Manavikaran Alankar
Quick answer: Manavikaran alankar, the Hindi figure of personification: nature given human feeling and action. Paribhasha, Chhayavad examples, and exam identification.
Manavikaran alankar is the figure of speech in which non-human things, nature, objects, seasons, abstractions, are given human feelings, actions or form. The paribhasha runs: जहाँ जड़ प्रकृति या अमूर्त भावों पर मानवीय भावनाओं और क्रियाओं का आरोप किया जाए, वहाँ मानवीकरण अलंकार होता है। Manav means human, and manavikaran is literally humanisation: dawn wakes like a girl, the wind knocks at the door, hope sits quietly in a corner of the house. English-speaking readers know the device as personification.
Unlike sandeh or visheshokti, which arrive from the old Sanskrit treatises, manavikaran is counted among the adhunik or modern alankars of Hindi criticism. It rose to prominence with Chhayavad, the romantic movement of the early twentieth century, whose poets treated nature not as scenery but as a living companion. Because Chhayavad dominates school syllabi, manavikaran turns up constantly in exam questions on Prasad, Nirala, Pant and Mahadevi Varma, and it is one of the easiest alankars to identify once you know the single test.
The Paribhasha in Plain Words
The definition has two moving parts. There must be a non-human subject: a river, a season, the moon, a machine, or an abstraction like memory, night or the nation. And that subject must receive something specifically human: an action only people perform, an emotion only people feel, a social role only people hold, mother, bride, traveller, sentry.
The word आरोप, imposition, is doing quiet work in the paribhasha. The poet is not claiming the river literally sings; the human quality is deliberately imposed on it as a way of seeing. That is what separates manavikaran from myth or superstition. The device is a chosen lens, and both poet and reader know it, which is exactly why it can carry feeling without asking for belief.
How It Works
An original example: भोर ने खिड़की खटखटाई, और रात अपनी गठरी बाँधकर चुपचाप चल दी। Dawn knocks at the window; night ties up her bundle and quietly leaves. Knocking, packing and leaving are human acts, so the sentence has turned two times of day into two figures, a visitor arriving and a lodger departing. Instantly the daily rotation of the earth becomes a small domestic story with feelings attached: welcome for one figure, a faint ache for the other.
That transformation is the engine of the alankar. Humanising a thing lets the poet attach the entire grammar of human life to it: intention, mood, relationship, fate. A cold wind is a fact; a wind that wanders the lanes looking for a door left open is a character. Readers cannot help extending sympathy to characters, so manavikaran is finally a machine for generating emotion about things that could not otherwise receive it.
The verbs are usually where the humanity enters. Nouns can do it too, calling the Ganga a mother or death a traveller, but in most exam passages you will find the human verb first: the field laughs, the lamp keeps watch, the evening hesitates.
Manavikaran and the Chhayavad Poets
The four pillars of Chhayavad made this alankar their signature. Jaishankar Prasad opens a famous lyric by urging the night, pictured as a woman at the sky's well, to notice that her hour is over and dawn has come. Sumitranandan Pant, raised among Himalayan forests, wrote of hills and deodars as elders and kin. Nirala gave clouds and storms the voice of rebels, and Mahadevi Varma addressed lamps and dusk as fellow sufferers in poems that read like conversations.
This was more than technique; it was a worldview. Chhayavad reacted against dry didactic verse by insisting that the outer world and the inner world mirror each other, and manavikaran was the hinge between the two. When Pant asks the mountain a question or Mahadevi consoles the evening star, the poets are really mapping human loneliness and hope onto a landscape large enough to hold them. Critics of the time even called the movement the poetry of humanised nature, which tells you how central the device was.
Manavikaran vs Upma and Rupak
Students often confuse personification with comparison, so draw the line firmly. In upma, the human is a stated standard of likeness: the moon is like a bride's face. In rupak, the identification is asserted but still explicit: the moon is a bride. In manavikaran the human standard disappears into the thing itself, which simply behaves as a person: the moon draws her veil of cloud and looks away. No like, no is, just conduct.
A quick sorting method for exams: hunt for comparison words first. जैसा, सम, सी, के समान point to upma. Direct identification of one noun with another points to rupak. Neither present, but the non-human subject performing human action or feeling human emotion, points to manavikaran. The three often decorate the same stanza, so label each line, not the whole passage.
How to Identify It in an Exam
Apply the two-question test. Who or what is the subject of the line? If the answer is non-human, ask the second question: is it doing or feeling something only humans do or feel? Both answers in place, write मानवीकरण अलंकार and justify in one sentence: the poet has imposed a human action or emotion on a non-human subject, naming both the subject and the action.
Stay alert for ordinary verbs that are not truly human. A river running, a wind blowing, a fire spreading are literal, not personification, because these verbs belong to the things themselves. The alankar needs a verb or feeling that would be impossible without a mind: the river sulks, the wind gossips, the fire remembers. When in doubt, ask whether a science textbook could use the same sentence; if it could, there is no manavikaran in it.
Using Manavikaran in Your Own Poems
Personification is the most portable of all the figures in this glossary; it works identically in Hindi, Urdu, English and every language you might submit in. The danger is cliche, because the easy versions are worn smooth: weeping skies, angry seas, smiling flowers have carried too many poems already. The fix is specificity of role. Do not make the rain cry; make the rain a clerk who stamps every roof in the colony and misses one house. The stranger the human role, the fresher the humanisation.
One deeper craft point from the Chhayavad masters: the best manavikaran is really self-portrait at one remove. Choose the thing whose situation secretly matches your speaker's, then give it exactly the feelings the speaker cannot admit to directly. A poem where the last bus of the night is tired of carrying other people home says everything its speaker never says. Judges scoring emotion and creativity in a monthly contest tend to remember that indirection long after plainer confessions have blurred together.
What poets can take from this
- Apply the two-part test: non-human subject plus specifically human action or emotion.
- Check the verb; if a science textbook could use it literally, it is not manavikaran.
- Rule out upma and rupak first by scanning for जैसा, सम, सी and direct identification.
- Remember it is an adhunik alankar, associated above all with the Chhayavad poets.
- In your own poems, give the thing a precise human role, not just a generic emotion.
- Pick a subject whose situation mirrors your speaker's, and let it feel what they cannot say.
Try it yourself
Choose one unglamorous object in your home, a fan, a doormat, a leaking tap, and write a poem in which it has a full human occupation, a shift schedule and one private sorrow.
Questions
What is manavikaran alankar in simple words?
It is personification: treating a non-human thing, such as a season, river, object or abstract idea, as if it were a person with human feelings and actions. When a poet writes that dawn knocked at the window or the evening hesitated at the door, that is manavikaran.
What is the difference between manavikaran and upma?
Upma openly compares a thing to a human using words like जैसा or सम, keeping the two separate. Manavikaran removes the comparison entirely and lets the thing itself act or feel as a person. If the line says the moon is like a bride, that is upma; if the moon draws her veil and turns away, that is manavikaran.
Why is manavikaran called a modern alankar?
It does not appear in the classical Sanskrit lists and entered Hindi criticism in the twentieth century, largely through the Chhayavad movement, whose poets, including Prasad, Nirala, Pant and Mahadevi Varma, humanised nature constantly. Critics needed a name for the device, and manavikaran, humanisation, filled the gap.
By the Writory editorial team, reviewed by working poets. Updated September 2026.
Enter a Writory poetry contest
Enter the September contest and have your own poem read and scored. That first entry makes you a Writorian.