DUE DATE SLIP GOVT. COLLEGE, LIBRARY KOTA (Raj.) Students can retain library books only for two weeks at the most

BORROWER'S No DUE DTATE SIGNATURE

Published by Motilal Banarsıdass, Jawahar Nagar, Delhi, Ashok Rajpath, Patna Chowl, P B 75, Varanast

¢ 1969 Price : Rs. 35 00

( vi )

6 THE INTER-RELATION OF THE KAVI AND THE SAHRDAYA IN SANSKRIT LITERARY CRITICISM Shn V. Venkatachalam N.A., SIROMANI. Head of the Department of Senskrit, V'ikram Unmernty, 35

7 BLUSHING A MISSING-LINK IN SANSKRIT LITERATURE AND POETICS Dr. R S Jaitly, M.A , PH D Lecturer in Sanskrit, Rajasthan Umcersity, Farpur 51

8 A SYNTHESIS OF THE DHV INYABHAVAV ADINS AND THE DHV ANLN \DINS Dr. D N Shulla, MA, PHD, D LIFT Sahilyacarya, Kasya-Tittha, Professor & Head of the Department of Sanskrit, Punjab Umrersity, Chandigarh. 67

9 VAKROKTI AND LITER ARY CRITICISM Dr (Mrs ) Hemalata R Tatpati, M A., PHD Depertment of Sanskrit, Karnatak Unitersity, Dhark er. 84

1O AN EXPOSITION OF THE RAS-THEORY IN THE RASAA \UMUDI OF SRIKANTH\ Dr A. N Jani, M.A , PHD, D. LITT. Professor and Head of the Departrent of Sanskril, Mf S. Umteinly, Barods. 92

11 CONCEPT OF RASA IN THE BHATTIKAVYA Dr Satya Pal Narang, M.A, PHI D Raras College, Deln 98

12 BHAVA IN SANSKRIT POETICS A HISTORIETTE Shri Basant Jaitly, N.A Defartrest of Sanskrit, Rayasttan Umisersty, Ja fur 102

'3 SOMF OISERVATIONS ON THE DEFINITION OF POETRY Dr T.G Mainkar, N.A , PH D, D. LITT. Prefesor end Hrad of th Depattmert of Seasint, Unerit of Drlla 114

( vih )

2t CONTRIBUTION OF THE VAISVAVA R4SA SASTRA TO SANSKRIT POETICS Shn Raghunath Sharma, M A Lectuart tn Sansnt, School of Correspordmet Courses and Contintring Edacation, Urtrersity of Delhn 195

22 DHVANI AS THE MEETIAG-POINT OF ALL PRINCI. PLES OF SANSKRIT LITERARY THEORY Dr. K. Krishnamoorthy, M.A , BT , PH D Professor and Head of the Depertment of Senskrit, Komatak Umeernty, Dharwar 201

23 OBSERVATIONS ON SOVE ELEMENTS OF SANSKRIT CRITICISM Shn L.L. Joshi, H A Formerly Chairman of the Rajasthan Publte Sattee Comrssien, Aymer 209

24 अलक्कारस्वरूप विवेचनम् ड० ब्रह्मानन्द शर्मा, एम ए., पी एच. डी. अध्यक्ष, सस्वृत्त विभाग, गवर्नमेट वॉलेज, अजमेर 212

25 संस्टृतसमीक्षाशास्त्र और हिन्दी-आलोचना ग. उदयभानुसिंह, एम. ए (हिन्दी, सरवृ त) पीएच डो., डी. लिट्. हिन्दी विभाग, दिल्ली विर्वविद्यालय 219

प्राच्य मोर पाहचात्य काव्यशास्त्र में विम्यसिद्धान्त हा. रामगोपाल शर्मा 'दिनेर', एम ए-(हिन्दी, मम्न), पीएच डी. व्लास्चाना, हिन्दी विभाग, उदयपुर वित्वविद्यालय 235

27 भी मुरबनदाम स्वामी, एम. ए, बाचानं अध्यक्ष, मस्टृन विभाग, जोपपुर वित्वविद्ालय 247

( xü )

summed up and edited without leaving out any important point of fact or view, was generally through the medium of the paper; however, m cases of exceptions it has been translated in the language of the paper and a note (tr ) to this effect has been given at the end of cach such case. The Semmar was acclaimed a grand success academi- cally and organisationally. This was so due to enlightened participation and active co-operation of eminent Professors and scholars of Sanskrit, Engush and Hind Academic success was due mamly to the General President of the Seminar, Dr. K. C Pandey, to the Chaitmen of its Sessions : Dt. P L. Bhargava, Dr R $ Tnpathu, Dr A P. Mishra and Dr. A. N. Jant, to Shn Bhim Sen who presided over the General Lecture delivered by Dr K C. Pandey, and to Shn Laxmi Lal Josh who was in the Chair at the concluding session I am deeply and most sinterely grateful to them I should not forget to express my gratitude to my collegues m the Departmnt of Sansknt: Shri V. R. Nagar, Shri M C Pathal, and Dr G C. Tripath: ( who also prepared draft of the discussion on the papers), who toiled bravely and unceasingly for orgamsing the seminar. I am equally thankful to Dr K.L Sharma, Shn V. C. Shrivastav, Shn B. L Samdam and Shri S N Joshi of the Department of English, to ShnD. N. Chaturvedi, Department of Geography, Head of the Department of Geology, to Shm Nadmurti, Department of Music, and to my Post-gi u uate students, and Restarch Scholars, Shri Bihari Lai Jain and Shn G. S. Purohit, for their enthusiastically active help in doing all sorts of jobs, During my long stay in Delhi in May and June, 1969, to see the book published I enjoyed rich hospitality of my publishers M/s Motlal Banarsidass and benefited from inspiring association with Lala Shri Sundarlal Jain and smiling and affectionate company of Shn Shantilal Jain and his wife Smt Lilavati Jam I can hardly pay back my debt of gratitude to them and theirs, more particularly to Shri Prakash and Smt. Anuradha. Credit for possibly correct printing is shared by Shri Jagdish Lal Shastri who spared no pains in cofreeting the proofs I am sincerely thankful to bim and to Shri M. R. Suri, energetic Manager of the Press, and

( mi )

Supreme is the porie priiple, namely, the poct-critic, which creates novel objeet without operation of causal law, renders the stone-like world soft and soothing with its rest and lights it through the flash of imagination and creative self-expression.

स्फरन्तमादेपु पदेव केवलम्। पवाद्िरङ्ग: छृतरोमविकियँ- जंनस्य तूष्णो भवतोग्यम्ञ्जलि:।। [Vipikā]

Beyond reach of words is the meaning of a poet, which bristles in words brimming with sentiment; Salutations to him (the entic) who keeps silence while his limbs eloquently express the meaning through horripilated Limbs.

सरस्वती भृतिमह्तां महीयताम् । [Kālidasa in the Sakuntala]

Let the words of the Icarned flourish !

2 Principles of Literary Critiasm in Sanskrit

all recall what MaCaulay once observed . "As sctence adrences, pertry dechines'. The age of epics is past We may find in modern times a near-epic like Testament of Beauty, but it will be a miracle if an epic like 'Mahabharata', 'Ramayana' or 'Paradise Lost' were to be now composed When humanity was young and its sense of wonder was not blunted by science, imagination was more active and heated to produce great epics. 4 Tale again our atuitude to tragedies I have no precise informauion if before the Greeks, tragedies were wrtten Bharata's Natya-veda ruled them out It is interesting to note that even after the Grecks introduced tragedies, Bharata's view found support in the West. There is a fine passage in Bacon which has a bearing on this point "The principal modifi- cation that history undergoes when dramatised by Shakespcare are due to the tendency to idealisation which forms the great distinction between poetry and history" Bacon calls poetry 'feigned' history and well remarks that 'the use of this feigned history has been to give some satisfaction to the mind of man mn those points wherem the nature of things doeth deny it, the world being mn proportion mfenior to the soul, by reason whercof there is agreeable to the spirit of man a more ample greatness, a more exact goodness and more absolute vaniety, than can be found in the nature of tungs The: fore, because the acts or events of true history have not thei magnitude which satisfies the mind of man, poctry feigneth auts and events greater and more heroical; because true history propoundeth the successes and issues of actions not so agrecable to the merits of tirtue and vice, therefore pocsy feigneth them more just in retribution and more according to revealed providence, because true history representeth actions and events more ordinary and less inter- changed, therefore poesy endueth them with more rareness and more unexpeeted and alternative variauion; so as it appeareth that pocsy serveth and confereth to magnanimity, morality and delectation. And therefore, it (poetry) was ever thought to have some participation of divineness, beeause it doeth raise and ereet the mind by submitting the show of things to the desires of the mind, whereas reason docth buclle and bow the mind unto the nature of things." 5 In early dramatic literature we were transported to some setting far-removed from reality-a sort of ideal, imaginary

4 Principles of Laterar Critiism in Sansknt

8 Lastly, there is the tume-worn question of the objective -the purpose of literature poetic, dramatic or prose Docs Art exist for the sake of Art only or should it have a didactic aim ? Should literature depict and reflect oll what one sees in the contemporary society, or should it adopt ways to correct and remove the evils and at least rse above them ? What docs Lterary criticism say about the wriungs of D H Lawrence ? 9 Criticism is often rendered by the word Tika. But today we do not limit literary erucism to only Mallinathi Tika. We rather have to keep to the expanded meaning in which Bradlay's 'Shalespearean Tragedies' was wntten Ghata-patadı discussion is indeed helpful, a close study of Mammata's Kavya- prakata is certainlv delightful Nevertheless a search for literary principles which govern literature of manv countnes, many languages and many ages, is an exciting adventure.

6 Principtes of Literary Criticism in Senskrit

and peetry of these two great movements of India, namely Jainism and Buddhism, were composed in Sansknt. Even the faith of Sillusm, Brahmo Samaj, Arya Samaj and so on was expressed through this language of immortalty, precision, and sanctity Sansknit has played effecuvely its role of understanding new movements of intellect and gning them a composed, graphic and classical expression. It has been thus a repostory of all expressions of Indian consciousness It could achieve this magnficent result by honouring the sentiments of the linguisuic temper of the pcople Like Dandin, Ananda-Vardhana, Mammața, and Rupagosvamin of the past, the modern scholars of Sansknt criticism, owe a responsibility to this sensible tradition and thus bring under their analyuical Len the literature of con- temporary India Non-Sanskrit criucs of contemporary literature of India which is imbued with modern sensibility, complam that the prinerples of literary cnticism enshrined in old sanskrit texts, though sacred yet largely ambiguous and unmtellgible, are mnadequate and even ivald to evaluate the new literary cons- cousness. They argue that an ultimate sense of desparr, help- lessness and alineation that permeats the creatre writing of today cannot be properly evaluated by the canons of enticism wluch are largely based on a philosophy of ultimate hope and a vision of the quieuiude. The philosophy of Absolute and a religious morality sancuoned by Smrtis, w'ach provide a broad frameworl for the lterary criticism in S ueknt have no relauon with the modern uterature that has ost fath in the absolute and has discovered a new sense of morality. In this world of relatrvity absolute has no place. However, the contemporary critics of alavta, alahani and what not, have not formulated so far any objective principles for the judgment of modern litera- ture, which could be acceptable to all concerned Interpre- tations and enuque of old prineiples don't satisfy them. Strong impact of science & technology has shrunk the world and brought our contact with the moon. Change of social and economic forces has brought about a new structure of morality; fanth in the old order of things, thoughts and patterns stands mutilated. Modern stagc of the world has no room for outworn plays of old characters New literary consciousness needs its under- standing and critical evaluauion in its own contemt In the

SEVEN PRINCIPLES OF LITERARY CRITICISM

(General President's Address)

Dr K C Pander

It is customan for the prestdent of a Seminar to speak on the subject, on which it is held I shall, therefore, confine myself to a Bird's-eye view of the subject and leave the rest for the learned specialist, who can deal with it with an mtmacy of Lnowledge and expert touch, whtch I cannot hope to emulate In the course of my summary I shall deal with - (1) Meaning of the principles of hterary criticism (n) Seven principles of literary cnticism (m) The relation of the first six principles to the seventh. (1v) Conclusion

(1) Meanirg of Literary Criluzsm

Cnticism is the judgement on the furm of a literary work, saying that it causes certain experience, has a certain effcet on the mind, and that this experience i due to special pecular features of the literary piece. From the point of view of the critic, Pricples mean the essential elements which determine a result From the point of view of the producer of a literary piece, principles are the laws which have to be followed in pro- ducing a worl of art Thus 'principles of literary criticism' means the essential elements, present in a literary piece, which form the basis of judgement that a critic pronounces, whether it is good or bad, according as they produce a certain effect on his mind, ie cause a certain expenience in him Literary critieim is an objecue and analyuical approach to poetry It is based on certain principles, which have been dascovered through close analy tical study of hterary worls The artistie medium of poetic presentation is articulate sound The

10 Prnciptes of Literery Crificism in Sanskrit

(u) Secen Prinnples of Literary Critirism

There are seven essential elements or principles which the analytical approach to poctry has revealed. (i) the charac- teristic (Lal sana), (nt) embellishment (Alankara), (ii) quality (Guna), (Iv) defect (Dosa), (v) style (Rit), (vi) suggestion (Dhvam), (v) aesthetre configuration (Rasa).

THE CHARACTERISTIC (LAKSANA)

If we confine ourselves to the available literature, we may say that the idea of the characteristic marks of poetry first arose in the mind of Bharata. To him, they are disunct from embell- shments, figures of speech or Alankaras. While the former are in the body itself, like slenderness of waist or plumpness of breasts, the latter are external additions, like ncchlace and bracelet. The conception is based on the analogy of lines in the shape of a lotus, flag, or disc, on palm or sole of foot, which are to a palmist unmistakable marks of greatness of the man (Mahapurusalalsana ) and because of which he can recognize the man as such even in the absence of all external parapher- nalia Bharata definttely distingwishes thirty-six such marks, adding that there are many more which a close analytical study can reveal Some of the important ones among them are : compactness, excellence, logicalty and wit. His pupil, Kohala, and followers discovered more. King Bhoja traced out many more and in his Sarasvati-Kanthabharana declared them to be sixtyfour, !

II. ALANKARA OR EMBELLISHMENT

The analytical approach to literary art was made from two points of view, that of the dramaturgist and that of the poetician The former distingusished between characteristic and embellshment. And Bharata admitted only four embellnh- ments or figures of speech, though he menuioned thirty-six characteristics as stated above. The poetician, however, abolshed this distincton, holding that a marl is a marl whether in the body, hike lines in the palm, or added to it, lile a badge. Thus Bhamaha (600 A.D )

12 Principles of Literar Critiaum in Sansbrit

III QUALITY (Guna) Quality belongs to a body, a substance. Words and meanings constitute the body of poetry (Sabdarthau sahitan Kavyam). Poctic qualties inhere in the t body of poetry much as heat inheres in fire There is a diffe- rence of opinion about the number, functions, and relation of the qualities Bharata admitted ten and recognized them to be means of presenting Rasa . (1) sweetness (Madhurya) (11) forcefulness (Ojas), (m1) perspictuty (Prasada)-such a clarity in thought and expression as leads to the arousal of unexpressed adeas, (rv) the pun (Slesa), (v) smoothness (Samadhi)-proper adjustment of ascent (high-flown language) and descent (simple language ), (v) magnificence (Udarata)- fanciful grouping of words, (vn) clearness of meaning (Artha- vyalu), (vn) umformity (Samata )-sameness of style, (ux) softness (Saulumarva) absence of harshness, (<) pohsh (Kanh )-bnghtness of style Bhamaha accepted the first three only The reason 1s obvious Some of them can be clatsed as verbal figures of speech the pun, for instance, others may be looked upon as mere absences of defects softness and polish, for instance, which consist respecuely in the mere absence of harshness and vulganty, both well-recognized defects As an exponent of the view that the embellishment, the distorted utterance (Vakrokti) is such a chare-tenstic (Lalsana) as gives sufli- ciency to a composition to be recognized as poctrc, he subsumed many of the above quahues under embellishment. Vamana (Eighth century A D.) denied that the poette embellishments are of primary importance, held that poetry is like a picture, and asserted that the comparative importance of embellish- ments and qualties in it is the same respectively as that of paits and lines in a picture. Just as the beauty of a picture depends on the lines, of which the sketch is made, while paints simply enhance it, so the beauty of a poctic production depends upon the poeue qualities, and embellishments simply enhance it. Accordingly he accepted all the ten qualities mentioned by Bharata. Ananda Vardhana (Ninth century A.D.) realized the force of the argumeht against the acceptance of the ten quali- tes, asserted that the distinetion between qualities and figures of specch is, that though both add to the charm of poetie com-

14 Prineiptes of Litrrary Critium in Sanskril Pradesh, and Gujarat, and, named after them, called Vaidarbhi, Gaudiya, Pafcali, and Lāți (1) Vaidarbhi is characterised by sweetness, abounds in sounds, is swcet to the ear, and has very few or no compounds (u) The characteristie of the Gaudiya is presentation of a heroic disposition mn the forceful sounds an long compounds and alliterations. (m) Pancali is matked by the use of natural sounds, and by fewer and smaller compounds than are found in Gaudiya (n ) Lati is simply a mixture of the two styles, Vaidarbhi and Pafcali Vamana studied the styles exclusively from the pomt of vew of the qualities He found Vaidarbhi, to posess all the ten, Gaudiya only two, forcefulness and bnlhance, and Pancali also only two, sweetness and tenderness He raised the question, 'what is the soul of poetry ?' the first tumne and declared that style is the soul of poetry (Ritratma Lavvasya) For a proper understanding of his analyas of styles it is im- portant to take into account his wider conceptions of qualities, which include even the presentation of Rasa, eg, brilliance (Kāntı) DIVERGENCE EXPLAINED Abhmnavagupta noted the divergence of views about the characteristic, embellishment, and qualty, referred to in the preceding sections, and conse- quently asserted that it is impotable to draw a very clear line of demarcation among them The distinction which Bharata drew, however, is based on the analytical study of the process of the externalization of poetie vision, as well as of that of apprchension That it has an educational value is assumed, because of its utility in educating a would-be-poet as regards the steps, by which he should proceed in creating a work of art and a connoisseur as regards the various elements which he ought to take mnto consideration in judging a worl of art. Abhinavagupta attmpts to show the mutual relation and comparative importance of these clements by analogy with an architectural work The characteristcs are like walls in the absence of which no architectural work can have being. Qualities are like smooth plaster, and embellishments ot figures of specch are like painting, drawn on the smooth sur- facc. The defeets may belong to any of the above three And - style is nothing but the manner of organizing matter in such a way as to give due place to the qualiues and embellishments.

16 Prineiples of Literary criticum in Sanshnt

constituents, it is not a mere jumble. The precise nature of the relation of the constituents is concerved on the analosy of a juice that an expert cook prepares by putting together in due proporton various things of distinet tastes, sweet, bitter, astrin- gent, sour, and taltish, in water, cooling them properl, and then filtering them The analogy imphes that the constatuents of the aestheuc configuration have to be well refined, they have to be in nght proportion and have to be so related that thev present a umty which has an aesthetie value, diunet from that of each constituent separately It means that the aesthetic cxperience at the emotive level, is not the expenence of a bauc emotion in isolation from other constituents of the configura- tion, but in harmomous umon with them, and that it is poctic genius alone which can conceive such a configuration and present it in such predominantly suggestive fanguage that a connoisseur can get the same expenience from it as that presented by the poet.

(nt) Relation end Comparattee Importanee of the Seren Principles of Lattrary Cnttrum

The relation of the first fve Laksana, Alankara, Guna, Dosa and Rit has been poited out on the basis of analogy of werl of Architecture in an carler section: the four meanings of the word 'Dhvan have been given, two meanings of the word 'Rasa' have been referred to; and words and meanings have been declared to constitute the '-ody of a literary picce. Lalsana, Alankara, Guna and Dosa are all related to the body, which is made up of words and meanings; and style is nothing but mode of utilising them so as to present a poctic vision cffectively. Dhvani, in the sense of that from which the sug- gested meaning arises, 15 nothing more than the body ofa poetic work, because it is nothing more than word and meaning; and Dhvani, in the sense of that which can never be presented bv word primarily, secondarily, implicauvels, but can only be suggested, 15 nothing more than Raca, which is recognised in Indian tradition to be the soul of poetry and, therefore, mnst important of all of them The relation of the six cuential elements of poetry to the last, the Rata, is similar to that of the body, which is well ornamented, posesses exeellent qualitics

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE SANSKRIT AND THE GREEK DRAMATIC THEORY

Dr P L Bhargoza

The art of dramatic composition and representation has been practised in India and Greece since very ancient times and a companson of the dramatc theory of the two countries has often attracted the attention of scholars Yet there are a number of points which call for a fresh apprajsal The autho- nty for the Greek dramatic theory is the Poetics of Aristotle, whercas for the treatment of Indian dramaturgy three works stand pre-cminent viz the Natyasastra, ascribed to Bharata, the Dasarupala of Dhananjaya and the Sahitya Darpana of Viśvanatha, A comparison of the two dramatic theories shows that though the scope of Aristotle is much narrower than that of Bharata and his successors, the fundamentals of the two throries show a remarkable agreement, despite equally remarlable differences in certain details Aristotle has mentioned only two types of drama viz. the Tragedy and the Comedy. According to the Natyasastra (Ch XX) there are ten types of drama The tragedy of Aristotle as we shall show later ias much in common with the Natala and the Prakarana of Brarata, while the one-act plays called Vyayoga and Utsrstikanka agree with the definition of tragedy in a still greater measure. As for Aristotle's comedy it corresponds to the Prahasana and Bhana of Bharata. The 'other types mentoned by Bharata have no parallel in Aristotle. Coming to the definition of drama, Aristotle, strangely chough, regards not only tragedy and comedy but also epic and other Linds of poetry as well as music as modes of imitation 1 The means and manner of imitation differs in different arts but the objects which the imitator represents are actions." The Natyasastra (Ch I) defines the drama alone as imitation of

I Anstotle on the Art of Portry transtated by Ingram Brwater, p 13- 2 Anstotte, P 25

20 Principtes of Litereny Criticism in Senstrit

of junctures which carry cach of the stages of the action to its natural close. They are the mukha or opening, pratimukha or progression, garbha or development, vimaria or pause and nirvahana or conclusion (N. S Ch. XXI) As regards unity of time Arstotle says: Tragedy endea- vours to Leep as far as possible within a single circuit of the sun or something near that 1 Bharata, however, wisely limits the unity of tumne to indrrdual acts. Says he, "An act should cover events that can take place mn the course of a single day." (N S XX, 23) But it was not considered necessary by him that act should follow act without interval, on the contrary anything upto a year was allowed to intervene between the action of one act and that of the next. To reveal to the audi- ence the events dunng such intervals the Natvasastra (Chapter, XXI) gives a choice of five scenes of mtroduction. As for the unity of place Anstotle hardly mentions it. He merely says that tragedy cannot represent actions which happen simultancoush tn diferent places This statement is applcable to all dramas, be they written in Greek or Sanskrit. According to Aristotle the first essential of a tragedy is plot. It is defined by him as the combination of the incidents of the story and regarded as the most imporiant element of the drama ? It can be either simple or complex. It is simple when the change in the hero's fortune takes place without peripety of discoyery and complex when it involves one or the other. A peripety is the change from one state of thing to its opposite, while a discovery is a change from ignorance to knowledge." The second dlement consists of the characters of agents repfe- sented who must be either abore our own level of goodness, or bencath it or just as we are. Third comes the rlemmt of theught i.c. the power of saying what is appropriate to the occasion." Fourth among the hterery deets is the diction of the personages. The fifth clement is song trhch if the greatest of the pleasurable accessorics of Tragedy." The last

Aristode p. 31 Anstotlc p 35 3+ Anstoue pp. 46-47 4. Anstotle p 26 Anstoue p 58 Artote p 39 7. Anstoue p 39

22 Princples of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit

the costumier alone in the Natyafastra of Bharata. Dresses and male-up constitute only one of the four elements of his- triomc representation, the other three being that by gestures, that by words and that by manifestation of involuntary states like tears, tremor ete Bharata gres elaborate description of these four elements of the spectacle. Not only this, Bharata gives interesting rules about the construction of the play-house and mentions the various conventions whch enable the actors to surmount difficultes inseparable from the dramauie form He deserves high praise for his sense of decency in prohibiting certain acts Thus he says . (N S. XXIV, 292-95) No kiss or embrace or any other pnvate acts should be presented on the stage As a Nataka is to be witnessed by the father and the son, the mother-in-law and the daughter-in-law all situng together these acts should be carefully avoided. The most important object of the drama according to Bharata and indeed all Indian writers is to evoke rasa or sentiment in the readers or spectators According to the Natyasastra (Chapter VI) sentunent is produced from the umion of the determinants, or causes, which give rse to an emotion, the consequents or external manifestation of emotion and the transitory feclings There are cight sentiments which are reducible to four according to Bharata (N. S Ch VI) Two of these are thecrotic an the heroic sentiments. About the other two Bharata seeuns to have erred. The entire Sanskrit dramatic literature pro des proof of the fact that the most important sentiments after the two enumerated above are the patheue and the comie In fact the pathetie and the comic are the predominant sentiments in two of the ten types of drama viz the utsrstikanla and the prahasana respectively. The question which naturally comes to the mind while making a comparative study of the Indian and Greek dramauic theory is whether there is anything corresponding to rasa in the Greek dramatic theory. The answer must be given in the affirmative The very definition of tragedy given by Anstotle lays emphasis on the arousing of the sentiment of pity or what is called Laruna rasa by Indian authors of poctics This is what Arisiotle says :A tragedy is the imitation of an action that is serious and also as having magmtude complete in itself; in language with pleasureable accescones, each kind brought

2 Prnriptes of Literar Cntiasm in Sensint

the Greek drama viz characters and plot and see in what cate- gonies the Indian dramas fall according to Aristotle's views. It will be scen that judging from what Aristotle says about these two elements in the tragedy and the comedy respectively the best Indian dramas are certainly not comedes as they have been hitherto called but tragedies pure and simple, while the only types of Indian play which can be gien the designation of comedy are the Prahasana and the Bhana As regards the characters of the tragedy Anstotle lays down that tragedy is an rnitation of personages better than the ordinary man. In the Sanskrit drama also the chief characters are supposed to be better than the ordmary man, barnng the characters of the Prahasana and the Bhana Let us now hear what Anstotle has to say about the plot of the tragedy. "In a perfect plot", says Anstotle, `the change m the hero's fortunes must be not from misery to happiness but on the contrary from happiness to misery and the cause of it must be not mn any depravity, but i some great error on his part."1 As for the tragie deed which brings about a change in the hero's fortunes from happmness to misery Aristode says: "When enemy does it on enemy there is nothing to move us to pity and the same is true when the parties are mdifferent to one another. Whenever the tragic deed, however, is done within +h family-when murder or the hle is done or meditated by wother on brother, by son on father, by mother on son, or son on mother-these are the situations the poct should seek afier ...... The deed of horror may fe done by the deer Lnowingly and consciously .... or he may do it, but in ignorance of his relationship and discover that afterwards .... A'third possibilty is for one medi- tating some deadly injury to another, in ignorance of his relationship, to male the discovery in ume to draw back. The D worst situation is when the personage 15 with full Lnowledge on the poit of doing the deed and leaves it undone. Next after this comes the actual perpetrauion of the deed meditated. A better situation than that, bowever, is for the deed to be 'done in ignorance and the relationshuip discovered afterwards. .But the best of all is the last (where the person meditating some - deadly injury to another males the discovery in time to draw

1. Anstode, p go

26 Principles of Literary Cnticism in Sanskrit

worse, however, not as regards any and every sort of fault but only as regards one particular Lind, the ridiculous. The ndculous may be defined as a mistale or deformity not pro- ductive of pain or harm to others; the mask, for erample, that excites laughter, is something ugly and distorted without causing pain.1 It is clear from tus deserption that the comedy of Anstotle corresponds to the Prahasana and Bhana of Bharata. There can be no greater travesty of truth than to use the word comedy for the Sanskrit Natala or Pralarana

DISCUSSION

Y. C Shnrartara : Cannot our dramas be called "Tragi- comedies" following the term used for the later Shakespcarean comedies as Winter's Tale and Tempest etc. ? Indian dramas are hardly com- parable to Greek tragedics as Indian and Greek vews of life are essentially different We beliese that the gods are fundamentally noble, the good ultunately prevails and destruction is followed by regeneration, consequently the hero meets with a happy end Whereas the Greek conception of drvinity makes some supreme sapernatural power responsible for the conduc of iren under whose unchallengeable sway a hero is crushed. P. L. Bhargana : I agree that ie far as the objects are con- cerned they differ in iwro cases. Howerer, judging from what Aristotle says about Comedy, the Indian dramas can certainly not be stamped as 'Comedy' since a Comedy contains characters inferior to common men, which is not the case in Sanskrit dramas The definition of Tragedy comes very closc to our dramas since the best kind of tragedy according to Aristote is one where a person per- petrates an act of violence but draws back in time This is exacty what happens in Mrccha- katila, where the situation is very tense as the hero Carudatta is being taken to the gallows and

Anstote, p 33

28 Principles of Littrary Critirism in Sensknt

P L Bhargara : There are other kinds of tragedy also. Arstotle enumerates four of them; among them one is where the action has actually been carricd out. However, he says the best is one where a person draws back in time. G S Mahajam - If the action of 'drawing back' is considered to be the most important element in a tragedy then most of the Shalespearean tragedies, which Bradley considers to be the best cannot be adjudged as the best since dreadful deed is always shown to be carried out in them K C Pandey There has been an etolution in the conception of tragedies Aristotle's remarks are based on Greel tragedies existing in his time. By the time of Shakespeare the conception of tragedy under- went change and his tragedies shoud be evaluated according to the conception of his time. G S Mahajam : Acschylus' Antigony is a Greek tragedy, is it best or not ?> =. P L. Bhargara : It would be a tragedy but not the best one.

30 Principles of Literary Crilicism in Sanskrit

do not actually find the word arankara, we have the expression aramkru The rhotacism is very common in the oldest Vedie language as well as in its sister language, the old Persian of Avesta, especially of Gathas. In fact all the 1-sounds of Indo- European language have invariably become r in its Aryan branch and if m some cases I still remams or rather has been reverted to, it is to be ascribed to the later influence of the Prakrta-dialects upon the Vedic I would just cite only one ex- Ample ef the Vedic word fima with Lat, lana and Eng wool Now, the word 'ara' is derned from the guna form of the root r with the vertatile a suffix added to it The root r in the Rgveda means as an intransitive verb to more, to come fast, to ascend etc and as a transitive verb to sel m motion, to bring or to send and to stir up The verb is maily conjugated according to cither the third (juhotyadi) group with reduphcated vowel as iyartı, iyarmi ete or according to the fifth group (svadi) with infix nu, rnot rnomi etc. Forms like rechati (te) are however also found especially in the Brahmanas The causative of this verb is arpayati, formed with pa infix as dapayati, snapayat ete which would Iiterally mean to let go something (to somebody) The transitive meaning 'to set in motion' is clearly descernible in the word aram, meaning firewood, literally 'those two pieees of wood which are moved or rubbed agaist each other.' As far as its intransitive meaning is concerned the sense of 'to move fast' soon attracts an object to itself and the sense becomes somewhat like 'to move towards a certam goal' or 'certain object' which further develops a slightly different nuance of meaning ie to move or go infe something Here I remind you of the word 'ara' meaning the spokes of a wheel. Etymo- logically it simply meant 'a thing which moves or rather shoots from the hub ite the rim of the wheel' This 'ara' has the main accent on the second syllable, that is on ra But there is one more 'ara' in the Rgveda having udatta on the first syllable ie a This second "ara' is an ad- jective and it denotes a characteristic, a quality which a thing attains after having got into something, i c. to be fit. We can say that a particular object fits in a certain thing if it goes into it and sits there smoothly. But as in English this concrete picture has developed an abstract sense of fitung or befitting,

32 Prineiples of Lrterany Critirism in Sensbrit

suktath" . .what propnety is there in connection with you through hvmns ? . meaning that the hvmns, the sperch cannot express the greatness of Indra. The words of the hymns arc just not suffinent And exactly this sense, the sense of being sufficient has preserved itself in classical Sanskrit with the word, 'alam' which is used adverbially without the root kr cither with ins- trumental or with dative case . falam viradena' meant- it is sufficient, chough with discusuon which suggests that no discusuons should be made how; alam Sramena-it is enough with your efforts, do not try any more This is the prohibitory sense, of alam the Varana And mn datne in the expressions like alam Ramo Ravanava, the meaning enough, sufficient is too obvious to be claborated There is a very short leap from 'fit'-the origmnal meaning of aram in the Ryveda-to "sufficent". The tranution is not at all difficult to understand if one thinks that if some thing fits in a particular object, it is exactly 'sufficient' for it. A very similar semantie development is seen in the Hmd word bhara which means enough, sufficient as well as whole : mujhe cka gilasa pan bhara cahiye, a glass of water would be suf- amt Vaha rata bhara jagata raha-he lept awale the trhake night This word comes from te root bhr-which means to carry (bharati, bibharti), then to carry in or fill in (bharana, bhara - filled up) Bhar is an adverb meaning "in a way that a particular thing is filled up" i e. sufficiently or wholly. As far as the third usage of alam is concerned with which we are mainly concerned here, it is evident from the foregoing passages of Rgveda that 'ara' in its abstract adjectival sense simply means appropriate, proper, 'as it should be lilc' and arankrti(or let us put alankrti which is the same as alankara) the appropriateness, propriety. Alankarasastra is therefore the science which tells whet a karye should be like and judges as well evaluates it with certain canons of propriety. The title Kavyalankara given by Bhamaha to his work umply means the appropriateness, pretrir'y pertainirg to Laye. And I confess, I cannot thinl of a better expression for Poetics in Sandnt. In fact the word alankara comprises not only the elements of Poetics but also of Acstheties in it.

34 Principles of Literary Griticism in Sanskn!

R. P Dunwedt : You say that Alankara means 'propriety' which should be rendered as cuate in Sanskrit as far as I understand Now Aucttya is not identical with Alankara since the former is an effect of employment of the alankaras. A N. Jam : Dr Tripathi has pointed out the very core of (tr.)

the meaning of the word Alankara and it should not be confused with the later or the present day usage of the word The words have their own history and they develop themselves not only phonetically but also semantically. The meaning "appropriateness", "propricty" etc. etc. is true with regard to Rgveda and ancient Literature only and not to its later concept.

36 Principles of Literary Criticism in Sanshrl

huself mn the Ramayana, dimly formulated by Kalidasa in a rather casual manner in his reference to Valmik in the Raghu- vamfa and deftly employed by Anandavardhana and Abhi- navagupta to support the theory that rasadheani constitutes the quintessence of poetry, provides us with a clue to under- stand the nature of the poet's experience as envisaged by Sansknt criuics We are clearly told by Abhinavagupta in unmistakable terms that the foka referred to by Anandavar- dhana should not be taken to mean what it usually denotes in ordmnary usage The foka spolen of here is the stharin of Kanmarasa and is clearly distinet from the earthy sorrows, which human fesh is hen to And it is this sthayibhara, trans- muted into the rasa state in the heart of Valmili that found expression in Valmiki's immortal song The various stages of tlis aesthetc experence of the poet ultimately blossoming forth as beautiful poetry, are also indicated by Abhinavagupta in the same context Abhinava writes-स एव तथानूतविभावतदु- त्थाकदाद्यनुभावचर्वंणया हृदयमवादतन्ममीभवनतभादास्वाद्यमानता प्रतिपन्न करुणरसरूपना. प्रतिपन्न The sequence of the stages involved in this experience is set forth in the Kaumudi as follows- प्रथम प्रागुक्तलक्षणमहृदयत्वविगिष्टस्य प्रतिपत: हृदयमवाद, ततस्तन्मयी- भावलाभ, तदनन्नरमखण्डो रमास्वाद इत्यर्थ 1 Abhinava employs the analogy of a jar filled with a liquid overflowing when at becomes full (रनपरिपूर्णक्ुम्भोच्चलनत्रत्) to elucidate the efusion of pectry fiom the emotion-filled heart of the poct and adds that his idea of this emotional overflow is supported by the Hrdaya-darpana too, where it is clearly affi- rmed that the primary pre-condition for the genesis of poetry is that the heart should be full to the brim with rasa- यावत् पूर्णों न चैतेन तावन्नंव चमत्यमम्. The above analysis of the psy chology of the poet's creatne moment makes one thing abundantly clear that the poet goes through the complete process of carggfs before hecreates his pocm The terms of this description of the poer's aesthetic experience are identically the same as those of the sahrdaya's acsthetic experience when he enjoys the poct's artistie creation cither as a spectator or as a reader. There is nothing here to warrant the conclusion that Abhinavagupta conceived of any difference between the poet's ereative mood and the con-

38 Prineiples of Literery Critrism in Seubrit

to a vicw, attnbuted to an anonymous Acarya that such dis- tincton is unwarranted and that the two should be taken as identical, this view is refuted by citing the view of Kaldasa that Lant a and satrdepet a are two distinct, mutually exclusve phenomena. No reason for such a conclusion is given, beyond saying that the stone that yields gold and the stone that can test it are qute different. या गन्दग्रामम्, अर्पनापम्, अलदकारतन्त्रन्, उक्तिनागंन्, अन्वर्दप तमाविघन् अधिहृदम प्रतिभासयति सा प्रतिभा। · ...... सा च द्विया कारित्री नावयित्री च। नचेरपदटुर्वाना कारपिनी ...... भावकस्वोपनुर्वाण्रा नावचित्री। भा हि ववे: थममनिप्रापं च भावर्पति। तया खलु फलित ब्वेव्बोफरर। ..- 'न इति कालिशम" । पृथगेव हि ववित्वाद् भाववत्व, नाववत्वाच्च कवित्वम् स्वरूपभेद्ाद्विपपभदच्च। चदाहु -

वरिचिदाच रचयितुमल वोतुमे वापरस्ता वलनाणी ते मतिरुनयया विस्मन नस्तनोति। न ह्येकस्मिन्नतिरायवता नन्निपातरी गुणाना-

The author of the anonymous T cpana on Hemacandra's Katyānutasana also declares t-atre to be different from schrdeyatre and quotes Abhinavas own benedictory verse in support : कवेरपि भावतावस्पायामेव रसास्वाद: संपछते। पथगेव हि वदित्वाद् भाववत्वम्। यदाह-सरस्वतनास्त्रत्व यविसहदवास्त्र विजयने।

Though the necessity to make some Lind of distinction between the creative and the appreciative attitudes cannot be ruled out, it should , at the same time, be admitted that the conclusion of the identical nature of the rasamada of the poet and the connoisseur, which is an inevitable corollary of the Sole-flofa cquation can not be disputed. The only way out of the tangle will be to deny resambhera to the poet white he is in the creative mood This is obvioudy the stand talen by Rajaselhara and the commentator of Kavyamulasana men- tioned above. But Anandavardhana and Abhinavagupta, to whom poetry is the effusion of the rasa-filled heart of the poct,

40 Printiples of Literary Griticum in Sanskril

poet The fact is the germ of the poet is an the sahrdaya too The creative faculty, wluich is the distingurshing mark of the poet is to be found in the sahrdaya too, with just a little difference Whereas the poet creates a world of his own and shapes it in words the sahrdaya re-creates from those very words the poet's world once agam The creations of both are purely subjective, but again there is a difference The poct imports objectivity to the subjectre world of bis creation through his words Consequently, the creation of the poet is mainly tntended for others, though he too does incidentally share it with them On the other hand, the sahrdaya recreates the poet's world all for himself In sptte of these differences, it can not be denied that the sahrdaya too is a crcator, in huis own nght The distncuon between the poet's creation and that of the sahrdaya can well be apprecated by an analogy from Vedanta Advaita Vedanta postulates two different categorics of empirical reahty, the tyarcharibs and the pratibhanke Of these the garahanke world is the world we live m, which is created by Isvara and the expenence of which is shared by one and all Jivas ahle. As opposed to this, the pratibharika is the dream world or the world of illusion which an individual Jiva creates for himself and the experience of which is confined abso- lutely to himself The position r thr kavi and the sahrdaya is closely similar to this Like i.s.a the poet creates a world, which like the syarahanka world is shared by all The sahr- daya, on the other hand, is ble the Jiva and creates a little world, which, like the prattbhastka creation, is limited to his experience. Even as the Jiva is the creator of his dream- world in spite of its limitations, there should be no difficulty in conceding that the sahrdaya is the creator of his world, for wInch he draws his matenals from the world created by the poet The parallelism is, in fact, complete In the universe of ainsq the Lavi and the sahrdaya bear identically the same relation towards aiafz as Isvara and Jiva bear to Figfe. The above Vedantic analogy, though it can not prove anything, is adequate to elucidate my stand-point that the sahrdaya is also a creator in a limited sense I shall now further claborate my contention that "the germ of the poet is in the sahrdaya" and that the sahrdaya can be equated with a kavi.

42 Principles of Lsterary Critieism in Sanskrit

Vijjika preserved for us in the Subhasitavali runs as follows :--

कवेरभिप्रायमशब्दगोचर स्फुरन्तमार्द्रेषृ पदेपु केवलम् । वदद्भिरङ्ज कृतरोमवितिनय- जंनम्प तष्णीभवतोवमञ्जललि ।

This much should suffice, I beheve, to explain the latter part of my hypothess, namely that the sahrdaya has in him "the germ of the poet" This relationship of the sahrdaya with the kav may be expressed as the sahrdaya-kavi cquation This near identity between the kavi and the sahrdaya becomes apparent from one more consideration. The make- up of the kavi and the sahrdaya as described or hinted at by Sanskrt ertics also points to their identical nature The three factors, afn, wrfe and sara which are enumerated in the case of the poet are implied in the case of the sahrdaya too. Pratibha, in the case of poet is described as darearaafa. In the case of the sahrdaya too, this purra-casana is mentioned as an essential precondition for salderatre. With reference to the spectators of the play it is said-

सनामनाना नन्याना रमस्यास्वाद भवेत्। निर्वासनास्नु रद्रगान्त काष्ड, हयारममन्निभा ।।

Sumilar statements like वासना नेदानीन्तनी प्राक्तनी च रसा- स्वादहेतु and पुष्नवन्न प्रमिष्वन्ति योगिवद् रससन्ततिम् also point to the fact that yamuey is an essential factor for aesthetic rehsh Likewise the reference to काव्यानुनीलनान्याम in his definition of the sahrdaya touches upon the other two factors namely व्युत्पत्ति and अम्यास in the equipment of the poct. This shows that the equipment required of the sahrdaya is not far different from that of the poet. Likewise, the very concept of hrdayasamzada, which is the final determinant of sahrdayatsa and which implies a kinship of hearts between the kavi and the sahrdaya (ममान हृदम यस्य स) also provides further support to my stand. Thus the parity of equrpment and the kinship of hearts of the kavi and sahrdaya provide interesting confir-

44 Prineittes of Litrvery Criterism in Sendr'!

only it had been चिरन्तनकाव्य कक्षणाविधायिनान् अणोपनीभिरपि बुद्धि- निरनुन्मोलितपूर्व The benedictory verse of Abhinavagupta in his Locana, in my opimion contains this very idea, Thus runs the verse :-

अपूर्वं पद्स्तु प्रयमति दिना कारणरला उगद् पावप्रस्य निजरमभरात्ास्यतरि च ।

स्मरस्वत्वास्तत्व कविसहृदपास्प्र विजयवे।।

The whole verse in my opanion, deserves to be reinter- preted in the light of what I have said above about the basic identity of the kav and the sahrdaya. The laer quarter of this verse सरन्वत्यान्तत्व कविमहद्दवास्य विजयते provided a bard nut to the commentators as the preceding lines apparently fitted well only with the Lavi and not the sahrdaya. In fact, the author of the Kaumudi has directly raised this question as follows : ननू काव्यात्मरुन्व कविशव्दोरादानेनव मेत्वति, करिमयं सहदयपदोपादानमिति चन; सहृदयननृं कविगिष्टविचारकिनानोचरीभूतस्येंव वाव्यत्व मुस्तषा काव्यर्पत्वादिति सूमः । अत एव वचनम्-वविरषि विदग्योन्सी सूक्तिनुद्दा- विचारक: इति। तथा चाचारयपेय 'मा व्यापारवती रस्ान् रसवितुम्' इल इलोके 'ते दवे अप्यवनम्ब' इति। तथा ननान कार्य (र्यो) निर्वर्तनत्वेन ननु चि(चिच) तस्मेव दुष्टिद्वयत्म विश्वनिणचने हेनुन्वं अरचिव्देनीमतुन्। - This should explain why the commentary sfrer and the commentary ale d should have, suggested in all more than half a dozen alternative explanation for this line. In my opinion, all these difficulties can be resolved by resorting to चर्मेघाग्य or कविमहृद्य instead of दन्द् In the light of the kari-sahrda cquation, there should be no difficulty in explaining this as ggre compound. The compound may be split either as व विरेव सहृदव or ववि महृदय एव or नविरिव सहदमः । It is interesting to note that Anandarardhana too appears to be thinking of this unity as the yinon of the poet and the salırdaya in his verse :-

46 Principles of Literary Criticism in Senskrit

creles of the city by his psendonym 'Sahrdaya'. In the course of the discussion, I affirm that the Kavi and the sahrdaya are fundamentally one in so far as the lavi is fundamentally a sahrdaya and vice versa, "The germ of the poct is in the sahrdaya " On being questioned whether sanskrit critics have said so anywhere, I premomtonly quote Abhinavagupta's सरम्वत्वास्तत्व कविमहृद्यास्य विजयते and add that the compound aftrety here should be explamned as Karmadharaya (not Drandya ) so as to signify their mutual abheds (siatd FEE) or sadharmya (कवि महृदय इच and कुतिरिव महदम") At this stage the dream ends. The previous might just before retinng to bed, I had read an artcle in the Dharmayuga dated 8th December, 1968, which gave an interesting account of a remarkable dream seen by Sir E A. Wallace, in which he had seen the full question paper of a test that he was to write the next day. The cointidence might have been a mere acci- dent, but to me it was meaningful The dream put an end to my vacillation. I promptly decided to make this the central theme of my paper for this seminar.

DISCUSSION

R. C. Duiredi : It is a very interesting paper, which procecds on philosophical distinction between the syaroharita and the prahbhasika sutta according to Vedanta. The sahrdaya is the author of the pratbharita poetry and the poct is that of the tyaraharika poctry. I raise one doubt. It has been stated in the paper that the sahrdeya st-ereekes with those very words the poet's world once again. It means that the world of the Sahrdaya is no longer the world of the poct, he has his own world, secondly the world of the poct is not vyavaharika since to be so it should be the same as the world of the sahrdaya. I. Venketachalam : I have drawn the above erample from Vedanta in order to male my point clear. I mean to say that fundamentally both worlds are the same. So far as the nature of the world or its con- tent is concemed, the world of the selidae is

48 Prinaples of Literaty Crteism in Sanskrit

tions are present in the latter It is the idca of the poet which is presented in the medium and in such a way that it is capable of giving rise to a mental picture in the heart of a Sahrdaya w hich is in all respects almost the same wluch arote in the mind of the poet The sahrdaya too is common 1 e. as Croce has sard, in both cases there is 'intui- tion' However, the distinction between the poet and the sahrdaya is that the former is capable of presenting intuition through the medium, the latter is not, ie if anffat y afem ete are present one is able to produce and if these are absent, he is unable to create the medium which Is common to all ve Vacchanka. Venkatachalam . I think Dr Dwivedi understands my point I try to explam my vew point through one more illustration A musician sings a particular Raga to his audience. The audience re-creates it in its own mind though it is incapable of presenting It R C Datred : There is a maxim . e TT 4 q which sufficiently explains that only by becoming a sort of poet that one can evaluate or appreciate bterature . There is a verse in the Ramayana which may be interpre'ed to mean that only the inhabitants of Ayodhya who have passed through the actual experience of separation from Rama can have 'he real aesthetic experienee of the Ramayana So I perfectly agree with what you say The tradition is there in the above-quoted maxim My pomt of objection was only himried' to those two sentences where you say that the worlds of the poet and the sahrdaya are of tno different kinds-the former is the vyavaharika and the other is the pratibhasika even when they are the same because the sahrdaya according to you re-creates the poet's world R S. Trtethi : Vamana who has been quoted in the Abhi- nava-bharati (Ch. VI), Gaudavaho and V. Raghvana's Śrngārapralāsa may be referred to

50 Principles of Literary Critrism in Sanshrit

you assume for a critic cannot be one with the practical reality of the poct. The apparent reality is always marked by subjeetive elements Rasanubhuti is possible when individuality is cast off and subjective elements don't mar the relish of rasa and there is a perfect harmony of the poet, the hero and the spectator, which is hardly possible if you contend that the world of the spectator, or sahrdaya is only pratibhaska i e. apparent, unreal .

I never say that the world of the sahrdaya is {tr ) Venkatachalam really apparent (pratbhastke) I used this term and the analogy from the doctrine of Vedanta simply to illustrate my point.

52 Princpies of Laterary Critictsm in Sansktit

Shame is another powerful factor which excites blushing- It has within its orbit two types of causes. moral causes and some improper behavioral patterns The second one has no connection with the moral sense If a man of conscience commits a erime in solitude, he may sincerely regret or suffer deep remorse for his guilt, but certamly not blush until hts crime is deteeted, specially by those whom he holds in high esteem Breach of the laws of etiquette 1 e impoliteness, any impropnety or an inappropriate remark, quite commonly seen and regarded improper behavioral patterns, are the second type of causes which excite intense blushing of which a man is capable In both the cases mentioned above, the same funda- mental principle, namely the regard for the opimons of others, is involved. Modesty is another powerful agent that eeites blushing A modest man always has an humble opimon of himself and is extremely sensitive about an indelicate word or deed The modest person readily blushes at shght praise, any indeltcate word uttered or such a deed narrated before him is bound to crimson his face, because his humilty and extreme sensitive- ness to indchcacy make him so Whatever may be the real cause, whether due to shy- ness, to shame for real cnme, to shame for the breach of the laws of etiquette, to modesty from humility or-indelicacy, blushing depends in all cases on the principle of regard for the opinions of others. The cases mentioned above affeet the car- diovascufar system in such a way that blood-vessels at the body-surface are difated, and more blood flows into the capif- Iaries that crimson the face As it has already been stated above that blushing is an effeet of shyness, shame or modesty and it is the most peculiar and the most human of all expressions, innumerable fascinating examples of it can be scen in every literature where the causes of blushing with all its accompanying movements and gestures are depicted wherefrom blushing as an effect emanates The cause and effect theory is thoroughly maintained Sanskrit literature the case is otherwise There it hardly any But in

example where the said cause and effect theory is handled as it ought to be This is not to sav that Sandrit literature is devoid of such situations. It rather abounds in it, hut the

54 Principles of Literary Criticum in Sanskrdt

"Evam vādim devarsau pāršve pituradhomukhi Lilakamalapatram ganayamasa Parvati "1 Griffith translates it thus - "Thus While he spake the lady beat her head To hide her cheeks, now blushing rosy red And numbered over with seeming care the while Her lotus petals in sweet maiden guide "?

In the onginal verse besides the context re the proposal for Uma's espousal, there are only two indications that comp- lete the sense of blushing They are 'Parfre fituradhomukhi' and 'Litakamalapatram ganayamasa' These are the movements and gestures which accompany blushing These are really acces- sories-subsidiary factors s The thing in question for which these subsidise, 15 missing The other examples from the same context will also justify my assertion When the proposal for the marriage was accepted, Himavan bade her daughter bow before the Seven Saints to have their fullest blessing This must have put her out of countenance Kalidasa describes her state excellently in the following verse : "Tām pranamādarasrasta-jāmbūnadavatamsakām Ankamaropayamasa layamanam muhurmuhuh "1 Grffith translatcs it thus -: "So low she bowed, the gem that decked her hair And sparkled m her ear ell loosened there. Then with sweet mode v and joy opprest She hid her blushes ou the Lady's breast" The onginal verse nas some points in favour of blushing They are 'Afuhurmahuk Iyjamanam' and *Arundhati ankama- ropajamasa'. Uma was really dreading the notice of the Seven Saints who were strangers to her and were looking at her at this solemn occasion This must have covered her with con- fusion Noticing this the lady Arundhati came to her rescue and hid her face on her breast. It will, thus, be seen that the

Kumarasambhavam, 6/84 Ibid, p. 50 3. Kumarasambhavam : Edited by S R Sehgal (Trans Portio" P 76

56 Principles of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit

Lajjānamramukhi pryena hasatā balā cıram cumbitā."1 Mahamahopadhyaya Dr Ganga Nath Jha translates it thus .- "Finding the love-chamber empty the girl rose gently from the couch and having intently gazed at the face of her husband who was feigning sleep, she kissed him with conf- dence, but noticing a tremor in his cheeks, she hung her head through shame and was repeatedly kissed by her smiling lover "t This is a situation where the excitation of blushing is a must The movements and gestures which accompany blushing are here She is unable to meet the gaze of her lover, casts down her eyes due to shame The reported kissing by the smiling lover is a further heightenig of her state This is almost a "made to order" situation for blushing But all this has been conveyed by only one word "Layanamramubht"-(hanging her head through shame) The original verse mentions the cause- shame-clearly, but the term that conveys the effect of it ie blushing is totally missing On the grounds of the evamples discussed above from different sources the conclusion can safely be drawn that no- where in Sansknt literature has "blushing' or a 'blush' been expressed or stated though the expression has been a natural and mescapable necessity The cause and effect theory has nowhere been maintained in the case of Laya and all its syno- nyms Only the use of Laja, Trapa, Vrida ete. was consi- dered enough without caring to express the various types of effects caused by them Consequently it was not possible for Sanskrit intelligentra to evolve a commonly accepted term for blushing And so it may be averred that the word with all its effects was perhaps unknown to Sansknt scholars But with the readers of today the case is qute different. These days medical sciences and Psychology with all its branches are so advanced and have become so popular that the knowledge of emotions, psychosomatics and the general principles of expression have become essential material for the students of literature They are familiar with the major physiological changes, which accompany emotions So whenever the con-

Amarufatakam, verse No 82 2 Kavyaprakāsa (Dr Ganganath Jha's English Trans ) Chapter IV, p 50 (a)

58 Prencptes of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit

tion leaves no doubt that the Acarya has no idea of blushing and therefore, it was not possible for him to handle it in his colour-scheme This justifably leads to the conclusion that Vararma or blushing was perhaps not known to our Sanskrit Ācāryas But the deseription of Varvarnya in the contert of 'Trida-wabhicharin'-the feeling of shame attaches weight to the mterpretation of the term as blushing. The rhange of colour caused by Vrida mav be blushing as well It is, there- fore, proper to tackle and cnuically examine lerserea in the context of I'rida and do justice to the subject. Bharata says that Vrida has improper acuon as its basis It is caused by Fibharas (Determmants) such as humilation, repentance on account of transgressing words of superiors or disregarding them, non-fulfilment of vows and the like It is to be represen- ted on the stage by Anubharar (consequents) such as covered face, thinking with downcast face, draw ng lines on the ground, touching clothes and rings and brting the nadls and the like I In the opiion of Visvanatha Kaviraja Frida is the absence of boldness causing the face to hang down in consequence of misconduct * Dhanañjaya first of all adds Vaivarnya to the definition of Vrida He says that Vrida is a lack of boldness in consequence of misconduct and so forth It can be inferred from Leeping the body averted, from concealment, change of colour, lowering of the head and the lile." In the said def- nition Trida has received only a partral treatment. It has been defined in the context of Duracera-(misconduct) only- Moreover the Trida caused by Duracarer (actions against the set code of behaviour ) can excite l'atramaia of pallor-type, not of blushuing-type, which is an ornamentation of the face. Hemacandra defining Vridi mentions J'airara as its consequent. He also treats the subject on the same lines. The definition of frida given by Panditaraja Jagannatha is really striking. He treats the subject in a comprehensive manner According to him Vrida is a parucular disposition of mind which is occassion-

1. Nityatintra Vol I, P. 363 Pub Onental Insutute, Baroda. 2 Sibityadarpana-3,165 3. -Gopala, 4/24 Visana, 2/23 (edned by Rankial C. Patitb).

60 Principtes of Laterary Criticism in Sansirt

"Nırudhya yantim tarasa kapotim Kujatkapotasya puro dadhāne Mayı smıtārdram vadanāravındam Sā mandamandam namayāmbabhūva *1

'When I placed before the cooing pigeon, his mate that was going away by stopping her forcibly, she (my beloved) slowly bent down her smiling lotus-hike face towards me."f Here 'smitardram' and 'Vadanararindam mandamandsn namayambabhure' suggestive of Vrida bhaca mixed with pleasur- able sensation, create appropriate atmosphere for blushing "Smttordrem' is a sure indication of that An intense blush is sometimes accompanied by a dlight effusion of tears and this is due to lacrimal glands partaling of the increased supply of blood which rushes into the capillanes of the adjoiing parts including the retma Blushing being an involuntary expres- sion 1 e Satterkabhara, which serves the purpose of bhara and anubhara both, it must have an external manifestation, other- wise it will lose its charm Sattrikas must be dealt with as Saltikes In such cases the application of the theory of sug- gestion is meaningless It 15, therefore, obvzous that blushing could not get its proper place in Sansknt Pocties also. In sum, it can be confident), asserted that the concept of blushing was almost unknowr or very vaguely known to Sanskrit poets and Acaryas Sanslrit pocts did often create such situations, where Vride with all its finest shades of import is beautifully suggested and its various effects-voluntary or involuntary-are excellently expressed, but this most impor- tant effect, ie. blu.hing remamed unmandested. Alankara- Sastra also did not do justice to it. Our Acaryas who had very shrewd cyes and were very fond of or rather crazy about classifying drvding and sub-dnnding the topic in hand and discussing it threadbare did not handle Vaivamya exhaustively by includig blushing mn its fold.

1. Bhamintliss, Spngara Vilasa, 28 (Pub Onental Book Agency, Poona) Ibid (Translated Portion)

62 Prineiples of Literary Criticum in Sanshrit

वे वर्ण्य स्वरभगमञ्चवितमा मन्दाक्नम्रानना कष्ट भो प्रतिनावतो ्धिसन वाणी नवोड़ायतै।। Here the expression l'awarrya may include blushing, the reddening of the cheeks Thus we can say that though blushing has not got its fair deal, it has not been completely ignored. R. G Deiedt : As far as literature is concerned it is actually not a missing link since, one could recall or search a number of ślokas mn Sanshrit, as the one which Mr. Venkatachalam has quoted, where the situa- tion of blushing has been described and almost any body can reproduce one or two of such verses This temptation at least I should resist following the embarassment of a damsel who had to stop the parrot from repeating the sweet talks with her lover in the nght : ब्रीडार्ता प्रकरोति दाडिमफल- व्याजेन वाखन्वनम्. Secondly Vıdyācakravartın in hıs commentary on the Alankarasarvasra gives description of changes in colour due to blu- shing etc. on the basis of some lost work named Bharatasamgraha-which may either be a metrical summary of Bharara's Natyasastra or his own commentary on thi worl Thus as far as literature goes, Hushing is not unknown. Now as far as the Geld ei poeties is concerned, I think there can be two reasons for its non-inelusion in the sattrikabhieas Firsth, the later writers on poetics were perhaps so obsessed by the authority of Bharata that they did not inerease the number of the sattvikas given by Bharata but treated these as upalaksana so as to cnable them to include other bhavas also as the need arose. The second strong reason for not mentioning blush- ing dtrectly is to my mind, the fecling of suggest- bility about it. Blushing is an internal state of embarrasment and shyness involving the whole personality, and it is not restricted to the face or cheeks only. It can, therefore, be better felt than expressed externally.

64 Princples of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit

wnter, but would like to point out that it was really very vaguely known to them In fact the flokas that they have quoted describe the situation of shyness and embarrassment and not the blushing itself Shyness is a caute and blushing is the effect of tt The effect should be described as such and not left to be guessed by the reader by simply describing the cause of it. Since blushing is an ivoluntary action, a sattrila bhata, which comprises not only bhana but also anubhara in it, it must be clearly indicated and can never be suggested Anubhavas are never implicit, they are exphcit What sur- prses me is that Sansknt poets create and critics desenbe situations where shyness-the cause-is present, but instead of giving crimsoning of the checks as its logical effect, they are waylaid to describe fear (bhaya) and nervousness (trase) etc. and never mention the crimsoning of the cheeks Panditaraja Jagannatha nicely defines shyness : स्त्रीणा पुरषमुनावलोकादे पुसा व प्रतित्ञानगपराभवादेदतपश्रो ववर्ष्याधोमुखत्वादिविकार आगचित्तवृतिविद्येपो ब्रीडा but he mentions only Fe.rwre.e and downhanging of the face as its effect, and doe not include the reddening of the cheeks That on comparatively darl faces of Indians such crir cning is not visible is also not truc. Blushing as visible even on the faces of Negrocs Charles Darwin has given several pictures of the Negroes while blushing with the remark that the dark colour of a Negro becomes still darler when he blushes It is difficult to agree with the view that blush- ing is included by our acaryas in Vairanya With our so well known tendency for minute hair-splitting -going into divzsons and sub-divisions and further divisions of the sub-dnision-it would really be surprising if the cnmsoning of the cheeks were to be included in such a general term as Varramya Besides Varanga is only of one kind. If the acaryas had hinted at the possbility of many more varic-

66 Principles of Literary Criticum in Sanskrit

exact synonym for the English word "blushing' in Sanskrit. Which word, Dr. Jaith, would you lile to use or coin for it in Santkrit ? R. S Jautly : Well, it is for the scholars present bere to decide.

R. S Tnpath I do not have anv ready word in my mind To my mind blushing was meluded mn Sanskrit Poctics in lapa Abhinava-gupta associates laja with sex and observes hke Freud : Hesrfa 54- विजुम्भासपव। सा हि अन्त अवरुद्वा तान् तान् विकारान् करोवि which clearlv means that the lajja as well as its cffects, i e blushing etc. were both included in the term laya Just as there is non-difference between faktı and sakhran so also both cause and effect may be referred to as one and the same. In the Abhi- navabharati Abhinavagupta remarks that the pre- vious acaryas have well counted all the bhasar and no others are possble If there be any other they are of minor nature and must be included in Hiws already known. I, therefore, think that blushing should be included in the laya.

68 Principtes of Literary Griticism in Sansint Finest Art. From Hindu point of view aesthetics is the sci- ence and philosophy of Fine Arts. Drama, the Drsya-kavya is intimately connected with Dance or vice versa. Similarly poetry and drama are cqually intimately connected. We Lnow poetry or Kavya is three-fold, Drsya, Sravya and Misra This is an ordinary or limted classifcation, but if we vicw all the arts, we may formulate the theory that appreciation or realisation of arts depends on only two senses, those of sight and those of hearing. On the basis of these senses the works of the independent arts and the arts themselves have been diided into three elasses, those addressed (1) to the sense of sight (Driya), to that of hearing (Sravya) (iif) to both (Drsya-Sravya) To the first class belongs architecturt, with sculpture and painting as its subordinate arts, to the second belongs poetry and music, and to the third drama which is nothing but the highest form of poctry. Now the question is how can we afford to ignore the historical elements of development or views on poctry or more appropriately the pocte categories These may be cnu- merated as follows. There are seven poetic categorics under which the results of the analytical approach have been placed (i) the characteristie (Laksana) (i) Embellishment (Alankara), (in) Qualty (Guna), (iv) Defect (Dosa), (v) Style (Riti), Sugggestion (Dhvani), (vil) Acsthetie con- figuration (Rasa). Of these the first five are objective and the last two are subjective. This is the analysis of Dr. K.C. Pandcy whose contributions to acsthetics are well known to the world Aesthetics is the soul of the Dramatic art which is its supreme development as well as its fundamental characteris- tic According to Hindu view, acsthetics is the science and philosophy of Independent Arts Bharata, the father, the founder and the exponent of this art, seems to have divided the art into principal and the subordinate ones For be holds that all arts occupy a subordinate position to the dramatics ih as much as they fnd due place in it It is with this fundamental baclground of dramatic art that I have some- where remarked that Muses of Fine Arts did not descend One after another, Poetry; Drama, Dince, Munc, Pamting all these Fine Arts are interrelated Like Kith and Kin.

70 Prirritks of Literary Critieism in Serskrit

Svarga and Apavarga Naturally, therefore, all arts, be it poetry or music, pamting or dance, are to be vicwed from this jofty idealem of aestheticism. In nearly all the phases of Indian art, the Rasa (or impassioned feeling) has played a very promment role. The Indian belref is that the supreme being ts Rasa-Svarupa (cf the Indian theory of Rasa-Brahma-Vada: mat a m: Again image-worship, for which icons used to be made of the mani- fold matenals with manifold symbols, to be worthy of de- sired end, has to be done in a manner of accomplished art In dance and drama there is identifeation of the spectator with the nata, actor A simlar identification is eesential between the worshipper and the worshipped. This 1s possible only through the arousing of rasa, the acstheticium in art. The scruptural monuments in our possession do corroborate tus dictum and there we find a number of different Rasas which the artists endeavoured to chisel upon the dry stones and metals Thus aestheticism in art becomes instrumental in produc- ing the bhavavyalu and this in its turn is dependent on the rasas or rasadrsts The following lines of the Samarangana male this clear:

रमानामय वस्यामो दृष्टीनामिइ लक्षणम् । तदायत्ता मतरिचिते नावववति प्रजापते।।

Citra m this text stands for pictorial images and sculptural ones, but Bhoja was cqually gifted with poetie in- sight (vide his two remarkable treauses-the Srnagarapra- Lasa and the Sarasvati-Kanthabharana), hence to my mind this term, Citra, also stands for embellished poetry, but unless it arouses some 'Bhava' or 'rasa' it is no Citra at all. Hence the previous doctrines as advocated by the early reputed authors on Alankiratastra, like Bhamaha, Dandin, Vamana, Rudrata, there is no alankara in poetry unless it arouses some bhava and it is just a question of degree only whether it is predomnant or sccondary. In the end I hope to expound and illustrate this poit. I think in this very advanced stage of re-thinking we cannot afford to be dogmatic. We have to cultrvate a more

12 Prineples of Lxterery Criticism in Sanshril

alwrays aimed at this great Ideal Am creation, unless it is conducne to the well being of life, unless inspiring and ennobling, and unless high enough for creative urge, is not worth the ideal It is from this fundamental angle that acstheticsm in iconographical art is to be vicwed and purmewed The following lines from the Samarangana-Sutradhara will suffice to illustrate this theme

हम्नेन सूचमन्नर्थ दृष्ड्या च प्रत्िपादयन्। मजोव इव दृश्येन सर्वाभिनयदर्रनान्॥ आगिके चैव चित्रे च इद नाघनमुच्यते।

The Visnudharmottara lines fan d RTE especially 'त ए चिन्रे विसेया नृत्त चिन् पर मतम ctc. also propound the same truth The Samarangana-Sutradhara recognises as many as eleven Rasas and eighteen Rasadrstis, Lalta, Hrstā, Vikastā etc, ctc The important points in relation to the acstheuics in the pictorial art still need to be expounded. Firstly, all these rasas, though characteristics of only human beings, men, women and children and in then hleness the anthropomorphic forms of the gods and demigods or demons have an appl- cation to all sentient creations 'पुरम्कृत्य भवंमत्वेषु योजचेन्'- This statement gocs to the very core of the art and shows that if birds and ammals in paints could be shown manifesting the sentiments, it is really the master-piece, the supreme achicvement of the artist, it becomes a new creation, superior creation to that of Brahma, the Primordial Creator Himself It is through the symbohsm of Mudras, hand- poses, bodily poses and the postures of the legs, that the mute gods speak to us giving vent to the sublimest of thoughts and noblest of expressions, these so-called brutes can alo share our experience There is nothing extra-ordinary nor super- natural about it. It is the marvel of the art. If poctry can create an idealistic world, full of beauty and bliss, the painting, her sister, must also follow the suit.

74 Principles of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit

society and what was our society in India at the time of Anandavardhana ? The massive impaet of monistic doctrine of the Advaita Brahma, as promulgated by the great Sankara was being felt and eultivated in practically atl the spheres of life and doings Kashmur, the birth-place of Anandavardhana and Abhinava- gupta could not afford to neglect to feel this impact. Kashmir Sarvism is an aftermath of Sankaracarya's infuence. According to my thesis no thought and deed m India 1s bereft of its metaphysical and spiritual content. The funda- mental postulate of our society was Dharma and there can not be a better definition of Dharma than what is given by our Acaryas

यतोज्भ्युदयनि वयससिद्धि सघर्मे ।

Dharma does not mean dogma or ntual, it means the sustaining factor of life in its most complete aspect. Abhyudaya stands for matenal prosperity and Nissreyasa for Moksa, the release of the soul from bondage These are two cardinal postulates which have perfected our culture Thus we can appreciate the balancing of materjalism and spiritualism in our culture With this introduction to the impact of the philosophy on practically all the Fine Arts in India, let me come to present a new dissertation that if such a matter of fact science and art, the Vastu and Silpa, are guided by lofty ideals of monistic principle, the poctry in India cannot be overesti- mated when we say that its highest development was perfect in the womb of philosophical speculations of Hindus. In our traditions Sahitya Panditas have always regarded themselves as brother followers of Vaiyakaranas The learned scholars are surely conversant with the Sphota doctrine or Sabda-Brahma-theory of Grammarians The credit for this goes to one of the most reputed grammarian philosopher, Bhartrhari, the celebrated writer of the Vakyapadiya, on which Dhvani doctrine has been evolved. Anandavardhana himself admits that this doctrine Vaıyākaranas : was borrowed from the

76 Prirriples of Litermy Critirim in Senthrit

Thus sphota, like Nada, Vastu and Brahman, is all- pervading, eternal and indestructible word-principle. The prineple that word is vested with a power which is different both from Abhidha and Laksana and by which it manifests 'Rasa' \astu' or 'Abhidha", is based on the principle of the manifestation of 'Sabda' technicall called, 'Sphota' of the Vakya-padiya. Sphopa, as erplained in this worl, is something eternal like 'Brahman'. It is this sphota which being itself a Dhvam' is also the cause of 'Dhvanis as the lght evisting in an 'Aranf gives rie to other light. The 'Sphopa' is lile the fine air which pervades all the concrete objects and like the same becomes perceptible when mamifesied by its onn means. Anandavardhana in his Dhvanyaloka contends that a word is capable of expresuing morc than one idca at ont and the same time. Sumilarly according to Bhartrhari a word can simultancoudy express several idcas. In the Dhvanyalola, the example of the jar and the candle has been cited to prove that 'Vyangya' (suggested) sense is percerved alongwith the perception of the denoted sense, ie Vacya. It does not disappear when Vyangya' is perceived just as the light of the candle does not crist when it males the jar manifest In other words, the comiention of the propounder of Dhyami is that a word is capable of expressing more than one idea at one and the same time. Now, according to Bhartrhari a word simul- tancously expresses several ideas. The word 'cow', though used simply to mean an animal and nothing ele, will cxpress something else also :

घटादिप कया दीपो वेनार्यन प्रबुम्मते। वतोज्यस्वापि नाविचयान् स बरोति प्रबाशनम्।। मुसगेपु तथार्येपु शब्दो देन प्रनुरने। तरमान प्रयोजवादत्यान्यपि प्रत्याममत्पनो ।1 Kumarila Bhațta also supports this foundation of Dhvzni :

78 Principles of Literary Critieum in Sansknl

not perceived at all when it manifests Anandavardhana seems to have taken the hint from the sphota.

sccond vew which regards sound to be independent of sphota but ipercepuible at the time of mamfestation of the sphota The sphota theory as fully propounded and estabhshed by Bhartrhan in the Vakya-Padiya is probably order than Pamm Pamim himself mentions a predecessor, Sphotayana The clear object of the Founder of Dhvam doctrine is to bring the impact of the philosophy of Rasa Theory (Raso Var Sah) as enunciated in the Tarttiriya Upanisad which was later adopted by many Alankarikas, esp the famous aesthe- tician Pt Jagannatha, the author of the Rasagangadhara. Mammata's elucidations of this theory, in a more profounder and illustrative as well as systematic way, 15 a second landmarl in the history of Indian Aesthetics These writers regard Rasa, Ananda, and Atman as identical Now let me come to Abhinavagupta m a brief revicw Abhinavagupta, the greatest gift of Kashmir, has been able to bring the East and West to one amalgamated plane. His psy chological approach is a landmark in Indian Aesthetics. Abhinavagupta was a rational mysuc. Accordingly the essentral constituents of aesthetic personality consist and pre- suppose the following ; () Taste, Rasıkatva (1) Aesthetic Susceptibility, Sahr- dayatva (mt) Power of Visualization, Pratibha (Iv) A contempletive habit, Bhavana or Carvana (v) The capacnty to identify, Sadharanilarana. (vi) Psy cho-physical condition, Anubhūti, Vyakti Hindu aestheticians have no doubt recognised five levels of acsthetics experience (i) sense, (u) imagination, (in) cmotion, (iv) catharsis and (v) transcendency, but the grea- test emphass as laid down by this great philosopher and pocuician Abhinavagupta-Padacarya, is on the transcendency. This transcendental level is recognised by lum as the highest. Thus the final stage in acsthetic expenience, according to Abhmavagupta, is of supreme bliss( paramananda) Acsthetic experience therefore in its final stage belongs to the level of Vyatireka-turiyatita, in which all objectrity merges in the subconscious and the subject, the self, shines in its Ananda

80 Principles of Literary Criticsm in Sanskrit

Vamana says that 'aujjvalya' is that quality of the colouring of a picture which makes the picture look new and fresh Aujjvalya is brilliancy which ensures the life of a picture Otherwise the picture fades and looks very old. This qualty is borrowed by him in poetry and says that poetry looks bril- liant and preserves brilliancy by the quality of Kantt in the chosen words ओज्जवत्य कान्ति । Ibid. III 1.25

औज्जवल्य कान्ति । वन्वस्य उज्जवलत्व नाम यत अमो कान्ति- रिति, तदभावे पुराणच्छायेत्युच्यते। औज्ज्वल्य कान्तिरित्याहुर्गुणान् गुणविशारदा। पुराणचित्रस्थानीय तेन बन्ध्य ववेवच ।। Ibid. III, I A similar idea of an old picture is visualised by Raja- śckhara, the dramatist, in a fine description of Nature in the fading twilight and approaching darkness in the prologue to his drama, the Bala-bharata He compares Nature at dusk to an old picture dulled by smole :

किञ्च स्तोकतम कलापकलनश्यामायमान मनाक घूमश्यामपुराणचित्ररचनारूपं जगज्जायते

Vamana in his Kavyalankara-sūtra (I, ni, 30-31) com- pares drama to picture and calls drama as literature par excellence because of its likeness to a picture

सन्दर्भेष दमयरूपक नाटकादि श्रेय तद्धि चित्र चिन्नपःवत् विश्येष- साम त्यात.

Bhatta Tauta, as he has been quoted by his pupil, Abhi- nava in his Abhinavabharati, says that Rasa realsation or emotional response is casily and excellently got only from a drama That is, there poetry attains the visual state when one can realise through the cyc what one can only imagine otherwise. It is because of this quality that drama is called picture by Vamana-a series of pictures before our cyes It is because of this qualty also that drama is called Ropa

82 Principtes of Laterary Criticism in Sansint

his Abhilasitarthacintamam (Mysore ed.), king Somesvara speaks of one type of picture called Bhava-citra:

शृगारादिरसो पत्र दर्शनादेव गम्यते । भावचित्र तदास्या चित्रकोतुकवारकम्।

Jayadeva, author of the Candraloka and his commentator, Vaidyanatha, apply the Rasa theory to Citra.

काच्चे नाट्ये च वारये च बिनावार्द्यंविभावित। आम्वाद्यमानकतनु: स्थायी भावो रस स्नृ ।।

The application of the Dhvani theory to Citra The application of the Rasa theory of drama and poetty to picture means that in pictures also Rasas are to be depicted by conditions which rouse them, viz the object of emotions, the excitements of emotions, the effects of emotions and the minor emotions which can be called feeting feelings and which are accessory to the major emotional mood. This means the application of the Dhvani theory to Citra also It certainly means so. For, in an artistic presentation, it is the suggestion that forms the very life of that artisuc expression. This can also be proved by taking the canons given by the Visnudharmottara for depicting things ble evening etc. A perusal of the verses in chapter 24, which show how moun- tains, sky, carth ete. must be depicted, will pro.e the truth of this statement. The subjects e g gamblers should be sug- gested by depicting them as bereft of their upper cloth -- 'उत्तरोमविहोनारव सूनानक्तानत्रवरगवित; a hghway must be suggested by portraying a caravan of camels, ete. carrying articles of transport (युक्न मनाररष्ट्राय: मार्गनार्य पदर्मचेन्). The night must be suggested by drawing a thief walking stealthily, by an Abhisarika hurrying to meet her lover in her secret meeting place and so forth. Rather it is in picture that this principle of Dhyani which according to modern English eritics, is 'Symbolitm' in paetry, appues exeellently. For here, in picture, there is no scope for the word which can name the subject depicted. In poctry, it is a fault to mention anything by its name. The mention of their names will never arouse

VAKROKTI AND LITERARY CRITICISM

Dr (Mrs ) Hemalata R. Tatpati

Vakroktı, for the first time in Sanskrit Poetrcs, got a very important and highest position as the all-pervading poetic con- cept in Kuntaka's Vakroktyivita Vakrokti is the very life of poetry according to Kuntaka and not a mere Alankāra of Sabda or Artha Innumerable alankaras of Sabda and artha are discussed by the earler rhetorcians but according to Kuntaka they are not having as much striking beauty as his Vakrokt has, hence the necessity of discussing this apurva alankāra. Kuntaka is influenced by Bhamaha who says,

सेपा सवंत्र वकोवितिरनयाज्यो विभाव्यते। यत्नोऽम्या कविना कार्य कोलड कारोडनया बिना॥

(Kāvyālankāra, II, 85) Following Bhamaha Kuntaka has revved again the ofd school of Alankara Tor Bhamaha, Vakrokti is the underlying princi- ple of all the alankaras, but Kuntaka's treatment of Vakrokti is very broad to include all other poetic concepts in it It I5 the princrple of Beauty underlying the poetic language itself. He defincs Vakrokti as,

"वदग्व्यमगीभणिति" (V. J. I, 10) .

Vakroktı decorates the vacya and the vacaka and is in- scparable from them All the three Vacya, Vacaka and Vakro- kt, together make a pleasant poetic composition which delights the connoisseurs For .the first time mn Alankarasastra Kuntaka defines Sahitya as the combination of beautiful and competent Sabda and artha with Vakrokti or Strikingness as its essential embellishment. He shows his independent genius in defining Sahitya. Later rhetoricians like Bhoja and Rajasekhara follow him but the originality and the modern approach is found only in Kuntaka's treatment of it.

86 Princptes of Literary Criticsm in Sanskrit

"सातिशयत्वशन्यवमयुक्नस्य वस्तुनो विभूषितस्यापि पिशाचाहेरिव

(V J P. 303, Dr Nagendra's Edn.) Kuntaka does not admit Svabhavokt, Rasavat, Preyas, Orjasvın, Udatta and Samāhta as alankāras According to him Vastu-Svabhava and Rasa, Bhava ete are always alankarya and can never be called Alankaras His treatment of Svabhavokti as an alankarya is novel and umque in the history of Alankara-Sastra There cannot be any existing Vastu without Svabhava, and if Svabhava itself is called an alankara there will be no alankarya in Svabhavokti. And the alanLarya cannot be one and the same Kuntaka mistakes the Svabhavolti alankara of earlier rhetoricians as a lokoktt or a common speech of ordinary people. So while proving Svabhavokt as an alankarya he stresses on the striling Vastu-Svabhava having poetic imagination In the same way, likc Svabhavokti, Kuntaka strongly protests to admit Rasavat as an alankara. He criticises the definitions of all earher rhetoricians, mcluding that of Anandavardhana, to prove rasavat as an alankarya. The term rasavat, though spuit into various Samasas, does not indicate any other Vastu except poetry And the rasavat alankara cannot be called as a whole poctry, because embelli- shment is a part of poetry and not the whole. Rasa is always alankārya according to Kuntaka, so he criticises Anandavardhana for giving rasa a subordinate position in the rasavat alankara Rasa is always Pradhana and it can never be subordinate to any other Vastu It cannot have a double position to be alankarya and alankara both. Anandavardhana's treatment of Rasa in the rasavadalankara as a gunībhūtavyangya kavya is a self contradiction when he gives highest position to rasadhvani as the soul of poetry in hu theory of Dhvam Kuntaka has correctly pointed out the mistake and has tried to correet the same in his own way. Rasavat, as alankara, can be explained as the alankara getting the tqual position and importance with rasa in

Prinriptes of Litarer Gritirir is Sershit

most supenor and consider other ritis as less superior or mfenor. According to Kuntaka geograplcal differenees cannot explam the ritis or differenuate them from one another Moreover, there cannot be an inferior way of poctc expression If it is not beautiful and supenor it can- not be called poctry at all and so it will be useless and futile to discuss the ways of expression which are pot admis- sble to poctry The mat purpose of poetry is to please the raskas by beauuful and artistic way of exprestion which gives the supreme delght So the Riu cannot be clasiftd as Uttama, Madbyama and Adhama as the adhama riti will be a poeuc flaw Kuntaka includes his margas in Vakyavakrata Though he generally classifies margas in three categones, namely, Sulumara, Vienra and Madbyama, he admuits that there are infimte arusuc ways of poeuc expression as the Kavi- pranbha is endless. The margas are completely dependent on Kavisvabhava according to Kuntala. A poct adopts a marga according to his Prauibha, Vyutpatti and abhyasa. In Sukumara marga the power of alaulila pratibha is seen and the importance is given 1o rasa, bhava or svabhava, hençe naturally the use of alankaras is less This is a pleasant and delicate way of expression and the famous poets like Kaldasa have followed it. In vicitra marga the fascination for alankaras is seen. The poct wants to show his artistic skill and the power of imagination by using a senes of striling figuratie expressions in poetry Of courst, these alankaras mainl reveal the beaun of alanlarya and the composition is not bereft of rasa. Valrokti is the life of this marga and it is very difficult to follow as it requires eminence and lot of practice along with the power of imagi- nation. Pocts lile Bana have followed this way of espression Madhyama marga is a combination of sulumara and vicitra margas and the poets having taste for novelty in expression follon this manga All these three margas are delighiful Thus Kuntala justifics all the beautiful portic ways of ex- pression giving all of them the equal importance. Kuntaka has shown onginalty and novelty in adopting gunas depending on margas. The four gunas Madhurya, Pratada, Lavanya and Abljatya belong to all the three

90 Prirrittes ef Litney Critrim i: Setrit

1. Vamavinyacarakrata which includes anuprast, Yrtus and Yamala in it. 2. Padapurvardha-Vakrata, and 3 Padaparardhavakrati which includes the beauty of Subamta and uihanta words. Kuntaka has discussed many varctics of using the striking and fit words to beautif the whole Kavi-vakya. Valvavkrata or Vastu-Vakrata includes all the alankaras, margar, gunas and rast. 5 Prakaranavakrata includes striking conversations in the worl, beautiful nature deeeriptiont, changes made mn the mcdents from that of the main source according to the theme of the concerned worl, for the sale of propnety, deselopment of the main character and rasa All sandhis and their angas also are mncluded in this classification. 6 Prabandhavakrati is a total effect of all these five varicties of Vakrata It also includes the change of rasa in a literary work from its original source, the proper arrangement of the whole work to help the full devclopment of rasa and bring propriety in the work The fit title indicating the main theme of the work, and the phalaprapti by the hero at the end come under this variety of Vakratā, Kuntala includes all the varicties of Dhvani in these six vericties of Vakrats making Vakrata a most broad and all-perrading concept. Both the Dhvani and the Yakroku theories are finally related to the Kavipratibha. But the medium of approach of both the rhetoricians is different from cach other. Anandavardhana reaches Pratibha of the poet through rasa which is suggested. His treatment is subjectie, guiding the critics to appreciate the best poety and get the bighest delight. Kuntala reaches Pratibha through Valrolti thich is an alaulila abhidha indluding other fabdavyaparas like Vyanjana etc and is found only in the best poctry and not in the ordmary language His treatment of the poetic coacepts is objective, guiding the ntw practiuioners in poetr, as well as belping the critics to

AN EXPOSITION OF THE RASA-THEORY IN THE RASAKAUMUDI OF SRIKANTHA

Dr. A N. Jant

Śrikantha, a Kannada musicologist was patronised by the Jam King Satrugalya of Navanagar near Dvaraka mn Saurashtra He wrote his work Rasakaumudi' during the reign (1569-1608 A D ) of his patron to harmonize the theory and practice of the Northern Indian music The work is divided into two parts The first half con- sisting of five chapters deals with music and the latter half, also consisting of five chapters, deals en passant with some topics of literature connected with music * Thus the latter half seems to be an appendix of the earher part which forms the mam theme. He tries to justify the superionty of music over hterature' and for grving precedence to music in the treatment. However, he prefers to call his work Rasakau- mudi rather than Sangitakaumudi probably to suggest to the readers that the latter half of his work is also equally impor- tant and that he is not only a musicologist but also a poct and a rhetorician.

I. Published in tbe GO Series, Baroda, rg63, can be had of the Sangcet Natak Akademi, Rabindra Bhavan. Ferozeshah Road, New Delhi, Price Rs I3 It was submitted to the Umversity of Bombay for the degree of D latt for which Dr Jan was declared cligibte in July rgG8. 2. c. सज्गोनयास्त किल पूर्वखण्डे विधाय साहित्यमयोत्तरेण। विरच्यते भूरिगू णंकनाम वदगभूत हि गुसपर्दिप्टम् ॥। ६.२ 3. cf. मगीनसाहित्यमिति प्रयोग प्रयोगविना प्रवदन्ति नित्यम्। तयाविघा नो वयपन्ति मिथ्या मगीनमाहान्म्यमतो:बिकं स्वात् ।।

94 Principles of Literary Crilicism in Sanskrit

the rasa becomes manifest through the alambana vbhavas eg the beloved, and the uddipana vibhavas e.g. garden, notes of cucloos ete, it being discernible in the form of the anubhavas eg the movements of the nech, the cyebrows, the eyes and the hands ete, and being enhanced by the sancari- bhavas, the mirveda etc. In the third and the fourth stanzast he repeats the idea expressed in the second stanza and holds further that this rasa is ascertained mn the actor who cleverly imitates the hero These two stanzas(3-4) are nothing but versification of the view of Bhatta Lollata as recorded by Mammata in his Kāvyaprakāša " In the first quarter of the fifth verse the vew of Bhatta Nayaka is given without mentioning his name explicitly as he is referred to only by the word kecit' The second quarter seems to represent the view of Sanknka as the expression 'şamajıkaprakara sadara.carvyamanah' reminds us of the words 'ratyādır bhāvas tatrasannapi sāmajk ānām vāsanayā carvya- māno rasa iu Śrišankukah.' The last two quarters of the fifth verse and the sixth verse represent the view of Abhinayagupta 4

1. vide Note 2, p 93 above.

जनित., अनुभाव: वटाक्षमुजाक्षेपप्रभुतिभि कार्य प्रवीतियोग्य वृती, व्यभि- चारिभिनिवेदादिभि सहवारिभिरुषचितो मुस्यया वृत्या रामाद्ावनुकार्य वदू पतानुमन्यानान्न्तंकेऽपि प्रतीयमानो रम' इति भट्टलोल्लटप्रमुतयः। 3. व भोगेन भुज्यत इति प्रवदन्ति केचित् (७५ अ) 4. लोके प्रमद्गादिभि स्थाम्यमुमानेऽम्यानमाटबबता काव्पे नाट्ये च तरेव

.. मनीतरभिव्यकन: सामाजिकाना वामनान्मनया स्थित स्यायी रत्यादिको नियनप्नमानुगवत्वेन स्थिनोपि सावारणोपायवलान् तवालविगनतपरिमिन- प्रमान भाव वशोन्मिपिववेद्यान्तगसपकंशुन्यापरिमिनभावेन प्रमाना मकलहृपप- मतादनाजा साधरण्पेन स्वावार इवाभित्नोपि भोवरीवतत्वस्वमापतैवस्णो विभावादिजीविवावधि, पानकरमन्यामेन धव्यमाघ, पुर इव परिस्करन

96 Prnciples of Ltterary Crihrism nt Sansknt

Thesc vaneties are illustrated mn 11-18. Remaining rasas are illustrated one by one in one stanza each . has a (19), karuna (20), raudra (21), vira (22), bhayanala (23), bibhatsa (24), adbhuta (25) and sānta (26) Thus the overall pattern of this chapter shows the author's close study of the Kavyapralasa and the above comparative study makes it evident as to what extent Śri- Lantha presses Kavyaprakasa into service Incidentally, this throws light on the popularty and hold of KavyapraLasa over the rhetoricians of Gujarat even during the 16th century when the present work was composed.

DISCt SSION

V Venkalachalam The expression सामाजिकप्रकरमादर चव्पमाण in 5b has been interpreted by you to contain a reference to the theory of Sanlula on the Rasa- sutra as reproduced by Mammata in his Kāyaprakasa But I think this lme cannot be detached from the preceding line (5a) in which the view of Bhattanayala has been explained Both lines form a composite unit and if you tale out Wiwifae ete. there is no subject left and the sentence is hardly complete In fact Sritantha makes no mention of the vicw of Sri Sankuka and gocs straight over to Bhatta Nayaka after giving a summary of the view of Bhatta Lollata Not only mn vicw of Sankuka but also in the exposition of Bhatta Nayaka the Samajika has his sharc -- which he gets out of his own Vasana. RC Dwired There arises one difficulty if we assume that the line 5b has a reference to Bhatta Nayaka We should not be oblmmous of the fact that Sri- Kantha is not only trying to give a summary of the four theones regarding Rasa as contained in the Kavya-Prakila but also to reproduce the language of Mammata as is perfectly clear from the whole stanza No 4 and the line 5b Now, if

CONCEPT OF RASA IN THE BHATTI-KAVYA

Dr Satya Pal Narang

Bhatti, the author of the Bhatti-Kavya, is an important figure not only in the history of Sansknt Grammar but also in the history of Sansknit poctics He was the author of a Sastra-Kavya which aimed at illustrating grammar, alankaras, poetics as well as conjugational forms in vanous tenses and moods Thus, in practice, Bhatt-Kavya is an important link between the Natyasastra, and the Kavyalankara of Bhamaha A question arises, when the grammar, alankaras and the gunas like Prasada and Madhurya were illustrated by Bhatti, why did he not illustrate Rasa? The answer striking to my mind is that he deliberately did not want to illustrate it As the trend of poetry during his contempo- rary period (6th Cent, A.D. last part) had changed, so every poet aimed at writing such a poem which could excel another in its scholarly approach Bhatti could not escape that trend. He asserts 'my work is like a lamp to those who possess grammatical sight, but it is useless lile a mirror for a bhnd person, who is not proficient in grammar'. In this respect, Bhatui can be compared to Subandhu, who boasts to have composed a Kavya which contains Slesa in cach and every word (प्रत्वस्षरस्लेपमयप्रबन्ध ---- )- Even the poct hke Kahdasa who is said to be the foremost of the Indian poets could not escape this tendency as he has employed Yamakas in the Raghuvamsa Canto IX. Bhatti also adopted the same trend to write a poem which serves two-fold purposes Bhamaha seems to take notice of such a tendency when he says that 'if poems were to be explained like a senpture (Sastra), ah ! the dull-witted are kitled." In fact,

वाव्याननि यदोमानि व्यास्यागममानि सास्त्रवन्। उन्सय भुघियानेप हन्त दुर्मेमसो हज।।

100 Prinsiptes of Literary Critirisr in Senskril tional characteristics of a Mahalavya and has thus written some verses which can be said to be the cramples of various Rasas Both Bhamaha and Dandin have accepted Rasa as one of the characteristics of a Mahalavya. In the deseription of the physical beauty of Surpanalha and Sita, the poct has tried to dwell upon Srngara Rasa. Vipralambha Srngara is found in about twelve verses in the Bhatti-Kavya (VI 73-84) which 13 mostly blended with grammatical illustrations and appears like a catalogue of suffixes rather than genume Vipralambha Srgara in parti cular But in the eleventh canto of the Bhatt-Kavya, an excellent picture of the Sambhoga Srgara is found In fact this canto is named as Madhurya Guna which again shows that Bhatt wanted to incorporate Rasa in a Guna. In about 50 verses (1.20, III.20-22, 49-50, V.95-95; VI 8 31, 124-125, XIV. 55-60) sentiment of pathos is found in the Bhatt-Kavya In fact, all these verses are seattered in various cantos and are not the examples of a systematic sentiment of pathos which again shows that Bhatti had no consistency with regard to Rasa (Rasabhava-nairantarya) lilc later pocts (Mahalāvyakaras) Similarly, in about five verses cach Raudra, Bhayanala and Bibhatsa Rasa are ako found but they are not very important to show the cxistence of respeetive Rasa in theory or practice. Heroic sentiment (Virarasa) is dominant in the Bhatp-Kavya Being a heroic poem, it was difficult for the poet to avoid the physical deseription of vanious indivi- duals and battle-fields But in mest of the deseriptions it is completely blended with illustrations of rules and conjugational forms which apparently appear to be adequate to enhance the beauty of the Vira Rasa. But it is only with a motif of illustrating grammar. On the whole, the Vira Rasa is merely outer physical expression of various heroie activities. Thus, having examined the Bhatti-Kavya both in theory and practice, it appears that all the contemporary rhetoricians were stressing upon cither Alaflara or Guna.

BHAVA IN SANSKRIT POETICS : A HISTORIETTE

Basant Jailly The world Bhava has acquired various meanings in Sanslirt literature However, if we examine it from the standpoint of poetics we shall have to admit that it is the soul of poetry The other three elements of poetry viz. imagina- ton (Kalpana) perception (Buddhi) and style (silpa) are in fact based on the Bhava Thts is the element which clearly draws the lme of demarcation among poetry, science and history Bhava is born of feeling, therefore, it is related with the mind Mind may be taken as an executne power of the soul and Bhava is described as the agitation or Vilara in the mind. The word Bhava is often used at the ends of compounds which stand for situation and mimetic changes but even then they cannot be placed under the heading 'Bhava' because it has been used in a technical sense and the number of Bhavas has been fixed by the acaryas Bharata, as usual, is the first aesthetician who has dealt with Bhava in details, The problem is, why the Bhavas are given this particular name ? Whether this name is given because of their happening or the quality of effecting ? Bhavas are called dispositional in nature (Cittavrtu Svarupa) and therefore the etymology of the word may be the first situation in which Bhava is taken to the peak and is never found in a static state. Sccondly, Bhava takes place in the Cittavrttis Bhavana Prakriya through the media of experience and knowledge in the least possible time and by mingling in- to the heat provides pleasure as sentment. That is why Bharata has used two verbs Bhavanu and Bhavayant, sımult- ancously It is to be noted here that both the verbs used by hum have a causal sense-one that happens or one that causes something to be He further clarifics his stand in the three Anuvamsya slokas which convey three different mean- ings of the word

I Nitasistra, 7 p 405, Motial Banarudis Ed

104 Principles of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit with the help of his treatment of Bhavayitri Pratibha He holds that the Bhavayitri Prauibha forces one to evaluate the pomt taken by the poet and his purpose at large It is under the shadow of this pratbha only that the tree of Kavyavyapara flourihes and without its help remains unfruitful t The des- cnption forces us to conclude that Rajasekhara considers Bhava to be of great importance, as it is with the assistance of the Bhavayitri Pratibha that the poet succeeds in fusing his emotio- nal experience into a poem and thus making tt full with life But it is to be admitted that this deseription more or less shows the importance of Bhava in general and does not throw any light as far as its specific qualites or definition part is concerned Dhananjaya and Dhamka come forward with a new approach The Kanka of Dasrupala states that when the heart of the spectator is fully associated with the pleasure, pain, joy and sorrow of the substratum (Asraya) that stage is Bhava * Dhanka, commenting on the Karka, emphasizes that when the emotions of the Anukarya are manifested in the the spectator, then this Vasana or Bhavana is called Bhava." The conclusion may, easdly be drawn that Dhananjaya and Dhanika take Bhava as the feeling of pleasure or pain in the spectator and thus look at the problem from the spectator's view-pomt only Their analysis is narrow in comparison to that of Bharata While in Bharata's analysis all the Sthayins Vyabhicarins and Sattvikas are included, the approach of Dhananjaya and Dhanika is upto Sthayins and Vyabhicarins only. Sattvikas have been referred to and dealt with separa- tely mn nature and it is only for the sake of being in accor- dance with the convention that they have been entitled 'Bhava'. It has been stated previously that Bharata does not consi- der Bhava as Cittavrtti only Abhinavagupta disagrees with Bharata and accepts it only as a Cittavrtti or cmotion 4 The stand of Abhinava clearly shows that his analysis of Bhava includes Sthayins, Vyabhicarins and Sattvikas and excludes all

Kavyamimamsa p 34, Chowkhamba Ed. Dasaropaka, 4 verse 3, Ibid 3 The same (Avalokapornon), 4 p 187, 1brd 4 Abhina vabharat p 34z Gackwad's Ed

106 Prennples of Literery Criticin in Sarstril

a tree and the tree gives birth to the fowers and fruits, in the same way Rasas are the root cause of the Bhavas and Bhavas are caused by the Rasas 1 Bhoja, too, conudering the cvoked Ratyadı Rasa as Bhava supports the stand of Bbarata, Abhinava and many other acaryas# Anyway this is not the definition of Bhava Ramsingh the commentator on Sarasvatilanthabharana brngs out the defimtion of Bhava commenting on Bhoja's Sabdaguna, bhavila, which is nothing but the expresnon of Bhava He wntes, the vrth of that citta is Bhava which is entangled in an emouional criss." This definition is very much alin to that of Abhmava and it would need no support if we observe that the Cittayrtti- Visesa of Abbinava has acquired here the shape of Bhavans- dasāpanna

Further, clanfving the nature of Bhava, Bhoja explains that all the Bhavas are fundamentally of the form of love. A warnor fights because he loves fighting, the clown laughs beca- use he loves laughing and so on. But this too is not an onginal stand The difference occurs when he recognizes as many Rasas as there are Bhavas He belicves that all the Bhavas are equal in the middle stage of Ahankara (madhyamavastha), previous being the para stagt. In this second or middle stage the basic Ahankara Rasa reveals it- self as Abbimana for many external objects with which it has come in contact. At this stage the basic or one Rasa multiples into several Bhavas and thete Bhavas which rose out of the Ahankara reach the climax being atttnded by their particular evoling conditions These Bhavas, though at climax, are in fact Bhavas but may secondanly be called Rasas because the Ahankara Rasa provides its character to these Bhavas also This is the same stage where Rau, Has etc, come to the mature stage of Smgara, Hasya etc. It is duc to this analysis that Bhoja, in his Srngaraprakafa, accepts no division among them as eight or nine Sthayins, thirtythree Vyabhicarins and eight Sāttvikas Every Bhava, for him, is

Abbrsavabharatt, p 249, Ibid Sararyatkaptbabharana 5 verse 13, Pandurarg Javan Ed Sararvauikanhabharana p 60, Ibad LA

108 Principles of Literary Critieism in Sarskrit

cannot be external only Bhanumifra takes Sattva to be the body of living beings or Jiva Sariral and explains Sattvikas in terms of external manifestations This is really wrong to the extent that the absurdity of his statement may be realised through the applance of simple logic. The emotion, which is in no way present mside, cannot be externally manifested in the true sense This is the main reason which has forced the Acaryas to submit that Sattvilas at the first stage emerge as Bhavas and later on they are manifested as Anubhavas. Why Bhanumisra has taken this one sided view regarding Sattvilas is still a puzzle which awaits an answer. However, if we mterpret the term 'Rasanulola Vikara' as indicating all the internal and external changes this definition of Bhava becomes specifically broad Visvanatha Kaviraja gives a more lucid defimtion of Bhãva According to him the principal accessories, love concerning a diety, teacher, sage, ling or the like and the Sthayi Bhava not properly awakened are denominated Bhava". The defimition of Visvanatha makes it clear that ths Bhava has been given a broader perspective in his Sahityadarpana. While in Mammata's definition the case of improperly awal- ened Sthayin was just inferred, Visvanatha has gien it full treatment by mentioning it clearly and thus he has stolen a march over Mammata Panditaraja Jagannatha starts with a discussion. He comments, if we accept Bhava as different from dependents, excitants and ensuant emotions but at the sametime sug- gestive of Rasa, it will be victimised by ativyapti because Sabda and Artha are necessarily suggestive of Rasa Be- sides it will only be applcable to the Rasavyanjaka Bhavas and not to the self-suggested ones * He further argues, if we define Bhava to be that Citta- vrtt which expressess Rasa, even then the situation does not alter as this definition too is a victim of Ativyapti For cxample if a Virahini has taken Kalagaru lquid as poison a garland of blue lotuses as snake, it is her false knowledage of the objcets which is born of separation In fact it is an

F. The same 4 p 38, 1bid 2 Sabityadarpana, 3 360, Motilal Banaraudas Ed 3 Rasagangadhera, 1 p 277, Banaras Htndu Unneruty Ed

ticians, he docs not philosophise the problem concerning the root cause of the Bhavas and takes it in an easy way He simply says that the Vibhavas are the root cause of the Bhavas and Anubhavas are their Karya ' His definiton does not provide any new gtound for the analysis of Bhava as he has repeated the view of Abhinava and many others who take it to be a Manovikara or disposition only The Bhakti Cult dealt with the Bhavas in its own way and provided a new dimension for its analysis The treat- ment, as found in the Bhalt Cult, is lucid and convincing but requires a separate article for a proper exposition of the subject At present we would have to keep ourselves content with the above estimate of the Bhava which pomts out how it has developed in Sanskrit Poetics and acqwred various shapes in the hands of different Acaryas Further, this analysis makes it clear that there are three main elements in it Firstly, that which remains in the shape of congerutal instinct ie Vasana Secondly, that which causes something to be and resides in our consciousness i e Bhavana of Alam- bana etc. Fmally, that which is externally manifested through the behaviour or figure of a person, ie. Anubhavas If we lool at the above mentioned elements in the context of modern Psychology it would be quite easy to draw the con- clusion that the first seems to contain a synthetic form of instinets and dispostions. The second rightly deals with the emotions and the third indicates towards the physical expres- sion of emotions Though deviations may be found here and there yet on the whole the deviations do lose their impor- tance if we keep in our mind dates of these worls when they were composed

VG Shneesteed Suppose a person, for example a Westerner, docs not beheve in impressions of former birth will he be able to accept thts analysis of bhana (which is based largely upon a behef in former birth) because I think that congenital instincts

The samc, p 2

112 Prineples of Literary Griticusm in Sanskrir

are called bhacas and as soon as they become externally mandfested they are called anubhdoes

R P. Diwedt One more question anses here The Anubhaoas (tr )

are of two types, those caused by Sttmka-bhavas and those caused by Sancar bhapas It means that the mental state in the anubhaoas is not indepen- dent from that of the sthaun or sancaribhards Since they are caused by either sthaytn or sancarin, they are obviously effects-1 e external I, therefore, think that since sattrikas cannot exist without sthaym etc they are only external 1 e knyarupa and they do not possess any mternal nature about themselves, as propounded by Dr R S Jaitly yesterday; otherwise we will have to assume that the sattrikas are not only caused by sthayins etc but that they exist in the atta independently also R S Jadly. I never said that the sattolas are only external and not internal. In fact I always emphasized the internal as well as external aspects of them The one is unmanifested, the other manifested Every Sattorka can be found in the same person m its unmanifested form as bhara before it is externally manifested as anubhara RP Duireds Is this internal state of rattrikas different from (tr)

that of sancarns and sthayns ? R S Jaitly: Yes, it is decidedly different from that of the Sancanns and the sthayins. How and where would you otherwise accommodate the bhards like stambha etc ? (tr.) R P. Duneedt The acaryas consider the anubharas of two types according to their ongin, of these the first type emanates from the sthanibhasas and the other from the Saficaribhacas. Exeept these two there is no other cause of anubharas But you accept the internal state of the satteka which means that there is also third type of the anubhacas (salteikas) whch have their own internal latent state as their

SOME OBSERVATIONS ON THE DEFINITION OF POETRY

Dr T G Maukar

It can be safely asserted that though many hile Poctry, Kama, few are able to define it When about to define, they often end by unsatisfactorily describing it The difficulty is really inherent in the problem itself There are many words as well as concepts, familiarty and understanding of which is usually taken for granted but a deeper examinatron of which reveals that there is only a vague awareness of the meaning and content of the same One may refer in this context to the words and concepts like the Beautiful, Good and the like Familianty breeds contempt, the saying gocs, and one might add m matters like these, familiarity ignores ignorance, is often unaware of the same It is an awareness of such a situation that makes men to attempt to define such concepts and thus try to be as precise as possible and have as close an understanding as possible in the use of such words and concepts Kane has such a powerful sway over the human mind that cultured minds like those of Bhartrhari have scorned Lingdoms in exchange of poetry, 'sulanta yadt ast rajmna kim'. It is no wonder then, that those given to a study of poetry should start with an attempt at defining it So all rhetoricians, both in the east as well as the west, arc seen from quite early periods in poetic studies, devoting much time and energy to the problem of defining poetry in as satis- factory a manner as is possible What is kanra and why we like at are questions which are often asked and rarcly answered satisfactorily. Hence fresh attempts and a drcerning criticism of the carher attem- pts become a sheer necessity. It would be no exaggeration af it were said the science of rhetorics is nothing but an attempt to arrive at a new and satisfactory answers to these questions of the definition of poetry, kaya, and the poetic ecperiehce and its precise way of affecting the reader. A definition by itselfis a difficult problem and it has been rendered

116 Principles of Literary Criticism in Sonshnt

too include all that is so denoted Such a harsh logical insis- tence also adds not a littie to the difficulties of the problem. One can be justified in thinking that poctry is an art and that since the main purpose of an art is to gne delrght; sakala-prayojara-maulıbhata, vigalita-vedānterar, Brahmāssādasako- darat etc -the definition should have a reference to these excellent pieces rather than to the ordinarv ones which are regarded as poetry only through sheer generositv and courtesy. A definition that covers all the specimens, from the best to the worst may perhaps satisfy a strict logician but rarely one who is a ranka, a sa-hrdeja, a lover of poetry. A defimton should not exclude anvthing that is good but at the same time it should not land us into the diffcult of calling even the bad piece as a worh of art Rhetoncs is primarily dis- cussion of good hiterature and not of its lowest vancty, which has no pretence whatsoever to art, or to anything that art umplies. As soon as Poetry, Kdeja, is regarded as an art, its relation with the other arts comes to the mind, for all these other arts too are seen as having the same main purpose of giving highest delight to man. It therefore becomes necessary to distinguish Kasya from the other arts which having a common purpose differ between themselves because of the medium they use. This medium is the chief dis- tinguishing factor, eracacchedaka, and hence ought to be given in a difinition for thereby the art stands separated from the group Word is the medium of Keeja and hence almost each and every definition of Kare in Sanskrit refers to the fabda which is the base. It is therefore that Bhamaha defnes Kaaa as "fabdirthzu sahitas kaeyem' and Dandin defines it as 'istartha-pacacchtind tadaral'. Vamana defines it as 'rilth atma kasyasya' yet his ritt is 'rlis'a padsracans'. Rudrata's definition is "Sabdarthar ko-jen' while Mammata's definition is 'tadadotay Sabdarthau sagunau analar)rti funch teapr. Visvanatha, who defines Kavya as 'rdkyem rasatsekeri', cannot resist the temptation of telling that it is a 'vakya'. Jagannatha too has to observe that the Kavya is rameiyartha-pratipadaka fabda All these writers lay stress on the sabda because of its being the medrum of this art. Yet it would be improper to stop at this mention of

118 Principles of Literary Criticsm in Sanskrit

but it is common Inowlcdge that this is not poetry It therefore becomes necessary to distingish the raba or the Sabdarthau as used in day to day life and as used in poctry In poetry the sabdarthau or the cakya are used by an artist to say something sigmificant in a deliberately chosen manner and he therefore seeks it to make more powerful alankr or add samething to its bare form so that they become sigmificant and evoke from us a response that the sentence or the words in our day to day life used, seldom do It is to convey this distinction that Mammata adds the words sagunau and adosau by way of giving the necessary qualifica- tions of sabdarthau in potery Jagannatha also clearly adds 'ramania-artha-prahpadaka' as a qualification of sabda and also gives the explanation that raraniata is the power to gic delight that is unique and wonderful, lokottara To strcss the fact that a sentence in poetry appeals to emotion, Visva- natha informs us that it is 'resatmake' and tales for granted that the sentence contams a sthinbhaca that can develop into a resa To Dandin also the 'itirtha' appears to be a common property of the body, tarira, of the words in life and in poetry, but in poetry, the alankaras, the dehasobhakara dharmas, the properhies that decorate the padaralf, are of sup- reme importance Vāmana's word kāapa refers to sabdārthau while his 'ith alma kamage' poits out this distinction between ordinary language and poetry. Anandavardhana also in his celebrated 'sa-hrdayalhadt sabdarthamangalam' clearly points out this very pertinent power of poctical language It will thus be seen that all these crities appear to suggest that the medium of poctry is words but these have a special power by which they affect emotion, convey a charming meaning and cause delight It should not be understood that words here are alan)ila while those in day to day use are not so In our day to day life also Upama, Amohti, Vajastuh are used and in poetry at times alarkaras as such may be absent altogether. It is therefore that Mammata observes 'analankrti krapf. We are all familar with poctry that is without any alarkarar and one which appeals through its emotional purity, mtensity and simphcity and one may refer in this context to verses hke 'matrbhth cintamansr am te hi nah ditatah gatsh' Duhkha- samtedanajaica rame cattanayam ahilam' and so many of tluis class.

120

and has not the very veasar cet' to do mach with these? One would be jurtifed in thinking thet ciare poetry all over the world and m any language is the samt, any defni- ton worth the mame should refer to this universal dement in poetrv Thus we see poetry being defined as -best words in best order' and an analysis rercals thet dest wrorde are tey mnch the samt as saray' and vahe-ottt ae The adjertive .best' hes obmioudy a refereote to sarrrebs, cmrihe and sammths Summilary best order' would suggert eractly what Vamana demres to suggert by his rEt and EEdE fods ren a', for "usta' could be parfecth undersood as 'ber' once Vamana himself tells us mirm grfmf. In both theee t7ews what is contemplated is the beauty and pedeciom in style and also imphes singular capaenty to coprty a char- ing meaning All this dicussion recalls to our mind the words of Dandm wantke errhrs tatt-ul. One might also be justifed in thinking that the deinmon of Vitranatha cre resEmalem tyrn, males one think of the eel- brated words mn the contest of poctry that it is 'spoatancons overlon of powerful feelings' and *emotion recolleeted in tranquillity'. The onlr dufference that one is lldy to be awart of is that while Wordnrorth appears to think primarih of the origin of poetry and from the point of view of the poct Yiranatha appears to heve the rasits before him. But when it as remembered that the rert is nothing but the si35ihtts in the compostion, it becomes clear that utimatey Visvanstha leads us to the 'emotion' in poetry that is capable of being 'rlished' by a sa edg: Two things suile one when one looks at these defsitions of t5s that there Sanskrit rhetoricians give uE Firdy, it is to be noted ihat none has 'condemoed' poetry as it males people dream, it entices with words, it ereates illudone aod ultimately makes tnactve and so oa or that it inberently rerts on a falschood, Similarly one dops not come acros 'didactic' definitions ble the one that Portry is crititien of life and so on Dapdin, Dhamaba, Yamana, Anendavardbana, Mammaja, Vivanatha, Jagannitha none of there adopis this point of vicw while speaking of poetry or when defiring it Though one might say that there is a reference to the ato defe in 'LErtisermite'ed iedrenje but it is clear that this

122 Principles of Literary Criticism in Sanshrit

Srngara and raht. Life is so full of incidents or mirth and sorrow and experiences of various types more meaningful, when a person is compelled to come out with an expression that is highly sigmificant as well as charming Sanskrit dramas themselves are full of so many utterances of this type, which convey something deeper, more valuable and of more lasting value in life Yet Mammata, leaving everything else should have thought of this 'double-dealing' and ryanjona through the word 'adhama' and the objeetnes that cleverly suggest the other meaning either as charming or as one deserving to be classed as the best 'ultame' is something which one cannot easily comprehend Indeed, what has this verse in it that could be compared with the 'Ode to Nightin- gale' or 'Ode to the West Wind,' or the 'Sky-lark' of "the Ode to the Intimations of Immortality,' to name at ran- dom ? In fact, one fcels tempted to observe that as a matter of fact the verse that Mammata himself has quoted to illustrate the 'asphuta alankaratoa' is a far better piece of literary art than ths one which he regards as one of the 'uttema' type. Judged by all the canons of poetry the verse :

"Yah kaumaraharah sa eva hi varah ta eva caitraksapāh te conmilta-malatisurabhayah praudhāh kadambanilāh sa carvasmi tathapi tatra surata-vyapāra-lilā-vidhau reva-rodhast vetasi-taru-tale cetah samutlanthate"

is a superior piece of art The emotional quality makes it a comparable lyric with any other lyric in any language The keen and familar intense longing of the human mind for joys once experienced has found a very eloquent yet poctic expression hert. The very happy choice of words, the soft alliteration and the predominance of soft sounds, y, v, r, 1 and t, the Jong metre-all these have combined effectively to gie a fine expression to the longing and the awakening of the mind into that heaven of experience in the green cane-thicket bowers on the bank of the rver Reva on the night in Caitra fragrant with the intoxicating aroma of the Aalatis. There is an effort to catch the magic of the atmosphere and expenence that once was and in this effort, the element of love or of frngara has become subordinate or further sugges-

124 Prinritles of Literary Grificism it Senstril

touches the life itself Suggestions that one gets after reading the sonnets of Shalespeare, Odes of Wordsworth and Shelley and Keats and the thall that one receives after it is the real pleasure mn poetry and deserves to be considered as deei or Vyaijana. Nenther the definitions nor the illustrations of Sansknt rhetoncians indicate any thing that they ever thought of poetry or the dhram in this manner. On the other hand one notices the anxiety and care with which they deure to see that a composition vaithout emotion and embellishment is not excluded from the defimition of tKaa' and one is surprised to find Visvanatha also to be following the tradi- tional way, after having properly realized the great importance of sase in poetry It is very difficult to see either force of reason in the argument that when a 'prabardht' is 'serers' then the verses in it or sentences in it also are 'serese'. Ont will readily grant that the Mrechakapika is "erar' but one would not agree to the view that the verse of Carudatta, 'Maitreya, Lsıpa mgadam puranalupe' is 'sarasa'. What is commonplace and bad must be so termed. These bimitations of the Sanskrit rhetoricians in a way erplan to us the limitations of Sanstrit criticism and litera- ture This also to a certamn extent explains to us the criti- cism that is levelled against them (Both these by modemn students of literature and those whose vision has been widened on account of their study of western criticism and western literature ) Srngara and Alankara appear to be the weak points of these writers. It is also difficult to understand why should have they spent so much energy in discussing whether the dose could be present in a kaa, if so to what extent, could a human composition be free from all the dyes and so on In the context of real poctry all these appear to be not important at all These writers themselves have shown that faws lile sidhosmmarse, pmarth do not serioudy affect the quality of a picce. Generations of critics and lovers have accepted Shalespeare with his so-called obscenity, Lawrence, Joyce and Pound with their "faults'. It is often interesting to think what would be the estimate of these writers according to the canons of these rhetoricians When one consders all these definitions and the mge- nuity shown in all these discussions and also the Enal out-

126 Principles of Literary Cnhteism in Sanstrit

total of these factors Even if all these factors are under- stood, there will always remai something that eludes our grasp and it is reall this 'eluding' part that bestows the individualty on the mind The individual fights hard to maintain this distinctness and logic is only a maid, an instrument in the struggle for a preservation of this aspect This will serve to explain the futility of discussions and deliberations in this matter, The indn"dual mind tres to preserve its own empire itact But this does not mean that the mind does not seel any contact with other minds The fact is just the other way This indnn- dual mind, so anxious to retai its indnuduahty mtact is also 'extremely cunous and eager' to know about the world and the self This Leen deure, a fundamental trait, estab- lishes a contact between an mndnadual mind and the other minds with whom it likes to have a discourse It is cager to 'listen' to other minds Reading literature is, as a matter of fact, listening to other minds It is only when a proper communication is established that an experience of one mind can be transferred into the mind, can be appreciated by it, can be alloned to enter the erstwhile closely and zealously guarded cmpire of the mind. Expenences that do so enter are honoured and preserved as precious possessions The empire of the mind expands, for it does not know the bars of culture, country, or time. These are experiences that are eternal and universal.

Poets use images to convey what they want ; they want to invade these individual empires of the readers, or of the 'sahrdayas'. It at once does strike a chord of sympathy in experience and reveals to us something unperceived hitherto The more we think on it, the more it expands and its content assumes universalty and depth The image is the spell, the charm of a magician, since it conjures up the universe of experience and content before us The beauty of this image has little or nothing to do with the constituents of the image, for its beauty hes in its content, in its rich ever-expanding suggestion It is this suggestion that is really the Dh-ari, the Vyanjans, in poetry This meaning differs from the grammatical meaning and the scholarly interpretations. This

128 Prinritles of Literary Criticism in Sanstrit

that desired such dialogues realized all this and it is through ther dalogues that our minds today have attained that culture that thev seem to possess today. The mind today is the creation of this ancient hiterary tradition It is because of this tremendous impact and power of literature, that it is of urgent importance that it is properly read, understood and appreciated. Rhetoricians help us in some measure no doubt but their lamtations in this matter also should be understood.

Bharata is returning to Ayodhya from the home of his maternal unele He has learnt of the serious illness of his royal father; but does not know that he has died He stops for a while in the vicinity of Ayodhya and enters into the memorial of kings (Pratimagrha) where the statues of the past kings of the dynasty of ILsvaku, beginning with Dilipa, are kept He admires the excellence of sculptured images in the pillars, in which divimty and humanity are thoroughly harmonised He is wonder-struck at the expression of life and emotion in them The Leeper of the memorial recognises the family resemblance between the statues of the past kings and the physical frame of Bharata And Bharata, when he comes to the statues of Da aratha, immediately recognises his father in it, though terrbly shocked at such a sight, he refuses to believe his eyes and asks the keeper "Whose statu" is this?" There is a reference to imitative painting in Bhagavata, Section 10 and subsection 62 This reference occurs in con- nection with the marnage of Usa, daughter of Bana, and Amruddha, grandson of Krsna and son of Pradyumna Usa beheld Aniruddha in a dream and became passion- ately enamoured of him She took her friend Citralekha, daughter of a minister, into confidence Citralekha was such an expert in imitative painting and was so familiar with the figures of all the past and present kings and princes, that she could draw such pictures that the original could be recognised in the pictorial presentation She offered her help and to enable Usa to recognise her object of love among the kings or princes, the started drawing their imitative pictures When she drew the picture of Aniruddha, Usa recognised her object of love in the pictorial exclaimed "This is that". presentation, smiled and

Imitation as a principle of presentation of drama on stage, was well-recognized in India at the time of Patanjalt (3rd cBC ) For, commenting upon Panini's aphorism (3-1-26) "THf q" he refers to it as follows :-= A scene, presenting the killing of Kamsa by Krşna, is bcing staged The stagc-manager is directing it personally Some one enquires, 'What is the stage-manager doing ?" The reply is that "He is directing the killing of Kamsa by Krsna" The objection to the use of the present tense is raised:

152 Pri-ritles of Litera Crifirim is Sehit imperfectly impresed by the world of ideas, are both irra- tonal (1I) since one of the component parts of human be- ing, the body, to which all impulses, passions and feelings belong, is irrational (III) since out of the three forms of human knowledse (a ) comprehencion of ideas (b) sease.per- cepuon and (c) opimon, the last two arc irratonal and (IV) since imtative art is confined to parual copying of the object of phenomenal world, is the object of sense perception and arouses passions and feelingt, it is urrational all round. It does not, therefore, strengthen the mind but corrupts it Hence it should have no place in the ideal Republic The theory of imitation m art has been enticised and mccted mn India also, but not because of any metaphysical dias and pohncal conbderation file those of Plato It is rjected on the logieal and acstbetical grounds There art two Indian Acstheucrant, Bhatta Lollata and Sritankuts, 5oth belonging to Kashmir, who are said to bave propounded the theory of imitation in art. (I) One tays that imitation is to ereate illusion of the histoncal and (II) the other says that it is to make the inference of the unitated besic mental state, the central fact in the acsthetic expenenct, pomtible respectivtly. The theory that art creates illusion through imitative presentation of the historical is criticised as follows :- If art creates illusion, it would arouse ordinary attitudts and responses And such an admission would mean the denial of an independent value to art It would also mean condemnation of all tragic preseatations, For, we will have to admit the rise of tragic fecling of sorrow from them, which as such is not relichable. The theory, that art imitates to male the inference of the basic mental state of the imitated posuible, is logically and historically subsequent to the theory that art, through imitation, creates illusion. The exponent of the imitation- inference theory raises the question -- "How can the awareness of the bacic mental state be possible from an imitative presentation, which creates fllusion? For, the illusion is purely pereeptual. It is respoa- sible for taking one perceptible thing for another which is also perceptible. It is incapable of direetly bringing about

1S4

#s to delude the spectator to take it for the real phenomtmon and to arouse the same tumult of feclings as doss the criginal And it was because of such a conception of imitation thet be condemned art, the produet of imitation, and therefert, illusion and deception Anstotle improves upon this concep- uon. He dicuses the meaning of imitation in respect of the (1) objeet (11) the means and (IlI) the manner.

The Object of Imitation If we remember the metaphyucal vien of Aristode there will be no difbcult in understending and accounting for the diferenee of Arstorahan conception of imitation from the Platomc For Plato. the external werld nas mert urabonal matter, on which form was somehow imperfecdy impressed. The idea was beyond the world of stars and, therefore bevond the reach of the eitative artist The objective world, therefore, to hum was a mere material symbal of the ideal, a mere reflexion, a pure and simple world of the stnse Imnation therefore, accerding to him, naturally conasts in deceptive reproduchon of the senseous According to Aristotle, however, the objective world is idea and maiter together. The idea is the soul, the ermce the purpose, the motive force, which determines the directioa of the growih, evolution, or development of matter whtre it inberes. It is not beyond the reach of the creative artirt For, art is one of the two kinds of virtus-mora! and intelleetual, It is intellectual virtue. It $ crratit acthity under intellectual direction. If, therdore, an antist is not guided by intellect in his creative aetivity, if be is concemed with ihe realm of senses only, if be prt sents the sensuous only and completdly ignores ibe ides, which can be grasped through intellect only, he is no artint at all. Imitation, therefore, according to Arinote, is ideali- sation, the pferentation of things not as they art, but as they should be; not as they are hnown to senses, but as they are sisualised by the intellect; not as they exist in the ertered world, but as they are to be under the controlling force of the idcas In applying the theory of idealisation to the worls of

136 Prenciples of Literary Crituwsm in Sanskrt

formed Therefore, while tragedy is concerned with the presentation of the supremacy of idea over matter, comedy is concerned with the presentation of self-assertion of matter, paymng no heed to the commands of reason Bat the principle of 'umitation', which consists in present- auon of an advance on the given reahty and not as it is, holds good in both the cases. The difference between the tragic and comic presentations lies only in this, namely, while tragedy presents a more advanced stage in the expres- sion of idea in the material medium than we can find mn the objective world, comedy presents a more advanced stage in the self-assertion of matter, in utter disregard of the com- mands of reason, than can be met within the phenomenal world But comedy does not cease to please simply because it is the presentation, not of the beautiful but of the ugly There is an inherent tendency in man to take delght in umitation, irrespectne of the fact whether the presented is bcautiful or ugly The mere consciousness that the object, present before us, is an imitatron of something that exists in the world of nature, though that object in stself may be ugly, is sufficient to please the human mind It is the re- cognition of a natural object in an artistic production "This is that" which is responsible for pleasure There is a kind of inference and, therefore, some exercise of the intelligence is involved in such a recognition And as the exercise of reason, the highest aspect of the human soul, is always pleasant to the mind the comedy is pleasant. It was Aristotle, who first noticed that presentation of uglmess in representative art has its own fascination He was the first to contradict the Platonic idea that the artistic presentation affects us as docs the corresponding reality. According to Arstote, it is not the content of likeness but the fact of likeness which is the seeret of attraction in comedy.

Wider Meaning of Imitation

Imitation, therefore, has a wider meaning to Aristotle than it has to Plato > It is not merely production of thing, so like that, which we perceive in nature, as to create illusion. It is production of things better or worse than they are to be

138 Principles of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit

bringing about purgation, discharge, of the excessive element of emotions, through freeing emotions from the unwanted and thus producing harmony among them i e. bringing them to 'the mean' Anstotle, thus discovers for the first time that art brings about the elimmation of certain elements of personality He paves the way for the Hegalian concep- tion of Katharsis as complete deindividualisation In Indian Aesthetics also, there is the padagogic view of art, but that is not presented in terms of katharsis There are two vicws on the moral end of art, one propounded by the poeticians and the other by the dramaturgists The former holds that poctry improves her lover morally like a curtain lecture, which proverbially is recognised to be more effective than hundred sermons from pulpit. And the latter asserts that drama improves the spectator morally by bringing about the identification with the focus of the situation and thus maling him experience the goodness of the path of virtue and badness of the path of smn It may, houever, be poited out here that no Indian Aesthetician maitains the moral improvement of the lover of art as the sole end of art The end of art is to arouse aesthetic experience. Aristotle was led to the assertion that tragedy has the ethical end, because he wanted to justify the existence of art in an ideal republic, in which Plato had refused a place to it In the history of Indian Acstheties, however, there is no such condemnation of artand cons- cquently there is no such counter-assertion as Aristotle made agamnst Plato. In worls on Indian Aesthetics there are references to the values of products of poetic and dramatic arts for the artist or connoisseur. Works of art are thus recognised to hayc made immortal the names of poets and dramatists, such as Bhasa and Kaldasa, Thev are adqutted to have brought royal patronage to the artist, for instance, Dhavaka, the real author of the Ratnavali, got considerable wealth from liog Harsa They are also known to have won the faxour of gods. Poct Mayura, for instance, is known to have got cured from leprosy, because of the favour of the sun, in praise of whom he wrote the Surya Sataka. They are also recognised to have educative valuc. And lastly they are acknowledged to have

140 Principles of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit

with such pleasing sights and sweet sounds, that their bitter- ness is not felt and they are accepted with delight, much as a bitter medicine mixed up with honey. It covers the apparently unwelcome nature of the moral principle with the agreeably beautiful, as a wise medical man coats a bitter pill with sugar, so that it is taken in with pleasure Morality is a demand of the beautiful as its ornament It is a demand of a smiling and lovely darling, which it is difficult to refuse and to meet which is a pleasure. It is such a presentation of the moral principles, which justifies the existence of art as a medium of moral instruction, separate from sacred scripture and history There is historical evidence to show that the presenta- tion of dramatic art had such an effect on the spectator We know that Sanputta renounced the world and embraced Buddhistic asceticism, because of the effect produced on his mind, by a dramatic presentation

Mysticism of Plotinus and Bhatta Nayaka in the Con. text of Aesthetics

Plotinus belongs to the line of writers who tool certain aspects of the whole of the aesthetic problem, discussed by Aristotle His predecessors busied themselves with discussion of the means of artistic productton, they examined the powers of language which is the means of dramatic and poetic pro- duction. Plotmus occupies himself with the end of art He takes up the problem of experience, for which art is responsible. He attempts the problem from metaphysical, epistemic and psy chological points of vicw He improves upon the Aristot- lian position in this respect According to Arstotle, aesthetic experience was only an emotive experience, consisting m the "mean" to which an emotion is brought by the kathartic effects of tragedy According to Plotinus, it is beyond the emotional level, it belongs to the transcendental, the spiritual level Plotinus thus frees art from subordination to morality and recognises the experience that it arouses as akin to mystic experience of the Ultimate, the One, the God. Sumilanty of this view of acsthetic cxperience to that

SOME THING OF ARISTOTLE

Bltm Sen

Let me first state Plato's position in regard to the poets He had felt the power of poets to delight and move. He had an affectionate respect for Homer and had read and absorbed him Buf he could not approve of them and wanted them to go out of his Repubhc He sau the basic truth that art seeks to imitate or represent nhat he calls phenomena But then he also felt that it was an imitation of an appearance, a copy of a copy and so twice removed from realty The abiding realty for him consisted in the ideas, the unchangeable "forms', of which the material things were an imperfect image Beautiful objects he san as having a reflection of the 'absolute beauty' nhich constituted for him the true reahty This awareness that art was twice removed from realty, was with him one reason for his disapproval of poetry Secondly, he saw that the appeal of the pocts was not to the reason but essentially to the emotional part of our being which he regarded as the most worthless part of the soul. He thus saw an antithesis between art and moralty and accordingly spoke disappro- vinglv of poets and poetry Plato confused the study of art with the study of morals Aristotle with a single lucky stroke of his logical mind removed this confusion, and in writing his 'Poctics' gave to the fine arts an independent place-in the scheme of human activity and created the studv of aesthetics. Hc tales for granted that a work of art whether a picture or a poem is a thing of beauty and that it affords pleasure appropnate to its own Lind Mark his definition of tragedy, "It is an imitation of an action that is complete and whole and of certain magmitude ...... " which means that it is beautiful. Further he males a clear distinction betueen the truth of nature and poctic truth "It rs not the function of the poet to relate what has happened, but what mav happen according to the law of probability or necessity."

144 Principles of Literary Criticism in SansInt

pity and fear to a disturbing pitch. The whole emotional state and balance are for some time completely changed. The paradoxical impulses are roused to a climax but in the catastrophe that follows they are reconcdled and stilled in the calm of the achieved attitude. There remains none of their emotional agitation; their devastating force is spent, and the mind of the spectator is at rest. This is one part of catharss Another side to it seems to be that the expenence is exalting and cleansing It certainly seems to have a reference to a moral effect which great tragedy produces and which has been accepted by an unbrolen tradinon through the centunes Tragedy is a tale of great passions of a noble sufferer. There is greatness and nobility in the suffering The feelings of pity and fear as they are roused, are both rcheved and elevated. It is a chastening calm which finally comes from a sense of the essential breadth and justice of things There is heightening and widening of consciousness It could certainly be maintained that this docs not come about mercly through an appeal to emotions of pity and fear Tragedy does evole other emotions also Love and admiration are equally important in the effect of tragedy. Indeed, all thas is rendered possible through the profound moral sense of the tragic dramatist. He has his own instinetive sense of joy and sorrow, of pitv and terror, of good and evil He has his perception of the essential meaning of an cvent and the ability to feel the pathos in human suffering He has his vision of the sorrow of mortal destiny as also of the awful grandeur and potentiality of the human spirit Tragedy true to its grain is essentially spiritual. Its infinite value is in the release of a noble vision and power. It is a vision of man's marvellous sprritual potentralittes We see man mvested with the dread awfulness and attributes of Gods "Even as man perishes he is seen revealing transcen- dent potentiality for higher and higher attalnment in the realm of the spirit This seems to be at the core of great tragedy and perhaps counts for some part of the experienee associated with the word catharsis.

I46 Principles of Literary Griticism in Sanskril denied it and propounded Ritt instead1. These words of Anandavardhana are very important in cvaluating the originality and importance of the doctrine of Rit. The appreciation and estimation of the excellence of poetic compositions through the means of the doctrine of Riti continued to weigh heavily even though imperceptibiy on Anandavardhana's mind Although he claims that the rhetoncians like Udbhata and others preceding him hare presented a ennque of the beauty or excellence of the external (re the vacya) ude of Lavya only, the internal (ie the pratiyamana) side remained untouched or unanalysed' Yet Vamana must be out of the category of such rhetorcians Had the fact been otherwase, Ananda would not have given him credit for visualising, howsDever indistinetly, Dhvani as the essential elcment of Kavya It is to be seen, how far the real or the intrinsc charm of Kavya can he explaied on the baus of Rit doctrine Vamana is in fact the first rhetorician who first con- ceived of the soul of poetry Thought about the soul of poetry was in fact the first attempt to have a vision of the essentral or the intrinsic element of poetry Vamana propounded Riti to be the soul of poetry, and defined it as 'Vifişta padaracana" Again he explained the word 'viista'

1 Ibd ka 3 46 and the Vrtt on il - अस्फूटस्कुरित काव्यनत्वमेतन्मयोदितम् । अपवनुवद्भिध्यतितु रतयः सम्प्रवतिताः।। एतद्ध्वनिपवर्ननेन निर्णीन वाम्यनत्वमस्फुटसफरितं सद् अ्वनु- वद्भि पतिपादमितु वैदर्मों गोडी पान्वाली चति रोवय प्रवतिता.। रीनिलक्षण विधािना हि कान्पतत्व्रमंतदस्कुनया मनाक स्कुरितमामीदिति सथयचे। 2 Vide Dhvany3loka, NA : 3 - तत्र वाच्च प्रसिद्धी य प्रकाररपमादिभि:। बहुषा ध्याहत: सोम्वस्नतो नेह प्रवन्नते ।। Vamana's Kany ilankarasotra and its vrtu रोतिरामा वाव्वम्य। विशिष्टा पतरचना रीति । विशेपो

I48 Principles of Literary Crtticism in Sanskrit

How can it be accepted that separate tastes of guda, marica ctc., are not different from the one and the only one pecular taste of the drink called Panaka ? Can any one have the taste of the Panaka by taling guda, marica ete., separately ? Thus it is clear that howsoever the exponent of Dhvam may try to includa Rin in the Gunas, he cannot deny the specific beauty or excellence of a poetic composition produced by Rit When the votary of Dhvant-School him- self regards the loveliness or the charm (lavanya) of a beautiful woman, charm which is the collecuve effect of all the Limbs placed or jomed together in the body in a beauuful manner, as different from the beauty of the mdnndual, wby can't then, the exponent of Rit-School also regard the excellence of a poetic composition produced therein by the specific emplayment of Ritis wherein there 15 assemblage of gunas as different from the excellences of the individual gunas ? When the Joveliness of the body as a whole cannot be included in the loveliness of the limbs, when the 'vyangya' cannot be mcluded in the 'vacya', how can then the 'Rit' be included in the 'gunas'? The history of the evolution of the concept of Rit t5 a long one At first, the excellence of a poetic composition must have been based on different gunas separately. Before nse of the concept of the Vaidarbha and the Gauda styles (margas ) deseribed in the Kavyadara of Dandin, separate gunas would have been representing different poctic styles (Kavyamargas). In later times, these gunas would have collectively formed the specific characteristics of different styles of poets of different tastes and temperaments Dandin visualised the Vaidarbha and the Gauda styles as forms of poetic composition The ten gunas described as the soul of Vaidarbha style by Dandin were visualsed by him mn a collective manner and not separately Only he did not present any analysis of the collective excellence or beauty produced by the gunas collectively. Vamana recognised this excellence as the effect of the proper employment of Riti Thus in the order of evolution, the former concept that the excellence was produced by the proper employment of the individual gunas, achieved elmax in the concept of Riti of Vamana,

150 Prineiples of Littrary Criticism in Senskrit

Out of these the first four with different definitions, of course are taken to exist m both the Margas, viz., the Sukumara and the Vicitra. Even though an mdependent thinker in his con- cept and analysis of Margas, Kuntaka is a strong supporter of Dandin and Vamana in y different way. According to him the three Margas are based on the poet's nature, taste or temperament and not on any geographical divisions or regions as conceied by Dandin His Sulumara Marga is in fact Dandın's Vaidarbhamarga and Vamana's Vaidarbhi-rit in a new form Kuntala undoubtedly differs from Dandin and Vamana in atleast one very important pomt, and it is this. Whereas Dandin and Vamana consder Vaidarbha marga or Riti to be the best of all because of its innumerable gunat, Kuntaka unlke them connders all the three to be equally meritorious or good because if the fact had been otherwise, no poet worth the name would have ever tred to write in the Vicitra (Gaudamarga of Dandin and Gaudi Riti of Vam- ana) or the Madhyama marga (Pancali Riti of Vamana). But the fact remains that even the most illustrious poets lthe Subandhu, Bana, Kaviraja and others have written in these styles In his opinion, therefore, no Marga or Riti is inferior to the other two Any way, this is an incontrovertble fact that by shon- ing the assemblage of gunas, Rasa, alankaras and pratibha in his margas, Acarya Kuntala only redeemed or resuscitated Vamana's doctrine of Riti. Thus the same doctrine of Riti ... first sprouted in Dandin's Kavyadarsa, then developed and twigs in Vamana's KavyalanLarasutra, finally lossoms and fruits in Kuntaka's Vakrolujivita.

Vide Vakrokujinta, Dr SK De's edition P ; - मागेपु गुणाना समुदापधमंता। यथा न फेवल गव्दादिघर्मत्व नया तम्क्षमव्यास्यानाबमर एव प्रतिपाविवम्।

152 Prineples of Literary Griticism in Sersknt

Philosophy? The use of the same term (grzs) mn poctits as well as the number three poit towards some such inffuence AP Muhra Yes, I do think that there is at least some relation between the two, though at present it 15 rather difficult to establish the real nature of this relationship V Yenketachalam. Madhurya can easly be related with Sattsa, and ojes with rajes, but what about Prasada ? Basant Jaitly You talled about the importance gien to Ritis and T'rtbs by Anandavardhana and Abhina- vagupta, what I feel is that both of these Acaryas gave more importance to I'rth and not to Ritis, because Ananda-Vardhana consrders Frffts to be a result of gunes and the Ketfrki has been referred to in terms of ideas suitable to Rasa, upenāgankā as words surtable to Rasa ete Abhinava too takes the Prttts in the same cense and explam, them as रमोचिन व्यवहार of the artha in the case of the Kathti etc and of the Sabda m the case of upanagonia etc Now if meaning and the word thus distributed become I'rttts the question arises what shall be the place for Rifis? It is true that Ananda-Vardhana has referred to Ritis but strictly speaklng there is no room for them cither in his or in Abbinava's scheme since Riti can only be रसोचित व्यवहार which has already been associated with the Vrthw. If this be granted, it would be wrong to say that Anandavardhana and Abhinava have attached great importance to Rifi. AP Muhre I think, I never said that Ananda gives im- portance to Riti. I only meant to say that he gives credit to Vamana for his Bash of dheeni, 1c. the element of dheam flashed first in the mind of Vamana, There is great misunderstanding about Trte on the baris of the saying: वृतयो नाटनमानर These Yittir are in the sense of rajeke-rayd a-rya- para The Urttis of Sroayalārpa 1e. uparāgandra ctc. are totally different from the P'rthus of drama

154 Principles of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit

स तत्वदर्शनादेव शास्त्रेषु कथित कवि । दर्शनाद्वर्णनाच्चाय रूदा लोके कविश्ुति । Loc. Cit

Even the sage Valmiki, who had a clear vision of the reality of things, was not acclaimed a poet until his poem emerged to express aesthetically what he had seen or experienced :

तथा हि दर्शने स्वच्छे नित्येज्प्यादिकवेमने। नोदिना कविता लोके यावज्जाता न वर्णना ॥ Ibid

Whle the conception of poet in India has borne comparison with the philosopher and creator, the literary critics have always asserted independence and freedom of hterary creation1 and have even established its supremacy over the former The benedictory verse of the Kavya-pralāsa clearly formulates the freedom and supremacy of the poetic creation

नियतिवृन निनमरहिता ह,लावैकमयीमनन्तपरतन्त्राम्। नवरसर्वचरा निमितिमाद्घती भारती केवेजयति ।।

The poet is able to see and express by virtue of his innate faculty called Pratibha Bhamaha declares that poetry dawns rarcly and on an only person gifted with this faculty : काव्य तू जायने जातु वस्यचित् प्रतिभावन. । Bhamahalankara, 1. 5 This rarest gifte, an innate faculty' and the very seed of poetrys is concerved by Rajasekhara as both a creative insprration (karayitri pratibha) and aesthetic sensibilty (Bhacayitri Prattbha)". Bhatta Tota, the master of Abhinava- gupta, has offered best definttion of Praubha, He says : "Pratibha is a form of intuitive consciousness, prajna, which is an inechaustible source of exceptionally novel blooms It is by virtue of this Pratibha alone that

1 Vide Dhvanyalota III-43 Abhmavabharati, 1 40. 2 Cf Agm Purana quoted in Sahityadarpana Ch I 3 Dandin s Kavyādarfa, I 103 4 Vamana KASV I 3 16 5. Sec Rajalckhara, Kavyamimamsa, pp 12-14

156 Primtles of Literery Criheimm in Seesbri!

is present the province of poetry is never erhausted .! Simflarly Kuntala, Ruyyaka and later alafkarias considered it necessary for any derenption to be called pocuc. Ruyyaka has redefined the poetic figures on the basis of the principle of Pratibha-which it, in thewr opinion, essentially a virtue of creanve imagination found in the worl of great poets Impact of grammar and systems of philosophy on the progressie evolution of the alankara proper is well recogmsed. Grammar forms the bass ef mam a varich of Cpens The discusnon about the distinchon between shei and agrlss due io the use of the word ig, of that berneen ahani and ripsha, and the mergence of many alantarat like Dipala and airth betray the obious influence of grammar The recogmtion of fgures lile erf5set, farise-th, and seru"gje distineth bear the stamp of the Mimamsalas In the emergence of figures file eami-s,

Tileott, Ierehahae ese geti difephti of second varicty, and cchke as well as in the harr-splitting diseussion in neo- terminology of the formulation and erposition of the concepts of the c'erhartastra the Naiyayikas had a major share Popular widom (Irhs-rige) and its tradition of expression were responsible for the formulation of many an alankara

cadpre In fact, classifcation of the ele karas givea by Ruyyala admits, inter alla, chain (Srrthels), reason (tarka), sentence (Vakya) and popular usage (Iokc) 2s the basis. Under the impact of Saivism emerged some new fgures such as Smarcro, ferirent, and allrthe and many old dlentars for cxample, rarmwtah, the second variety of the fgure wdate, Bicrike were given new orientation. The terms of Kashmir Saiva philosophy, such as aliss, armsate, wap, sie, and wlethe were frequenthy used to discuss the concepts of the elatterer. Ruyyals has, in fact, treated the wbole sphere of the cleetares on the basis of the principle of Pretftla The admission of an dlantore or its varicty is, according to hict,

1. न वान्यायदिरामोर्जन्त यदि स्यात् प्रतिनाशः ।

158 Prnnples of Litrrary Criticism in Seutrit

the above menuioned flaws and added ten more to the list. I need not go into the details of his treatment but nould confine myself to two observations. This is obvious from Bhamaha's treatment of logical fallacies1 that logt (Buddhist as well as orthodox) exercised considerable infuence on him This was natural because Bhamaha belonged to an age which was marked bv encounter of ideas and was dommnated by the worls of Vasubandhu and Dinnaga However, even when he bases his treatment of the poetic faws on the way shown by the logicians of the coantry and constructs the grammar of poetry after the style of the grammarians, he also asserts the independence of the literary crucism from the Sastras The logie of poetr B distinct, says Bhamaba अपर वक्पते न्यायलक्षण वाध्यनधपम्। इद तु शास्त्रगनंषु वाध्येप्वनिहित यपाः 1KA1. 30 This is constructed by cnuacs on the basis of the poetic tradition and is based on empirical experience while the Sastras are concerned with the reality of things:

It was perhaps to underlmne immanent nature of the poctic meaning that Bhamaha advised not to believe the transcen- dental theory of meaning propounded by the grammanans, it would be tantamount to a belief in the reality of a sky- flower.' In his discussion on the correct use of wordy (Sebds-sathatss) Bhamaha is indebted to grammar as well ay to all other disciplines but when we read the Kavyalankara in its proper perspective it becomes clear that according to Bhamaha it is not sausabdya or perfection of the word or its correct cognition that can constitute a poem rather an acsthetic harmony of both the words and meanings: mRTaY सहितो काध्यमु-

Vide KA IY 1-2 2 3 दपयेरषि चादेय बचो न स्फोटवारिनाम्। नम. बुसुमनम्तीति बद्दस्पात् का सचेतन ।1 KA

160 Princples of Literary Cnticisn in Sanstrit

should not take any independent notice of the grammatical and logical defects unless they are related to the poctic sense (Lavyartha, the rasa). Mahimabhatta's treatment of the five poetic flaws, borrowed by Mammata later on, is very systematic and is broadly speaking aims at the stylistic perfection through avoidance of impediments to elear grasp of meaning Mammata followed the Dhvam school in his conception of the poetic blemish as marring the principal sense (ic rara) and his broad classification of the blemishes includes rasg-dosas along with the verbal or formal and the material (relating to meaning or content). Progressive cvolution of dess-concept and treatment of its varietics makes it clear that the literary eritics concerned themselves more and more with obstacles-formal or matenal -- of the poeuic content ( alankara, Guna or rasa) than with the grammar and logic, pure and simple Another important principle of Literary Griticism is the guna or poetic excellence Despite many important differ- ences among critics from Bharata to Post-dhvani period about the nature (whether it is positive entity or simply a negation of the blemishes) and number (ten or three) the guna principle has concerned itself evclusively with the stylistc perfection through aesthetic mode of arrangement of words of literary creation and was in its final analysis intimately (not indirectly as in Bharata) related to rase, and writers on diani analysed properly the mental states that guizis help to arouse. In their analysis they must have been Infueneed by the nature of triad of gunas admitted in the Samkhya but mn any case no writer seems to be obssessed with the sastric concept, the eritic largely on his own analysed the mental states that_gunas help to aronse It is true that Anandavardhana took the cue from grammatical theory of Sphota which treats cach letter as suggestive of sphota-one, constant and unchanging lile Brahman of the Vedanta, but he has himself made it abundantly elear that the diami as a literary princple was developed by him on the basis of a tradition of critical judgement of the readers. In his auto-comment (vrtti) on 'Kavyasyatma dhvaniriti budhairyah samamnita-purvah' and elsewhere also in his epoch-maling work, the Dhvanya-

162 Principles of Literary Criticism in Sanshrit

of great repute in literary criticism Abhinavagupta, who has given a solid foundation of Kashmir Saivism to Sansknt Criticism, passes strictures on the efforts of over-jealous exponents of philosophical views, as being inspired solely for deluding supple minds ( Sukumeramanomohana) or mere poses (bhramani/, amatra)1 Independence of judgment of poetry (Lavyadhi) was brought out on the bass of pre-eminence of poetc function by another critic, Bhattanayaka, in his now lost worl, the Hrdayadarpana

शन्दप्राधान्यमाधित्य तत्र गास्त्र पृथग्विद्ठ। अर्थनत्वेन युक्ते तु वदन्त्वास्थानमेतयो। द्वयोरगु णन्वे व्यापारप्रायान्चे वाव्यछी नव्रेत Bhattanayaka, in fact, did not view highly didache value of ethical tone in literature According to him what matters most is intrinsic merit of a poem Abbinava has similarly questioned the didactic purpose of literary creation in his commentaries on the Natyasastra" and the Dhvanyaloka' According to him principal element is not knowledge, for in that case there would be no difference of literary work from ethics and historiography Ananda had also said a f aaffa. वृत्तमानवर्णनेनात्मपदलाभ इतिहासादेरेव तननिद्धे- Dhanarjaya stressed this idea by saying that dramas flow with joy, and knowledge is no fruit therefrom and one who seeks it as from the history ete must be saluted, as he is hostile to the real taste of literature"

आनन्दनिर्प्यान्दिय सपवेषु व्युत्पत्तिमात्रं फलमल्पवुद्धि । योजनीतिहामादिवदाह माधुस्नमम नम स्वादपराड मुनाद।। Dašarūpaka, I. 6 Rajasekhara has stated criticism (discipline of the literature, Sahttyartdya) to be the fifth Vedat, which asserts its independence : Abhinavabh3ratı, III, pp 1:6-77 2 नतु कि गुरुवदुपदेश वरोति, नेत्वाह विन्तु वुद्द्धि विवर्धयति स्व- प्रतिभामेव तादसी विनटनि 1 Abhinarabharati, P 41 3 Vide Locana on Dhvanyaloka p 40 KN (G OS ) 4 पच्चमी माहियविदेति पानावरीय।

164 Principles of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit

who believed that principles of Criticism are not to be interpreted exclusively on the basis of any particular system, derde at attempts for over- philosophisation of what are essemially literary concepts evolved from the judgment of literature. Venakatachalam Before we wind up, I would like to put one question at this stage You have shown that various themes of the poetics have been influenced by the principles of Indian philosophy yet they have developed themselves independemtly, but as far the Rasa-theory is concerned, I think that a perusal of various theories on Rasa shows that in this sphere the acaryas seldom rose above the philosophical tangle in which they had entered perhaps of their own accord There is, there- fore, very little independent development in the field of Rasa-theorics What do you think of it ? R. C. Dunwedi Rasa-sutra has been explamed in the light of almost all the schools of Indtan Philosophy This very fact ipso facto implies that no parti- cular system of philosophical thought can be applied to or held to be exclusively valid in relation to the exposition of the Rasasutra of Bharata This makes a particular system of Indian philosophy in relation to rasa-sutra only incidental and not essential to it Moreover I think that Rasa-theory is one of the few topics in Poetics whose development can be persucd back to its very inception The Rasa- sutra of Bharata is by itself pure and simple and is devoid of every kind of doctrinaire influence of Indian philosophy R. P. Duneedt : The Rasa-Sutra which is the basis of Rasa-theorics that developed later on has been proved to be an iterpolation in the Natya- Šastra (tr.) R. K. Duiredi . If this be finally accepted, it would support me in as much as one can hold that the later

166 Prinriptes of Literary Crititism in Senshrit

tradition ? Is this not an independent contri- bution of Poeties towards Rasa-theory ? And all the examples of the rasedmen which I have quoted towards the end of my paper should alto be regarded as complete originality in the Rasa-theor Bhattanayala conceived two poetic functions, 5'dnans and bhega to explain the process and realisation of rass. Both these functions are independent of philosophic impact and were propounded independentl Dheem-theorsts replace in a way the above wo functions by Dage-a which is not onh an independent concept of lterar criticio but is also staunchh refuted by the philosophers of every chade in India. For cxample, Jayanta Bhatta, the great roysnho, clearly controverts its admission to the class of Sabda-tapāra

168 Principles of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit

of action,' and thus ennches and complexes the communica- tive content of language, it also presents successfully a com- prehensive and valid record of experience in relation to the ultimate questions of life On one side, the symbolic iagination is the sy mbolising trend, bringing more and more area of experience into formal expresston, and thus enlarging the Geld of aesthetie perceptions, on the other, it is a peculiar and exploratie mode leading men forward in various ventures in philosophy, science and general speculation It provdes a break- through where other modes of cogmition falter or stop Thus symbolic imagination refers both to the extent and the mode of imaginative pursuit Its mode of operation is through analogies Analogies provide a spring-board for Lnowing the unknown, for realising the un-realsable Every artist begins with Lnowing man, his feelings and emotions, his relations with other men and environment, questions of morality, justice, significance and all the com- plex problems of living a life His pride and passions, his struggles with his spint, truth, and his place in the gamut of creation form the core impressions about life and this world on the consciousness of the artist. During this journey of knowing the world cmotionally and tmaginativcly and discovering himself also in the process, he starts "giving the body of this world" a name, a symbole interpretation It is in this stride of experience that the author of the Mahabharata conceived of the world as a place of action, struggle, actual combat. In a similar spint the writer of the Bhagoad-Gita remarked that the whole world was a field of action, and exhorted individual human beings, through Aguna, to work out their destiny through knowledge, devo- tion or action (Jaana, Bhakti, and Karma) Tulsidas as the author of the Ramacaritamdnasa, looked upon life in terms of ethical and moral values, culminating in a harmonised prac- tice of varying and warring sects ( Saioa, Vaisnara) of rehgion The Upanipads and the Vedas symbohse the human quest for

I Tale, Alt-n, "The Symbohe Imagination" The Kr-gor RiWr XIV z, Spring 1952, pp 256-57 2 Ibid

170 Printts of Litray Ciiris, t: Sebit

more ironically disposed soul, the 'President of Immortal was a very crudl God, and all human beings are dispensed wath an mevitably tragic lot In companson with the tragic and ironic view of the artists in the west, the hterateurs in Inda present a bliss- ful, beatific attitude toward life, a bent of sprrit that manifes- ted its frassde' characteristic. Most of the dramas in Sane krit are nentber coamc { S-ttadte) of tragic (D=BE=) but ennobling and divmnisng (fraals-ts) The same elerating fca- ture may be noted mn portry also Perhaps this can largely be accounted for in termx of the cultural pantern of tocet, the preponderance of a rebgious spurn m bfe an unshakable fanh in the doctrmne of hars, and the concept of God as Saw-de- nende The Iids and the Cparned concerred of this creation as created in bhes, preserved mn bliss, fnally dissolved in bhss. Obmousy such a philosopi of hfe would reficer ielf in hterature of the penod as well Men steeped in sach a faith adopted a happy. stoc atuitude which shaped thr dormy not so much in relation to onc another, as in relation to the ultimate reabty or God. The poets and dramatists, fashioned by the stronglv rehgous framework ef society, responded harmomously to the cosmic moral order, the order of Rte and Setpe. In the Casndyye-Uperyede Om (), with its phonetic analysis and in the symbole and auditory-imaginative sene, is defined as the essence of reality. Here, an infnite realry, the prime cause of this creation, is perctrved in vicual and sonal terms Similarly, the phrase wirg eg #ar symbolires the desire of the O- to multiply and divereify itself for the cxultation and delight in the many. The phrase has been conceived symbolically, and esplains, in one way, one or the many causes of the ereation of this unirerse. Such a summ- arised and epitomised expression points to the way the world was looled at and interpreted, at one stage of the develepment of man's mind. In the same way the concept of mis life, death, death-in-life, ages (Salyyirs, Trrisrere, Datters, Kelijge) Arettras, and deluge are figuratrely, symbolically conceived expressions of realities difficult to grasp and master. Since time immemorial, man has pasrionately craved for, attempted to go out of and to transcend the limitstions of

172 Prinaples of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit

a co-mixture of various forces and factors operating, affec- ting simultaneously In the history of the development of thought mn men there was a period or a stage when Synthetc human approach was not splt by logical thinking or scientific reasoning At that trme no analytical approach had detailed claborated, specialised it or misdirected it to a myopic range At that stage people still enjoyed an elevated and itegrated level of thought, experience and ideals. During this period, the peniod of mythic, metaphoric, pre-scientific non-abstractionist, and undissociated thinking, the mode of symbolic imagination helped people to live an integrated intellectual, aesthetic and spiritual life They exercised frecly in symbolc interpretations and their unifed sensibilty added to their stature as aesthetes, artists, devouts In 19th century in the west, symbohc imagination and thinking was revived re-invoked to give an integrated vision of hfe to the artist and free his consciousness from a dissociative onslaught of science, scientific thought, over-specialisation, and the mass organisation of life The process continues mn the 20th century also

Different genres of literary expression use various figures of speech as simile, metaphor, personification, myth etc It may be interesting to study their relationship with symbolic imagination It is a common notion today that the figures of speech are not the devices of adorning poetry or other branches of literature. They are integral to expression. When a poct employs a simile, or, seems indulging in a metaphor, his is not a forced use, rather this parallel or the transformed image has been suggested to him, as if in a flash by the subject under aesthetic contemplation As such this facile use of a simile or metaphor gives a clue to the working of the poetic mind which unconsciously jumps at similaritics, parallel images, metaphonc transformations In fact, these things suggest the direction of the symbolic imagination in a poet, and serve as the preliminary stages to its final culmi- nation. Metaphor, in a stanza or in a complete poem, may be one untt of artistic communication in a recognisable form, but it is essentially a mode of thinking and experiencing, working on the principle of 'similtude' and 'dissimilitude'.

174 Principles of Literary Cnticism in Sanstril

and indicative use, give only the literal, the commonly shared or the semantic meaning But when poet, with his creatne power of imagination, used the word in suggestive sense, it shot forth echoes and re-echoes, and further echoes of mean- ing and sense In thns sense, the suggested meaning of the word took an evocatie character which endlessly affeeted vanous readers and produced varted hterary pleasure. The whole process is described in the term anuranina Just as a pebble cast in calm water sends out rings of waves genera- ted bv its plunge, and the cireles contmue to expand in all directions, showing no end, so is the case with the suggested meaning of words The poct, the Pratibharan Purupa, effects this magic with a careful arrangement of Bhaca, Vibtara, Anubhapa, and Sancanbha:a He may use other figures of speech also Here it should be noted that the various figures of speech are talen as mtegral ingredients in poetic expres- sion in Sanskrit poetics also as in Englsh They are not contrived or stramned devices embellishig an artifcial expression Imagination or Pratibha as it is termed in the Sansint poetics is a sigmificant term and an essential trait of a poet. Basically it is his experiencing, transforming and creative faculty Without it a man cannot claim his title to the rank of a poet Though imagination primarly suggests the faculty for creating images, m a pervasive sense it covers the entire range of creatre psyche in the poet An imaginative poet feels rhythm and rhyme in a novel form; the auditory imagi- nation in hum takes him to the forgotten past of language where he invigorates himself with the raw energy of every syllable, accent, beat and other individual components of a word, the visual imagination fashes before the poet continu- ously new, concrete and pictorial images, and the imagina- tre lights endow him with a new creative vision, bathing his words and sentiments in fresh and charming forms. In Sansknit also word the sound and word the sense (both pho- netic and visual) are fused by the energy of imagination of the poet. When the poctic imagination works in harmony with Dheaw, it creates a master-picce. An energetic touch of the poctic imagination transmutes the old themes, treated by the poct earlier, and even common words into things of

176 Principtes of Literary Criticism in Sanshrt

dismantled, molten and refashioned into nen objects and phenomena It may appear extreme, but in a sense all imaginative activity is symbolic, since what is produced or brought forth stands for what has been experienced, what has shaped the sensibilty of the artist and goaded him mto creation Or as Ehot put it "The poet's mind is in fact a receptacle for scizing and storing up numberless feelings, phrases, images which remain there until the particles which unite to form a new compound are present together" Imagi- nation, brings 'all the partieles' 'together' and forms the required 'new compound' Even the most realiste picce is as a literary composition, much different from the reality outside the written pages It is not so much to insist on the formal limitations of a literary production as to bring forth the essential, symbolically transforming nature of imagi- nation in the poet that this fact should be noted In Sanskirt poetics, the acceptance of Seabharokt: Alankara as an integral figure of specch is an affirmation of this symbolc actnity of imagination Similarly, in a most hife-like statue the connoisseur or the sensitie criuc will discern not the details but conception of integrity of the artist, projected in a transformed, suggestive manner.1 It was to this creatie, symbolically imaginative faculty of the poet that Anandasar- dhana referred to and paid a glowing tribute when he called the poet the master of his world, doing with it anything that pleased him Abhinavagupta, going still further, main- tamed that m poetry even the operation of the causal pheno- menon was not called for ' Mammata, who was more eloquent over this aspeet of the poetic genius, called the poet even greater than God The poct was not bound by the sense of destiny; he created a world of eestasy and rapture which was self-sufficent, totally independent of any cxtrancous factor.4 And finally a word about the word, or the behaviour of language Some schools take all words as symbols, and

Essays in Samknit Chf cur, p 194 2 Ibid pp 183-0 3 Ibid p 184 4 Ibid p 184

PRINCIPLES OF LITERARY CRITICISM OF THE DHVANI SCHOOL A REVIEW

The study of Poetry as a distinet discipline owes its origin to Bhamaha and Dandin, belonging to north and south respectnely and almost to the same period, from the middle of the seventh century to the first quarter of the eghth Since then the study continued unabated, and many scholars came forward with their vews, and gave rise to a grand body of hterature which they christened as the Alamkara Sastra or the Science of Pocte Embellishments. Undoubtedly, the tenn clambara, mn its techmical sente, was first used by Bharata in the contert of embellishments of the drama Discussing the diction of a plav in the 17th Chapter, devoted to Verbal Representation mn the Natvafasta, Bharata recommends the use of four figures of speech suited to the drama. As far as our knowledge gocs, this reference to Egures of speech as a means to embellish dramatic diction is the first. In the absence of definite material, relating to the intervening period, we can safely surmise that by the time we reach to Bhamaha, and with him to the historie period, so to say; of the Alamkara Literature, discussions must bave been going on in the circle of scholars. In all probability, these discussions were direeted, following the clue suppbed by Bharata to the question of finding out what constituted the charm of poetic creation. That is why, it appears Bhamaha named his treatise-KavyalamLara, the portie figure, attempted to define the figures of specch relating to poetry, as was done by Bharata in relation to the drama. Though Bhamaha was acquainted with the Natyalastra and the Bharatan school, as is evident from his classfcation of poctry as well, he omittted to treat of Rasa, the evoking of which was the chief end of the drama. This proved to be a lamentable loss as it deprived the poctry of its purpose. Bhama- ha had to defne Kavya and supply a purpose of it, and rpole

180 Prinriples of Liferary Critirism in Sebrit

that would ensure flawless composition. The importance of poctic imagmnation also was not fully comprehended, although 'pratibka (genius) was considered valuable for the poct. To Bhamaha, ultimately, it was the Alamkara, both of sound and sense, that was essential for poetry Alongwith this, it should akco be noted that the study of poetry assumed, from the verv beginning, the nature of more or less a mechanical discipline-all theorists calling it a Sastra -- that too not of poetry but of the alemtaras. Hence the entire treatises tool the shape of authoritative prescrip- bons concerning 'dos' and 'don's' The enties were more interested in discussing in great detail the indidual figures of both sound and sense, and based their views mostly on indrvidual verses The whole Kavya was seldom subjected to a critcal assessment That is why, m spite of the fact that such great poets as Kabdasa, Bharavz ete. antedate all the Alamkaras, they do not find full treatment at therr hands. At times, instead of referring to the poems of celcbrated pocts, many theorists supply even their own examples. This mechamcal and presenptive atttude continued nght up to the time of the Dhvanikara and more correctly to that of Anandavardhana towards the muddle of the 9th Century. From Bhamaha to Anandavardhana, the inter- vening period is roughly that of 200 years. This period was marked by great intellectual activity and Dr. S.K. De is nght to call it the creative stage in the development .of Sanskrit postics, marked as it was by the formulation of all important theories regarding poetry. The approach to Kavya, during the interval, may be said to have been from the crude to the subde. Starting with the external factors, the study of poetry developed slowly into a serious and deeper enquiry into all the essential elements. The progress may be pointed out thus :-- From the Alamkara to the Ritr; from the Riti to the Rasa; and from the Rasa to the Dhyani. These are the well-known schools of Sansknt poctics, which bold the Alamlara, the Riti, the Rasa and the Dhvani to be the soul of poetry, and the evolution of these schools followed more or Iess a chronological order It is remarkable that a regular attempt for a synthesis of earlier concepts is traccable in all the follo-

182 Principles of Laterary Gritreism tn Senskrit

to the follower of this school, the style, the Gunas and the Alamkaras are to be judged mn a Kavya In addition, Dosas are however to be shunned by the poet, grammatical correct- ness maintained and poeuc conventions honoured. The Rasa school, of which our nowledge is rather scanty, based its observations on the famous aphorism of Bharata 'the combmnation of the Determinants, (vibhava) Consequents (anubhava) and the Transitory states (vyabhi+ cari-bhava) evolves the Rasa " On the basis of the frag- mentary references extant of the vews of the three main exponents-Lollata, Sankuka and Bhaita Nayaka, it appears that they thought Rasa to be the end of poetry and so mn the Kavya, one should carcfully judge the right use of the proper Tiphapas, trubharas and the Tabticart-blares All the three exponents are unanimous abont the end of poetry, i. evolving the Rasa, but they differ with regard to the relation between the Fibhia ete and the Rast, and the process of its evolution Thus it can be said that uptil the advent of the Dhvani theorv, the study of poetry, starting more or less like a mere studv of rhetone or persuasne manner of expression, gradually assumed the grandeur of poctics : All the factors-nght from the word and meaning, the figures of sound and sense, the blemishes of composition to the soul and essence of poetry-were discussed claborately and thread- bare All the different theones, however, remained as theses and anti-theses until the genius of the Dhvanikara brought about a synthesis of all by putting forward his theory of Dhvani. (3)

It is well known that all the schools of Sanskrit poetics can broadly be divided into two groups-the pre-Dhvani and the post-Dhvant schools The concept of Dhyam serves as the central point which marks the change of the whole outlook regarding poetry, and cveryone will agree with Rajasckhara in paying homage to the great savint, Ananda- vardhana who, following the Dhvamkara, established with Bharata, Napadastra, VI p 71 (Clowthamte Edn )

184 Prinriples ef Literer Criticis ir Sersint

of specch, the Doms Gunas and the like, which had so long been invariably associated with all the treatises on Poctics. This dissociation of rhetorical matter from the treatment of Karya is very important, as it removes the imbalance from the treatises on Alamlara, which devoted the largest space to these items One should not howerer thtnl that the Dhvani- kara was ignorant of therr unportance. On the other hand, it w he who for the first ume saw these in the proper perspective It is Kavya that he is dealing with and not mercly the embellishments or blemishes of poctie composnion The Dhvamalola also gies an answer to the old ques- ton-'What is the special feature of the poctic expression > As we have sern, different schools answered the question different. To one thuis speciality is the Alamlara, to others it is the Cuna, to some others it is Rasa But the Dhvani theonsts say that the special and characteristic feature of poctic espression is Suggestion (dheri) The words used by the poct do not convey merely the comentional expresstd Sense (agyertha), nor the Indicated ( Letge) one, but the Suggested sense (ryargerthe) The standpoint of the Dhyani- vadin is that the self-same Expressive words (rarate) when used by a poet become Suggestive (regeke) and convey the Suggested sente Since nciber the suggestie word, nor the suggested sense nor even suggestion as a function of words (uees-taera) is accepted by any of the philowophical schools, the theory of suggestion truely belongs to the literary ficld The Dhvanivadin holds that the function of suggestion is typical to poetic expression and hence, is its unique feature. The Dhvani School puts forward the view that Dhvani, i.c. the suggested sense is the soul of poetry. Anandavardhana, through his corent and convincing arguments, prores the existence and valdity of Dhvani He accepts the challenge of the carlier schools of Poetics on the one hand and the phrlosophical schools on the other, and successfully establishes the distinct and separate entity of the Suggested sense in addition to tke Expressed and Indicated senses apcepted by all. Lilewise, the function of Suggestion also as a distinct function of words and sente is convincingh established.

186 Prinaples of Literary Crittcim in Sanshnit

(5)

Let us now enumerate the principles of judgement of Kavya according to the Dhvam School These may be said to be as follows - (1) In the Kavya, the Suggested sense is of the fore- most mportance The cntic must see what is being suggest- ed-Rasa, Vastu or Alamkara, and whether it is all important On this will depend its classification as the best or the second-rate or as the lowest (2) Careful assessment is to be made of the Alamkara, Guna and the style. The critenon of judging these is whether they enhance the charm of the suggested sense. The Dosas are also to be viewed from this point of view In relation to certam Sentiments, some Dosas may not appear as blemishes (3) Suggesnion of Sentiment is the highest type of suggestion, and so the use of alemkaras should be carefully taken account of It should be noted that employment of complex figures of both the sound and sense docs not only add charm to poetry, but actually impedes the relish of the Sentiment suggested. (4) There is thus no fxed rule regarding the use of Alamkaras, Gunas and the Ritis in the Kavya. Their aptness should always depend on the sense suggested by it. (5) Last but not the least, is the importance of Poctic imagination. Anandavardhana declares the poct to be a creator, in the world of poetry, capable of doing whatever he likes. Suggestion of sentiments, proper use of the figures, the style and the Gunas, in other words both Content and Form are all determined by Poctie imagination The pranbha of the poct can mould even the age-old theme into something rich and strange It bestows a new sgnificance, a novel charm, chayd upon the Kavya and renders it a source of joy for ever. In the judgement of Kavya, therefore, an cvalua- tion of the imagination of the poet is also called for. (6) The Dhvan school does not say that the Kavya should be didactic. The suggestion of Sentiment is the lughest purpose of poetry and, when suggested, sentiment is

188 Prinaples of Literary Criticism tn Sanskrl

etc are suggestive of it. The Determmants, the consequents and the Transitory States are themselves Expressed (varya) but become suggestive (waiaka), and by the power of suggestion (uyafgjana) suggest the Permanent Mood (Sthayin) in the heart of the listener or spectator. He then tastes this suggested mood This tasting of one's mood is Rasa Abhmavagupta goes on to clarify that the Kavya, by its power of suggestion, arouses the Permanent Mood mn man and then he tastes it objectively although rt is inseparablc from his own self From this it follows that for the Rasa- realsation one must have the respective Permanent Moods in him in a latent form or as, what is called, vasand Those who do not have this basand are incapable of relishing the Rasa In relation to Rasa-realisation, the theory of universalt- sation (Sadharanikarana) of both the object (mbhara elc ) and the subject (raska or sahrdaya) establishes the super-normal character of aesthetc pleasure Forgetting, even if temporar- ily, one's narrow individuality is the highest bliss that rasd- realisation brings about By this very process the self-same 'thing of beauty' is enjoyed equally by both the oppressor and the oppressed, the old and the young, men and women. Man, by nature, sympathises with his fellowmen, but the Kavya urges him to sympathise with the sympathies of others When we read, for example, of the pathetie laments of Rama, we are pot merely sorry at his loss but sympathise with his feclings. This remarkable feature of the Kavya makes the pleasure denved from it a-lauktta, super-normal It liberates our self-centred mental process and makes it all-embracing. To conclude, we may say that the principles of the Dhvan School, in so far as these have touched the fund- amentals of the poet's art hold good even to-day. The form and content of hterature do change with the passage of time and judgement in literature is, to a great extent, individual stic and so never final. But whatever be the form and con- tent, the appeal of the Kavya will ever consist in what it suggests This is true even in case of the most modern poets who are unwilling even to accept the control of grammar

JAGANNATHA'S RAMAIYATA

Dr (Kuman ) Summn Pard

Jagannatha is the last luminar in the galaxy rf literary critics Bharata is the first known exponent of the system of literary cnucism who expressly dengnates the contents of his Natyasastra as Kavva-guna, Kāvya-Doșa or- Alankāras pertaining to Lavya The period from Bharata to Jagannatha covering nearly two thousand years of uime is marled bv an antense idiological investigation into the essence of poetry. Durng this long period of scholasne speculation various currents of thonghts dommnated the feld adbering vehementl to one principle or another Six such schools arc known as --

1. Rasa School -- which Stresses-emotion 2. Alankara -figures of specch 3 Riu -style 4. Dhvant -suggestiveness 5 Vakrolti -fascinating uncom- monness of idca and expression. 6. Aucitya -propriety of idea and erpression These six schools should not be considered as thorough- ly exclusive of each other or antagonistic to cach other, rather they represent the gradual Tages through which the study of literary criticism was marching towards the inner core of poetry. It is a continuous search and hence a gradual grorih of the doctrine, which can thus be classfed in four stages also :- : 1. Formative stage-from unknown beginning to Bhảmaha 2. Creative stage-from Bhamaha to Anandavardhana 3 Definitive stage-from Anandavardhana to Mammata 4. Scholastic stage -- from Mammata to Jagannatha,

192 Priurples of Literery Crifirism in Serslrit

In the third the process starts with qsts1t and ends in चनसार The three elements er, "TaM and TFTT7 thus loom out dearly It is the भावना that anterconnects ger and चनसवार. Kavva is thus the result of these three-गव्द, भादना & दमस्वार The word चमसवार stands for लोकोत राह लाद "लोकोतरत्व चाट लाद- गनश्चमन्तारत्वापरपर्यानोऽनुभवनासिको जाविविनेद" It is a supermun- dane pleasure of which personal experience is the proof It cannot be derived from ordinary words like a son is bomn to you This r is related to word through EET which is desenbed br Jagannatha as "पुनः पुनरनुनवानात्ना" It consists in continued contemplation. Of the three clements, :, #aal and qara the last one is supreme To this Jagannatha refers as-afa चमरकारित्व चावचिष्टमेव"1 On thi चनरकार only he has based the clasification of poetry. Upto Jagannatha the pontion of adtymar was the fundamentum Divisions of poctry, which was not ver just. Some very beautiful instances of poetry were thus thrown in the third class. In the post-dhvani period Visvanatha had gone to the extent of recognising only two varieties-af & aieuon only. He did not recognise the third varcty even as a kavya. At this time Jagannatha on the bass of TT so re-arranged the poctry that instanees which Visvanatha refused to recognise as Kavya, could assume the status of aameres. Jagamnatha is not the first onc to recognise qHFFIT. In the sisteeath century sunet in hws 'रनम्दोप' had defined poetry as "चमत्वारविद्येपकादित्वम् मुन- विशेषकारित्वन् वा". Before him in the 18th century विद्देशवर too had wntten his HRTfET. According to Narayana, the great grand-father of वदनाय, चननदार i th s0ul0 poctr. All thee must have infuenced Jagannatha. To Jagannatha not only the HTTt but all the three elements शब्द, भावना and चमलार are important. His शब्द is रमनीपत्ा- arter. While dealing with Rasa he says-

1 Rasagaógādhara p :

194 Principles of Literaty Criticism in Sanskrit

Jagannatha. It is thus a synthesis and a symbol of all the principles of poetics R C. Duteedi : The idea of Camafkara which, according to some scholars, owes its origin to the sound Camdl produced at cating a good dish was later on philosophically propounded under the infuence of Sarvism It would be interesting and instru- ctve to leam Jagannatha's oniginal source of ramaniyata concept, the author and the book in which it is hinted at for the first time and to trace its development through the centunes till it is finally raised to such an eralted position and declared the soul of poetry by Pandita-Raja Jagannatha The idea of romanipala was accepted by all the poeticists who preceded or followed Jagannatha. It would indeed be interesting to explore its precise correlation with Lindred con- cepts and various terms used by acaryas through the ages to express their pre-eminent concern with ramanfata and how it is effected by a poet. I am afraid Jagannatha, by making ramarij (beautiful) an adjective of meaning, artha, in his definition of poetry, laid more stress on content rather than form Indian tradition of literary criticism has by and large laid equal emphasıs on both the word and meaning, which Jagannatha and some other poeticists scem to contradict.

196 Prinitles ef Litmtsy Crifiris in Sebrit

In the beginning, the tradition in poctics seems to have made no mention of Bhalh at all Vedic and Pauranic treatises were considered, as if, super-literary works that could not be dealt on par with other compositions of poctry erpres- sive of the human feelings Bharata, therefore, in line with the tradition prevalent in his times recognises onh cight sentiments,1 where the Erotc (Srngara) is expresure of an attachment between a male and a female on the human plane. It is only mn Abbinavagupta (C 1100 AD) that we fnd a great stress on Santa, though Bharata has also made a men- tion ofit' Bhetn finds a mention at this stage as one of the mgredients as a Sancari emotion centred in gods as distinct from the attachment for a hwman berome." This attachment need not necessaril be centred in gods ete. but may be expressed as Devotion and Faith with concentration on God. These were regarded as ingredients of the Santa ress' Mammata" and Hemacandra" also endorse this vien in plaring Blakt in the category of a B'ir. A departure from the tradition is manifest with Pandita- raja Jagannatha who seems to have been infueneed by the Bhakti stalwarts lile Sri Ropa and Jiva Gosvamins. He maintains, "Therefore why these the only rams? Propped on the supreme God-head, manifested through the enthralling horripilation and flow of tears ete., well nourished by the cmotions of joy at the time of hstening to the narrations of the Puranas lile the Bhagavata and others, the intimate and immediate experience of the Bhakti sentiment in derotion to the Lord is utmost difficult to conceive. The devotion bere in the form of love for the Lord, is the stable emotion. This cannot be included under the Santa rasa, there being a con- tradiction between attachment and detachment."* It is really a pity that inspite of strong adrocacy for the rasabood of Bhalti, Panditaraja declares his slavery to the tradition and

Nitvatistra, Ga-lwad Senc, Bartda 1954, \ol I. IV. 16 2 Ibd, Vol I, IV. 120 3 Dharvaloba locam, Ed Chewlhamba Seno, p 175 Abbinsvabbaran, D-lhi 1660, p €36 Karyaprakau, Ed Jhalltara, Foona 10:8, p 11s

7. Rasagaagadbara, Niraavesagar Prtas, Ermbav 1916. p. 45 P 105

198 Prenciples of Literery Criticism tn Semskrit no intrinsic defect or shortcoming in Bhalti being potentially capable of culminatiog in the status of a fullfledged rass. Its inclusion, therefore, under one or the other emotions or senti- ments serves pracucally no purpose and cannot, therefor, be justifed, if rase in its pure intrinsic nature is the very essence of the Highest Bliss "Rasa, veril is He". -'Ons enjoys Supreme Bliss on attaiment of this Rasa"1 This authorit of the highest philosophie value goaded the protagonists of the Bhaltt school not to recognise it as a mere rasa but to pro- claim it as rese-rat or the king of rasas, the only sentiment capable of transformation mto the eight, mine, or tuche traditionally recognised roses The mote force behmd a rese is not merely a recogni- ton by a group of literary erties but the very underlving vitalty, the real joy, that forms the fundamental numenon of love, pathos, fear ete. capable of taste by the men of taste. The stable emotion of all-engulfing, sweet attachment develops through the eight successive stages of Bis-a, Prems, Sneha, Afana, Pranaya, Raga and Avraga to mount mto the rudha bherg that is the rarest wealth by itself: The joy and ecstacy are mexpressibly tasted both in union and separation, the poison, honey and nectar being fused into one in both the aspects It is an irony of anguith and enjoyment to be suffering severe pangs of separatioa even amongst the most intimate embraces of the lover or the beloved. And it is the highest boon to dive deep into the loving embrace where a glance would be a well neigh impossibility in the case of love with parakiya ' The poor wretch Lnocling about for a hand- ful of gram strikes against the inconceivable fortune of the rzin of golden treasure overhead .*

mopy within the just man's psyche, and from the fact thal w'en a ran i aitracied to eicelence mn mea and acuons eiervwhire br w odr being drawn bv an anxictv for tue most valuable part ef I toualf There can never be a real confhet betwten a mens co-xern for Limtelf ard Lu concem for what is izluable ja the world around him nisad, Gita Press, Goraktapura, \ E 219 p 173 2 Upvalanilamamı, p 416 (1) Babu varyare yatah lLalu yatra pracehrna kamulzivam c (u) va ca miho durlabhata aa paranE mezriathan a rat \ 3 jbid p 14 4. Ibid p 500-8r

200 Principles of Laterary Critirisr u Sanskrit

This is the supreme Copernican change wrought by the Varsnavite rhetoncians in the nuclens of the Sanskrit poetics an so far as the tradibonal hterature used to revolve round the mundane objects of senses and now the whole structure moved on the prot of the Absolute Lord, the dearest of the dear, the lovelest of the lovely and the final goal of all poetry, poets and poetics

(b) Bhagavadbhatu Rasitana. Kintad tisaya va ve rasadvastatra nedrtat. Rasatvam pupvate pūrnaskhasparurvalāranit. Panporaarasa Kudrarasebhvo tharavedraub, Khadvotebhva iadityaprabbeva balzvattara 11

202 Pnentles ef Litae Critias it Sesbit

to us than what they would mean to any schoolboy or linguist or lexicographer or scientist, I am afraid we are no literary critics and we cannot clam to interpret nightly the principles of cnticism. Much earber than Bhamaba, in Kalidasa humself, we have the mvocation to fabds and aitte as happily wedded to each other in a harmony which is the privilege of poetry. No Indian theorist could take this acsthetic harmony (say=) for granted, that would be begging the question His busi- ness was to esplain it in detail, in terms of literary categories. In all poems, whether taken in parts or as a whole, there is beauty and the busmess of the theonst is to demonstrate the hidden art of the poet in the use of falds and erthz to result in the reader's aesthetic dehght. This brings us to the second basic premiss of all the Sanslant theorists that all poetry must end in the reader's delight, whether it is called bril (joy), or deeeds (bliss) or raa (acstheuc experience) I would lile to Lnow if there is a single wniter in the whole range of Sanskrit Alerkar(SHtra who denies this essential fact, viz, the reader's delight while enjoying a poem In this broad sense, and this is the only sense which is justrfcd, all concepts propounded in the fisre are aesthetic concepis, ie. concepts concerned with the cluct- dation ef beauty as attamed by the unique sah ha of tebds and ertha

III

Now let us see bow each of the concepts throws light on beauty in poetry and how each provdes a sufficient explanabion in itself without opposition to, but mn relation to, the other concepts. First comes Alankara, perhaps the most misunderstood of all concepts Its differentia itself is pofroltt or the principle of atitha to use Bhamaha's exprestion, Without imagmative handling by the poct there is no cleckare of amy type-of fabda or of ertha One is regarded as a poet at all because his perception involves the activity of his imagina- tion or fratbh3 It is the imagination whtch perceives things in multi-coloured relations, similarity, contrast, identity, etc.

204 Prinaples of Literary Criticism in Senshrit

never ernammtal. It is the poetaster or imitator that we have the mechamcal adding up (atra) where art is reduced to artifce, and this abuse only proves the rarity of masstens or master-poets This consideration of propriety or sucitya is the first reqwrement in the maling of a literary critic and without it, one would be no more than a pretender in the critic's dress. What then is the nature of the total impression of beauty with reference to which something may be accepted as appropriate (ucifa) or rejected as inappropriate (crinta)? This question turns on the criterion which is at the baus of all literary judgement, of all statements of gunas or excell- ences and dosas or flaws m hterature. Guas and doyas are related concepts and then dichotomy is disastrous The Indian tendency towards normative classification usually makes one lose the binding thread of underlying principle behind all accepted gunas and daar Again, we fall back on the literary taste as the guiding factor and on the aestheuc delght of the critic in deciding this issuc. At this stage we have to face another question Is all poetry uniformly good ? Are there no gradations of goodness or different mamifestations of goodness ? By goodness is here meant aesthetie and not ethical valuation, of course Agam from the earliest wnter on poetics proper, viz, Bhamaha, up to the latest, we have converging evidence to the fact that at least two types of beauty are clearly distinguishable, their mixture constitutig a third. One is the sweet and sponta- neous path of genius which can be contrasted with culuivated artistry revelling in gaudy glitter of thought and languagt. If the first is natural art, the second is cultrvated and sophis- ticated art. Critcism has to recognise both. This is at the back of the concept of two styles or margas or rilis, viz, Verdarbhi and Gaudi, later including Pafieali, the mixed one. Kabdasa represents the first, as Subandhu the second by common consent; while Bana illustrates the third. One may be interested in further subdivision of Rin or one may not be. But the fundamental recogmution of Rili cannot be avoided by any sahrdaye or literary entie. What then is the basis for all Ritu ? The answer is to be sought in the total impression of beauty conditoning all

205 Prreiples of Literery Crihcism in Sanskrit

Perhaps it could be the stuff of drama. But what about poetry, accepted as poetry by one and all? Is there no beauty in language valued for es own sale, no beautt in thought commonly held as valuable ? If we agree that we have something more in poetry than mere represented cmotion, we must at once realise that any definition maling rase in the narrow sense the sint qa ron of poetry like relyert rasetpicker katyem by Visvanatha, should fall wide of the marl For as Jagannatha hunself admitted ungrudgingh, the word rett is a much abuced term mn ansknt pocues Its precne signif- cance must be caught by the critic before bandying it about recklessl I avoid all the textbooks on Ale-taratastre and take what the dictionary writer has to say on Resa. Ksirasvamin, the brilliant commentator on Amaralosa, has this to say on

ratyādayo bhava anukriyamanāh samajkaih rasyanta it rasāh; yadahuh - "vibhavaranubhavaisca vukto'tha vyabhicaribhih asvadyatvat pradbanatvat sthayyeva tu rasibhavet [Ksirasvāmin on Amtratme, Natya-varga, H D. Sharma's edn , Poona, 1941, p 51.] Avoiding all controversy, this must be accepted as the crucial meaning of resa. It is a sthipbhasd (ic. one of the eight recognised by Bharata) Which gets heightened into resz by the blending of ribhases, subsdoss and ryabFicanbti-es. All these are mental states, moods, feelings or cmotions except ribhasas which are the stimuli, physical or personal, occasion- ing mental states. Their imitation or representation by actors make them relishable to spectators in drama. This is the very essence of Bharata's concept of Rese and should not be lost sight of in abstract theorisings about aesthetic expe- rience indulged in by several writers in the name of rasd. Let us ask ourselves whether in our Mfahabacjs, such rars can be felt or explained. Tale the first canto of the Kumarasarbhie We have Kaldasa's fine description of Mount Himilaya. Now it is a simple parseia-sarmni. Can we assert that there is rase in Dharata's sense? If any one were to assert so, we should ask him these questions :- What

203 Principles of Literary Crifteism in Sanskrit

all concepts in Alenkirafastra, ancient as well as modern It ad- mits intellectual ideas (tastu) and figurative modes (alankara) on a par with mental states and emotions (rasadt) into the realm of poetry provided they undergo the minimum transformation through the imagination (pratibha). The poctic process itself is searchingly re-defined as suggestion or dhoani to clear the common misunderstandings of it by scholars as identical with primary or secondary denotation (abhtdha or (aksana) . Dhvani, then, is not a new concept as such, it is the understanding philosophy of all concepts, viz, rit, alankara, guna-dosa aueitra, rasa, etc Even the worst critics of Anandavardhana, viz , Bhata Nayaka and Mahimabhatta accepted the search- ing analysis of Anandavardhana, while quarrelling with him on the issue of the name to be given to the underlying poetic function, which is umque Though I have not used the word Dhoant so long m this paper, all my re-valuation of the diffe- rent concepts has been from the attitude of dheem only, and I claim no onginality for it The implications of such a re-valuation on practical criticism are obvious Practical criticism will have to analyse poeuc beauty inhering in form as well content, now taken as one umit, and now taken mn part, under all the different heads of Alankara, Guna, Rasa etc , and no one analysis would be complete by itself To talk of a poem's rasa as existing without its alankara or guna is anathema The earlier the analogy of detachable ornaments ( haradicadslanFarah) is shed, the better it would be for practical criticism We may talk of a poet's failure when alankara miscarries; but not of poct's success without a shred of alankara or guna. If the truth of this is realised, we could write independent studies of every Sanskrit poet in as many chapters as we have concepts, to bring out the success or failure of the poet. Such studies might put a stop to our cheap imitation of Western crtical jargon and raise the prestige of Indian literary criticism itself.

210 Prinsples of Laterery Crineism in Seutrt

may or may not be a Rasila. The audience enjoys the fetlings of pleasure and pain in a detached, impersonal manner and thus the emjorment of Rasa becomes a sort of universal espenence Bharata, therefore, seems to be qute nght mn not using the word Sthayibhava as equivalent to Rasa, The aestheuc pleasure which has been called carvana, is essenhal for Rasa-espenence The masterpiects of Sansknt Iiterature provide us abundant food for the enjoyment of the intellectual palate. They prowde not only sweet products for immediate enjovment but are also taste- ful to rummaie on for the whole of our hfe Santknt poetry is a fountain of pleasure for one's soltary moments. I am never tired of imprecsing on our youngmen the pleasures of Sansknt literature, as apart from value of this languagt as a vehcle for literary writings and modem screntific termni- nology Every writer of Sansint poctics has expanded on the importance of Sabda or Artha, and some have emphasised ther inter-relation The simple truth is that we cannot separate the Sabda from the meaming anymore than the Ardhanarisvara Siva from Parvati. Kaldasa has involed ther both together. दर्नववित मंजवनी दागरयंत्रतिपतये The most comprehenuive and acceptable definition of portry thercfore appears to be Panditaraja's : imdsanT :T aTe and not a host of other definitions which arc well known, but which leave out one aspect or the other of good poetry. The useof language with a vien exclusvely to beauty-and not for bombast or meaningless jargon -- is the only_true explanation of all Alankaras. Hence it is but Dh-em, used in its wide sense The Dhvani school has rightl dominated the field of literary criticio ever since it was propounded by Ananda-Vardhana and explained in all its imphcations by Abhinavagupta Kuntala could not convert the later cnities to Vakrolt being the soul of postry as it was identified with one of the Alanlaras however much he tried to male its definition very pervasne. I may say a few words about the great emphasis laid on Praubha by various wtiters. No doubt a poet's Pratibha is of great importance in any composition. But modern psy cho-

अलङ कारस्वर्पविवेचनम्

डा. ब्रम्मानन्द शर्मा

अलमुपपद्पूर्दके कृधानो घञ्प्रततनयोगाइलटवरव्दन्य व्यपत्ति। घन्न्र- प्रत्ययदच भावकरणयो'रित्ववदकरणभल्टक्ततृतिर्वत्वस्व प्रथमोज्यं, "अलवियने- इनेनेत्यलद्कार" इनि करणपत्पनिवलाच्च अलदकरपमाचनमित्वन्य हितीयो- उर्ध। अलनकरण मिनि प्रथमोज्य गोभायानापरपर्या एव। न च मूल्त वर्मेरप (अत्र कर्मणा वदेषिवगत वर्मानिप्रेत ने तु व्याकन्णगन वर्मवारक) गमन- पटननेखना दिवदम्यादि कर्मरपत्वात्। कर्म चेद मुख्यन वबिनम्वड़म्, तन्पव एनडवलम्बनेन काव्यप्रव तिदर्शनान्। सहदस्य तु काल्लगतन्पास्य मोनावानम्प प्रतोनिन हि कमंसपत्वेन अपि तु गुणात्मव घर्मरपत्वेन पूर्वविद्यमानरूपे गोना- घानमहेणाधानन्य नम्पन्नत्वेन प्रतीने। सा चैधा प्रतीनि शोभारूदव। नाघनरूपोध्त । साघनन्चेद न हि बाह्ययोगन काव्यय्ोभापावक निमपि तद्हि्वति तत्त्वमषि तु वान्तरिकयोगेन तच्छोनाघायक सदन्नर्वंनि तत्वम् । तदन्तर्वनित्वाच्च तम्च

मिद्धम्। तच्चानलकारस् योभात्मवत्वेन वे प्रहादुपपन्नमित्युनयघाच्लद्ववार सहदयदृष्टया शोभार्प मौन्दर्षरूपो वेनि पर्यदनिनम् । इद मोन्दर्य शब्दार्थगतत्वेन हविविध सत् गव्दाल्टकाराव्थतद्वारदवेत्य रद्कारवविध्य प्रयोजनमिन्वालडकारिवरणा मनम्। तच्च मव्दार्थयोभेदद्हा- भावेडमम्भवमित्यत्र वश्चन भेदहेतुमृंक। स व गन्दन्य सामान्नायंद्रहोन न सम्भवनि, उन्चारणाशेन नह लर्थतत्त्स्यापि तत्रान्र्भावात्। जन" शब्दर उन्चारणस्प इतम्मानि स्वीकार्यम्। तथात्वे वर्णविषयमुतत्य उन्चारपरपम्य शन्दस्व वुद्धिविषयभूतादर्थान्पार्यकयोषपने.। बन शब्दानड्वार उच्चारण-

सगीतविषयत्वेन वाध्यागत्वाभावान् वा्मे व भव्देन नह अर्थस्य नियतस्म्वन्न-

मित्वयंसम्वद्धमेवोच्चारपसोन्द्र्वं गउदालवकारस्य स्वरूपमिनि प्मवसितम्। १- धन्नि च भावकरणमो-अष्टाध्यायी ६-४.२७ २ अन शोनात व्रिवेचन विषयगन रूपमादाय वृत न तु आन्मगत रुपमादाय।

214 Prinriples of Literary Crifrism in Senshrit

पर्यापमिति ततरवापालडकारतानमन्डेवा । अथ वृन्तकोत्या ध्वनवदोन्गमलङगरर्पवनरोवउननवियि बबोने

मलडकारम्च तत््दरप ध्वनिवादिना नम्मन न देनि जानन्दादिर्टते-

नगाश्िनान्त्वदङ्वारा मन्नव्या कटकादिवन्।

उपकुर्वन्ति न सन्न वेञद्द्वारेण जातुचित्।

चारन्वस्यंव नमेण शव्दार्मपतालकारतम्। तयात्ववप वाच्यवाचवम्माने- इनागगन्स्प यतुपाश्षन तन रमध्वन्चुन्मुसीभावेनेव वाव्यतत्वविचारी हतु। रसध्वनी वाच्यादीनामगन्वात् नदामनर वानिधान सेपा युक्तम्। परनम्मन्मते रमध्वन्वभावेउि ललदवारवद्भावेन विञ्च गव्दचित वाच्यिननवस्यमबर स्मृतम्' इति ध्वनिवादिना मम्मटेनापि तैयान्वस्वीवरेप स्वनन्वनमा कल- वाराणा प्रतिपादनोपपत्तेनेहि नर्वत्रापत्ाभिधान नेपा युक्तम्। वभिननगुप्तपादाचार्यान्तु तथा हि वचेनन गकरीर दुष्टलद्युपेतनषि न भाति अलबकावस्वाभावाद इवि रमध्बन्यभावे न हि वलदवारजव्य विमष मौन्दर्य मन्यन्त इ्तेतेपा मत विचारणोयन्। नत तथा हि ववेवन नकनरीर वृष्टलाद्युपेतभपि न नावीत्यम प्रथम विचायते। जन रस्य प्रामानुन्यादेन रसरहिसा शब्दार्थंयो. गववरीरुल्यावमभिनवलम्मतम्, पर पूर्वदिद्यमान- मामविगमे इद गरीरस्य पूर्वविच्यमानरमापहारे एवं अव्दार्यत्रो शवणगीरन्द- नम्भवान् प्रते व रमायोगमानवद्यनिन तथात्वानावात् न हि न्भगितचो शब्दार्थयो शवसरीस्तुन्च व युक्तम्। एव मवि 'रम पामा एवं इ्ति यदि भद- वामाग्रह्न्नहि नीरसमब्दारथयोसूतादिवदेव निप्पाणगरीरतव स्वास्। मुत्या दपरचालव्वव्ारयोगेन विर्भाप चारत्व भजन्त इपनुसवसम्मनम् 1 सतो नोगम- शब्दार्यं मोरप्लद्ववारयोगेन मोन्डर्वंदो इति नेनम्। दम्नुव अचभरीरै डवाशनाघाने सवापि तदावानेन या कप चारतागदे प्रागविगमनपनीविजन्वा सद्धो संव हेतु । अन्वादच प्रनीने नवगरोरश्विव प्रकृतनपप न्टप्राणभोगान नम्पतति व तम सबर्गनान् जनुमानत मिद्धि । न तमा नीरनदयन्दार्थयी दाब्दारयंयी रमुस्य निमतलोगाभावेन तय वद्विगमन- प्रवोलनुपाते।

216 Principles of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit

ब्रह्मानन्द दर्मा जपनेत्र तु भिन्नमेव। किन्तु मुसे यत्सौन्दर्य बुरूपना वा विद्यतै तस्य तस्या वा कि स्वरूपम् । रे प्र द्विवेदी मुग्मेव तत्मौन्दयंम् १ द्रह्मानन्द शर्मा मुखमेव तत् । बकटाचलम् योज्य काव्यदास्त्र प्रत्न पन्था विद्यते तस्मिन् कि नामानोचित्व भर्वद्भिरालोचित येन नूतनम्य कम्पापि पय प्रवर्तन भवताममि- रचितम् ? ब्रह्मानन्द शर्मा पूवंवर्तिनामभिनवगप्तपादाचार्ादीना मते या वापि समति- विद्यते सा तु मया कवितव यदगत्वाभिधानमेवोचितम्। अस्माक मते तु वाच्यार्भरूप एवालकार: स्यान्। ते तु पुनरगत्वेन तत्व निर्देश कुर्वन्ति। वॅक्टाचलम् अगत्वे का हानि ? रे प्र द्विवेदी काव्यशास्त्र तूच्चते यद् 'ब्राह्मणथ्रमणन्यायेनालवाराणा- मलकार्यता'। ये इदानी वाह्यावस्थायामलकारा सन्ति ते एव यदा अन्न्भ ता भवन्ति, ध्वनिभूता भवन्ति, तदा 'अलवार्या उच्चनने। एवम् अलवारालवार्ययोर्भेंदो ध्वनिवादिनाभपि सम्मत । "परतीयमान पुनरन्यदेव वस्त्वस्ति वाणीय महाववीनाम्। यत्तत् प्रसिद्धावयवातिरिक्त विभाति लावण्यमिवागनासु" अत्र यन् प्रसिद्धपद् वर्तते तस्य व्याल्यानम् वानन्दवर्दनेन वृत यत् प्रमिद्वभ्य अलवृतेम्य प्रतीतेभ्यश्व अगेभ्य । एवमानन्दवजने- नापि अलकारालकार्ययोभेद स्वीनिनयते। भर्वाद्धिम्त्वयाभेद प्रतिपाधते मसमेव सौन्दर्यमितिवत्। वनेन कि नूतनत्व सिद्ध काव्यवास्त्र इत्यस्माक जिनासा । रामचन्द्र द्विवेदी. अलकारविपये प्राचा मते व्वस्थादवयी विद्यते, एका अन्वय- व्यतिरेकगर्भा अपरा वाशयाययिभावगर्भा। प्रथमा त्राधानेन मम्मटेन द्वितीया च स्वपितुरनुवतिना रय्केण प्रतिपादिता। मम्मटस्य मतेडनर एवभूतगव्दस्य अन्वयात् एवम्तगव्दस्व च व्यतिरेकादम दव्दालवार अर्थावारो वा। अय नब्द बन चार विद्यने अयमर्य अब चार विद्यते दनि निस्चित्य सयूयवेण स्थाप्यते अय शब्दालकार अर्थारकारो या। यदि मब्ाययो रष्टार्योदिवारयोदचाभेद स्वीचियत तहि गव्दस्नावत शब्दा- लवार अर्यस्नावद अर्थालवार। नहि विमाथित्य, कि स्वमें- वान्दपोकृत्व एवम्य तम्यवाल्वारम्य नब्दालवार्ता अर्था- लकारना वा स्मात् अमेदे व आधयस्य पूववतित्वम् आशितस्य

218 Princittes of Laterary Criticism in Sanskrit

व्यवहार नभवनि। चारसव्दार्यंना तु पूर्वभाविनी रवीवार्था। रममदर्भ पूर्वत्र चारता्दार्थसदभों न भविष्यतीति तु अचिन्त- नीचम्। आत्मन नवंत्र विद्यमानतानामपि सथा 'जोवात्मा' इति शब्दस्य मनुप्े एव व्यवहारो नरवति तर्यब इय रमदेवता तनरव निष्ठत यत्र मन्दिर मुन्दर नवति। तत कोउप अलवारेप स्यान् वा एतत्सन्। किन्तु चास्तबदार्यता तु नविप्वतेव। ना वनोननिहया तिशयास्यादिस्या वा स्वान्। अलवारविद्यीप- म्नु प्रस्नान्नरम्।भवता भतेन तु रम्यायंस्व काब्ये सवत्र स्द्रावादर्थापकारत्व निवतनवाऽपवति। प्राचा मते तु वहुष् दोपाभावस्पतव स्थान्।

220 Principles of Literary Criticism in Sanstrit

बोध, भाव-वोष, मृत्यु-वोन आदि स्प्टतया पास्चात्व प्रभाव के सूचक हैं। हिंदी -ालोचना के इतिहाम का आयाम लगभग सवा चार सौ वर्षो का है। उसके दो स्पष्ट अवस्थान हैं। पहला अवस्थान लगनग सवा तीन मौ वर्षों का है जो हिंदी-माहित्य का मध्चकाल कहलाता है, औोर दूसरा पिछली एक शनाब्दी का है जिने हम आधुनिक काल बहते हैं। मध्ययु गीन समीक्षा प्रायेण संज्ञातिक है। उसका क्षेत्र काव्प तक मौमित है। उनके प्रणेता आचार्य-कवि है। उन्हें कवि-आचा्य कहना भी भमीचीन नही प्रनीन होना, क्योंकि वे प्रवृत्वा कवि हैं, उनके भाहित्व मे आचार्यत्व की अपेक्षा कवित्व का स्वर हो मुखर है। वुछेक अपवादी को छोडकर प्राय भारी-ी- सारी समीक्षा पद्यवद्व है। इम वाल की समीक्षा पर सस्कृत-मीक्षानास्त्र का एकाधिपत्य पाया जाता है । आाधनिक काल मे मैद्धातिक समीक्षा को अपेक्षा व्यावहारिक समीक्षा कहीं अधिक लिसी गयी है। आवुनिक आलोचना का क्षेत्र बहुत व्यापक है। उसरी परिधि में कविनेतर साहित्य-रुप(उपन्वास, कहानी, निबध, रेवाचित्र, रिपोर्ताज आदि) भी ममाहित है। ये गद्य-रूप पश्चिम को देन हैं। अतएव इनकी आलोचना भी पाद्चात्य समीक्षाशास्त्र के मानदडो द्वारा निर्धारित है। परत्, वाव्यगास्त और काव्य-समीक्षा के क्षेत्र मे सस्तृत का प्रभाव अव्याहृत रहा है। आलोचना-पद्धतियां मसकृन-आलोचना-पद्धति के प्रभव का आकलन करने के दूर्व एक स्पष्ठी- करण अक्षित है। कुछ लोग रमवादी वालोचना पद्धति, मार्क्सवादी आालोचना- पद्धनि आदि का व्यवहार कर दिया करते हैं। यह वपवहार भाति-जनित है। रमवाद या मा्क्मवाद आलोचना के मानदड हैं उन्हें आलोचना-पद्धति कहना मलत है। उन मानदड़ी के प्रयोग की सली ही आलोचना-पदति है। यदि कोई आलोचक रस को बाब्य की नसोटी मानवर रस का शास्तरीय विवेचन करते हुए उदाहरण-हप में किसी रचना का उल्लेख करता है तो हम वहंगे कि वह आालोचना वी वाचार्य-पदधनि का अन्सरण करता है। यदि वह यालोच्य रचना की व्याय्या करना हुआ उसमे निहिन रम-्मौन्दर्य का उद्घाटन करता है तो बहना चाहिए कि वह आलोचना की व्यास्यात्मक पद्धतति है। इसी प्रवार केवल प्रदसात्मक कथन या विवेचना आरोचना की भक्ति-पद्धनि या प्रमस्ति -पद्धविया 'सव्ुणाभ्यवहारी' पद्धति है। दूमरी और, केवल दोप-दर्गन जालोचना की अरोपकीसदति या सदनसद्धति है। नाम्पयं यह है कि रसवाद की दृष्टि से ही आलोचना की विभिन पद्धनियों का अवलबन किया जा भकता है और किया गया है।

१. वाव्यमीमामा (गायववाट संस्वरण), पृ० ५.

222 Principles of Literary Crilieasm tn Sansknit

"गमचरितमानम" 'गोनावले" औौर 'वरवरामायण' मे ही उद्दाहरण दिने गये है,' वा-निक काल मे प्राचान पद्ति पर बे्ड प्रवार वे द्रथ लिे गये है (!) जिनम गद्य मे नक्षणा-नरूपण करते उदाहरण-एप मे सस्कत-नाबादों द्ारा उद्धन पद्यों के हिंदी-अन वाट अथवा हिदी-पद्य दिये गये हैं, जमे-'भारनी-भूपप' (जजनदास केडिना), 'वाव्-वल्पगम" (व्हैनालाल पोहार) आदि (२) जिनमे हिंदी-गोनि-परपग का पालन किया गया है, जैने-'रम-वल्न" (हरिजीघ). (३) जिनमे गद्यवद्व विम्नृत मंद्वातिक विवेचन-वि्लेषण किया गय है गौर आवशयन नान सार मुगने या नये उद्दाहग्ण भी दे दिये गये हैं, जैमे-'रन-मिद्वान स्वव्प-विश्वंनण' (वावदप्रकाण दीक्षिन), "ध्वनि- सम्रदान और उनके मिद्धान' (नोलामवर व्यान) आदि। मिद्वात-प्रतिपादन की दृष्टि मे एक बन्च प्रभाव भी द्ृष्टव्य है। जिनप्रकार मम्जन के महाकवियों ने यत्र-्नत्र जपने वाव्यमतो की सक्षिप्त निवधना की है उमो प्रकार हिदी के कवियो ने भी। सस्कृन मे टीका-पद्धति या व्यावहारिक नमीक्षा का निदशन वाव्यनृतियों पर लिखिन टीकाओ मे उपलब्ज होता है, जैने सजीवनी (मल्लिनाथ), अर्य- दयोननिका (राघत्रभङ्ट) आदि रोकाकारों की आलोचनासैलो वाचारमं- पद्धनि से भिन्न है। उनकी दृष्टि लक्ष्य रचना पर के दरित है, निद्धात-मक्ष गोप है। अनी मान्यता के सनर्थन अथवा स्पष्टीकरण वे लिए उन्होंन जावदसकता- नसार सैद्धानिक विचार-चर्चा भी की है। इन प्रनग मे मल्लिताथ की प्रतिजा ध्यान देने चोष है "नामूल लिल्यने विचिन्नाननेक्षितमुच्चते।" 'अमूस' का आपात म्राह्य जर्य है-पपामाणिक । इससे एव दूमरा अर्थ भी दयोतित होना है-डोकाकार या काव्बालोचक के लिए काब्ज ही मूल वस्तु है, उने छोडकर इवर-उनर को गप्प हुकिना अवाउनीम है। "अपेकिन" की व्यजना यह है कि सहृदय प्रबुद्ध माठक की काव्य वा ममं ममझाने के लिए विस्तृत

१ नौरन के लच्छन लिए रामायण के लच्छ। तुलसोभूपण ग्रथ को या विधि कियो प्रतन्छ ।। -चुलमोभूपण (अप्राशित), पृ०१ २. वागर्यावित्र सपूननो वागर्यप्रतिपत्तये। -- वानिदान गिरा वरय जल चीचि नम कहिजत निन्न न भिन्न।-नुग्मीद्न भुमाषित हारि विगत्वयो गदान्न दुर्जनन्वावंरिपोरिवामृतम्। सदेत्र घने हृदपेन नज्जनो हरिमंहागनमिवानिनिमलम् । -बाप वचि विजान रस के लापूरी। दरिि निवर निजरना दूरी ॥-जायसी

224 Prinnples of Liyrery Critirim in Soutrit

मिलवा है।'मृक्ति-पद्धति का जयुनावन विशमित रुप हिदी-विद्वानों दाग लिवताजी गयो भूनिकाओ, जाकामवाणी को दाताजो, जपनी कृनि पर लिखवाने या छदम नाम मे सवस लिये गये लेखो और जीवित नाहिन्बवरो पर प्रमीन गोप प्रवषो मे भी देखने को मिलता है।

इनके विपरीन, ऐनो ननीक्षाएँ भी पाधी जाती हैं जिनका प्रयोजन वालोच चिपन का तडनमात्र है। व्यन्तिविवेक" और 'चित्रनीमासावटन" इमो पद्धति की वालोचनाएं है। यह वान ध्यान देने योग है कि सस्कृत में मुन्तियं कवियो को पेश्च करके चली जौर नवी-तुली गव्दावली मे निर्माचाक समीक्षा का निचोड-ना प्रस्तुत बिया गता, सननात्मन ममीक्षा नज्जातिक जर भुवे- युक्त रहीं। हिंद्ी में भी लायु नित बग में दोपवर्णनपरत आलोचिनाए लिस्ी गरची, किंतु वे मं द्वातिक न होवर व्यवहारित है। 'बालिदान की निरकुगना" में महावौग्प्रनार द्विवेदी ने, जौर प्रमाद जी के दो नाटव" में तृपानतर गुप्त ने वालोच्य माहिन्यकारों के केवल दोपों जा उद्घाटन बिया है। पहिली इनि को तत्त्वानिनिवेसी औौर दूनरी को मरी जालाचता का उदाहरण नाना जा मजना है।

राजगेवर ने भावक के जो चार प्रकार (१. वरोचगी, 2. मत्सरी,2. भनुाभ्यवहारी,४ तत्वाभिनिवेगी) दनलाये है उनने में प्रथम दो सडन-पर्दन के आलोवत हैं, और तोनरा मक्ति पद्धति का। चोये को जचिन्मान भार बाचाने- पद्धनि जमवा टीता-पदति के मनीक्षत वर्ग में रसा जा सकता है।

मस्टृन नीक्षानान्त्र मे काल्यालीचन के छट मानदंड प्रसिद्ध है। ग्न, वढवार, ध्वनि, रोति, चशोकत और ओचिन्य। हिंदी के प्ररचीन एव वर्बाचीन जालोचनागास्ती माबः अलवारवादी का रसवादी है। मिसी-बिनी ने आनंदे-

अमा कालिदानम्त्र भारवेर्वयगोरवम्। दण्डित पदलालिनयं मा्घे नन्त तबो गुप:।। मुबन्घुर्वाणभ;दच कविराज इति नबः। बनोक्तमंनि:मारचनुर्यो दिद्दते न वा ।। कविवा बरता तीन हैं तुलमी केसव सूर। नचित् सेती इन लेनी बाबर बिनन भजूर॥ सूर मूर उननी ससी उड्दगन बैनवदान। 2. बाइकनीमान्ना (गापववाड सस्वरम), पु० १४

226 Prenceples of Literary Crattcism in Sanskrit कि रम-सिद्धात व्यापकतम है और उसकी सर्वाधिक चर्चा हुई है। वे रमवो व्यग्यरूप मानते हुए भी यह भूल जाते हैं कि वस्तुरूप, अलकादरप और रमरप तरिविध ध्वनि की केवल एक विा रस है। ध्वनि व्यापक है, रस व्याप्य है। रम निरुपक ग्रथो की तुलना मे अलकार-निस्पक ग्रथो की सख्या वही अवित है। रम-मिद्धात-पोपक "काव्यप्रकाश", "साहित्यदर्पण", 'रसगगावर" आदि मे भो अलकार को रस की अपेक्षा कई गुना अधिक स्थान दिया गया है। व्यावर्हारित समीक्षा मे तो टीकाकारो ने प्रायग अठकारो का ही निदन किया है, यदानवदा ही रम की चर्चा की है। नाट्मशास्त्रीय रचनाओ के रक-प्रकरण को समिन्ित कर लेने पर भी सस्कृत-समीक्षा मे रम की चर्चा सलकार की अपेक्षा न्यून है। हिंदी मे भी अनकार पर सवमे अधिक लिखा गया है। मात्रा की दृष्टि से रम का स्थान उनके वाद आता है। पचास से अधिक केवल सलकार प्रय दिव गये हैं।' रसनिस्पक सयो के दो वर्ग हैं। सामान्य और शृगारपरक ।' शृगार के सदर्भ में नायक-नामिका-भेद-वर्णन रीति-परपरा के आचार्यों का प्रिय विषय रहा है। कितने ही ग्रथ केवल नायिका-भेद पर लिसे गये हैं।' शृगार- वर्णन मे उनका मन विझ्ेप रमा है, अन्य रसो की चर्चा केवल काम-चलाऊ है। उनकी प्रतिभा का चमत्कार नायिका-भेद-निरूपण मे अवेक्षणीय है। आधुनिक काल मे रभ-सिद्धात पर कई महन्वपूर्ण स्वतत्र ग्रथ और शोनप्रबध लिख गये हैं। हिंदी में समीक्षाशास्त्र का आरभ तब हआ जब सस्कृत मे समीक्षानास्त्रीय मौलिक चिनन का मुग अवर्मित हो चुका था। भरत, भामह, वामन, यानरवर्धन, कुतक यदि मोलिक विचारक थे। टोकाकार होते हुए भी अभिनवगुप्त को मोलिकजा अमदिग्म है। १२ वी दती ई० से ही सस्वृत-समीक्षाद्यास्त में

१. ललिनललाम(मतिराम, १७वी शती ई० का उत्तरार्घ), भायाभरण (बैरीमाल, १७४८ ई०), पद्माभरण (पद्माफर, लगभग १८१० ई०), अ ठकार-मजूपा(भगवानदीन, १९१८ ई०), अलकार-पोयूप ("रसाल', १९२९ ई०), भारती-भूपण (अर्जूनदास केडिया, १९३० ई०), अलकार-मजरी (कन्हैयालाल पोदार, १९३६ ई० ) आदि। २ रसिकप्रिया (कैसवदाम, १५९१ ई०), रमसाराग (भिखारीदाम, (१७४ ई०), नवरमतरग (वेनीप्रबोन, १८२१ ई०), रसकल्स (हरिऔष, १९३१ ई.), रसमजरी (वन्टैयालाल पोद्ार, १९३४ ई०) आदि। ३ हिततरगिणो(कपाराम, १५४१ ई०), रमराज (मतिराम, लगभग १६४३ ई०), शृगारनिणय (भिम्वारीदास, १७५० ई०) आदि। ४ सभूनाय मुलवी (१६५० ई०), बुदन (१६९५ ई०), वेशवराय (१६१७ ई०), खड्गराम (१७०८ ई०) आदि के द्वारा लिखित 'नाविकाभूद'।

228 Principles of Literary Criticum in Sansint को दूर्ति आधुनिक युग मे हो रही है।' इस पीटी के अनेक आलोचको ने महहत के मूल-प्रथों का गभीर अनशीलन करके नाव्यशास्त्र के विभिन्न पक्षो की श्रांड् मीमासा की है। यह सस्कृत-काव्यशास्त्र की महिमा का चमलार है नि हिंदी के अनेक आलोचक मूल-प्रथो से सबंधा वनभिन्न होने पर भी आचार्य प्रवर के उच्चासन पर विराजमान है। विचारणीय प्रश्न क्या सस्वृत के समीक्षानास्त्र में प्रतिप्ठित याल्य के भानदड आज पुराने पड गये है? क्या सस्कृत का कोई वाव्य-सिद्धान ऐसा है जिसके निवय पर हम पुरानी औौर नयी कविता को समान रूप से परस सबते हैं? नयी पीटी बे अनेक आलोचको का उत्तर है-नही। उनकी दृष्टि मे वाव्य के पुराने प्रतिमान काल-कबन्दित हो गये हैं। नव प्रतिमानो के निर्वारण मे वे ईमानदारी, वर्तमान की सही पहचान, प्रामाणिक अनुभूति, अनुभूति की जटिलना, तनाव, बिघटन, विसगति, बिडवना आदि शब्दों के नूतन अयवोष आदि की बात करते हैं। उनकी आलोचनाजों से निष्तृष्ट यह तात्पर्य अवस्यमेव मान्न है कि पुराने मिद्धातो को आंग मूं द कर नही स्वीकारना चाहिए, उनमे युगघर्मानुसार सशोधन अपेक्षित है। न्टेकिन, जो कुछ भी पुराना है उने केचुल की तरह छोड देना चाहिए -- यह बतिवाद है। नवा कवि कोई सिद्धात निर्चित बरके चलने के लिए बाघ्य नहीं है। परतु, आलोचक को इनना स्वच्छद होने बैा अधिकार नहीं है। उने यह निश्चित बरये चलना पडेगा कि कविता जोर ववितेतर वाटमय मे क्या तास्विक भेद है, कविना के वे कौननमे व्यावर्त क धर्म हैं जिनके आधार पर उसकी समीक्षा नर्णीय है। बहृत-से नये समौक्षतों के सवध मे कठिनाई यह है कि वे नामान्य रूप मे समोक्षा-सिद्धान के उपस्थापन को, और विशेष रूप ने नवी वविता वे मूल्यावन मे समर्य नये काव्यशास्त्र के निर्माण वो भी हटिवादिता था दवियानमी समझने हैं। दूमरी ओर, सस्तृन-वाव्यमास्त्र के समर्यक आलोचक है। वुछ्ध आलोचको या आग्रह है कि रम ही बाव्य की एवमात्र कमोटी है और नयी बविता भी उनी कमोटी पर परजी जानी चाहिए। दे रम की व्यापरना की बात तो बरते हैं बिनु उसे भिद्ध करके दिवा नही सवते। उनका रम-निद्धान अभिनवसृप्त

१. रम-मिद्वान्त : स्वरूप-विश्वेषण (आनदप्रकाश दीक्षिन). रम-विभर्श (राममूनि त्रिपाठी), ध्वनिनापदाय और उनके मिद्धान (भोगारावर व्याम), रोविकालीन बलवार-माहित्य का नास्त्रीय विवेचन (ओम्प्रबाम सर्मा), लसग और उश्नका हिंदी-काव्य में प्रसार (राममूति तिपाठी) आदि।

230 Principles of Literary Gritieism in Sanskru

गीत चेचता हू, में सभी किसिम के गीत वेचता हूँ। जी माल देखिये दाम बनाऊंगा, सेकाम नहीं है, काम वताऊँगा, कुछ गीत लिखे हैं मस्ती मे मेंने, कुछ गीत लिन्े हैं पस्ती मे मेंने, यह गीत सख्त सरदर्द भुलायेगा, यह गीन पिया को गक् बुलायेगा। जी, पहले बुछ दिन शर्म लगी मुझको पर पीछे-पीछे अवल जगी मुनको, जी, लोगों ने तो वेच दिये ईमान। जी आप न हो सुन कर ज्यादा हैरान। मे सोच-समझ कर लासिर अपने गीत वेचता हूँ, जी हाँ, हजूर मे गीत बेचना हूँ। इम रचना से किस रस की प्रतीति होती है? यदि कोई हाम्य रम की जन भूति करता है तो उने हृदयहीन स्मझना चाहिए। यदि करण रस माना जाए दे फिर 'वरण' की नवी परिभाषा बनानी पड़े गो। एक प्रयोगवादी वविनममालोच का कथन है कि इसकी सबसे बड़ी विशेयता यह है कि इसमे गनीर वान हल्बे पुर्के टग मे कही गयी है। लेविन हल्के-फुल्के ढग को कविता का लक्षण नह माना जा सकता। वान्तविकता यह है कि इस कविता मे ध्वनि का ही चमतरा है। आज के पाठक और ममालोचक की रचि और मृत्यावधारणा विद्टत हो गर्य है। कवि ने यह वान बडी शक्निमत्ता और चित्रान्मवता मे कही है। उमं प्रत्येक वाबय से ध्वनित प्रश्न चमत्कार को उत्कर्न प्रदान करते है। तीसरा उदाहरण धर्मवीर भारती की 'बविता की मौन' से लीजिए। नख ने उसकी जबानी तोड दी मो बड़ी ही नेक थी कविना मगर घनहीन घी, कमजोर थी, और बेचारी गरीवन मर गयी। इसमे धोन या वरणा नहीं है, क्योकि सविता वा उपमहार है: सो सृम्हें में फिर नया विश्वास देवी हूँ नया इनिहास देती है, कौन कहता है कि वविता मर गदी?

232 Prinaples of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit जाने वाली प्रत्येक वस्तु पर लागू हो सके। नायष के साय ताशत्म्य वाला सिद्धान्त व्यापक नहीं है। वस्तुन भावक का ममस्त भाव्-वस्तु के नाथ तादात्म्य होता है। वेवटाचलम् यह ठीक है कि श्रेक्षक अथवा सहृदय वा सभी नाटकीय पात्ी से तादात्म्य होने में कुछ वै यक्निक कठिनाइया है। विन्तु ववि का- जिसका मैंने जने निवन्य मे महदव से जभेद स्यापित बन्ने का यसन किया था-काव्यमर्जन के समय अपने पात्रों से तादान्म् स्वीकार वरना ही पटेग। यदि ववि लपने पात्ो से वादात्मय स्थापित नहीं वर सकता तो वह उनका स्वाभाविक चित्रम, उनके मानमिक भानो का यथार्थ विवेचन जीर उनके अनुरुप भाषा का प्रयोग करने में सफठ नहीं हो सकता। यह मामना ही पटेमा कि कवि जपने पात्रो के साथ तन्मचीभाव कन्ता है। उ भा सिंह यह ठीर है कि कवि तन्मयता के विना नही लिन सक्ता, वभि- नेता भी नन्मयता के विता अभिनय नहीं वर सरता। प्रेसन को भी अपनो एक तन्मयता होती है। पर प्रश्न यह है कि ये तीनो म्वम्पन एक ही है या इनमे युछ साम्य-दैषम्य है। मनुसूदन सरस्वती के मन को भ्वीकार करते हुए में यह मानना हूँ कि इनमे 'तारतन्य' है अर्यान् मामारणीतरण में मात्रा का भेद है. गुण या स्वरूप का नही। जिस प्रकार आप ववि और महृदप को मूलत एव मानते हुए उनकी अनुभूनियो में मात्रा का मेद करते हैं उनी, प्रवार सें में भी प्रेक्षक और कवि के तादात्म्य मे मात्रा-नेद को स्वीकार करता हूँ। वंकटाचलम् : जन्भूति या भावना मे तो मात्रानेद दो भकता है पर वाझाल्य के माय ऐ सा सभव नहीं है। या तो पूरा सादात्म्य होगा या विल्कुल नही होगा-वाघा तादात््य हो, लाघा न हो ऐसा नही हो सवता। उ. भा. सिहः वाव्य तीन प्रकार पे हो मकते है-एक तो नवि विसी प्रस्यान वयावस्तु पर लिखे, दूमरे अपने जीवन मे आये और निकट मे अनु भव बिच गये िमी व्यवति के विषय मे लिगे और तीमरे स्वय अवनी नननियी पर लिखे। इन बीनी मे प्रथम तो मुनी-मुनावी या बल्पित वेन्तु है, दूमरी ववि द्वारा देखवी गयी और परिचित, तीमरी मे ववि स्वय जमवा वनुनव करने वाला है। तौनो ही प्रवार वे वाल्य मे साधारणीनत्य होता है पर उसमे अन्तर स्वीवार बरना होगा। हम जो प्रेसन वे

234 Priantles of Litnery Critirism in Sashrit

रा गो धर्मा 'दिनेशः आपने सनौ जो यह वहा कि जिसने जवाहरदाल नेहुर को देसा है वह उनके विषय में वच्छी विता लिख नगता है। में समझता हूँ कि प्रत्यक्ष अनुनूति मे वच्छी वचिता नहीं लिद्ही जाती है, परोक्ष जनुमूति ने लिसी जाती है। यदि किनी बी माँ मर गई है तो वह बें ड कर रोमेगा, वचित्ा नहीं लिसेग। मृन्दर दश को देख कर व्यन्ति प्रमल होगा उस पर बविदा नही परेग। उदिता करने की प्रकिया पूर्त परोभानुनति को प्रतरिया है। ज्वाहरलाल नेहम को देवे मा न वेस, यदि वाषि के परीक्षानमति प्वल है तो वह लन्नी पंचिता कर मनता है। वलन्त जवली- परोक्षानुभूति मे लापवा क्या तालर्य है? कया 'अननूति' जंनी दन्तु भी परोक्ष हो नवती है? मे रुमझत्ा हूँ 'परीक्ष' औौर 'अनुभूति' ने शब्द कपने में विरोषी हैं। रा गो गर्भा 'विनेम' वह वे ही ला वह मवते हैं जिन्होंने बविता नहीं लिद्ी।

236 Pnni ker of Literery Cnticism in Senshnt

लेनको जौर कवियों ने भी पाव्यात्य वाज्य-पद्धतियों ने प्रभावित होषर व्वतन ऐेनों के रूप मे 'बिम्ब' या बिम्बवाद की नर्चा ओर स्यारना का पपन्न किा है। इन नए चचांकारों मे वुछ व्यक्ति तो ऐने है जिनग दुष्टिकोष यह रहा है कि पादवान् निद्वान्ों के भारतीय निद्धान्तों के साथ र कर समया बाए; विन्नु वघिकार नए लेसव प्रदिचन के लरेन्न, इलियट, एजरा दाइस्ट अराद नाहिलारे एव विभिन मनोविनानवेत्ताजों के चिन्वन से आत्रन्त हसर भारतीय वाष्यगास्त को अतुं नानने की अबनी बुद्धा का पोषा बरते रह हैं। वद्यावषि आधुनिक भारतीय आचार्यो मे बैवल स० नोखत्र ही ऐसे चिन्दद है, जिन्होंने पाच्य वर पारवाल वाब्य-मिद्धान्तों का गभीर मयन बरके अरी न्यापना निष्पक्षता से देने हुए स्वतन् पुस्तक के रूप में इनी पारचान् निद्ान् 'वान्य-विम्व' वा निन्पेन दृष्टि ने विवाद विसलेषण तिया है। हम विमिन प भापाजं पर विचार क ने हुए यहाँ हिन्दी के इन मनीपी आाचार्य दाज प्रन्तुन बिन्ब को व्यान्ता का सन्यान प्रस्तुत करणे। 'विन्द' शव्द अंम्रेजी 'इमेज शद वा पर्चान है। इस (इमेज' गब मै व्यास्ता को स्पष्ट करने के लिए गार्टर आकसपोर्ट टिवगनरी', 'चेन्वस ट्बेंटिएम नेन्चरी टिवगनरी', 'घर्ड न्यू इस्टर नेगनल डिकगानरी, 'एन्नाइक्टोपीटिच ब्रिटेनिदा' आदि मे लवर बई महत्वपूर्ण वदियों और लेखवों की कृत्िकें तक् को सम्नितित बिना जा मवता है। मया-गार्टर वाइनफोर्ड डिकानरी की परिनाषा इस प्रकार है। विम्ब : 'हिनी पदार्थ का मननिचन या मानसी प्रविकृटति ।" इस परिनाषा से यह निद्ध होता है कि बिम्ब पदार्य का एक ऐमा चित्र है, जो मानस पर या नानस के द्वारा निर्मित होता है।

मिलती है। चेम्वर्स टुर्वेोटएय मेचुरी डिव्हनरी में निम्नाविन परिभाश

"वन्मना जमवा गमुति मे उपस्थित चित्र अर्वा प्रतिकृति, िसग होना कनिदानं नही है।" दस परिनापा में वरपना जौर 'म्नूति वे नामनाय चसुदस्विय का नो मदनं माया गना है। यहां विन्द को माना तो चित्र हो गना है, पन्तुउसे भन से हटा बर मन मे घनो तब विन्तृत का दिया गना है। चासुपता बी वनिवार्यता कन्वीवार ब्बे उसकी व्यापवता वडा दी गई है। 'न्यू ई टग्नेरनल डिवयनरी' मे प्राप्न परिनाणाएँ इस प्कार है-

१. माव्यर्निम्ब पृष् ४

238 Principles of Literery Critieism in Senshrit

विम्त्र पदार्थों के आन्तरिक नावृस्व की अभिव्यक्ति है।" म्वय ड० नगेन्द्र ने भी सपनी परिनाया देते हुए वही तय् सिद्ध बिया है। वे लिनते हैं कि काञ्य-दिन्द गव्दार्य के माध्यम मे कल्पना द्वारा निमित एव ऐसी मानम-छवि है, जिनके मूल में भाव की प्रेरमा रहती है।" इस परिनाष मे पूर्वोक्न नभी पविभापानों से अधिन व्यापवता है। डा० नर्गन्द्र ने राम् विम्व को माननछदि माना है, उनके लिए मव्दार्थ का माध्यम बतलाना है, कल्पना को उनको निर्नात्री शक्ति घोपिन बिचा है तथा नाव को प्रेरक वहा है। न्वष्ट है कि काव्य के नद्म में दिन्ब एक ऐमी अ्षभिव्यजना है, जो भाव की प्रेया मे जल्तत की रचता ने एव गब्दार्थ के माध्यन में भानन में वन्वर चाहर आानी है। यदि ध्यान से देखा जाए तो डा० नरेन्द्र ने इस तथ्प को ददृत नन्छी तन्ह से स्पष्ट कर दिना है नि विन्द वाब्य वा रूप है, पाव्य की बारा नही, एक भाघन है, मिद्धि नहीं। वे मानने हैं नि 'बला की सजना दस्नुई विन्ब-रचना का ही नान है।" वहां बिम्व-रचना की बला की सर्जना बठाने में उनका यही उद्देद्य प्रतीत होता है कि विम्द वन्ग वा नजित न्वरूप है। यदि वला मजेना को ही, जो कि किसी अन्य नाध्य का नाघन है, नाध्य मान लिया जाए, वला कडा के दिए का नारा नत् स्वीकार कर लिया जाए, तोबात दूसरी है, अन्पया इन परिभापाजो वे लनुसार बिम्ब वाल्य के काघन पक्ष ना ही निद्धान्त रहरता है, माध्य पक्ष का निद्धान्त नही 1 और इम दृष्टि मे यह निद्धान्न भारतीन वान्शास्त्र के अलवार, रोति, चशोनित गदि निद्धान्तो के ममान काव्य के अनिक्रजना-पक्ष तक ही नीमित रह जाता है उन्नी बाता का मूल्य नहीं दन पाता। नत्म वान यह है वि बिन्व मूलत अनुनूति वे नम्बेषण मे नहायत होता है। काब्य में वह सम्प पप-बिया शब्द के द्वारा ही पूर्ण हो नकती है। यहो बाग्म है नि हर यब्द बिनी न जिसी बनभूति के बिम्व को प्रेपिन करता है। मद्द की न्वतंत्र रूप मे एव सीमा है, इनीलिए उसना बिम्ब एव जड है। ववि इन जहवा को तोड बर जब गब्द को अपनी अनुमूनि की अनिव्यक्नि वा माध्यम बनाता है, तब प्रवीर जन्न लेते हैं और प्रवोकं ने माध्यम ने ही इन गन्दी मे वह सवित था जा्ती है, जिसने बैवल वन्तुजों के ही नही, गुपों के नी विन्त पुनरन्वदित हो उदते हैं। इस प्रकार विम्त शब्द की वह शक्ति बन जाती है, जिसने माम्यम मे वन्तु-जगन्, जी भात-जान् में परिवर्नित हो चुका होना है या नुननम जो स्यूस से हटबर मानस

१. वान्य-विम्ब, पुष्ठ ५ २. वही पृष १

240 Prinaples of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit

भाग को उस सीमा तक बटा दिया है, जिन सीमा मे पत्रकारिता, इनिहास आदि की पहुँच होनी चाहिए। वम्नुन बिम्ब-सिद्धान्न के मूल में यह भाव छिपा है कि वाब्य जो प्रस्तुन करता है, वह मत उस दस्तु या गुण जगत् का मूल रुप नहीं होता है, जिसकी प्रत्यक्ष या परोक्ष अन्भूति ववि को होती है, अपितु उस वस्तु या गुणजगत् का प्रतिस्थ होना है। इस तथ्य को हम सहज मे समन सनते है कि विम्व-निद्धान्न के जन सार बाव्यन्मर्जना मे यथार्थ का नही, यथाथ की प्रतिव्ृति का जवन होता है। और प्रतिककति जहां है, वहाँ वहत-कुछ प्रतिभा, शचच एव वत्पना है-वह यथार्थं में भिन्न एक नई सृष्टि है। जिम प्रकार दर्पण मे हमारी जो छवि बनती है, वह हमारा शनगीर नही होनी और प्राय ठीक बभी भी नहीं होती जँसा हमारा रूप है। निर्चय ही दर्पण का उस छवि के निर्माण मे बद्भुत योग रहना है। एक दर्षण मे हम अपनी छवि देख कर आने ही मौन्दर्य पर मख्य हो जाने हैं, तो दूसरे दपथ मे अपने जसी रूप को बदला हुआ देखवर उम दर्पण वो हो फोड देना चाहते है। फिर भी हम यह नहीं वह सकते कि हमारा वोन-म। रूप यथार्थ है। काब् में विम्व-निर्माण की पतरिया नो जड द्पण से भिन्न चेवन मानस द्वारा पूर्ण होती है और उस पर बुद्धि तथा आत्मा का भी अनुशासन रहना है। इनीलिए वह लोकोतर भूमि पर ले जाती है। यह वह लोक नहीं होता जिसकी छवियां जडता पर आधारित होनी है, और जिनमें हमारी इन्द्रियाँ प्रत्वसन प्रभावित रहती है, अपितु वह ऐसा जगत् होता है, जहाँ हमे लौरिन वभाव की पूर्ति का अनसर मिल्ता है। अत बिम्ब केवल 'जो है' को ही प्रतिब्निया नही होता या 'जो था' के अगो मे ही नहीं बनता अपितु 'जोनही है' या जो 'नही था' उसमे भी वह नमान की सापेक्षना वे आधार पर अवतग्नि होना है। पाश्चात्य विचारक 'तोचे' ने अपने सौन्द्य-दर्गन के मूलाधार मे जिस महजान् भूति को स्वीकार किया है, वह कवि की प्रनिभा, रचि और वन्पना के सयोग से अनेव रुपों में परिवर्निन होनो हुई बिम्ब बनती है। और तभी उनमे मौन्दर्य-भावना जाप्रव होनी है।

विम्ब और मम्ृत काव्यतान्भ जंसा कि हम आरम्भ मे भनेत वर जुके हैं, भारतीय वाव्यशा्त्र मे 'विम्ब' की एक मिद्धान्न के रूप मे तो स्वीवृति नहीं है, बिन्नु सस्वृत के आचार्य 'बरिम्व' शब्द जोर वाब्य मे उसकी स्थिति मे परिचिन ववस्य थे। विम्व हमारे विभिन्न 1 मान्य-गिद्धान्ती मे सहचारी मात्र हे, रचना का नेतृत्व नहीं बरता। इस तथ्य 1 वो कुछ्ध अधित्र विस्वार से समझने के लिए गव मे पहुचे रम-विद्वान्त को लिया

242 Principles of Literary Crtieism in Senshnt

लक्षणा और व्यंजना के प्राय समस्त व्यापार विभ्वात्मक ही होते हैं। मन्तर है तो इतना ही कि विम्न्न जिस रूप या गुप का मूतन करता है, उननी सीना रहुती है, जब कि लक्षणा और व्यजना उम सीमा को लांध कर मपनी शकति वा आगे भी प्रसार करती है। 'निराला' की कविता 'जूही की वली' को नए समीक्षक विम्व-रचना का वच्छा उदाहरण मानते हैं। इम कविता में, पवन और कली दोनो प्रतीक भी है। किन्तु, विम्ब औौर प्रतक का समस्त वस्तित उनमे लक्षणा एव व्यजना पर ही निर्भग है। जहाँ प्रतीक और बिम्व-विवान का कार्य समाप्त हुआ है, वही व्यजना का महत्वपूर्ण कार्य गेप भी रह गमर गया है। और, जब उन व्यापार वा विस्लेयण किया जाता है, तब वे दिम्ब उभरते हैं, जो शब्दार्थ में नही, व्यम्चार्थ मे निहित थे। ये निहिति बिन्द अचासुप तो हैं, पर लगोचर नही। अलकार-विधान तो समग्रत विम्वात्मक ही होना है। सादश्यमूलक सभी अलकारो मे बिम्ब का चमत्कार निहिति रहता है। आचार्य डा० नगेन्द्र ने इन सम्बन्ध मे दृष्टान्न और निरणंना अलरो के साहित्य दर्पण और काव्य-दर्पप प्रन्थो में दिए गए लक्षण उद्घृत किए हैं, जिनने 'प्रतिबिम्ब' एव 'विम्बान- विम्ब' शब्दों का प्रयोग भी हुआ है। ये दोनो अलकार ही नहीं, रपना, उत्मेक्षा, रूपक, सदेह, आदि अनेक ललवारो की स्थापना विम्ब के आयार पर हो हुई है। सस्कृत के आचार्यों ने विम्ब को गोण मानकर उससे उत्पन्न होने वाले शब्दार्थ-चमलार ही को प्रधानता दी है। अनकार-सिद्धान्त वा समस्त प्रस्तुन और तप्नस्तुत विधान बिम्ब-रचना करता हुआ ही बागे बटता है। वास्तविकता यह है कि अलकार-विधान मे विम्ब का ही नही बिम्ब के भी बिम्ब का ग्रहण होता है। यही कारण है कि अलकार-गगन्र चनतार बेवल विम्ब के प्रस्तुन पक्ष तक ही सीमिन नही रहता, न वस्तु या गुण की यथार्यता वक काव्य का सोन्दर्य बेंघ पाता है। हरिऔघ जब लिसते हैं-

दिवस का अवमान समीप या गगन था बुछ लोहिन हो चला, तरुशिसा पर थी अव राजती कमलिनी बुल-वल्लभ की पना।

तब वस्तु-जगत वा 'फोटो' ही सामने जाना है, मानस-सास्तातहव दिन्ब का विस्तार उसने भी विम्बनप्रतिविम्व तर नहीं होता । अत बिम्ब-मिद्ान के लिए जहाँ यह छद् विनेष कवित्वन्पूर्ण है, वहाँ बनकार-मिदान्त के लिए इम पा स्थान वाब्य की सामान्य श्रेणों मे ही है। विशेष श्रेणो का बवित्व

244 Princiles of Literary Criticism in Sensirt

हो नहीं, उनके द्वारा होने वाली सभिव्यक्ति और अभिव्यग्य के औचित् को भी सम्मिलित किया गना है। बलकार, ग्स, आदि सनके लिए औचित् की मर्यादा स्यापिन की गई है। उन मर्यादा में बिन्ब-योजना भी लाजाती है। विम्ब सिद्ान का नगर कोई जदा उपेक्षिन रह जाता है, तो मात्र वह अरा जो खण्टित बिम्दों मे जुडा हुआ है, क्योंकि उसमे जोचित्व का पूर्ण निर्वाह नहीं हो पाता। वनोकिन मे वर्म मे प्रवन्य नक को जो वतता स्वीवृत है, वह स्वत िम्बों का निर्माग हो नही कगनी तिम्बो के माध्यम ने ही काव्य की निद्धि तक पहुँ चती है। जब प्रसाद जी निम्नारकित पक्तियी मे वानय-वत्ता स्थापित करते हैं, सब उनसे महज रूप मे विम्त-विधान सानने आजाना है-

घिर रहे ये घुधराले बाल अस अदलनित मुन के पास। नील घन शावक से सुक्कुमार सुघा भरने को विध के पास ।।

अत स्पष्ट है कि वनोक्ति-सिद्धान्त भी विम्व-प्रनिया को उपेक्षा नहीं करता, किन्तु वह बिम्ब को अपना ल्टन भी नही बनाता है।

विम्ब-सिल्ान्त की अपूर्णता मस्कल वाव्यपास्त्र के प्रमस-सिद्धान्नीं मे विम्ब की स्थिति को समय रेने पर यह स्पष्ट हो जाता है कि यह मिद्धान्न वाव्य की नमीक्षा वा पूर्ण मिद्धान्त नहीं वहा जा सबता। रचना-प्रतरिता के मानमिक आयामो तक तो इस मिद्धान्त की अच्छो पहुंच है। वाब्य वी व्वास्या भी इस सिद्धान्न वे दवागा सफलना- पूर्वव की जा नकती है, विन्नु वाव्य की निद्धि का मुल्यावन इस सिद्धान्त के द्वारा सम्भव नहीं है। बिम्-विधान के द्वारा हम वाध्य मे विभिन्न माननी छवियों को तो देख सबते हैं, बिन्तु उन छत्ियों की योजना वा ल्वच सोजने नही जा सकते। अन विम्व-मिद्वान्न रूपनाणन्नपटन द्वागा मोन्दर्ष-भावना की स्थिति एव मण्टित-सरिष्ट बिम्दों के माध्यम से जिनामा-चिन्नना की बौद्धिक स्थितित्री ता ही हमें सीमिन रखता है। वह वाब्य वा एव साभिप्राम मर्जना नट्ी चनने देना। इन निद्धान्त मे स्मुनि और वस्पना वा जिवना महृत्व है, उनना भाव की परिणति का नहीं है। इमीलिए वाजवल हिन्दी की विचार-प्रधान नई कविता मे यह निद्धान्न पश्चिमी माहिन्य से भी अधिक गम्मानिन हो रहा है। विम्य मिद्धान्त की सूांता का मृश्य वाग्मयह है कि दिम्ब वाध्य-भाषा के बामा है, वाम्प की नहीं, वाब्य का तो बह उावरम

246 Prinriples of Literery Criticism in Sendrit है, उसने प्रभावित होता है या अनुनूति प्राप्त करता है तो वह बन् भृति उनके लन्दर भावातमव होनी है। नाव से मेरावालरव वाव्यगास्त्रीय भाव नहीं वपितु सुष्मता है। जिस्ती भी दन्तुया दृश्य की लपने मानन पर बनी हुई भावातक सत्ता को हन जब मत्नेपित करना चाहते हैं तो वयावन् प्रेपित न करके उन सबने हमारे नानन पर बने हुए रूप या छबि को हुन प्रेषित करते हैं। जो प्रेषित बिचा जाता है वह हनारी दृष्टि में बिम्व है। यह चिम्ब वन्त का बयार्थ रूप नहीं होता बनोंत उनवे पीने व्यतिनान अनुनति भी होती है। बिन्द के माध्यम मे हम किनी अनुनुति को जगाना चाहते है। इस प्रकार दिम्ब माधन है-नाध्यरूप न होने वे वारण वह वाल को बाना नही हो नकता, जसा जपने दिनीच प्रदन मे वहा है। जहा नक एक प्रतीक पा सबध है, यह विनी भाव को व्यक्त बरने से लिए प्रयुवन होता है हैने मैंने उत्लू वाला उदाहरम दिया है। मत्यु के लिए 'नीली झील' भी एक प्रतीष है। इन प्रनोक बों वषि ने पिनी अनुनृति ने मटा है-अनुभूति की भावालक सता तो यहां भी है विन्नु नीली झोल प्रतीक बि्ब नही हो मकताा, विम्व न्नुत प्रतीन मे आपे की चस्तु है। डा क्चाणलाल शर्मा सभबत्र आपको यह रोचन प्रतीत होगा कि हिन्दी तथा अन्य नारनीय भापाओं मे जो बिम्तमिद्धान्त अब्रेजी ने प्रनाय ने बाया है वह वन्नुत जग्रेजी को चीन औौर जापान बो देन है। भारतीय तथा रोमन आदि लिपियां वर्ण या अक्षर सूचति परती है बिन्तु चीनी लिपि वन्तुत एव चित्र लिपि है जहा प्रत्येत चित्र एव वस्तु या विचार वा घोनव है (adingram) । पचान दर्द पूर्व जब इजरा पाउण्ट ने सर्व प्रमम इस निदान्त की जन्म दिया तो उसके मन में यही भारणा सी नि एन पूर विचार से निने एर शन्द-चित्र हो वयो न प्रस्तुत किला जाए। अपने १५-६० वर्षो वे जीवन वाल में यह इग्टैष्ड मे अधिक प्रनिद्ध नही हो सका। हिन्दी मे यह नभवन इम गनाब्दी वे तीसरे दमर मे आाचा बिन्तु चौये दगब के परारन होने तब यह बहुत वधित प्रनिद् नही रहा। वारण यह है कि दम प्रकार वी बविद्ा रिखना बहुत वदिन है। (बनू-)

240 Prinaples of Literary Criticism in Sanstrit

रतेरत्पते, कटाक्षादिभिरनभाव तस्या प्रतीते, तज्जादिभि सन्चारि- भिश्च तस्या परिपोषस्य स्वीकारात्। तथापि उत्पतिमन्तरा प्रतीते परि- पोपस्म व अभावात् उत्पते प्राधान्यमादाय उत्पाद्योत्पादक्भावसम्बन्ध एवं प्राधान्यात्तदभिमत। अत एवं तन्मतम् उत्पत्तिवादनाम्ना व्यपदिश्यते । विभा- वादिभि उत्पत्त्यादित्रमेण परिपोषम्पयात रत्यादिग्थायिभाव एव रस। एप च रस मुख्यतया रामाज्वावनकार्य एव वतंते, विन्तु सास्थिषवाचिवा- द्विकाहायंरपरभिनय रामाध्यनुवतरि नटेपि गमत्वाद्यनुसनधानवलात् स वतते। रामत्वाद्यनु सन्धानवलात् नटे गौष्या वृत्या, आरोपेण वा विद्यमानस्य रमन्य साक्षात्कारात्मक ज्ञान सामाजिक विधीयते। तज्जानाच्च सामाजिका- नामानन्दान् भूतिर्जायते, रते स्वभाचमुन्दरत्वेन तन्जानस्य अनन्दप्रदतवात्। तदुक्त पण्डितराजेन-"म श्यतया दुप्यन्तादिगत एव रसो रत्यादि कमनीय- विभावाद्यभिनयप्रदशनकोविदे दुष्यन्ताद्यनुक्त्तरि नटे समारोप्य साक्षालियते। मतेडस्मिन् साक्षात्कार ध्म्यस्े लौविक जारोप्यादो त्वलोविक"। इति। श्रीसबुवस्तु-चितन्नतुरगादिन्यायेन रामन्वेन ज्ञाते नटे नटेनीच्चारित- काव्यवलानुमन्धय विभावारये वारणे शिक्षाम्याससमधिगतपाटवप्रदशित अनुभावास्य कार्य, कृमिमनिजानुभवार्जनवलान् प्रकाशित सब्नार्यास्य सहकारिभिश्च रामविपयिण्या रतेरनुमिति विधीयते सामाजिक । यद्यपि नटे- नाभिनीता विभावानुभावव्यभिचारिण वृत्रिमा, न पारमार्धिका, तयापि नटंन शिक्षाम्यासगमधिगतापूर्व कौशलेन ते विभावादयस्तयाभिनीयन्ते यथा सांमाजिकाना तब वृत्रिमताज्ञान न भवति। अतो भवति तेभ्यो रतेरनुमिति गामाजिकानाम्। गा च अनुमितिसिद्धापि रति स्वभावसुन्दरत्वात् आानन्द- प्रदा इति सामाजिवाना वागनया चर्व्यमाणा सामाजिकेस्य आनन्द ददाति, आनन्दरूपरमजनपत्वाब्च रमनाम्ना व्यपदिश्यते। अन मवे रसमूनस्यसयोग- पदस्य गम्यगमकभाव सम्बन्ध, निष्पत्तिपदस्य चानुमितिरर्थ । रतेरनुमानादेवं- तन्मत नं यायिवमतानुसारि व्यपदिश्यते। अनोभयवापि मते अनवत निष्ठा स्थायिभावारया रतिरेव रसिवाना रसजनिका। एकत सा अनुकति रमस्पतानुभन्यानात् जानलक्षणालोिव- मननिवर्षण साक्षात्घियते। अपरत च अन्मित्या जायते रगिके इति बेवल भेद। परन्तु अस्मिन्मनव्व्येपि रति सामाजिके नव वतते। अपिष या रति रहा- तामेति सा लौकिकी एव न तु तती विलक्षणा। तग्या ज्ञानाच्च य आनन्द उप- जायने म सागाजिवेष तिष्ठनीति रसानन्दयोव यधिवरण्य न तु सामानापि- करण्यम्। भट्टनायनसतु अन्येभ्यो लोविकेग्य शास्त्रीयेम्यदच वब्देभ्य वाब्बरब्दानो वंलक्षम्यात् तेयु अभियाव्यापाराद् भिन्न व्यापारद्य स्वीकरोति-भावरत्व

250 Prinriples of Literary Critiris in Senstrit

वेवलाना भावकत्वम अयापरिताने तदभावात्, न च वेवलानामर्थाना, शच्दा- न्तरेणार्र्यमापत्वे तदभावान्, द्वयोन्तु नाववत्वमरमाभिरेवोक्तम्" इत्यादि भिर्लोचनवचन स्पष्टमेव वाव्वस्प वर्धान् शष्दार्ययोभवविवरवभूवत न तु विभावादीनाम्। वतो विभावादिभि सह नतैन भाव्यभाववस्बन्द। तुष्यद् दुर्जनन्यावेन यदि विभावादेभाववत्वमहीनिेत, सदापि भावतव नाम साधारणत्वापादनम्। नच र्यादे स्यायिभावस्य साधारणत्वापादनेनेव रननिष्पत्ि मनवन वावत् सामाजिकाना तत्य नोगो ने स्यात्। मतो हेतोरपि नात्र विभावादीना स्थायिना सह भाव्यभादवसम्बन्घ सघटते। वत एव पण्डितराजरकतम्-"एव साधारणीवृतेष दुश्यन्तरातुन्तव्ादेघवारो वस्थादिप पङ्गी पूर्वव्ापारमह्मनि तृनीनम्य भोगइृत्वव्यापारन्य महिम्ना निगीरणयो रजम्नमसारुविक्तसत्वजनितेन निजचस्वभावनिव विविश्न्ति- लक्षो न साक्षान्वारेण विषयीवृती भावनोपनीत नाघारणात्मा रत्वादि स्थायी रस। तन भुज्यमानो रत्वादि, रत्वादिभोगो वेत्य भममे व उस"। इति। नत्र मते रामादिरनि भाववत्वव्यापारे दामादिव्यितविरेपमम्न्ध परिहृत्व साधागणीवृतेनि सामाजिकाना तम्या भो न काचिदषि बाता, त्रयापि ना रति न सानाजिकानाम् अपि तु रमाप्रर्वेति चस्तुगत्वा सामाजि वाना साक्षात्वारात्मको नोगो नोपपद्यने। स्वच्चा एव रसे स्वेन मनसी नह मयोगेन साक्षात्कारनम्भवात् पररत्वा मह नाधारणीवरमउपि मनस मनिकर्षाभावात्, मनन मन्निवर्षमन्तरा व रत्मादीना साक्षासारनुपपत। तम्मादभिनवगप्न एतामनुपपात्ति पव्हितु रससून्रमन्यया व्याचस्यो। तथा हि य स्थायिभाव साधारम्यमापाद्य भामाजिरय: चर्व्चमाण सत् समत्वमधिगच्छति, म न परकीय-अनुवारयगव्ानुवत् गत्ो वा, अपि तु सामा- जिवनिष्ठ एव। न नामाजियाना हृदने वासनारपेम पूर्वमेव बतते। बिन्तु तदानी नोजनभिव्यक्वदसाचा वर्तते। यदा तु पाव्े दोपाभावपुपालवारसस्टत

रत्यादे स्यामिनो भावस्व नीतादीनि वारणानि, वटाक्षिकेपादीनि वार्योपि, वग्जीन्मुनिर्वदावीनि महवारिवारणानि व व्यक्तिविरोपसम्वद्वानि दवि वैन नामाजिवसनस्य स्थायिनो रत्नादे नमद्वोदनमनिव्यक्तिरवा सम्भवति, तथापि वाब्ये तपा वारणवार्यमहवारिया दोपानावगपालवारसंस्तृतै मुन्दर: गव्द: नाटयें च चनुविधरमिनयें समुपस्थापिनल्वान् तानि सहदवहदये - स्थान सभन्ते। चितगतादच से विभावादव चमत्वारित्वात् सहदयन नायने

१. रमगद्वाघरे ए. २४।

252 Principles of Littrary Criticisin tr Sanskrit

मिनवभारत्याममिनवगुप्तेन-एतन लोवव्यवहारे वार्यवारणमहचारमर- लिङ्गदर्मने स्थाय्यात्मपरिचितव त्यन मानाभ्वासपाटवादवना तरेबौद्यानवटाक्ष- वीादिभिलों किको कत्दमात्रध्ाग, अन एवालोविवविभावादिव्यपदेशभाग्भि प्राच्यवार्णादिर्य-

पूर्व कावपे नाटचे च विभावादीना देशकालसम्बन्धपुर्व क विसेषयर्म पुरम्वारेय

पस्थितिभवतीति प्रतिपादिन स्वयमभिनवगुप्तेनाभिनवभारत्वाम्-"ग्रीवा- भज्गाभिरामम्" इत्वार्दिवाकमात् "वाक्यार्थप्रतिपतेरनन्नर मानमी साक्षात्कारा तमका हमिनननद् वाकयोपातवालादिविभागा इत्यादिना। व्यक्तिविदेप-देशका नादिमम्वन्यरहर्नस्त एव मावारणीकृनविभावादिनि सामाजिक चेननि वाननारूपेण विद्यमाना साम्भ्ननमभिव्यज्यमाना रतिरषि व्यक्तिविशेषसम्वन्वरहिता मती सावारण्येन वानित्या्यते। अर्यात् सामाजिके

व्यज्यते, अपि तू रनित्वेन रूपेणाभिव्यन्वते। अभिव्यञ्जकाना विभावानुभाव- व्यभिचारिणा मावारणान। अन एव तन् सवलहृदयानाम् एकघनतजव प्रनोति सत्रादो वा जायने। अर्यात् सवलहृदयाना नमानवानुभूतिन्तस्था। मन्यया

सस्वात् व्यक्नीना च परम्परमतन् वपम्यान् रतर्मुभतिन सवसहदयप ऐव रूप्य भजेन, न च तेपा महदयाना परम्पर सवादोगप उपपद्येत। अत एवोक्नमभिन वभारन्ाम्-"अयमेव पर देगवालाद्यनालिद्धिनम्। तथाविष हि नात्मान्लन् निरव्कृती न वा विरेपत उल्लिसित. । एव परोपि ।" इनि। तथा मानरणवैनाभिव्यक्ता गनतच सामाजिय न लौविकत्यक्षादिप्रमाणेम्य, ताटम्स्माव बरोचगालियोगिनानात भिन्नेन बनुभूत्यपरपवविण अलोविवेन मानमेन ज्ञानेन माक्षात्वयते वदा रो भवनि। न चाय लोविन ततक्षादिप्रमाणव्लापार । विनन्दलोविवविनावाति- मयोजेपनवॅविय चर्वणा। मा च प्रतयक्षान् मानागमोपमानादिलोविव प्रमाण नथा

१. अभिनवभारता पृ २८४। २ वभिनेवभारत्या पृ २७१ । AY तथंव।

254 Priraples of Literary Criticism in Sanstrit

निक्ा, यवा च तेपा विभावानुभावव्यनिचारिमता अलोनिकम, यया वा तन्चा रमनप्रकार प्रत्क्षादिम्वविघलौविकप्रमाणाविषयत्वात् कलोविव, तथा अस्या सावारण्जनोपस्थिताया तालालिका रते कारणाना विना- वादीना हेतुत्वमपि अलोकिकम् तथा हि लोके द्विविघो निमित्तहेतुभंवति- वारक ज्ापक्च। विभावादयमच रनस्य न वारकहेतव। यतो हि दम्डादीना कारकटेनूनामभावेऽषि घटादे स्यिनिद् स्यते। नच विभावादिवोषाभावे रस- स्थिति वेनाप्पनभूयते, अपि तु विभावादिवोघमत्वे एव। अत एव रत्प विभावादिज्ीवितावधित्व प्रोजनम्। न वाषि विभावादय रसषत्व न्ञापव हेनत्र। दीपादिम्य प्राक घटादेरिव, नापनहेतुम्य प्रागपि ज्ञाप्मस्व सत्वर्रण- नात्। न च विभावाबिम्य पाक रम केनाध्यनभूयते, नाघारणीवताया रनरेव रम्यमानत्वे रमत्वात्, तम्याशच विभावादिव्वंभात प्रागनत्वात् । नतो न लौनिक्या रने स्मत्वम् अपि नु तद्विलक्षणाया अलौविचमा एव । अ्न एव आचार्य ण भरनेन रसमूतरे विभावादीनामुपादानेपि स्थायिपद्द नौपातम्। तथा मनि परवीमा चित्तवृति रम इत्यन्युपगस्पेत न चेदमनीप्टम्। सधो- वनमभिनवगुप्तेनाभिनवभारत्याम "अन एव सूने स्थायिग्रहण न वृतम्। तन् प्रत्यृत शल्यभून स्यात्। केवलमोचित्यादेवमुच्यते स्थायी रम इनि। मौचि- त्यन्तु तन्स्यायिगनत्वेन काग्णादिनया प्रसिद्धानाम् अबुना चर्वधोपमोगितया विभावादित्वावलम्वनान्" इनि। लोचनेश्प्येनदेव तेन उक्नम्। यथा-"अनएव न पररौया चित्तवृत्तिगम्वते इन्नभिप्रावेण 'विभावानुभावव्यभिचारिमयोगात् रसनिष्पति' इनि सृघे स्यायि- ग्रहण न कृनम्। तन् प्रत्यृत शल्यभूत स्थात्। स्थायिनन्तु रमीभाव औचित्या-

रत्याच्यवगमाच्च ।" न चोभनविधप्रकारभिन्न- कोजपि हेतु लोके उपलभ्यते इति वयं विभावा- दोना हेनुन्वम् इनि सक्पम्। उभयप्रवारनिनस्व हेतो लोके अद्र्मनेन सद- भिनाना विभावाविहेननामनोवितत्वनिद्धे। विभावादीनामलोनिनत्व- मिदिरव रनम्य जनोवितत्वमाधिकेति भूषणमेव न दूषणम्। तदुक्तमभिनव- भारत्याम्-"अन एव विभावादयों न निष्पतिहेववो रसस्त तद् वोधागमे- पि रनसभवप्रममान्। नापि सप्तिहेनव बेन प्रमाणमच्ये पनेयः। सिदस्य वर्स्ान् प्रमयभूतस्त रमश्याभावान्। विन्नहि एवद्ि विभावादन इनि।

१. अभिनवनारत्या पू. २८४ २. लोचने पु. १५६

256 Prnctples of Lilmory Criticism in SansInt

यया- 'उष्वोनवंमारूहय यद्मंनत्व, घी पदपन श्रन्तिसवेदपन्ती। पन् तदार्य पन्विल्पिजाना,

नत्मात्मनामन न दूषिनानि, मतानि नान्वेब न शोघितानि।

मुल सतिष्ठाप लमामनन्ति ।। परमत्र एनववसम ध्येय यद् रनाम्दादन निर्विध्नय चमल्ानिरवेगरमना

स्वानभृत्यपवपयचिया सवित्वव भर्वनन। नम्मात् रमाम्वादनार्घ सुविदि बस प्रनोनिप्रतिबन्धवाना मक्लविष्नानामभाव आवसनव। ते च दिघ्ना - प्रतिपनावयोपना, सनावनाविर्द, स्वगनन्दपरगनव्वनिवसेन देगवालव्रिशेया-

ममशयोगरच। तत प्रथमन्च विघ्नम्त परिशरारयं लोवमामान्यवस्तुदिपयो हृदयमबाद,

गनत्वपरगनन्वनियमेन विदधूपत्रतों वार्डप' इत्वादि-प्रन्वावनारीवनेन नदरूनायिगम नन्युरम्सर

प्रतिमीपशदिना नम्पच्हादनस्रोम्यूपायमच समाथीयते। निजनुगानिविवशीनावस्य मृतीनविन्नम्त व्यपोहनार्थ तु प्रतिपदार्यनिष मानारण्यमदिम्ना भवदरभोमत्वमहिपुनि सव्दादिविषनम्प जातोधगान-

ससस्य चनुयन्यर विश्नन्त र्वुटत्वाभाइस्पस्व पन्चमस्त् विघ्नन्म चारभारणार्य

अभिनय नमाशरीमने। अप्वानदारस पष्ठन्य प्रत्यूहस्य वपोहनाव लप्धानविभावानुमाव्र- व्पनिवारिव्तिरकत स्यासेव ववारेव ैनायोरे। बत एव 'स्थानि- नावान् रम-वमान्वास्चाम' दन्यादिना तच्चर्वपाया एव तनवमुपतम्, न तृ विनावादिच्तंमाया ।

१. अभिनवभारत्व पृ २०८ ।

258 Prinriptes ef Litrery Criticisn in Sersbrit

परिचर्चा

रे. प्र द्विवेदी- भट्टनावकमतत्यापने भवद्निरक्त पन् मे जनुकारवनिष्ठा रतिनेव मनुते। अस्तन विचिन्मनानम्? वस्तुत निभावम्य भावारणीकरणनेव त्मतन्। त्वीवारेपवचयेया ामानि- कादीना तन प्रवृत्तिर्घटने। वाव्यमगगादी वुतापि रिः साधारपोहा भवतीत्यत्र प्रमाप नाम्ति । वन्ति चेहीवताम्। मु दा. त्वामी वाध्यपनादो रसगज्ञावरे चैत्सष्ट निवित वर्तते 'नापा- रपीदृता रवि' । नन्य रते साघाग्मीतरय नजानम्? रेप्र द्विवेदी परनिष्ठाया वने सामारणीकरण नवतीति चुनाति वान्मप्रकाये नटनाननमने नाम्तिि वदधि मन डा. रानचन्द्र- द्विवेदिन होवमेनाक्षरणा सनुपन्धापितन्। मु दा स्वामी एनन्पूवंमेव प्रनिवादिन चद्विनावाइन पूर्व विशेषरूषेण समु- पत्याधन्ने। रनिरमि विवेपकपेम उनम्ापिता भवतियानवा? रे प्र द्विवेदी वाननेन परनिषठाया रतेरास्वाद्यत्व प्रतिवादित जनेरि किन्तु भहायतमतेपि सवेज वतत इत्यन कि प्रनाणम् ? सु दा म्वामी- वजते। रतो को नाम सामारणीतरणानूवँ विरेपो वर्तते। रष्ुन्तलानिष्ठत्वमेव विद्येष। बिन्तु ना रति: गतुन्वरमा एवं वनते या साघारमोनियते, नतु नामानिरानाम्। रे.प्र द्विवेदी- सरकमि नावा विभावरना एव बनने। विभावस्यव च साधारणोकरणन्। 'भावारणाटना रत्यादि रिन्वन कानाजिवनिष्ठा एवं रविन पुनरनुकार्यनिष्टा रविरनिमेता। रा व द्विवेदी. 'भावनाभाव् एवोउ मृङ्गारावियनी नत्र"' अववारविमण- न्युद्ृतस्त्र भटटनावडमत्रस्वास्त वोमिपान? सु. दा स्वानी: अनिनवभार्नामेय पदानामयों वर्तन-भावनाद्वारा माना- रमीव रमेन रमस्य भोो नदति।

260 Prnciples of Literery Critieism in Serstrit

दर्पमद्ृड् विदवनाय नाहित्यदर्पपेड्रमुमेव पममनसरति। रुदिपयोजनान्या दवैविध्यं चो-प्रेक्ष्येमानेव मेदान् पोडगामस्यावता नर्वात। वाव्यपदीपकारादय त्रममिम- "हटपयोजनान्या भेदे संभवत्यवि न ते विभाजकत्वेनोवने, रिन्तु हेतुन्बेनेति न त्ृतो नेदो गणित। अन एव व पश्चाद् "व्यंग्येन रहिना रुदा"- वित्यारिना तत्वृत नेद दर्दाविष्यति, जन्पया पुनरवनिममगा्। एवं च ययोकनव्याम्यानेन पड्दिघत्वे निच्चूढे पत् 'पड्विधति रुहिप्रयोजनोपादान- लक्षपारोपाध्यवमानरयं पड्निरपाधिनि वल्पिना विया प्रवार वस्ा- मिति पड्विधेनि चण्डीदासव्यास्थान तन् "गुद्धव सा ठिया, सारोपान्या दु"

शुद्धानेदचनुष्टपन्य स्वानन्वयम् अमवा जारोपध्यदमानभूतमो नेदयोरपा-

"लक्षणा ताबड् द्विविघा-(१) शुद्ा, (२) गोपो च। तव्राद्या ट्विविया (१) उपादानलक्षणा (२) रूक्षणनक्षणा च। ते अवि प्रतयेष (१) सारोपा (२) साध्यजनाना चेनि दविविये इनि शुद्धानेदच्वास। गोणी तु दवेघा (१) सारोपा (२) माध्यवनाना चेनि षडविघन्व तक्षणाया" इन्येव पदवघत्वमन्या आापादयन्ति। सुघानागरवारो भीमसेनदीभषित म०म० दुर्गापमादव्विदेदी', व्यानट्ट श्रीनन्दविद्योरगाम्मी, डा० न्वज्जञनिहन श्रीनिवाननान्त्रो' चंतमेच नममनुघावन।

अर्मच्मदर्मनन्तोत्री निन्नेनवाम्वना प्रभनन्ते। से हि 'जारोरष्यवनान मूली शुद्वानेदयो 'उपादान-क्षण"मुन्न्या तान्या विदिक्नतामेव गणन्ति ।

१ "स्वमिद्धन-"दवि वा० प्र० गनवता: प्रदोपोवतरमिका। २. मुनानागरे वाव्मप्रदीपन्पेवोपर्षद्धना "एक्षमा छावदु पह्दिनन्द लस्षयान" इमा एव पक्तनो ल्यन्ते। प्रक्षिप्ता जपीना सनवन्ति। ३. माहित्ववर्णस्त निर्णचनागरीये मम्बरण पु० ५६।

५ चोदमाविदयानचनन प्रवामित वाध्यववागान्य हिन्दीनापानवार।

मम्मटन्य लजगनेदानवं ज्ञानिवानपप वयननि । म०म०गो०ना०ृने

262 Princples of Literary Criticism in Sanshn!

प्रवरणमिद समापयितुकाम वनयो लक्ष्यलक्षतयो नेदानेदायामपि "मनवो- लंक्ष्यस्य लक्षकम् च गगानटेलक्षणाया को भेद" इत्वनेन वृततिप्रन्येनोप- स्थाप्यति। सदेव प्रकरणमिद "शुद्धवे"ति वारिकालम्पेन "एव"कार- साचिव्पेन व्यवच्छेद्य प्रकरणान्तराव "मारोपान्या तु" इत्ेव कारिकोपलन्ने व्यवच्छेदमाननपरे 'अन्यन्तु"-पदे ववदधानो वृत्िकृत् म्वातन्त्रपेमेव प्रत्नमते । चानुविध्य प्रतिपाद्य न पूर्वोवनयो उपादानवक्षणयो वाव्यप्रकाण इव शब्द- व्यापारविचारेऽपि मवलनाय "लक्षणा तेन पड्विधे'विवार्क्योत्तरम् "बाद्य- भेदाभ्या महे"ति मते। इत्थ यथा "एवननु" श्दसाचिल्बेन प्रदीप- कार चण्टीदामनत प्रत्यादेष्टि तयंव "अन्च" गब्दनचिवास्या ताम्या प्रदीप- कारमनमपि प्रत्यादेष्ट वाक्यते। २. काव्यप्रकान गन्दव्पपारविचारयोमेम्मटेन लक्षणाया यास्युदाहरणा- न्यूपस्पापिनानि, ये च ेपु तस्या भेदा सभवन्नि तदुभयमप्यवोदत्तया तारिबम स्पप्टम्- उदाहरणानि लक्षणाभेदा चुन्ता प्रविशन्ति उपदनलक्षना २ गगाया घोप लक्षणलक्षणा ३. गोवाहीक मारोप गोगी ४ गौरयम् साध्यचनाना गोणो वायुपु' तम् सारोप शुद्धा बायुरिदम् माध्यवसाना शुद्धा

प्रवारन्नराम्युपजिगमिपाया पुन "वुन्ता" पुरपा प्रविशन्नी"वि "गगायाः तटे दीप" इनि, अन्वानि चंवविचानि माहित्यदर्पणठृत्प्रभुतिनि प्रतिपादितानि स्वतान्यमो समय्रहोप्यत्। न चानी सगृहणाति 1 एवच्चात्र विन्मयावह यत् प्रदीपेऽपि स्थलानीमानि न लम्बन्ने, काव्यप्रकामव दुद्ाहृतानामेदेपामुकतानामेव स्थलाना तत्रोपलम्भात्। ३. येप वाग्येपू लक्षणाया उपयोगो दृश्यते तेपामम्यनुस्तीलनेन तथ्यमिद द्वदविमानमन्नुते यदुपर्भु कता एव पड भेदा व्यवहारोपयोगिनो भर्वन्ति नान्े। एतदर्पि च निम्नप्रदतवा तालिक्या स्पप्टभूपिष्ठम :-

लक्षणाभेद दाव्पभेंद उदाहरमन उमादानलक्षणा वर्थान्तरमन्नमितवाच्चव्वनि "त्वामम्मि", "वदली कदली०" ।*

१. वाव्यप्र० उदा०-२१, नाहिन्यदपंणे ४।र-इदा०।

261 Principles of Lnterary Criticism in Sanskrit यद्यप्पनान्िमयो काव्पभेदयोनमिनी नोल्लिन्लेते तयापि येपा ततूर्ववतिना तानि िस्यन्ने तत इद स्पष्ट यद् गोडुलनाथादिभि प्रतिपादित एवं रक्षणानेदेशन वाव्योपयोगी सम्भवाभिमनद्य निद्धर्चतत, नान्च, उक्तेपु वाव्यस्थउपु प्रकारान्नरोपजनितम्य लक्षणाभदस्वान्पलम्भान। लक्षणाया बनीतिशवागता- मभिमन्यमान माहित्दपंणकारोपि वल्पिनवाक्रचजञण्डैरेव "गगाया तटे घोष" इत्यादिभिन्नान् उदाहरनि, न नु वाव्यम्यल। वन चानी वाब्यभेदान गर्णायन् वाव्यस्थकान्युपस्थापयति तत्रानावपीमानेव वाव्यप्रवारटृद्निनवान् पड़ेव भेदानुपयोजवति नान्यान्। न हि लक्षणापादानोपजीविन अदिवक्षित- वाच्चवस्त रवने पदगताप अर्थानरनमणाय नवने तन्येव नमने चे"ति, वाक्गनाथ च तम्मे वाव्यप्रवायृद्ुदाह्नम् 'न्वामसि्मि वच्नि विद्गुपाणि"- त्वादि वाक्यमेव निदशननया प्रस्तवीति, प्रम्नवीमि चंवमेव पदगवाय नत्न्त्र- निरसारान धनिक्ृद्ुदाहन निम्शानान्य इवादण इनि पद्म्, वावरणाय चार्मं वाव्यप्रकाणनदगिनमेव उपकृत वहु नत्ने त्यादि विपरीनरक्षणो दाहरणमेव। न चंतेपु स्मल््पु लभ्यमानामु रक्षणामु उपादान-लक्षपयो आरीपादिसर्वन्तितित्व दृद्यते। म्पकपरिणामादीनामपि विद्ुपानेन यानि निदशन- स्थलान्युपन्थापितानि तेप्वपि आगोपास्यवनानास्यामिनर वशचनापि रक्षणा- प्रकाग नानुभूयने। एनेन स्पष्ट वल्क्षमाना भे दान्तराणि वाव्यानुपयोगोन्वेष। न वेवेद्द वाब्ये, नाव्यात्मके वनेषि यावन् तानि नोपयुज्यन्े। गुमबार्ा- त्मकमयवाद प्रयुजाना वदिका ऋपनोषि "यजमान प्रस्तर.", 'आदित्यो दूप" इत्यादिषृ म्पतेषु व्यावहारिकीमेव लक्षणामुपजीवन्ति, न वाल्पनिवीन्।

माहि्यकोमुदीवारो विद्यानुपणोि "इहोपादानलक्षणादिपु नेदेपृ आाद्या- मध्यमाम्या रुपनप्रथमानि- इयोसती निरूपविष्वत"-इत्येव "लक्षणा तेन पडविधे"नि वाक्यविवरय एक्षणोपयोगस्व विगमिमामक्तेनव पया दयोनचति। माहिनसारवार अच्चुनरायोपि च तामेव दिगमनुमरनि-"जहती रक्षणा- पंममनिका, गगाता घोप इत्यत्रात्वन्त वाच्चस्तिरस्तृत वजह्वप्युपादाननाम्नी व्वेनोभियावनि, अनवार्थान्नरे मवमनवाच्चोय सूच्चने, गोपी प्रयोजनवज्री मारोश चन्द्र माननम्, गोर्वोहीक इनि जेया रपवाल्वृनी हिना, मेव भाध्यव- महना तु गोरवायमिनि स्पृटा चन्द्र एवदमित्यादो म्परातिद्यवोक्तिवृत् इनि। (माहित्तसारे २२३१-३८) । १. द. मीमामाद्गनम्य १४।१२- सूतरे गावर भाष्य तत्नवार्नित व।

1

266 Primeiptes of Literety Critiris in Seustrit कन्च च दोपों दगम उ्लान एव परिकरान् पूर्व कान्पलिंगसुपनिबम्नवोर्गन हेन्द- लवार विस्मरन। एतेन "पनविगत् परनि मम्मटभट्ट एद निरनास्पच्ेद्

पद्ुच्पने-आयुर्षु नमि न्वादो वचिन्यम्, नधापि नेनदलवान्ता न्ुशनि, वचितुमलेगनावन्या कारत्वजववतानस्युपनाद्, तया नति 'गतीस्तरूब इत्वादावपि वलरारमवमत्सुपेयेन, वंचिनसदेवन्यान्नापि नत्वान्।' वाब्ो पयोगित्व पेषा व्यव्पार्यप्रत्यायनमानत एव चरितायमि नि, नटि "गोवी- होक गोरेवे सादावप्परीनयतामलवारत्वाभाव, न्यायमास्मान। न "विच्छितेरतिभमिन्नानभूयते इति नातपत्र न्यायनान्पमि" ति वाच्न्, पश्ञान्रेपि विच्छिनिविगेषस्य स्वीनन वकमदान्। स्वीतरिलते चानि "क्ाचु- घृंतमि रवादी युद्धारोपभूनो यो हेतुहेतुनतोरभंदोनभूपत्रे तमेेवभाभित्

मुष्पयवानाम्',''नारज्न्य विगन" इन्वादियु स्थलेपु रद्र-जगभाय

एवात्र विच्छिन सत््वम्। न वैवल्मेनिरेद, काव्यप्रकामटोविसपु मुर्चा- वृद्ध नीमनेन, विवरणटृड् गोवुलनापरच स्थरेप्वेपु विच्छिनिविद्योपन- नमोदने साघयेते च नत शज्ारांपाध्वनानवो नायवनाम्। अ्ति च

१ नामहोत वाघ्यत्वानावनेव मनुवे-"गतोउ्तमर्वो भातीन्दुर्यानन् वासान पसिण 1 इत्येवमादि कि वाब्य वा्नमना प्रचक्षते ।।-न।८।। २ वन एव स्वय वाध्यम्वागाट्टवैव वाच्यव्ंचवी बोद्ध मस्या-मैदा- वतेन च वाक्पेन प्रनिवादम। दव्पचम इललान। अन एव च पण्डितराजोनि

4 ६ वर्वाहि मुनानादक्षाप्रकरण-"मद़ान्या वाम्या हेन्ववारं निम्पविष्वती" वि नीनमेन, विवरण व-'हतुम्वादिनबन्दस्य हे वारबार- स्वध्पनदेन तन्मूल्या लक्षना "आयुद निमहोन्नवस्य""पलिपवर" इत्वादो कपपन्य प्रकारां्रम् अथवा 'हनुमवा नह हेतीरमिमानममेदनी हेतु रिति मनेन हेन्वतवारसुन्पानपनि" इति म० म० गोवुरनाय. ।

268 Prinriptes of Literery Criticism in Sanskrit

वीकोपि' मम्मट पनित एव प्रेक्षाजुपाभुपालम्भगोचरे। तच्च उपरपन्या- लवारविमर्गिनया का्व्मरोलिगालवारपवरणत स्यातचरमेव, बत्रासौ महता सरम्भेणोक्तिप्रवारस्यालवारनाव प्रत्यादेप्टि। एतत्प्रत्यावेदपजरम्या र- गगाघरवत् पण्डितराजस्वापि प्रतिना-

"काव्यलिंग मालकार वैचिन्षात्मनी विच्छितिविरोषस्यानावाद्, हेतुहेतु- मद्भावस्य वस्तुसिद्धत्वेन कविप्रतिभानिवंत्यंत्वायोगात्"

इस्येवमन वदर्येव काव्पलिगापरपर्यावस्य हेनी भामहोपत्ञमिन खिलीवारम्, उद्भावयत्वेव व नत्र निर्हृतुत्वरपदीपाभावान्त्भ् तताम् । अर्चात चेतन् तथ्चताप्रच्ानत्तिम्। तथा हि-हेतुहेतुमद्भावस्य आर्यन्वमेवात्र समन्कृति प्रमुते। अन एव 'भयानवत्वात् परिवर्जनीया दयाशितत्वादनि देव नेव्य" इत्न मार्व्यलिगत्व प्रत्याचक्षाण पण्टितराजो र्नाकरवार इवव गम्पमान हेतु- त्ववस्पच हेतो सुन्दरत्वेन वाव्यलिगने"ति हेतुमृपन्यस्यति। अन्तिर चत्त् 'वपु प्रादुर्भावाद्"इत्यादिप् काव्यल्गिम्यलेपु। - चार्यत्वमात्रेण वुनचिदलवारत्वमापधने, कविपतभाप्रनुतत्व्येव तन्निप्पादक- त्वान्। यदि चापघने, तहि हेनुहेनुमद्भावोकयापि तद्ापद्यतान्तराम्, तत्र नविश्रतिभाया जागस्वत्वन्यानुनविवरवात्। कि च यो हि "महौजनो मान- घना घनाचिता" इन्यम् भागविपय्ये धनुनृदरू्पकव्यविनगततवेन बहूना विगेषणा-

बाव्यलिग मन्वते। नूनमनौ मम्मटस्यव प्रभाव। यद्यपि कव्पलिंगपदम् इदप्रथमतया उद्भट एव प्रयूवत, विन्तु न हेत्वर्थम्, वपि त्वनुमानार्पम्। भम्मटोऽ्यनुमानार्थं वाव्यलिगमेव पद प्रसुजीत, प्रयुजीत च वाव्पतिगार्थ पाव्य- हेनुपदमेव दगम उल्लातेप चनुर्य उलास इव चेदुचिततर स्पात्। २. बदवारमर्वस्वे जयरयट्टतालकारविमर्शिनी पृ० १८१-८२, निमध- सागरम०- २ । ३-४ भगगावरे काव्पर्निगालवारप्रवरणान्ते । ५ रमगगाघरे वाव्यलिगमतरणारम्भ। अवरच भानहस्व 'हेनुस्टिप्ट"

६ रनगगाघरवाध्यलिगमत्रणादग्ने। रतनावरे गोभानमनोजि पदार्थहेनुवे काव्यलिंगे हेनुत्वस्ारयत्वमेव चमत्कृतिवारम मनुतै।

270 Prinsiple of Littrey Crifeis in Setrit

प्रति गरण्यो भर्वत, आरोने च विषय:। ततर्च तन्प्निभोगिवापि वियनिता- वच्छेदकेनवाच्छेचते। बत्र एव चारोपे विषय-विययय ोनंध्य व्दुश्पशियेम नावोजुभूपते, अनेदे न। बन्नि च "घृतनाव, महमंघात विनिन्नन नलनिपाति- ममरोल्लास" इत्यावियु विधीयमानाना

विसनिपत्या विचलित आचार्यो 'हेतु"रिति नाम्ने रचि न दर्घ। कारोपे च निहितिमनिरप्चसी निर्वाहद्िरा न लेने, वाय्पलय तम्याभावात्, रूपके च मनोदि

वर्त्भानुवन्तमानेन, अवत एव च स्वपनमि वाबयनस्षे "सननहती पुन क्वापी" लनरारागा स्फुटनाया वंत्रत्पितत्वमाघाय स्ान प्रति दवितोदानीनदेन तत्नदना महुदवगिरोममिना निर्वाहाय प्रयत्नोपि न व्ृत्तः।

कितप्रमनन दे वा मगह कर्नुमुचित। कियते च परवननि: मलंकाररलावर- वित्ानृप्रमुखरालपानिक। वलारत्नावरवारो हि नाइशपबन्धनूलवन् वारोपमित सवन्नान्तरमूलवमप्पारोप रुपवतिच्छिती हेतु प्रतिबद्यवे। वक्ति हि न-

(वृत्ति-) तद्धर्मत्वादिपतिपत्तर्य सामानाधित रम्यनिर्देश आरोर। (सूत्रम्-) "आरोपे हदक्म् ॥२६॥।

इ्चेजमारोनमान्रन्य रूपनत्वम्, उदाहरति च नादृदयनूलकाप वर्म्न "तुम

१. नानट-"उपनानेन धन् सत्वमुपमेयन्य रुप्यते। गुमाना सनना दृष्ट्वा रूपक नान तह बिट्दु ।।" बाच्या० २२१ दम्डो-"उतमेव विरोनुननेदा रुमन निप्यने॥" राव्यादर्शन्य न।६६ उद्भट :- "मुला मदन्यविरहाड् यत् पदेन पदान्तरम्। गुगदृत्तिप्नधानेन युज्से रपर्क तु सन् ।"- काम्मा० १११ वन पद्यपि सादृशस नाम्ति तयापि उदाहरणेश्य तदतपेव "जयोक््नाम्य ने"लन्न ।

लविवक्षितनामान्या वल्प्पत इति रूपर्क प्रयमन् ।।"

2. घनालोक पपमोदयोतार्भे।

272 Prinnples of Literary Criticut in Sarstrit

मनमिजवुस्ती शृंगारभीविमानमहो नु भो निरवधिसुखश्रद्वादुजे दृनी मुगवेतन ।।" अ्न इन्दुरूपे दारमे वान रुपाना श्रद्धाना जारोप । प्रन्वक्कता (अलकारमर्वस्वक्ृता) उपलंशारानुमा- रिष्जा'मत्र "दरद्ाहेतुन्वान् धद्धगस्यनिदघता जयमेव पक्षः बटासितः।"

नन्ति चालवारनवम्- नद्विभगिनोवासदयी मम्मदमहन्य प्रायेणानरकार एव। वयामि पदिम एव वादिनो दुश्पन्ते तवापि हेतु स्वब भन्मट एवं। गध्- प्राग एव नोषि भादुस्वमि सवन्धान्नवमपि 'अभिन्न-चनचार" जनवनया- पद्ियते। अन एवानी "हृशमघिष्ठिवनादा" विन्पादिषु, "चजन् राज- मुना न पाठपति वायवाग्णनावमपि "वमलमनम्भनी" स्ादाविच, त्यादाविव वा माइम्पनिदेवाभिन्नाया एवतिमनाप्म्तुतोविवरुपाया वि्छि- तेनिप्पादडमुरोबुरते। अन्यनापि प "उद्दात चस्तुन" मपन्नहता चोपलसमम्" -इनि, "एक नमेणानेनस्मिन् पर्वावोज्यन्ततोजचय" ति निदगना, "अभवन् दन्नुमदन्ध उपमापगवल्पय, वम्बहन्न्वयस्योविन तरिवरेद च मावदे"ननि च निनमिन्ना अपि विन्छित्तीरमावेवयरेवालकारे नाहणानो दृध्यने। वनी हि सवन्धान्नरमूलतमप्चारोप सादृसयमूलवेन तेनव मह स्पनिच्छिनो नाहमोवाच्चेत् ोज्वमुना विगुणीयान्। अत एव न तहोकवारो गोबुलनायर्मोपाध्यायो स्पव्मेव "आयुर्दानमहो मवम्ये" लादिनि प्राुपस्यापिते पद्यगतने दूर्व रपवस्व" प्रत्रागन्तरमेवीद्भावपति,

१ नन्नामन्ा तत्हनार टीवापाम्।

४ वारणे प्रस्तुत वार्योकविवो निष्पसाया अप्न्तुवमगमाया राल प्रकाग उद्दाहरणम् । ५ ur वाचमती भाइम्तनूलाया अप्रसतुनपगनाया ल्दाहरणम् । ७-१ वाध्यमनासम्म दगम इल्लाने। १० द० २६६ पृष्ठ ६ सर्वातमनत्यमेव पाइटिप्पनम्।

274 . sincples of Literary Critieis tn Sanshnt

स्यालम्बेथाः सुरनितनयालम्भजा मानयि्यन स्रोनोमूर्ल्या भवि परिणतां रन्तिदेवस्य कीतिन् ॥ अत्र हि कीनिहेनुभूनावारचर्मप्व्रत्या कीविगव्दादवेवोलेवानु कौनिन्वेनव प्रतीप- मानन्वादम्तेव कायंद्वारा कारणभ्याध्यवनानम्। एवमेद "स्वागतमविलम्विनी मनोग्यस्येति" शात्ुनलवाववेषपि वार्यभूनेन मनोरथेन कारममृतन्च दुष्यन्नस्याध्यवमानान् नेवर स्थिति, विषचिण प्रति विपलन्त तार्राेन वारणताना प्रनिद्वचतरत्वात् अस्ति च स्वविषयनूनान दुध्पन्नाय मनोरयो विपयी। नाम्नि व कीति-चमव्वत्यो मनोरयदुष्पन्तयोरचात विचिरदपि साम्य येनात्राध्यवमानस्थ गोगता वल्पयिन वावनेव।

सादृश्येतरेपा मबन्यान्तगणा तु वेनालम्ननं वादलम्बिन, राव्यम्पलेपु तदुदा- हरणानाननुपदरगिनन्वान्' तेप्वलकासप्रयोजवताय नाघविनु दुप्वरन्वादि"ति चेन तम्रापि स्वादेव कार्यकारणभाव इवैव तादृनी प्रयोजक्ता, परत्रपा रुट- प्राचना न स्वात्। अ्ति हि रूढमायता नात म्यादिभि जायमानवोरारीपाध्य- दमानवो "ब्राह्मणस्तक्षा" "नक्षा" इत्यादिप। नमापि दुश्यते चेच्चमन्वार, स्वीकियतानमामलकृतिप्रयोजतश्वम्, गवेध्यन्तान्तमा च तदुदाहरणान्यवि महति मारस्वते जगतत। एव म्वितमेतद् यद् गोकुलनाथादिभिरपगत एवं एक्षाभेद्दगनानभो मम्मटस्पभिमत, स्थित चंतद् पत् तन मुख्जयोरारोपाध्यवसानयोरपयोगाय स्वीव्त्तव्यमेव तद्पठितेपु वाकयेपु वाध्यत्वम्, तदर्थ चमन्तृनितस्वम्, सदर्ध

मेघदूते ४५-नम पद्चम् । २ आाबुन्नलम्य तृतीयेदने "तपवि तनुगानि वामस्त्वाम्" इतिपचा नन्तरीय मसीवाक्यम् । ३. गोतुन्टायादिनि य रपि टीकावृद्भिहत्वलवार उदाहुत, जगभाषा- दिभिरुयदन महात्मभिवाचार्यकरने मुदारोप्व वोदाहर्णानि दनानि, न शुद्रा- ध्यतनानस्ापि। तहुदाहरणट्वनमम्मानिरेवानान्पव्यने पूर्वोक्तन्। वार्यवारण- भावातिरिक्त न्मबन्यमूलव सुवारोपाध्यवमानरयोस्तुदाहरमानि प्रामेण मर्वे रेव वकानीनि इसमुवित।

साहित्यिक अभिव्यविति

टा० देवराज उपाध्याय

निवध का विषय है साहित्यव निव्यक्त। अन सर्वप्रयम अभिव्यक्ति और ाहित्य इन दो शन्दो के अर्थ के बारे मे निश्चय कर लेता है। प्राय अनि- व्यक्ति शब्द का प्रयोग जिनी वस्तु की लभिव्यक्ति वे अर्य मे बिया जाता है। मुद्, मान्र अभिव्यकनि के जर्य में नहीं। पर किनी वन्तु की अभिव्यक्ति नरण बात है, शुद्ध अनिव्यक्ति अलग बात है। ववि का सम्बन्ध शुद्ध अभिव्यक्ति से ही होना है, जिसी वन्तु मे नहीं, यह बात ववि को मुक्त हृदस से स्वीकार कर लेनी चाहिए। एक युग था कि वति या प्रभुत्व था, सब बानो में ववि की पूछ होनी थी, कोई सकट आया लोग नवि के पान नमाधान के लिबे जाते थे। पर विज्ञान ने ववि को सव क्षेत्रों से अपदस्य कर दिया। १६वी शनाब्दी मे सगोल, नूगोल तया शरीरगास्त ने वुछ भाग को ववि ने छीना, १७व्री गताब्दी मे रामायनिकी तथा नौनिकी ने बुछ जौर नमि ले ली, १८ वी मे अर्यगास्त तथा राजनीति को नूती बोली, १९वी मे प्राणिगास्त्र तथा नमाजशान्य की दुढाई फिरी और २० वी पानाव्दी मनोविज्ञान की पनाका फहरा रही है। जन कवि के नान लेना चाहिये हम विसी वस्तु के बारे मे कोई भरोने की खात नहीं वह मवते। हमारा क्षेत्र अभिव्यक्नि हे, शुद्ध अभिव्यक्ति। अत में अनिव्यक्ति को जिमी वस्तु मे सम्बन्ध तोड वर उसे उन्मुक्त करना चाहगा। दूनरी और साहित्य को चोट मनुचित कर्गा। नाहिन्य के दो चर्गों-ज्ञान वा माहित (LIterature of Knowledge) तथा नक्ति वा साहिन्य (Lterature of Power) में से वेवल दूसरे वो ही माहिन्व वहगा। अन शुद्ध अनिव्कत्र और दाक्नि का माहित्य दोनों को मानवर लागे यह गा। अन हमने दो चाते तब की। प्रथमत माहित्य या अर्य तप विया। दिवीयन धमिव्यक्ति वो प्रधानता दी और निश्चिन किया कि साहित्य का ध्येय बनि- व्यक्ति है जिसी वस्तु की अमिव्यक्ति नहीं। हुम कोमल में बामल, मर्म-स्र्गी से मर्म-म्पर्गी मावो को ले सवने हैं पर उनकी अनिव्यक्ति अनाहिच्त, दिनासक हो भवनी है, एमी हो मवनी है वि पाठव के हृदय मे सषोन उतन्न हो, और वह अन्दर में प्रशुव्प हो उडे। इनना हो नहीं। यह भी मनव है कि जिम छय्हु मे भाव को पाउव पर उन्पन्न करने वो चेष्ठा की जा रही है उसके टौ विपरीन भाव उन्पन्न हो। मैंने ऐमी रचनायें भी पटी हैं, ऐमे भाषा भी मुने हैं जिनका उद्देदेय है पाठर तथा थोना मे उच्च नाव उत्न्न वरता, उदाहरणाय

278 Principles of Laterary Critiasm in Sanskrit

की, पाठक मे भक्ति मे भाव जगे, सूर के विरह-वास्य को पढ कर विरह के नाव जगे, भूषण ने वीरत्व के गीत गाय, पाटक मे वीरत्व के भाव जगे। पर क्या यह मही है मानव इतना सीधा सादा प्राणी है? वह इतने हो मीघे तया सस्ते टग से प्रनितिया करता है? व्यावहारिक जगत तथा उसी की परिधि मे विचरण करने वाले माधारण मन व्य के लिये यह सभव भान भी रिया जाय नो क्या साहित्व के क्षेत्र तथा उसकी भीमा में प्रवेश करने वाले पाठव के लिये भी इसी मापदण्ड से काम लेना होगा? यदि यह वान सही मान ली जाप तो तरामदी की समस्या कमे हल हो, लोग दुन्ान्त नाटकों से लानन्द कसे ब्रहण वर केंगे १ वह करणा जो "भवभूति" मे अधिव मूल्य नहीं रखती उसवा उत्तर विद्व की विभूति वसेबन जाता वास्तव मे यदि वही सव इसने मस्ते ढग से होता तो अग्स्त को विरेचन-निद्धान्न की तया भट्टनायक वो साधारणी- वरण की स्यापना ही कयों कग्नी पडती। प्लेटो तो अपने आदशं गणन्नत्र मे कवियों को निष्कासित कर ही चुके थे। वन हो न हो बाव्य का ममार एक अलग हो मसार है, वहाँ कौ दुनिया ही निरली, वहाँ के विधान तथा नियम ही भिन हैं। शामद इसी को देखवर हमारे वाव्यगास्त्री ने कहा होग। बनोक्नयो यत्र विभूपणानि वाक्नायवाध परम प्रवपं। अथष बोध्यप्वभिषंव दोप मा काचिदन्या मरण बचीनाम्। पवृत समार मे भी असाहित्यिनता नहीं चल मवनी पर वहाँ वह बुछ अर्वि नव चल भी जाय पर काव्य जगन मे तो एव क्षण भी वह चलने मे रही। प्रृति ने गाम को पैदा विया पर वही उसे खा भी गई। नहीं, सा कहा गर्क खाने जा रही थी कि ववि ने इसके फोमादी तभा रकाक पजो तथा दाढ (Red in tooth and Claus) में छीन बर अपने शन्नि-प्रद्र, वल्याण प्रद, अहिमा तथा प्रीति की गोद मे लिया कि भाज राम स्वय तो अमर हो हो गये दूमरों को भी अमर्व प्रदान बररहे हैं। यही वारण या कि माहित्वास्त्रियों के सामने जन काव्य के स्वम्य पर विचार करने का प्रश्न आया तो जन्होने देसा कि वाव्य-जगत तथा नादनिव जगन मे तो एव बात मामान्य रूप मे मिठनी है, दोनों वुछ-न-वुछ वक्नन्य देने हैं, कोई बात वहते हैं, बार्क उपदेश देते हैं पर दोनों मे एक अन्तर भी स्पष्ट है। वास्तविव जगत मे उपवेश प्रभुमग्मित हो, मुद्त्सम्मित होना है, पर वाल्य मे "बान्ता-मम्मिनन्द" बी ही प्रधानता है। जौर में दूछना हू वि यह जी वाल्नामम्मितत्व है वह विघिष्ट वभिव्यविन के मिवा और क्या है?

280 Prinnples of Literary Critiaum in Sanskrit

rapid Retreat और इम को पढकर लोगो के हृदन मे निराशा के बादल छा जाते थे। इसी बात को यदि वहा जाता था-"The retirement of the French forces of the previously prepared position m the rear was accomphished briskly and efficaently " ब्म नारा वरतावरण ही बदल जाता था।

इम उदाहरण को सामने रख कर विचार करने में कितिने ही लक्ष्य उपलब्ध होते हैं। (१) यदि उक्ति का उद्देश्य प्रभविष्णुता है, पाठको की भावनत्ता पर अधिकार करना है तो साधारण व्यवहारगत भाषा के प्रयोग मे काम नहीं चलेगा, साथ ही शास्त्र इत्यादि में प्रयुक्न इतिवृत्तात्मक शब्दार्थोपनिवन्ध भी पर्याप्न नहीं होगा। मूल वन्तु से अधिक महत्त्व अभिव्यक्ति को देना होगा। इसी को कुल्नक ने कहा "वशोकति काव्यस्य जीवितम्" और वकोबिन को स्पप्ट करते

अतिशान्तप्रसिद्धव्यवहारमरणि ।"मनलव वाञ्य (साहित्य) का उद्देश्य सामान्य सूचना मात्र देना ही होता तो शब्दो के सामान्य प्रयोग से काम निवल जाता है। पर साहित्य का उद्देश्य अलोनिय आह्लाद का उन्मीलन बरना है। अन उमको अभिव्यक्ति मे विचिधना-सम्पन्नता होगी ही।

अन अब प्रद्न यह उपस्थित होता है कि यह प्रभविष्णता, लोकोतर प्रदा- यवता का ममावेश उक्ति मे किस तरह िया जाय कि वह माहित्य की थेणी मे प्रतिष्ठिन हो जाय। दूसरे शब्दों में अभिव्यविति माहित्यिक विन तरह हो मके। बर्धान् ऐसी हो जिसका अभीप्ट प्रभाव पड सबे, न कम न अधिक । यदि कम प्रभाव पडा तो वह माहित्य है ही नही, और आवस्यवता से अधिष प्रभाव पडा तो बह साहित्य नहीं। जो माहित्य पाठव वो भाव से आगे बटकर नियातत्परत्व में प्रवृत्त वर देना है वह माहित्य नही। साहि्य का वाम 'वर्णनीयनन्मयीभवन- योग्यना' उत्पन्न करना ही है, उमे प्रतितनियानत्पर बरना नही। साहित्य का नाम हे पाठव के हृदय के वाठिन्य की गला देना। लोहा को लाल बनावर नम- नीयता ला देना है। लोहा लाल है, प्रभाव ग्रहण वरने की स्थिति मे है। अब निसी आवर उने यथेष्ट सोड दे सवते है। वाव्पवास्यियों ने भी रम-विवेचन के प्रमग में बहुन-मी बाते कही हैं वे भी हमारे लिये प्रागगिव महत्त्व रसती हैं। बभिनव के मतानुसार "भर्वथा रमनात्मव वीनविध्नप्रनीतिवाहयो भाव एव रम । नत् विप्नापमारता विभावप्रभुतय ।" यो तो विघ्न अनेव हैं। पर उन्होंने मात विघ्नों का उल्लेख किया है। पनिपनावसोग्यता, सभावनाविरहो नाम इत्यादि। यह तो हमारे वाव्यगास्यियों को बाने हुई। हम सभी अपने दनिर जीवन मे भी इम वान का ध्यान रगते हैं।

संस्कृत अलंकार शास्त्र मे काव्य का सर्जना-पक्ष

मूलचन्द्र पाठक

बब्य के दो पक्ष हैं-नजना और आस्वाद। प्रदम का नबन्ब ववि ने है और दूसरे का महृदन मे। ववि की अनुनूति ही वह बीज है जो वाब्यव्वक्ष के रप मे अपुरित, पल्लदित जौर पुष्पित होकर भहृदव के रनास्वाद मे फलिन होना है।' इम प्रवार वाब्य-कर्म का प्रसार अनुभूति में अभिव्यकति की जोर होना है। बन बाच्य-प्रविना के एव छोर पर कवि की नत्ता है और दूनरे पर महदप की तथा काव्य है इन दोनो सत्ताओ का योगमुत। यद्यपि अनुभूनि के घरातल पर कवि और महदय वा अद्वंत वमदिष्य है तथापि काव्य-विपयव, बविगत व महृदयगन प्रचियाएं परस्पर भिन्न ही हैं। कविगन प्रतरिया स्वरूपन सजनात्मक होनी है नया उनका अन्भूति मे अभिच्यक्ति की दिशा मे विवास होना है जबकि महृदयान प्रतियाएं ग्रह्णात्मक होने के कारण काब्यरप लभिव्यक्ति के माध्यम ने उनी मृलवतिनी अनुभूनि की और वग्रमर होनी है। अभिनवगुप्त ने लनुभूनि जोर अभिव्यक्ति को ही चमद प्रस्या व उपास्या गब्दो मे अनिहिन वरते हुए लोचन के सगल इलोड़ मे वाब्य की अन्वण्ड पत्रिन्या के अगनून उक्न दोनों पक्षों के अविभाज्व सम्बन्ध की ओर इम प्रकार नवेन रिया है-

अवुवं यद्वम्तु प्रथयनि बिना कारणकन्ा जगद् ग्रावप्रस्य निजरमभरेण भारवति च।

मरन्वत्याम्नत्व वविमह्दवास्म विजयते ।।

मम्मृन जलशरगास्त्र मे काव्य पर ववि वीर महदय दोनों ही दुष्टियो में विचार किया गया है, यद्यपि कनिषय विद्वानों को यह शिहायत रही है' कि स्टत वाव्य-चिन्नको ने वाव्य की विवेचना एकन्न लयवा प्रधानत महुदष वी दृष्टि मे ही की है। यह नो मच है कि सस्कृत लनकारगान्त्र मे वाब्य की मजंन-प्रकिया का उनना विस्तृत, व्ववस्थित एव प्रोट विवेचन नही किया गया

१. वनिनवभारनी (गालकवाड ओरियन्टल मिरीज, बडौदा) भाग १, बध्याव ६. प २९४ (द्वितीय सम्बरम १९५६) मुशीरक्ुमार दे. सस्टृस पोएटिक्स एज ए सटडी वाफ एस्पेटिक्स, पु.२

28 Prineiples of Literary Cnteism in Sanskrit

प्रतिफलित होता है।' हेमचन्द्र के साध्चर के अनुनार भट्ट तोन कवि के लिए ऋषि होना आवस्यक मानते हैं। किन्नु ऋृषि मे केवल द्रष्टृत्व का गुण होता है जबकि कवि मे दर्शन के अतिरिक्त वर्णना शक्ति भी होती है। शाम्नो मे प्रयुवन कवि शब्द केबल तत्वद्रप्टा अर्य का वाचक है जब कि लोक में दर्गन और वणना इन दोनों को लेकर कवि शब्द प्रचलिन है। इम विपन मे वाल्मीकि का दृष्ठान्त देने हुए भट्ट तोन ने कहा है कि आदि कवि मे स्वच्छ दर्मन की नामथ्य तो पहले ने ही विद्यमान थी निन्तु वे जब वर्णना मे भी प्रवुत्त हुए तनी लोक मे वविता का जन्म हुआ। इमी प्रकार अभिनवगुप्त ने भी वर्णना के योग मे ही कविन्नज्ञा स्वीकार की है' 'अनएब ते वबयो वर्णनायोगात् तेषाम्'। मम्मट ने काव्व को 'लोकोत्तरवर्णनानिपुण कविकर्म' वहते हुए कवि की वर्णन- धर्मिता का ही निरदेश किया है। महिम भट्ट ने कवि प्रतिभा को भिव का तृतीष नेत्र मानते हुए वहा है कि उसके द्वारा कवि नलोकयवर्ती भावो का माक्षानकार करता है। इम प्रवार यह म्पष्ट है कि सम्वृन माहित्व जोर विनेपन बनवार- शस्नि मे कवि को दशन और वर्णना की शक्तियों से नम्पन्न एक ललोकमामान्य व्यक्ति माना गया है। वह वस्तुओ के बाह्य रप वा ही अबलोवन नहीं करना, उनकी सारभृत आत्मा का भी साक्षालार करता है। यह साशालार वम्तुप उमवा प्रानिन-ज्ञान ही है। सस्वृत अलकार्णास्त्र मे कवि की उपमा प्राम प्रजापति (ब्रह्मा) मे दी गई है। आनदवर्वन के अनसार ववि ही इस अनादिननन्त वाव्य-मसार का एवमान प्रजापति है। वाव्यन्मृष्टि उसकी इच्छानुमार रुपन्रग बदलती रहती है। प्र जापनि के समान वह भी अपूर्व निर्माण की क्षमना से मम्पन्न है। उसका काब्य- जगत् मदेंव उसवा इच्छानुवर्नी रहता है।" अभिनव और मम्मट ने वचि वौ व ह्मा मे भी उच्चतर पद पर प्रतिष्ठिन निया है। अभिनव के भनानमार ववि को वाणी ब्रह्मा में भी उत्तृष्ट है क्योंकि जहाँ ब्रह्मा की शक्ति परिस्टिन्न है

बही, सव्याब १२ २ बावानृगामन, अव्याय ८ मूत्र १ की वृत्ति धवन्वादोन, उद्योन ३ प ५०८ वा लोचन (वालप्रिया मस्तरण, चौसम्बा ११४० ई ) ४ वाव्यप्रवाश, उल्गम १, कारिका २ ५ व्यक्नि-विवेक २, ११८ ध्वन्यागेत, उद्योन ३, वारिका ४३ की वृत्ति पृ. ४९८ ७ अभिनवनारनी, भाग १ प् ४

286 Prinaples of Lsterary Gritiism in Sansknt

करण के लिए ववि-म्वभाव को आधार स्वीकार कर उन्होने काव्य के मूलवर्नी तथा उसके समम्न अग-प्रत्यगो को प्रभाविन करने वाली कविनमत्ता को रेखानित किया है।' अलकारगन चारत्व मे 'यवि-प्रतिभा-निर्वतितत्व' का निदध वर वुन्नर, मम्मट, म्य्यक व जयरय आदि ने कवि व्यकनित्व के महत्त्व को बहीवार बिना है। इस प्रकार रम-्जनिवादी तथा वयोकितवादी आचार्यों व उनके अनुयायियों के अनुसार काव्यात्मक अभिव्यक्ति का सौन्दर्य कवि की विशिष्ट अनुभूनि या उनके व्यक्तित्व की ही देन है। किन्तु यहाँ यह निर्वेन वरना आवस्यक है कि मस्कृन आलकारिको ने काव्य के मूल में जिम कविव्यक्तित्व को प्रनिष्ठा दी है वह कवि का लौविक व्यक्तित्व नही है, अपितु वाव्य-व्यकतत्व है। कवि लोकिक भाव-भृमि पर अवस्थिन होकर काव्य-्मृजन में प्रवृत्त नही होना, अपितु उसका एक अलोकिक और विगिष्ट वाव्यवव्यक्तित्व ही उसकी कृति मे प्रकाशित होना है। जिस प्रकार महृदय की रमानभूति एक बलोविक अनुभव है, उमी प्रकार ववि की म्जनात्मक अनुभूति भी वस्तुत अलौनिक ही है। अभिनव के मन मे वाव्य या नाट्य का मूल कविगत साचारणीभूत सचिन् (अनुभूनि) है।2 यही सवित् परमायन रम है। वाव्य इनी रमात्मक मवित् की शब्दार्थमयी अभिव्यजना है जिसके माध्म से महृदय भी विगत रम- मविन् का साक्षात्कार करने मे नमर्थ हो जाता है। इम दृष्टि मे ववि नौ सामाजिक के तुल्य ही है-'कविहिं सामाजिवतुल्य एव"। भट्ट तोत के अनुभार नायन, ववि और थोना तीनो का अनुभव समान होता है।' भरत मुनि ने 'कवेरन्नगत भाव भावचन्भाव उच्यते' भाव की इम परिभाषा द्वारा इमी मन्य की ओर इगित किया है।' अभिनव के अनुसार कविगत रम हो वाब्य का बीज है, काव्य वृक्ष है तपा नाद्लगव अभिननादि पुष्सस्यानी हैं एव सामाजिन का रसाम्बाद फल है।" इम प्रकार सगस्त कान्य-प्रक्रिया एक जीवन्न, अपण्ड व विताससील प्रतिया है जिमका प्रारम्भ ववि मे और पर्यवमान सहृदय में होना है। इम प्रवार यह वाव्य-विश्व अय से इति तक रममय ही है। अन. ववि वव्य मे अपनी जिन अनुभूनि को बाखबज करता है वह उसके लोविव व्यक्तित्व से सम्बन्य नही रसती, प्रत्युन उसके अलोषिक काव्पात्मक व्यक्वित की अमूल्य निधि है। 'गृगारी

वही १, २४ २ लभिनवमारनी, भाग १, पृ. २९४ ३. ध्वन्यागंन, उद्योन १, वारिका ६ वा लोचन ४ नाट्यगास्त्र, अध्याय ७, इल्ोक २ ५ अभिनवभारती, भाग १, पृ २९४

288 Principles of Litmary Critiriss in Sanskrit

पार्यन्तिक प्रयोजन घोदित किया है।1 उनने अनुनार नवि को कौनि से प्रीति वो ही प्राप्ति होती है। मदपि वाल्यानुगील्वों को नाव्य में प्रीति के अनिनक व्यत्पत्ति वा न लान होता है परन्तु इन दोनों में प्रीति हो प्रधान है, अन्यमा बाब्य मे कान्ता चम्मितत्व की क्या विशेषता रह जायेगी * वत नानन्द ही वाव्य का, कवि व सहृदव दोनों की दृष्टि मे, प्रमुख प्रयोजन है। धर्म, व्यं, नाम व मोक्ष की व्युन्पत्ति से भी अन्नन मानन्द कौ ही उपलब्ि होनी है।' इसी प्रकार मम्मट ने भी 'सद्य परनिरवृ'ति' वो ही वाब् वा मौलिभूत प्रयोजन स्वोकार तिया है।' उक्न विवेवन के निष्वर्य के रूप मे वहा जा वना है कि रन व ध्वनिवादी वाचार्यों के मत मे कवि जपनी काव्य-मर्जना मे बिभी लोनिन या व्यावहारिक प्रयोजनवदात् प्रदृन नहीं होता, उभवा पारमायिक प्रयोजन आनन्द-ान हो है, वद्यपि व्यावहारिक स्तर पर अर्थ-प्राप्ति, भग व नमगल-नाग नादि भी प्रयोजन कहे गये हैं। यदि रमवाद की दृष्टि मे भी विचार परे तो भी प्रीति या वानन्द को नाव्य का प्रयोजन मानना समीचीन प्रनीत नही होता, वयोवि नानन्द या रम की अनुभूनि तो वाव्य-प्रतिभागत भजना और लास्वादन का आवर लक्षण है अत उमे प्रयोजन कैमे वहा जा नबता है वह तो वन्नुत काव्य कौ प्रकृति है, प्रयोजन नही। आनन्द या प्रीति को वाञ्य का चरम प्रयोजन स्वीकार करते हुए रमवादी बाचायों ने एक प्रवार से वाव्य-विषयक निम्पयोजनवाद की हो स्थापना की है। नाव्य-विषयक इस आानन्दवाद वो हम पश्चिम के बना चला के लिए' मिद्ान्त का नारतीय मस्वरम वह मबते हैं। अनिननगुष्न ने ध्वन्वालोक के प्रथम उद्योन की पचन वारिवा की व्यास्या करने हुए वादि वर्वव वाल्नीकि वे शौक की इलोन न्स्मति वे सदर्न मे बाळ्य- सर्बन को भूल प्रेरणा व प्रक्रिना वा वडा गभीर विवेचन किया है। उनने अनुनार निषाद द्वारा गरविद्ध पोन्च को देख वर शोवाबुल प्रौज्ची जायन्द वर दढी। वाल्मीकि वा नवेदनगील हृदय महानुभूनिवद्तान् बौच्ची के नाथ पनरा हृदय- सवाद व तन्मवीनवन का अनुभव करना हुआ लोविन शोब मे भिन बत करग रम मे परिणत अपनी हो शोकानुभूति में निमन्न हो गया। वान्मीवि द्वारा अनुसूत यह गोव न लोविक या और न व्यक्तिगत ही। यद्यपि उसना सूल बाघार नोज्ची वा लोनिक गोफ ही था, परन्तु वोज्ची वे आषन्द आदि अनुभावी की चर्वणा में वाल्मोकि वे हृदय मे उद्बुद्ध गोक एव अलोवित व भाघारणोकृन अनुसव बन गया था। जिम प्रकार जल मे परिपूर्ण वुन छलवने लग जाना है या तोत

१. ध्वन्वालोक, उद्योत १, कारिका १ वा लोचन पु, ४o.४१ १ वही ३. वान्यप्रकान, उल्लास १, २ की वृत्ति

290 Prnciples of Literary Critirism in Sansint

सवाद एव सन्मयीभवन के द्वारा साधारणीवृत सवित् (अनुभूति) का अनूनव बरता है। यही सवित् काव्य का उत्म है। अन अभिनव के अनुसार काव्य मे अभिव्यक्त अनुभृति निर्व यक्तिक और अलोबिक होती है। यही कारण है कि उसमे महृदय के चित्त मे भी रमानुभति जायत की करने की सामर्भ्य रहनी है। कवि का अनुभव ही अन्नन सहदय का अनुभव बनना है। अत यह अनिवार्य है कि कवि को भी साघारणीवटन भावी के माध्यम मे रमानुभूति हो। अभिनव ने लन्वत्र भी कवि-हृदय की महज भावनफूति के रूप में दाब्य का निरूपण किजा है। म्वन्यालोक की एक कारिका में प्रयुव्न 'निप्यन्दमाना' शब्द कौ व्यास्या करते हुए उन्होने कहा है-'दविव्यमानन्दरम स्वयमेव प्रस्तुवाना, इत्यर्थ'अर्थान ववि की सरस्वती स्वय ही वतरिगन रसरूप दिब्य वानन्द को प्रवाहित करती है। इम सम्बन्ध में उन्होंने भट्टनायक का एक इलोन उद्त किया है जिनके अनुसार वाव्य-मर्जना की प्रकरिया वन्म के स्नेह से दवित धेनु के दुग्य-निध्न्दन वे समान सहजनफुर्त होनी है। ध्वन्वालोक की अन्निम कारिा मे ध्वनिकार ने वाव्य-मर्जन की इमी अप्रयन्नप्रमृन प्रविया का निर्देत करते हुए कहा है कि म्वय भगवनी सरम्वती ही सुरवि की वाब्य-वस्तु वा निर्माण कर देती है, उसके लिए कवि के अपने व्यापार की बावस्यवता नहीं होनी। इम प्रकार ध्वनिकार जानन्दवर्षन तथा अभिनव तीनों के सनुसार काव्य कवि के हृदयस्य रम की ही स्वत रफूरन अभिव्यक्ति है। मस्वृत वाव्य-चिन्नकों ने वाव्य-प्रयोजनी के ममान वाव्य-हेतुओ दा भी विम्नुत निर्पण विया है। मुस्यत शक्ति या प्रनिभा, व्युत्पत्ति या निपुणता • एवं अभ्याम को बाब्य का वारण माना गया है। आचायों मे दो बानो बौ लेरुर मनर्भेद रहा है-(१) उक्त तीन हेतु भम्मिलिन रप मे वाव्य के कारण है या पृथक पथक (२) वाब्य-निर्माण में इनना परस्पर क्या सबन्ध बे यनुपान है प्राय सनी आचार्यो ने शक्ति या प्रतिभा को वाव्यन्मर्जना का मुख्य हेतु स्वीकार किया है यद्यपि व्युत्पत्ति और अम्यान के आपेक्षिन भूल्य ने योगदान के विषय में उनका मनवत नहीं है। प्रनिभा तत्व की व्याल्या सस्तृत काव्यशास्त्र की एक महनी उपलब्धि है। आवार्यों ने प्रनिभा को बाव्य की मूल सजना-गवत माना है। इनरे अभाव में रामय का प्रवत न ही नहीं होना और यदि हठातु किया भी जाना है तो वह उपहाम वा ही पात होना है। वैसे तो अलकार-रोति वादी आचार्यों ने भी प्रनिभा या शक्ति के काव्य वीजन्ब को जगीवार किया है विन्तु वरक के बहिरग मे लधित हचि रसने के कार्ण वे काव्य को इम मूल शक्ति वा दल्गेग मात्र परवे वह मंने, इसने स्वरूप एव काव्पन्मुप्टि मे इसके योगदान के विपव मे वे प्राय मान हो रहें। व्वनिवादी जानायों मे ही सर्वप्रयम प्रतिभा के स्व्प व काब्य-निर्मा

292 Pnciples of Lsterary Criticisma in Sanshrit जो जगन् की विग्परिचित वस्तुओं और व्यापारो को नित्व नूतन वैचिन्य से गुम्फित वर हेती है। यह दृष्टि वम्तुशो वा बोघ मात्र नही है, अपिमु रस वोष का अतिनमण करने पर ही इसका जन्मीलन होना है। यह जमर है नि इन्द्रिय- ज्ञान के अन्गास या आवृनि से यह प्रतिभा अचिव चमक जठनी है।1 अभिनव के अनुसार प्रतिभा कवि-हृदय मे स्थिन एव अनादि प्रास्तन सखार है।1 हमचन्द्र ने प्रनिभा के विषय मे भट्ट सोन का यह मन उदत किया है- प्रज्ञा नवनवोन्मेपशाननी प्रनिभा मना। सदन प्रामनाजीवद्वर्णनानिपुण कवि।। लर्यान निन्य नवीन स्करणाओ से शोभिन प्रज्ा को ही प्रतिना कहते हैं। जनने वनु प्रामित जीवन्न वर्णना में निपुण व्यक्त का ही नाम कति है।

गजनेसर के प्रतिभाविषयक विचार भी अनीव महत्व रखते हैं।1 उन्होंने नमाधि (चिन क एकाग्रना) और अभ्यास द्वारा उद्नानिन शक्ति के वर्मरूप मे प्निना का प्रतिगदन किया है। सनवन वे प्रतिना को शक्ति का तरियात्मव रूप मानते हैं। उनके मन मे प्रनिना यति वे हृदय मे वाल्न्सजना के निमित शन्दार्थसमूद अरवारनत्र उक्ति-प्रणारी आदि नामग्री को प्रविनामित बरती है। इस प्रकार राजनेत्रर ने प्रनिना को वाव्यान्मन अभिव्वजना वे उपवरगों का मार्नासेव नाकषालवार बरने वाली बन्नवृष्टि माना है। उनके अनुमार प्रतिभा-रहिन व्यक्ति के लिए पदार्यंममूह् प्रत्क्ष होतर भी अप्त्वक्ष रहवा है। इसी बारण मेघाविरद्र तथा बुमारदास जन्मान्त्र होने पर भी सफल कवि हो सके। राजसेंदर ने पनिना के दो रूप नाने है-(१) कारचित्री (२) भावनित्री। वान्य-निर्माग मे कवि को साहाय्य देने दारी प्रतिना वारवित्री और भावव को वाव्यान्वादन मे समर्थ बनाने वाली प्रनिभा नावयिती होती है। वार्गययाँ प्ररिभा के तीन रूप है-(१) महजा, (२) आहार्या, (३) भोग- चिकी। इन प्रतिभाओं के घनी दवि नमग भारन्वत, बास्यामिव और औराधिव चहे जाते हैं। राजनेवर ने प्रनिभा व व्युसपति दोनों की वाब्य-निर्भा के लिए सेवस्कर कहा है। इन दोनों के आवार पर उन्होंने ववियो के तीन भे दे माने हैं-वाब्य- नति, यान्तनति और उभव नवि। वे इन तीनों मे विसी प्रवार वा तारम्य नहीं मानने कलोकि बपने अपने क्षेव मे वे सभी श्ेष्ठ है। इन प्रकार राजगेगर १ ध्वन्यानंक उद्योन ३, वारिका ४३ का लोचन अभिनवभारती, भाग १, ज ७, १ ३४५ 3. वाध्य-ोमाना, अध्याय ४ ४. वही अन्याप ५

294 Prinriples of Literary Creticism in Sonsieil यह स्पप्ट है कि सस्वृत आलकारिकों वा एव बर्ग यह मानता है कि वदि जन्मजान ही नहीं होते, उनवा निर्माण भी किया जा मवता है। भामह, दण्डी, क ट्रट आर्दि वे ग्रन्थ कवियों को राव्य-निर्माणार्य प्रतिक्षित करने के लिए रचे गये हो, ऐसा लगता है। राजगेसर ने वाव्य-मीमाता मे कवि वे प्रशिक्षण-पम व चर्या आदि का जो विवरण दिया है उससे प्रतीत होता है मस्वृत ववि मात्र प्निभा का सम्वल लेकर काव्य-निर्माण में प्रवृत्त नहीं होना था, उसे एक लबे समय तक निश्चित शिक्षा-दीक्षा मे होकर गुजरना पड़ता था। दूसरी ओर रम- ध्वनिवादी आाचार्यों की मान्यता के अनुसार प्रतिभा ही वाव्य-निर्माण मे दवि को प्रभुख महायिवा है तथा व्युत्पत्ति व अम्यास प्रतिभा के उपकारक मान्र है। वान्य कोरा मिल्य या रचनाकौशल नही है, वह एक अमण्ड, सजीव व विकाम- शील प्रकिया है जिसवा आरभ कवि की मर्जनात्मक प्रतिभा मे निहिति है तया जो शब्दार्यमयी अभिव्यजना मे सविग्रह होवर सहृदयो के प्रति, रमास्वादन के लिए, निवेदिन होना है। अभिनवपुप्त ने काव्य-मर्जन की प्रनिता का अभिनव भारती मे इस प्रकार वर्णन विया है-'तदेव मूल बीजम्थानीयो वविगतो रम। बबिहि सामाजिवनुन्य एव। ततो वृक्षस्थानीय काव्यम्। तत्र पुप्पादिस्थानीयोभिनया- दिव्यापार। नन फलस्थानीय सामाजिकरसास्वाद । तेन रममयमेव विश्वम्" (अ भा भाग १, अ ६qृ २९४)। बीज से लवर फलोत्पति पर्यन्त वक्ष के विवास की जो सहज प्रनिया है वही नविगन अनुभूति की, राव्य के माध्यम से, महृदय के रमाम्वादन मे परिणति की भी प्तिया है। राजशेनर ने भी भावयित्री प्रतिभा के मदर्भ में वविवर्म को वृक्ष की ही उपमा दी है-नया बलु फलिन क्वेर्व्यापारतर, अन्वया सोध्वकेश स्थात् (वा मी अ ४)। वाल्मीदि के ओोक की इलोक पग्पति बी ग्वस्या में लोचनशार ने बनाया है कि आदिववि वा शोन उनी प्रवार कोर बन कर फूट पडा जिम प्रकार कि रमपरिपूर्ण चलस छलक उठता है। बाज्य-निर्माण वबिगन रस वा ही उच्छलन है। पर यहां यह प्रद्न मन मे उठता है कि बना रमनदगा मे कदि के लिए वाव्य-म्जन सभव है? अभिनवगुप्त ने रमानुभूति का जो स्वम्प प्रतिपादित बिचा है उसने अनुगार तो रसावस्था मे काल्य-निर्मा मे ववि की प्रवृत्ति सभव प्रतीत नहीं होती। सभवन इम ददा के तुसत पश्चात् ही जब वि ववि की चेतना रमानुभव के तीव्र सस्वार या स्मृति में युक्न रहती है, काव्य वा निर्माण होता है। इम प्रवार काव्य-्मर्जन वे क्षणो मे वाम्नविन रमन्दणा मे न होनर भी कवि 'रमममाहितचेता' तो रहता ही है। आनदवर्घ न व अभिनय दोनों ने अलवार, गण, रीति आदि वाव्यान्मव अभिव्यजना वे विभिन्न ततवों वो रस के नाथ मवड मान वर यह निरपित तिया है वाल्य-

296 Principtes of Literary Crticisn in Sanshrit

पृथक् प्रवलन करना पडता है।' यह पृथक प्रयस्नरप अतिकम निर्चन हो रस- भग का हेतु बन जाता है। वि को महान् आतलाम तनी होता है जब वह ध्वनि की आतमा स्नर्प असलक्ष्यम व्यष् का समाहितचित ने उपनिवन्यन बरता है। आनन्दजर्वन ने नघटना या रीनि को रनानिव्यजन सथा माधुर्मादि गुणो पर आमिन भाना है। इम प्रजार मघटना गुणो के माध्यम से रम प्रो ही उन्नी- दित करती है। चक्ता तथा वाच्च वे ओचित्य को सघटना का नियमहेतु मान बर उन्होने प्रवारान्नर से वाव्य मे रम को जगिता वा ही प्रतिपादन किया है। आानन्दवधन के अनुसार काव्य का निवन्धन करते हुए केवि को सृदव रन्परतन् ही गहना चाहिए। प्रबन्ध वाव्य में इतिहाम-सिद्ध इतिवत्त मात्र वा नि्वाह कवि वा प्रयोजन नही है, अपितु गम-निव्पान हो उनका एव मात्र उद्दष्व होना चाहिए। आनन्दवधन ने महाववि वे न्जननमे के नार का निम्नलिित वारिषा मे निददा किया है- वाच्चाना वाचकाना च बदौित्येन योजनम्। रमादिदिपयेणंतन् वर्म मुख्य महाववे ॥ (ध्वन्या २, ३२) सर्थात् रमाभिव्यक्नि विषयक जौचित् के सारथ वाच्य (अर्य) तथा वाचब (गब्द) की योजना ही महाकवि का प्रधान नमे है। र्नादि की विवक्षा के बिना ही ववि द्वारा निवद् बलवार चिन या अयम वाव्य कहा जाता है। गुपीभृनस्वम्य या मध्यम बाव्य मे रनादि की अभिव्यक्ति तो रहती हे पग्नु कवि उमे समुचित महत्त्व नहीं दे पाता। उनमे वाच्यन्वाचक व्म्पारय मे अभिव्यजक हीवर भी स्वय प्राघान्य प्राप्त पर लेते हैं, रम के प्रति गुणीनूत नही हो पाने। नाट्यगास्त्र ने १६वे अध्याय मे लक्षणो वे स्वमप की विवेचना बरते हुए वभिनवगुप्त ने विभी मज्ञाननामा विद्वान या लक्षाविषयव मत उजृत बिया है जिनमे कैव्य-निर्माप की प्रतिना के तीन श्रमिक मोपानों वा वर्णन विजा गया है।'इम मत के अनुमार बाब्चन्मजना मे ववि वा प्रथम व्यापार स्वय उमरी प्रनिभा है। प्रतिभा ्यापार से ही वाव्य में गुमो वा विन्यास होना है वर्योदि प्रतिनागाली ववि मे ही रमादि की अभिव्यजरा व मापुर्णादि गुपो वे उप- निवन्धन की सामथ्यं रहती है, सामान्य ववि मे नही। 'इम शब्द से इस बन्नु

दही स्वन्यालार, उद्योन २, वारिवा १९ वी वृति, पृ २३३-४ स्वन्यागंव, उद्योत के, पृ ३३६ Y बनिनवभाग्ती, भाग २, अम्याय १६,५. २९६ (बड़ोदा, प्रयम सस्वरण)

298 Prineiples of Literary Criticisn in Sanskrit

यद्यपि काव्य-नर्जना की प्रनिया एक अजीब जटिल, मनिश्चित व बहुतबुछ रहस्यमय प्रतरिया है तथापि रनवादियो की उक्त व्वास्या किभी सीमा तक, मोटे स्प मे ठीक मानी जा सवती है। ललकार-ध्वनि व वम्तुध्वनि का भी बन्तव रत-ध्वनि में पयं वसान मान कर अभिनवगुप्त ने ध्वति निद्धान्त को भी रन निद्धान्त की परिधि मे नमेट लिया है। बत्र एक प्रद्न काळ्य और वस्तु जगत् के सम्बग्य का रह जाता है अर्यात् कवि अपने नाल्य मे जिम जगत् की मृष्टि करता है उनका बाह्य जगन् मे क्या नम्बन्ध है' वरा कवि जात् के वस्तु-्यापारी का ज्यो का तयो अनुकग्म वल्ता है या उन्हें किसी बन्व रूप मे प्रम्तुन करता है। इन विषय में सम्कृन वार्लकादिकी को मान्यता नितान्त स्पप्ट है। मस्तृन अलकारशाम्त्र के अनुसार मोटे रूप मे वह सकते हैं कि वाब्य वाह जगन् एव लोक जीवन पर ही आधारित है। वाव्यगत वनुनूतिचो का भूल उम्म जीवन की अनन्त एव विचित्र अनुभूनिर्या ही हैं। जगत् के नाना चन्तु-व्यापार हो वाब्य मे प्रतिलित होते हैं। राजशेसर के मत में कव्रियों के मति-द्वर्पण मे ममस्त विश्व प्रतिफलित होता है-"मतिदर्पणे कबीना विद्व प्रतिपलनि।" भरत के 'अवस्थानुष्टतिर्नाट्यम्' 'लोकवृत्तानुकरण नाट्यम्', नामह के 'यक्त लोवस्वभावेन' 'तन लोवाश्य वाव्यम्' आदि वयन लोक और वाल्य के पनिष्ठ सम्बन्ध वे सूचक है। परन्तु सस्वृन काव्प-चिन्तकों ने वाब्य और लोन वे मम्बन्य को स्वीकार करते हुए भी दोनों मे प्रभूत अन्तर माना है। उनके बनुमार ववि वाहा जगन् का अन्वर्ता मात्र नही है, वह एक स्वतत्र सप्टा और विघाता है। उसकी सृप्टि लोक पर आधारित होकर भी एव जपूदं सृष्टि है। इमी ब्रतवंता वो आचार्यों ने वही चतोक्ति, वही अतिरायोविति, कही नवनवोग्मेप वयवा नवनवोकेस के रूप मे प्रस्नुत किया है जो कि वस्तुत. ववि-प्रतिभा की देन है। ववि की प्रतिभा उसकी निवनवीन दृष्टि का ही एव रूप है जो इम जगन् को नित्व नृतन वं चिन्य से सुत्ित बर देती है। यह लोबचार्ता में पतित बोनमात्र नही है, वषित्ु इसे हम ववि की दिव्य दृष्टि वह मवते हैं।1 ववि-प्रतिभा वेदल वन्तु- जगत् मे ही बजवंता और वैचित्य की मृष्टि नहीं बरती वह उसकी वाली मे भी निन्य नवीन उन्मेपो को जन्म देती है। वाननदवयंन के बहुसार प्रिया के हाव भावो के समान मुकवियों की वाणी की न तो कोई अवधि है और न उनमे कनी पुनमक्ति ही होती है।1 कविच्चाणी, जिसके विषयो को कोई दयता नही है, वसबजों वो हमारे दृदब मे एक सवंधा नूनन रूप मे निर्वेगगत बरती है।1

१. ध्वनयालोड, उ्द्योत दे, कारिका ४३पृ. ५०८ २ ध्वनालोन, उद्योत ४, बारिवा ७ की चृति मे उद्घुत इलोष पृ ५२९ ३. वही, उद्योत ४, वारिका ३ की वृत्ति मे सदत इलोव पृ- ५२७

300 Prireiples of Litrrety Critirimm in Sendkrit

स तस्वदर्दनादेव शान्त्रेप पठितः कवि:। दर्मनादु वर्णनाच्चाय रूढा लोके वविध्ु:।। तथा हि दर्दाने स्वच्छे नित्के्मादिववेरमन । नोदिना वविता लोवे यावज्जाता न वर्मना ।। (बाव्यानुशासन, अष्बाय ८ की दृत्ति में उद्दुत)

परिचर्चा

धु ना नागंद व्यक्तिगत मोर नहीं रहा जीर माधारमीवृव हो गया, उस दणा मे ो वाल्मीकि को हो वानन्द की प्राप्ति होनी चाटिर घो। मैं मनझना हूँ, 'मा निमाद' आदि इलोर की दटवर पाउव को नष्ण नन की प्रतीति होती है। इस प्रवार उसे आनन्द प्रान्त होना है। वाल्नीकि के विषय मे यह बहना वहां चक उचित है? मू घ पाठक मेंने जो वुछ कहा है अभिनदपुप्त ने साक्प ने बाषार पर रहा है। वम्नुत जिस शोक को दाल्मीवि ने इस दलोब में दद् बिया है वह मु नि का अपना गोब नहीं है वपिनु सषाधारमोक्टत चोड है। इमके अनिरिक्त वदि ववि को स्व रसानुूति नहीं होी तो दह महृदय पाटव गो कसे रमानुभूति बरा सबता है। मदषि यह ठीक है कि वति रतानुनूति की दश्ा मे बाल्यसजंन नहीं करता। बाद मे उसके सस्वार या स्नृति जो सेप वह जाती है उनी से कृवि वाव्यसजना बर्ता है। पु ला भाउव्र में वेवल वह जानना चाहता पा वि वान इकवा समसेन क मे कर सबठे है? मुं च पाठव: वृवि में एक विरेप प्रतिना होती है जिसके द्वारा दह लोन के भावों को आत्ममान बर चपने भावों के रूप में अनुभव बर सपता हे या बपने नातो को नाधारणीटृन बरबे देस सकता है। मु दा न्वामो दाल्मोनि का व्यक्तिगत गोव वाब् ग वारम नही हुआ अवितु साधारणीवृत् शोक हो वादय बना। दन्तुन वदि मे नाधारणोवृत नाव ही वाब्य मे रुप में प्रत्िपलित होते है-न कि व्यनतिात रूप में बपने से भबद भाव। पु ना भांव: वाल्मीवि को हुआ तो व्यक्तिगत्र शोब ही या. मु दा स्वामी: दह व्यन्तिात वहाँ रहा ?

304 Pri-ciples ef Literer Crifirine in Samstrit

202, 204, 205, 226, 266n, C 267, 268, 270n, 285, 287, 294, 298 Bhaminiv iāsa, 59, 60 Cartanya, 5,

Bhanumiśra, 107-9 Bharata, 2, 3, 10-14, 18-23, Candralaka, 227n, 260 (c), 261a

26, 32, 53, 57, 58, 62, 68, Cassirer, E. 177

69, 73. 101-6, 157, Chindoga zparisad, 170 159, Charles Darwin, 64 160, 164, 165, 178, 179, 182n 190, 195-97, fmfG, 227n 206, 210, 226, 247, 205, 249, 254, 255, 286, 298 Coleridge, 121 Bharatesemgraha, 62 Comperche Arstheies, 17 भारतीभूपण, 222, 226 Crocc, 48, 240

Bharavi, 180, 268 Bhartrhar, 74, 76-8, 114, D

123 Bhāsa, 25, 129, 138 Dandın, 6, 7, 35, 67, 70, 100,

मापामररा, 22n 101, 116, 118, 120, 148-50, 154n, 159, 193, 211, 267, Bhatta Lollata (or Lollata), 73, 91, 96, 129, 132, 182, 273, 293, 294

247, 253, 255 Dante, 169 Bhatțanarayana, 205 Daterița (-ropakta), 18, 19, Bhattanāyaka, 69, 94, 96, 97, 23n, 45, 58n, 104, 162 140, 141, 162, 166, 182, Dhananjaya, 18, 43, 45, 58, 208, 233, 248, 249, 251, 258, 278, 289, 290 104, 111, 162, 197 Dhanika, 104 Bhatta Tauta (or Tota), 80, 153, 154, 284, 286, 292, धर्मदान, 223 297 ध्नवीर नारती, 230 Bhatti (ka-ya). 98-101, 301 धर्नदुग, 46 Bhavabhuu, 27, 123, 278 भवानीप्रसाद मिम, 229 Dhavaka, 138

निमारीदान, 22Ga, 227 DH Lawrence, 4

Bhoja, 10, 69, 70, 73, 81, 105, ध्वनिसंप्रदाय कोर उसके मिदान्त 106, 109, 195 222, 228 नोलगकर व्यान, 223, 228 Dhseryalks, 43, 76, 145, 146, भूपम, 278 147n, 154n, 161, 162, 175n, BibL, 168 183-85, 187, 189, 207, 214, बिहारी रत्नाकर, 223 , 227, 270, 283-288n, 290, 29In, 292n, 295-96, Blackmur, R.P. 167 298n Bradlcy, 4, 28 Brahmeres, 30, 283 Diaralaks erd tts Cntics, 173,

दजनाय, 223 177n Dinaga, 158

306 Prinaples of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit

काव्यचिम्य, 236, 237, 238n वुन्दन, 226n काव्यदरपसा, 227n, 242 Kuntala, 67, 81, 84-91, 125, Kacrādarša, 148, 150, 154n, 149, 150, 156, 193, 210,

267, 270n, 273n 226, 280, 285, 286, 293 Kuppuswami Shastri, 45 काव्यकत्पद्र म. 222, 227n Kuralajananda, 227, 260n Kāoyālankāra (Bhamaha), 32, 84, 98, 153, 158, 159n, L 179n, 213, 267 285, 287n 270n,

Kan alankara (Rudrața), 103, Leghusritt, 161

266n, 267n, 269-70n, 287n लक्षणा और उसका हिन्दी काव्य में KayalarFarasutragrtlı, 33, 79, 80, 146n, 149n, 150, 154, प्रसार, 228

181n लक्षमीनारायण सुधाशु, 235 Kagamimāmsā, 43, 104, 154, 155n, 162n, 220n, 221, ललितललाम, 226n

224n, 283n, 285n, 292n, Langer, 237

299n Lawrence, 121,236 Lion and the Honey Comb, 167 काव्यदपण, 227n Locana, 43, 44, 145n, 147n, Kāejānušāsana, 28, 58, 155n, 154, 161, 162, 183, 219, 283n, 284n, 287n, 293n, 221, 247n, 249n, 250, 251n. 300 254, 285-88n, 291, 292n, Kaoyaprakāfa, 4, 13, 56, 94 Lucy Poems, 119 95n, 96, 97 107n, 154, 155n, 214, 221, 226, 227, 258-75 (also commentarics frequently), 287n, 288n 284n, 285n, Macaulay, 2 K C Pandcy, 68, 79 Madhusudana, 5, 197, 227, Kcats, 124 232, 233, Kath, 19 Madhyamasyojoga, 25 केरबदाम, 225, 226n, 227 Mchabharato, 2, 168, 187, 205 Kelava Mısra, 191 महावीरप्रसाद द्विवेदी, 224 मेगवराम, 226n Mahima Bhata, 15, 67, 105, Kohala, 10 153, 160, 163, 208, 281 Krishnamoorthy, K. 173 293 इृपाराम, 226n मैंचिलीगरण, 243 Krşnakavı, 109 Malamkagrtmtra, 205 वृष्णानन्द गुप्त, 224 Mallinatha, 222 Ksemendra, 191, 193 Mammata, 4, 6, 7, 13, 67, 78, Ksirasy amin, 206 91-7, 107-9, 115-18, 120.

बृरपनि, 221, 225, 227 22, 125, 160, 176, 181,

Kumāradāsa, 292 190, 191, 195-97, 214,

Kumārasambhara, 53, 55, 61 216, 227, 258-75 (comm-

Kumārila Bhatta, 76 entators also; frequently), 284-88, 293, 299

308 Prinnples of Literary Criticism in Sansbrt

Rasapradipa, 192 Safisuni, 157, 222 रसरहस्य, 221, 225, 227 SarFara 74, 283 Sensfril Drema, 19 ₹77E, 226n Sarshrit Porltes as a Stuty of Resārna:asudhākara, 107 Arsthettrs, 282n रसरू्प, 221, 227 Saradātanaya, 191 Sayaseatikanthabrarara, 10, 70, रससारास, 226n 81, 105, 105 रससिद्धान्त : सल्पविश्लेपण Sarbartaro, 223n

222, 227 Shakespeare, 2, 3, 26-28, 124,

Rasatarengini 107, 227 169

रसविमरश, 228 नम्मूनाथ नमन, 226n Shelley (P B), 124, 169 रसिकप्रिया, 226n स्वामनन्दरदाम, 235

Ratnecali, 138 Šiupālebadha, 223 Ratnesvara, 81 S K De, 109, 180, 201, 282 R C Dwnedy, 157n Sht-rk, 122 Rgveda 21, 29-31, 67 Sobhaharamitra, 268n

रीतिकालीन अलकार माहित्य का मोमनाय, 225, 227n

शास्त्रीय विवेचन 228 Senapalaslasa, 272n Somcsvara, 82 Robert Browmng, 169 Sorr Thoughts en Irdian desthe- Robert Louis Stevenson 211 fics ard Literary Cnhcunt, Ross (W. D), 23 201 Rudrata 70, 103, 116, 155D Sphotayana, 78 159, 197, 266, 267, 270n. SriLantha 92, 93, 96, 97 287, 294 Śrisanku (-La), 69, 73, 94, Rūpagos amin, 5, 6, 57, 65 95, 97, 132, 137, 182, 191, 195. 196, 199, 227n 248, 253, 255 Ruyyala, 151, 156, 157, 191, शंगार निर्णय. 226n 216, 286 Syngerrbrakajc, 48, 70, 106,

S Subandhu, 33, 98, 150, 204 107n

Subhantzeali, 42

265h ,223,278 Sakrbadarfcra, 18, 58n, 108, Serašateka, 138 149n, 154n, 195n, 226, Scaterira Valatastra, 17 227n, 242, 200, 262, 264, Sprbolic Imaginatton, 168 266n, 268n साकन, 239 T Sarurtala, 3, 123, 223, 274 Samarārgcrasttradhara, 69, 71- Teittirim Up, 98, 198n

73 Tale, Allen, 168

Sameaeda, 21 Tarfialora (T.A), 155n

Sathra, 155n Tantratarttka, 264n T.E. Hume, 237, 245

PRINCIPLES OF LITERARY CRITICISM IN SANSKRIT

Principles of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit

P. G. SaCMON

Papers of a Semmar (sponsored by the University Grants Commission, New Delht held in December, 1968 under the auspices of the Department of Sanskrit, University of Udaipur.

Edited by Dr. R.C. Dwivedi

1969

MOTILAL BANARSIDASS DELHI .. VARANASI . PATNA

CONTENTS

Preface x1 Excerpta XV

SEARCH FOR UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLES OF LITERARY CRITICISM (Inaugural Address ) Dr G S Mahajam, M A, PH D. Vice-chancellor, Untoersity of Udaipur 1

2 SANSKRIT CRITICISM AND CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE (An Extract from the Welcome speech) Dr R C. Dwivedi, M.A , PH D. Sāhttyacarya, Darsanacarya, Head of the Department of Sanskrit, Untoerstty of Udaipur 5

3 SEVEN PRINCIPLES OF LITERARY CRITICISM (Gencral President's Address) Dr K C Pandcy, HA. M O.L, PHD, D LITT. Hony. Diector, Abhinaoagupta Institute of Aestheties and Sawa Philosophy, Lucknow Unwersty, Lucknow 8

4 A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE SANSKRIT AND THE GREEK DRAMATIC THEORY Dr. P L. Bhargava, MA , PH D Professor & Head of the Department of Sanskri, Rajasthan Unmersty, Jatpur 18

5 AN ETYMOLOGICAL NOTE ON ALANKARA THE WORD

Dr. G C Tnpathi, MA , PHD, D PHIL Lecturer in Sanskrit, Unmersity of Udmipur. 29

( vii )

14 COMMON TRENDS IN INDIAN AND GRECO-ROMAN AESTHETICS Dr. K C. Pandey M A , MO L, PH D, D. LITT. Hony. Director, Abhinabagupta Instiute of Aesthehcs and Satca Philosophy, Luckntowo Untaersity, Lucknow 129

15 SOME THING OF ARISTOTLE Shr Bhim Sen, M A Dutttor, School of Base Snences ond Humaiuties, University of Udarpur 142

16 THE CONTRIBUTION OF RITI TO THE EXCELLENCE OF POETIG COMPOSITTON Dr A P Mishra, HA, D PHIL Professos and Head of the Department of Sanstrit, Umterstty of Allahabad 145

17 PHILOSOPHIGAL CONSIDERATIONS AND INDEPEN- DENCE OF LITERARY CRITICISM IN SANSKRIT Dr. R.C Dwivedt, MA, PH D , Sahityācarya, Darfanacarya, Head of the Department of Sanskrit, Umvertity of Udaipur 153

18 SYMBOLIC IMAGINATION AND DHVANI Shrı B B Palwal, N.A. Lecturey in English, Umnersity af Udarpur. 167

I PRINCIPLES OF LITERARY CRITICISM OF THE DHVAM SCHOOL A REVIEW Dr Biswanath Bhattacharya. WA, PH D. Reader in Sanskrit, Banatas Hindu Umtersity, Varanast. 178

20 JAGANNATHA'S RAMANIYATA Dr (Kuman) Suman Pande, M.A, PH D. Hamidia Cotlege of Arts and Comonere, Bhopal. 190

( i )

28 मम्मटामिमतं लक्षणायाः पड्विघतं हेललंकारशच का रेवाप्रसाद द्विवेदी, आचार्य, एम ए-, पीएच डी, मसिम्टेप्ट प्रोफेसर, सस्कृत विभाग, शासकीय महाविद्यालय, इन्दौर 259

29 साहित्यिक अभिव्यक्ति डा. देवराज उपाध्याय, एम ए (हिन्दी, सस्कृत), पीएच डी अध्यक्ष, हिन्दी विभाग, उदयपुर विश्वविद्यालय 276

30 संस्कृत अलंकारशास्त्र में काव्य का सर्जना-पक्ष श्ी मूलचन्द्र पाठक, एम ए (हिन्दी, सस्कृत), व्यास्याना, संस्वृत विभाग, उदयपुर विश्वविद्यालय 282

Index Works and Authors 303.

PREFACE

Principles of hterary criticism is a fascinating subject and a help to understand, evaluate and appreciate a work of ima- gination. Critics of Sanskrit set on to explore these from the 5th ceutury A.D. onward and their search, now more through modern languages of India including Enghsh, knows no end- Present work, which offers ongmal formulations of new ideas and fresh msight ito topics of literary criticism and aesthetics, is a co-operative venture of nearly thirty scholars. Ideas and principles explained and enunciated here may not be found absolute and commanding universal validity. Yet we hope, these refreshing reffections will help better understanding of the subject. World is coming closer day by day and one may fondly hope that the 'twins shall meet' and give burth to better informed Comparative Criticism which will be significant addition to departments of comparative learning like comparative religion and philosophy. It was on the recommendation of our distinguished Vice-chanccllor, Dr. G S Mabajant, who later very kindly inaugurated the Seminar, that the University Grants Commission, New Delhr, accepted my proposal to sponsor a seminar on "Principles of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit". I am deeply and thankfully indebted to him and the Commission. The seminar was held from 26th to 28th December, 1968 under the auspices of the Department of Sanskrit, University of Udaipur. This publication, which bears the same title, is an outcome of deliberations at the above seminar and consti- tutes substantially its proceedings. The papers presented to the seminar have been edited with a view to achieve some kind of uniformity (where none secmed posible due to variety of styles). Absolute uniformity has never been my aim here (perhaps that could not be realised cither, due to lack of time and resourees at my dis- posal). Discussion on the papers', which has been considerably 1 Some of the papera could not be taken up for ducustion primarly because the authors were not preseut and secondanly for lack of trme at oar disposal

( xilf )

his staff for printing the work in good time. However, some mistakes have crept in for which I am apologetic to the readers The seminar has been a wholly exciting experience for us, the participants. May I now invite Sahrdayas to share our esperience and request the learned critics to evaluate our co-operative performance ?

Department of Sanskrit R. C. Dwivedi University of Udaipur 7th June, 1969

EXCERPTA

नवरसदचिरां निर्मितिमादवनी भारती क्वेजमति ।। (Benedictory verse in the Kavyaprakisa of Mammața)

Supreme is the poet's speech which projects a creation, free from the laws of myeti (destiny), constituted by pure delight, independent of anything else and charming on account of nine (or novel) sentiments.

समष्टि: सर्वशास्त्राणां साहित्यमिति गौपते।

Criticism is the sum of all Sciences.

पञ्चमी साहित्यविद्या [Rajasekhara in the Kavyamimarmasa]

Literary Criticismn in the fifth Veds.

द्ें वस्मनी मिरां देव्या: शास्त्रं च कविर्क्मे च। प्रज्ञोपनं तवोरारय प्रनिभोदवमत्तिमन् ।। [Bhatta Tauta quoted by Bhatta Gopala in his commentary on the Kavyaprakāsa)

Two are the paths of Goddess of Learning, one, Scienee, the result of intellect; and two, Poetry, the product of imagination.

अपूर्वं मदस्तु पययन विना कारणकलां जगद्पवमस्वं निजरसमरान् सारयनि व। कमात्यस्वोपाइयाजसरसुनवं नासपति त- त्सरस्वत्वास्तत्वं कविसहृदवारयं बिजयने।। [Abhinavagupta in the Locana]

SEARCH FOR UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLES OF LITERARY CRITICISM

(Inaugural Address )

Dr G S Mahajanı

I I cordially welcome you to this historic City and also to the University which has vet to make hrstory The City Is blessed by nature and hallowed by history But the Umiversity has yet to develop its physical facilities It is therefore not m the usually formal sense but qurte sincerely I request you to overlook our shortcomings in making your stay as comfortable as we should have liked 2 Sanskrit literature is so vast, rich and ancient that it was wise to hmit the scope of your discussion-as apparently you intend to do It is trite to state that as language only precedes its grammar, literature must first exst before the prin- ciples of cniticism are formulated All languages are expressions to thought and we see two broad streams-Science and Litera- ture There was a time when even scientific subjects like mathe- matics and medicine were treated through verse We have now reached a stage when whie prose has free access to both, poetry is largely confined to humanities-literature Can you formulate a rule that the subject-matter of poetry must be non- scientific ? The more fundamental question to my mind is to investi- gate which of the now recognised principles of hterary criticismt are absolute, all pervading and common to all languages and which of these are only relative ? Human mind is cast mn the same mould, but since nurture affects nature and environment inflvences heredity, it is an interesting exercise to discern what is absolutely natne and immutable Again we observe that humour is pecular to certain languages, not so to others The scope of humour and wit is, to my knowledge, limited in Sansknt But English language is particularly suitable for subtle humour. Why ? 3 Times affect the very nature of hterary output You

Search for Untersal Prineiples of Literary Critictsm 3

world in which the ter of cause and effeet ruled with only the minimum of delay even with major opposition Today litera- ture aims at keeping close to the contemporary society and takes upon itself to depict its problems and deals with them But life in its short-term duration is full of injustices, triumphant vice and ttnreqtited virtue. And therefore literature turns to tragedies Ons of the dramaturgic presenptions of Bharata is thus throun overboard 6 Take again the doctrine of the three Umties Here at any rate, one thought, there is something which is absolute But expefience reveals that the success of a play is quite independent of this doctrine In fact, it will be found that all dramatists of note have discarded the unities-doctrine Shakespeare, for example, is no slave to Umty of Time which he violates conspi- cuously m the Winter's Tale by introducing an interval of I6 years between the 3rd and the 4th Act Kalidasa, too, in his Sakuntala, introduces an interval of at least 5 years between the 7th Act and the earher ones Of course, other things being equal a dramatist should prefer a short to a long duration for the action, so as to make the spectacle for the play as close an imitation of real life as possible A well-constructed drama makes us feel for the time as if the events represented were really taking place The effect of a play upon the audience Iargely depends upon the success with which this illusion is kept up, and long mtervals of time tend to destroy this illusion, because they remind the spectators that they are looking not at real events, but at a scenic representation Then agam if the times of action are shortened the retribution for vice and reward for virtue are rendered more impressive If they are delayed, the effect is lost 7 Next, what about the subject-matter or, tf yot like, the plot? Does Bharata have any dramaturgic principle for this ?" Should a plot be ortginal or can it be borrowed ? Detec- tive stoncs and thrillers. mostly depend on the originality of the plot. Agatha Christie has written over fifty books but each has a new plot, never used before or by any one ' Shakespeare and Kaldasa on the other hand often freely borrowed materral from history and mythology This fact, however, does not detract from the piece of art, because merit les in their handling of the material

SANSKRIT CRITICISM AND CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE

(An extract from the Welcome Speech)

Dr R C Dutedi

The renowned scholars of Sanskrit Criticism have shown great favour to this young University Department of Sanskrit by accepting all hardships of journey in winter to attend the Seminar in this city of lakes, not so well connected by trams Your affection and generosity shall be sole refuge of our mnability in making befitting arrangements for the scholars of your age and fame My awareness of organisational limitations does not belittle my sense of pride and joy at your distinguished visit It rather waxes to find that not only pre-eminently the scholars of Sansknt but also of Hindi and Englsh have found it interesting to actively associate themselves with the Seminar. This reminds me of the famous lie कान्यशास्त्रविनोदेन कालो गच्छति aar- Your participation, I am sure, will mnaugurate comparative studies of the Principles of Literary Criticism in Sanskrt mn depth In the past ages Sanskrit was the national and composite velucle of literary and cultural consciousness of the country It systematised, conserved and transmitted the intellectual movements of the country. The literary tradition, which originated with the languages of the masses-Pal, Prakrta or Apabhramsa-was critically evaluated by the Sanskrit alankarkas, It is not surprising therefore that many origmal works on poetics are full of illustrations from the Prakrit The movement of Bhakti was similarly popular in its ongin But ats philosophy was constructed in Sanskrit by Ramanuja and Caitany, his followers Rupagosvamin, Jivagosvamin, and by Madhusudana who expounded the principle and phuilosophy of Bhakti Rasa Jamnism and Buddhism originated as popular movements etpressing their farth in local languages But it was not very long after their origin that the religion, philosophy

Sanskrit Critrasm & Contemporary Indian Literaturs

past the Sansknt Acharyas never failed in appreciating and judging the literary mood of the people who expressed themse- Ives in the idiom of the day The scholars of Sanskrit criticismt will no doubt revive the old tradition of understanding and evaluating the modern Praknts -- Hindi and others, and if need be evolve new canons of literary criticism Dandın, Mammata, and many other acaryas did not ignore the lterature in the people's languages, nor will the distinguished eritics partici- pating in the semmar This may open up new horizons and lay the foundations of new canons of literary chticism I have ventured to make some observations, it was but irresistible in the enlightened presence of so distinguished acaryas here

See Prinaples of Lsterary Crittcism 9

ctter as a unit of such sound is the smallest constrtuent that the objective analysis of a poctical work reveals It shows (1) that the letters are distmgwshable from one another because of the distinctive sounds and different effects, pleasant or otherwise, which they produce on the sense of hearing, (u) that they enhance the excellence of poetry becauise of their harmony with the suggested emouon, (m) that recurrence of the same or sumlar sounds in a composition, constitutes vanous figures of speech, such as alliteration, and, therefore, has ornamental value in beautifing the piece where they occur, (n) that thetr distinct sounds have exciting, softening, or neutral valuc (Dipta, Masrna, Madhyama) to the mind or heart of the hearer, (v) that the use of words containing letters of a parti- cular sound-qualty helps in the arousal of a particular acsthetic emotion; (vz) that even a letter can suggest an emotion, (vii) that often a skilful choice and atrangement of words, made up of letters which have a particular visual form in writing, makes a wntten verse look like a sword, a drum, a lotus, and so on, because of the visual shape of letters and thus gives rise to pic- torial poetry (Citrakāvya )

THE DISTINGUISHING MARKS OF POETRY

Poetry is a set of well-connected meaningful words which constitute, as it were, its body But such a set is also used for the ordmary communication of ideas in daily transactions, as well as in scientific and philosophical works Metrical form cannot be looked upon as the distinguishing mark of poetry, for in India even the works on technical subjects are wntten in that form. A quesuon, therefore, arises - what is it that distinguishes poetry from common speech ? Ifit is said to be the beauty or attractiveness of words a further question arises- what is it that makes them attractie ? It cannot be said that attractiveness is due to the presentation of an attractive set of cvents or of a complete aesthetic configuration, technically called Rasa, for a detached stanza, presenting a single idea, is also called poetry The reply is that it is the presence of six essentials, which are called principles from the poit of view of the cruc, and the abcence of defects, counted under the fourth, that distinguishes poetry from common speech.

Secen Prenciples of Literary Criticistn 11

refers to the view about the externality of embellishments as that of "others" (Pare) and discusses forty-three embellish- ments, maintaming them to be characterisuc marks of poetry and including in his list most of those, mentioned by Bharata. He did so because he tool the word Alankara, not in the sense, significd by the Englnh expression 'figure of speech', as it is usually translated, but in its hteral denvatie sense, mearung "that which gives sufficiency" (Alam Laroti) In the context of poetry, therefore, according to hun, it means "that wluch gives sufficiency to a composition to be classed as poetry" Taking the word in this sense, he idenufied characteristics (Laksana ) with embellishments (Alankara) and asserted the general characteristic of all types of poetry to be a turn or twist (Valratva) that a poetic gemus giyes to words and mean- ings. He held thus turn to be the charactenstic of all embel- Lishments Bacon secms to echo this very idea when he says that the poet distorts nature. As an empincist he means by nature the material world, the sum total of all that is percepuble. He, therefore, finds that works of poetic art present the objects of nattire, not in the form mn which they are directly preceptible through the senses, but in such a form as is different from what exists in nature, though surilar to it, so that it cannot be thougbt to be simply a copy of what is already there in hature. Accordingly he does not agree with the naturalstic view that poetry is characterized by close adherence to nature, by faithful presentation of nature as it is On the contrary, he holds that poctry is distorted nature.

THE WIDER MEANING OF ALANKARA

Subsequently, however, the particular derivative meaning of the word Alankara was ignored, and it was used in the popular conventional sense of omament or figure of speech. Conse- quently the number of Alankaras continued to increase from the forty-three recognized by Bhamaha, who amalgamated the *. charactensucs, embellishments, and some of the qualities, to one hundred twenty-four, in the hands of Appayya Dikşita (sixteenth century, AD.), and gave rise to excessively orna- mented poctry.

Secen Prinaples of Ltterary Critiasm 13

position, the former belong to the whole, hke the beauty of a gurl, whereas the latter pertam to a part only, like a bracelet to an arm, and accepted only the three qualities which Bhamaha had recognized IV DEFECT Defect (Dosa ) is that which dimnushes! the excellence, attractiveness, or value of a work of art Ac cording to Bharata, poetic defects are ten circumlocution, superfuous espression, urelevancy, want of significance, Lin- refined expression, tautology, want of synthesis, illogicality, hiatus, slang Mammata (1ith century, A D ) m his Kavya- Prakasa, Ch VII, deals with poeuic defects in very great detait In regard to defects it may be pomted out that defects are not necessarily always defects This view was elaborately, propounded by Abhinavagupta in his important work, the Pururayovicara, winch is now known from references only, but which is referred to and quoted in the Ghatakarpara Kulaka' VivrtI, wntten by him There are very few poems which present so many problerns as does the Ghatakarpara Kulaka Its authorslup is one of the most disputed points Some regard it as a work of poet Ghatakarpara But Abhinavagupta holds on the basis of a persistent tradition, current among his teachers in Kashmir, that it is a work of Kaldasa and that it is an excellent poem, without the least blemish, that the use of Yamaka in it does not diminish but enhances its poetic value. किचि जत्र कर्ना महाकवि कालिदाम इति अनुशतमम्भाभि। न चास्य काव्ये तृगमात्रमपि कलकमान्मुत्य क्षितवन्तो मनोरयेऽपि सुप्तेउ सहदया। इति। अथ च

निवद. स्वानन्त्रय सपदि गुणदोधान् विभजते। दा सा वैदग्नी प्रकृनिमधुरा सस्त सुकवे बोतादादभ्यविमुभगभाव परिणन: ।। इति V. Style (Riti). Style is the mode of arranging words, according to their sound and meaning values, so as to present the poet's ideas effectively in harmony with the central theme something like arranging different parts of the humnan orga- nism in a picture. There are four recognized styles, based on the study of poctry of different regions Berar, Bengal, Uttar

Sesen Prnaples of Literary Cntrum 15

VI. SUGGESTION (DHVANI) Suggestion, re, the suggested meaning, is calfed Dhvam because it is connected with the symbolic or conventional meaning just as the echo is with the original sound of a bell, tolled in a temple Just as the rise of the echo depends on acoustic conditions, which are due to the constructon of the temple, so the nse of the suggested does on the subjective elements whuich constitute the personality of the aesthetc individual. Dhvan is also used for conyentional symnbol and conventional meaning from which the suggested meaning arises, for the power of word that is responsible for the arousal, and for the composton that contains such a meanng Discussion on the vanious problems connected with sug- gestion, such as distinction of Dhvant as a power of word from other powers, primary, secondary and implcative , and of Dhvam as a meaning, different from other types of meaning, recognised in the learned circle, presentation of the psycholo- gical conditions, necessary for the rise of the suggested meaning and refutation of the arguments against the acceptance of Dhvani, such as those advanced by Mahimma Bhatta and other opponents, need more space than can be given in the course of this address Suffice it to say that it is one of the most essential elements of poetry and a literary eritic has to satisfy himself that the Lterary work under cntcism, has got this element before he judges it to be of the hughest type. VII RASA : The word signifies acsthetic configuration. It is wed for the aesthetic object as well as for the aesthetic cpcrience, got from it, because the constituents of both are the same. As found in a drama, thev may be classified as follows : (i) The situation with a focal point which the central figure, the hero of the piece, faces, (u) the basie emotion that it arouses in the hero and that which the personalty of the hero arouses in the human focus of the situation, (iii) transient emotions which arise from the basic emotion, like waves from the sea, and merge back into it, (iv) physical changes, which are consequent on the rise of an emotion, both involuntary, such as hompilation, the blush, and voluntary, like the move- ments of hands and feet. The aesthetie objeet is not a mere juxtaposition of these

Seeen Princples of Literary Crheuri 17

and is free from all defects, with the soul, which is their enlt- vening principle and in the absense of which the body of poetry with all its ornaments etc is like a dead body But Dhvani, in the sense of that which can be only "suggested and can never be presented in conventional terms, is identical with Rasa For Rasa is admitted to be suggestible only Thus, there is complete agreement between the two statements which seem to contradict each other Kavyasyatma dhvamh and Vakyam rasātmakam Kavyam

(1v) Conclusion

Looking at aesthetics as philosophy of mdependent arts, I have referred to the aforesaid seven principles as aesthelie categories, in some of my writings Here, however, I call them principles, because I am dealing with them, not from the point of view of a philosopher, but from that of a critic, who looks at a work of pochc art from the objective point of view, to find out if it has got the recogruised essentials in order to pass a judgement on it, on the basis of the experience that they jointly arouse in hun Those principles compare well with those, discussed by I.A. Richards, the btle of one of whose books is the same as of the subject of the present Seminar, i e. Principles of literary Criticism; as well as with those propoun- ded by F. P. Scott, who talks of five approaches to literature (1) kistorical (2) sociological (3) roralistc (theologieal) (4) estopoligical or architypal (5) formal or structural; T S Eliot, Mathew Arnold etc. They are being discussed in my Com- parative Acstheties Vol. III, Acsthetics Indian and Western. A detaled treatment of these seven nrinrintes in a difterer manner is to be found in Comparative Aesthetics Vol. I, Indian Aesthetics and in the Svatantra Kall Sastra Part I, Bharatiya. Learned friends, desirous of knowing more of them may refer to"them.

Sansint & the Greek Dramatic Theory 19

actions (krtānukaranam) The Dasarūpaka (I, 7) defnes this imitation in a slghtly different way by calling drama an imtation of a state or condition (avastha ) which led Dr Keith to make the inaccurate remark that "in the sastra it is a state or condition, in Aristotle it is action, a distinction absolutely in accord with the different gentuses of the two peoples "1 The fact is that in the sastra action is as much the object of imitation as in Anstotle Agam the statement of Arstotle that tragedy is essentially an imitation not of persons but of action and life, of happiness and misery, agrecs mn substance with the statement of Bharata (N S Ch I) that when human nature with its joys and sorrows is depicted by means of re- presentation through gestures and the like it is called drama A very important rule observed by the Greek tragedian consists of the three unities The most important of these unities is the unity of action According to Anstotle the unity of plot ie action does not consist, as some suppose, in its having one man as its subject An infinity of things befall that one man, some of which it is impossible to reduce to unity; and in like manner there are many actions of one man which cannot be made to form one action The truth is that just as in the other imitative arts one imitation is always of one thing so in poctry the story as an imitation of action must represent one action, a complete uhole, zith its several incidents so closely connected that the transposal or withdrawal of any: one of them will disoin and dislocate the whole Now a whole is that which has beginning, middle and end A well: constructed plot therefore cannot either begin or end at any point one likes ' The unity of action is of no less importance in the Indian drama Whereas Aristotle divides the action: into three stages, Bharata drvides it into five stages, viz arambha : or beginning, prayatna or effort, praptyasa or possibilty of attainment of the object, myatapt or certainty of attaiment- and finally the phalagama or fruition There are besides five clements of the plot viz the bija or germ, the bindu or drop, the pataka or episode, the prakari or incident and the karya or denoument. Based on these parallel sets is a third drvision

The Sansknt Drama, p 355 2 Arstotle, p 37, 3 Aristotle, pP 40-42

Sansknt & the Greek Dramahe Theory 21

clement is spectacle which according to Anstotle is the least artistc of all the parts because the tragic effect is quite possible I without a publc performance and actors and besides the getting up of the spectacle is more a matter for the costumier than the poet I These elements are mentioned by Bharata also Accord- ing to Bharata, the plot or itivrtta is the body of the drama and is of two kinds-the principal or adhikarka and the subsidiary or prasangila (N S Chapter, XXI) These two are, how- ever, not exclusne. The principal plot is essennal in every drama, while the subsidiary plot may or may not be present in a drama The characters are divided by Bharata, like Arıs- totle, into three categones according to their nature or fila Ic. Duttama or high;madhyama or middle and adhama or low. Bharata unlke Anstotle also postulates heroes of four types They must all be dhira or self-controlled but they can be distingwish- ed as udatta or exalted, santa or caim, lalta, or light-hearted and uddhata or haughty (N S Chapter XXXIV) The clement of thought by which Anstotle no doubt means dia- logue is called pathya by Bharata and is traced to the holy Rgveda itself (N. S. 1, 17) Corresponding to the element of diction mentioned by Aristotle we have in the twenty-second chapter of the Natyasastra mention of the four styles which a poct may adopt m a dramatic composition They are the Kaisiki or graceful, ssattvati or grand, "arabhati or violentt and bharati or verbal. Lake Arstotle Bharata also regards song as the greatest of the pleasurable accessones of drama deny- ed from the holy Samaveda itself (N. S. I, 17). Bharata adds dance and instrumental music to song as pleasurable accessores of a drama (N. S Chapter XXVIII). The fundamental dfference between Aristotle and Bharata, however, 13 with regard to the element of spectacle. While Aristotle regards it as the least artistic of all the parts and strangely enough con- nects it wit thie costumier alone, Bharata regards it a most important dramatic element which he traces to the holy Yajur- veda (N S. I, 17). In fact the very designation of drama in Sanskrit as drsyakavya or a poem to be seen shows the impor- tance of spectacle. Moreover, spectacle is not connected with

1. Arustotle p 39

Sansknt & the Greek Dramatie Theory 23

in separately in the parts of the work, in a dramatic not in a narrative form, with meidents arousing pity and fear where- with to accomplish its catharsis of such emotions.1 This catharsis is no doubt very much the same as rasa. Aristotle cearly says : "Though the objects themselves may be painful to sec, we delight to view the most realistic representation of them in art."2 According to Indian writers also a poem or a drama gives a spintual joy to the reader and even when a person is shedding tears on reading or witnessing a pathetic scene he is nevertheless emjoying a spintual pleasure. To quote Bharata Just as well-disposed persons while eating food cooked with many kinds of spice enjoy its taste and attain pleasure and sauisfaction so the cultured people taste the durable psy chological states while they sce them represented with words, gestures and involuntary states and denve pleasure and satis- faction" (N S. Ch VI). The question arses whether pity is the only sentiment according to Anstotle which a drama arouses The answer is that so far as tragedy is concerned pity is certainly the predomi- nent sentiment. Unfortunately the second part of Arstotle's Poctics in which the nature of comedy seems to have been discussed is missing. But we can presume as Ross has nghtly observed that comedy was probably described as effecting a purgation of the tendency to laughter as tragedy does of pity and fear." The bhayanaka and raudra rasas of Indian writers an poetics-are also hinted at by Anstotle when he mentions fear and anger along with pity as being aroused by the elcment of thought in a drama. What is, however, surpnsing is that Aristotle does not make any mention of what Bharata and his followers regard and what seally are ro of the most important of sentiments viz the erotic and the heroic. Surely if a tragedy causes pity and a comedy causes laughter, an erotic play causes the blooming or vikasa and a heroic play the exaltation or vistara of the heart as the Indian writers on poetics say.5 We would now take up for discussion two clements of

I Ansolle, p 35 2 Arstotle, p 29 3 WD Ron Arstotle p 290 4 Anstotle p 66 Dafarupaka, IV P 43-44

44

back ) "I Judging from what Aristotle says, are not the most famous Sanskrıt Natakas, prakaranas, vyayogas, and Anlas the best examples of Tragedy ? Let us take the greatest of Sanskrit Prakaranas, the Mrcchakatika The machinations of Samsthanaka, against whom Carudatta cherishes no animosty have succeeded in the sentence of death being passed on the innocent Carudatta for the murder of Vasantasena This misfortune is partly due to Carudatta's mnability to defend humself However, the discovery of the fact that Vasantasena is alive is made mn tune to save Carudatta from cxecution One of the most famous of the Sanskrıt Naātakas 1s the Mudraralsasa We meet with a similar situation mn this drama The noble Candanadasa is being taken to the place of execution because he has incurred the wrath of Canakya for giving shelter to the farily of his fnend Raksasa Just -then Raksasa arnves and accepts all the terms of Canakya so that his fnend's life may be saved Another famous Sanskrt Nataka is the Venisamhara Here we find the actual situation of a brother mtending to kill his brother but withdrawing in trme. In the sixth and the last act of this drama Bhimasena after killing Duryodhana goes to meet his brother Yudhisthira. As he is besmeared with blood from head to foot he is not recognized by Yudhisthira who mistaking him for Duryo- dhana wishes to crush him to death Just then Bhima speaks and is recognized and everything ends happpily. Among the Vyayoga type of dramas the most famous is the Madhyama- vyayoga of Bhasa. Here we have the situation of a son trying to kill his father unknowingly and prevented from doing so by his mother who amves in time to tell her son that the man whom he wanted to kill was his own father Another of Bhasa's drama the Urubhanga belongs to the type called utsrstikanka Here we find the actual depiction of the death of the hero Duryodhana. Aristotle unfortunately has said very httle about the comedy. .But from what he has said it is clear that the Sanskrit Natakas and Prakaranas cannot be called comedies. The chafacters of-the-comedy are thus desenibed by Arstotle: "As for comedy it is an imitation of men worse than the average;

1. Arstoue, PP 53-54

Sanskrt & the Greek Dramatic Theory

it is discovered only in the last moment that he Is mnnocent. ' Pandey : You have put forward m your paper that "Catharas' is no doubt very much the same as 'Rasa' Now the word catharsis simply means 'punfication'-i e puttification of sentiments which imphes that they should be brought to the mean -- not . too much, not too little, whereas Rasa is a har- monious union of Vibhava, Anubhava ete like a mcely blended syrup (panakarasa) There seems to be, therefore, almost no similanty between the two Bhargara Yes, they are not exactly the same. But I see the sumilarily m the fact that both of these elements, the purification of the sentiments (catharsis) as well as Rasa lead to spiritual joy. Pander, But Aristotle nowhere talks of spintual joy. . : Catharsis is simply a physical process of purifica- tion Dugred : According to Anstotle Pathos_is the main sentiment of the drama whereas you said we adtnit nine chtef sentiments reducible to four. But Bhavabhuti, just, too hke Arstotle, admits the Pathos to be the only sentiment. (tr ) Bhargasa : This statement of Bhavabhuti is true of Uttara-ramacanta only. Even his other dramas - do not follow this maxim. This may not be valid in respect of all literary creation. S. Mahajani : According to our defimtion, Comedy is a drama which ends well. And as such when a person contemplates a deed of violence but draws back in time and the untoward incident is averted it is Comedy and not tragedy. L. Bhargara : From Aristotelian point of view this is not a Comedy but a tregedy puire and simple. S. Mahajani : Well, that is a question of definition, that wav many of our Comedies will be tragedies ! iant Jaitly : If only that is tragedy where the assanlant "drawy back in time" then no Shakespearean Tragedy could be a real tragedy.

AN ETYMOLOGICAL NOTE ON TIIE WORD ALANKĀRA

Dr G C Tripathı

According to the famous lexicographer Amarasimha, the word alam has three different shades of meaning It can denote (a) bhusana ie to adorn-in this sense it is always associat- ed as a nominal suffix with the verb kr-(b) varana re. to forbid-used as an adverb with instrumental case and (c) paryapta ie to be sufficient -- Pier also used as an adverb in which case the use of dative is prescribed by the grammarians As is well known, the word alankara in Sanskrit means ornament and in poetry it is used as a terminus technious for those factors which enhance the beauty of the poetry namely the figures of speech But if we go back to the beginnings of Sanskrit Poetics we find that the word alankara-sastra is used to denote the science of the Poettes itself of which the figures of speech form but a small part. The word alankarka is used for a person who is well versed in Poetics, besides, of course, the comparatively recent meaning of a person, who attaches foremost importance to the figures of speech in Poetry It is a common belief that the onginal meaning of the word alankara is ornament and also in such expressions as alankara-Sastra or LavyalanLara the same meaning is reflected with a slightly different shade, meaning "the science of that particular clement wluich adems the poctry in some way or the other" and as such the word alankara in its broader sense comprises everything which forms part of the poetry But in my humble opinion the word alankara in the older expressions like kavyalankara or alanLara-Sastra has a considerably different shade of meaning and it should not be confused with the word alankara meaning ornament or the figure of specch. To understand it let us look at the etymology of the word. Coming to Rgveda, the very first thing that we observe is that the sound / in alam is a later vanation of the onginal r Hence we have the word aram instead of alam and though we

An Etymological Nott on the Word Alankara 31

appropriate, proper, apt (eg in the sentences like -- it does not fit you, tt is not fit for a gentleman etc ) exactly in the same way the adjective 'ara' in Rgveda comes to mean fit, sufficient, appropnate, proper, apt, suitable etc The word aramati sunply means 'proper thinking', aramanas=proper or becoming of thought r e according to thoughts The nominal prefix aram which is added in Rgveda not only to the root kr as is the case mn classical Sansknit but also to gam, and bhu is m fact an adverb which has developed itself from the accusative singular of the adjectie 'ara' It is no more declinable since it has got stiffened like so many other adjectives as eg Varam (Varameko guni putrah) which are used in their accusative singular form as adverbs The combination of aram with root kr occurs at five places in Rgveda and almost everywhere it means 'to do the fit or the right thing', to treat in an approprate manner, ie. to worship or even to serve I am giving here all the passages with Geldner's translation . I yah svayam vahate so aram karat. RV 5/44/8 "He who carnies (her) by himself does the right thing 2 yatha vidvan aram karat visvebhyo yajatebhyah 2/5/8 "So that the wise one (Agn) may do the nght thing to all worthy of sacrifice" 3 aram krnvantu vedun samaganim indhatam purah

"They should prepare the ved rightly" 1/170/4

4 chi manur devayur yajnakāmo aram krtyā "Come O Agni, Manu wants to sacrifice to gods, having set everything right ..... " 5. aram daso na milhuse karānt aham devaya bhurnaye anagāh 7/86/7 "I as sinless would serve (or worship) the angry god as a slave serves his master " Besides these verbal forms the word aramkrt-a root noun with aram-appears four times in Rgeda (1,145, 8 1.10, 8 5 10, 8 67.3) in the sense of the "one who makes proper, appropriate, sets right" etc. The word arankrtr is used but once in Rgveda ie, in 7/29/3 Vasistha says to Indra : "ka te asti arankrtih

An Etymological Note on the Werd Alankara 33

In view of the above discussion the development of the meaning Bhusana or ornament hardly needs an etplanatron The word kara is to be taken in an instrumental sense- "through whtch is done" The objects through which the appro- priateness (of form or appearance) is acheved is alankāra And as Beauty is only another name for Perfecton born of appro- priateness, an alankara is a means to perfection or m other words to beauty.

DISCUSSION

V Venkatachalam I just want to point out that our Rhetoricians have not imssed the meaning suggested by Dr Tnpath in his paper The suffix ghan can be used in bhane as well as in karana घन च भावकरणयो In bhare-mutpath the meaning of the word alankara would be 'beauty' and not "instrument of beauty " The first Sutra of Vamana is काव्य ग्राह्यम् अलकारात and just after that he says : मोन्दयमलकार It shows clearly that Vamana had all the principles which beautify a poetic work in vicw when he gave his book the title of the Kavyalankara (-sutravrtti) and he has given due treatment to all of them R C Dewed : Besides the shade of meaning suggested by Dr. Tnpathi in the paper the word is found to be used in other senses also For example in the Kausitaki Upanisad the word Alankara has been used in the sense of competent or elaborate language It seems that in Buddhist cireles the word came to be established in this very sense as is evident from a reference by Subandhu in his Visavadatta : वोद्धमगोतिमिवालकारभुविताम, where Alankara occurs in the sense of 'graceful approach', or 'Art of persuasion' This compares well with the concept of the Greek rhetorics May I suggest it to Dr. Tnpathi to probe further this use of the word Alankara to find out its connection with the Rgvedic aram etc.

THE INTER-RELATION OF THE KAVI AND THE SAHRDAYA IN SANSKRIT LITERARY CRITICISM

V Venkatachalam

The question of what makes a poet has been discussed by Sanskrit critics from Dandm onwards The three factors that together go to make a poet as enumerated by Dandin have been repeated in more or less the same form by subsequent writers, though some of them have singled out Pratibha as the factor, par excellence But when we look up to these very sources for their views about what makes a sahrdaya, we are disappoited. We find that no writer has ever attempted a scientific treatment of the equipment of a sahrdaya Beyond random references to the sahrdaya and his pre-eminent place as a determinant factor of the various facets of good poctry, no clear statement of the nature of the sahrdaya is to be found in the carlier writings, let alone any discussion of सददयत्वबीज on the lines of कवित्वतरी व. As against this, sanskrit literary criticism has dealt in extense with the question of the aesthetic experience of the sahrdaya, in a manner that has almost no parallel in any other language. Whereas on the plane of experience, the sahrdaya has received such preferential treatment from the eritics, the poet appears to have been relatively ignored. The creative mental process of the poet, which expresses itself in the form of poctry has not been similarly analysed These deficiencies apart, no integrated or comprehensive study of the inter-relation of these two concepts of karitea and sahrdaytea has been made by writers of Sanskrit criticism or by modern exponents of their theones. The present paper is an attempt to bring together at least the more important oncs of the scattered statements of the entics on the nature of the kavi and the sahrdaya with a vicw to review this question of the inter-relation of the artist and the art-eritic from the stand- point of sansknt literary crucism. I first take up the famous soka-floka equation which throws a food of light on the psy chological state of the poet when he is in the creative mood. This cquation hinted at by Valmikr

The Inter-Relatian of the Kars and the Sahydaya 37

noiseur's appreciatie mood It is Ardayasamrada-parity or community of hearts leading to its total merger (tanmayibhara ) with the object before hum-that ts the real governing principle of safrdayate and Abhmnava expressly affirms that the poct shares this frdayasarcads during his creative moments. Thts leads us to the logical conclusion that the kavi is a sahrdaya first, before he becomes a kavr. Two questons anse here First, whether the poet's resarubhaca and his koyasit are co-eval or the latter follows the former. It is difficult both ways If we were to say that he creates when be is actually in huis emotional ecstacy it will strike at the root of ratarubhand itself, wluch consists in an expenence of sheer delight, which banishes all else from the province of lus experience. If we say that the flokasryt clearly follows the fotarubhat, this will amount to saying that the poet does not create when he is in the creative mood, but aftr it. This again will be self-contradictory The correct poution is : the poetic creation comes after his raranubhara. As for the apparent contradiction involved in this it may be resolved by an explanation analogous to that usually given to explain the sequence between apgnire and egHr. The sequence though present is not felt and the creation and the creatrve mood, therefore, appear to be simultaneous (वाच्चेन त वस्य सहैव प्रवीनि। and विद्यमानोपि कमो न मलस्पने). The second objection is of greater cousequence. If the mental state of the kavi in his creative mood and of the sahrdaya in his appreciative mood are both identical ; both being the same rasanubhava, there can be no rational explanation for the fact that the poct creates whereas the sahrdaya does not. In other words, if the transmutation of foke into Kanmarasa in the heart of Valmiki burst forth in the form of poetry, why should not the identical transmmutation of Soke into Kerinarare in the hearts of the numerous sahrdayas not find similar ex- pression? It is, therefere, essential to differentiate between the acsthetic attitudes of the kavi and the sahrdaya. There are, in fact, Sanskrit critics, who have drawn such distinction. Rajafekhara, for instance, speaks of two different kinds of trehsh, the creative, with which the poet is endowed and the ecstatic which is the eift to the sahrdata. Thonch ha mhe

The Inter-Relation of the Kam and the Sahrdaya 39

definitely cannot subscribe to this view, which divests the poet of the essentially-emotional stuff of which he is made. Apparently, Abhinavagupta seems to hold that though there is no qualtative diffcrence between the creative and appreciative rasanubhavo of the poet and the sahrdaya, there is a quantitative difference When in the creative mood, the poct's "fine frenzy" is considerably more mtense than what usually characterises the aesthetic experience of the sahrdaya. The metaphorical image of a jar filled with a fuid incapable of holding any more and resulting m an overflow, which he has employed mn the context to describe the poet's heart, suggests precisely this fundamental difference between the rasanubhana of the creative mood and that of the normal appre- crative moods The words of Hrdayadarpana quoted by him in this context that unless and until the heart is full with rasa it does not let it out, make Abhinava's mind still more clear. That Abhinava subscribed to grades in the rasanubhona is cvident from his statements in other contexts too. Thus, the ultimate position according to this view is that the kavi and sahrdaya share the identical raranubhans in their creative and ecstatic moments and are quite at par in this respect, except that the poct's expcrience is a whit superior, quanttatively, to that of the sabrdaya. When this subtle distinction is made, the con- clusion previously reached that the kavi is at bottom a sahrdaya and that there is no basic distinetion in their mental attitude becomes quite secure. Putting the same conclusion in terms of mathematical terminology, we may say that the kavi-sahr- daya equation follows from the loka-floka equation of Ananda- vardhana as its incvitable corollary Thus the foka-floka equa- tion, properly analysed and interpreted, provides a very inter- esting peep-hole to study the views of Anandavardhana and Abhinavagupta about the inter-relation between the kavi and the sahrdaya. So far, I have tried to show that the kavi is a sahrdaya. Now looking at tt from the opposite angle, can we likewise say that every sahrdaya is basically a kavi and that sahrdayate implies fundamentally katitta ? My answer to this question is-though it may appear somewhat unusual, and even a bit revolutionary-that we can cquate the sahrdaya too with the

The Inter-Relation of the Kav and the Sahrdaya 4t

Let us take the example of another fine art, Music. In this case, a vocal singer who weaves the fabric of melodies of a particular raga is the creator, corresponding to the poet, who weaves his fabric of words The sahrdaya m the case of Music is the connoisseur who has a tramed ear for music and who with his hrdayasamrada, shares the ecstasy of the melodious music along with the vocalst The sahrdaya, in this case, has a thorough knowledge of the nuances of the raga, its notes and cadences and can, in fact, survey the whole scheme of the raga within his muind and recognise the most mmute Iapses in its reproduction by the singer While hearing the raga being rendered, he anticipates the musician and creates the whole fabric of the raga within his own mind That the con- noisseur of music mentally creates or recreates the entire scheme of the raga more or less simultencously with the singer is too patent to need any argument But if he is asked to render vocally the raga by himself, he would plead inabihty. It would not be mappropriate if we say that he sings in his own mind, which amounts to saying absurd or self-contra- dictory as it might seem -- that he is a "mute" singer ! This mental creation of musical melodies will become more evident if we take the case of an Instrumentalist, who is not a vocalist The Instrumentalist reproduces the raga through the cords of his instrument, what his vocal cords dare not attempt In this case, it is crystal clear that he creates the entire scheme of the raga in luis mind before transferring them to the mnstru- ment. These instances from Music should suffice to show that the sahrdaya in the case of poetry too creates the poet's world in his own mind and it is this re-creation that is the real source of his delight Ifthe sahrdaya in Music isa"mute" sınger, the sahrdaya in sahitya is a "mute" poet-a as afr. It is interesting to note that the well known poetess Viika of Karnataka, while paying a tribute to the sahrdaya refers to his silent expression of the poet's ideas, which practi- cally amounts to saying just what I have said, namely, that the sahrdaya is a "mute" poet Viila says that the viston of the poet is beyond the pale of words and the sahrdaya does not make the futile effort of trying to espress it by words, but instead expresses the thrill through the hornpilation of his lanbs, being all the while dumb This beautiful verse of

The Inter-Relaton of the Katt end the Sahrdasa 43

mation for the kan-sairdiys cquation, envisaged by Sanskrit literary critics Here, I may add a word of caution about the use of mathematical terminology in this discussion. If I have done s0, it is only because the fote-floka relationship propounded by Anandavardhana has often been spoken of as an cquation. It is qute obvious that this is not mtended to imply absolute identity of the soka and floka for, after all, the sthayibhava itelf is not the pocm. Likewise, when I speak of kam-sahrdaya equation or sahrdaya-tar equation, on the same Lnes, I do not in the least, propose any identity of the kavi and the sahrdaya. What I mean to convey by the equation is that the one is a necessary concomitant of the other, in other words, that kartea and sahidayata are factaysa. It is indeed interesting to note that even as cat and artha are farvaia the kavi who deals with rat and the sahrdaya who deals with ertha are also fr94ra The total upshot of all that I have said about the inter- relation of the kavi and the sahrdaya may be conveniently put down as follows. The kavi is a sahrdaya with a difference and likewise the sabrdaya too is a kavi with a difference. Each per- forms the distincuve function of the other in a slightly atten- uated form. Employing the language of verse extracted in the Kavyamimamsa, we may say that the kavi is also a wias only, the kavi is armras whereas the sahrdaya is wrqmag; on the same analogy I wish to add that the sahrdaya too is a स्रप्टा; only the kavi is वाक्सप्टा, whereas the sahrdaya is हृदपस्रष्टा This conclusion of frdaaer of the kavi and the sahrdaya, which I have sought to establish here is not my inde- pendent idea of the inter-relation of the kavi and the sahrdaya. On the other hand, I have deduced tlus only from the des- cription of the process of aesthetic relish given by the Sanskrit cntics. Though the basic idea behind the Lavi-sahrdaya equation may not have been stated explicitly in so many words by any of our writers, I still feel that there are subtle indica- tions of the same in the writings of our critics. Adopting the language of Anandavardhana, used in a similar context, I may say that the idea of the underlying identity of the kavi and the sahrdaya is ए्वन्वालोकलोचनप्रभुतिनि लक्ष्पे सर्वन प्रसिद्धव्यवहार

The Inter-Relation of the Kam and the Sahrdaya 45

या वयपारवनी रसान् रमयिनु कानि्कबोना नवा दृष्टिर्या परिनिष्ठितार्थंविषयो मेपा च वैपरचिती। ते द्े अप्यवउम्ब्म विश्वमनिक निर्वर्णयन्नो वय श्रान्ता नव च लज्जमन्यिशयन तद्भकितुन्य सुखम्॥

Though Abhinava has taken the second line as referring to areagfe, the lie can be mterpreted with equal felicity as pomting to waagaf. The verse would then mean that the combined vision of the kavi and the sahrdaya comprehends the entire universe Ltkewise the expression afa-aas m Dhananjaya's verse in the concluding part of the Dasarupa should also be explamed, in my opimon, on the same lines as Karmadharaya in preference to the Dvandva Though I am unable to find any other writer directly supporting my mterpretation of कविसह्यास्य the late M M Kuppuswam Shastri's cryptic and tantalsing state- ment mn the opening of his commentary appears to lend some support to me. He writes :- अय 'सरम्वत्यास्तत्व कविसहृदय।स्य' इनि लोचने अत् धवन्यमाना अर्यविशेपा आन्वाद्यन्ताम् "परस्परममास्वाद' इत्यादिपद्ये उपलोचनस्योपनमे। The verse referred to here is his own benedictory verse which runs as follows -

कवितिाबुधपोर्योंग नमाम सिवयोयं था।। I leave it now for the readers to judge Before concluding, I seek your indulgence for striking a purely personal note to say a word about the genesis of this paper. The paper owes its ongin to a strange dream I had in the small hours of the morning of the 4th December. I had been cogitating for well over a week about themes for the paper to be presented by me in this seminar. I bad been vacillating and vacillating for quite some time, when this dream furnished the nucleus for the present theme and deeided the issue In the dream-vision, I saw myself engaged in a rather animated dicussion with a highty respect- ed scholar-critic of Madras well Lnown in the intellectual

The Inter-Relation of the Kam and the Sahrdaya 47

exactly the world of the poet Just as an clephant created in an mndrvidual dream is mn its nature exactly the same as the real one with the only difference that the latter is created by God and can be perceived by all of us but we create our own 'elephants' in our dreams so also the poet is the author of a world whereas the sahrdaya creates a world of his own on the basis of the world of the poet. The only difference is, that whereas the poet's world can be enjoyed by every body, (ust as the real elephant), the world of a sahrdao is a personal experience, although the world is the

R. G Duncedi sarne, just as the gaja tattoa is the same. Can it be called gajatatina ? Venkatachalam : Yes, Yes, why not ? Say it gajatoa if you please This gajatea is the paramarthka sat; gaja of the world is the oyaoaharika and that of the dream Is the pratbhaska one. R. C. Dutedi : Gajatva is never a paramarthika reality. I am afraid , you have missed my pomt, That there is a difference between the world of practical | reality (oyanaharika) and the world of dreams or illusion (pratibhasika) is well understood by all of us and is very well explamed by Abhinava in his commentary on the Isvarapratyabhijnavivrti. My point is whether the world re-created by the sahrdaya is exactly the same as the world of the poet or is it different from it ? If they are exactly the same both of these can either be yyacahanka (practically real) or pranbhanka (apparently real). P. L. Bhargara : He says that they are the same with a diffe- rence. Venkalachalam : Yes, they are the same so far as the fattta is concerned. But the experience is comprehensive in one and limited in the other. K. C. Pandy : You have got to make a difference between the medium i e. a set of words and the idca arous- ed by it. Poet's work is to provide a medrum which is capable of giving rise to identical ideas in a Sabpdaya provided certain subjective condi-

The fhter-Relation of the Kai and the Sahrdaya 49

-for the comparative,importance of the poet and the fsahrdaya B BRabwal . You have compared the frenzy of the poet in the mood of creation with that of the sahrdaya How would you compare poet's frenzy with that of the sahrdaya when the poet is not creating and simply experiencing ? The distinction between the poet and the Sahrdaya (critic) is admitted in Sanskrit poetics, the former experiences and commumcates whereas the latter is only capable of experiencing The poet creates a work of art without any end in view, It is purely an aesthetic or poetic delight in creation whereas the critic has defimtely some end in view-be it simply elucidation or analysis. Would you accept that there is an end in view with the poet also ? Venkatachalam According to Ananda-vardhana and his followers both the poet and the Sahrdaya experience rasa Yet it is the intensity of the experience which makes a person poet Whereas the atten- uated form of the experience makes it difficult for a critic to communicate This is of course, a deduction which, I feel, can be made on the basis of what our own critics have stated Abhi- navagupta compares a poet with a jar full of rasa which, unless it is full, can't overflow To differentiate between the mental state of the two would not be advisable The quality of the ex-

Surjan Das Suamt : You have placed the poet and the eritic on the same level and do not accept any qualita- tive difference between the two But I think that even a qualitative difference can be drawn between the two A poet has both Linds of pratibha-the karayttri as well as the bhapayitri. But the eritic has only the second kind of Pratibha in himself and hence it is not proper to hold them both as identica! Secondly, the state of apparent realty which

BLUSHING A MISSING LINK IN SANSKRIT LITERATURE AND POETICS

Dr R S Jauly

Emotions tfuenee profoundly, and in counttes wayt, the livet of men Studente of human behaviour are familiar with the major physiological changes which accompiny emotiont. These changes mnclude blushing or pallor of the face, excetuve sweating, cardiovateular changes, disturbances in respiration, muscular changrs, which determine facial expresuon, vocalt- zation, involuntary movements, postures and gestures, and many vague visceral sentatione Who has not noted the ready fow of tears, inhibition of salivary flow, errertion of har, dilation of pupik, wide opening and protruuon of the eyet, acceleration of the heart-beats and such chaners in the activity of glandi under the stress of emotions ! These changes which are fully expresive of internal ttates of men can be observed at the surface of the body An understanding, therefore, of the various emotions and thei mandfestationt-voluntary or involuntary-i a mater of practical importance for the studente of literature This paper endravours to study bluthing and it various causes with partcular reference to Sanskrit lstera- ture and Portice Blushing u the most pecuhar and the most human of all expressont It is an involuntary reddening, specially of the face auneiated with the feeling of embarrasment and con- fu-ion due to thynew, shame of modeity Shynes is one of the chief cauees which inducee blushing In thie state the face it reddened, cyes are etther averted or cast down and awkward nervout movemente of the body are also witnewed. It depende on the senstiveness of the person concerned. Concerted perions are never thy, because they valur themscives to high that they do not expeet depreriation and so are not at all afraid of it. Shy pereons are very eensitive to the opinion-whether good or bad-of othere Their dit approbation or ridicule and, eometimes, approfntion ako makr them blath.

Blushing A Missing-Lank in Sanskrit Literature and Poetics 53

cause and effect Imk is nowhere noticed The movements and gestures which accompany blushing are profusely mentioned, but not blushing It seems really surprizing that no term was ever evolved in Sanskrit literature for blushing The matter does not end here According to the techni- cal termmology of Poetics blushing should come under the category of involuntary expressions called 'Salukabhavas' Their pecuhar characteristic is that these expressions can never be caused by any external action on the body This is the reason that these are involuntary Laughing can be caused by tickling the skin, weeping or frowning by a blow, but Satvikas cannot be caused by any physical means It is the mind which must be affected first They emerge only when the mind is stirred That is why in the words of Bharata they are "Manahprabhava' (arising directly from the movement of mind ) and 'Na Sakyate anya-manasa Kartum' (cannot be induced by the action of another mind on oneself) According to the above characteristic blushing is one of the best Satukabhanas, but the crux of the point is that it has not been enumerated by any Acharya in the list of Satuikar There is no point in holding a novel view, unless that 1s substantiated by apt evamples and valid proofs Here is an attempt to demonstrate from the poetie pieces of renowned Sanskrit poets that the context and the contents of the poems discussed below are best suited for the expression of blushing The standard translators in rendering those poems mn English consciously use the word blushing in order to complete the desired poetic effect, though in origmal no term that gives the sense of blushing, is found. This is one of the problems that has no solution The other problem, namcly not cnumerating blushing in the list of Saturkabhavas, will be dealt with later on Here are some of the examples from Kalidasa's "Kumara- sambhavam" to illustrate the point. At Siva's command the Seven bright Saints approach Himalaya to seck Uma-the mountain-maiden as his bride At the time of proposal the presence of Uma makes her position quite embarrassing and her modesty and shyness become apparent on her cheeks It would be in the fitness of things if the original and its translation are critically examined The verse runs thus'-

Blushtng . A Afissing-Link in Sanskrit Literature and Poettes 55

the accompanying acts and motions of blushing are given by the poet, but he does not say that Ums blushed' The trans- lator from the description of acts and motions, concludes that she blushed and introduces the word in his rendering. When the rite of marnage had ended and the wedded pair was left alone, Siva took Uma's hand within his own to lead his darling to the bridal bower-Kautukagara Her maidens there looked with arch simles and glances at the par. Such an occasion and situation would normally make a maiden blush But our Sanskrıt poet says 'Navaparmnaya-layabhūsanam' (feel- ing bashful on account of bemg a new bnde), 'Tatkrtaktepam Vadanamapaharamtim'-(turmng the face away when Siva tred to attract her eyes towards him ), 'Kathanct Sayanasakhibhyo dattavacam'-(attending the queries of her bed-fellows with modest reluctance) (1) Only these accessories of blushing are there and it is for readers to infer blushing on these accounts. Another example from the same source may be taken. When the first love-sport of Siva and Uma was over, Uma taking a mirror in her hand was vicwing with pride the traces of past enjoyment on her body in solitude She was not aware of Siva's presence there The moment she saw the reflec- tion of Siva in the mirror, she reacted by doig so many things to hide her feelings By implication this is a situation where blushing is normal and natural But all thts has been conveyed in these words :

'Kām kām na cakāra lajjayā"2

The next example is from Amarusatakam The Nayika depicted in it is Mugdha-(a young girl attractive by her youth- ful simplicity) She is portrayed in a situation which indicates the originating source-cause of blusing The verse runs thus - 'Sūnyam vasagrham vilokya fayanadutthaya kincicchanair Nıdravyajamupāgatasya suciram nirrvarnya patyurmukham Vısrabdham pancumbya Jatapulakamālokya gandasthalim

Kumarasambhavam, 7/95 2 Tbid , 8/11

Blushing : A Mussing-Link in Sanskril Lateratare and Poetics 57

text suits and some of the accompanying movements and ges- tures are seen, it becomes clear-cut case for the expression of blushing That is the reason why translators generally use the termn blushing in rendering such passages mto Englsh I have stated before that blushing has the real characteris- tic of 'Satrita bharas' ve the involuntary evidences of strong emotions brought about by hormonic or endocrinal action, glandular discharges created by acuons of the autonomic per- vous system, and even then it has not been enumerated by our Acharyas m the list of 'Satitas' They are eght m number viz Stambha (Stupification-prevention of motion by fear, joy or pam), Seeda (sweating), Romanea (Homipilation), Scerabhanga (disturbance of speech), Vetethu (trembling) Veicana (changes of colour), Afru (tears) and Pralaja (faint- ing, loss of consciousness) But one of the kinds enumerated above has the characteristic of blushing Feranga might create a doubt in the minds of readers and they might like to include blushing into its fold as the liberal sense of the term is alteration of colour and that is associated with blushing. But it is very clear from the vanous defimtions of Vaivarnya that this alteration of colour has not been mentioned in the context of blushing Bharata says in his Nalyefastra that Varvarya occurs due to cold, anger, fear, sickness fatigue and heat and this should be represented by alteration of cloour of the face by putting pressure on the artery and this is depen- dant on the limbs.1 Visvanātha Kaviraja alo explams Vaivar- nya as an alteration of colour caused by sorrow or intosication or anger.ª The same conception of Vaivarnya has generally been maintamed by all the Acharyas. No doubt they men- tion the change of colour (Varnamathabhara), as Bharata docs, but definitely in a different context. Rupa Gosvamin (Sisteenth Century ) is the only exception as far as the various types of Vaivarnya with its different colour-effects are concern- ed. He says that in sorrow the change of colour is white, grey or black, in anger red and in fear black or white. The state of excessive happiness also causes red colour." This descrip-

1. Nitraslstra 7158 and 105 2. Sabityadarpana 3/138 3 Haribhakbrasamrtasedhu Dakanatbaga, Labari 3/20, 21-

Blushing : A Messing -Link unt Sanskrit Laterature and Poeties 59

ed in a woman when a man directs attention to her personal appearance and gazes intently at her It is also caused due to non-fulflment of vows and defeat. It is to be represen- ted by conscquents such as change of colour, down cast face and the hke.1 Here m Jagannatha's defintion of Vrida it scems certain, as if the writer had a farr idea of blushing, but both the verses cited as examples by hum, tell a different story. The first verse runs thus .*

"Kucakalasayugāntarmāmakinam nakhānkam Sapulakatanu mandam mandamalokamānā Vınıbtavadanam mām viksya bala gavakse Cakitanatanatangi sadma sadyo vivesa "

Dr. Har Dutt Sharma translates it thus "The young lady, with her body all horrpilated looking at the marks of my nails between her two jar-like breasts, at once entered the house, with lumnbs expressing fear and bent down, when she saw me with my face placed mn a window (looking at her)."3 Explaining the verse Panditaraja himself says that here Vrida is mixed with Trasa (fear) and that is why the lady at once entered the house, with limbs expressing fear and bent down. Except for the implication of fear the situation des- cribed above can make any sensitive lady normally blush. The lady in question would have blushed here, but neither the term expressive of blushing is found in the verse (which was neces- sary), as being anubhava (consequents) all the involuntary actions must be given specific expression, nor trasa mixed with Vrigt creates proper atmosphere for blushing, as it must have induced a disturbing influence over the lady and she must have found her mind much confused. Such a frame of mind is certainly favourable for the suggestion of Fridabhara, but not for the expression of blushing. The other example suggestive of Vrids is an excellent one. The state indicated therein is most appropriate for blushing :--

1. Ragangidhara P. 97 (Nirraya Sagar Prem, Bombay) 2 Poon1) Bsamunelas, Srogara-nlasa, 30, (Pub onental Bock Agercy,

3 (Tran Portion)

Blushing : A Missing-Lank in Sansirit Iaterature and Poetics 61

L. L. Jesht . I can give you a very plausible reason for the absence of the description of blushing in our lite- rature It is simply that our complexion is normally too dark to make the crimsoning of the cheeks clearly visible t There are, however, some excel- lent descriptions of the situation of blushing in Sansknt literature, such as the following two ślokas from the Kumarasambhava

हरस्तु किष्विचित्परितुप्तर्धयंश्चन्द्रोदयारम्भ इवाम्बुरासि। उमामुखे बिम्बफलायरोष्ठे व्यापारयामाम विलोचनानि। विवृण्वती शॉलसुनापि मात्रमरगे स्फुरद्वालकदम्बनल्पे। साचीवृता चास्तरेण तस्थौ भुखेन पर्यस्तविलोचनेन।।

This is fine description of blushing But the actual word of blushing does not occur on account of the reason, I have already explained. Ventatachalam : Dr Jaitly has placed sufficient evidence before us to show that hoth in literature as well as in poetics there really exist situations which call for a mention of blushing and the absence of any such word is rather striking. But he himself points out that the picture is not so bleak as he painted it in the mitial stages and that at least in poetics blushing is comprehended indirectly under Farama coming under Vrida (Shyness). In fact the word remaae should be taken not an the sense of Tamabhasa but in the sense of Varnacikara There are really some situations of shyness where blushing has been indicated through the word Vaisamya. I remember of a Sloka where the speech of a person trying to speak in an assembly of the lcarned scholars has been compared with a newly wedded bride :

नाहतादि पुर पद रचवनि प्राप्तोपतं हठान् पु्टा न प्रनिवक्ति नम्पमनसे स्नम्भ समालिगति।

Blushing A Missing-Link tn Sanskrit Literature and Poettes 63

P. L Bhargava : The impression that I gathered from the paper of Dr Jaitly is that not only blushing has been totally ignored by our acaryas but by our poets also and that there is ho mention of the cri- msonning of the cheeks due to shyness in Sanskrit uterature As far as Dr Dwivedi's contention is concerned, that blushing is more internal than external I can say that not only blushing but every feeling is essentially internal but it has its external manifestation too And when the exter- nal mamfestations of other feelings have actually been described by the poets, it is surprising that the external manifestation of shyness is totally ignored Shr Joshi humorously remarked in the beginning that blushing finds no mention in Sanskrit Literature because due to our dark complexion crimsoning of cheek is not visible. But it is not true, if we consider it seriously, because redness of the face in anger has actually becn mentioned R P. Duwdt : You have associated blushing with shyness But, I think it is not hecessarily so Crumsoning of the cheeks is caused by the increased blood circu- lation which may be due to any kind of excite- ment Blushing should, therefore, be connected with excitement in general and not particularly with shyness To the suggestion of Mr. Venkatachalam, that blushing be included in Vatoanga I wish to point out that it is normally used derogatively in the sense of 'fainting of the natural brightness of the face', for the shadow of depression Look at the following famous śloka of Kalidasa : सञ्चारिणी दीपशिसेव रात्री य य व्यतीयाय पतिम्वरा सा। नरेन्द्रमार्माट्ट इव प्रपेदे विवर्णभाव स स भूमिपाल. ।। Therefore, I think, blushing can hardly be included in Vawamya. (tr) R S Jaitly : I agree with Shr Joshi and Mr. Venkata- chalam that blushing was not unknown to Sanskrit

Blushing : A Musing-Link mn Sanskrit Literalure and Poeties 65

ties we would have been able to say that perhaps they included blushing m tt. But obviously that is not the case I, as such, do not object to the suggestion of blushing being included in cawaraya but only wish that it should have some clear division to provide for crimsoming of the cheeks caused by the shyness That the Sanskrit acaryas really overlooked blushing and it was not included in Veiramya Is evident from the colour scheme given by Rūpa- goswamin He describes the colour effects of various emotions on face, such as whiteness in sorrow and redness in anger on face ete ete but he no where mentions the pink colour caused by shyness. (tr ) Brahmananda Sharma In fact the word blushing in English comprises both, the shyness as well as crimsoning of the cheeks It mcludes, in other words, the cause as well as its effect, whereas in Sanskrit the cause (shyness) and the effect (crimsoning) are denoted by two different terms Synonyms from two diffe- rent languages seldom have the same extent of meaning. It is, therefore, not justified to search for an ecact synonym in Sanskrit for the English word, "blushing" and to declare that the absence of blushing in Sanskrit is striking and thus constr- tutes a missing link R. S Jautly : As far as English is concerned the word blushing (tr )

denotes only the effect i. e. crimsoning of the checks which is the external mamfestation of a particular emotion. There are some acaryas in Sanskrt who comprise in sattvila bhava both bhaya as well as anubhava. Some take it to mean only the external effects, the ensuants Following the view of the first category of acaryas, we should not interpret the word, "bluslung" as meaning shyness as well as crmsoning, since blush- ing is only crimsoning, the effect, pure and simple

R C Daicedi Dr. Sharma has pomted out that there i no (tr )

A SYN ITIESIS OF THE DHVANYBHAVA-VADINS AND THE DHVANIVADINS

Dr D.N Shukls

My studics of reputed poeticians and aestheucians of Kashmir have given me a new approach to both poetics and acsthetics In the contemporary studies and rescarches, the scholars have not been able to reconcile the dufferent schools of poctry cspecially the Alankara school and the Dhvant school. It is my first approach to reconcile this seeming oppositon between Dhvanyabhavavadins and Dhvanivadins. We are all aware that there are as many as five schools of poctics, namely, Alankara-school of Bhamaha, Dandin etc. Rīti-school of Vamana etc. Vakrokti-schoot of Kuntala ctc. Anumt-schoot of Mahimabhatta etc. Dhvani-school of Ananda, Vardhana, Abhinava- gupta and Mammata etc. Similarly, there is also a very narrow approach to acsthetics that it is only related to Rasasvada. The land- mark amalgamation of Alankara, Rasa and Dhvani by Ananda- Vardhana, the great Kashmirian hterary lumniary, who has shed lustre, is unfortunately not fully grasped by contempor- ary scholars. Let me, therefore, concentrate on this theme. The Vedas themselves are repository of Poetry and Munc. The Hymns of Rgveda are carhest compositions or most appropriately revelations. Thus these suggest that the poetry is not a mere verbal jinglng and jugglery. It aims at some revelations. This background was responsible for poctic insight, genius and genesis which culminated in the sphota-Theory of the Vaiyakaranas, the Nada-Theory of the Sangita-Panditas, the Vantu-Theory of the Sthapatis and the Sthapakas and lastly-the most prominent doctrine of Dhvani of the Sahitya Panditas. This fundamental back- ground is enough to convince us that the poetry is the

69

Origis of the Daama to Bharata means the first performance of the Est drama. The aestheticty of the dragatic art has captivated the miads of a mumber of reputed anthors, Ife Bhattanayak3, Sri-Saiku, Lollita and Abhmavagupta for whom the Natya- fastra's aphorism'

was the starting point for the Rasa-Theory. I do not think I should take this ade of the dramatic derelopment here. I am more concerned with the art of the Art rather than the philo- sophy of the Art. This later aspect, I hope to take whilc saying some thing on the art of poetry. My own originhl contribution is the amalgamatiod of Alnkara ard Dhvani both. Poetry and Drams, Le Sravya and Driya Kavyas, are the two mamfestations of poetry. We all kcow that the main theme of the dramatic performance is Raisada This leads us to Acsthetic Ideal of our Fine Arts.

Aesthetic Ideal of oor Fine Arts Art in ladia is Iconography. The Visnudharmottara has remattable contribution on this score and Raja Bhoja in bis celebrated treatise, the Samaranganatutradhara, has simply canonised this aspect of Indian Art which distinguishes it from the Greck Art and provides a Philosophy for Art which is its gencis and genius. Icpcograpby is both a science and art For an artistic perfection of an hnase, it hws to be accomplished in such a way as to arouse in us the acnthetie experience akin to one as we get fom poetry and music According to the Indian actheticians, the main purpose of poetical composition is to arouse pleasure, the Arvada (what is called "Rasisvada') in the reader. And this Rasisvada is extolled as Brahmi- mand-Sabodara. It is frora this fundimental point of Indian aestheticians that we do not have tragedics in our dramatic literature. The Indian view or more appropriately the Hindu view of life it one of unbounden futh in eternity, a prafound sense of optimism and sublime outlook of life, celoured by the noumenal eristence and heavenly blys, both

Dhcanyabhaca-Vadtns end the Dheanitadins 71

rational approach. We have to bring the two ertremes of the Dhvanyabhavavadins, i.e. the Alankarikas and Dhvani- Vadins into one integrated plane to judge the art of poctry in both its aspects, the Vacyartha and the Vyangyartha Anandavardhana, the founder of the Dhvani school and the greatest exponent of this doctrine himself opines this very view. After defining the Dhvamt, he is not neglecting the foundation of Dhvani and let me quote both hīs Kārikās :

योप्य: सहृदयश्लाध्य काव्यात्मेति व्यबस्थित.। वाच्यप्रतीयमानाल्यो तत्य मेदावुभौ स्मृतौ।। तन्न वाच्य. प्रसिंद्धो य प्रकाररुनमादिभि । बहुषा व्याङृत सोज्य ततो नेह प्रतन्यते।।

Thus it is clear that Alankaras are a bedrock or the foundation of the Dhvam-doctrine. The above-quoted two Karīkas themselves speak of the cvolution and development of the Dhvani doctrine from the Vacyartha to the Vyangyartha. The Vacyartha is the foundation and the Dhvani is the sublimest iposing edifice of poetry. This acsthetic idcal is really one of the major contributions of Indian canons of Art as propounded mn the texts like Visnudharmottara and the Samaranganasutradhara, which give a distinct and unique character to Fine Arts in India. The oft-quoted aphorism ar a # is not without significance and high meaning, it aims at ennobling life. Even birds and beasts, the so-called brutes, when characterized with these different sentiments in accordance with the different situations, can go higher up; men and women, imbued with them, sumply become divine. Further more this acsthetie element in Indian Art pre-supposes the ideal of beautful not only in its real perspective but also in the inner manifestation, the sole criterion of the beautiful the 'Sundara' from the Hindu view of life. Internally beauti- ful, in its turn, pre-supposet the truthful, the 'Satya' both internally and externally and the art which is both Satya and Sundara, that alone becomes the Beneficient, the Siva the supreme ideal of life. The Indian seers, especially the Kashmirian philosophers, teachers and monks, have

Dheanyabhava-Vadins and the Dhvamvadins 73

Thus a perusal of the sections on painting in the Visnudharmottara and Bhoja's Samarangana-Sutradhara will show how Citra is based on the canons of Natya For them Citra is only one scene of Natya and the latter is a succession of Citra The Visnudharmottara says that Citra is as much the art of imitation (Anukarana) as Natya The poses of the hand in dance called Nrtyahastas and Rasadrstis are equally essential in pamting These are studied elaborately mn the Natya and this study is absolutely necessary and is fally utilsed in pamting What the hand poses implicitly express, the rasas and the rasa-drstis make that explicit. Thus the images are bestowed with lfe movements through this symbolism of gesti- culation the very essence of dramatics both put together (Sarvabhinayadarsanat) Therefore, this delmeation of the rasas and rasa-drsus and therr respresentation constitute the fundamental background both in the Angika (Drama) and the Citra (painting) arts The science of Aesthetics included dramatics. The symbolism in Art is again a second landmark to illustrate the impact of philosophy on Fme Arts mn India. Mudras, Lanchanas and Laksanas of the Indtan images themselves speak of this fundamental impact and it is not necessary to treat this massive subject here There is a great misconception among the contemporary writers that Hindu images have no mudras. The renowned adherents Rasa theory like Bharata, the founder of the Rasa school in Sanskrit Acsthetics and others Lke Srisanku, Bhatta Lollata and Abhinavagupta, all stand for Rasasvada Anandavardhana has epoch-making distinction to have enunciated this theory of Rasa on the amalgamated plane of Rasa and Dhvani thus bringing both poetty and drama as an mtegrated Fine Art Abhinavagupta has a scholarly exposition to his credit to focus the attention of the later writers to adopt this everlasting and everfresh doctrine of Dhvani. Dhvant, the Mahavişaya, and Rasa, Alankara and Vastu as its main constituents. We have been hearing that literature is the mirror of

Dheanyabhara-Vadins and the Dhoantadins 75

"परिनिस्चितनिरपस्ररदप्तब्रह्मणा विपरचता मनमाश्रित्य एव प्रवृत्तः एच ध्वनिव्यवहार।" "प्रथमे हि विद्वाम वैयाकरणा। ते च वर्गेपु ध्वनिरिति व्यवहरन्ति। सयेव अन्येस्तन्मनानुसारिभि सूरिभि काव्यतत्त्वार्यदशिभि वाच्य- वाचरमम्मिश् शव्दान्मा काव्यमिति व्यपदेश्य व्यजक्त्वसाम्याद स्वनिरिति ठक."

Similarly the further etposition also helps us to enunciate this background

अजमवृत्तियं शब्द सूदषमरवाच्चोपलम्यते। व्यजनाद्कायुरिव् स म्वनिमित्तात् प्रतीयते "

Punyaraja, a reputed commentator on the Vakyapadiya clucidates it still higher to help us in establishing this stand (vide his commentary on the above Kārikā) The grammarians employed the word Dhvant that manifested the sphota, similarly in the poem, words mani- fest suggested sense. The very first verse of Vakyapadiya enunciates this principle .

अनादिनिघन बह शब्दनत्व यद्रक्रम्। विवर्नतेर्यभावेन प्रक्रिया जगनो मया॥

Similarly the following quotation of the Vakyapadiya also help us to enunciate this background .

अरगिस्या कया ज्योति प्रकाशान्तरकारणम्। तद्वच्छव्दोजि बुद्धित्य शुनीना कारण परम्॥

Punyaraja clucidates it still higher to help us mn establishing this stand

मूक्ष्मो वाचुरिव नर्वमूर्तीनामन्तर्वहिदच व्वनिरवस्यित, म एवं कदिवद् आकाश इनि पड़पते, तत्र कया सूडमस्य वायोर्यं््जनाद् अनिध्क्जनादु अभिव्यकक्ति तथा मूषमो ध्वनि. स्वनिमिलरमिव्यकत प्रचितविविवास्प योनदेशं प्राप्त उपलम्पते इत्ययं।

Dhranyabhaca-Fadins and the Dhrameadins 77

The term like Vyanjana, 'Vyanjana' 'Vyanjaka', 'Pratyayana', 'Pratyayaka', 'Prakāsana', "Prakāsaka' used by Anandavardhana in connection with his theory of Dhvam frequently occur in the Vakya-padiya Anandavardhan's views that the relation between a significant word and its meaning is eternal are based on the simtlar view expressed in the Vakyapadiya .

नित्य शब्दार्थंसम्बन्ध समाम्नानो महषिभि। सूत्राणा सानुनन्त्राणा भाध्याणा च प्रणेनुमि ॥

The hint for Anandavardhana's recogmising even a single letter as expressive of 'Rasa' is supplied by the statement of Bhartrhan in which he declares even a single word to be capable of denoting the sense of the wholc sentence -

सोज्यमित्यभिसम्बन्वो वुद्धया प्रक्रम्यने यदा । वाकरे सघटनाया च स प्रबन्धेपि दीप्यते।

In order to meet an objection of the Mimamsakas, Anandavardhana divides the Vyangya sense into 'Nantariyaka' ie. inseparably connected and 'Vivalsita' ie desired or intended; the former being not different from the 'Vacya' or the denoted sense, the latter deserves the designation of Dhvant This idea of 'Nantariyaka' to my mind has been borrowed from the Vakyapadiya The kind of Dhvani, called "Asamlaksyakrama-Vyangya' in which no order or succession of the manifester and the manifested is perceived during the mamifestation (Rasa), 13 based on a vieh expressed in the Vakyapadiya, regarding the manifestation of sphota In reply to the question 'Is the order of the manifester and manifested at the time of the manifestation of sphota felt or not > Bhartrhari gives two views . According to one, sound sphota is perceived as indistinct just as the sphapika stone, in which the colour of the Japa fower is reflected, looks coloured and not distinet from fowers (vide Punyaraja's commentary on the Vakyapadiya) while according to the second, the sound, though having its own existence independent of sphota, is

Dkcanyas tara-Vadins and the Dheenttades 79

aspect. This elucidation has been very scholarly and ably detailed by Dr K.C Pandey In the end I must refer to Kashmir Sarvism which had vay profound impact on the writers belonging to this school. Abhinavagupta was a great Sarva and the moorings of Kashmir Safvism before Vasugupta were providing the germs of this all powerful movement of Kashmir Sarvism which to my mind permeated every thought of Fme Arts-Architecture, Sculpture and Pamting It is, therefore, imperative to touch this branch rather the man branch of fine Arts to bring this topic home. In my work on Silpasastra I have given a new lead about how to co-ordinate Munic, Dance, Drama, Poetry, Painting, Seulpture, Iconography and architecture and have formulated the following mavim -

पड्वेदा: । पड्दर्शनानि। तर्यदर पडुकला।

Aspects of Poetry in terms of Pictares :

Vamana, among other Alankārikas, was a keen student of pictures. With much msight, Vamana says that the essence of poctry is style (Riti) and compares thts Riti to the lineat beauty : एगामु निमृत् रेखाप्विद चित्र काव्य प्रतिष्ठितम्- As style is the soul of poetry so are lmes that of a picture. On secing this remark of Vamana we are reminded of the Vimudharmottara which says that the masters praise the lines:

रेसां प्रचसन्त आचार्गा:।

Vamans again returs to the same metaphor of which he sectps to be very fond of and says in his Kayalankarasūtra- vrtti : मदा विन्छियते रेवा चनुर वितरप्डित. 1

Another reference to the painting in Vamana speaks of colour. The Visnudharmottara, after saying that the masters praise the lincs, remarks that some others praise 'colour' : व्र्इदमिवरे जना:

Dhnanyabhana-Vadins and the Dhoanioadins 81

Vamana briefly compares Ritis, the essence of poctry, to lines (rekha) which are the essence of pictures This Sutra Is quoted and further explained by Ratnesvara in his commen- tary on Bhoja's Sarasvati-kanthabharana यया चिनस्य लेवा अगप्रत्यगलावण्योन्मोलनक्षमा, तथा रीतिरिति द्वितीये विस्तर ।

Rajanaka Kuntaka, another great Alankarika, mn chapter III of his Vakrokti-jivita, says thus regarding the poet's beautiful speech

मनोशफ नकोल्लेसवर्ण च्छायाशिय पथक। चित्रस्थेव मनोहारि कनुं किमषि कौशलम्॥

The stamp of beauty on a poet's utterance is totally different from the materials of poetry, viz, the words and thoughts. It is the result purely of the great powers of the poet, constituting hus genius This is like the beauty of a picture which is born of the gemius of the artist and is sepa- rate from the plank or wall on which the picture is pamted or the colouts employed Kuntaka here refers to two sur- faces, wall and plank, to the rules for hines, anatomy etc. given in the Citrasutras, to the colours and to the Caya or kanu or aujjvalya of which Vamana spoke The following 1s Kuntaka's Vrtu on the Kanka given above

फलकमालेस्यावारभूता भित्ति, उल्लेख चित्रसूयप्रभाणोपपन्न रेखाविन्यास- मात्र, वर्णा रज्जा्द्रव्यविदेषा, छाया कान्ति। तदिदमत्र तात्पर्य-यया

विनकारकौयल पूयवन्वेन मुख्यतमोद्भासते ·- Ibid. P 154

The application of the Rasa Theory to Citra

It follows from the above mentioned fact that Citra 13 based on Natya, that the erites of old applied the Rasa theorv of Natya, and Kavya to Citra as well As a matter of fact the Rasa theory apphes to all arts So it is that while speaking of the kinds of pictures in the section on paiting mn

Dhean abhana-Vadins and the Dhramvadins 83

those Rasas, this would rather constitute a flaw of poetry, called the tassafara Thus the title of a picture forms a very little part of it. If one docs not avoid this faw, his poem comes to the state of that picture which can be known only by tts title or that frame which has the title of the picture within.

Vakrokti and Literary Criticism 85

According to Kuntaka alankaras are not separate from alankarya. Alankaras essentrally exist in poctic Sabda and artha and are not added externally to the poetic composition. They are distingwished and discussed to reveal and explam their nature Kuntaka is not a blind follower of his pre- decessors He takes bold steps against them time to time to prove and justify hts own theory He criticises the earlier rhetoricians who gave a minor position to alankaras as the cxternal means of decoration to poetry hke Kataka etc to a human body Kuntaka stresses that there can be no beattiful poctry without striking alankaras Alankaras are meant to enhance the beauty of alankarya He mcludes all the alankaras mn his Vakyavakrata Alankaras are dependent on Kavipratibha and without the power of imagination there is no striking Alankara There is novelty and beauty in poetic expression, though the theme may be the old one, due to the mfinte ways of figurative expressions At the same time, while giving such a hrgh posttion to Alankaras, Kuntaka is also aware of the fact that the excess of the alankaras, sometimes, mars the delieacy and beauty of alankarya There should be propriety in using the alankaras so as not to harm the beauty of the delicate Vastu-Varnana and the development of Rasa For example m the following stanza,

"भोताक्जने च नयने स्फटिकाच्छकान्ति- गॅण्डस्थली विगतकृत्रिमरागमोप्ठम्।

कि यन्न सुन्दरमभूत् तरुणोजनस्य ।।"

There is Upama Alankara when the fair complexion of the bathing ladics is compared with the tender teeth of young elephants The beauty of the delicate theme, i e the description of the natural beauty of the bathing ladies, is doubled by this Upama Alankara, Thus the use of Alankara should be proper according to the Kavya-Vastu. The Vastu which_is to-be decorated also should be cqually striking as the Alankaras, otherwise the composttion will be like a ghost without having soul though decorated with alankaras, and such a poctry will not please the cntics.

Vakrekti and Literary Criticism 87

composition by its striking beauty Such a rasavat alankara enhances the beauty of alankarya, for example,

"उपोडरागेण विलोलतारक तथा गृहीव राशिना निशामुखम्। यया समस्त तिमिराशुक तया पुरोऽपि रागाद् गलित न लक्षितम्।"

The nayaka-nayika-bhava is attributed to the Moon and the Night So it is a beautiful Rupala with a touch of Stesa enhancing the beauty af the Srngara rasa depicted in the stanza Though it is a Nature description it is sards and pleasing due to this striking rupaka alankara which can be called rasavat Similarly, bike rasa, bhava, rasabhasa, bhavabhasa, bhavasant ete also are alankarya according to Kuntaka. So he does not accept preyas, urjasvin, udatta and Samahita as the alanLaras Kuntaka, Like Anandavardhana, is aware of the great importance of rasa in poetry, but like all other poctic concepts he includes rasa also in the varieties of Vakrati, mamly in Vākyavakratā, Prakaranavakrata and prabandhavakratā. He eriticises Udbhata's Svašabdavācya theory of rasa. As in alankara, Kuntaka admits the importance of aucitya also in rata. Kuntaka admits the view of Anandavardhana that if rasavat is not admitted in inammate objects, the vast portion of good poetry will be included in nīrasakāvya: He divides rasa mnto three categories :- 1. Mulhyacetanavisaya, hke gods, human beings ete. 2. Amukhyacetanavisaya, hke animals, birds etc. and 3. Acetanavişaya or relating to inamimate objects. The uddipana vibhavas, by their minute description, become subordinate to rasas according to Kuntaka. Thus he admits the importance of rasa in poetry but treats it objecti- vely as a Vastu, unhle Anandavardhana who treats it sub- jectively as the soul of poetry. Kuntala eritcses the Ritt concept of the earler rhetoncians who name them after particular countries Like Vaidarbhi, Gaudi etc, and accept one of them as the

Vakrekti end Literary Criticism 89

margas, but their nature is different in each marga In Sukumara marga Madhurya guna stands for the use of the pleasant words having no compounds. Prasada is clarity of meaning. Lavanya is the beauty of arranging the poetic composition and abhyatya is the use of sweet and pleasing sounds in the Sukumara marga In vicitra marga, Madhurya stands for the lack of loose composition (Saithilyabhava ) and prasada is meant for uncompounded words with a touch of ojas. Lavanya is skill i arranging letters strikingly and abhrjätya is meant to avoid the too harsh or the too soft letters in a composition In madhyama mārga a beautiful combination of both the groups of gunas is found. Kuntaka justifics his two novet gunas lavanya and abhijatya. They are the qualities residing in an extra- ordinanly beautiful fady but by upacara are attnbuted to poctry, as Madhurya and prasada gunas are attributed, though they are the qualties of sweet meats and water respectively. Kuntaka gives two more general gunas. aucitya and saubhagva as belonging to all the margas. Aucitya is a clear deseription of things with propnety and Saubhagya is a charm found in a composition as a whole. Kuntaka takes the ides of aucitya from Anandavardhana and relates it to all the poetic concepts Saubhagya Guna is his own addition of a novel Guna decorating the entire compotition. Thus Kuntaka shows novelty and originalty in the treatment of all the poetic concepts discussed by the earlier rhetoricians, and his treatment is very close to the modern literary cnticism which can be applied to any literature. He practically points out the drawbacks of earlier thetoricians and tries to correct them in his own way. The broad treatment of his Vakrokti theory supported by the practical illustrations with his own critical commentary shows his great genius as the best critic as well as the best poct. Kuntaka's classifcation of Vakrata is based on the chsufcation of Anandavardhana's Dhvani. He is greatly infuenced by Anandavardhana and many times he quotes him in his work with great respect. He classifics Vakrata into six parts ;.

Vakrokt and Literary Critcism 91

appreciate the existing poctry Kuntaka is vastunistha and his select illustrations in the Vakroktyjivita show his highest taste. Thus his book is meant for both the entics and the poets Though being most broad, systematic and modern, Kuntaka's theory of Vakroktr did not become as popular as the Dhvamt theory of Anandavardhana due to the lack of eminent followers And hence the importance of Kuntaka's contribution to Sansknt Poetics remamed sorely neglected

Rasa-Theory in the Rasekaumudi of Sritantha 93

The sixth chapter, which consists of five stanzas only and which is named as prasamsadhyaya, serves as a small bridge leading over to the second half In the first verse' of the seventh chapter Srikantha argues out the case of treating rasas in his work on the ground that they enhance the beauty of drama and dance. In the second stanzae, instead of confining the scope of rasas merely to the feld of drama and poctry, he rightly extends it further to that of mustc, and describes as to how

1. cf. वन्पते सप्तमे्यामे रस्षमन्दोहलक्षणम्। तेऽपि सर्वे स्वय वस्मान्ाट्यसोमाग्यदीपक्ा ।। ७२ (Here नाट्स =drama as well as dance) 2 ॥ तत्र रसस्वरूपमाह ।। उद्याने प्रेपमीमिमलयजपवने कोविलार्चविभाव-

व्यक्तीभूनो विवद्ध मुचिरमुचितो भूरि निर्वदनाच- र्नाट्ये गीवे च वाश्े त्रिद्ठ वमत रस बुद्धबुद्धत्वमाच ।।२।।

सवचितो भूलतिकाविभगैमे गेरपागस्य वरकियामि ।।३।। निर्वदमुस्य: महकारिभिस्न मवचत पल्लवित, कमेण। रामादिरूये पट्ुननंकेषपि प्रतीयमानो रसरब्दवाच्य ।।४।। भोगेन भुग्यन इवि प्रवदन्ति केचित् 4 कार्यों न कारणक्लारविभाचनासे पस्मान्न ति्षत रसो रसनीवरूी ।।५॥

मानाजिकाना विल वासनानक। एत्रोउप्यने करनुभूयने रसो न स्पातती लौक्कभोगमन्निम ।।६।। Verial Lrctionet 1b रसम् (for रस), Icd बम्मानाट्य, 2 a मन्यजय 2c विवद (for विवद) 2d मोनेय (for गोने च) 5b सानविक, च्ममान 5d रसो (for रसो)

Rasa-Theory in the Rasakaumudi of Srikantha 95

After this the seventh verse gives the number of rasas as mine by the inclusion of santa, as against Mammata who mentions here (IV. 29) only eight, though he speaks of Santa as the ninth rase m 4 35 After this follows the exposition of these rasas as follows Srgara and its varietics and sub-varieties (8-10)1 after Mammata 2

हृदममिव प्रविशान् सर्त्रा गोणमिवार्लिंगन् अन्पत् सर्वमिव तिरोदधत् ब्रह्मास्वाद- भिवानुभावयन् अलोकिकचमत्कारकारी शृगारादिको रमः। सच न कार्य:। विभावादिविनायडपि तस्य सम्भवप्रमगात्। नापि ज्ञाप्य सिद्धस्य तस्या- सम्भवान। अपि तु विभावादिभिव्यज्जितदच्वंगीय। कारकजापकाम्यामन्यत् वत द्प्टमिति चत् न वत्रविद्दृष्टमिन्यलौकिकसिद्धेभ्पणमेतन्न दूपणम्। चर्वणानिप्पत्या तस्य निव्पतिरपचरितेति कार्योप्युच्यनाम्। लोकिनप्रतयक्षादि-

परिमितेतरयोगिसजेदनविलक्षणलीकोतरस्वमवेदनगोचर इत्रि प्रत्येयोऽप्सभि- घोयताम्। तद्ग्राहक च न निविकत्पक विभावादिपरामर्यप्रवानत्वात्। नापि सविकन्प चर्व्यमाणस्यालोविकानन्दमयस्य स्वसवेदनसिद्त्वात्। उभयाभाष- स्वरुपस्य चोभनात्मकत्त्रमवि पूर्ववल्लोकोत्तरतामेव गमपति न तु विरोधमिति थोमदाचार्याभिनवगुप्तपादा। काव्यप्रकाना (ed. by झलकीकर, 1950, pp 91.95) I. । तत शृगार ।। भृगारी द्विविय प्रोक्त सम्भोगो विप्नलम्भक।

परिलोक्नमानार्धरित्येव परिगण्यते।। द्विनीयस्तवभिलावर्थ्यान वाससापहेतुन। विरहानलसम्भनस्नत पञ्चविध समृत ।। (७८-0) 2 अत्र शृगारम्य हो भेदो। सम्भोगो विप्रलम्मशच। तन्राघ्यः परस्परावलोकनालिंगनाय रपानपरिचम्तनाद्यनन्तत्वादपरिच्छेयय एक एव गभ्यते। Kāvyaprakāša, p 100 and अपरम्तु अ्भिलायविरदेध्यप्रवामशापहेतुव इति पञ्चविध । Ibid, p. 102

Rasa-theory in the Rasakaumudi of Srikantha 97

we look up agai to the lines 5b and further 5c it will be obvious that the expression caroyamonah etc appears in the Kavya-Prakasa m context of the theory of Abhinavagupta (ennoaam" etc ) and not in that of Bhatta Nayaka or Sankuka. The words karyo na etc mn 5c have been culled from the deseription of the theory of Abhinava- gupta I, therefore, think that the summary of of the view of Bhatta Nayaka ends with 5a, and m 5b-6d the theory of Abhinavagupta has been

R P Danpedt It is true that some of the expressions in 5b propounded

to 6d are reverberations of the view of Abhinava- gupta as quoted by Mammata, but an examina+ tion of the last sentence (6d) of these lines shows that Srikantha again ends with bhukttroda (see fFiTaf TH ) of Bhatta Nayala We can thercfore assert that Srikantha has described only the view of Bhattanavaka with the mixed termino- logy of Bhatta Nayaka and Abhinavagupta (tr.) R.C Dwieh: I can hardly agree with your view. In the last line वेद्यान्तरस्परंविहीनचेनसा सामाजिकाना विल वासनारमन, एकाउन्नकरनुभूयते रस ete the bhutticada has not been expanded but rather refuted by the author. This, in my opinion, typically and exclusively clucidates the view of Abhinavagupta

Concept of Rasa in the Bhaatti-Kaoya 99

Bhatți also did not remain behind the race Therefore, he introduced a new style in poetry. Moreover, from the study of the Bhattt-Kavya, it appears that Bhatt was a follower of the Alankara and Guna school. He illustrated as many as thirtyeight Alankaras, including Sabdalankara and their categories The whole of the eleventh canto is said to be an erample of Madhurya guna Evidently, later rhetoricians accepted Madhurya as a guna Also, most of the verses of this canto can be sard to be good examples of Srngara Rasa Bhatti could name the canto Srngarakanda, but he named it deliberately as Madhurya Kanda It shows that Alankaras and Gunas were more agreeable to Bhatti than Rasa It again indicates that Bhatti thinks that Alankara and Guna are more important in a poemn than Rasa which betrays his contemporary trends in the treatment of Rasa in practice. To illustrate the above tendency it can safely be stated that like Bhimaha, Bhatti also incorporated Rasa in an Alankara called Rasavat. The etample given by Bhattfl is one applicable to Srngara (of inanimate objects). But since he has not referred to any Rasa there, it shows that he trics to mncorporate this Rasa in an Alankara This omission of Rasa by Bhattt evidently shows that he was not a follower of the Rata School. Moreover, as Bhatti was writing Laksyagrantha, he could have illustrated various Rasas like Alankaras But he has not done so bscause, perhaps, he did not think it to be an essential clement of poetry Thus, various cements used by the Bhatti-Kavya show that in fact, the time of Bhatti did not give any distinet importance to Rasa. That is why, it is ignored by the poet. Though theoretical references to Rasa are completely wanting, however, in practice Bhatti has followed the conven-

Bhath Kărya, X. 48 गरहमगिरणन दिव्रो निवम्व वियुणमनृत्तमलव्ाशान्तियोगम् । - अुउयननसन मनोअमिरमं निववरकरमंदनादिव स्वृदन्तम् । -

Corceert of Rasa in the Bhattitassa 101

It is supported both by Bhamaha and Dandmn. It further shows that the seed of the esplanation of the procedure of Rasa which was put by Bharata in his Natyasastra was suppresed by the poets who cared almost exclusively for Alankara and Guna. The Bhatti-Kavya proves the same both in theory and practice.

Bhaca mn Sansint Poetics 103

(a) Bhava is the meaning born of Vibhavas and conve- yed by Anubhavas ie three types of acting known as Vacika, Angika and Sattvika Here Bhava 15 used for the meaning of poetry.1 (b) The second verse is nothing but the repetition of the first. Kaverantargata Bhava cannot be anything else cxcept the meaning of poetry But the point worth noticing here is that Bharata has made an attempt to explam the word Bhava from the spectator's view, as he always keeps him in mund. The question, what is Bhava for the spectator, demands thorough consideration Bharata ponders over the problem and talking in terms of transference says that which communi- cates the emotional expenence of the poct to the spectator through the acting of Vak (conversation) Anga (body ) Mukha- raga (anointing of the face) and Sattva (the qualty of purty) is called Bhava." (c) That which brings Rasa or sentiment into being which pervades, mtensely affects the spectator is known as Bhava.3 Rudrata docs not talk about the Bhava as such, but his stand may be made clear from the twelfth chapter of his Kavyslankara He says that the acaryas are of the opinion that Bhavas are Rasas like madhura, amla etc. because they may be relished. He further argues and stresses that Nirveda ete. ic. all the Vyabhicarins, Sthayins and Sattvikas are also Rasa because they too have the quality of Rasas. The question before Rudrata is how the Bhavas are culmin- ated into Rasa unless they possess this particular quality. This is the line of his analyus and he has rightly coneluded that they are Rass because they have the quality of Rasas. The statement of Rudrata is to be regarded of importance because he has pointed out an important qualtty of Bhavas which though hinted at by Bharata but was not so force- fully put forward. Rajasekhara has not written anything about Bhava inde- pendently. Only a brief outline on his stand may be formed

1, The tame, 7- P 407, Ibid z The sms 7. p 407. Itd. 3 The tame, 7- p. 408, 1bid

Bhara tn Sanskrit Poctics

the Vibhavas and Anubhavas, probably because they are external and absolute in nature, This interpretation of Abhinava seems to provide equal footing to the Bhavas of poetry and the Bhavas which are worldy But the difference is there. In the world as such Bhavas merely remam of happen, but in poetry or drama they pervade and do cause something to be Later Acaryas on poetics have more or less repeated Abhinava by accepting Bhava as Cittavrtti or dispostion. Anyhow it should not be taken as the end The impor- tance of the contrbution of Abhinava lies in his theory of Praktana Samskara He, like many other philosophers, believes that the samskara of our pre-birth accompany us and remain with in the present life 1 For instance, when a new born child faces an unknown or distorted figure, he feels frigh- tened. This fear, in fact, is caused by his congenital instinet or samskara of fear. These impressions and instinets actually cmerge in the shape of Bhava As a matter of fact we don't need to say that the stand of Abhinava 1s peculiarly original and the modern psychology seems to support his view with its analysis of the congenital instincts. Mahimabhatta has added nothing new to the conception of Bhava, He flatly says that in the world specific situations like Rati etc. remain in a static state in Ramadi. They are known as Bhava in poetry or drama. Poets and actors impose them on their own selves for the deseription or acting of a particular type and with the help of this medium they provide Rasa, as it has been said (by Bharata) that these situations which provide Rasa duc to the various types of acting are known as Bhava .* The question before the Sarasvatikanthabharana of Bhoja is, whether Bhavas are caused by the Rasas or Rasas are the root cause of the Bhavas? The question was first of all posed by Bharata. He came to the conclusion that Rasas are the root cause of the Bhavas and the case is vice versa also ie. the Bhavas are caused by the Rasas ' Abhinava later on justifed that stand of Bharata. He held, as a seed produces h. The same, p $45, Ibid 2 Vyaktnveka, p 7. Chowkhamba Ed. 3 Natyalistra, 6. verse 30, Gackwad s Ed

Bhasa tn Sanskrit Poctics 107

born of Ahankara, therefore, all of them are Sthayins, all are Vyabhicarins according to circumstances and all of them are Sattvikas as they are mind-born (manah-prabhavatvat), Sattva meaning nothing more than mind 1 Mammata includes two factors in his definition Firstly, Rati concerning gods, sages, teacher, son etc but by no way Kantavisayaka as it becomes Srngara Secondarly, the suggested stage of the Sancarins 2 The question automati- cally anses, in which way Kantavisayaka Rati is to be treated if it is not perfectly evoked by Vibhavas, Anubhavas etc ? The answer to the question is, it should be treated as Bhava The answer puts forward one more fact that the Sthaym not properly evoked is also Bhava It is here for the first time that the Apusta Sthayin has been included in the definition together with other factors The analysts of Mammata thus provides a broader sphere to Bhava as such and his success lies m the fact that the word Bhava has frequently been used, by the later followers, in the same technical sense which was indeed provided by him. Bhanumisra defines Bhava as Rasanukula Vikāra." Rasinukula is a new term which has been used for the first time in Rasatarangini. It imphes, that agitation only is Bhava which obviously produces Rasa This agitation or Vilara is of two types re. external and internal. Internal too is of two types viz. Sthayın and Vyabhicarn, Sattvikas ete are external because they pertain to the body This is worth considering All the Acaryas are of the opinion that Sattvilas possess dual nature. They are Bhavas as well as Anubhavas If we look at the problem from a broader angle, all the Bhavas appear to be Sattvikas because they are born of the Sattva This interpretation gives birth to a new problem that why only Stambha, Sveda ete. have been named Sattvikas ? The solution of Rasarnavasudhakara is that Sattvikas are called so because they are born of mind which is being overwhelmed by Sattva or the quality of purity. Sattva is the quality of mind therefore Sattvikas

Śrgaraprakāt, p 354-355, by Raghavan 2 Kavyapraki:s, 448 Rasatarangint, i Page 6, Vedkaresyara Press Ed The same, 1 p 8-9, Ibid

Bhana in Sansknt Poeltts 109

ensuant (Anubhava) being Karyarupa on one hand and ex- presses Rasa on the other Because of this Atıvyapti blemish this defimtion also cannot be accepted 1 After preparing grounds through the discussion, out of which two main arguments are given above, he mntroduces his definition According to his Rasagangadhara, Bhava is the Vyabhicarin suggested with the help of Vibhavas as it has been said previously by Mammata," It is beyond any doubt that the defimtion is liberal enough to include both suggestive of sentiment and suggested Bhavas mn its circum- ference But when we look at it with a critical sight we feel that the soul of the broadness which was visible in his dis- cussion is missing in his defimtion He has completely faled in crossing the limit of the thirtyfour Vyabhicarins mentioned by him. It may be deduced that he kept the defimition of Mammata in his mind and therefore farled to include Sthayins and Sattvilas in it Moreover he was too much conscious about his analysis where bhava is assocrated with the Bhavadhvani only The date of Krsha Kavi, the author of Mandaramara- ndacampu is not known to u5 Any how Dr SK De con- siders him to be later than Appayya Duut. His analysts of Bhava is sumilar to that of Bhanumisra$ The only diffe- rence is that he has accepted two kinds of Sarira ie Sattvikas and Anubhavas. Further he accepts the emergence of Sattva in mind in connection with the Sattvikas but surprisingly calls them Dehadharma like Bhanumisra 4 It has been pointed out before that the Sattvikas have dual nature, there- forc, it will be simply worthless to discuss it again here Muraridana in his Yafavantayasobhusana 'considers the questions about the root cause of the Bhavas etc. For him Bhava is merely an agitation or perturbation in mind $ It automatically implies here that he has accepted Bharata's first etymology of the word ic. Bhavatiti Bhavh, one that hap- pens is Bhava. Proceeding further, unlike most of the acsthe-

I. The same, 1 p 282-83, Ibid The same, 1 p 283. Itid 3 Vandiramarandacampo, 9 p 91, Pardurang Javn Ed 4. The same, 9 P. 97, Ibid 5 Yatavantay obbugane, 2 vase 2.

Bhaca in Sanskril Poetics 111

and feelings etc. are not necessarly related to the impressions of previous lives Secondly to Jook upon bhaca as Vasana, as Ablnavagupta docs, is to give it a very narrow definttion which will be not applcable, and to call bhare as rasanutula nkara is giving it too wide a defimtion Basanta Jautly Would you kmndly explamn a little more, how these defimitions are characterised by (non-applı- cability, aoyapti) and affoyapt (over-applcabilty)? VC Shrtoastara Well, ratana is limited only to sthapbhanas and it does not include other bhaor, and in the second case rasanutile mitara wil comprise not only bhicas but physical conditions as well Basanta Jaitly As far as the first question is concerned, I think that there is not much of a difference bet- ween the theory of latent impressions of Abhinava and what I have said about congenital stage. V Venkalachalam Latent impressions are related to previous births, but not the congenttal instincts. Basenta Jailly: Congenital instincts are also related to some- thing which was there prior to our birth, you may call it heredity or something else In fact, our congenital instincts are governed by long chain of the development of human race, preced- ing our birth R P. Dettedi; With regard to Sattuka Bhasas you have said that all the icaryas accept two aspects of them- internal (feeling) as well as external (manifesta+ tion ie. knyarapa). Abhinava and Dhananjaya put forward the view that the Satlmka-bhanas are sättvika only when they are reflected or mani- fested in the citta of a Sahrdaya Otherwise objectively spealing, they are abstract and inter- nal Thus onc and the same thing can have two aspects of manifestations according to its different bases. Do you think that these two aspects are possible in one and the same substratum > (tr.) Basarta Jaitly: As far as I think-and the modern psychology scems to corroborate my view -Sattrilas, when they are caused and so long as they are internal,

Bhaca tn Sanskrit Poctices 113

R.S. Jaitty. I think that instead of the above classification of the Anubhavas referred to by you, if we classify them as voluntary and mvoluntary, that would be more comemient and we could ther include the saltrkas mn mvoluntary aubharas (tr) Sarjan Das Samt In my opimion it is useless to classify the amubhasas on the model of western psychology as voluntarv and involuntary mn order to incorporate the sallrites In fact the word anubhara denotes that every type of bhag can have its ohubhacas. Why restrict it and say that only sthaymn and sancanbhacar can have their bhavas in their latent internal state ? (tr ) Vekatachalam. I think that the orginal question of Dr R.P. Dwivedi remains still unanswered His main contention was that if you assume an internal state of the sattakas it can either exist as a sthaytbhaca or as safcanbhaca in the heart. There is, of course, no other possibility. If I have understood Dr. R S Jaitly correctly, I venture to answer this question on his behalf, making his view more clear. He perhaps means that though sthay and sancarms are ultimately the root causes of all the anubharar including satteika thasas it is so with the Sattvikabhavas that before they are externally visible they are internally created by sthayins or saficnns, e g. interal Erdratf in the case of fall of tears etc. This internal state 13, mn fact, a link between sthapns and saficanns on the one band and the satteitas on the other. There is no term in our Rasa theory for this state. Therefore he prefers to call it simply the bhag state of the sattrika bhasds. P.L. Brargara: Assocation of the term Bhara with the Sattuta has been in a way responsible for the confusion that these are internal, whnle, in fact, these afe not different from the anubhacas.

Sare Obsrations en the Definiton of Poetty 115

all the more difficult by the severe expectations of the Naiyayi- kas, the absence of the three faults of atuyattt, over-extenston, coitti non-extension and dra-htare, impossibilty In a sense, these three appear to be very natural expectations of a good definition, but it is these that have created innumerable diffi- culties for the rhetorcians 4 look at the works of Mammata, Visvanātha, Jagannitha Pandita and others will show how much ingenuity is spent on these problems. Arguments and counter- arguments and refutations and improvements characterse these works. It must not be supposed that it is the severe logical expectations and tests that have made these problems so difficult, for m their very nature the problems are difficult to be solved, and admit of different explanations, since what is being discussed is essentially a subjective prob- lem: what do I understand by poetry and why do I like it Here is an attempt to define what i that affects me, its nature and its constituent factors and abo how I have becn affected by these factors. In other words, here is an attempt to study the object that excites the mind and also the excite- ment experienced by the mind. Accordinglv, the approach in the definitions attemptted is scen either to be 'objective' or 'subjeetive.' In the former is made an attempt to understand the nature of the object, the cause, while in the latter is made an effort to understand the experience, the effect. This often confuses the issues and this confusion is again made worse by the fact that the cause has many constituents and the importance of these is differently understood while the effect is also conditioned by the receptivity and eulture of the mind involved and so admitting a variety of responses. The word sshrdsye itself would need clarification and one would be not satisfied with mere 'termayi-bharana-jogyata.' If all these points and difficultics related to them are properly appreciated, it will be dear why the Sanskrit rhetoricizns are often seen to indulge in a battle royal on this issue. These definitions appear unsatsfactory on account of another additional reason, namely the expectations in a def- nition. What should it define and include-only the best specimen of even that which deserves the name only by courtesy > The word taga would be seen to include all this, the best as well as the most trash, and so must the definition

Sart Obsercal.ons on the Defimtion of Poetty 117

the medium. Poetry is word no doubt but also has something more. The lulabies and the nursary rhymes that attract us in our infancy and at times lmger in our memory and seem to harass us occasionally are not poetry One therefore agrees with Mammata when he points out that compositions, where attention is pard to sabda-camatkrh, do hot deserve to be regarded as poetry and if so regarded should be put down in the lowest class, adhima variety. The illustration that he has given, Svaccandocchaladacchakacchakuharacchātetarambucchata- murcchanmohamaharsibarsavilutasnananhil ahvaya vah blundyadudyadudaradarduradaridirghadandradruma- drohodrekamahormimeduramada mandakıni mandatam at once carnes lus point and one is likely to observe that this verse may express devotion but is certainly not poetry. Sound has to play an important part here no doubt but poetry is not all sounds and nothing more. As soon as it is sad that here Sabda has importance as medium, one might think of musc, sargila, but a little thought would indicate that music seels to appeal through pure and simple sound alone while poetry that appeals through the charming meaning ought to be regarded as different from it. The sara in music is sabda but not a fabda in the sense m which it is to be understood in poetry, kagja. It would be proper to say that Jabds, the medium, separates music and poetry from the other arts while it is the meaning that separates, distinguishes poetry from music. Poetry may be enriched and heightened by its internal music but it is not all music, and here music is always subordinate to its meaning It is because of this great importance of meaning in tage that almost all the definitions as a rule, one might say, observe that kaoya is labdrthas The words debd!Eds bring us to language but poetry is not merely the language that we use in our daily life. In our life too fabdirthay are used and sentence is the unit. This unit satisfies the three expectations of atantsa, jogjald and sermdh, but in a sentence, catsa, that secks claim to poctry, something more is very necessary. Capacity to convey something, grammatical correctness and a logical consistency characterise a sentence used in day to day life

Same Obstrcations on the Definition of Poetry 119

A point to be noted here is that mn these discussions Vamana when he discusses the concept of Riti appears to take the objective point of view, discusses the Kavya as and how created by the poet, in other words he has the poet in lus mind while Anandavardhana and Visvanatha appear to have the rarita, the reader, before them and therefore appear to diseuss the matter from the subjective pomt of view Vamana is seen discussing the constituents of the 'cause' while Visvanatha and Anandavardhana appear to discuss the "effect.' As a matter of fact, one feels that a good defintion of poetry should make a reference to all these aspects of its capacity to give highest delight, appeal to emotion and con- veying of a charmintg meaning and yet instead of attempting any co-ordination and harmonization of these vanous aspects, critics are seen to lay special emphasts on this or that aspect according to the tradition to which they belong. What we call 'beautiful' has so many diverse constituents and these agam have appeals in varying degrees to different minds so much so that unanimity in these matters seems very difficult. Can we really accept Jagannatha's contention that there is no rasa in the descriptons of children and animals, 'kapibalamla- std'. How do we respond to the description of the child's pranks as described by Tarapida in the Kadambari of Banabhatta ? What is our response to the Lucy Poems of Wordsworth ? One may accept Jagannatha's vicw that there is no poetry in 'mrgah dhavant' but can this mean that there is no poetry mn a running deer ? What is then our reaction to the Kalidasian poem : "Grivabhangabhiramam muhuranupatati syandane baddhadrsph pašcardhena pravistah farapatanabbayāt bhūyasā pūrvakāyam darbhaih ardhavalidhaih śramavivrtamukhabhramxbhih kirnavartma pafyodagraplutatvād viyatı babutaram stokamureyām prayāti" Do we not regard this piece as a very fine composition? Again one may concede that ramaniyarthapra'tpadakatsa is more ertendive, vyapata, than sarasatsa and 'sa-hrdaya-hrdayalhad fablarthamangalers' but then ean these be ignored altogether

Some Obsercations on the Definition of Portry 121

'upadesa' has very remote similanty to what is contemplated by the term of Mathew Arnold, 'enticism of life' In a way this is as it should be if we take into consideration the attitude towards poetry that is to be seen in these Sanskrit critics. According to thetn the mam purpose of poetry is to give highest delight and therefore with reference to those who seek 'criticism of life' in poetry and those who do not like poetry, they observe "osmai namah scadu-paranmuthaya' and 'arasıkeşu kasıtra-ntredanam' etc What is the view of these critics so far as 'language of poetry' is concerned ? Colendge and Wordsworth had to start a movement in this respect over the issue which could be perhaps stated as whether the language of poetry must be the 'artificial and ornate' or it could be the 'simple one used in our daily life' This movcment could be understood as a reaction against the 'Omate School.' The same is reflected in Sansknt rhetorics in the controversies between the Alankarkas on the one hand and the prota- gonists of Rasa and Dhram on the other. Bhamaha would represent the former attttude while Anadavardhana and Visvanatha would represent the other These latter are conscious of the great power that sunplicity of language often possesses Mammata seems to concede this point when he adds 'analankrti punah krapt' in his definition of Kaya It would be worth our while if we consider the illustra- tions of Katja as giten by these writers, for it is these illustrations that are expected to make the defimtions clear by supplying, clarifying or explaining whatever has been expressed or imphed in the definition. It is therefore that mn such works, the illustrations also should be given the same import- ance as the definitions themselves Mammata gies the verte: "Nissesacyutacandanam stanatatam nirmrsțarāgo dharo netre duramananjane pulakita tanyi taveyam tanuh i mithyavadim ,dut bandhavajanasy ajnatapidagame vapim snatum ito gatāsi na punah tasyadbamasyantikam" as an illustration of 'uttara karya' since it has dhram in it. When one studies this concept of "highest' type of poetry as fevealed in the choice of this verse, one, might feel that as to why these critics should have rarely looked beyond

Soret Obtercatioss ent he Definition of Poetry 123

tive in itself of that eternal longing that human mind is always seen possessing for the past jovs. To be mn that famihar atmosphere where every thing has a story to tell, is to be fully intoxicated and to feel intensely to 're-lve' the whole cpisode. There is something finer and deeper about this attenthi so that it does not remam only a banal longing for the physical pleasure. The personal expcrience has something much more human about it, and so has nsen far above the mere experience of an individual. Onc can refer to another fine verse, agamn familiar to us: "Utkampini bhayaparukhalitamsukantā te locane pratidifam vdhuram kypanti krurena dārunatayā sahasarva dagdhā dhomanctena dahanena na viksitan" It would need an Udayana to fully bring out the world of beauty aed significance of the phrase 't locare' in this exqui- site deseniption of Vasavadatta. How could one do justice to the celcbrated words of Rama in the Uttararamacarita "e h rah decsah gatfh' which again have not remained at the level of personal expression of Rama bat have come to symbolize the eternal cry of the whole hamamty, the pang felt at the loss of the happy world which has gone for ever, never to return. It is with these thoughts and similar to these in mind one thinks that it would have been more approprtate if the 'attoa' poetry were illustrated with pieces like these or one of the type of "niham janimi keyure nāham janami kundale nūpure tvabhyinami nitvam padabhivandanāt" rather thas the pieces of the type of 'rikiea-cmta-candmar, ete. It is indeed dificult to understand as to why these rhetoricians, when there are so many fine passages in Kalidisa, Bhavabhuti, Bhartrhari that could be taken as brilliant poetry anywhere in the world, pasages that have something valuable directly from life, ignored as if all of them and went about such 'srgaric' pieces- Tradition bocours the Sakuntala as a very good piece and the verses in it as the best, at the least the four traditionally enumerat- ed, but the rhetoricians even do not refer to these also. If poetry is 'suggestive', tyzsjata, then the suggestion so conveyed should have something really deeper about it, which

Some Obsereations on the Definshon of Poetry 125

come of all these efforts to defie poetry one is remmded of the fact that defining poetry is like catching a butter-fly, that wantonly flies from one fower to another in a garden For a pretty long tme one 's not able to catch it at all And when after a long exhausting chase one is able to catch it, one finds that all the best colours on its wings have fallen off, it has completely faded and lustreless, indeed what one finds m one's hand is the dead body of the butter-fly How true is this "!

The more and more one thinks of this problem, the more is one convinced that it is beset with really insurmoun- table difficulties and defics any solution The perception and appreciation of beauty in literature is as a matter of fact a very subjective fact and an attempt to have any gene- ralizations based on that or about that are bound to be tmnsatisfactory as well as extremely difficult. The intensity as well as the nature of an experience of an individual is difficult to be measured por can the constittents and reasons of appeal can be correetly understood. The nature as well as the intensity of perception and appreciation depends on an 'inner necessity' felt by the incividual as well as on the previous impressions of that individual mind In the absence of these two things all discussion about literary beauty and tts experience remains nothing but a talk meaning nothing This is the reason why at different times by so many diffe- rent persons were put forth different views rather vehemently in this field Anandavardhana, Kuntaka, Vamana, Mammata, Jzgannätha all these difer between themselves and it is the appreciation of these differences that is Likelv to lead to a proper appreciation of their views. No seminars are likely to bring about a unanimuity amongst rhetoricians in this respect. For in the ultimate analysis, a discussion that 1s philosoplucal or intellectual presentation is not Likely to grasp cotrectly an experience. If such a discussion strikes the cord of assent in us then only we are in a mood to accept or otherwise there is an urge to disagree violently. The core of an individual is something that cannot be thoroughly grasped, some of its clements come from social environment, some from heredity, but the individual being is not mere the sum-

Some Observations on the Defintion of Poetry 127

meaning is understood only by minds that are capable of establishing 'harmony and a concord' This may be 'mood' generated in us, may be beyond the capacity of words to convey, but then there is no doubt that there is something that is felt keenly as captivating, enchanting, expanding This expansion is many times felt by the poet lumself too, and the images reveal an ascending expansion of content I shall illustrate Take Kalidisa at the end of his Raghuvamsa XIX 51 He observes about the tragic end of the illustrious dynasty of the Raghus Vyoma pascimakalasthitendu va panlasesamiva gharm- apalvalam rājni tatkulamabhūt ksayāture vāmanārcitiva dipabhāja- nam XIX 51. Kaldasa thought of the great dynasty as the vast Vyoma and the dymg King the fading digit of the moon and then coming to the earth, our world, he thinks of the 'dned up lake, a pathetic awcful sight' and finally he comes to the 'Lamp' 'with its dying flame' The porgnancy, ascending order of subtlty and purity and sublimity 15 something that can be felt and hence these Kaldasian images coming one after another mean so much to us The number of the images is immaterial, for it is the natural blooming of the poet's mind into these images and the suggestive quality of these images that captivate us Poetry need not always discuss philosophy, need not discuss truth of life It fills us with a mood and we seem to overhear the poet It is well said that 'greatest poetry is that which is overheard ' How finely do we overhear Kalidasa here as well as elsewhere, in the Meghaduta too The poet writes for himself undoubtedly, to etpress himself but this exp- pression invades the empires of minds of the sahrdayas A living cxpanding mind overwhelms another mind that seeks to be so influenced This dialogue of two minds is the aimn and fulflment of all poetry and lterature, the zgahta-tedyantara Through this dialogue between human minds, the quality of the mind has improved and all the classical literature is nothing but such dialogues These dialogues have enriched our philosophy, understanding of life, of human problems and human conflicts. The powerful minds

CONMON TRENDS IN INDIAN AND GRECO-ROMAN AESTHETICS*

Dr KC Pardey

Casting a glance at the history of Greco-Roman acsthe- tics we find the following mam currents - (1) Sophut Gorgtus, speaking from the poit of vicw of the artut, asserted that imitation is the principle of artutic production, and infhted that imitation should be so thorough as to create an ilusion. Accordingly, speaking from the point of view of the spectator, he said "Tragie representation is a deception, which turns out to the homour of both, of him who decerves and of hum who is deceived, in which it is shameful not to know how to deccive oncself and not to let oncself be deceived." "Imitation' is recognised to be the principle of artistie production in the earlicst peniod of the history of art every- whert. And imitation, when it is most successful, produccs illusion. Such a theory of art, namely, that a work of art creates ilusion, that it deceives the connorsseur to tale the product of art to be the product of nature and arouses the same psycho-physical responses in him, is attributed to Bhatta Lollata, Accordingly it is said that he mamtained that just as at the time of ilusory knowledge of slver at the sight of brillmace of mother of pearl, there is the same experience for a moment as at the sight of the real silver ; so, on the objective perception of the stage-representation of the historic, there is for a moment an ertremely p'easant experience, very much the same as at the sight of real For, the spectator is aware of the presence of an emotive state in the focus of the sitnation, the hero, though it is really not there. We find a reference to imitative sculpture in the Pratims Nitata of Bhasa. The scene may be p'esented as follows ;-

" Gamal Htre ddired by Dt Parder during the Semintar Remaris ef Shr Bhan Seo wto prendd blow

Common Trends in Indian and Greco-Roman Acsthelcs 131

"Kamsa was killed long ago How can the use of the present tense be grammatically justifable in reference to the action presented on the stage ?" And the reply is that "It 1s jusufiable, because in the imagmnative grasp of the stage- presentation, the actors shine as the original historcal charac- ters." The fact that Patanjal admitted dramatic presentation to be such an imnitation as made the actors shine as origmal characters in the imagination of the spectator is referred to by Helaraja in his commentary on the Vakyapadiyam (Kanda III P 177) as follows - In witnessing a drama, in which the past deeds of historical characters such as Kamsa and Krsna are imitati- vely presented, the represented shine as orginal in the imagmation of the spectator becanse of similanty

Criticism of the Theory of Imitation

But imitation as the principle of production of works of art in any artistic medium, may it be clay, stone, pamt. musical sound, language or human body, has been condemned both in East and West It has been recogmsed as a principle of production of works of arts for preserving the memory of great persons, but not of such works as have independent valuc Imitative art is domincered by hedonism It is cap- able of giving sensuous satisfaction only It docs not lead the mind beyond the particular to the Universal It may hiave educative value It may enable us to get an idea of the imtated through imitahive representation, but it has no acsthetic valuc Plato in the West was the first to condemn imitative art. And he knew of no other art than umtative In the context of his metaphysics and ethics, he formulates the problem of acsthetics as follows :- "Is art, mimens, a rational or irrational fact ? Does it belong to the noble region of the soul, where philosophy and virtue are found, or does it dwell in that base lower sphere, with sensuality and crude passionality ?" In summarising the solution we may say that (1) since matter and the world of phenomena, which is but matter

Ce nen Trends in Indias and Greco-Roman Aesthelics 133

the awareness of what is mental, such as feeling and emotion, which are cssentrally mental states, though they find expres- sion in the physical changes" The exponent of the imitation-inference theory, there- fore, maintams that the basic mental state is known from the imitative presentation, through mference of it from the situation, the cause of emotion, from the mimetic changes, the effects of emotion, and the mvariable concomitants of emotion, the trangent emotion. He guards agamst the criueism, levelled agamst the imitation-illusion theory, namely, that if art creates illusion and arouses the same kind of reacton as docs the real, it has no independent value and the tragic presentations should not be enlvening but depressing He asserts that the cmotion that is inferred from the imitative presentation is not the real but imitated and therefore, it does not arouse that com- motion mn the heart, which the awareness of a real emotion docs. For, when we see an angry lion in a picture and are aware of its being only an imitation, the emotion of fear does not arise in us. But this justification of the imitative art is illogical. The inconsistancies of the imitation-inference theory are apparent. For, if the spectator takes the reasons, which are reali- stcally presented on the stage, to be real, how can the basic mental state, inferred from them, be spoken of as imitation ? But if he tales them to be the products of art, the inference of the badie mental state from them is out of the question.

From Imitation to Idealisation

In the history of Aesthetics, both in the East and the West, the criticism and consequent rejection of the theory of imitation in art, because of its sensuousness, deceptiveness and hedonism, has led to the substitution of "imitation", as a principle of artistic production, by Idcalisation and of hedomism by Pedagosism. In the West, for instance, we find Aristote, a pupil of Plato, propounding idealstic and the pedagogic views of art. Aristotle's teacher, Plato meant bv imitation the produc-

Cocw Treds it Ind an and Greco Roman Aestiees 135

poetical muse, we have to keep two poits in our minds (I) hrs conception of soul and (ID) distinction between virtue and philosophy. Tragedy is not presentation of pure abstract idea. For, such an idea is to be realised only in philosophic contemplation. Tragedv is not philosophv. It is imitation of warthy o- itlastrious and perfect action. It Is, therefore, not concerned with the pure intellectual aspect of the human souL Its amm is to present the appettive aspect, to which all passions and emotions belong and which is the spring of all action. It preseats human soul, not in its blmnd pursuit of the objects of sentuous satisfaction, but m its effort to strike the aem between two extremes under the guidance and control of reason; or rather a sonl which, because of long and continuous obedience to the dictates of reason, has got into the habic of always following the midile course between two ettrees, a soul, which is virtuons, worthy or illustrious and exhibits its worthiness in all actions. But tragedy is not the only product of the poetical Muse. Epic and comedy are also her prodactions. The mean- ing of imitation, as has just been stated, is the particular meaning in the contert of tragedy. In general, bowvever, imiation meant presentation of action of worthy and virtuous persons no less than that of the depraved and vidious. Men arre of three kinds. (i) better or (ti) worse than we are and (in) Iike ourselves. Epic, such as that of Homer, imita- tes better men than we are. Tragedy and comedy differ from each other, because of the d'Ecrence in their objects of imita- ton. The former imhitares better and the latter worse men. The former is the presentation of the beautiful and the latter is thet of the ugly. The Comedy

The full meaning of comedy, we can understand, only if we remember Aristotle's conception of the ugly. According to him, as we have already stated, there are two principles, idca and matter. And although they are always together, yet matter dees cot always submit to the directing force and control ef idea. It resists the force of idea. Thus, when matter refutes to submit to idea and asserts itself in diobe- dence to the dictates of reason, we have the uglv and de

Common Trends in Indian and Greco-Roman Aesthefics 137

found mn the external world It is the presentation of an advance on a given realty It is not confined to the per- ceptible It extends to the mental Voices and figures are to be imitated no less than the passions and feelings

Recognition and Inference Admitted by Aristotle

It is interesting to find that Arstotle, like Śrisankuka, admits - (1) That aesthetic experience is a recognitive experience in so far as the spectator recogmses the natural or historical in the artistic representation, and (2) that there is a kind of inference and, therefore, some exercise of the mtelligence is involved in such recogni-

Thus, Aristotle in speaking of "some kind of inference" seems to have realsed that the mnference of the emotive state of the presented is not the ordinary inference (a) of effect from cause or (b) of cause from effect or (c) of one invanable concomitant from another. He seems to realise that empirical inference of the emotive state, presented in a work of art, is not possible He seems to admit a different means of knowledge to account for the awareness of emotion from a work of art. The criuicism, therefore, that has been levelled against Srisankuka's theory of inference of emotive state from a representation m a work of art, does not apply to Anstotle's theory of imitation in the context of aesthetics. Aristotle seems to present an advance on the imitation theory of risankuka

Pedagogic view of art

Plato condemned art, refused it a place in the ideal republic, because of its sensuality and hedonism. Aristotle differs from his teacher, Plato, and asserts that the end of art is not simply to please the senses but to improve its lover morally. Hes theory is technically called 'pedagogtsm' This theory is, however, propounded in the context of tragedy. And tragedy, he holds, brings about the moral improvement of the spectator, not through sermons, put in mouths of important characters, but through Katharsis of emotions,

Common Trends tn Indian and Greco-Roman Aesthetics 139

the ethical value of effecting the moral improvement of lovers of art But it is pointed out that the ethical value of works of the poctc or dramatic art, is different from that of the categorical imperatives of the sacred scriptures, and also from that of persuasive reasoning of a fnend who tries to lead to the path of virtue For, art does not command nor does it reason And the moral improvement of the lovers of art is not the sole aim of art, because such an admission would mean denial of independent value to art Indian Aesthetician, therefore, holds that the ethical value of worl of higher art is only a dependent, secondary or implied value The true, primary or independent value of lgher art is aesthetical only Art primarily aims at arousing aesthetic experience only. And because aesthetic experience is possible from the presentation of the ideal, and not of the real, of things as they should be and not as they are, and because the ideal, if it is 'human', must necessarily be ethi- cally also ideal and, must necessarily act and talk in strict accordance with the highest ethical principles, therefore, art is attractive. It draws the spectator very much as the object of love draws the lover to herself It addresses itself to the aesthetic senses, the eye and the ear It pleases Itsuggests to the mind all that it cannot present to the senses It builds up a world of imagination before the mind's eye of the specta- tor, with the presented and the suggested material. It lifts the aesthete from the empincal world to the world of imagination and makes him willingly live in it He identifies himself with the hero of the piece, experiences ethical satisfaction in performing the onerous duty in difficult situation and realizes the goodness of the path of virtue and badness that of vice. And the characteristic of humamty is to strike to realise in practical life all that healthy imagination presents to be good, true and beautiful The spectator, therefore, automati- cally follows the path of morality after he has imaginatively grasped what is "Good". Art thercfore serves ethical end without aiming at it. Art is "purposive without purpose" Art presents morality as an essential element of beauty and immoralty as a dominant aspect of ugly to offset beauty by contrast. It mixes up the moral principle, that it presents,

Common Trends in Indian and Greco-Roman Aesthetics 141

expounded by Bhatta Nayaka is very great indeed For, both Plotinus and Bhatta Nayaka use almost the same language to present the cssential nature of aesthetic experience The former says "It is akin to the experience of "the one", and the latter says "Brahmananda sahodarah" (It is akin to the transcendental Bltss)

Some Thing of Aristotle 143

"The true difference between the histonan and the poet is that one relates what has happened, the other what may happen. Poetry therefore is a more plulosophical and a higher thing than history, for poetry tends to express the universal, history the particular " The first distingurshing mark then of poetry is that though it deals with the indt- vidual, it shows the universal truth, it seeks to represent the permanent possibilties of human nature It is an idealzed treatment of life. It will thus be seen that though Anstotle also uses the word mmutation and considers it as the essential in a fine art, it has for him a far more comprehensive meaning than with Plato. With him it is an aesthetic term, and implies not a literal transeript of the world of realty as perhaps with Plato, but an imaginative reconstruction of life. It umnplies on the part of the poet a selection, chimmnation, organisation, and intensification with a vicw to represent a higher reality. There is no question of art being twice removed from realty If the poet necessarily gives us some thing less than reahty, if he cannot in his verses give us the physical warmth of flesh and blood, he gives us in compensation some thing more, evoking so much of spirit and heightened feeling as life itself can only yield to the chorcest minds in ther happier moments Again tragedy as he defines it seels through pity and fear to effect the proper catharsis of these emotions. Whatever be the meaning or significance of the word catharas it is plain that its appeal is to the emotions of pity and fear There is no awareness whatsocver-as-in Plato of the emotions being the worthless part of our being. There is no sense of any essentral antagomsm between emotions and reason. It will thus be seen that Aristotle stated for once and all that art is an idealized imitation of life, that it auns at universal truth, that it is its essential attribute to be beautiful, that its end is pleasure and that its appeal is through the emotions. I shall now briehy say how I understand "tragic catharsic' Catharsis seems to have been used as a medical metaphor. Tragedy does stir and evoke the emotions of

THE CONTRIBUTION OF RITI TO THE EXCELLENCE OF POETIC COMPOSITION

Dr A P Mishra

A survey of the history of Sanskrit Poetics reveals the incontrovertible fact that before the doctrine of Dhvant was discovered, Rit and Vrtti, like Gunas and Alankaras, were considered to be very important factors in creating an excellent poetie composition It was only in later days that its tradition was mostly interrupted With the establishment of the element of Dhvant, ie suggestion in poetry, began the process of inclusion of Riti and Vrttt in it (Dhvam)I. The question to be considered here is whether this inclusion was really proper or justified, and whether there was no strong basis behind the doctrine of Rin and Vrttr which could justify their separate evistence. In other words, is the inclusion of Riti and Vrtt in Dhvam possible> Before we take up this question for constderation, it could be only proper to make certarn observations about Riti and Vrtti With the rise of the Doctrine of Riti in Sansknit Poetics, a new line or durection of the appreciation of beauty or excellence of poetic composition comes to light Even Anandavardhana is quite appreciative of the originality of Vamana's doctrine of Rit He says that the clement of Dhvamt must have flashed even though indistmnctly into the mind of the propounder of the doctrine of Riti as the soul of poetry, only he could not explam it as one which brought about charm in poctic compositions, and for this reason

t. (i) Vide Lorana on the Dhvanyaloka, Kanks 3 46 - रीनिहि गुणेषु पर्यवसिता• गुणाशच रसपर्यवसायिन एव। (ut) Vide Dhvanyaloka, vrtt o Ka 3/47 and Locana on it - या काश्चिन् प्रभिद्धा उपनागरिकाद्या. शब्दतत्त्वाध्ना वृतयो याद्चार्थ नत्त्वमम्वद्घा कशिक्वादयस्ता सम्यगरीतिपदवीमवतरन्ति। रीविपदवीमिनि। तव्देव (रीतित्रदेव) रमायंवमावित्वान्।

Ce-tribatior of Riti ta the Excellerce of Poetic Compositton 147

as gunatmaka Thus according to Vamana, the excellence or beauity of Kavya is due to the mherence of gunas in it. The word 'padaracana' points towards the body and the word 'mfista' towards the element which can be called the soul of poetry. It is really the proper use of gunas which brings about beanty in poetic composition. Abhinavagupta also explained 'vacva' and vyangva' mn poetrv as "samanya' and 'viesa' This visesa of Abhinaval can be foreseen in the wod 'vhesa' in the defmtion of Riu It is to be clearly understood here that the propounder of Ritt distinguishes one from the other The collective state of gunas is different from their non-collective or the individual state. Generally speaking, cach guna produces beauty in a poctic composition", but the assemblage of gunas produces a different type of excellence. Thus the excellence brought about by Riti as an assemblage or collection of gunas is different from the one produced by the indrvidual gunas But Abhinavagupta, in hts impatience or haste to include the beauty produced by Riti in the one produced by the individual gunas, could not evaluate or estimate it correctly and properly On the one hand, Abhmnava draws similarhty or parity between the axemblage of gunas in Rit and the combina tion or the blending of guda, marica ete., in the drink called Pinaka; and on the other hand, he does not consider the assemblage as d fferent from the individual constituentsf.

Vide Locang on Davanyalka 12 -- तुन्बेजंखप वे किमिनि चन्मविवेत सहदना: पताघन्ते तद् भवितव्रं तत्र केनचि् विशेषेन । वो विदेष सः प्रतीयमानभागो विवेकि- निविशोष हेतु-वादातमेनि व्यतस्याभ्यते। 2. वान्यगोमाया: कर्तारो र्मा गुाः। नदनिरामहेनवन्त्वलवारा। 3. Vide Locang - तबा (गुमाना) मसुविनवृत्वोंण महन्योन्यमेरनक्षमन्वेन पानक इव

वियन गोडोन-वैद्भं पाक्चालहेवावप्राचर्यदशा, तदेव तरिविध

4 जाविजातिनतों नान्या, समुदायमच समुदाविनी नानय इति वृततिरीतपो

Contribution of Rilt to the Excellerce of Peetic Composttion 149

Vamana accepted ten gunas each of the word and the meamng. He is the first rhetorician to have divided gunas in this way. He defined Sabda-gunas as the gunas of the composition or the construction of words 1 The two types of gunas fully explam the excellence of both, the word-construc- ton and the meaning The scope of Artha-gunas is so wide as to include within it almost all the means of creating or pro- ducing poetie excellence, so much so that all the charms of Rasa are included in the Artha-guna called 'Kant', all the shades of meaning m 'Samadhi', and all the forms of striking expressions (Uktivarcitrya) in the 'Madhurya' guna of Vamanat. Thus we sce that Vamana has tried to visualise or envisage through the means of Ritis the beauty, charm or excellence of poetic composition in its wide perspective. Since the time the principle of the three gunas viz Prasada, Ojas and Madhurya was propounded in the Dhvami School and all the twenty gunas of Vamana were included in them, the roots of the Riti-School loosened and gave way, and its im- portance dechined Consequently, it ceased to be the soul of poetry in due course and began to be regarded or considered merely as an element or a factor of poetic excellence.3 Although Ritt was soon declining in importance ever afterwards with the ever widening sphere of Dhvan, still it contiued to hold ground with a change of course in its form and name Acaraya Kuntala re-establshed the three- fold Ritis of Vamana under new names in Sukumara, Vici- tra and Madhyama Kuntaka has put forward an altogether new and oniginal analysis of the two Margas propounded by Dandin, and the three Ritis and ten gunas propounded by Vamana In all, he propounds six gunas ie Prosāda, Madhurya. Lavanya, Abhijatya, Aucitya and Saubhagya.

t Vide Kavyalinkarasutravrth, Guna Section ओज प्रमादशसेयमम तासमाविमाचुय मो कुमार्यो दारतार्य व्यक्तिकान्तयो वन्यगुणा। वन्न पदरचना।. त एवारयगुणा. । Vide Kavy Mankarasutra III 2 1o - दीप्तरसत्व कान्ति। उकनिवचिन्य माघुर्यम्। 3 Vide Sihityadarpana - उन्तपहेनव पोक्ता गुणालकाररीतर।

Centribution of Riti to the Excellence of Paetie Composition 151

DISCUSSION

P.L. Bhargera: What is your opinion regarding the view of some later Rhetoricians that the gunas of Vam- ana can actually be included in the three mam g'has viz. modhurya, ojas, and prasada?

A.P. Mnhre I think that these Rhetorcians have not done justice to Vamana and his excellent principle of ten grtar It is not possible to reduce all the guras to only three. The devices of the acaryas are no doubt ingentous but they are far from being satisfactory V Yeteechalam- Now that you have presented a paper under- lining the importance of the Riti-School, I would like to know how far it is justified and scientific to mclude all types of Rasas in only one gund viz. Kanht and all kinds of Ukt-Vaintra in one particular gr-a, madhurya? A.P. Mishre: Yes, perhaps not. But what I wanted to point out is that these acaryas also who persue an ana- lytrcal approach to poctry and apparently take care of only its Fasya aspect, were not oblivious of the finer side of the poetry, ie rasa and the subtle shades of meaning ( Ukhircitrd) etc. and their contribution to Sanskrit Poetics should also be properly appreciated RC Dutedi. Ruyyaka in his Alankara-Sarvasva makes a very pointed reference. वामनेन तु कश्चिद्ध्वनिभेदो- and there he sums up Vamana's view. With the exprestion alautarath he is repro- ducing the alankara concept of Vamana. Fiar mg - HTTTOT. Jayaratha in his commentary erplains this sentence of Ruyyaka to show how the view of Vamana is incotporated in Dheart and that he was also first to conceive the idea of soul of poetry. .. A question that I have in mind is whether one could correlate his principle of the three gurar with the three primordial gu-as of the Samkhya

PHILOSOPHICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND INDEPEN- DENCE OF LITERARY CRITICISN IN SANSKRIT

Dr R.C Duterdt

In this paper I propose (1) to state the obvious impact of Indtan philosophrcal thought on Sansknt Criticism and (u) to assert that the criticim, though mnformed and infuenced by phlosophical thought, is vet by and large independent of philosophical considerations and that these are incidental to it and do not constitute the essence of critical judgment of literature The idea of poetry and its objectives, the description of the poet and acsthete (chrdeja), the poetie word and its meaning and their relation, the varieties of poctic figures (alankaras), the role of imnagmation (pratibha) in the conception and creation of literature, the trad of poetic etcellence (gare), the theories of rasa and dirami and Mahuma- Bhatta's theory of inferentral nature of poetic sense are some of the major topics that come readily to one's mind when one secks to trace the influence of Indian philosophical thought in general and orthodox svstems in particalar. I propose to deal with some of these excluding rasa in particular which would reqwre separate treatment That the literarv critc in India worted under the impact of philosopby and other Sastras, which are not pertinent for our consideration here, is no wonder to us Western Cnticsm has abo been informed and influenced and cven at times swept off its feet by the onslaught of psychology and philosophy. This is natural when both philosopher and poct are engaged in 'seeing' the word, the philosopher may 'see' it better but it is only the poet who describes better what he sees. The title of a poet is accorded not merely to ene who is endowed with a vision of world but to one who possesses both vision and expression, The famous stanzas by Bhatta Tota bear quotation on this point - नानकि कविरित्ुकानुविमच किल दर्शनान्। विचित्रभावनर्मा सतत्वमरूता वे दर्मनम् ।।

Independence of Literary Crticism in Sanskrit 155

one deserves the title of 'poet', of onc, who is skilful in expression"* :

प्रत्ञा नवनवोन्नेपगालिनी प्रतिभा मता।

The doctrine of Pratibha in Sanskrit Cntieism is very comprehensive. It includes (1) creative mspiration, imagi- nation, genius, (ii) competent poetic expresston2, (m) aesthetic sensiblity, and (Iv) poenic beauty' The literary cnucs had conceived this doctrine independently until Abhmavagupta, in his philosophical analysis of the Pratibha, identified it with the ultimate consciousness, the Self, and admitted that in a poet it burns with a punfied lights. Pratibha in Saiva metaphysics is identified with con- sciousness as creative emission (Visarga ) However, what one notices is that prior to Abhinavagupta the literaty critics did not consider its metaphysical overtones and were happy to explore it as a concept of poetic creation, expression and appreciation. Even Anandavardhana, who was himself a great philosopher, treated Pratibha in its literary context only. According to him it is a unique gift which is mant- fested through the Muse of great poets, attains endless forms on its journey through the dheanr and so long as it

Quoted by Hemacandra, Kavyanusisana, p 3. Momikyacandra in Samketa on KP p 7 Oz thts poirt sce also Rudrata, I 13, Rapsechara, KM pp tt 12-14, Jaganratba, R. G (Kavyaghatananuk la Sabdarthopastht h)

3 प्रतिभाअुवंवस्तुनिमाक्षमा प्रज्ञा, तस्ता विशोषो रमावेगवव्य्य मोन्दर्य वाव्यक्षमत्वम् । See T.A, V.p 432, and XI, pp o 62; M V V, VV toT onwards 5 T.A. V. P 432 6 सरम्वती स्वाद्ू तदयंत्रम्तु निम्बन्दमाना महता कजीनाम्। अलोत सामान्यमभिवनक्ति परिस्फुरन्न प्रतिभाविशेयम् ॥ I.6 7 ध्वनेयं मुगमूबव्पतचत्वाव्वा प्रदसित:। वनेनानन्मा्याति कबीना प्रतिभानगुमः ।। IV.6

Independence of Literary Criticism in Sanshrit 157

dependent upon the creative instinct of the poct on the one hand and tts aesthetrc meaningfulness on the other, the difference of an alankara from another is based on a distinct consciousness that each should arouse' Thus, for example, u'preksa and dufayoktt are distinguished on the basis of adhyacasaja", and bhamka, rasacat', wabharortt on the basis of consctousness of identity, universality and so on Ruyyaka is never tired of repeating in essence that poetic figure being a potent media of effecting consciousness, should bloom forth from the poetic prauibha, and never regrets to dis- card cumbersome varieties of the flgures which hurt the aesthetic sensibility (the second aspect of pratbha) His commentator Javaratha, who was himself a great thinker of Sarvism, has further underlmed these aspects, namely the figure must be effected by pratibhas and that it should produce a distinct consciousness It is such a fgure that becomes synonymous with poetic beauty and Srividyacakravartin in his Sanjivini a commentary on the Alankarasarvasva often repeats that 'an alankara is nothing but beauty' अनकारो हि विच्छिति । Another important entity for our consideration is the concept of poetic flaws. Among the ten types of flaws enumerated by Bharata1s, tajadapeta (defined as pramāne- pancarnta), Visamdhi and Sabdacyula are clearly Sastric Güdhartha, (paryajafabdabhihita), arthāntarta (avamya-Vamana) atthahing, bh mirtha, ekartha, abhiluptartha refering to impendi- ments created in comprehension of the meaning, were also partly influenced by grammatical and logical considerations, the Tisrna (metrically uneven) relates to prosody Bharata believed that these Baws mar poetic beauty of a Iterary composition Bhamaha followed Bharata in the treatment of

T 0 Vide D- R C Dwivedi (ed ), Alankarasarvasa-Saojivici, pp 82-34 Moulal Banarudas, Delhi, it65 3 Ibid PP 329-335 4 Ruyyaka and Javaratha have given a fult philosophical treatment to 5 dita and other figures For this see R C Dwivedt . Percept like cspenenee in B a its included in Etsays on Indran Poctics, Dellu Igb5 71-165 5 Sre Jayaratha, Vimarimi on A S (N $ cd) pp 44, 58, 6 N.S XV1, 80-91

Independente of Literary Crticsm in Sansknit 159

The words and meanings both must be out of turnt and should emerge from one's own expertence of them" It was to probe this uncommon use of word and meaning by the poet that Bhamaha propounded the principle of Vakroktr which, according to him, pervades entire poetic composition, constitutes essence of all poetic ecpression' and is media of effecting aesthetic sense in poetry anayartho otbhamyate Dandin further asserted the empirical nature of literature and its criticism by admitting equal importance of the seabhaooktt and had even questioned the grafuing of hetu and maya (हृतुन्यायलवोच्चय) on literary judgement विचार कर्कशप्रायस्तेनालीडेन कि फबम् ।

Bhamaha had observed that faws of logic and grammar sometimes become gunas Dandin takes this principle further by illustrating every defect and showing how each turns into a virtue Vamana deals with the dosas systematically in the III adhtarana. Contradicting the opinion of Bharata he maintains that dosas are not positive entities but merely opposite to gunas and these are treated by him under the categories of pada, padartha, rakya and catartha Rudrata, who follows Bharata in his conception of the poetic blemish as positive entity, treats dosas under the broad classes of verbal and material Bhamaha had recognised seven dejas of upama which is exclusive to poetry Dandin and Rudrata also treated these with varying numbers. Anandavardhana by expounding the universal and ephemeral character of the blemishes makes them subservient to the acsthetic meaning of dhoint It is from their relation to sentimtents that the blemihes denve their raison d'etre in hiterary eriticism This is significant because critical judgment of literature

I Vide KA I 36, V 66 2. नन्य नत्यनराव्दा वागाविभाति मुदे मताम् । परेण घृतमुक्तेव सरमा कुसुमावलो ।। KA II 84-5 4 To state the independ-nce of postie eepression and free it a bit fromn the chatn of grammir Bhimsha said that even a faulty expression or a bid word dys not matter so long as the pattern and object of descnption bas some charm Vide Kavyālankāra I 54

Independence of Literary Griticism it Sanskrit 161

loka, Anandavardhana makes following observations which deserve our attention: (i) वुर्व काव्पतन्वविदभि Vrth on kinka I I (i) यनो लक्षणक्ृतामेव स न प्रमिद्ः। Ibid (ui) तर्यवान्यस्नमनानुसारिभि मूरिमि वाञ्यतत्त्वार्यंदशिभि वाच्य- वाचक्समिश्र शब्दात्मा काव्यमिनि व्यपदेश्यो व्यञ्जवत्वमाम्याद् ध्वनिरित्य बन. 1Ibd Mokul Bhatta and bis pupil Pratiharenduraja in their observations make it clear that the Sahrdayas (aesthetes) were responsible for conceiving the novel doctrine of Dhvam.

(i) एमगामागावगाहित्व त घ्वने महदर्यनू तनतपोपवणितस्य Abhıdhavrttmatrka, N.S. cd. p 21 (u) तया हि तत्र विवक्षितान्यपरता सहुन काव्यवत्मनि निरूपिता Ibid. p. 19 (iii) कंदिचतह्द्ततध्वंनिर्नान व्यंजकत्वभेदात्मा काव्यवर्मोऽभिहित । Laghuvrtti, B.S S. ed. p 85 The continuous tradition of disen in the learned circles and Sahrdayas is alluded to by Anandavardhana who refers to them as of mature minds in the concluding verse of the Dhvanvaloka and Abhinavagupta who further states that though the principle of disar was not reduced to writing nevertheless it was continuously m vogue:

अतिच्छिन्नेन प्रव्राहे तरेनदुकत् विनापि विशिष्टपुस्तक विनिवेशनान्। (Locana, p. 32 (KSR 9 ed ) In fact Anandavardbana has given an independent founda- tion to the poctic meaning and the best that we can say about grammatical impact is that it served as a prelude to or preliminary stage in the evolution of Dheant as a comprehensive doctrine of Literary Criticism. This is the real sigurficance of the concluding verse of the Dhvanya- loka. I would now like to conclude by further bringing to your notice the denunciation of the Sastric polemics by acaryas

Int fependense of Literary Crtheism in Sanskrit 163

In the near past when creative criticism ceased and what remamed was simply re-assertion of old principles in new language of the Naiyayikas, the ultra-logical spint seems to have run not One may now fondly hope that this sin of araata polemics will not be inflicted upon new ventures of evolving or re-interpreting the principles of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit and a sicere effort will be made to seck new pastures in modern contet of literary consciousness

DISCUSSION

L. L Josht I have always thought that Indians are falsely accused of being too philosophical Your paper shows very clearly that they are most worldly and practical people and thus confirms my view. S D Swamt Pratibha is essential not only for Kavyasastra but for other Sastras also Mahunabhatta has referred to the importance of it in various branches of knowledge (tr ) R C D.o oed: Should I assume that you are not raising any objection against what I have said 7 Because I pre-suppose that Pratibha is mndispensable for the creation of Poetry That it plays an impor- tant role in other sciences also, is obvious I do not contradict it I have endeavoured to show how the concept of Pratibha, based on the long tradition of poets (cf मरस्वती स्वाद्ु तदर्यवस्तु निप्यन्द- माना महता क्वीना etc) was later on explained more and more on the bass of philosophy Abhinavagupta is the first to explain the signi- ficance of Pratibha in poetry and to establish it on sound philosophical foundations It is a fact that prior to Abhinavagupta no pocticist cared to explamn this term in all philosophical detail I have also tried to show how the concepts of Prattbhā, alankāra, doșa ete remained primarly, and pnor to Abhmnavagupta invariably, unaffected by the philosophical overtones Even after Abhmnava his followers, for example Jayaratha

Independence of Literary Criticism in Sanskru 165

acaryas have tailored a sutra to suit their philosophical predisposition and design. R. S Jautly At the time of Bharata, I think, the layer of the paint of philosophy on the Rasa-theory was not very thick The layer became thicker and the paint darker with the later acaryas In this process completely new ideas were introduced in Rasa with regard to its theoretical aspect, but as far as its practical aspect, the aspect of relishing, rasana, was concerned, no worthwhile progress could be made I would bke to know your opimion about it. R. C. Dunoedi You are right in saying that the theoretical knowledge and the discussion about the actual process of rasanubhuti does not help a spectator or a reader to relish a piece of art It is rather a hindrance than an asset. We all here have become somewhat jada to enjoy rasa properly but there are many more outside this room who are fortunately not interested to know the process of relishing but would rather relish it to the brim of their heart. S D Spami The claboration of the Rasa theory has not taken place purely on the philosophical back- ground The various names, śrngara, karuna etc , the conception of different types of bhanas, the process of sadharanikarana ete, all these things are onginally contrbuted by the poctics itself (tr.) Venkatachalan . I do not say that in the Rasa-theory there I nothing but philosophy, what I mean to say is simple that the process of rasanubhat has not been able to separate itself from philosophy. R. C. Deitedt : Recall to your mind the two famous lines : मोंक द्योकतवमागत and दलोकतवमापचत मस्य छोक, which prove that both a great poet (Kalidasa) as well as a great critic (Anandavardhana) agree to the effect that fota becomes floka. In which school of philosophy would you find this

SYMBOLIC IMAGINATION AND DHVANI

B B. Paltual

Imagination and memory, along with mtelligence and reason, are essentially the characteristics of Homo Saptens If memory assists man in establishing and maitaming connection with the past, imagination carries him forward and enables him to project himself into future Intelligence and reason, the knowing and ordering faculties of human consciousness, distinguish creation both in pracuical and imaginative fields. In literary, aestheuc and philosophical worlds, imagination plays a distinct, mevitable role It functions as the cogmitive, comprehending, transforming and re-creative agent. The world of imagination 13 infinite and eternal because it is creative and symbolic Imagination means creation, and this creation is on many levels such as cognition, transfor- mation and re-creation. An imaginatively created thing is essentrally created for the second time, through formal means This creative or re-creative activity of imagination is on both the lines of the scale-of space and time The extent of space and time, which can be brought into knowability and consciousness, is the limit of imagination. This hurmt forces the artist to create his world within this defined scope and this forms the spatial and temporal limit of his imagin- ation. This limmit refers to its body, scope or its extent and yet, in this very form, it defines its nature also Imagtnative realisation may indulge in pomting, naming, elaborating, for- mulating, or in symbolsing What imagination does not or cannot grasp in its entirety or that for which it does not find adequate, analogous figures, it transmutes into symbols, often abstract but occasionally concrete also This function of imagination, this raid on the intractable and unknowable is the symbolic imagination 1 The symbolic imagination not only brings the various meanings together at a single moment

176.93 Blackmur, R P Th Lien end da Howycns (London, 1956), pp

Symibolic Imagiration ard Dheani 169

unlimited knowledge, and as clear and precise an understand- ing of the nature of the ultimate reality as possible In the Vedas this cosmos is described as Brahranda This is a very apt instance of the symbolic imaginaton Here the entire cosmos is rmagined as ardi (or egg) of Brahma, the celebrated god of creation Besides, the mode of expression is also symbolc. The whole created umiverse is visualised as analo- gous to an egg Htranyagarbha or the golden egg of the creator of this urverse, Brahmi, gives the idea of what this creation is like Thus the supreme egg becomes the 'objective cor- relative' for the spatral concept of the unrverse In the west, in the Eitte and in Milton's Paradtse Lest, the earth is descri- bed as a ball suspended with a golden chain by God The old testament of the Bible contains a detailed account of vanous, created things-trees, forests, ammals, mountains, rivers, birds ete. These provide excellent illustrations of how, and within what limmits, human imagination has tred to work for itself a structnre and lustory of his surroundings.

The literature of nearly all languages in the world entertains some of the followings concepts which are symboli- cally and imaginatively fotmulated. The world is a stage and human beings are actors who from mfancy to old age and death play the appointed roles according to their age. Shakespeare conceived of man vanously, sometimes as flies in the hands of wanton boys : e. gods who kill us for their sport. To Milton and Dante human destiny is essentially in accept- ing the will of God. That is why the aim of his Paradise Lost 13 'to justify the ways of God to man'. The culmmation of Dante's expenence of Lfetime is mn the ejaculation: 'In His will les our peace.' According to Robert Browning, a just, watchful and chartable God sat in beaven and everything was right with the world P.B Shelley, a poet of rare lyric beauty and a thinker, too,of equal sensitiveness and depth, consi- deted life a stain on the radiance of etermity, and death a release and re-union of the spark with ever-lasting, divine effulgence. He said Iafe like a dome of many coloured glass Stams the white radiance of eternity Till death tramples it to fragments.' Eternal or the One remains and only the people, the many change and pass To Thomas Hardy, a

Symbolic Imagination and Dhrars 171

mortal life The concept of Nirtdna as the emptying of desires and finally thought also from the conciousness and self,- a successful attempt at denatunng the human psyche-is a symbol of possible, achievable perfection Life is another miracle, one more baffling phenomenon Biologically a protein cell multiplied to millions, psychucally a consciousness or the thinking principle, life remams inscrutable even when expl- aned either as an end of a "thing that was', or a contmum of a spint understood according to the theory of Karra or the transmigration of soul Besides, one has to die constantly in order to live Sleep, rest, and the fixed, dead position of a foot giving fixity and energy to the other or to step forth are the opposite of life needed for life Again, any com- plex and comprehensive expression or this phenomenon can be only symbolc Eqaully mysterious and perplexing is the prinaple of death Inscrutable, puzzling, death has lured some of the best of humamity mn her pursuit To know by expenence means not to live To know it without dying would only be knowing it only partly or falsely Only sym- bolically, by focussing many pomts of view together, can one reach near a somewhat real (-real as it is knowable in life -) nature of death The symbolic phenomenon which enables man to look at things from the nearest perspectre, and yet in the widest stretch, needs some rlaboration with regard to its functining. Symbolic method is not literal or connectrve. It is spring- ing and projective Even when analogies, parallels, suggest- ions, hints, evocations and provocations work, the symbolic imagination projects reality or experience which is mndependent of such concessions The symbolic procedure is non-analytical, nondiscursive, non-elaborative, and a-rationalsuc It is more instinctie, intutive and formula-lile The person using symbolic imagination intuits truth, apprehends it as ifby his sixth sense. In Sanskrit poctics this symbolie, imaginative activity has been analogised to the third eye of Sir, which can see through present past and future. The whole process is synthetic, converging and concentrie. Looled at philosophically or from the stand- point of thought, the symbolic imagination presents an integrated, synthesised attitude, an inference coming from

Symbolie Imagination and Dhrani 173

Simlarly myth-making, the creation of a tale, a narrative, and personification are also illustrating and exemplifying devices, used in an mtegrated form, to body forth, to present in concrete terms some abstract or obscure phenomena which have been symbolically apprehended Needless to note here, that all of these four devices simile, metaphor, myth and persomification-esther employ or imply analogy which, in its functional or operational aspect, is an mherent trait of the symbolic imagination The Dheam system or the concept of suggestion m Sanskrt poetics provides an interesting parallel with the concept of imagination in the western aesthetics The Dhram theory starts with the following three fundamental postulates1 (1) Dheant cxists apart from the primary and secondary sense of the world, (u) Dham is most intrinsic to poetry, (m1) Dheani cannot be explamed in terms of Denotation (Abhidha) or Indication (Laksand), hence the necessity of coming a new term, Suggestion ( V'amjana) Anandavardhana, the principal architect of the Dheem theory mn Sanskrit, was confronted with a three faceted question what is the essence of literature? How is the poet's gemus, Prahbha, and skill related with it? And, finally, how can the proper response of the critic be ensured? The essence of literature, he declared, was Rasa. Rasa was the creation of an aesthetic mood by the poct with the assistance of huis imagination or Pranbha Anandavardhana did not condemn or run down Alankara, Riti, Vakroktt, and other principles of explaming the spirit of literature, but he found them inadequate. Most of those approaches related to the externals, the devices used for embellishment in literature or tried to define the poetic effect based on the pattern of ar- rangement of words and meaning The real spirit of literature was not captured, and not expressed by canons The principle of Dhvani, on the other hand, Anandavardhana said, estimated the sigmficance of Alaitaras, Gunas and other elements of poetry, assimilated and incorporated them into poetic effect and created the marvel of aesthetic delght. Dhram was the suggested, the echoed meaning. The world, in its denotative

1. Kribnamurthy K Dhrenyaleka and Its Cntis (Mysore, tsCB) p II.

Symbolic Imagination and Dheani 175

beauty and power 1 The three kinds of Dheam, Vasti-Dhrani Alarkara-Dheant, and Rasa-Dhoam, are like the three stages of the poctic imagination in ascending order, finally Ieading to the symbolc imagination The object mn the Vastu-Dhoan offers the first, concrete and tangible parallel to the poet to develop his suggested meaning Then in the Alankara-Dhzanr, second stage, he passes on to the next ascending order, where the parallel offered is an Alnkara, an integral beautifying device, an objective correlative which yet provides some grip over Dhent,-a grip of an edifying mechanism In the rasa- Dheam, the last kind and the final stage of the suggested meaning, both the poet and the reader are left facing a phe- nomenon of aesthetic delight which is mfectious and moving in its impression and yet so clusive There is not single unit of language which can be attributed to possess or contamn this effect when it has once been produced As acknowledged in the Sanskirt poetics, so also in English, the symbohc or the suggested meaning is independent of the ob ects (including words) that led to it. It transcends the words and sentences with the help of which it was created So many focuses of inter. pretation and so many levels of meaning are fused together in tlus multi-dimensional effect that a complex, nch and bewildering symbol is created Here it should be noted that a continuous creation of Rasas, a co-mingling of many directional poetic effects, a concentering of many visual images and rhythm patterns, may finally develop in the poct a vision,-a view, an interpretation of life and the world,-which, carher in the present essay, has been given as the prime purpose of the symbolic imagination Symbol as remarked earher, may work through a word or a group of words, through a sound or a pattern of sounds, through a poetic stanza or as the structure of the entire poem, gradually leads a poet to adopt an attitude towards the whole realty-life and the world, and since this journey is made through imagination, it ends in a symbolic imagination serving as a world-view with a poet. Imagination is a big furnace in which experiences, observations and impressions of various kinds are absorbed,

› Anandavardhana, D regeltd, IV, 15

Symbolic Imaginatton and Dheani 177

language something like a symbolic graph This seems rather an extreme view like the one which considers man living in a symbohc universe with language, myth, art and religion as a part of it.I Besides, such an athitude toward language does not facilitate the differentation and criticism armed at In hterature This view is shared by Anandavardhana also. Answering the objections and arguments of the Mimamsakas, he held that the symbolism of a word was condthoned with reference to the speaker, occasion, trme, place and the context at the time of speaking2 Even when a few words serve as symbols, all do not Word 15, primarily, a sign of an object or a phenomenon which it denotes Symbol, as differentiated from sign, represents the concept, goes to deeper levels of perceptual knowledge, and attempts at coming individually closer to expenence. Sign is the commonly shared, the semantic meaning of the word, while symbol usu- ally forces a particular, individual and deeper meaning. Thus language, this senes of phonetic and visual curves, operates on both symbolic and non-symbolic planes of meaning, and the artist employing the symbolic imagination uses words that serve his purpose.

DISCLSSION

Venkalachalam: Do you really take language as a phonetic and visual curve ? B B Palitral: Yes, I consider both visual and phonetic contents as basic for language. R.P Dnred: How do you distinguish between imagination and symbolic imagination ? B B. Poliwal: Imagination is gencrally and pervasively creative faculty in a poct. Symbolic imagination is a special analogical faculty, a characteristic of symptomatically, summarizingly and religiously harmonising power.

Camrer, E Ar Essay O1 Man, (New Haven I944) p 26 2. Dimgayalka end Its Cntts, p 115

Prrciples of the Dhram School 179

of proficiency in Dharma, Artha, Kama, Moksa and the Arts, as well as attamment of fame and pleasure"! as the purpose of good poetry He defined poetry saying "words together with a definite sense constitute poetr"? But assigning of equal importance to word and meaning alone was not suffi- cient to differentiate poctry from ordinary expressions So the figures of speech were constdered essential for Poetre expression, which alone gave a special charm to Kavya Thus to the first literary critic, figures of speech appeared to be the essential feature of poetry Bharata had the dramatic diction which was to be embellished in order to evoke Rasa, but Bhamaha had nothing more than the Poetic diction which could be embellished by the figures of speech Consequiently, the poctic figures became all important, and thus what was an clatira, a means of embellisnment to Bharata, became an end alsntare, in the hands of Bhamaha. In addition to the fgures of speech, however, the treat- use of Bhamaha includes discussion of other factors of poetry as well, such as, the purpose of poetry, the qualifications of a poct, the definition and classification of it, the blemishes, the Ganas and the logical and grammatical correctness These topics save his treatne from being a mere handbook of advice for the practical working out of poctry. Still it cannot be demed that Bhamaha did not visualise aesthetic pleasure as the ultimate end of Poctrv Thus, the prncples by which Bhamaha would judge poetry may be enumerated thus .- Poctry must be embellish- ed by Egures of speech; the express on should be correct both logically and grammatcally and should avoid Dosas and be attended with Gunas. (2)

We have dilated on Bhamaha to show that at his time the charm of poetry was recognised but the search into its cssentials led only to the external factors Word, meaning and the figures of speech-these were the factors which drew the attention, and efforts were made to formulate a theory

t. Bhimiba, Kavvalankira, I z. Daarmirhakāmamokyesu Varcakapyam Kalasu ca f Ktot Kltm potm ca Sadhukivyanis vanam II 2 Ibrd I, 16 Sabcarthau Sahtan Kavyam.

Prineiples of the Dheani School 181

wing schools. The Riti school, for example, docs not hold that Alankarar are useless in the Kavya, but says that it is the Style ( Riti) that is the essential element. Similarly, the Rasa school docs not deny the usefulness of either the Alam- kara or the Riti but holds the Rasa to be essentral. The Dhvam School, m its turn establshes the supremacy of Dhvani and declares all the other factors to be subordinate to it. After the advent and establishment of the Dhvam theory, an assumdlation of all the factors is reached at and these arc assigned their relative importance. A kind of organic arrangement of all these factors is ultimately accepted and the Kavya comes to be viewed as a composite whole-for example, "the Word and Meaning constitute the body, Rasa is the soul, the Gunas are like the qualities of courage etc., the Dosas are like the physical drawbacks, the Ritis are like the special combination of the limbs, and the Figures of speech are like the ornaments of hands, ears etc." Although it would perhaps be wrong to hold that all the earlier schools automatically accepted the synthesis made by the following schools, it is true that in spite of sporadic opposition from the orthodox adherents of individual schools, ths order of priority of the factors of Kavya became standardised by Anandavardhana, and universally accepted after Mammata. The Dhvanikara is thus the first literary critic who founded a school in which proper assimlation of all cartier concepts was effected Let us here, once again, consider the principles of Literary criticism devised till the advent of the Dhvant School. The view point of the Alamkara school has already been referred to. The Rit school, in its turn formulated the following principtes. The Riti or the style is the casence of poctry; the sty le however means the special use of words, and this speciality consists in the Gunas; the Gunas, ten in number, pertaining to both sound and sense, add charm to the poetry; the figures of speech enhance that charm. Thus

Rour a mi Karyasva. Viata padaracanā rītih. Vil-p ginatml. Kivyasbhavah Kartiro dharmi grriț Tadatrayabctavas cālamkirāh.

Principles af the Dheani School 183

theoretical precision the profound concept of Dhvani as the soul of poetry. The treatise Dhvanyaloka is the best flower of Sanskrit Poetics, and although enough has been written after it, it will not be wrong to hold that since then the study of poetics has not made any sigurficant advance. With the treatse, Dhvanyaloka, the names of three cxtra-ordmnary entics are associated. One is the anonymous wnter of the Kankas known as the Dhvanikara, the second is Anzndavardhana, the writer of the Vith and the third 18 Abhinavagupta, the wnter of the commentary, Locana The writer of the Kankas has been completely shadowed by his own work but that he was different from Anandavardhana was admitted by Ablunavagupta huimself In Sanskrit Poetics, these three are like the muntreja of the Sansknt Grammar. If the Dhvamikara supplied the outlmne of a new approach to creative ltterature, Anandavardhana developed it into a full- fledged theory by adding his erth to it and lastly Abhinava- gupta rendered it proof against all possible attacks and esta- blshed the theory on the highest pedestal. I think that the name of the treatise bears reference to both the Dhvanikara and Anandavardhana. Dhvant may be said to refer to the Karikas written by the Dhvanikara and Aloka, to the Vrtti wntten by Anandavardhana. Perhaps this is hinted at by Ablunavagupta when he says-'Can the vision please without the cye, even if there be moonlght ?'1 (4) It has been observed that the Dhvanyaloka marks a departure from the old approach to poetry and in it the study assumes the grandeur of an aesthetic approach. Let us see to what ertent the Dhvani School achieved success in providing a new and higher standard of judgement. The treatise itself is remarkable. It docs not start with a technical definition of Kavya and other allied topics. On the contrary, it refers to the very gencsis of poctry and thereby gives a supramundane grandeur to the art of Poetry. Secondly, the treatise totally avoids detailed diseussion of the figures

Eda.) I. Abhinavagupti, Locana, celophen of chapter I (chowkhamba Kam leinam teiloko bhau candnlayapı hr

Princples of the Dhoam School 185

It is not necessary to dwell on the arguments advanced by the Dhvani School in support of the validity of the Suggested sense and its postulation of the function of suggestion, as these are quite well known to the students of literature It will, however, suffice to say that theory depends not only on logical argument, which is never- theless fully competent, but has its sanction from the employ- ments by great poets of words having power of suggestion The approach of Dhvanyaloka is remarkable in this respect as well The theorists do not assume the role of an irrefutable Sastrakāra but argue their case in the light of the practice of the poets like Valmiki, Vyasa and Kaldasa The theory, thus presented came to be accepted, mn course of time, by the entire literary world Of course, one or two discordant notes were heard but the mam objection against the theory was not regarding the validity of such a special sense but about the process of reaching at it The Dhvam School holds that this Suggested sense can be of three kinds-the Matter (pastu), Figure of speech (alamtara) and the Sentiment (Rasa) Since both the matter and the figure of speech can be either Expressed or Indicat- ed but the Sentiment can never be Expressed or Indicated so the Suggestion of Sentiments is given the pride of place in the Kavya The excellent Kavya is that in which the senti- ment is suggested, and so the Kavya itself 1s called Dhvant- Kavya The Dhvani School holds that the suggested sense should always predominate in the Dhvant Kavya In the case of its beig subordinated to the Expressed sense, the Kavya is to be treated as a second-rate one. The third and the lowest vaniety of Kavya is that in which there is no suggestion at all Anandavardhana takes great pams to prove his contention that all great poetry owes its greatness to their power of suggestion. Il Dhvam is thus accepted to be the soul of poctry, the other factors so long severally accepted to be essential by different schools must be rejected as non-cssentral. The Alamkara, Rit, Dosa and Gunas are not important per se but may be so or otherwise only in the context of Dhvam, the soul of poetry.

Prinaples of the Dheart School 187

a thing to be tasted by the connoisseurs (sahrdaya) The Kavya may and docs have a particular message which may be related to any of the four ends of human efforts-Dharma, Artha, Kama or even Moksa But the judgement of litera- ture is not based on this message. It is the sentiment, the proper suggestion of which decides the success or otherwise of the Kavya. Anandavardhana refers to the Mahabharata and says that as far as the message is concerned, it conveys greatness of the path of renunciation (rrokya) as the most important end of human life but as a Kavya it suggests the Quietistic Sentrment ( Sazta rasa) Sumlarly, the Ramayana, although upholding the ideal life of Rama, suggests the Pathe- tic (Aurmnz) as a whole. Herem we find that unlke hıs predecessors, Anandavardhana is clear about the distinction between the 'literature of power' and that of "knowledge'. As a pnnciple of judgement, then, it is appropriateness or propricty that has to be judged in relation to the suggestion of Sentiment. The memorable verse-"Save impropriety, there is no other canse of interruption of the Rasa, the great secret of Rasa consists in the observance of celebrated propriety '-of Anandavardhan supphes the clue to the over-all evaluation of the Kavya. The Dhvani School, thus, ushered in a newer and decper insight into the essentials of poetry. The contribut- ions of the Dhvankara and Anandavardhana, in this respect, have been umique. Although not duectly related to the principles of criticism, I would like to refer to the psychology of Rasa-realisation put forward by the thud great erponent of the school, Acarya Abhinavagupta. In the fcld of Sanskirt hterature Abhinavagupta stands as the great master with unparallelled msght. Though his contribu- tion to Poctics consists in the two comments he wrote on the Nityasastra and the Dhvanyaloka, these two works, all schol- ars agree, are more original than many, and are held in the highest regard. The theory propounded by Abhinavagupta proceeds from the premise that the Rasa is suggested, and the Vibhand

6 Anandavardhana, Dhvamyilcka, III, p 330 (chowkhamba Edn.) Anauetyid re ninvad rasbhanganya Karanam I Prauddhaucityabandhity rasigyopamat para ll

Priniples of the Dheani School 189

over language. It is upto the modern critic to prove that suggestion is the soul of poetry, holds true even today I would conclude by saying that like the work of Anstotle, the Dhvanyaloka is the first treatise on Sanskirt Poctics, in which the approach is from Poetry to Poetics, not the other way round. Like it agam, it recogmses the unique importance of a poet's imagiation and sense of propriety It also distinguishes Poetry from history and mantains the comparative greatness of the former It is neither necessary nor possible that literary theones of two different countries would follow the same lines but what affords great surprise is the unwversalty of the fundamental pranciples of the poetic art. The Dhvant School supplies certamn such principles that are valid even in different climes and times.

191

Jagannatha thus comes lust in the last stage. After him the race of entics practicallv extinguished. Even at the time of Jagannatha, the scheme of poetics was ultimately stand- ardised. The theory of Dhvam was finally established by Mammatt. Then in the post-Dhvam period what was that which inspired Jagannitha for a fresh contemplation and rencwed ivestigation ? The span of 550 years between Mammata and jagannitha is marked bv uportant authors lie Ruyvaka, Vivanitha, Hemacandra, Vidvadhara Vidvi- citha, Appayva, Vagbhata, Kesava Misra, Saradātanaya, Rupa-Goswamin, Rajasekhara and Ksemendra. Even uportant thoughts lise the SapgTae of strt, the

are of SATTT were eutrent. In this age of prolifie literary otttput what was that which Jagannitha ongmally contributed to the literary feld ? It is bis concept of tntaar on the fomndation of which he boc to the Kiva as "riiqwfwr) . What B this a ftrqr ? He explains it as : "रमगोपडा च लोकोनराह साइजनवजानगोचरता" In this definition of poctie renriim Jaginnitha usss the word att which be latet replaces by the word #TET. The three ways in which he presents his general definition, where the word WTEAT is used instead of ETr, become more important from the point of chrity and precision, the two points which are most dear to Jagannitha. The three ways in which Jagannitha presents his general defnition are :-

(2) वयविवदिवार्यविकतभावनाव चममकारजनसतावच्लेदक तत्वम्,

In the Erst the process starts with Grrt and eads with

In the second the process starts with sar and ends with

Jagannātha's Ramaniyata 193

"समुचितन लिनस निवेशचारुणा काव्येन समर्पित These words clearly bring to notice the importance he attaches to the सनिवेशचारन्व through औचित्य and लालित्य Though he accepts the व्यवहार of 'दुष्ट काव्यम' and does not incorporate faefora in the definition of his Kavya he is very particular about the precision and accuracy in the use of words For this only he deals with the leenq and elaborately discusses even small things ltke the use of qe or qra Thus the atamer is not lost sight of In his view the words must be accurate, appropriate and appealing Then only they can give the delight which he calls a transcendental delght. Even the words like 'A son is born to you' can give delight but it is not लोकोत्तर काव्याह लाद is thus शब्दाश्रित शब्द arc thus important He defines प्रतिमा as "काव्यघटनानकलशब्दार्थोप- स्थिनि ।"

HIs particular भावना is पुनः पुनरनुसधानात्मा and it generates the अलोविकाह लाद This blissful state of mind is the supreme element among the three It is not only the Rasadhvam that cautses this अलौकिकाह लाद but वस्तुध्वनि and &Ttrerfr as well State of mind is so much important to hrm that not only Gunas but Bhavas are defined in the form of Cittaprttis by him. It is important to note in this connec- tion his definitions of nidra and marana-

(i) "अमादिपरयोज्य चेन समीलन निद्रा" (ii) "रोगा दिजन्या मूर्च्छारया मरणप्रागवेस्था मरणम्"

Thus शब्द, भावना and अलौकिकाह लाद stand for सन्निवेश- सौन्दर्य, आम्बाद and आनन्द respcctively. These are the three elements which his concept of tyoftyar involves Jagannatha's रमणोयता is thus not only the इप्टार्य of दण्डिन, not only the सौन्दयम् of वामन, it is the सहृदयशलाध्यता of ध्वनिकार, the स्त्रस्पन्दमन्दरता of Kuntaka, the औचित्य of क्षेमेन्द्र and रसात्मकता of Vilvanatha as well All these find a beautiful synthesis in the thvftuar of

CONTRIBUTION OF THE VAISNAVA RASA-SASTRA TO SANSKRIT POETICS

Raghmath Sharmat

The Vaisnava Rasa-Sastra has infused into the Sanskrit Poctres the most bewitching and maddening essence, that has immediately sublimated it from a mundane literary discussion to a sublime culogy of the Supreme Bliss Touched by the magic wand of the great master of the devotional sentiment Sri Cartanya, the literary giants in the form of Sri Rūpa Gosvimın, Sri Jiva Gosvamın, Kavi Katnapūra, Krsnadasa Kaviraja and others were transformed, as if, into the supreme apostles of the Bhatt rasa, where the rugged dry faggots and the hardest stones (saphires) started oozing the nectarine juice, whereby the hife-less pulsated mnto life and the active living got benummed, as if, into static inanuate 1 True to the tradition of the master of poetics, Bharata these Vaisnava rhetoricians poured forth the juice of Bhakti through its veins so as to render all the primary' as well as petty3 emotions as contributory ingredients of an exquisite displav of the great king of the rasar, Bhekti -- the Rasa-rat The great traditional literary entics, right from Abhinavagupta through Bhoja, Mammata, Vifvanatha and others, have attached varied importance to rasa in the ficld of poctry The l'aynacz rhetoricians have also pronounced rass as the very soul of poetrys and have joined in lme with some of the important traditional rhetoricians like Visvanatha* in attaching supreme importance to Rasa as a manifestation of the supreme bliss of Brahman and as translated into cight, mine or twelve currents (Rasas) as interpreted in poeuics at a later stage.

Sr-madbhiravacam spintaam ganmatăm palatasa orim Hanbhaku Racim-ta ardiu, Ka bt, Vikram Fra 1983, p. 309 61456 Ib d, P 3% Ujvalantlama-ı Karamali Ed .. e5, P 4 5 1936 Aladkis kaustubha, Ed Varendra Research Society, Berga 6 Sthrtvadarpapa, Ed Moulal Banarndas 1936, P 48,

Gortribstia: of the Vaisrara Rasa-firre to Sanstnt Poeties 197

epresses his inability in classifying Bhath as a rasa.1 This is a dear blot on the traditional litcrary system. Thus Panditaraja holds : "The counting of the ninc-hood of the ratay in adherence to the words of the Mum (Bharata) will break asunder and hence the lack of liberty in recogmtion of rass-bood of Bhakti-the traditional sistra, therefore, carrics more werght.'7 Rudrata, Udbbata, Dhanafjaya, Hemacandra and others have pracucally endorsed the Bhasc-hood of Bhakt on the lines of Mammata, mostly in obedience to the tradition. It was the proud privilege of the Vaisnavaite rhetoricians to have pronounced the sole seat of rama in the Supreme Brahman' alone and its expression m the sublimest bliss in the form of Bhat. It is generally mamtaned that the literary tradition prior to the Bengal Vaisnavism concerved of Bhakh mostly in terms of human love as between a man and a woman and then apphed it to the sphere of gods. What the followers of the Bengal Varsnavism did was sumply to reverse the order of this appheation. That i to say the former eztended the human ssntiment to the divine plane whereas the latter interpreted the divine-sentiment in human terms. But there is still a third view singular by itself, in so far as it recognizes not merely sublimation of himan sentiments, but takes the sentiment of love mn its highest perspective of the archetypal form of Platonic love that is ideally true and sincere between an ideal hero and the ideal heroine in its ideal fervour and Edelity.' It is, therefore, clear that there was

(The Reahy of the Vediats i Brahmin but the Vannarzs regrd theu Lord Krtan as Suprerne Brahman). A devononal attachment towards rods in penerl may, if at all, be regirded as a mere emonen becaue of the presence of the mdnndualstic supect of Absotate censciotacis in thom Eut the s.mhar treatmeat to an attachteret towards Ged (Parimitmant-tbe abolute scat of the Sop- reme bles casnot be justsed Sri Madhesrtdana Sarasvati remarks m h

Esiny prokmb ruo ret yaduttim rasstondub. Deiaare jivatvat parisadprkrst,

4- God'd Thomns, Piateese Love, Locdon 1963, p 141 : "The just mus, eotte the unjest, loves haset This wes a Greek cenmoaplce, but it fullowed, Puto thought from the peace and hare

Contributten of the Vatsrara Rasa-fastra to Santkrel Porties 199 The excruciating pangs of separation carry with them the nectanne hallucinations drawing the self and the environ- ment into the all-engulfng love, both the lover and the beloved. This is the Mahibhaga, the most majestic trance pulsating with Mohena (bewitching) and Madana (intoxicating) life-currents where the separation itself melts into the ecstacy of the intimate umon and a the subhmest lumt of the un- himated joy The ideal taster of the rarest rasas, the crest- jewel of all the rasikas casts asunder His own eestatic forces of humnself as of others (Parakiyas) to over-reach them inspite of all hundrances, hardships and limitations of ethies, sociology and religion, so as to enable them to cross them all for an intimate taste of the supreme super-sensuous enjoyment of Supreme Bliss. Let there be no bar to a recognition of the king of the sentiments raseat on the ground of uncommon experience. Devotion as also love are common in human mind, literature as well as religion. If the unique beauty, eestatic separation and ecstasy of union in a Sakuntala or a Yaksini can be regarded as objects of common taste, why should the highest ecstasy m union and separation between Sri Krsna and Sri Radha be precluded from the taste of the rantas ? The rareness of quality is required at both the places and the tasteful capatity is a pre-requiste for both the enjoyments. The apostle of Bhattt as also a master of poetic criucim Sri Rupa and his companions scatter the pearls of the highest literary water at the lotus-feet of the absolute Master of the absolute bles. And this contribution has crowned the litcrature with the supersensuous blss capable of touch by the minute poetie sense of a true poet, All other poctry, centred in the fading objects of earthly beauty, are rejected as mere trash, playing only with a semblance of resa (rasābhasa)"

Ibid, p 463 . Niriyana Tirtha, Bhatucandnta (Quoted mn the Kalyana Bhaku aatt, p 347) *Ittham ca laukr arase iregiradau vısayavacchınnasyarva Bhagaradikirekta cetovritilakşane bhaktirase tu annvacchnsaadinaadaghanasya thagavatah sphua-id AtyastidkskvamEnsodasya A'o bhagavadbhakurasa eva Luttarknupckpys paramarankab sevyab.

DHVANI AS THE MEETING-POINT OF ALL PRINCIPLES OF SANSKRIT LITERARY THEORY

Dr K Knshnamoorthy

I

Besides Dhrant, the major principles of Sanskirt eriticism are Alankara, Guna-Doşa, Ritt, Rasa, Aucita and Vakrokti In lustorical surveys of these by scholars like SK De, PV Kane and V Raghavan we are made to feel that there is a progress in thought from theorist to theories and a kind of evolution in the concepts themselves We are asked to beheve that, by turns, each prineiple provided the master-key to unlock the secret of poetic essence Theorists are classed as belonging to the Alantara School or Guna-cum-Ril school or Dhvani School or Vakroku School or Aucitya School I have been struggling in my recent writings (viz, (1) Essays in Sanrkrd! Cntiism, Karnatak University, Dharwar, 1963; (2) Somne Thoughts on Indian Aesthetics and Literary Crificism, University of Mysore, Mysore, 1968) to show that this procedure of scholars is not conducive to any clanfication of the most fundamental facts of literary theory which are shared in common by most of our Sansknt writers I shall try in this paper to present some of the difficulties facing an enquirer into the nature of poetry as envisaged by our ancients and to indicate a lme of approach which would make confusion less,

II

The basic analysis of Kasya or poctry in which every Sanskrt theorist is agreed is the distinction of fabda and arth. There is no writer on Alankarasastra, from Bhamaha to Jagannatha, who does not allude to them or who does not rear all his conceptual superstructure on the foundation of this distinction. Let us simply ask ourselves whether we understand the significance or realise the importance of this foundational fact. So long as fabda and arthe mean no more

Dicani es the Meeting-Point of All principles 203

though they are factually unrelated and it is the imagiation which endows personal feelings to manimate objects too. These are the vanous alankaras like Simle and Metaphor. The poet's funchon conasts in recordng an expenence which E different from the worldly or the togical or intellectual esperience of facts; and the means he adopts consciously of unconsciously as dictated by his imagination are the elankares In other words, the recognition of an alerkara as such demands literary sensibility and a poet-like imagination (Bharayitri pratbif in the words of Rajasekhara) on the part of the reader too All good alarkaras are lost upon the mere grammanans, just as Rasas or gunas are missed by them. The outer characterucs of an alenkara which everyone can grasp, whether a sahrdaya or not, do not explamn its poetic essence Genra gacayah' is no upemalankara. Much of the cant in our books on the Alantarafadra can be traced to a deliberate disregard of this primary consideration I should hke to stress therefore that all clankaras are expressions of the imagination and are deltberate departures from the matter-of- fact or logical uses of language. Their beautv is their success; and absence of beauty in a kacjalintara is a contradiction in terms A mechanical figure of speech is a-kana (unpoetic) and hence no alantara, just as a doll is no baby, but an imitation of a baty. Thus we are, willingly or unwillingly, led to a conuderation of the sol of poetry, the atman. It is always somcthing fdt by the man of taste and does not admit of intellectual dialectics The use of language, then, with a vicw exclusively to beauty B the only true explanation of all clantaras and hence it is nothing but dison. Thus the true alantaratafin has perforce to be a dhcenicadi, if he has lterary sensibility. Usually, the cluntaras are held to beautfy the part and not the whole. Again, a mimomer ! They would not be adoraments at all if they did not indirectly beautify the whole though attaching themselves to the parts (a-gadearens jitcit) as Anandavardhana would say. Again, it is wrong to think that a poet's task lies in taking an unpoetic ides, and adding to it an cli-tira to make it poeuc. He is a poet only in so far as his imagination seizes facts and rela- tions poetically. In a true poet, alinkares are integral and

Dtsari As the Meeting-Point of all Princples 205

hterary judgement; and agam we are facing what is techni- cally called the atman or soul of poetry Its manifestation may take different forms and these are the gimar or excel- Iences, grounded agam in fabda and artha Corresponding to the two primary Ritu, we must at least admit Madhurya and Ojas and lucidity or prasadz as a third to explam gencral poctic appeal in all instances In the epics like the Ramayans and the Mehibhirats we have only Prasida, but Madhurya Ojas can be best felt in the refined poems of classical Sanskrit. Guras, then, condition the poetic personality itself and are mseparable from any poet's work. Kalidasa is mostly Madura; Bhatta Narayana is fired by Ojas But the theme may demand change of gunes as when Kalidasa describes a fight in Milentagrimitra or Bhatta-naravana describes the soft passion mn the Fetisamhara. This consideration brings us to the reahsation that parti- cularly in drama, the psychological content has a great bearing on g.eu-cum-rili concepts. This i3 the famous principle of rasd pertected by Bharata mn his Nati-fistre. In classical Sanskrit mahataa, which is primarily concerned with Varpana or imaginative description, and not abh naya ot representation of paycho-phytical events, onlv that broad principle of rasa may be generally admitted, the detailed claboration of its varieties being held to be confined to particular portions only. This is cractly what Bhamaha and the ancients did in their concept of Rasesedelsikara. The Raracadalekarar refer only to such pasages in classical Sanskrit literature where the different xsas rise to a p'tch. Bat the gentral principle of sase is ad- mitted by them in their definition of mahatesya itself. Rarar also contribute to the reader's trih or dnanda in their own way as clanteret, giar and rilu. They can all be called dasters in a broad sense or rare in a broad sense, in the sense of aesthetie factors revealed in poetrv. But the general practice of writers is to narrow down the meanings of these terms to suit their own ideas and to indulge in rating one literary theorist as against another. I think this is a mistake of modern critical scholarship which deserves to be kalted. What eractly is the stuff of poctry? Is it pure emotion, sentimeent, feeling, mere citta-er'tt-cifea and hothing more!

Dheani as the Meeling-Point of all Principles 207

is the sthaytbhaca ? If the answer is utstnae, or anything else, questions regarding its anubhanas and oyabkicaribhatas will reman unanswered. In fact a general oismaya or wonder can be affirmed in all barnana since attfaya is an essential ele- ment of all poetry In other words, my simple submission is that the rosa theory, when pressed literally to apply to all poetry, can do more harm than good In the widest sense of rasd, as meaning the aesthetic delight of the reader, there is no poetry or fine art, whether music or painting, sculpture or architecture, without rasa. But this is not what is usually meant when the theorists talk of a poem's dominant or ancillary rasa In the sense of aesthetic sensibility, it cannot be demied either to the poet who worls under rasoeesa and who reveals his rasaoatta in his varnana (to borrow the words of Rajasekhara) or to the actor who is imbued with it during lus activity of representation despite the demands made tpon his attention by his art. I wonder whether it can be demied even in aesthetic perception of beauty in nature m one's own life, apart from poetry But rasa in the narrower sense cannot be affirmed either of the man in life or of the poet or of the actor, or of the reader of poetry at all times It must needs be confined to the spectator of drama and to the reader of poetry at times when the mental states as patterned by the poet and present- ed by the actor ring as rasa

IV

Throughout, I have dwelt on the common points of agreement or the concensus of Sanshrit literary theorists relating to the essentials of the basic concepts I do not believe that some theorists realised these implications while others did not I am led to feel that every theorist realised these facts qite well, though he decided to emphasise one or the other vital element, since every writer is seen relating all these different concepts in a sort of general philosophy The general philosophy is implicit in some but becomes explicit for once in Anandavardhana's Dheanyalokd That is why I regard that the theory of Dhvani is the meeting-point of all theorics of Sanskrit literary criticism It clears misunderstandings about

OBSERVATIONS ON SOME ELEMENTS OF SANSKRIT CRITICISM*

LL Josht

क्त्ीना मानम नौमि नरन प्रतिभामभमि यत्र हम्नमानीव भुदनान चनुदंस। I admire oar President, Dr K O Pandey's selection of Abhanvagupta for complete mastery. Abhinava is not only an eclectic, who takes the best and the most reasonable from all the older wnters of renown, he is also a propounder of Advarta Saivāgama whtch believes mn the identity of the jivatman with the Paramatman. The jivatman or the indi- vidual soul is regarded by this school as being of the nature of Cidananda or conscious bliss which finds expression mn Rasa. The tenets of thuis school seem to eliminate the nccessity of renunciation and the freedom from emotional disturbance (on which Advaita Vedanta insists) For world- Iv people, as most of us are, attainment of the supreme bliss through a complete identity of the knower and the known is clearly a d'fficult process. Advaita Saivagama has therefore a greater appeal to the Rasikas as their apprecia- tive soul can hope to experience the Supreme Bliss with- out the renunciation of appreciation of beauty everywhere and in everything. This is our Rasa-experience which we may enjoy without going to the full extent of an aghoratenthin and exclaiming like one of them :

पेनी मुरा भ्रिनतमामुसमीशितन् ग्राहः स्वभावजलिनो विकृतरच वेष। मेनेदनीदृशनदुश्वन मोभवर्नम

I believe that in Abbmnava's vicw Rasa-empenenee emerges only in the audicace, and not in the actor, who

Remarb ef Shr Jnhr who prended over the concliding function hdd co 23 12. 1g60.

Obsereatons on Sore Elements of Sanskrit Criticism 211

logy has come to believe that creativity is not confined to a few naturally gified people It is mnherent in human nature and can be encouraged by proper education Old ideas in new combmnations can also yield new ideas A Sahrdaya studies good poetry deeply and his memory or rumination over the old ideas may trigger new ones This need not be motiyated by extraneous factors like fame or wealth, as these might result in excess of mouvation which is fatal to a work of art. Thus Dandin seems to be correct in testifying

न विदयने ययनन पूर्ववासनागुगानु्बन्धि प्रतिभानमद्भुनम्। श्ुतेन मन्नेन च वागुपासिना घव करोत्येत्र कमप्यनुग्रह्म्।।

Many successful writers like Robert Lous Stevenson have testified efforts they had to make before thev came to be recognised as great writers

dtantarasear upar cecanan

भांवो वयानानिनि चेल उच्वारणमोन्दर्यस्वार्थयोगे शब्दे च शब्दार्थनोरसयो- रन्तनवि मेदावगनान। पूर्वत्र अयमौन्दर्संस्य सब्दालडकारनियतागत्वाभावात् स जषि व कुतचित् वदप वे शन्दमोन्तर्पंत्य प्रायान्यान् 'प्रावान्येन व्यपदेशा भवन्ति' इनि मन्ालकारत्वानिवान सकम नया हकवत्नुप्रामपो नयम्चार्थगतस्य मौन्दर्सस्य मनोउि तमान्तमवाभावान् समकलाठानुपासमोश्च क्मदः सनो पर्यवं पम्पार्यमास्यान्मवव्य मौन्दवस्य तत्र प्रानान्याभावात् शब्दा लद्कारत्वाभियान युक्तम। परत्र तु अथमन्दयंस्य उच्चारणमोन्दर्यस्य च

शम्ानवागन्यनि कलमुच्चा रणमौन्दर्य मर्याइकरक चार्यमोन्दर्यमिति

अशोच्पने-एववाअपभनेर्योन्चारण एव क्मेणउपो स्वरूपे, जाशयव्यनि- रिक्नन्य मौन्दस्वरपसानुदलसने आधवरुपेपत तत्प्रतितेशच। समीक्षक- दन्टयानें बोनवत्त मौन्दर्यउत्वञ्वेनि तत्वद्वय विद्यते। अत्र सौन्दयंतत्वस्व बोजनत्त्वविरहिनम्वतीत्यभावान् अर्थरूपेणवोपस्यानम्। एव सत्यपि भौन्दयं- मयंगन न त्वर्यंसूपमिमत्माक या वातीयकनस्तत अर्थमोयपरस्मरमेवार्थान- सन्बान हेतु। न हि सनेन अर्थरुपम व तन्मोन्दर्यमित्यस्भाव मिद्धान्तस्व कापि प्षत्त । विञ्बर लोकगाकमनववनितोत्दर्स्य चाभुपरनलरूरचान् 'मुख बभल- नितर सुन्दरम्' दति वाक्गवन्य मादश्नान्मकस्व सोन्दर्यस्य च वाक्यारय-

मोन्टसमप्य न्वारणरपमिति जैरम् । एवनर्योलद्शारो रम्पायंरुम शव्दालक्वकाराचार्यमम्बद्धो रम्ोच्चारपरूप

विचारनीनम्। पुतत्र वाच्चव्यम्पारीनामवििलरस्ार्यप्रकाराणा परन च

मनमत्र प्रस्तुपन .- वकामिने नमब्दोकरिष्टा गवामलकनि। - काव्यालद्रकार १-२६ मावन्वरी हुदनावर्जरका अर्यपतारान्ावन्नोलटकारा.। - वान्यालसार:

पयुदहूरण वाच्चायम्य प्राज्ान्वेन प्रतिभामान् कुनवत् सनोि व व्वम्पार्या-

Alantarasvar upartcecanam 215

अय 'भनङकायस्याभावान्' इत्यमो विचार्यते। अन्न रसोज्लद्कार्यों- उदडकारायच तदलदकरणहेतव इति तेदभावेडललकारावानम्य वैयर्थ्यपत्तिरित्य- भिनवगुप्तपादाना मतम्। अत्रोच्चते शब्दार्थयो (रसस्य) नियनयोगाभावेन न हि तस्य सवत्ालककार्यत्वमिति तकभावेष्प्यलडकाराघानस्योपपति। ननु तत्र किमलङ्कारयमिति चेतु शब्दायवित् नवित्यस्माक मतम्। ननु एवमर्पि शब्दार्यवलद्वकार्यों तदात्मके च नत्मौन्दर्ये अलद्कारावित्यलद्कारालङकामे-

सोन्दयंदृष्टया तवालद्कारव्यपद्शो बोघतत्त्वदृप्टया चालडकार्मव्यपदेश इति सर्व मुन्थम्। ननु लोडेउदकारालड्डकार्ययोरेवमभावात्कथमेतदिति चेन्न लोकगतस्व तयो रपम्यावानन्व्वात्। लोके हि पुथगवस्थितस्यालडकारस्य मलनकार्यण योगो हारस्येव वणठन। न तथा काव्ये। तत्र वाच्यवीचकच।दृत्व- रूपम्पालद्वकारम्य वाच्यवाचनरूपादलद्कार्यात पथगवस्थानासम्भवात् 1 विञ्च रमम्वाध्पलद्कार्यतवे 'रमोज्त' 'अलङ्गकारोज्यम्' इनि प्रतोतिद्वयभानैऽपि उभयो

अनो रमाभावेधप्यलद्कारमौन्दयंमद्भावेन न हि अलडकारावारभूतयो

शम्दालङ्ककार इति स्यितम् ।

परिचर्चा

रे प्र द्विवेदी मउदार्ययोर्पमेंखवेनालवाराणा वर्णनमवृत्वा मवता शब्दार्यंयो- रभवत्वेनालकाराणा वर्णन वृतम्। विभेतन्मन सम्कृतकाव्यशास्त्रा- नुमोित वुनापि च श्निपादितम् डा. ब्रह्मानन्द शर्मा- जय तावदस्माक दुष्टिकोमेद। रे. प्र. द्विवेदी. शब्दारथीं तु धर्मिणो, मलकारबच ध्मे। दगने तु सर्वस्य ब्रह्मात्मनत्वाद्धमंवमिणो, यक्तिदक्तिमतोगु पनुणिनोर्वभिद्:। बिन्नु व्यवहारे उभयोमध्येजन्तर विद्यत एव । अत भवता वमोभदत्वेन चर्चा कर्नव्या। तहि मत्र भवना शब्दार्थयोराथवत्वेना- लकारस्वाशिनत्वेन व्यवस्या कर्तव्या न त्वभिन्नत्वेन। ब्रह्मानन्द गर्मा : वाम शब्दार्थावाययी अलवारश्च शव्ार्थाधित विन्तु मव्दारययोभिन्न न तन्य विभषि स्वरूप विद्यते। स तु सब्दार्यं- रूप एव। रे.प्र ट्विवेदी भवना मुखे यदुपनेत्र बनते तत्कि चक्षुभ्यां भिन्न तद्रप वा?

Alankarasnarúpavivetanam 217

च तदन्वयवतिन्व न समवनि। जमभवति चास्मिन् सबये महती मव्यवस्था स्यान् नब्दार्थालकारयोरच भद एव न प्रसज्येत । ब्रह्मानन्द शर्मा मया न हि प्रोक्न यत् सर्वथा तथोरभेद। गया केवलमेतत् पोक्त यन् वोधनत्वदृष्टया, ज्ञानतत्त्वद्प्ट्या वा थौ शब्दायों तरवेव सौन्दर्यदृप्ट्या अनकार।अत्र केवल दृष्टिभेद। वकटावलम् सौन्दर्य दृष्टिर्वोघइुष्टिश्च इनि दृष्टिदय भवद्धि स्थापयितुमिध्यते परतु सौन्दर्यस्यापि बोसो भवति। अन सौन्दर्यदृष्टर्बोवदृप्टावेव कय नान्तर्माव ? ब्रह्मानन्द शर्मा सवस्थापि बोधो भवति रिन्तु सरोंदर्यवोघो भिन्न अयंत्रोघशच मिन्न । (वोन-अर्थशोघ, न तु बोधभामान्यम्) अर्यबोघ बिचायं यदि [भेद नियते] तहि तन्न तु अयस्येव प्रावान्यम् सौन्दर्म दुप्ट या [तु अ्वारस्य] वेकटाचलम् वय तावत् प्रथम स्पष्ट जिज्ञामामहे कीदृशी भवता मनसि अभदम्य घारणा विद्यते ब्रह्मानन्द शर्मा एपा धारणा यत् मुसे यत् कुरूपता मौन्दर्य वा विद्यने तस्य स्वरप मुखाद भिन्न न किमपि विदयने। मुसमेव तत। एवमेव अलकारा अपि न वाह्मरूपा अपि तु शब्दार्थरूपा एवं। लोके यया अनकारालकार्ययोभेंदो विद्यते-पथा अलकारा शरीरात् अपनेतु शब्धने ने तथा वाय्ये। तन तृ से न "हारादिवद्" वनन्ने अपि तु मुसे सौन्दर्मादिवन् यनो हि तेषाम अस्नित्व नन्दार्थयोभिन्न न सभवति। यथा सौन्दर्य मुमर्पमेव तर्थत्र शन्दालवार रम्योच्चारणर्प, अर्यानकारश्च अर्यावचोष- रूप । रे प्र ह्विवेदी. यदि गुणमुणिनोभेंदो भवना न मन्यते तदा 'गुणी' एव वभ्यनाम्। कय गुणस्य ग्रहणम् ? नलवारो भावर गन्दायीं तु दव्यस्पो। मथा भावतव्ययोभेद भर्वद्धि स्वीकियते तर्थव जनवारस्न (मोन्दर्यस्प) द्रव्यरयाद् शव्दाद् अर्थाच्च भेदो- ्वस्वमेव स्वीकायं। जय भेदो व्यावहारिक। यदि भवता दर्शनमाधिय विन्विद् विचाय ते तदा रवन्यत्। तत्र तु सवमेव ब्रह्मात्मक भवति। रामचन्द्र द्विवेदी: जरयम्ब विमर्दिन्या टिप्पप्वेका व्नते वन् मर्द्याप पर- मार्थन भरवं ब्रह्मात्मक नवनि रिन्तु मथा मनुष्ये एव 'जीव' इत्यस्य व्यवहार विवे वर्थव चास्सव्दार्यंमदर्भ एव रमस्य

संस्कृत-समीक्षाशास्त्र और हिन्दी-आलोचना

डा उद्दयभानु मिंह

हिंदी-आलोचना के दो मख्य उत्तमर्ण हैं (१) नस्कन का समीक्षागास्त्न, जौर (२) पाश्चात्य (प्रधाननना अगरेजी) साहित्यालोचन। हिंदी -लोचना पर इन दोनों सरोतो का प्रभाव दोहरा है (१) साहित्यिक मानदडो की स्वी- कृनि, और (२) साहित्य-समीक्षा मे उन मानदडो के प्रयोग की पद्धति का अनु- मरण। इन दोनों के प्रतिफल-स्वर्प एक तीसरा प्रभाव भी उन्लेस्य हे मस्वृन- काव्यशास्त्र और पाश्चात्य माहित्यालोचन की पारिभाषिक गब्दावली का अविकल, परिवर्निन अथवा अनूदित रप मे प्रयोग। "समीक्षा" औौर "आलोचना" को ही लीजिए। आधुनिक हिंदी-ाहित्य मे प्रचलिन ये शब्द व्यत्पत्ति की दृष्टि से भस्कन के ही शब्द हैं कितु स्वगुणार्य की दृष्टि मे वे अगरेजी "तिटिसिक्म" के समशील हैं। इम पर मे यह क्षिप्रानु- मान नही कर लेना चाहिए कि वे सम्कृन की साहित्यशास्त्रीय विचारवारा से सवथा विच्छिन है। शाम्त्न-भेदो का निरूपण करते हुए राजमेखर ने समीक्षा को "अन्तर्भाप्य" और "अवान्तरायंविच्छेद" कहा था। काव्य के सदर्भ मे ये लक्षण उमके तन्चाभिनिवेगी विवेचन का सवेन करते हैं। दर्गन, विचारणा, विवेचन आदि अर्यों मे परमरा-प्युक्न "आलोचना" का सूत्र अभिनवमुप्त के "लोचन" से मिलाया जा सकता है। आलोचना का मुख्च उद्देद्य है भावक को वह दृष्टि प्रदान करना जिसकी सहायता से वह आलोच्य वस्तु के मर्म को भली भाति ग्रहण कर भके। "ध्वन्यालोक्लोचन" के प्रथम उद्योन के अन मे अभिनवगप्त ने कुछ इसी प्रकार की वान कही थी : कि लोचन बिनालोको भाति चन्त्रितयापि हि। तेनानिनद्गप्तोञ लोचनोन्मीलन व्यघात् ।। हिंदी-भापा-माटिन्य मसनाश्रयी है। फ्लन सस्वृतनममीक्षानास्त्र मे प्रयुकन रस, चलवार आदि से सबद्ध शब्दावली का हिंदी-लालोचना मे तर्थव व्यबहार होता आया है। यह और बान है कि मूल प्रयोक्नाजों के तात्पर्य मे अनमिन होने वे कारण एकव आलोचतों ने कतिषय शब्दी का मनमाने दग से अथं-परिवरतन कर दिया है, कभी-वभी अर्य का अनर्थ भी हो गया है। "साधारणीररण", "तादात्म्य", "आनन्दरम" आदि ऐसे ही शब्द हैं। आधुनित दिंदी-नमीक्षा मे प्रचलिन व्रामदी, बामदी, अभिव्यज्नावाद, प्रगतिवाद, प्रयोगवाद, नयी बविता, ठोन कविता, अ-्कविता, युग-बोन, साहित्य-

Sarstrit Samiefasastra aur Hirds Alocana 221

मन्कृन-ममीभ्ा-गैली के विबिय रूप हिन्दी-जालोचना मे भी प्रनिफलिन हुए है। मस्कृन-माहिन्य में आलोचना की दो प्रमुख पदनिनां दिखायी देनी हैं (१) आचान-सद्धति, और (२) टीक-पज्ति। आधुनिक माहिन्य-ममीक्षा के दो स्पष्ट विभाग सर्वमान्य है (१) सै ज्वातिक सनीक्षा, और (२) व्यात्र- हारिक ममोक्षा। आचान-पद्धति पर लिसित "ध्दन्यालोन", "कव्यप्रकाश" जादि प्रय मे द्वातिक समीक्षा के उक्ृष्ट उदाहरण है। 'कान्यमीमामा" मे निदिष्ट आाम्नमेद (वृति, पद्धति, नाथ्य, समीक्षा, टीवा, पजिका, कारिका और वार्निक) ममीआाशास्त् के मदर्म मे, अपनी मैदानिक विवेचना की विशिष्टना के काग्य, आनावसद्धति के ही विभिन्न रूप हैं। मस्कृत-वाचार्यों ने रस, कलकार, ध्वनि आदि के शाम्ीन निम्पा के कम में प्राप अन्यरचिन और कमी-कभी स्वरचिन उमहरगो द्वारा' जपने मिद्धान्तों का स्पष्टीकरण किया है। मिद्धान-प्रतिपादन हो उनका प्रधान उद्देभ्य गहा है जय दुनिनों का विवेचन गो। लक्षण-उद्ाहरण वे द्वारा गा्त्रीर नमीक्षा की यह परिपाटी हिनी-लोचना मे १६वी गनी ई० मे लेकर २वी गनी ई० तक चनग्नी नहीं है। १८वी-१९वी गनी वि० मे तो आचार्यनदाभि- लायी कवियों ने इतने अधित गीति-्प्रयो का प्रणमन किया कि उन दो शतिशो वो हिंदी का रीवितन कहा जाना है। भारतीय भाषाओं के इनिहास मे यह "रीडिकाल" हिंदी की ही बिशेषना है। मन्बुत के आचार्य तत्त्वन. माचार्न थे। हिंदी के तथाकयिन आाचार्य मन्तः वति ये। जन "ध्वन्यालोड़", "काश्यप्रकान" आदि की कारिकाजो तथा सुनिजों और "ध्वन्यालोकलोचन", "अमिनवभारती" आदि टीकाजो मे जो मृदम-विवेचन-बन्नी मिलती है वह हिंदी के रीतिप्रयी मे दृष्टिनोचर नहीं होनी। पद्यवद्ध होने के कारण इनमे विषन-वरिवेचन का बैगडक नहीं है। "रनग्हन्य" (दुलवि), "व्यम्ाबंकौमुदी" (प्रवापमाहि) आदि दुष्टेक बृनियां ही ऐसी है जिनने गद्यवद्व बुनि पानी जाती है। उनमे भी तत्वाभिनिवेसी व्याम्यान नही है। मम्ृन आचार्यों ने बहुता अन्वरचिन उदाहरण दिने थे। अविक्तर हिदी-रोवितवियों ने स्वरचिन उद्ाहरण बिने है। हिंदी के रीनिशल मे विद्यमान मस्कुन के पडिनराज जगन्नाय मे भी इम युगोन प्रवति' का पारा जाना आतम्मिक नही है। हाँ, हिंदी मे अपवाइस्वरुप "तुल्नीभुद" (रसरूप, १७५४ ई०) जंमा अन्वास्प्रप भी उपलय है जिमने वेवल तुन्नी के

१. निमान नूजनम्दाहरणानुर्प काव्य मनात्र निहितं न परम्प विचिन् । - रसगनानर, १६

Sansint Samisatastra aur Hindi Alocana 223

तिवेचन की आवश्यक्ता नही है। परेगिनज्ञाननला हि वुद्धय। अन टीक्ा- कारो ने अर्य के व्यास्यानपूर्वक रचनागन लालित्य (रस, अलकार, ध्वनि आदि) का पयास्यान सक्षिप्त निर्वेश किया है। उदाहरणाय "वृत न कर्णापितवन्धन मने " की टोका में राघजभट्ट ने वाच्य अयवा व्यम्य-रूप मे प्रतीन गव्दायनिकारो का, लक्षणा तया व्यजना के रमणीय व्यापार का, ालवन गकुतला के रूप-चित्रण का, और आशन दुप्यत की मनोदना का सारगर्मित निर्देश किया है।' टीकाकारों की दृष्टि कही-कही पर पाठालोचन की ओर भी गनी है। हिंदी मे "हरिप्रकाम", "अमरचद्रिका", "मानमसोयप", "बिहारी- रन्नाकर" आदि टीकाऐं इसी प्रकार की रचनाएँ हैं। िमी ने व्याम-रोली अपनायी है, किसी ने समाम-ैली। टीक-पद्धति को हम आधुनिक व्यास्यान्मक वालोचना का पूर्वरूप वह मनते हैं। दस्तुन पाठक के लिए व्याख्यान्मक आलोचना जिननी उपरोगी है उननी प्रनावाभिव्वजक या निर्भयात्मक आलोचना नहीं, क्योकि रचना के अर्थ-ग्रहणप के बिना वव्यनिष्ठ मौदर्य की प्रनीनि सभव नही है। हिंदी के आलोचक-शिरोमणि रामचन्त्र सुक्ल ने सूर, तुलमी आादि के अनेक पद्यो की ममीकषा व्याम्पात्मक शेली मे ही की है। दूर्वोकन पद्धनिनों के अनिरिक्त दो एकागी समीक्षा-प्रणालियाँ भी सस्कृत- परपरा मे दृष्टिगोचर होनी हैं जिन्हें हम सुकन पद्धति और सदन-पद्धति कह महते हैं। अनेक मुक्तियों मे कालिदान, वाण आदि कवियों के काव्य-वँनिप्ट्य को प्रशनान्क आलोचना उपलब्ध होती है।' इम प्रकार की परपरा हिंदी मे भी चरती रही है।'कविपम मूक्तियों में तुल्नात्मक ममीक्षा का आभाम भी

१. उदाहरणाय - अभिज्ञानवातुन्तल, ६।१८ पर अर्थद्योतनिका २ सिगुपालवन, १६० पर म्वंद्रकपा-विलामिनीविभ्रमहन्तपनरिका इति मावीयान् पाठः। अन्यया विप्रटटष्टार्यप्रनीतिकत्वेन कष्टानारयदोपापते.। ३. निगंतामु न वा वस्य कानििदिानन्य सुवितषु। श्रीनिम घुरमार्वांनु मजरीष्वित जायते।। -- वाणभट्ट रुचिरम्वरवांपठा रमभाववनी जगन्मनी हरत । मा कि नरुी न हि न हि वागी बाणम्य मतुरतीलस्य ॥ -चर्मदाम ४ (क) मनमया ने दोहरे ज्यो नाव के तीर। (न) ममुस कविता धनजानंद की हिर आंगिन नेह की पीर तकी। -द्रजनाय (ग) भाट को देन न चहै बिदाई। पू्छे वेमत्र की व विताई॥

Sastnt Samiksafistra aur Hindt Alocana 225

वर्जन को भोनि व्वनि को काव् का प्राणतत्त्र स्वोकार किया है।' रीति, बकोक्ति या औचिल को हिंदी-आचारों ने काव्य का प्रतिमान नहीं माना। वारण यह है है कि उत्तरवालीन मस्कृत-ममीम्ानाम्त्रियों ने इन्हें व्यात्मा न मानवर काव्योपकारक तत्व में ही इनकी सक्षिप्त विचार-चर्चा की थी, हिंदी के रीति- प्रयकर उमी माग पर चने और रीति आदि के आपेक्षिक महत्त्व को और भी घटा दिया। बडी विचित्र बान है कि मुप्रनिष्ठित ध्वनि-मिद्धान को उन्होंने अनेक्िन गौरव नही दिया। बैननदाम जैसे दिगज पडित ने उसकी एकदम उपेक्षा कर दी है। सभवन दग्बारी वातावरण में कठिन विषय का विवेचन मनत नहीं था। मस्बून-ममीजागास्त मस्ून (और प्राइ्ृत) की लम्म रचनाओ पर आथित या। हिंदी-भमीआामान्त्र पोने चार मौ वर्ष तक सस्कृत रूक्षणप्रयो पर ही सव- नवित रहा। आपुनिक शन्त्र-सपत्ि का अविवान या तो सम्पृत का दाय है या पर्शिचिन मे आयात है। हिंदी का अपना आलोचनामान्त्र नहीं है। बहुन वर्षों मे इसकी चर्चा सुनी जा रही है, लेविन अनी तब हिंदी के ललित साहित्य को लथय मानवर उनने बनार पर व्यापक आयोचनासास्त का प्रणयन नहीं हुआ। कुछ आउोधर भारतीन और पार्चात् समीक्षा-निद्धातों की मिचडी पशा रहे हैं बीच-बोच मे हिंदी के उदाहरग भी दे देते हैं, यह ठीक है कि प्राल्ल को ग्रहष वरना जन चिन नहीं है और तुग्नाम्मन अध्ययन की भी उपयोगिता है, परतु यनकचगा हेत है और नमीआानास्त्र-निर्मान का यह ढग वैज्ञानिक नहीं है। आवस्वकता इम वान की है कि आगमनात्मक विधि मे हिंदी-साहित्य में उपलब्ब तथ्यों की परीजा बरके मिद्धानों को स्यापना की ाए। सम्बृन-ममोक्ापास्त का प्रवर्नन नाटुयमास्त्र मे हुजा। रस की निष्पन्मना नाड्य में ही मानी गपी, थव्य वाब्य मे उसकी प्रतिष्ठा बाद मे हुई। उसका विशुद विवेचन नाटुनमास्त्रीन ययो और उनकी टीकाओं मे किया गया। हिंदी -मनीनागान्त्र का आरम वाब्य मे हुआ, बनोंकि आधुनिक वाल के पूर्व वा हिंदी-ननाटिन् वबिता बा ही साहित् है। यही कारण है कि मज्ययुग मे नाट्य- मास्नोन नथ नहीं निसे गरे। सम्कृन-ममोक्षापास्त मे सलकार तथा रन का अपेक्षावृत वनिक विवेचन हुआ है. नौर तदनु मार हिंदी में नी। हिंदी के एकन बालोचकों को यह मोह है

१. उण जीत वाको कहन शन्द सर्य है देह। गुन गुल भूकर भू्षां दूपय दूया एस।।स्वस्हम्य (दुलपति),१।३४ स्यम्य प्राप यह नग मत गब्द अर्य पहिचानि 1 - रसपीयूपनिघि (मोमनाय), ७।६

Sanskrit Sanikşātāstra aur Hindt Alocana 227

सग्रहकारो की परपरा चन पड़ी थी। मम्मद, विब्वनाथ आदि स्वतत्र विचारक न होकर सप्रहकर्ना ही हैं।1 हिंदी मे १६ वी गनी ई० मे लेकर ११ वी गती ई० तक मस्टृन के काब्यालोचन-मिद्धातों की ही उद्रणी होती रही, उमी प्रकार काव्य के प्रयोजन, हेनु, लक्षण, गूण-दोष आदि का निरूपण किया जाता रहा। मस्कृत के अन करग पर हिंदी मे भी दो प्रकार के शाम्त्र प्रय लिसे गये · "काव्य- प्रकान" सादि की भांति विविवाग-निरूपक, और "बुक्लयानन्द" आदि की भांति एकग-निरूपक ।'

हिंदी-रोनिग्रयों के अध्ययन मे विदित होना है कि केशवदाम, बुलपति, निवारीदाम सादि कुछ को छोडकर अधिक्नर रीनिकि पल्लवग्राही पडित थे। उन्होंने सस्कृत के गिने-चुने ग्रथो से सामग्री ग्रहण को। उनका मुख्य उद्देश्य मम्वृत-काव्यवास्त्र को हिंद्ी मे प्रस्तुत करके सबके लिए बोधगम्य बनाना था।" उन्होंने न तो समस्त उपलब्ध ग्रथो का अभिनिवेद्यपूर्वक अध्यनन किया और न ही विवेच्य विपन का प्राजल प्रतिपादन। किसी-किसी ने नवीन अलकारो को सोज की, अलकारो का नसे ढम से वर्गीकरण किया", नयी नायिकाओं की उद्- भावना की, *परनु शास्त्रीय मिद्धाती का प्रौड उपस्यापन नही हुआ। इम अभाव

१ उत्तर-वाल मे रूपगोस्त्रामी, मन सूदन सरस्वती, पडितराज जगन्नाथ आदि में निम्मदवेह मौनिकता पायी जाती है। लक्ष्य वाउ यह है कि हिंदी-आचार्यों पर उनका कोई प्रनाव नहीं पडा। २. वविपिया (केसवदाम, १६०१ ई०,) वविकुलकल्पतरु (चितामणि, १६५० ई०), रमनीनूपनिधि (मोमनाय, १७३४ ई०), काव्यनिर्णय (भिसारी दाम, १७४६ ई०), काव्य-कन्पद्धुम (बन्हेयालाल पोहार, १९३४-३६ ई०), वाब्य-दर्पण (रामदहिन मिश्र, १२४७ ई०] आदि। ३ दवा. अन्बार, रम, नानिकारभेद आद्ि के पूर्वोक्न ग्रथ। राज्यपशाग(मम्मट), माहित्यदर्पण (विश्वनाय), चल्रालोक(जयदेव), कुबलवानद (अन्पय्य दीक्षित), रमनरगिणी, रममजरी(भानुमिश्र) आदि। ५. जिनी देदबानी प्रगट है कविता की घात। ते भाषा मे होहिं तो मव सम्झे रम बात।। -- रमरहस्य, ११४ ६- स्वगुप अलकार (भिसारीदान), धन्पताल्कार (रमरूप) आादि। मामान्य और विसिष्ट (बेसवदाम), उपमा वादि ग्यारह वर्ग (निवारीरास) ८. परिवास्त्रेमिका, देश-प्रेमिका, लोक-्मेविका आदि (हरियज)

Senstnit Samitsalastra dut Hindt Alocana 229

आदि आचार्यो के मतो की प्रतिध्वनि-मात्र है। उम परपरा प्रथिन रम वे निक्य पर नजी रविता सरी नहीं उनरती। स्वय सम्कृत के काव्यशास्त्र मे रम काव्य का अकेला मानदड नहीं रहा। रम को श्रेष्ठ मानने वालो ने भी वस्तु-भलकार- ध्वनियों को पर्याप्त महत्त्व दिया है, और, उन आचार्यों ने जिसे अधम काव्य कहा है वह भी तो काब्य ही है। उममे रम कहाँ है? नयी कविता कही जाने वाली कुछ ऐसी रचनाएँ मिल् जानी हैं जिनमे रमाभिव्यक्ति है, परतु कविता मानी जाने योष अधिकाण रचनाएँ ऐसी है जिनमे अभिनवगुप्त का "रम" नही मिलेस। अनएव हमारी मान्यता है वि व्वनि-निद्धान भाज भी प्राह्य है। इमका यह तालयं नहीं है कि नने कवियों और जालोनको को ध्वनि के १०४५५ भद वठम्भ कगय जाएँ। मेरा अभिप्राय मूल सिद्धात से है। तीन छोटे-छोटे उद्धरणो श्वरा बसने इस क्थन की पृष्टि करना चाहूंगा। गजानन मुक्तिबोष का "एक आन्मवस्व्य" उनकी श्रेष्ठ वविनाओ में परिगगित है, उनकी आरभिक पक्तियां हैं

.. ओर, नव मेरा मिर दुखने लगता है, घुधम्धु घले भडेले मे, आलोचनारील अपने मे से उडे धुएँ की ही चक्करदार नीियो पर चटने लगता हू।

इन पकतियों का कविन्व किस वान मे है? यदि रन मे है तो बताना पडेगा नि बोनना रन है। क्या करण रम है' कहा जा सकत्ा है कि यहाँ पर चिना की वयजना की गमी है, और चिंना सचारी भाव है, इसलिए यह वाक्य रमात्मक होने के कारण काव्य है। परतु चिना वह देने मात्र से इमकी रम- पीयता को व्यात्या पूर्ण नही होती। अवित महत्त्वपूर्ण है आरम के तीन विदुओ के बाद प्रनुक्न 'और', 'धुघले', 'घुऐ', 'चबकरदार सीटियो आदि की ब्बजना जिनने भरा कुटापरम्त, निरामाच्न्न तथा भरनी जटिल अनुभुतियों मे धुमड़ रेव्यतिन का वित हमारी कव्पना की आाँलों के मामने जभर बाता है। वानदवर्नन की 'छापा' से वित-चोजना' या 'निश्वविधान' का भी अभिपाय ग्रहण बिया जा सकता है।

"मोनफरोण' नवानीप्रसाद मिश्र की प्रसिद्ध रचना है जी हा हुजर, में गीत बेचता हूँ। में तस्टू-तरह के

Sarstrit Sanitsatastra dur Hindi Alocara 231

डम रचना मे भी ध्वनि की रमणीचता है। भृत्व से त्रियमाण व्यक्नि न तो कविता लिव सकता है और न वला का सरक्षण का सकता है। विषम परि- स्थितियां काव्य-रचना के मार्ग मे वाया नले पहुंचा ले कितु उसके प्रवाह को शेक नहीं सर्तों।

ध्जनि-मिद्धान समन्वयवादी है। उमके साथ अन्य सभी सिद्धातो की ठौक सगति बेठ जानी है। रम भी अनलश््यनमध्यय्य ध्वनि ही है। इसलिए नवीन परिन्थितियों की दष्टि-पथ मे रसते हुए युगवर्मानुसार उसका पुनर्व्यास्यान होना चाहिए। सम्वृत-काव्यशास्त का यह मिद्धान आज भी सर्वाधिक उपाबेन है।

परिचर्चा

पु. ला. नागंव अपना निबध पढते हुए बीच-दीच मे मौसिक रूप से आपने साधारणीकरण के सबन्व मे जो अपने विचार व्यक्त किये हैं औोर मह प्रतिमादित करना चाहा है कि साघारणीकरण व्यक्ति (-प्रक्षक) के अपने अन्त करण का होवा है और उस समय मन, वुद्धि, चित्त तथा अहकार पृथक् पथक कार्य न करते हुए मैवद मता-मात्र रह जाते हैं तया साधारणीवरण का तात्यं नाटन के नामन नानिकादि का दर्सक से तादात्म्य नही है-उम सम्बन्ब मे मुझे एक यह शाका है कि यदि दर्शक बा नायक से तादान्म नहीं होना तो वह उसके सुसी या दु.खी होने पर स्वय कैसे मुन या दुम का अनुभव करता है और नानक अण्नी जटिल परिन्थितिमों से छूटने के लिये जिजना व्यत रहता है उतनी ही व्य्ना श्रेक्षक को भी क्यों होती है?

उ. मा. निह : नाटर के नावक के साथ तादात्म्य होने की बाल मुझे अचन्त मक्कचित लगती है। मद प्रकार के नायकों के साथ हुमारा तादात्य कभीनमी नहीं हो सर्ता। राम के साथ हो जाएगा, दुष्यन्त के साथ हो जाएगा विन्तु ना और प्रहसन के नायकों के साथ नहीं हो मकना। महावाव्य के नायक के माथ भने हो जाए पर भुकतक के नायक से होना सदिष्त है। जिस मुक्तक में नापन होता ही नहीं तो कया वह।ँ कवि के माय होगा रूथवा उममे वर्षित चन्तु मा नात्र के साय ? निद्वान्त ऐसा होना चाहिये जो वाब्य कही

Sanskrit Samiksāfastra aur Huds Alocana 233

रूप मे रगमच पर देसते हैं, जिसको देख कर हमारा साधारणी- करण होता है वह उम व्यक्ति के साधारणीकरण मे भिन्न है जिसने, उदाहरणार्य, राम की कस्पना करने काव्य लिसा था, जवाहरलाल नेहरू को अपने जीवन में देखवर काव्य लिखा था या जिसने अपने जीवन के किनी प्रेम-व्यापार को लेकर कविता लिस दी थी। यह भिन्नता किम अर्थ मे हो सकती है यद्यपि में यह मानता हूँ कि स्वरूप मे भी कुछ न कूछ सन्नर है फिर भी, क्योकि इसमे यहाँ विवाद बहुन बट जाएगा, इम लिए में केवल यही कहूँगा कि यह अन्नर मात्राजन्य अधित है और इसवा सबसे वडा प्रमाण यही है कि कवि को अपनी रचना पढ कर जो सुखानुभूनि होती वह हमे नहीं होती। उसके स्वगतत्व का सर्वधा अभाव नहीं हो जाना, जब कि हमारे स्वगतत्व हो सकता है। रा. च. द्विवेदी तच्न भट्टनायक के "नायवन्य कते श्रोनु समानोनुभवस्तत" इम कथन की आप कैसे व्यास्या करेंमे? उ भा. मिंह इमकी पहली व्याल्या तो यह है कि मुढ परपत्ययनेयवद्धि' और दूमरी यह कि-जैसा तुलसीदास जी ने कहा है, निज कविन केहि लाग न नीका। मरन होउ जयवा अनि फीका-ववि को अपनी रमहीन रचना भी प्राव मरस दिसाई पटती हैं। िसी साहित्यकार की एक कविना है 'वियेना की सड़क। रगमच पर मुनाया करने मे 'विचेना की तडक, वियेना की सदक। क्यामा ठहरी, पर गई भडक।लोग सूव तालिया पीटते थे। वह सोचते पे-न जाने बिलनी रसमय कविता है मेरी। बत्र यहा यह बनाइये कि यदि अभिनवगुप्त को बात स्वीकार वर लें तो कवि को अपनी हो वस्तु की रमानुभूति कसे होती है, इसे कैसे समझा जाएगा ? वकटाचलन् : रमानुभूनि मे तो श्रेणियां मानी जा सवती हैं पर तादातम्य अनुभूनि मे हम अपनी दुद्धि आदि के चित् मे विलयीकरण की शेणियां कैमे स्यीवार कर सकते हैं, यह मुझे अभी तक स्पष्ट नही हुआा। उ. भा. मिह् यदि किनी दूमरे वा ही प्रमाम लेना हो तो में मयुसूदन सरस्वती, को उद्घुत वर सकता है। जउन्होंने रमानुभूति मे जी तारतम्य की बान कही है वह सामारणीवरण के विषय में भी सत्य है। व्योकि रसानुभूति जौर साधारणीकरण एव दूसरे से नियमत: सबद्ध हैं।

प्राच्च एवं पाश्चात्य काव्यशास्त्र में बिम्ब-सिद्धान्त

द्० रानगोपाल बार्मा 'दिनेश'

मन्ृतनाज्यमान्त्र समार का नर्वानिक वैज्ञानिक एव सृचिन्तित राव्य- शान्त्र है। तरिकाल-दर्शी आाचार्यों ने वाव्य-रचता के सभी पक्षो पर अनेक दृष्टि- कोंगों मे बिचार किया है। रम, बकोक्ति, रीति, ध्वनि, अलकार, औचिन्य आदि ि्ज्वान्तों का पृथक सुयह् सन्मबानों के रूप मे शवाब्दिनी तक वाल्मान-पुनराल्यान होता रहा है नौर मन्डन-माहिन्य की परम्पराजो मे विवना वायुनिक भारतीय भगराजों के माहियों में नी सच्यावति इन निद्धान्तों पर चर्चा परिचर्चा ही नहीं गनीर रिचारा भी पचनी रहती है। काव्यगान्त्रीत चिन्तन, विरनेषण और मजस्यारन की इन मुद्दीर्घ प्राच्य-परम्परा में 'बिम्ब' एक मिद्धान्त के रूप में सब तर प्रतिष्ठित नहीं हो रका है। हिन्दी के उन विव्वानों ने, जिन्होंने प्राच और पारचान दोनो काव्यदास्त्रों का जन्ममन एव विश्लेपर किया है, बिम्ब- निज्वान को पुव एव पाउवाल काय-मिद्धान हो षोषित किया है। मतः यहा दन्तुत विषन पर विवार करने के लिए नारम्भ मे ही यह स्पष्ट समक्ष नेना बानस्पा है कि विम्व-निद्धान्त को भारवीय वाव्य-निव्ान्त के रूप में सम्वृत- वान्यगाम्त्र मे लोज निकालना हमारा लखच नहीं है। हम इम मिद्धान्त पर गुद पारचान् निवान्त के रूप मे ही विचार करने, निन्तु हुमारा लक्ष्य यह होा कि हन सम्हृत नाव्यसास्त्र की मान्यवार्जी से मवर्भ में इम बात की परींझ्षा करे कि इन निद्धान्त की भारतीन वाञ्य-सिद्धास्त्रों के मन्य क्या स्यिति है? साय ही हम यह भी देखने की चेष्ठा वरेंगे कि का इन सिद्ान्त वो एक पूर् काव्-निसान्त के रूप मे स्वीशर करना उचिन है? हमारे मच्चयन का बह लभ्य भी होत कि हम पता लगाए कि आपुनिक वास् के मूत्याकन में उसको क्या उपयोगिता है या हो सकती है?

'बिन्ब-विदान : वाका कान के मश्म में अन्भूति और वनिध्बजना के भिन्न-भिन पक्षों पर विवार करने नमन हिन्दी के कई लाचार्यों ने 'बिम्व' की चर्चा की है। ऐने वाचायों मे रामबन्द्र शुक्, डाब ववननुन्दरदान, ल्ड्मीनाराया 'समुनागा, डा० हजारोममाद द्विवेदी और डा. नोन्त मच्य हैं। नई पीठी के चित्ुनचोच

Pracya ccam Paicalya Kanyafastra riem Bimbanddhanta 237

१ किसी व्यक्ति या पदार्थ की प्रतिक्टति। मूनं और दृष्ट प्रत्यकन । एक पदार्य के लिए किमी ऐसे मून-अमूनं पदार्थ का प्रयोग जो उसके अन्नविक समान हो अयवा उमे व्यजिन करना हो, जै से भृत्यु के लिए निद्रा का प्रमोग।' इन तीनो परिभाषाओं मे प्रयम परिभाषा मे कोई नना तथ्य नही, द्वितीय परिभाषा प्रनिकृति के रूप मे विम्ब को स्वीकार करनी हुई भी उसकी मूर्तता और चाकुपना प्रतिपादित करती है तया तीनरी परिभाषा बिम्ब कौ अपेक्षा प्रनीव के अधिव निकट है। एन्साइक्ल्ोनोडिला ब्रिडेनिका मे प्रस्तुन की गई परिभाषा की शब्दावली है. "ऐ मी मचेन म्मुनि जो मूल उद्दीपन की अनुपस्थिति मे जिभी वनीन अनुभव का समन् अयवा जन रूप में पुनरु्पादन करती है।"1 इम परिनाषा मे "बिम्ब" शब्द 'मचेन स्मृनि की पुनसत्पादन क्षमता' वा पर्याप बन गना है। वम्नुन ये परिभाषाएँ 'बिम्व' की शाब्दिक व्यास्याएं हैं, काव्यमास्त्रीय कम। जिन विद्वाना ने विम्ब-मिद्धान्त पर विचार किया है, उनमे एजरा पाउण्ड, मी०डे० लीविम, लेंगर ट्वेंन, ट्यूम जादि के नाम उन्लेबनीय हैं। लीविम ने माना है कि 'काब्य विम्ब एक प्रवार का भावनार्भिन सब्द-चित्र है।' स्पष्ट है नि गद्द कोयों की परिभापाजो मे जो विम्व मानन और उमकी दाक्तियो नक सीमित था, वह इन परिभाषा मे गव्द नव आ गना है-भाव मे उत्पन्न होकर शब्दो में बेंच गता है। काब्य भी गब्दों मे भाव का ही तो आनाम है। अउ यह परिभाषा दमे विम्व के काव्यगास्त्रीय वर्त की ओर अगसर करती है। लगर चिन्वते हैं कि 'बिन्ब ऐ न्दिम माध्चम द्वारा अध्यान्मिक अयवा बौद्धिक मचो तक पहुँचने का मा् है।" इम परिभाष मे फिर शब्द से पठारन तथा मानमिवना की ओर प्रनाम है। बिन्तु एक तथ्य वक्त दोनों हो परिभाषाओं से सामने आता है, वह यह है कि चिम्त को इन दोनो विद्वानों ने मापन माना है, माध्य नहीं, जं सा कि 'शब्द- 'चित्र' और 'मार्ग' शब्दो से प्रकट है। टी० ई० ह्यूम ने तो स्पष्ट कहा है कि

वाब-विम्ब पृष्ठ ४ · वहाँ 3. व्डी ४. वही

Pracya eoam Patcatya Kanalastra mem Bumbasiddhanta 239 मे बतिनि हो चुके होने हैं, काव्य के रूप मे पुन मूर्तिन हो जाते हैं। यह शक्ति कवि की प्रतिभा के रायन से जन्म लेती है और शब्द की जडता को ही समाप्त नहीं करती, उसकी प्रकृति को भी बदल देती है। अन सक्षेप मे कहा जा मक्ता है कि काव्य-बिम्ब मूलत एक प्रकार की काव्य-भाषा है, जो उसी व्यक्ति के पाम हो सकती है, जिसके पाम कवि-प्रतिभा होती है। इमी कवि- प्रतिभा के फलस्वरूप शब्द-कोप या जननामान्य वा 'जगल' शब्द साकेत' महा- काव्य की मीता के लिए राजभवन और साम्राज्य के अनेक सुखद चित्र प्रस्तुन कर देना है-"इन कुटिया मे ही राज-भवन मन भाया"। हम जोकुछ देखते, सुनने, सृघते, स्वाद लेने और स्पर्य करने में अनुभव करते हैं, वह सब हमारे मानम पर अपनी भिन्न-भिन्न छवियाँ डाल कर पीछे छूटता रहता है। वे छबियाँ मानम के घोल मे सकमम करती रहती हैं। कवि-प्रतिभा उम सकमण से नई छचियां गडनी और उन्हें शब्दों मे उत्तार देती है। जो शब्द उन छबियो के वाहक बन जाने हैं, वे नयी अर्थवता से अनुपराणित होकर काव्य का स्वत्प धारण कर लेने हैं। काव्य-सर्जना की इस प्रकरिया मे जो काव्य-चेतना जन्म लेती है, वही समस्त मानस-छवियों के शब्दी में उनरने का फल होती है। यहाँ एक बात और स्मरण रखने की है कि बिम्व मानस-यत्र के माध्यम मे या शब्दयत्र की महायता से की गई फोटोग्राफी नही है। इसीलिए बिम्ब के निर्मांग मे सहुज अनुभूति के साथ-माथ वल्पना भी सहायक होती है और वि की रुचि भी। कथा, कवि भिन्न-भिन्न प्रकार के फूल देखता है। वे फूल रम, रूप, गघ आदि मे वनेक बन्नर रखते हैं। उन सब की छचियाँ मानम पर अकिति होनी रहती है, विन्नु वे कवियाँ न तो पूर्गंत अपने वास्तविक रूप मे रह पाती है और न स्यानी ही हो मकती हैं। एव-एक क्षण मे वे अपनी झलक दिखाकर मानम के धोल में धुलनी मिलनी रहती है। वे घूलनशील छबियां परस्पर सझलष्ट होकर कवि की रुचि के अनुभार उसकी कल्पना और प्रतिभा के बल पर एक ऐ मे नए फल के रूप मे शब्दो में प्रकट होती हैं, जो अनेक छब्ियों को एक लवि होना है, जो बम्तु-जगन् से आया होने पर भी वम्नुजगत का न होकर समप्रतः प्रनिभा, रवि और कल्पना से प्रमुत होना है। उममे जो रग होता है, जो रूप वह धारा करना है और उनमे जो गम अनुभव होनी है, वह देवे हुए किमी एक फूल की देन नहीं हो सबनी। इसीलिए विम्त् की सजना फोटोग्राफी नही है। और इनी लापार पर बाब्य मे पयार्य की माग उमी रूप मे नहीं की जा सकती जिन रूप मे चित्रकला मे की जा सकती है। विम्ब की दृष्टि में काव्य मे पयार्य का इतना ही अस्तित्व है कि यवि जो बिम्बनमर्जना करे वह उसके प्रत्यक्ष या परोश्ष अन्भयो पर आनारित सवश्व हो। वाय्य-बिम्ब के सिद्धान्त को उसके मही बर्य में न समझने के कारण ही कुछ नए रचनाकारों ने काव्ब में सथायं की

Praga ceam Pafcatya Kaoyalastra mem Bumbasiddhānta 241

जान, वनोकि मम्कृन और हिन्दी के अधिकाम आचार्य इमी मिद्धान्न को काव्य की सर्जना एव मूल्यकन का पूर्ण सिद्धान्न मानते हैं। यह मिद्धान्न दो दृष्टियो मे महत्त्वपूर्ण है। प्रथम तो यह कि रात्य-गजना की नमस्न प्रतिना को इमकी क्मोटी पर मफलतापूर्वक चसा जा सकता है। शब्द के सभी व्यापार और उनके द्वारा ग्रहीन होकर मभिव्यक् होने वाला वम्नु-जगत् ही नही गुण-जगत् भी किस प्रतिया में काव्य बनना है-यह मव समझने में यह मिद्धान्त महायक होना है। द्वितीय वान यह कि इम निद्धान्न की कमौटी पर सफलतापूर्वक उम मूल्य को भी समझा जा सकता है, जिनकी मिद्धि वे लिए काब्य मजिन होता है। इमीलिए रम-मिद्धान्न को आालम्वन, नाधन एव उद्दीपन की लोकिव भूमि से जारम्भ करके रमाम्वाद की लोकततर मनुमनी भूमिका तब विम्तृत किया गया है। इस मिद्धान्त के विभाजन-व्र्यापार मे बिम्ब-मिद्वान्त अन्नर्भूक्त है। आलम्बन और आशन के रूप एव चेप्टा-गन ममस्त भवर्षण काव्य मे बिम्ब बन कर ही प्रस्तुत होते है। जद्ीपन के विभिन्न चित्र भी विम्न-रचना का ही तो विस्तार करते है। अनुभावों की अभिव्यक्ति बिम्बात्मक होती है। रमवादी कवि निरन्तर विभिन्न प्रकार के पूर्ण, खण्टिन और सरिलिष्ट बिम्ब प्रस्तुन करके ही अपनी रचना को रनानुभूनि की मघुमती भूमिका तक पहुंचाता है। अत विम्त-मिद्धान्न के अनुसार हम जहाँ विम्बी की रचना पूर्ति पर रव जाते हैं, वहाँ रग-मिद्धान्त के अनुसार हम बिम्त्रों को सावन मान कर उनमे आगे वेह जाते है-रचना की निष्पनियों की भोज करते हैं और वह निप्पमि लोको- त्तर आनन्द मे परिगत हो जानी है। रम-मिद्धान्न और विम्न-सिद्धान्न को साथ रवकर समझने मे यह तथ्य छिपा नहीं रहना कि जहाँ प्रथम सिद्ान्न काव्य वों रचना की ध्याच्या केरवे उसके मून्याकन मे भी प्रवृत्त होना है, वहाँ विम्ब-मिद्धान्न रचता की व्यास्या नक सीमित रह जाता है। बिम्ब-प्रक्रिया का्य-रचना या उनकी आाम्ता की कोई ऐँसी पनिया नहीं है, जिसे भारतीय वाब्यगान्तों न जानने हो नया जिने उनकी बिनी मोल्निता के आधार पर रन-पनिया मे निन कोई पूयक पञ्ननि माना जा मकता हो। रम-मिद्धान्त में जनमूनि का निर्देभवनोनका एव साधागणोतरण आवश्मत माना गना है जोर विन्त-्प्रकरिता मे भी ये दोनों बाने आवश्मक मानी गई है। जहां वक शम्दार्य के मान्वम का प्रम्न है, वह दोनों के लिए चाहिए, तिन्नु रस विम्ब् को शव्दार्य तक सीमित छोड़ वर उच्च माननी भूमिक की ओर अग्भर हो जाता है। इम प्रकार वर्हाँ बिन्न-मिद्धान्न के द्वारा हम विनी काब्य की रचना के तत्वो जोर उनमे नजिन मौन्दर्नें मे परिचित होने हैं, वहाँ रम-निद्वान्त के द्वारा हम रचना के नत्वो, उनने मजित मोन्दर्य और उन दोनों की मब्निष्ट देन से लोकोनर आनर को भी उपलब्ति बरते है।

Pracya mam Patcha Kasyašastra mem Bumbanddhanta 243

मैथिनीशरण की निम्नाकिन पक्तियो मे मिलेगा, जहाँ सातिमान् अलकार लाने के लिए विम्त-योजना हुई है-

नाक का मोनी अवर की कान्ति से बीज दाडिन का समझ कर स्रान्ति से देखकर सहसा हुआ शषुक मौन है सोचता है अन्य शुक यह कौन है।

अन यह स्पष्ट है कि सस्कृन काव्यवास्त्र का अलकार-सिद्धान्त भी विम्व-मिद्धान्त मे अधिक व्यापक और विस्तृत भिद्धान्त है। बिम्ब-सिद्धान्त को समस्त स्थितियाँ उसके प्रस्तुन और अप्रस्तुन विघान मे अन्तर्भु कन हैं। नए चिन्तक भारतीय काव्यशास्त्र को दूर से और ऊपर ऊपर मे देखने हैं, इसलिए उन्हें विम्ब-मिद्धान्न भारत के लिए एक्दम नई उपलब्धि प्रतीत होता है।

जहाँ तक रीति, औचित्य और वनोकनि मिद्धान्ती का प्रश्न है, इनका क्षेत्र सब्द और अर्य की उन सभी सीमाओ का स्पर्ग करता है, जिन सीमाओ मे वान्य-मनना के अनिवार्य उपकरण के रूप मे बिम्ब-विधान किया जाता है। रीति-सिद्धान्न मे गुणो को आवार-भूत तत्त्व माना गया है। शब्द और अर्थं वे वलग-वलग गृण माने जाने के कारण रीति-विधान बिम्ब-्योजना मे समर्थ होता है। उदाहरणार्य, 'नमना' नामन अर्यनगुण के कारण ही निम्नाकिति पक्तियों में भिववारी के स्वरूप का बिम्ब अपने पूर्ण प्रभाव के साथ प्रस्तुत हो सका है। इम विम्ब की रचना के मूल मे ऋ्म-निर्वाह तथा भरल अयं-प्रतीति -- दोनो ही प्रकार की समना विद्यमान है। निराला जी कहते हैं-

वह आता दो टून क्लेज के करता पछनाता पय पर आाना। पेट पीठ दोनों मिलकर है एक चल रहा लकुटिया टेक मुटठी भर दाने को-मूख मिटाने को मुह फदो पुरानी सोली को पंनावा दो टक क्लेज के बरता पछताठा पथ पर आता।

औचिल-मिद्धान्त में शब्द, अर्य, भाव, आदि के सभी प्रकार के औचित्व

Pige ce Piketa Kergalosta rer Berbanddharta 245 है। हिन्दी की नई कविता पश्चिम के अनुकरण पर काव्य-वस्तु की सवहेल्ना बरके वाज्य-भाषा को महत्त्व देती जा रही है, इमल्ए इस अपूर्ण काव्य- निद्धान्न के सम्मान मे अभी जौर अधिक वद्धि को हो सम्भावना है। आज का हिन्दी कवि और ननी आलोचक भी-यह घोषणा करने लगा है कि वस्तु-पक्ष कवित्रा की कोई कलौटी नही, भाषा ही कविशा की पहचान है। वह कहता है कि मनुष्य की मुल सवेदना मे कभी अन्तर नहीं जाना, केवल भाषा के सदर्भ बदलने हैं। ऐमी परकीय मान्यता वाले चिन्तकी के लिए विम्व-मिद्धान्त एक दूपं कमोटी बन जाए, तो कोई आन्नर्य की बात नहीं।

परिचर्चा

जापने नेनिचन्द्र जैन और रानस्वरप चनुवदी के इस मत का उष्ेन करने हुए कि अनोक किमी एक शउ्द के द्वारा व्यापक नाव को व्यक्त कबना है इसने अरनी जनहमति व्यक्न की। यद्ि जैंन और चनुबदी जो ने इस विषय मे माल धारणा प्रस्तुन की है तो कृपर आर ही बनाएं कि इसकी नही व्यास्या क्या हो सनती है। इनके अनिरिक आापने सपने निवन्ध मे स्वीकार किया है कि विम्ब नाव की प्रेरणा मे बाहर आाना है। माव एक बानरिक वन्तु है और यदि विन्द उनकी प्रेरणा मे बाहर लाता है तो निश्चित रूप में वह भाव का सन्पेदन होगा। ऐसा होने पर वह कालय की आन्मा को ही सन्प्रेदित करेगा जौर केवल वाहा-रूप मे या शव्द रुप मे उसरी न्यिति म्वीवारना भूल होगो, ज सा कि आपने किया है। तीनरी वाज में यह कहना पाहूँगा कि जापने स्यान स्यान पर विभिन्न विद्वानों के मनों का न्नेन करते हुए जो यह कहा है कि ह्यूम ने इम विषन पर यह लिना है, लेबिन ने यह निसा है और डा. नगेन्त्र मे बन्ति डा नगेन्द्र ने हीयह कहा है उसमे यह कही स्ष्ट नहीं होना कि आाप बिम्त्र से बा समकते है नौर इन निद्धान्त की कमे व्यास्या कर्ते हैं। यदि जाप इस निदन्न में हमे सपने विचारों मे परिचिन करा सबने तो हुमारे लिए वनिक लामदाना होता। डा. शमगोंपाल धर्मा : में लपके अम्तिम प्रश्न का उत्तर पहले दूगा-विम्ब से में क्वा मनजता हूँ : जव रचनाकार निनी वस्तु को देवता

अभिनवगुप्तपादप्रतिपादितं रसविवेचनम्

सुरजनदास स्वामी

रमो वे काव्यस्य जीवितमारमा वेति निर्विवादमभिमत प्रायम् सरवेषा- मालकारिकाणान् । अत एवोक्नमग्निपुराण-'वार्ग्वदस्व्यप्रथानेऽपि रस एाच्र जोवितम्"। इति। आचार्यो भरतोि-"न हि रसादते वश्चिदप्यर्य प्रवतते" इति बरुवाणो रमस्य इनरवाव्याङ्गापेक्षमा प्राधान्यरूपमा्ित्व साघयति। ध्वन्यालोरकारोपनि-यत परियाकवता कवीना रसादिनान्पर्यविरहे व्यापार एव न शोभते"। "सत्य न तादृक बाव्यप्रवारोग्ति यत्र रमानीनामप्रतीति"। *वचेनना अषि हि मात्रा वथाययमुपचितरतम्वभादतया चेतनवत्तान्तयोजनया वा न सन्तयेद ते ये यान्ति न रनाङगता, तस्मान् नाम्त्वेव तद् वस्तु मत् सर्वात्मना रतान्पवंवनः ववेस्तदिच्छया वा तदभिमनरसाहृता न घते"। "पतीयमानस्य चान्यमेववनिउि रमभावमुसनंव उपलक्षण प्राधान्यान्' इत्यादिमिर्वचन: रनम्चव प्रापान्य प्रतिपावयन तम्य काव्मजीवितत्वमाचप्टे। अभिनवगुप्तस्तु "रम एव वन्नुन वाव्यस्पात्मा वस्त्वकारध्वनी तु भवथा रम प्रति पर्मं- बम्पेने" इति स्ाष्ट रनम्बंव काव्ामकत्व बूते।

चारिमयोगाड् रमनि्ष्पत्ति"। अन्चद मूत्रन्य व्यास्याभद्वात् रसविपये नाना मजानि विजमभन्ते। यद्यप्पत प्रयान्ेन अभिनवगुप्तपादाचार्याणामेव मतं प्रिवादनीयन्। नयापि तन्मवन्ध वेविष्टघप्रतिपादनार्यं सम्यक अवगतर्यन्च वन्यान्यनि मनानि सनासन प्रतिवादनीयतामर्हृन्ति। चम् मटटल्ोल्लठो मरनम्त्रस्यमनोगनवस्य उत्पाद्योत्पावन भावसम्वत्व निध्पनिरदस्य व उत्पत्तिमर्य मनुते। यद्यपि नम्ब मते विभाव सह रते जन्पाद्योतपदक भावसस्वन्न, अनुभाव सह प्रत्याव्यमन्यामत भावसम्बन्य, व्निचारिमिरच पोन्यपोपकनावमम्बत्यो

₹. नाटधमास्त्े पृ. २७२ । २. ध्वनालोके पृ. ४९७। 2. स्वन्पालोके प. ४९७ 1 ४. ध्वन्यालोके पृ. ९०। ५. लोचने पृ. ८५।

Abhiraragupta-tratipaditam Raseticecaram 249

भोजकत्वञ्चेति। अभिवला विशेषघर्मंपुरग्सरमुपस्थापिता रामादयो विभावा माव्रनापरपयर्यिण भावकत्वव्यापारेण रसप्रतिबन्धकान् रामत्वाविविश्देषधर्मान् परिहृत्व नाननन्वादिसामान्ववर्मपुरस्मरम्पम्थाप्पन्ते। एव वटाक्षभुजाक्षे- पादिप्रभनय अनुमादा एज्जोमुक्पप्रभनयो व्यमिचारिणरच रामादिव्यविन-

माधारणीकरनात्मना भावतत्वव्यापारेप मीतादिय नामाजिकरमप्नतीति- प्रतिबन्धका पूज्यन्वादिवर्मा अपि निगक्यिन्ते। एबञ्च मीनादयो विभावा, कडाआादनोज भावा लज्जीसुकनादयरष मञ्चारिण माधारष्यमापादिता मन्न मामाजिकरमप्ननीनी प्रतिबन्धवता नोपयान्ति। यथा च विभावादय मानारध्यमापाद्यने भावकतत्वव्यापारेण, तर्येव म्यायिभावो रतिगपि रामा- भावनत्वव्यापारेण मानात्यमागद्यमानाया स्नेब्च मानाजिक रजम्तनी अभिभूय सत्वोद्रेकात् प्रकाशनन्दमयमविद्ुविश्रान्तिसतत्वेन मनमों या परिणति तदान्मवेन भोज- वत्वव्यापरेम माशान्कारो बिचीचने। ताइ्सेन मनना साक्षात्तियमाणा मा माधारमीकृतान्मा रतिरेव रम। अत्र मते भरतसुनन्यसयोगपदस्य भोज्य- भोजकनावसम्बन्व, निष्पत्तिपद्त्य प भ्वितरयं। मतो हि भावत्वव्यापारेण माधारणीकना विभावादय चर्व्यमाणा मन्त भोजका, भावारणीकटना च रनिनोजया। साधारणीवनानानेव विभावादीना चर्वपया रजम्तममी अभिभूय मत्वोदकेण मनन प्रकशानन्दममनविद्विधान्सनत्वरूपो भोग उपजायते नान्यया। बम्म मनम्य मान्मनान् मारित्वात् अत्र माधारणीवृतावा रतेभोंग। नोने एव मास्यमनेन अन्य रनविधयतमनस्य मावृत्य साग्यमतानृयापिरव वा। तथा हि यया मान्यमने बुजिवर्माणानेव ज्ञानसुल्वादीना बुद्धिप्रतिविग्बिनाया चिति अविवेवेन पुम्पस्य साक्षाल्यारातवो भोग तथा अन्नापि रामादिनिष्ठाया सेरेव मामाजिराना मावारणीकरमरुपाविवेवेन भोग । डा नगन्द्रमहोदयम्तु भट्टनापनमते भरननूवस्यमयोगपदम्य भाव्यभावक- नम्बन्न, निष्पत्तिपदम्य च भाविनिमर्य मनते। परमेतन् नोचित प्रतिभाति। न हि विभावाइयी एवावेभविका भ्नायकमने, अपि तु वाव्यशब्दा एच भावका। एनच्न-"तच्च नद् नावनत्व नाम बत् वाव्यस्व तद् दिभावादीना भाघा- रत्वावाइन नाम 'वाव्यञ्च रमान् प्रति भाववम्", "न च काव्यशव्दाना

१. लोचने पृ. १८६। २. लोचने पृ. १८८। ३ लोचने पृ. १८९।

Abhinaragubta-tratipaditam Raserirecanam 251

(मुहुमुंहुरनुसन्वीयन्ते)। पुन पुनरनुसन्ानात्मनो ज्ञानस्यव भावनात्वात्। सदुक्त जगनायपण्डित-"भावना च पुन पुनरनुसन्धानात्मा ज्ञानविशेष" इठि। भाव्यमानाइच ते साधारणीवृतरूपेण उपस्थिता भवन्ति। प्रतिपादितञ्च एतन् पण्डितराजेन "समुचितललितमनिवेशचारणा काव्ेन समपिन सहृदपहृदय

त्वादिमि"रित्यादिना सन्दर्भेण। मावनमा सह सहृदयताया अि विभावादीना साधारणीकरण आवश्यक्ता वरीर्बनि। यतो हि सहुदयता नाम तन्मयीभवनम्। तदुक्तमभिनवग् प्तेन-'येषा राध्यानुमोलनाम्यामवशाद् विददीभूने ममोमुदरे वर्णनीयतन्मयीभवनयोग्यता, तेजन्र सहुदपा"। न च तन्मयीभवनमन्तरा केवल भावनया वस्यापि वस्तुत माधारणीकरण सभर्वात । वारणवार्यमहनारिणा साधारणीवरणञ्चाभिनवणप्तमते भट्टनायक्वत् न नाननत्वादिसाधारणवर्मपुरम्वारेणोपस्थितिस्नेयाम्, अपि तु ममदेते, परम्पवति, तटम्यस्यवते इत्येव व्यक्तिविभेयमम्बन्वनियमम्य, न ममचते, न परस्यवते, न तटस्थन्यवते इति व्यक्तिविनषपरिहारनियमम्य च परिहारेण देववालव्यवन- कारणादीना व्यक्तिविनेषमम्बन्धपरि- - हारनियमवर्ज नभुवंवम् पम्यापने सति रते कारणानि सहदयहृदये वासनासपेण विद्यमानन्य रत्यादेनविम्य वाम्वादाड ग्योग्यनापादने सम्यानि भर्वान्त, अतो विभावयन्ति-वामनात्मनया अविमूक्ष्मरूपेण अवस्थिवाना रत्यादीनामा- स्वादयोग्यनामापादयन्तीति वृत्पत्वा विभावा, कटाक्षादीनि कार्याणि अनु- भावयन्ति-वामनारूमेणवस्थिनान् मामाजिवचिनगतान् रत्यादीन् भावान् अनुभवविषयनामापादयन्नीति व्यृत्परया अनुभावा, लब्जादिसहकारि- कारणानि च वामनारूपेण स्थिनान् रत्यादीन् काये विशेषणामित सब्चार- पन्नीति व्यूत्पत्या व्यभिचारिणो व्यपदिभ्यन्ते। माघारणीभवनानन्तर रत्यादे वारावावंमट्वारीणि अनौिक्नामुपमान्ति। अर्थान देशकाल्व्यक्निविशेप- सम्वन्पराहिन्येन उपस्थापितत्वात् तानि अलौविकानि जायनते। लोके हि तानि कार्यकारणमहकानिवारणमनया प्रोच्चन्ते, इदानीन्तु विभावादिच्यापार- विभपत्वात् अलोकितिविभावानुभावव्यभिचारिमत्ञा भजन्ते इति भाव । वस्पा दमाया तानि अनविकाभिरेव सज्ञाभिर्व्यपदेश लभन्ते। स्पष्टीदृतं चंतद-

१. रनगद्धावरे प्. २। रमगज्भावरे। ध्वन्वालोंकलोचने पु ३७८।

253

विगिष्यते।" इठि। अभ्मिन्मने मामाजिक रमनापरपपयिग अलौविकेन ज्ञानेन प्रनीतिविषय- तामागदिना रनि सर्वविघरिशेपराटिन्येन जभिव्यक्ता सनी न लोतिकी, लौकिक्या रते व्यक्तिविशेषसम्बन्यित्वास्। नापि शबुक्मतवत् मिथ्या। तथा हि शक्कुनमने नहे अनुभीयमाना स्थावित्वेन सम्भाव्यमाना या रनि मानाजिक आस्वाकयने, मावन्नुन शन् क्तरि नई न विदने, अपि तु अनुवत निष्ठत्वेन मामाजिके प्रनीयते इनि मिय्यन। अभिनवाप्तमते तु या रति मामाजिक- राम्वाधने, सा चम्तुन सामाजिकानामेवे चनमि वासनारूपेण विद्यते इति न मिय्या। नावेपानिर्वाचा रतित्वेन तम्पा निर्वक्त शकपत्वात् सामाजिन- चेनमि वम्नुतो विद्यमानन्वाच्च। नापि सा लोविक्तुत्या सववियविगेपगहित्येन तस्या अभिव्यनउत्वान्। लोविकतुन्यायरिच लोविक्वत् व्यक्तिविशेषसम्बन्धि- त्वान्। न वा मटुलोल्लटमवबद् आरोपिना एषा रनि। तथा हि भट्टलोल्लटमते नटे वन्युनोविद्यमानापि रति बादिकादिभिवभिनय तत्र रामत्वानु- मन्जानवलाल वारोप मामाजिक साक्षात्व्रियते। अत्र तु मते न मा नढे सारोज्य साक्षान्कियते, जवि तु मामाजिक म्वचेनमि वासनास्पेण विद्यमानाया: विभावाविच्वंणया मानरण्येन अभिव्यक्नयम्तस्पा आम्वादो विधीयते। अन सा नाम मने आारोपरुमाउपि, अपि तु अलौक्वयेत सा रति। अन एवोसमभिनव्रनारचान्-" तन एव विशेषान्रानुपतितत्वान् सा रसनीया मनी न लौविकी, नानिवाच्या, न लैविवतुत्या, न तवारोपादिरूपा वा।" एपा रनिवच वन्तुन न न्यामिनी, व्यक्तिविशोषमम्बन्धिन्या लोबिक्या एव सते स्यानिजव्ान। अम्मातस व्यक्तिविश पादिसम्वन्वराहिलेन अभिव्यक्या स्यानितितभभनवात्। बन एव मान मिद्धवन्तुम्वमाना, अपि तु तालालिववेद। जन एव रमन्य तानालिकत्व ्यानिविलसान्त चोस्मनिनवगप्तेन यथा जनेरि निविध्नमवेवनान्मवप्त्रणगोचरता नीवोय चर्व्चमापमकसारो न नु निन्नम्बभात, तानानक एव न तु चवमानिरिक्तवालावन्दस्त्री, स्थायि- दिल्भा एद रन। एप रम सवंया बनेरिक:। तथा हि रम्यमाना सती रमव्यपदेश भजमाना रति मानारध्येनोपस्यित्रवान् यथा अलौनिको, यथा च मीतावटाक्षमुजा-

वभिनवभारन्दाप २८०॥ २. अभिनत्रभारन्या पृ. २८०।

Abhmnansgupta-pratipaditam Rasasicecanam 255

अलोकिक एवास चवणोपयोगी विभावादिव्यवहार । क्वान्यन् इत्य दृष्टमिति चेन् भूषणमेतदम्माक्रम् अलौनितित्वमिद्ी। पानकरमास्तादोउपि कि गुड- मरीचादियु दृष्ट इति समानमेतत् ।" विभावादीना वारकटेनुत्वाभावेपि रम्य च निप्पत्यभावेपि तद्विपयिप्या रमनाया. निष्पत्या रमनानिष्पति च रने उपचर्य रसमुनर 'रमनिष्पत्ति' इति प्रयोग वृतु। तदुक्तम् 'नहि मृत्रे निम्पततिरिति क्यम्, नेय रमस्य अषि तु सद्विपयरमनाया. । तन्निष्पत्या तु यदि तदेकायतजीवितस्य रमस्य निप्पत्ति- १च्यते न करिचदत्र दोप।"

यद्यपि सामाजिनतृद्ि साधारण्येन अभिव्यकना अत एव तात्कालिकी अलौकिको रतिरेव प्रत्यक्षानुमानम्मृतयादिलौकिव प्रमाणभिन्नस्वमवेदन-सिद्ध- रमनाव्यापारविषयमूता रस । तयापि सा रति लोकापेक्षया स्थायिभाव एव। अत एव आचार्येण भरनेन "नानाभावोपगना अपि स्थामिनो भावा रसत्वमाप्नु- वन्ति", "नानाभावाभिनाव्यजितान् वागङ्जसत्वोपेवान् स्थायिभावानास्वाद- यन्ति सुमनम प्रेक्षका" इत्याद्ियु वचोषु, "भावाभिनयसव्द्धान् स्थायि- मावास्नया वुधा । आस्वदयन्ति मनमा तरमान्नाटचरमा स्मृता ।।" इन्पानुवच्यइलोके च म्यायिभावस्य रमत्वमुक्नम्। स्पष्टीकृतन्च तदभिनव- गुप्नेन-'नानाभूर्नविभावादिभिरप समीप प्रत्यक्षकल्पना गता लोकापेक्षया मे ते स्यामिनो भावास्ने रस्यमान कजीवित रसत्व प्रतिपद्यन्ते। अत एतया द्टया स्यायिभावन्य रमत्ववचनमयुचिनम् ।" रमावस्यान सावारवृताया रते देशाद्यनियन्त्रमेन निविध्नमुपचयात् भटलोक्टमम्भन उपचयवराद, भावानुगामितया करणान् शबुकसम्मतः अनुकरणवाबार विन्ानवादावलम्वनाच्च वस्यचिन् सास्यद्श सम्मत- मुन्दु म्वजननरकनयुक्ता वाह्या विषयमामग्री एव रम इति वादोप्यत्र मते जञशन: स्वीकन वक्पते। वन एव अमिनवगुतेन रमस्वरुपविषये भट्टलोल्ल- टादीना मनानि प्रत्यास्पन स्वमनप्रतिपादनात् पूर्व एतन्स्पष्टमुक्न यन्मया न रसविपयन्पूर्व विब्चिदुच्चने, अपि सु पूर्वाचार्यागां मतान्येव परिष्त्रियन्ते।

अभिनवभारत्या पृ. २८५। २. नाटचगास्त्रे पृ २८८। pr तर्तव पु २८१। ४ तर्वच प्. ३१०। ५ अभिनवभारत्या पृ. २८८।

257

रमनिर्षयाननिरिति सुत्रे मयोगपदमुपादीयते। भृमारादिरमाङ्गाना विभावा- दीना प्र्वेक व्यभिचारित्वेन मशययोमे सत्यपि तेषा सयोगन्य कुन्नापि व्यभि- चारित्वाभावेन समययोगस्वायोगात्। एेपा विघ्नाना च भरवत प्रथममभिनवगुप्तेनेय सविस्तर निरुपण विहिनमभिननभारत्याम् । तच्त्र विस्तरममान्नेहोद्घियते। अम्मिन्मने रममून्नस्थमयोगपदम्य व्यसपव्यजकभाव सम्बन्ध निप्पत्ति- पदम्य चाभित्यक्तिरथं। परत्यभिज्वादर्शनवेद्दान्नदर्भनानुभारिणो चंपा व्यास्या। अन रममुत्र रमपद् 'रम्पते आम्वाद्यने' इनि व्युत्पत्या रत्यादिस्यानि- भावपरम्।तम्माद् निभिन्नेयु मनेषु कमन उत्पत्त्यनुमिनिभुक्यभिव्यक्यो रत्यादिम्यानिभावानामेव न नु रमम्य। अनोञभिनवग्प्तमतेमिव्यकिनि लौकिकस्य वामनारपेण सामाजिकाना चेनमि विद्यमानस्य रतिम्थायिभाव- म्यैच। रसम्प तु नाभिव्यक्ति तम्प तातालिकान, म्यानिविलक्षणत्वात्, पूर्वंनिद्धत्त्राभावाच्च। त्म्य नु स्वमवेदनमिद्धा प्रचकषादिप्रमाणविलक्षणा बोजरूपा रमनेव। पया पण्डिनराजेनोकम्, रत्वाद्युपहिना चिदेत रस। अनो रमे रयादि- स्थानिभावीनहिनन्य निदान्मनोननुभूनिभवनि बोघरपया स्वानुभत्परपयनया रमनना। तया च रमोउि स्वनचेदनसिद्ध, रनेरिचदात्मनश्चोभयम्यापि मनो- मानविषयन्वान्। कि तु सनानी निविययस्चात्मनोऽनुभूनि। अत्र तु रत्यादि- विषयसर्वाितस्पात्मन इन्नेव विभेष। अन एव रमाम्वादस्य पग्त्रह्माम्वादम- विवन्वमुच्चते न परत्ह्याम्वाद्ववम्। ये तु वेचिदाबुनिका प्राह्-रमम्य हृदमात्रमम्बन्वित्वात् तम्य बुद्धि- मन्चन्चिमिर्दर्गंनं महु मम्बन्वस्यानन नारनीनानामाचार्याण नोचित प्रति- भानोति ने सर्वयाज्भिना देवाना प्रिया रमनत्म्य। न हि केवलायारिचन- वतेराइशदन रन अषि नु रत्वाविचित्तवृततिविगिष्टम्यामन। अन्यया सर्व- रनानामानन्वनिवारित्व न स्वान। चिनवुनीना सुनदु वोभवरूपन्वान्। अपि च 'दश्वर सर्वभनाना हटेसेजर्जुन तिष्ठनि' इति गीतावचनेनान्मनो र्वादिम्यानिभावाना चोभयोरषि हृदवतिनवेन अन्वर्मुसमनोवृत्त्या तन्मवी-

मम्मटाभिमतं लक्षखायाः षड्विघत्वं हेत्वलंकारश्च

डा० रेवाप्रसाद द्विवेदी

मम्मटाचार्य .-

"मुत्यार्यंवार्धे तद्योगे रुदितोऽय प्रयोजनात्। अन्योग्यों लक्ष्यते पत् सा लक्षमाअरोपिता करिया॥। इत्येव काव्यप्रकाशे

"तद्बाघ हडितोडर्यद वा लक्षणोयस्तदन्वित" । इत्येव प शब्दव्यापार-

विचारे लक्षणामामान्य लक्षयित्वा द्वयोरप्यनयोप्रन्पोस्तद्भेदाशच- "स्वसिद्यें पराक्षेप पराय स्वसामर्पगम्। उपादानं लक्षणं चेत्युक्ता गुद्धब सा हविया ।" सारोपान्या तु पत्रोवनो विषयी विययस्तया। विधय्यन्त कृतेअ्यसिमिन् सा स्यात् साध्यवसानिका ।। भेदाविमौ च सादश्यान् सबन्धान्तरतस्तया। गौगौ शुद्धौ च विजञेयी।।" इरचेव प्रतिपाद्य

"तक्षणा तेन पडुविघा" इतम्या पडतिनत् निगमयति। अत्र के नु ते पहू भेदा इनि प्रश्ने वाव्यप्रकाशटीनिवारो नैवधा प्रतिष्ठन्ते। तेपु-

भिद्यमाननामगोृत्वाप्टविघन्वमस्या आमनन्ति। मम्मटोक्ते पड्ववत्वे च (१) रुडि, (२) प्रयोजनम्, (३) उपादानम्, (४) लक्षणम्, (५) आरोप, (६) अन्यवमान चेत्ेपा भे दपाना 'पडवयत्वोपयिक्ता दर्दयन्ति । काव्यप्रक्ाश-

₹- "जाति किया मुन सज्ञा वाच्चोज्य समितव्वनि"-रित्यन्य पूर्वार्लम्। ततस्तन्यदेनात बाच्योर्ज्य परामुश्यते। २ कव्यप्रदीपप्रभाया: काव्यमालनस्करणे पृ० २६। ३. अनुदूत वाज्यन्रदीप, तह्मना च।

Laksanayāh Sadadhatsam Hetealankārašca 261

(१) मुद्धा सोपापाना, (२) शुद्धा नलक्षगा, (३) शुद्धा सारोप, (४) शुद्धा माध्यवसाना, (५) गोगी नारोपा, (६) गोी साध्यवसाना चेति पोहात्व तन सिद्धान्नवन्ति । जमदेव अप्पय्यद्कीक्षित, पण्डिनराजो जगन्नाय, यीविधाचकवती, हरिनकर, निन्वेश्वर स्चंतेन कमेण मनुप्यन्ति। मम्मट- स्योपजीव्यनमो महमुतुलोपि रक्षणामेदगणनायाममुमेव त्रममात्ियते।" सांनपस्थिती मविकलह। वनमत्र तुनीयमेव मन मम्मटाभिमत प्रतिपद्यामहे, प्रतिपद्यामहे चे त्रयमत्र प्रमाणम् (१) काव्यप्रवान-गव्व्यापारनिचागयोनक्षणाना प्रतिपादननम, (२) तजत प्रस्तुतानि लक्षणमेदानामेयामुदाहरणानि, (३) उपयोगित्व चेनि। तत्न- १ प्रतिपादनकम पूर्वोद्ध ताभि 'स्वमिद्वय पराक्षेप' इत्पेनाभि लक्षणा- भेद-कारिकामिस्तु स्पष्ट एव, काव्यप्रकामदव्यापारविचारयोस्वदीयेन वृत्ति- प्रन्ेनाति म स्वष्टभूयिष्ठ । तत्र काव्यप्रकाने ग्रन्यक्वन् "तुन्ना प्रविशान्ति ..- उपादानेनेय लक्षणा" इनन नारम्य गगाया घोष इत्यत्र नटम्प -लक्षणेनपा लक्ष"-इति यावद् उपादान-लक्षण न्नास्तो भेदयी निमक्त-निदशने प्रदश्य, "अनयक्पा चेव शुद्धा, उपचारेणामिशितन्वात्" इन्येव तयो शुद्धात्व च निगमय्य

१. चन्द्रानोकन्य ९१०-१३ कारिकामु। २. वृत्िवातिके। जन्नामावेका जहदजह्लक्षणानान्नी "ग्रामो दग्घ" इ्जादिष प्रामेकदेणाचयर्य प्रयुक्ेन त्रामाविणव्देषु सप्तमीमपि लक्षणा मनुते मा च "अषह्स्ते हुस्त" इन्वदिभिम्दाटरण मम्भटेनीपदर्शिनायाम् अवशवावय- विभावमूष्णया लक्षमगम् जन्तमंवनीति न वतो भी। ३. रमगगापरम्य लक्षगाननरगारभे। ४ वा्यपकानम्य सजीविनीनाम्या टीकायाम्।

वाव्यप्वागस् हिन्दीनापानवाहे। . "गवोरचारमियरवाल्लक्षमा हविविना मतरा। उपादानान्लणाच्च शुद्धा मा द्विविधोदिता। आरोवाध्यतमानान्या शृज्ोगोपचारयो। प्रत्येक

च लमा निन्वत्वाशुद्धच्वान्, अन्पारोपाइ, अध्यवमानाच्चा तनसुदस्तन्वस्प दैविष्यन् चवावान क्षगास्याम कताम्, नारोपाध्यवनानम्क्वलोरपि प्रत्वेक वविप्रमेदना गुद्धगोतचारमियत्वान्" इति, इन वञ्चवहितपूववतिना "एनेन चनुविनेनोरचारण मह पूर्वोक्नो हो एकषाभेदी मंकस्ण्य पद्पकारा लक्षणा वस्तव्या" इच्पनेन च वृतिप्रन्थेनाभियावृनिमानृवाया सम्ममिद स्पष्टमेव।

Łaksanajah Sadmdhatoam Hetralankārašca 263

लक्षणाभेद माव्यमेद उद्दाहरणम् 2. लक्षणतक्षगा अत्यन्तनिरन्कृतवाच्चव्वनि "सपकृत वहु तत्र". त्यादि' ३. सारोपा गौणी रुपकपरिणामापह नुतय "रात्रिकापालिकी"२ ४. साध्यवनाना केमलमनम्भसि कमले च गौणी कुवलये-0* ५ मारोपा गुद्धा आयुष तम् ६ माव्यवमाना शुद्धा आयु

१. दाव्यम० उदा० २४। वाव्यप० उदा० ४२१। काव्यप्र० उदा० ४४९। ४. निम्नलिसिताप्टीवितारोपि तालिकामिमामनुमोदन्ते- सुधानागरकारो भीमनेनदीक्षित। सदुक्त तेन-"अनोपादान- सक्षणाम्याम् अर्यान्नरमत्रमितात्यन्नतिरस्कृतवाच्यो .... , गौगीस्ा भारोपमाध्यवसानास्या स्पकातिचायोवनो .. ... निल्पमिध्यतीति । २. म०म० गोक्ुलनाथनर्मा 1 यद्ुच्यने तेन-"प्रयोजनवती तु यद्युपादान यदि या लक्षणम्। उमप्रयापि व्वनिविशोषो व्यजपति, "मगाया घोप" इत्यन तटे लक्षणलक्षणया गगावाद्- रप्यस्य तेन च पावनत्वरूपस्य अत्यन्ततिरस्कृतवाच्यव्वनेर- मिन्यजनात्। "वुन्ना प्रविशन्तीत्यन्न वुन्तवरेपूपादान- लश्ष्येष वुन्नवादरप्यद्वारा निर्वतश्हतृ त्वादेरर्यान्तरमत मिउवाव्यकस्व ध्वननात् ....... सादृश्यमला लक्षणा। गीर्बाहीक इचन रूपयम्, "गामिमा वारये"त्यनाति- शयोक्तिन्, "जडेन वाहोकगवेन दण्डमादाय गुप्ता घनिक्स्य गाव"इ्पत्र परिणामम्, "गोरय न तू वाहीक" इत्यन्रापह- नुनिम् उत्यापयति।" नरविहमनीपाकार। यङुच्यते तेन-"उपादानलक्षणार्या- Ar नरमनमितवाध्यध्वन्य पयोगिनी, लक्षण-लक्षणा चात्यन्त- विरम्दववाच्यव्वन्युपमोगिनी, गोणमारोप रूपकालकारो- पयोगिनी गोगसान्यवसाना च प्रथमातिशयोकतिप्रयोजिवा। इति। 20 वामनस्प वालवोिनी।

Letsarejah Sadedhatram Hetralankarasca 265

दार्रानिका' वषि तामेव मतिमृतिमनुसरन्ति। ततरच काव्यप्रकाश विधित्सु- मंम्मदोनपि काव्यानपयोगीनि लक्षणान्तराणि तितिशति चेद वंज्ञानिकमेव पन्यानमाथयति। ततश्च तृतीयमेव लक्षणाभेदगणनाकमममौ सिद्धान्ततवोररी करोति नान्यम्। नन्-"यदि वाव्योगयोगिन एत लक्षणाभेदा अत्र प्रतिपिपादयिपितास्तहहिं प्रयमतमाश्चच्चार एवं भेदा अन प्रनिपाइनीया, सेवामेवोपयोगस्य मम्मदोदा- हृतंयु वाव्येपूपल्म्पन्वात, सतदन 'लक्षणा तच्चनुविधे त्येव निगमनीयम्, न तु "लक्षणा तेन पड्विधे"नि। अन्वी शुद्धारोपध्यवसानमूलौ सु भेदौ परिहर्तव्यावेव मम्मर्टन, तदुपयीभाज काव्यम्थलम्प तेनाइितत्वान न परिहिनो चेन् वाव्म्थलान्यपि तेन तन्ुपमोगभाजि दर्गनीमानि। नच तानि दगितानि प्रमकमत्र प्रन्थरलने अवाव्यवचनम् वास्यावचन दा। यदुच्चते- "घृनमाय, आयुरेदे"-न्यादीनेव प्रयोजन वयजयन्ति म्यलान्यनोदाहरणतया- भिमनानीति नास्ति ताहृमवोषठ्वपभीतिरिति नत्य च्यनाम् "अम्त्त्र वैचिश्य न वा, नाम्नि चेन् क्यमिद वाब्बन्वेन गण्बते, वस्ति चेन वभमिद गौणोपचार- वइलकारकोडो न निवेश्यते, क्य च निवेशिनमषि वक्ष्यमाणहत्वलकारकोटौ पंड, "हेत्वलकारो न लक्षिन, आयुर्षृ तमित्यादिरूपो ह्येप न भूषणता कदा- चित्रति, वंचित्याभावादि" त्वेवनेतन्निरास्यिते। मशुष्यते-"परिवरा- लक्कर पावदेव काव्यप्रकाश निर्माय यपरते मम्मटाचाये नोपपूरणम्मालक- नटटम्पेंय दोष, परिकरादुध्वंमेत कारणामालप्रकरणश्य वचित्रमाभाव प्रनिपादयनो वृत्तिवन्यन्योपलमभादि"-नि, तहि चनुर्थ उल्लासे कस्य दोष, यत्र काव्यलिगम्य वृते हेतलकार इनि काव्यहेनुर्रिति च व्यपदेश नियते,

१ इ० न्यायदर्शनमुत्रम्-२२१६४, व्याकरणमहामाध्म् ४।१।४८- मूत्रे, वाक्यपरीवस्य द्विवीय काण्ड च। २. गन्दव्वापारविचारेपि मम्मटो व्यवहारोपयोगिनीमेव लक्षपा ोमानने "इ हेयोपादेवाना हानोपादाने प्रमाणादेव, तच्च निर्चयात्मना प्रामाष्य भजते, निश्चमनच दाब्दनाहिन्सेनार्थ विषमीवरोनी' नि तेन तर्थव प्रवान्त- त्वान्। मुकलमदेषि व्यवहारीपयोगिनोमेव लक्षाममुख्ययाभिघासज्ञया लभमति। :. दोपान्यामान्या दव० व्यक्निविवेत अम्मन्मस्वरण पृ ३८७ ४३६,। ४ वाव्यप्रकाते कारपमालालवारवृतति। ५ द वामनाचायम्य काव्पप्रकामभुमिका पृ० ८, म० म डा०

६. काव्यपप्रकार उद्या०-७१ महिलामहव, उदा० ९० पविमन्नीo । वाध्यमवारो जदा० ६५ बेमेसु बलामोडिय०।

LatspaTh Sed-idhatoam Hetcalailarafca 267

हेन्वनतारम्य वस्प् प्रचानभिमवम् (१) वर्यावमेयहेतुन्दवेन हेतुना मह हेतु- मत्री यढ़ वांतन् तदूस्पनेतम (२) एक च हेतुमता हेनोगनिन्ननया सद् द्न तदस्पन्। अनमोवत प्रयम तत्र वाव्यादंकारी दण्डी-"हेनुइच मुकनदेनों च वाचामृत्तमनूषममि नि भूषणोत्तिमता पम्पनि, प्रस्तौति च तन्पपचान मार्पचनुदिमति कारिकोदाहुती। भामहाचानध्च वंत्र

"हनु-द सूष्भो लेशरच नानंकारतमा मनः । समुदनाभियान्य दनोक्यननिघानन: ।।2

हेनुभिममच्ारपक्षो वे न मेलपन्ति अद्यकि नामहम्य दर्गनमिद सुक्षम- नेनपों कृने हवस्त मनि न विनसमन, पन्यन्वेत्र से तत्ालकारभावन् अयापि हेतां. कृते दण्डिन पदवी आनहुम्विलीकारेणामो मोचयित न प्रनवत

हतुनना रूह हेनॉरनिनानममहमफड़ मबेड छत। सोलंशरा हेतुः स्पाइन्येम्यः पृया्सूतः ।।'

इन्दंव निश्मेव दन्यानमुन्मील्य "लविरलतमलविकान-'-काल" इन्नादिना निदजयति, नमनेनमा वानुमोदनमुप्सकताना: महृदनपरमगया। अनमो: प्रथम वाव्यनिगनान्ता अननिचानि विणद्ीकृतपग्वतिकतिपमाचानपद्-

१. कायाइक ६३३५५१। *. वाक्यालकरि २ो८८, सत्र ममर्यंनाय चात्र २६६ पृष्ठे प्रथम पाद- विननदना "मवोन्तनक" इ्पादिकारिक प्रमनीति। नमुदानामिधानं-

भुम:। ४. सदरट: मूशमदेमी लभवति, पार्यवनन चानवोगकार्वमावलमति। द्र. काभ्ाक ११८-१०२। मुझने काव्मप्ताहक्वति उवंकारभाव पत्पति, दमन उच्लमे "दुनोसि लभित" इन्याबिना लकनोतन्यामेन तमुदाहरपि। ५. ससाया० अटर। काव्यगमे कारामालामवरमे "हेनुमजा महे शारिवाकननपंत्र संसेक वाचवोनिनीकरी वामनाचार्य, पुनरत उदुमझी- मतं राखति।

Lakşenayāh Sadedhatcam Hetoalarkarafca 269

नामुपन्यामे परिकरविष्छितिमभिमनुते-

"यद्यप्यपुष्टार्यस्य दोपताभिधानान तन्निराकरणेन पृष्टायंस्वीकार: कृत. तयापि एकनिष्ठल्वेन बटुना विशेयणानामेवसुपन्यासे वे चित्रयमित्यलकारमन्ये गणित."।

इत्येव च ता दोपाभावान्नभविवियत्तेसतायं अलकारत्वत्प गजस्वत्यमविरीपयते तस्च "आयुृ तमि"त्यादिष एकाकिहितुटेनुमद्भावम्थलेयु मा भूदलकारत्वची

"आयुर्ध तं यशस्त्यागो भयं चौर: सुखं प्रिया। वरं द्यतं गुहजानं श्रेमो ब्राह्मणपूजनम् ।।'

इत्यादियु, "अविरलकमले त्यादिपु, "उल्लाम" इत्यादिष च तादृशानेकहेतु- हेतुमदमेदभाक्षु वाव्यरत्नेय तुभा क्थ न जायत इति यत्सत्य विम्मयावह- मेत। एव प्रथम हेनुभेदमलकारतयागीकृत्य परत्र प्रत्यवतिष्ठमान श्रीमम्मट" ज्यारिगणे वदधद्वश्नन्त्रमम सिपति, मशकप्रमाण वाच बहुमन्यमान स्फटिक जगुप्मने, वलहानमानयोचच वालि-मुग्रीवयो मुध्रीवमेव हिनस्ति, वालिनमेव रक्षति। किमन्न तन्त्रमिति चेदिवम्- हेतुह्वेनुमनोरभेदेन जायमाना विस्छित्तिरनेदमेवोपजीवनि, न हेतुत्वम् । तनरच तन्ा हेनुनाम्ना व्यपदेनोगनुचिन, विन्छित्तिगनननार्म्नवालकाराणा व्यपदेगन्य निर्वारणात्। बन एव मयामपि सामग्रयाम् अनन्वय उपमापदेन न व्यपदिशयने, तन्न विच्छिते. द्विनीयमद्शव्यवच्छेदजनितत्वात्, एवमेव उज्नेयोस्मापि, तम्पा नृनीनमद्णव्यवच्छेदाश्नितवात् । एव यदि बिच्छित्ति- निदानम् अभेदमुत्मृज्य अर्भेदानुयोगिनी हेतोर्नांना व्यपदेश नियते तहि तनप्रतियोगिना हेनुमता किमपराद, तन्नाम्नव व्यपदेव वथमत्र न तियते हेतुमानिति मवान्निमानितिवन्। नाम्नि चान्र अनेदोपि विच्छितिकारणम्, देनो हेुमत आरोपस्येत तन्कारपवयानुनृयमानत्वाद्। अस्ति चामेदारोपयो-

२. स्द्रटकाओ्याल० ७।८२-कारिकाया नमिमानोविवृति। अत्र

मनवाद् दीपव तुम्नयोगिवान्वतरमाकवंप्रसमो हेतुकेदा्य विघटयतीनि एवनिष्ट- तवा वनेनेषामभेद प्रम्तुवन्ति "अविन्लवमलविनाम" इत्यादीन्येवोदाहरणानि

Laksarayāh Sadndhaļcam Hetgalankārašca 271

कान्ता विरक्तम्ये हादि, तदिनरमवन्यमूलकान न तरम

"उल्लामो लतिशानामसालमुर्च्छा वियोगिवगस्य। प्रमर्वत दक्षिणवायुर्बहुजयो मदनमल्लम्य ।।" इन्यतत् पद्यरत्म्।

निराकरोनि व माइस् कमूल आरोपे स्पकत्वमायव्न जरतगनेवम्- इहान्ये सादृश्यनिमित्त एवारोपो रुपक, न सबन्यान्तरनिमितकोऽपि, तेन संबन्धान्तरयूईक आरोपो वचिन्ममान्नम, न त्वलंकार कश्चदिति" मन्यन्ते, पर्स्ति च "उपमंव निरोभतमेंदा रूपकमिध्यत" इत्यादि। तन्न निषुशहृदयावजंकम्। तया हि इह ताबड् द्विविधा लक्षणा, प्रयोजनरहिता रुढा, तद्युता च कार्या। तत्र रुढामा प्रभोजन-यंग्यार्थाभावादभिघावद वचिन्नय-चाहनातिरहान्न रतपरिपोषकत्वमिति नालकरता। कार्या पुनस्त- द्वँलसम्पंन वाव्यजीवितालमाना सर्वसा कविभिरादरणीयति सर्वेया स्वति- कारादीनामविप्रनिपति। न व तस्या: सादृश्य सबन्यानरे वा कश्चिद तिशोषो, येनेकतालकारता, परत्र तदभाव इति स्थान्। न च संवन्धान्तर- निमित आरोपोज्लकरतया लक्षितः नापि तद् युज्यते, रुपक्सानात्यन तदन्तर्मानम्यवोचितत्वान्। अत एव 'आरोपो रुपकमिति सामान्येनंबर सूत्रिनम्, न व सादृस्यमिन्यनुथनतम् ।'

सगृह पानि चामु वरमेवाभिनानमनना वारिक्या- "सादृश्यमंबन्धनिवन्धनाना अलंक्वतित्वं यदि लक्षणाया । साम्पजपि सर्वस्य परस्य हेनो संवन्धभेदेनि तयंत्र युक्ता॥। अलवारविमर्णिनीकरी राजानवयीजयरयोपि र्नाक्रमिम प्रगुणवन्नलकार-

मानुवुर मनमिदमेवम पस्थापर्गनि- "केवाचित् संवन्नान्तरहेतुरप्यारोपो रुपशांगमेवेति मतम् । मदाहालंकार- माध्यकार-"लक्षणापरमाय याव्रना रुपकम्" इत्युपकम्य "सारोपान्या च सादुइ्पाड् या संब्रन्धान्तराड् वा" इत्यादि। स तु यया- "अमृतकवलः शोनाराशि: प्रमोडरसप्नपा सितिमराव्डं ज्योन्म्नावाही तुपारघरट्टिका।

अरकाररत्नाकरम्प पुनानस्कर पृ० ३२-३३ ॥

Lakşanāyāh Sadcidhatean Hetaalankāraśca 273

पण्डितराजोपि च "उनाम" इत्वादिनि' पद्ये। अत एव च रत्नाकरकारो हेत्वलकाराय काव्बलिंगान्मक प्रथममेव हेनुभेद लक्षपति, वाब्यलिगमिति नाम विहान च "हेतु"गन्देन व त व्यपदिगति। द्वितीय चाभेदभूत हेनुभेद रूपक एव प्रागुवनेन ऋमेष गनार्थयति। एवमेद चातिरायोवितप्रथम- मदेदि "आनुरेव" लादिक मकलयितु तल्लक्षणे सादुव्येनरमपि सबन्वमुपा- ददयान्। यदि च "आयुर्घृ तम्" इत्यादावारोपापेक्षयातिशये चमकाराविक्य- मनुभूपेज तहि "वायंकारणयो पौतीयंविपयंयतो' जायमानायामतिवयोकनो भेदमम् मक्लयेन, सदर्थ प तल्लक्षण "कायवारणयोभेदवमयोयों विपयंय" इन्प्रेव मणोबनेन्। वम्ति चात्र हेनुहेनुमद्भावाशिन एवातिनाय, अन एव दण्डिना हेनुनाम्नव व्यपदिम्यते भेद एपोतिमसोक्ने काव्यावररो। अत एवं न काव्य- प्रवामे नरमिहमनीया रचित्व्वान् नगमिंहठक्कुरोपि शुद्धानारीयाया अविशयो केरम्मिन मेदे चारितार्य्य ' पस्ति, यद्यपि पूर्वोवनेन कमेण लक्षणमशञोघयिन्दा तेन स्व्प तत् चारिताय्य न लम्मेस, पौवापयंविपययमात्रेण कार्यकारणयोर- मेदारोवनो प्रविषेद्ध ममवयत्वात् । ननु-"दक्यनेनरा शुद्धम्य आरोपम्य रूपके, अतिमयोक्नेशचनुर्य भेदे वा मग्रह क्नुम्, तद्विगिन्दानाम् "अविरल-वमलविकाम" इत्यादीना काव्या- नामुपलम्पमनव्वान्, शुद्धाध्यवनानम्य तु का गनि, तद्घटितम्य काव्यस्यो- दाहरणनना अनुपस्यानन्वादि"नि चेद, अन्नि तम्मापि सादृशमे व भवत पुर एव म्कूर्नमानमृदाहग्णम्। कि तदिति चेदिदम्-

"आराध्यनं शरवणभवं देवमल्लघिनाव्वा मिद्धन्द्वन्हू-जलव गमपाद् दीणिनिमुंक्नमाग: ।

१. "इल्लाम" इत्वादे उलोवम्य विवरणे "मत्र वृत्त्यनुपास-प्राचुर्या- दोजोगुप्रवाशकवाच्च नब्दम्य, पमादगुणयोगादनन्नरमेवाविगतस्य रुपकस्य हेचग्वारम्य वा वाच्चन्य चमतृन्योन्तुत्वस्वन्यन्वान् मममेद प्रावान्यमिति रमगगापरे काव्यस्यावममवनिरूपमान्ते पण्डितराजी रूपकत्वमत्र प्रतिपद्यते। २. "परप्रन्नापक लिंग हेतु"। (सू० ७९ अल रत्ना)। "लिंगेन परत्न्नायन परार्यानुमानसप काव्पलिंगपर्जायो हेनु "इति (वृत्तिस्तत्रं व) । ३. काव्यादर्गम्य २२५३, २५७ 1 ४. नरमिहमनीपया वावोतिन्वामुद्धता इय पक्ति-"मुद्मारोपा तु चनुयातिसपोस्तिमस्िके"निः दर० बालवीचिनी "लकरा तेन पदुविधे"ति पररानं।

Laksanayah Sadoidhatram Hetoalantarašca 275

परिचर्चा

पु ला मा्गव मन्मने तु 'स्वमिद्धये पराक्षेप परार्य स्वममपंणम्। उपादान लक्षण चेत्युक्ना शुद्धव मा द्विवा' इति क्थयता मम्मटेन स्पष्ट कृन यदत्र तृतीय मतमेव मम्मटाभिसम्मत वतते। अस्मिन् विपये विवादस्य अवमर एव नास्ति। रे. प्र द्विवेदी• वम्नुतो नाम्ति विवाद। प्रदीपट्टनायमेव हेनुर्दत्त - "रूटि प्रयोजनाम्या भेदे सभवत्यपि 'एव -- 'तु'- शब्दमोरनालोचनाविजुम्भितत्वादनादेयम्" इनि तृ मया तम्य वावनानि उद्युतानि। अन स एव भेदोन्माभि स्वीनियते। अन्न एक एव हेनुरस्माभि प्रतिपादित, उपादेवतारूप । अन्येि तावद् हेनव मन्नि तेजत्र नोपस्थापिता। तेप अम्याप्यन्तर्भाव । अ न. जानी इयमषि मान्यनेका वनने पण्डितेपु यन् काव्यप्रकाश मम्मटेना- ल्लटमूरिणा चोभाम्या लिमिित-"वृन श्रीमम्मटाचायंवय' परितराववि। प्रवन्व पूरित शेपो विघायाल्लटसूरिणा"। अन् प्रष्टुमना अस्मि-अप्यय भाग अल्लटसूरिबिरचिते भागे प्राप्यते उनाहो मम्मटेन रचिते। रे प्र द्विवेदी म न जानी तदा तु मनद्वष वनेनेव। रे प्र द्विवेदी पग्विरालकारान् परम् अल्लटमूरिविरचिते मागे वनते कारण- मालालकारस्य वर्णनम्। कारणमालालकारम्य वृत्तौ एव वनते एतन्य हेत्बलकारस्य खण्डनम् । किन्तु चतुर्थ उल्लामे मम्मट- कृतान् प्रयोगानेव दुप्ट्वा अल्लटसूरिणा हेत्वलकारे चमत्कार- भाव म्वीकरियने। मम्मर्टनामकृत् चतुर्थ उल्लासे क्य्यते यत अत्र काव्यलिंगमिनि यद् वक्तव्य तन् करिचिद् उच्यनेश्न हेत्व- लकार इनि। अत काव्यतेतु अन काब्यलिंगालकारो चवंते। हेतुहेतुमनोर्षवाभेदो वर्नते ईदुश न किमप्युदाहरणमविकृत्य तेनोक्नम् अत हेत्वलवार इति। वस्तुत कुन्नचनापि उदाहरणेपु मम्मटेन हे्त्वलकारम्य नामोल्लेखो न कियते। इदमेव मनसि वृत्वा अ्लटमूरिणा अप्रे उच्यते यदत्र एवविधेषु हेत्लकारस्यलेपु चमकारो नाम्ति। सरवजषि एतादृमा प्रयोगा अस्माभि समु- पस्यापिना ।

Sahityika Abhioyaktt 277

कामिनी और कचन की आमक्ति से दूर करना पर अभिव्यक्ति में कुछ ऐसी त्वरा होती है, वह ऐमी लजीज और अजीज हो जाती है कि आमक्ति दूर तो क्या होगी वह और भी बडने लगती है। हिन्दी मे उग्रजी का साहित्य इसका उदाहरण है। उप्रजी की पुस्नके "चद हमीनों के खनूत", "वधु की बेटी", "चावलेट" का यीम कोई बुरा नही, सब मे नवयवको की चरित्रम्रप्टता को दूर कर उनके पवित्राचरण की हो वकालन की गई है। पर उनकी रैली मे वुछ ऐभी उग्रता है कि वह अपने आघार पर ही कुठाराधान करने लगती है, जिस चीज का विरोध करना चाहती है उसी के प्रति आसक्ति, आकर्षण उत्पन्न करने लगती है। दूमरी ओर यह भी सभव है कि कवि या कथाकार य द्व पर या अन्य किसी दुरवपं विषय पर रचना कर रहा है पर फिर भी उसकी अभिव्यक्ति इतनी सौम्प हो, सतुलित हो कि उसे पद्ठ कर या सुन कर हृदय में शान्ति के ही भाव सत्न्न हो। गाघी जी वहा करते थे कि यदि अहिंमा-दर्शन एक व्यापक दर्शन है तो उसमे युद्धो को भी सभालने की शक्ति होनी चाहिये। उसी तरह कहा जा सकता है कि साहित्यिक अभिव्यक्ति सबको ही मभाल मवती है। जयवर्द्धन नामक रपन्याम का एक पात्र वहता है "में मान नहीं सकता कि वाधी का चिन्र शान्त नही हो सक्ता"। साहित्व मे या दर्शन मे युद्ध और विग्रह हो, पर साहित्य-दर्गन को स्वय कभी विग्रहात्मक होने को नहीं कहा जा सक्ता। जिन्दगी जो दीखती है वही तक वर्णन का लाभ नहीं है। उसकी एक भूमिका, एक परिपाश्त्र देकर प्रम्तुन करना पडता है। वही साहित्यदर्शन की विश्षिप्टता है। दुरक्षत्र मे सहस्र लक्ष व्यक्ति मारे गए लेकिनि इम आस्यान पर रचे गए महापुराण ने इतिहाम को जौर सस्कृति को और धर्म को जीवित रखा। वह युद्ध को भी, हिंमा को भी, हत्या वो भी, ग्रष्टाचार को भी इम तरह वणित कर मबता है, इम तरह अभिव्यक्नि दे मकता है कि वह भी माहित्य हो जाय, 'सहम्य माव' को जागृत करने लगे। और वाम्तव मे देखवा जाय तो माहिन्त यही करता भी आया है। वहाँ शृगार रस है, तो वरण रस मी है, वीभत्म मी है, बीर भी है, हास्य भी है। सभी का मूल रूप भिन्न-भिन्न है पर सभी माहित्य मे आकर रम ही हो गए हैं, मत पारम्परिव मेदभाव को भूल कर एक माथ बेठे हैं। साहित्य के 'दीरघ दाघ निदाघ' ने जगन को तमोवन चना दिया जहाँ कहिलाने में बहि, मयूर, मृग, बाघ एवत्र रहने लगे है। यही काम साहित करता या रहा है, भाज भी उमे यही करना चाहिये। जब्र से लोगों के बीच वज्ञानिक दृष्टि का विकास हुआ और व्यक्ति पर भी यात्रिक दृष्टि से विचार करने की प्रवृत्ति जगी तब से यह सोचा जाने लगा कि जिस तरह का वष्प विषय होगा उमी तरह की प्रतिक्रिया पाठक मे भी जगेगी। नम्व भाति का विषय, अमूक भाति की प्रतिनिया। तुलभी ने मक्नि-परव कविता

Salntyıka Abhioyakti 279

यहाँ पर साहित्यिक अभिव्यक्ति से मेरा क्या अभिप्राय है मेरा क्या तात्पर्यं है और वह साधारण अभिव्यक्ति से क्यों कर श्रेष्ठ है-इस बात को स्पष्ट करने के लिए मुझ जरा कवि बनने दीजिये। दो प्रात थे, दोनों स्थानी मे आर्थिक मदी के कारण बेरोजगारी छा गई। निणंध यही हुआ कि लोगो को आर्थिक वृत्ति तो दी ही जाय, इसके सिया दूसरा कोई चारा ही नहीं है पर वृत्ति प्राप्त करने की शर्त ऐसी बडी कर दी जाय कि लोगो को इसके लिये उत्माह न रहे पर परिणाम जो मामने आया वह अति भयकर था। जब कभी जाच करने वाले निरीक्षक उनके यहा जाकर छोटी-छोटी बातो की पूछताछ करते नो उन्हें मखरना और वे समझते कि उनकी विपन्नना का उपहास किया जा रहा है। उन्हें लगना कि उनकी मिसमगी पर उनकी पल्नियाँ, बन्चे आन्म-लानि से गले जा रहे हैं। उनमे माहम नही रह गया कि वे समाज के अन्य सदस्यों मे आसें मिला सके 1 कुछ ने तो आत्महत्या कर ली। वुछ ने इस विवटृन जीवन मे चोरी करना और डाका डालना ही शेयस्कर समझा। दवा रोग से नी भयकर निकली। दूमरे प्रान्न मे भी वृतिदान के द्वारा ही समस्या हल की गई। पर वहाँ पर इम दान न वह कर दाया कहा गया। प्राप समझा यही जाता है कि मनुष्य मावो से प्रभावित होता है, "भाव अनुटो चाहिये, भापा काऊ होय"। पर अत्र यह बात समझ मे आने लगी कि "भाषा" (अभिव्यक्ति) अनूठी चाहिये, 'भाव काऊ होय"। प्रभविष्णुता भाषा, अभिव्यक्ति, मे रहती है, भाव मे नही। वह भापा-परक है, भाव-मरक नहीं। कहा गया कि हम RIsk Cover करने के लिये बीमा कराते हैं ही, थोडी थोडी अर्य-राशि किसि्तीं के रूप मे जमा करते हैं, जब पालिमी परिपक्त हो जाती है, हमे रक्म मिल जाती है। वह तो दान नहीं, हम उमके दावेदार हैं। माज जो समाज मे समृद्धि है उसको बनाने मे मभी ने थोडी-थोडी किस्त जमा की है। वह ऐसे ही अवसरो के लिए तो किया गना था। आज अर्यसकट रूपी दुर्घटना के बारण बह पालिसी मेच्चूर कर गई है और रुपये प्राप्त हो रहे हैं तो यह उचिन ही है। यह सीधा सादा व्यापरिक मामला है, इम हाथ दे जम हाथ ले, अन किदि्न की अदायगी अर्थात् वृत्तिदान का प्रारम्भ बड़े धूम-घाम से किया गया। इम ममारोह का उद्घाटन राष्ट्रपति के करकमलो के द्वारा किया गया। फोटो लिया गया। वृत्ति-प्राप्त व्यक्तियों का फोटो अववारो मे प्रकाशित किया गया। जहां एक प्रान्त मे इस दान के कारम बराजकता फेली वहाँ दूमरे मे सुराज की स्थापना हुई। प्रश्न यह है कि यह जादू क्यो वर सभव हो सका। दूनरा उदाहरण लीजिये। जय विश्वव्यापी त्वितीय महायुद्ध चल रहा था। तो एव ही समाचार दो रूप में प्रकाशित किये जाते थे। French amny in

Satttyika Abhuyakti 281

उद्याहरण के लिये उम स्थिति को ध्यान पूर्वक देखिये जब दो स्परचित व्यक्ति आपम में मिलते हैं। प्रश्न यह है कि जो अपरिचय की दीवार उनके वीच सड़ी है वह कैसे टूटे और वे किम तरह समीप जाये पर लब देखिये उनमे किन वरह बान प्रारम्भ होनी है। "Fine day, isn't it ?" दिन बडा मुहाबना है। "It certainly is" हा, ववध्य (मिलन का प्रथम बाधार बिद्ठु प्राप्त हुआ। आगे बहने का मार्ग प्रगुस्त)। 'Altogether it has been a fine summer मत मिलावर इम बार श्रीष्म ऋृतु बडी मच्छी रही। "Indeed, it has been What a mce spnng too 4et हे, इम बार बनन ऋतु नी सुमद रही (दो मिलनबिद्डु प्राप्त हो ही गये है। दूसरा व्यक्ति ननीव मिलनबबिड्डु पर सहमन होने का निमत्रण दे रहा है)। "हा, वसस ऋृतु भी मुमद थी" (तीनरे बिट्डु पर सहमनि प्राप्त) । अद मंत्री का मार्ग प्रशस्न है जिस पर वे दागे बट सकते हैं। प्रद्न यह है कि अजनवीपन का, अपरिचय का, पूथकत्व का चट्टान कसे टूटा ? दो लोक के प्राणी एक कमे हुए? उत्तर है शुद्ध अभिव्यक्नि। यहां अभिव्यक्ति पर ध्यान दें। यदि यह नही होती तो मारे मैत्रीभाव के वात्रभूद भी वहा पर पारम्परिक सम्मेलन की घटना नही घट मकती। कल्पना कीजिये कि एक व्यक्ति ने स्पष्ट शब्दों मे दूमरे के प्रति अपने मेनीभात की घोषणा की 1 यह सुनकर दूनरे के हृदय में तुरन्न शक्रा संदा हुई कि कुछ दाल में काला है। यह व्यक्ति ठम है, इसकी दृष्टि मेरी थैली पर है और मेन बेन प्रकारेण दह मेरे विश्वाम को प्राप्त कर मुझे अत मे लूटना चाहना है। जन मे जाने आते बात यहाँ तक वद सकती है कि वहाँ साम्प्रदायिक दम्ा हो जाय, पुलिन को गोली चलानी पडे और बितने निरीह व्यक्तियों की जान जाने। प्रदन यह है कि घटनाओं ने यह विचित्र मोड़ वसो लिया। प्रारम्भ तो मंत्री के प्रव्मन मे ही हुजा था, एक ने दूसरे के प्रति प्रेम के ही माव प्रगट किचे ये। पर वहा पर यह दुम्वद दृश्न कमे सामने जाया ? उत्तर है. गुद्ध अभिव्यक्ति। भाव तो मँत्री ने ही थे। प्रेम के ही थे। बड़े सुन्दर भी ये पर के जिन तरह अभिव्यक किये गये वह ढग उप्र था, हिंमान्मक था, उनमे रवरा थी और उसी में ध्वम के बीज चिपे थे। यही है मदमाव की बदिमात्मक अमिव्यकति। चाहे तो इमे वप बर्नोचिन्य कह सक्ते हैं।

Sanskrit Alankāralastra rum Karya kā Sarjanā-paksa 283

जितना उसके आस्वाद पक्ष का, किन्तु यह आरोप तभ्यमूलक प्रतीत नही होता कि सस्कृत काव्य-समीक्षको ने काव्य के सजना-पक्ष की सवथा उपेक्षा की। अलकारशास्त्र के विभिन्न प्रथो में काव्ध-सर्जन के विषय मे अनेक महत्वपूर्ण घारणाओं व विचारो का निरपण मिल्ता है जिससे यद्यपि काव्य के निर्माण-पक्ष का समग्र चिन्न तो नहीं उभरता, फिर भी काव्य के इस महत्त्वपूर्ण पक्ष के सम्बन्ध मे स्कृत काव्य-विवेचको की सम्मक अभिज्ञता का परिचय तो मिल ही जाता है। प्रस्तुत निव्य मे सस्कृत आलकारिको के काव्य-सजना से सबन्धित विचारों की एक सक्षिप्त रूपरेखा प्रस्तुन करने का मतन किया जा रहा है। सम्बृन मे काव्य-निर्माता का सामान्य अभिधान 'कवि' है जिसकी व्युत्पत्ति 'कु शब्दे' या 'बुद्ध शब्दे" या 'कबृ (वृ) वर्णे" या 'कव वर्णन"' धातुओ से उणादि इ प्रत्यय वे योग से मानी गई है। अन कवि शब्द का व्युत्पत्ति-लभ्य अर्य है 'शब्दनीय' 'वर्णनीय' या 'कवि का कमे'।' सस्वृत साहित्य मे कवि शब्द का काव्य-रचयिता के अलावा स्तोता, विचारव, विद्वान्, अन्तर्दृष्टि- सम्पन्न, सर्वन, स्ष्टा, ऋृषि, शन्नदर्शी, भविष्यद्वष्टा आदि नाना अर्थो मे प्रयोग हुआ है। शतपथ ब्राह्मण मे कवि को ऋषि से अभिन्न माना गया है। ईशोपनिषद् में ईश्वर के लिए 'कवि' विशेषण का प्रयोग मिलता है-नविमंनीपी परिभू स्वयभू। शकराचायं के अनुमार यहाँ कवि का अर्थ है भान्तदर्शी या सवंद्रप्टा"। वानन्दवरघंन ने कवि-प्रतिभा के लिए 'दृष्टि" शब्द का प्रयोग करते हुए कवि को मुख्यत दप्टा माना है। राजगेसर का भी यही मत है। उनके अनुसार प्रतिभायुक्त व्यक्ति परोक्ष पदा्यों को भी देख लेता है जब कि प्रतिभा- विकल जन को प्रत्यक्ष वस्तुएँ भी मदृप्ट रहती है।" अन्मन्न राजशेसर ने महाकवि को दिव्य द्ष्टा बनलाते हुए कहा है कि त्रिलोचन शिव तथा सहस्रनेत्र इन्द भी जिसे नहीं देस पाते उसे कवि अपनी प्रातिभ दृष्टि से अनायास प्रत्यक्ष कर लेता है। राजमेखर के मत मे ववियों के मतिदपण मे समस्त विश्व

नमरकोर, भानूजी दीक्षित कृत टीका, निणय सागर प्रेस, पृ २५२ २- वाव्यमीमासा, वध्याय ३ ३ वाध्यानु शासन, अध्याय ८, सूत्र १ ४. मभिनवभारती (गायनवाड ओरियन्टल सिरीज) भाग २, भध्याय १६, पृ. २९७ (प्रथम सस्करण ) ५. ईशोपनियद, मत्र ८ पर शकराचायं का भाप्य ६. ध्वन्पालोक, उद्योन ३ काव्य-मीमासा, अध्याम ४

Sanskrit Alankārasāstra mem Kaoja kā Sarjanā-paksa 285

वहां कवि-वाणी की अपरिसीम।1 मम्मट के मन मे वल्ला की मृष्टि नियनि-कृत निनमो से बद्ध है, सुनन, दुम्न तथा मोह में आधूर्ण है, उपादान आदि कारणो के परतत्र है तया केवल पडरनो से ही युक्त है, जत्र कि कवि-निर्मिति नैसगिन निकमों ने रहित, एकमात्र माहलाद-स्वरूप, बाह्य वारणो मे अनीत तथा नवरसो से आप्यायित है।2 इम प्रकार सम्कृत नाव्यन्ममीक्षको ने वाव्य को एक मौलिक व बपूर्व भृजन मानने हुए काव्यलोक मे कवि के मावंभौम स्वातनय को स्वीकार किया है। कवि ब्रह्मा द्वारा निर्मिन जगन का बनुकर्ती मात्र नहीं है, वह एक नूतन और विलक्षण सृष्टि का विाता है। उसका विधानत्व न वेवल ब्रह्मा के समकक है, अपिनु उसमे भी श्रेप्ठनर है। मस्कृत ममीआ-शास्त्र मे कदि व्यक्नित्व को पर्याप्त महत्त्व दिना गया है। वाव्य कवि व्यक्तित्व की सृष्टि है, उमी की आातमाभिव्यजना है। जिम प्रकार वीज ही वृक्ष के रूप मे विकसिन होना है उसी प्रकार कवि की अनुभूति हो काव्य का रूप प्रहण करती है। अनकारवादी और रीनिवादी आचार्यों की दृष्टि प्रधाननया काव्य के वहिरग के विद्लेषण-विवेचन नक ही भीमित थी अन वे काव्य-निर्माण मे कृवि व्यक्तित्व के वथार्थ महत्त्व का समचित मुल्याकन नहीं कर सके, यद्यपि उमका एक अस्पष्ट निवश उन्होने अवश्य किया है, विन्तु रस- ध्वनिवादी आाचार्यों ने ववि व्यक्तित्व तया कृति वे सम्वन्व का विाद निरुपय किया है। अलकारबादी भामह के अनुसार कवि का पार्थिव रूप तो वाल-वलिन हो जाता है परन्नु उमका वाव्यमय वषु चिरस्थायी रहता है।" राजगेसर के बनुमार जैसा कवि का स्वभाव होता है वैभा ही उमका वाव्य हुआ करता है। आानन्दवर्जन द्वारा उदृत एक आनुवच्य पठोत के अनुमार यदि कवि शृगारी हो तो जगत् रसमय हो जाता है यदि वह वीनराम हो तो मव कुछ नीरम प्रनीत होने लगता है। वुन्तक ने भी वतोकतत्तत्त्व को कवि-व्यापार-जन्य विच्छित्ति या वं चिष्य मे वुक्त भगीभमिति वह कर वृतिगन सौन्दर्य के विधान में कविव्यक्ति का योग स्वीकार किया है।'इमी प्रकार रीतियों के वर्गी-

१. लोचन, ध्वन्वालोक उद्योन ४ ृ ५२७ राब-प्रराग, उल्लाम १, कारिका १ ध्वन्यागेक, उद्योन के, कारिका ४३ की वृति, पृ ४१८ ४. वाव्यालंकार (भामह क्रत) १६ ५ वाञ्च-मीमामा, रध्यान १० उवन्यालोड, उद्योन ३े, कारिका ४३ की वृत्ि, पृ ४९८

Satstnt Alarkarafastta re Kaceja ta Sarjant-paksa 287

चेतु कवि: काध्ये नादि ब्लीक की व्याख्या मे लोचनकार ने स्पष्ट कहा' है कि यहाँ शृगारी का अ्य स्त्री-वपसनी नहीं है, वरन् भृगाररसीचित विभाव, अनुमाव आदि की चर्वमा-रूप प्रतीनि से यूक्त' यह अर्थ लिया जाना चाहिए। इम प्रकार सस्कृन अलकारगास्त्र ने कवि के सजननर्मा जलौनिक काव्यात्मक व्यकतव को काव्प का मूल खन्म स्वीकार किया है। वब प्रश्न यह है कि कति काव्य-निर्माग मे क्यो प्रवृत्त होना है' वह कौन-भौ महनी प्रेरणा या उत्प्रेरेक प्रयोजन है जो उमे मर्जनोन्मुस बना देना है। प्राय ममी सस्कृन बालकारिको ने काव्य के प्रयोजनी पर विचार करते हुए उन्हें दो वर्गों मे विभक्त किया है-(१) कवि के प्रयोजन, (२) महुदय के प्रयोजन। अविक्नर आाचारयों ने कीति, प्रीति, अर्थ-प्राप्ति, अनयं-निवारण तथा पुरु्पाय- चनुन्टन को कवि की दृष्टि से प्रयोजन स्वीकार किया है। भामह के अनुसार महाकतियों के दिवगन हो जाने पर भी उनका काव्यमय कलेवर अभुष्ण रहता है। बद तक वदि की अनर्वर कौति पृथ्वी और अन्नरिक्ष मे व्याप्त रहती है तब तक वह बिन्य लोक मे निवास करना है।1 अन भामह के अनुमार चिरम्थायी कीनि की वाछा हो तो मनुष्य को काव्पसप प्रयत्न में दत्तचित्त होना चाहिए।" सत्रट के बनुनार भी अलवटन व भरम काव्य के रचयिता महार्का का स आकल्य स्थायी रहता है।" मम्मट ने मश की काव्य-प्रयोजनता का निरूपण करते हुए कालिदाम का दृष्टान्न दिया है।' सद्रट व मम्मट ने अर्यप्राप्ति, रोग विम् कनि या सिवेनरक्षनि को भी काव्य-प्रयोजन स्वीकारा है।* रिन्तु हेमचन्द्र ने अर्थ-प्राप्ति व अनर्य-निवारण को अनकान्तिक बनलाते हुए बेवल आनन्द और यग को ही प्रयोजन माना है।*भामह जोर विश्वनाथ ने पुरुषारयचनुष्टय को भी काव्यन्परयोजन के रूप मे प्रस्तुन किया है।' अभिनवगुप्त ने अन्य प्रोजनी को बस्वीकार करते हुए प्रीति या वानन्द को ही काव्य का प्रमुख व

१. सन्यान्गेक, उद्योड : पृ. ४९८ का लोचन 5. कायारकार (भानह दृत) १, ६ : वही १, ७ ४. वही १, ८ ५ वही २४ ६- काअप्रकाग १. २ को वत्ति ७. काव्यालकार (सटट वृत) १, ८; काव्यप्रकाश १,२ ८ काध्यानुमामन, अध्याय ₹ सूत्र ३ गधारकार (भामहकत) १,२; साहिनयनदसण अदमाय?

Senstrit Alankaralastra mem Kaeya kā Saranā-patsa 289

मावावेग की स्थिति मे मनुध्य की चित्तवृत्ति स्वन विलाप-प्रलाप आदि के रूप मे प्रवाहिन होने लगनी है उमी प्रकार वाल्मीकि की वह तीव्र शोकानुभूनि भी 'मा निषाद' आदि इलोक के रूप मे छनव पड़ी। शोक की यह इनोक-्परिणनि आकस्मिक एव स्वन स्फूर्मं थी जिससे कि वान्मीकि को बाद में यह विस्मय हुआ कि शक्कनि के शोक में आन मेरे मुम् से यह केसी बाणी फूट पडी? यद्यपि आदि कवि की प्रथम वाणी का वाच्यार्थ शोक नहीं है, वह नो शापपरक ही है, तरयापि वह व्यजना द्वारा कविगत सावारणोकन शोक की ही अमिव्यक्ति है। अभिनव के अनुसार वाल्मीकि का यह (मावारणीकृत) शोक आवेश के कारण स्वन स्फुरणा द्वारा इलोक-बद्ध हुआ, न कि किसी प्रयत्न के द्वारा। करुण रम या अन्य रसो का स्वभाव ही उच्छलन या छदक पडना है। अन कवि का रमावेग यर मावावेग ही काब्य-भजना की मूल प्रेरणा है। अभिनव ने अपने मन के समर्यन मे भट्टनायक के हृदय दर्पण का यह वाकर उदधृत किया है- 'यानन्पूर्णों न चैतेन तावन्न व वमन्यम्म्' अर्थान जब तक ववि-हृदय गम से परिपूर्ण नही हो जाता तब तक काव्य का उद्गार नहीं होता। इम प्रकार अभिनव व भट्ट- नायक दोनों ही काव्य को कवि का भावोदगार या भावोच्छ्वास स्वीकार करने है। किन्तु यहाँ यह स्मरण रखना चाहिए कि रमवानी आचार्यों ने वाब्य को कवि की व्यक्तिगन भात्रान्भूति का उद्गार नहीं माना है। अभिनव के अन्भार वाल्मीवि ने 'मा निषान' आदि इलोच मे जिम शोक को अभिव्यक्ति दी है वह उनका व्यक्तिगत शोक नही था। यदि उमे व्यक्िगन बोक ही माना जान तब तो वाल्मीनि वो भी तौञ्च के ममान शोक से दु सित मानना पडेगा। उम स्थिति मे रम की आनन्दस्वरूपना खण्डित हो जायगी। साथ ही लौकिक शोक मे संनन्त व्यक्ति को वसी दमा नही सुनी मा देखी जाती जसी कि वाल्मीनि की हुई थी। यहां अभिनत्रगुप्त का यह तात्पर्व प्रनीत होना है कि वाल्मीकि ने 'मा निषाद' आदि मे जिम गोकानुमूति को अभिव्यक्न किया है वह उनकी सावारणीभूत अनु- मूनि है, व्यक्तिगन नही। प्रिपमाण क्रोञ्च को देखकर यौन्ची के हृदय मे जो शौक उद्बुद्ध हुआ वह एक लौकिक और व्यक्तिगत अनुभव भा। किन्तु गोक- विह्बल श्रोञ्ची के अनुभावादि के अवलोक्न मे वाल्मीकि के मन मे सहानुभूति- वज्ान् जिम शोक का उदप हुआ वह वन्तुन कवि का सावारणीभृत अनुभव दा। 'मा नियाद' मे कत्रि के इनी माधारगोक्ृन यनुभव का अभिन्यजन हुबा है। अभिनज के पुर्वोक्न मन मे यह भी लगता हैवि वे साधारणीकरण की प्रक्रिया को महृदव तक ही सीमिन रखना नहीं चाहने, उनकी दृष्टि मे कवि का संवेदनशील हृदय नी अन्य प्रागियों के सुच-दुग यदिका साकात्कार कर हुदय-

Sanskrit Alankirasastra mem Kaoya ka Sarjanā-paksa 291

में उनके कन त की गभीर व्यास्या की। रम व ध्वनिवादी आचार्य बाश्मीर गंवागम के अनुयायी थे अन उनके प्रनिभाविषयक चिन्नन पर काशमौरी शैव- दर्शन का गहरा प्रभाव पडा है। दा्गनिक दृष्टि में प्रतिभा ईश्वरीय सर्जन- भक्ति का ही मानवगत प्रनिरुप है। वह कवि की सर्जना -क्ति तो है ही, उसकी तत्त्व-दृष्टि, अन्नदप्टि, मानम-चित्रो का विधान करने वाली कल्पना, काव्यात्मक अभित्र्यंजना के कोगल, सौन्दर्यानुभति, प्रातिभज्ञान, वस्तुओ में अपूवंता का दर्गन करने वाली क्षमता सादि की पर्याय भी है। इम प्रकार सस्कृत आालकारिको ने प्रतिभा के रूप मे काव्बनिर्मात्री शक्ति का बडा ही विशद निरूपण किया है। आनन्द्रवचन के अनुमार महाकवियो की वागी दिव्य आनन्द रम को प्रवाहित करनी हुई अठ्रोकमामान्य व चनुर्दिक स्फुरणशील प्रतिभा-विश्येष को अभिव्यक्त करनी है। यो तो इस समार मे विभिन्न प्रकार के कवियो की एक लखड परम्परा रही है परन्तु प्रतिभा-विशेष के धनी महाकवियों की सख्या उँगलियों पर गिनी जा मक्ती है। यदि वृवि मे शक्ति या प्रनिमा हो तो कवि के वन्पुतपतिजन्य दोष भी आवृत हो जाते है विन्तु प्रतिभा के अभाव से उत्पन्न दोघ छिर नही पाते। ध्वनिमार्ग का अवलबन करने पर कवि की प्रनिभा नि सीम हो जाती है। यह प्रनिभा की ही देन है कि दप्टपूर्व अर्थ भी कान्त मे नित्य नवीनता धारण कर अवनीण होते हैं तथा हर कवि के लिए नूनन निर्माण का क्षंत्र अक्षुण्ण रहता है।' अमिनवगुप्त ने प्रतिभा के स्वरूप की इम प्रकार व्यास्या की है-'प्रतिभा अपूवंवन्तुनिर्मारक्षमा प्रज्ञा, सस्या विरोपो रमावेशवमद्यमौन्दर्यकाव्यनिर्माण- अमस्वम्' अर्यान् अपूबं वस्तु के निर्माग मे समर्य जजा वा ही नाम प्रतिभा है। रंस वेस, चित्त-नर्मेस्य, मौन्दर्यानुभूति व वाव्य के निर्माण की क्षमता ही उमका विनेष है। कवि के हृद-मन्दिर मे मनन जामन प्रतिभारूप सरस्वनी के अनुग्रह से ही कवि को अवूर्ब निर्मार की शक्ति प्राप्त होनी है। अन्यन लोचनकार ने वहा है-'अक्नि प्रतिभान वर्णनीयत्रस्तुविषयनूतनो्लेखशालत्विम्' अर्यात् वंनोर वम्तुओं के सवया नूतन पक्षो और विभेषताओं का उन्मीलन करनेवाली ववि-यकत ही प्रनिभा है।'यह प्रतिभा कवि की एक ऐमी विलक्षण दृष्टि है

₹. ध्वन्यालोड, उद्योन१, कारिका ६ २ वही उद्योत ३ ३१६ ३. वही उद्योन ४।१-३ ४. अनिनव-भारती माग १, अन्याम १, पृ.४ ५. ध्वन्यालोक, उद्योन ३, कारिका ६ का लोचन

Sanskrıl Atarkāralāstrā rem Kāma kā Sarjanā-paksa 293

ने वाव्य-सजना की दृष्टि से प्रतिभा और व्युत्पत्ति को एक ही कोटि मे रमा है।' वुन्तक ने पूर्वजन्म व इह जन्म के मस्कारो के परिपाक से प्रोढता को प्राप्त करने वाली प्रनिभा को एक विलक्षण व अनिवंचनीय तत्त्व माना है। उन्होंने कवि- व्यापार के रूप मे काव्यगन कवि-कर्त त्व को महत्त्व देते हुए कहा है कि प्रतिभा मे तत्काल उदित एक जनिवचनीय परिस्पन्द के कारण लोनिक पदार्थों का स्वरूप एक विशेष उत्कर्य या विच्छिति से आच्छादित हो जाता है। यह विष्छिति ही कुन्तक की वनता है जिसे वे काव्य का जीवित स्वीकार करते हैं। महिम भट्ट के अनुसार जब कवि रमानुकूल शब्दारयं का चिन्नन करना हुआ एकग्रचित हो जाता है नब क्षपभर के लिए उसे आत्म-माझ्ात्कार की स्थिनि प्राप्त हो जाती है। इन आत्म-म्पर्ग मे उत्पन्न प्रत्ञा को वे प्रनिभा कहते हैं। यह प्रनिभा कवि के लिए मिव के तृतीय नेत्र के समान है जिसके द्वारा वह लोक- नयवर्ती पदार्थो का भाक्षालार करता है।4 हेमचन्द्र के अनुमार अजानावग्ण का उपभम हो जाने पर उद्भामित आत्म- चंतन्य ही प्रतिभा है। उन्होंने व्युत्पत्ति और अम्यान को प्रतिभा का सस्कारक मात्र माना है।* प्रनिमा नबन्धी उक्त विवरण मे स्पष्ट है कि भारतीय काव्य-मीमासकों ने वान्य-मजना के लिए प्राय एव म्वर मे प्रतिभा की सत्ता आवश्यन मानी है। माथ ही उनके मस्कार के लिए व्युत्पत्ति व सभ्याम के महत्त्व पर भी उन्होंने बन दिया है। वाब्य लोक के प्रति कवि का एक सपे षण या आत्म-निवेदन ही है। काव्यानुभूनि का मूल बघार भी वन्नन लोक जीवन ही है। अन कवि के लिए लोतव्यवहार का तथा लोक की बौद्धिक व भावात्मव परम्परा के मूर्त- रूप शाम्त्रों एवं अन्य कचियों के काव्यो का ज्ञान प्राप्त करना आावश्यक है। वाबय एक क्लान्मक अभिव्यजना भी है अन उनकी पद्धति व उपकरणो पर वविवार प्राप्त करने हेनु कवि से लिए अस्याम की आवस्यकता का भी निषेध नही किया जा सकता। इसीलिए दण्डी व मम्मट आदि ने प्रनिभा, व्युत्पत्ति व वन्यान की मयूक्न काव्य-वारणना अगीकार की है। केवल व्युत्पति व सभ्याम द्वारा श्रेष्ठ काव्य की मर्जना सभत नही है, वैयोकि प्रनिभा के अभाव मे ऐमा वाबय केवल निर्जोत शब्दार्थों की मघटना मात्र होना है।

१. वही अध्याय ४ २ वनोकिजीदिन १, १ की वृत्ि ३. व्यविनि-विषेव २, ११७-११८ ४. वाधानुमामन व १, मूव ७

Sanstrit Alankaralāstra mem Kāeya kā Sarjanā-paksa 295

सजन मे आरभ मे अन तक कवि का व्यापार रम से ही प्रमुत एव उसी की अनिव्यजना मे तन्पर रहता है-ग्रन परिपाकवता कवीना रमादिनात्पयंविरहे व्यापार एव न शोभते।" जब कवि रमादि के प्रति तत्पर होकर सर्जन-दर्म मे सनग्न होना है तब यह सभव नहीं कि कोई वम्तु जमने अभिमत रम का अग न बने।3 रमवादियों के मन मे रस वाव्य की आात्मा होने के कारण उसका अगी है और बनकार, रीनि आदि अग। जिन प्रकार शरीर आात्मा की अभिव्यक्त है तथा उममे माधयम सें आन्मा ही स्वय को प्रवाशिन करती है उभी प्रकार वाध्यान्मक वर्णना व अनिव्यजना वस्तुत कविगन ग्म का ही बहि प्रकाश है। रस मे आशिन होकर ही कखव्प मे उन्हें औचित्य प्राप्त होता है। विगन रम का अभिव्यजन-रूप महज व्यापार या प्रयत्न ही बलकारो का स्वन विघान कर देता है। इन प्रकान में निष्पादिन अलवार ही ध्दनि-मन मे स्वीकन है' वयोकि जनवार का तो लक्षण ही यह है कि वह रम रूप अगी का अगभून हो गया कवि के भावाभिव्यजनरूप व्यापार या प्रमत्न से निर्वनिन हो। जब कोई सनकार रस के निवन्धन के लिए बृनमक्य कदि को उम वामना वा उललयन कर यत्नान्तर द्वारा निष्पन होता है नव वह रम का अग नही रहता। मो जब् आाचार्य लोग अलवारों का निरपण करने बैठने हैं तो वे बड़े दुर्घट पनीन होने हैं बिन्तु जब कोई प्रतिभाशाली कवि रमममाहित- चित् हॉकर काव्य-न्जन के प्रति उन्मुम होना है तब वे ही लवार मानो पनिम्पर् करते हुए जा जाकर गिरते हैं। आनन्दवर्यन ने वाणवन बादवरी मे चन्द्रारीड द्वारा कादबरीदर्गन के प्रमग का इमके दूष्टान्न के रूप मे उल्लेस किया है। उनके मन मे रमाभिव्यक्ति के का्यं में अलकार आदि को बहिरग मानना उचित नहीं है कनोनि रसो का विशिष्ट वाच्चार्य के द्वारा आक्षेप ही मनत्र है। बाच्चार्य का प्रतिवादन गब्दों द्वारा किया जाना है तया बाच्यार्य ही दम्नुन रूपक बदि अलकार कहे जाते हैं वन वे रमव्यजना की दृष्टि से बन्नुरग ही है। इम प्रकार वस्तु और वर्गना, जनुभूनि और अभिन्वजना दो पूथक एव स्ण्डित वम्तुऐ नहीं है, वे एत ही जीवन काव्य व्यक्नित्व के दो अविनाज्य पहुलू है। जहाँ शृगारादि रनो मे कवि यमक, दलेप आदि की योजना करने लगना है वहां निश्चय ही उनकी बहिरगना सिद्ध है क्योकि उनके निमतादन के लिए ववि को अपने अनुभूनिप्सून, सटूज अभिव्यजना-व्यापार मे

१. ध्वन्यालोक, उद्योत ३, कारिका ४२ की वृसि, पृ ४९७ २. वही पृ. ४९८ ३ घ्वन्यादोक, उद्योत २ कारिका १६ व उमकी वृत्ति

Sanstrit Alankāralāstra mem Kāma ka Sarjanā-paksa 297 का वर्मन करू' इस प्रकार के वर्णना रूप द्वितीय व्यापार से वाव्य मे अलकारो का सम्पादन होता है। "में शब्दों को समुक अर्थों से सर्घटित करूं', यह कवि के तोसरे व्यापार का स्वरूप है। इम प्रकार कवि-कर्मे के तीन सोपान हुए- (१) प्रतिभारूप प्रथम परिस्पन्द से रस व गृणो की निष्पत्ति (२) दणना- रुप् द्वितीय व्यापार से अलकार-योजना तथा (३) तृतीय व्यापार से शब्दार्थं- सघटना।

मद्यपि उक्त विवेचन से काव्य-र्वन की समग्र प्रतरिया का तर्कयुक्त प्रति- पादन नहीं होा तयापि रमवाद की दृष्टि से (और यही दृष्टि भारतीय काव्य- शान्त्र की प्रतिनियि दृष्टि है) काव्य-स्जन की समस्या पर महत्त्वपूर्ण प्रकाश पड़ता है। रसवादियों के अनुमार प्रनिभा ही काव्य की मूल सर्जन-शाकति है। प्रविमावाली कवि अपनी सहज सहृदपता द्वारा अन्य मनुप्यो व प्राणियो के साथ जनना हुद-्मवाद स्थापित कर तन्मयीभवन की स्थिति का अनुभव करता है जिमके फलस्वरूम उसकी चितवुत्तियाँ साधारणीकृत रूप मे जाग्रत हो जाती है। इन्ही साधारणीभून चितवृतियों का आस्वादन कविगत रस है जिसे अभिनवगुप्त ने काव्य का बीजस्थानीय माना है। यह रस ववि की अपनी विशिष्ट प्रतिभा की ही देन है। तदनन्तर इम रमानुभव के ताल्कालिक संतार या स्मृति को प्रेरणा से वह मपनी अनुभूति की वर्णना मे प्रवृत्त होता है। इस कार्य में उसे कल्पनाशक्ति, जिसे भारतीय आचार्यों के अनुसार प्रतिभा का ही एक रूप कह मकते हैं, मबमे अधिक सहायना देती है। इस कल्पना शक्ति द्वारा वह प्रयम तो वर्गेना का मानसिक साक्षानार करता है और फिर उसे शब्दार्थमभी अभिव्यजना मे परिणत कर देता है। काव्य-निर्माण की उक्त समस्त प्रकरिया वस्तुतः वि-प्रतिभा का ही कमिक जन्मीलन है। यह कवि-प्रतिभा काव्य-सजना की सभी अवस्याओं को अनुप्राणित किये रहनी है जसा कि भट्ट तोन ने भी कहा है- प्रज्ञा नवनवोन्मेपशालिनी प्रतिभा मता । वदनुप्रागनाजीवड्वर्णनानिपुण कदि । गुणीमूत व्यंम्य या मध्यम काव्य मे कविगत रभमस्कार वर्णना को पूरी तरह यनु प्रागित नहीं कर पाता जिमले वस्तु (ववि की अनुभूति), और वर्णना में वमनुलन उत्पन्न हो जाता है। फिर भी ऐ से वाव्य मे कवि की अनुभृति प्रत्यक्ष या अम्नत्यक्ष रूप से व्यक्त अवश्य होती है। चित्वाव्य मे कवि अपने रमानु- भव के प्रति नितान्त उपेक्षाचील रहता है जिनसे उमके बाव्य मे मात्र रचना- वोचल का वैचिनरय प्रकट होता है। अनएव ऐसे काव्य वो अनम काव्ब की सज्ञा दी गई है।

Sanskry Alankāralāstra mem Kāvta kā Sarjanā-paksa 299 आनन्दवर्धन के अनुसार ध्वनि या व्यजना ही एक मार्ग है जो कवि की प्रतिभा के रुणो को अनन्त बना देता है जिससे प्राचीन कवियो द्वारा दुष्टपूर्व विपम भी उसी प्रकार नूतन छटा धारण कर लेते हैं जिस प्रकार कि मधुमास मे वृक्ष।' उम दृष्टि से व्यजना और कवि-प्रतिभा को पर्यायवाची सा माना जा सकता है। रसवादी आचार्यों ने लोक और काव्य की भूमिकाओं को पयक मानते हुए वाव्यगत अनुभूतियों को अलोनिक स्वीकार किया है। लौकिक अनुभूति देश, काल व व्यक्तित्व के सीमित बोध से ग्रस्त रहती है जबकि काव्य में व्यक्न कवि की अनुभूति एक साधारणीकृत अतएव लौकिक बोध को सीमाओ से मुक्त चित्तदृति है। काव्य मे ववि का व्यक्तित्व लौकिक आवरणो से मुक्त होकर एक सावमोम, सावकालिक व विश्वजनीन रूप ग्रहण कर लेता है। तब् उसकी वाणी केवल उमी का प्रतिनिघित्व नही करती अपितु वह समस्त मानवता का मायोदगार बन जाती है। सस्वृत काव्यशास्त्र के अनुसार काव्य का सत्य वस्तु-जगत् के सत्य से भिन्न होना है। राजशें स्षर ने काव्य मे निबद्ध वस्तुओ को 'प्रतिभासरूप' माना है। अर्वन्तिमुन्दरी के अनु सार काव्य में वस्तुओ का कोई निश्चित स्वभाव नही होता, विदग्ध कवि की वचन-वकता ही काव्य मे किसी वस्तु को स्वभाव-विशेष प्रदान करती है। मम्मट ने कविभारती को नियति-कृत नियमी से रहित कहा है। अभिनव के अनुसार काव्य और नाट्य न अनुकरण है और न अनुभावन। वे वस्तुत भावानुकीर्तन या अन व्यवसाय रूप हैं।1 काव्य मे लोककि विपयो और भावो का साधारणोवृत रूप मे साक्षात्कार कर सहृदयों द्वारा रसानुभूति प्राप्त को जाती है। इसी का नाम भावानुकीतंन या अनुव्यवसाय-विशेप है। इस प्रकार काव्य मानवमात्र की मूलभूत एकता का, उसके देश, काल व व्यक्ति से अनिवद्ध रूप का दर्शन कराने मे समर्थ होना है। इसलिए कर्वि को भ्ान्त-्द्रष्टा, सर्वं- दर्मी या ऋषि कहा गया है, प्रत्युत कवि ऋषि से भी एक कदम आगे है। ऋपि मे केवन्द्र ततत्वदर्शन की क्षमता होती है जब कि कवि अपनी उस प्रतिमा-रूप तत्वदोसनी दृष्टि को वणंना द्वारा सवगोचर भी बना सकता है - नानृपि कविरित्युक्तमृपिस्च किल दर्शनात्। विचित्रभावघर्मा शतत्त्वप्रख्या तु दर्शनम् ॥

₹ वही, उद्योत ४, कारिका ४ २. काव्य-मीमासा, मध्याय ८ अभिनव-भारती, भाव १, ५ ३५-७

Senskrit Alankarafastra mem Kaoya ka Sarjana-pakşa 301

रा. चं. द्विवेदी • आपने काव्य के सजनापक्ष का बहुत सुन्दर विवेचन किया है पर में समझता हूँ आप जयरय द्वारा इस प्रसग मे कही गई कुछ मुख्य बातो को अपने निबन्स मे और सम्मिलित कर लेना चाहेगे। हृदय-संवाद के उसने दो भेद किये है-चित्तवृत्तिमवाद और वस्तुमबाद। वस्तु सवाद मे उन्होंने वस्नुमवन्धी रचना-प्रत्रिया- तथा अनुभूति को अलवारादि मे सवन्धित किया है-ईदुगिद वन्नु इति दम्तुमवाद। और दूसरे सवाद का वर्थ है 'परकीगा- मारिचतवृत्ते. आत्मीयचित्तवृत्त्यमेदेन सह परामर्य'। यदि सजंना-पक्ष की दृष्टि से जयरथ की बलोचना वर तो प्रतीत होगा कि जयरय के मत से वुछ तोए से कवि हैं जो अलकार रचना मे ही ततपर होते हैं और बुछ दूमरे के मनोभावां को अपने मनोभावो की भावि अनुभूत करते हुए उन्हें वाव्य मे व्यक्त करते हैं। साय ही इम बात का भी पर्यालोचन आवश्यक है कि प्रतिभा का मर्वनोभावेन प्रामुख्य मानने पर भी सस्वृत का परवर्ती साहित्य व्युपत्ि और लभ्यास वा उत्तरोत्तर दाम या घनी क्यों बनता चला गया जैसाकि भट्टिकाव्य, नैपय अदि की काव्यमर्मना से प्रमाणित होता है और इन काव्यो के कवियों के अपने वक्तव्य भी है। मुझे तो ऐसा प्रनीत होना है कि "शुतेन मदनेन च बागुपासिना घृव वरोन्येव कमप्यनु- प्रहम्" में उत्लिखित मनुग्रह सस्वृत कवियों को अधिक प्राप्त हुआ, आनन्दवर्पन द्वारा निदिष्ट-सरम्वन्नवेषा घटयति सयेष्ट मगवती-सारस्वत प्रसाद कम उपलब्ब हो पाया।

INDEX

Works and Authors

A 74, 76-8, 86, 87, 89-91 118-121, 125, 145, 146, Abhidhānttimātrkā, 161, 26In 152, 155, 159-62 165, 173, 175m, 176, 177, 180-87, Abhinaca-bharatf 48, 66, 80, 81, 190, 191, 203, 207, 208, 104n, 106n, 154n, 162n, 210, 214, 216, 224, 226 221, 253-258, 282, 284n, 283-85 290, 291, 294-96 286n, 291n, 292n, 294, 297, 301 296n, 299n Anlgony 28 Abhinavagupta, 19, 14, 36-39, 43-45, 47, 49, 66, 67, 69, Appayya Diksıta, 11, 109, 191,

73,74, 78-80, 94, 97, 104- 227n, 261, 266

6, 110, 111, 147, 152, 154, Arstotle, 18-28, 133-38, 140-

155, 161-63 176, 183, 187, 43, 189, 278

188, 195, 196, 209, 210 अज नदास केडिया, 222, 226

214, 216, 226, 229, 247, Arthadyotamta 222, 223n 251-55, 257, 280, 282, 284, Art Of Pedtry, 18 286-292, 294, 296-300 Aştādhsāri, 212

Acyutarāya, 266 Arantisundari, 299

Aeschylus, 28 Acesta, 30 Agatha Christie, 3 Agtiburāna, 154n, 247 B

Alaka ( Allata) 265, 275 Alankarabhassa, 271 Bacon, 2

Alankarakaustubha, 195n. वरोमाल, 226n अलंकारमंजरी, 2260 Balabhārata, 80

अलंकारमंजपा, 226n Bālapriyā, 44

AlantarEnasarint 271, Bāna (Bhatta), 88, 119, 150,

अलंकारपीयूप, 226n 204, 222n, 223, 295

Alantarasareasra, 62, 151, 157, वरव रामायणा, 222 2680, 272 वनीप्रबीन, 226n Alankāraratnākara, 268, 270-73 Bhagagadgitā, 168, 257 अमरपदिका, 223 भगवानदीन, 226 Amarakosa 206, 283n, Amarasimgha, 29 Bhagerata, 130, 194n, 196

Amaifatata, 55, 56 Bhakticandrka, 199 Bhaktrasayana, 197n आनन्दप्रकाश दीक्षिन, 222 Anandavardhana, 6, 36, 38, Bhamaha, 10-13, 67, 70, 84, 98-101, 116, 120, 121, 153, 39, 43, 44, 49, 67, 71, 73, 157-59, 178-180, 190, 201,

Index of Works and Authors 305

I

E. A. Wallace, 46 I A. Richards, 17 Ingram Bywater, 18 Euot, 176, 236 ka Up, 283 de Ersay or Man, 177n Essays it Samrtnt Cutiasn, 176n, 201 J Etsayr os Irdean Pocties, 157a Jagannatha (Panditarāja), 58, F 59, 64, 78, 108, 115, 116, 118-20, 125, 155n, 190-94, F. P. Scott, 17 196, 197, 201, 206, 210, 221, 227n. 248, 250, 251, 257, 261, 266, 268 273

गजानन मुरतिबोध, 229 Jahlana, 272n Jayadcva, 82, 227n, 261 Ganganath jha, 56 Tayanta Bhatta, 166 Cazdato, 48 Jayaratha, 151, 157, 163, 217. Geldner, 31 268, 271, 286, 301 Guttarport (-kulaka,) 13 (-Fet) 13 जामो, 227n Jayapardsana, 277 vioniy, 229 Jivagosvāmin, 5, 193, 196 nanei, 222 Joyce, 124

Gargius, 129 477, 242 Gould Thomas, 197 K H Kalambari, 119, 295 हजारोपमार डिवेदो, 235 Kalıdāsa, 3, 13, 36, 38, 53, Har Dutt (H D ) Sharma, 59, 54, 63, 88, 98,, 119, 123, 200 127, 138, 164, 180, 185, ERailn, 222, 226 227n, 242 202, 204-6, 210, 2220, 223,287 1952, 197n कालिदास की निर कुरता, 224 हरिपकारा, 223 Hegehan, 138 पन्हैनालाल पोचदार, 222, 226,

Helaraja, 131 227n

fanfri, 2260 Kammali, 35, 44

Heaucandra, 33, 53, 155n, Kavıkarnapūra, 195 191, 196, 197, 284, 287, 292, 293 करिकुलक मपतरु, 227n

Homer, 135, 142 रचिप्रिया, 2270 Hianedurpers, 36, 39, 162, Kavirâja, 150, 195 239 कचिता को मोत, 230

Index of Works and Authors 307

मानसपोयय, 223 Paradise Lost, 2, 169 Afandiramarandacampu, 109 Patañjalı, 130, 131 Manikyaçandra, 155 Plato, 131-34, 136-38, 143, 197, 278 142 Matbew Amold, 17, 121 मतिराम, 226 Platonit Loce, 197n Mayūra, 138 Plotmnus, 140, 141 Medhavirudra, 292 Poctes, 18, 142 Meghaduta, 127 Pound (Ezra), 124, 236, Milton, 169 237, 246 Miamsadarsana, 264n Prabhakara, 191, 192 Mrechatatita, 25, 26, 124 THIT, 244 Mudrarasasa, 25 Mukula Bhatta, 161, 261, प्रसाद जी के दो नाटक, 224

2653 प्रतापनाहि, 221

Murăndana, 109 Prathārendurāja, 161 Pratmānđtaka, 129

N Punyarāja, 75, 77 Pururavo-vicara, 13 o- 235, 236, 238, 242, 245, P V Kane, 201, 265m

249 Naiadho, 301 R

Narayana 191, 192 Narayanatirtha, 199 Raghavabhatta, 223 Natyatastra (N.S ) 18-23, 57, Ragharabandania, 224 58n, 62, 69, 98, 101, 102n, Raghtamsa, 36, 98, 127 105n, 157n, 162, 164, 178, Rajasekhara, 37, 80, 103, 104, 182n, 187, 205, 225, 247n, 154, 155n, 162, 182, 296 203, 206, 219, 224, 283 191,

नवरसतरंग, 226 285, 292, 291, 298, 299

नायिकामेद, 226n Ramacandra-gunacandra, 191

निराटा, 242, 243 Rāmānuja, 5

Njāyarūtra, 265r Ramiana, 3, 36, 48, 187, 205 रामपन्द्र शुक्ल, 223, 235

O रामचरितमानस, 168, 222 रामदहिन मिथ, 227n Ode to the Intimations of Immor- राममति त्रिपाठी, 228 tality, 122 Ode to Nightingale, 122 Ram Sıngh, 106

Ods to the West Wind, 122 Rasagangadhara, 59, 78, 108, 109a, 155n, 192n, 22In, योमप्रकाश शर्मा, 228 226, 250, 251n, 258, 26In, 266n, 268 P ₹H7mm, 222, 226n

पद्मामरण, 226 Rasakaumudi, 92

9E4157, 226n रसमंजरी, 226, 227n Panim, 78, 130 avtyufafo, 225, 227n

Index of Works and Authors 309

Tanbest, 26 Thomas Hardy, 169 Vasugupta, 79

T.S Elot, 17 Venisamhara, 25, 205 Vıdyābhūsana, 266 तुलसीभ पस, 221, 222n Vıdy acakravartın (Śri-) 63, तुलसीदास, 168, 221, 222n, 223, 157 233, 277 Vidyadhara, 191 Vidyanatha, 191 U Vijkā, 41, 42 Vimarkni, (Alankara-) 157n, Udbhata, 87, 146, 197, 267, 217, 257, 268, 271, 272 268n, 270n Vrmudharmettara, 69, 71-3, 79

Ugra (works also), 277 Visvanatha (kaviraja), 18, 57, Uycalanilamanı, 195n 58, 108, 115, 116, 118-21, Upalocana, 45 124, 191-93, 195, 206, Urubhanga, 25 227, 260, 266, 287 Uttararamacarita 27, 123 Visvesvara, 192 V Raghavan, 48, 201 Y Vritmartka, 261 Vyākaranamahābhāsya, 265n Vagbhata, 191 Paktımeeka 105n, 224, 265n, Vagbhatalankara, 155n 284n, 293n Vardyanatha, 82, 191 व्यव्यार्थकोमदी, 221 Vakroktyimito, 81, 84, 86, 91, Vyasa, 185 150, 285, 293n Fakyapadija, 74-8, 131, 265m Valmiki 35-37, 185, 284, 288, 289, 294, 300 Winler's Tale, 3, 26 Vamana, 12, 14, 33, 48, 67, Wordsworth, 119-21, 124 70, 79-81, 116, 118-20, 125, 145-52, 154, Y 18In, 193, 226, 267 159,

Vasacadattā, 33 Vasubandhu, 158 Tejurreda, 21 Tafarantayasabhūsana, 109