Similes in the Mahabharata: A Stylistic Analysis

INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from (tie original or copy submitted.

dissertation copies are in ytpew etrir

Thus, some thesis and

face, while others may be from any type of

computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy

submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment

can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send DMf a complete manuscript and

there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning

the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps.

Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerqraphically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and wtiite photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrati'ons appearing in this copy for

an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.

Bell & Howell Information and Learning 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA

H A R V A R D UNIVERSITY G radua te School of Arts and Sciences

THESIS ACCEPTANCE CERTIFICATE

The undersigned, appointed by the Division

F a c u l t y o f Arts a n d S c i e n c e s Department S a n s k r i t and I n d i a n S t u d i e s Committee have examined a thesis entitled S i m i l e s i n t h e Mahabharata: Analysis

A Stylistic

presented by Anna R a n e r o - A n a t o l i n candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy and hereby certify that it is worthy of acceptance* /

!

.............................................

Signature

Stephanie Jamison

Leonard van d e r Kll^JP Typed name ................................................................................... Signature

Calvert W a t k i n s Typed name ................................................................................... Date

....!!.?!?f .......

Similes in the Mahabharata: A Stylistic Analysis A thesis presented

Anna Maria Ranero-Antolin to The Department of Sanskrit and Indian Studies

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of

Sanskrit and Indian Studies

Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts

June 1999

UMI Number: 9949791

Copyright 1999 by Ranero-Antolin, Anna Maria All rights reserved

UMI Microform 9949791 Copyright 2000 by Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-

@ 1999 by Anna Maria Ranero-Antolin All rights reserved

Anna Maria Rmero-htolin Thesis Advisor: Calvert Watkins

Similes in the MahSbharata: A Stylistic Analysis Abstract

This dissertation concerns the style of the Sanskrit epic the MahSbhgrata. The language and style of this epic form the transition from the earliest stage of Sanskrit, represented by the hymns of the Rgveda, to the highly formalized poetry of classical Sanskrit. While the Mahabhiirata has received a great deal of attention from historians, anthropologists and scholars of religion, the study of this text as a literary work has been neglected. In this dissertation I analyze the comparisons or similes (upama, in Sanskrit) in Books 6 and 7 of the Mahabharata. The simile is the most

prominent stylistic device of the Indian epics, as well as one of the oldest rhetorical figures of Sanskrit literature. A simile is the comparison of one thing with a substantially different thing, as in MBh.6.14.13 sa iete bhumau vdtarugva iva

drumah 'He lies on the ground like a tree broken by the wind.' In this project I also examine the metaphors (riipaka, in Sanskrit) in the abovementioned books. In a metaphor the subject of comparison is only implicitly compared with its object,

as in MBh.6.1O6.43d dvipo bhipno 'bhavat 'Bhipna became an island.' According to the Indian treatises on poetics (Almkaras'Zstra), the metaphor is a variant of the simile.

The goal of this project is twofold. First, by defining and analyzing the similes and metaphors in two books of the Mahabharata, I attempt to bring to light the poetic dimension of the text heretofore overlooked by the critics.

Second, a diachronic study of the simile in several works of Sanskrit literature

(the MahZbharata, the egveda and the Chiindogya Upani8ad) brings to light a pattern in the development of Sanskrit style. The results of this study will lead us to new conclusions about the relevance of the Mahabhzrata as a literary work as well as its place in the history of Sanskrit diction and stylistics.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction Chapter 1: Typology of Similes A. Syntax

B. Distribution C. Semantic Content Chapter 2: Similes and Figures of Sound Chapter 3: Similes and Metaphors Chapter 4: Similes and the Formula Chapter 5: The Pre-Epic Simile A. The Bgveda

B. The Chanciogya Upanisad Conclusion Appendix 1. The Metaphor of the Battlefield as a River Further Examples

Appendix 2. Formulaic Similes in Books 6 and 7 of the MahZbharata Bibliography

This dissertation concerns the style of the Sanskrit epic the Mahgbharata. Although the Mahgbharata has received a great deal of attention from historians, anthropologists and scholars of religion, the study of this text as a literary work has been neglected. This epic is usually dated between 400 B.C. and A.D. 400.' Its language and style form the transition from the earliest stage of Sanskrit, represented by the ritual hymns of the Ijigveda, to the highly formalized poetry of classical Sanskrit. The analysis of the rhetorical devices employed by the epic poet will therefore provide us with a better understanding of the epic diction and of the development of Indian stylistics.

In this dissertation I will focus on the comparison or simile (upam& in Sanskrit). The simile is the most prominent stylistic device of the epics, as well as one of the oldest rhetorical figures of Sanskrit literatut-e.2 I will also examine the metaphor (riipaka), a variant of the simile according to Indian theorists. Further, I will study the similes in two works of Sanskrit literature that predate For a discussion of the dates of composition of the epic, see Biihier. Georg, and J. Kirste. 1892. "Indian Studies 0:Contributions to the History of the Mahabhgrata." Sitzunderichte der WienerAkademie der Wissenschaften 127, no. 2, pp. 1-58 (see esp. p. 2 1ff.); Dahlmann, Joseph. 1899. Genesis des Mahdbhdrata. Berlin: F. L. Dames, pp. 163-74; Dandekar. Ramchandra Narayan. 1954. "The Mahabhgrata: Origin and Growth." University of Ceylon Review 12, no. 2, pp. 65-85; De Jong, Jan Willem. 1984-85. "The Study of the Mah3bhzrata." Part I: Hukkhnka Konkyu 10 (1984), pp. 1-17; Part 2: h k k e Bunk KonAyu 11 (1985). pp. 1-21; Grintser, Pave1 Alexandrovich. 1974. Drevneinduskij epos: Genesis i tipologija. Moscow: Nauka, p. 136ff.; Hopkins, E. Washbum. 1901. The Great Epic o f India. New York: C. Scribner's Sons [Reprinted 1993. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass]; Kane, Panduranga Varnana. 1966. "The Two Epics." MCRf 47, pp. 11-58 (see p. 15ff.); Macdoneil, Arthur A. 1900. A History ufSanskritLiterature. London: D. Appleton & Co. [Reprinted 1990. Delhi: Motild Banarsidass], p. 241ff.; Oldenberg, Hermann. 1922. Das Mahdbhffrata:Seine Emstehung, sein Inhalt, seine Form. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, p. 3lff.; Renou, Louis. 1956. Histoire de fa fanguesanskrite. Lyon: Editions IAC, pp. 101-2; van Buitenen, J. A. B., trans. and ed. 1973. TheMahdbhdrata. Vol. 1: TheBook ofthe Beginning. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press (see Introduction, esp. pp. xiii-xv); van Nooten, Barend A. 1971. The Muhdbhdrata. New York: Twayne Publishers, p. 25ff.; Wintemitz, Moriz. 1909. Geschichte der Indischen Literatar. Vol. 1 . Leipzig: C. F. Amelang. [Trans. by S m a , V. Srinivasa 1981. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, p. 436ff.I The importance of the simile as a literary device is recognized by the Indian tradition. Thus, in his Nirukta, Yaska mentions a definition of the upma (Nirukta 3.13- IS); this term is also found in the sdtias of Payini (2.1.56, 4.1.55). Bharata's Natya&stra (N$, the earliest text in which the 'adornment' is brought up, mentions four kinds of alaiplcara: upamti ~ p a caivu b t e n al-ra dpaiary yamakam t a m I a l a m r d s m vij&eyds'catviSrah 'Simile, metaphor, dipaka and yamaka are to be understood as the four ~ ~ E S W17.40). S

the MahSbhZrata, the (Igveda and the Chzndogya Upanisad. A close examination of the stylistic peculiarities of these works will constitute the preliminary basis for a comparison with classical poetry. This project is, however, beyond the scope of the present dissertation. One important feature of a number of highly elaborate passages in the epic,3 to which scholars have barely paid attention, is that here we can see the origins of classical Sanskrit poetics as elaborated in

treatises on Alamk~ras~stra.~ The comparison of such passages with later poetry would shed light on the relevance of the epic text in the codification of rhetorical figures in Sanskrit literature? A simile is "the comparison of one thing with a substantially different

thing in terms of a property, quality, or mode of behavior which they share,"* as in MBh.6.14.13 sa s'ete ... bhumau ... vdtarugca iva d r u d 'He lies on the ground like a tree broken by the wind.' All Indian theoreticians agree that a simile consists of four parts: (1) the upamsna, or object of comparison; (2) the upameya, or subject of comparison; (3) the s8dhZrwadhama, or common property; and (4) the dyotaka, or particle of comparison, such as ha, yathd, etc.'

Thus, in the previous example, vdtarugnah ... drumah 'a tree broken by the wind'

E.g. MBh.6.55.89, 6.102.78 (stanza found after this verse in D3.j). 7.159.40ff.. etc. The Mahabharata does not contain as many rhetorical figures as the other epic of ancient India, [he RiXmByqa- The latter is considered by [he Indian tradition the Adiklvya or "first poem," although by later standards its composition lacks at times poetic refinement For the influence of the epics on kSvya literature, see Renou, Louis. 1959. "Sur la structure du kavya." JA, pp. 1-1 13. I take this definition from Gerow, Edwin. 1971. A Glossary of Indian Figures of Speech. Mouton: The Hague, p. 140. -IIn this dissertation I do not deal with classical Indian descriptions and classifications of similes, for two reasons. First, as I indicate later in this introductory chapter, the presence of a number of figures of speech in the Mah3bh-ta does not imply the poet's acquaintance with a developed theory of poetics. To believe that the poets of the Mahabharata composed the epic according to the norms of classical poetic theories, as some authors have suggested, is anachronistic (see, for instance, Sinha, Jagdamba Prasad. 1977. The Mahdbhdrata:A Literary Study. Delhi: Meharchand Lachhmandas). In the second place, the discussion of similes and other figures of speech in AlaqWr&stra works is a vast subject and might be the topic for another dissertation. In this introduction, however, and only for practical purposes, I employ the definition of simile and metaphor established by Indian theoreticians. The simile (uparna) is described in the following works of Alaipkara^asira: NS 16.40-52, B 23-33. D 2.14-65, V 4.2.1-21, U 1.15-21, AP 344.6-21, R 8.4-31, M 125-34 (see Bibliography).

'

is the object of comparison, sa 'he' (the hero) is the subject of comparison, fete

bhumau 'lies on the ground' is the shared property, and iva 'like' is the particle of comparison. Similes can also be expressed by means of bahuvrihi compounds in which the common property is elided, as in kamlapatrak;d 'possessing eyes like lotus leaves.' According to Indian writers on Alamkardastra, the riipaka, or metaphor (lit. "having the fonn o f ) , is a development of the upam%? But while in a upam2 the two terms (subject and object of comparison) are literally compared, usually by means of a comparative particle, in a rijpaka the subject of comparison is only implicitly compared with its object, and no comparative particle is employed, as in MBh.6.106.43cd agadhe manmas tasya dvipo hhfsmo 'bhavat fads 'Bhisma became then the island for him who was sinking in the

ocean.' Compounds such as narqabhd 'man-bull,' or purusavydghrah

'man-tiger,' which are extremely frequent in the epic, are also instances of metaphors. Little work has been done to describe the epic simile or epic diction, in general. One of the first Western scholars to pay attention to the literary structure of the Mahabhsrata was E. W. Hopkins, who in 1901 published his pioneering

and still influential work The Great Epic of India. The first half of his study deals with the sources known to the epic poets and with epic philosophy: the remainder is a thorough analysis of epic versification. In a brief chapter in the latter half of his book, Hopkins makes several observations that touch up on the significance of similes and metaphors in the poem. First, he indicates that the presence of similes, metaphors and other figures of speech does not imply the influence of any ars poetica on the ~ a h ~ b h s r a t aHe ? states that many of the See

NS

M 13945.

16.56-58.

B 2.21-24, D 2.66-96, V 4.3.6. U 1.11-13, AP 344.22-23. R 8.38-56,

Hopkins (1901:205): "The presence in the epic of rflpakas, metaphors, of this or that form, no more implies acquaintance with a studied ars poetica than do such phenomena in other early epic

similes we find in the corpus of the epic are stock similes, and he proves this by means of an extensive list of similes and other expressions shared by both

epics.10 However, as Hopkins himself points out, the purpose of this catalogue is to show the parallelism in the two epics rather than to study this poetic device. Secondly, he remarks that both the Mahabhgrata and the RamZywa lack the more complex figures of classical literature. Finally, he deals succinctly with two

rhetorical figures, the simile and the metaphor, pointing out that "on epic similes and metaphors an interesting essay remains to be written.'"'

In 1922, Hermann Oldenberg published an influential work in which he undertook a systematic study of the Mahabharata, Das Mahabhdrata: Seine

Emfiehung, sein Inhalt, seine Form. In the fourth chapter of this book, Oldenberg analyzes briefly the language of the epic and compares it with that of the I$gveda.'2 In the sixth chapter, he deals with the epic style, observing that in a He number of places the poem seems to have been originally a prose narrati~e.'~ distinguishes three categories of passages in the epic (descriptions, speeches and narrative passages) and analyzes the style of each. In a short section of this chapter (pp. 162-66) Oldenberg examines the employment of similes in the Mahzbharata. He writes that the imagery of epic similes indicates a correspondence between the human and the natural world, and that this correspondence is already evident in Vedic literaturd4 He also points out the

."

poetry See also Gerow, Edwin. 1977. Indian Poetics. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, p. 219ff.; Lienhardt, Siegfried. 1984. A History of Classisul Poetry: Sanskrit, Pali, Prakrit. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, p. 53; Warder, A. K. 1974. Indian KSvya Literature. Vol. 2: The Origins and Formation of Classical KQvya. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, p. 20; Wintemitz (1922326-27). la Hopkins ( 1901 :40344). Hopkins (1901:2O5). l2 Oldenberg (1922:136). l3 Oldenberg (1922:145-46): "Die Verse des Epos erwecken an vielen Stellen den EindrUck, aIs lage da ungefahr jene Prosa vor, die man eben nur dem Versmass angepasst, dam vielleicht hier und da durch ein Schmiickendes Beiwort bereichert hatte." l4 Oldenberg (1922:163): "tol ganzen vedischen Ritualwesen herrscht die Neigung, oft in Verzermngen und Pedantenen sich aussernd, das Eine and das Andre abbildend, als Erscheinungsform des Andem zu fallen: Natuwesenheiten und Menschliches enlsprechen einander, Some und Auge, Wind und Atem: hier und don die gleichen, ja dieselben Wellen im grossen

epic poet's abundant employment of similes that contain images of animals and nature, and the relative absence of images of material culture.15 Oldenberg also remarks that the epic poet employs long series of similes on occasions. These are often of a stereotyped character, but they may also contain powerful images? He finishes the section on similes with the comment that the type of simile usually known as "Homeric" does not occur in the Indian epic.17 An opinion on the epic style similar to that of Oldenberg is found in the third chapter of Louis Renou's work Histoire de la langue sanskrite. where he characterizes the language of the Indian epics as "abrupte et

He briefly

enumerates a few characteristics of the epic style: the relative absence of prakritisms, the employment of "nominal style," the nominal composition, the abundant use of epithets and repetitions, etc." However, he does not discuss any figures of speech. He merely indicates that the passages in ornate style are rare in the Mahabhgrata, especially in comparison with the RSmayaqa. As an example of ornate style, he mentions the description of the warriors sleeping after the battle in MBh.7.159.40ff., which is characterized by the presence of a number of similes and metaphors. Renou adds that the Mahzibhzirata lacks any elaborate instances of alliteration, puns, and other rhetorical devices that are relatively frequent in the other epic. The second chapter of this dissertation, in which a number of instances of figures of sound in the epic are examined, will prove that Renou's view is not correct.

Daseinsstrom. So zeigt sich denn auch in rnanchern Biide, das die epischen Dichter brauchen, dieser Zug." Oldenberg (1922:164): "Irre mich nicht, tritt menschliches Leben mid Treiben rnit seinen Interessen und Verrichtungen in den Vergleichungen rnerkiich weniger hervor als die beschaulichere Natur." l6 Oldenberg (1922:164). " Oldenberg (1922166). Renou (1956:104). He adds: "On definira 1E&e c o m e un langage 2 purete arnoindrie, ouvert aux facility qutentralne Itexercise d'un idiome populaire." l9 Renou (1 956: 107-9).

"

We find an attempt to describe the similes in a number of Sanskrit works

in Jan Gonda's Remarks on Similes in Sanskrit Literature (1949).~'For Gonda, the simile is, first of all, a linguistic phenomenon, and it can be found not only in literary works but also in non-literary speech? Throughout his work, he mentions a number of similes in everyday speech, which he then compares with similes in Sanskrit works. In my view, his differentiation of literary and nonliterary similes is often not justified. He further claims that his analysis will be ~ o r n ~ r e h e n s i vbut e ~ it ~ lacks any sort of organizing principle: a quick glance at (he table of contents shows that there is no topical or chronological arrangement.

Further, he never discusses similes in compounds, nor the relation between simile and metaphor, because "the metaphor cannot always be recognized

~ne~uivocally.''~ Despite the wealth of examples of similes from a wide range of Sanskrit works (including the epics), Gonda's book is disappointing because it is never systematic. More systematic than Gonda's analysis is that of Ram Karan Sharma, who, in his Elements of Poetry in the Mahdbharata (1964) attempts to collect as completely as possible the similes and other rhetorical figures of speech (including metaphors) in Books 1, 3 and 6 of the poem? About two-thirds of his book (pp. 15-125) is devoted to similes, which he catalogues according to the images they contain: gods, natural phenomena, animals, plants, people, philosophical terms and material culture. He begins his introduction agreeing with Hopkins that, despite the presence of a number of poetic passages in the epic, Gonda, Jan. 1949. Remarks on Similes in Sanskrit Literature. Leiden: E. J. Brill. Gonda (1 949:9). Gonda (1949:8): "It seems to me to be an awkward procedure to confine our investigation to a very small p a t of the literature; we are not able to rate the 'figure' at its true value, if we confine ourselves to too small a domain. We must, I take it, making our choice from various kinds of literature, proceed in a cornparating manner. We must not confine our materials to kavya and Vgveda, which contain, omnium consensu, a great deal of unusual speech, and which are in many ways 'court-art."' Gonda (1949: 10). Shanna, Ram b a n . 1964. Elements of Poetry in the Mahabharata. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. 20

"

one should not claim the poet's familiarity with any theory of poetics.25 However, his classification of rhetorical figures in the Mahzbhgrata follows that of later kavya

theoretician^.?^ He further writes: "Even if we do not get evidence

of a well-developed science of rhetoric prior to the composition of the

Mahabharata, we should not deny the poetry of the Mahabharata the place it deserves, in the light of what has been said about its poetical virtues by later rhetoricians, poets, critics, or other writers."27 He justifies his view by quoting two passages from Book 1 in which the epic is described as a k8vyd8 One should, therefore, read Shanna's book with caution, since he seeks to demonstrate that the Mah3bhSrata belongs to the group of kZvya works. Further, as I noted above, his entire work consists of a catalogue of figures of speech (mainly similes), but he neither analyzes them nor discusses their function in the context of the poem. The most significant step in the study of the Mahabhgrata as a literary work has been made by Pave1 A. Grintser, who, in his Drevneindijskijepos:

Genezis itipologija (1974), deals with the poetic techniques, especially with the formula, in the two Sanskrit epics. About two-thirds of the similes in my corpus occurs in formulas. Therefore, it is necessary to examine this rhetorical figure in the context of traditional (oral) literature. In his work, Grintser follows the Sharrna (1642). Sharrna classifies the figures of speech in the Mahabharata in eight groups: (1) simile (upam%),(2) metaphor (rflpaka), (3) poetical fancy (utprek@). (4) hyperbole (atigayokti), (5) inference from circumstances (arthiipaiti), (6) antithesis (viroha), (7) exclusion by specification (parisarpkhyii). (8) miscellaneous figures: (I) excellence (vyatireka), (II) converse (pratTpa), (EII) poetical doubt (saipdeha), (IV) mistaker (bhrantiman), (V) equal pairing (tulyayogita), (VI)accompaniment (sahokti), (VII) poetical reason (kavyaiiiiga), (WI) description of nature (svabhavokti), 0 incongruity (viqama), and (X) modal metaphor (saMsokti). 27 Shanna (1964:3). MBh.1.Appendix 1.13 kparp mayedalp bhagavm kavyarp paramapajitam / 'This sacred, highly honored poem has been composed by me (i.e. Vyasa).' MBh. 1.Appendix 1.34-36 tvayil ca kgvyam ity uktarp tasmat kavyag bhaviqyati / asya kavyasya kavayo na samartha v i h q ~ e/ viieqwe grhasthasya &$si traya ivasramah / 'Since you (i.e. Vyiha) have called it kavya, this will be a kavya. Poets cannot excel this poem, just as the remaining three ramas as cannot excel the grnasthil^rama.'

methods developed by Milman Parry in his 1930 study of the Homeric epics,29 and by Albert Lord in The Singer of Tales (1960).~OParry proved that the style of the Homeric poems is typical of oral poetry because it is characterized by the use of fixed formula^.^' He showed that, in Homer, only one formula with a certain meaning is admissible in a given metrical position. According to Grintser, and as Chapter 4 of this dissertation will show, this principle is only applicable to the Indian epic to a certain extent, since there is a greater metrical variety in the sloka than in the Homeric hexameter. He adds that the abundance of synonyms in Sanskrit allows for the existence of metrically and semantically equivalent formulas? Grintser divides the formulas into six groups, according to their syntax:33

Parry, Milman. 1930. Studies in the Epic Technique of Oral Verse-making.1: Homer and Homeric Style. (Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 41. pp. 73-147) [Reprinted in Parry, Adam. 1971. The Making of Homeric Verse. Oxford: Clarendon Press], Parry's theory has been further developed and modified by a number of scholars working on different traditions around the world. See, for example, Finnegan, Ruth. 1970. Oral Literature in Africa. Oxford: Clarendon Press; Finnegan, Ruth. 1977. Oral Poetry: Its Nature, Significanceand Social Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Ivanov, Vjaceslav V.. and Vladimir N. Toporov. 1974. Isdedovanija v oblasti s1avjanskLr drevnostej. Moskva: Nauka; Kiparsky, Paul. 1976. "Oral Poetry: Some Linguistic and Typological Considerations." In Stolz, Benjamin A., and Richard S. Shannon, eds. Oral Literature and the Formula. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 73-106; Nagy, Gregory. 1974. Comparative Studies in Greek and Indie Meter. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; OpIand, Jeff. 1983. Xhusa Oral Poetry: Aspects of a Black South African Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. An extensive bibliography on oral traditions can be found in the following works by Foley, John Miles: 1981. Oral Traditional Literature. A Festschrift for Albert Bates Lord. Columbus: Slavica; 1985. Oral-FormulaicTheory and Research: An introduction and Annotated Bibliography. New York: Garland; ed. 1986. Oral Tradition in Literature: Interpretation in Context. Columbia: University of Missouri Press; ed. 1987. ComparativeResearch on Oral Traditions: A Memorial for Milman Parry. Columbus: Slavics; 1988. The Theory of Oral Composition: History and Methodology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Lord, Albert Bates. 1960. The Singerof Tales. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. In this work Lord offers some fundamental observations about the formula. He considers the origin of formulas not only within the tradition but also within the individual singer "Even in pre-singing years rhythm and (bought are one, and the singer's concept of the formula is shaped though not explicit* He is aware of the successive beats and the varying lengths of repeated thoughts, and these might be said to be his formulas. Basic patterns of meter, word boundary, melody have become his possession, and in him the tradition begins to reproduce itself*(p. 32). He adds that tradition generates formulas in the singer by means of the traditional themes inherited by the singer "The fact of narrative song is around him from birth; (he technique of it is the poss&sion of his elders, and he falls heir to it. Yet in a real sense he does recapitulate the experiences of the generations before him stretching back to the distant past" (p. 32). " Parry defines the formula as "a group of words whichis regularly employed under the same metrical conditions to express a given essential idea" (Pany 1930 = A. Parry 1971:266-324). Grintser ( 1974:32ff.). Grintser (1974:40ff.).

"

"

( I ) Attributive forrnuhs, e.g. bhfmo bhimapar~krumab'Bhima of temble prowess'; (2) Narrative fonnulas~e.g. @mdpradakqi~am'Having made a circumambulation'; (3) Auxiliary fomuias, e.g. taqu lad vacanum frumd 'Having heard those words

of him'; (4) Formulas of direct speech, e.g. fr~tumicchdmi '1 wish to hear'; (5) Maxims, e.g. esa dharmah sandtanah 'Such is the eternal law'; and (6)

Similes, e.g. p~rpucandrunibhdnand 'faces resembling the hi1 moon.' The first group includes compounds of the type purusa~ydghrab 'mawtiger,* which in fact is a metaphor. Grintser lists all the formulas he finds in the Mhgbhgrata and the Riimayqa in an appendix, indicating whether they occur in even or uneven pgdas. According to his analysis, about me-fifth of these formulas contains similes. Whereas the style of the Mahzbhiirata has barely been examined in works dealing with the epic language, many prominent scholars have studied the egvedic poetic practice, and in particular the Vedic similes. In 1886, Bergaigne published an article, "La syntaxe des comparaisons vtidiques," in which he examines the syntactic structure of this poetic device in Vedic literature, especidly in the bgveda and in the Atharva veda? He begins his analysis by dividing the Vedic similes into two categories. The first category, that of similes marked by yathd/ydthd, he calls "historic.'* To the second category, that of "poetic comparisons," belong similes marked by iva and mi. As an example of the first category, he quotes RV.4.12.6 (= 10. i26.8), indicating that this verse is

also an instance of non-padelism in case between the subject and the object of ~ o m ~ & s o nIn ? ~the in~oductovremarks to his study he adds that "la syntaxe

vddique off= des tours d'une hardiesse, ou, si I'on veut, d'me mal ~in~ulikre.''~~

A very different approach to 8gvedic similes was that of h o l d Hirzel, who, in 1890' wrote Gleich~isseund Metaphern in the Rpeda in euZturhistorischer

Hinsicht z~sammengestel~t?'H i n d attempted to compile d l the similes in the bgveda, arranging them according to topic. Thus, we find all the similes that refer to gods in the first chapter, those from the *'m@ologicd-historical world"

in the second chapter* and hose concerning human kings in the third. In his introduction, Hirzel states that he intends to compxe the Fgvedic similes with those in ancient Greek literature, especially in the works of Homer, Hesiod and the tragedians? Unfomnately, Hirzel's study is not complete (for instance, he does not mention similes that contain images of nature or animals), and the c o m p ~ s o nwith Greek epic and drama is limited to a few examples in the first chapter. A number of scholars in this century have paid a great deal of attention to similes (as well as other figures of speech) in more general works on the Ckldner4O and ~ e n o u ? One Vgveda. Among these scholars are 0 1 d e n k r g ~ ~ must also mention Gonda {P349):2 texts, and an article by Brent

who quotes extensively from several Vedic on the rnetrics of Rgvedic n6, which also

xi Bergaigne (1 886:76).

Hinel, AmoId. 1890. Gleichnisse und Metaphern im we&i~ cuffurhistorischerHinsicht zwamengesfeflt. Leipzig: W. Friedrich. l8 Himel (189&3). 39 Oldenberg, Herrnann. 1909- 12. &we&, Tmbitische umi aegetische Nufen. (Abhmdlungen der kGnigfichen Gesellschaft der Wissemchdten zu Gottingen, 1 1, 13.) Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhmdlung meprinted 1970. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht]

.

huis. 1955-69. Etufks vt5iique.r et flgingennes. 17 Vols. (Publications de I'hstitut de Civiiisahon hdienne, Fast. 1, 2- 4, 6, 9-10. 12. 14, 16-18, 20, 22-23, 26-27* 30.) Paris: E. de Bmcard. a See p. 6 of this intmduction. 43 Vine, Brent. 1978. "On the Metics and Chigin of Rig-Vedic mf 'like, as.'*' IIJ 20, pp. 171-93.

4 Renou,

discusses similes. "I%e most recent study on the syntax of the bgvedic comparisons is that of Stephanie W. Jamison, who, in 1982, published "Case Disharmony in Rgvedic Similes.'& After an introductory section in which she explains the syntactic structure of the Vedic simile, she examines a number of instances of this figure in the bgveda in which the subject and the object of the comparison are not in the same case. She argues that the poet takes advantage of existing syntactic ambiguities of a verb and generates new constructions in the

simile and in the frame. She concludes that case dishmony is employed by the I$gvedic poet as a poetic device. With the exception of a few (rather) ambiguous instances, this type of simile does not occur in the ~h~bh3rata:' As for the Upmi$ads, these texts have barely been examined from the

point of view of poetic devices. Here we have the general studies on their linguistic peculiarities by

first:^

~orgenroth?' ~suchida:~~ s u j i 'and ~

wecker,j0 as well as a few general remarks on the literary aspects of the texts in Olivelle's edition of the earliest u ~ a n i p d s *In ~ ' his Die Lehre der Upanishaden

und die Anfdnge ties B~ddhismus(19 151, Oldenberg briefly exmines a few similes

in the ~ ~ m i ~ dands in : ~his 1917 text on ancient Indian prose, he mentions in passing thm the Upani$adic texts indude a number of instances of this poetic

* Jamison* Stephanie W. 1982. ''Case Dishamony in 8gvedic Similes.'* f!J 24, pp. 25 I J I . a I examine these instances in Chapter 1. * Furst* Alfons. 1916. "Der Sprachgebrauch der alteren Upaniqads verglichen mit dern der fdheren vedjschen Perioden und dem des Wassischen Sanskrit.**KZ 47, pp. 1-82. a Morgemth* Waifgang. 1963. "Die Sprache der Chandagya-Upaniqad? In hrorija i kufrura drevmej lndii. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo vostdnoj literatury* pp. 223-34. &Tsuchida, Rytaro. 1985. "Some Remarks on the Text of the sve~$vam-Upaniqad.*'~uur~af of Indian and Buddhist Studies 34. pp. 48-60, 49 Tsuji, Naoshirti 1955. *'Some linguistic remarks on the Maitri Upani8ad.'' In Studies in fdcdugy and Bu&huioa Presented in Honor of Prafissur Susumu Yumguchi on the Ckcusion ~fhis Sktieth 5inhhy. Kyoto: Hozokan Kyoto. %Wecker*Otto. 1906. "Der Gebrauch der Kasus in der Uteren Upmiqad-litemmr verglichen rnit der Kasus-Iehre der indischen Gramrnatiker." BB 3@ pp. 1-61, 177-207. OIiveMe, Patrick, ed. 1998. The Early Upaniguk. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press (see h w u c ~ o n ) . Oldenberg, Herrnm. 1915- Die khre der Upanishaden urtd die Anfa~gedes Budhismw. G6thgen: Vandenhmck and Ruprecht, pp. 182436.

device? More wehl for the present work are several articles by ~ a l o m o n ,in~ which he describes the language of the Upani5ads and other post-bgvedic texts in relation with epic or "ksatriya" Sanskrit. None of these works, however, systematicd~ydiscusses any figures of speech. m e above discussion of previous literature on the pre-classical simile shows that a comprehensive study is needed. However, such a study would be a long and complex one. First, there is the problem of size. The text of the Mhgbharata as constituted by the Critical Edition consists of approx. 100,WO flokas? or double verses? Secondly, the text is not homcqjeneous, and throughout the epic we find elements that belong to various stages in the composition of the

poem. Thus, my analysis focused on Bmks 6 and 7* BhT$mapmm and ~ r o n a ~ a n m the : ~ first two of the so+xilled "Battle Books'' (approx. l5,WO verses). These books are commonly regarded as the core of the epic? Therefore, it is here that 1 expect to find stylistic peculiarities of the oldest stages of epic

Sanskrit. This9 in t ~ r n ,facilitates the compxisan with the egveda and the Chiindagya Upmigad. As for the ggveda, I analyzed the similes in Book 7.'' s3 Oldenberg, Herman. 1917. Zur Geschichte der a!tindische Prost?. (Abhandlungen der Kihiglichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschdten zu G6ttingen. 16, No. 6.) Berlin: Weidmannsche BucMmdIung, p, 28: "Schon wo es sich nicht direkt um die zentraIe Idee des muen G e d d e n h i s e s handelt, zeigt die Diktim oft einen Zug van W m e . von poetischem Schwung, wie er den eigentlichen Br8hmatpis fremd is& So in manchen Gieichnissen. k n n an solchen sind die Upani4aden besonders reich. Hier konnte ja nicht jene Weise nackten, tmknen Behauptens geniigen* in der die Briihmqas jeden noch so wiIk~r1khenEinfdl oft mit einem einzigen Wort abtaten. Das dlenacheidende Geheimnis vollauf glaublich. versthdlich zu machen mussten GIeichnisse helfen? Sa10mon~Ri~hard. 1981. "A Linguistic Analysis of the Mu~#akiaUpaniqad." M K S 25, pp. 91405; 1989. "Linguistic Variability in Post-Vedic Sanskrit." In Caillat* Colette, ed. LXafectes dms Zes /itt&raturesindo-ayennes. Actes du colhque international organist$ par 19UA. Paris: College de Fiance, pp. 275-94; 1991. "A Linguistic Analysis of the W n a Upaniqad." W i X S 35, pp. 47-74 1995. "On Drawing Socio-Linguistic Distinctions in Old Indo-Aryan: The Question of Kgatriya Sanskrit and Related Problems." In Erdosy* George, ed. Lmguage, Material Culture a& Efhnicity. (Indian Philalogy and South Asia Studies. Ed. by Wezler? A.* and Michael Witzel.) Berlin and New York: Walter de Gmyter, pp. 293-305. Sukthaakar, Vishnu Sitaram* et d., eds. 1933-66. 77ze Mahdbhdrata. 19 Vols. Poona: B h a n d a k Oriental Research Institute. Volumes 7-9 of the Critical Edition of the Mahilbhiirata. Fd. by Belvalkw, Shripad Krishna (1947). Vishnu S. Sukthankar (1953) and Sushi1 Kumar Re (1959). Poona: BhanMar Oriental Research Institute. See, for instance, Gnntser (1974: 136ff.), Hapkins (1898: lo), Wintemitz (1909:436ff.). Aufrecht, Thedor, ed. 1877. E e Hymen &sRigve&. 2 Vols. Born: A. Marcus Reprinted 1968. Wiesbaden: Otto Hamssowik]

''

This is one of the ''family books,"q which are considered the nucleus of the Book 7 consists of 104 hymns and contains apprux. 9W verses. The ChZndogya Upmigad, the only work in my study that was composed in prose, was read in its entirety?

My methodo1ogy was an extreme1y close reading of the abovementioned texts. The first goal of my reading was to identify the similes in these books. 1 treated the comparisons marked by lva, yuthti, -vat, yafhd/tathd (clausal skniles) or by adjectives meaning "similar" at the end of compounds, such as -sums, -sadp%z, ere. In my study I also included epic similes expressed by bahuvrIhi compounds in which the common property is elided, e.g. kumafapurrdksa 'possessing eyes like lotus leaves.' Similes in the egveda are marked by the particles iva, yathd or mi. In the Chzndogya Upaniqad, similes are always marked by yafhd/farhd.

The next step was to analyze the syntax of these similes. The basic structure of the epic simile is shghtiowud: it is expressed by means of' one of the abovementioned particles, and the noun phrases, that which is compared and that to which it is cornpad, are typically in the same case. In the Fgvecia, however, we find several examples of non-pardelism in case between the subject and the object of the ~ o r n p ~ s o nFurther, ?~ in the MahSbhiirata we have a number of instances of clausal similes, that is, similes in which the comparison is not between two nouns, but between two actions, as in MBh.6.79.41 pdpdavrm

samare sendtp sammamarda sahfijarab / y h d vanagaju rdjun mrdgutpi carati padminfm 'He crushed the m y of the Pzndavas in the battle with his elephant* just as a forest elephant, 0 King* steps un a lotus that grows on the earth' This 59 %oks 2-7 are ~ u d I y called the 'TmiIy books" because each of them is attributed by tradition to a family of reciters. The reciter of Book 7 is the seer Vasi4fia. a Winteinitz (190!?:51), Macdonell (1900:34), etc. Oliveile (1998). a See Jamison (1982).

type of simile, which is also found in the Chibdogya Upanisad, is absent in the bgveda. This thesis analyzed the movement from nominal similes in early Vedic to clausal similes functioning in relative independence in the epic.

The study of the syntactic peculiarities of epic similes was followed by an examination of their distribution within the line, as well as in the poem. The majority of the examples I excerpted from the poem occupy the second or fourth piida of the sloka, and they are usually stereotyped expressions of a formulaic character, such as c a h t a iva parvat*

'(elephants) like moving mountains,' or

puspitdv iva kiMukau '(The two heroes shone) like two blooming kims'uka trees.'

As for the distribution of similes in the poem, my reading shows that similes and other rhetorical devices occur much more abundantly in the long descriptions of battles than in the didactic parts of the epic.63 Further, many similes are found at the most dramatic points of the story, where they tend to accumulate." In Chapter 3 of my dissertation, I analyzed a number of variants of the most common metaphop5 in Books 6 and 7 of the MahSbh2rata, that of the battlefield as a river, and I argued that the similes that usually precede or follow it have a demarcative function." In my corpus, I have found only a few instances of this metaphor without a simile.

In battle scenes, we typically have 1 simile in 5 stanzas, and, in didactic parts, 1 simile in 10 (or more) stanzas. E.g. in MBh.6.15.1-28 (Bhiqma's death), MBh.6.55 (Knpa and Arjuna enter the combat), MBh.7.48.10-17 (Abhimanyu's death), etc. That is, without taking into account metaphoric epithets of the type nararfabha 'man-bull,' puruqavy~ghra 'man-tiger,? etc. '' The following is an example of the metaphor of the battlefield as a river with a simile in the last verse: MBh.7.146.46-47 vadhyamane bale tasrniips tava putrasya marina / prilvartata nadT ghoa Sonitaughatararigini // ubhayob senayor madhye naragvadvipavahinT / yatha vaitarani aian vamafistra~uramnrati // 'When the army of your son was being slaughtered, 0 Lord, a terrible river arose, possessing streams of blood as waves (46), in the middle of both armies, carrying away men, horses and elephants, like the [river] Va.itaranT= 0 King, [flowing] toward the city of Yarnars kingdom'

"

(47).

The semantic content of similes was then examined. From the images contained in epic similes, we can learn about the transmission of thematic motifs in Sanskrit literature. For instance, as Hopkins remarks, in the Mahiibhiirata the god Indra does not have the importance he had in Vedic times." However, a large number of epic similes refer to several of his attributes (strength, brightness, etc.), as well as to his wars with the demons.68 One must also note that, in Grintser's list of formulaic similes in the Sanskrit epics, Indra is the only Vedic god mentioned!'

The study of the imagery in the Mahiibharata and the egveda

sheds light on the way the epic poet appropriates and employs a number of motifs inherited from the Vedic tradition. Further, the survey of the similes in Books 6 and 7 of the MahZbhZrata reveals a considerable number of images that refer to nature. The similes in which these images are contained are typically quite short (one piida) and lack the elaboration of later classical ~oetry?' However, some passages, such as

MBh.7.159.40ff.:~ recall the style of the later kavya poetry. This passage is interesting because its main poetic feature is the accumulation of similes. A close reading of the text further allowed me to study the stylistic

features of similes. Figures of sound such as alliteration, assonance and repetitions or echoes of sequences and words are stylistic devices frequently employed by the epic poet, particularly in com~arisons.~~ Figures of sound (especially "See Hopkins, Edward Washbum. 1915. EpicMythology. Strassburg: K. J. Triibner [Reprinted 1986. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass], p. 54. 6 and 7 of the epic. It will be examined in detail in This is a frequent simile in Chapter 4. Grintser ( 1974:376-77). TO E.g. MBh.6.43.59 prdcchOdayat tam isubhir mahameaha ivdcalam 'He covered him with arrows, just as a great cloud [covers] a mountain,* MBh.7.74.25cd sapapSta hatab pf/Avy#m vdtaru.gna iva drumah *He fell to the ground like a tree broken by the wind/ etc. See Chapter 1. Some examples of figures of sound in the MahgbhSrata follow. Alliteration: MBh.6.Appendix 4.147 nd*dmasa vqena v e u r v r w n ivaujasd '[&eta] destroyed [the army] vehemently, just as the wind [destroys] the trees with violence*; alliteration and repetition of phonetic sequences: (yuddham) devSndg danavair iva '(a battle) like [that] of the gods and the demons,' MBh.6.89.4 ahinam SwaV&ega sammtdt p a r y a v m ~ nI prVAtam Vaidhdrdbhifyfara^IVA baldhakah 'They

" "

"

alliteration) are also extremely abundant in the Rgveda, and almost completely absent in the Chiindoma Upanisad. One of the aims of this thesis is to examine the relationship between the function of the text (narrative, ritual, didactic) and its form. The study of the epic similes cannot be complete without analyzing metaphors as well. I noted above that, according to the Indian tradition, metaphors (riipakas) are a development of the simile (upama). There are about

120 metaphors in Books 6 and 7 of the Mahzbharata, and in more than half of these the battlefield is said by the poet to be a river (of blood). Further, in a number of cases, this metaphor is introduced or delimited by similes. The detailed examination of several variants of this metaphor sheds light on the relation between simile and metaphor in the epic? Finally, in my dissertation, I examined the similes contained in formulaic expressions. Here I followed Watkins' definition of formula as "the verbal and grammatical device for encoding and transmitting a given theme or interaction of

theme^."'^ That is, rather than stressing the importance of meter as the main conditioning force, my analysis of formulaic similes in the epic emphasizes the theme as "the deep structure of the formula."75 I also followed Kiparsky in the distinction he makes between fixed and flexible formulas.76 Fixed formulas appear

in a constant shape; flexible formulas can be inflected, expanded and split by covered him with a shower of arrows on all sides, just as clouds [cover] a mountain with showers of water in the fall'; alliteration, assonance, rhyme and repetitions of words: MBh.7.2.37 hmstaMabhah sa hutdfanaprabhe /&h& fubhe vai svafithe dhanurdhaRA4 I slhilo m j d d h i R A f h i r mahSRAfbh svayam vimdne-s iva sfhitah 'Similar to the oblation-eater, splendid, the bowman (Karga], ~dhiratha'sson, the great charioteer, standing on his own chariot, [which was] splendid and similar to the oblationeater, shone like the king of the gods standing on his own chariot.' See Chapter 3 and Appendix I. "As stated in his response (p. 110) to Kiparsky (1976:73-106). See also "Aspects of Indo-European Poetics." In The Indo-Europeans in the Fourth andThird Millennia. Ed. by Polome, E. 1982. (Linguistics Extranea, Studia 14.) Ann Arbor Karoma, p. I1 1 [Reprinted in Selected Writings. (Innsbrucker Beitage zur Sprachwissenschaft, 80.) Innsbruck Institut fur Sprachwissenschaft der Universitat hnsbruck, 1994, pp. 674-90.1 Watkins (1982: 111). 76 Kiparsky (1976:82ff.). Kipmky follows J. B. Hainsworth's analysis of the Homeric formula in his 1968 work The Flexibility ofthe Homeric Formula. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

"

''

other words. My reading of the epic shows that while many formulaic similes are fixed, there are also a great number of flexible ones. The examination of several instances of formulaic similes in Books 6 and 7 of the Mah8hhSrata ilhstrates some of the composition techniques of the epic poet. The final chapter of my work dealt with the sirniles in the bgveda and in the Chzndogya Upaniqad from a comparative perspective. The function of these texts is radically different from h a t of the epic: the Fgveda is a coliectim of ritual hymns addressed to the gods; the Chiindogya Upaniqad is a work of philosophical/didactic chmcter. Therefore, the employment of similes (and other rhetorical devices) in these texts differs considerably from the usage of the same type of poetic figures in the epic. This comparative analysis illustrates how the composers of the MahZbh8rata appropriate the tradition to create a new type of poetic language. This dissertation consists of five chapters and two appendices. Chapter 1 examines the typology, function and semantic content of similes in Bouks 6 and

7 of the MahiIbhSrata. Chapter 2 identifies and analyzes a number of epic similes characterized by the employment of phonetic figures such as alliteration, assonance and repetitions or echoes af sequences and words. Chapter 3 describes the use of metaphors in the epic, and the relation of metaphors to similes.

Especial attention is given to the most frequent metaphor in the books under exmination, that of the battlefield as a river. Chapter 4 treats the simile in the context of traditional oral style. Chapter 5 examines the similes in Book 7 of the Fgveda and in the Ckindogya Upani9ad. Further exampies of the metaphor of the battkfield as a river are included in the first appendix. A list of formulaic similes is given in the second appendix.

The god of this project is twofold. First, by defining and analyzing the similes and metaphors in two books of the Mahiibhzrat* I attempt to bring to

light the poetic dimension of the text heretofore overIooked by the critics. Second, a diachronic study of h e simile in several works of Sanskrit literature will bring to light a pattern in the development of Sanskrit style. The results of this study will lead us to new conc1usions about the relevance of the MhSbhZmta as a literary work as well as its place in the history of Sanskrit diction and stylistics.

A. Syntax The most commonly used par%icleto mark a simile in the Makbharata is ivu (approx. 1,900~in my corpus). Less frequently, similes are marked by yathd (approx. 300~)~ by -vat (approx. 1 2 0 ~ or ) by adjectives meaning 6'similar'* at the end of compounds, such as m m a , -sadria, -upam&, -prakliya, -saqtnib/za, etc.

(approx. 450x1. Similes can also be expressed by means of bhuvfihi compounds in which the common property is elided (appmx. 150x), as in kamalapafrdk~ub 'possessing eyes like lotus leaves,' or pfirgucandrunibhdnand 'possessing a face similar to the full moon?' The vast majority of the similes in the MhgbhZrata are nominal; that is, the particle merely indicates that the nouns or pronouns they mark have semantic countevas in the matrix clause. This relation can be of two types. The two nouns can k compared as semantically independent of the rest of the ciause, as in MBh.6.16.30 dhvujdb ..Jvu/urttu ivupdvakdb 'banners

... like blazing

fires.' Or,

the comparison may be suggested by the meaning of the verb. This latter type is the most frequently used in the epic. In this type, double comp&sons, with two nouns in different functions compared to two other nouns in these same functions (e.g. subject/object; subjecvinsmment), are common, Triple comparisons also

Examples: Rouble (Nom./acc.) ~ h . 6 . 7 8 . 5 M[sa] nyahanat tiivakq sainym vajrapiiqir ivEsuram

Gerow (1971:240) calls these *'inverse'' c o m ~ u n d sbecause ~ here, in conmt to metaphoric the subject (lotus leaves, fbll

compoun&, the object (eyes* face) is gammaticaily subordinated m moon).

'He destroyed your army, just as he who holds the thunderbolt in his hand (i-e. Indra) [ d e s ~yed] o the demon.'

(NomJloc.) mh.6.29.7d mayi sarvm i d m protm satre rnaqiga~iiiva 'A11 this is woven on me just as a row of pearis [is woven] in a string.' Triple (Nom./acc./ins~.j bBh.6.Appndix 41.147 [iveto

... viihinIm] niiiaygrn%a

vegena

vgyur v&$in ivaujasa '[&eta] destroyed [the m y ] with vehemence, just as the wind [des~oys] the trees with violence.'

(Nom./acc.floc,) MBh.6.Appndix 4.15-1 6 te tu bgnamayam vaqarp ivetarniirdhany ap2tayan / nidiighiinte 'niloddhiitii meghii iva nage jalam / 'They poured a shower of mows on Sveta's head, just as clouds, tossed by the wind, [pour] water on the mountain at the end of the summer.'

A second type of simile in the MAgbhZrata is the clausal type

(approx. 80x in Books 6 and 7). Here the comparison lies not between two noun phrases, but between two clauses. The first clause is usually marked by yuthd, and in a few cases by yadva4 in the seeand clause, t a h ~is employed in the vast majority of cases, and only occasional~ymizm or tadvud. As Jamison (1982252) points out* this type of simile accurs only very marginally in the

Wgveda. However, it is prominent in works of post-i$gvedic literature such as the CMndogya Upanitjad. It is interesting to note that while a number of the ciausai similes in the epic have a didactic character:*

most of them occur in

descriptions of battle scenes and are of a purely descriptive nature' The For instance* those in the Bhagavad CZt2 (MBh.6.144).

20

examination of this type of simile seems to indicate that the epic poet adopted a syntactic structure that had k e n originally employed in didactic works? exploiting it as a poetic device. The compmhve analysis of h e similes in the Mhzbhzrata and the Chsndogya Upanisad, which I undertake in the last chapter of this dissertation, will shed light on the origins of the clausal similes in the epic. In most of the clausal similes in Books 6 and 7 of the Mahzbhitrata (approx. 65j, the poet emp1oys the same verb in both clauses. That is, though formally these similes are clausal, semmtically they are nominal. In a number of instances (approx. 10) the verb is repeated, but typically the verb in the second clause differs from that in the first clause in tense, mood or verbal prefix. The mood employed in the vast majority of similes of this type is the indicative; only in nine cases do we have an optative. In one instance (M13h.7S.9)9 the optative is used in both clauses. One must note that many of the clausal similes in which the verb is repeated contain other words that are also repeated in both clauses. That is, the poet is seemingly trying to turn a nominal simile into a clausal one by merely repeating several parts of the first clause. This method of composition recalls that of a large number of similes in the Chandogya Upaniqad, as we &a11 see in Chapter 5. Examples: Repeated verb Resent: MJ3h.6.26.37 yathaidM~sisamiddho 'gnir bhasmasiit kumte 'rjuna / jiizniignih sarvakmgni bhasmasiit h m t e tathii 'Just as a blazing fire turns wood

//79

ashes, kquna? so does the fire of

knowledge turn dl actians into ashes.'

It is interesting to note that, in this simile, despite dl the clausal machinery, the semantic locus is in the metaphorical compound jtidndpih 'fire of IcnowIedge.'

Perfect: MBh.6.102.73 yath2 kurfinarn sainyani babhafiia yuddhi payjav* / tatha p3gdavasainySni babhafija yuddhi te pita // 'Just as the PZ~du'sson destroyed the troops in the combat, so did your father destroy the Pfindava troops in the combat.'

Past participle: MBh.7.19.32 anilena yathabhrzni vicchinniini samantatah / tatha piirthasya sainyiini vicchinnani kvacit kvacit // 'Just as clouds are tom by the wind on every side, so were the troops of m a ' s son tom in different places.'8o

Same verb with variation in tense, mood and/or verbal prefix Presentmaorist: MBh.6.92.3 1 yatha hi govno vaqam samdhgrayati khzt patat / bhimas tatha dronamuktam Saravarsam adidharat // Just as a bull endures the rain that falls from the sky, so

has Bhima

endured the shower of arrows released by Drona.'

MBh.7.64.53 yathodayan vai gagme stiryo hanti mahat tam& / tathanuno gajEnTkam avadhit" karikapatribhih // 'Just as the rising sun in the sky d e s t r o ~great darkness, so & hjuna destroyed troops of elephants with arrows that had k a k a feathers.'

" A variation of this simile occurs later in the same book (MBh.7.146.38). Notice that, in the

latter, the poet alters the word order in the second line: instead of particle + verb (tathd ... + particle (vicchinnSnita/hd). Further, in the second clause we

vicchinndnz'), here we have verb also have the verb dmn.

*

MBh.7.146.38 anilena yathSbhrEqi vicchinngni samantatat~/ vicchinn3ni tatha ajan balmy asan vitfarp pate // 'Just as cIouds [are]&XJ by the wind on every side, so were the tmaps, 0 King, 0 Lord of men.' This is [he supplelive wrist form of han.

Similes with optative

MBh.6.58.59 yatha pas'unitm sayghiitaq yqtyg p a l a prakalavet / tatha bhimo gajanikiiy gadaya parvakiilayat // 'Just as a herdsman would urge [his] herd with a goad, so

Bhima

urge the elephant division with [his] mace.'

MBh.7.5.9 yatha hy akarqadhiira nau rathas c8siirathir yatha / draved yathegtaiy tadvat syitd fie senzpatirp bdam

/f2

'Just as a boat without a rudder and as a chariot without a charioteer

would run at will, so would be an army without a commander.'

In about 15 instances, we have two different verbs in a clausal simile. As is to be expected, in most of the similes of this type, the two verbs belong to the same semantic field, usually "to take, obtain, receive," or a motion verb, "to go, run, enter," as in the following examples:

MBh.6.79.4 1 pS~davimsamare senam sammamarda sakufijar* / yathii vanagajo riljart *rnrdgamgg3carati padminim // 'He crushed the army of the PZndavas in the battle with [his] elephant, just as a forest elephant, 0 King, steps on a lotus that grows on the

earth.'

MBh.6.112.66 yatM hi sumahitu agnib kakge carati sitnilah /

tathii jajvzla bhigma 'pi divyiiny astriiny u&rayan

//

Here Wt is a dummy verb (see next page). Notice also that the verb in the simile runs into the second line (cf. MBh.6.1.19, below). This is the form given by the text of the Critical Edition. Variants: K5 Eh g&apri, T2 mattam. Neither variant makes sense in this context. This simile is a variant of a simile that occurs approx. I5x in my corpus. I shall examine this image in Chapter 4 below.

'Just as a great fire wanders in a thicket with the wind, so

did

BhTqrna

bum raising the divine weapons.'84

-9

MBh.6.112.100 us@irto hi naro p d v a i jahdhzrgh pratkehati / tathii jagrzha giingey* iaradhzriih iikhqc$n& // 'Just as a man afflicted with thirst welcomes the showers of rain, so

did

the son of GMgii receive gikhiupjin's showers c ~ fmaws.*

In a few instances (approx. 5) we have a dummy verb in the main clause that summarizes the ~irnile.8~ This verb is typically from the stems bhii or as, 'be,' and in one case from vid 'find, know.' In some cases (MBh.6.79.41,

MBh.6.112.66), the verb car 'walk, wander, step on,' might be taken as a semidummy verb. Examples: MBh.6.1.19 yatha sivhasya nadate svanam s'rutvetare mrgiih / traseys tadvad eviisfd dhgfluiig[rabalam tadii /lS6 'Just as the other animals would be afraid, having heard the voice of the

roaring lion, so was Dhnariigra's army then.'

" In this simile we have an inverted metaphor. In the first half of the sloka, the fire (agnih) is

said to wander (camti) in the forest, whereas BhQma bums (jajvsia, perf.) in the battlefield. A dubious case is MBh.7.170.47 (see below), where the first verb might also be considered a dummy. 86 Here the yarM clause breaches the half-verse boundary, and the verb occurs in initial position in the second line. Cf. MBh.7.5.9 (previous page), which also contains a dummy verb. In this example the whole verbal complex, lavayatvw nigacchari 'reaches saltiness,' and vyarthay bhavafi 'becomes useless,' has to be considered in each case.

"

'Just as the sweet water of the divine river Gang& flowing into the ocean, reaches saltiness, so does the manliness of your glorious [warriors], 0 King, having reached the heroic sons of PEncju, become useless in the battle.'

MBh.7.170.47 na hi me vikrame tuly*

kaicid & purniin iha /

yathaiva savitus tuiyam jyotir anym na vid~ate/ f 3 'There exists no man equal to me in strength in this world, just as no other light equal to that of the sun is found (or known).'

In the similes I have examined the subject and the object of comparison are always in the same case and number!'

The only exception to the non-

parallelism in number (approx. 4x) is that in which the subject of comparison is a collective (the army). In this case, the object of comparison may be plural, as in the following example:90

MBh.6.46.11 yathanalarp prajvalitam patarngsh samabhidmtgh / viniiiayaiva gacchanti tatha me sainiko @ah

//

In my view, vidyate is the dummy verb in this simile, but one might also take both verbs (asti and vidyate) as dummies. A potential instance of non-parallelism in case is found in a number of similes in which (he combat on the battlefield is compared with the combat between Indra and the demons, as in the following sloka: MBh.7.134.22 tad yuddham abhavat te@ip lqlapratiwai¤in5 / ptha devgsure wddhe ~akrasvasaha danavaih // 'There was a battle of those [warriors, who were] intent on slaying each other, just as in the battle of the gods and the demons [there was a battle] of Sakra with the dgnavas.' The frame contains a genitive plural only (&tapratikflai&dm), whereas the simile contains a genitive singular and an instrumental (Sakrasyasuha d&navaih). The differentiation in case is important-the emphasis here is on the god as the one who obtains victory, since his opponents, the dgnavas, have been relegated to the instrumental. Cf. MBh.6.65.33. 90 See also the example mentimed above: MBh.6.1.19 yatM ...mndh / trasqw tadvad evdsfd dhdnargstrabafam 'Just as animals ..-would be afraid* so was Dhflar&tra8s m y . '

'Just as moths (pl.) msh into the blazing fire for [fieir] destruction, so does my

m y

(sg.) [go].*"

B, Distribution

In the introduction to his catalogue of poetic devices in Books 1, 3 and 6 of the epic, Sharma remarks that figures of speech occur more often in passages of "heroic poetry" than in "moralistic" or "legal" passages?2 My reading of Books

6 and 7 shows that long descriptions of battles encourage the use of similes and other figures of speech, whereas other parts of the epic, such as those that have a didactic character, use figures of speech more sparingly?3 Thus, in battle scenes, the frequency of similes is about 1 in 5 stanzas:4

whereas in didactic

parts, we have 1 simile in 10 stanzas? Brockington mentions similar percentages

in the different books of the ~ ~ i n a y a q a ? ~ As a number of scholars have pointed out, similes, along with other

figures of speech, tend to be used most in the epic at culminating points in the story or argument.97 At such points, we often find long series of similes. Some of the passages in Books 6 and 7 that illustrate the accumulation of similes are MBh.6.15.1-28 (Bh13ma's death), MBh.6.55 (Krq~aand Aij'una enter the combat), All the manuscripts mentioned in the apparatus of the Critical Edition regularize the syntax of the simile by changing the singular to plural: K02j.5 D2.3.6 TZ sainikdh jan*, M3-5 sainikd javSl, TI G24 ime sainyd nird@&, G I J ime sai~yddikdjavdt. Shama (l964:ll): "It seems that the portion of the epic which we may call 'heroic poetry' has the greatest number of figurative expressions, the theological or moralistic portions has less, and the legal portion still less. This is, however, an a priori conclusion that needs further investigation." Such as MBh.6.4-11 (description of the merits of the earth), MBh.6.14-40 (Bhagavad Gita), Appendix 8 (didactic stories about death), etc. * I have come up with this figure after sampling 300 pages of Book 6. '* As in the Bhagavad Gita. Appendix 8 to Book 6 shows an even lower proportion of I simile in 13 ^lokas. Brockington, John L. 1984. Righteous Rama: The Evolution of an Epic. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 33-34. Brockington (1984:33), Gonda (194956ff.). Oldenberg (1922164ff.). For a detailed discussion of the function of similes in the RamiIya~a,see Porcher, Marie-Claude. 1996. "Remaques sur la fonction des figures de style dans Ie Ramayaqa." Centenaire de Louis Renou. Actes du colloque international (Paris, 25-27 January 1996). Paris: Librairie Honor? Champion, pp. 429-47.

"

"

"

"

MBh.7.1.23-28 (the army's grief without Bhiema), MBh.7.48.10-17 (Abhirnanyu lying dead on the battlefield), MBh.7.60.11-21 (description of Arjuna's chariot) and ME3h.7.76.3-9 ( K ~ n aand Arjuna). The adhyzya that recounts Abhimanyu's last fight and death (MBh.7.48) is arguably the best example of the epic poet's tendency to accumulate similes at the most dramatic moments of the narrative. This adhyzya consists of 53 stanzas and contains 24 similes, that is, I simile in almost every second stanza. Many of these similes include stereotyped images, such as the comparison of the two heroes with uprooted bannersg8 or that of Abhimanyu with a wounded elephant." A few similes, however, are quite elaborate, for instance, that in stanza 50, in

which the battlefield is compared with the mythological river vaitarqi.'"

This

simile is supported by a string of metaphoric compounds that occupies 2 stanzas (49-50) in varphstha meter. The last stanza of this adhygya, also in vams'astha

" MBh.7.48.10

t3v anyonyam gadagfibhyam sarphatya patitau kqitau / indradhvajav ivotsr$(au raqamadhye parawtapau // 'Having hit each other with the tips of their maces, both fell down to the ground, like two uprooted Indra-banners in the middle of the battlefield, causing pain to each other.' MBh.7.48.14 bobhayitva carnthp sawam malinim iva kufijarah / aiobhata hato viro vyadhair vanagajo yalha // 'Having agitated the whole army, just as an elephant [agitates] a lotus, the hero wounded with sharp weapons looked like a forest elephant* lM (See also Appendix 1). MBh.7.48.49 garfrasatpgha(avah5 asfgjalS rathajupii kuqaraiailasaipka(3 / manu$yasTr$opalamS~sakardam3 praviddhaMnSvidha^astramBlini // "Carrying heaps of bodies, possessing blood as water, possessing chariots as rafts, full of elephants as rocks, possessing human heads as stones and flesh as mud, possessing various kinds of abandoned weapons as garlands.'

"

Mbh.7.48.50 mahabhayz vaitar~lvadustaiH pravartita yodhavarais tada nadT / uvaha madhyena ra~2jiraipb h ( ^ q bhayWahS jivam~pravahini// 'Producing great fear, like the [river] Vaitari@, difficult to cross, a river was produced by the best of warriors then, it flowed in the middle of the battlefield, carrying fear, carrying away [both] living and dead [heroes].'

meter, contains an unusual simile in which Abhimanyu is likened to a sacrificial fire.

"' One must also note MBh.6.55. This adhyaya, which describes Qgna and

Arjuna entering the battlefield, consists of 132 stanzas and contains 37 similes and 5 metaphors, a percentage much higher than in other episodes of the epic. Some of the metaphors in this passage are quite elaborate and will be examined in Chapter 3 below.

Besides emphasizing some of the most significant moments in the story, similes may also have a demarcative function. This function is particularly evident in the case of a number of metaphors in which the battlefield is said to be a river (of blood). Most of the metaphors of this type begin or end in a simile, which in some cases is embedded in the metaphor. The similes embedded in the metaphor invariably compare the river in the battlefield with the river Vaitarqi, as in MB h .7.146.46-47 prdvartata nadJghord io&aughatarahgi@ ... yathd vaitarafl rdjan yamard~lrapuramprati ' A terrible river arose, having streams of blood as

waves,

... like

the [river] Vaitmyi, 0 King, [flowing] toward the city of Yama's

realm.' The simile that introduces the metaphor may compare the river on the battlefield with a river flowing at the end of a yuga, as in

MBh.7.13.8 yugantakale ymeva, or it may liken the warrior who causes the massacre to a god, as in MBh.7.20.30 dropas tu p~gdavdnikecakdra kadanap mahat / yathd daityagaife v i ~ ~ usurdsuranamaswah tf 'Dro~acaused a great

massacre among the Pzqdava troops, just as Viqqu, honored by gods and asuras,

lo'

MBh.7.48.53 apetavidhvaslamahartiabhU$~am nipiititarp 6akrasamaxp mah3ratham / rqe 'bhimanyurp dadflus tad3 jan8 vyapo^hahavyalp sadasiva pSvakam // 'Possessing ornaments of great value gone or fallen off, fallen, similar to Sakra, the great charioteer, in the battlefield the people saw Abhimanyu then, like a fire on the altar whose oblation has been taken away.'

[caused a massacre] among the daityas.' These similes will be examined in detail in Chapter 3 below. A frequent feature of the similes in the epic is the repetition of the same

object of comparison in similes close to each other, with few or no instances of the same object of comparison elsewhere.102One example is the simile in MBh.7.2.1 and MBh.7.2.3, in which the army without its commander Bhisma is compared with a boat sinking in the ocean.'03 The only variation of this simile in the books I have examined occurs in two adjacent slokas three adhyiiyas later, where an army without a leader is said to be like a boat without a rudder or a captain.'04 Further examples: A hero in combat is compared to the body fighting with the five senses (MBh.7.71.12 and 13), Kriqna and Arjuna are compared to fishes free from the net (MBh.7.76.6 and 9), the army is said to be a forest

(MBh.7.68.54 and 69.7, metaphor).

As Brockington (1984:33) remarks with regard to the similes in the Ramayqm. In my corpus I have found approx. 10 instances of repeated similes. lo3 MBh.7.2.1 hatap bhigrnarn ildhirathir viditva bhinnam nSvm ivStvagadhe kurflnarn / sodaryavad vyasanat sfltaputM saiplarayisy~stava putrasya senam // Having learned that BhTqma had been slain, Adhiratha's son, the son of the charioteer, wishing to save from calamity, like a brother, your son's army, [the army] of the Kurus, [which was] like a shattered boat in the very deep ocean.'

MBh.7.2.3 hate tu bhiyne rathasattame parair nimaiiaffm navam ivzrnave kuriln / piteva putfiips tvarito 'bhyayat tat& swtgrayiqyms tava putrasya senam // '[Once] BhTqma, the best of the charioteers, [had been] slain by the enemies. [Kargal came quickly then, wishing to save your son's anq, the Kurus, [which was] like a boat sinking in the s e like a father (wishing to save his] sons.' bfBh.7.5.8 na fie nzyakw sena m u h U m api tiqmati / ahavesv ahavdrestha netrhlneva naur jale // 'Without a leader, an army does not stand even for a moment in the battie, 0 you the best in battle, like a boat in the water without a captain.'

'Just as a b a t without a rudder and a chariot without a charioteer advance at will, so does m y [advance] withciut a commmder.'

an

About 95% of the Mahiibhfirata is composed in sloka meter (technically

epic anuqmbh). Therefore, the vast majority of similes occur in slokas. In Books

6 and 7, they also occur in a number of long meters (upajfiti, miilinT, vams'astha, puspitiigrfi, irregular and mixed). Altogether there are 515 stanzas in long meters, and 78 of them contain similes (and some metaphor^).'^^ Most of the shorter similes occupy the second or the fourth pada. These are typically stereotyped expressions and have formulaic character, as we shall see in Chapter 4. About one-tenth of (he similes in Books 6 and 7 occupy the first pada, and fewer the third pada. The use of similes in the first pada does not seem to have any special stylistic ~alue.''~Among the shorter similes and metaphors that typically occur in the last pads (but which can also be found in other places in the verse), we have frozen expressions like the ubiquitous metaphor nararsabhah 'man-bull,' 'bull among men,' or compounds of the type

kamalapatrakfah 'possessing eyes like lotus leaves.' These epithets can be applied to any hero in the epic.

C. Semantic content More than half of the similes in Books 6 and 7 of the Mahiibharata contain images that refer to the natural world. The rest of the similes refer to the gods, philosophical terms and items of material culture.'07 Similes in which sacrifice Some statistics (in order of frequency): upajgti 247 stanzas/48 similes, irregular 207 stanzas/17 similes, mixed 39 stanzas/5 similes, vaqkstha 18 stanza@ similes, p u s p i t w 3 stanzas/2 similes, millin1 I stanza/I simile. There are also eight lines in the long meter drutavilambita (a jagaff) inserted after MBh.7.159.42. These lines contain 2 similes and 5 metaphors. According to the editors of the Critical Edition, the style of these lines suggests later interpolation. Contra Gonda (1949:47ff): "In my opinion there is occasion to raise the question, if there exists any connection between the place in the sentence occupied by the simile and its 'Affektgehalt' (emotionalism). Indeed, in sentences or utterances which are spoken under the influence of feelings and sensations, the most 'affektbetonte' element will push itself towards the First place in the sentence. ... As for Vedic and Sanskrit texts, in a number of cases the simile occupies the first place in a sentence or in a verse; then it seems to me that usually a peculiar stylistic value may be recognized? "" As Shanna (19649) points out. Brockington (19S4:34) remarks [hat the imagery in the Ramayqa is similar overall to that in the MahabhSrata.

'

and ritual are mentioned are infrequent in these books, reflecting the relative absence of such considerations from the basic narrative.108 The single most frequent object of comparison109is the god Indra (approx. 220x),"' though he is not such a prominent deity in the epic as in the &gveda.l1 In the Mahsbharata, Indra symbolizes might, splendor and prominence. Numerous similes refer to his weapons, banner and abode, as well as to his wars

with the demons. The latter are most often refered to with the generic term asura, but a number of them are also mentioned by name, especially Bala [or

Vala], Vma, Maya, Taraka and Namuci. Most of the similes in which the war between the Pandavas and the Kurus is compared with Indra's wars with the demons have become formulas in the Mahiibhiirata, as in MBh.6.96.51 fayoh samagamo ghoro babhuva kawkodayah / yatha dev~sureyuddhe s'akras'ambarayur iva

'There was a terrible, fierce combat of the two (warriors], like [the combat] of and gambara in the battle of the gods and the demons.' Other gods mentioned in similes are Yama (approx. 140x), Siva (approx. 20x), Viqqu (approx. l4x), Brahma (approx. 5x), Rudra (approx. 5x) and Kzrttikeya (3x). It is interesting to note in this connection that, in Grintser's list of formulaic similes, Indra and Yama are the only gods mentioned,Il2 hdra in his function both of leader of the gods and of killer of asuras,'" and Yama in compounds in which the heroes' weapons are compared with his rod.114In a large number of instances (more than 200), we also have the frozen simile X-indra 'best of X's,'

as in ~jendrah'best of kings,' gajendrah 'best of elephants,' munlndrab 'best of At least in terms of vocabulary employed in similes and metaphors.

'@More common than anything in [he natural world.

Brockington (1984:34), Grintser (1974:377), Sharrna (1964:16ff). See Hopkins (1915:54). 'I2 Grintser (1 974:376-77). E.g. devarajasamyuddhi 'similar to the king of the gods in battle,' iakrapratimatejasah 'possessing strength similar to [that of] %dm,' vajrapaifir ivdsurdn 'just as the holder of the thunderbolt [killed] [he demons,* etc. 'I4 E.g. yamadandopama '[a weapon] similar to Yama's rod' (itself not a Vedic image). lo ' I

sages,' etc., where we can see that this term has lost its original meaning as the name of the Vedic god. The usage of Indra mythology and lexicon in classical Sanskrit literature has been analyzed by Jarnison in a 1996 article,ll5 in which she shows that Vedic materials are still a meaningful part of the tradition for Kalidasa and his audience. Most of the similes that contain images of nature refer to mountains, which symbolize immovability. For this reason, warriors are often likened to them in fighting scenes, as in MBh.6.49.11 virus tasthau girir ivdcalah "The hero stood like an immovable mountain.' Heroes are also compared to the sun, which symbolizes brilliance, power and might, as in MBh.6.84.1 na fekuh Npdavd

dragurn tapamam iva bhSskaram 'The P8ncjavas were unable to look [at him], who was burning like the sun.' Other natural elements, such as the stars, sky, earh,

rivers and ocean, are also included in similes. Particularly common is the identification of the battlefield with a river. One must also note here the frequent employment of clouds as objects of comparison, as in MBh.6.42.14 chadayantah

s'aravrdtair meghd iva divdkaram '[they] covering [him] with arrows, just as clouds [cover] the sun.' Among the plants, trees in general, and especially the kims'uka tree (a tree with red flowers), appear often in similes. The epic poet frequently compares the wounded heroes with these trees, as in MBh.6.44.43ef as'obhama

mahdrdja pujpita iva kimsuk*

"They shone, 0 Great King, like blooming kiqhka

trees.' In a few instances, other types of trees are mentioned, such as the kamikiira, palm tree (tala) and mango (cam). The lotus (kamala,padma, pufkara,

pu~&rtka, rdjlva, etc.) is the most common flower in similes, especially in compounds in which the eyes of the heroes are compared with lotus flowers or

Jamison, Stephanie W. 1996. ''Vjmt et V@ragm and Sur la structure du kSvya-Some intersections: ~ e d i cmotifs in Kumttrasambhava VS.." In Langue,style at structure duns Ie monde indien. Centenaire de Louis Renou. Actes du colloque international (Paris, 25-27 January 1996). Paris: Librairie Honor6 Champion, pp. 123-42.

lotus leaves, as in MBh.6.29.2 kamalapatraksah 'possessing eyes like lotus leaves,' MBh.6.102.63b rdjfvalocanah, MBh.7.172.53d ambujebaeah, etc. Among the animals mentioned in similes, the most common are elephants, lions, snakes, tigers and bulls, all of which symbolize might. Instances of horses, birds and insects as objects of comparison are fewer. In Books 6 and 7, elephants (gaja, vdrapa, kunjara, mdta*,

ndga, hastin) are mentioned about 80

times. Many of these similes are included in fixed formulas, such as matto mattam ivu dvipam '[he attacked him] just as an enraged elephant [attacks another] enraged elephant,' or tottrair iva mahsdvipam '[he struck him with arrows,] just as [one strikes] a big elephant with hooks.' In a number of formulas (about 20) the army is compared to elephants treading upon lotuses, as in MBh.7.3 1.I7 @an pothayam cakrur d v ~ sthutanadan ~ @ iva "They crushed the fallen ones, just as elephants [crush] big reeds.' Elephants are also likened to mountains, as in MBh.7.19.19 nUMjanacayaprakhyo madandho dvirado babhau I abhivnlo mahameghair yathd sydt parvato mahdn 'S irnilar to a heap of black ointment, blind with mada, the elephant looked like a big mountain covered by great clouds.' Lions (sipha, kesarin), tigers (vydghra, idrdula) and bulls (rjabha) are mentioned by the epic poet in approximately every second verse in metaphors such as narawhab 'man-lion,' purusavydpab 'tiger-man,' and naranabh& 'man-bull.' A frequent formula (approx. 25x) is that in which a warrior attacking his rivals is compared with a lion attacking small animals, as in MBh.6.92.23 q&tayat kupdalinam si@ab k~udramrgapyatha 'He felled the hero who was

wearing ear-rings, just as a lion [fells] a small animal.' Snakes (sarpa, Mujaga, aslvisa, pannaga, uraga, ndga) are mentioned in a large number of similes (approx. 60) in which the subject of comparison is a weapon, usually in the formula diivisopamab 'similar to a poisonous snake.' Warriors may also be

compared to snakes, as in MBh.7.3.23

(lam padavam)

... dslvisam &tiharam

sughoram '[that Pgndava], a poisonous snake of terrible appearance.' A remark on similes and metaphors that contain images of nature: It is

generally t h o ~ g h t "that ~ the first descriptions of landscapes in Indian literature occur in the ~iimityaqa.'~'However, as we have seen, a large number of similes in the Mahsbhitrata have images of nature as objects of compari~on."~It is true that most of these similes are quite short (usually one pacia) and occur in

stereotyped expressions, like that in which the warriors are compared to fallen trees1" or kims'uka trees, or that in which the heroes shooting arrows at their enemies are likened to clouds covering a mountain. However, in a number of instances these images of nature are expanded into more elaborate ones that contain figures of sound such as alliteration and assonance, variation of vocabulary, compounds, etc., as in the following examples:

MBh.6.43.13cd [tau s'us'ubhatej vasante puspas'abalau ~uspit3viva kims'ukau '[Those two heroes shone] like two kims'uka flowers blooming in spring.'

MBh.6.58.12 athainam s'aravarqena chadayZmasa bhiirata /

@rim ial3garne ~advqiialada ialadhitrinah // H e covered him with showers of arrows, just as clouds, carrying water [cover] a mountain in the rainy season.'

?-

See Renou (1956:109, Note 2). For instance, in RSm.4.1 and 4.27. l i 8 As Shanna (1964:9), Oldenberg (1922:164), etc., remark. l 9 The comparison of a fallen warrior to a tree is an ancient simile, perhaps of Indo-European date. See West, Martin. 1988. "The Rise of the Greek Epic." JHS 108, pp. 151-72. On p. 154 he compares several instances of this simile in the Rgveda with similes in the Iliad. In these similes an adversary may be felled like a tree, whether it is a tree struck by lightning (RV.2.14.2, 6.8.5, U. xiv 414) or one chopped down by a joiner (RV.1.130.4, 11. iv 482-7, xiii 178-80, 389-91).

'

supuspito mZrutavegarugno mahidharagrad iva kamikarah // Wearing a golden garland, he fell from his elephant, adorned with gold, similar to a mountain, like a blooming karnikzra [falling] from the too of

a mountain, tom by the violence of the wind.'

In a small number of instances, the style of passages with similes and metaphors that contain images of nature is closer to that of classical kgvya works than to the rest of the epic. One of these passages is ~~h.7.159.40ff.,'" where we have a description of the warriors sleeping on their elephants after the battle. The first two stanzas of this passage (a sloka and a trigubh) compare the heroes with a painting. Further, they are said to cling to their mounts like lovers. These

stanzas read:

MBh.7.159.40 tat tatha nidrayii bhagnam avscam asvapad'" bdam / kus'alair iva vinyastm pate citram ivgdbhutam // 'That m y , overcome with sleep, fell asleep, like a wonderful picture painted on canvas by skilful [artists].'

MBh.7.159.41 te kgatriyzh kun(ja1ino yuviiniih parasparm sZyakavikgataflg3h / kumbhesu linah susupur gajznsm

h c q u lagnab iva kiimininam //

As Renou (1956109) remarks. I read variant b:prdsvapadwfam.

'Those warriors, wearing ear-rings, youthful, wounded by the others' arrows, lying on the backs of [their] elephants, fell asleep, as if [they were] clinging to the breasts of [their] lovers.'

In the stanza that follows, the poet describes the moon appearing in the sky by means of a compound simile, kdminiga&apddund

'white like the cheeks

of lovers,' and a metaphor, kumudandthena 'lord of the white lilies.' This

elaborate sloka is quoted by the Indian theorist Mammata (1 1th century AD.), in his Kgvyaprakiisa (10.88), as an example of poetic speech:'"

/ MBh.7.159.42 tat@ kumudmathena k2minig~dapSndun~ netranandena candrena miihendfi dig a l a y b a //

'Then the [celestial] region belonging to the great Indra was adorned by the moon, bringing joy to the eyes, white like the cheeks of lovers, lord of the white lilies.'

The most interesting lines in this passage, however, are not those in the

text of the Critical Edition, but those found after verse 42 in several manuscripts

(B hi Dn D 2 . 5 ~ ~ These ). lines read:

As the Critical Edition remarks.

navavadh~smitac~mmano ha& pravisfi* kumudakarabSndhav@ / Coming out of the splitting of the region of the Thousand-eyed [god], of a golden color radiant with the mane [that is] the moon-beams, removing the herd of elephants [that is] the darkness, the lion of the Udaya Mountain (i.e. the moon) came out. Possessing the lustre of the body of Hara's excellent bull, possessing splendor similar to the full bow of the God of Love (i.e. Smara), charming and delightful like the smile of a young bride, the relative of the water-lilies came out.'

All the nominatives refer to candm 'moon' in sloka 42, although in that verse this word was used in instrumental case. Each line contains a compound (which in most cases occupies the entire line), and each compound contains a simile or a metaphor that describes the moon. It is in passages like this that one can see the beginnings of kiivya.

The Indian theorist Bhamaha (718h century A.D.) defined poetry as fabddrthau

sahitau kdvyam 'Poetry is sound and meaning put t~gether.'"~A similar definihon is that of the French poet Paul ValtSry (1938)? who wrote that "l'op6ration du po*te s7exerce au moyen de la vdeur complexe des mots, c'est-h-dire en composant i la fois son et sens

... cornme

hlgiibre op6rant sur

des nombres comp~exes."124 Sou~dafidMeaningwas also the title of Roman J&obsonPs never-finished work on the essence of language Figures of sound such as alliteration? assonance and repetitions or echoes of sequences and words are poetic devices that the epic p e t employs with alliteration the most frequently utilized?

In a sample of

twenty adhyayas from Book 6 (adhygya 1-20, 721 dokas), 1 have found more than 200 instances of figures of sound. My analysis of Books 6 and 7 of the Mhabhgrata indicates that these poetic devices are even mare commonIy employed in verses that contain similes and metaphors. In this chapter, I will illustrate and analyze several figures of sound (alliteration, assonance and reptitions or echoes of sequences and words) that occur in similes in the abovementioned books. Alliteration is the reptibon of the same sound (or sounds) at the beginning of adjacent or closely connected words. Assonance is the resemblance of sound between two syllabIes in nearby words, arising from the rhyming of two or mare accented vuweIs, but not consanants, or the use of identical Kdvdlamkdra 1.16. a i ~ r e s1. I414. As mentioned by Calveit Watkins in his How ?aKill a &agun: Aspects of fn&-E~~opean hetics. 1995. New Yark and Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 26. Watkins quates fmm Wadimir N. Toporov's influentiat article entitled (in its Gemm tmsIation) "Die U ~ a n g eder indmuropiiischen Pmtik" Pu&u 1 3 (198I), pp. 189-251. is Gmda (1949:43ff.), Hopkins ( 1%) 1:2@2ff.), Sharrna ( l964k 13, 159-166). H q k h s (190k203) remarks that "alliteration [in the epics] is a c o m o n trick, but is not so overdone as it is in the works of later p&." ' ~ 3

consonants with difTerent vowels. Such phonetic echoes, ofien combined with alliteration, are extremely fiequent in epic similes, as the following exampies will show. A particular form of echo that serves a demarcative function is the stylistic device known as ring-composition. Ring-composition is the beginning and the ending of a discourse, or complex utterance longer than a sentence, with the same or equivdent word, phrase, or sound sequence.127This device is of great importance in oral literature: it serves to isolate unities within a larger discourse. 1 have found approx. 10 instances of ~ng-cornpsitionin verses that contain

similes and metaphors in my corpus. The function of all of these figures of speech is indexical: they serve to point to the message, that is, the poetic text, and call attention to it.128 According to some Indian theorists, the excellence of sound (sauiabdyam) was the main constituent of poetic beauty, the meaning of words being considered "something exteriof' (bdhy~rn).'~~ More than one-third of the similes in my corpus illustrate the figure of alliteration. A large number of these similes combine alliteration with assonance or repetition of phonetic sequences, as in the following

' ~ 7As

defined by Watkins (1995:34). Watkins l1995:29). la As EMm&a expiains in his K#vdioqk&ra 1.14, where he refers to other schools of Sanskrit poetics. For Bhnrnaha (as well as for Daq#in, and the successors of both), figures of sound and figures of meaning are equally important. An extreme example of the use of figures of sound occurs in MBh.7.50.32, the climactic line in Arjunais lament for his son Abhimanyu. This line does not contain any similes, but is incIuded in a passage in which the p t employs a Iarge number of similes, as well as several metaphors. The dramatic effect of this passage is enhanced by the figures of sound in this line* as well as the rhetorical figures in the rest of the Iment. The line in question reads: la

MBh.7.50.32cd ya& putrap na pdyUni yUy= ymasiXdanam 'If I do not see my son* I will go to Yma's dweiling (I will die).' Here we have repetition of the syllable ya/ya, which is also the first syllable of three of the six words in this Iine. We aiso have rhyme in two words* paeUmiydqw, which are hrther located in a metrical boundary and therefore emphasized. In a sort of mirror image, the vefb in the first piIda is preceded by its object, putram 'son** whereas the verb in the second pgda is folIowed by it, yamasd&mm 'Yma's dwelling.' Note &so the phonetic echo created by the two accusatives putrum -*. y u m d & m .

mh.6.Appndk 4.147 nSiay3rniki vegena viiyur ~ k q z nivaujasz '[&eta] destroyed [the army] vehementIy, just as t!he wind [destroys] the trees with violence.'

~h.3.112.11b vilterito vk$a ivav&Um& 'Trembling like a tree tossed by the wind.'

A number of similes (approx. 20) in which we find alliteration and other

figures of sound have become formulas. The following are some examples (statistics include variants):

MBh.6.65.33d [yuddharn] deviinii~&nayair iva *[A battle] like [that1 of the gods and the demons.' (approx. 15x1

MBh.6.49.9~ i&agmisrnapm'am '(A weapon) similar in touch to $aha's ~undeholt.'(approx. 1Ox)

MBh.6.1 f 3.48b meghz h a divakaram 'Just as clouds [cover] the sun.' (apprax. 15x)

MBh.6.45.58d gZv*

sftardita iva

'Like cows afflicted with cold.' (appmx. 5x)

In the first simile, the effect of the alliteration is reinforced by the repeated sequence of consonants (d-v-B,d-n-v), with reversal of the second and third consonants in ddnmair. In the second example, iakrdia~is~masparfum

'(a weapon) similar in touch to &kds

thunderbolt,' the syllable fa is repeated

three times. Further, the word that introduces the simileTsama 'similarv' also begins with a sibilant followed by the vowel a. Note that the syilable $a occurs both at the beginning and the end of this compound, as a sort of frame. The fact hat this simile is included in a long compound that occupies an entire psda (usudly the fourth p3da in a iloka) also calls attention to it. The eff'ect of this simile is much more striking than that of the variant indrdianisamasparidh (MBh.7.22.46, ins.)? where the word i d r u replaces iakru, the usual name of the gad in the epics. Other variantsT such as vujrdfa~isamaspariab, brahmadaqdusamaspariab? etc., are likewise devoid of the rich phonetic texture of the first simile. In the example that fo~lows,meghd iva divdkaram 'just as clouds [cover]

the sun,' the syllable va/vd is repeated twice. Further, the first part of the compound divd-karam echoes the comparative partick iva. In the last example, gdvah sltdrditd iva 'like cows afflicted with cold,' the phonetic echo produced by the repetition of the syllabks va @&ah ...iva) and td (~Ttdrditd)is reinforced by the vowel sequence i

-

8

-i -

8

-i-

a @dvab~ltdrdrd iva).

hother example of a formula that has a remarkable phonetic texture is the fallowing:

tad adbhutaxn ivabbvat

That pattle] kcame like [something] wonderful.'

In this brief formula? which contains just four words? we have phonetic echoes created by the reptition of syllables (fa? va/vd), parts of syllabks

(tudud-) and consonants (bh). The s i d e begins and ends with a dental occlusive and a vowel preceding or following it (tad ....abhavut), a small-scale ring-

composition. This is perhaps the single most kequent formula 1 have found in my corpus (over 3 0 0 ~ ) . Instances of similes that iIIustmte the employment of alliteration and phonetic echoes are abundant in Books 6 and 7 of the epic. In what foIlows, I will examine four of the most striking examples. The first instance occurs in MBh.6.44.48. It reads:

MBh.6.44.48 k e r n paiicatihqa Weua b h m b ~ a b h a/ Hjatem ma&Ebi%hurucchritena w a r a t h e /

babhau b h i q ~tadz rSjam5 cmdramB iva men@â // bWith [his] banner of silver and with a palm-tree with five stars raised on [his] great chariot, 0 Bull among the 3haratasTthe great-armed Bhigna looked then, 0 KingT like the moon with [Mount] Meru.'

This is the final aoka of the adhyiiya and, as is often the case in the passages 1 have examined, it is the most elaborate verse. The subject of the comparisonTBhisrna, is not mentioned until the last line, and the object of comparison, candramd iva meruoa 'like the moon with [Mount] MeruT3which occupies the very last pifda of this aokaTechoes the first word of the verseT k e t z ~ i . ~Both ~ ' words, mem@ and ketufid, show the same vowel sequence:

e

-u

8. FurtherTthese three lines are rich in phonetic figures, such as

alliteration (bhTfa) a d repetition of syllabks (fa, ma, rdja-), and even of parts of words ( m h d - ) . Moreover, in two instances, the aoka has to be read vertically in order to join adjectives with the nouns they qualify: kemd ... rdjatena,

mahdbdhur ...bhrjmas. The phonetic echoes created by the sequence of sounds in

13'

In the

text

established by the Critical Edition, but not in all manuscripts. Variants:

Ks candrum iva mrudga@b,

S mer~'cu~drummd yafhd.

the first word of this verse and in the last word of the simile serve as a sort of ring-composition. The second instance of elaborate combination of alliteration and repetition of phonetic sequences is found in a sloka that contains a comparison frequently employed by the epic poet, that of the combatants with clouds. This is a variation of a formula I will analyze in Chapter 4.

MBh.6.89.4 athainam <araVA&ena samantzt p a r y a V a y a n /

parVAtarp V m d h g r ~ b h i h