A History of Sanskrit Literature c10.s2.1

Language: English

c10.s2.1.1

Daṇḍin³ draws a vital distinction between two styles as prevalent in his day, the Gauḍa and the Vaidarbha, eastern and southern, and from his account and other evidence we gather that among the characteristics of the former was the love of long compounds not merely in prose, where they were accepted even by the Vaidarbha, but in verse also; love of alliteration and of harsh sound effects; the use of recondite etymologizing phraseology, and a desire for strength resulting often in bombast and affectation. It has been suggested by Jacobi¹ that the contrast of styles has a historical basis; Sanskrit poetry was practised, it is argued, eagerly in the east and Sanskrit poetry there had developed the evil effects of old age, before the art became current in the west and south. The simpler style of the south was also on this view influenced by the freshness of the lyric of Mahārāṣṭra born of close contact with the people. It is already a serious objection to such a conclusion that in the *Nāṭyaçāstra* we find the qualities which Daṇḍin ascribes as characteristic of the Vaidarbha ascribed to the Kāvya style in general; this is a strong suggestion that at the time of the *Nāṭyaçāstra* there had not developed those characteristics of the Gauḍa style, and that they emerged gradually with the development of poetry at the courts of princes of Bengal.

c10.s2.1.2

This view gains support from the fact that, though Daṇḍin praises the Vaidarbha style, and evidently disapproves of the Gauḍa, in practice poets of later date often affect the Gauḍa manner. Açvaghoṣa, however, affords a more convincing proof still of the early character of the Vaidarbha; his style unmistakably is of the Vaidarbha type; as Bāṇa later says of the western poets, it aims at sense rather than mere ornament; it is his aim to narrate, to describe, to preach his curious but not unattractive philosophy of renunciation of selfish desire and universal active benevolence and effort for the good, and by the clarity, vividness, and elegance of his diction to attract the minds of those to whom blunt truths and pedestrian statements would not appeal. This project left no room for mere elegance or for deliberate straining after effect, and thus it results that Açvaghoṣa’s works attain a high measure of attractiveness, especially when we make the necessary allowance for the decidedly bad condition of the text tradition of both epics. Simple, of course, in the sense in which it can be applied to English poetry, is an inappropriate epithet as regards any Sanskrit Kāvya, but relatively to the later standard, even in some measure to Kālidāsa, Açvaghoṣa's style is simple. Nor may we deny it the epithets of sensuous and passionate;

c10.s2.1.3

the picture of the pleasures of love drawn by Açvaghoṣa is already marked by that wealth of intimate detail which appeals to all Indian poets, but proves a grave stumbling block to critics who find matter for offence even in the charming picture of the deceiving Zeus in the *Iliad* and reprobate in the author of the *Odyssey* the episode of the amour of Ares and Aphrodite. But still more sincere is the burning enthusiasm of the poet for his own ideal, not the Arhat, contented to seek his own freedom from rebirth in this world of misery, but the Bodhisattva, the Buddha to be, who delays, however, his entering into Nirvāṇa until he has accomplished his view of freeing all other creatures from the delusion which makes them cling throughout the ages to mortal life and its woes. This is a new note in Sanskrit poetry; Vālmīki has majesty and a calm seriousness, but he is free from passion like his hero, who though he experiences vicissitudes yet stands apart from them, and of whose ultimate success we never doubt. Nanda's rejection of Sundarī may seem to us heartless enough; his transference of his fickle affection to the Apsarases has its comic side, but in the end he seeks the welfare of others, even as does the Buddha; Rāma on the contrary in his rejection of Sītā after the long agony of separation from him has no warmer motive than obedience to the doctrine that Caesar's wife must be above suspicion.