Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Studies in the History of Sanskrit Poetics v2.c76: Preface

Studies in the History of Sanskrit Poetics v2.c76

Language
English

Preface

v2.c76.1

Circumstances beyond my control have somewhat delayed the publication of this volume. Apart from the delay due to my remoteness from the place of printing, I could devote to it such time as could be spared from more regular duties; but in the interest of the work itself, I should have been glad if the delay had been longer and given me an opportunity of making it fuller in some parts than it actually is.

v2.c76.2

An attempt was made in the first volume to settle a working Chronology and indicate the original Sources of Sanskrit Poetics; the present volume is concerned with the more difficult task of tracing the development of the Systems and Theories. While I could not ignore the content in investigating the growth of the discipline, I thought it more useful to lay stress on the essentials of the doctrines and omit minor details, my object having been more historical than expository. I could not, for instance, give in this volume a technical analysis of individual rhetorical "figures", with which the Alaṃkāra-śāstra is traditionally and popularly associated; but I have dealt with the general doctrine of poetic figures, in so far as they are not mere tickets of nomenclature but positive agents in the production of stylistic beauty or aesthetic pleasure. The study of analytical rhetoric, apart from its value as a formal discipline, may be regarded as pedantic and futile, but Sanskrit Alaṃkāra-śāstra possesses a speculative interest by involving, besides mere Rhetoric, a great deal of what is known as Criticism, Aesthetics or Poetics ; for it was almost impossible for the Ālaṃkārikas, concerned as they were with form and technique, not to busy themselves with the general phenomena of literature or theorise on general principles. My omission, again, of all consideration of such peculiar development of the rasa-theory as we find in Vaiṣṇava devotional works may be criticised, but my concern here is not with bhakti-rasa but with ālaṃkārika rasa, although I have referred in passing to this erotico-religious application of the theory in Rūpa Gosvāmin's Ujjvala-nīlamaṇi.

v2.c76.3

For a similar reason of historical and general treatment, greater emphasis has been laid on the earlier writers who cover the more creative periods of the discipline ; of later writers, who show in the main an excessive dependence on their predecessors, only typical names have been selected with a due regard to their historical as well as intrinsic importance. It is hoped, however, that no important writer or his work has been overlooked. The dramatic theories, the omission of which has already been explained in the preface to the first volume, form an allied but indeed a totally distinct subject, which is reserved for a more detailed treatment, if possible on a future occasion, than what could have been practicable within the limited scope of this work. In spite of these and other limitations, I venture to think that I have been able to make out a case for (if not actually write) a *history* of Sanskrit Poetics, and apply, however tentatively, the historical method to an important but comparatively neglected branch of Sanskrit speculative literature.

v2.c76.4

I take this opportunity of thanking critics and reviewers who have accorded a generous welcome to the first volume, as well as make renewed acknowledgments to those scholars who have made helpful suggestions, among whom my special thanks are due to Prof. Jacobi, Dr. Barnett and Prof. Sovani. Some minor errors and misstatements in the first volume—inevitable where there are so many details—are corrected, and some new materials added, at the end of this volume.

v2.c76.5

Little did I expect when I had the privilege of associating the first volume of this modest work, on its dedication-page, with the name of Sir Asutosh Mookerjee, who took a personal interest in it from the beginning, that he would not live to see its completion. I cannot make an adequate acknowledgment of all that I owe to him, nor need I dwell here on the roll of his public services, so untimely closed; but I recall with gratitude and affection the debt which I, with many other students of this and past generations in Bengal, owe to this departed friend and patron of higher education and research in this country.

v2.c76.6

University of Dacca December 15, 1924. } S. K. Dé

Linked texts (1)