388. 392 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

392 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

three varieties, वृत्तगन्धि (resembling verse), चूर्य and उत्कलिकाप्राय; qu is of various sorts, but he gives two divisions of both nu and पद्य into अनिबद्ध (unconnected) and निबद्ध (connected i. e. a प्रबन्ध) and declares that among complete works, the drama is supe- rior (सन्दर्भेषु दशरूपक श्रेयः' I. 3.30). हेमचन्द्र (8th भध्याय) divides काव्य into प्रेद््य and श्रव्य, and the former into पाठ्य and गेय and these into numerous varieties; श्रव्य is divided into महाकाव्य, आख्यायिका, कथा, चम्पू and अनिबद्ध. He further speaks of काव्यs composed in संस्कृत, प्राकृत, अपभ्रंश and ग्राम्यापभ्रश and regards भाख्यान, निदर्शन, प्रवहिका, मतल्लिका, मणिकुल्या, परिकथा, खएडकथा, सकल- कथा, उपकथा as varieties of कथा. Vide ध्व. pp. 174 ff and the लोचन thereon for several varieties of काव्य. 15 Dosas. This is an important topic in all works on Poetics. THE (I. 12) states that, not being a poet does not entail adharma or disease or punishment, but to be a bad poet is declared by the wise to be death itself. Similarly, the T- af (I. 7) observes that one should not make light of even an insignificent blemish in a poem and that even a handsome body may cause disgust (to the seer) on account of a single leprous spot. ara speaks of ten dosas (17. 88, GOS 16. 88, vol. II. p.331). Vide p.110 above. दएडी and भामह speaking of ten and eleven dosas rsepectively. But they make no scientific distinction between dosas of पद, of वाक्य, of पदार्थ and वाक्यार्थ. This is done by वामन. This distinction of the dosas of पद, वाक्य and अर्थ is accepted by मम्मट and other later writers. The doctrines of the ध्वन्यालोक that, in a composition in which rasa is to be evolved, शचिंत्य of various kinds has to be looked to (p. 178 ff) and that certain items that conflict (विरोधि) with the main rasa should be avoided (p. 199 ff), as they gave rise to the dosas of rasa. Vide मम्मट VII for रसदोषऽ. मम्मट refers (10th aa) to several dosas of alankāras and shows that they are included in the several dosas discussed by him in the 7th sar. One cannot avoid dosas altogether but there are degrees in dosas, the worst being rasadosas. The साहित्यदर्पण says (I. 2) 'सवथा निर्दोषस्यैकान्तमसम्भवात ।'. One has to remember the warni- ng of कुमारिल 'न चाप्यतीव कर्तव्यं दोषदृष्टिपरं मनः। दोषोप्यविद्यमानोपि तच्चि- त्तानां प्रकाशते।' q. by अ्जुनवर्मदेव on अरमरुशतक verse 72 and by the व्यक्तिविवेक. On dosas, vide Dr. Raghavan on 'Srngaraprakasa' vol. I. pp. 216-257, Dr. Krishnamoorthy on 'doctrine of dosas' in I. H. Q. vol. 20 pp."217-232.

THE INFLUENCE OF OTERS SASTRAS ON POETICS 393

16 The Influence of other Sastras on Poetics. The greatest influence has been exercised by grammar. The ्व. (pp. 47-48) makes it clear that the word ध्वनि was borrowed from the grammarians (vide p. 198 above प्रथमे हि &c.), because they employed the word ध्वनि that manifested the Sphota just as in a poem words manifest the suggested sense (व्यअकत्वसाम्याव). Fte is the all-pervading, eternal and indestructible word principle. ध्वनि (sounds and words) manifest it. The very first verse of the वाक्यपदीय is 'अनादिनिधनं ब्रक्म शब्दतत्वं यदक्षरम्। विवततऽर्थभावेन प्रक्रिया जगतो यतः ॥'. Letters and words are devices used to analyse the operations of our speech. When we utter a word the last letter carrying with it the samskāras of the letters previously uttered produces an idea in our mind and therefore it is called शब्द.1 नाद or ध्वनि is अभिव्यज्जक and स्फोट is अभिव्यंग्य. Vide लोचन p. 47 which quotes several verses from the वाक्यपदीय (e. g. I. 84, 103) and remarks 'व्यक्तशब्दानां तथा श्रयमाणा ये वर्णा नादशब्दवाच्या अन्त्यबुद्धिनिर्ग्राद्याः स्फोटाभिव्यअ्जकास्ते ध्वनिशब्दे- नोक्ता:' The स्फोट theory is very ancient. पाशिनि mentions a predecessor called स्फोटायन 'अवङ स्फोटायनस्य' (पा. VI. 1.123). The महाभाष्य tells us that the संग्रह of व्याडि principally dealt with the question whether शब्द was नित्य or कार्य 'संग्रहे प्राधान्येनैतत्परीक्षितम्, नित्यो वा स्यात् कार्यो वेति।' (vol. I. p. 6, Kielhorn). Vide Sankara's bhasya on Vedantasutra I. 3. 28. The भागवतपुराय XII. 6. 40 identifies स्फोट with ब्रह्म. The काव्यप्रकाश says: 'सक्केतित- श्वतुर्मेदो जात्यादिर्जातिरेव वा' II. p. 32. This is based upon the महाभाष्य (vol. I. p. 19) 'चतुष्टयी शब्दाना प्रवृत्तिः'. भामद VI. 21 also is based on this. The काव्यप्रकाश (II. p. 33) quotes the वाक्यपदीय 'नहि गौः स्वरूपे गौः &c.' and also वाक्यपदीय II. 217-218 (काव्यप्रकाश p. 63) 'संयोगो विप्रयोगश' as helping in the determination of the meaning of a word that has several significations. The sub- divisions of Upama have been based on grammatical rules by भामह (II. 33 वतिनापि क्रियासाम्यं), उद्धट (कारिका I. 15 ff), the काव्य- प्रकाश and साहित्यदर्पण, viz. upon पायिनि's sutras about क्यच् &c.

1. पदे न वर्णा विद्यन्ते वर्णेष्ववयवा इव। वाक्यात्पदानामत्यन्तं प्रविवेको न कश्चन॥ वाक्यपदीय I. 73; नादराहितबीजायामन्त्येन ध्वनिना सह। आवृत्तपरि- पाकार्याँ बुद्धौ शब्दोवधार्यते ॥ वाक्यपदीय I. 86. For 'the doctrine of Sphota,' vide Journal, Annamalai University, vol. I pp. 231- 240, vol. II pp.109-119, न्यायमज्जरी of जयन्तभट्ट (6th आहनिक), वाक्य- पदीय I and शब्दकौस्तुभ.