________________
1050
SAHṚDAYALOKA
(vṛtti, VJ. I. 6, pp. 6, ibid) "tad ayam atra paramārthaḥ, sálamkārasya alamkārasahitasya sakalasya nirastávayavasya sataḥ, samudayasya kāvyatā, kavi-karmatvam tena alamkṛtasya kāvyatvam iti sthitam na punaḥ kāvyasya alamkāra-yogah, iti. - "The truth is this. Poetry is the work of a poet, wherein the undivided whole of 'adorned' and the 'ornament' is the reality. Therefore, it is clear that poetry is the name of what is adorned and the question of super-adding ornaments to preexisting poetry, does not arise." (Trans. K.Kris., pp. 292, ibid). We can compare this with A.'s observation on alamkaras when he says that when properly delineated, alamkāras are never extraneous (to poetry) - vṛtti on Dhv. II. 16 reads as - tasman na teṣām bahirangatvam rasa'bhivyaktau." (pp. 60, edn. K.Kris., ibid)
K. seems to follow A. in his broad concept of poetry when he observes that poetry is both word and sense taken together, enshrined in a style revealing the artistic creativity of the poet on one hand, and giving aesthetic delight to man of taste on the other (VJ. I. 7). He wants that both word and sense are to be of a peculiar nature. The expression or word and context or thought or meaning should both be charming and so to say, 'made for each other'. Thus, K. observes : (vṛtti, VJ. I. 7 - pp. 13, ibid) tatha ca arthaḥ samarthavācaka-asadbhāve svātmanā, sphurannapi mṛtakalpa eva avatiṣṭhate. śabdópi vākyópayogivācya sambhave vācyántara-vacakaḥ san vākyasya vyādhībhūtaḥ pratibhāti ity alam atiprasangena." - "Thus, thought, though striking in itself, will be no better than a corpse, when it is not embodied in an adequately striking word. In the same way, a word which does not have an adequate thought-content, but which expresses something irrelevant, is to be deemed as a disease of the poem." (Trans. K. Kris., pp. 299, ibid). This again smells of A.'s observation on Dhv. I. 8, wherein he holds that only the implicit sense and word having capacity to suggest the same deserve the careful recognition of a first-rate poet. A. observes: (vṛtti, Dhv. I. 8) (pp. 14, 16, Edn. K.Kris. ibid) :
"vyangyórthas tad-vyakti-sāmarthyayogi śabdaś ca kaścana, na sarvaḥ; tāv eva śabdárthau mahākaveḥ pratyabhijñeyau."
K. almost follows A., without conditioning his 'word and sense' by vyañjanā alone. He seems to develop an indepedent approach which is not vyañjanā-biased or better say, vyañjana-oriented. But he does not go further as we will go to observe, and all his tall talk about vakratā paters out into this or that variety of dhvani based on vyañjanā alone. By mere throwing away an accepted terminology, or just by replacing an old one by a new one, we do not stand to gain much. Exactly this happens in case of K., who can not totally tear himself away from A.'s
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
