2023-03-29 18:10:24 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
GLOSSARY
177
('lance'), süla ('spike'), and hala (plough"). Rudrata apparently
considers pictorial verses citra par excellence, for they get first place
in his account. He gives no specific name, however; type (b) above
is also considered citrakavya.
Lastly (d), the princ of repetition may be located not in the
verse at all, but in the individual syllable; that is, the place of the
syllable is not specified, but rather its phonemic quality. Dandin
and the Agni Purāṇa call this type niyama, and Dandin gives examples
of verses composed of four or fewer vowels or consonants, including
one tour de force the only consonant in which is the phoneme
"n".
The last three types depart in certain respects from the classic
yamaka, which is a repetition of phonemically identical syllable
sequences in specifically defined and symmetrically related parts of
the verse. The first type (b) can be seen as a variation on the maha-
yamaka (q.v.), inasmuch as the entire verse is somehow repeated;
but the repetition is subjected to conditions which in turn limit the
occurrence of syllables within the verse, and this is foreign to yamaka.
The second type (c) involves a repetition only of specifically placed
syllables and does not refer to symmetrically related parts of the
verse. Type (d), of course, puts no restriction at all upon sequence.
It may be seen from the preceding that not all authors agree
either on the terminology or typology of citrakavya. Dandin, the
earliest writer to deal with the subject, defines types (a), (b), and
(d), calling them prahelikä, duşkara, and niyama. The Agni Purāṇa
seems to refer to all four under the names (a) citra, (b) vikalpa, (c)
bandha, and (d) niyama, and groups the last three together as
duşkara. Rudrața, in turn, considers (a) krīdā, (b) and (c) citra,
but ignores (d). Lastly, Mammața, who uses only the term citra,
treats indiscriminately of (b) and (c).
Citra, as a category of poetry, is extremely important in the history
of Indian poetic speculation. The growing contempt for the poet's
virtuosity on the part of the critics probably reflects in part the
increasing dependence of the poets on these devices, a fact that
Sanskrit literary history has often remarked. From its origins per-
haps ultimately in religious symbolism, citrakāvya has passed from
one extreme (Dandin's view that it is a kind of recreation of the poet
and his audience) to the other, becoming more and more a central
issue opposing the poet to his audience (the critics). The development
of the tantric religious systems may have accentuated this divorce,
177
('lance'), süla ('spike'), and hala (plough"). Rudrata apparently
considers pictorial verses citra par excellence, for they get first place
in his account. He gives no specific name, however; type (b) above
is also considered citrakavya.
Lastly (d), the princ of repetition may be located not in the
verse at all, but in the individual syllable; that is, the place of the
syllable is not specified, but rather its phonemic quality. Dandin
and the Agni Purāṇa call this type niyama, and Dandin gives examples
of verses composed of four or fewer vowels or consonants, including
one tour de force the only consonant in which is the phoneme
"n".
The last three types depart in certain respects from the classic
yamaka, which is a repetition of phonemically identical syllable
sequences in specifically defined and symmetrically related parts of
the verse. The first type (b) can be seen as a variation on the maha-
yamaka (q.v.), inasmuch as the entire verse is somehow repeated;
but the repetition is subjected to conditions which in turn limit the
occurrence of syllables within the verse, and this is foreign to yamaka.
The second type (c) involves a repetition only of specifically placed
syllables and does not refer to symmetrically related parts of the
verse. Type (d), of course, puts no restriction at all upon sequence.
It may be seen from the preceding that not all authors agree
either on the terminology or typology of citrakavya. Dandin, the
earliest writer to deal with the subject, defines types (a), (b), and
(d), calling them prahelikä, duşkara, and niyama. The Agni Purāṇa
seems to refer to all four under the names (a) citra, (b) vikalpa, (c)
bandha, and (d) niyama, and groups the last three together as
duşkara. Rudrața, in turn, considers (a) krīdā, (b) and (c) citra,
but ignores (d). Lastly, Mammața, who uses only the term citra,
treats indiscriminately of (b) and (c).
Citra, as a category of poetry, is extremely important in the history
of Indian poetic speculation. The growing contempt for the poet's
virtuosity on the part of the critics probably reflects in part the
increasing dependence of the poets on these devices, a fact that
Sanskrit literary history has often remarked. From its origins per-
haps ultimately in religious symbolism, citrakāvya has passed from
one extreme (Dandin's view that it is a kind of recreation of the poet
and his audience) to the other, becoming more and more a central
issue opposing the poet to his audience (the critics). The development
of the tantric religious systems may have accentuated this divorce,