________________
112
Study of the Civakacintamani
kavyas such as drama (nātaka). In Sanskrit the rasa theory was first propounded by Bharata in his Nātyaśāstra. He deals with rasa in order to indicate how the actors in a drama or a dancer must portray the sentiments on the stage in such a way as to captivate and keep the audience en rapport with what is going on, on the stage. He also deals with the rules regarding what must and what must not be shown on the stage and the combination of sentiments are allowed. As we have seen earlier there is a great resemblance between the rasa theory of Bharata and the Meyppättiyal of Tolkāppiyar.
But unlike in Sanskrit where the later rhetoricians evolved clear-cut definitions about rasa, dhvani etc., based on the ideas of Bharata, there has been on similar effort in Tamil. The rhetoricians in Sanskrit extended the ideas about rasa to the Śravya kavyas as well and this resulted in the stress on sentiment placed by authors like Dandin, Bhāmaha, Vāmana, Udbhata and Rudrața. Tēvar appears to have been well versed in these doctrines unlike the earlier authors in Tamil who wrote epics spontaneously and not in cooformity with rigid rules of poetics.
It was the convention in Sanskrit that a mabākāvya would portray one predominant sentiment and contain other sentiments which must be depicted in such a way as to enhance the main sentiment. Tēvar chooses the śrngāra rasa as the main sentiment of his work. He names every canto of the poem to indicate one marriage of the hero Civakañ. In some cantos the names are based on actual marriages and in some the names indicate his union with knowledge (ñānam), earth (maņmaka!), coronation (pumakal) and salvation (mutti). Thus naming all his chapters after the weddings of Civakan, Tēvar makes the Cc. a poem of weddings (maņa nal).
The wedding and the marital life of Civakan 'receive descriptions throughout the book. The love in union known as 'kūtal' in Tamil and as sambhoga śțngāra in Sanskrit is portrayed elaborately both in accordance with Tamil and Sanskrit literary traditions. Tēvar dwells on subtle details as amorous glances, dalliance, honeymoon etc. and in describing them makes full use of his artillery in figures of speech, lilting melody and alliterative phrases. Sometimes his erudition in the later Sanskrit mabakavyas which are full of these figures of speech reaches the point of tedium and detracts from the beauty of the poem. They hamper the delineation of the exact sentiment he wants to convey through his verse. For example:
ațciy aim poriyalan utampenum pūļci niļ kotip purrin akatturai
vāt ka ņökk enum vai eyicr ār alal • vēțkai nākattin mittun kolap pattal, 1
(She was again affected by the poison that is spread in the teeth (the look of his sharp eyes) of the snake (desire), which lives in the hill (Givakan's body which controls the five senses of impelling nature) where the creeper (of
determination) grows), 1 Cc. v. 1292,
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
