________________
34
SAHĄDAYĀLOKA excellences. The alamkāras (such as yamaka, upamā etc.) only enhance the poetic beauty of poetry (which is basically caused by poetic excellences.). The figures of speech only make for the enhancement of poetic beauty (i.e. they do not cause the same). They only add to the poetic beauty caused by guņas or poetic excellences. We will discuss this point later in greater detail but it may be noted at this juncture that more and more clarity and sublety are added to literary criticism and the literary critics now get ready for sharper analysis. We have seen that Vāmana starts with clarifying the concept of poetry from the point where Dandin had Dandin mentioned only the body and 'vital airs' - 'śarīra' and 'prānāh' - of poetry, whereas Vāmana talks of 'soul-ātmā-of poetry. It may also be carefully noted that by the very mention of rīti/style as the 'soul of poetry, we do not score a point in branding Vāmana as a 'rīti-vādin' or promulgator of 'rīti'. Actually even his predecessor Dandin also devoted a lot of space to the consideration of "mārga”, and even Bhämaha was not totally ignorant of this concept. Actually, on the other hand, Vāmana, though declaring 'rīti' as the soul of poetry, has started his work with the famous words that "kāvyam grāhym alamkārāt”, i.e. poetry is to be understood or felt through poetic beauty or alamkāra.” This drives us to believe that even Vāmana, not unlike almost all ālamkārikas or literary critics, is also a kāvālamkāra-vādin' - i.e. one who considers 'alamkāra' (i.e. any source of beauty) as the - soul of poetry. It is only in this sense that we have to understand the so called 'Alamkāra-school. Actually all, including you and I, are kāvvālamkāra-vādin i.e, one who tries to appreciate and realize the secret of poetic charm. The earlier masters, as seen clearly in Dandin considered all factors that caused poetic beauty as 'alamkāra'. It is childish to brand Bhāmaha and the rest as belonging to the so called alamkāra school which took only yamaka-upamā etc. only as the soul of poetry. Actually nobody has sweared in this name and declared from the top of the roof that, “alamkāraḥ (i.e. yamaka, upamā etc., the figures of speech) is the soul of poetry". If some modern scholars take it this way, it is sad
live on their part. Actually, all the literary critics beginning with Bhāmaha, or even earlier, concentrated on one point and that was poetry itself, and by poetry was meant the extra-ordinary literature that was graced by beauty. The decyphering of this poetic beauty is the sole concern of any literary critic, any ālamkārika, worth the name, including the great Anandavardhana, Abhinavagupta and Mammața. These literary critics started noting down all devices that caused poetic beauty and tried to discriminate among them on their own preference. Thus the devices came to be branded as alamkāra, guna, rīti, vrtti, dhvani, rasa, bhāva,
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
