2023-04-06 02:50:29 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
xvi
only a minute fraction of the total of life; and that is
why a modern man does not find problems of life in
Sanskrit poetry but sees only certain incomprehensible
things there. The fact is that the problem of real life
is dealt with in Sanskrit literature, but the modern
notion of life is an entirely different one,
a far
narrower one.
In metre also Sanskrit metres are far more flexible
than the rigid metre of European classical literature.
Within the limitations of the fixed number of syllables
in a line and the rigid sequence of long and short
syllables in the line there is considerable scope for
variety. In Sanskrit one does not feel the never
changing iambics. The shifting of the cæsura, variety
in the length of the words, long syllable through
conjunct consonants varying with long vowels, hard
and soft sounds, all these factors, to say nothing of
the free distribution of longs and shorts in the line,
give ample scope for the variety that is needed. And
one does not feel that there is a limitation at all. If
one carefully analyses a few stanzas in a Sanskrit epic,
one can see how all these possibilities have been taken
advantage of. European scholars have not discarded
Greek poetry on account of their never ending trochaic
and iambic feet offering no scope for variety except a
shift in the position of the cæsura, and what a large
variety there is in Sanskrit in comparison !
It is true that the pace in Sanskrit poetry is far
far slower than what it is in European classics. This
simply shows that the region of life comprehended in
only a minute fraction of the total of life; and that is
why a modern man does not find problems of life in
Sanskrit poetry but sees only certain incomprehensible
things there. The fact is that the problem of real life
is dealt with in Sanskrit literature, but the modern
notion of life is an entirely different one,
a far
narrower one.
In metre also Sanskrit metres are far more flexible
than the rigid metre of European classical literature.
Within the limitations of the fixed number of syllables
in a line and the rigid sequence of long and short
syllables in the line there is considerable scope for
variety. In Sanskrit one does not feel the never
changing iambics. The shifting of the cæsura, variety
in the length of the words, long syllable through
conjunct consonants varying with long vowels, hard
and soft sounds, all these factors, to say nothing of
the free distribution of longs and shorts in the line,
give ample scope for the variety that is needed. And
one does not feel that there is a limitation at all. If
one carefully analyses a few stanzas in a Sanskrit epic,
one can see how all these possibilities have been taken
advantage of. European scholars have not discarded
Greek poetry on account of their never ending trochaic
and iambic feet offering no scope for variety except a
shift in the position of the cæsura, and what a large
variety there is in Sanskrit in comparison !
It is true that the pace in Sanskrit poetry is far
far slower than what it is in European classics. This
simply shows that the region of life comprehended in