manye and the Missing iva: Rūpaka or Utprekṣā?
In the poetry section of the paper, a three-mark alaṃkāra question quotes the line manye 'yaṃ kanyā candraḥ ('I fancy this girl is the moon'). The line contains no iva, no yathā, and no sadṛśa. Candidate A identifies rūpaka, because the girl is directly called the moon. Candidate B identifies utprekṣā, because of the word manye. Candidate C identifies upamā, because the comparison is implied and the poet has simply dropped the marker. The key says utprekṣā. The teacher must decide, and must also handle a script that writes 'rūpaka' but adds the note: 'the poet is imagining the identity, so the metaphor is not literal.' The marking scheme gives one mark for the name and two for the explanation.
1. Which alaṃkāra is correct, and what exactly does *manye* contribute?
Read the worked answer
The correct identification is utprekṣā. The word manye ('I think, I fancy') marks the act as imagination or sambhāvanā: the poet does not assert that the girl is the moon; he presents the identification as a fancy. Rūpaka would require an unqualified identification, such as iyaṃ kanyā candraḥ without a verb of imagining. Upamā would require a marker of comparison (iva, yathā, sadṛśa) or an explicit statement of similarity. The absence of a comparison marker does not push the line into upamā; it removes upamā from consideration. The presence of manye is the positive signal for utprekṣā. The line is therefore not a failed upamā but a complete utprekṣā.
2. What would change if *manye* were removed and the line read *iyaṃ kanyā candraḥ*?
Read the worked answer
Without manye, the line would assert an identity: 'this girl is the moon.' That is the classic ground for rūpaka, because the upameya is directly identified with the upamāna and no comparison marker intervenes. The removal of the verb of imagining changes the speech act from 'I imagine X as Y' to 'X is Y'. This is the diagnostic the examiner should teach: look first for a word of imagining or supposing (manye, iva with a verb of thinking, dhruvaṃ in some contexts), because that converts an apparent identification into utprekṣā. If the assertion is flat, rūpaka becomes the better answer. The example also shows why alaṃkāra identification cannot be done by spotting a single word such as 'moon'.
3. Candidate A writes 'rūpaka' but adds the note that the poet is imagining the identity. How should this be scored?
Read the worked answer
Candidate A should receive one mark out of three: the script recognises that an identification is present, which is a genuine observation, but the name is wrong and the note does not yet use manye as the decisive signal. The note shows that the candidate is on the edge of utprekṣā without naming it. Feedback should say: 'You have noticed the identification. Now ask whether the poet asserts it or only fancies it. The word manye makes it a fancy, so the figure is utprekṣā, not rūpaka.' A candidate who writes 'rūpaka' and gives no reasoning should receive no marks, because the answer is then indistinguishable from a guess.