________________
Sanskrit Aesthetics
speak of the two classifications of the Arts. "The first (classification) divides them into the Arts of the "Eye" and the Arts of the "Ear", according as they respectively use one or other of the senses of sight or hearing as their primary channel of approach to the mind. Thus grouped we get the arts of Architecture, Sculpture and Painting placed in broad contrast to the Arts of Music and Poetry. By the second (classification) they are arranged with reference to the greater or lesser degree in which they severally depend upon a material basis for the realisation of their respective purposes. "Nor do they venture upon a definition of Art, applicable to all the (Fine, Arts. They merely attempt a definition of one of the Fine Arts, namely, Poetry (or Creative literature as such) and investigate into the sources of literary beauty. Finally, they arrive at the conception of rasa as the first and foremost source of Beauty in Literature. Modern scholars like M. Hiriyanna say "...the numerous works in Sanskrit on poetics which, though their set purpose is only to elucidate the principles exemplified in poetry and the drama, yet furnish adequate data for constructing a theory of line art in general." And, "The conception of rasa.....is general and furnishes the criterion by which the worth of all forms of fine art may be judged." (Art Experience p.2, and p.64). There is the other view too, expressed by some scholars in their modern writings that in the context of other fine arts the term rasa is used by metaphorical extension only and the rasa theory is not applicable to other fine arts. There is much that could be said in favour of and aganist these two conflicting views. But without entering into this controversy let us revert to aesthetic investigation carried on by the Sanskrit Alamkarikas in relation to the fine art of Poetry (including the Drama), which is placed, among all the fine arts highest in order of dignity."
Jain Education International
83
In the growth or development of Sanskrit literary criticism we discern two distinct stages: The first stage is represented by the early writers on poetics who preceded Anandavardhana, and the second by Anandavardhana, his able co nmentator Abhinavagupta, and reputed followers like Manmata, Visvanatha, Jagannatha and others, not se reputed. Bhamaha, Dandin, Udbhata, and Rudrata-these early alamkarikas-are regarded by common consent as the protagonists of the view that in kavya (poetry, creative literature) it is the alaskaras that enjoy the pride of place. They were aware of the pratiyamāna sense but they were not aware of Anandavardhana's theory that prattyamana sense or dhvani is the soulthe essence-of poetry. The, however, include this prattyamäna sense in their definitions of figures like aprastuta-prasamsa, samăsokti, akşepa, paryāyokta, etc. They deal with other sources of beauty, namely, gunas
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
