2023-03-29 18:09:33 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
26
aware of the fully articulated formal analysis of the simile into upameya,
upamāna, sādhāraṇadharma, and dyotaka," and use these categories in
distinguishing various similes as well as figures based on simile.
INTRODUCTION
(c) An Alternative System: The Stylistic Argument
The second problem which hindered the elaboration of formal figurative
categories was the lingering discussion of the poetic styles (riti or mārga),
which were originally geographical variations in the use or avoidance
of certain conventional aspects of Sanskrit syntax, such as long com-
pounds, involved etymological forms, certain kinds of alliteration, and
the like. Soon what was regional style became merely stylized usage:
rīti. At first two, then three, then five styles were differentiated on the basis
of certain typical conjunctions of the syntactic and grammatical characteris-
tics, or guņas ('qualities') relating to usage.
46
The analysis of poetry as rīti was fundamentally an empirical enterprise
and, as such, not really congenial to the Indian thinkers. It was based
on the notion that the occasional use of a particular feature was of greater
significance than the idea of the feature or its essential character. Poetry
as style was defined as a conventional configuration of certain positively
or negatively present characteristics; for example, the rīti called vaidarbhi
was defined by the presence of the guṇas (sāukumārya, prasādatvam, etc.)
and the absence of ojas." That the characteristic is present or absent is
the essential thing, not what it is or what natural purpose it serves. In a
sense the guna/rīti theory completes the alamkāra theory by providing
a concrete notion of poetic context lacking in the study of figures as
theoretic forms. But it is certainly not the case, as some have supposed,
that it was intended to supersede or replace the alamkāra theory.48
The subject and object of comparison, the common or comparable property, the
adverbial indicator of comparison ('like').
** Raghavan, Studies on Some Concepts of the Alankāra Šāstra, p. 131.
**
For complete list, see below, p. 32, note 68.
47 There is indeed a general correlation of the gunas with one of the styles, and their
opposites with the other (Dandin, Kāvyādarśa, 1.42), but several exceptions, notably
ojas (1.80) demonstrate the variability of the gunas vis-à-vis the styles. In some cases
the opposite of the guna is (apparently) also a guna; in others, a defect (doșa). Sec
below, p. 33. Dandin in all cases illustrates both the guna and its opposite, and these
illustrations may be taken as instances of the stylistic opposition thus made concrete.
** "The decline of the alamkāra system was probably synchronous with, and perhaps
hastened by, the rise of the rival riti-doctrine" (De, HSP, II, p. 66). What decline?
The alamkāra continues to preoccupy long after the riti has been fossilized as allitera-
tion by Rudrata. Attempts to elevate the riti into a competing poetic doctrine or school
are made tenuous by the certain identification of but a single writer (Vamana) with it.
aware of the fully articulated formal analysis of the simile into upameya,
upamāna, sādhāraṇadharma, and dyotaka," and use these categories in
distinguishing various similes as well as figures based on simile.
INTRODUCTION
(c) An Alternative System: The Stylistic Argument
The second problem which hindered the elaboration of formal figurative
categories was the lingering discussion of the poetic styles (riti or mārga),
which were originally geographical variations in the use or avoidance
of certain conventional aspects of Sanskrit syntax, such as long com-
pounds, involved etymological forms, certain kinds of alliteration, and
the like. Soon what was regional style became merely stylized usage:
rīti. At first two, then three, then five styles were differentiated on the basis
of certain typical conjunctions of the syntactic and grammatical characteris-
tics, or guņas ('qualities') relating to usage.
46
The analysis of poetry as rīti was fundamentally an empirical enterprise
and, as such, not really congenial to the Indian thinkers. It was based
on the notion that the occasional use of a particular feature was of greater
significance than the idea of the feature or its essential character. Poetry
as style was defined as a conventional configuration of certain positively
or negatively present characteristics; for example, the rīti called vaidarbhi
was defined by the presence of the guṇas (sāukumārya, prasādatvam, etc.)
and the absence of ojas." That the characteristic is present or absent is
the essential thing, not what it is or what natural purpose it serves. In a
sense the guna/rīti theory completes the alamkāra theory by providing
a concrete notion of poetic context lacking in the study of figures as
theoretic forms. But it is certainly not the case, as some have supposed,
that it was intended to supersede or replace the alamkāra theory.48
The subject and object of comparison, the common or comparable property, the
adverbial indicator of comparison ('like').
** Raghavan, Studies on Some Concepts of the Alankāra Šāstra, p. 131.
**
For complete list, see below, p. 32, note 68.
47 There is indeed a general correlation of the gunas with one of the styles, and their
opposites with the other (Dandin, Kāvyādarśa, 1.42), but several exceptions, notably
ojas (1.80) demonstrate the variability of the gunas vis-à-vis the styles. In some cases
the opposite of the guna is (apparently) also a guna; in others, a defect (doșa). Sec
below, p. 33. Dandin in all cases illustrates both the guna and its opposite, and these
illustrations may be taken as instances of the stylistic opposition thus made concrete.
** "The decline of the alamkāra system was probably synchronous with, and perhaps
hastened by, the rise of the rival riti-doctrine" (De, HSP, II, p. 66). What decline?
The alamkāra continues to preoccupy long after the riti has been fossilized as allitera-
tion by Rudrata. Attempts to elevate the riti into a competing poetic doctrine or school
are made tenuous by the certain identification of but a single writer (Vamana) with it.