Author:hari
{ಅತಿಶಯೋಕ್ತಿ} ಅತಿಶಯೋಕ್ತಿಯನ್ನು ಕಾವ್ಯಜೀವಾತುವೆಂದು ಆಲಂಕಾರಿಕರು ಪರಿಗಣಿಸುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಇದನ್ನು ಎಲ್ಲ ಅಲಂಕಾರಗಳ ಅಂತಸ್ತತ್ತ್ವವೆಂದೂ ಗಣಿಸುವುದುಂಟು.[1] ಮಹತ್ತನ್ನು ವರ್ಣಿಸುವಾಗ ಇದರ ವಿನಿಯೋಗ ಮಿಗಿಲಾಗಿ ಸ್ವಾಗತಾರ್ಹ. ಅಂಥ ಒಂದು ಸಂದರ್ಭವನ್ನು ವಿದ್ಯಾರಣ್ಯರ ಸ್ತುತಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ನೋಡಬಹುದು:
ಸತ್ಯದ ಭೂಮಿ ಧರ್ಮದಮೃತಾಂಬುಧಿ ಶುಷ್ಕತುರುಷ್ಕಕಾನನಾ-
ಭೀಲದವಾನಲಂ ನಿಖಿಲ ಕನ್ನಡನಾಡಿನ ಸೂತಿಕಾನಿಲಂ
ಶುದ್ಧಚಿದಂಬರಂ ಬೆರೆಯೆ ಪಂಚತೆಗಂದಿಗತೀತಪಂಚಭೂ-
Nāyikā
The main heroine of the play is called the nāyikā; she, along with the nāyaka, plays the most important role in the drama.
चाणक्य यंहा दो शब्दों का प्रयोग करता है – ‘अपवाहयंति’ और ‘कर्षयंति’ अर्थात् ‘पूरीतरह से भक्षण करना’ और ‘उत्पीडित’ करना।
चाणक्य का कहना है कि यदि हम इन कठोर विपत्तियों से बचना चाहते है तो हमे अपने स्थानीय राजा की आवश्यकता है। सिकंदर के आक्रमण से जिस प्रकार उत्तर पश्चिम के राज्यों का विनाश हुआ था उसके उपरांत देश को जिस आशा और विश्वास की आवश्यकता थी वह चाणक्य के दूरदर्शी दृष्टिकोण द्वारा प्राप्त हुआ। चाणक्य ने न केवल एक शक्ति संपन्न साम्राज्य की स्थापना की वरन उसने भारत में सिंकदर के प्रतिनिधि सेल्युकस निकटार को भी हराया।
Bhallaṭa
Bhallaṭa is best remembered as the poet who put the genre of anyokti (allegorical verses) on the map. He composed a century of verses and elevated this genre, which was only a trickle before. To this day, his poem arguably remains the best of its kind. A verse from the opening section of Bhallaṭaśataka describes the nature of suggestive poetry in a memorable manner:
बद्धा यदर्पणरसेन विमर्दपूर्व-
In Chikkapete area of Bengaluru, near the garment shop belonging to Late Rajasevasakta Pamadi Subbaramashetty, on a lane to the east of the shop, was a large house. It was an enormous bungalow. Advocate Venkatagiriyappa lived there. Venkatagiriyappa was my father’s maternal grandfather. His era was the period that the British began ruling the Mysore province.
Artha-prakṛtis
Artha-prakṛtis capture the gradual development of the plot. The Nāṭyaśāstra identifies five stages of development, namely
Now, with the advent of democracy, our lives are full of constant turmoil. The king reigned over a kingdom that was subject to rule by a single ruler. Democracy, on the other hand, has many leaders. It is difficult to achieve consensus with multiple leaders - more so about wealth and its distribution. So, what is theoretically thought to be a multi-leader system practically results in anarchy.