Studies In Sanskrit Sahitya Shastra

SR No.: 007023
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: V M Kulkarni
Publisher: B L Institute of Indology
Publication Year: 1983
Total Pages: 216
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 22 MB

Page 153

Sanskrit Sahityaśāstra
___141
त्वात् कदाचिन्न लक्ष्यते । यस्त्वशक्तिकृतो दोषः स झटिति प्रतीयते.......तथा हि महाकवीनामप्युत्तमदेवताविषयप्रसिद्धसंभोगशृङ्गारबन्धनाधनौचित्यं शक्तितिरस्कृतत्वात् ग्राम्यत्वेन न प्रतिभासते । यथा कुमारसंभवे देवीसंभोगवर्णनम् ।
“How is it that in such cases the sensitive readers do not find the subject-matter devoid of literary beauty ? It is because the 'fault' is hidden from view due to the poet's genius. There are two kinds of faults (1) one due to the lack of vyutpatti (sense of proportion and propriety resulting from the poet's learning and observation of life) and (2) the other due to the absence of genius. Now, the fault that is due to a lack of vyut patti can sometimes escape notice as it will be hidden from view by grace of the poet's inborn genius. But a fault due to lack of genius immediately obtrudes itself on the attention of the sensitive reader. . . . . . . . .For instance, great poets can describe the well-known sexual love, among the very highest gods and goddesses, and although such descriptions are improper, nevertheless, due to the saving power of their genius they do not strike us as vulgar. An example is the description of the love-making of Pārvati and Siva in Kumāra-sambhava:
तस्मादभिनेयार्थेऽनभिनेयाथै वा काव्ये यदुत्तमप्रकृते राजादेरुत्तमप्रकृतिभिर्नायिकाभिः सह ग्राम्यसंभोगवर्णनं तत् पित्रोः संभोगवर्णनमिव सुतरामसभ्यम् । तथैवोत्तमदेवतादिविषयम् । ......यत्त्वेवंविधे विषये महाकवीनामप्यसमीक्ष्यकारिता लक्ष्ये दृश्यते स दोष एव । स तु शक्तितिरस्कृतत्वात्तेषां न लक्ष्यत इत्युक्तमेव ।
"Hence the truth is that both in plays and poems any description of vulgar, sexual love in respect of kings etc., with heroines of high character would be extremely vulgar or obscene like the description of the sexual love of one's own parents. The same is true also of its description in respect of gods and goddesses who are high characters. ......While it is true that in these matters even mahākavi's (great poets like Kālidāsa) have erred and shown indiscretion still their fault is not noticed as it is covered by their genius as we have already mentioned."
Abhinavagupta in the course of his commentary on the first passage says :
'आस्वादयितृणां यः चमत्काराविघातस्तदेव रससर्वस्वमास्वादायत्तत्वात् । उत्तमदेवतासंभोगपरामर्शे च पितृसंभोग इव लज्जातङ्कादिना कश्चमत्कारावकाश इत्यर्थः । शक्तितिरस्कृतत्वाद् इति । संभोगोऽपि ह्यसौ वर्णितस्तथा प्रतिभानवता कधिना यथा तत्रैव विश्रान्तं हृदयं पौर्वापर्यपरामर्श कर्तु न ददाति । यथा निर्व्याज-पराक्रमस्य पुरुषस्याविषयेऽपि युध्यमानस्य तावत्तस्मिन्नवसरे साधुवादो वितीर्यते न तु पौर्वापर्यपरामर्श तथात्रापीति भावः ।।
"The absence of any impediment to the realisation of aesthetic relish by the sensitive readers is the all-in-all of a rasa. For rasa entirely depends on relish by the sensitive reader. The cognition of the sexual love of the gods and goddesses of high character produces shame, disquietitude and such other feelings as the cognition
2. Dhvanyaloka III, pp 316-17 (Banaras edition with Bālapriyā commentary) 3. Ibid, pp 332-333 4. Locana (pp 317-318)