2023-02-15 09:58:53 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
XX
A Handbook of Classical Sanskrit Rhetoric
power or fancy) create speech (vācam ie poetry). and then his
friends (sakhāyaḥ ie the readers well-qualified like the poet) under-
stand the proper meaning; blessed dignity (bhadrā lakṣmīḥ) is
enshrined in their speech. (RV.X. 71.2)
In his Kavyamīmāmsā, Rajasekhara fascinatingly idealises the
origin of poetics as a special branch for the sutdy of literature from
the Vedic studies and fondly seeks its divine origin from the
supreme Godhead Siva. According to his opinion, Śiva, the master
of all arts taught sāhityavidyā or critique of literature to Brahmā,
the divine creator, from whom it was handed down to others
through oral tradition and ultimately all such deliberations were
documented in later period.
Yaska's Nirukta (cir 700-500 BC) (ie the lexicon of the Vedic
language as well as linguistic study of the Vedic words) is perhaps
the oldest extant work which used the word alamkāra in the sense
of figure of speech. The earliest definition of upamā (simile) is to
be found here, and a few illustrations of some varieties of upamā
are also quoted from Vedic hymns. The famous Sanskrit grammar
Aṣṭādhyāyi of Pāṇini (cir 700-400 BC) uses the three words upamā
(similitude), upamāna (the standard of comparison) and upamita
(the subject of description) which are closely connected with the
figures based on similitude.
All the difinitions of alamkāras as quoted in this work have
been taken from twenty seven standard texts of Sanskrit poetics
wirtten over a period of about two thousand years (ie 100-1800
AD). Therefore, it is necessary to give a brief account of such texts
in a chronological order. It should be mentioned here that these
texts are not uniform in structure and treatment. Some works per-
vade the entire field of poetics along with dramaturgy, others deal
with general and particular topics of literary criticism and a few of
them propound individual theories of literary criticism like dhvani
or vyanjanā (ie extra-ordinary implication of Art) or aucitya (ie pro-
priety as the overall criterion of artistic expression) or vakrokti (ie
artful diction as the essence of poetic language) or rasa (ie aes-
thetic contemplation offering uninhibited delight free from all
objective relations which, in other words, is conceived in the
Digitized by
Google
Original from
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
A Handbook of Classical Sanskrit Rhetoric
power or fancy) create speech (vācam ie poetry). and then his
friends (sakhāyaḥ ie the readers well-qualified like the poet) under-
stand the proper meaning; blessed dignity (bhadrā lakṣmīḥ) is
enshrined in their speech. (RV.X. 71.2)
In his Kavyamīmāmsā, Rajasekhara fascinatingly idealises the
origin of poetics as a special branch for the sutdy of literature from
the Vedic studies and fondly seeks its divine origin from the
supreme Godhead Siva. According to his opinion, Śiva, the master
of all arts taught sāhityavidyā or critique of literature to Brahmā,
the divine creator, from whom it was handed down to others
through oral tradition and ultimately all such deliberations were
documented in later period.
Yaska's Nirukta (cir 700-500 BC) (ie the lexicon of the Vedic
language as well as linguistic study of the Vedic words) is perhaps
the oldest extant work which used the word alamkāra in the sense
of figure of speech. The earliest definition of upamā (simile) is to
be found here, and a few illustrations of some varieties of upamā
are also quoted from Vedic hymns. The famous Sanskrit grammar
Aṣṭādhyāyi of Pāṇini (cir 700-400 BC) uses the three words upamā
(similitude), upamāna (the standard of comparison) and upamita
(the subject of description) which are closely connected with the
figures based on similitude.
All the difinitions of alamkāras as quoted in this work have
been taken from twenty seven standard texts of Sanskrit poetics
wirtten over a period of about two thousand years (ie 100-1800
AD). Therefore, it is necessary to give a brief account of such texts
in a chronological order. It should be mentioned here that these
texts are not uniform in structure and treatment. Some works per-
vade the entire field of poetics along with dramaturgy, others deal
with general and particular topics of literary criticism and a few of
them propound individual theories of literary criticism like dhvani
or vyanjanā (ie extra-ordinary implication of Art) or aucitya (ie pro-
priety as the overall criterion of artistic expression) or vakrokti (ie
artful diction as the essence of poetic language) or rasa (ie aes-
thetic contemplation offering uninhibited delight free from all
objective relations which, in other words, is conceived in the
Digitized by
Original from
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN