Recent Russian Publications On Indian Epic

Author(s): J W De Jong
Publisher: J W De Jong

Page 27

RUSSIAN PUBLICATIONS ON THE INDIAN EPIC
27
at a lower percentage of formulas, i.e. 39.6 per cent but he remarks that Sen has used only one book (R book 1). Moreover, G. taxes him with inconsistency in the application of his principles, for instance in saying that the use of dhịtimān (R 1.1.8d: dyutimān dhrtimän vašī) is formulaic in 1.21.6c (dhịtimān suvrataḥ śrīmān) and in 1.28.3d (dhịtimān suvrataḥ śuciḥ) because in these cases dhịtimān occurs either in different pāda-s or in different positions within the pāda. G. is even less convinced by the calculations made by J. L. Brockington with regard to stereotyped expressions in books 2, 3, and 4 of R.2 According to Brockington more than 1 in 30 pāda-s in book 2 (3.4 per cent) are stereotyped, about 1 in 21 pāda-s in book 3 (4.9 per cent) and over 1 in 16 in book 4 (6.3 per cent).
According to G. the great number of formulaic phrases in the Indian epic proves its oral character. Formulas, remembered by the singer, and formulaic expressions, created according to established models, were an indispensable instrument for the composition of epic verses in a given metre. The formulaic style is not characteristic of classical poetry. G. points out that comparisons of the eyes with lotuses, etc. are not formulas but clichés, standard images. Also the limitations which the choice of a metre imposes on a poet must not be confounded with the use of formulaic
1 G. mentions also 1.71.7c (mahāvīryasya dhịtimān) but Sen does not say that here its use is formulaic (op. cit., p. 402).
2. Stereotyped Expressions in the Rāmāyana', JAOS, 90 (1970), pp. 210-27.