The Dhvanyloka and the Dhvanylokalocana: A Translation of the Fourth Uddyota, Pt. I Author(s): J. Moussaieff Masson and M. V.

Patwardhan Reviewed work(s): Source: Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 97, No. 3 (Jul. - Sep., 1977), pp. 285304 Published by: American Oriental Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/600735 . Accessed: 21/08/2012 16:08
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the American Oriental Society.

http://www.jstor.org

THE DHVANYALOKA AND THE DHVANYALOKALOCANA: A TRANSLATION OF THE FOURTH UDDYOTA, Pt. I1
J. MOUSSAIEFF MASSON AND M. V. PATWARDHAN
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO POONA

In this article we present an annotated translation of the famous fourth chapter of the Dhvanyaloka along with the first English translation of Abhinavagupta's commentary on this chapter in his Dhvanyalokalocana. The singular importance of this text for the subsequent development of Indian aesthetics is stressed in a brief introduction.
a translation PAGES CONTAIN FOLLOWING of the fourth chapter of the famous Dhvanydiloka2 of Anandavardhana (Kashmir, 9th century A.D.), on this famous and the equally commentary text, the Dhvanyalokalocana by the well-known THE

1 For a more complete treatment of the major ideas of both texts, we refer the reader to the Introduction to our forthcoming work in the Harvard Oriental Series by Daniel H. H. Ingalls, and to the articles and books by us mentioned in the bibliography at the end of this article. 2 It is often stated that Btihler (Detailed Report, p. 65) discovered the D.Al. However, Jagannatha in the seventeenth century knew it, and a manuscript was found in the famous Kavindra collection in Banaras in the eighteenth century. The work was taught in the traditional method, from manuscripts, long before there was any edition. The first ed. was by Durgaprasad and Parab, in the KM series in 1891. This does not contain however the Locana on the fourth Ud. which was not available at the time. (De published this separately in the J. of the Dept. of Letters, U. of Calcutta; it has since been reprinted in "Some Problems"). The whole text was edited in 1940 by Pattabhiramasastri, along with the Locana, and the Bdlapriya commentary on the Locana written by Sri Ramasaraka Pisharoty (a pandit from Kerala who died not very long ago) in Benares. The ed. is careful and the Bdlapriya is an excellent commentary. Unless otherwise indicated, all references to the text of the D.Al. and the Locana are from this edition. In 1944 S. Kuppuswami Sastri edited the first Uddyota of the D. Al. with the Locana and the Kaumudi of Uttuigodaya (a fourteenth-century commentator on the Locana). The commentary is extremely learned and often very interesting on its own account. The other three Uddyotas were promised, but were never published and we understand from Professor Kunjunni Raja, that the rest of the Kaumudi was never discovered. 285

and literary critic, Abhinavagupta philosopher 11th century A.D.). Taken together, (Kashmir, these two works constitute the most profound examination of poetic theory India has produced.3 Although not an autonomous work, this chapter stands somewhat apart from the rest of the book; it is a sort of epilogue to the preceding three which established with chapters, great rigor, careful logic and unusual an entirely lucidity new approach to the subject of poetry.4 This 3 Both S. K. De and P. V. Kane acknowledge that there is nothing quite like either work in the whole of Sanskrit literature. Edgerton (1936), who wrote briefly on the Dhuanydloka, called it "perhaps the greatest monument to Indian poetic sensibility." Many ideas of both texts are as valuable and important now as when they were first written. L. Renou (1954) felt the same way: "Ainsi, sous quelque aspect qu'on l'envisage, la doctrine relative au dhvani comporte des enseignements fort valables et pour ainsi dire actuels." 4 Curiously enough, Anandavardhana himself does not mention any older work on poetics which has not come down to us today. The lost works cited by Abhinava (e.g., the Kdvyakautuka of Bhattatauta, or Bhattanayaka's Hrdayadarpana) are all later than Ananda, and generally they were written under the influence of the D. Al. The same applies to the works of Lollata, gaAkuka and others mentioned in the sixth Adhyaya of the Abhinavabhdrati (see Masson and Patwardhan: "Aesthetic Rapture.") Presumably Bhattalollata was the first critic to take up the rasasutra of Bharata for detailed analysis. Bhattalollata appears to have lived in the ninth century under the reign of ganikaravarman, Avantivarman's successor, because Ksemendra, Abhinava's pupil, in his Spandanirnaya, p. 34, speaks of Bhattalollata's Vrtti on Vasagupta's Spandakdrikd. The early commentators mentioned by Abhinava (e.g., Kohala, Rahula) most probably passed over this problem in

286

Journal

of the American

Oriental

Society

97.3

(1977)

approach, as is well known, involved the theoretiof the concept of suggestion cal examination made the corner(dhvani) which the Dhvanyiloka stone of the theory of literature; a place it has in Indian maintained aesthetics. permanently The main concern of both texts is not only sugin a general sense, but primarily the gestion, of a heightened emotional experience suggestion While rasa5 was known to via literature (rasa). the earlier tradition6 it was never considered in silence. It is not impossible that Anandavardhana's D. Al. acted as the catalyst for this extraordinary upsurge in poetic theory in Kashmir. Note that when we use the name Anandavardhana, we are including for the sake of convenience the presumed author of the Karikas who could not in any case have lived much It is not clear before the time of Anandavardhana. whether Bhattenduriaja wrote down his teachings on poetics, but he did explicate the text of the D. Al. (see Locana, p. 8), whose doctrines he presumably followed. The date and identification of gaikuka are not without problems (see Gnoli, 1968, p. 32). 5 A single, consistent translation of the word rasa is perhaps not possible. Abhinava himself uses the word very loosely (even Ananda is not without guilt in this respect) to mean often simply the sthdyibhdva; conversely, he often uses a given sthayibhava in the sense of rasa, e.g., in the fourth Uddyota, p. 526, where ratim sutaram posayati stands for srngararasam sutardm posayati. o Sometimes he uses rasa to mean simply "emotion" in general. Thus on p. 87 of the Locana, Abhinava quotes the fine line from the Hrdayadarpana: ydvat ,pmro na caitena tdvan naiva vamaty amum, with apparent approval, although in other places (e.g., A. Bh. Vol. I, p. 291, tena ndtya eva rasd na loke, and in the second paragraph of the same page: ata eva nate na rasah, he denies its existence outside the realm of art for he claims that rasa is not subject to restrictions of time and space: uktamn hi desakdlapramdtrbheddniyantrito rasa iti (ibid., p. 291, the editor's surmised emendation is not needed). The best translation seems to us to be "imaginative experience" or "aesthetic experience." "Mood" conveys a sense of transitoriness that is not really appropriate to rasa. A vyabhicdribhdva is more a mood than is the heightened state implied by the word rasa. Rasa is always alaukika, as Abhinava stresses again and again (e.g., A. Bh. I, p. 285: lokottaro 'riho rasa iti tatparyam sitrasya, referring to the rasasutra of Bharata). 6 The earliest treatment is in the sixth and seventh Adhyayas of the NS. Nor is it fair to say that Bharata was not fully conscious of the primary importance of rasa, for in dealing with the vrttis; kaku; prakrtibheda;

relation to suggestion. Anandavardhana not only shows that rasa can never be directly expressed,7 but also that rasa may not be confined to
jatyangas, etc., he relates these concepts to rasa. The later refinements, e.g., prddhdnya, vyanjand, sddhdranikarana, are not explicitly mentioned in the NS, though Abhinava sees them prefigured there. At times this view seems reasonable. Thus when Bharata uses the word sumanas (Vol. I, p. 289), it is only natural to think of the sahrdaya; but at other times, as when Abhinava insists that Bharata was aware of the vya7gyartha, it is at best suspect. Bhamaha mentions rasa only in passing (I. 21; and V. 3 where the meaning is unclear). DaUdin of course was aware of rasa (I. 62): kadmam sarvo 'py alaikdro rasam artham nisiicati tathdpy agrdmyataivainam bhdram vahati bhiyasd See also I. 18; I. 51; I. 62; II. 275, 285 and III. 149. But Dandin does not devote any special study to rasa. Vamana mentions it only once, at III. 2. 14 (diptah rasah). Udbhata under IV. 3, is more elaborate, and it is not impossible (in view of the times that Abhinava, both in the Locana and in the Abhinavabhdrati, says ity audbhatdh) that he considered the problem in much greater detail in his now lost commentary on the NS. One may add that Pratiharenduraja, in commenting on Udbhata's definition of rasavadalainkra, says that readers curious about the doctrine of rasa, should see another work written by Udbhata. Is this a reference to the commentary on the NS, or to still a third lost work of Udbhata's ? Note that according to Abhinava, Lollata criticised the views of Udbhata on NS VI. 10 (A. Bh., I, p. 264: nirdege caitat kramavyatydsandd ity audbhatdh. naitad iti bhattalollatah). This shows that Lollata commented on NS VI. Indeed, he must have written a commentary on the whole of the NS, for in Vol. III of the A. Bh., p. 36, Abhinava quotes and rejects a view of Udbhata on the order of the sandhis and sandhyangas. It is rather curious then that Lollata's views on rasanispatti are not mentioned in the rasaprakarana of the A. Bh. This seems to us more evidence that Ananda himself, or at least the dhvani tradition which he represents, is responsible for such speculation. The temptation in any case to link speculation on rasa with dhvani theory is very strong and is certainly supported by the D. Al. itself, although it is odd that Ananda should not explicitly give his views on rasdsvoda. 7 See Masson (1973). Mammata bases his discussion of laklsana (for which gunavritti and bhakti are synonyms) on the D. Al. and the Locana, as do most later writers. The example gaingydm ghosah has generated so much confusion among Western writers that a note is justified. The confusion of English speakers is that we

MASSON AND PATWARDHAN: DhvanyCtloka

and Dhvanyalokalocana

287

single stanzas, and may, in fact, be the prevailing emotional atmosphere of complete works. As examples, in the fourth chapter of his work, Anandavardhana does not confine himself to poems, but takes the daring step of demonstrating
the major rasas in the Rdmayana and the Ma-

hdbhdrata. No earlier writer had even considered as a work of "literature"8 the Mahdbharata
can say: "I have a house on the Ganges," whereas in Sanskrit one cannot. The correct translation of the Sanskrit phrase is: "I have a house in the Ganges" which sounds as odd to English speakers as gangdgyamghosah does to Sanskrit speakers. All laksana with the exception of niriudhalaksand, is prayojanavati, that is, it has a special purpose. But this purpose (prayojana) cannot be conveyed by laksand itself. It has to be conveyed by vyaijand, suggestion. So all laksand implies the use of yaiijand. The word gangd by laksana gives the meaning of tata. But this word tata is not mukhydrthabadha. In other words, lakcsana comes to an end after we have understood the sense of tafa (this is the main innovation of Ananda). In order to fulfill the purpose, we have recourse to another power in language, vyaijand. Now why cannot gaigdtire ghosah give us the same notion of holiness, etc., through vyanjand directly, without passing via the stage of lak.sand? The reply of the Indian critic is that in gaAgdtire ghosah we give prominence to the word tira and not to Gangd, whereas in gangdyam ghosah all our attention is fixed on gangd (for in a tatpurusa compound, the final member is regularly predominant). We need laksaia. only in order to make grammatical sense of the sentence. Once this is achieved, the aesthetic sense is served by vyafijand. Moreover, although gangdtire ghosah may contain within itself a vyangydrtha, it is not a charming one. Ananda has said that all sentences we utter contain some form or other of a vyangydrtha. But what makes them cases of poetic dhvani is something different. Other conditions must be fulfilled: there must be beauty, this must be ascertained by the sahrdaya, and the suggested sense must be more important and more charming than the literal sense. Dhoani is a larger concept and includes other areas besides poetics. Poetic dhvani is smaller in scope. Moreover, in gangdyadmghosah as well as in gagagdtireghosah, there is no question of dhvanikvuya in the sense of rasadhuani because there are no vibhdvas, anubhdvas and vyabhicdribhdvas, in short, no sdmagri, without which rasadhvani is not possible. This is why, on p. 59 of the Locana, Abhinava refutes the charge that in simho batuh there is poetry. 8 The problem is not only that the definition of "literature" was restricted to include only kdvya and ndtya, but also that writers before Anandavardhana with the

whereas Anandavardhana shows that it is not only literature, but that it contains a unity of imaginative mood not even suspected by earlier writers.9 When he shows that karucnarasa, the closest Indian equivalent to what we understand by tragedy (though not in the restricted Greek use of the term), runs through the entire Ramayana, he went counter to accepted Indian notions of unhappiness and its effect on the reader. For by claiming that karunarasa is the major aesthetic experience of the Rdamyana, Anandavardhana implicitly accepts the fact that the end of the epic is an unhappy one, and the prospects of a future happiness in heaven are of little or no concern to the literary critic.10 In this the later
single exception of Vgmana, wrote their own examples in order to illustrate the theories they were developing, rather than making use of the existing literature. But it is clear from their discussions that the IM. Bh. would have found no place in a discussion of poetics. Ananda seems to have been the first to really look closely at the existing literature. He was, it should be noted, also the first writer on aesthetics to give examples from Prakrit works (mainly muktakas and verses from Hala, but he quotes also from longer works, e.g., the Setubandha of Pravarasena on p. 222 of the D. Al.). Professor Ingalls has suggested to us that in view of the large number of "suggested themes" in the Sattasai, it is not impossible that the very inspiration for dhuani came from an examination of Prakrit sources. We consider this very likely, and have pointed out, in an article on the Gaiidavaho and the D. Al. other Prakrit influences from this work. 9 It would be unfair to criticize Ananda for not being aware of the composite authorship of the Mahdbhdrata. He was not; but we do not think that his unawareness invalidates his conclusions on the aesthetic unity of the whole. Earlier writers never discussed or in any way foreshadowed this insight, for no earlier writer had considered a whole poem as a single work of literature. Only individual verses had heretofore been considered. In fact, Bharata has a verse in the seventh Adhyaya (VII. 119, p. 379) that might be interpreted against Ananda's theories: na hy ekarasajam kdvyam kificid asti prayogatah bhdvo vd raso vdpi pravrttir vrttir eva ca Unfortunately Abhinava's commentary on this verse is lost. 10 This can be verified by turning to Bharata's distinction between vipralambhasrngdra, and karunarasa on p. 308, Vol. I of the NS: alrdha yady ayam ratiprabhavah Sirngdrah katham asya karundsrayino bhdvid bhavanti. evdbhihitar atrocyate-purvam sambhogavipralambha-

288

Journal of the American Oriental Society 97.3 (1977) importance given to rasadhoani in the Dhvanyaloka, Anandavardhana could not have remained unconcerned with such a fundamental issue. Must we then assume that the practice of commenting on the famous line from Bharata13 (tatra vibhdvanubhdvavyabhicarisamyogad rasanispattih) arose after the time of Anandavardhana, but before the time of Abhinavagupta?14 On camatkara also, again one of the key words in the system of aesthetics built up on the basis of the Dhvanyaloka by Abhinavagupta, there is only a solitary mention.l5 Did Anandavardhana perhaps take this and other related concepts for granted? On pratibhd and vyutpatti, although the terms are used,16 Anandavardhana does not go into any detail, nor does he discuss their relationship. Did Anandavardhana regard vyutpatti, "moral" or "intellectual" instruction, as the goal of poetry, or did he regard priti or inanda, "aesthetic delight" as the unique goal? Judging from the first Kdrika,17 the latter would seem to be correct, 13 Natyasastra, Vol. I, p. 272, right after the equally
famous line: nahi rasad rte kascid arthah pravartate. 14 Three possible explanations suggest themselves: Ananda was not so concerned with the drama as he was with poetics; Ananda gave his theories on rasa in another work (but then we must ask why Abhinava does not mention the fact); Ananda inspired the later writers that Abhinava mentions (anikuka, A. Bh. I, p. 272, Bhattatauta, p. 274, Bhattanayaka, p. 276, Bhattalollata, p. 277, and finally his own views p. 278). Consider the fact that nowhere does Ananda speak of vasand. 15 D. Al. IV. 16, Vrtti, p. 549: sphuraneyam kacid iti sahrdaynadm camatkrtir utpadyate. Abhinava can scarcely speak of aesthetic experience without mentioning camatkdra, and in this he is followed by most of the later tradition, including the Yogavasistha. (See Santarasa, p. 29. Further on camatkara, see Raghavan's essay in Some Concepts). 16 D. AI. p. 91, 93, 130, 400, 467, 522, 543 for pratibhd; vyutpatti on p. 516, 540. 17 D. Al. p. 9: tena briimah sahrdayamanahpritaye Thus Mammata under I. 2 (p. 10) says: rdmddivat vartitavyam na rdvanaddivad ity upadesamr ca yathayogam kaveh sahrdayasya ca karotiti sarvathd tatra yataniyam. This is repeated in all later commentaries at the beginning of works on kavya (e.g., the Tilaka on the Rdmayana). For Abhinava's views, see Sdntarasa, p. 17ff. For Western parallels, one may compare the views of Shelley on Plato (British Journal of Aesthetics, Vol. 8, No. 4, p. 383). Compare also the views of Torquato Tasso in his

tradition, with one exception,1l was unable to follow him. Throughout the Dhvanyaloka in fact, one has the feeling that Anandavardhana was enunciating principles that not only were in advance of most of the existing literature but were also beyond the comprehension of most of his contemporaries and successors. What we do not know are Anandavardhana's attitudes to a number of questions of aesthetics to which he refers, either directly or implicitly, but on which he does not declare himself. Thus on what becomes the major question of aesthetics for all later writers, and the subject to which Abhinavagupta12 devotes his most inspired writing, namely the nature (as opposed to the mode of operation) of imaginative experiences, Anandavardhana is curiously silent. Obviously with the
krtah srngadraiti. vaigikasdstrakdrais ca dasdvastho 'bhihitah. tds ca samdnydbhinaye vaksydmah. karunas tu sapaklesavinipatitestajanavibhavandaavadhabandhasamuttho nirapeksabhdvah. autsukyacintdsamutthah sdpeksabhdav vipralambhakrltah. The important words here are nirapeksabhdvah and sdpeksabhdvah. The former refers to a complete, final and irreversible loss, whereas the latter means that there will be an eventual reunion within the time span of the aesthetic action, so that it does concern the reader. Abhinava on p. 530 of the Locana, makes this clear when he explains the significance of the word atyanta in Ananda's phrase nirvyuddhasca sa eva (namely karunarasa) sitdtyantaviyogaparyantam eva svaprabandham uparacayatd as: atyantagrahanena nirapeksabhdvatayd vipralambhasaikdm pariharati. 11 Thus in the incompletely preserved fourth Unmesa of the Vakroktijivitam (p. 239 of De's ed.), Kuntaka says: rdmdyanamahdbhdratayos ca ca sdntdngitam purvasuribhir eva niripitam. But this is curious, forif the purvasuribhir is a reference to the fourth Uddyota of the D. Al (as De, fn. 1, takes it to be), then Kuntaka is mistaken, for Ananda gives karuna, not sdnta, as the pradhdnarasa of the Rdmdyana. Moreover, pirvasiribhir would be an unusual adjective to use of somebody not so far removed in time. Is it possible then that there were works before Ananda which spoke of rasa in a prabandha ? This is highly possible in the light of the interesting line in the Vrtti on p. 530: etac cdmgena vivrtam evdnyair vydkhydvidhdyibhih, which could be a reference either to earlier Alafkarikas, or, more likely, to a now lost cmomentary on the M. Bh. 12 See Locana, pp. 180-190. The passage has been translated in Sdntarasa, pp. 62-78. See also the long section in the A. Bh. I, pp. 272-286, translated by Gnoli (1956).

tatsvaripam. The later tradition is far more didatic.

MASSON AND PATWARDHAN: Dhvanydloka not to find any discussion but it is disappointing When the Karikakara issue. of this important first uses the term rasa (D. Al. II. 3), it is left to to provide not only examples, Abhinavagupta18 One wonders just what but basic definitions. Anandavardhana had in mind when he used the Other terms, which term abh&sa19 for example. Discourse on the Heroic Poem. The medieval Italian commentators on Aristotle (Castelvetro, Mazzoni, Guarini) have much to say on this topic which is reminiscent, in other aspects as well, of the D. Al. A good selection of their views will be found in A. H. Gilbert, Literary Criticism, Wayne State University Press, 1962. 18 For example, here is Abhinava on bhdvdbhasa, p. 200: sa pdtu vo yasya hatdvasesds tattulyavarnaniijanaranjitesu lavaunyayuktesvapi vitrasanti daityah suakadn tdnayanotpalesu "The demons that Krsra has not [yet] killed are terrified even of the lotus-like eyes of their beloveds, even though they are beautiful, for they are colored with black collyrium, the same color [as Krsja's body]. May that Krsna protect you." atra raudraprakrtindm anucitatraso bhagavatprabhavakdranakrta iti bhdvabhdsah. "There is bhavdbhasa in this stanza, because the fear that arises from the greatness of the Lord is inappropriate to those whose nature is full of violent wrath." 19 D. Al. p. 175, 222. Cf. NS. XXIII, 76, where Bharata speaks about love among prostitutes. ViSvanatha, however, (III. 247, p. 183 of Vidyasagara's ed.) understands the following: anaucityapravrttatve abhdso rasabhavayoh, and the examples are: upandyakasamsthdydm munigurupatnigataydii ca bahundyakavisayaydrg ratau tathd 'nubhayanisthdyam This is taken from the Locana, p. 78 and p. 178, where Abhinava speaks of Ravaia's love for Sita, which, since it is not reciprocated, gives rise to rasdbhasa: kenaitad uktam ratir iti? ratydbhdso hi sah. He goes on to say: etac ca srngardnukrtisabdam prayuiijano munir api sucitavcn (this refers to NS. VI. 40, p. 295: srngdranukrtir yd tu sa hdsyas tu prakirtitah). The important difference however, is that the later tradition failed to take into account the qualification made by Abhinavagupta in the third Uddyota (p. 317), namely that at the time of viewing such spectacles, we are not aware that they are improper. This is a product of our later thinking. He makes an unusual comparison: sambhogo 'pi hy asau varnitas tathd pratibhdnavata kavind yathd tatraiva visrdntam hrdayam paurvaparyapardmarsam kartum na daddti yatha nirvyajapardkramasya purusasyavisaye 'pi yuddhyamdnasya tdaat tasminn avasare sddhuvddo vitiryate na tu paurvaparyapardmarse.

and Dhvanydlokalocana

289

made famous are visrdnti, the Abhinavagupta aesthetic repose that we attain in any profound the imaginative sadharanikarana, experience;20 of art to transcend the bounds of one capacity individual and to apply to humanity in general;21 the "dilation of the heart," a doctrine that vikcsa, may be prefigured in the D. Al.22 and which comes to play an important role in later thinking on what happens during a dramatic performance;23 20 See A. Bh. Vol. I, p. 280, loke... abhidhiyate. Cf. also p. 286. 21 A. Bh. p. 281: nijasukhddi .. . sahrdayikriyate. 22 D. Al. II. 8 srngdre vipralambhdkhye karu.ne ca prakarsavat madhuryam drdratdm ydti yatas tatrddhikam manah See the Locana, p. 208: diptih pratipattur hrdaye vikdsavistaraprajvalanasvabhdvd. Cf. Gnoli, "Some Expressions used in Indian Aesthetics," East & West, 1955, No. 2, p. 121: "Vikdsa designates technically the psychic state brought about by the artistic description of a love scene, etc.; it denotes a state of expansion, of transparent dilation that pervades the whole being associated with the quality of sattva (luminosity, lightness, joy, pleasure)." 23 Cf. Dasaripaka IV. 43: svddah kavydrthasambheddd atmanandasamudbhavah vikdsavistaraksobhaviksepaih sa caturvidah See the important remarks of Dhanika, beginning with nanu ca yuktam and especially: yadi ca laukikakaru.navad duhkhdtmakatvam eveha sydt tadd na kascid atra pravarteta tatah karunaikardsdndm rdmdyanddimahdprabandhdntm uccheda eva bhavet. He ends by saying that there is dtmdnanda in karuna also: tasmdd rasdntaravat karunasydpy ananddtmakatvam eva. This is one of the key problems of aesthetic theory: How is it that we "enjoy" tragic situations? From a psychological point of view this is a question of particular interest. Psychoanalysts must deal daily with the difficult phenomenon of people who cling to the sources of their unhappiness, for example, a dry marriage, empty of all love, that neither party can dissolve; ill people who seem so reluctant to part with their illness, and so on (cf. Loewald, 1960; 1972). For Freud, in Beyond the Pleasure Principle (1920) such strange behavior was attributed to the repetition compulsion, which eventually led to the stark therapeutic pessimism of his great essay Analysis Terminabie and Interminable (1937). Although many analysts have since disputed the need for a superordinate regulatory principle of mental functioning (linked, by Freud, to the death instinct) (e.g., Schur, 1960; 1966; Kubie, 1939), no analyst has questioned the clinical observations (see Kubie, 1941). Schur has suggested we retain the empirically valid observation of a compulsion to repeat, that may

290

Journal of the American Oriental Society 97.3 (1977) There is a verse in Madhusudanasarasvati's Sribhagavadbhaktirasayanam (I. 8, p. 15) that translates as follows: For the object that makes a deep impression on the mind when it is soft, remains even after the mind has hardenedagain. When the mind is truly receptive, first impressionscannot be erased. This seems an appropriate description of the power of the Dhuanyaloka. There is a sense in which many of the images, particularly in this fourth chapter (e.g., madhumdsa iua drumdh, or kaoir ekah prjadpatih) "strike roots far below the surface of the mind" not only for us, as we read it today, but also for the early writers on This is certainly why the Sanskrit aesthetics. influence of this text has been so persistent. Once read it could not be forgotten and continued for more than a thousand years to exert its fascination on all those interested in imaginative literature. What is equally astonishing is that there is only one later work that recaptures this intellectual excitement, and that work, strangely enough (for we can think of no parallel in Sanskrit literature), is the commentary on this text, Abhinavagupta's Dhvanyalokalocana. In the history of Sanskrit literary criticism, if we make exception of Anandavardhana, there is no greater name than that of Abhinavagupta. The later tradition regards him as the most important writer on poetics, and, in matters of theory, is content generally merely to summarise
his teachings.28 The great Mammata is indebted

and finally the sahlrdaya, which we can translate as "the fully responsive reader," one who is "gifted with an alert sensibility."24 Anandavardhana uses this term frequently,25 but curiously he does not define it, although Abhinavagupta does so.26 Perhaps Anandavardhana only took this term from earlier literature,27 though its occurrence is rare outside of the Kashmir literature on literary criticism at this early stage. Anandavardhana's thinking on these concepts is never made clear in the Dhoanydloka. well be at the very basis of neurosis. As early as the
Interpretation of Dreams (1900), Freud was puzzled by

people who dream repetitively of a severe traumatic

event. He suggested, later (1920), that these dreams are belated attempts at mastery. Schur (1966, pp. 177-178)

thinks this explanation is not sufficient and that "what the patient really wants is the undoing of the traumatic situation." (However, Schur does not indicate with any
clinical examples how the endless repetitiveness of such dreams demonstrates this propensity; is there, for example, a gradual alteration of the traumatic event in

the dreams, eventuating in its total dissolution?) But Schur does note that many such dreams contain an embedded dream (the dream within a dream), the meaning of which (as Freud showed long ago) is the reassurance that the dreamerhas escaped, his trauma is in the past (cf. Stein, 1965). Couldthis apply to the situation of the
pleasure in karunarasa ?: the event happened to him, not

to me, the sadness belongs to somebody else. Somehow,

however, this strikes me (JMM) as insufficent, and I wonder if it isn't true that we are somehow moved to sorrow because it reminds us of our own real (past or

present) unhappiness. To say that we "enjoy"this may

merely mean that we need to be periodically reminded of such depths within ourselves. In my opinion, alongside the universality of repression, there seems an equally strong force towards the lifting of repressions, towards the desire to know about our own inner lives (and our own real past). It is this drive, I think, that gives the

to Abhinavagupta on almost every page of his Kavyaprakdsa, and Hemacandra, who in his Kavydnusdisana quotes large passages verbatim,
terminology became standard to the point where it is not possible to pick up any book on
28 Abhinava's

literary criticism after the twelfth century and not come

across expressions like hrdayasamodda, tanmayibhdua, caruand, alaukika, sddhdranikarana, etc., in special senses all of which occur for the first time in the Locana. What is even more interesting is that later philosophers, especially in the Trika school, began to use these same

psychoanalyst his greatest pleasure in his daily work.

The passage from Dhanika has been translated in our Aesthetic Rapture-the Rasddhydya of the Ndtyasdstra. 24 See John Wain, (1965, p. 105), where he discusses the "vanishing centre of literary criticism." 25 D. Al. p. 9, 10, 23, 26, 33, 38, 42, 46, 49, 162, 218, 247, 305, 316, 396, 402, 474, 501, 516, 519, 529, 535, 543,

553.
26 Locana, p. 38: yesdm kdvydnusilandbhydsavaadd visadibhite manomukure varnaniyatanmayibhavanayogyatd te svahrdayasamvddabhdjah sahrdayd.h.

terms in their works on philosophy. One has only to look at a work like Mahesvarananda'sMahdrthamainjari to see Abhinavagupta'sinfluence (verse 19, for example). Not only are his own students, like Ksemaraja(in his
commentary on the Vijiidnabhairava for example) won over, but even orthodox Advaitins such as Madhusuidanasarasvati, many years later, avail themselves of his

27 Cf. Vamana I. 2. 21.

I. 12). terminology (see his Sribhagavadbhaktirasdyanam

MASSONAND PATWARDHAN: Dhvan ydloka and Dhvanyilokalocana

derive from says openly that all his doctrines (etan matam eva casmabhir upajAbhinavagupta writer on Alafkaivitam).29 The last important ra astra, his derives Jagannathapanditaraja,30 most precious theories linking religious ecstasy and art from Abhinavagupta.31 While writers are aware of this fact in general, most have been unable to identify in such writers as Mammata and Visvanatha doctrines which stem specific from the Dhvanydlokalocana, or, more rarely (was the text always in a state of less satisfactory Afrom the Abhinavabharati, preservation?), massive and complex commentary bhinavagupta's The reason for this on Bharata's NatyaSastra.32 is that while modern scholars have been quick to of the Dhvanyalokathe importance acknowledge locana, few have read it.33 UDDYOTA IV KARIKA

291

I: Through the description of dhvani as as well where the [dhvani] suggested [proper] sense is subordinate [to the literal sense] already in poets given, the quality of poetic imagination becomes endless.

VRTTI: The path of dhvani [proper] [where the sense is predominant] and of [dhvani] suggested where the suggested sense is subordinated [to the has literal sense] which has been propounded, another function, [namely it points to] the endlessness (dnantya) of the poetic imagination (praShould you ask how [this is achieved] tibha). the reply is: KARIKA II: For literature (vdni) that is embellished with any one of these varieties [of suggestion] though it reproduce ideas already treated, appears fresh (nava). with when it is embellished VRTTI: Literature any one variety from among those different kinds of dh,vani already enumerated, though it touches upon an idea (artha) already treated by an older Thus freshness may be poet, attains freshness. instilled in poetry even though it follow an ancient theme, by recourse to both varieties of Avivaksithe following As for instance tav&cyadhvani. verse: "As the fawn-eyed girl moves into her adolescence is there anything of hers that is not seductive? Her gentle smile is artless, and the wealth of glances from her eyes are tremulous and sweet. The quaver in her voice is drenched in wave after wave of newly-awakened love. The manner of her walking has the fragrance of [a newly] sprouting [bud]- coquetry."1 verse is atyantatiraskrtavdcya because the primary meaning of such words as mzlgdha, madhura, vibhavta, etc., is lost. Abhinava contents himself with giving the vyainglydrtha, passing over the laksydrtha in silence. We must be careful in applying Western notions. To say that these words are "suggestive" means something quite precise for the Sanskrit literary critics: it does not mean that one cannot quite place what is meant, nor that the suggestion will differ with each reader. This is indeed why Abhinava is able to give quite precise meanings for the "suggestive" sense of each word. Both Ananda and Abhinava take great pains to empliasise that there is nothing mysterious about their doctrine of dhuvani,and least of all anything vague. It is not a:irvacya, indescribable, or ineffable. What the theory gains in clarity and precision it loses in subtlety, since one might justly say that if the suggested 1 This

VRTTI: Having thus analyzed dhvani in detail in the author order to refute views, conflicting states a further purpose of his analysis: 29 Kdvydnusdsana, 1964 ed., p. 103. 30 See the Rasagangddhara, pp. 25-27 (1939 KM ed.) 31 Cf. Masson and Patwardhan, gantarasa, and the review-article by Bhattacharya (1972). 32 Thus on p. 397 of A History of Sanskrit Literature, Keith ascribes the doctrine that the joy produced by poetry is different from the joy produced by a phrase like "A son is born to you" to the Rasagangddhara. In fact it occurs first in the Locana, on p. 80. Thus too, S. K. De in "The Theory of Rasa," p. 206, remarks: "Hence Visvanatha remarks (III. 6-7 and Vrtti, ed. Durgaprasada, p. 78) that those very things which are called causes of pain in the world (like banishment of Sita in the forest), when consigned to poetry and dramatic representation, possess the right to be called, in consequence of their assuming such a function, alaukika vibhdvas, etc." But this too has already been put forward by Abhinavagupta in the Abhinavabhdrati, I, p. 292: na hi loke vibhdavnubhdvddayah kecana bhavanti. See also p. 293, middle of the page. Mammata's famous comparison of suggestion to a woman revealing only a small area of her breast the better to excite passion, is also taken from the Locana. 33 What follows is part of a complete translation of the Dhvanydloka and the Dhvanydlokalocana to appear, in three volumes, in the Harvard Oriental Series. Given the difficulty of the texts, we would welcome comments from scholars on this sample translation in the hope that we might improve the larger work which is scheduled for publication in 1979.

292

Journal of the American Oriental Society 97.3 (1977) Freshness also accrues to a poem if recourse is had in it to the already mentioned varieties of suggestion in which the literal sense though intended, really exists to reveal the suggested sense (vivaksi tinyaparavacya).
"The [newly wedded] wife rests her mouth on the face of her beloved who feigns sleep. The ecstasy (rasa) of kissing him is checked by her for fear of waking him, and yet (api) she bends down again and again, wavering [between shyness and desire]. He, on the other hand, daren't begin [the love play] for fear that she will turn her face away in embarrassment. And yet (tu) their hearts, in the bliss of anticipation, have already passed over into love's far-away shore."

This verse appears fresh by recourse to Tiraskrtavicyadhvani, though there already exist [older verses on the same theme] such as the following:
"To whom are women in love not dear, with their inviting smiles breaking forth, their roving eyes, their slurred words, their langorous swinging of their precious behinds ?"2 Or again: "The first [in a series] is truly first. Thus the lion is truly a lion among wild beasts as he eats abundantly of the flesh of elephants killed by himself. Who [dares] to challenge him?"

This verse attains freshness by recourse to that variety of suggestion where the literal meaning attracts to itself an additional sense (arthdntarasanrkramitavacya) even though such verses as the following and others similar in nature to it already exist:
"Who can surpass the man who has earned for himself an eminent position through his own power? Has a lion ever been defeated by the largest of bullelephants ?"3 sense can be successfully paraphrased, what gain is there in only suggesting it? The point, surely, is that the suggested sense cannot really be paraphrased. But this neither Ananda nor Abhinava actually says. 2 Praskhaladgirah, nitambdldsagamini, etc., are the clich6s of Skt. literature. The description in both cases is of girls who are just entering womanhood. The first verse eschews words such as the above which became the stock-in-trade of poor writers. For Ananda it is the resonance of a suggested meaning in a poem that permits it to attain the stature of poetry. This is best achieved by avoiding the well-worn expressions of literature, i.e., a worn-out expression such as praskhaladgirah can be used once and once only. This is a very radical criticism of the existing literature. In fact, one is struck in this fourth chapter by the far-reaching theory of literature it provides. The key to writing, we are told, does not lie in the subject matter, or even in verbal innovation, but in a disciplined (vyutpanna), suggestive, poetic imagination. The impression one has in reading this chapter is that we are on the verge of a poetic breakthrough, a new era of poetic activity with a theorectial framework of remarkable sophistication. As it turns out however, the greatest Indian poetry lies in the past. All of the great names are before Anandavardhana: Kalidasa, Bhartrhari, Bhavabhiiti Magha, etc. 3 Both these verses are examples of arthantaranyasa. The first, (yah, etc.), achieves its effects by the repetition

This verse is original in spite of the existence

of such verses as:4 "Seeing that the bedroom is [at last] empty, the young bride raises herself somewhat from the bed, and looks for a long time at the face of her husband who pretends to be asleep. [Convinced he is really asleep], she kisses him freely. But when she sees the horripila-

of prathamah and simhah. Just as in the original example of arthdntarasankramitavdcya given in Ch. II (p. 137, rdmo 'smi sarvam sahe), these words carry overtones (i.e., inalienable power, etc.), that are lacking in the second verse. The difference between the two verses is supposed to be that in the first verse there is the use of laksand (along with a suggested prayojana) on the words prathama and simha. But one could say that the word krita in the second verse is also a case of laksand. Anandavardhana would probably reply that it does not contain a charming prayojana (as he says in Udd. I, p. 142, vyargyakrtam mahat sausthavamr ndsti). One might also say that mahimd is svasabdanivedita in the second verse, whereas in the first it is only suggested. This is an additional point against the second verse. 4 Amarusataka, 82. Both of these verses contain rasa, namely sambhogasrngidra. The first verse is perhaps more subtle than that of Amaru, but not necessarily better. It is curious that Ananda should quote this verse to show that the verse is new because it is an example of rasadhvani, since the Amaru verse is also an example of rasadhvani (and has, in fact, been quoted by Visvanatha in this connection). One would expect the Ananda would have given as the older verse an example where dhvani was missing, though it would seem that his point is that regardless of what kind of verse the older one is, there can be a new verse on the exact same theme as long a dhvani is used.

MASSONAND PATWARDHAN: Dhvany&loka and Dhvanyalokalocana tion on his cheek,5 she lowers her face in shyness. Her beloved only laughs and gives her a long and deep kiss." Or again, the verse beginning taraigabhrfibhaiga,6 is original compared to the older one beginning nianbhangi. KARIKA III: The extensive domain of [dhvani] such as rasa, etc., should be followed [i.e., exploited] [by poets] according to this method [namely the use of dhvani in all its varied forms], for it is by recourse to this [employment of dhvani] that the path of poetry, otherwise limited (mito 'pi) reaches into infinity. VRTTI: This domain [of dhvani] characterised by rasa, bhdva, rasabhdsa, bhdvaibhdsa, and bhivapraeama, with their respective (yathdsvam), various vibhdvas, and anubhavas is very extensive as has been stated earlier7- the whole of this [domain of dhvani] should be employed according to this method. By having recourse to the use of dhvani consisting of rasa, etc., this path of poetry which is otherwise limited in the sense that it has been trodden (ksunnatvut) in many ways (bahuprakaram) by thousands or even a countless number of older poets, achieves endlessness. Rasa, bhaiva, etc., become infinitely diverse by using the vibhavas, anubhavas and vyabhicaribhdvas of each of them. When good poets write about things in the world (jagadvrttam) using even one variety from among these, they can make things at will, appear differently from the way they [really] are. This has already been stated when we discussed citrakdvya. On this subject a great poet has written this Prakrit verse:
"The literary art of great poets is all-conquering. For it causes various ideas to enter the heart [of the reader] and appear [there] in a form which is different, as it were, from their real form."8 5 According to the Didhiti (a modern Skt. commentary on the D. Al.), the word ganda is sometimes objected to on the ground that is it aslila, since the word also means "pimple." The reply is that this latter is a somewhat rare meaning of the word, and does not immediately come to mind. It is not likely that Ananda had this in mind when he chose the verse. 6 See page 201 of the text of the D. Al. 7 Page 215 of text. The reference to Citrakavya is p. 498. 8 This lovely verse is untraced. For a suggested author (Vakpatiraja), see J. Masson and M. V. Patwardhan:

293

Thus then the endlessness of poetic themes, due

to the employment of rasa, bhuva, etc., is well established. this [But] in order to substantiate very point it is said: "By using rasa in a poem even subjects seen time and again will all appear new, just as do trees in the month of March." So9 in that variety [of dhvani] where the literal is intended but is concentrated on meaning a hidden meaning suggesting (vivaksitdnyaparavicya) by having recourse to the resonant suggested sense that arises from the [punning] power of

the word itself (sabdasktynanurananarlpavyagya),

For example: "Now there originality is achieved. is only you to bear this earth,"10 in spite of the

existence of such verses as:

"The snake prince, the Himalaya mountain, and you are the great, the weighty11 and the firm. Since without transgressing any limits, you hold this tottering earth." There can also be originality in a poem through of Vivaksitfnyaparavacya in using that variety which the suggested sense is resonant, depending for its effect on the suggestive power of the literal

meaning

(arthaSaktyanurananarirpavyangya).

As

in the verse: "As the god-like sage spoke,"12 etc., in spite of the existence of such verses as:13 "The Dhvanydloka and the Gaiidavaao" published in the D. D. Kosambi Memorial Volume, Popular Prakashan, Bombay. 1974. 9 It is puzzling that Ananda should follow this verse with tatha hi, which seems to have nothing to do with the verse in question. Moreover, why does Ananda repeat more examples of what he has already established? Is this why Anhinava says, on p. 527, yad anudbhinnam uktam, tad eva kdrikayd bhangyd niripyate ? Abhinava, too, seems confused by this repetition, which is why he says first that the next verse is a Kdrikd. But even if it is a Kdrikd, this is no explanation, since what has Karika III done if not discuss the dnantyam of kdvydrtha? 10 See p. 297 of text for the reference to Harsacarita. 11 Guru is of course punned (weighty and important) as is sthira (stable, and firm in resolve). Alanghitamaryddd refers to the duty that has once been imposed and which is not to be abandoned, and the bounds which have once been fixed and which are not to be crossed. 12 See p. 248 of text for a discussion of this key verse (Kumarasambhava 7. 84). 13 An interesting problem arises over these two verses: the second verse cannot be bhdvadhvali, since the word

294

Journal of the American Oriental Society 97.3 (1977)

cursed daughter-in-law has made him carry a whole

"As conversations turn to their bridegrooms, young girls lower their faces in embarrassment. But they reveal their sexual longing by the emergence of horripilation." that form By14 using [in vivaksitfnyaparavdcya]

basket full of arrows."16 Just as the subject matter of poetry retains its freshness by a judicious use of the different varieties of the suggested element,17 so it could just as easily achieve this by using the many varieties of suggestors (vyanjaka) as well.'l However we shall not give any examples of this for fear of our book becoming unwieldy. They can easily be supplied by the sensitive reader on his own. Though it has often been repeated,19 it is said [once again], because it is so essential (sdrata): KARIKA IV (V)20:Although suggestiveness is possible in a great variety of ways, the poet should pay special attention to one [of these ways], namely that which consists of rasa, etc.21 VRTTI: Although many forms22 of suggestiveness are possible of words [and meanings] which is the
16 See Vajjalaggam, 204-214, for a whole section of

of resonant suggestion that depends for its effect on the suggestive force of the literal sense, where the literal sense consists in a creation of the imagination of the poet (kavipraudhoktinirmitasariratva), originality is achieved. An example is: "The month of spring prepares," etc., which is original in spite of the existence of such verses as: "As soon as spring begins, suddenly the lovely sexual longings of those in love appearat the very same time as the buds of mango-shoots spring into existence."14 An example of a situation where [in vivaksitanyaparavdcya] the literal sense consists in a theme based on the imagination of a speaker invented by the poet (kavinibaddhavaktrpraudhoktinispannasarira) and where the suggestion depends on the resonance achieved through the suggestive power of the literal sense is the following Prakrit verse: "O merchant, how can we have in our home the tusks of elephants"etc.15 This verse can by no means be considered "stale" (dli.dha) in spite of the existence of such verses as the following: "My son was one who could make a widow of the great bull-elephant'swife with but one arrow. Now my
sprhd is a synonym of utkanr.thd,one of the vyabhicaribhdvas given by Bharata, and so it is svasabdanivedita. However, since Ananda, in a very curious passage (see p. 248), says that in asamlaksyakramadhvani, the vyaif he really meant it, an example of rasadhvanil But obviously he could not have meant this verse as an example of rasadhvani. How are we to explain this glaring contradiction? We suspect that the passage in the

these verses. Note especially no. 206; Patwardhan, op. cit. p. 299:
"Lucky is the day to-day in that the hunter's wife

maddened with the consciousness of her beauty and youthful charm, scatters (broadcasts, publicises) her good fortune on the streets (or, in the street on front of her house) under the disguise of the parings of the bow (of her husband)." The point in this stanza is that the hunter is now too weakened from love-making to even lift his bow, and so he must whittle it down each day !
17 Omit dhvaneh on p. 529 which does not construe

with anything properly.

18 D. Al. III. 2, and II1. 16. also KP. 4. 42-43. (Jhalkikar, pp. 148-185). 19 See D. Al. III. p. 336, lines 1-2; p. 364, line 13; p. 401, lines 1-4; p. 496, lines 1-2; p. 497, lines 9-10. 20 It is clear from this Kdrikd (V), that its author also recognised the greater importance of rasa. The other types of vyaijand mentioned are vastu and alankdra. 21 Verse five seems to follow very logically from verse III, and would lend support to our view that the fourth kdrikd is really a Sangrahasloka. Note that the prose section of this sloka proceeds to illustrate the principle enunciated in Karika III. The order seems to be that of

bhicdribhdva should be directly expressed, this would be,

second Uddyota where Ananda allegedly says that

asamlaksyakrama involves the direct statement of the We have vyabhicdribhdvas has been misunderstood. attempted to prove this in our "Solution to a long-confused Issue in the Dhuanydloka," Journal of the Oriental Institute, Baroda, vol. 22 (1972) pp. 48-56. 14 Add the word api after ityidisu satsv on p. 528 and

importance. First we dealt with different varieties of suggestion in individual poems, exclusive of rasa, (i.e.,
uastu and alankaradhvani), and then rasa in individual poems; finally the most important aspect of suggestion, rasa in large works. 22 Read vicitre not vicitram on p. 529.

place a danda after them. The next sentence is entirely

separate. 15 See third Uddyota, p. 229 (Hala, 25).

MASSONAND PATWARDHAN: Dhvanydloka and Dhvanyalokalocana cause of the limitlessness [of poetic] themes, [nonetheless], the poet who wishes to secure novelty for his themes, should pay special attention to one form of suggestiveness, namely that which consists of rasa, etc. All the poems of the poet who concentrates on the suggested sense in the form of rasa, bhdva, rasabhasa, and bhdivbhdsa, and on their suggestors which were mentioned earlier,23 namely letters, words, sentences, sentence structure (sarighatana - racana) and whole works turn out original. Thus in the Rdmayana, the Mahabhdrata and other works, though battles and the like are described again and again, they seem new each time. When one single rasa is presented as dominant in a large work, this creates originality24 in the subject-matter and [gives rise to] great beauty as well. Such as where? Well, for instance in the Rdmadyana and the Mahdbharata. For in the Rdmdyana, karunarasa25 has been hinted26 at by Valmiki when he says:27 "Sorrow was transformed into poetry." It is that very [rasa] that has been sustained till the end, since Valmiki ends his work with (Rama's) final separation from Sita28 (sitatyantaviyogapa23 D. Al. III. 2 and 16 (p. 302 and 347). 24 What makes the battles seem original each time is not merely the aforesaid use of dhvani in each particular description,(such as vira, bhaydnaka, etc.), but also their subordination to a more general aesthetic goal. So in the case of the Ramcyana, the constant expressions involving pain, sorrow, separation, etc., all conduce to the over-all end of the work, a feeling of karuna. In the Mahabhdrata,the more battles are described, the more distasteful war becomes and the more firmly grounded our feeling of detachment, of worldweariness (vairdgya). This theory, advanced as it is, would be appropriateto a work where the subject is a unified one, but it can hardly be applied to a work as varied (in authorship as well) as the Mahdbhdrata,which contains several rasas, and cannot be viewed as a unity. Ananda of course could not have agreed. 25 J. Massonhas dealt, in detail, with the issues involved
in the krauncavadha episode of the Rdmdyana (and the

295

ryantam eva svaprabandham uparacayatd). [The same applies to the] Mahabhdrata also, [that work] which has the form29of a philosophical [or didactic] text (sastra) and is possessed of the beauty of poetry (kavyarupacchgaya). When the great sage (Vyasa) ends his work in such a way that it makes us feel melancholy (vaimanasyaddyini) by his having the Vrsnis and the Pandavas all finish in a pathetic way,30 and by his showing how his book puts emphasis on the creation of worldweariness (vairaigya), he suggests by this emphasis that [among the rasas] sintarasa is meant to be predominant, and [among the goals of life] moksa is primarily intended. Moreover, this has been partially (ams'ena) explained by other commentators as well. The saviour of the world (lokanaitha) who wishes to lift people out of the morass of rampant (udirna) ignorance (moha) into which they have fallen, and provide them with the pure light of knowledge, has himself asserted this very thing when he said the following and many other things like it over and over: "The more the course of the world (lokatantra) unfolds itself before us as vain and insubstantial, the more, surely, does [our] detachment grow." (M. Bh. 12.168.4) From this the ultimate meaning (titparya) of the Mahabhdrata appears very clearly: the two subjects intended as predominant are Sfntarasa with other rasas in a subordinated position, and moksa, with other aims of life likewise subordinated (upasarjana). The topic of the predominance and subordination (aingdgibhava) of the different rasas has already been dealt with.31 It is no contradiction (aviruddha) to say that if we do not
earth. At the very end of the Rdmdyana, Rama is promised a heavenly reunion. One wonders whether this obvious interpolation existed at the time of the D. Al. If it did, then Ananda in an unprecedented critical attitude seems to suggest that this cannot concern the literary critic. 29 Read sdstraruapeon p. 530. 30 Note what the Didhiti commentary (p. 611) says on this: tesam eva yadidrsah parindmah tarhi kd kathdnyesdmm? "If even they ended up like this, what hope is there for the rest of us?" The Mahdprasthdna episode, especially the svargdrohana, does indeed convey an atmosphere of dejection. After all, the brothers undertook this suicidal voyage because things looked so bleak. Yudisthira especially strikes one as a tired man, battleweary and without illusions about man's perfectability. 31 D. Al. III. 20 and following.

discussion of the same in the first Uddyota under I. 5) in his article: "Who Killed Cock Kraufica? Abhinavagupta's Reflections on the Origin of Aesthetic Experience", JOI, Baroda, Vol. XVIII., No. 3, March 1969.
26 Asutrita, "suggested"? Used earlier in the first

Uddyota in the sense of "presented as preparing the ground for."

27 Ramdyana I. 2. 40. 28 This refers to Sita's

being swallowed up by the

296

Journal of the American Oriental Society 97.3 (1977) the poet-creator of Krsna's genealogy (harivarMna), Krsnadvaipayana has made this hidden beautiful And because this sense wonderfully patent. us to great devotion impels [hidden] meaning for another truth, beyond the phenomenal world, all wordly activities assume a preliminary34 and vincible position (pirvapaksa)35 as being fit to be ignored (nyaksa).36 The description of the exceptional power of gods, holy places, penance etc., is [only] a means to attaining the highest Brahman, because the various particular gods and other things [i.e., holy places, penance, etc.],
34 Cf. Raghavan, The Number of Rasas, p. 36: "The author of the Bhagavata in his criticism of the Bharata, says that in the Great Epic, Vyasa has described "Pravrtti" (as Pfrvapaksa) so much and so well, that man who is by nature attached to it has mistaken the Pirvapaksa itself for the Siddhanta". Here is the verse, as quoted by Raghavan: 'nusdsatah jugupsitamdharmakrte mahdnvyatikramah suabhdvaraktasya yad vdcyato dharma ititarah sthito na manyate tasya nivaranam janah (Bhagavata, I. 5. 15). Note the important verse of Abhinavagupta in his Gi(ed. by V. L. Shastri Pansikar in his tarthasangraha edition of the Gita, N.S.P., Bombay 1912 with 8 commentaries), p. 2: dvaipayanena munina yah iham vyadhdyi sdstram sahasrasatasamitam atra moksah pradhanyatah phalatayd prathitas tadanyadharmaddi tasya pariposayitum pranitam 35 Professor D. H. H. Ingalls has kindly directed our attention to an interesting remark of Nllankantha on M. Bh. I. 1. 275 (Poon Ed. p. 24), where an adversary is made to remark: atrdnarthakoyuddhdhipralapo bhuydn drsyate, to which the reply is: evam bhdrate'pi dharmabrahmapratipddanaeva paramatatparyam. arthavadajdtam api yudhisthirddivadvyavahartavyamna duryotatha ca sarvasdhanddivad ity dsayentoktam ...... mdd api granthdtsdram evadeyamitarat tyajyam riuyate. Note how similar this is to the last two verses of the of ASvaghosa. Saundarananda 36 Jacobi (p. 334 ZDMG, Vol. 57, 1903) remarks that should be for adhyaksyena,ddhyaksyenaor adhyak.sena read. He translates: ". .. erscheint das ganze weltliche Treiben ganz deutlich als iiberwundener Standpunkt." The Balapriyd takes nyak$enato mean "entirely"(kdrtsyena) following the Amarakoga. We take it to mean "despised"(Cf. nyakkrta), literally "looked down upon" from ni and akSa.

take into consideration (anapeksa) the ultimate (paramarthika) inner truth (antastattva) [of the Mahabharata], other subsidiary goals of life [beside moksa] and other subsidiary rasas [besides gdntarasa] are beautiful in their own way (svaprddhanyena, i.e., suavisaye), just as the body, when we do not take the soul into consideration, is thought beautiful, though it is really only subsidiary [to the soul]. "But,"32 [someone might argue], "in the Mahibharata all of the subjects to be presented (vivaksauvisaya)have been given in the table-of-contents (anukramani), and this one [viz., the supreme importance of moksa and ndntarasa] is not found there. On the contrary, we can understand, through the very words used (svaSabdaniveditatva) in that section (uddeSa), that the Mahabharata teaches all the goals of man, and contains all the rasas." We reply: what you say is true. In the table of contents it has not been said in so many words that in the Mahabharata S&ntarasa is the main [rasa] nor that moksa is more important than all the human preoccupations. But it has been shown through suggestion [as in] the following phrases: "And the blessed eternal Vasudeva is praised herein."33 The intended meaning, arrived at through suggestion, is that "the deeds" of the Pandavas, etc., which are recited in the Mahabhdrata, all end pathetically -are only a manifestation of cosmic ignoranceand that the blessed Vasudeva, whose form is the highest truth, is glorified here. Therefore turn your minds devoutly to that revered, highest God alone. Do not set your hearts on the empty outward shapes of things, and do not exclusively fix your thoughts on mere wordly virtues like of discipline, enforcement political sagacity, valour, etc. And further, take into account the The word [sandinanity of wordly existence. tanah used in the stanza from the Mahabharata quoted above], aided by its suggestive power, clearly reveals all these ideas. The verses immediately following, such as: "He indeed is the Truth", etc., are [also] seen to contain implied in them similar ideas. By completing his work at the end of the Mahabharata with the description
32

The passage the Piirvapaksin seems to have in

mind is Mahabharata I. I. 48: vedayogam sauijiinaam dharmo 'rthah kdma eva ca dharmarthakamaldstrdniii lstrani vividhani ca. But this stanza does not mention moksa. See Abhinava, p. 530. 33 M. Bh. I. I. 193. (BORI ed.).

MASSONAND PATWARDHAN: Dhvanydloka and Dhvanya lokalocana are its manifestations (uibhuti).37 The description of the life of the Pindavas, etc., aims at giving rise to vairagya; vairagya is at the basis of moksa; and moksa is a means to attaining the blessed one as has been principally shown in the Gitd, etc. Thus the description of the life of the Prndavas is indirectly a means of attaining the highest Brahman.38 By designations such as Vasudeva, etc., is meant the highest Brahman, the abode of unlimited power, which is well-known in the Gita and other parts [of the Mahibharata] under the name of Vasudeva [lit.: as denoted by such words as Vasudeva-tadabhidhdnatvena],-the whole of whose essential nature was reflected in the incarnation at Mathura.39 It is not merely a part of that supreme Brahman as reflected in that incarnation that is meant by the designations Vasudeva, etc. This is proved by the fact that the name VSsudeva is qualified [in the quotation from the Mahabhdrata given above] by the adjective "eternal" [which could not qualify an individual]; and [further] because this appellation is used of other manifestations of Visnu in the Rdm&yana, etc.40 This matter has been decided (nirnita) by the grammarians themselves.41 And so, through the sentence found in the table of contents, it is revealed that everything different from the blessed one is ephemeral, and thereby it is well-established that looking at the Mahabhdrata as a sistra, the highest goal of man, namely moksa, is alone intended as the most important [of the goals of life], and

297

looking at it as poetry, Santarasa, which is characterised by the nourishing of the happiness that succeeds the destruction of desire,42 is intended as the most important [of all the rasas]. Because it is the very essence of the whole work, this meaning has been conveyed through suggestion, and not directly. For an essential idea, if it is revealed without stating it in so many words,43 carries a far greater beauty. It is well-known among the assemblies of the cultured and the learned that something which is highly prized should be revealed by suggestion and not in so many words. Therefore this is established: when a poem is being written, to employ rasa, etc., as the major element (angibhflta) will result in the attainment of a new subject-matter and a great beauty of composition. And so in literature we find that to include a literal meaning that is appropriate to the [major] rasa [of the work], even in the absence of any figure of speech, confers exceptional beauty. Here is an example:44

42 T.rsnaksayasukha is, according to Ananda (see p. 309 of the third Udd. of the D. Al.) the sthayibhava of santarasa. 43 Svasabdanivedita is a key concept in Ananda's system. See Locana, p. 528, sadasprsfe 'rthe kd hrdyatd? See also the discussion in the first Uddyota, pp. 78-83. Cf. Also D. Al. p. 78, 245; 248. Locana, p. 525, 528. For a devastating criticism of Udbhata IV. 3, see Kuntaka's Vakroktijivita, III. 37 (p. 159, De's ed.). Contrary to the general view, Ananda did not hold that 37 See Gitd X. 16 and 41, for this meaning of vibhiti. the vyabhicdribhdvas can be directly expressed. See 38 Paramparayd obviously goes with the preceding M. V. Patwardhan and J. L. Masson, "Solution to a Long series, and thus the danda should be removed and placed Confused Issue in the D. Al.", JOIB. For a fuller treatafter paramparayd. ment of the issues involved in svasabdavdcya, see J. 39 Understand angirupam after not Conveying" in the Journal of mathuraprddurbhdvd- Masson,-"Telling Indian Philosophy, 1: 145-155, 1973. refers to nukrtasakalasvarupam. Mdthuraprddurbhdva 44 In this verse, adbhutarasa arises from the fact that Krsna as an incarnation,being only a part (amsa) of the highest Brahman. Vasudeva does not referto this limited Agastya drank the whole ocean in one gulp. Here Agastya individual (since qua avatara he is not eternal), but to has a vision (darsana being taken to mean this) of the the principle lying behind it. To limit him to a specific two divine incarnations of Visnu that took place long place (Mathura)obviously shows that this is only a part, in the past. According to Abhinava the suggested sense not the amrin or angin, the whole. is that the whole ocean was held in one single hand 40 Both Tripathi (p. 1349) and the Didhiti (p. 621) (pratiyamdnamn jalanidhidarsanam). Ananda's point in quote the following verse from the Radmyanato support citing the verse would seem to be that the vdcydrtha Ananda's statement: (in this case the vision of the two incarnations) adds yasyeyama vasudhd krtsna vdsudevasya dhimatah charm to the vyangya (namely adbhutarasa). It is in mahi?i mddhavasyaisdsa eva bhagavan prabhuh fact more important than the veyaigya sense, because it is ProfessorRaghavan points out to us that at Ramanaya aksunna. He seems to be saying that a rasa can be too I. 40.25, the word Vasudeva is used for the sage Kapila: obvious, a vdcydrtha, if it is aksunna, is preferable. Anandadrsuhkapilam tatra vdsudeva.rsandtanam. da says: k.sunnamrhi vastu lokaprasiddhyd adbhutam api 41 See Kdiikd on Panini IV. 1. 114. ndgcdryakdri bhavati. What is thus suggested in this

298

Journal of the American Oriental Society 97.3 (1977) And so it has been demonstrated how novelty of poetic themes is occasioned by employing some variety of dhvani. It is also possible to have novelty of poetic subject-matter by using any of the three varieties of dhvani within gunibhatavyargya as well. But they have not been illustrated [here] thinking that it would lengthen the book unnecessarily. Critics can find such examples for themselves. in this manner, there will be no end to the subjectmatter of poetry as long as there is the gift of poetic imagination.
KARIKA VI: By using dhvani and gunibhfutavyaigya

"Glory to the foremost among sages, the greatsouled one, born from a pot, who had a vision of both the divine fish and the divine tortoise in the palm of his hand." For in this example, the vision of the fish and tortoise [by the sage] in the palm of his hand is helpful (anuguna) to adbhutarasa, and confers great beauty [on the poem]. For the vision of the divine fish and tortoise in the palm of one hand, because it is a novel [idea] is more helpful to adbhutarasa than is [the idea] of having the whole ocean present [in the palm of one hand]. For a stale (ksunna) thing, since it is well-known [to everyone], even though it is unusual, does not cause wonder. To use a novel idea is not only helpful to adbhutarasa, but is also helpful to other rasas as well. For example: "O fortunate one, the side [of her body] that you accidentallytouched as you went past [her] on the road, is still sweating, trembling, its hair bristling [with

Krishnamoorthy translates: "That part of body which touched the end of your balance as you passed her along the street." Tulaggena, as Abhinava notes, means "accidentially" (kdkataliyena). It is a desi word given by Hemacandra in the Desindmamald, V. 15. It occurs several times in the Vajjdlagga, e.g., 153, 226,

VRTTI: Even in the presence of the works of earlier poets. As long as there is the gift of poetic imagination (pratibhd). If this is not present however, there will be no subject for the poet at all. As for beauty of composition, which consists in the arrangement of words appropriate to the two kinds of sense [namely the principally sugexcitement]."45 gested sense and the subordinately suggested The aesthetic experience that is the result of sense], how can it be possible if there is no presentation of [suitable] ideas ? If beauty of composipondering the [literal] meaning of this stanza does not arise even in a slight degree from the suggesttion were to consist exclusively in the writing ed sense (vastudhuani), namely that she, having down of syllables, ingoring any particular [i.e., touched you, sweats and trembles, her hair bristsuggested], meaning, this would not endear itself to sensitive critics. For in that case [i.e., if this ling [with excitement].46 idea of bandhacchaiyd were accepted] the designaverse, namely holding the entire ocean in the palm of his tion of poetry would apply even to an arrangement hand, is a stale and shop-worn idea. But the vdcydrtha, of sweet and skilful words without paying attenhaving the vision of the matsya and the kacchapain the tion to any meaning whatsoever [i.e., even in the hollow of his hand, is a new idea. It would thus seem absence of any meaning whatsoever]. Should it that what gives rise to adbhutarasa in this stanza is be objected that since poetry consists after all not the vyangyavastu, but the vacyartha. in the unity of word and sense (sabddrthayoh 45
sihityena kdvyatve),47 how can such a case [as

the one just described] be considered poetry, [we reply that] just as [if you foolishly] accept a work written by a later writer [without any suggested sense] on a theme handled by an earlier writer
to be the poem of the later (paropanibaddhdrtha) writer (tatkovyatvauyavaharah), so also even where

and 496. 46 Ananda's point about this verse is rather subtle:

there is a suggested vastu, a vacydrtha, and a rasapratiti.

Now the vyangyavastuis, according to Ananda himself,

that when the lover touches the woman, even accidentally, she trembles all over: sa tvdma sprstva sidyati, romdiicate, vepate. This is a hackneyed idea. Apparently the vdcy-

drtha, namely that a particular side of the Nayika, touched accidentally by the Nayaka, is sweating, etc., is not a hackneyed idea, but is aksunna. Obviously
Ananda saw a difference, for it is this vacydrtha that gives rise to sgrgdrarasa, and not the vyangyavastu.

there is the asbence of any meaning whatever, the designation of poetry [would have to hold good, i.e., this is the absurd position you would be forced to adopt]. There is endlessness of subject matter (arthanantya) due not only to the suggested sense, but
47 Sabddrthayoh sdhityena kdvyatve is an echo of the famous definition of kduya given by Bhamaha, I. 16: sabddrthau sahitau kdvyam.

MASSONAND PATWARDHAN: Dhvanyaloka and Dhvanytlokalocana due also to the expressed demonstrate this it is said: KARIKA VII: By [i.e., even without the purely denoted of differences of (desa), time (kala), sense. In order to

299

its very nature (svabhdvatah) the help of a suggested sense], sense is inexhaustible because circumstance (avasthd), place etc.

VRTTI: "Purely [denoted]" means "even when the suggested sense is absent." By its very nature the expressed sense gives rise to endlesness. It is the very nature of things both sentient and insentient, that there should arise endlessness through differences in condition, through differences in place, through differences in time, and through differences in the individual nature [of things -svalaksa.iya]. By using these [differences] just now mentioned, and through the [use] of "natural description" (svabhdvokti)48 which consists in a faithful portrayal of the true nature [of an object] that is well-known to be varied, the subjectmatter of poetry will become endless.49 Through
48

the differences in the attending circumstances, the same theme appears as quite new and fresh [though repeated in the course of a poem]. Thus in the Kumarasambhava, we have a description of the physical beauty of the blessed Parvati, in the very beginning of the poem (prathamam eva) by means of such phrases as "the very assembly as it were of all the standards of comparison,"50 yet she is re-described, though the description of her has already been completed, in another manner as "wearing the flowers of spring"51 [in the third Canto] where she acts as the helpmate of the god of love as she comes int. the vision of the blessed Siva. She is described still again at the time of her wedding, when she is being dressed, in such verses as: "They seated her facing the East,"52 that describe the beauty of her body in an altogether new manner. And all these descripWhen he calls it pratyaksagocarah, he has something special in mind. Unlike the objector in the Dhuanydloka who says that poets are not trikdalajnas, it is part of Mahimabhatta's definition of pratibhd that this is precisely what a poet, through pratibhd achieves: sd [namely, pratibhda hi caksur bhagavatah trtiyam iti giyate, yena sdksdt karoty esa bhdvdms traikdlyavartinah "Imagination is said to be the third eye of giva, by which he brings into immediate view those things which are existent in the past, the present and the future." He then goes on: sdmdnyas iu svabhdvo yah so 'nydlarikdragocarah mlistam artham alamkartum anyathd ko hi saknuyat. (Raghavan points out that this must be a misreading for so 'ndlarkdrdgocarah, and this can be shown from Manikyacandra's comm. on the Kavyaprakasa, where these verses are quoted and where he comments: iha vastusvabhdvavarnanamdtram n6lankdrah). "But the general (i.e., ordinarily perceived) nature of things is not within the scope of the alankdras. Otherwise, who would be able to embellish a faded meaning?" We take this last sentence to mean that a sdmdnya description of something cannot add to our enjoyment it, as it would be the description of a hazily perceived thing, mlista, unless we describe the vaisistya of that thing. The above quotations are from the Vyaktiviveka, p. 109, TSS ed. We have quoted the verses from Raghavan, op. cit. p. 113, 114. See also our "Santarasa and Abhinavagupta's Philosophy of Aesthetics", pp. 19-20. 50 Kumdrasambhava, I. 49. 51 KS, III. 53-56. 52 KS, VII. 13-21.

the fullest discussionis by Raghavan, On svabhavokti,

"Some Concepts of the Alaiikaratastra", p. 92ff. Ingalls has pointed out that it does not quite correspond to the commonly held view of a description of "ordinary" life (the poems of the Sattasai are not necessarily connected with svabhavokti), but is more akin to the close, miniature-like observations of a living creature. See his "A Sanskrit Poetry of Village and Field: Yogesvara and His Fellow Poets," JAOS, vol. 74 (1954), pp. 119-31. 49 The notion of samdnyarupa and visistarupa plays an important role in later alankara thinking about suabhavokti. Since Anandavardhana has also been dealing, at least in a peripheral manner, with svabhuvokti in this same section, it seems likely that both Kuntaka and Mahimabhatta took their cue from the fourth Uddyota. For a discussion of the opinions of these two authors on svabhdvokti, see Raghavan, op. cit. p. 113. Though Anandavardhana is not mentioned, the discussion bears too close a resemblance to this passage to be merely coincidental. Mahimabhatta has some interesting verses on this subject. He distinguishes between a samdnyasvabhdvokti, and a vigistasvabhavokti, the former being negligible, indeed not an alankara at all, and the latter being closely associated with pratibha: visi stam asya yad riipam tat pratyaksasya gocarah sa eva satkavigirdrm gocarah pratibhdbhuvim "Its form [that is, the form of svabhdvokti] which is particular falls within the sphere of the immediately observable. It alone falls within the sphere of the speech that has arisen through the imagination of good poets.-'

300

Journal of the American Oriental Society 97.3 (1977) achieved when one describes, one by one, the individual peculiarities of insentient objects which have a variety of different conditions, such as the "early stage" and so forth. Here is an example:55 "The buds which come forth on the waterlilies of the lily-grove, imitating now the unhardenedtusks of young she-elephants, on being eaten, by their soothing of the puckered throats, produce a new and limpid sweetness in the cry of wild geese." By this indication [one can find in literature] examples in the case of other stages in the same manner (evam). Variety arising out of a difference in place is also possible for non-sentient beings. This is wellknown in the case of winds blowing from different directions56 and from different places, and it is also well-known in the case of bodies of waters and flowers and so on. Likewise there are enormous individual differences visible among sentient creatures, in men, animals and birds, etc., according to whether they have been brought up in villages, in forests, or in water. Surely the scope is unlimited if one observes these differences with care and they are faithfully described. To take just the example of men: who can ever exhaust the tremendous variety and differences that exist in respect to the behaviour, actions, etc., of men coming from different directions, different countries, etc. ? This is especially true of women I All this is presented by good poets according to their imagination. [I.e., the poet depends, ultion his imagination-pratibha). Difmately, ferences in time also yield variety. For example in the case of insentient things such as the directions, the sky, waters etc., [variety is achieved] according to the different seasons of the year. And it is well-known that for sentient beings, [emotions like] longing (autsukya), etc., depend on certain times [of the year, i.e., longing is common during the rains and so on]. From the point of view of differences due to their specific nature, it is well-known that every single thing in 55 This translation is from Ingalls, p. 140, verse 284. In his notes to this verse, Ingalls quotes Mil. VII. 1. 30 and Kum. Sam. III. 32. We think that kadaya means astringent, and the idea is that when the swans eat the astringent lotus stalks, their voices are purified. 56 It is tempting to think that salilakusuma goes with breezes, since breezes are said to carry perfumeand spray from the water bodies. But this would then leave anyesam without anything with which it could be connected.

tions, repeated several times by the poet in a single poem (ekatra), do not seem either repetitive or lacking in completely fresh ideas.53 This has been shown in [my] Visamabdnalili: "Thereis no end to them, nor do they seem to be in any way repetitive- [namely] the flirtatious ways of loveable women and the ideas of good poets." Here is another way of introducing change in the attending circumstances, namely that all insentient objects such as the mountain Himalaya54 and the river Ganges have a second form that is well-known as the presiding deities of these objects, and when this is used [in poetry] by endowing it with the appropriate attributes of animate beings, something new is created. An example is in the Kumdrasambhava, where there is a description of the Himalaya under its form as a mountain, and again when in the course of the eulogies uttered by the seven sages the same mountain is shown in its sentient form. That strikes one as completely novel. It is a wellestablished procedure among good poets. This literary principle (prasthdna) has been discussed in great detail in the Visamabdnalild for the The novelty [achieved] instruction of poets. through the [description] of different conditions of sentient beings such as childhood, etc., is well-. known in the case of (the works of) good poets As for the differences based on different circumstances in the case of sentient beings, there is manifoldness due to the further differences (avantardvasthdbheda) in each of the circumstances. For instance, in the case of young girls, some have their hearts pierced by the flower-arrows of [the god of love], while others do not. And even within this category, some are shy (vinita), and some are forward (auinita). Endlessness is also 53 About the passage, na ca te fasya kaver,etc., Jacobi takes na with ekatra,which solves the difficulty of the expression apunaruktatuena though it involves repetition of the idea expressed by asakrt. If we prefer to read the na with the main verb (which is after all the more common construction), then we must remove the a and read
punaruktatvena, and instead of nava, we must read anava.

Our Nepali manuscriptreads a second na, which makes it positive. The idea is in any case quite clear. 54 This refers to the fact that the opening verses of the Kumdrasambhava describe the Himalaya as a mountain (and therefore as an acetanavastu). Later, in the sixth sarga, he is treated as a householder with a wife and daughter (therefore as a cetana person).

MASSONAND PATWARDHAN: Dhvanyaloka and Dhvanydlokalocana the world is capable of being used in poetry in this manner. The themes of poetry, if one will simply set down in writing the specific nature of things as one sees them, are endless. At this point some might object that things are described according to their superficial nature (snmadnydtmand) and not according to their intrinsic natures (visesatmand). Poets write about things by relying on the nature (svaripa) of [experiences of] happiness, etc., and their causes that they have themselves experienced and which they then attribute to others (anyatra), depending on the superficial nature (rupasdmdnya) of what they have experienced and what others [are reported Poets cannot directly to] have experienced. perceive the past, future and present and specific nature (svalaksana) of the thoughts57 of others etc., the way Yogins can. Because of the limitedness of the generic nature of all experiences and of what can be experienced (anubhayvdnubhdvasdmdnya) common to [i.e., commonly perceived by] all thinking persons, it, [i.e., the generic nature] has already come into the sphere of older poets, as it is not reasonable to assume that it was not noticed by them.58 Therefore, if any particular idea is considered to be new by modern poets, it must be said to instance only conceit [on their part].59 There is variety [merely] in the manner of their writing about it (bhaniti) [and not in the subject matter itself]." Reply: If it is held that poetry is composed only on the basis of general ideas, is its endless variety as demonstrated [above] to be regarded as the result of a mere repetition [of the so-called generic ideas expressed by earlier poets like Valmlki in their works]? But if it is not like that [i.e., if the endless variety is not to be regarded as a mere repetition] (na cet), how can the endlessness of variety in poetry be denied? What has been adduced, namely that poetry proceeds through recourse to the general nature of things and that since generalities are limited, they have already come under the sphere of [older poets] and so there is [now] no possibility of any novelty in poetic subjects, is incorrect. Since, if poetry were to be poetry only through recourse to the general nature of things what would be the cause of the excellence of poetic 57 On p. 541, read paracittddi and separate it from svalaksa.nam. 58 Join and separate tasyd with avisayatvanupapatteh so as to read tasya and avisayatvanupapatteh. 59 Place a dai.a after abhimdnamatram eva on p. 542.

301

themes dealt with by great poets ? Or what would be the justification for calling any poet other than Valmiki a poet at all?60 For [according to you] there is no other poetic subject matter apart from the general nature of things and the first poet himself (eva) has already shown these generalities, [i.e., the general nature of things]. Were [the opponent] to reply that this is not a fault, because there can be novelty of style (uktivaicitrya), we would further question him by asking precisely what he means by novelty of style. For style is a way of presenting a particular idea (vacya) and if novelty of style is conceded, how can novelty be denied in the case of ideas? For thought and its linguistic expression are intimately interconnected with each other. The form of thoughts which appear to us in poetry is of course (eva) perceived as non-different from the particular objects which appear to us [in the external world] (vdcydndm ca kdvye pratibhdsamdndndria yad riipa.n tat tu grihyaviSesabhedenaiva pratiyate).6 Therefore the person who posits variety in style will be forced, even against his will, to accept variety in content also. This is said in brief as follows:62 "If we admit pratibhd with regard to the subject matter [of poetry] even in the case of a single poet
Professor Ingalls has suggested to us that the word kiikrtah from the earlier sentence should be supplied before kavivyapadeSa eva va. The idea is that if we allow the Purvapaksin's argument, then we would find ourselves in the position of denying the title of poet to anyone but Valmiki, since he has already dealt with things in their general nature. 61 The idea behind the sentence vdcydndm ca kdvye
60

pratibhdsamandnanam yah riipam tat tu grdhyaviseSdbhedena

eva pratiyate is that what we come across in poetry corresponds precisely to what we actually perceive in the real world, that is, these poetic ideas are not mere generalities, but are, like external objects cognised by our senses, specifics. 82 The KM reading for this verse is:

vdlmikivyatiriktasya yady ekasydpi kasyacit iSyate pratibhd 'nantyam tat taddnantyam aksatam
"If it is conceded that even one single poet apart from Valmiki had endless creative imagination, then we must perforce admit that creative imagination is endless

(andntyam aksatam)."
Aksatam, unscathed, intact, i.e., something that we must necessarily accept. The BP ed. seems a better reading however.

302

Journal of the American Oriental Society 97.3 (1977) VRTTI: How can we even consider other poets of limited power [when]: KARIKA X: Though assiduously written about by thousands of thousands of [poets similar to] Vacaspati, it cannot be extinguished any more than can the primordial matter (prakrti) of the universe. VRTTI: Just as in the case of primordial matter of the world, in spite of the succession of past aeons, and [in spite of] the abundance of varied things that have appeared [out of this primordial matter] nobody is able to say that its power to create still further objects is at present exhausted, in exactly the same way, the subject matter (sthiti) of poetry is in no way exhausted today in spite of the fact that it has been closely dealt with by innumerable poetic minds. In fact, the contrary is true: it constantly enriches itself with ever new ways of presenting things (vyutpatti). Nevertheless, though this is so: KARIKA XI: Among great minds, similarities (samvada) are frequent.66
65 It was Jacobi, writing before the edition of the Locana on the 4th Uddyota, who first saw the distinction

apart from Valmiki, [then we must perforce admit

that] the creative imagination is inexhaustible." Moreover, to say that variety of style makes for novelty in poetry actually helps our thesis. For all the methods (prakdra) that we have already explained as means for achieving endlessness in poetry are again doubled through variety in style. Furthermore, the whole gamut of figures of speech such as simile, puns, etc., which is so wellknown, and is already endless in and by itself, will, by being presented with diversity of style,
branch out a hundredfold (satasdkhatadm dhatte).

And style consisting in the use of a particular language, produces a still further diversity of poetic ideas, depending on the variety of ideas conveyed in that particular language. An example is my own verse:63
"Man spends his time in crying out Krsna, Krsna [also: "mine, mine"] and yet the blessed Janardana never even enters his mind."64 Thus in whatever way we examine the matter, there will be no end to [the variety of] the themes We have however to say the following: of poetry. KARIKA VIII: In literature we often see the use of of circumstances, differences etc., in the case of ideas [or objects]. But this expressed directly gains in beauty through the use of rasa.

between the Vrtti and the Kdrikd here: "Diese Worte tat tu bhati rasdsraydt konnten vierte Pada des Verses sein, dann miisste na tac chakyam apohitum Bemerkung des Vrttikara sein, was mit besser gefiele." It is rather VRTTI: ["The use of differences of circumstances, curious that the Vrtti just happens to be metrical I ideas"] as etc., in the case of directly expressed The Didhiti has in fact retained this reading: It is impossible to deny this was shown earlier. avasthddivibhinndndm vdcyadnm vinibandhanam [since we often find it illustrated in literature]. bhumnaiva drsyate laksye na tac chakyam apohitum What follows is said briefly now in the form of This is an easier reading, and it is certainly possible that advice for good poets: Abhinava is wrong in his remarks. However we would have to explain the prose (but metrical too) passage: KARIKA IX: If the subject matter (vastugati) that tat tu bhati rasdgraydt. We have seen that the Kdrikas is diversified according to time, place, etc., is used attach great importance to the vdcya sense and the in accordance with [the doctrine] of propriety and is associated with rasa, bhiva, etc., present Kdrikd says that this importance of the vacya is borne out by the actual practice of great poets. So the 63 Note Jacobi, Vrttikara could mean this prose passage as a contrastive p. 340: "Siehe Pischel, Materialien zur Kenntnis des Apabhramsa S. 45 f. Wegen des Sinnes verphrase: "True, there is such a practice, but in order for it to shine, there must be recourse to rasa." gleiche M. Bh. XII. 13, 4. XIV. 13, 3. 51, 30: 66 Note that on p. 173 of the second brahma asdsvatam dvyaksaras tu bhavenmrtyus tryaksararm Uddyota, Ananda mame 'ti ca bhaven mrtyur na mame 'ti ca sasfvatam quotes a stanza in Prakrit that is actually st. no. 406 "Two syllables is death, three is the eternal Brahma. from the Gaidavaho. Ananda used other ideas from the "It is mine," this is death, and "It is not mine," this is Gaiidavaho, a fact that has not, so far as we are aware, the eternal." The idea of course is to extol the lack of been noticed. (See for instance, verses 66, 85, and 86 of the G.). We have dealt with this issue in detail in an feeling possessive towards external objects. 64 The Prakrit text should read: article entitled: "Gaiidavaho and the Dhuanydloka" mahu mahu itti bhanantaaho vaccai kdlu janassu published in the Commemoration volume to D. D. Kotoi oa deu janiaddanau goari hoi manassu sambi, Popular Prakashan, Bombay, 1974.

MASSONAND PATWARDHAN: Dhvanyaloka and Dhvanyalokalocana VRTTI: It is clear that the minds of the intelligent agree. However: KARIKA XI (contd.): The wise consider them all to be the same. man must not

303

VRTTI: Should this be questioned, [we explain as follows]: KARIKA XII: Similarity means resemblance with something else. It can be like a reflection (pratibimbavat, of a tangible thing like a painted likeness (dlekhyCdkdravat),or like a physical similarity between [two] people (tulyadehivac ca saririndm). VRTTI: By similarity of poetic themes is meant the resemblance of one poetic subject with another. It has been considered as three-fold: like the reflection of somebody in [a mirror], like the painting of a person, and like a physical similarity between [two] people. A poetic theme can be like the reflection of something i.e., it can be the echo of another kavyavastu; it can bear similarity to another theme in the way a painting [is like] the original; or it can bear a resemblance with another theme like the resemblance of a person with a similar person. KARIKA XIII: Concerning these, the first has no reality of its own. The second has, but it is of a low order. But the third has a well-established life (prasiddhdtmn) [of its own]. The poet should not abandon [a poetic theme] that resembles another [poetic theme] [if the resemblance is in the last mentioned way]. VRTTI: Out of these, the first, the poetic subject which resembles another the way a reflection does, ought to be thoroughly avoided by a discerning poet, because it has no reality of its own (aananytmd), it is devoid of a real personality (tfttvikawarirasunya). The next, the similarity to another [poetic subject] which is like that of a painting [of something] to the original [subject], though it has its own reality, ought to be rejected because that reality is of a low order. The third variety, where the theme of a poem nevertheless resembles [another] ought not to be rejected by the poet, since it possesses a beautiful and separate reality of its own [in the form of a suggested sense-dhvani]. Nobody can say that because somebody resembles someone else, they are exactly the same person. In order to confirm (upapddayitum) this, there follows this verse:

KARIKA XIV: A poetic subject, though it may follow one already existing, as long as it possesses its own reality, shines all the more, like the moonlike face of a young girl shines all the more [because it has a separate reality of its own]. As long as it has a reality of its own, a VRTTI: real essence to it, then a poetic subject will shine all the more even though it follows another already existing [poetic subject]. As in the case of one body resembling another, so also a [poetic] subject which assumes the form of some old and beautiful [poetic subject] [may well] engender the highest loveliness. And it does not seem [on that account] at all repetitious. Like the face of a
girl [resembling] the shining moon.

In this way we have separated the limits of resemblance in the meanings of [whole] sentences, which arise out of combinations [of word-meanings]. Now it is shown that there is nothing wrong with the subject matter of poetry resembling a [previous] subj ect matter in individual words: KARIKA XV:67 There is absolutely nothing wrong with writing about an older subject (vastu) as long as there is the arisal of a new poetic import (kdvyavastu), [just as there is nothing wrong] with using [the same] individual syllables, etc., [i.e., wordsl in one's writing [as have been used by an older poet]. VRTTI: Not even Vacaspati the god of poetry himself is capable of creating new letters or words. It does not detract from the originality of poetry and other [forms of literature] to use those very
67 Karika XI is rather puzzling. If Ananda and Abhinava are right, and it does deal with the use of words already used by older poets, then why does the Karika use the expression vasturacand? Can vastu really mean padartha in a punned sense, i.e., padanam arthah? This is what Abhinava says it means. Why didn't the Kiarika say sabdaracand? The drsfdnta concerning aksararacand also makes sense. Butwhatwill the di refer to, if vastu refers to words? The suggestion we have is that ddi refers to words, and vastu means a theme (kdvyavastu). But this means giving a rather twisted interpretation to kdvyavastuni in the next line for it not to

be synonymous with the vastu in line one. We could

suggest that it means: as long as at least (one or more) new themes are introduced. Cf. ta eva padavinyasds ta eudrthauibhuitayah tathdpi navyam bhauati kavyam grathanakausalaf In this anonymous stanza, arthauibhiitayah must be understood in the sense of vdcydrthasampat and grathanakausala in the sense of vyangyarthasamCarayanakauSala.

304

Journal of the American Oriental Society 97.3 (1977) KARIKA (Contd.): If a good poet is reluctant to use that which belongs to another, the blessed Sarasvati herself will provide him with [poetic] subject matter as desired. For the good poet reluctant to take what belongs to another, this blessed Sarasvati will provide material as desired. Those poets who proceed to write poetry because of the ripening (paripdka) of their former74 merit (punya) and assidous practice (abhyasa), and who are unwilling to take themes written by others, do not require any special (soavydpara) effort on their own. The blessed Sarasvati herself will bring into being the sought after theme.75 For it is just in this that the greatness of great poets lies. Om 1 "Thus has been revealed the dhvani which thrives in the garden of the wise known as poetry, the place where all pleasures are to be found, and from which
VRTTI: [dhvani] fortunate readers (sukrtibhih) obtain all

same letters in the very same form again. The same applies to the meanings of words (paddrtharipdni) and to the various devices of embelleshing these meanings (arthatattvdni), such as puns, [simile], etc. Therefore:
KARIKA
XVI:68

Any

theme

whatsoever

will be

beautiful even though it resembles a previously existing [one] as long as the thought arises in the minds of people that: 'This is ineffably quivering It can be used by a good poet [with beauty]'. without his incurring any blame. VRTTI: '0, this is ineffably vibrating I' This aesthetic rapture (camatkrti)69 is produced in the case of sensitive readers. When a theme, even though it follows one already existing, is utilised by a good poet with sylistic beauty (bandhacchdya) which consists in using words capable of conveying the desired literal and suggested sense, he does not become blameworthy.70 The final position is therefore this (ittham): KARIKA XVII: May the words [of poets] in which there is embedded7l the nectar of many ideas,72 spread out. In their own blameless task (anavadye svavisaye) [namely writing] poets should not be despondent. VRTTI: [They should not be despondent] thinking that [since] there are new poetic themes, for a poet to write about a subject already used by another poet is an error.73
68 We take yad api tad api as the subject (uddesya):

desired objects. This [dhvani] carries the beauty of effortless (aklista) qualities and figures of speech appropriate to rasas. May this [dhvani] which has a greatness similar to the wish-fulfillingtree, be enjoyed by noble-minded souls." "The famous Anandavardhana explained76 that [dhvani], which is the path to the exact knowledge (naya) of the essence of good poetry, and which was practically (kalpa) dormant in the minds of [even] those of mature intelligence (paripakvadhiydm), for the sake of giving delight to those sensitive to literature."
END OF DAVANYALOKA

anything (i.e., any kdvyavastu) whatsoever. Ramyam

is the predicate (vihdeya): is beautiful. We take kiincit to go with sphuritam (as a noun): an indefinable flash. It is rather odd that in view of his ideas on andkhyeya Ananda should use the word kificit. To say idarmkiicit ramyam sphuritam, "Something beautiful has arisen" involves duranvaya. 69 This is the only use of the word camatkrti in the

(to be continued) second line. But this would involve kalpandgauravado;a. 74 Prdkatana goes also with abhydsa as well as punya. Cf. A. Bh. I, p. 288, tena ye kavyabhydsapraktanapunyadihetubaldt sahrdayah. 75 Cf. D. A1.Z. 6. 76 Vydkarot is important. The word is used Moreover tad (i.e., dhvanisvarOpam) was ciraprasuptam.

D. Al., though Abhinava uses it often.

primarily to denote an explanation of something already expounded

70 The phrase sukavir vivaksitavyangyavacyarthasamar-

panasamarthasabdaracandrupaya bandhacchdyayo panibadhnan nindyatarn naiva ydti), according to Professor Raghavan, contains the whole essence of the D. Al. in a nutshell. 71 Nimita means "embedded." The word is from ni plus ma, "to establish." 72 Amrtarasa can also be understood as a karmadhdraya, "rasas which are nectar." 73 One could read na on p. 550 before the phrase santi, etc. This would take the prose as a pfrvopaskara to the

This means that it existed previously. But it cannot be taken to mean (as the Didhiti takes it) that dhvani was simply not used for a long time, since Ananda's numerous quotations from near-contemporary sources belie this. It must mean then that the actual doctrine (from the time of the dhvanikara) had not been in vogue I Paripakvadhiyam is further evidence. It cannot, in the circumstances,refer to poets (again contrary to the Didhiti) for the same reason as given above. Therefore it must refer to theorists, and points to the earlierexistence of a dhvani theory.