________________
1038
SAHRDAYĀLOKA or 'adhama' class as done by Mammața, J. chooses to promote some of these, with a faint but clear touch of vyangya sense, to the class of 'madhyama' or gunībhūta vyangya. Thus for J., samsókti, paryāyokta, and such other arthálamkāras with a distinct fragrance of vyangya, are part of madhyama kāvya.
J. makes a subtle distinction of absolutely clear presence (jāgarūka-gunībhūtavyangya) of a distinct subordinated suggested sense and also indistinct or hazy presence of a subordinated suggested sense (i.e. a-jāgarūka.) The former is seen in 'uttama' class and the latter in the 'madhyama' class. But J. is very clear that these - both classes - are never placed in the 'adhama' class. J., it seems, is generous as compared to M. and Viśvanātha (= V.) in recognising the merits of both emotionbased alamkāras, i.e. rasavad etc., and alamkāras gifted with the fragrance of subordinated suggested sense. M., V. and a host of others had placed them all under 'adhama' variety, not doing justice to their special charm and status. M. had called both arthálamkāras and śabdálamkāras as 'artha-citra' and 'sabda-citra', and branded them as 'adhama' or 'avara' due to the predominance of vācya i.e. expressed sense.
J. defines the ‘adhama kāvya' as - "yatra artha-camatkştir upaskrtā sabdacamatkřtih pradhānam, tad adhamam caturtham." - i.e. where the charm caused by śabda i.e. sound aided by the charm caused by sense (artha) is principal, we have the fourth type of poetry.”
We know that M. has placed both artha-citra and sabda-citra in the same class, viz. 'adhama-kavya'. J. observes that to place both these in the same class is not proper and hence for him adhana kävya is seen where the charm of words, graced by the charm of meaning or sense, is principal. For J. only sabda-camatkrti, totally divorced of artha-camatkrti does not make for kāvya at all.
J. makes further point when he observes : (pp. 59, R.G. Edn. Athavale, ibid) : "yady api yatra artha-camatkşti-sāmānya-śunyā sabda-camatkrtis tat pañcamam adhamádhamam api kävya-vidhāsu ganayitum ucitam. yathā ekākṣara-padya ardhávrtti-yamaka-padmabandhā”di. tathā’pi ramanīyártha-pratipădaka-sabdatārūpa-kāvya-sāmānya-laksana-anākrāntatayā vastutaḥ kavyatva-abhāvena mahākavibhih prácīna-paramparām anurundhānais tatra tatra kāvyesu nibanddham api na asmābhir gaṇitam, vastu-sthiter eva anurodhyatvāt.”
(pp. 59, Athavale Edn. R.G. ibid) J. suggests that some feel that a class of poetry where there is charm of sound only, without the charm of sense which remains as a common factor, should be
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
