Ancient Indian Poetics

Like the dramaturgy a class of literature known as Poetics came into being as a result of the critical study of the various branches of poetical literature. This branch of literature treats mainly of the laws of poetry. These laws deal with prosody and metre, sentiment (rasa) and figures of speach (alankara), and qualities (guna) and defects (dosha). Irosody treats of the laws of versification and the quantity of syllables and accent. Rules on accent, Vedic and classical, are dealt with in the Phit-sutra of Santanava (later than Patanjali, B. C. 150). Metres are referred to in the Brahmanas and the sections of the Sankhyayana Srauta Sutra, Nidana Sutra, Rik-Pratisakhya, and Katyayana's Anukramani to the Rigveda and the Yajurveda specifically deals with metres. The regular text, however, is the Pingala's Chhanda-Sutra which deals with the Vedic, classical, and Prakrit metres. The Srutabodha is variously ascribed to Kalidasa and Vararuchi; a chapter civ) in the Brihat-Samhita of Varahamihira also refers to the subject. Some reference is made to Dandin and Bhamaha also. Suvittatilaka is ascribed to Kshemendra. Hemachandra compiled the Chhandanusasana. Kedara Bhatta wrote Vrihatratnakara, in the 15 th century, dealing with 136 metres, and Gangadasa wrote the Chhandomanjari. The sentiment (rasa) is "a condition in the mind of the spectator of a drama as well as the reader or hearer of a poem. This is produced by the emotions (bhava) of the characters. Emotions are excited by factors comprising the object like of love or are

hightened by the spring season, etc. The sentiments are subdivided according to the emotions which excite them into eight to ten groups, viz. erotic, comic, pathetic, and those of horror, heroism, fear, disgust, wonder, and calm (santa) and affection (vatsalya). The figures of sound (Sabdalankara) and of sense (Arthalankara) were at first not distinguished as classes. of figures. The ten qualities (guna) comprise the suggested sense (slesha), clearness (prasada), evenness or ease of comprehension (samata), special sense (samadhi), sweetness (madhurya), strength of compounds (ojas), smoothness in metres and conjunction (saukumarya), explicitness of sense (arthavyakti), elevation of subject and sentiment (udara), and loveliness (kanti). The defects consist of absence of complete meaning, incongruity with the context, tautology, ambiguity, violation of syntactical regularity, grammatical errors, break of metrical rules, breach of euphonic rules; and inconsistency of time, place, artistic usage, popular belief, logic and science. This brief reference to the various aspects of poetic literature will indicate cultural development of the Hindu mind in matter of literary appreciation. Early poetry of standard quality must have grown up independently of these laws but the later literature followed the rules as a matter of discipline. The literary critics, like the legislators of the moral, spiritual and political laws, grew in number and formed themselves into various groups known as the schools of poetics. Dandin of the seventh century in his Kavyadarsa has developed a regular school of thought after referring to many predecessors whose works are lost. According to him a poem may consist of verse, prose, or both. But the leading element of poetry is Alankara which lends beauty to the poem in its words and sense as ornaments do to the human body. He followed the already developed doctrine of Marga (path, school, style) of which six (Vaidarbhi, Gaudi, Fanchali, Avanti, Magadhi, Lati) are mentioned by various writers. Dandin accepts the Vaidarbha (southern) and Gauda (eastern) as the main divisions of styles, the rest being subordinate to these two. The distinguishing

marks are the presence in the former of the ten qualities which the other (Gauda) does not usually accept. His list of figures includes simile (in thirtytwo varieties), metaphor, Dipaka, Avritti (repetition), Akshepa, Arthantaranyasa, Vyatireka, Vibhavana, Samasokti, hyperbole, poetic fancy, and Hetu, Sukshma and Lesa, the last three being rejected by Bhamoha. Chronologically Bhamoha comes directly after Dandin and before Vamana. Bhamoha's Bhamchavivarana is lost but his Kavyalankara insists on the figures "as the essential feature of the poetry whose body is word and sense". He has, however, no marking lines between qualities and figures. He rejects the distinction of two styles, recognizes only three qualities which are, however, not connected with any special style. According to him a sweet pcem is that which is agreeable to hear and has not too many compounds, and a clear poem is one which can be understood by even women and children. Long compounds supply strength but are incompatible with sweetness and clearness". He gives a new list of ten additional defects and describes logical and grammatical errors in poetry. Vamana at the end of eighth century completes doctrines of Dandin but supplies a new idea, viz., 'the soul of pcetry as opposed merely to the body' as mentioned by Dandin. According to him 'a poem is not n. erely words and sense, but there must be qualities and figures as well.' He introduces the doctrine of Riti for Dadin's doctinc of style, and admits three kinds, viz., Vaidarbhi, Gaudi and Panchali. "The Vaidarbhi is perfect and have all the qualities. The Gaudi posseses the qualities of Kanti and Ojas understood here in the sense of many compounds and high-sounding words. The Panchali has sweetness and gentleness (madhurya and saukumarya) like the style of Puranas. According to Vamana "the qualities are vital, the figures not, they are related rather to the body, word and meaning of poetry than to the style which is the soul." Vamana's quality of beauty includes the feature of sentiment which Dandin places in the figures Preyas, Rasavat and Urjasvin, and the quality of perspicuity covers the Svabhavokti of Dandin. Vamana further insists that "simile lies at the bottom of all figures" and thus omits various figures. Udbhata, the contemporary of Vamana, deals in his Alankara-sangraha with forty-one figures including

three varieties of alliteration. He emphasizes on the element of sentiment on poetry and adds the ninth Rasa, calin (santa). Like Bhamaha he ignores the styles of Dandin. He introduces the theory of three VTittis (manners), viz., elegant (upanagarika), ordinary (gramya), and harsh (paurusha), based entirely on sound effects, primarily alliteration. He adds the figures of Drishtanta (exemplification) and Kavyalinga (poetical causation), divides simile according to grammatical form of expression, and investigates the relations of double meaning to other figures as well as the different kinds of blending of figures. Rudrata in the earlier part of the ninth century wrote his Kavyalakira in sixteen chapters of Arya verses. He divides figures on the base of sound and sense. Under sound he classes figures on the base of equivocation (vakrokti), paronomatia (slesha), pictorial effects (chitra), alliteration and Yamakas. And under sense are included figures bised on reality, similitude, hyperbole, and coalescence. He extends the manners (vritti) of Udbhata to five manners of letters (varna), sweet, harsh, pompous, dainty (lalita) and excellent (bhadra). He accepts also the styles of Vamana and increases the number to four based on the use of compounds. The Vaidharbhi has no compounds, the Panchali compounds u to three words, Latiya five to seven, and Gaudiya any number He introduces the theory of sentiment and recognizes ten of them, adding the feelings of calm (santa) and friendship (vatsalya). g The dramatist Rajasekhara wrote Kavyamimamsa in about 30. He defines poetry "as a sentence possessing qualities and figures". He accepts Vamana's doctrine of styles. He developes the doctrine of Dhvani (tone) which was originated by Anandavardhana of Kishmir in about 850 in his metrical Karikas, Dhvanyaloka. Its "super-commentary", Lochana, is by Abhinavagupta who refers to some not distant predecessors. Mammata is also included in this school. According to the holders of the doctrine of Dhvani (tone) 'the soul of poetry is not style nor sentiment, but tone (dhvani) which means that an implicit sense is the essence of poetry'. Three-fold suggestion, riz, a subject, a figure, and a sentiment are admitted by the orthodox members like Anandavardhana, Mammata and Abhinavagupta, the last of whom holds that 'all suggestion must be of

sentiment to which 'subject' and 'figure' are reduced. Visvanatha in his Sahitya-darpana followed this lead. This provides for the ordinary view that 'metaphor or simile is the base of poetry' and that 'the literal sense may be intended but a deeper suggestion is implied', and that 'one figure lay at the base of others' as when Vamana found simile in all and Bhamoha hyperbole in all figures. But the system admits that the beauty may be of sense or sound, and permits the kind of poetry called Chitra (picture). In dealing with the qualities, the figures and the manners of the earlier writers 'one great simplification was effected by reducing the number of qualities, restricting their extension to sound effects, and by merging in them both the Ritis of Vamana and the identical Vrittis of Udbhata. There came a new doctrine regarding the relation of qualities to the poem, 'the sentiment being regarded as the vital element, and the qualities being related to it as the soul of the poem.' a The three qualities of sound are given by Mammata as depending on arrangement of letters, compounds and style of composition. He also brings Vrittis of Udbhata under qualities and styles of Vamana into close relation to compounds like Rudrata. This doctrine draws definite line between figures and qualities. 'The figures are only of importance so far as they seek to enhance the sentiment. If figures do not aid the sentiment, then they are merely forms of speech, and their place in poetry is of the third type (chitra). Anandavardhana allows compounds freely in Akhyayika but they are not suitable in love-sorrow, and in Katha they should be employed moderately. The doctrine of defects (dosha) is treated from the same point of point of view as that of qualities (guna). Tautology may become an excellence if it enhances the suggested sense. This school insists that in love there is a defect in using unmelodious (srutidushta) words. A large number of writers followed this doctrine, the more well known of whom may briefly be referred to here. Bhatta Nayaka's Hridayadarpana is a sort of commentary only. Kuntala in his Vakroktijivita stresses on figures as the essential feature of poetry and not as ancillary to a sentiment. This view is refuted by Mahiman Bhatta who holds that Dhvani can always be reduced to inference and that there is no such thing as immediate 54

apprehension of sentiment. The Agnipurana adopts the ordinary definition of poetry 'as possessing qualities and figures and being free from defects' and recognizes four styles. Bhoja in his Sarasvati-kanthabharana requires poetry to possess sentiment and adds two more styles, Magadhi and Avantika between Vaidarbhi and Panchali. His treatment of sentiment in his chief work is supplemented by his Sringara-prakasa where the erotic sentiment is made the chief feature. Mammata, as already noted, set out the theory of Dhvani in his Kavya-prakasa (about 1100) with a commentary in a complete form. He defines a poem 'as sound and sense, free from defects, possessing qualities and sometimes figures. He ignores sentiment as essential, although he makes the qualities essentially attributes of the sentiment. He reduces the qualities to three and includes under them the styles and manners. of earlier writers. He classes defects as those of sentiment, of word, proposition, and sense. He treats figures as of sound and sense. Visvanatha in his Sahitya-darpana (about 1350) largely follows Mammata, accepts the doctrine of styles and admits four of them, viz., Vaidarbhi (dainty) with sweet letters and no long or short compounds; Gaudi with letters of strength and long compounds; Panchali with letters of other significance and compounds of five or six words; and Lati intermediate between Panchali. and Vaidarbhi. On figures he follows often Ruyyaka. Similar are in spirit and manner the Ekavali of Vidyadhara (about 1300) and the Pratapa-rudra-yaso bhushana Vidyanatha (about 1300); both accept 'subject and figure as objects of suggestion as well as sentiment'. Vidyadhara enumerates like Bhoja twenty-four qualities. Hemachandra's Kavyanusasana with Viveka commentary is 'destitute of originality' borrowing from Mammata, Abhinavagupta, Rajasekhara and others. Two Vagbhatas of 12 th and 13 th centuries wrote the Vagbhajalankara and the Kavyanusasana. The older defines poetry to include ten qualities, figure, sentiment an style which are, however, welded into a whole. The younger follows Hemachandra and allows only three qualities. Ruyyaka (about 1100, wrote the AlankaraSarvasva and commentary, to summarize all earlier systems and asserts the doctrine of Dhvani Jayadeva's

Chandraloka is a manual of figures, on which Appayya Dikshita based his Kuvalayananda (about 1600). Jagannatha in his Rasagangadhara supplies a revised definition of poetry 'as sound expressive of a charming idea (ramaniyartha-pratipadakasabda). Kshemendra develops the conception of propriety (auchitya) in his Auchityavichara as essential or life of sentiment, and discusses in his Kavikanthabharana 'the charm of poetry with illustration of its ten aspects, the defects and excellences with regard to sense, sound, of sentiment', and the various forms with which a poet ought to be familiar. Still more practical advice to poets is given in the Kavyakalpalata and its commentary by Arisinha and Amarachandra (13 th century). In the 14 th century Bhanuchandra wrote on sentiment in his Rasamanjari and Rasa-tarangini. A proper classification of the figures of speech appears to have been left out by all these intellectual giants who analyzed poetry so very cleverly. Only Ruyyaka offers a division of figures of sense based on the principles of comparison (upama), incongruity (virodha), linked succession (srinkhala), logical reasoning (nyaya), sentence economy (vakya-nyaya), popular maxims (lokanyaya), apprehension of a secret sense (gudhartha-pratiti) and combination of figures (Sankara). This division is not quite logical.' The idea that the face of the beloved is like the moon can be utilized to illustrate a long series of figures based on similarity alone : "Thy face is like the moon' is simile (upama). 'The moon is like thy face' is the converse (pratipa). "Thy face shineth ever, the moon by night alone' is contrast (vyatireka). 'The moon doth reign in heaven, thy face on earth' is typical comparison (prativastuupama). 'In the heaven is the moon, on earth thy face' is exemplification (drishtanta). 'Thy face doth bear the beauty of the moon' is illustration (nidarsana). The moon doth pale before thy face' is indirect eulogy (aprastuta-prasamsa) "The moon is like thy face, thy face is like the moon' is repeated simile (upamayopama). The sight of the moon doth bring thy face before me' is remembrance (smarana). 'Thy moon-face' is metaphor (rupaka). 'By thy moon-face the heat of passion doth wane' is commutation (parinama). 'Is this thy face or the moon' is doubt (sandeha). 'The Chakora (bird) •

thinking it to be the moon flieth toward thy face' is confusion (bhrantimat). This is the moon, this is the lotus, so the (bird) Chakora and the bee fly to thy face' is different representations (ullekha). 'This is the moon, not thy face' is negation (apahnuti). 'Thy face is like thy face alone' is self-comparison (ananvaya)'. 'Thy face is indeed the moon' is lively fancy (utpreksha).' 'Thy face is a second moon' is hyperbole (atisayokti). "The moon and the lotus are vanquished by thy face' is equal pairing (tulyayogita). "Thy face and the moon rejoice in the night' is illumination (dipaka). 'How could such beauty be born among men, not from the earth doth arise tremulous loveliness of the lightning' is the typical comparison another form of prativastu-upama). This does not indicate, as rightly held by Professor Keith, mere philosophical subtleties. These illustrations show an extraordinary training of the mind and intellect and also an uncommon sincerity of attachment to something one really likes. Apart from literary achievements the Hindu mind penetrated the fathomless depth of feelings as are clearly indicated by the poetics.