Vaishali Institute Research Bulletin 2

Author(s): G C Chaudhary
Publisher: Research Institute of Prakrit Jainology & Ahimsa Mujjaffarpur

Page 316

OPINIONS OF RAJASEKHARA AS A CRITIC
307
also, groups Pratibhä among the Prakirpas', and holds that it is the seed of poetry?
As conditions of poetry, the three-Pratibhā, Vyutpatti and Abbyása, are indeed inseparable from one another. Anything that the creative imagination of the poet works upon, has its source either in life or in literature and is thusan out-come of the poet's Vyutpatti. Similarly it is the 'esemplastic power of the poet's creative imagination that shows things in new combinations and thus brings in the element of surprise without which poetry will be no better than the matter of fact narrations. Again it is the creative imagination that perceives the rhythm which is the sap of poetry-no rhythmical composition is possible without the creative imagination coming to the aid of reason'. As regards Abhyāsa there is no denying that it is dependent upon Vyutpatti--knowledge of prosody, grammar and poetry being essential guides to it. It is also interlinked with the creative imagination for imagination and expression of poetry are not two separate actions, taking place in the mind of the poet consecutively they are rather interdependent and simultaneous. Hence Pratibha, Vyutpatti and Abhyasa help and are helped by one another and the three are inseparably linked. Maybe Rajasekhara perceived their interdependence to some extent and so held Pratibha and Vyutpatti to meet together in Sakti which also combines in itself Abhyāsa. Thus his Sakti, remarkably enough, has become the meeting ground of all the three and this alone is the condition of poetry. Later Mammaţa lays it down that the three as conditions of poetry are untenable for they together are the 'Condition of poetry. If Rajaśekhara had only precisely designated 'Śakti' as the combination of the three, his exposition would have been perfect.
Various categories of poets
Rajasekhara divides poets into three broad classes: Šāstrakavi Kavyakavi and Ubhayakavi. He contradicts the opinion that Sastrakavi is inferior to Kavyakavi on the plea that the two move in different spheres and it is therefore unfair to judge them by the same standard,
1. ht faert gallufsz 41 Gif I (1, 3, 1,) Kavya's
लक्ष्यज्ञत्वमभियोगो वृद्धसेवाऽवेक्षणं
furaha 175 stufÆl (1, 3, 11) Ibid 2. facaatoi afaH1971 (1, 3, 16) Ibid 3. Kävya P. 1-3, See the commentary-aari aaa:'