________________
'Classification of Poetry (Criticism Oriented)
1033 Thus, for J. We have "uttama” type of kāvya, when vyangya, though subordinate in itself, is the cause of 'Camatkāra' or surprise. J. feels that in the special variety of gunībhūta-vyangya viz. aparánga-vyangya, the (first) vyangya is principal so far as it is compared with the expressed sense, but is subordinate when placed against the second suggested sense, and hence it should be taken as 'dhvani' kāvya. Now to avoid 'ati-vyāpti' of 'uttama' in such illustrations, J. has used "eva" or emphasis in the definition. If may be noted that in illustrations of alamkāras such as rasa-vat and the like, the 'vyangya' is principal as compared to the expressed sense but subordinate as compared to the other suggested rasa. The 'camatkāra' caused by the first vyangya is not as great as the one caused by the second vyangya.
J. has included the term 'camatkāra-kāranam' in the definition of uttamakāvya. Now this condition is meant to exclude līna-vyangya i.e. very feeble suggested sense, i.e. one where vyangya is almost fainted. Such a condition prevails in 'vācya-citra' type i.e. the illustrations of "arthálamkāras”. Now J. criticised M.'s definition of 'gunībhūta-vyangya' type, which runs as : "a-tāděsi gunībhūtavyangyam, vyangye to madhyamam" - i.e. "But when the suggested meaning is unlike that (i.e. is not principal), it (poetry) is called "mediocre” wherein the suggested becomes subordinate." By ‘atādrśi' i.e. "unlike that” means “not far excelling the expressed sense.” (Trans. R.C.D. pp. 13, ibid)
Now it may be observed here that J. strikes to distinguish between the fact of a subordinated suggested sense which in itself is superior to the expressed on one hand, and a subordinated sense which is inferior from the point of charm to the expressed sense. In the first variety fall all emotion-based alamkāras such as rasavat, preya, ürjasvi and samāhita and in the second fall such alamkāras as samāsókti, aprastuta-prašamsā, paryāyokta etc. For M. both of these were gunībhūta-vyangya, for in them a suggested sense, viz. rasa-bhāvā"di in the first, and any suggested sense viz. rasa, vastu or alamkāra - becomes subordinate to another sense, be it again vyangya or vācya. M. explains ‘aparánga-vyangya' variety of gunībhūta-vyangya i.e. madhyama kavya as, “aparasya rasā"der vācyasya vā vākyarthibhūtasya angam rasā"di anuranana-rūpam vā." i.e. "To another i.e. to rasa and the like or the expressed meaning which has become the purport of the sentence, is subservient the rasa and the like, or the reverberation.” (Trans. R.C.D. 141, ibid). Prof. Dr. R. C. Dwivedi adds in a foot-note here (pp. 141, ibid) - "In 'Aparanga' the term 'apara' refers to 'rasā"di' and the expressed meaning principally denoted by a sentence. The term 'anga' refers to the rasā"di and the expressed
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
