁璦) 10.92. (惫峁泃迟颈).

[3]:

pratipattu岣� s膩d峁浥泍膩d补苍颈艣肠补测补岣� 蝉补峁兣沘测补 sa iti//
upameye sadasa峁僢havati 惫颈辫补谤墨迟补峁� 惫腻迟补迟丑辞辫补尘腻苍别补辫颈/
yatra sa 苍颈艣肠补测补驳补谤产丑补statoparo ni艣cay膩ntoanya岣�//
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥� 碍腻惫测补la峁僰膩ra (of Rudra峁���) 8.59. & 8.61.

[4]:

yatr膩nek膩rthe sa峁僤ehastvekak膩rakatvagata岣�/
sy膩dekatvagato v膩s膩d峁浥泍膩tsa峁� 艣补测补岣� 蝉辞补苍测补岣�//
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥� 碍腻惫测补la峁僰膩ra (of Rudra峁���) 8.65.

[5]:

bhedokt膩vityanena na kevalam补测补峁� 苍颈艣肠补测补garbho y膩vanni艣cay膩ntoapi
蝉补峁僤别丑补岣� svik峁泃a岣�/
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥� 碍腻惫测补-辫谤补办腻艣补 (of 惭补尘尘补峁璦) 10.92. (惫峁泃迟颈).

[6]:

tena prak峁泃膩prak峁泃agatatvena kavipratibhotth膩pite sa峁僤ehe
蝉补峁僤别丑腻濒补峁僰腻谤补岣�/
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥� 础濒补峁僰腻谤补sarvasva (of Ruyyaka) pp-42-43.

[7]:

sa ca 迟谤颈惫颈诲丑补岣� / 艣uddho 苍颈艣肠补测补garbho 苍颈艣肠补测腻苍迟补艣ca / 艣uddho yasya
蝉补峁兣沘测补 eva paryavas膩nam /... 苍颈艣肠补测补garbho ya岣� sa峁兣沘yopakramo
苍颈艣肠补测补madya岣� sa峁兣沘y膩nta艣ca /... ni艣cay膩nto yatra 蝉补峁兣沘测补 upakramo
ni艣caye paryavas膩nam/
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥� 础濒补峁僰腻谤补sarvasva (of Ruyyaka) p-43.

[8]:

yatra 蝉补峁兣沘测补 eva paryavas膩na峁� sa 艣耻诲诲丑补岣� /... yatr膩d膩vante ca
蝉补峁兣沘测补 eva madhye ca 苍颈艣肠补测补岣� sa 苍颈艣肠补测补madya岣� /... yatr膩dau
sa峁兣沘yoante ca 苍颈艣肠补测补岣� sa 苍颈艣肠补测腻苍迟补岣�/
&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;鈥� 厂腻丑颈迟测补-诲补谤辫补峁嘺 (of 痴颈艣惫补苍腻迟丑补) 10.57. (惫峁泃迟颈).