Text 8.14

अथ साभिप्रायत्वम् ओजः, अर्थ-वैमल्यं प्रसादः, उक्ति-वैचित्र्यं माधुर्यम्, अपारुष्यं सौकुमार्यम्, अग्राम्यत्वम् उदारता चेति पञ्च क्रमाद् अपुष्टार्थाधिक-पदानवीकृतामङ्गलाश्लील-ग्राम्याणां दुष्टतया निरासात् स्वीकृताः. वस्तु-स्वभाव-स्फुटत्वम् अर्थ-व्यक्तिर् दीप्त-रसत्वं कान्तिश् च वक्ष्यमाण-स्वभावोक्त्या रस-ध्वनि-गुनी-भूत-व्यङ्ग्याभ्यां च क्रमाद् आश्रिता.

atha sābhiprāyatvam ojaḥ, artha-vaimalyaṃ prasādaḥ, ukti-vaicitryaṃ mādhuryam, apāruṣyaṃ saukumāryam, agrāmyatvam udāratā ceti pañca kramād apuṣṭārthādhika-padānavīkṛtāmaṅgalāślīla-grāmyāṇāṃ duṣṭatayā nirāsāt svīkṛtāḥ. vastu-svabhāva-sphuṭatvam artha-vyaktir dīpta-rasatvaṃ kāntiś ca vakṣyamāṇa-svabhāvoktyā rasa-dhvani-gunī-bhūta-vyaṅgyābhyāṃ ca kramād āśritā.

Now, on the topic of the artha-guṇas (qualities of the meaning): The ojas which is the fact of having a purposeful word; prasāda, which refers to the clarity of the meaning by avoiding superfluity; mādhurya, which is poetic expression; saukumārya, a meaning which is not harsh; and udāratā, the absence of a vulgar meaning, were listed simply because they are the absence of these faults, sequentially: apuṣṭārtha (irrelevant meaning) (7.85),^[1] adhika-pada (superfluous word) (7.60), anavī-kṛta (not made new) (7.96), amaṅgala aślīla (unpleasant due to being inauspicious) (7.11; 7.31), and grāmya (vulgar, colloquial) (7.90).

Artha-vyakti, clarity regarding the nature of an entity, is included in our svabhāvokti ornament (a description of the nature): It is expounded ahead (10.134).

Kānti, the fact of having a radiant rasa, is included in our system either as a first-rate rasa-dhvani or as a second-rate rasa-dhvani.

Commentary:

Vāmana’s artha-guṇa called artha-vyakti (explicitness of ideas so that the nature of an entity is clearly perceived) is the same as Mammaṭa’s svabhāvokti ornament. For this reason, Paṇḍita-rāja Jagannātha says that some of Vāmana’s guṇas were re-categorized as ornaments.^[2] Another instance is Vāmana’s fifth category of ojas (a purposeful word).

Jagannātha illustrates it:

gaṇikājāmila-mukhyān avatā bhavatā batāham api |
sīdan bhava-maru-garte karuṇa-mūrte na sarvathopekṣyaḥ ||

“Lord, You saved people such as Kubjā and Ajāmila. Alas, even I am sinking in the desert hole of material life. O personified compassion, I do not deserve to be disregarded in any way” (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM p. 62).

Here the vocative karuṇa-mūrte (O personified compassion) is highly significant in the context. This constitutes the parikarāṅkura ornament (highly significant noun) (11.40). That word does not merely reflect the absence of the fault called apuṣṭa (irrelevant) because a name of the Lord could have been used instead.

Vāmana defines his artha-guṇa ojas as the maturity of the meaning (the diversity of the wording^[3]): arthasya prauḍhir ojaḥ (Kāvyālaṅkārasūtra 3.2.2). It has five varieties: padārthe vākya-racanaṃ vākyārthe ca padābhidhā, prauḍhir vyāsa-samāsau ca sābhiprāyatvam asya ca, “Prauḍḥi is: (1) Many words are used to denote one word (this is a form of the paryāyokta ornament: circumlocution, 10.154), (2) One word expresses a whole sentence (this is a form of dhvani), (3) The exact same purport is repeatedly stated in many ways, (4) Several short sentences are tightly grammatically constructed into one sentence, and (5) A word is purposeful (illustrated above)” (Kāvyālaṅkāra-sūtra 3.2.2) (cited in Kāvya-prakāśa 8.72).

Paṇḍita-rāja Jagannātha gives examples of Vāmana’s varieties of ojas. The following four verses correspond to the first four items above:

sarasija-vana-bandhu-śrī-samārambha-kāle rajani-ramaṇa-rājye nāśam āśu prayāti |
parama-puruṣa-vaktrād udgatānāṃ narāṇāṃ madhu-madhura-girāṃ ca prādurāsīd vinodaḥ ||

“At the time of the beginning of the splendor of the friend of the groves of lotuses (i.e. at dawn), when the kingdom of Night’s lover quickly comes to an end (i.e. when night is over), the pleasure of the men who arose from the First Puruṣa’s mouth (i.e. of Brāhmaṇas) occurred, and so did the delight of the charming, honey-like words (the mantras of the Vedas)” (Rasa-gaṅgādhara).

khaṇḍitā-netra-kañjāli-mañju-rañjana-paṇḍitāḥ |
maṇḍitākhila-dik-prāntāś caṇḍāṃśor bhānti bhānavaḥ ||

“Adorning the eastern horizon, the sunrays are resplendent: They are expert in nicely coloring the lotus eyes of the khaṇḍitā woman (a heroine who sees her lover arrive home in the morning showing signs of infidelity)” (Rasa-gaṅgādhara). Jagannātha explains that here the technical term “khaṇḍitā” signifies a whole sentence: In the morning, the husband is coming home from another woman’s dwelling.^[4]

ayācitaḥ sukhaṃ datte yācitaś ca na yacchati |
sarvasvaṃ cāpi harate vidhir ucchṛṅkhalo nṛṇām ||

“The fate of men is out of control. Someone does the trick without being asked. And some other person, being requested to help, does not help. It even takes away one’s all in all” (Rasa-gaṅgādhara). Here the same idea “Everything is under the control of destiny” is differently worded so many times.^[5]

tapasyato muner vaktrād vedārtham adhigatya saḥ |
vāsudeva-niviṣṭātmā viveśa paramaṃ mudam ||

“Understanding the Vedas’ purport by listening to the sage who was practicing austerities, he, whose mind became absorbed in Vāsudeva, achieved the highest joy” (Rasa-gaṅgādhara).

Moreover, Bharata Muni’s mādhurya-guṇa is the fact that even if a clause is repeatedly heard, it does not become annoying.^[6] Thus Vāmana’s artha-guṇa mādhurya corresponds to Bharata Muni’s mādhurya-guṇa. Paṇḍita-rāja Jagannātha says their mādhurya is this form of poetic expression: The same kind of clause is repeated with a different twist.^[7]

He illustrates it:

vidhattāṃ niśśaṅkaṃ niravadhi-samādhiṃ vidhir aho
  sukhaṃ śeṣe śetāṃ harir avirataṃ nṛtyatu haraḥ |
kṛtaṃ prāyaścittair alam atha tapo-dāna-yajanaiḥ
  savitrī kāmānāṃ yadi jagati jāgarti bhavatī ||

“O Ganges, Brahmā can remain in deep trance without thinking about his duties, Hari can happily recline on Śeṣa, and Śiva can dance as he likes: For all intents and purposes, my means of atonement are done, and I do not need to perform austerity, give in charity, or sponsor a fire sacrifice—if you, who fulfill desires, are alive in the world” (Rasa-gaṅgādhara).

Jagannātha explains:

atra vidhy-ādibhir nāsti kim api prayojanam ity eṣo’rthaḥ. samādhi-vidhānādi-preraṇā-rūpeṇokti-vaicitryeṇābhihitaḥ, anyathānavī-kṛtatvāpatteḥ,

“Here the type of meaning which is repeated is: “Brahmā is useless,” and so on. It was said by poetic expression in the form of allowing him to be in perpetual samādhi, and so forth, otherwise the fault called anavī-kṛta (not made new) would have occurred” (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM p. 60).

Mammaṭa not only demolished Vāmana’s system of guṇas. He implicitly discarded Bharata Muni’s methodology, refined Ānandavardhana’s system and thus established himself as the topmost poetical theorist of Sanskrit poetics. However, the core of Sanskrit poetics originates from Bharata Muni.

The modern ojas originates from his second definition of ojas:

avagīto’pi hīno’pi syād udāttāvabhāsakaḥ, yatra śabdārtha-sampattis tad ojaḥ parikītitam,

“When the composition manifests pomp, although it might be reproachable or vile, by the excellence of sound and meaning, that is called ojas” (Nāṭya-śāstra 16.107).

The modern prasāda (clarity) originates from Bhāmaha:

ā-vidvadaṅganā-bāla-pratītārthaṃ prasāda-vat,

“Poetry in which the meanings are understood by everyone, from women and children to scholars, is said to have prasāda” (Bhāmahālaṅkāra 2.3).

Bharata Muni’s prasāda-guṇa is the perception of a figurative meaning or of a second-rate implied sense: apy anukto budhair yatra śabdo’rtho vā pratīyate, sukha-śabdārtha-saṃyogāt prasādaḥ parikīrtyate, “When a word, or else a meaning, although not literally expressed, is perceived, owing to an easy connection between the words and their sense, by intelligent persons, that is prasāda” (Nāṭya-śāstra 16.100).^[8]

Bharata Muni’s samādhi-guṇa is a first-rate implied sense:

abhiyuktair viśeṣas tu yo’rthasyehopalakṣyate, tena cārthena sampannaḥ samādhiḥ parikīrtyate,

“When the composition is endowed with a meaning which is a distinct particularity of a meaning and when that particularity is perceived by those well-versed in the art, that is samādhi” (Nāṭya-śāstra 16.103).

Bharata Muni’s second definition of samādhi-guṇa involves a second-rate implied sense.^[9]

Daṇḍī accepted Bharata Muni’s ten guṇas in principle. Daṇḍī’s samādhi-guṇa includes the concepts of figurative usage and implied sense. His definition is:

anya-dharmas tato’nyatra loka-sīmānurodhinā, samyag ādhīyate yatra sa samādhiḥ smṛto yathā,

“When a different attribute is fully contemplated upon in another afterward, by being in conformity with worldly norms, that is samādhi” (Kāvyādarśa 1.93).

Daṇḍī exalted his samādhi-guṇa:

tad etat kāvya-sarvasvaṃ samādhir nāma yo guṇaḥ, kavi-sārthaḥ samagro’pi tam ekam anugacchati,

“In poetry, samādhi-guṇa is all in all. The whole caravan of poets follows that one” (Kāvyādarśa 1.100).

Years later (c. 850 CE), Ānandavardhana revolutionized poetry by inventing the Dhvani theory.

Bharata Muni classed an exalted occurrence of either śṛṅgāra-rasa or adbhuta-rasa in his udāra-guṇa (exalted).^[10]

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Rather, in the modern system, Vāmana’s fifth category of ojas, which is the fact of having a purposeful word, is classed either as Mammaṭa’s parikara ornament (the assistants) (10.176) or as Jayadeva’s parikarāṅkura ornament (highly significant noun) (11.40). See Jagannātha’s example in the Commentary.

[2]:

apare tv eṣu guṇeṣu katipayān prāg-uktais tribhir guṇair vakṣyamāṇa-doṣābhāvālaṅkāraiś ca gatārthayantaḥ, kāṃścid vaicitrya-mātra-rūpatayā kvacid doṣatayā ca manyamānā na tāvataḥ svīkurvanti (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM p. 62).

[3]:

prauḍhiḥ pratipādana-vaicitryam (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM p. 61).

[4]:

atra “yasyāḥ parāṅganā-gehāt patiḥ prātar gṛhe’ñcati” iti vākyārthe khaṇḍitā-padābhidhānam (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM p. 61).

[5]:

atra daivādhīnaṃ sarvam ity ekasmin vākyārthe nānā-vākya-racanātmako vyāsa-padavācyo vistaraḥ (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM p. 61).

[6]:

bahuśo yac chrutaṃ vākyam uktaṃ vāpi punaḥ punaḥ || nodvejayati yasmād dhi tan mādhuryam iti smṛtam || (Nāṭya-śāstra 16.105)

[7]:

ekasyā evokter bhaṅgy-antareṇa punaḥ-kathanātmakam ukti-vaicitryaṃ mādhuryam (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM p. 59).

[8]:

“Perhaps by this Guṇa, Bharata means to imply some kind of hint (anukta artha), transparent from the words used (such as we find, e.g., in the figure mudrā in Candrāloka, and Kuvalayānanda), which may correspond partly to the metaphorical mode of expression included by Vāmana in his peculiar definition of vakrokti (iv.3.8), or comprised by later writers under lakṣaṇā or upacāra. Referring to Vāmana’s definition of artha-guṇa prasāda as artha-vaimalya (iii.2.3), Abhinava seems to support our suggestion when he says: so’rtho vaimalyāśrayo’pi vaimalyam upacārāt, [“Although the meaning is based on clarity, the said clarity takes place figuratively (because that meaning is not literally expressed),”] thus attempting to approximate Bharata’s prasāda to Vāmana’s artha-guṇa of that name.” (De, S.K. (1988), History of Sanskrit Poetics, Vol. II, p. 13).

[9]:

upamāsv iha dṛṣṭānām arthānāṃ yatnatas tathā |
prāptānāṃ cātisaṅkṣepāt samādhir nirṇayo yataḥ || (Nāṭya-śāstra 16.104)

[10]:

divya-bhāva-parītaṃ yac chṛṅgārādbhuta-yojitam |
aneka-bhāva-saṃyuktam udāratvaṃ prakīrtitam || (Nāṭya-śāstra 16.111)