________________
'Classification of Poetry (Criticism Oriented)
971 once and for all. All external forms of poetry, either nibaddha, or a-nibaddha, gadya, padya, miśra, abhineya, anabhineya, geya or whatever, can be classed as dhvani' from the point of view of criticism, or to be more precise, vyañjanā-biased criticism.
Anandavardhana is not blind to other possibilities in poetry and is charitable enough to accept other types' or 'class' of poetry called the gunībhūta-vyangya or poetry of subordinated suggestion and also 'citra-kavya', a type where this suggested element is either negligible or of no value, or is totally absent. But he for himself does not brand these types respectively as 'uttama' or the best or highest type of poetry, 'madhyama' or second-rate poetry and 'adhama' of the lowest i.e. third-rate poetry. It is Mammața who makes bold to make these terms current and his posterity accepted this terminology without question. However, the basic fact remains that classification of poetry into 'dhvani', 'gunībhūtavyangya', and 'citra', or 'uttama (even futtarnottama' with Jagannātha), 'madhyama' and 'avara' is absolutely criticism based, is vyañjanā-biased and is irrespective of its external form or size.
We humbly believe that the oldest available, and therefore to be taken as first written document on Dhvani, is the 'Dhvanyāloka' which is a composite unit in itself written by a single author, the great Anandavardhana, who wrote down the kārikās, the vștti or gloss and also adorned his arguments by apt quotations from the vast poetic literature spread before him in the form of works of the great poets viz. Vyāsa, Vālmīki, Kālidāsa, Bāna, and scores and scores of others who have engrammed their names in golden letters in the history of Sanskrit poetry.
Of course, some scholars are of the opinion that the kārikās were authored by some unknown person, and had come down to Anandavardhana as an oral legacy and that the latter wrote only the vștti portion or gloss. But we have absolutely no faith in such useless talks. For us the whole work known as the Dhvanyāloka or Kāvyāloka is a single composite unit written by only Anandavardhana. We follow in this regard the lead of Prof. Dr. K. Krishnamoorthy, D. R. Mankad, and the rest. We believe that this theory of single authoriship receives strength not only from various observations in the A.bh., as pointed out by Dr. K. Krishnamoorthy, but also from the tradition current among literary critics in Sanskrit who unequivocally declare Anandavardhana to be "The dhvanikāra", and also from a quotation from the Locana of Abhinavagupta who observes that this tradition of dhvani was handed over to posterity only orally without being put in a book form. So, the Dhv. is the first composite unit of its type written by Anandavardhana himself, who is
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
