Three Lines, Three Alaṃkāras: When *iva* Is Not the Deciding Sign
A 4-mark Padya item prints three short lines and asks candidates to name the alaṃkāra in each and justify it in one sentence: (i) tvadānanaṃ candra iva bhāti; (ii) tvadānanaṃ candraḥ; (iii) tvadānanaṃ candra iti manye. The scheme gives 2 marks per line (1 for the name, 1 for the justification) and a maximum of 4, so a candidate need only do two lines well. Script D names upamā for all three, writing each time "येथे चेहऱ्याची चंद्राशी तुलना आहे." Script E names upamā, rūpaka, upamā. Script F names upamā, rūpaka, utprekṣā, but justifies line (iii) only with "iva शब्द गर्भित आहे". The moderator has to decide whether manye is a genuine marker of anything, and whether a wrong justification should still earn the name mark.
1. Analyse the three lines and state, for each, the single feature that actually decides the alaṃkāra.
Read the worked answer
(i) Upamā. Three conditions hold: two distinct things (face, moon), an explicit word of comparison (iva), and an implied common property (brightness/beauty). Nothing is asserted to be identical.
(ii) Rūpaka. The word of comparison is gone and identity is asserted: the face is the moon. The upamāna is superimposed on the upameya, which is the defining feature of rūpaka.
(iii) Utprekṣā. Iti manye marks saṃbhāvanā - the poet presents a fancy as something he imagines. The face is imagined as the moon; it is not offered as a literal identification.
The decisive point is not the presence of iva. Utprekṣā can also carry iva ("candra iva manye"), so iva alone cannot separate upamā from utprekṣā. What separates them is whether the statement is asserted as fact (rūpaka), offered as a comparison (upamā), or put forward as an imagining (iti manye, jāne, dhāraye).
2. Score D, E and F against the 4-mark scheme, and state your rule for a correct name with a defective justification.
Read the worked answer
D - 2/4. Upamā is right only for line (i). Lines (ii) and (iii) are named wrongly, and the same sentence "चेहऱ्याची चंद्राशी तुलना" is not even a justification for a comparison that the text does not make. Award 2 for line (i) and nothing for the others.
E - 4/4. Upamā and rūpaka are both named with acceptable reasons; the candidate has two complete lines.
F - 4/4, but for a reason worth recording: lines (i) and (ii) are complete (2 + 2). Line (iii) has the right name with a wrong reason - iva is not "understood" there; the marker is iti manye. Rule: name and reason are separate marks, so a right name with a wrong reason earns 1, never 2. Here it does not affect the total because only two lines are needed, but the annotation should say so, since F's reasoning would fail on a paper where line (iii) were compulsory.