Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
Returning to the "Atma-Sharira" analogy of poetry, we look for an element that is external and decorative. A 'Hara' (necklace) is something one wears upon the body to increase beauty, but it is not an inseparable part of the person. In Sanskrit poetics, this role is assigned to the figures of speech.
Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
The term 'Alamkara' literally means 'that which does the work of ornamenting' (\(Alankriyate~anena~iti~alankarah\)). In the works of Mammata and Vishvanatha, Alamkaras are explicitly compared to 'Hara-divat' (like necklaces, etc.).
The specific verse from 'Sahityadarpana' says:
\(Upakurvanti~tam~santam~ye'ngadvarena~jatu~chit | Hara-divadalankaras-te'nupraso-pamadayah ||\)
Key points of the comparison:
1. External Nature: A person is still a person without a necklace. Similarly, a verse can have Rasa (and thus be poetry) even without a formal figure of speech. Alamkaras are 'Anitya' (optional/non-eternal).
2. Function: A necklace beautifies the neck (a limb of the body). Similarly, Alamkaras like Upama (Simile) or Anuprasa (Alliteration) beautify the 'limbs' of poetry, which are Shabda (word) and Artha (meaning).
3. Indirect Benefit to Rasa: While a necklace is on the neck, its purpose is to make the whole person look better. Similarly, Alamkaras reside in the words but their ultimate goal is to enhance the 'Soul' (Rasa).
Why other options are wrong:
- Rasah is the soul, not the ornament.
- Doshah are like physical defects (lameness), not ornaments.
- Gunah are like internal virtues (heroism), which are inseparable from the soul.
Step 4: Final Answer:
Alamkaras are considered to be like necklaces (Hara) in poetry. Thus, Option (A) is the correct answer.