Studies In Sanskrit Sahitya Shastra

Author(s): V M Kulkarni
Publisher: B L Institute of Indology

Page 17

Sanskrit Sāhityaśāstra
Rājasekhara (First quarter of the tenth century A. D.) is the next writer, who treats of plagiarism in his Kävyamimāmsā, 'a brilliant miscellany on topics relating to Poetry'.11 His exposition of this topic may briefly be set forth as follows :
Plagiarism means an appropriation of the words and ideas from the work of another (and passing them off as his own). It is two-fold : i) that which should be avoided, and ii) that which should be adopted. Of the two kinds of plagiarism (viz., one of words and another of ideas) that of words alone is five-fold, arising from 1 a 'pada' (word, term) 2 a 'pada' (quarter of a stanza) 3 'ardha' (a hemistich) 4 "Vrita' (metre) and 5 'Prabandha' (a long continuous composition). 'Borrowing one word does not bring discredit to the later poet-this is the view of Rājasekhara's Acārya. Rājasekhara, however, holds that it is correct povided the word borrowed is not double-meaning. He then illustrates how a double-meaning word can be borrowed bodily or in part, by way of ‘yamaka' and so on. Then he raises an objection against the advice of borrowing from others saying "while all other thefts committed by a person pass away by lapse of time, literary theft endures even to sons and grandsons;12 but he cites his wife Avantisundari's excuses for plagiarism, whether in words or ideas. Thus the plagiary may say, 'I have a reputation, he has none; I enjoy a secure position, he is a climber; this is inappropriate in him, appropriate in me; his words are like a tonic (guļ ūci-a very useful medicinal plant) mine like 'wine' (Mşdvikā-a bunch of grapes), that is, our styles are different; he ignores specialities of dialect, I attend to them (or I choose a good language, say Sanskrit, for my composition, he has chosen Prakrit); no one knows that he is the author, the author lives a long way off; the book he wrote is obsolete; this is the work of a foreigner'.
Rajasekhara's Ācārya holds that the appropriation of more than three words, that are not double-meaning, (in sequence) is plagiarism. Rājšekhara disagrees with him on this point saying any striking expression of an earlier poet should not be borrowed by later poets. Even a pada or a quarter of a stanza containing words that can be readily identified as the composition of an earlier writer, should be considered as an example of plagiarism. His Acārya holds the view that if a quarter of an earlier stanza is borrowed by a later poet, with a view to conveying an
opposite idea, it should be called not plagiarism but adaptation. He, however, • clearly says such adaptations are nothing but plagiarism. Likewise borrowing of half
11. Chapters XI-XIII, both inclusive. 12. t#: srfagida Triaritafa
afa gag dag 1177 7 aftaifa il-p. 57
Rājasekhara merely quotes the excuses for plagiarism; normally, he, in such cases, either shows his approval or disapproval. May be, he does not here intend to offend his wife. Later on, however, he denounces it in words:
यत्तु परकीय स्वीयमिति प्रोक्तानामन्यतमेन कारणेन विलपन्ति, तन्न केवलं हरणम् , अपि तु दोषोदाहरणम् ।
-p. 61