________________
Sanskrit Sahityaśāstra
121
CRITICAL REMARKS :
This study of Bhāmaha's approach to "Grammar in relation to Poetry" shows that he lays particular stress on the following considerations in regard to the use of words in poetry : (i) The words must be correct according to the system of grammar of Pāņini
(Kātyāyana and Patañjali). (ii) They must not be unintelligible but such as are sanctioned by usage. (iii) They must not be harsh, but pleasing to hear. (iv) They must not be vulgar (but refined). (v) They must not be meaningless but pregnant with meaning, and (vi) They must be such as are imbued with the beauty of consonants.
It further reveals his ardent love for grammatical purity, his keen aesthetic sense and his fascination for the enchanting beauty of consonants. It makes clear also the fact that his rules refer to poetry of love (in union and in separation) only and not to poetry as a whole. • Bharata treats of grammar not for its own sake but because it subserves the purpose of Rasa. Bhāmaha must have taken a hint from Bharata in dealing with grammar in relation to poetry. We do not have any other pre-Bhāmaha work dealing with this topic. It is not, therefore, possible to judge to what extent Bhāmaha is indebted, if at all, to his predecessors or is original in his treatment of this fascinating topic. Of his successors, Vāmana deals with it from one point of view only and that is of grammatical correctness. Abhinava illustrates the strikingness of ten kinds of words by suitable examples and counter-examples while commenting on the fourteenth chapter of the Natyaśāstra. 13 Anandavardhanał4, Kuntaka15, and Ksemendra16 treat of this topic of Sabdavaicitrya in a slightly different context. Bhāmaha's inquiry into the 'Purity of words' is incomplete as it has reference to the poetry of the softer emotions only and does not take note of the needs of the stronger and more verile experiences of life. Taking cues from Bhāmaha later rhetoricians scientifically worked out the Vyañjana-cărută in different contexts of the 'Rasadis' and presented us with the results of their researches, viz., the three dictions-Vaidarbhi, Gauļi and Pāñcāli with their characteristic vyañjanas. 13. G.O.S. ed. Vol. II. Pp 224-234. The text of the Abhinavabharati is corrupt. Read also Dr.
Raghavan's article on "Writers quoted in the Abhinavabharati" JOR, Madras, Vol. VI part III, pp. 218-222). It is interesting to note that the reconstructed verse (on p. 219) does not agr:with the printed text of Abhinavabhārati in the G.O.S. ed. For it leaves out 'Agama' expressly mentioned on p. 225 of the Abhinavabharati and adds 'Hita', to make the ten kinds of words. The verse as reconstructed by Ramakrishna Kavi (p. 224, fcot note) suits
the printed text of Abhinavabhārati all right. 14. Dhavanyāloka III. 16. 15. Vakroktijivita II. 16. Arsityavicārasarcā, Kärikās 19-26.
16
