Text 8.1

एवं दोषान् निरूप्य गुणालङ्कार-भेदं तावद् आह,

evaṃ doṣān nirūpya guṇālaṅkāra-bhedaṃ tāvad āha,

Having thus described the literary faults, at first he only mentions the difference between a literary quality and an ornament. (This verse defines a guṇa, and text 8.2 defines an alaṅkāra.)

ye rasasyāṅgino dharmāḥ śauryādaya ivātmanaḥ |
utkarṣa-hetavas te syur acala-sthitayo guṇāḥ ||8.66||

ye—which; rasasya—of a rasa; aṅginaḥ—[a rasa] which is the main element; dharmāḥ—attributes (qualities); śaurya-ādayaḥ—[qualities,] such as bravery; iva—like; ātmanaḥ—of the soul; utkarṣa—of eminence; hetavaḥ—causes; te—they (the qualities); syuḥ—are; acala—is unwavering; sthitayaḥ—whose existence [when there is a rasa^[1] (8.27)]; guṇāḥ—the qualities.

A guṇa is a quality of the rasa which is the predominant element in the composition, like bravery is a quality of the soul. A guṇa is a cause of the eminence of the rasa and always exists [when there is a rasa].

aṅgino rasasyotkarṣakā dharmā guṇāḥ ātmana iva śauryādayaḥ, te ca rasa-viśeṣe niyata-viśeṣāḥ syuḥ. ātmana iveti, yathā śauryādayo nākṛteḥ, tathā mādhuryādayo na śabdārtha-yugmasya. na hy ayam ākāraḥ śūraḥ sthūlatvād iti sa-hetuḥ,^[2] asthūle’pi siṃhe śaurya-vīkṣanāt. tataś ca sa-vyabhicāratvān nākṛti-gataṃ tat, varṇās tv ākṛti-vad guṇa-vyañjakā vakṣyante.

A literary quality is a settled particularity when there is a specific rasa. The comparison with a quality of the soul is for this purpose: Just as bravery and other qualities are not the characteristics of the body, so the literary qualities are neither the characteristics of sounds nor the characteristics of meanings (sound and meaning are the body of poetry). It is not reasonable to think that the body of a man is brave because it is stout, since bravery is seen even in a lion which is not stout. Therefore bravery does not relate to the body, because there are variations. Nonetheless, the phonemes suggesta literary quality like the body is suggestive of a quality. This is expounded ahead.

Commentary:

There are three literary qualities (guṇa): mādhurya (sweetness, melting), ojas (vigor), and prasāda (clarity of the meaning). In short, Mammaṭa made the rule that when śṛṅgāra-rasa or karuṇa-rasa occurs, a poet should use the construction of mādhurya-guṇa (the quality of sweetness), and that when either vīra-rasa, bībhatsa-rasa or raudra-rasa predominantly occurs, a poet should use the construction of ojas guṇa (the quality of vigor). All the most important subsequent poetical theorists accept Mammaṭa’s system.

A guṇa is so called because it is a quality of a rasa (guṇa = rasa-guṇa).^[3] In other words, a guṇa is a specific nature (dharma = svarūpa-viśeṣa)^[4] of a rasa. This is the technical sense of the word guṇa. Abhinavagupta explains that a guṇa is a form of relishment.^[5] Thus whenever there is no rasa, there is no guṇa in the technical sense.^[6] Similarly, if there is no soul in the body, there is no quality.^[7] Consequently there is no universal rule that sweet phonemes, for instance, are necessarily suggestive of mādhurya-guṇa. Therefore the guṇas are figuratively said to inhere in the phonemes (8.11), as in the term “sweet phoneme”: This is the conventional sense of the term guna.

Ānandavardhana’s definition of a guṇa implies that there is no universal rule that a second-rate rasa-dhvani, such as the rasavat ornament, must involve a guṇa.^[8] According to Kavikarṇapūra, a guṇa enhances the relishment of a rasa.^[9]

In Vedānta philosophy, the understanding is that a material quality belongs to the subtle body and a transcendental quality belongs to the soul. Ahead, Mammaṭa uses the word ātmā (soul) in the sense of mind (8.9).^[10] As regards poetry, the sense of ‘soul’ is explained as follows: vāg-vaidagdhya-pradhāne’pi rasa evātra jīvitam, “Although in poetry the main thing is cleverness in the wording, only a rasa is the life in it” (Agni Purāṇa 336.29) (Sāhitya-darpaṇa 1.2).

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

atrātma-dṛṣṭāntena śabdārtha-yugala-lakṣaṇaṃ kāvyaṃ śarīram iva, śruty-kaṭv-ādayo ye doṣāḥ śvitrādaya iva, mādhuryādayo guṇāḥ śauryādaya iva, anuprāsopamālaṅkārāḥ kaṅkaṇa-hārādaya iva rasādi-dhvani-rītyaiveti pradarśitam iti draṣṭavyam (Bāla-cittānurañjinī 8.66).

[2]:

sad-dhetuḥ (Rashtriya Saṃskṛt Saṃsthān edition). Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa’s elaboration is a paraphrase of Alaṅkāra-kaustubha, where the reading is sad-dhetuḥ (Alaṅkāra-kaustubha 6.1).

[3]:

vastutaḥ to mādhurya, oja aur prasāda ye tīnoṅ guṇa rasa ke hī dharma athavā guṇa haiṅ (Siṅgh, Satyavrata, M.A., Ph.D., Kāvya-prakāśaḥ (Śaśikalā Hindi commentary, Caukhambā, Vārāṇasī, India, reedited in 2009), p. 295).

[4]:

tathā kāvye’ṅgitvam āptasya rasasya dharmāḥ svarūpa-viśeṣā mādhuryādayo’pi sva-samarpaka-pada-sandarbhasya kāvya-vyapadeśasyaupayikānuguṇya-bhāja ity arthaḥ (Sāhitya-darpaṇa 8.1).

[5]:

evaṃ mādhuryaujaḥ-prasādā eva trayo guṇā upapannā bhāmahābhiprāyeṇa. te ca pratipattrāsvāda-mayā mukhyatayā tata āsvādye upacaritā rase tatas tad-vyañjakayoḥ śabdārthayor iti tātparyam (Locana 2.10).

[6]:

acala-sthitayaḥ apṛthak-sthitayaḥ, niyata-sthitaya iti yāvat. naiyatyaṃ ca raseṇa tad-upakāreṇa ca. ye rasaṃ vinā nāvatiṣṭhante, avasthitāś cāvaśyaṃ rasam upakurvantīty arthaḥ (Sāra-bodhinī 8.66).

[7]:

śauryādibhir ātmaivālaṅkāryaḥ, na tv acetanam (Bāla-cittānurañjinī 8.67).

[8]:

tam artham avalambante ye’ṅginaṃ te guṇāḥ smṛtāḥ|
aṅgāśritās tv alaṅkārā mantavyāḥ kaṭakādi-vat || (Dhvanyāloka 2.6); alaṅkāro hi bāhyālaṅkāra-sāmyād aṅginaś cārutva-hetur ucyate (Dhvany-āloka 2.5).

[9]:

tena rasāsvādotkarṣakatvaṃ guṇatvam (Alaṅkāra-kaustubha 6.1).

[10]:

The definition is: ātmā deha-mano-brahma-svabhāva-dhṛti-buddhiṣu prayatne ca, “Ātmā means body, mind, Brahman (the Soul or the soul), one’s nature, firmness, intelligence, and determination” (Viśva-prakāśa). Sometimes the word ātmā means ego (Bhāgavatam 6.12.11; 10.63.26).