2023-03-29 18:09:42 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
52
the stuff of the imagination'. This sense is conveyed by the commentator
Vādijanghaladeva: "yadyapi kävyaśobhākaraḥ [sic] dharma alankārā
ityuktam tathāpi naitāvatālańkārasādhāraṇalakṣaṇamätrakathanād eva
jñātum pāryante । kim tvadyāpi [utprekṣya nirūpyante]¹³¹ lakṣaṇodāha-
raṇapradarśanena katicit",132 Although he repeats what had by then be-
come the standard remark about the anantatva of the figures, he does
render clearly the sense of vikalpyante: 'by an act of imagination, a certain
number are now to be fashioned with the aid of definitions and examples'.
In other words, it is the multiplicity of manifest figures which cannot be
described fully.133 The figure as form may be clothed in an infinitude of
referential dresses. Of course it is obvious that, qua poetry (qua kāvya),
the form alone defines the force of the expression; its referential content
is incidental and may be supplied as appropriate. Dandin appears to
confirm this intent in the last kärikā of chapter 2: 367:
which translates:
INTRODUCTION
panthāḥ sa eşa vivṛtaḥ parimāṇavṛttyā
samkṣipya vistaram anantam alamkriyāṇām
131
vācām atītya vişayam parivartamānān
abhyāsa eva vivarītum alam višeşān
Our attempt to rescue Dandin from the charge of anantatvam is rendered
problematical by his repeated references to 'varieties' of known figures
111
The path [of the figures] has been disclosed by the method of
circumscription,
Summing up the infinite extent of figurative exemplifications;134
When one goes beyond the subject matter of words [i.e., the verbal
science, poetics],
Practice alone is able to disclose the [existential] differentiations
[of individual figures].
Restored by the editor, D. T. Tatacharya (or by V. Krspamācārya?). The gerund
utpreksya may also have the connotation "looking over', 'comparing'.
Dandin, Kävyādarša (ed. Tatacharya), p. 64.
A remark so obvious that when made it would seem to require another inter-
pretation; but in Dandin's text it is a passing remark, one which can appear to antic-
ipate later theoretical discussions.
134 The Sanskrit term is alamkriyā, which is taken as synonymous with alamkāra
'figure'. But is it accidental that Dandin uses this exceptional term in those two con-
texts where by our interpretation he is discussing not the figure but the manifest figure?
The feminine often has the acceptation of concreteness. But contra, the term alamkriya
is required by the metre, and it is used once (4.64, Tatacharya ed.) where clearly no
distinction is intended. Also "tän" (masc.) in 2.1. Cf. Kavyādarsa 2.3 and above p. 31.
the stuff of the imagination'. This sense is conveyed by the commentator
Vādijanghaladeva: "yadyapi kävyaśobhākaraḥ [sic] dharma alankārā
ityuktam tathāpi naitāvatālańkārasādhāraṇalakṣaṇamätrakathanād eva
jñātum pāryante । kim tvadyāpi [utprekṣya nirūpyante]¹³¹ lakṣaṇodāha-
raṇapradarśanena katicit",132 Although he repeats what had by then be-
come the standard remark about the anantatva of the figures, he does
render clearly the sense of vikalpyante: 'by an act of imagination, a certain
number are now to be fashioned with the aid of definitions and examples'.
In other words, it is the multiplicity of manifest figures which cannot be
described fully.133 The figure as form may be clothed in an infinitude of
referential dresses. Of course it is obvious that, qua poetry (qua kāvya),
the form alone defines the force of the expression; its referential content
is incidental and may be supplied as appropriate. Dandin appears to
confirm this intent in the last kärikā of chapter 2: 367:
which translates:
INTRODUCTION
panthāḥ sa eşa vivṛtaḥ parimāṇavṛttyā
samkṣipya vistaram anantam alamkriyāṇām
131
vācām atītya vişayam parivartamānān
abhyāsa eva vivarītum alam višeşān
Our attempt to rescue Dandin from the charge of anantatvam is rendered
problematical by his repeated references to 'varieties' of known figures
111
The path [of the figures] has been disclosed by the method of
circumscription,
Summing up the infinite extent of figurative exemplifications;134
When one goes beyond the subject matter of words [i.e., the verbal
science, poetics],
Practice alone is able to disclose the [existential] differentiations
[of individual figures].
Restored by the editor, D. T. Tatacharya (or by V. Krspamācārya?). The gerund
utpreksya may also have the connotation "looking over', 'comparing'.
Dandin, Kävyādarša (ed. Tatacharya), p. 64.
A remark so obvious that when made it would seem to require another inter-
pretation; but in Dandin's text it is a passing remark, one which can appear to antic-
ipate later theoretical discussions.
134 The Sanskrit term is alamkriyā, which is taken as synonymous with alamkāra
'figure'. But is it accidental that Dandin uses this exceptional term in those two con-
texts where by our interpretation he is discussing not the figure but the manifest figure?
The feminine often has the acceptation of concreteness. But contra, the term alamkriya
is required by the metre, and it is used once (4.64, Tatacharya ed.) where clearly no
distinction is intended. Also "tän" (masc.) in 2.1. Cf. Kavyādarsa 2.3 and above p. 31.