https://ebooks.inflibnet.ac.

in/engp11/chapter/kuntaka-vakrokti-jivita/#:~:text=It%20sees
%20the%20poetic%20language,the%20language%20of%20the%20common.

Kuntaka is known as the originator of the Vakrokti School of Sanskrit literary theory.

Historically, he occupies a place between Anandavardhana and Abhinavagupta. Kuntaka

lived at a period when literary criticism in India was acquiring a great sophistication. Among

his contemporaries, his critical persuasions acquire a special significance. Vakrokti is a

theory of poetry which perceives poetry essentially in terms of the language of its
expression.

He took vakrokti concept/ (term) from Bhahamaha and made it broader than him. He states

that vakrokti is of six types. Vakrokti sees the poetic language as language of metaphor and

suggestive communication. He developed his theory of vakrokti deriving inspiration from the

dhvani theory. His theory helps greatly to practical criticism as an important aid. According

to him the broadest principle which can do justice to all the categories of literary theory

including dhvani is only vakrokti which might admit of innumerable varieties. Kuntanka‟s

work on beauty of the poem is noteworthy. He widely described different types of figures of

speech that are used in decorating the poem. He also highlights the uniqueness of the poet.

When great poets compose different literary works based on an identical theme, they are
each

seen to possess infinite individual beauty, each of it possessing distinctiveness from the

others.

Vakrokti: The Theory of Language – Explained in a Student-Friendly Tone (800 words)

The concept of Vakrokti is an important part of Indian literary theory and was introduced by
the Sanskrit scholar Kuntaka in his famous treatise Vakroktijivita. The term “Vakrokti” is
made up of two words—vakra meaning ‘crooked’ or ‘indirect’, and ukti meaning ‘speech’ or
‘expression’. So, it literally means “crooked speech” or “deviant expression”. In simple words,
Vakrokti refers to language that is not straightforward, but artistic, expressive, and
imaginative—language that stands out from the normal, everyday use of words. According
to Kuntaka, this is what gives poetry its life and beauty. He even calls Vakrokti the very “soul
of poetry”.

Kuntaka's theory was proposed as an alternative to Anandavardhana’s famous Dhvani

theory, which focused on the suggestiveness or implied meanings in poetry. While both
theories agree that poetic language carries hidden layers of meaning, Vakrokti focuses more
specifically on the stylistic and expressive aspects of language, rather than the deeper
implied meanings alone. Although Vakrokti may not be as broad in scope as Dhvani, it still
plays a very significant role in the understanding of poetic expression.

In Sanskrit poetics, language is seen as a combination of sabda (word/sound) and artha

(meaning). Poetry is not made from just words or meanings alone—it is an artistic blend of
both. But what makes this blend poetic is the unique way it is expressed. The beauty of
poetry comes from a special quality added to the language, something that makes it more
vibrant and expressive. This special quality could come from lakshana (secondary meanings),
alamkara (figures of speech), or guna (qualities of style and substance).

For example, lakshana refers to a situation where a word is used to suggest something
beyond its literal meaning. Alamkara focuses on the beauty of literary devices like
metaphors, similes, and personification, while also ensuring grammatical correctness and
musicality. Meanwhile, guna theory is concerned with both the quality of expression and
depth of meaning. In this way, Vakrokti theory draws attention to the fact that poetry is not
just about what is said but how it is said.

Kuntaka’s theory can be connected to several Western ideas about poetic language.
Aristotle, for instance, said that poetic language is inherently different from ordinary speech.
Later thinkers like E.M.W. Tillyard also supported this, claiming that poetry is always indirect
or oblique in nature. French poet Paul Valéry described poetic expression as being marked
by its “deviation” from the ordinary. This does not mean that poetic language is incorrect or
ungrammatical; rather, it follows the rules of grammar but still finds unique ways to express
thoughts and emotions. For example, in the line “Bangle sellers are we…”, Sarojini Naidu
inverts the usual sentence structure to emphasize “bangle sellers”, giving it poetic weight.
Similarly, Rabindranath Tagore once said that even though literature follows the rules of
grammar, it is still a thing of freedom and joy.

The Prague School linguist John Mukarovsky made a similar point when he described poetic
language as a "purposeful distortion" of normal speech. According to him, the uniqueness of
poetry lies in how it deliberately shifts from standard expression to catch the reader’s
attention or to better convey emotion. Russian critic Roman Jakobson even went so far as to
describe poetry as “organized violence committed on ordinary speech”. In short, poets bend
language not randomly, but with artistic purpose.

However, this “deviation” in poetry must be meaningful and not just random. Kuntaka
believes that when a poet uses language differently, it should be for a reason—it should
enhance beauty or meaning. For example, saying “The hill ate a mango” is deviant but
doesn’t make poetic sense, so it becomes laughable. On the other hand, poetic distortion,
when done right, creates delight.

In conclusion, the theory of Vakrokti celebrates the uniqueness and artistic potential of
language in poetry. It shows how poets can transform ordinary speech into something
beautiful and expressive. Even though it may not cover every aspect of poetry like
Anandavardhana’s Dhvani theory, it provides deep insight into the stylistic power of poetic
language. For students and lovers of literature, understanding Vakrokti can deepen
appreciation of how poets craft their verses—not just in what they say, but in how they say
it.

1. Varna-Vinyasa Vakrata (Phonetic Level / Sound Arrangement)

  Meaning: This type of vakrokti occurs at the sound level. It refers to the creative
arrangement of letters and sounds to create musicality or rhythm in poetry.

 How it works: It includes devices like alliteration (repeating consonants), assonance

(repeating vowels), and rhyme to make the line sound poetic.

 Example:

o “Love laughs at locksmiths” – Shakespeare

(Alliteration with the letter ‘L’ creates a rhythmic and musical effect.)

o “Break, break, break, / On thy cold grey stones, O Sea” – Tennyson

(Repetition of sounds like ‘b’ and long ‘o’ makes it melodious.)

2. Pada-Purvardha Vakrata (Lexical Level – First Part of the Word)

 Meaning: This type involves the use of creative words or expressions that are rich in
emotion or meaning. It relates to how individual words are chosen or modified.

 Includes:

o Rudhi (conventional expressions with emotional overtones)

o Upachara (transferred meaning or metaphor)

o Visheshaṇa (special adjectives)

o Paryaya (synonyms), Samvriti (innuendos), Vritti, Linga, and Kriya (gender or

verb usage).

 Examples:

o “Death lays his icy hands on kings” – Upachara Vakrata (Personifying death).

o “Blind mouths” – Milton, in Lycidas – (Visheshaṇa Vakrata: Using an adjective

in a shocking, ironic way for corrupt priests).

o “The starlight night is full of fire-folk” – Hopkins (Vritti Vakrata: Creative

compound word to describe stars).
3. Pada-Parardha Vakrata (Grammatical Level – End Part of the Word)

 Meaning: This type deals with grammatical elements like tense, number, gender,
person, and voice. The poet creatively alters these to add drama or focus.

 Includes:

o Kala (Tense) – Using present tense for past events (called Historic Present).

o Karaka (Case), Purusha (Person), Samkhya (Number), Linga (Gender),

Upagraha (Voice).

 Example:

o “Loud sounds the Axe, redoubling strokes on strokes...” – Pope

(The past is shown in the present for a dramatic effect – Kala Vakrata).

o “Our heart’s charity’s hearth’s fire...” – Hopkins

(Complex string of possessives creates intensity and poetic effect.)

4. Vakya Vakrata (Sentence Level)

 Meaning: This type occurs at the sentence level, where the structure or construction
of a sentence is twisted or rearranged to add style.

 Includes: All kinds of figures of speech or tropes, such as simile, metaphor, paradox,
hyperbole, etc.

 Examples:

o “My love is like a red, red rose” – Simile

o “The world is an unweeded garden” – Metaphor

o “Deep down, he’s really shallow” – Paradox

5. Prakarana Vakrata (Contextual or Thematic Level)

  Meaning: This involves creative deviation in the theme, context, or incidents chosen
in a literary work. It is seen in the plot or structure of a specific section.

 Example:

o The play within a play in Shakespeare’s Hamlet is a good example.

This structural innovation—called garbhanka in Sanskrit drama—is used to
reveal hidden truths.

6. Prabandha Vakrata (Compositional Level / Entire Work)

 Meaning: This is the highest level of vakrokti, where the entire composition—its
plot, structure, style, and theme—shows creative deviation.

 It shows: The poet’s genius in organizing the work in a unique, unusual, and effective
way.

 Example:

o Nabokov’s “Pale Fire” – A novel presented as a 999-line poem with a bizarre

commentary.
The entire structure is unique and cannot be boxed into a normal format.

Final Note:

Kuntaka believed that these six types were not fixed or exhaustive. A creative poet could use
any number of stylistic twists, depending on their genius. In essence, Vakrokti is about
imaginative deviation—the art of saying ordinary things in extraordinary ways.

Would you like a chart or visual to remember these six types easily?

Critical Note on Vakrokti

The concept of Vakrokti, introduced by the Sanskrit critic Kuntaka in his work Vakroktijivita,
holds a significant place in Indian literary theory. Literally meaning "crooked speech" or
"oblique expression", Vakrokti suggests that poetry is not about plain or direct language, but
about using language in a special, creative, and imaginative way. According to Kuntaka, the
essence or “life” (jivita) of poetry lies in its vakrokti—its deviation from ordinary usage. This
theory focuses on the expressive beauty of poetic language and considers its deviation from
regular speech as a source of aesthetic pleasure.

Kuntaka’s theory was seen as an alternative to Anandavardhana’s Dhvani theory, which

highlights suggestion (dhvani) as the soul of poetry. While Dhvani emphasizes the meaning
behind the words, Vakrokti shifts the focus to the form and style of the language used.
However, critics have pointed out that Vakrokti is not as comprehensive as Dhvani, since it
deals mainly with the surface level of expression, even though it still touches upon deeper
aspects of literary beauty.

What makes Vakrokti important is its clear emphasis on the artistic use of language. Kuntaka
believed that poetry comes alive when the poet twists or stylizes language, making it unique
and memorable. He classifies Vakrokti into six types, ranging from the sound level (varna
vinyasa vakrata) to the overall structure of a work (prabandha vakrata). These include
sound arrangement, choice of words, grammar, sentence construction, thematic structuring,
and full composition. Each of these types shows how poets can creatively shape language to
bring out emotional or aesthetic effects.

For example, at the phonetic level, poets use alliteration or rhythm to please the ear. At the
word level, poets might choose a striking or metaphorical expression instead of a plain one.
At the sentence level, the use of simile, metaphor, or irony adds beauty and depth. And at
the thematic level, deviations in plot or structure (like a play within a play) show innovation
and literary skill. All these variations come under Vakrokti.

What strengthens Kuntaka’s argument is that his theory finds parallels in Western literary
thought as well. For instance, Aristotle noticed a difference between poetic and ordinary
language. Modern critics like Tillyard, Paul Valéry, and Roman Jakobson also suggest that
poetic language is inherently different because it breaks away from common speech.
Jakobson even calls poetry “organized violence committed on ordinary speech,” which
echoes Kuntaka’s belief that poetry gains its power from its special use of language.

However, it is also important to note the limitations of Vakrokti. Since it focuses mainly on
the form or style, it does not fully explain how poetry can move, inspire, or convey profound
meaning beyond words. It pays less attention to the emotional, symbolic, or philosophical
aspects of poetry. Moreover, not all poetic greatness comes from language deviation alone;
sometimes simplicity and directness can be equally powerful.

Still, the Vakrokti theory has great value in understanding the stylistic richness of poetry. It
teaches us to appreciate how poets play with language—not just what they say, but how
they say it. It invites readers to notice the twists and turns of poetic expression that give a
work its unique flavor.

In conclusion, Kuntaka’s Vakrokti theory reminds us that poetry is an art of expression,

where language becomes more than just a tool for communication. Through carefully
crafted deviations, poets create beauty, emotion, and rhythm. Though not all-encompassing,
the theory is a valuable contribution to literary criticism, especially for its focus on the
aesthetics of language.

Kuntaka's theory of Vakrokti finds parallels in Western literary thought:

One of the key strengths of Kuntaka’s Vakrokti theory is that it is not limited to Indian
aesthetics alone. Its central idea—that poetry is a special, stylized form of language—finds
strong echoes in Western literary criticism. This universality makes Kuntaka’s insights
especially valuable and relevant even today. The theory’s emphasis on linguistic deviation or
oblique expression connects naturally with several important Western thinkers who also
recognized that poetic language is different from ordinary language.

Kuntaka argued that what makes poetry effective and beautiful is the way it deviates from
regular speech. He proposed that poetic language is not just informative or straightforward
—it is imaginative, layered, and stylized. This concept is closely paralleled by Aristotle, one
of the earliest Western literary critics. In his Poetics, Aristotle mentioned that metaphor is
the greatest thing in poetry and that poets must have a “gift of metaphor.” He acknowledged
that the beauty of poetry lies in its ability to say ordinary things in extraordinary ways. This
mirrors Kuntaka’s idea that Vakrokti—the creative twist in language—is the life force of
poetry.

The connection becomes even stronger in modern Western criticism. For instance, E.M.W.
Tillyard, a British literary critic, stated, “All poetry is more or less oblique: there is no direct
poetry.” This directly supports the Vakrokti idea that poetry must use a language that is
somehow ‘crooked’ or ‘indirect’ to achieve its artistic effect. Tillyard emphasizes that poets
express truth or emotion through a language that is intentionally suggestive or symbolic,
rather than plain.

Similarly, Paul Valéry, the French symbolist poet and critic, argued that the deviation of
expression is a hallmark of poetry. He did not mean ungrammatical or incorrect usage, but
rather expressions that are abnormal or unexpected—crafted to surprise or move the
reader. This directly resonates with Kuntaka’s views on how poetic language gains its charm
through its uniqueness and stylized construction.

Another powerful parallel comes from Roman Jakobson, the Russian Formalist and
structuralist linguist. He famously defined poetry as “organized violence committed on
ordinary speech.” This statement reflects the very core of Vakrokti: the idea that poets
purposely distort, rearrange, or elevate language to produce aesthetic effects. Jakobson’s
notion of foregrounding—the process of making language stand out—matches Kuntaka’s
understanding of Vakrokti as a purposeful deviation that highlights the poetic elements of a
text.

John Mukarovsky, from the Prague School, also made similar observations. He said that
poetic language is an aesthetically purposeful distortion of standard language. According to
him, poetry draws attention to its own language by deviating from everyday forms of
communication. This concept of artistic distortion is in perfect harmony with Kuntaka’s
classification of Vakrokti at various linguistic and structural levels—from sound and words to
sentence and theme.
In conclusion, the parallels between Kuntaka’s Vakrokti and Western critical ideas show that
the idea of poetic deviation is not culture-specific but a shared insight across traditions.
These similarities highlight the global relevance of Kuntaka’s theory and reinforce the idea
that poetic beauty often lies not in what is said, but in how it is said.

A Critical Analysis of Kuntaka’s Language of Poetry and Metaphor

Kuntaka, an influential figure in classical Indian literary theory, offers a unique perspective on
poetic language and its nuances in his work Vakrokti-jīvita (The Life of Poetic Language). His
theory, often referred to as Vakrokti Siddhānta, revolves around the idea that oblique or
deviant expression (vakratā) is the soul (jīva) of poetry. Unlike other theorists who focused
on the emotional or structural elements of literature, Kuntaka gave primacy to stylistic
deviation and linguistic creativity as the defining features of poetry. His exploration of
metaphor, diction, and stylistic beauty offers a sophisticated lens through which poetic
language can be understood and appreciated.

Kuntaka’s concept of vakrokti—literally “crooked speech” or "deviation in expression"—is

not merely about ornamentation or decorative language. Instead, it emphasizes the
uniqueness of poetic expression that sets it apart from ordinary language. According to him,
what distinguishes poetry from prose or regular communication is its capacity to surprise,
delight, and provoke thought through subtle and imaginative use of language. He identifies
six levels at which this deviation can occur: phonetic, lexical, grammatical, sentential,
contextual, and compositional. This layered understanding underscores his belief that poetic
beauty lies in how language is manipulated at every level of expression.

Metaphor (upamā) plays a central role in Kuntaka’s theory as one of the most potent forms
of vakrokti. For him, metaphor is not just a figure of speech but a creative linguistic act that
reveals the poet’s imaginative power. While earlier theorists like Bhāmaha or Daṇḍin also
discussed figures of speech, Kuntaka’s approach is more dynamic because he connects
metaphor directly with the individual genius of the poet. He sees metaphors not as rigid
comparisons but as transformative tools that elevate the ordinary into something
aesthetically rich and meaningful. In this way, poetic language becomes a vehicle for both
beauty and insight.
One of the strengths of Kuntaka’s approach lies in its emphasis on the individuality of the
poet. He believes that no two poets can express an idea in exactly the same way, and it is
this creative uniqueness that makes a work poetic. Language, in Kuntaka’s view, is not just a
medium but an active force in shaping the emotional and intellectual effect of poetry. This
idea aligns closely with modern literary theories that value style, authorial voice, and
linguistic experimentation.

However, Kuntaka’s framework is not without its limitations. His intense focus on stylistic
elements sometimes overlooks the thematic or emotional dimensions of poetry. For
example, theorists like Ānandavardhana and Abhinavagupta emphasized dhvani (suggestion)
and rasa (aesthetic emotion) as central to literary experience. Kuntaka, on the other hand,
does not fully engage with the emotional resonance or the deeper philosophical meanings
that a poem might carry. In this sense, his theory can seem somewhat narrow, especially
when analyzing poetry that is more emotionally charged or ideologically complex.

Yet, Kuntaka’s focus on linguistic creativity makes his theory particularly useful in analyzing
poems that thrive on innovation and clever wordplay. His ideas are especially relevant in
today’s context, where poets often experiment with language, breaking traditional forms
and playing with syntax and imagery. From modernist poets like T.S. Eliot to contemporary
spoken word artists, the importance of stylistic uniqueness echoes Kuntaka’s central claim
that poetic beauty lies in vakratā.

Furthermore, Kuntaka’s theory encourages close reading and attention to detail, making it a
valuable tool for students of literature. By emphasizing the significance of phonetic variation,
unusual word choice, and syntactic twists, it trains readers to appreciate the finer aspects of
poetic craftsmanship. It also reinforces the idea that meaning in poetry is not always direct
or obvious, and that part of the pleasure of reading lies in uncovering the subtle deviations
that give language its artistic power.

In conclusion, Kuntaka’s Language of Poetry and Metaphor presents a detailed and

thoughtful theory of poetic language centered around the concept of vakrokti. His belief that
stylistic deviation is the life of poetry highlights the importance of linguistic innovation and
individual expression. While his theory may not account for all dimensions of poetic
experience, especially emotional and philosophical depth, it remains a valuable contribution
to literary criticism. For students and scholars alike, Kuntaka’s insights continue to offer a
rich framework for understanding and appreciating the artistic potential of poetic language.

Function of Poetry According to Kuntaka

Kuntaka, an important figure in classical Sanskrit poetics, developed a unique theory of

poetry in his work Vakrokti-jīvita (The Life of Poetic Language). His primary focus was not on
the emotional impact or spiritual purpose of poetry, as seen in the works of theorists like
Ānandavardhana or Abhinavagupta, but rather on the stylistic beauty and artistic
expression that makes poetry distinct from ordinary language. According to Kuntaka, the
main function of poetry is to delight the reader through linguistic creativity and
imaginative expression, which he calls vakrokti—or “deviation in expression.”

Kuntaka believed that poetry functions primarily through its vakratā (obliqueness or
deviation), which allows the poet to express ideas in a novel, charming, and engaging way.
He defined poetry as language that is artistically twisted or stylized, giving rise to beauty and
aesthetic pleasure. This deviation is not random but purposeful—it enhances meaning,
enriches imagery, and reflects the poet’s personal style. In this way, the function of poetry is
closely tied to aesthetic enjoyment (kāntisambandha) rather than just conveying
information or moral lessons.

He identified six levels at which this deviation can occur:

1. Phonetic – creative use of sounds and alliteration,

2. Lexical – imaginative word choice,

3. Grammatical – unique usage of syntax or sentence structure,

4. Sentential – striking expressions within sentences,

5. Contextual – interesting arrangement of ideas,

6. Compositional – the overall organization of the poem.

Through these layers, the poet transforms even ordinary content into something
extraordinary and pleasurable. Hence, the primary function of poetry is to evoke wonder
and appreciation through linguistic excellence.

Unlike some other theorists who emphasized the moral or emotional functions of poetry,
Kuntaka’s theory is more formalist in nature. He does not deny that poetry can express
emotions or ethical values, but he insists that its true value lies in the beauty of expression,
not in the subject matter alone. In his view, two poets may write about the same topic, but
the one who uses more imaginative and elegant language will produce better poetry. This is
because, for Kuntaka, style is the soul of poetry.

Therefore, poetry functions as a mirror of the poet’s creativity, a space where language is
elevated through skillful expression. The joy that comes from reading or hearing poetry,
according to Kuntaka, is rooted in this linguistic ingenuity. It is not just what is said that
matters, but how it is said.

In summary, Kuntaka sees the function of poetry as the creation of aesthetic pleasure
through artful deviation from ordinary speech. His theory celebrates the stylistic richness of
language and places the poet’s creativity at the center of literary experience.

Figure of speeches

Kuntaka's Vakrojivita is a significant work in the realm of Sanskrit poetics, offering an in-
depth examination of various figures of speech (alankaras) and their role in enriching poetry.
Kuntaka’s theories are crucial to understanding how language can be manipulated to
enhance the beauty and emotional appeal of poetry. Among the many figures he discusses,
there are eight key figures of speech that are not only essential to grasp but also relatively
easier to learn for those studying classical rhetoric. These figures include Simile (Upama),
Metaphor (Rupaka), Hyperbole (Atisayokti), Euphemism (Prayayokti), Slesa (Equivocation),
Dipaka (Illuminator), Rasa (Essence of Poetic Emotion), and Vyatireka (Contrast). This essay
critically analyzes these figures of speech, providing an understanding of their function and
ease of application in poetry.

1. Simile (Upama)
The figure of Simile, known as Upama in Sanskrit, is one of the most accessible figures in
Kuntaka’s Vakrojivita. A simile makes a comparison between two distinct entities using a
word like "as" or "like" (in Sanskrit, iva). For example, comparing a lover's eyes to the "full
moon" creates a vivid image. Kuntaka highlights how similes offer clarity and strengthen
descriptions, making them a simple yet powerful tool. The ease of learning simile lies in its
direct comparison, where the poet explicitly draws connections between two elements,
making it easy for students to understand and apply. Simile’s use of familiar imagery creates
an immediate visual or emotional response, making it one of the most common and
straightforward devices in poetry.

2. Metaphor (Rupaka)

Metaphor or Rupaka is another figure that Kuntaka emphasizes for its richness and
complexity. Unlike similes, metaphors do not use connecting words like “as” or “like.”
Instead, a metaphor asserts that one thing is another, creating an implicit comparison. For
instance, in the metaphor "The poet is a light," the poet is directly identified with light,
implying enlightenment, wisdom, or clarity. Kuntaka explains that metaphors are powerful
because they engage the reader’s imagination and condense meaning into fewer words.
Learning metaphors involves understanding the subtleties of language, as they often require
a deeper level of abstraction. Despite this, metaphors are relatively easy to grasp once one
understands the concept of substitution—replacing one concept with another to create a
more striking or profound image.

3. Hyperbole (Atisayokti)

Hyperbole, or Atisayokti, is the figure of speech that involves exaggeration for effect.
Kuntaka observes that hyperbole is used to elevate the subject, often creating a sense of
grandeur or emotional intensity. For instance, saying “Her beauty surpasses the stars” is an
example of hyperbole that magnifies the subject’s qualities. The figure is easy to learn
because it taps into universal experiences of exaggeration—whether in everyday speech or
in literature. Hyperbole is particularly effective in expressing intense emotions or ideas and
serves to heighten the impact of a subject. The key to mastering hyperbole lies in
recognizing when and how to amplify characteristics for poetic effect, making it a highly
versatile tool in poetry.
4. Euphemism (Prayayokti)

Euphemism, or Prayayokti, involves substituting a mild or less direct expression for one that
may be harsh or offensive. Kuntaka emphasizes its importance in poetry because it softens
or beautifies the impact of certain subjects. For example, saying "He has passed away"
instead of "He is dead" is a euphemism that cushions the emotional weight. Euphemisms
are easy to learn because they align with natural speech habits. Most people instinctively
use euphemisms to avoid bluntness in conversation. In poetry, this figure allows poets to
convey delicate or complex subjects in a more nuanced way. It is a figure of speech that,
while simple, adds layers of meaning and emotion to poetic language.

5. Slesa (Equivocation)

Slesa or Equivocation is a more sophisticated figure of speech where a word or phrase has
two meanings, often creating a pun or double entendre. Kuntaka explains that slesa involves
a duality of interpretation, where one word or phrase can be understood in more than one
way, enriching the poetic expression. An example of slesa would be using the word "light" to
mean both "illumination" and "not heavy." While slesa can be complex, it is relatively easy to
learn because it relies on wordplay, a concept that is both fun and intuitive. Students can
practice creating slesa by finding words with multiple meanings and weaving them into their
poetry to create layers of meaning that reward careful reading.

6. Dipaka (Illuminator)

Dipaka, or Illuminator, is a figure of speech in which an object or concept indirectly

illuminates or highlights another subject, enhancing its aesthetic appeal. Kuntaka explains
that the illuminator could be a metaphor or an element that deepens the understanding of
the subject. For instance, comparing a powerful king to the sun makes the king appear even
greater by aligning him with the life-giving force of the sun. This figure is easy to grasp
because it follows a simple principle: by associating one subject with a more luminous or
powerful entity, the subject's qualities are amplified. The key to mastering dipaka is
recognizing how certain objects can elevate others through association.

7. Rasa (Essence of Poetic Emotion)

The concept of Rasa, or the essence of poetic emotion, is one of the central themes in
classical Indian poetics. According to Kuntaka, Rasa is the emotional flavor or mood that a
poem conveys to the reader, and figures of speech play a crucial role in evoking this
emotion. For example, a love poem might evoke a sense of sweetness or longing through its
use of metaphor, simile, or even euphemism. While Rasa itself is a more abstract concept, it
is relatively easy to understand once one recognizes that poetry is meant to stir emotions in
the reader. Learning to evoke Rasa involves carefully choosing words and figures that
resonate emotionally with the audience.

8. Vyatireka (Contrast)

Vyatireka, or Contrast, is a figure that highlights differences between two subjects to

emphasize their distinctiveness. Kuntaka suggests that contrast can be used to draw out the
unique qualities of each subject. For instance, describing a stormy sea as opposed to a calm
lake enhances the beauty and serenity of the lake. Vyatireka is easy to learn because it relies
on the basic principle of opposition—showing two things in their stark difference enhances
the effect of each. It is often used in poetry to heighten the beauty or significance of a
subject by juxtaposing it with its opposite.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the eight figures of speech outlined by Kuntaka in Vakrojivita—simile,

metaphor, hyperbole, euphemism, slesa, dipaka, rasa, and vyatireka—are essential tools in
the poet's arsenal. While some figures, like simile and hyperbole, are relatively simple to
understand and apply, others, like slesa and dipaka, require a more nuanced understanding
of language and meaning. Regardless of their complexity, these figures are fundamental in
enriching poetry and making it a medium of both emotional expression and intellectual
delight. For students of classical poetics, mastering these figures of speech not only
enhances their comprehension of Sanskrit poetry but also equips them with the tools to
create their own beautiful and evocative works.
The quote "Poetry is that word and sense together enshrined in a style revealing the artistic
creativity of the poet on the one hand and giving delight to the man of taste on the other"
reflects the essence of poetry as a blend of expression and artistry. Poetry, at its core, is not
only about the words used but also how these words are arranged to convey deeper
meanings and emotions. The "sense" refers to the underlying thoughts, ideas, or feelings
that the poet seeks to communicate, while the "word" encompasses the specific language,
diction, and structure chosen to express these ideas.

The mention of style emphasizes the importance of form, rhythm, meter, and other stylistic
elements that differentiate poetry from ordinary prose. It is in the poet’s creative use of
these elements that the true artistic nature of poetry comes to life. Style becomes a conduit
through which the poet’s imagination and skill are revealed, transforming simple words into
powerful expressions of thought and emotion.

Moreover, the phrase "giving delight to the man of taste" underscores poetry’s capacity to
offer aesthetic pleasure. The beauty of language, the precision of expression, and the
evocative power of poetry resonate with individuals who appreciate and value the craft of
writing. For those who have a refined sense of taste, the delight derived from poetry is not
merely from its meaning, but from its artistic merit—the sound of the words, their rhythm,
the vivid imagery, and the emotional depth they evoke.

In conclusion, poetry is a unique form of literary art that combines thought and expression
in a manner that both showcases the poet’s creativity and offers profound enjoyment to its
audience. It is this dual nature of poetry—its intellectual depth and its aesthetic pleasure—
that makes it a powerful and enduring form of expression.