Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Sanskrit Poetics c6.s1: 16 The Influence of other Śāstras on Poetics.

History of Sanskrit Poetics c6.s1

Language
English

16 The Influence of other Śāstras on Poetics.

c6.s1.1

The greatest influence has been exercised by grammar. The वाक्यपदीय (pp. 47-48) makes it clear that the word ध्वनि was borrowed from the grammarians (vide p. 198 above प्रथमे हि &c.), because they employed the word ध्वनि that manifested the Sphoṭa just as in a poem words manifest the suggested sense (व्यञ्जकत्वसाम्यात्). स्फोट is the all-pervading, eternal and indestructible word principle. ध्वनि (sounds and words) manifest it. The very first verse of the वाक्यपदीय is ‘अनादिनिधनं ब्रह्म शब्दतत्त्वं यदक्षरम्। विवर्ततेऽर्थभावेन प्रक्रिया जगतो यतः॥’. Letters and words are devices used to analyse the operations of our speech. When we utter a word the last letter carrying with it the saṃskāras of the letters previously uttered produces an idea in our mind and therefore it is called शब्द.¹ नाद or ध्वनि is अभिव्यञ्जक and स्फोट is अभिव्यंग्य. Vide लोचन p. 47 which quotes several verses from the वाक्यपदीय (e. g. I. 84, 103) and remarks ‘व्यक्तशब्दानां तथा श्रूयमाणा ये वर्णा नादशब्दवाच्याः। अन्त्यबुद्धिर्ग्राह्याः स्फोटाभिव्यञ्जकास्ते ध्वनिशब्देनोक्ताः।’ The स्फोट theory is very ancient. पाणििन mentions a predecessor called स्फोटायन ‘अवङ् स्फोटायनस्य’ (पा. VI. 1. 123). The महाभाष्य tells us that the संग्रह of व्याडि principally dealt with the question whether शब्द was नित्य or कार्य ‘संग्रहे प्राधान्येनैतत्परीक्षितम्, नित्यो वा स्यात् कार्यो वेति।’ (vol. I. p. 6, Kielhorn). Vide Śaṅkara’s bhāṣya on Vedāntasūtra I. 3. 28. The भागवतपुराण XII. 6. 40 identifies स्फोट with ब्रह्म. The काव्यप्रकाश says: ‘सङ्केतित-श्चतुर्भेदो जात्यादिर्जातिरेव वा’ II. p. 32. This is based upon the महाभाष्य (vol. I. p. 19) ‘चतुष्टयी शब्दानां प्रवृत्तिः’. भामह VI. 21 also is based on this. The काव्यप्रकाश (II. p. 33) quotes the वाक्यपदीय ‘नहि गौः स्वरूपेण गौः &c.’ and also वाक्यपदीय II. 217-218 (काव्यप्रकाश p. 63) ‘संयोगो विप्रयोगश्च’ as helping in the determination of the meaning of a word that has several significations. The subdivisions of Upamā have been based on grammatical rules by भामह (II. 33 वतिनापि क्रियासाम्यं), उद्भट (कारिका I. 15 ff), the काव्यप्रकाश and साहित्यदर्पण, viz. upon पाणििन’s sūtras about क्यच् &c.

c6.s1.2

¹ पदे न वर्णा विद्यन्ते वर्णेष्ववयवा इव। वाक्यात्पदानामत्यन्तं प्रविवेको न कश्चन॥ वाक्यपदीय I. 73; नादैराहितबीजामान्येन ध्वनिना सह। आवृत्तपरिपाक्यां बुद्धौ शब्दवधार्यते॥ वाक्यपदीय I. 86. For ‘the doctrine of Sphoṭa,’ vide Journal, Annamalai University, vol. I pp. 231-240, vol. II pp. 109-119, न्यायमञ्जरी of जयन्तभट्ट (6th आह्निक), वाक्यपदीय I and शब्दकौस्तुभ.

c6.s1.3

Daṇḍin (II. 227) refers to the words of the महाभाष्य in discussing the verse लिम्पतीव. The definition of विभावना (क्रियायाः प्रतिषेधेपि) given by the काव्यप्रकाश is based on the view of grammarians that ‘kriyā’ means ‘hetu’. Vāmana deals in his 5th adhikaraṇa with the grammatical purity of words and Bhāmaha also (in VI. 30-61) does the same.

c6.s1.4

Logic (Tarkaśāstra) deals with the power of words (abhidhā). The same subject is discussed in the अभिधावृत्तिमातृका, शब्दव्यापारविचार, त्रिवेयिका, वृत्तिवार्तिक by writers on alaṅkāra. Alaṅkārikas regard anumāna as a figure of speech. The figure काव्यलिङ्ग also is suggested by तर्क phraseology. Mahimabhatta wrote व्यक्तिविवेक for establishing that ध्वनि comes under anumāna and Śaṅkuka appears to have held that rasa is anumeya and the vibhāvas are anumāpaka. The Sāṅkhya philosophy had not much influence over alaṅkāra, but in dealing with Nāyaka’s theory of rasa frequent reference is made to सत्त्व, रजस् and तमस् (as on vol. I. p. 279 of अभिनवभारती and p. 283 तत एव कापिलदैः खस्य चाश्चल्यमेव प्राखत्वेनोक्तं रजोवृत्ति वदद्भिः). The word भोग or भोगीकृति seems to be suggested by the सांख्य doctrine that पुरुष is भोक्ता and not कर्ता.

c6.s1.5

The पूर्वमीमांसा system also has lent some doctrines to अलङ्कारशास्त्र. The काव्यप्रकाश view (सङ्केतित...जातिरेव वा) is the पूर्वमीमांसा view (आकृतिस्तु क्रियार्थत्वात् जै. I.3. 33). The views ‘तात्पर्यार्थोपि केषुचित्’ (काव्यप्रकाश II.) and ‘तात्पर्याख्यां वृत्तिमाहुः पदार्थान्वयबोधने’ साहित्यदर्पण II. 20 are derived from the अभिहितान्वयवाद which was supported by Kumārila and Pārthasārathimiśra in his Nyāyaratnamālā.. The अभिहितान्वयवाद and अन्विताभिधानवाद are mentioned in the काव्यप्रकाश II. and V. The काव्यप्रकाश mentions ‘लोहितोष्णीषा ऋत्विजः प्रचरन्ति’, ‘यत्परः शब्दः स शब्दार्थः’ (V. pp. 225-227) which are topics discussed in the पूर्वमीमांसा. Vide जै. III. 8. 12 for the first. The words ‘फलं संवित्तिः प्रकटता वा’ in काव्यप्र. II p. 61 give expression respectively to the theories of प्रभाकर and कुमारिल. अर्थापत्ति is an alaṅkāra acc. to साहित्यदर्पण aud अलं. स.; it is regarded as a प्रमाण by पूर्वमीमांसा. परिसंख्या which is a well-known technical term in पूर्वमीमांसा (as in जै. I. 2. 34, III. 7, 33) is an अलङ्कार according to रुद्रट, काव्यप्रकाश, साहित्यदर्पण and others.

c6.s1.6

From the Vedānta some works like the चमत्कारचन्द्रिका, the मन्दारमरन्दचम्पू (9th बिन्दु), and रसगङ्गाधर (p. 23) quote the Upaniṣad¹ passage ‘रसो वै सः’ in order to describe the blissful stage of Rasa realization. The काव्यप्रकाश describes रस as ब्रह्मास्वादमिवातुभावयन् (vide p. 360 above). These writers regard रस, आनन्द and आत्मन् as practically identical. The बृहदारण्यकोपनिषद् (IV. 3. 21) has the following very interesting passage ‘तद्यथा प्रियया स्त्रिया संपरिष्वक्तो न बाह्यं किंचन वेद नान्तरमेवमेवायं पुरुषः प्राज्ञेनात्मना संपरिष्वक्तो न बाह्यं किंचन वेद नान्तरम् । तद्वा अस्यैतदाप्तकाम-मात्मकाममकामं रूपं शोकान्तरम् । अत्र पिताऽपिता भवति...तीर्यो हि तदा सर्वान् शोकान् हृदयस्य भवति.’ ब्रह्मसूत्र (I. 1. 12-19) deals with the passage of तै उप and others which speak of आनन्द मयात्मा.

c6.s1.7

¹ ‘रसो वै सः। रसं ह्येवायं लब्ध्वानन्दी भवति’ तै. उप., ब्रह्मानन्दवल्ली 7.

c6.s1.8

the *Gesta Romanorum*, the *Legenda Aurea* of Jacobus de Voragine, and the *Speculum Historiale* of Vincent of Beauvais. These were the books that fed the imagination of the Middle Ages, and they were the books that the Church, in its wisdom, provided for the instruction and edification of the faithful.

c6.s1.9

But the Church did not merely provide books; it also provided the means of their dissemination. The monastic scriptoria, where monks labored in silence to copy the sacred texts, were the precursors of the printing press. And when the press finally arrived, it was the Church that first harnessed its power, using it to spread the word of God to the corners of the earth. The Gutenberg Bible, the first major book printed in Europe, was a testament to the Church's commitment to the written word.

c6.s1.10

Yet, even as the Church championed the spread of knowledge, it also sought to control it. The *Index Librorum Prohibitorum*, or List of Prohibited Books, was a tool used by the Church to suppress ideas it deemed dangerous or heretical. This tension between the desire to educate and the need to control would define the Church's relationship with literature for centuries to come.

c6.s1.11

It is a complex history, one that is marked by both enlightenment and suppression. But it is a history that cannot be ignored, for it is the history of the very foundation of Western civilization. The Church, in its role as the guardian of knowledge, has shaped the way we think, the way we write, and the way we understand the world around us.

Linked texts (24)