A History of Sanskrit Literature c25.s3.12

c25.s3.12

It remained to seek some way of dealing with the qualities and figures and the styles or manners of the earlier writers, so as to find them a just place. One great simplification was effected by reducing the number of qualities, restricting their extension to sound effects, and by merging in them both the Rītis of Vāmana and the Vṛttis of Udbhaṭa, which were at the same time practically identified. This became possible through the adoption of a new doctrine as to the relation of qualities to the poem; the sentiment being regarded as the vital element, the qualities are related to it as the soul of the poem, in the same way as heroism is an attribute of the soul of man. This fact, however, precludes us from regarding qualities as stereotyped in the old fashion; everything depends on the sentiment, and what relatively to sentiment would be a quality might in the abstract be a defect. If, then, we admit qualities, they must be such as are never defects, and they must be positive in nature, not mere lack of defects, and distinct in character. On this score we can dismiss Vāmana's Çleṣa, Samādhi, and Udāratā as merely forms of Ojas, strength; Saukumārya and Kānti are no more than the absence of the faults of harshness and vulgarity; and Samatā, evenness, is in some cases positively a blemish. We have thus left just three qualities, and these of sound only, there being no need in the views of the school, which Mammaṭa in special develops very clearly, to allow of qualities of sense. These are strength, which is regarded as causing, or as Viçvanātha insists, coincident with an expansion (*vistara*) of the mind, and which has its proper place in the sentiments of heroism, horror, and disgust; sweetness, which stands in a like relation to a melting (*druti*) of the mind, and is normally present in the sentiment of love-in-union, but appears also, rising in degree in order, in pathos, love-in-separation, and calm; and clearness, including the older Arthavyakti, which corresponds to an extension or pervasion (*vikāsa*) of the mind. The idea of these psychological equations was probably borrowed from Bhaṭṭa Nāyaka who in his theory of the enjoyment (*bhoga*) of sentiment spoke of these three conditions of the mind. In concrete terms the characteristics of the three qualities of sound are given by Mammaṭa as depending on arrangement of letters, compounds, and style of composition; thus sweetness depends on the use of all the mutes (save linguals) with the corresponding nasals; *r* and *ṇ* with short vowels; and no compounds or short compounds; strength arises from the use of double consonants, or consonants followed by the corresponding aspirate; conjuncts of which *r* forms part; lingual letters save *ṇ*; the palatal and lingual sibilants; long compounds; and a formidable, loaded, composition; no special rules are given for clearness. It is obvious that Mammaṭa is here incorporating much of what Udbhaṭa taught regarding his Vṛttis, the characteristics of the Upanāgarikā and Paruṣā forms being closely similar, and thus it is possible for Mammaṭa to bring the Vṛttis under qualities. Nor, as he includes the use of compounds in his treatment, does he find it difficult to include the styles of Vāmana, as brought into close relation to compounds by Rudraṭa. It is, of course, all rather artificial, and very much of an effort to harmonize without real care for the facts, but it is normal and plausible enough.