Sahrdayaloka Part 02

SR No.: 006909
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Tapasvi Nandi
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2005
Total Pages: 642
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 15 MB

Page 287

842
SAHRDAYĀLOKA sataka as derived from nāțaka and prakarana. He of course takes them as covered by nātaka and prakarana and hence nātikā, sattaka or totaka does not deserve independent recognition for him. Read, Bhāva-prakāsana (VII. 3, 4, etc.) (pp. 260, 261 Edn. Agrawal, Chowkhamba Surbharati Prakashan-Varanasi - second Edn. '83)
“rasāśrayā yady api syur nātikā-toțakā”dayah, nāta kā”dişvathaiteşām antarbhāvān na te prthak.” nāțake ca prakarane nātikāyāḥ purātanaiḥ, antarbhāvaḥ krtas tasyām
toțakasyā’pi darsitaḥ.” Here the mention of sattaka which is 'nātikā-pratima' is read following Bhoja. The A.bh. merely mentions Kohala as having defined the sattaka, and Bhoja's Sr. Pra. is the first available document which attempts the definition of sattaka. Abhinavagupta has cited the Karpūra-mañjarī of Rāja-sekhara as an instance of sattaka (in prāksta only). This he does when he explains the lāsyángya called saindhava, which has to be in prākrta. Prākrta, Abhinavagupta explains there, is best suited to śrngāra rasa and hence Rājasekhara wrote a whole sarțaka-type drama, the Karpūra-mañjarī in Prākta. : tathā hi śộngāra-rase sātiśayópayogini (nī) prakrtabhāṣā iti sastakaḥ karpūra-mañjaryākhyaḥ rājasekhareņa tan-mātra eva nibaddhaḥ.” Rājaśekhara in his prologue to this play defines sattaka as similar to nātikā but devoide of praveśaka and viśkambhaka. kim sátakam ? kathitam eva vidagdhaiḥ -
"tat sāțakam iti bhanyate dūram yo nātikā anuharati, kim punar api praveśaka
viskambhakau na kevalam bhavatah." Rājasekhara however does not suggest that this type has to be in prāksta. He suggests through sūtradhāra that prākrta is accepted here as it was softer than samskrta, as the author being a Kavirāja is master of both Samskrta and Prakrta alike. Dr. Raghavan suggests that on the strength of this sūtradhāra's remark we can attempt amendation of Bhoja's text defining sattaka as "prākstayā samskrtayā sa (here we suggest 'vā”) satďako nātikā-pratimah."