2023-03-29 18:09:36 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
34
INTRODUCTION
syntactical procedures) which, although they do not permit delineation
of a distinctive genre, function as necessary conditions of all utterance
and a fortiori of poetic utterance. They impose conditions upon the
poetic expression which are effective only in extremis: usually when the
poem violates some rule of com prehensibility or grammatical intention
(so that it no longer means what it was intended to, for example).73
Such are the doşas. It behooves any poet to be aware of the general, as
well as the specific, capacities of his medium, just as the sculptor would
not use the same tools on granite and wood.
The dosas ('defects', with a connotation of 'sin') clearly parallel
terminologically the gunas ('qualities', with a connotation of "virtue") and
like them, pertain to the general preconditions of poetic language. Un-
like the dosas, however, the gunas are relevant not in omission, but in
commission; they appear to characterize language which is functioning
properly. In the definitions of Daṇḍin and Vāmana, several of the gunas
are said to be literally 'non-dosas. Most of the others imply a corres-
ponding defect, as prasāda implies vyutpanna ('language understood with
difficulty'). A few, like ojas, appear basically neutral, relative not to
"good" or "bad" but simply to variations in effect: certain poetic contexts
call for compounding, certain others do not. But if the gunas are basically
the avoidance of dosas and not positive qualities pertaining specifically
to the poetic in utterance, it does not appear profitable to situate poetry
per se in the guṇas. Vāmana's attempt to do precisely that met with
little approval, as we have seen. This attempt would make no more sense
than would, for example, the definition of poetry in terms of the func-
tioning of nouns and verbs. Certainly, poetry cannot be thought of
without nouns and verbs, and these are essential to it, but they simply
do not relate to the level of poetry on which its specific differences are
to be found. In one sense the mere avoidance of negative conditions
(doşas) does create a positive condition which it is the business of the
poet to cultivate; but as such, the gunas are truistic and do not define
poetic expression any more than a properly inflected noun can be con-
sidered poetry (although, again, no poetry is possible without properly
inflected nouns).
In substituting these positive conditions of poetry (gunas) for the specific
differentia of poetry (the figures), Vāmana may be said to have attempted
a tour de force, but the basic universe of discourse of Indian poetics
78 Dandin, Kávyādarśa, 1.7 is to be understood in this sense, no doubt.
74 E.g., arthavyakti (comprehensibility") defined as aneyarthatvam, "whose meaning
need not be reasoned about' (Daṇdin, Kāvyādarśa, 1.73).
INTRODUCTION
syntactical procedures) which, although they do not permit delineation
of a distinctive genre, function as necessary conditions of all utterance
and a fortiori of poetic utterance. They impose conditions upon the
poetic expression which are effective only in extremis: usually when the
poem violates some rule of com prehensibility or grammatical intention
(so that it no longer means what it was intended to, for example).73
Such are the doşas. It behooves any poet to be aware of the general, as
well as the specific, capacities of his medium, just as the sculptor would
not use the same tools on granite and wood.
The dosas ('defects', with a connotation of 'sin') clearly parallel
terminologically the gunas ('qualities', with a connotation of "virtue") and
like them, pertain to the general preconditions of poetic language. Un-
like the dosas, however, the gunas are relevant not in omission, but in
commission; they appear to characterize language which is functioning
properly. In the definitions of Daṇḍin and Vāmana, several of the gunas
are said to be literally 'non-dosas. Most of the others imply a corres-
ponding defect, as prasāda implies vyutpanna ('language understood with
difficulty'). A few, like ojas, appear basically neutral, relative not to
"good" or "bad" but simply to variations in effect: certain poetic contexts
call for compounding, certain others do not. But if the gunas are basically
the avoidance of dosas and not positive qualities pertaining specifically
to the poetic in utterance, it does not appear profitable to situate poetry
per se in the guṇas. Vāmana's attempt to do precisely that met with
little approval, as we have seen. This attempt would make no more sense
than would, for example, the definition of poetry in terms of the func-
tioning of nouns and verbs. Certainly, poetry cannot be thought of
without nouns and verbs, and these are essential to it, but they simply
do not relate to the level of poetry on which its specific differences are
to be found. In one sense the mere avoidance of negative conditions
(doşas) does create a positive condition which it is the business of the
poet to cultivate; but as such, the gunas are truistic and do not define
poetic expression any more than a properly inflected noun can be con-
sidered poetry (although, again, no poetry is possible without properly
inflected nouns).
In substituting these positive conditions of poetry (gunas) for the specific
differentia of poetry (the figures), Vāmana may be said to have attempted
a tour de force, but the basic universe of discourse of Indian poetics
78 Dandin, Kávyādarśa, 1.7 is to be understood in this sense, no doubt.
74 E.g., arthavyakti (comprehensibility") defined as aneyarthatvam, "whose meaning
need not be reasoned about' (Daṇdin, Kāvyādarśa, 1.73).