2 History and Development of Poetics-2

R. Thiagarajan

1.Bhamaha the trend setter of poetics

Bhamaha’s (7th cent.A.D) Kavyalankara is an important work in Sanskrit poetics. This work is the first to deal with poetics separate from dramatic theory; therefore, this can be considered the earliest extant work on Sanskrit poetics proper. More over, Bhamaha is well known as the earliest exponent of the Alankara School of literary criticism in Sanskrit. Bhamaha Alankara is in 6 chapters called Paricchedas. It comprises 398 verses, including two verses at the end of the sixth chapter, which briefly describe the number of verses on each of the five topics. It deals with Kavya Sarira or the forms of poetry, figures of speech (Alankaras), Doshas (poetic blemishes), Nyayas ( epistemology) and Sabdasuddhi (grammatical accuracy). some practical hints to the poets are also provided by Bhamaha. He divides prose compositions into Katha and Akhyayika. He enumerates and discusses only three qualities or gunas namely Madhurya Prasada and Ojas.

 

According to Bhamaha Vakrokti is the most essential in poetry. By Vakrokti Bhamaha means all poetic expression, as opposed to the plain and matter of fact utterance, thus covering all modes of adorning expressions. The influence of Bhamaha’s views on subsequent poetical works is substantial. Subsequent to Bhamaha the other works which contributed to the Alankara theory were Kavyalankarasangraha of Udbhata(8th cent A. D) and Kavyalankara of Rudrata(9th cent.A.D). Udbhata authored the Bhamahavivarana– a commentary on Bhamaha’s work.

 

2.The Zenith of Literary Speculation

 

In the next seven centuries that followed, almost all the important Sanskrit works were written, and all the literary theories developed.

 

During this period both poetics and dramatic theory have attracted attention of the scholars, and literary speculation reached its zenith.

 

2.1 Dandin’s Kavyadarsa

 

After Bhamaha the next writer on poetic theory was the well known critic and poet Dandin (8th cent A. D)-the author of Kavyadarsa. His work is a systematic presentation of substance than Bhamaha’s; it is popular in South India and Ceylon where it was adapted into Tamil and translated into Sinhalese respectively. Dandin wins the credit for his more systematic presentation of the Alankara theory. He is recognized as the earliest theorist to devote attention to the Guna-Riti aspect of poetry. The greater portion of the first chapter in his work is devoted to a study of ritis and their constituent gunas. However, he does not attempt to build a poetic theory based on the concept of riti. His work was an attempt to introduce Riti and explain its association with Gunas. He drew attention to the fact that poetic figures are not the only aesthetic entity in poetry. He wrote a critique of poetry incorporating ritis, gunas, alamkaras and doshas. Dandin rejects Bhamaha’s division of Katha and Akhyayika. Dandin has avoided needless classification. In four chapters, Dandin covers practically the same topics dealt with Bhamaha but with some pronounced differences The book defines the various classes of Kavyas on the basis of form and Language. After defining Dandin lays down the ten distinctive qualities of style and differentiates between vaidarbha and the Gauda schools.

 

2.2 Vamana’s Kavyalankara

 

Vamana (9th cent A. D) is held in high esteem among the major scholars in the early Indian Poetics.

 

He was the successor of Dandin who built up a theory of poetry based on the Guna-Riti concept. His work Kavyalankara-sutra-vrtti is a very significant work that comes up with original ideas and concepts. It is regarded as the earliest attempt at evolving a philosophy of literary aesthetics.

 

The work consists of sutra or a short epigrammatical statements with the author’s own gloss. The rules are all illustrated by vamana with verses taken Bana, Bhavabhuti and Magha. He popularised the Riti theory, and he was the first to introduce the concept of soul in poetry. In his opinion Riti was that soul, the factor that separates poetic speech from ordinary speech. Like Dandin, he too explains Riti associating with Gunas.He gives importance to Vaidarbhi,Gaudi and Panchali styles.His work in five Adhikaranas deals with all aspects of Alankara except Dramaturgy.

 

His Kavyalankara-sutra-vrtti is divided into five Divisions or topics (Adhikarana), each of which consist two or three chapters (adhyaya). There are twelve Adhyayas. The first Adhikarana (having three chapters: Prayojana pariksha; Adhikari chinta; and Kavya-kanti) deals with the need or prayojana of Kavya ; characterises the nature of those who are fit for

 

studying Alamkaras, and declares that style is the soul of poetry. The second Adhikarana(having two chapters: Pada Dosha and Vakya Dosha) is about the

 

defects of words, sentences, propositions and their meanings. The third Adhikarana ( having two chapters :Guna-alamkara- vivechana; and Sabda–Guna nirupana) discusses the aspects of Gunas ; and , the fourth Adhikarana ( having three chapters : Sabda-Alankarika vichara ; Upama nirupana ; and , Upama prapancha nirupana) deals with Yamaka , Anuprasa, Upama and such other Alamkaras. The fifth Adhikarana (having two chapters: Kavya samaya; and Sabda shodhana) is devoted to poetical conventions, observance of the rules of sandhi, necessity of grammatical purity and the like. The last chapter also deals with the purity of words.

 

Just as Udbhata followed Bhamaha, Vamana followed Dandin. But, unlike Udbhata, who focused on a single principle for inquiry (Alamkara), Vamana attempted to find a way of covering under a single organized whole the various principles that had been discussed by his predecessor Dandin. He brings into his work an analytic interest to the study of poetry attempting to offer rational explanations of the principles involved in the subject. Further, he introduces fresh concepts and ideas into the theory of Poetics.

 

2.3 Anandavardhana and Abhinavagupta

 

Anandavardhana (820–890) Many important theoretical works were written in 9th cent.A.D. Among them the prominence goes to Dhvanyaloka a work articulating the philosophy of “aesthetic suggestion” written by the famous aesthetician Anandavardhana. This is the most important work in the entire history of Sanskrit poetic theory.The philosopher Abhinavaguta wrote an important commentary on it. Modern Sanskritists have a

very high opinion of Anandavardhana. Commenting on Anandavardhana’s Dhvanyaloka, .P.V Kane writes that “the Dhvanyaloka is an epoch-making work in the history of Alankara literature. It occupies the same position in poetics as Panini’s Ashadhyayi in grammar and Sankaracarya’s commentary on Vedanta. Anandavardhana was’the most brilliant of all Sanskrit critics’.

 

Anandavardhana is credited with creating the dhvani theory. He wrote of dhvani (meaning sound, or Resonance) in regard to the “soul of poetry “When the poet writes,” said Anandavardhana, “he creates a resonant field of emotions.” To understand the poetry, the reader or hearer must be on the same Wavelength” .” The method requires sensitivity on the parts of the writer and the reader.

 

Anandavardhaba, in four chapters called Udyotas dealt with Alankaras from Dhvani point of view. According to him there are three modes of expression namely Abhidha or explicit connotation, Lakshana or the secondary import and vyanjana or implication by suggestion. The last aspect constitutes Dhvani or tone. He classifies Dhvani into three types-

  •  vastudhvani,
  • Alankaradhvani ( and)
  • Rasadhvani.

 

He divides Kavyas into three classes namely Vyangya kavya poems where Dhvani is predominant, Gunibhutavyangya where the suggestive element plays only secondary role and Chitra kavya, poems with no Dhvani at all but simply depending on artificial verbal jugglery. The first type is the best and the writings of all great poets belongs to this class. With plenty of examples quoted from Valmiki, Kalidasa and others he shows the presence of Dhvani in their writings.

 

A brief survey of Dhvani and Rasa-Dhvani

 

With the rise of the Dhvani School, the elements of Rasa and Dhvani gained prominence, and superseded the earlier notions of poetry. And, all poetry was defined and classified in terms of these two elements.

 

Anandavardhana said: all good poetry has two modes of expression – one that is expressed by words embellished by Alamkara; and the other that is implied or concealed – what is inferred by the listener or the reader.

 

The suggested or the implied sense of the word designated as Dhvani (resonance or tone or suggestion) through its suggestive power brings forth proper Rasa. Abhinavagupta qualified it by saying: Dhvani is not any and every sort of suggestion, but only that sort which yields Rasa or the characteristic aesthetics delight.

 

Anandavardhana regarded Dhvani– the suggestive power of the Kavya, as its highest virtue. The Alamkara, figurative ornamental language, according to him, came next. In both these types of Kavya-agama, there is a close association between the word and its sound, and between speech (vak) and meaning (artha). The word is that which when articulated gives out meaning; and meaning is what a word gives us to understand. Therefore, in these two types of Kavya there is a unity or composition (sahitya) of word (sabda-lankara) and its meaning (artha-lankara).

 

Anandavardhana‘s definition of Kavya involves two statements: Sabda-Artha sariram tavath vakyam; and, Kavyasya Atma Dhvanih – the body of poetry is the combination of words and sounds; and; Dhavni, the suggestive power is the soul of the poetry.

 

The Dhvani theory introduced a new wave of thought into the Indian Poetics. According to this school, the Kavya that suggests Rasa is excellent. In Kavya, it said, neither Alamkara nor Rasa but Dhvani which suggest Rasa, the poetic sentiment, is the essence, the soul.

 

Anandavardhana maintained that experience of Rasa comes through the unravelling of the suggested sense (Dhvani). It is through Dhvani that Rasa arises (Rasa-dhavani). The experience of the poetic beauty (Rasa) though elusive, by which the reader is delighted, comes through the understanding heart.

 

Then, Anandavardhana expanded on the object (phala) of poetry and how it is achieved (vyapara). The Rasa which is the object of poetry, he said, is not made; but, it is revealed. And, that is why words and meanings must be transformed to suggestions of Rasa (Rasa Dhvani).

 

The Rasa Dhvani, the most important type of Dhvani, consists in suggesting Bhava, the feelings or sentiments. In Rasa Dhvani, emotion is conveyed through Vyanjaka, suggestion. Rasa is the subject of Vyanjaka, as differentiated from Abhidha and Lakshana.

 

Anandavardhana in some instances considers Rasa as the Angi (soul) of poetry. Its Anga-s (elements) such as Alamkara, Guna and Riti seem to be dependent on this Angi.

 

Thus, the principle of Rasa Dhvani is the most significant of the Kavya dharma, understanding Kavya. And, the Rasa experience derived from its inner essence is the ultimate aim of Kavya. Hence, the epithet Kavyasya Atma Dhvani resonates with Kavyasya Atma Rasah.

 

Anandavardhana regarded Rasa-Dhvani as the principal or the ideal concept in appreciation of poetry. He said that such suggested sense is not apprehended by mere knowledge of Grammar and dictionary. It is apprehended only by those who know how to recognize the essence of poetic meaning.

 

Abhinavagupta accepted that; and expanded on the concept by adding an explanation to it. He said, the Pratiiyamana or implied sense which is two-fold: one is Loukika or the one that we use in ordinary life; and the other is Kavya vyapara gocara or one which is used only in poetry.

 

He also termed the latter type of Rasa-Dhvani as Aloukika, the out-of–the world experience. It is an experience that is shared by the poet and the reader (Sahrudaya). In that, the reader, somehow, touches the very core of his being. And, that Aloukika is subjective ultimate aesthetic experience (ananda); and, it is not a logical construct. As Abhinavagupta says, it is a wondrous flower; and, its mystery cannot really be unraveled.

 

Dhvanyaloka along with its commentary Dhvanyalokalocana (l0th cent. A. D) by Abhinavagupta transformed the entire trend of poetics and gave a turn towards an entirely new perception. These two treatises focus on a firm understanding of the aesthetic element in poetry. Their critical view is applauded by the theorists as the best approach to evaluation of poetry. Then onwards, the emphasis got shifted from the formal to the content aspect of poetry.

 

3. Essence of Dhvani

 

The neo-theorists Anandavardhana, and following him Abhinavagupta were the first to recognize and emphasize the importance of the function of suggestion in poetic language. On the basis of this concept they established the theory of Dhvani. Even though the presence of suggestion in poetry had been noted by earlier theorists too, it was the achievement of the Dhvani theorists to grasp its real aesthetic significance.

 

Anandavardhana and his followers deserve further credit for their success in satisfactorily incorporating the concept of Rasa into their critical framework, thus affecting a fine synthesis of the two concepts viz Rasa and Dhvani. Thus, introduction of Dhvani theory was the crowning achievement in Sanskrit aesthetic thought.

 

4.Interpreters of Rasa

 

Right from Bhamaha up to the 9th cent. A D. the attention of literary theorists was focused on poetry. Mostly, the major works belonging to this period deal with poetry and poetic criticism. However, in the field of dramatic theory, there existed a few prominent scholars who made valuable contributions to the poetics at least in the form of commentaries to Natyasastra of Bharata. They are Bhatta Lollata (8th century A. D) and Sri Sankuka of the 9th cent A.D. Their works are not available now but their views on Rasa are found quoted in subsequent treatises such as Abhinavabharati (Abhinavagupta’s commentary on Natyasastra), Kavyaprakasa of Mammata and Kavyanusasana of Hemacandra. Bhatta Lollata approached the concept of Rasa realisation as a Mimansaka or grammarian. Rasa, he said, is an effect of which the vibhavas or the aesthetic object is the direct cause. It resides in the original historical character (Rama etc.) represented on the stage, as well as the impersonating actor. The actor feels himself as the represented historical personage during the duration of the enactment but remembers his real nature through the faculty of anusandhana or recollection. In this context mention may be made of Bhatta Nayaka of the 10th century A. D. about whom our knowledge is restricted to references in Dhvanyalokalocana and the above mentioned works.

 

Like Bhatta Lollata and Sri Sankuka, Bhatta Nayaka too is credited with an interpretation of the Rasa-sutra. He was the author of a treatise entitled Hrdayadarpana which is now lost. It is not certain whether the Rasa interpretation appeared in this work or in a separate commentary on Natyasastra.

 

(A detailed discussion on Interpreters of Rasa Sutra is made in a separate module)

 

5.Summary

 

Bhamaha’s (7th cent.A.D) Kavyalankara is an important work in Sanskrit poetics. This work is the first to deal with poetics separate from dramatic theory; therefore, this can be considered the earliest extant work on Sanskrit poetics. After Bhamaha the next writer on poetic theory was the well known critic and poet Dandin (8th cent A. D)-the author of Kavyadarsa. His work is a systematic presentation of substance than Bhamaha’s; Vamana was was the successor of Dandin who built up a theory of poetry based on the Guna-Riti concept. His work Kavyalankara-sutra-vrtti is a very significant work that comes up with original ideas and concepts. It is regarded as the earliest attempt at evolving a philosophy of literary aesthetics. Many important theoretical works were written in 9th cent.A.D. Among them the prominence goes to Dhvanyaloka a work articulating the philosophy of “aesthetic suggestion” written by the famous aesthetician Anandavardhana. This is the most important work in the entire history of Sanskrit poetic theory.The philosopher Abhinavaguta wrote an important commentary on it. Modern Sanskritists have a very high opinion of Anandavardhana. Commenting on Anandavardhana’s Dhvanyaloka, .P.V Kane writes that “the Dhvanyaloka is an epoch-making work in the history of Alankara literature. It occupies the same position in poetics as Panini’s Ashadhyayi in grammar and Sankaracarya’s commentary on Vedanta. Anandavardhana was’the most brilliant of all Sanskrit critics’. Right from Bhamaha up to the 9th cent. A D. the attention of literary theorists was focused on poetry. Mostly, the major works belonging to this period deal with poetry and poetic criticism. However, in the field of dramatic theory, there existed a few prominent scholars who made valuable contributions to the poetics at least in the form of commentaries to Natyasastra of Bharata. They are Bhatta Lollata and Sri Sankuka Their works are not available now but their views on Rasa are found quoted in subsequent treatises.

 

Web links

  • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhamaha
  • https://www.scribd.com/…/Kavyalankara-of-Bhamaha-P-v-Naganatha-Sastry…
  • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daṇḍin
  • https://archive.org/details/kavyalankara
  • sreenivasaraos.com/tag/kavya-alamkara-sutra-vritti/
  • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anandavardhana
  • https://archive.org/details/Dhvanyalokah
  • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhinavagupta
  • hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/concepts/abhinavagupta.asp
  • shaivism.net/abhinavagupta/4.html
  • www.hindupedia.com/en/Alaṅkāra-śāstra
  • https://nuitnoire.wordpress.com/…/comparative-analysis-between-bhatta-…