A History of Sanskrit Literature c25.s2.37

c25.s2.37

Still less important from the point of view of theory is the *Kāvyamīmāṅsā* of the dramatist Rājaçekhara (*c.* 900) which is a work in other regards of no small interest and originality. He conceives of the Kāvyapuruṣa, the spirit of poetry, son of Sarasvatī, and the Sāhityavidyā, science of poetics, who becomes his bride, the term Sāhitya being derived, we may believe, from the old doctrine of the union of word or sound and sense to make a poem, as laid down by Bhāmaha, Māgha, and others. He distinguishes carefully science, Çāstra, and poetry, and analyses the divisions of the former; he discusses at length the relation of genius, poetic imagination, culture, and practice in making a poet and classifies poets on this score. A further classification is based on the fact that a poet may produce a Çāstra, or a poem, or combine both in varying proportions, and of poets in the narrower sense he makes eight illogical groups. His own conception of poetry appears traditional; he defines it as a sentence possessing qualities and figures, and he accepts Vāmana's doctrine of styles which are the outcome of Sāhityavidyā's wanderings in diverse lands. The sources of poetry are touched on, and the subject-matter as concerned with men, divine beings, or denizens of hell is investigated. Very interesting is the discussion of borrowing from earlier works; it is recognized as justified by freshness of idea and expression, and elaborate illustration is given of thirty-two different ways of evading improper plagiarism. Important also is the consideration of poetical conventions, and we are given a geography of India and many remarks on the seasons with their appropriate winds, birds, flowers, and action. Rājaçekhara also gives curious details of the likings of different parts of India for certain languages and their mode of mispronouncing Sanskrit. The Magadhas and others east of Benares are blunt in Prākrit, good at Sanskrit, but the Gauḍas are thoroughly bad in Prākrit, the Lāṭas dislike Sanskrit but use Prākrit beautifully, the Surāṣṭras and Travaṇas mix Apabhraṅça with Sanskrit, the Draviḍas recite musically, Kashmirian pronunciation is as bad as their poetry is good, Karṇāṭas end up sentences with a twang, northerners are nasal, the people of Pañcāla sweet and honey-like. Women poets are recognized, and sex barriers despised, while of the ten grades of poets the rank of Kavirāja, held by Rājaçekhara, comes seventh even above the Mahākavi himself. Great stress is laid on the assemblies at which poets were judged and where the prize given by the king included crowning with a fillet and riding in a special chariot. The poet's paraphernalia is given, chalk, a board, palm leaves, birch bark, pen and ink.¹ More important is the insistence on the equal rights of all four forms of speech: Sanskrit; Prākrit, elegant, sweet, and smooth; Apabhraṅça also elegant, as loved in Marwar, Ṭakka, and Bhādānaka; and Bhūtabhāṣā current in Avantī, Pāriyātra, and Daçapura, while the people of the Madhyadeça used all equally well. The people of that land show also their admixture by their colours, brown like the easterners, dark like the southerners, white like the westerners, while the northerners are fair. When we add that he quotes extensively including the *Mahimnaḥstotra*, gives many fine verses and some anecdotes, and is usually lively if pedantic, the merits of his work can be appreciated.²