2023-03-29 18:09:33 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
27
We have indicated the historical background of the guna/rīti theory
and its empirical preoccupation with differentiating various total styles
by calculating grammatical variables. Vämana was the first to have
attempted to state the crucial relation between the gunas and the alam-
kāras, but in so doing turns the matter on its head and makes of the
gunas not the predicates of a definition, but 'qualities', that is, 'virtues'
constituting poetry itself.49 Taking Dandin's definition of alamkāra-
"kävyaśobhākarān dharmän alañkārān pracakṣate" 50 Vāmana turns it into
a definition of guna—"kāvyaśobhāyāḥ kartāro dharmā guṇāḥ."51 To this
conception of the guṇas, the alamkāras are subordinated as specific
excitants or heighteners of the beauty thus produced: "tadatiśayahetavas
tv alamkārāḥ".5² To establish this distinction, which is crucial to his theo-
ry, he appeals to a number of analogies, most importantly that of the soul
and the body. Guņas pertain to the soul of poetry and are inherent, like
courage, and essential to it; the figures pertain to the body and, like clothes
and ornaments, are incidental and optional-at least this is the interpreta-
tion of the tradition which is accepted, in general, by De. In fairness it
must be admitted that the text is laconic and may not intend the distinc-
tion to be made in quite this way: all Vāmana says is "purve ... nityāḥ"
("pūrve guṇā nityāḥ. tair vinā kāvyaśobhānupapatteh").53 Elsewhere he
mentions the soul in connection with the definition of riti, implying a
distinction which becomes commonplace later.54
HISTORY OF THE SEARCH FOR SYSTEM
The way Vāmana intended the analogy of soul/body presents something
of a problem. First of all, it is hard to see just how the gunas are any
more inherent than the figures in the poetic expression, if they are
indeed present or absent as required for the differentiation of Vamana's
three styles. Daṇḍin expresses himself more appositely: The gunas are
Both writers who discuss style also discuss alamkāra in extenso. The riti theory and
Vāmana are side-issues in the history of Indian poetics. Reasons for De's ahistorical
interest in Vamana will be proposed below.
**Playing on the same equivocation in Sanskrit guna as in English "quality".
50 "We consider the figures properties producing beauty in poetry", Kävyādarśa, 2.1.
51 "The qualities are properties which are productive of poetic beauty", Kävyālam-
kārasūtrāņi, 3.1.1.
"The figures, on the other hand, are causes of their pre-eminence", ibid., 3.1.2.
"The former are inherent" (the former, viz., the qualities, are inherent; for without
them there is no realization of poetic beauty), ibid., 3.1.3 and vrytti.
** Ibid., 1.2.6, "ritir ātmā kāvyasya", "style is the soul [atman] of poetry", and the com-
mentary specifies the implication that poetry is thereby analogically the "body"
(sarira) whose soul is the riti. Cf. the definition of the dhvani in Dhvanyaloka 1.1:
"dhvanir ātmā kävyasya". The mention of the soul of poetry is given a different
interpretation by De, below, p. 29.
We have indicated the historical background of the guna/rīti theory
and its empirical preoccupation with differentiating various total styles
by calculating grammatical variables. Vämana was the first to have
attempted to state the crucial relation between the gunas and the alam-
kāras, but in so doing turns the matter on its head and makes of the
gunas not the predicates of a definition, but 'qualities', that is, 'virtues'
constituting poetry itself.49 Taking Dandin's definition of alamkāra-
"kävyaśobhākarān dharmän alañkārān pracakṣate" 50 Vāmana turns it into
a definition of guna—"kāvyaśobhāyāḥ kartāro dharmā guṇāḥ."51 To this
conception of the guṇas, the alamkāras are subordinated as specific
excitants or heighteners of the beauty thus produced: "tadatiśayahetavas
tv alamkārāḥ".5² To establish this distinction, which is crucial to his theo-
ry, he appeals to a number of analogies, most importantly that of the soul
and the body. Guņas pertain to the soul of poetry and are inherent, like
courage, and essential to it; the figures pertain to the body and, like clothes
and ornaments, are incidental and optional-at least this is the interpreta-
tion of the tradition which is accepted, in general, by De. In fairness it
must be admitted that the text is laconic and may not intend the distinc-
tion to be made in quite this way: all Vāmana says is "purve ... nityāḥ"
("pūrve guṇā nityāḥ. tair vinā kāvyaśobhānupapatteh").53 Elsewhere he
mentions the soul in connection with the definition of riti, implying a
distinction which becomes commonplace later.54
HISTORY OF THE SEARCH FOR SYSTEM
The way Vāmana intended the analogy of soul/body presents something
of a problem. First of all, it is hard to see just how the gunas are any
more inherent than the figures in the poetic expression, if they are
indeed present or absent as required for the differentiation of Vamana's
three styles. Daṇḍin expresses himself more appositely: The gunas are
Both writers who discuss style also discuss alamkāra in extenso. The riti theory and
Vāmana are side-issues in the history of Indian poetics. Reasons for De's ahistorical
interest in Vamana will be proposed below.
**Playing on the same equivocation in Sanskrit guna as in English "quality".
50 "We consider the figures properties producing beauty in poetry", Kävyādarśa, 2.1.
51 "The qualities are properties which are productive of poetic beauty", Kävyālam-
kārasūtrāņi, 3.1.1.
"The figures, on the other hand, are causes of their pre-eminence", ibid., 3.1.2.
"The former are inherent" (the former, viz., the qualities, are inherent; for without
them there is no realization of poetic beauty), ibid., 3.1.3 and vrytti.
** Ibid., 1.2.6, "ritir ātmā kāvyasya", "style is the soul [atman] of poetry", and the com-
mentary specifies the implication that poetry is thereby analogically the "body"
(sarira) whose soul is the riti. Cf. the definition of the dhvani in Dhvanyaloka 1.1:
"dhvanir ātmā kävyasya". The mention of the soul of poetry is given a different
interpretation by De, below, p. 29.