On Genre and the Lyrical Tendency in the History of Sanskrit Poetics

■ Article ■ On Genre and the Lyrical Tendency in the History of Sanskrit Poetics

●

Mari Hattori

1. Introduction The notion of the lyrical as a subtype of poetry is not a basic feature of Sanskrit poetics as it is in some other traditions. As Lienhard has noted, "Indians did not divide poetry into three categories that we are familiar with, i.e., lyrical, epic and dramatic" [Lienhard 1984: 45]. The term 'lyrical' is still useful, however, in application to Sanskrit poetry if the evoking of rasa (aesthetical mood), which is brought about only through suggestive expression, is a prominent goal. I use the words `epic' and 'lyric' or 'lyrical' in the sense mentioned by Lienhard: "The main purpose of lyrical poetry was to affect the sense of the reader by suggestion. While epic poetry created art on a large scale and, by its very nature, aimed at painting a broad canvas, in short poems detailed descriptions and suggestive techniques formed an ideal combination which, aided by the format itself, endeavored to attain perfection even in the smallest elements of the poem" [Lienhard 1984: 63]. Lyric is a style that became increasingly widespread in the history of Sanskrit poetry.

服部真理 Mari Hattori, Research Student, Department of Indian Studies, Graduate School of Letters, Nagoya University. Subject: Sanskrit Poetics. Articles: "The Guna in Vamana's Kavyalankarasutravrtti", in Nagoya Studies in Indian Culture and Buddhism: Sambhasa, vol. 21, 2001, pp. 45-53. "Semantic Aspects of Vamana's Poetics" (in Japanese) , in Studies in the History of Indian Thought (Indo-Shisdshi Kenkyu), 13, 2001, pp. 22-37. 40 Journal of the Japanese Association for South Asian Studies, 15, 2003

In contrast to the European classification of genres, in Sanskrit literature the lyrical tendency was a general feature of kavya poetry and not the differentia of a particular type of kavya. Lienhard described the background of kavya and pointed out the difference between the `smaller poem' (laghukavya) and the 'grand poetry' (mahakavya): "laghukavya , which is the older form of poetry, may have developed directly out of the lyrical beginnings described above, [but] the development of the major form, mahakavya, was not at all so simple. The long poem, also called sargabandha, was rather the result of a long period of assimilation which united the epic and lyrical traditions. Epic elements, which carry the action forward in a logical manner, are prominent in older mahakavyas such as Mvaghosa's poetry; in later long poems, however, they are largely replaced by the lyrical tendencies inherent in the concentrated stanzas of the minor form to such a large extent that laghukavya and mahakavya came to resemble each other" [Lienhard 1984: 63]. Taking up the idea of the lyrical tendency of kavyas mentioned by Lienhard, this paper intends to show how this tendency of kavyas is related to the explanation of genres or that of poetry in the Sanskrit poetics (alarikeiras'astras). Firstly, I will discuss the role of genre, which is characteristic in Sanskrit literature.2) Secondly, I will extend the observation in the context of poetics with special reference to the Kavyiidaria (KA) of Dan. d in, written in the 7th century, and the Kavyalankarasfitra (KAS) and Kavyalankiirasfitravrtti (KASV) of Vdmana, written in the 8th century. Thirdly, I will point out how we can see an echo of this characteristic in the later poetics. In conclusion, I will mention the relation between the lyrical tendency and the later poetics, which emphasizes more abstract concepts such as 'rasa' rather than 'figures of speech' (alankara) and so on.

2. Role of genre in Sanskrit poetics Chari points out, "At any rate, it may safely be asserted that literary criticism in Sanskrit is not predominantly a genre-oriented criticism, in spite of the recognition by critics of many formal divisions of literature" [Chari 1995: 63]. He presents a clear analysis of the varieties of genres and sub-genres of kavyas made by Sanskrit poeticians, that is, On Genre and the Lyrical Tendency in the History of Sanskrit Poetics 41 those based on the distinction between "the literature that is meant to be read or heard (Sravya) and that meant to be enacted (drslya)" , those based on the distinction between "verse and prose", those based on the distinction between "short and long", and those based on the distinction of the subject whether it is "fictitious or drawn from historical or legendary source". He then argues that "the genre concept itself was not applied as general criterion of evaluation. There is no rigorous application of the criteria appropriate to each genre, no evaluation of work as being 'good of its kind.' In their theoretical excursions as well, the overriding concern of these critics is with their respective doctrinal standpoints - figuration, style, suggestion, deviant expression, rasa, and so forth - in terms of which they sought to define the nature of literature. From this, one might hazard the conclusion that the theory of genres or formal categories did not play a crucial role in the Sanskrit theory of literature, as it did in Western criticism" [Chari 1995: 74]. After indicating that an aesthetic character such as style (riti), which specifies the nature of work, is not sufficient as a criteria to identify the genre of Sanskrit literature because "it does not yet give us any notion of the distinct pleasure that it communicates, or, more accurately, of the meaning components that communicate that pleasure", Chari con- cludes that "the rasa doctrine seems to offer not only the best definition of the literary art, but a more satisfactory basis for distinguishing between kinds of aesthetic effects and consequently for generic distinc- tions" [Chari 1995: 75]. Keeping in view the "notion of the meaning components that communicate that pleasure" which is necessary when we deal with the classification of Sanskrit literature proposed by Chari, let us consider the point of "distinct pleasure" that we can find in the explanations of genres of literature by Dandin and Vamana. I use the term 'distinct pleasure' to refer to the very point in a poem where the charm or beauty comes. They emphasize either 'figures of speech' (alankara) or `style' WO , rather than 'rasa', as the essential factor that enhances poetry, but we can still see the point of the 'distinct pleasure' when they discuss the genres of kavyas. 42 Journal of the Japanese Association for South Asian Studies, 15, 2003

3. Classification of genres in the KA, KAS and KASV The following passages illustrate the classification of kavyas mentioned in the KA.

padyam gadyam ca mis"ram ca tat tridhaiva vyavasthitam. / padyam catuspadi tac ca vrttam jeitir iti dvidhall (KA 1.11). "This (the body of kavya) is of exactly thre e kinds: verse, prose, and mixed. The verse is a stanza of four lines and it (the verse) is of two kinds, vrtte and jati.4) chandovicityam sakalas tatprapanco nidarsitah.I seividya naur viviksiinam gambhFram kavyaseigaramll (KA 1.12). "The details of these are all mentioned in the Chandoviciti.5) The knowledge (of this book) is a ship for those who wish to enter into the deep ocean in the form of kavya." muktakam kulakam kosah samgheita iti tadriah. / sargabandham- s'arfupatvdd anuktah padyavistarah// (KA 1.13). "Variation of metrical poetry , such as muktaka,6) kulaka,7) kosa,8) and samgheita,9)is not mentioned because of the fact that they are part of the composition in cantos (sargabandha)." apadah padasantano gadyam dkhydyikei katheiliti tasya prabhedau dvau . . . // (KA 1.23abc). "Prose is a succession of words which is not divided into quarters . It (prose) has the two varieties of dkhydyika10)and katha.11) mis'rani natakadini tesam anyatra vistarahl gadyapadyamayi kacic cam- par ity abhidhiyate II (KA. 1.31). "Mixed compositions are the drama') and so on . Their detailed explanation will be [shown] in another place. There is a certain [mixed composition] containing prose and verse, called campu." Here in KA 1.13, we can see that the KA has treated each variety of verses as a part of `sargabandha' . After this passage, Dandin explains `sargabandha' in detail , where we can see his concern with composition of a work as a whole.

sargabandho mandkavyam ucyate tasya laksanam/

asir namaskriya vastunirdeso vapi tanmukham// (KA 1.14). itihasakathodbhutam itarad va sadasrayam / On Genre and the Lyrical Tendency in the History of Sanskrit Poetics 43

caturvargaphalayattam caturodattanayakam // (KA 1.15). nagardrnavasailartucandrarkodayavarnanaih / udyanasalilakrTddmadhupanaratotsavaih // (K A 1.16). vipralambhair vibhilhais"ca kumarodayavarnanaih I mantradfitaprayandjindyakabhyudayair api // (KA 1.17). alamkrtam asamksiptam rasabhavanirantaram I sargair anativistirnaih iravyavrttaih susamdhibhih// (KA 1.18). sarvatra bhinnavrttantair upetam lokaranjanam / kavyam kalpantarasthayi jayate sadalamkrti // (KA 1.19). "Composition in cantos is grand poetry (mahakavya) and its definition is as follows: Its opening is benediction, salutation, or table of contents. It (mahakavya) takes its plot from historical leg- end or story or based on a fact. It adheres to the attainment of four ends of human life. It has a wise and noble hero. It (mandkavya) should be embellished with the description of a city, the ocean, a mountain, seasons, moonrise, and sunrise; and with [the description of] a garden, play in the water, drinking wine, and the joy of love- making; the sorrow of separated lovers, a wedding, and with the description of birth of a son, and also with [the description of] a king's council, an embassy, the marching forth of an army, a battle, and the victory of a hero.n) It (mahiikavya) should not be con- densed; it should be filled with rasa (aesthetical mood) and bhava (emotion) without interruption; and endowed with cantos that are not too lengthy, with metres agreeable to the ear, with nice joints, and with different metres in the end [of the cantos]; such a kavya endowed with good figures of speech, satisfying people, lasts to another kalpa." The above passages show how each element of description is necessary for a composition in cantos. This 'distinct pleasure' proposed by the KA, that is, enjoying verses in the light of whole composition, con- trasts with the following explanation mentioned in the KAS as well as KASV. First, we examine the quotations from KAS where Vdmana expresses his view on the classification of poetry. kavyam gadyam padyam ca (KAS 1.3.21). "Poetry (kavya) is [of two kinds: ] prose (gadya) and verse (padya) ." gadyam vrttagandhi ciirnam utkalikaprayam ca (KAS 1.3.22). 44 Journalof the JapaneseAssociation for SouthAsian Studies, 15, 2003 "Prose i s [of three kinds:] (1) prose having an aroma of metre (vrttagandhi), (2) pounded prose (cfirna),14) and (3) prose abounding in compound words (utkalikapraya)." padyabhagavad vrttagandhi (KAS 1.3.23). "Prose having an aroma of met re (vrttagandhi) possesses verses as its portions." anaviddhalalitapadam cfirnam (KAS 1.3.24). "[A prose] which has graceful words which are not compounded is pounded prose (cfirna)." viparitam utkalikeiprayam (KAS 1.3.25). "The opposite of [the 'pounded prose'] is abounding in compound words (utkalikapraya)." padyam anekabhedam (KAS 1.3.26). "Verse (padya) h as many varieties." tad anibaddham nibaddham ca (KAS 1.3.27). "That is either not b ound [into a larger composition] (anibaddha) or bound [into a larger composition] (nibaddha)." kramasiddhis tayoh sraguttamsavat (KAS 1.3.28). "These can be attained in sequence, just like a string of flowers and a crest." nanibaddham cakaty ekatejahparameinuvat (KAS 1.3.29). "The verse which is not bound [into a larger com position] (anibaddha) does not shine, just like a single atom of fire." saindarbhesu dalarfipakam ireyah (KAS 1.3.30). "Among composite works , the stage play (dasariipaka) is best")

From the above, we notice that the KAS differs from the KA in the classification of literature and also in what it considers as the main genre of literature. In his KA, Dandin divides literature into three genres, i.e., verse, prose and mixed. Although he mentions this classification of literary forms, he does not attach much importance to it. He does not discuss any of them in detail. He sets aside the investigation of the verse by saying that verses are merely parts of a sargabandha, and in the following stanzas (KA 1.14-19) he goes into detail of the sargabandha. It is almost the same with the case of the mixed. The mixed forms are exclusively represented by the stage play and their explanation is given in another place where the stage play is discussed On Genre and the Lyrical Tendency in the History of Sanskrit Poetics 45 as mentioned in the KA 1.31b . On the contrary, the KAS divides literature into two forms, i.e., verse and prose, and takes 'stage play' as the best among all. Here we can contrast the 'distinct pleasure' of Dandin with that of Vamana. Both KA and KAS emphasize that, be it as sargabandha or as stage play, the best genres can be enjoyed because of the totality of each part. We have already seen that the individual verses such as muktaka are subordinate to the sargabandha according the KA. In the KAS, however, Vamana pays more attention to individual parts than Dandin. In the following passage, Vamana mentions that the larger composition is based on the attainments of composing individual parts just as a crest of flowers is based on the attainments of a string of flowers.

kramasiddhis tayoh sraguttamsavat. tayor ity anibaddham nibaddham ca paramriyate. kramena siddhih kramasiddhih. anibaddhasiddhau nibaddhasiddhih sraguttamsavat. yathd sraji mai:ay-dm siddhayam uttamsah lekharah sidhyate (KASV 1.3.28). "By the word 'tayor' , that which is not bound [into a larger composition] (anibaddha) and that which is bound [into a larger composition] (nibaddha) are referred to. 'Kramasiddhi' means there are attainments (siddhi) according to a sequence (krama), that is, once the verse that which is not bound [into a larger composition] (anibaddha) is attained, only then can that which is part of a larger composition (nibaddha) be attained. Sraguttamsavat' means just as when a string of flower (sraj) or wreath has been attained, only then can the crest (uttamsa) or crown be attained."

We should note, however, that Vamana emphasizes the importance of the charm in totality based on individual parts in the end.

tad dhi citram citrapatavad vilesaseikalyeit (KAS 1.3.31). "Because it is colorful , just like painted cloth, because of the totality of features." tad dalariipakam hi yasmdc citrarn citrapatavat. visesdnam sakalyeit (KASV 1.3.31). "'Tad' indicates the stage play (dalarfipaka) , 'hi' means because, 'citram citrapatavat.' [`Visesasiikalyeit' means] because of the totality of various features." 46 Journal of the Japanese Association for South Asian Studies, 15, 2003

tato 'nyabhedaklptih (KAS 1.3.32). "Based on which , there is the production of other variations." tato das'ariipakad anyeseim bhedeinam klptih kalpanam iti. dalarft- pakasyaiva hi-dam sarvam vilasitam, kathakhydyike mahakavyam iti. tallaksanam ca nati-va hrdayamgamam ity upeksitam asmiibhih. tad anyato grahyam (KASV 1.3.32). "'Tatas' indicates 'based on stage play'; ['anyabhedaklptih' means] there is the klptih' or forming (kalpana) of other variations (anyesam bhedeinam). Because all of this is a manifestation of the stage play itself - the katha and dkhyllyika and the grand poetry (mahakavya). Since their definition is not extremely attractive, we do not mention it. It can be obtained elsewhere. "16) Now we can say that Vdmana was more attentive to the importance of individual verses than Dandin, though both explained that the charm of literature could only be expressed through the overall composition. We may further observe that the sargabandha or mahiikavya was chosen as the central genre of kavya by Dandin with his focus on composed totality, whereas the stage play was chosen as the best genre by Vamana along with his focus on its beauty based on individual parts.17) Here we can see that there are 'distinct pleasures' in both KA and KAS, and how they have chosen the best genre of literature.

4. Genres of kavya dealt with by later poeticians In the observations above on the KA and the KAS as well as KASV, we have seen that they did not deal with the classification of kavyas without taking into account the 'distinct pleasure' of literature for each poetician, and that the viewpoints on the importance of individual stanzas in a poem was more distinguished in Vamana's poetics than in Dandin's. Now we can extend this point into the later poetics. We can see the passages in the Dhvanydloka of Anandavardhana, written in the 9th century, which explain that a single stanza (muktaka) will be fruitful just like a composition when made carefully. tatra muktakesu rasabandhabhinivesinah kaves taddsra3,,amaucityam. tac ca darsitam eva. anyatra kamacarah. muktakesu hi prabandhesv iva rasabandhabhinivelinah kavayo driyante. yathii by amarukasya On Genre and the LyricalTendency in the Historyof SanskritPoetics 47

kaver muktakah irngararasasyandinah prabandhayamemah prasiddha eva (Dhvanyaloka on 3.7, pp. 174-175). "Among the m, in the case of muktaka, for a poet who is attached to composing [in the form of] rasa, propriety is based on that (rasa) . And this was just shown. In other cases, it is up to [the poet]. There are poets attached to composing (in the form of) rasa in the case of muktakas just like in the case of whole compositions (prabandha) . For instance, it is well-known that the muktakas of the poet Amaruka are almost like prabandhas flowing with sentiment of love (irngararasa) ."

Here we can also note that Anandavardhana is careful about whether the verse is connected with 'rasa' (aesthetical mood) or not. This is a further point of change from Vamana to Anandavardhana. The former started to consider the position of individual stanzas only in terms of how all the charm, i.e. the complex of literary qualities (gunas),") can be brought about, and he regarded the stage play as the best form. The latter, on the other hand, focused on rasa more than on the issue of best genres, though he described individual genres carefully.") We can see that this emphasis on aesthetical concepts such as rasa viewed as applicable to any good poetry is taken further in the Rasagangeidhara, written by Jagannatha, a 17th-century's poetician and poet. His view of poetry is so transformed as to generalize kävya even without using the term 'rasa' as follows.

ramaniyarthapratipadakah ..abdah kavyam. ramanTyatii lokot- tarahladajanakafridnagocaratei. lokottaratvam cdhladagatal camatkarat- viiparapary-ciyo 'nubhavasaksiko jettivilesah (Rasagangddhara, p. 6). "Poetry is an expression which is productive of a bea utiful meaning. To be beautiful is to be the object of knowledge, which pro- duces extraordinary pleasure. The property of being extraordinary, which belongs to that pleasure, and is also called 'rapture', is wit- nessed through experience, and is a particular generic character ."

The following shows his classification of kavya, which has no reference to genres.

tac cottamottamottamamadhyamadhamabhedac caturdha. sabdarthau yatra gunThhiivitatmanau kam apy artham abhivyanktas tad adyam (Rasagarigadhara, p. 19). 48 Journalof the JapaneseAssociation for SouthAsian Studies, 15, 2003 "Therefore , there is fourfold [kavya] based on these subtypes: best among the best, best, middle, and lowest. Where word and meaning, being subordinated themselves, manifest extraordinary meaning, that is the first one (best among the best)."

After this passage, Jagannatha explains 'the best among the best' and gives examples in connection with rasa.20) The examples are quoted from his own lyrical works. This shows clearly that the above quoted statement in the Rasagangadhara has in view poetry like that represented by these lyrical verses.21) From this, as also from the case of the Dhvanydloka, we can understand that the preference for those concepts of poetics such as rasa or 'suggestion' (dhvani) was associated with a focus on lyrical stanzas, and with a corresponding lyrical view of poetry.22) It has been pointed out that the way Jagannatha analyses poetry is very logical, taking the method of the Naiydyikas.23) We cannot directly connect these two things, i.e., his explanation of poetry using the terminology of Navyanyaya and the fact that he was a poet of lyrical stanzas, because we have to take other aspects of his background') into consideration. However, it is interesting to see how nicely this sophisticated generalization of poetry works in application to these lyrical stanzas.

5. Conclusion We have observed how the 'distinct pleasure' of literature played an important role in the classification of genre in the history of Sanskrit poetics, a phenomenon that was parallel to the development of general lyrical tendencies in Sanskrit poetry. In the case of Dandin and Vamana, genre preferences were associated with what they saw as the 'distinct pleasure' of literature, i.e., the former preferred the composed totality and dealt exclusively with grand poetry (mahakavya), whereas the latter emphasized the importance of individual verse and regarded the play as the best genre. In later writers, sharing with Varnana a similar emphasis on individual verses, the 'distinct pleasure,' in the form of rasa, became dominant and took the place of distinct criteria for individual genres, as seen in the Dhvanydloka. This change made the On Genreand the LyricalTendency in the Historyof SanskritPoetics 49 poeticians' interpretations of poetry more lyrically oriented than in the period when mahakavya had been in fashion. Finally, in the work of Jagannatha, who was a devoted poet of lyrical kavyas, we noted two points: (1) a generalized definition of kavya where the 'distinct pleasure' of literature became "an expression which is productive of a beautiful meaning", and (2) the individual verse's property of having rasa being much more important than the classification of each genre . It should be concluded, from what has been said above, that the echo of the lyrical tendencies of the kavyas is to be found in the history of Sanskrit poetics, not in the preference for the lyric as a genre as opposed to other types of poetry, but in the development of a generalized explanation of kavya which allows any good poetry to be taken lyrically,25 and in which the question of genre is therefore no longer so important.

Acknowledgements This is a revised version of my paper read at the 15th Conference of the Japanese Association for South Asian Studies, in which I pointed out the preference for stotra (hymn of praise, in this case the Sankara- stotra) or lyrical poem (in this case the Gitagovinda , the Gangalahari etc.) in recitations sung in modern Pune, recorded by myself in 2000 , and the theoretical background that explains the lyrical tendency of Sanskrit literature. This paper includes only the latter part of the presentation. I would like to thank the members of the audience who gave me relevant suggestions on my paper. I am also grateful to Prof. Gary Tubb who gave helpful discussion on several points in this paper and corrected my English.

Notes 1) However, according to Lidia Sudyka, the style of the Bhayikavya is closer to Avaghosa and Kalidasa's poems. Sudyka has pointed out that "Bhatti's way of writing is intermediate between those of Kaliclasaand Bharavi" despite the fact that "judging by the structure of his poem it seems that Bharavi lived earlier than Bhatti" [Sudyka "From Mvaghosa to Bhatti: the development of the mahakavya genre", read at the 2nd International Conference on Indian Studies, Krakow, 2001]. 2) We are not concerned here with the detailed history of each genre of keivya. For further details of the classificationof kavyas in the history of Sanskrit poetics, see Raghavan [1978: 588-611]. 50 Journal of the JapaneseAssociation for South Asian Studies, 15, 2003

3) Belvalkar explains vrtta as "a stanza the metre of which is regulated by the number and position or order of succession of syllables in each quarter or pada" [Belvalkar 1919: 11]. 4) Belvalkar explains jati as a stanza the metre of which is "regulated by the number of aggregate syllabic instant" [Belvalkar 1919: 11]. 5) The Chandoviciti is the name of a work dealing with metres written by either Pirigala or Dandin. Cf. Prabha, p. 14, 11.10-12: chandarnsi viciyante nirflpyante yatra sa chandovicitih pirigalamunikrtam chandahs'iistram. chandovicitir nama dandydcaryakrtas-c chandogranthaviksa iti kecit. Belvalkar explains that "it seems to us that Chandovichiti is only a generic name" [Belvalkar 1919: 12]. 6) Belvalkar explains muktaka as "a solitary stanza complete in sense and requiring no help of context for its interpretation" [Belvalkar 1919: 12]. 7) Belvarkar explains kulaka as "a group of stanzas forming one complete utterance, the principal verb occurring once at the beginning or at the end" [Belvalkar 1919: 12]. 8) Belvalkar explains that "kosa is of the nature of an anthology, though not neces- sarily of multiple authorship" [Belvalkar 1919: 12]. 9) Belvalkar explains that "sanyhdta is what may be called 'Longer Poems' dealing with a theme of the poet's own invention" [Belvalkar 1919: 12]. 10) According to Dandin, iikhydyika is [the chronicle] which is narrated only by a hero. Cf. KA 1.24a: nayakenaiva vacyd. 11) According to Dandin, katha is [the tale] which is narrated by a hero or another narrator. Cf. KA 1.24b: anya nayakenetarena va. Dandin gives further explanations of akhydyik5 and katha, from KA 1.26 to KA 1.31. But he ends up saying that there is no distinction between akhydyikei and katha. 12) According to the Prabha the word `natakeidi' indicates ten varieties of the stage play (daiarfipaka). Cf. Prabha, p. 30, 11. 20-23: adis'abdena prakaranadinany samgrahah. taduktam das'arripake natakany saprakaranam bheinah prahasanarn dimah vyayogasamavakarau vithyahkehamrgii daSa iti. 13) I followed Ingalls' translation of this passage, KA 1.17. See Ingalls [1965: 33]. 14) The Kiimadhenu explains that "By the word 'pounded', a collection of separate words is indicated figuratively." Cf. Kamadhenu, p. 38. 15) Pandey [1959: 508] points out that KAS and KASV are related more with the Natyas'astra than with the KA; the former as well as the KAS and KASV attach importance to the stage play among all composition whereas the latter does to the grand poetry (mahakiivya). Raghavan [1981: 115] points out that this passage of the KAS had been quoted by Abhinavagupta. 16) The Keimadhenu explains that "In case someone wishes to know the definition [of katha, iikhydyikii, and the grand poetry (mahiikavya)], he should refer to the Kavyeilankiira of Bhamaha and so on." Cf. Kiimadhenu, p. 43. 17) In the case of drama, we must also take the factors of composite arts into consideration, in addition to the importance of each verse. As for mahakavya, Ingalls explains that "The verses in each major joints (cities, mountain, love-in-separa- tion, battles, and so on) become impressive by their cumulative effect" despite the fact that "each verse of a great kavya is complete in itself." He also points out that On Genre and the Lyrical Tendency in the History of Sanskrit Poetics 51

"Vidyakara quotes very sparingly from the great kavyas. From Kalidasa's two great works of this type he takes only a single verse whereas he takes twelve verses from the same author's plays" [Ingalls 1965: 34]. With regard to Dandin's preference for mahakeivya, we should also note the fact that the Natyathstra "had played almost no part in general literary criticism" until Udbhata, who was a contemporary of Vamana, "turned his attention to it" [Ingalls 1990: 5]. 18) Cf. KAS 1.2.8: viseso gunatma. "The essence of its being special is qualities." For further details of Vamana's concept of beauty, see my paper Hattori [2001]. 19) Cf. Dhvanydloka on 3.7, pp. 174-176. We should also note the cultural context behind the change in theory proposed by Anandavardhana. Gerow explains that after the end of Gupta monarchy, "drama ceased to be a living art form, and was brought more and more into conformity with the rather academic" [Gerow 1977: 251-252] . 20) sayita savidhe 'py anisVara saphalikartum aho manorathan / dayita dayittinanambujam daramilannayand nirThsate (Rasagarigadhara, p. 20). "Though lying near, unable to fulfill her desires, a wife, with slightly closed eyes, is looking at her husband's lotus-like face." This verse is quoted from Jagannatha's own poetry kfrilgiiravilasa. See Sharma [1958: 60]. 21) Shastri points out Jagannatha's preference for lyricism [Shastri 1987: 10]. Sarma explains Jagannatha's philosophy and poetry as follows: "In poetry, his language is simple and as sweet as honey. But in his criticism he is strong and argumenta- tive. His critical writing is marked by accuracy, aptness and clarity of thought and expression" [Sarma 1994: 182-183]. 22) Tubb points out that according to Anandavardhana the principal subject of Mahandrata is "the peaceful flavor (s-antarasa) and the human aim characterized by liberation (moksa)" [Tubb 1991: 176]. He also explains that "his (= Anandavar- dhana's) remarks may provoke some surprise, for in each of these works (= Mahandrata) what he identifies as principal is not the heroic flavor (virarasa) that one might expect to find predominating in an epic poem, but another flavor altogether" [Tubb 1991: 175]. From this, it is clear that Anandavardhana was very much aware of the lyrical aspect of the epic Mahabharata associated with the concept of 'the peaceful flavor (s-iintarasa)' which can "affect the sense of readers by suggestion" to echo Lienhard's phrase which we have seen at the very beginning of this paper. The fact that kavya is taken differently in later poetics from the way Dandin and Vdmana took it can also be seen as follows, where Jagannatha excludes the literary quality (guna) and the figure of speech (alankeira) from the definition of kavya. Cf. Rasaganga-dhara, p. 12: laksane guntilamkaradinives-o 'pi na yuktah. `uditam man- dalam vidhoh' iti kavye dfityabhisarikavirahinya-disamudirite 'bhisaranavidhinisedha- jrvandbhavddipare `gato 'stakam arkah' ityadau aivydpty-cipatteh. "It is also not proper to include (the concept of) guna, alankara, and so on, in the definition of kavya. Because [such a definition] would not extend to poetic statements such as `the moon has risen' or 'the sun has set ,' which when uttered by a messenger or a woman going to meet her lover, or a woman separated from her lover, aims at (suggesting such meaning at) enjoining the tryst or prohibiting it, or (the possibil- 52 Journal of the Japanese Association for South Asian Studies, 15, 2003

ity of) her dying."

23) See Gerow [1977: 287]. 24) Sarma explains that "Jagannatha flourished in the golden period of Hindi poetry

and saw the immense popularity of it. He also wanted to make Sanskrit popular" so "unlike most of the Sanskrit poets of decadent age when poetry was confined to

the narrow world of erotic themes, Panditardja's poetry was free from this re- stricted scope" and "his verses suggest much more than they express" [Sarma

1994: 183-184]. 25) It has been pointed out by Lienhard that the range of what was considered as

kavya underwent expansion, so that forms such as stotrakavyas and sastrakavyas came to take on more of the style of kavya [Lienhard 1984: 47-48]. Here we can

note that this had a parallel in the development of Sanskrit poetics through the

growth of generalized criteria applicable to those forms.

REFERENCES

Belvalkar, S. K., Raddi, Rangacharya B., 1919, Dandin' s Kavyadars'a Pariccheda

edited with a New Sanskrit Commentary and English Notes. Bombay: The Depart- ment of Public Instruction.

Chari, V. K., 1995, "The Genre Theory in Sanskrit Poetics", in Patrick Colm Hogan

and Lalita Pandit (eds.), Literary India, Comparative Studies in Aesthetics, Colonial- ism, and Culture. New York: State University of New York Press, pp. 63-79.

Gerow, Edwin, 1977, Indian Poetics, A History of Indian Literature, in J. Gonda (ed.), A History of Indian Literature Vol. V, Fasc. 3. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.

Hattori, Mari, 2001, "Concept of Beauty in Indian Poetics", in G. U. Thite, Asha Gurjar, S. S. Bapat, Kanchan Mande, R. Mohadikar, P. Deshpande, and M. A.

Kulkarni (eds.), Subhasini, Prof. Saroja Bhate Felicitation Volume. Pune: Prof. Saroja

Bhate Felicitation Volume Committee, pp. 113-122.

Ingalls, Daniel H. H., 1965, An Anthology of Sanskrit Court Poetry Vidyakara' s "Subhasitaratnakosa" , Harvard Oriental Series 44. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Ingalls, Daniel H. H., Masson, J. M., and Patwardhan, M. V., 1990, The Dhvanydloka

of Anandavardhana with the Locana of Abhinavagupta, Harvard Oriental Series 49. Cambridge, Massachusetts and London: Harvard University Press.

Lienhard, Siegfried, 1984, A History of Classical Poetry Sanskrit-Pali-Prakrit, in J.

Gonda (ed.), A History of Indian Literature Vol. III, Fasc. 1. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.

Pandey, Kanti Chandra, 1959, Comparative Aesthetics, vol. 1, Indian Aesthetics, the Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series 2. Varanasi: Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Office.

Raghavan, V., 1978, Bhoja's Srngaraprakas'a, Madras: Punarvasu. •\•\

, 1981, Abhinavagupta and His Works, Chaukhamba Oriental Research Studies 20. Varanasi: Chaukhamba Orientalia. Sarma, N. N., 1994, Panditaraja Jagannatha, The Renowned Sanskrit Poet of Medieval

India. New Delhi: Mittal Publications. Sharma, Aryendra, 1958, Panditaraja-kavya-Sangraha (Complete Poetical Works of On Genre and the Lyrical Tendency in the History of Sanskrit Poetics 53

Panditaraja Jagannatha), Sanskrit Academy Series No. 2. Hyderabad, Deccan: The Sanskrit Academy, Osmania University. Shastri, Kala Nath, 1987, Works of Panditaraj Jagannath's Poetry (Stotra Kavyas: Five Laharis). Jaipur: Publication Scheme. Tubb, Gary A., 1991, "Santarasa in the Mahabharata", in Arvind Sharma (ed.), Essays on the Mahabharata, Leiden: E. J. Brill, pp. 171-203.

A Selected List of Sanskrit Texts Dhvanyaloka. The Dhvanyaloka of Anandavardhanacharya, 1935, Kavyamala No. 25. Bombay: Nirnaya Sagar. (Reprint, 1998, New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Pub- lishers Pvt. Ltd.) KA. In Rao Bahadur M. Rangacharya (ed.), 1910, The Kavyadarsa of Dandin, with the commentary of Tarunavachaspati and also with an anonymous incomplete commentary known as Hrdayangama. Madras: Brahmavadin Press. Kamadhenu. In Jha, Bechana (ed.), 1971, Kavyalankara Sutra of Acharya Vamana with the Kavyalankarakamadhenu Sanskrit Commentary of Sri Gopendra Tripurahara Bhripala, The Kashi Sanskrit Series 209. Varanasi: Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Office. KAS. In Narayanarama (ed.), 1953, Kavyalankarasutrani. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. KASV. In Narayanarama (ed.), 1953, Kavyalankarasutrani. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Prabha. In Shastri, Rangacharya Raddi (ed.), 1970, Kavyadars'a of Dandin, with the commentary by Prabha. 1970, Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. Rasagangadhara. In Chatterjee, Chinmayi (ed.), 1992, Rasagangadhara of Panditaraja Jagannatha, with the commentary of Nagea Bhatta and English Translations. Calcutta: The Asiatic Society.